Science and Research Committee on Jan. 26th, 2026

[Tony Baldinelli, Conservative, Niagara Falls—Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON]

Yes, it's just the perspective of needing to understand what the requirements are.

David, you talked about the IESO reports that have come forward. I can go back to the one that talked about getting a clean grid by 2050. It talked about taking the 42,000 megawatts from the system capacity of the day to 88,000 megawatts in 20 or 25 years. It was going to cost $400 billion in Ontario alone. That report said that it would take six times the 14,000 workers in the field today to get there. From that standpoint, the lack of any involvement of the sector in the AI strategy documents and discussions precludes the government from having that information and developing a plan that I think would succeed. Would you not agree?

I'll go with you, Francis, first.

[Francis Bradley]

I would agree, and that's why it's the first of the recommendations we put forward—so that there is input from the electricity sector as the task force moves forward with its work. We believe it's essential that this takes place.

[Tony Baldinelli, Conservative, Niagara Falls—Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON]

David, can you comment on that?

[David Donovan]

I think it's pretty essential that the power sector is involved in the AI strategy. The growth that's going to come from this part of the sector particularly is astronomical. We've been living in an economy where large mines or large auto companies take five to eight years to come online, and now we're looking at AI data centres that can do that in three years or less. It's very challenging to build any type of generation or electricity infrastructure in that speed.

[Tony Baldinelli, Conservative, Niagara Falls—Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON]

David—and to George's point—do we know what the megawatts are going to be for the small modular reactor that's currently being built at Darlington?

[David Donovan]

It's just over 300 megawatts each.

[Tony Baldinelli, Conservative, Niagara Falls—Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON]

I was talking to someone in the field, and they were talking about a data centre being built in Montreal that would be 300 megawatts on its own. That would be the size of the entire baseload of that SMR.

I come from Niagara Falls and clean hydroelectric power. I think surrounding that generation station is only about 2,200 megawatts. That's the largest hydroelectric generating station in Ontario. If we're not beginning to plan now, it's going to take years to get the capacity that's required not only for the AI centres, but for the growth that is going to be needed to get the economy moving forward. Would you not all agree?

[Francis Bradley]

I wouldn't want to leave the committee with the impression that conversations are not taking place on a regional basis, a provincial basis, among current operators of the system and proponents of data centres. These conversations are taking place on the ground. Our concern is at a national strategy level. There is, of course, very active conversations at a local level on how these individual projects are going to be deployed. Our concern is that, when talking about a strategy from a national perspective, the critical voice that should be at the table is not there.

[Tony Baldinelli, Conservative, Niagara Falls—Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON]

David, I have a question for you. From a regulatory standpoint in working with the federal government, are there approvals that can be acquired quickly, and have they been, with regard to the plans the Province of Ontario has put in place to move forward with the expansion of the grid? I mean, for example, not only the SMR. I'm glad to see.... I have a local company in Niagara Falls, E.S. Fox, that is involved not only in the SMR project but also at both Darlington and Bruce Power.

What can we do to help speed up the regulatory process?

[David Donovan]

I think George can add to this.

We've seen some increase in funding to the Canadian nuclear regulator, the CNSC, which has been very welcome. The number one concern we have is in regard to the timelines involved in the Impact Assessment Act. The provincial government has signed an MOU with the federal government. We're still waiting to see how that plays out. The unknown timelines in the Impact Assessment Act are definitely a concern for getting some of these projects online on time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

You have six seconds.

[Tony Baldinelli, Conservative, Niagara Falls—Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON]

I cede my time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

We will now proceed to MP Noormohamed for six minutes.

Please go ahead.

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you to all of you for being here.

It's heartwarming to hear my Conservative colleagues talking about a clean grid and clean energy. These are important pieces for us to consider as we have this conversation.

Mr. Bradley, you've rightly identified the fact that there are provincial issues here at play and provincial jurisdictions that are responsible for the grids. If only the federal government had a magic wand to wave to create a national grid—which, of course, we don't.

One of the concerns that many have is the downstream impact on ratepayers of AI data centres and these types of new centres. Obviously, we need to be building, and we need to be thinking about that.

What is the impact of, let's say, Alberta putting a halt on renewables, putting a halt on solar and wind projects? They provide support to grids in different ways, of course, notwithstanding baseload power and so on. They are important contributors to the grid and to cost efficacy for consumers. What is the impact of pulling that stuff out of electricity production?

[Francis Bradley]

You would have to talk to somebody in Alberta in the Alberta market who would be able to give you an assessment of that. We look at these issues from a national perspective, not from a province-by-province perspective.

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

My question is, if you take out renewables, if you take wind and solar out of the power mix, what does that do? What does that mean for consumers writ large?

[Francis Bradley]

Well, the only way we're going to be successful in the future is with an all-of-the-above approach. I spoke earlier about the need to meet a doubling of demand by 2050. The only way we will be able to do that is if all of the non-emitting options are on the table and we pursue each and every one of them to the absolute max. The ability, frankly, to double our system in 25 years suggests we're going to need every opportunity for wind, solar, tidal, nuclear, hydro and any kind of technology that is non-emitting. We are going to have to double down on each and every one of them if we're going to be successful. Otherwise, the impacts, as you note, will be on customers and affordability.

The bigger concern I have is with respect to reliability—whether or not we'll be able to meet the demand as we go forward. Today, and this past weekend, certainly brought a focus on reliability. We saw many jurisdictions in this country, because of the very cold weather we had, come very close in terms of meeting all of the reliability demands of customers.

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Absolutely.

Mr. Christidis, I know you wanted to jump in on this, so please go ahead.

[George Christidis]

I can't but agree with what I just heard from Francis and Mr. Donovan, but I want to be a little sharper, if you don't mind.

We're at a moment now where we have to act. Each provincial government is going to be taking a look at what's right for itself in terms of economic and social development, its grid, etc.

The discussion here is very important and is obviously around artificial intelligence, data centres and the new economy, but I think we're at a stage, quite frankly, where we have to act to enable the deployment of energy infrastructure, certainly nuclear energy infrastructure, but beyond. As for the debate on what type of technology versus another, it is really about enabling choice, from our perspective, where provinces and key sectors will be able to look at what's right for them. We feel that nuclear is actually very competitive. We moved from a space where nuclear was not on the table—it took a lot of years but we got there now—to where it is fundamental, along with other technologies.

The point now, and I think others may agree, is to act. We need certain moves to enable investments. We need certain moves to enable the right regulatory environment. We need certain movements to enable the workforce and other key, critical items. In an environment that is not only about clean energy and not only about economic development, we may be talking about economic stimulation in the context of a national security issue. It's not a Canadian language. We are a bit uncomfortable to talk that way, but all these items around developing infrastructure now have a heightened lens, which I'd argue this committee has a very important role to discuss and encourage as much as possible on a bipartisan or multipartisan basis so we can proceed with these very critical discussions and decisions that have to be made for our country.

I'll leave it there.

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

I want to thank you for making that point because I don't think any of us is under the illusion any longer that these are not national security matters. Our ability to have a secure grid and our ability to provide reliable power to ensure that our industries can work under extreme circumstances while looking at external pressures.... The need to have that kind of stability here at home to ensure that workers and the workforce have what is required is certainly paramount.

In that process, we all recognize that getting new power to grid, reliable power to grid, doesn't happen overnight. It takes time. It takes effort. It takes strategy. It takes commitment, and it takes work.

In the short term to medium term, what are some of the safeguards that governments—and I say governments at all levels—should be putting in place to ensure that as we are building data centres and as we are doing this work to ensure that Canada can lead globally on AI, ratepayers are not taking the downstream impact of it?

[Francis Bradley]

I can begin.

The biggest action that we could take is to facilitate the building of the infrastructure that is going to be required and do so in a timely manner. The more we delay, the more expense piles up, and the more expense lands on the customer in the end.

There are certainly things the federal government can do to facilitate that. We saw the introduction of, for example, Bill C-5 last year—

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

I'm sorry for interrupting. The time is up for MP Noormohamed. Maybe you can come back to that in the second round of questioning.

We will now proceed to MP Blanchette-Joncas for six minutes.

Please go ahead.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'd like to welcome the witnesses who are with us for the second hour of our study.

Mr. Bradley, according to several analyses, AI data centres could account for up to 14% of the country's total energy demand by 2030. In your opinion, what energy sources in Canada can actually meet that demand in the short term without increasing greenhouse gas emissions or undermining the stability of the current grid?

[Francis Bradley]

Thank you very much for that very important question.

Ensuring that we meet the demand in a manner that does not increase our carbon footprint is critical. To be able to meet some of these challenges in the medium term as opposed to the much longer term out to 2050 really is the trick here. Because a lot of infrastructure takes a long time to build, in the medium term it's going to require looking at a large variety of non-emitting sources. It isn't simply a matter of gambling on non-emitting nuclear or gambling exclusively on large hydro, which also takes a long time to move forward with. We're also going to require renewables, and we'll have to require storage as well.

In the medium term, we will certainly be looking at more wind. We'll be looking at solar. We'll be looking at storage opportunities. On the coast in Atlantic Canada, we're looking at opportunities with respect to tidal and to wave. There's a large variety of non-emitting technologies that are going to be important over the short term, medium term and long term.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Thank you.

Quebec already has clean, stable and immediately available electricity, which is exactly what AI and data centres need. We actually have a wonderful data centre in Rimouski, the region I am proud to represent. That data centre is now owned by Telus.

So, in terms of energy and grid efficiency, do you think it's realistic to develop a pan-Canadian AI strategy without relying on Quebec? Is Quebec one of the best places in Canada to develop AI, given its stable, clean and immediately available energy sources?