Evidence of meeting #27 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was trucks.
A recording is available from Parliament.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Groupe Robert
You can't make him drink, if he doesn't want to drink.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Trucking Alliance
I've become conditioned over the last 25 years to continue to try to move that stone up the mountain, and it's frustrating. Looking at the electronic on-board recorders and electronic stability devices—which I wish we had talked more about today, in terms of our relation to the public on the highways—we need some leadership. Whether it's transport or environment, we need a coordinated Canadian approach.
We're not being tossed out of offices or not being listened to, but we don't seem to have the ability to take the step as a country and move forward on some of these things. Trucking isn't sexy, and I think that's part of the problem we have: there are always much bigger fish to fry. They say, “You guys wait over there. We'll save the manufacturers; we'll save these guys or those guys”, but without trucks, the whole things stops.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
Mr. Robert, you made an interesting comment. You said you focus on what you do well. If you want tires, you go to Michelin; you're not the tires man. I think you've highlighted one of the great marvels of the free market, where people and businesses can specialize in what they do well and buy the rest.
Government is the same. We don't do trucking well. I have no idea how to run your business, nor does Transport Canada or any other department. That's why government should not be running your business.
You also said you've been through three models of the iPad in the last 18 months. That is another example of how private industry is driving innovation in a way that government could never even fathom doing by itself. In fact, I have a report here from our committee analyst on the history of all the transportation innovations in the last two centuries. Almost every single one of them was produced by the private sector and commercialized, with an almost zero role for the government.
I'm convinced by today's testimony that the government is the problem and not the solution. We need your suggestions on how we can get out of your way and let experts like yourself run your business successfully.
I'll close with a very specific question.
You talked about natural gas being a bridge fuel; that is, it is the next generation of fuel power for your tractors, but you see hydrogen being the long-term goal. Natural gas may be a perfect bridge because it contains hydrogen.
Can you tell us how the engineering of your tractor engines makes natural gas a convenient bridge fuel between today's diesel and tomorrow's hydrogen? To whatever extent, describe how the natural-gas powered engine and the future hydrogen-powered engine have similarities, and how one can bridge to the next. I'd really appreciate your insights on that.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Groupe Robert
I may use five minutes here, Mr. Chairman.
You start with diesel. It's an internal combustion engine. Your car uses gasoline. Diesel uses high compression to burn. Westport's technology changes the injector and replaces a portion of the head of the injectors.
Today we use what we call “variable timing” in the engine. That means that the fuel comes to the piston and lights a spark at the piston while the piston keeps going up, and at one point, either fuel or gas comes in. Then the big explosion happens, and this is what makes the engine turn.
I believe that the combustion engine will be here for a good while. Why? It's because this is a solid structure, developed over the years, and in general it is very reliable compared to everything else. If you look at electronics, that's a throwaway situation. If you look at an engine itself, it's very solid. I believe that the combustion engine will stay here for a good period of time.
For the next generation, we need to find a way to break the molecules of natural gas from CH4. Once you bring air into the piston, it will break the molecules and burn only the hydrogen. What I've seen is that you can burn the hydrogen at around 1,200o instead of at 1,700o. First of all, you recoup a lot of energy. You don't lose your energy.
As well, the combustion engine will become much smaller. Today you have to put water around the chambers to cool the engine, and at 1,700o, you need a lot of water. Tomorrow, at 1,200o, we are going to have much smaller engines that are going to burn gas much more efficiently. What I've seen is that the smaller hydrogen engines were producing 35% more horsepower than comparable diesel or LNG engines. That is just to illustrate that the technology will do it.
There are sites on the Internet, but I'm not going to talk about things on the Internet. They are there. Search for Roy McAlister. In the 1990s I had the privilege of meeting with him. This man had an idea 50 years ago that one of these days we were going to burn hydrogen. I swear to God that he is going to do it, hopefully, before he dies.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
Thank you.
With that, I'll thank our guests for being here today. It has been a really interesting committee today. I thank you for your time.
Committee members, I will not be here Thursday. I have asked Mr. Nicholls to chair it. Come prepared.
We have invited Westport. We're just waiting to hear from them; maybe somebody could help us out and encourage them to participate.
The meeting is adjourned.