Environment Committee on June 6th, 2024

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Those concerns remain. I also have concerns about some things that have been said on this committee. There are proven impacts from—

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

You just said you didn't say those concerns.

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

There are proven impacts from Imperial Oil on the Athabasca River. That is irrefutable, Mr. Chair. Emissions from the oil and gas industry in Canada did not peak in 2017. They have continued to go up.

I'd also like to point out—it was glossed over earlier—that some of these companies are actually lobbying against paying tolling fees on the pipeline that will get their product to market.

I have a question for Mr. Corson.

Mr. Corson, you said earlier you would like to put your money where your mouth is to reduce the carbon intensity of your operations. I think that's great. Again, I want to say that I want to bet on Canadians when it comes to both renewables and lowering the carbon intensity per barrel of Canadian oil and gas, because you're right, it does have a higher ESG focus than other places.

Mr. Kruger, if you could elaborate on this. I know that another big expenditure of oil and gas companies is advertising. There's legislation before the House to look into some of the advertising of oil and gas companies, public and government relations. Mr. Kruger, could you compare for us the approximate amount of money that is spent on decarbonization from Suncor and on advertising for public and government relations in your company?

[Rich Kruger]

I would say that this year we're probably spending several hundred million dollars on decarbonization, and probably on advertising it's closer to maybe $10 million, something like that.

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

It's only $10 million on advertising, public relations and government relations?

[Rich Kruger]

Yes, Canadians like our Petro-Canada site, so they tend to go there.

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

Okay. That's great. Thank you very much.

Mr. Chair, I just want to state towards the end of my questioning here—I'm not sure when the timer was stopped—that I 100% believe that Canada should continue to develop our exceptional energy reserves. I want to be proud of them. I'm on team Canada, since I've been accused of maybe not being. I'm 100% on team Canada. I want to be proud of what natural resources we are able to get to market.

However, Canadians aren't proud of a product that is seven times dirtier, seven times more carbon-intensive and that's contributing to more than 12% of Canada's total emissions. The oil sands in Canada are responsible for more emissions than are the entire provinces of Ontario and Quebec combined. That includes the daily activities and all the industry in both provinces.

We have a lot of work to do, and the oil sands, unfortunately, are headed in the wrong direction, as I pointed out earlier. Oil and gas emissions from the oil sands are going up, not down, and we need help to get them down.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Your time is up, Mr. van Koeverden.

Ms. Pauzé, go ahead.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Do I have five minutes?

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

No, you have two and a half minutes.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have a preliminary remark that I'd like to make. Earlier, in response to a question from Mr. Kram, the industry people said that it would be better for Canadian oil to be used everywhere because we have a good regulatory framework. However, I've constantly heard them criticize the regulatory framework over the past two hours. So I'm somewhat surprised.

I have a question for Ms. Harradence, from Enbridge.

We understand from what we can see on your website that your company has invested approximately $10 billion in renewable energy and infrastructure projects since 2002. So that's an average of $500 million a year. It's not great, but it's still something. Again according to your website, the projects concerned are currently operating or in development. I'd like to get some specific details on that.

The projects featured on your site comprise 23 wind farms and 14 solar farms. Can you tell me where they are located, how many of them are in operation and for how long they've been operating?

[Michele Harradence]

I can provide you with the specific details afterwards, but they are across North America and offshore in Europe, so they range from here in Ontario down to Texas. The most recent is on the solar side, our Fox Squirrel assets, which we added in Ohio. Just for clarity, that's $10 billion that we've invested since 2002 in renewable energy projects. In more recent years, and most recently, we've invested over a billion dollars in renewable natural gas, whereby we take gas from landfills and capture that.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

I see. I don't want us to start discussing renewable natural gas because that would be the topic of a completely different discussion.

I have a question for Mr. McKenzie.

Mr. McKenzie, your company states on your website that its goal is to make a considerable contribution to meeting Canada's target of reducing emissions by 30%, by cutting 30 megatonnes of greenhouse gas emissions by 2030. According to The Energy Mix, which is a media outlet that reports news from your industry, Cenovus has set an ambitious goal of net zero emissions and has committed to reducing its carbon intensity by 30% between now and 2030.

We don't have a lot of time, Mr. McKenzie. Are we talking about a goal or a commitment? Is it an emissions reduction or a per-barrel intensity reduction? Is it 30 megatonnes or 30%? They aren't the same thing.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Your time is unfortunately up, Ms. Pauzé.

Ms. Collins, go ahead.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

It's pretty disturbing to hear the lack of accountability from Imperial Oil. They're saying that there's been no impact on the Athabasca River. The reality is that Imperial's Kearl pond seeped 5.3 million litres of toxic waste into communities that already have disproportionately high rates of bile duct cancer. I sat down with the Mikisew Cree First Nation and heard stories about how they all have family members and friends who have been diagnosed with cancer. It is deeply concerning to me.

I also want to take a moment just to note that Mrs. Stubbs talked about stopping the collusion between elected officials and CEOs. We have heard accusations that her husband is a lobbyist for Enbridge and she's now here asking questions of that same company. It seems like the Conservatives continue to run interference for their friends in big oil. They continue to cheerlead the fuelling of the climate crisis.

I'm just a little bit shocked from what I have heard, both from the CEOs today and from Conservative MPs. It is time to tackle the climate crisis with the urgency and at the scale that matches the emergency that we are in.

I want to maybe give Imperial Oil a moment to speak to the impact that it has had on first nations communities that have disproportionate rates of cancer in their communities because of your tailing ponds.

[Brad Corson]

Thanks for the opportunity to clarify what is a significant amount of misinformation that you and others have shared.

The Kearl seepage incident is very unfortunate. I have appeared before this committee two times to talk about all of the actions that we are taking to mitigate that, and all the actions we are taking to prevent its recurrence and certainly the impacts to the indigenous communities.

However, we have significant data that demonstrates that there has been no impact to the Athabasca River and similarly—

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

The Mikisew Cree First Nation has been asking for a health study for nearly two decades.

If you felt some level of responsibility for the pollution that you're putting into the water, would you not fund that health study or at least give them the funds to do an independent study of their own?

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

The time's up.

We will go to Mr. Deltell for five minutes.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I yield the floor to Mr. Mazier.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Mr. Mazier, go ahead.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for coming out here today.

This has been a very engaged, emotional and impassioned debate. I think everybody got their chance to have their say. Maybe we don't agree on a lot of different data points, but it was a very good discussion. I think we have a lot better understanding of what's really going on with this industry, especially when it comes to energy.

You know, there's an old saying that energy should not be idolized or demonized, and I'm a firm believer of that

What I'm asking the committee here.... There was a motion that was tabled on April 11. Notwithstanding the motion that was adopted by the committee on Thursday, April 11, 2024, that we ask Scott G. Stauth, president of Canadian Natural Resources Limited; Darlene Gates, CEO of MEG Energy; and Ryan Lance, CEO of ConocoPhillips, to appear for one hour at a future meeting.

The reason we're asking them is that they are the other people from the Pathways Alliance that are missing. I think this would complement the NDP's motion that was originally put on the table to talk about Pathways. I don't think we had a good enough discussion about that today, honestly.

I don't know if any of the other committee members want to comment on that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Mr. Mazier, are you moving a motion?

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

I'm amending that motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

What motion are you amending? There's no motion on the table.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

It's the motion from April 11.