SoVote

Mr. Robert Kitchen (Souris—Moose Mountain, CPC)

May/5/22 11:42:47 a.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-19

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Kings—Hants for his talk about the CCUS. I have the only working carbon capture and storage facility, on a coal-fired power plant that produces energy for Saskatchewan. I am so glad to hear he has been to Saskatchewan, and I would invite him and arrange for him to have a tour of the CCUS facility, so he actually understands what it truly means to capture that CO2 and put it in the ground. My question is a very simple one. Is it the industry we want to kill, or is it the emissions?

103 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 65 - May/5/22

Mr. Mike Morrice (Kitchener Centre, GP)

May/5/22 11:45:30 a.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-19

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Kings—Hants for his speech. He is a member that I have a great amount of respect for. That being said, when the member mentioned a tip of the cap to carbon capture and storage, we need to be honest: If we want even a 50% chance of staying below 1.5°C and ensuring a livable planet, we need to do our fair share. That means, as scientists have told us, that we need to leave 86% of Canada's proven fossil fuel reserves unextracted. To do so means investing in workers. I wonder if the member would be open to commenting on the importance of the implications of taking that same $7.1 billion, in a new subsidy, and instead investing that in workers and a just transition for them.

141 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 65 - May/5/22

Hon. Michelle Rempel Garner

May/5/22 12:12:24 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-19

Madam Speaker, I think my colleague misunderstood. I was eviscerating the government on the fact that there are no substitute goods for carbon energy, to a large extent, across Canada to ensure that the price on carbon makes carbon pricing elastic. It is inelastic right now. The second thing is what the government has done, and we have criticized the government for it. Canada still needs carbon energy. That is just the reality. We cannot argue with that; we need it right now. With the policies the government has, all that is happening is an offshoring of our jobs to Saudi Arabia and Venezuela, and it is raising the cost of energy because we do not have a stable domestic supply. There is a lack of investments or a prevention of investments in energy infrastructure. I am not saying that we should not be looking at ways to provide alternatives, but that has not happened and the government fails to realize it. I think there is a record of policy failure over several years, and this budget does not rectify that.

181 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 65 - May/5/22

Mr. Mario Simard (Jonquière, BQ)

May/5/22 1:28:54 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-19

Madam Speaker, I was listening to my colleague's speech on carbon capture strategies in the oil and gas sector. I always thought the Conservatives liked to position themselves as defenders and custodians of the public purse. Two of the big carbon capture projects under way in Alberta are costing more than $2 billion, and 57% of that is coming out of the public purse. Low-carbon oil is therefore not cost-effective without government support. I have a hard time understanding how a Conservative could advocate government support for an industry that does not need it. Could my colleague explain?

102 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 65 - May/5/22

Mr. Robert Kitchen

May/5/22 1:29:47 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-19

Madam Speaker, once again, I would be more than happy to have the member come out to Souris—Moose Mountain. I would take him to CCS, so he could actually see what is going on. There are many people at the CCS Knowledge Centre. I would be happy to introduce them, so the member could learn a little more. Ultimately what we are talking about is carbon capture. We have a power plant, BD3, that is capturing all the emissions. It captures 98% of the sulphur. It takes that sulphur and produces sulphur dioxide that it either utilizes or sells. It captures the CO2 by using amines to capture it and inject it into the ground. The power plant injects it into the ground two kilometres below where we are. On top of that, it can then sell that emission to help reduce the emissions for oil-intense companies. They would utilize that to further reduce, by 37%, their emissions.

161 words

All Topics