Thanks, Mr. Yakeleya. Mr. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. With regard to the Sahtu hydro assessment, last year in 2009-10 we budgeted $100,000 for the assessment of hydro resources in the Sahtu region. This year, 2010-11, we budgeted $500,000 to work on specific hydro projects and, as the Member indicated, there is a Sahtu symposium being held in Deline this week and what we’re expecting out of the workshop is it would review the findings of the Sahtu hydro assessment. I should point out, and as the Member knows, there are multiple sites in the Sahtu region that are technically feasible to develop such as there are a number of river basins: the Great Bear, Mackenzie, Keele, Mountain, Carcajou, Camsell and Red Stone. As well, there have been some discussions on mini-hydro and so on. So our expectation is that as a result of the Sahtu hydro symposium, we’ll get some direction as to which specific projects we can begin to work on in 2010-11. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I certainly look forward to the start of the potential sites that can produce hydro for the benefit of the people in the North here. The Minister has listed off some sites that I know very well, so it’s good to know that the Minister is up to speed in my region. I look forward to the results of the Sahtu hydro symposium. I mean, not only for our region but also for the Northwest Territories. I hope that we can move, once we have a clear plan and understanding as to what areas of the hydro that we wanted to look into and not be boggled down with various viewpoints as to which hydro or which plant could be used in terms of being feasible for the hydro here.
I wanted to pick up on the point of Mr. Krutko in terms of residual heat initiatives. I know it’s a good initiative. It’s highly costly, I think, to put in the communities or it’s got to be with a partnership. I wanted to ask this Minister, is this something that we need to look at in terms of having a working relationship with the NTPC in terms of working with them and working with the community in terms of an agreement?
With regard to residual heat, most of the thermal communities have NTPC as the operator, so we would have to work in partnership with NTPC and, obviously, if the diesel plants are located in the centre of a community, it’s probably much cheaper to utilize residual heat because you don’t have to pipe it as far and so on. Thank you.
Just a comment that I wanted to run by the Minister here. Mr. Chair, in the JRP recommendations of 176 recommendations, in there there’s a phrase in there that they use in terms of the Inuvik facility, Inuvik compressor facility that has waste energy. I know there’s a facility that’s being planned close to the community of Tulita. Is this something that this government has looked at as a possibility of tapping into the waste heat energy for the community of Tulita? I know there are some discussions around natural gas conversions into the community once, and if, the pipeline is built into Good Hope and Fort Simpson and Tulita. But there’s also an interesting point on the waste heat energy in terms of the community of Tulita benefitting from that by-product, so to speak. Is that something that this government will look at?
No, that’s not something that we’ve looked at. We’ve concentrated more on having outtakes on the pipeline that we could use for community gasification or community gas conversion projects. Also, at one time, we did look at having the compressor stations generated by hydro power, but that was a recommendation that was made by Deline and so… But specifically using residual or waste heat from compressor stations, there will be three compressor stations, from what I understand, in place for the pipeline. So depending on how close it is to the community will probably make the difference whether it was feasible or not. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, certainly the Minister is very correct that at one time that we thought that we could -- and when I say we, we in the Sahtu -- thought that with Sahdae Energy could look at the potential of hydro to feed the compressor stations. Using that, however, doesn’t seem to be getting much attraction from either the community or the proponents, so it’s kind of like it’s a no-go there for now. It may change tomorrow. However, there is a compressor station that’s very close to Tulita. It’s almost going to be like a jet engine, I guess, and close to the community. It’s a loud compressor station and there’s lots of waste. According to the report I’ve read, there’s good potential for using the waste energy to probably be of benefit to the community in terms of tapping into that source there. I’m not going too far with this. I wonder if that’s something that this Minister probably could look at and maybe it’s up to the proponent if they want to look at it.
I know there is a lot of effort being done on the natural gas conversion. There are dollars being spent on this but, you know, it might be a missed opportunity once the pipeline is built and we don’t tap into it. It might be something like, yeah, we should have done it. I’m just asking that, throwing it out and see if the Minister would consider it. If not, then there are other things to look at.
We’re always interested in looking at ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. When and if the pipeline goes ahead and when we get the more detailed design, we would certainly be interested in looking at it. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Minister. The chair will recognize Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I want to follow up on some of the energy subjects that are of interest and concern, and I want to preface my remarks by saying I was very impressed with the opening remarks of the Minister and I appreciated many of the things that the department is planning. I think the Minister has been listening to committee.
I want to start with hydro and just ask where are we at with the projects that we have going now, and again I’ll preface that question with a statement that in Lutselk’e we’ve been doing feasibility studies, hundreds of thousands per year since 2001. This is our tenth year and in Whati similarly since 2002. What year are we planning to construct and where are we at at aligning the dollars required for that? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Mr. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. In Lutselk’e we’re making very good progress and to the extent that we’re investing more money and we’re fast tracking the project, and with regard to the three-year expenditures from ‘09-10 to ‘11-12 we’ll have invested $4 million. So we’re making good progress there.
In Whati we still have to sort out some issues with the Tlicho Government and with the change in leadership. We’re requesting meetings so that we can clarify the direction that the Tlicho Government wants to go to, but we have expended about $250,000. We’re looking at spending about $1.5 million in Whati, Mr. Chair.
It’s good to hear that there’s still attention being directed to these. Again, I’m interested, we’re 10 years down the line, what’s the construction date and do we have the dollars lined up or a strategy laid out for the upfront costs for that construction? Thank you.
For Lutselk’e we’re looking at a start date of 2012-2013. Whati is much more difficult to pinpoint. We also have the Taltson Hydro Project that is undergoing regulatory review and our Hydro Strategy, which we have significant expenditures planned there. If the Member is interested I’ll ask Mr. Vician, through you, Mr. Chair, to go into more detail.
Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mr. Vician.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for the question. In terms of the overall Hydro Strategy, as the Minister has indicated there’s a proposed budget of $1.5 million directed to the Hydro Strategy, which is targeting studies across the Northwest Territories identifying high potential for hydro conversion from our current diesel system, issue areas like the Gwich’in hydro potential work that is proposed for 2010-11, investigating some options, again, in the Inuvialuit region for renewable energy transfer, as the Minister has indicated, work with Tlicho Hydro on some development options in that region and looking at some of the other water survey gauging information that we continue to need in both the Akaitcho, Sahtu, Gwich’in and Deh Cho regions. So those are some of the primary initiatives that are targeted under the $1.5 million proposed for 2010-11 under the Hydro Strategy. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Vician. Anything further, Mr. Bromley?
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate those remarks and that information. I think the next question is about biomass and I’m wondering what is the plan for significant replacement of fuel oil heating, particularly in our thermal communities for say with wood pellets or woodchips and I’m talking about for residences, for municipal buildings and so on. I’m not talking about any GNWT facilities. So what’s the plan, the energy planning that’s going on to get biomass replacement of fuel oil heating for residences and municipal buildings particularly in our thermal communities? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Mr. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. As part of our energy priority investments, our alternative energy priority investments, we’ve identified biomass as probably one of the biggest and most important parts of this initiative and this is something that we’ve identified significant investments over the three years of the $5 million and we’re working and participating with the Department of ENR on the development of a draft Biomass Strategy. We are also participating in the Biomass Working Group. For your information, or you may already be aware, this group includes representation from the Government of the Northwest Territories departments, the Arctic Energy Alliance and the federal government. I don’t want to get into the details at this point because the strategy is scheduled to be released in the next few weeks, but I’d like to reassure the Member that there is a component in the Biomass Strategy which includes working with the private sector and further development of the biomass market in the Northwest Territories and ITI will be participating in these actions. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I appreciate those remarks. Again, I think there probably are some important opportunities for communities here. Is there a plan to involve them or the Association of Municipalities or something like this in a meaningful way at some point soon in the planning? Again, because I think these are important opportunities that the communities should be brought into as soon as possible just to help build the capacity there in the uptake. Thank you.
That is my understanding, and working with ENR we’ll be working closely with the NWT Association of Communities and engaging communities. I’d like to point out that our expectation is because of the fact that our government has had tremendous success in promoting the use of biomass in the Northwest Territories and you can see it in the large number of government buildings that are using wood pellets. So I expect that we’ll have similar success with communities, although because of the fact that there’s biomass available in every community in the Northwest Territories except maybe in the Nunakput region perhaps. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Just to add to the Minister’s comments, the fact that it’s cheaper we’re saving money on every front there. So I’m sure that will be attractive to communities. So my last question is just of the $5 million over three years, how much is planning for this year in the budget? It’s not obvious to me. It may be here, but I just haven’t caught it yet. Thank you.
The Government of the Northwest Territories has identified $2 million this year. It’s located in the budget of ENR. So that’s where it’s identified right now, Mr. Chair. Thank you.
Just in follow-up to that, is there a planned expenditure with ITI next year, then? When does ITI start spending some money on, I presume it would be ITI working with the private enterprise and so on getting the uptake? Thank you.
Our expectation is that the money would be available from existing ITI funding programs. If there was a requirement for additional funding, we would have to look at the $2 million that’s available from... We’d have to work with ENR for any incremental requirements.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Anything further, Mr. Bromley?
No, I guess not, Mr. Chairman. Just a comment that I think we’re still hoping to get a briefing on this and maybe that will answer some of the other questions. I don’t want to take up more time.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Thanks, committee. We’re on page 12-21, Industry, Tourism and Investment, activity summary, energy, operations expenditure summary, $5.731 million.
Agreed.
Page 12-22, Industry, Tourism and Investment, activity summary, grants and contributions, contributions, $5.225 million. Mr. Yakeleya.
Just on the Taltson River hydro electrical for this, I know there are some discussions here on the project. I just want to ask the Minister about this project here. Certainly businesswise it’s a good business opportunity for the mines and you don’t have to tell me what the benefits of it are, I just want to know about the start-up of the project. You had listed some numbers and it’s a joint initiative by other proponents to look at this hydro development. Are we foreseeing anything on issues that will be run into like we’re seeing with the Deh Cho Bridge Project? Cost overruns, I mean, you’re looking at hydro and the Deh Cho Bridge. They’re megaprojects that we haven’t yet secured, or have we secured power agreements with the mines? Are we going ahead? Have we heard the environmental issues? Politically are we looking at serving the mines rather than the communities? This is something I want to make sure that when I bring it to my region that I have some information here.
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Mr. McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As the chair of the Ministerial Energy Coordinating Committee, if I could pass the question on to the Premier who is responsible for the Power Corporation if I may, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Mr. Premier.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The question about the Taltson River hydroelectric facility, the project, as it is right now, has gone through its environmental work, the regulatory piece. In fact, they’re looking at the transmission line and adjustment there. The work around the partnership agreement as well as the power purchase agreements is ongoing. The work that is involved in this, as Members are aware, is taking quite some time to come up with the project as it is. We have entered in and are working on a partnership with, as Members are aware, Deze with the NWT Metis and the Akaitcho, as well as our energy piece through the Hydro Corporation. We’ve done a lot of work on there not only on the feasibility, but also the environmental, the hydrology, and a lot of the work beforehand, as Members are aware through the expenditures. Now we’re getting down to the point where we are getting closer to the power purchase agreements. One of the difficulties there with having a power purchase agreement in place is that depending on the final outcome of the regulatory process is if there are adjustments that need to be made, then we would have to make adjustments to the potential project which then could affect power purchase agreements. So we need, it’s almost a parallel process. Once we get the final results of the regulatory, then we’ll have a much clearer understanding of our positions that we can work out with industry on that. To date things have come along much better and we’re hoping that we’ll be able to have a deal ready very close to the timing that, for example, a decision would be made on the next potential mine in the Northwest Territories. For the estimations for the cost estimates a lot of work has been done in that area and has been part of our process through the environmental work and regulatory process.
Thank you, Premier Roland. Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Premier. I ask this question in all sincerity regarding this project. I do support the business case. You are having aboriginal landowners be a part of it. You don’t have to sell me on the greenhouse and thousands of trucks that go up the winter road. You are looking at a business case here. A lot of people say we’re more focused on the diamond mines than reducing costs or lowering costs to our communities. That’s the political world. It does make a business case.
There are power purchase agreements that need to be negotiated. Mr. Premier has indicated they are close. To date I haven’t seen one. Yet we’re still proceeding on a good-faith basis, just like with the bridge. Now we’re coming to cost overruns to the tune of $200 million on the bridge. I have to ask these questions. I have to ask these about the Taltson project.
There is potential for other mines that are going to be opening up to have the agreement. They are talking about Peace River having a nuclear plant. Certainly they want to see it up here in the Northwest Territories. This is an opportunity to hook up to the grid in Alberta. This is something we’re approving, we’re okaying, but we have to know for sure about the Taltson that we have some agreements in place. I think the Premier said they were close to some. But we’ve been hearing this for a long time. What’s securing us to say yes, we feel comfortable? That’s what I’m getting at. That’s why I ask this question. I need to ask it to have a good sleep tonight.
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Any comments, Mr. McLeod?
Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think those are all very important questions. I think that with the environmental assessment the rationale and logic is that there’s a very tight business case. It will be a function of the power purchase agreements and how the financing would be arranged. I think that it will all hinge on the environmental assessment and negotiations with the diamond mines. That’s where the regulated/unregulated difference is and I think that hydro power is a very important part of reducing our greenhouse gas emissions.
Again, Mr. Chairman, I know the importance of hydro energy as a valuable asset to the communities. To help the communities, you see it in the prices of electricity paid where there’s hydro going into the communities versus the thermal communities. You don’t have to sell me on that. The hydro communities have this infrastructure given to them as a gift from the federal government. They set up mines here and we’re taking it over. I think for myself I want to say that I do support the Deze Energy Corporation. It involves some really good people in there to put the project together. It’s helping to reduce the greenhouse emissions. It’s cutting the loads of trucks into the mines with fuel for the mines. That will help with the wildlife in that area. There is good potential for people in Lutselk’e, Fort Smith, Fort Resolution and Hay River to look at this here. I’m not going to go into that area. I want to know about security to say yes. We have a project that the money that we’re approving is going to get a good return on it, hopefully, that we can have these types of discussions in the future when we look at mini-hydro projects in the Sahtu or any other region to go ahead with this initiative. Thank you.
As the Premier said, it will all hinge on completion of the environmental assessment process, the negotiation of power purchase agreements, the financing and arrangements with the partners in the Deze Corporation. So we’re optimistic about the whole project and, certainly, every step of the way we have to do the due diligence for a successful project. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister McLeod. Committee, we’re on page 12-22, activity summary, Industry, Tourism and Investment, energy, grants and contributions, contributions, $5.225 million.
Agreed.
Page 12-23, information item, Industry, Tourism and Investment, energy, active positions. Questions?
Agreed.
Page 12-25, activity summary, Industry, Tourism and Investment, tourism and parks, operations expenditure summary, $11.344 million. Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just on the tourism and parks, I want to ask the Minister, in terms of parks, when I was looking at his magazine that the Minister put out, very nice in terms of explaining the whole parks strategy in the Northwest Territories. It looked at the various different regions and the number of parks that they have. The one, only one park that they have in the Sahtu is the McKinley. I think that was featured in the article, and the other regions have many other parks. So I want to ask if there’s a strategy to have parks in the Sahtu increased maybe to two or three, because we have one right now. It’s in Norman Wells. I’d certainly like to look at other parks in the other communities that are equivalent to other parks that they are having right now in the other regions.
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Minister McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. In the Sahtu region, we’re working very hard to see the introduction of one of the largest and most beautiful parks in the Northwest Territories, the CANOL Trail Park, and we certainly want to work with the Sahtu region to get the federal government to speed up its remediation of the land before it can be transferred so that we can have the area designated as a territorial park. I think no one knows better than the Member, who has walked every step of the way of the CANOL Trail. I think it will be a major attraction for tourism not only in the Sahtu but in the Northwest Territories. Thank you.
