Thanks to the Minister. On the waste reduction side of things, we’ve talked annually for many years about the need to start on recycling of electronics and tires and perhaps some other things and start moving towards an extended producer responsibility in the areas where we can. What’s been our progress in those oft repeated goals?
The next big step for us in terms of waste reduction, and I’ll get the deputy to provide the detail, is we’ve been working on an electronic waste program so that we could look at diverting the tonnes of screens and computers and all this other electronic waste out of our landfills. I’ll ask the deputy to provide some detail.
Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. Mr. Campbell.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. At this time we are undertaking a pilot project involving four communities in the Northwest Territories – Fort McPherson, Norman Wells, Fort Smith and Fort Providence – on electronic waste. Of course we’re closely monitoring that. We have in the plans here for the following year to build on that and have electronics included as another component of our recycling process. Of course, we’re working with the Alberta Recycling Management Authority there on refining an approach that would work in combination with the results of the pilot project, as well, so the expectation is there to grow in that area of recycling electronics.
Thank you, Mr. Campbell. Mr. Bromley.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. I appreciate the update. Not unlike previous year’s updates. Will it happen this year?
Yes, that is the expectation. It will happen in ’14-15.
Thanks to Deputy Minister Campbell. That’s good news.
The narrative makes reference to the senior science advisor, and I’m wondering who that is.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Minister Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It’s a gentleman named Mr. Applejohn.
Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. I’ll ask you just to repeat that, please.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It’s a gentleman by the name of Mr. Andrew Applejohn.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Mr. Bromley.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. I had no idea that Mr. Applejohn was our senior science advisor, but it’s interesting to know we have one and that might be interesting to pursue at some point but not here.
I believe, given that we are the authority over greenhouse gas emissions, and we’re doing some good work internally, but we still aren’t doing anything for outreach to speak of other than our incentive programs. The Arctic Energy Alliance is doing some work there. With the Diavik wind project we know that it’s possible to do significant work in that area, but it seems to have to be done voluntarily. Obviously, with all our experience now, we know that there are many, many opportunities where it can be done to achieve creation of jobs as well as meet our environmental goals and actually reduce costs for businesses.
Is the Minister going to ever move on the required renewable energy portfolio as indicated in the Greenhouse Gas Strategy as a possible direction? For example, when we approve a project we could start requiring, well ahead of time as this is going to happen in the next year or two years from now, 5 percent of their energy needs must be produced from renewable energy and that 5 percent is going to up by 10 percent every three years, just by way of an example, up to a certain amount. Is the Minister thinking about this and when can we expect some responsible action on that front?
Our attention has been focused on doing a whole host of things tied into promoting alternative energy. For example, we spent millions of dollars on our Biomass Strategy. We created a market. We’ve converted our own institutions to the tune of millions of dollars both in retrofits and in the savings. We are working hard to get our own biomass industry set up in the Northwest Territories. We spent millions encouraging people with rebates and subsidies to convert to alternate energy, biomass in particular. For example, the Power Corporation is going to be covering the whole Northwest Territories and changing all their lights to LED lights.
We are trying to provide the options to people in communities where there are no other options other than the expensive diesel. Right now we’re looking at LNG in Inuvik, which, while it’s still a fossil fuel is definitely cheaper than burning diesel. As we move forward and we renew the Greenhouse Gas Strategy, we will continue the discussion about setting in place the requirements such as the Member has suggested, but we have to make sure that in fact there are those options out there. I know Diavik has invested a significant amount of money in wind energy and are to be fully commended for that. Our grid build-out, if that were to proceed, would in fact put a renewable energy source within reach of a whole host of resource development activity in the North and South Slave. Those are all things, fundamental, very important things that we’ve been working on to meet those objectives.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Committee, we’re on 13-17. Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to again raise the issue of the waste reduction management section with the territorial government here and the issue of waste management, the issue in our small communities, and again I’m going to ask the Minister in his plans with this department is there any type of discussion plans that will be coming forward in the future in regard to the amount of vehicles that are dumped in our communities. There are a lot of vehicles in there and there are a lot of vehicles piled up in the dump. I always thought this was a good incentive to look at how they can have these mulchers come into the communities, eat up these vehicles, clear up the site, put them on the barge and bring them down to a site down south. Take this mulcher and go to another community and do the same thing as part of the waste reduction plans. When you go into the small communities, you see a lot of vehicles and barrels and other stuff just sitting there. It takes up a lot of space there.
I’m going to continue to ask the Minister, I mean, we may not have the money this year or next year, but I think we have to start looking at some type of plan to see where we can start a program like this. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Minister Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We have focused the attention of the Environment Fund folks on the current recycling plus expanding into electronic waste. On our to-do list are things like barrels and vehicles. I was just mentioning to the deputy, I remember in Fort Smith last summer they came into the South Slave, I’m not sure if they made it to Yellowknife, but they came into town and we had mountains, literally, of fridges and stoves and washers and dryers and they shredded it all up and put it into cubes. I think they did Hay River as well. I’m not sure if they came to Yellowknife. But they didn’t do vehicles; it wasn’t big enough. But they came in; I’m assuming they worked out an arrangement with the town.
So, we know that that type of activity is there, but one where we have a big enough piece of equipment to go and shred and compact vehicles is still down on our to-do list just mainly tied to resource capabilities. Thank you.
I’m quite pleased that the initiative is coming to some of our communities, as the Minister indicated. I would look forward to the Minister putting some type of a briefing or paper together. Hopefully, it will come into one of our Sahtu communities, or along the Mackenzie winter road, Fort Simpson or Wrigley and come through that area here. Maybe we can look at something. Right now I’m just hearing it from you and I’m happy that Smith and Hay River had the opportunity to do and we look forward to something like for some discussion. It might even be in the next Assembly, but give me something so I can continue working toward it. Thank you.
We will provide the information we can to the Member and to committee. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Continuing on with questions on environment, I have Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to ask a couple of questions with regard to recycling. I see on page 17 waste reduction has an expense of $100,000, yet in the text it says this program is largely funded through the Environment Fund, so we get revenue… I forget what the revenue amount is, $350,000 or something back under revenues. Could I get the total cost of the program, so the gross cost, and then the net cost to us as a government for running this recycling program? Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. For that response, we’re going to go to Ms. Magrum.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Again, I would refer the Member to an information item on page 13-40, which reflects the revenue and expenses for the Environment Fund. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Ms. Magrum. Ms. Bisaro.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. Thanks, Ms. Magrum. Okay, this is telling me we have a surplus of $150,000 – that’s what we’re estimating – and in ’13-14 it cost us $1,000. Am I right in that? Thanks.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. For that we’ll go the Minister Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, I think the category you want to look at would be the closing balance at the bottom. It’s projected at $1.892 million. Last year it was $1.742 million.
Thanks to the Minister. Yes, I understand that. I was looking to get a cost per year, so we’ve got a good, healthy balance and I’m really pleased to hear that we are expanding recycling and that we’re expanding into e-waste, because I think that is one area where there’s a good potential for us to divert a great deal from the landfill and basically help our environment.
The other question I wanted to ask here has to do with contaminated sites and remediation. I’m trying to understand, and I know my colleagues asked a number of questions yesterday when we were talking about lands and sites and authority and so on. In terms of Environment and Natural Resources, what is the responsibility of this department for contaminated sites? The text tells me that it identifies, assesses, prioritizes and manages the cleanup of contaminated sites throughout the NWT, but prior to that it also says that this section works with the federal government. So, could I get clarification on just how ENR fits into the contaminated sites either that we have or we will have and where the federal government fits? Basically where the responsibility lays, I think, is where I’m going. Thank you.
There’s going to be a number of federal sites, the donuts, such as they are called, such as Giant Mine and others that the federal government will maintain. We have negotiated a whole list of ones that will come over fully to us. I’ll ask the deputy minister if he wants to add any further detail.
Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. Mr. Campbell.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. ENR will be responsible for the contaminated sites in the Northwest Territories on transferred lands post-devo here. Of course, we are going to be working closely with the Department of Lands in this area as well. Again, our department is the lead department in this area on contaminated sites.
Thank you, Mr. Campbell. Ms. Bisaro.
Thanks, Mr. Chair, and thanks to Mr. Campbell. So, I look at the amount on page 17 and its $357,000. It doesn’t seem like much money to deal with the contaminated sites that we’re going to be taking over.
Can I get an indication of how many sites or what kind of remediation to sites we expect to do with $357,000? Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. For that we’ll go to Ms. Magrum.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. This does not include the accrued cost for the GNWT for the clean-up of identified environmental liabilities. That fund is administered through the Department of Finance. Departments identify what environmental liabilities exist and then the Assembly votes on funding for that Environmental Liability Fund, which then pays for the remediation of those sites. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Ms. Magrum. Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thanks to Ms. Magrum. So in the assessment that the Department of ENR does, is one of the parts of the assessment that they’re doing to assess the cost of remediation of a contaminated site either when it’s a working site or after it’s a working site? What I’m getting at is in terms of securities. If the department assesses a site as being contaminated, will they also advise Finance, I presume, that the costs to remediate that site is let’s say $1 million, then presumably the responsibility lies with Finance to go and get that money either from a company or from GNWT. Is that a function of ENR, that they will assess the cost to remediate? Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Minister Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There are various levels of environmental assessment and the boards that will be involved, the ones that assess and decide on the security that’s going to be required for whatever particular project, at that point ENR has a role to play as the project proceeds and as it gets close to its end days whether the fund has kept pace with costs and what needs to be done, and does what needs to be done match what was initially envisioned when the security deposit was set. But I’ll ask the deputy if he could add a bit more detail.
Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. Mr. Campbell.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The Department of ENR will be involved in assessing the securities for sites. As the Minister mentioned, the EA process, we work closely. Our staff and our two new divisions have that expertise to provide that information to the land and water boards for them to determine and recommend the securities for the operating sites.
Thank you, Mr. Campbell. Mr. Campbell, I’ll give you a chance just to repeat that last part. I don’t think it was picked up.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Sorry about that. It will be for the new projects that are coming on stream, establishing those securities. That’s the role of ENR working with the land and water boards in setting securities, in particular in terms of the water licences.
Thank you, Mr. Campbell, for correcting. Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for the clarification. ENR is going to identify the site, one of the boards is presumably going to establish the amount of security that is required, so who then demands of a company that they put up that security and once ENR determines, say, that liability is a million dollars and the company has only put up $500,000, who is going after the company to make sure we get that other $500,000 so that remediation is not going to fall on the taxpayers of the NWT?
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Minister Miltenberger.
That will be a function of the boards and the approval process before they’re granted their permits.
Okay. One last question. Then I’m applying for a development. Before I’m granted my permit, I have to put up the security that has been assessed to me. Is that correct?
