The boards will set a schedule for payment.
Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. Ms. Bisaro, your time is up. Let me know if you want to get back on this one here. We’ll go, again, environment. I’ll go back to Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to just follow up a little bit on the tail end of our conversation, the Minister and myself, through you, our Chair. I asked about would the Minister consider implementing a mechanism that’s in the Greenhouse Gas Strategy, and that’s a renewable energy portfolio, a mechanism whereby we would require industry, new industry, for example, to start providing some basic minimal amount of their energy needs through renewable energy. The Minister responded, noting that he is spending many millions of dollars. He has got many projects. He’s replacing boilers. He has a lot of programs under the efficiency programs. He’s replacing light bulbs. He has a Solar Strategy, a Biomass Strategy for more millions of dollars, and that they’re achieving some modest gains. That is basically what he said.
I’d like to suggest that what this is, is a very simple mechanism with no costs and would yield probably well over an order of magnitude and more gains in reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. I guess I would say, firstly, does the Minister agree, and would he not agree that a mechanism such as this, as he always says, very carefully considered and put in place, responsibly put in place, would in fact not only achieve those things, it might very well support our interests in grid connections and a market for those grids and other energy objectives that we have as a government?
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Minister Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Two things: I don’t think we should diminish the amount of work and time and effort we’ve spent in making a fundamental shift in the use of alternative energy in the Northwest Territories, which I think is very significant and I think it in fact probably leads the country in terms of things like biomass and our investment in solar, especially in remote communities, and we’re going to continue to make those investments.
Yes, I agree with the Member that we want to look at all avenues when it comes to being as environmentally conscious as possible with the smallest carbon footprint possible, and as I indicated, when we go forward with the renewal of the Greenhouse Gas Strategy and the Solar Strategy, and as we look at the things that we’ve done and where we have to continue to go, we’ll consider that option as well.
I didn’t mean to suggest or belittle the efforts that we have. I’m just saying how much better we could do with so much less and thereby free up resources for the many competing demands that we have. Much of what we are doing is aimed at 4 percent of our greenhouse gas emissions as generation of electricity in our communities, a miniscule part of our greenhouse gas emissions, and essentially our residential customers, which are already going down on their own accord, and not at, in fact, industry where our growth is. I would appreciate the Minister’s recognition of that and bringing that focus to getting this mechanism going or at least giving it the serious consideration it needs.
Just on the financial security end of things, we know, for example, that the federal government is carrying leased properties, which financial security has been assessed but they’ve only collected half of the security assessed by the boards despite repeated attempts by third parties to get everybody up to the plate. What would be the case? The Minister presents a pretty theoretical picture but that’s not the way it’s working. Are we going to do something different?
Our intention, of course, is to protect the interests of the people of the Northwest Territories, to work with the regulatory authorities, and to work with industry to do the things required. I can’t speak for what has been done by the federal government but our intention is to make sure that we’re not left liable, that we’re not left unprotected and without the proper securities in place.
That’s all I had. I just wanted to make sure that we have that commitment. I know the Minister would agree that a Giant Mine would not be something that this government could handle casually as the federal government is.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. We’ll treat that one as a comment here. Page 13-17. Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I need to just go back and try to make sure I clearly understand how things are going to work around contaminated sites here. If I’m doing a development, I’ve gone to a board and I’ve got my licence and they’re going to grant me my licence and they tell me I have a payment schedule, there are two things and they both have to do with enforcement. Who is going to make sure that I keep to that schedule? If I do not, where does the enforcement come from? If, during the life of my project, which is 10 or 20 years, but after 20 years it’s determined that the liability for remediation has gone up and it’s now $2 million instead of $1 million, who enforces on me the need to put up that extra security? Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Minister Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As we proceed down the path to April 1st, we have this development assessment process we are setting in place with Lands, ITI, ENR. As projects come through the door, there’s going to be basically a checklist and a layout of what needs to get done by whom during the different stages of the application process. Then once they’re in business, the monitoring of the various parts of the operation including the remediation if it’s required, the securities, and the enforcement. That’s one of the benefits of having an integrated coordinated approach and we’re going to be able to do that with the three main departments as well as departments like Finance that have a role to play with environmental liabilities as Ms. Magrum pointed out. Thank you.
So, I think the Minister is telling me to kind of wait and see, but I’m still not really hearing that, as a government, we know how we’re going to force companies to put up the security if they don’t for whatever reason. I guess I need to know from the Minister and maybe it’s not firm yet, but are we thinking about taking people to court? Are we thinking about pulling licences? What sorts of things do we have to enforce the securities that have been determined for a particular project? Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, the schedules put up by the boards will contemplate making sure that we have money in the bank before the project starts, that we want to make sure that we have the protected integrity of the regulatory process, that we have securities that reflect the need, the potential requirements for reclamation and remediation. If they want to get their permits, they’re going to have to meet those requirements that are going to be laid out through that process. Thank you.
Thank you to the Minister. I understand that, but you also said or somebody said that the payment is going to be on a schedule established by the board. I presumed that schedule would not be in advance of the licence. I presumed it would be I get my licence and then I pay over a number of years. Pardon me, Mr. Minister, but I’m getting a little confused or I have been confused and I’m trying to just find out where we’re going. I’m happy if you tell me that these things are going to be worked out and you will advise Members and committee later on down the line, but it’s a real concern for me that we are setting ourselves up for potential unsecured liabilities where we’re going to be left as a government to look after sites, maybe not as big as Giant but like Giant, where we just don’t have the capacity to deal with contaminated sites.
Looking at what’s happening now is probably a lot of the reason why I’m concerned about what’s going to happen as we go forward. I don’t think right now we have adequate security for the operating sites that we have within the territory.
Pardon me for asking the same questions over and over, but I just don’t feel much love in terms of the fact that we’re going to be secure when this is all said and done. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Our intention is to make sure that we proceed April 1st. We’re not going to be licensing projects with no security, with hoping that they’re going to put money in. I mean, the federal system, I can’t speak to that, I’m not that knowledgeable about it. I don’t know how much slack they cut people, but the commitment has been very clear from the government that we intend to protect the interests of the people of the Northwest Territories on a go-forward-basis. There’s no intention of getting by on goodwill and don’t worry, trust us, we’ll be there if you need it. We’re going to be looking to work with the boards and the regulatory process to put the appropriate securities in place, that they are in a fund in a way that protects our interest, that the inspections are done and that we have a system that can stand that kind of scrutiny and we don’t end up coming back here in a year or two years with all sorts of enormous liabilities because we allowed development to go ahead without the proper protections. Thank you.
Thanks to the Minister. I understand. I know that we’re both coming from the same place and I accept his reassurance, but I would like to know from the Minister if that reassurance is written in a policy. Is there a policy somewhere that you can point me to? Or will there be a policy either before April 1st or as soon as possible after April 1st which will lay out just what the Minister said so that we are not left, as a government and as a territory, looking after liabilities that we didn’t create? Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, there’s an interest by the government to be able to come to committee and do a detailed briefing about the regulatory authorities, the processes that are currently in place that are going to continue to be in place and how we’re going to refine those now that our role is response as a government where we’re going to be our own regulator. We take over the authorities that were previously with the federal government and that would include being able to have that discussion on securities. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. Committee, we’re on page 13-17. Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will be happy to have those discussions, which are huge in their absence as of this date. But what the heck, we have 25 days to go or something. I think it’s a very legitimate request. Where is this written down? The Minister has been saying what’s actually fact. I want to see the legislation. I want to see the policy. Would the Minister provide that? If it doesn’t exist, tell us it doesn’t exist and the intent is to do it. The Member, my colleague Ms. Bisaro, requested, asked where is this legislation or this policy. The Minister responded, well, let’s have a discussion. No, no, no. What can I say? We’re 25 days out here. I want to see it. I am making the same request. Please show it to me. Please tell me we don’t have it but we’re going to do it and it’s going to be in place on April 1st.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Minister Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We will provide all the existing policies and directives that govern securities and then will continue to be in place and that will potentially at that point, as we devolve and evolve, may require adjusting, but we will pull that together. We have the National Energy Board. It has set security requirements, but we will pull those documents together from across the territory and we will make sure that they are passed on to committee.
I appreciate that commitment. Will this bunch of documents include an NWT document and policy that requires financial security be in place before the project is approved?
We’ll provide what is currently there and what we see as required next steps. Thank you.
I guess that means that maybe one doesn’t exist, but anyway, we’ll have to wait and see. So, so be it.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. I’ll take that just as a final comment. Committee, 13-17, activity summary, environment, operations expenditure summary, $8.197 million. Does committee agree?
Thank you, committee. Committee, 13-18, activity summary, environment, grants and contributions. Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Alternative Energy Program, I note that it’s reduced considerably from ’13-14 to ’14-15 and yet I see some new programs added towards the bottom of that page, so have we split this program up into a number of them, or have we just dropped a whole bunch in the Alternative Energy Program? Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Minister Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. When I look at ’14-15, I see $3.889 million versus $3.6 million from ’13-14. So it’s gone up incrementally right from ’12-13, so I’m not quite sure what the Member’s question was.
Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. I’ll get Ms. Bisaro to clarify the exact entries on this activity summary. Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The third line down, Alternative Energy Program, goes from $1.175 million in ’13-14 to $300,000 in ’14-15, yet towards the bottom we have one, two, three new programs: Business Support, Solar Energy and environmental baseline studies. So why the drop in Alternative Energy Program?
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. For that response we’ll go to Ms. Magrum.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. In the ’13-14 revised estimates for the Alternative Energy Program that included Alternative Energy Technology Program for $300,000, which does exist in that same line for the ’14-15 mains, it also includes a wind demo project, which in ’14-15 is a separate, stand-alone item further down under biomass. In the ’13-14, the Alternative Energy Program includes smart grid and it also includes a solar PV expansion. Solar PV expansion is a separate and expanded program in the ’14-15 Main Estimates. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Ms. Magrum. Questions on environment, grants and contributions, I have Mr. Bromley.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. I just have a couple of questions on wind energy. The contribution to Aurora Research Institute to measure wind energy potential in the NWT, I believe I recall when there was this exact program a number of years ago. Is this a reinstitution of that program? I do remember seeing their maps and hearing some of the programs that they had going on that.
Just while we’re on the wind energy, I know the Minister has talked about the Storm Hills as a potential long-term solution to some of Inuvik’s energy issues. What’s happening and what’s the schedule on that development? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. For that we’ll go to Mr. Campbell.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Under the ERI that initiative there for the funding is for wind monitoring in the Inuvik area. There’s a second site that if we wanted to do some monitoring in that area.
On the other initiative with Storm Hills, we’re working with NTPC with that initiative and we expect a report here on that monitoring program here shortly.
Thank you, Mr. Campbell. Mr. Bromley.
Thanks, Mr. Chair, and thanks for that information. I’ve never known NTPC to be much of a wind expert outfit, but it would be great to see them get into that. They’ve certainly held up a lot of wind projects in the past.
Just on solar energy, again, I’m a supporter of the Solar Energy Program. I think the net metering discussions that have been going on through the board and thermal communities and so on, with participation of the department, are very productive. It would be great to see a net metering program get off the ground.
One problem there is NTPC’s reluctance to fund or waive the standby change above five kilowatts. I think that’s already the case, and obviously I think there are a number of initiatives out there in the 10 kilowatt area. Still modest, but could gain us a lot towards this strategy’s goals if that standby charge was waived.
I wonder if the Minister would have a look at that, and could I just get a general breakdown of what this $625,000, how that is planned to be allocated, if that’s known? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Minister Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just in regards to the standby charge, I’ll check. My recollection was that we already had this discussion and we had agreed to waive that standby charge, but I’ll double-check with NTPC, but I’m sure that’s what we did.
With regards to the breakdown of the solar, I’ll ask Ms. Magrum if she has information.
Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. Ms. Magrum.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I can provide an overview of the Solar Smart Grid Technology Program for $125,000 in ’14-15. This is an electrical network that uses information and communications technology to gather and act on information. For example, information gathered about the behaviours of suppliers and consumers can manage electrical generation in an automated fashion to improve the efficiency. Natural Resources Canada is working with NT Energy and the GNWT to collaborate on an NWT pilot demonstration project. This is based on lessons learned from existing projects in British Columbia. Smart grids are going to go into Jean Marie River and Colville Lake. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Ms. Magrum. I think I concur with the Minister. I believe, Mr. Bromley, the standby charges were removed in October of 2013, but we’ll get that validated. Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. That certainly was the discussion at our level. Unfortunately, at the technical level, being privy to the discussions with the Utilities Board, I don’t think that’s what’s happening, so I appreciate the Minister looking in on that to see if there can be a correction there.
I’m very appreciative of this solar smart grid program. I think there’s some real potential there, so I appreciate the efforts. That was $125,000. I didn’t hear where the rest of the dollars were focused. Maybe there is an application or proposal program or something. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Minister Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My note says photo PV systems will be added to diesel community grids as selected communities prefer. It ties in with the smart grid technology to help cover the costs of not only the smart grid technology but the solar requirements and now they have, as well, decided to include wind in that and batteries, so it’s going to be a very unique pilot project that is being watched with great interest by a lot of jurisdictions with remote communities. If we can make it work, we anticipate the penetration to be at least 50 percent of the diesel would be offset by wind, battery and solar. Thank you.
That sounds pretty exciting. Good luck. Thank you.
Okay. Committee, we’re on 13-18, activity summary, environment, grants and contributions, $3.889 million. Does committee agree?
