Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Natural gas as a community energy supply has gained attention lately and there’s a consideration being given to expanding that use in communities. Let’s examine some related issues and consider the wisdom of our long-term approach.
The situation in Norman Wells is well known. Huge costs are being faced as the local gas supply ends and the town struggles to find a cost-effective replacement. In Inuvik a $5 million contract is being let to provide a propane backup should local gas supplies fail, as they will in two to 15 years. Inuvik is preparing itself to deal with the Norman Wells situation of today. Yet, studies have been carried out to consider the conversion of Simpson, Tulita, and Good Hope to natural gas. A lot of money spent on the barely economic possibility of hooking these communities to another finite fossil fuel: natural gas.
But wait. A recent Pembina Suzuki Foundation report proves that natural gas is not the answer to climate change; it’s, in fact, one of the causes. Any economic forecast will tell you that fossil fuel prices will continue driving up our small communities costs of living. More importantly, the report clarifies that massive retooling to go to a different fossil fuel uses up precious infrastructure dollars on a temporary solution that is increasingly recognized as insufficient. This use of dollars also detracts from known renewable energy solutions that are often more economic in the same time frame. These solutions contribute both greater economic benefits through job creation and stimulation of local economies, and obviously greater environmental benefits. Does it make sense to keep pouring on the gas, Mr. Speaker? I don’t think so.
Nordic and other countries’ experience shows that the answer is conversion to local renewables, especially biomass and small hydro in our country. Reasonable payback times are proven; the local employment and investment opportunities are enormous. Safety from volatile energy pricing and reduction in the cost of living are benefits we should be leading our citizens towards now. Imagine if the people of Norman Wells or Inuvik could turn back the clock to when they signed on to gas. Knowing the conversion costs they paid and, yes, will pay again, we need to ensure that renewables are examined. This is the foresight we should be offering them as leaders, but I don’t see it happening.
Mr. Speaker, when we plan for renewable, we plan…
Mr. Bromley, your time for your Member’s statement has expired.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement.
---Unanimous consent granted
When we plan continuing dependence on fossil fuels we are planning for now. When we plan for renewables we are planning for from now on. I will be asking questions on why renewables aren’t being considered here. Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. The honourable Member for Hay River South, Mrs. Groenewegen.
