Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Agriculture and Forestry
Issue 8 - Evidence - Meeting of October 1, 2009
OTTAWA, Thursday October 1, 2009
The Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry is meeting today at 8:05 a.m. to study the current state and future of Canada's forest sector.
Honourable Percy Mockler (Chair) is in the chair.
[Translation]
The Chair: I would like to welcome you to this meeting of the Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry.
[English]
On behalf of the committee, I welcome the witnesses to this meeting of the Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry.
I am Senator Mockler from New Brunswick. I am the chair of the committee.
I would like to ask the members of the committee to introduce themselves.
Senator Mahovlich: I am Senator Mahovlich from Ontario.
Senator Hubley: I am Senator Hubley from Prince Edward Island.
Senator Eaton: I am Senator Eaton from Ontario.
Senator Plett: I am Senator Plett from Manitoba.
Senator Rivard: I am Senator Rivard from Quebec City.
The Chair: I would like to share with witnesses that the committee is continuing its study on the current and future state of Canada's forest sector. Since the beginning of our study, the committee has heard about the past and present difficulties and challenges in the industry. Today, and in future meetings we will look into the future of the forestry sector. We will focus on the challenges, innovations and outlook of the sector. As I have shared in private with you, we have challenges with governments and stakeholders. There is no doubt in our minds that we can look at a better industry. I want to take this opportunity to thank the witnesses from the two groups that we have here this morning.
From the Canadian Biomass Innovation Network, we have Mary Preville, Acting Director General, Office of Energy Research and Development, OERD; Hamid Mohamed, Assistant Program Director, OERD; and Jeff Karau, Project Officer, Canada Forest Service.
[Translation]
Our second group is the Centre de recherche en pâtes et papiers at the Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, represented by Mr. François Brouillette, Assistant Professor, CIBA industrial chair on paper chemicals, and Mr. Daniel Montplaisir, Assistant professor, KRUGER industrial chair on green technologies.
[English]
Thank you for being here this morning. Following your presentations, we will have questions from the committee members so you can share additional information with us.
Mary Preville, Acting Director General, Office of Energy Research and Development, Canadian Biomass Innovation Network: I am pleased to be here today to present to you on behalf of the Canadian Biomass Innovation Network. Natural Resources Canada manages the Canadian Biomass Innovation Network. Along with my team, we will be happy to answer any questions you may have. We have a presentation that I believe has been distributed in both official languages.
We refer to the Canadian Biomass Innovation Network as CBIN. It is a network of federal researchers, program managers, policy specialists and expert advisers. Together, it works with partners from industry, academia and the provinces. It links with the international community and is very much focused on the bio-economy with a specific focus on bio-energy.
The network started about five years ago. It is supported by a federal interdepartmental executive committee and it has an external advisory panel. Mr. Ron Kehrig of Enterprise Saskatchewan chairs the advisory panel. It has members across the country from universities, industry and the provinces.
It also includes a research and development portfolio committee. It manages bio-energy research and development programs of Natural Resources Canada that are undertaken by all players that have a role in bio-energy in the federal government.
On page 3 of my presentation, you will see the federal departments and agencies that participate with CBIN. The Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, NSERC, links universities. It is managed by NRCan and includes the Canadian Forest Service, the laboratories of Natural Resources Canada in the Innovation and Energy Technology Sector, the Office of Energy Efficiency and our Office of Energy Research and Development. Fisheries and Oceans Canada participates somewhat. The National Research Council also has a large bio-economy program. Also included are the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, Industry Canada, Health Canada, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and Environment Canada. That is the federal component to the network.
[Translation]
On page 4, we talk about the networking strategies of the Canadian Biomass Innovation Network. The CBIN is a link with relevant federal and provincial programs, universities and industry. It develops partnerships to co-fund larger research and development projects and it promotes more efficient hand-off along the innovation chain. It works with regulators to address technical knowledge gaps and barriers. This involves especially the development of codes and standards for new technologies.
The network builds international cooperation especially with international organizations, the International Energy Agency, the OECD, APEC, and the Global Energy Partnership led by Italy and which was the outcome of a G8 meeting a few years ago. More and more there are also North American energy working groups. Canada, the United States and Mexico work together. There is also a Canada-U.S. Energy dialogue; leaders from both those countries recently announced an action plan.
[English]
The following slide shows a daunting map of CBIN's world. It shows the network with whom CBIN liaises. It liaises with provincial organizations, provinces themselves, international organizations and other national organizations. It also links other governmental programs to ensure efficacy of our research projects. It takes special care that there is no duplication and synergies where appropriate.
Last year, CBIN had a national networking meeting with federal-provincial representatives as well as academics to help identify future research and development needs and how to better work together.
The next slide illustrates international cooperation. I have mentioned a few of the multilateral organizations. The first two bullets are APEC and the Global Bioenergy Partnership, which is led by Italy. The International Energy Agency has a number of implementing agreements and countries come together and pool resources — either financial, talent or results — to leverage efforts. Some are specifically dedicated to bio-energy research and development such as the Bioenergy Implementing Agreement. The others listed all have a components related to bio-energy. For example, alternative motor fuels look at biofuels. Industry, energy, technologies and systems have a component that looks at bio-refineries, research and development. The expert group on science and technology looks at a broad range of more basic scientific questions related to energy.
We have listed bilateral relationships where a bio-energy component is under discussion. That includes Chile, the European Union, Brazil and India. Initial activities under those bilateral relationships are usually in the form of joint workshops.
I have presented the network in its breadth and depth. Its specific research and development is related to energy in four specific areas. It looks at the feedstocks — what types of agricultural crops residues are available. These are not food crops; they are wastes and residues — thing that would be left to rot. There is forest fibre, including to a large extent, waste and residue, livestock manure and municipal solid waste. It is basically the supply available from biomass to turn into energy. To turn it into or convert it to energy, a number of technologies are used. These include combustion, which is familiar to everyone — the burning of wood or whatnot.
There is a new technology known as gasification, where you produce a synthetic gas to make electricity, as well as pyrolysis where you make oil from the bio-fibres and residues that can be turned into heat and power, electricity, and other fuels. Some of the fermentation and digestions turn into gases. That is how you convert it to energy.
Energy production from biomass is aided and you get multiple products such as energy, chemicals and bio- materials. We call those types of processes bio-plexes and bio-refineries. Research and development also looks at areas of sustainability and measurement tools to ensure that the proper life cycle analysis of all these future technologies are taken into account, in order to set appropriate policies.
Slide 9 shows a number of recent research and development successes; I will not go through them all. They stem from the resource feedstocks component to various harvesting and collection systems, to various conversion technologies to energy, including some environmental criteria that have been established for biofuels — that is, the best places to establish biofuel plants.
On slide 10, we list some of our research and development partners and the four areas of research. There are quite a few on the feedstock area, federal-provincial, universities, industries — many different organizations, extending to various landowners as well. On the conversion, there are similar organizations, including Sustainable Development Technology Canada which has a substantial bio-energy program.
Some of the organizations that look at bio-refineries include NSERC, the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council; Industry Canada's IRAP program; the Centre québécois de valorisation des biotechnologies; BIOTECanada; and the Council of Energy Ministers, which is a federal-provincial grouping of ministers of energy that specifically look at biofuels.
My last slide illustrates some of the CBIN communication tools. There is a public website. There is also a private website on which we distribute more specific data and information reports. We just ask that people register and they are certainly welcome to the information. We post project information, research and development project information and we have a particular brochure for the general public as well.
[Translation]
Daniel Montplaisir, Assistant Professor, KRUGER industrial chair on green technologies; Centre de recherche en pâtes et papiers, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières: Mr. Chair, thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak to this committee. My name is Daniel Montplaisir and I am an Assistant Professor at UQTR, and the Kruger industrial chair on green technologies, as well as a member of the Centre intégré en pâtes et papiers.
To give you some of my background, I have only been at the centre for one year. I have about 18 years of experience in the industrial sector, a good many of which were spent with Kruger, a pulp and paper producer. My areas of expertise are mainly in pulp and paper, which is what I will be talking about today.
The Centre intégré en pâtes et papiers is located on the University Campus in Trois-Rivières. There we have equipment and resources. This centre brings together several organizations involved in training and research, which makes it a centre that is specialized in pulp and paper. This specialized centre focuses on technology transfer, applied research and support to industry. Mr. Brouillette and myself are part of the Centre de recherche en pâtes et papiers at the Université de Trois-Rivières. This centre focuses mainly on university research and students training at the master's and doctorate levels.
Currently at the Centre intégré en pâtes et papiers, we mainly do what is called ``traditional'' research, that is pulp and paper processes, pulp procedures, et cetera; we have developed an innovation sector that is more particularly focused on bio-refining, the development of bio and nanotechnologies, as well as the use of new sources of fibre. That is what my green technology research chair mainly focuses on.
To come back to that chair, it is mainly dedicated to forestry bio-refining and a concentrated effort is being made to develop green technology, that is technology that has little impact on the environment during the bio-refining.
``Bio-refining'' refers to the breakdown of material, wood or lignocellulosic material, in order to make chemical products, as referred to by your previous witness.
I am a strong advocate of forestry bio-refining. I think that given the extent of the current crisis in the pulp and paper sector, it is of utmost importance that we develop new markets.
To give you an example of the current situation, between 2000 and 2009 the newsprint market declined by 42 per cent in North America, which is unprecedented in history. There is very little hope that that will increase one day; on the contrary, it will continue to decline. The same applies to a lesser extent to other paper grades: any paper used for printing and for what I call rapid consumption media, that is newspapers and magazines. One could also include advertizing inserts. Therefore new products must be developed.
The paper industry has the advantage of already possessing the necessary infrastructure to harvest wood in the forest and to bring it to urban centres. We have the infrastructure, the energy, the workers, the organization, and that is a significant advantage when it comes to integrating forestry bio-refining into these operations. However, great challenges still remain.
With respect to bio-refining in general, first generation material — sugarcane, corn starch and vegetable oil — are materials whose technologies are relatively well known compared to forestry bio-refining; these are materials that can be more easily transformed than wood.
With respect to wood and forest material, we face significant technological challenges in terms of hydrolysis and transformation for the purposes of creating chemical products and bio-products, however the advantage of wood is that. . . The problem was the use of resources normally used for food, what was called the ``Food vs. Fuel'' debate in the U.S. The problem dealt with resources normally being used for food being used instead to produce chemical products and energy. In various countries, including Asia, there was pressure on rice prices for example and corn prices in Mexico. Therefore, the advantage of using forest material is that it removes bio-refining from the food chain.
For all those reasons I think that bio-refining is a solution of choice.
To come back to our university research, and our funding, our research is mainly funded by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. We also occasionally obtain private funding for our research. That is the case with my research chair as well as that of Mr. Brouillette. We are fortunate to have this, but we are the exceptions in our sector.
With respect to our pulp and paper research centre, the programs are excellent, and they provide very good support to university research. The current problem is the lack of funding for short-term projects involving applied research. Given the extent of the forestry crisis, room should be made for less fundamental research and more applied research instead, that could provide more rapid technology transfer to the industry in order to prevent events such as plant closures and even the breakdown of infrastructure.
François Brouillette, Assistant Professor, CIBA industrial chair on paper chemicals, Centre de recherche en pâtes et papiers, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières: Mr. Chairman, thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak to you about the research chair. I am from the Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, CRPP, the academic part of the Centre intégré sur la recherche en pâtes et papiers.
As research chair, my background is in chemistry and environmental science. I have working experience in public- private partnerships at the Quebec Environment Ministry and at LPM Technologies, a small business in the area of specialized chemicals for pulp and paper. I also have experience at CIBA, a multinational corporation working in pulp and paper chemicals. I have been at the Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières as CIBA industrial research chair since 2005.
The chair, which was created in 2005, is a partnership between the Université de Québec à Trois-Rivières and the industry (CIBA). We are located on campus, in the facilities of the Centre intégré en pâtes et papiers. The City of Trois- Rivières is a major centre for pulp and paper research. We are attempting to develop new pathways to research in pulp and paper while staying close to our basic skills.
A research chair generally involves a very small number of members. Right now, it is made up of master's and doctoral students, three post-doctoral fellows, one research professional and one technical assistant. We also receive many undergraduate interns, both from here and abroad, who are attracted by the international reputation of the pulp and paper research that is being done in Trois-Rivières.
What led to the creation of the chair? In 2005, R&D in pulp and paper in Trois-Rivières was moving increasingly from producers to suppliers in the industry. Many pulp and paper companies had had to close their research centres. There was increasing reliance on suppliers to develop new technology. At the time, CIBA was a supplier of pulp and paper so it seemed logical to fund a chair to proceed with research, especially since this was an academic environment independent from the company.
The fact that Canada is an important market for suppliers of pulp and paper specialty chemicals and that partnerships between universities and the industry are beneficial to both attracted human resources and unique equipment to the CIPP.
When the chair was created, the main objective at the time was to work on the development of value-added paper to replace newsprint. The way to achieve that was to proceed without any major changes to the plant processes where mostly newsprint was manufactured. The point was to use chemical additives to allow the manufacture of value-added grades. At the time, the benefits for Canada were the ease of transition toward value-added grades and an increase in competitiveness with printers, because these value-added grades are used for commercial printing such as magazines. This ran in parallel with the development of a critical mass of researchers in the field and an increase in the local production of specialized chemical products.
We realized that the industry suppliers, who also do their own development now, are located outside Canada. I myself worked for a Canadian producer who, over time, sold its assets to a foreign corporation. We saw that the entire market was developing outside Canada. Our work was one way to repatriate local production to Canada when it came to the additives used in the industry.
Funding of the chair is based on an industrial and private partnership. Our main partner is the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC). The Council has several programs that fund the chair, including CRD research and many others. NSERC is an essential partner for our research. Even though we deplore the fact that short- term projects are not given the same consideration, I have noted that even though projects have to be spread over a period of five years, there is some flexibility along the way. We were able to convince the council to maintain our funding, but given the context, we had to change the course of our research somewhat in order to adapt it to the current situation. The council fully understands the situation. This way, it was possible to maintain the funding even though we were not continuing the chair's research exactly according to the initial plan.
CIBA was the industrial partner at the time. It provides essential support by explaining the viewpoint of the industry. It is important to get feedback from the industrial side, something that is often missing in an academic environment. CIBA was bought out by BASF, but does continue to support the chair nevertheless.
Our total budget is $2 million over five years. That may seem high, but a significant part of the budget is used for pilot projects and those are expensive. A large part is used for production trials for paper or chemicals.
Since 2005, our objective has been to save the most newsprint paper machines we can in eastern Canada not through process modifications but by adding chemical additives. Initially, the immediate objective was to improve paper printability by looking for two essential parameters, a good surface cohesion of paper and a good uniformity of the sheet.
However, that is not sufficient in the current context. We must turn to something else, because even the market for value-added paper is on the decline. We have made the change recently, specifically in the past few months, as we are working on new projects in the laboratory.
Therefore, rather than using additives to produce value-added printing paper, we will turn to chemical modifications of cellulose or lignocellulosic fiber, because there are lignums and cellulose in the fibers, and chemically and permanently modify the properties of the fibers in order to incorporate them in other types of materials than paper or in more specialized paper.
Right now, there are processes that have existed for many years to achieve these objectives. However, we have to adapt to the context of green chemistry and respecting the environment. Processes exist to do that, but they are not necessarily suitable for today's environmental requirements. So there is some research that remains to be done on that. The products that can be produced are lower volume products than newsprint of course, but they can be attributed to one or two plants in Quebec or Canada. I am referring to grease resistant and super absorbent paper, special packaging, even printed electronics; there will be a need for support paper that can print electronics, plastic replacements, et cetera.
The current work of the chair is that which is most oriented to the future: modification of the hydrophobicity level of fibers, which means being able to adjust the degree of resistance to water or grease in a fiber by modifying it, but under certain conditions, with a modification that could be done on an industrial scale without having to make major changes to the process.
Second, we are looking for ways to consolidate the fibrous structure, which means that we want more resistant and more easily recyclable fibres. These are two somewhat opposite properties, but we must find a way of obtaining them. There is also application in specific grades.
Finally, let us not forget that we will continue producing traditional paper, because there will always be a market for this paper, be it only for wrapping paper or for hygienic tissue. Some grades of paper will remain, not all paper grades will disappear overnight. We must keep our expertise in this field because those grades will still be there.
On the next page, you will find an example of results that will satisfy the curiosity of those who would like to know how fibres can be modified to make them more hydrophobic. At the bottom of the page we see three sheets of paper. In black, at the bottom, we see the fibres of a sheet of paper. And we see a drop of water placed on top of them. The more the drop of water rises above the surface of the fibre, the more hydrophobic the fibre is. Thus, through a simple chemical modification that we did — and this is also a green chemistry reaction that applies the principles of green chemistry — we can reach this objective at various levels of hydrophobicity. This is a small example of what we are doing.
In conclusion, let me take off my chair holder's hat and put on my hat as director of master's and doctorate programs in pulp and paper at l'Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières to say that it is important that we not forget the aspect of training qualified personnel so as to continue developing new projects and to keep the industry going ahead. This is because we have noticed that in the recent past several engineers and several scientists left the industry because plants or research centres were closed down. These people left, often at a young age, and even if things get better, they will not return to this industry because they have turned the page and gone on to do something else. More than ever, it is important to maintain programs of post-graduate training especially for scientific research.
In the field of pulp and paper and in the adjacent fields that we are now developing, these programs must be attractive for undergraduate students, because once they have acquired a baccalaureate in engineering or in chemistry, they could be attracted to post-graduate studies in pulp and paper. Therefore, we must adapt these training programs to the new fields of research that we want to develop. Nevertheless, we must keep our pulp and paper profile because as I said, this industry will always exist to some degree and we need people that have the knowledge to keep the industry moving ahead.
At l'Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, we have gone in that direction, we already had a master's and a doctoral degree in pulp and paper science and a doctorate in paper engineering. We have already begun to modify these programs to adapt to the new situation.
Senator Poulin: Ms. Preville, I want to thank you for your presentation. You have a very impressive partnership network. Basically, you are seeking out all possible partnerships, national and provincial, in this industry, with a view to developing an entirely new economy.
I would like to have a better notion of the results of your work. I was looking at the three main strategies: networking among various partners, working with the regulatory system and with international cooperation. Could you give us an example of a partnership in a concrete project to show that your networking has succeeded?
Ms. Preville: With your permission, I will ask my colleague from Forestry Canada if he would like to tell us what is being done in order to understand the resources.
[English]
Jeff Karau, Project Officer, Canada Forest Service, Canadian Biomass Innovation Network: We have a number of affiliations, both with agriculture and another international group called the International Energy Agency, the IEA. We are working on a project entitled BIMAT.
BIMAT is an inventory mapping system that uses GIS to identify where residues are, what the proximity is of those distances to a potential site for an activity to use them, and how available those resources are. We partner with Agriculture Canada on this and we partner with the Canada Centre for Remote Sensing. The U.S. has quite a bit of interest in this activity. We have presented this model in the European forum where it has been well reviewed.
It is a good collaborative tool, but it also makes optimum use of the proximity of those resources to a potential user. Canada is a huge country. Yes, we have immense resources, but sometimes the sheer distance between the resources and an end user is prohibitive. You can consider this a siting tool to identify what level of material, feedstock or residue is available. That assists the project in identifying what level of activity could be sustainable over a long period of time. You do not want to have everyone trying to compete for the same resource.
Senator Poulin: Is the tool an opportunity for revenue generation for the government? Mr. Mohamed is eager to answer that question.
Hamid Mohamed, Assistant Program Director, OERD, Canadian Biomass Innovation Network: This is in the first phase. It is the developmental phase, because it is part of the research and development program. However, we are not quite sure exactly where we will go with it yet. It started in the Province of Saskatchewan. Other agencies, such as the space agency, are involved in it, too. We are looking at international cooperation. We are looking at provincial cooperation as well. As I said, this is phase one and there is still phase two and phase three to go.
We have another tool in Natural Resources Canada called RETScreen, and it is the siting of renewable energy and energy facilities. It is actually all over the world now. Everyone uses it.
We initially gave it freely, and now many people are adding to it because they are helping build it. These things always need updating and expansion, and that is what is happening now, so we get the value from that too.
Senator Poulin: What is the value?
Mr. Mohamed: The value is being able to use that tool in Canada for a variety of other purposes.
Senator Poulin: Let me rephrase my question. ``Value'' for me also means revenues, and I am thinking that these are incredible research results done through partnerships in Canada. Is there a mechanism, a model, within your partnership to generate revenue because of the interest that is fostered in other countries.
Mr. Mohamed: Agriculture Canada is the leader on this, and I would have to leave that to them to decide.
[Translation]
Senator Poulin: Ultimately, research will help the pulp and paper industry to grow and to survive in Canada. You told us about concrete projects. Could you give us an example of a project whose success would benefit the industry or have a positive impact in the near future?
Mr. Montplaisir: I have been working for the research chair at the Université de Trois-Rivières since last December. The laboratory opened in May of this year, which is why we have not advanced very far in our projects. Nonetheless, there is a project that is heading towards a transfer of technology planned for the end of 2009. The research chair made the commitment to supply to Kruger, once or twice a year, a technological transfer to the industry that can be tested by the industry.
Kruger is an industrial partner that has a co-generation plant that produces large quantities of ash. We discovered that these ashes have a high calcium oxide content that we transformed into mineral pigment. This pigment can be added to paper to replace the clay pigment that comes from Brazil and from Georgia. With this project, we are attempting to transfer technology to the industry.
Senator Poulin: If I understand correctly, in your agreement with Kruger, the company is expecting you to offer concrete results that would contribute to its success?
Mr. Montplaisir: Yes, as a matter of fact.
Senator Poulin: This is an important and interesting agreement.
Mr. Montplaisir: It has a short-term phase and a long-term phase.
Senator Poulin: Mr. Brouillette, have you any comments?
Mr. Brouillette: This is more or less similar to our agreement with our partner CIBA because we are morally committed to supply technology. This technology should be really applicable to the industry within a period of five years. The existence of the chair is abundantly justified by successful technological transfer.
An example of technological transfer would be the improvement of printing paper by developing new chemical additives. We have developed an additive that decreases the amount of fibre detached from the surface of the sheet during printing. As this is a major problem, we developed a test for determining how much fibre is detached.
Afterward, we directly modified the fibre instead of adding a product to the pulp. The same additive had to be developed so that it could react with the fibre by attaching it directly. Moreover, this additive, which is added to the fibre, provides the same properties, but in a permanent way, independently of the amount of fibre retained in the sheet.
This is an example of a product that evolved and that is currently being used by the industry. A further technological transfer will be made later in order to modify the fibres.
Senator Poulin: I do not want to pry secrets out of you, but in your agreement with CIBA, who is responsible for marketing new technological products? Is it the private company or is it the chair?
Ms. Brouillette: All the chairs at l'Université de Trois-Rivières work in a more or less similar way. Given the fact that NSERC is funding the research, we must follow the rules that apply to the federal government's granting agencies.
The discoveries are the property of the researchers or of the university, not of the company. Besides, the company has a short period of time in which it can take measures to obtain a patent. The company can then obtain an operating licence and royalties are paid to the university. The company must do this within a short period of time because the students have to publish their results and they need to do this in order to get their diplomas, especially at the doctorate level.
In short, the company decides whether or not it is interested in the technology. If it is interested, it goes through the process of obtaining a patent and the university grants it an operating licence.
Mr. Montplaisir: The patent is owned by the university and by the researchers. The industry has an exclusive licence for a limited period of time. Ultimately, the discovery will be open to the general Canadian market after a certain number of years in a period of time that is not as long as the duration of the patent.
Senator Rivard: I address my question to the two doctors who are here this morning. Are there any other pulp and paper research chairs in Quebec?
Mr. Brouillette: At the Université de Trois-Rivières, there is one research chair in biotechnology and environment and another chair that specializes in value-added paper. In other universities in Quebec, there are also research chairs in the field of pulp and paper, such as the Polytechnique and McGill University among others.
Senator Rivard: Given the decrease in demand for newsprint and as the price has gone down, does deinking remain viable?
Mr. Montplaisir: I worked on developing a big deinking project with Kruger. Two years ago, we were supposed to install it at Trois-Rivières and the project was dropped because of a lack of supplies. China also put some pressure on the export of used paper.
I would say that the recycling of paper into newsprint is less attractive than it was 10 or 15 years ago. Biorefining has to do with forestry residue. Urban residue could be biorefined to produce other things than recycled paper. This could potentially lead to new markets.
Senator Rivard: Have you done any research into this?
Mr. Montplaisir: It is one among many elements on my list.
Senator Rivard: Regarding the conversion of biomass, we know that everyone is complaining about excessive urban waste and we know that incineration is perhaps the least harmful solution because most incinerators recover the heat to make electricity, or co-generation, or even for other technologies like pyrolysis.
Is there much demand for this, or are most municipal and regional incinerators strictly conventional incinerators that waste the energy derived from combustion? Is there more and more pyrolysis, co-generation and so forth? What is your role in developing these technologies? Does this involve financial assistance? In brief, what are the problems?
Ms. Preville: Most of the work done by the network concerning municipal waste goes on at the feed-stock level; this is constantly changing, and that is the biggest problem. As it is never stable, the technology also has to change and adapt. In this field, we are mainly looking at combustion, because combustion can deal with differences in feed stock. This does not exclude looking at new technologies like pyrolysis in the future, but there are many challenges and it will really take a long time. I do now know whether Mr. Mohamed would like to add anything.
[English]
Mr. Mohamed: As you know, there are packaging changes over a period of time, over which we have little control. We are looking at the various technologies and they can be the base for a variety of things. Mostly, we are working on agricultural and forestry biomass, but there is a company in Quebec, Enerkem, that is gasifying municipal solid waste now. There is a plant in Quebec and they are building one in Alberta.
[Translation]
Senator Rivard: Still on the topic of biomass, getting rid of what we refer to as pathological waste costs municipalities and hospitals a tremendous amount of money.
Have you already considered other options? I know that there is only one incinerator in Quebec — I believe it is located in the region. It costs clients a fortune. Have you already examined other ways, aside from burial or incineration, to deal with waste in this sector?
Ms. Preville: No, the network has yet to examine this sector and, for the time being, it is not studying it.
[English]
Senator Fairbairn: Thank you for bringing this exciting story to our committee. You talked about working with other provinces, both in agriculture and forestry. I am from Lethbridge, Alberta, and we have agriculture in every corner of Alberta and we have many trees.
Have any of our universities, either in Edmonton, Calgary or even in Lethbridge, connected with you. It seems to be becoming ever more difficult. Of course, we are in the mountains and that means we have a lot of weather you have to add to what, otherwise, in other parts of Canada, would not be there. Have the universities hooked up with you? I hope they have.
Mr. Mohamed: Thank you, senator. We have many connections with Alberta and we have discussions with both departments within the province. We had a meeting in Ottawa last September, where we invited people from all provinces and there were several people from Alberta. One of our colleagues from Alberta participates in the international agency bio-refinery task force. Her name is Kirsty Piquette.
We are building this network. We are planning to meet with all the universities that have energy research centres at some point, but that will be later on. That is part of the CBIN networking plan.
Senator Fairbairn: Given the difficulties in some of these industries, it is tremendous what you are doing and even more tremendous that you are reaching forward and helping in other parts of the country. Sometimes, people think it only comes in one part of Canada, but it is all over. It certainly is in my province and I am delighted to hear that.
Mr. Mohamed: We are cognizant of regional diversities, so we have to think regionally while thinking nationally.
Ms. Preville: Of all the energy sources that the country has, and we are fortunate to have them, bio-energy is the only energy source that is common in the sense of interest across all the provinces and territories. Although, it has its own regional differences, every province and territory has an interest in it and bio-energy is quite a priority.
Senator Eaton: Ms. Preville, you have a very impressive linkage system. Do you invest or link to the private sector?
Ms. Preville: The federal component to the network is responsible for some investments in research and development. Of that, some goes to the private sector, some directly to universities and a majority of it is performed in the federal laboratories of Natural Resources Canada and the National Research Council of Canada, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, et cetera. Therefore, yes, a portion makes it way to the private sector.
Senator Eaton: I asked that question because there seems to be a lot of interest in biofuels, specifically, either made from ethanol, chicken fat or cellulose. There have been so many. Now that we have hybrid cars, how far away are we from putting biofuel in our car?
I am speaking of cars, planes or any form of transportation. I am thinking of transportation, but you can get on to heating if you would like.
Mr. Mohamed: There are known technologies. For example, there are companies that have gasification technologies which have been used for heat and power. There is a good example in Victoria. Dockside Green has chosen a company called Nexterra. Of course, Enerkem is in Quebec and it has gasification technology, and heat and power, too. There is a company called Iogen that has a fermentation technology for producing ethanol from cellulose.
Senator Eaton: Yes, but how far away are we from being able to use it for transportation purposes?
Mr. Mohamed: There is currently ethanol in gasoline.
Senator Eaton: I cannot fill up my car, or put it in a plane or boat.
Mr. Mohamed: I cannot tell you that because these technologies are under development. They have to build plants and things like that. It depends on the prevailing economic conditions and the price of oil and so forth.
Senator Eaton: Is Canada advanced in that; are we on the cutting edge or trailing behind? Where do you place us in the world of biofuels?
Mr. Mohamed: We are on the cutting edge of developing technologies. We have good companies with leading technologies in the world.
Ms. Preville: We are at the cutting edge specifically for ethanol or biofuels made from cellulosic material, not from traditional grain or corn, which is passé. We can produce those items that you find at the pumps. We will use the new technologies of wood, fibre and other cellulosic fibres — that would otherwise be wasted.
Senator Eaton: Are we a decade away?
Mr. Mohamed: Many factors go into adoption of a new technology. Sometimes it is quick in that it may be five or 10 years. Sometimes it is decades.
Senator Eaton: Does the minister give you priorities or internally do you decide where to put your energies and money? Do you have such a wide spectrum of responsibility that you cannot prioritize?
Ms. Preville: There are a couple of answers to that question. First, the priorities for investment of the funds that CBIN uses are usually reviewed on a four-year cycle. That is the money in the Main Estimates of Natural Resources Canada. It is done with the assistance of our interdepartmental partners. Second, priorities are given when programs are identified in the federal budgets. At that point, directions are given as well as the sums of funding available.
Senator Eaton: In the course of these hearings, we heard from a very interesting young First Nations doctor from Lakehead University, who pointed not First Nations individuals who are interested in forestry are unable to study forestry. He said that there are not the appropriate bridges in place from mainstream departments such as yours.
Do you have a bridging system or have First Nations students from Northern Quebec, for instance, interested in your programs?
Mr. Brouillette: Not in my chair —
[Translation]
Senator Eaton: You do not have such students in your faculty?
Ms. Brouillette: From the first nations, no, not to my knowledge.
[English]
Mr. Brouillette: We have many foreign students. It is extremely difficult to recruit in Canada and Quebec for graduate studies in pulp and paper. Therefore, we have many foreign students coming to our university. When they finish, they want to stay here and work in the industry, but it is difficult to attract students from Canada.
Senator Mahovlich: My question is similar. I was told that the key plant for ethanol was seaweed. They could extract more ethanol from seaweed than any other plant. We have been burning trees all our lives. You would think that the tree would have more ethanol than seaweed.
Have we done enough study to see how much ethanol there is in a tree?
[Translation]
Mr. Montplaisir: In the research that I am conducting, ethanol production is not necessarily the focus.
We are also looking at more specialized products, with a higher value than ethanol.
Forest matter is something that will be determined in the future, but some things are much easier to manufacture than ethanol. If we compare it to Brazil's sugar cane or corn, we can see that forest matter certainly poses more difficulties. However, forest matter, in addition to the cellulose that can be manufactured from ethanol and other derivatives, does also give us lignin which has a chemical structure that can result in products that are completely different from ethanol, which can replace the monomers that are manufactured currently from oil, for more renewable resources.
[English]
Mr. Mohamed: I presume you are talking about algae. It will be used more to produce biodiesel and airplane fuel rather than ethanol. That area needs a great deal of research. Not a great deal is known about how to grow algae and how it grows in Canada. The National Research Council has a program that includes algae and is building a network across the country to work on algae.
Senator Plett: One of your forms of energy is livestock manure. I am from Manitoba. One of our largest problems is the large number of hogs. People want to build more hog barns. One of the issues we have is spreading the hog manure. Applications are turned down on a regular basis because they do not have enough land to dispose of the manure. It seems logical to me that I would see plants all over Manitoba trying to create energy out of this hog manure while saving one of our problems. Quebec also has many hogs and has the same problem.
Could you comment on that please?
Mr. Mohamed: Our program is to produce biogas from hog manure. It is a known technology, but the regulations and standards are not in place yet. We are not involved in that step. The Province of Manitoba actually has a strategy for biofuel and this is probably part of it. How much manure you can spread on land, I will have to leave to Agriculture Canada.
Senator Finley: You have given very interesting presentations. Could you tell me roughly, in today's dollars, what a 42 per cent decrease in newsprint represents?
Mr. Montplaisir: For example, the price of journal paper varies between $600 and $700 for 5 million tonnes; $500 per tonne is a rough estimate.
Senator Finley: It is roughly $1.5 billion per year.
Can you estimate a total amount of money being spent between public and private enterprises on research and development to replace the $1.5 billion, if indeed, that money can be replaced?
Mr. Montplaisir: Presently, the private sector is not largely involved in pulp and paper. Most of the companies contribute to FPInnovations as a consortium of research. Right now, most of the mills do not contribute because they are part of AbitibiBowater and they are in some financial straits.
Senator Finley: I have a question for the Canadian Biomass Innovation Network. You have this huge network of linkages. Let me concentrate on the linkage within Canada. Can you give the committee an estimate of the total value of research and development, both public and private that is being done through your Canadian network?
Ms. Preville: For the 2008-09 fiscal year, the research and development funds that CBIN manages are $5.25 million per year. Our leverage in the past two to four years has been about 2.5 times that amount, which would raise it to about $13 million per year.
You have to appreciate, however, that those are just leverages on the dollars that CBIN invests. Many other programs across the country invest, from NSERC, from other federal departments, from regional development agencies, and so on. I do not have a total figure for you today.
Senator Finley: I am a rookie on this issue. I have only been doing this for a couple of weeks and this is my second meeting. It strikes me that one sector of the tree economy we are losing $1.5 billion per year. One of the overarching networks is Canadian Biomass Innovation Network. Presumably, you can leverage about $13 million a year, which would take around 100 years to replace the $1.5 billion.
Within Canada, is there an oversight where I could go and say to someone, ``Let us see the strategy for this?'' In my two meetings, I have met a number of different organizations and your organization represents a huge network of other organizations. You have ties with private industry and the education system, and so on.
Where is the overarching strategy? Where is the thing that is saying, ``We will invest in anticipation of getting a return?'' I know that research and development is a good thing, but I am looking at $1.5 billion, which represents drops — that is, a whole bunch of ancillary things that have gone, probably never to come back as you say. Where is the strategy for that?
Mr. Brouillette: On our side, there is a forest sector initiative sponsored by NSERC and led by FPInnovations in Montreal. They have four different topics in that program but it is still a small amount of money. A $1 million budget for four networks and 60 or 70 Canadian scientists is not that much.
Senator Finley: Presumably, there is an industrial component and there must be an agricultural component. Is there some kind of overarching, either industrial or public strategy for this? No?
Mr. Mohamed: The Department of Agriculture is working on strategies, as is the forestry sector. Various provinces also have strategies. This is a complex area, from basic biotechnology and genetics, and so on, down to the farm. To have an overall structure for science and technology and for investment et cetera is a daunting thing.
Senator Finley: Daunting, it may be; however, I will continue to ask the question. Again, I go back to the fact that we are losing $1.5 billion a year. I think all of us should be extraordinarily concerned about that loss. I would imagine that one of the strategic imperatives, if you were in a corporate world, would be to say, ``This is where we have to focus the money to replace our immediate revenue stream.''
Ms. Preville: I fully appreciate your question, Senator Finley. It relates, I think, primarily to the pulp and paper industry, which is not a particular focus of the Canadian Biomass Innovation Network, so it is virtually impossible for us to answer at this time.
Senator Finley: You do have a considerable interest in trees; am I right?
Ms. Preville: Correct.
Senator Finley: They have also a particular interest in trees.
Ms. Preville: For different purposes, yes.
Senator Finley: Absolutely, but I recall the story of the invention of Post-it notes. It was the same thing. By accident, there was an overlap of something else that created one of the world's largest selling consumer products.
I will end the question because I am obviously going somewhere that probably one should not go. I wanted to see the relationships and find the person in charge.
The Chair: Forestry is a provincial jurisdiction; however, when there is a crisis in the industry, the provinces ask the federal government to play a bigger role or to be at that table.
The government has invested major amounts of money in different sectors of the industry to help the communities that have been impacted, for example, $1 billion for the Community Adjustment Fund. The federal government, through its regional development agencies, has supported communities hit hard by the global recession.
I see many companies looking at biomass and at innovation. As you have said, Mr. Mohamed, this occurs across provinces and territories.
You then also see another billion dollars. I want to know if stakeholders for the pulp and paper producers want to increase their energy efficiency and environmental performance of their operations. There is no doubt, in my mind, that if we were not facing the present economic crisis, there is a good chance that you would not be here today as witnesses. We would not have the stakeholders at the same table to look at the new products of tomorrow.
I have seen a new, innovative product called light-weight panels. A 4-by-8 veneer panel takes two people to move from one place to another, whereas, the new lightweight panels will require only one person.
With the money invested today, do you think the federal government should play a bigger role in managing the forest sector on private and Crown lands across Canada?
I would like to have your opinions on that, knowing that you are doing research and development. No doubt, at the end of the day, your research and development must be commercialized. I see the grid of partners, Ms. Preville. What are your comments on the role of the federal government in the management of forestry?
Ms. Preville: One of the clear roles of the federal government relates to research and development in all areas of energy. The provincial responsibilities extend, not just to forestry, but to all energy resources. However, the key role, and one where we have been given the mandate, is in research and development. We continue to allocate those resources in the best way possible, in partnership with as many organizations and experts as possible.
[Translation]
Mr. Brouillette: In our everyday life, it is the granting agencies that really help us with our research, and that is the primary impact that the federal government is having on our research. As for the transfer of technology, we can do some of this with the grants we receive.
For instance, at the CIPP, we are integrated at the college level, which enables us to transfer this technology provincially, because colleges come under provincial jurisdiction. As far as we are concerned, the funding of research is the primary sector in which the government can play a role.
The Chair: Should I conclude that the federal government should be investing more in the research and development of new products and/or be sitting at the table with their provincial partners? In my opinion, this is not simply a provincial matter since there are community-based initiatives. I believe that the communities have an important role to play in the crisis that we are currently experiencing, whether it be at the provincial, territorial or federal level.
What is the percentage of research and development that is currently commercialized compared to that which is not, either in the forestry sector or in the pulp and paper sector?
Ms. Preville: That is a very good question. I cannot provide you with exact percentages. In research and development — and perhaps my university colleagues will support me on this point — there are so many aspects of risk and types of research and development.
Is this very long-term scientific research and development designed to completely change the industry, but which will not see the light of day until 34 years have elapsed? Or is this something done in the short term in order to resolve an immediate problem?
In this instance, the research and development is completely different. That is why I am not able to provide you with an exact percentage.
Mr. Montplaisir: I agree with you that it is difficult to have an exact figure. As regards the research in the forestry and pulp and paper sector that is done in conjunction with the Canadian university partnerships, I think that we have a high percentage of the short- and medium-term projects.
We are researchers who are in constant contact with industry and the private sector and I do believe that we are somewhat privileged as far as this is concerned. As regards the research done by our industrial chairs, we could easily say that more than 50 per cent of the research will have an impact on our respective partners. Without generalizing, I can confirm that we are very close to industry.
[English]
The Chair: Mr. Mohamed, we often hear that for the industry and the forests of tomorrow, we will need to implement plantations and do a lot of silviculture. Do you have any comments on that subject, given your experience?
Linked to that particular field of silviculture and plantations, and looking at your partners, agencies, departments, and stakeholders, what is the future for the softwood and hardwood industries?
Mr. Karau: I will try to answer. First, in terms of plantation forestry for bio-energy, CBIN is actively involved in developing plantations. The advantage with plantations is the higher volumes and, obviously, the proximity to the end- user.
Another senator mentioned utilizing manure. This is an ideal opportunity for various manures to be used for fertilizations because it is not a food crop.
We do softwood plantations and silviculture for the production of dimension products, like two-by-fours. There is better uniformity and so forth. However, our natural forest in Canada is so large that it will probably continue to be the main source for both hard- and softwood products. There is some opportunity for specialty products that you would grow specific hardwoods for, but the work CBIN does focuses primarily on short-rotation systems that produce high volumes of material over a very short period of time.
The Chair: Regarding the answer you gave me about manure in follow up to Senator Plett's question, would fertilizing pre-plantations accelerate the growth of our trees?
Mr. Karau: It is a highly intensive form of management. It is not something you could undertake on a huge scale. On a small scale, it increases the productivity. It also provides a method of disposal for a product that sometimes has a negative value.
The Chair: Do we have we any projects or pilot projects?
Mr. Karau: Yes.
The Chair: Where are those pilot projects?
Mr. Karau: There are a couple in Quebec affiliated with the Jardin botanique de Montréal. We also have pilot projects in southern Quebec close to Huntington. These pilot projects would be approximately between 5 hectares and 20 hectares.
The Chair: Have we any such pilot projects in Western Canada?
Mr. Karau: We have plantations and short-rotation systems. However, I do not think we are doing much in the West on the manure disposal issue.
Senator Eaton: We had a professor here from the Maritimes who was said that we are short of good-quality hardwood trees in Canada. Some furniture makers have to import quality hardwood because we do not have hardwood readily accessible of a good quality for things like furniture and specialty items like mouldings.
Are we looking at new hardwood growths that we could better manage? The projects for hardwood trees are very long term.
Mr. Karau: Yes. Without getting into the details, the time to produce a tree of size and quality for furniture production in Canada is long. Based on our climate, there is a very small area within Canada that produces good hardwoods. Primarily, we produce a large volume of softwoods. The best hardwood-growing areas are well populated as they are the most southern areas of Canada.
One opportunity is a co-benefit with CBIN is some of the short-rotation work with poplar. Poplar has been maligned as being not a very popular hardwood. However, it is emerging to have a number of uses. One of them, interestingly enough, is for mouldings. A moulding has no structural requirements. One merely wants a wood that is easily shaped and looks good. Poplar can fill some of those gaps in hardwoods.
Looking at other species, I do not think a great deal of research is looking at embellishing our hardwood production. There are some flooring activities and so forth, but for furniture, et cetera, much of the hardwood is outsourced.
The Chair: Could you provide us with information on who we should contact regarding pilot projects with manure?
Mr. Karau: Primarily, your best point for that would be Agriculture Canada since it is an agricultural by-product.
The Chair: When we talk about biomass and green opportunities of tomorrow, they are twofold. First are biomass thermal plants and second are wood pellet plants. We see that in Sweden and Austria who are world leaders in pellet production.
Have you any comments about the future of the industry in Canada regarding pellet production? At a point in time how will it compete in the event that we have better markets?
I am a firm believer that we should be looking at niche markets. There will be a time when wood pellets will compete for trees and industries will go back to lumber production.
Mr. Karau: Currently, almost all of Canada's pellet production is exported. Ironically, there is a very limited domestic market. If we have an opportunity, it could be to build our domestic capacity for pellet use. An interesting issue and one of interest to the energy sector is co-firing with coal or coal substitution using pellets. Canada is also involved, through CBIN and the IEA, with a number of activities looking at a modification called torrefaction — the pellet becomes even denser in terms of energy. This is of interest because it has more caloric energy, more weather resistance and does not produce noxious gases, et cetera. We are actively involved in research on pellet production.
Pellet production is one way that the forest sector thinks might be another activity to supplement their business as usual.
The Chair: Should government encourage Canadians to heat their residences and commercial interest with pellets?
Ms. Preville: From CBIN's perspective and realm, it is not a question that we are in a position to answer.
The Chair: You have no comments on it?
Ms. Preville: I have no comments.
The Chair: Brazil's research and development is examining efforts to identify winning combinations to help the country and world leaders in paper and pulp production. How does the Canadian pulp and paper industry compare with Brazil?
Mr. Montplaisir: Neither of us knows enough about the Brazilian industry to answer that question. I am sorry.
[Translation]
The Chair: Is there a great deal of research being done in Brazil, Europe and the United States? We know that the crisis is real.
Mr. Montplaisir: Scientific information circulates a great deal around the world. With all of the means available to us through the electronic documentation centres, before we begin our research, we do a biographical search and we look for the most relevant and recent information in the world. The information is there. If there is something interesting going on in Brazil, we can get our hands on it. There is a lot of information from Japan and China on many subjects, including processing, biorefining and bio-cellulosic technology. When the information is available and published, we can get it.
With respect to private research being carried out in certain countries, such as Brazil, perhaps, we do not always have access to the information. Public information circulates a great deal.
The Chair: You also said, and here I refer to the people from Trois-Rivières, that you were losing high numbers of skilled personnel in the pulp and paper sector as these people are leaving the industry and going elsewhere.
Mr. Montplaisir: Yes.
The Chair: And can you tell us, with the current situation, what percentage has left the industry?
Mr. Montplaisir: I can only talk about my personal experience with Kruger. If I take the example of the Trois- Rivières plant, where I worked recently, we are losing specialized managerial staff.
For a plant with 1,000 employees, we had managerial staff from between 160 and 165 employees. Currently, we have about 100 managerial employees working in specialized labour management, and engineers. It is particularly difficult to retain young engineers and professionals. Rather than work under a great deal of pressure in a difficult sector such as pulp and paper, if there is another sector, such as the aluminum industry, which is experiencing an economic boom and doing well, it is easy to make the choice to accept an equivalent salary and a more pleasant job in a stronger economic sector.
When I left Kruger to join the university, at age 42, I was the fourth youngest managerial employee in the plant. There were no longer any managerial employees under age 30. There were a few between the age of 30 and 40. This is the most problematic group in Quebec, it would appear.
When older managerial employees start retiring in massive numbers, there are very few young people with five to eight years of experience that are going to be able to succeed them.
Mr. Brouillette: We had many engineers in this age group who came to the Université de Trois-Rivières seeking a master's in the pulp and paper sector. They came from the chemical engineering and mechanical engineering sector. They did not know the pulp and paper sector. They obtained jobs in this sector and got their master's while working at the same time. Most of these people quit the program before completing their master's. They no longer wanted to work in this sector. We experienced an exodus of students. Currently, we have three students remaining in the program. These students are working for companies that still believe a great deal in research and are involved in it.. These are individuals who are doing their master's and who have the support of their employer in order to continue.
The Chair: What role does the National Research Council play in our company?
Ms. Preville: Mr. Mohamed will answer.
[English]
Mr. Mohamed: The National Research Council has a wide-range of research and development materials and bio- energy and biochemicals. They have set up a new program called the National Bioproducts Program and work with a variety of partners.
The Chair: I see you partners include NRC, the Biotechnology Research Institute, the Industrial Research Assistance Program, and the Institute for Chemical Process and Environmental Technology. At the end of the day, am I right to conclude that NRC plays an important role to commercialize directivity at the end of research and development? What impact does it have with your partners?
Mr. Mohamed: I will leave it for NRC to answer. They have mechanisms in place to commercialize what they are doing, and they work with companies, of course. How does it impact on our network? They are wonderful partners. Basically, we do not control the network. We work together with the various departments and agencies in the government to develop synergies and joint projects in some areas. The way the departments commercialize it is part of their commercialization activity.
The Chair: We will certainly have NRC as witnesses, so we will question the impact of commercialization of the projects.
[Translation]
In research and development, for the pulp and paper sector, could you tell me what percentage of the work is commercialized?
Mr. Brouillette: About 50 per cent. In our case, we are talking about the industrial research chairs. All of our findings are made public. Right now, we do not know how our findings are being used, but a good portion of the results are used.
[English]
The Chair: With all your sectors and your professionalism, your information was enlightening. In a snapshot or a Polaroid shot, what do you think the forestry industry of tomorrow for Canada will be in order to sustain economic development, job creation and our communities?
Mr. Karau: I think the future of the forest sector will be an increasingly diverse mix of activities. They will be producing conventional and novel products. The concept of the bio-refinery is something that probably holds great promise. We will have to be more adaptable and we will have to be able to respond or anticipate changes in market demands. We will do it right.
The Chair: Yes, because we are the best country.
[Translation]
Mr. Montplaisir: The way to see the future is to use the forest resource as fully as possible. This is a precious resource. We talked a great deal about lignocellulosic fibre. There is also the bark, branches that are left on the ground, and residues. These need to be used more. We grow high-quality wood in Canada. We need to make the best possible use of the proprieties of each product and residue.
Senator Eaton talked about the scarcity of hardwood. One way to resolve this problem is to use this hardwood when its proprieties and qualities are required. We can build furniture using products other than hardwood for those parts of the furniture that we do not see. This type of strategy enables us to make the best possible use of our fibre, wood, compound and biorefinery products, et cetera.
[English]
The Chair: On behalf of the committee, I would to thank each of you for being here this morning. It was very enlightening. If you feel that you want to add to the committee presentation, please do not hesitate to do so, by email or in writing.
For the senators, next Tuesday the committee will meet in camera to examine the draft report that was distributed this week. In addition to that, on Thursday we will be hearing from witnesses — and I know this is being cherished by Senator Eaton — who will be talking to us about the use of wood in the construction industry.
(The committee adjourned.)