“I want the House to pass this bill to committee. It gives businesses a tax credit to buy equipment that turns wasted heat into electricity. This will lower energy bills, create more power, and cut pollution without creating new government programs.”

“Madam Speaker, I am pleased to support Bill C-269, the heat recovery tax credit act, introduced by my Conservative colleague the member for Calgary Centre. At its core, the bill is about common sense. It is about making better use of energy that Canada already produces, strengthening Canadian industries and creating the conditions for businesses to invest, innovate and grow. It does not create another government bureaucracy or impose new regulations on Canadians. It encourages private sector investment and gives Canadian businesses an opportunity to turn otherwise wasted energy into an economic advantage. That is the kind of practical, results-driven approach Canada needs. The heat recovery tax credit act proposes a 30% non-refundable investment tax credit for equipment that captures waste heat from industrial processes and converts it into electricity. Why is my colleague’s proposal important? Electricity demand is growing. Steel mills, cement plants, chemical facilities, pulp and paper operations and refineries all use significant amounts of energy to generate heat. Much of that heat escapes through industrial processes and is lost. Estimates suggest that between 30% and 50% of heat generated through industrial processes may be wasted. That is energy Canadian businesses have already paid to produce but cannot fully put to productive use. The technology exists to recover some of that lost heat and convert it into electricity. It is proven, commercially available and already in use, but upfront costs can discourage investment and uptake, particularly when the tech falls outside of a company’s core operations. That means projects that could lower operating costs, improve efficiency and generate electricity may never proceed. Bill C-269 would help close that gap by encouraging businesses to invest their own capital in technology that delivers measurable economic and environmental benefits. It is about unlocking investment, not putting government in charge of it. As the Conservative shadow minister for infrastructure, I certainly recognize how critical reliable, affordable electricity is to Canadians’ everyday lives and, in a major way, for Canada’s economic future. Canada needs more power. Advanced manufacturing, artificial intelligence, data centres, population growth and, of course, new industrial development all increase demand for electricity. Canada’s ability to attract investment, develop natural resources, build infrastructure and compete internationally depends on reliable, affordable energy and electricity. The question is not whether more electricity is needed but whether legislators and policy-makers will create the conditions for the private sector to produce and use it. Canada needs major energy and infrastructure projects, but those projects require significant investment, complex approvals and years of planning and construction. Opportunities to generate additional electricity from infrastructure projects already built and operating cannot be overlooked. Waste heat recovery can be installed at existing industrial facilities without requiring additional fuel. Some systems can be deployed in as little as 12 to 24 months, rather than waiting years for new generating capacity. That means more efficient infrastructure, additional reliable electricity and the value add of potentially lowering operating costs for Canadian employers. Depending on the facility, electricity generated through waste heat recovery can be used on site or supplied to the grid to strengthen local power supply. Canadians should not be forced to choose between a strong economy and better environmental outcomes. For too long, Liberal governments have approached environmental policy through higher taxes, more regulations and additional costs on the industries and workers that drive Canada’s economy. Conservatives believe in innovation, Canadian ingenuity and practical solutions that deliver results. When a manufacturer can recover energy it would otherwise waste, lower electricity costs, improve productivity and reduce emissions at the same time, that benefits businesses, workers and the environment. Waste heat recovery can generate electricity without additional fuel or additional emissions from the recovery process. It allows businesses to do more with the resources they already have and use. There should not be limits on what Canadian innovation can accomplish when industry deploys productive uses for energy that would otherwise go to waste. In Lakeland, the County of Vermilion River has demonstrated how natural gas recovered from oil field operations can be put to productive use instead of being vented or flared. That project uses a different technology, but it demonstrates the same principle. Recovering wasted energy can create economic value and deliver environmental benefits. Bill C-269 would build on that principle by encouraging investment in equipment that converts industrial waste heat into electricity. More than ever, competitiveness must be at the centre of this discussion. Canadian businesses compete internationally every day for customers, capital, contracts and jobs. When manufacturers decide where to expand, they look at energy costs, taxes, regulations and the overall investment environment. When Canadian companies face higher costs and more barriers than their competitors, Canadian workers ultimately pay the price. Investment opportunities are lost, projects are delayed, and jobs and talent move elsewhere. Meanwhile, other countries encourage businesses to adopt industrial efficiency technologies like my colleague outlines here. The U.S. provides investment tax incentives for waste heat recovery. American facilities have used these systems to generate electricity from energy that would otherwise be lost. Canada should not stand on the sidelines while competitors create conditions that attract investment. Our manufacturers, resource sectors and workers deserve the opportunity to compete and succeed here at home. Bill C-269 would help address a gap in Canada’s tax system and encourage investment that might otherwise flow to competing jurisdictions. There is no doubt this legislation does not try to solve every challenge facing the energy system through another massive government program. Instead, it is a targeted measure built around private sector investment designed to achieve real outcomes. Businesses must make qualifying investments in equipment that produces tangible results. They make the decisions, choose the technology and take responsibility for the projects. Government’s role should be to create the conditions for investment and success, not to stand in the way of Canadians who want to invest, innovate, build and work. Canada already uses investment tax credits to encourage other clean energy technologies, like solar, wind and hydroelectric power. Waste heat recovery has not received the same targeted treatment despite its potential to generate electricity from energy already available. If the objective is more reliable electricity, greater efficiency and lower emissions, this technology deserves consideration too, and the opportunities extend across the country. In Alberta, waste heat recovery could support refining, petrochemicals and industrial manufacturing. In Ontario and Quebec, it could benefit steel, cement and chemical production. In British Columbia and Atlantic Canada, it could help forestry and pulp and paper operations. Across the Prairies, it could support food processing and other energy-intensive industries. This is not a proposal limited to one province or one sector. It has applications across Canadian industry, from coast to coast to coast. Canada faces a serious productivity challenge. For too long, productivity growth has lagged behind that of our major competitors. Businesses need confidence to invest in equipment, adopt technology, expand operations and create opportunities for workers. That confidence does not come from government announcements or promises. It comes from affordable energy, predictable rules, a competitive investment environment and the ability to get projects built. Sometimes that requires major reforms like cutting red tape, removing regulatory barriers and accelerating approvals, and sometimes it requires a targeted change that unlocks private capital for opportunities already within reach. That is what Bill C-269 would do. Instead of allowing valuable energy to go to waste, it would encourage businesses to put it to work. Instead of putting another burden on industry, it would create an incentive to invest. Instead of forcing a choice between economic growth and environmental improvement, it would support both. The impacts are clear: more electricity, lower operating costs, stronger productivity, reduced emissions, more competitive Canadian industries and more efficiency all around. Those are results Canada needs. Canada has abundant natural resources, world-class industries, innovative businesses and capable workers. What Canadians need are the conditions to put those strengths to work. Canada cannot tax and regulate its way into prosperity. A stronger economy cannot be built by making it harder and more expensive to invest and produce in Canada. Energy, investment and opportunities already available cannot be wasted. Bill C-269 is a practical opportunity to support Canadian industry, strengthen electricity supply and encourage innovation without unnecessary government intervention. I encourage members of Parliament everywhere to support it at second reading so the committee can hear from industry, examine the evidence and consider how this measure could support Canadian businesses and workers. Again, I want to thank my colleague from Calgary Centre, who has been concerned with ways to increase energy efficiency and productivity across the Canadian economy for years.”

• Echo ×3

  A repeated line

  “As the Conservative shadow minister for employment.”

  Said 3 times by 3 members since May 29.

  Every time it was said →

“I support this bill, and I want it sent to committee. Waste heat from industry is pollution that harms nature. This bill gives businesses a tax credit to turn that heat into electricity. We need that power to avoid blackouts, and we need this credit so companies build here instead of leaving for the United States.”

“Madam Speaker, as always, it is a pleasure to speak on behalf of the constituents of Skeena—Bulkley Valley, especially when we are talking about something important like Bill C-269, which has been brought here by my colleague. I support it. I come from a small reserve in Kitamaat Village. For those who do not know, we are basically the heart of industry in northwest B.C. For the last 70 years, we have been the heart of industrial development. Kitimat has an aluminum smelter, which at one time was one of the dirtiest smelters in Canada if not North America or the world. Our band then supported the modernization of that smelter into one of the cleanest smelters in Canada, or North America, producing a high-quality product for the world. That old smelter was dumping out a lot of CO2, carbon and heat, not just into the atmosphere but into our waters. Heat is a form of pollution. It does, in fact, affect the environment. Nature does not like extreme heat. It does not like artificial heat. If members do not believe me, they should come to Kitimat. At a time when there were no regulations being enforced, or in existence, the heat itself actually caused a lot of problems in terms of the seaweed, salmon and shellfish going away. Now we are starting to fix that with updated technology and learning more about what heat means. What is being talked about in Bill C-269 is the capturing of waste heat and turning it into electricity. This is at a time when the topic seems to be reducing our carbon footprint, but also how to make Canada more competitive and how to diversify our economy and try to reduce our reliance on the U.S. economy. I do not understand why there is opposition to this bill. Members can call it what they like. They can call it value-added or manufacturing. They can call it whatever they want, but it is an efficient way to take something that would normally get into our environment and make use of it. This is especially true in British Columbia when talking about electricity demand and supply, where the conversation has now shifted to Site C, the multi-billion-dollar dam in northern B.C., not being enough for B.C.’s demand. It is not enough, and given the politics, I doubt I will see another dam being built in my lifetime, so we have to think about other ways to meet that demand. Vancouver actually put a ban on using natural gas for new home builds. That ban was reversed last year because the electricity demand could not be met. In fact, B.C., at peak times, has a deficit of electricity, so it imports electricity from neighbouring provinces as well as from the United States. The United States still produces electricity from coal. Yes, the electricity we use when we plug into the wall is green, but we have to trace that back to where it comes from. If it is coming from the United States, and the U.S. is using coal, that electricity we are using is not so green. There are now different conversations about how to use natural gas for electricity. This is a complete reversal of the conversation that was being held 10 years ago, and it all comes down to the demand for electricity. If we are going to become an energy superpower, like the promise made by our Prime Minister, then we have to look at all the components that go into that, including domestic use. If we can make industry more efficient by capturing waste coming from it and turning it into a usable product to make industry’s own operations more efficient, then we should seriously consider it. This should be going to committee. Canadians do want this. They want us to do more, not only to compete with the United States but also to reduce our footprint and be more competitive. Nobody is looking forward to the blackouts that are going to come when one of our energy sources goes down. We saw that in B.C. when the natural gas pipeline went down. All the demand shifted to the electricity grid, which is in danger of blackouts. There are energy shortages in the United States, where there are rolling blackouts to keep up with the demand. This might not seem like a big issue with respect to how it is going to affect us, but everything counts. Everything matters when we are talking about energy efficiency. Yes, Canada is doing a good job, but I agree with our Conservative leader, who is saying that we should be looking at technology to reduce our footprint. Here it is, right here. This would not cost taxpayers anything. It would make industry more competitive with the United States. The government is talking about incentives that are already in place that could be utilized by industry. Why is industry not using them, then? Why is industry going to the United States and making investments in the United States but not here? It is because converting waste heat to electricity is simply not incentivized in Canada. It makes sense for a company to go to the United States, which actually encourages that type of investment. If we do want to compete with the United States, then we have to seriously consider these types of measures. With respect to industry in Kitimat, we have had pulp and paper mills that distributed a large amount of heat into our environment. We had a methane export facility, and now we have the largest private investment in Canadian history, LNG Canada, which produces a lot of heat. The bill would not be the cure for everything, but it would be a good step in the right direction. I do like the comments made by our Bloc colleagues, saying that they could support it in principle and that they agree it should go to committee for more review. I agree as well, but we hear the government already shutting this down without giving the public a chance to see the reality of what this could actually mean to places such as Kitimat and other industrial centres. We want to attract investment. We want to keep investment here. We do not want what is happening in eastern Canada, where all the companies are starting to move to the United States just for competitive reasons. We do not want that, because when it happens, people start to leave, especially our young people. With the way it is going right now, I can tell the House that I do not agree with giving our young people a leaving Canada tax, when the overall economy in all its forms is what is driving people away from Canada. It is the brain drain, and this is just going to keep building up. This is what is needed in small measures, for all the reasons pointed out by my colleagues as well as by the Bloc, because ultimately what we are talking about is turning waste into value and treating heat as a form of pollution and addressing it seriously. I am sure every centre around B.C., or throughout Canada, for that matter, that has an industrial centre can see this, and they can see it comparable to other issues that are facing industry. We do want to do good by Canadians and industry, in small measures, medium measures and big measures. Bill C-269 would be a step in the right direction, and I encourage all my colleagues to encourage the government to accept the bill’s going to committee.”

“I want the House to vote for this bill. It gives businesses a tax credit when they buy equipment to turn wasted heat into clean electricity. This helps companies save money and protects the environment without costing the government anything.”

“Madam Speaker, it is a real privilege to rise today on behalf of Mission—Matsqui—Abbotsford to speak to Bill C-269, an act to amend the Income Tax Act with respect to a heat recovery tax credit. Conservatives believe that we need to empower Canadian business, not with handouts but with broad-based taxation measures to give them a leg-up. We have a history in Canada of providing rebates and tax measures for various projects. Here is another great opportunity to give our Canadian companies a competitive edge. I think of my own riding, which is a major food processing hub and a major food production hub in British Columbia. We have many greenhouses. When people are driving down the Abbotsford-Mission highway and it is about 1°C or 2°C out, they can see these greenhouses just humming. They use a lot of heat, so why not convert that heat into electricity? Why not allow for that in our Income Tax Act? Why not allow for a change to our capital cost deduction measures to give these businesses a leg-up? This is a common-sense measure that would provide some incentive for companies to be more efficient. When they are more efficient it causes two things: They make more money, and they do more to protect the environment. These are principles that all Canadians agree on. These are measures that, in the past, the government would have accepted. We hope its members will vote with us today, because this is a common-sense measure to take an incremental step to help our Canadian businesses. Bill C-269 would introduce a non-refundable investment tax credit for equipment that captures waste heat from industrial processes and converts it to electricity. It would correct a gap in existing clean energy incentives, which currently exclude waste-to-heat power, despite its strong environmental and economic benefits. The bottom line is this: It would help Canadian businesses turn wasted energy into clean, emissions-free electricity using infrastructure and technology that already exist. Across Canada’s economy, 30% to 50% of industrial heat is wasted. Technology already exists to convert much of that wasted electricity into better usage. Under the existing technologies, and if this bill is passed, it would recover one-third of lost energy. There would be zero new emissions with the application of Bill C-269, no new fuel and no new system overhaul. The key point I want to stress today is that this would be one of the simplest, fastest and most cost-effective energy opportunities we can take. It is a good-faith proposal that Conservatives are putting forward to provide a solution that would help many businesses in Quebec, Ontario, our manufacturing hubs and the agricultural sector all across Canada. It is a common-sense measure that would spur investment. It would not cost the federal government any money. It would lead to efficiencies in the operation of Canadian businesses. How can we not get behind such a simple measure?”

“I want the House to send this bill to committee and pass it. It gives a tax credit to companies that turn waste heat into power. The United States has had this tax break since 2020, and Canada is losing business and investment to them because of it. Right now, even Canadian public funds are going to projects in the U.S. instead of here. This bill will keep that investment in Canada, cut waste, and create more electricity at a low cost.”

“Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my Bloc Québécois colleagues, who carefully examined this bill, consulted with their constituents and found constructive ways to implement it to make our economy more competitive. I also want to thank them for agreeing to send this bill to committee so that we can examine the details that warrant further discussion. I will also address some of the government’s responses, insofar as the bill is not perfect. As members know, any private member’s bill is drafted with the Library of Parliament to replicate the tax credits that already exist. As much as a bunch of regulations would come forth with the bill, those are to be determined at committee as well. I do question the negativism that was brought forward on that. What I am trying to do, and I think it is the role of all of us as private members, is to find the gaps that are going to make for a better Canadian economy at the end of the day. Waste heat to power is one of the gaps in our system that the United States is exploiting very fulsomely at this point in time. To get back on par with the United States as far as our competition goes, and to get investment back into Canada for these types of common-sense approaches to less waste and more electricity, this would be a winner for everybody. I do agree there is overlap with other tax incentives, exactly as there is in the United States. We do need to be competitive with it, even in the stacking that happens in those credits. The bottom line is to get this investment happening in Canada. Here is one of the riddles on this. I am working with a company, and everybody knows the company I am working with on this, to try to get this moving in Canada. That company is out of Calgary, with a suboffice in Houston. It has received a $50-million U.S. investment from none other than the Canada Growth Fund. The Canada Growth Fund is going to invest, alongside a big U.S. investment entity, another $50 million U.S. into waste heat to power. It is going to give the money only when it is approved for the financial mechanism. That is going to happen at this point in time in the United States, because the returns are better. Canadian taxpayer dollars, again, are going towards investment in the United States. Talk about cutting off our nose to spite our face, we are actually funding more competition from the United States through Canadian taxpayer dollars. That is a ludicrous approach to what we need to do to build this economy. The U.S. has had this regime since 2020, and we have been playing catch-up ever since. We have been losing investment in Canada as a result of the U.S. being much more investable than Canada is. We have to get ahead of this. I am trying to get us on par, but the fact is, we have to be more competitive in this Canadian economy. I can talk about the bill from our last Parliament. The bill in 2021 was called an act to amend the Income Tax Act (capture and utilization or storage of greenhouse gases), and the Liberals voted against that too. Now here we are, five years later, and they have come forward with a bill on enhanced oil recovery and carbon capture that was half as effective as it needs to be in order to be competitive with the United States. These are things we need to move forward with at pace and at the time when they are necessary. We have lost five years, and we are still half as competitive in that credit as we need to be vis-à-vis our major competitor for investment in that sector. The U.S. has had this, as I said, since 2020. The primary beneficiary of it in the United States is the chemical industry. Think about how much waste heat comes from the chemical industry. It has exploited that in the United States and done a number of retrofits, making sure that it is very competitive in the chemical industry as a result. That is something I think we need to replicate here in Canada to get that investment back in this country so it makes more sense to invest here. I know that we have spoken about a lot here, but one of the things I always like to talk about is how much the government has spent on environmental measures. This is an environmental measure because it would get more electricity from the same amount of hydrocarbons and other power being produced. We would be capturing that and turning it into something real: less waste and more electricity. It is a cheap way to do that. However, in the last 10 or 11 years, the government has spent hundreds of billions of dollars on its environmental policies, all of which have resulted in almost net-zero reductions in CO2 emissions and a whole bunch of deindustrialization of the Canadian economy.”