Speaker 1 [00:00:02] Hi. It’s John here. Speaker 2 [00:00:03] And it’s Theresa. Speaker 1 [00:00:05] Hey, Theresa. I’m sure you’ve heard all about the delays and issues at Canada’s major airports lately. I flew west this week and the security lines were crazy. Speaker 2 [00:00:14] Yeah, I have been hearing that from all over the place. Last weekend, Amsterdam’s largest airport asked airlines to cancel flights or divert them to other airports because of staff shortages. Passengers, and I’m sure you’ve experienced this to have to queue for hours. It’s being felt all around the globe as more Canadians are traveling for leisure again, they’re facing challenges between COVID screenings and labor shortages. And questions are being raised about whether airlines, airports and the broader travel industry will be able to keep up. Speaker 1 [00:00:44] Yeah, I mean, let’s admit it. These are largely privileged problems, but they’re causing serious disruptions in the economy. We know travel’s back. We’re all eager to get out and enjoy summer. I flew to Vancouver, then to Calgary and back to Toronto in the last week. Really impressed with the way that staff were keeping up with large crowds and a pretty high variability of crowds. But it’s going to be a real bumpy summer if we don’t iron a few things out. The biggest concern for Canada’s travel industry may very well be supply. A historic labor crunch has left the sector short of 177,000 workers. Speaker 2 [00:01:22] A lot of turbulence, you might say. Speaker 1 [00:01:25] This is disruptors. The ten minute take where we dove into the latest innovation, tech and economic buzz. Speaker 2 [00:01:31] This week’s take is on the travel industry’s post-crisis boost. Can the industry keep up with all of this demand? Speaker 1 [00:01:38] Today, we’re joined by Claire Phan, economist at RBC, who just wrote a fascinating proof point piece called Canadians Are Scratching the Travel Rich Again. But can the industry meet demand? Clare. Welcome to the ten minute take. Speaker 3 [00:01:53] Thanks, John. Speaker 1 [00:01:54] Love your report and wonder if we can start with a bit more insight into Canadians travel spending. We know it’s already well above pre-pandemic levels. What more are you seeing? Speaker 3 [00:02:03] So like you said, obviously demand for travel has been incredibly strong. Funding will travel. Spending typically predates actual travel activities because many of us tend to pay for those trips ahead. So. But just by where things are going, where those spendings are going, we can sort of expect a really robust path for recovery, for travel activities later this summer into next year. Speaker 2 [00:02:25] I’m really surprised by those findings. The robust travel ahead, considering that inflation is at an all time high and cost of living has gone up tremendously. What does the data show in terms of who in Canada can actually spend on travel? Speaker 3 [00:02:38] Well, to your point, inflation has definitely been surging and it was due to, you know, extremely elevated demand for goods at the moment, because a lot of these services, including travel, largely just simply wasn’t available for purchases for many of us. But now, you know, with a lot of these activities resuming back to normal, we’re seeing more price increases in airfares. It’s getting more expensive to dine out and to, you know, spend a night at a hotel. These things are all going to be more expensive. So the implications for travel demand were as to what we’re expecting in the near term. We do expect some level of resilience for travel demand, and that’s because Canadian households overall have accumulated a huge stock of savings over the course of the pandemic, and that amounts to roughly $300 billion. And to put that amount into perspective, that’s basically worth more than three times the tourism spending in 2019. So it’s a huge amount of money. And that, combined with just the pent up desire to really go somewhere, is why we’re expecting, you know, at least in the near term, a lot of Canadian households will probably be spending through higher inflation and rising costs. Speaker 1 [00:03:48] Claire I’m sure a lot of people hearing this understand the challenges, but also see this in pretty much every sector, the great resignation is leaving no sector untouched. How is the travel and tourism industry different than other sectors in terms of how labor shortages are impacting? Speaker 3 [00:04:06] So the broader labor shortage issue really is underpinned by aging demographics, and that’s been a challenge that faced by the Canadian economy and many other economies like for many, many years, and that’s largely been expected. What’s different for travel related industry, and that includes accommodation and food services, travel or accommodation that includes, you know, air transport. It’s like many of these jobs are client facing are high contact. And over the past few years, these were particularly the jobs that faced the most turbulence in terms of rising instability and uncertainties as to where their careers could be going. So a lot of workers within these industries actually have switched careers over to other sectors, and it’s going to be really hard to convince them to come back. Speaker 2 [00:04:50] If I just think about my own travel browsing experience in the last a while and seeing lots of deals on flights and hotels as these industries are trying to recover from losses experienced during the pandemic. And yet, as you’ve just mentioned, as we keep hearing these labor shortages, these cost pressures and all this consumer demand driving up prices. So if you scan across the travel tourism industries, can you tell us specifically which parts or subsegments are getting hit hardest in terms of costs and therefore prices? Speaker 3 [00:05:19] Well, from a consumer’s standpoint, as we all know, car rental prices have been going way up year over year. Just in April, the sort of inflation for car rental was around 20%. And that’s eroding a lot of purchasing and spending power on travel just because with more budgets being allocated to renting a car, you might have left to find out other travel related expenses and sort. So but from a business standpoint, inflation has been widespread across all industries, but more particularly these days for food and energy related items. So that from an industry perspective, means things are getting harder for restaurants and for airlines as well, just because of rising food and energy prices, which accounted for half of inflation actually in April. Speaker 1 [00:06:03] Claire, I wonder if you can cast your eyes a few months or several months down the road. Certainly a lot of talk of recession or slowdown or soft landing out there. And I’m curious how that plays out for the sector, because normally travel is something we all tend to fall back on when times are tight. It’s typically a part of what people see as disposable income. Or discretionary spending. And yet having been locked up for a couple of years, probably most people don’t see it as discretionary. They see it as essential. I got to get out of here and enjoy summer and maybe fall while I can. So with these sometimes contradictory forces of play that probably muck with traditional economic models, I’m wondering how you’re thinking about the travel industry going through summer and into fall and which corners may bounce back more than others and which ones may be slower to recover? Speaker 3 [00:06:58] That’s a loaded question right there. How we’re framing it essentially right now is just given where we are in the economic cycle, which is the peak of the peak. So things are heating up. We’re short of labor. Inflation is rising, and that’s particularly true for the goods sector. And that’s why central banks are acting really, really fast. Right now, Bank of Canada just hike interest rate by another 50 basis point. And the whole purpose of that is to tame consumer demand in order to tame inflation. And what does that mean for the travel sector? Well, demand for travel has just been coming back. So we’re not we have not been seeing the same level of inflation for travel services when we’re comparing to goods inflation. So I really like your point about, you know, how many, many households these days probably see travel to some extent with their savings as a discretionary item. And just anecdotally speaking, a lot of my coworkers, including I’m sure you guys as well, and my friends are all like, it’s all it’s on everyone’s agenda, going somewhere near or far this summer. So at least in the near term, again, going back to the point, just like really strong level of pent up demand, a lot of savings, all of those are expected to support activities. But our further in the longer run, there is the question of whether rising inflation and rising interest rates. With that comes rising debt payment activity, whether that’s servicing costs, rising debt servicing costs. And those are all expected to start to hit lower income households first and work their way through higher income households and less in demand in the longer run. So that’s our take on the whole recession earthquake, which I’m sure will not play out as the way we sort of expected. But then as of currently what we’re seeing right now in terms of weaker spots in the travel. So, you know, activities in North America and Europe are quite strong by parts of Asia, including China, are still seeing some like more stringent quarantine and testing requirements. And China pre-pandemic being the largest source of international departure that’s slowing sort of recovery over there is going to drag on global travel recovery into next year as well. And on top of that, this is related to travel, which anecdotally has been coming back more. But overall to leisure travel is still relatively weaker and we could reasonably expect it takes longer for that to come back as well. Speaker 1 [00:09:25] It’s a fascinating story of economic disruption and one that we’re all playing a role in in different, different ways. Claire, thanks for being on the ten minute take. Speaker 3 [00:09:33] It’s such a huge pleasure. Thank you, guys. Speaker 2 [00:09:37] So, John, I have some travel planned for later the summer. And this conversation with Claire is making me think that I’ll have to cut back on every other spending category to be able to afford it. And I mean, it’s wild to me that demand for travel is as high as it is, given everything that’s going on, interest rates and fuel prices and all of the things that we don’t want to hear anymore. Although that makes me think that it makes sense if people want to escape for a little while to just get away from these maddening conditions in our day to day lives. Speaker 1 [00:10:05] Yeah, one assumes this is temporary, but temporary is a kind of an expandable word. This could go on for many, many months, even as the economy slows down, just because there is that pent up demand we want to get out and what better time to travel than summer? So it’s in general a good problem to have, although in specific cases, especially for the operators, a big challenge. Speaker 2 [00:10:28] Well, that is it for this week’s ten minute take. Join us again next week for another episode. Until then, I’m Teresa Do. Speaker 1 [00:10:35] And I’m John Stackhouse. Talk to you soon. Speaker 4 [00:10:42] Disruptors, The ten minute take is created by the RBC Thought Leadership Group and does not constitute a recommendation for any organization, product or service. It’s produced and recorded by Jar Audio. For more disruptors, content like or subscribe wherever you get your podcasts and visit rbc dot com, slash disruptors.

Speaker 1 [00:00:01] Hi. It’s John here. Speaker 2 [00:00:02] And it’s Theresa. Speaker 1 [00:00:04] Hey, Theresa. You know, if we did a word bubble on disrupters, I suspect that the top word would be innovation. It means everything. And some people say it means nothing. Curious what you think of when you hear the word innovation. Speaker 2 [00:00:18] Oh, man, I’ve been thinking a lot about this and I still don’t have a clear answer. But to my mind, I think it’s the systems, the resources processes, the infrastructure that supports novel ideas that improve how we live, how we do business, really everything. It’s about improvement upon existing things. What are your thoughts, John? Speaker 1 [00:00:39] Wow, Teresa, you’re such the tech person. I thought you were going to say Tesla iPhone model off various technologies as being the clichés of innovation. And here you are talking about systems. Yeah, innovations, all of those things and a lot more. I got to serve on the selection committee recently of the Governor General’s Innovation Awards. It was a great half day that I spent with some remarkable Canadians looking at amazing innovators in every sector from every region across the country. It’s the annual celebration of innovations that exemplify excellence and help improve the quality of life in Canada and around the world. And so often we forget that really is the test of innovation. Is it improving the quality of life, whether it’s a phone, a car or the way we run a school or a neighborhood? Speaker 2 [00:01:32] You are so right, John. And even Steve Jobs, you know, going back to that iPhone reference, he’s one of the great tech innovators of our time. He understood that innovation is about more than just the iPhone. And he famously said that it’s what distinguishes between a leader and a follower. The innovator the leader is that bold risk taker who sees a need and risks a new approach. And when that proves successful, it encourages others to follow in that innovator footsteps, opening the door to the possibility of more innovation. And we’ll be exploring and inspiring example of that later on in the show. But the world has changed dramatically in recent years, John, and with it, the need to innovate is changing, too. Speaker 1 [00:02:11] We’re going to need innovation at every turn as we try to come to grips with the fallout from COVID. As we think about the backlash on globalization and how we can continue to make goods in new, more innovative ways that don’t drive up the cost of living for everyone. And we’re going to have to do that in a world of economic and fiscal constraints where perhaps we don’t have the resources that we might have assumed even 12 months ago. And that’s where innovation really proves itself in allowing us all to do more with less and perhaps even leaving less of a footprint on the planet. This is Disruptors. An RBC podcast. I’m John Stackhouse. Speaker 2 [00:03:00] And I’m trying to reset so. In this episode of Disruptors, we’re looking at innovation. What it is, where you find it in the Canadian economy and why it’s so important. After the break, we’ll hear from the two co-founders of a groundbreaking preschool in Nunavut who are bringing innovation to the world of early childhood education. Speaker 1 [00:03:25] But first, our conversation with one of Canada’s leading thinkers on innovation. He’s a professor and author, a former tech entrepreneur and key advisor to the federal government who has some fairly provocative things to say on what this country should be doing to build a more prosperous innovation economy. Dan Breeziness is the Munk Chair of Innovation Studies, Co-Director of the Innovation Policy Lab and Professor of Global Affairs and political science at the University of Toronto. He’s also the Clifford Clark visiting economist at the Department of Finance. And prior to joining U of T in 2013, he co-founded a software startup in his native Israel. In addition to all that, and if all that weren’t enough in March, Dan won the Balsillie Prize for Public Policy from the Writers Trust of Canada for his book Innovation in Real Places Strategies for Prosperity in an Unforgiving World. Dan, welcome to Disruptors. Speaker 3 [00:04:23] Thank you, John. Theresa It’s wonderful to be here. Speaker 1 [00:04:26] It’s great to have you on the podcast and want to jump right into one of the arguments in your book about the difference between innovation and invention. Too many of us confuse or conflate those. I wonder if we can start off with a quick explanation of the difference between innovation and invention and why that’s important. Speaker 3 [00:04:47] Let me move one step even further and then do that. So let’s first ask why innovation is important. And innovation is important because it’s the only way to have sustained economic inhuman wealth for growth, period. That’s it. So if you don’t care about those things, innovation is not important if you’re most human beings. Innovation is critically important. However, innovation is not only invention of new things. So if invention is the act of coming up with a new idea. Innovation is the act of employing those ideas to offer goods, products and services and all across the production stages. So from the coming up with a completely new idea to improving things, to combining them with others, to making them more accessible, all those things. Speaker 2 [00:05:43] When we talk about innovation, often it’s an abstract terms. And so I’m wondering, could you provide an illustration of innovation, why it matters to a company or a country and what’s at stake? Speaker 3 [00:05:54] Let’s start with one example. We are now talking in something that very old technology, which is called Tesla or videoconferencing. If only ten years ago, the three of us would had to do that. We will do everything in our power to make sure in the same room, because otherwise we’ll have to go to special ed rooms, which are unbelievably expensive. And the quality of what we can achieve in those rooms will be horrific. And that’s just ten years ago. And that technology was invented at least 30 years ago. What really happened that completely transformed it right to real innovation is that huge millions of millions of engineering hours in improving processing and improving software algorithm and improving data communication to the fact that when we had COVID, we actually did not need to stop most of what we’re doing, including the education of our kids, because teleconferencing zoom teams, the software we use now was not only good enough, but cheap enough. But we don’t even think about the cost. Speaker 1 [00:07:01] Everything you lay out, Dan has me thinking about the role of government and the fact that government was arguably absent in a lot of that innovation that you just you just specified. Some people feel that innovation actually increases the farther you get away from it from government. And yet here you are in Ottawa at the in the beating heart of government in the Department of Finance. Why did you. Having spent so much of your life trying to understand innovation and being a participant in the innovation economy, want to go into the depths of government to try to tackle it as opposed to doing it from the outside world. Speaker 3 [00:07:42] So, first of all, most people are wrong and in multiple ways. Okay. If you look just at the example that I gave you, we can also talk about things like vaccines and marinade technology on the rest. You will find out that up to 85, probably 90% of the funding and all of our resources, like human beings like me and professor of it, went into developing those technologies. So in the end, somebody can work for two years and make billions on them with government, public money, public people. Not only that, but if you would be in any class on the economics of innovation one on one, one of the first things that they will tell you is that you should expect under free market condition to have less than optimal innovation. And the reason are, I mean, there’s multiple reasons, but to simplify it. Innovation has a huge amount of both risk and uncertainty on. One side and the other without rules. We already mentioned patents. There is no way that if you and I, John, will spend years and all our money to come up with a new innovation, which in the end the just information, unless we state, then make sure that we can make money out of it. Everybody will copy us in a second. So we will have no incentives, no market incentives to actually spend all of time now added to uncertainty. Now add the risk and what you would expect under free market condition, meaning without government is to have very little innovation, if at all. Speaker 2 [00:09:25] That’s strikes me as where we are living in a culture of comfort. Maybe some might use the word complacency. So what do you say to business leaders about how they might be able to move the dial and take on some more of that risk? Speaker 3 [00:09:40] Up until a few years ago, if I was an investor, I would give gold medals to all the Canadian business management because they haven’t managed to give us one of the highest profit margin in the world with one of the lowest risk. The problem is, as a Canadian, it has to our society rather than negative consequences. Median wages, for example, are stuck for 46 years, and the quality of work is much, much, much lower than what they should have. I also think that Canadian managers are first and foremost Canadian. So if they understand what is at stake, if they understand the issue, this is a behavioral problem. And they are also giving other resources. Right, lower risk and lower uncertainty, which the government can do. Until we all figure out how Canadian business can routinized, so innovate all the time, then I think Canadian businesses will actually be very open to that. But when you have a story over 30 years in which you completely disregards what is a main failure, all your recommendation, policy solution, business behavior will take you in the wrong way because you don’t admit what is wrong. Speaker 1 [00:11:00] You mentioned competition and the lack of competition is perhaps one of the inhibitors. And this has been widely discussed and debated over many, many decades in the country. We have regulated industries that have both manufactured and perhaps natural oligopolies. I work for one in the banking sector, but we also have the main airlines transportation, telecommunications at a high variance. I would suggest an innovation between those sectors. How do we ensure we’re getting more innovation in the market structures that we have, which does not have to be directed from government? Does it have to be demanded from consumers or is there some other kind of magic, magic formula? Speaker 3 [00:11:42] So right now we are and what’s, I think technically called a pickle because and you can see it and I know I know you know the statistics for over 20 years, I’ll bear the meaning. Business investment in R&D has gone down and year after year we are now lower than Pilote, which basically means that we are a developing country level. We also look at other things which has a horrible name. TFT Or maybe multi-factor predictive. Basically, apart from telling you how much innovation you have, it tells you how Canadian businesses utilize their human capital. So High TSB is a Toronto Raptors, no matter what kind of players you give them. They excel and they reach a playoff. What most Canadian business look like now is that Toronto Leafs the highest wages in the industry for the lowest results possible. And so first, we need to figure out how we utilize Canadian, because this is now 30 years and businesses are profitable. We should not expect that it will come like manna from the earth. And we definitely do not want, unlike Finland and Israel, to be faced with existential crisis before versus change. So I think there’s two ways public discussion and honest one about what is wrong, which hopefully will also start demands from consumer and then collective action together. And here I would think that public policy has to lead because nobody else will do that. Speaker 2 [00:13:25] To pivot slightly. So you’ve spent many years talking about how Silicon Valley is not necessarily the right model for innovation, and yet a lot of people still look to it. And we can think of Canada’s Supercluster strategy as being very similar in design. You’ve been critical of those high tech hubs for producing unequal levels of prosperity. So how do we build an innovation economy that does benefit the many and not just the few? Speaker 3 [00:13:51] So let’s again go back to, if you remember, invention and innovation, and then let’s at the global system. And I think most people now understand after COVID that what really happened in the last 30 years is the way we, meaning humanity, produce of goods and services have been sliced into different stages. So a way to think about it is that there are at least four stages. We, Silicon Valley, focus on only the first one because it focused on only the first one, which is just R&D. It it’s a model of it does not create jobs for anyone who’s not an R&D engineer and maybe, you know, a venture capitalist and a few celebrity chefs. And when they finish a job, it actually moves to a different place, Korea, Taiwan, China, where they also need to do a huge amount of innovation. But what they do there create a lot of different kinds of jobs. So different skills. If you look about Canada, let’s just assume for a moment where do we really want to be with Silicon Valley, we might have three regions, Greater Toronto and I’m adding Waterloo and Hamilton just for the sake of it, Vancouver and Montreal that might be able to play that game, and it will create unbelievably high inequality. But then there is the rest of Canada. It is not clear to me why the forestry industry of Canada cannot compete with the Finnish one. Pulp and paper also in sophistication. Also in innovating in the equipment. We have a huge country with a huge amount of variance in both the natural goods and skills. Canada, unlike a place like Israel or a small place like Silicon Valley, can actually have different innovation models in different industries in different places. Each one of them focus on a different stage. Speaker 1 [00:15:51] Dan, I wonder if I can ask you about the subtitle in your book, Strategies for Prosperity in an Unforgiving World that was actually from. Only 21. And I think it’s obvious to all of us that the world is even more unforgiving in 2022. How does innovation change in an unforgiving world, and what do Canadians need to really come to grips with to make it work for, for everyone? Speaker 3 [00:16:15] Canadians should start thinking about innovation like hockey. We need to win and easily win and actually create more innovation. We might even help the world. Right? But we need to win. And the other team is very willing to get the few penalties in order to win the Stanley Cup. If we are not willing to inflict a few penalties at the right time, the Stanley Cup will keep on going to Florida. Speaker 1 [00:16:41] That is so painful and so poignant. Spot on. Speaker 2 [00:16:45] I wish I was a hockey fan. Speaker 1 [00:16:47] Elbows off Canada. Speaker 3 [00:16:48] Exactly. Maybe even knees if if we can get it corrected. Speaker 1 [00:16:52] Dan, thanks so much for being on Disruptors. Speaker 3 [00:16:54] You’re very welcome. And I hope to see you in the real world soon. Speaker 1 [00:17:00] Coming up after the break, we’ll talk to the co-founders of an innovative new model for early childhood education. So stay right there. Speaker 2 [00:17:10] What you’re listening to Disruptors an RBC podcast. I’m Theresa Dome, once let you know about a new weekly report from RBC Economics. It’s called Proof Point, and it provides original, timely economic insights from RBC’s economics and thought leadership team. Find out why demand for cash is at its highest level in 60 years, despite a broad shift to e-commerce. Or learn why Atlantic Canada has become a magnet for new residents. To explore more, visit RBC dot com slash thought leadership. Welcome back. On today’s show, we’re exploring all facets of the innovation economy. And as John mentioned, off the top, he was a judge at this year’s governor general’s innovation awards. So, John, what can you tell us about the winners? Speaker 1 [00:17:58] Well, the winners are all on the public record now, so I’m not opening an envelope. And some of them you’ll recognize the first is carbon cure. You may recall CEO Rob Nevin was featured two summers ago on Disrupters, talking about their ambition to be a global leader in carbon capture technology to reduce the concrete industry’s carbon footprint. Speaker 2 [00:18:18] Oh, and I hear there’s another disruptors alarm on the list of recipients as well. Speaker 1 [00:18:22] That would be apply board and CEO Martin Vaziri and his brothers, who are such a great Canadian story. They came from Iran, went to University of Waterloo, and have developed through a high board, the world’s largest online platform for connecting international students with schools. Speaker 2 [00:18:41] There was also a cool eye company I heard about. Speaker 1 [00:18:44] That would be Brain Box A.I. and all of us in buildings right now, which is most Canadians will appreciate what they’re doing, which is applying AI to optimize energy use, especially in commercial buildings, to reduce the carbon footprint of heating and cooling systems. Speaker 2 [00:19:02] And I think there was also a winner that came from our local university system. Speaker 1 [00:19:06] A company called Desired Sensation Level or Dstl, which has produced the world’s first pediatric hearing aid prescription out of Western University in London, Ontario and the National Center for Audiology. Speaker 2 [00:19:19] And as we’re reaching the tail end of the pandemic, can you tell us about the company that helped get us to this point? Speaker 1 [00:19:26] That would be lipid nanoparticles that enables COVID 19, many vaccines. We all know what are now the household names behind many of the COVID fighting vaccines, companies like Pfizer. But they don’t do it on their own. They depend on a kind of supply chain of innovation, and that includes companies like lipid nanoparticles. Speaker 2 [00:19:47] One of the other winners and our next guests are not on the technology side. By contrast, they found an innovative new way to deliver a program that is essential to our society. Karen New Track and Tessa Lockett are longtime educators who launched a preschool in the remote Arctic community upon Inlet, Nunavut. Launched in January 2016. It’s called Perovic, which means a place to grow. In a note to the preschool, combines traditional Inuit knowledge in ways and traditional Inuit child rearing with Montessori methods. In 2019, the PUREVIEW was awarded the $1 million Arctic Inspiration Prize for a project committed to addressing the, quote, causes rather than symptoms of issues facing the north. And this May Perovic was one of six winners of a 2022 Governor General’s Innovation Award. Karen TSO, welcome to Disruptors. Speaker 4 [00:20:40] Thank you for having us. Speaker 2 [00:20:42] I’d love to start with a bit of your backstory. So Karen, I understand you’ve lived in Pine Inlet all your life, but Tesla, you moved to the far north from Ottawa just over a decade ago. And I’m wondering how you ended up in Nunavut and ultimately how did you and Karen decide to launch Cervi? Speaker 4 [00:20:58] I ended up in Nunavut in 2003 for the first time. I was going to Trump University and I took part in a Bush school program that was being run by the University of Manitoba. And this was done with a lot of different disciplines at the university. And I was able to go and join a summer long program in paying her tongue. And I immediately fell in love with the Inuit, and I knew I had to come back. So I got my teacher’s degree. And when my husband and I graduated from university, we were in interview. We wanted to be here more than anything. And so when we got to Pine Inlet, Karen and I met very early on when we arrived in the community, and it was a day meeting where we first met and the day meeting they were talking about how a certain issue that was at the forefront in the community at the time was referred to supporting students adequately at the high school and Pine Inlet and how we can improve supporting Grade nine students. And as children move through the school system, you know, the more and more we were looking at all of these issues, the more and more we were saying, well, we really need to be doing a better job earlier on in education, because even when children sometimes enter the school system, they might not have had access to proper early childhood education programs. And in Pine Inlet at the time, there wasn’t any. So Karen and I shook hands on it after a pretty heated discussion at the local Education Council and said, No, I think we have to do something about that. Speaker 1 [00:22:30] So it felt like we have to do something about that should be sort of engraved in the desk or on the wall of every would be innovator, because that is really what innovation is about. It’s about someone deciding, I’ve got to do something about this, which is starts with identifying a problem. And probably anyone who’s listening who has is connected to education. And we all are recognized as problems everywhere in the education system. It’s a it’s a process of endless improvement. And I’m curious how you went beyond problem identification, because that’s often where innovation stops. People identify the problem. They point fingers, but no one figures out how to get to solutions. How how were you able to get from problem to solution. Speaker 4 [00:23:19] In the preschool? We have a situation where just at the time when a child is entering, sort of being excited to potentially leave home and ready to branch out beyond the family unit. It’s a moment where we felt that it was really important to nourish and make sure that a child might have access to programing that, AH is not typically involved or accessed in in the in a community like Pine Inlet, which is a remote community in the Canadian High Arctic. And so often people say, well, we can’t get that here because of this, that or the other thing. Well, why not? So you get to a point where you just kind of have to know what you have and you just want to go in and do that and experiment. And the success that we’ve had in the community has been really central to parent support when people sort of so seeing what we were trying to do and trying to provide cultural materials, language materials that were really grounded in and what was important and pond and land. We received parent support immediately and that was really crucial to what we were doing and how we were doing it and why we became successful because so many people had input into what we were doing in the preschool. It was developed over a period of two years with the new Newman Arctic College. So at that time it was like a slow build and it had the involvement of so many people from the community. So everyone really had a vested interest and and seeing this program succeed, but also that everyone really had a part of themselves in it, like everything from little sewn materials and the. Preschool. You know, we had the elementary school teachers have input into the actual language development of Inuktitut in the preschool program imagery that was attached to certain silverbacks. And whenever Owen saw, we were just trying to do the best that we could so that we could support children in schools as a good launching pad to be ready for school. Everyone supported us right away. It was like this organic excitement around what we were trying to do and when everyone kind of became involved that it really generated this incredible energy behind it to make sure that it was successful. Speaker 2 [00:25:36] One of the challenges for any innovator is scaling bring that new product or service or program to a broader market, and having a father reaching impact and having started with a classroom of 18 kids in 2016 but have since launched a program where trainers are now touring the North, introducing the program to the rest of Nunavut. How are you scaling and expanding that program? Will also retaining that grass roots approach that has in part made it so successful? Speaker 4 [00:26:05] When we decided to move forward at the suggestion of NTI, we had made this project in Pond Inlet and it was really going well and Pond Inlet and we were contacted by Nunavut Technology Inc. and they said, We really like what you guys are doing in Pond Inlet. How can we support you in doing that? And we said, Well, what do you mean? What do you mean? What do you want us to do? And they said, Well, we have funding that we could support you by maybe making a documentary or in training binders. And and we said, Oh, that’s a great idea. Oh, that’s a great idea. I think we would pick a community that might be interested. And we’d already been contacted by several community programs who wanted to see what we were doing and actually come to the community to see how it was playing out in Parliament. So essentially we’ve reached out to Clyde River, the early Saxony program there, and they had already communicated with us that they’re interested in trying something similar to their preschool program. So we did a pilot project there and it was successful. And everybody contacts Karyn one at the time, you know, to say, hey, how can we how can we do that? How can we get that in our facility? And and it’s all word of mouth. It’s all very organic and how we can continue to expand, but it’s different for every community. And and we try to incorporate their culture because every every region is has different cultures. So for example, like in Panama, there’s a certain style of community sled. So for example, the sled that we might use in the preschool program in Pond Inlet and make a smaller version for it for the children to use in their play, there’s a totally different style of community in Cambridge or Rankin and the different ways of. So we have little clean sealskin cleaning boards and structures with little wooden, you know, is the nice to clean the seal skin. And each region may have different ways to clean their still skin and how we do it in pontoon. Speaker 1 [00:28:23] But that kind of culturally appropriate technology, if I can put it that way, would be wonderful to have more broadly across society. So often we have things kind of presented to us or pushed on us as a one size fits all. And I think that’s one of the many things that makes you an innovator, is finding ways to do things in a culturally appropriate and and inclusive manner. Speaker 4 [00:28:48] And our dialect is different. So we adapt to their dialect, like Cambridge Bay and Rankin and Pontin, but all have different dialects. Speaker 3 [00:28:59] But it’s. Speaker 4 [00:28:59] All right, it’s in it. And we knocked it and we can still understand their language, but we we adapt to their third language. Speaker 2 [00:29:09] I think that that ability to adapt and to build on original ideas is extraordinarily important and terrific has been so successful. Again, you’re exporting the concept to different regions in different parts of the world, but it seems to me that the program is more than just educating young children. It’s also about empowering individuals, whatever their age, to find the solutions, to meet their needs and to create their own past success. Karen Tas I’d love to hear from you about what can future innovators and other communities around the world learn from the approach that you’ve created to inspire their own innovations? Speaker 4 [00:29:45] I think what you’ve touched on there is something that to me is the most moving part of this project is that it’s not only about the development of a child, it is also about the development and fostering and healing of adults that. The training as well. So, for example, we’ve all been taught a certain way, usually in one specific way in our own education, which is top down, and to absorb knowledge and to have the teachings of others imposed upon us. If I may say and then in this project, when you enter a room of the training, when you have, okay, well, you’re here and you’re going to learn from the child, you’re going to sit in the side of the room and you’re going to observe how a child learns and how they move from one activity to another and how they are stimulating themselves by their own interests. That also transcends into the adults as well. Whenever we go and work with the community, we’re not saying, Hey, we have this great program, do what we do. It’s What do you need? How can we support you? This is our experience. But what kinds of things can we provide for you? Speaker 2 [00:30:52] I think that is such an excellent sentiment and one of mutual respect and understanding. Karen and Tessa, thank you so much for joining us today and for being on Disruptors. Really appreciate your. Speaker 4 [00:31:01] Time. Korean me. Speaker 3 [00:31:03] Again. Speaker 1 [00:31:06] What a thought provoking set of conversations and kind of a nice bookend for innovation. We started with Dan presidents who gave a profound overview of the innovation, challenge and imperative in the world that if we are going to improve prosperity, if we’re going to be able to afford all that we take for granted in our society, we are going to need to innovate much more than we are today, and that’s on business to really take forward. And then we heard from Karen and Tessa, who I thought captured really well how innovation is seen and should be seen through the eyes of the user. Too often we have innovation from a central organization. It can be a government, it can be a big company saying Here we’ve got a better mousetrap and we’ve made it accessible for you. But the user experience kind of sucks. And as we know, whether it’s technology or education or health care or other aspects of our lives, the user experience is critical to innovation. Teresa, what stood out for you? Speaker 2 [00:32:11] I loved hearing from Karen and Tessa, John, and especially them talking about how they’ve shifted the locus of power in the classroom. And it’s that turning of conventions on their head that I think is a super key ingredient in making sure that innovation really is able to spread throughout the economy. And exactly as you mentioned, it is the focus on the user, in this case, the student that makes everything they do just so remarkable. I can clearly understand why it is spreading throughout the circumpolar world. It’s quite beautiful. That is all for now. Thanks to our guests, Dan President, Karen Nu, Tarak and Tesla Lockheed. Next week, join us for the latest tech and innovation buzz with our ten minute tech series. Until then, I’m Teresa Doerr. Speaker 1 [00:32:54] And I’m John Stackhouse. This is Disruptors, an RBC podcast. Talk to you soon. Speaker 2 [00:33:01] Disruptors, an RBC podcast is created by the RBC Thought Leadership Group and does not constitute a recommendation for any organization, product or service. It’s produced and recorded by JAR audio. For more disruptors content like or subscribe wherever you get your podcasts and visit our rbc.com/disruptors.

Speaker 1 [00:00:01] Hi, it’s John. I recently had a chance to spend time in British Columbia talking with a fascinating and eclectic group of people, from energy economists to motorcycle makers, about Canada’s clean energy transition. It’s all part of this special three part series we’re calling The Climate Conversations. In the first episode, I spoke to some of Canada’s leading thinkers on energy and climate issues. And while each came at it from a distinct and sometimes competing perspective, there was a consensus that, yes, both energy and climate security are possible. In the second episode, I took a tour of BC’s Clean Tech Valley and met some of the exciting innovators who are helping shape Canada’s transition to a clean energy economy. These are the entrepreneurs who give me great hope for the future. But we can’t talk about our future or the importance of developing climate and energy security without first acknowledging the failings of our collective past when it comes to Indigenous peoples. Indigenous Canadians are deeply proud of where they come from and who they are. Their traditional territories are vital to their identity, not just to their livelihoods, land, water, sky, shape, indigenous identity. And we need to remind ourselves that energy comes from land, water and sky. So any discussion of an energy transition needs to not only include indigenous people. It needs to incorporate indigenous thinking and indigenous ownership. If we are to truly meet our ambitious climate and energy goals as a country, we need to ensure that all Canadians, but especially indigenous Canadians upon whose lands we live and work, are engaged in this fight for sustainable change. The future of our economy and our country may just depend on it. This is Disruptors. An RBC podcast. I’m your host, John Stackhouse. On today’s episode in the final of our three part series, The Climate Conversations, I’ll be speaking with two remarkable indigenous leaders in British Columbia who are working to transform both our society and economy through innovation, collaboration and an entrepreneurial spirit. After the break, we’ll hear from the elected chief of the Hyslop people centered on Bcc’s northern coast, who’s also chair of the First Nations LNG Alliance. But first, my conversation with a Vancouver based business leader who is helping transform the way indigenous communities conceive and execute projects for a more sustainable future. Mark PUD lastly is Director of Economic Policy and initiatives at the First Nations Major Projects Coalition, which is a national collective of more than 65 indigenous nations seeking ownership of major projects such as pipelines and electric infrastructure. He’s also director of governance at the First Nations Financial Management Board, which is leading the development of an indigenous response to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Mark, welcome to Disruptors. Speaker 2 [00:03:10] Well, thank you. I’m very pleased to be here, John. Speaker 1 [00:03:13] I wonder, Mark, if we can start with some reflections on the impact of climate change, because you’re part of a nation and a community in South Central B.C. that has not only been devastated by climate change, but also captured the world’s attention. Maybe you can share a bit of what you’ve you’ve learned from that experience. Speaker 2 [00:03:34] Well, we are from the into come, which is in central interior, British Columbia, South Central B.C. and we had both of the big climate events of British Columbia hit us within six months. The first was the fire at Lytton. Lytton as one of our communities in our nation where the temperature went to almost 50 degrees Celsius, hottest temperature in Canadian history, and then the place burned to the ground the next day. And then last winter, we had the atmospheric river come through and it hit Merritt, which is also one of our nations communities. And the rivers just washed everything out. There were 38 washouts in both directions up to my community, washed away the reserve where my mother was born. It’s gone completely and Highway eight still isn’t rebuilt. So it’s it’s been a horrific year climate wise for us. Speaker 1 [00:04:17] And people around the world watched in horror and some said this is why we need to get off fossil fuels immediately or as quickly as possible. And yet many of the communities that were devastated by this are also investing in projects that will continue to ensure that oil and gas get to people in Canada and around the world. How do you balance what some see as a contradiction and others just see as a as a challenge between those two points of view? Speaker 2 [00:04:47] I think what’s important to remember is that this is an energy transition. There is a point where we are going to have to stop using a lot of these fossil fuels, but in order for us to do that instantly is going to cause enormous pain. We just don’t have the renewables and in the amount we need to do an instant switch. So I think right now it’s a question of smart decisions about which petroleum based assets we will develop and use. The references you’ve made to a lot of First Nations, particularly in B.C., around LNG, LNG as a cleaner fuel than oil. And that is where a lot of first nations are putting their effort right now. So it’s a transition. It’s not going to be instant. Speaker 1 [00:05:22] What indigenous perspectives do we need to be more mindful of in terms of finding this balance? Speaker 2 [00:05:28] I think to look at this is that Indigenous people right now are very invested. Some Indigenous people are very invested in the petroleum and the energy sector and there’s a lot of interest right now in developing sources of energy that are cleaner. And I think that’s where indigenous people, at least from the Coalition, are willing and happy to proceed. The question we have is we don’t want to be caught off guard in the development of new energy systems like we were in the past, where they are coming from our lands and our resources and we are not benefiting from that. So there’s a lot of hard questions to be asked about what’s our energy mix going to be. And then for Canadian society about what’s the role of indigenous people on whom our lands are are basically tied to these energy, either in clean energy and hydroelectricity or solar or wind or in petroleum and natural gas. There’s some tough questions that have to be worked out. Speaker 1 [00:06:18] And what is the role of indigenous peoples in those decisions? Speaker 2 [00:06:22] We are the owners in many cases of title on these lands and for us to be involved in these projects, it means we have to be involved at the beginning, not at the end. Most industrial development in this country now is done centrally or somewhere. Somebody else decides that indigenous people are consulted at the end. That’s just not going to work in the future, and it’s certainly not going to work under a world of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, which calls for free prior informed consent before these projects are developed. Indigenous people have to be informed upfront of what’s being planned or is going to proceed. Indigenous people then will have a say in the planning, the operation, the development and the ownership of many of these projects. What consent comes down to is. Have the Indigenous people been informed ahead of time? Freely given their approval to projects. This doesn’t mean that indigenous people are against all projects. No. The Coalition, for example, we have 85/1 nations across the country who are interested in participating in projects and are interested in smart projects that meet the national goals energy wise and economy and First Nations aspirations towards self-determination. Speaker 1 [00:07:26] Tell us a bit about the the Major Projects Coalition, how it came about and what it’s trying to achieve. Speaker 2 [00:07:31] The Major Projects Coalition started about six or seven years ago when 6/1 nations in northern British Columbia had an opportunity to acquire equity in a pipeline project. They then went out to try and source that equity and found that it was too expensive the cost of capital because First Nations the way were organized under the Indian Act. We don’t own our land, we don’t own our assets. They’re held in trust by the government. And trying to actually raise money on assets that you don’t own is a fruitless exercise. There’s just banks wouldn’t do it. So if we could get capital, it would be at the cost of credit card type rates. And that’s just not economic. So the 16/1 nations said, you know what, this is could happen to us again, so we’re going to be ready the next time. So they formed the coalition as a service organization, 2/1 nations, to improve their technical ability to access capital and technical skills and finding people who could assist them prepare for the next deals that would come around. And it’s happened. You’re starting to see it now from those 16 we have grown to 85. The coalition does not market itself. It is all by word of mouth. And these are first nations who are being approached by proponents of major projects looking for commercial partners. And we provide the service to those communities to ask the right questions about going into those projects. Speaker 1 [00:08:47] What sort of projects are you looking at or communities looking at? Speaker 2 [00:08:51] There are energy projects, a lot of clean energy projects now, either in hydroelectricity or partial ownership of transmission lines. And those include the gambit of geothermal. Hydrogen is now coming up as as more and more communities are being approached. Transmission lines, pipelines have come up in discussion. There’s railway discussions now about everything from via rail project in Ontario and Quebec to other projects here in British Columbia and sometimes mining companies as well. Mining companies looking to access critical minerals for net zero batteries and car manufacturers. Those are all coming up. Speaker 1 [00:09:24] When there is indigenous ownership. What what changes? Speaker 2 [00:09:28] What changes with indigenous ownership? First of all, indigenous people will then be involved at the project from the beginning. So it allows Indigenous people to have more say in how the projects will be built and improved. A lot of times traditional knowledge can be better incorporated into the planning of a land based project. The other side of it is it provides in theory the Indigenous party with a revenue stream which is independent from government for priorities that the First Nation wants to focus on. The other side of this, that changes is it changes the relationship between the proponent and the first nation. Because if a first nation moves into an equity position within a project, they essentially become core proponents. And corporate opponents by nature have given consent. So it’s a win for both sides. Speaker 1 [00:10:12] The climate transition is going to take a lot of capital. Our research at RBC estimates Canadians will need to invest or mobilize $2 trillion over the next 25 to 30 years. That’s roughly $80 billion a year or about four times what we’re investing in transition activities right now. How can we see more indigenous capital mobilize Mark and perhaps do so more quickly? Speaker 2 [00:10:38] Well, I’m glad you noted that there is indigenous capital in this country. My community has a revenue sharing deal with a mining company in our territory and when we started to set that up, we did some research to find out how much indigenous capital is there in Canada. And we found just back of the envelope calculations at that time about $8 billion of assets under management by Indigenous people. And it’s not in one spot. It’s different settlements from either land treaties from negotiations with mining companies or energy companies. We figure now that somewhere between 13 and 18 billion my nation has a fund right now of about 50 million. And we have the ability and the fund to make direct placements into investments that that will grow that fund. Most of these nations do. So that capital is there. The question, though, is that how can indigenous people directly invest in these projects? I think for a lot of the financial sector, they don’t see us as Indigenous investors. The idea of being an indigenous investor seems to be an oxymoron to some of these companies who come into territories and don’t think of Indigenous people in that sense. That has to change. You already pointed out the amount of money that’s going to have to be mobilized for the transition, the energy transition. Where’s that going to come from? It’s going to come from Canadian investors, but also outside the country. Canada at the moment needs to attract that investment, and one way to do it is to reduce the risk of these projects. And one way to do that is ensure that an Indigenous people are co proponents are part of the projects upfront. The Coalition did a conference last year on ESG investment standards and we found in the ESG investment standards there’s practically no Indigenous involvement and there’s no Indigenous risk mitigation of the risks that Indigenous people could pose to projects. We’re proposing that no, you bring us in as investors at the beginning, and we will demonstrate by our involvement that that risk is taken care of, and that should improve the ability of the project to raise capital from outside investors. Speaker 1 [00:12:30] You spent a lot of time, I know, looking at how other countries are progressing with respect to indigenous ownership in in all forms of development. What should we be learning? What can we learn from other countries? Speaker 2 [00:12:41] We have to think about under the United Nations Declaration, the rights of indigenous people as a worldwide thing. It’s not just Canadian. And there’s a rush for capital to attract those trillions of dollars needed to transform economies. Different nations in different parts of the world have different ways of engaging indigenous people. And in our work we engage with some in New Zealand and in the United States. We also did some checking into South America. Every area is different. Canada has an edge on this and that we are more advanced in the concept of self-determination as being a right of indigenous people. Other nations are also pursuing that path. And what we found is that we have a lot to share with Indigenous people in other parts of the world, but it’s a worldwide competition right now to get these capital dollars into transformative economies. And Canada right now. I’m very pleased to say, is doing better than most countries in the world. Speaker 1 [00:13:32] What has shifted that has made Canada seen as more of a leader than laggard? Speaker 2 [00:13:37] I think what it is here is we have a rule of law. We have a very well-developed court system precedents on indigenous issues. Also, there’s a shift in the public attitude where people understand now that a lot of the resources needed to transform our economy are going to come from indigenous lands, the power stations, the geothermal plants, the hydroelectric facilities, the transmission lines, the critical minerals. I have an 18 year old daughter and she knows where the lithium came from in her cell phone and she knows what’s involved in the power generation. When she leaves the lights on, that’s changed here. There’s a massive attitude shift and people’s understanding of what’s involved in driving this economy. I think that’s an edge that Canadians have and we need to mobilize that. Speaker 1 [00:14:23] Mark. We’ve been exploring through this podcast series the incredible challenges that Canada is facing in terms of finding a balance between energy security, ensuring that we have affordable, accessible energy, and that we’re able to support other countries, especially our allies, with that while facing extraordinary inflationary pressures and balance out with climate security and the race. And it really is a race to net zero. How do you think about these challenges and many more from an indigenous perspective, which often suggests more time is needed if we’re to make the right decisions and we need to think generationally and not be in such a rush. How do you balance that need to really get things done in a hurry and not be wasteful in the process? Speaker 2 [00:15:10] I bring us back to the discussion of the atmospheric rivers and the fires in Lytton that happened last summer. You’re right, we have limited time now to save the climate and that affects all of us. It’s not just indigenous people versus the rest of the country or the federal government. By 2030, we’re supposed to have shifted most of our vehicle sales 50% anyway in this country over to electric vehicles. It takes more than eight years to build a mine, never mind power stations. We as indigenous people are in this with everybody else. So there have to be, as you said, smart decisions made. And the only way smart decision is going to be made is that there’s a wholesome, fully engaged discussion from the beginning about what we’re going to do. I think what you’re referring to in the in the sense of Indigenous people having longer timeframes for things is true. But our house is on fire and it’s a mutual house. We’ve got to start moving on this. And this is why at the Coalition we’re calling for an immediate discussion on all these projects upfront with Indigenous people at the beginning. Speaker 1 [00:16:07] Our house is on fire. What’s the one thing you’d like to see happen this year to help us move quicker in the direction we need to move? Speaker 2 [00:16:16] I would like to see some form of cheaper capital access for Indigenous people to make the investments in these projects to be proponents in them. That will be the number one challenge that we face as Indigenous people to get involved in these projects. We have 85 members across the country in the Coalition. All of those nations have joined because they want to be participants in these projects. And the problem we have is finding capital and that doesn’t mean a giveaway. Indigenous people are beyond that. They’re not looking for giveaways from these projects. We’re looking to have a meaningful involvement in the economy, in the projects, in the net zero solutions. Speaker 1 [00:16:49] And Mark, I think we should all be saying challenge accepted. That’s something we can solve. Mark, thank you for being on RBC Disruptors. Speaker 2 [00:16:56] Thanks for having me. I’ve enjoyed this immensely. Speaker 1 [00:17:01] Coming up after the break, I’ll speak with the elected chief of the Hyslop people who is transforming the economic prospects of her 1900 member nation. So stay right there. Speaker 3 [00:17:14] You’re listening to Disruptors and RBC podcast. I’m Teresa Do. The world has rightly been consumed with combating climate change for some time, but something changed this year as Russian troops invaded Ukraine. Policymakers across the world were confronted with a more immediate challenge. Energy security. Tensions between energy security and climate change were simmering for some time, but the war has laid bare the vulnerability of global oil markets and the ability of bad actors to disrupt energy supply chains. It’s its domino effect on other commodities and industries has already knocked out global economic growth. Just released a new RBC Economics and thought leadership report called The New Climate Bargain How Canada Can Manage Energy and Environmental Security. To read it, click the link in the show notes or visit RBC dot com slash thought leadership. Speaker 1 [00:18:10] Welcome back. On today’s episode, we’re speaking about our clean energy transition and how Canada’s indigenous peoples can help lead the way toward greater economic prosperity and sustainable development. And our next guest knows a thing or two about both. Crystal Smith is the elected chief of the Hyslop people, centered on Kitimat Village along BC’s northern coast. In November 2019, she was named chair of the First Nations LNG Alliance, a group committed to encouraging First Nations development of what was then a nascent liquid natural gas industry and providing employment and other sustainable benefits for BC’s Indigenous people. She Smith, welcome to Disruptors. Speaker 3 [00:18:49] Thank you for having me. Speaker 1 [00:18:50] Let’s start with your story and what got you into politics is not the first temptation for many people. What experience inspired you to run to be chief of the Haisla people? Speaker 3 [00:19:00] My stepfather was actually an elected council member when I was in elementary school, and I remember him coming home and talking about a few things that they were working on and that they were focusing on just getting a better understanding of what our chief and council back then did. I grew up admiring him for the accomplishments that he made in his life and didn’t necessarily want to be in politics, but definitely wanted to be a part of the betterment of our people, whether that I worked for the nation or but I always envisioned myself being as an employee or something here with the nation. And then later on, what actually got me into learning about more in-depth was I became the executive assistant to our first female chief councilor, Dolores Pollard, in, I believe it was 2009. And I stayed as the executive assistant until 2013 when Ellis Ross was running for Chief Councilor, and it was actually one of his speeches that he made at the Vancouver Convention Center in his belief of what the work that we were doing with the LNG industry and his vision of what it could do for our people, and immediately told them, I want to become a part of your team. What do you think if I run for council and kind of took the plunge from there? Speaker 1 [00:20:19] What a great story and a good reminder that the next generation is always watching and wondering if you can share a bit of the Haisla story, because it’s not a well understood story, unfortunately, across Canada. Tell us a bit about what the community has built over the last decade. Speaker 3 [00:20:34] One thing that I definitely think that is important for people to understand is that while we’re being a part of a new industry, that our nation isn’t the new industrial development overall. We’ve witnessed methanol plant, aluminum smelter, a pulp and paper mill be developed and built and operated in our territory for 20 to 50 years. And essentially we’ve sat on, on the sidelines, witnessed the destruction of our territory, our environment and our cultural resources to being active partners within a process where we had a seat at the table with LNG, Canada and Coastal Gaslink talking about what was important to us, what it means to be Haisla. Having our seat at the table gave us huge responsibility in terms of being the landlords of all of our resources and giving advice to developers and builders as to how to safely do it with minimal impacts to our environment. One of our elected leaders, Heber Maitland, he was a chief councilor in the eighties, I believe termed the saying that we just wanted a share and a say. We wanted a share of the wealth that was being generated. We wanted a share of the employment opportunities that were available. And we wanted to see as to how they were being built, how it was being developed. And today I can proudly say that we’re there as a part of LNG Canada, coastal gaslink and more so now is owners 51% owners of Cedar LNG with our partners. Speaker 1 [00:22:09] Pembina And in terms of development, what has been done differently because of that share and say. Speaker 3 [00:22:16] For an example one of our very important cultural resources to to our nation is still a camp. And so the spawning time or the, the time that they would come into the rivers is in between February and March. And there’s not too many other levels of government or any other entities that put a value on the election can. But it’s a huge staple of our Haisla identity. So in terms of the B.C. LNG, Canada was doing some dredging and within that process of doing the permit application, we worked out the issues prior to that permit being applied for so that as opposed to the permit going into the regulators and then coming back to us for our questions, it actually went along with our support when being filed. And that involved no dredging during February and March when the oil can could possibly arrive. So there’s many things like that within the process of what we’ve implemented into the discussions and essentially negotiations. Speaker 1 [00:23:24] One of the big ideas we’re trying to explore is this challenge that Canada now faces of needing to produce more resources both for Canadians and for the world, and do that more sustainably. We have very ambitious climate targets, among other environmental goals. And at the same time, to pursue reconciliation in more and more meaningful ways. How do we do that, especially in the short timeframe that many people believe we have to reach goals like net zero? Speaker 3 [00:23:54] Well, for one, for the LNG. Even before ESG became a thing, our team actually sat in in a room in Vancouver for, I want to say, a week to go over proposals for a partner. How much money the nation would make wasn’t a huge priority. The priority was what kind of technology will you use and will you use air cooled or water cooled? We stuck to what we wanted for our environment, and we chose a partner that aligned their visions and their desires with the nation. And actually, I remember throughout that process there was one RFP that came in and that the executives would not leave the topic. And they were very adamant that the project needed to make money. If the project didn’t make as much money as they envisioned, the nation wouldn’t make as much money as we desired. And I had looked at our team and I said, I don’t think this conversation needs to go any further. And the room kind of looked at me stunned. Our team looked stunned. And I said, there’s no compromise. And what we’re saying is that we want minimal impacts. I’m not willing to stand up in front of our community and say we chose money over our environment. And so I looked at the rest of the elected leaders and said, are you willing to do that? And the answer was no when the conversation ended. Speaker 1 [00:25:16] You’ve said that the Coastal Gaslink project, which will transport natural gas from north eastern B.C. to Kitimat, promises, I think you use the word transformational benefits for the Haisla nation. Can you explain what you mean by transformational? Speaker 3 [00:25:30] You know, we think about what we’ve been able to do and being a part of a process where, you know, coastal Gaslink and LNG Canada took the time to understand and get to know who we are and why certain circumstances remain the same. And it was because of our past history with industrial development and having proponents come in and, and learn who you are and what you want to accomplish and align themselves of saying, this is where we can help with that vision. Here is where we can help with that goal and being partners within that process and providing resources that necessarily weren’t provided before. We have the lowest unemployment rate right now. If you want to work, you can work. There’s nobody that that doesn’t have an opportunity. So that’s on one level where I’m saying it’s transformational. Analysts own source revenue or funds being generated by impact benefit agreements. We now have the ability to work on behalf of our people. Our chief and council and our staff have that ability to create programs that actually deliver what is required and what is needed. And we’re able to prioritize what is important. Our culture and language is a huge example. I had a meeting last night at dinner meeting, and I’ve got a twin identical twin sister and I was sharing how my day started yesterday. It’s my first day back after two weeks off of work, and she shared an audio recording of her speaking our language. Sorry. Speaker 1 [00:27:08] No. Take your time. Speaker 3 [00:27:10] We grew up with our grandparents, and when they didn’t want us to know what they were talking about, they would speak our language. And hearing her speak, it gives me hope that my grandchildren will be able to speak our language and will know exactly what it means to be high. So they will learn our culture. They will learn how to harvest food, they will learn our language. And that is so important. Speaker 1 [00:27:41] Thank you for sharing that. It’s inspiring, it’s beautiful. And also, I imagine quite challenging for as it is for any community with strong traditions around the world to preserve culture and tradition with respect to indigenous rights. One of the questions is with the concept of free, prior and informed consent, one of the challenges that many see with consent is who it comes from. And there’s much debate, as you know, about the role of hereditary or traditional leaders versus elected leaders, chiefs and council. How do you balance different forms of governance within the community and ensuring that there is concern, but sometimes consent doesn’t come with unanimity? How do you think through those challenges. Speaker 3 [00:28:35] Regardless of your if you’re a hereditary or elected, you have an obligation to your membership and they are the deciding factors as to who represents them, who speaks on behalf of them and how that looks. You know, some communities are further advanced than others, such as Katla. I absolutely admire their process and how both their elected and hereditary systems essentially work together and how they get to agreements for for their members. Our community said we have the support of our hereditary leaders in regards to the work that the elected leadership is doing right now. Our membership acknowledges that and that the predatory system wants their elected body to represent rights of title. And you know that that process and I honestly reflect back and ask why. And when I listen to our Chiefs speak, it’s essentially to benefit all types of members. They want that ability for for doesn’t matter which family you come from, it doesn’t matter where you live. You deserve a benefit. And essentially, that’s what that that’s their role as well as a predatory leader. It is to look after our land. It is to make decisions that are in the best interests of the land and our people and to share that wealth. Speaker 1 [00:29:59] We’ve covered a lot of ground here. I wonder if I can wrap up with one last question about economic reconciliation and what you think the rest of Canada needs to come to grips with. For communities like yours and leaders like you to navigate this journey. Speaker 3 [00:30:16] It’s a process that but we have to be a part of and that it’s putting a lot of responsibility and expectations on proponents and other levels of government. But this process internally has been long, difficult, huge learning curves in terms of what we’ve been a part of. So essentially give some time because it’s not an overnight process. An entity has its shareholders and its board of directors. Our shareholders are 1900 members, and that’s just specifically Haisla and that’s who essentially gives us our mandate of a yes or a no. And that process takes a lot of time and a lot of effort to accomplish. So give the First Nations communities the time and again. Not all of us are the same. Some of us will be a little bit quicker and have had a lot of practice through that process. But give time, get to know the community, get to know what their goals and what their visions are. Speaker 1 [00:31:14] Time and balance. Those are two key words you’ve stressed today. Christel, thank you so much for being part of RBC Disruptors. Speaker 3 [00:31:22] Thank you for having me. Speaker 1 [00:31:27] What an inspiring set of conversations. And I don’t know about you, but it takes me back in time. Actually, about 20 years ago when I was a newspaper reporter, spending a year crisscrossing Canada, engaging with different indigenous communities from Vancouver Island to Cape Breton to the far north, trying to understand this great quiet divide we have in the country between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples. And at the time, many of these communities were actually leading an economic revolution, whether it was through salmon farming or hockey franchises or the hotel industry or nickel mines up in northern Quebec. And it was the rest of Canada that was slow to catch on. We’re still too slow. But as we accelerate through the climate transition, it’s time for Canadians to recognize that indigenous communities and indigenous peoples need to help lead this transition. And they can take all of Canada to an incredible place if we partner with them and if we give them the say and share that we heard about in this conversation, that’s the only way that we’re going to get to energy security, climate security, economic security and the kind of Social Security that Canadians have become a model for to the world in previous decades. It’s the only way we’ll be able to build sustainable prosperity for all and for generations to come. That’s it for this time and this special Climate Conversation series. Thanks again to our guests, Mark Podlasly and Chief Crystal Smith. And let us know what you think. Just email us at disruptors at RBC dot com or follow us on your favorite social channels. Join us next week for the latest Tech and Innovation Buzz with our ten minute take series. Until then, I’m John Stackhouse, and this is Disruptors, an RBC podcast. Talk to you soon. Speaker 3 [00:33:19] Disruptors, an RBC podcast is created by the RBC Thought Leadership Group and does not constitute a recommendation for any organization, product or service. It’s produced and recorded by Jar Audio. For more disruptors content, like or subscribe wherever you get your podcasts and visit our rbc.com social disruptors.

Speaker 1 [00:00:01] Hi, it’s John here. I’m in Vancouver. And if you want to see the future of clean technology, there are few places in the world that will give you a better view. Twenty five percent of Canada’s clean tech companies are here. This is maybe the Global Center for Hydrogen and Fuel Cells and all sorts of other technologies that will change the way we live, manufacture, travel and consume, and can also help the rest of the world transform the way we use energy. In episode one of our climate series, you heard about the great challenge Canada is facing to balance energy security and climate security. It’s possible it’s going to cost a lot $80 billion of investment that we’re going to need to generate as a country, and it’s going to take new technologies. And to get there, we’re going to need innovation at a scale we haven’t seen in our lifetimes. I had the opportunity to talk recently with Marty Reed. He’s a long time investor who moved from Silicon Valley to Vancouver in 2015 to launch Evok Innovations. And I asked him where some of the most exciting areas are right now for clean tech. Speaker 2 [00:01:09] Certainly, carbon capture is top of the headlines along with hydrogen. Those are kind of two areas that have just generated enormous attention. I think we absolutely have solutions today that are proven and able to scale, and we can’t use any excuse to delay that path. In parallel, though, we know we need real true innovation to get ultimately where we need to get. And so it really is a all paths strategy. Innovation will be critical, but at the same time, there are solutions today that we can’t be dragging our feet on deploying. Speaker 1 [00:01:43] Marty, I think, is speaking to one of the fundamental challenges of the transition for Canada, and that’s that we need to get a lot more comfortable with risk. We’re going to have to take chances and invest a significant amount of money in technologies that have yet to be proven at scale. We don’t have time to wait for the perfect business case to be presented. Instead, we’re going to have to make a number of bets and count on some of them paying off big time. This is Disruptors, an RBC podcast. I’m your host, John Stackhouse. On today’s episode, we’re taking a road trip through Clean-Tech Valley and meeting some of the innovators in BC’s burgeoning clean tech sector. British Columbia is in many ways showing us how to do it. It’s been a leader in North America in both policy and private sector investment, and it’s not only changing the economy and society all around me here, but also demonstrating the economic opportunity that could bring in a new era of sustainable growth for all Canadians. So stay with us as we travel through Greater Vancouver and meet some of the entrepreneurs who have set out to transform the decade ahead. We’re at the entrance of 70, which two people familiar with the Clean-Tech space is a Canadian champion for carbon capture and sequestration. Speaker 2 [00:03:14] Hi there. Hi, I’m John. Hi, John. Nice to meet you. Speaker 1 [00:03:17] Great to meet you. Speaker 2 [00:03:19] So my name is Matt Stevenson. I’m the CFO of Svante. I’d been here for I think about seven years now and joined the company halfway through its development. This is our pilot manufacturing facility. And so today this is where we make the actual filter bids that capture CO2. And you know, we have an operating plant sketch when we’re building another one right now for Chevron in California, and this is where we actually produced today, the beds for those plants. We also have engineering and manufacturing staff here. And so what’s really exciting for us is we’re going to be moving. If you just look out at about five minutes that way to the south, to a brand new one hundred and forty thousand square foot facility, which was going to house all of our R&D or manufacturing, our new manufacturing line and some of our product prototyping. So it’s it’s an exciting transition for us. Speaker 1 [00:04:05] Before we go any further, explain the name Svante. Speaker 2 [00:04:09] Yeah, this is this is where we reveal our inner geek as a company. We also take savant that we’re find to be CO2 savants. But this font is named after Sun Arrhenius, and in the 1890s he was one of the first scientists to put down on paper. The connection between CO2 in the atmosphere and rising temperatures. So this is well understood physics. However, there’s another connection to us, which is he was sort of a chemical engineer before chemical engineers existed, and then he was putting together a lot of disciplines at the time, physics and chemistry, and he came up with something called the or any US law, which is a law that every chemical engineer and many other engineers learn in their undergrads about the connection between the rate, the speed at which you do something and the temperature. In fact, our adsorption process is a rapid cycle process and relies on that principle. We actually use the erroneous law in the in our daily business. And so it’s got a it’s got a few connections to the company. Speaker 1 [00:05:04] Matt, we’re now in your office and we’re looking at a plastic model, I can’t help but think of childhood visions of a toy garage I used to have where you could take the Mattel cars I think they were and make them go around the circular ramp, going up to the parking garage on the roof. I don’t think any of my friends as a kid had a plastic model of a carbon capture unit because it was just born in the wrong century. Speaker 2 [00:05:29] Well, I suppose we’re always been a little bit ahead of our time, although the times are catching up. You know, we created this quick model. We wanted it to be as simple as we think our process is, which is to have a solid state filter material that absorbs the CO2 and then regenerates it and purifies it. And does that in a really simple piece of equipment and does it very quickly. And so that’s what you see here. You see a simple device. So it’s a Speaker 1 [00:05:50] big circle with plastic pieces, red, orange, yellow that you can move around. And I’m trying not to just start playing with that because it looks like fun. Speaker 2 [00:06:02] You absolutely can. You’re welcome to. Yeah. Each of the colored sort of representations of ducks is showing a step of the cycle. So, you know, in the red duck, we’re showing flue gas would be flowing through this duct. The next duck, that’s orange. You would have steam coming in and regenerating the CO2. So you now have just water and CO2. If you cool it down, you have purified CO2. And then the yellow step is where you’re cooling down the absorbent and making it ready again to absorb CO2 from flue gas. And what you see here in the black material is a representation of our structured absorbent beds. So these are simple filter units that we put in this rotor, and it just rotates through each step of the process, absorbing the CO2, deserving the CO2 and being cooled down. And what you get in this material is something that’s very modular, very scalable and very low cost. Speaker 1 [00:06:49] So this model is, I’m guessing, two feet in diameter. What does a real unit look like? Speaker 2 [00:06:55] Yeah. So if you think about our existing pilot plant in Saskatchewan, that’s capturing 10000 tonnes per year of CO2, that’s four meters in diameter as we scale it up. We actually do it as a big, tall roadster with a big hole in the center. And when you get up to, you know, a 14 meter diameter, it’s only one or two meters wide and that’s capturing, you know, could be a thousand tons per day of CO2 or 350000 tons per year. And then we have larger device designs up to 24 meters and outside diameter that could do, you know, a million tonnes per year of CO2. Speaker 1 [00:07:29] Can we go see the some of the real stuff? Speaker 2 [00:07:31] Absolutely. I’d love to show you that. Speaker 1 [00:07:35] We’re now entering the main part of the industrial facility where the brains of 70 look to be part and work hard. Speaker 2 [00:07:42] That’s right. Yeah, so we stepped into our pilot manufacturing line. So this is the day where we actually produce our structured absorb and filter beds that are operating today in the field and our pilot plant in Saskatchewan soon to be operating in a plant with Chevron in California. And we’ll walk through the process of making our filter beds, you know, sort of in the sequence that I showed you, which is you’re starting with absorbent powder, you’re turning that into a slurry. You’re coating that slurry into a thin film. You’re then printing dots, stacking it and forming it into a structured absorbent than the unit Speaker 1 [00:08:16] you’re talking about. Might look like maybe a big window inside a box that you might buy at the Home Depot. How many of these would you need for a unit of that size that would capture a million tonnes? Speaker 2 [00:08:31] Forty eight of these will capture 10000 tons of CO2, and it’s relatively linear from there. So if you want to capture a million tonnes per year of CO2, you’re looking at not tens of thousands, but you know, thousands of these units right here that are organized again into 48 modules that are repeatable. Speaker 1 [00:08:53] So thousands of these units to make a one megaton facility work and just to give people a sense of the demand that may be out there as a country, we’re going to have to deal with 40, 50, 60 megatons of carbon capture, depending on your perspective over the next over the next decade. So we’ll need hundreds of thousands of these units, whether they come from 70 or plenty of others entering the space. How many of these can you produce in a given month? Speaker 2 [00:09:23] I’ll put it in a different way. What we’re scaling up across the street and our new manufacturing facility is going to be able to do 10 one million tonne per year capture plants every year. So if you were to think about 40 or 50 megatons in Canada around the oilsands decarbonization, then you’re talking about four or five years worth of production out of that manufacturing facility. Speaker 1 [00:09:48] We’re back in the boardroom. Thanks for the tour. Matt, tell us a bit about what sectors you think are ready to go with carbon capture and where you’re looking for acceleration. Speaker 2 [00:09:59] We’re seeing a lot of interest across the hard to beat industries, so that’s from oil and gas, petrochemicals, hydrogen generation, which we see really is a rapidly scaling market through to cement and steel industry. So we see a lot of interest across the board. And really what it comes down to is where are the projects where all of the factors are coming together? So that includes the pricing regulatory regime and also local factors like energy prices, availability of renewables, et cetera. Speaker 1 [00:10:29] We’re going to have to do a lot of this in a very short period of time. And one of the questions that’s often asked about CCU technologies is can it work at scale? You’re doing pilot projects. They seem to be working, but they’re going to have to be much bigger. Do we just have to take a chance on that because we don’t have time to gradually ratchet up what we do? And how should we get our heads around that, that big bat and all the risks that go with it? Speaker 2 [00:10:55] I think you can take smart, calculated risks in the DNA of 70 is doing everything at Gigaton scale. So even when we’re doing a small pilot plant, we’re thinking about doing it in a way that’s massively scalable. So I think when it comes to the risk of scale up, you don’t have to take wild risks. You can take really smart risks when it comes to project execution and technology. I think what we need to see to help projects move forward is to remove some of the business and commercial risk associated with the regulatory and pricing environment. We really need to see stability and strength in carbon pricing to allow a large number of these projects to take off. Speaker 1 [00:11:29] What do you say to people who say all that’s good, but doesn’t this just become a cover for more oil and gas production, which is what we ultimately need to bend the curve on? Speaker 2 [00:11:40] I understand that argument, but I think, you know, the energy transition is about four pillars in our view. So it’s about electrify as much as you can. It’s about a massive deployment of renewables. It’s about the use of hydrogen for hard to decarbonize aspects of the economy, and it has to be about carbon capture and removal. If we’re going to hit our net zero goals in 2050 or our global climate targets around 1.5 degrees Celsius, the the global energy economy is a is a complicated system with a lot of inertia. It’s not going to transition immediately tomorrow. And while we go through that transition, we need to be decarbonizing it to ensure that we’re meeting our climate goals. In today’s world, when people are focused on energy security, it’s even more important that while we’re going through that energy transition, we’re decarbonizing the fossil fuel side of the picture. Speaker 1 [00:12:28] Matt, before we get back on the road down the hydrogen highway, one last question can you remind? Food of ARTIGO was again Speaker 2 [00:12:36] spontaneous, one of the first scientists to write down on paper the connection between CO2 in the atmosphere and a warming climate, and we certainly owe him a great debt of gratitude. Speaker 1 [00:12:45] I hope someone in memoriam makes him an honorary Canadian. Thanks for your Speaker 2 [00:12:50] time. I’m certain we would do so. Thanks very much, John. Speaker 1 [00:12:57] We’re now in North Burnaby at the foot of Burnaby Mountain. The cherry blossoms are in full bloom, it’s gorgeous. And right before me next to the cherry blossoms is a big hydrogen tank. It’s part of Loop, which is the next clean tech company. We’re going to visit. They do something with fuel cells, which I don’t really understand, but hopefully after this interview, we’ll all have it figured out. Welcome to Loop. We’ll open the door and get inside. Speaker 2 [00:13:28] So I’m Rob Stevenson, director of technical services here at Leute. So what we’re looking at is two mock ups of the modules that we currently produce in this facility. So this unit up on top here, that’s a 30 kilowatt capable unit. We’ll get into some of the power rangers a little bit later in the tour and then underneath it is 60 kilowatt capable unit. What that does is if you feed it hydrogen, you feed it air and coolant circuit. It will provide that power to charge a battery bank or power vehicle. Speaker 1 [00:13:59] All right. Thanks, Rob. Let’s go inside. Go inside. Yeah. Speaker 2 [00:14:05] So this clean room is a facility that we put in about three years ago to build our stacks or stacks or the power producing unit within our fuel cell modules there, where we introduce hydrogen and oxygen into alternating series of what we call unit cells to create electricity. So those stacks are what we build inside this clean room. And the two individuals that you see in there right now are in the midst of building one and getting it ready to put it into a product. Speaker 1 [00:14:36] So a tech time out here? Can you explain what a fuel cell is and what you do with it? Speaker 2 [00:14:44] Certainly. So, yeah, fuel cells are a mix of two main components. One is the stack, which we just talked about being produced within this clean room. The other main series of components within the module are a fuel so module are called the balance of plant. The balance of plant provide all the necessary gases and fluids to keep the stacks alive and produce electricity. So we introduce hydrogen. We introduce oxygen via air. And then we create using the chemical reaction. We create electricity out of that and we remove heat. We extract heat from it using a coolant system. Speaker 1 [00:15:22] So it looks like a big box of energy, kind of a magic box energy. Speaker 2 [00:15:26] That’s a good explanation for it. Speaker 1 [00:15:28] Do I have to put hydrogen into it or does it come preloaded? Speaker 2 [00:15:32] You do. So typically, the hydrogen will be provided by a tank system that will be part of the integration work that we do when we put this unit into the hands of a customer. And they’ll have that as a high pressure gas supply that they will connect to the bulkhead fittings on the other side of the module from what you see here and keep all our integration connection points in one area to make it easier for the customer to plug and play the product into their application. Speaker 1 [00:16:00] And do customers need to go to a central depot like a hydrogen station to plug and play? Or would they have that at their own, at their own site? Speaker 2 [00:16:08] It’s yeah, it’s a very good question. The infrastructure is traditionally lagged the development of the hydrogen network, essentially, and it’s it’s been perpetual in that, but it’s really accelerating quickly that we see in places like California, places like Europe, there’s a there’s a real acceleration like almost like an inflection point has been hit here at the establishment of hydrogen fueling stations for vehicles, and that’s getting more and more play. Lots of that going on in China as well. Lots of fuel cell vehicles in operation there that are being fueled at stations. They can also be delivered to site depending on your application through industrial gas suppliers. All right. All right. Speaker 1 [00:16:50] And then I’m sorry, I’m interrupting reporting. OK, great to see you. Speaker 3 [00:16:55] Hey, John, it’s great to have you at the facilities. I’m Ben Nyland, CEO of Loop Energy. Looking forward to showing you around today. Speaker 1 [00:17:02] So we’re now walking up Burnaby Mountain to the other Office of Loop. I’ve got to pause and admire this address. It is 20 700 production way and one innovation place, which kind of says you can’t have innovation without production and you can’t have good production without innovation. So take us inside Ben. All right, Speaker 3 [00:17:24] let’s go on in. This section we’re walking through here is the engineering department. So lots of folks working here. We’re actually going to be reconfiguring this shortly to Speaker 1 [00:17:34] accommodate the Speaker 3 [00:17:35] growth that we’re getting in the employees. So this is they’re nicely spaced out now it’s going to get a little bit tighter over the next little while. Speaker 1 [00:17:41] And how many employees do you have now? Speaker 3 [00:17:43] We’re just about 100 employees at this point. And when we did our IPO last year, we were around 40. So we’ve grown quite dramatically. Speaker 1 [00:17:51] Where do you think you’ll be in a year from now? The objective is to have doubled close to double what needs to happen out there in the market for Luke to flourish for years to come? Speaker 3 [00:18:01] Well, I think the good news is that starting to happen, the fact that energy security is now aligning with climate change to provide real momentum in this direction, I think there’s been desire by governments to put in regulation. Companies want to move in this direction, but they need to see the economic benefits. And so that alignment, the fixing of the chicken and egg problem, where’s the hydrogen going to come from? You need hydrogen before fuel cells. Well, you need fuel cells to know you’re going to consume. The hydrogen is getting fixed because of the alignment of energy security and climate change. So what needs to happen is an abundant supply of hydrogen that is reasonable cost that can be accessed by those who are using fuel cell systems. And the good news is that’s happening in spades in Europe. In China, significant pushes in that direction, and we’re now starting to see that in North America, there are projects in Alberta and Ontario and Quebec to get hydrogen corridors set up. And so that momentum that’s happening in China, in Europe is now translating into North America as well. Speaker 1 [00:19:03] And you’re aiming for heavy vehicles, trucks, busses, fleet operators are going to need to make changes. They are making changes. We’ve certainly seen municipalities, for instance, lead the way. But the big fleet operators, retailers, shippers and the like are going to have to replace their fleets. What’s it going to take for them to move at scale? Speaker 3 [00:19:26] So many of them have deployed battery electric vehicles in their fleets to test those out. We’ve talked to some of the biggest fleets in the world logistics fleets. There are companies like Amazon, for instance, who have established Hydrogen Strategy Group within Amazon. And you think Amazon is a retailer? They have a huge logistics fleet. They see hydrogen as being part of that and hydrogen being a key part of the solution. So, so really, they need to see something that they can count on at scale. So that means reliability in the vehicles proving the technology. It also means being able to fuel those vehicles effectively and deploy them across the fleets. And so that’s where we when we talk to fleet operators, they really want to see vehicles that accommodate their cargo requirements that accommodate their range requirements and accommodate their operational requirements. So many of these vehicles operate 16, 17, 18 hours a day. They can’t necessarily be plugged in with batteries, right? Batteries are great in certain applications, but there are many applications where batteries don’t fit. And what we’re finding is when fleet operators are sensitive to distance to range, they’re sensitive to cargo limitations and operating hours. That’s where fuel cells really come into play. So as fuel becomes more available, as hydrogen becomes more available, they will be in a better position to scale those fleets. Speaker 1 [00:20:43] You’re a global company. Growth in Asia and Europe, China specifically. How far behind is North America? When you look at those other regions, Speaker 3 [00:20:53] well, I guess this is probably a good news. Bad news story, right? So in terms of motivation, in terms of programs, in terms of momentum, we are well behind. There are serious programs, serious amounts of money flowing in. You know, the Canadian government just announced a $9 billion program for Canada. This spread across many, many sectors. Germany, France and Spain have all announced seven eight nine billion euro programs specifically directed at hydrogen, right? And so there’s a level of focus in these other areas that we don’t have yet. So that’s kind of the bad news piece we’re well behind. But the good news is they made those decisions relatively recently. So. So China made those decisions five 10 years ago when they realized hydrogen was important to energy security. Europe has just been making those decisions in the last two or three years. And so it’s a matter of making those decisions and making those commitments and really in it from a time perspective, we’re not that far behind. And from a technology perspective, Vancouver is the cradle of fuel cell technology. We have great trucking companies in North America. Cummins is one of is possibly the leading diesel engine manufacturer in the world. Well, they own 20 percent of lube. They’re interested in this space. They just need to have certainty that the commercial offtake is going to be there when they develop those products. Speaker 1 [00:22:13] We’ve all heard for many years about the hydrogen highway. Before we go, I wonder if we can just pop over to the window and take a look at our weather event? Absolutely. You bet. Coming up after the break, our third and final stop along BC’s hydrogen highway, so stay right there. Speaker 4 [00:22:35] You’re listening to Disruptors, an RBC podcast. I’m Theresa Do. Russia’s attack on Ukraine is a defining moment for global energy markets as governments and consumers grapple with energy shortages and high gas and power bills. Climate change targets are clashing with energy security measures. Coming soon, a new RBC Economics and thought leadership report on how Canada can play a role in calming nervous oil markets in the short run and develop a framework for a competitive and decarbonize oil and gas sector for the long haul. The world’s going to need it. To learn more. Check out the link in the show notes of this episode and visit our bbc.com slash thought leadership. Speaker 1 [00:23:17] Welcome back. On today’s episode, we’re speaking with some of the innovators in the heart of BC’s Clean Tech Valley. Each in different ways working to reduce emissions across Canada. Our first stop was 70, a carbon capture company transforming both fossil fuel based electricity generation and industrial processes. And We Just left Loop Energy, which produces hydrogen fuel cell systems for the automotive and power generation sectors. On the last stop of our journey, we’ll meet a serial entrepreneur who’s bringing his passion for the open highway to the world of EVs. The team of motorcycle? Hey, hi, it’s John Stark host to seek at 2:30 Finance. Beyond these doors is the future of motorcycling. I’m going to go inside and see what that future looks like. My name is Jay Jro, and I’m the founder and CEO at Daymond Motorcycles. We do some of the development here and we do some of the development in San Rafael. We’ll go upstairs just because it’s beautiful up there. And this is the picture of the factory that’s being built in Northview, Surrey, just on the south side of the patellar bridge, two hundred and eight thousand square foot factory to build up to 40000 thousand motorbikes a year. Those motorcycles that will build at the Northview factory will be the hyperdrive based bikes, and I’ll show you guys hyperdrive downstairs. The hyperdrive system is a battery pack and a powertrain train, and it’s all the electronics and the air and a collision warning system, all in the shape of a motorcycle without wheels. And that means we can mount suspension and wheels and bodywork plastic to turn hyperdrive into any kind of motorcycle. We want a true EV platform for motorbikes. So I’m going to get you to back up literally to the day you got the dream for this. Everyone’s been talking about electric vehicles, but we always think Tesla or other cars. When did you think of an electric motorcycle? I got the idea for electric motorcycles. I guess when Vector X made an electric motorbike that was around twenty seven twenty eight, they had a really sexy looking electric motorbike. And at the time I was starting an electric car company called Ref-. So here in Vancouver, we did electric SUVs and pickup trucks that we sold to the US Army and US utility companies amidst Paladins province of B.C. in Ontario. And they were very unique EVs in that they could feed energy back into the power grid so they can be plugged into a charging station and they could push energy out of the vehicle into the power lines to balance supply and demand on the grid. But during that time, I was lusting after this Vector X company and another electric motorbike company called Mission, who we’ve since acquired at Damon. So I guess I’ve been thinking about electric motorbikes and I thought, That’s wonderful. I love writing, but that has no purpose. Like, what’s the purpose of making electric motorbikes electric? But, you know, fast forward all the way to 2016. I was in Jakarta riding a motorbike around twenty two million other daily riders, and I thought, Oh, there’s a real purpose to motorbikes being electric and of course, air quality and all of that. And then, you know, dodging trucks and crashing my motor bike on the sidewalk in in Jakarta. The safety issue became more paramount. You know, if you crash a motor bike here, it’s bad, but you’re not going to get run over by 50 more. But there is really, really bad. And so that kind of, you know, I guess over those eight years came to a realization that we need to reinvent motorcycling. OK, let’s go back downstairs. Jay, tell us about the production goals that you’ve set out. You showed us the picture of the plant that’s going up. So we’re on track to start production at the end of the year. We’ve got twenty two hundred or so orders growing at a hundred and fifty or two hundred a month. Three quarters of orders come out of the US. And of those a quarter out of California, probably not too surprising, 13 percent of North America is electric. Cars are sold into Vancouver and B.C.. And so the demand, you know, not just here but everywhere for electric vehicles is really, really high. How big do you think the market is? Oh, it’s eventually it’s 100 percent of the market. It’s enormous. I mean, it’s worldwide. It’s one hundred and forty four billion. It’s 160 million motorcycles sold annually around the world. And how many of those wish it to be electric? Not everyone, not everyone. Today, the average motorcycle customer is fifty seven years old in North America. The average Damon customer is thirty seven young people, twenty five to thirty five years old. They don’t learn how to drive cars with gears, and so they’re intimidated to drive a motorcycle with gears. That doesn’t mean they don’t want to ride a motorbike, but they expect technology. They expect system integration with their phones, they expect integration to the cloud. They expect it to be safer. They expect it to be easy. They expect it to be clean and silent as well. How is the riding experience different? Oh, that’s that. That is a long conversation. Let’s start with the old guy here. This bike we built about three years ago, and I’ll go through how the riding experience is different. I’ll start by turning it on. First, on the outside, it looks like it looks like a regular motorbike, and we designed it to look like a motor bike. But we also designed it to look powerful and fast and and to kind of blend in with other superbikes, which means you could buy one of these and not look, quote unquote weird around your buddies and their guest bikes. And the idea is that we want to draw people away from gas bikes as they are known, but to also be familiar, so futuristic but familiar. But the more obvious things is like the rearview mirror that shows me everything behind me while I ride. No motorcycle has a rearview mirror, so you now have blind spot warning without having to check over your shoulder on a motorcycle. When you look left and right because your helmet, you actually block your field of view forward. You have to take your eyes off the car ahead in order to check for a car beside you. And now you don’t with a blind spot warnings. The other thing is different in the rider experience is the forward collision warning. If there is a vehicle approaching, the handlebars are going to vibrate. There you go. If there’s a vehicle or a pedestrian approaching or a pedestrian. Crossing at a light. You’re not looking the handlebars vibrate to warn you of that potential forward collision warning, as you just saw. And then the last thing I think it makes it pretty significantly different is the bike transforms forms at the push of a button. Right now, it’s in a low crouched sport bike position. But while you ride, you can put the bike into an upright rider position. Take the weight off your back, drop your legs down, and now you can be in a more comfortable commuter style position so you can have like two bikes in one, and absolutely none of this kind of technology has ever been done before on a motorcycle. Tell us a bit more about the software. Seems is obviously software enabled machines, but it seems that’s a big area of focus for you. Think and mentioned not only the software, but what the software drives on the tail of this motorcycle. You have to seventy two gigahertz radar. You have a 10 hp wide angle camera in the front and then there’s a front radar in front camera as well. And this in the front, it’s one hundred and fifty meter radar with a 140 degree wide angle front camera, also 10 80p. So the cameras, the radars, there’s also non-visual sensors throughout the motorcycle that collectively ingest every bit of data that it can about its environment. So is the ground wet or dry? How far leaning over is the bike in terms of angle? What’s the wheel speed? What’s the tire temperature? What’s the ambient temperature outside exactly? How many centimeters away is that approaching car? All of that information is processed on the onboard air engine that air engine does onboard processing to determine that a potential vehicle threat in real time and then warn you of that threat again through the vibrating handlebars or through the lights. We are not depending on the cloud to do that processing. So even though the bike is five g connected, we don’t need that internet connection to tell you if there’s a threat. You mentioned how you were inspired in some ways by riding in Jakarta. How are you thinking about geographic opportunities since you’re probably not going to be able to scale quickly enough to serve the entire planet? So we’re focusing on North America and Europe first. We do have orders from many other places, but we’re focusing our early shipments into North America and then Europe in twenty three. And then we’re working on a third design for a different category of motor bike that comes after the hyper fighter and its siblings that will kind of widen the triangle, if you will, for us. And then we have another platform that will be a different battery chassis platform for lower cost motorcycles that that’ll first get launched in Latin America. We have a partnership down there called Taco Tacos, the largest motorcycle manufacturer in Latin America, and together we will manufacture our hyper light platform in the two to $5000 range for that very broad market Ecuador, Colombia, Mexico and so on. And then those kinds of lower cost motorcycles will be available in North America and Europe as well, and eventually into Southeast Asia. We’re doing this whole episode on clean tech and focusing on Vancouver as one of the world’s great clean tech sectors. We’ve talked to hydrogen companies, the carbon capture companies, talking to a consumer facing manufacturer. What do we need to do, J, to keep entrepreneurs like you here and to ensure that you scale from Canadian soil? Well, have babies. That’s the reason I never moved to Silicon Valley. This is my third startup. It’s my third tech startup in Vancouver and my very first one, I had my first kid and that made it pretty difficult to think about moving, which made each company so much harder than it needed to be because fundraising in Vancouver is really hard. Access to capital has gotten better slowly over these 14 years that I’ve been doing it. The talent pool in Vancouver is really good. The loyalty is really high. The diverse, clean tech talent is the other reason we wanted to manufacture in Vancouver because all the people here want a company like that to work for. They want something big to be proud of. They want to assign themselves to an OEM brand, something that they see, not just an app in your pocket, but something that you see go down the road that you can be proud of, that you see. Oh, that’s from Vancouver. Yeah, thank you. Yeah, it’s been fun. Thank you, guys. This is great. What a trip. Vaughn, our audio engineer, and Jen, one of our producers and I have been driving around Greater Vancouver getting to meet these incredible companies. We’ve learned a lot about carbon capture, about hydrogen and fuel cells and about electric motorcycles. I can’t tell which company is more exciting, but it’s not really a contest because we need them all and thousands more like them to innovate and transform our economy in the years and decades ahead. The race to net zero is real, but the race among entrepreneurs to find new ways to get us there in sustainable and profitable ways is also very real, and they are ahead of the pack. At least the ones we spent time with today. I’m thinking back to Matt at 70 and what they are building and already putting in the field to capture carbon and get it back in the ground so that we can continue to use oil and gas for the foreseeable future as we develop other fuels and energy systems. From there, we went to loop and met Ben to hear about one of those new fuels hydrogen and the fuel cells that loop is building to change the way trucks and busses move around our communities and between our communities. Next time you’re on a highway, just look at those 18 wheelers and think about the fuel they’re consuming and what a way to end the journey. Jay sees the future for motorcycles, and he’s making it happen. His customers see this, and it’s why he’s getting orders from all over the world for his super bikes. That’s the kind of vision we need for the next generation of the Canadian economy entrepreneurs, operators, investors and all of us as consumers and citizens who can see things differently and get excited about it. But you know what? As excited as I get about all of these things, I know we’ve got a problem. Not all Canadians are engaged in this transition, and critically, Canada’s indigenous peoples are not being given the opportunity to lead in the way that they can to ensure that we are transforming our society and our economy, not only in more sustainable, more creative and more tech forward ways, but also in more inclusive ways. On the last episode of our climate series, we’ll meet some remarkable indigenous leaders from British Columbia who are doing just that, creating an economy and society for the future that we’ll all want to be part of. I’m John Stackhouse and this is disruptors and our BBQ podcast. Talk to you soon. Speaker 4 [00:35:37] Disruptors an RBC podcast is created by the RBC Thought Leadership Group and does not constitute a recommendation for any organization, product or service. It’s produced and recorded by Jar Audio. For more disruptors content like or subscribe wherever you get your podcasts and visit rbc dot com, slash disruptors.

Speaker 1 [00:00:01] Hi, it’s John here. I’m not in the studio today. I’m actually on the shores of Burrard Inlet staring at some of the most beautiful scenery in Canada, knowing this is the epicenter of Canada’s climate challenge. Just north of me is the North Shore Mountains, which last summer were clouded in smoke from devastating fires to the east of here devastating floods over those mountains. Was that horrific scene of listen B.C. burning to a crisp? Everyone here knows the reality in the here and now of climate change, and we’re all coming to grips with the reality of energy security. Knowing that what we pay and what we need to move around to stay warm and to stay cool is not getting any easier or cheaper by the year. I just stepped out of a conference room where Justin Trudeau was rolling out Canada’s new emissions reduction plan, which tries to balance energy security and climate security along with economic security. Can it be done when Europe is staring at the reality of a horrific war? Can it be done when consumers all around the world are struggling with inflation? Can be done when the technologies that we know we’re going to need to get to net zero aren’t really in our hands yet. These are some of the questions that we’ve been wrestling with at disruptors, and we’re going to try to find answers to over the next three episodes. Join me as we meet innovators and disruptors from all over Canada who are trying to navigate this new challenge. They know this beautiful corner of Canada and all of our communities hang in the balance. This is Disruptors, an RBC podcast. I’m John Stackhouse. On today’s episode, we’re talking with some of Canada’s biggest thinkers on climate and energy security. Each year in Vancouver for the annual Globe Conference, the conference kicked off with a splashy announcement that Canada would now aim to cut emissions by 42 percent in the oil and gas sector by 2030. But how do we get there? How do we reconcile our climate and energy goals? That may seem like a challenge of today, but it’s also a challenge we’ve seen in decades past and students of history are looking back in time to the last big shock to global energy markets. Among those looking back to the future is Peter Tertzakian of the Arc Energy Research Institute in Calgary and noted author on energy trends. I caught up with Peter on the floor of the conference. Peter, hey, how you doing, John? Peter. Let’s start with the long view history. Fifty years ago, the IEA launches. We’re now facing another energy crisis. Same or different? Speaker 2 [00:03:04] Well, there’s a lot of eerie similarities. And in the 1973 energy crisis was a consequence of military conflicts in the Middle East, the Yom Kippur War. We were in the midst of a Cold War or adversary was the Soviet Union, which was Russia. Today, we have prices spiking oil prices in the face of excess demand. And so there’s a lot of areas similarities. The only difference was, you know, rather than us sanctioning other countries, we were effectively sanctioned with the Arab oil embargo. And so, yeah, the circumstances were different. But in the end, there was a price spike and actual shortages of vital fuels for the economy dominantly of oil. That led to the formation of the International Energy Agency, whose core mission was to restore energy security. Speaker 1 [00:03:54] There was a climate movement back then, smaller than it is now, but the Brundtland Commission had just done its piece, and the world was aware of some of the challenges, not to the degree we are now. Clearly, the tension between energy and climate, if there was one, then energy one out. Today, we also have a tension between energy and climate, right? Speaker 2 [00:04:15] Will this play out? Well, actually, so I think some lessons from the past don’t. Environment as a broader umbrella has always been a force of change. In the words of energy, you can go back centuries in terms of, you know, all the way from denuded forests to all sorts of issues. There were big environmental drivers in the 1970s, including smog, leaded gasoline, ozone layer, you name it. Eventually, I think the later 70s acid rain and so on and so forth. So energy and environment have always been closely linked. And that environment is a force of change to transition. However, it is an insufficient force of change, in my opinion, to take you to where you want to go as fast as possible. That’s where the energy crises come in. And unfortunately, very unfortunately, it takes a crisis to bring about the force of change, which is very powerful and that is energy security and affordability or lack thereof. Speaker 1 [00:05:12] So are these crises competing or supportive? Speaker 2 [00:05:16] Well, that’s a great question in the near term that are competing the way the script plays out in the near-term. When you have a crisis like this, do you have to scramble to satisfy societal needs for these vital energy commodities for heat mobility ET? And so the first response is typically a regression. Oil and natural gas is oil too expensive to burn? What am I going to burn out here is coal. It’s cheaper on this. Are burning coal emissions go up for environment? And so the first phase is always regressive. That’s the phase we’re in right now as we record this podcast. But eventually as the fog of war and the fog of the crisis sort of settles down of it, then you start to see the policies coming out, OK, we’ve got a change and now you double down. Obviously, in Europe, they’re already doubling down because they’re at the heart of the crisis. We have yet to see it here, in my opinion, really in North America and other parts of the world because, you know, we’re fairly shielded. Yeah, for the price of gasoline, up 50 percent. It’s a nuisance for a lot of people, but we’re an affluent country. But of course, up three or four times, that’s a big deal. Speaker 1 [00:06:16] What lessons should we reflect on from the 1970s to do things differently so that we find more of a balance between environmental concerns and energy security concerns? Speaker 2 [00:06:27] Yeah, that’s a great question. I’ll tell you why, because as I reflect on this, this is almost half a century. Forty eight years since the formation of the IEA and that first price shocks, and here we are, back to square one. We’ve doubled oil consumption and production emissions are keep going up, and we’ve had several mini crises in between. But it’s not like 1991, the Gulf War 2003 invasion of Iraq. We have the lead up to the financial crisis and the price spike. Don’t we ever learn? I have not. Heard anything in any of these policies about how to put in like a ratchet so you don’t go backwards once inevitably. You know, as I said, the fog of the crisis sort of clears our supply chains improve over the next few years. But if that means that the price of oil, gas, coal etc goes down, then there’s sort of the sense, false sense of energy security again. If you go back to the 70s in Europe, what they did was they actually put in fairly aggressive fuel taxes and they did not allow the price of the fuels to go down. And they that was also an impetus to build out a lot of mass transit, high speed rail, etc., etc. Now we don’t have the luxury as much in Canada because of our vast geography and low population density. But there’s also an educational component to this that the demand side, in other words, a consumer has to participate in the transition. And overwhelmingly, the dialog over the last 50 years has been How do we deal with transitioning the supply side? I think now again, we have to see how do we get people’s mindsets to think differently because I don’t think that part of it’s been addressed. Speaker 1 [00:08:09] One of the ideas that struck me from my conversation with Peter is from decades past that energy usually trumps climate or environmental issues when it comes to a political decision. Voters think about the here and now. They think about cost of living, and that’s playing out in the world today in many different places. But a big difference today is there are many more choices for energy, and the cost of some of those choices continues to go down. So while we see a significant spike in prices for fossil fuels, particularly, there’s more options for all of us. And it’s the consumer that’s all of us who has a major part to play in Canada’s energy transition. But there’s little doubt that the suppliers, the Big Oil and gas producers are also the ones who have to think differently. As Peter put it, one of them who’s thinking differently is Susanna Pierce, the president and country chair of Shell Canada. She understands the challenges ahead better than most. We caught up with her next. Susanna, great to see you. Speaker 3 [00:09:11] Good to see you, John. Speaker 1 [00:09:12] So much has changed since The Last Globe Forum. It’s dizzying to think about pandemic war, economic disruption and so much more. How has all of that changed your net zero thinking? Speaker 3 [00:09:27] One of the interesting things about net zero for us is when we talk about it and when we commit to it, it’s scope one, two and three. So it’s the emissions which we create. When we produce energy, it’s emissions we cause to be created because of electricity consumption or state or steam or heat. But it’s also the emissions of our customers and that’s what we call Scope three. And 90 percent, the emissions we need to tackle are our customers. It’s. And that’s really difficult because we can control scope one and two to a larger extent and three. But with that in mind and that target in mind, you know, with the pandemic happening and now certainly with the challenges of war in Ukraine, it certainly does increase the complexity. I would say, and I think it increases, you know, the challenges we have to work with all the parties we need to to get to that commitment of net zero by 2050. Having said that, though, it doesn’t change the commitment. The commitment is there. We have a commitment to achieve net zero by 2050 with what we see happening in terms of the war and the disruption in the energy markets and of course, what’s happened in the rebound since the pandemic. All it really suggests is that the challenges are real. This isn’t a simple solution, and I think those who have suggested the easiest way to get to net zero is just to cut. Fossil fuels are clearly it’s not the answer because we see what happens when you cut the ability of consumers to get natural gas or oil, and they suffer from that. And we are suffering to an extent where you see prices, where they are. So in short, there’s no easy solution, but that just means it just means we all have to work together and that no lever should be off the table. Speaker 1 [00:11:00] What do you say to those people who would take issue with that position and perhaps argue that high prices, shortages, rationing even is going to drive us to change faster and adopt and scale the replacement technologies? Speaker 3 [00:11:14] Well, I would say I probably don’t disagree that high prices will incentivize some to say, Well, let’s move more quickly to energy security that doesn’t depend on fossil fuel imports. And I think that’s a very important thing to keep in mind, and we should look to see what we can do to lean in and and maybe continue to press towards lower carbon solutions, renewable energy solutions that don’t require imports from unstable areas. But there’s a cost, and we’re experiencing that right now, so it can’t. It has to be in a way that recognizes, well, we want to make that transition. We do need to think about the now and the now really needs to be providing the energy that customers need because of the energy the customers need is too expensive. Then they’re having to make some choices and for. Customers, some of whom it’s a choice between putting food on their table or paying their energy bills, for some industry, it’s a choice of keeping a factory open or shutting it down. So we need to be very thoughtful about how quickly we move. But I would say to those that say it just means we need to double down while I don’t disagree, but we have to be mindful of the impact that has and address all along the way. Speaker 1 [00:12:15] I have to think about both. Yeah, we do. Scope three is really all of us. It’s what we consume. It’s how we get through our lives in a comfortable and meaningful way. And many people are struggling with energy security, not just at a national level, but at a household level and trying to balance that with what I might call climate security released climate stability. How are we going to ensure that people have energy security and climate security? Speaker 3 [00:12:45] Well, you know, I fundamentally believe in when you say Scope three, I mean, scope three is our customers emissions. But if I’m the customer go three, I’m still one. Those are my emissions that I’m. I’m producing what I drive my car when I consume energy. And so I think fundamentally each one of us has to ask, You know, how much energy do I need? Are there ways that I can reduce my energy consumption? Because energy efficiency and energy reduction to an extent is one way of reducing emissions and increasing to an extent energy security because you don’t need as much of it. So we have to start with what can I do to be more efficient with the energy that I use? But there will come a point, of course, where it becomes a very difficult choice between again, food on the table shutting a factory down. And so in the short term, I think what we have to do is find ways of accelerating the energy supply where it’s needed. And as much as we can, can we find ways of accelerating the decarbonization as well? So we know in the short term we will continue to need a short to medium term. We’ll still need fossil fuels because so much of our energy system runs on fossil fuels. But what can we do to decarbonize the fuel system? So what can we do, for example, to decarbonize fuel use and carbon capture sequestration? So can we capture emissions in carbon capture sequestration, which again creates an emissions reduction while we look to produce the fuels that the energy system needs? What can we do to increase the amount of renewable biodiesel renewable fuels that again can reduce the amount of carbon that is in the fuel system using the fuel infrastructure that we have today? So I think there’s a combination here of recognizing the energy system runs on fossil fuels. Today, we can decarbonize the fossil fuels that we have by using carbon capture, sequestration, renewable fuels, hydrogen while we look to transition the types of renewable infrastructure that we will need, such as EVs such as hydrogen vehicles and all the rest of it. So there’s a pathway, Speaker 1 [00:14:35] and Shell is a critical player on that on that pathway. The Canadian government has unveiled its emissions reduction plan, including in anticipation of a 40 percent reduction in net emissions for your sector by 2030. How are you going to do it? Speaker 3 [00:14:53] What I see in the emissions reduction plan is that government has recognized that there are challenges for the private sector and making investments that are not economic. So what do we need? What I see and that at first glance, is that they’re looking at how do I drive carbon tax price certainty? That’s important because I’m making an investment on a certain carbon tax. I want to know that it will be there because if we reduce the carbon tax, then all of a sudden those investments may not be economic. They’re looking at addressing some of the regulatory uncertainty. So we have the clean fuel standard. But how do we make sure again that we will be able to generate the credits? So I think the plan at this point recognizes the challenges. It doesn’t mean, again, it’s going to be simple, but it does mean that if we can work with customers so we can work with producers and across the entire value chain, we’ve got a better shot than I think we ever have had. Speaker 1 [00:15:38] I think it’s safe to say very few expected energy markets to be where they are today and to see where Canada’s places in the energy world. As Susanna noted, We can’t think of Canada in isolation. We are part of a global economy and part of a global society. And that’s the challenge the Canadians need to come to grips with. Coming up after the break, we’ll have more disruptors climate conversations from Vancouver. So stay right there. Speaker 4 [00:16:07] You’re listening to Disruptors and RBC podcast. I’m Theresa Do. Russia’s attack on Ukraine is a defining moment for global energy markets as governments and consumers grapple with energy shortages and high gas and power bills. Climate change targets are clashing with energy security measures. Coming soon, a new RBC Economics and thought leadership report on how Canada can play a role in calming nervous oil markets in the short run and develop a framework for a competitive and decarbonized oil and gas sector for the long haul. The world is going to need it to learn more. Check out the link in the show notes of this episode and visit our bbc.com slashed thought leadership. Speaker 1 [00:16:50] Welcome back. We’re talking with some of the big thinkers and innovators in the energy sector here in Vancouver to figure out how we can accelerate Canada’s transition to a lower emissions economy. One of the big questions that seems to be coming up repeatedly is whether Canadian oil and gas through technology and innovation can be both low emissions and globally competitive. To get more perspective on that. I talked with my colleague Colin Guldimann, an economist with RBC Economics and thought leadership and principal author of our research on the climate transition. Colin, you’ve let our research on climate through a number of reports. How do you thread the needle in your mind in terms of the the contradiction? Some would see it between higher emissions as a result of greater oil and gas production, balancing that with not only the need, but now the declared intention of the country to reduce emissions by 40 percent with respect to the oil and gas sector. Speaker 5 [00:17:47] So I’ll start just by noting that the government’s plan to reduce emissions in the oil and gas sector does account for some growth of production through to 2030. Or at least that’s what their forecasts suggest. And I think the story here is really that there are a lot of technological solutions that already exist in the oil and gas space to cut, for example, methane emissions, which are highly polluting and warming the atmosphere more quickly than carbon dioxide. But I think the fundamental question here is Canada’s role as an oil and gas producer going forward, not just to 2030, but also to 2050. As we make these investments to decarbonize the sector, are we doing those in a way that has a view towards maintaining the competitiveness of the sector in 2050, when so much is still left uncertain about where prices will be, where production will be and where demand will be in 2050? If you look at the landscape now, you think, OK, planes really hard to decarbonize, so we’ll need oil for jet fuel, we’ll need oil for petrochemicals and plastics and all these other non-combustion uses. The IEA has a great report out that suggests demand in a net zero world could still be 25 million barrels a day. Canada’s production around five million barrels a day. Why shouldn’t Canada be an oil and gas producer with 20 percent market share? So that’s the question. Can we fight for that last barrel? And if we decarbonize the sector smartly with an eye to cost and competitiveness, I don’t see a reason why that shouldn’t be the case. Speaker 1 [00:19:13] As Colin explained, We can have both climate security and energy security, but it’s going to cost us how much is still to be determined and the cost may be more than economic. We’re going to need to think through abatement technologies that allow us to continue to produce oil and gas, at least for the foreseeable future, but also new energy technologies both for production and consumption that allow us to literally rewire much of our economy. Just how feasible is that? Who better to answer that than Linda Cody? Linda is the executive director of the Pembina Institute, a think tank advocating for a clean energy transition. She also has a lot of experience in the energy sector, having worked as chief sustainability officer for Enbridge and as vice president of sustainability for the 2010 Vancouver Olympics. Linda can take some credit for this magnificently green convention center. The greatest part of the city’s waterfront. Here’s part of our conversation, and thanks so question is. Energy security vs. climate security. So let me, Linda, start out with a broad question. Many people are thinking about this choice anew because of global events and markets, energy security versus climate security. Is it a versus or is it possible to have both? Speaker 6 [00:20:31] Well, it needs to be an and I’m sure others have said this to you. It needs to be an end and not an order. Although I think it’s probably correct that historically, you know, and when there’s been a competition between those two values and priorities, security has obviously always trumped because people need access to energy and the energy needs to be affordable. But this time around, there’s just a lot more at stake here. And so we got to somehow translate the order into an end, and that’s going to be a big challenge for Canadians, especially. Speaker 1 [00:21:08] I think you’re a great student of society. What do you see out there that gives you confidence that we will be able to approach this and we’re ready as a society to approach this differently. Speaker 6 [00:21:19] I see good leadership. I see good leadership on the part of government today with the release of the emissions reduction plan, the new Canadian Plan, which is much more detailed than anything we’ve ever done before. But I also see good leadership in communities among cities, in business, in industry and indigenous communities and in the nonprofit NGO sector. So that’s where I would be hopeful that there will be good leadership and that that. Leadership will be able to navigate the complexities of the tradeoffs involved here. Speaker 1 [00:21:54] How can we help society show leadership at home in terms of all of our own activities, because many people see the price of gas or the price of heating their home and they’re saying, I just can’t afford this, I need somehow to get more of conventional energy sources so I pay less and maybe someone else can address the mega challenge of of climate. Speaker 6 [00:22:18] I guess it’s how it’s framed to them, right? And that’s where leadership can make a difference. You know, definitely Canadians care about these issues. And yes, energy has to be affordable. But at this point in Canada, we aren’t experiencing what they’re experiencing in Europe, although it could come here, and that’s the uncertainty that we’re facing right now. Speaker 1 [00:22:39] Yeah, I guess I’m premising the question on the kind of survey that shows people are willing to pay, you know, a couple of hundred dollars a year for climate action, but they don’t want to pay a lot more than that. And some of these things are expensive for new electric vehicle costs more than a conventional one. Speaker 6 [00:22:57] Yeah, not really funny. And not definitely. Not everybody is in the category where they can afford an electric vehicle. But I think we’re all in the category that we can see the costs of not acting on some of the climate challenges that are out here. And we’re in British Columbia today, and this is a province that in the last 10 months has been battered. It’s really coming home here to people in ways that it hasn’t before is so individual choices count. But really, the choices made by governments and business and cities count a lot more riots. So that’s the level at which I think people have to get together around this new Canadian climate plan. And because it certainly isn’t, it won’t work if it’s all up to the federal government to do it. So it is a call to action. And I think there’s some reason to hope that Canadians will act on this. Speaker 1 [00:23:50] Well, to make it happen to make the climate plan a reality, we’re going to need a lot more electricity and it needs to be clean or green electricity from renewable sources. We know how to do that, but we’re going to have to do it at a scale and speed that we’ve never done, certainly in our lifetime to be able to run a country that has 50 percent new vehicles by the end of this decade as electric vehicles. I’m curious what you think we need to come to grips with as a country in terms of really getting going at a meaningful speed and scale to get to those 2030 goals? Speaker 6 [00:24:32] Well, demand for the electricity will obviously be part of it, right? But greater cross territorial and provincial collaboration around electricity is obviously going to be key. And that’s where I think that indigenous communities also come into the equation as well on electricity. It’s going to be a much bigger lift for us than it is in the US to get to a 20 35 net zero grid. So it’s going to take new investment mechanisms, new shared infrastructure, new relationships, hopefully in the North American context. Hopefully we’re not just talking about an East-West grid here. Hopefully, it can be a North-South grid and we can take advantage of some of that speed and scale and scope and speed Speaker 1 [00:25:19] scale, scope three critical words for this conversation. You hear it across the energy sector. Everyone agrees the future will include more renewables. The real challenge is how big, how bold and how fast are we moving today? If you ask Marion Smith, she’d say not fast enough. Marin is executive director of Clean Energy Canada, a Vancouver based organization aiming to accelerate Canada’s clean energy transition through original research dialog and public engagement. And as you’re about to hear, Marin is encouraged by what she sees in the renewable space and the promise for innovative clean tech solutions to get us to net zero. Marin Many people are thinking a little bit differently about the climate challenge than they might have say six months ago. Given global events and what’s happening in markets due to energy prices, how do you think about things differently, if at all? Given how the world has changed, Speaker 7 [00:26:16] I’d say what’s going on in Ukraine right now has really brought to our attention the fact that there isn’t energy security when we are dependent on fossil fuels. And so we see Europe saying, well, we’re in a crisis crunch right now for getting more gas and oil. In fact, we’re going to double down and move faster on shifting to renewable energy because that provides a nation’s security. You can produce your own renewable energy, and the cost of renewable energy have dropped significantly 90 percent for things like. Solar wind also significant drops and the kind of the lynchpin is the batteries, because we know that wind and solar are intermittent. The battery costs have dropped as well. So when I look at recent events that have happened in Europe and really the crisis around energy, we are now seeing that the transition to clean renewable energy that can be created locally in many places is part of the solution. And I think we’re going to see that accelerate, including things like hydrogen as one of the energy sources. Billions and billions of dollars have already been spent in Canada dealing with climate crisis. So we need to accelerate. We know that climate change is accelerating faster than we expected. I think what we’re seeing already in the electric vehicle space shows us actually when the companies get behind it and see that this is where the world is going. We have seen dozens of new makes and models come out, including some of Canadians. Favorite cars like the Ford F-150 is coming out with an electric version. We’re seeing other trucks SUVs coming out with as electric models in the next few years. So I think that once business sees the opportunity and we’re experiencing that, that’s why the price of solar wind batteries have all dropped just because industry is seeing that this is where the world is going and they are developing the products there. So when we talk about energy security, actually this energy transition is going to take us to a more secure future. But it’s not just energy security, it’s economic security. Speaker 1 [00:28:29] Depending on your projection, we’re going to need to double, maybe even triple our electricity supply over the next couple of decades. Where’s that going to come from? Is it all wind and solar? Will we need more hydro nuclear? What are the sources we’re going to need to invest in? Speaker 7 [00:28:46] Yeah. So electricity is something that Canada is good at. We already have over 80 percent zero emission grid. You know, we have huge, enormous potential resources. Alberta and Saskatchewan are the leaders in solar resources and is on par with places like Florida, even Vancouver. Rainy Vancouver has the same amount of solar energy as Germany. But this is where innovation comes in. This is where I’m going to be excited to see what comes. Solar and wind are clearly cheap sources of renewable energy at this point. Are we going to see solar roofing tiles? Are we going to see solar windows in buildings, geothermal? Where is that going to fit into the mix of things? I’m not sure that we’re going to see either nuclear or large scale hydro because of the cost, because there are other energies now in renewable energies that are so much cheaper. But there are there will be places where those energies are important and do you need to be part of the mix? I think what is exciting to me is what is going to happen in this space going forward because with the potential to double or triple our electricity in Canada, I think we’re going to see some creative new ideas. Speaker 1 [00:30:05] I’m back outside overlooking Burrard Inlet. The clouds have rolled in, the rain is sprinkling, we’ve heard over this episode the enormous challenges and opportunities Canada faces in the climate transition. We’ve never done anything like this as a country, certainly not at the speed and scale that we’re going to need to take on the transition in the coming years. Electric vehicles, hydrogen, food production, housing, everything has going to have to evolve, but faster. We’re all going to have to change the way we make things, the way we consume things, the way we sell things to the world. Great opportunity for those who get it right. Our research from RBC Economics suggests we’re going to need to mobilize $80 billion a year to make that happen. That’s about four times what we spend and invest now in transition-related activities. But the capital is there. The public desire is there. Increasingly, the public policy is there, and the ambition in many businesses is there. How are we going to do it? How are we going to balance energy security and climate security? Well, it’s possible, but it’s going to take a lot of innovation. That’s what we’re going to chase in our next episode. We’re going to meet some of Canada’s great cleantech innovators and hear about what they’re doing, how they’re building differently and how they see the future as an exciting one for all of us. I’m John Stackhouse and This is Disruptors, an RBC podcast. Talk to you soon. Speaker 4 [00:31:45] Disruptors, and RBC podcast is created by the RBC Thought Leadership Group and does not constitute a recommendation for any organization, product or service. It’s produced and recorded by Jar Audio. For more disruptors content, like or subscribe wherever you get your podcasts and visit our rbc dot com slash disruptors.

Speaker 1 [00:00:02] Hi, it’s John here. Speaker 2 [00:00:04] And it’s Theresa. Speaker 1 [00:00:05] So, Theresa, I’ve got to start with a personal question. What did you have for lunch today and do you remember what it cost? Speaker 2 [00:00:11] It was a packaged salad from the grocery store and it cost about five dollars, which is about the same price it usually is, although the amount of greens I got was much less than I remember. I feel like every trip to the grocery store just hurts my wallet a little bit more, and I feel like I’m making more trips more often. Speaker 1 [00:00:28] It’s one of the stories for almost everyone on the planet in 2022. Rising food prices. Of course, there’s a number of factors global inflation, supply chain disruption, the horrific war in Ukraine. But we’re seeing whole countries. I’m thinking of Sri Lanka and Pakistan going into political crises because of this and other countries like Yemen and Somalia unable to get wheat, or Brazil where farmers are struggling for fertilizer. So this is a massive global challenge that everyone is feeling Speaker 2 [00:00:57] pretty much every day. That’s right. And meanwhile, in Canada, food price inflation is up seven percent compared to last year. And by our RBC’s count, it means that the average household is spending at least $500 more on groceries and fruit this year and likely closer to $1000. And that’s thanks to meet cost. It’s much more expensive than it was last year. I definitely do not see myself having a barbecue feast anytime soon. John, you recently spent some time in B.C. and met with farmers and agricultural leaders while you were there. What did you Speaker 1 [00:01:27] learn? Yeah, I got to travel. It’s quite remarkable to be on an airplane again, but I was in Vancouver and then went up the Fraser Valley to Abbotsford, which people will remember was the center of devastating floods last year, and the impact is still very much felt. You can see fields of blueberry bushes and crops still ruined. And you know, one farmer told me about his struggle to get his cattle back on the farm. He had moved them out for a cow sitting, I guess you’d call it somewhere and he can’t get them back because all the housing for his farm workers has been destroyed. So it’s going to be a long time for recovery. And that, of course, is hard enough for the farmers and people of the Fraser Valley. But it’s having a ripple effect well beyond there in terms of prices Speaker 2 [00:02:16] at seeing all that damage firsthand and must have really struck a chord and really doesn’t leave us well positioned for future needs with population growth. We’re going to have a billion more people to feed in just a matter of a few years, and we’ll have to produce so much more food than we do now and find ways to do that with lower emissions. It’s increasingly a global crisis, this food insecurity. So what can be done? Speaker 1 [00:02:36] This may be Canada’s greatest opportunity of the 2020s to produce more food, to export more food for a hungry and divided world, and somehow to do that with fewer emissions. It’s kind of our space race. I got to meet some interesting AG tech producers when I was in B.C., and we’ll talk to one of these real innovators in the space. This is disruptors the 10 minute take. Today, we’re joined by Dave Dinesen, founder and CEO at Kubik Farms. Dave, welcome to the 10 minute take. Speaker 3 [00:03:08] John, great to be here. Speaker 1 [00:03:09] Dave, let’s start with the problem that you’re trying to solve. What? What is Speaker 3 [00:03:12] it? So Cubic Farms is a local chain agtech company, and we develop technologies that let you grow commercial scale amounts of food for people and actually feed for livestock as well. And you can do it locally, anywhere on Earth, 12 months a year and at commercial scale. Speaker 1 [00:03:29] And how does this play out? Can I have a feedlot in my backyard with this kind of technology? Speaker 3 [00:03:34] Well, this technology really is ideal for commercial scale, so our cubicle farm technology grows, for example, salad products and other leafy green type products. And it’s really designed to be next to a distribution center that’s already going to grocery stores or other communities anyway as it grows an enormous amount of produce in a relatively small amount of space. So instead of having to bring truckloads of salad products in from California or Arizona, we can now grow at commercial scale right across the country and near major centers. Speaker 2 [00:04:06] And Dave, what makes this technology a viable alternative or supplement to traditional farming? Speaker 3 [00:04:11] So the real thing that enables that is it’s very energy efficient. So we can grow a lot of produce indoors 12 months a year in a completely contained environment. And we’re leveraging LED lighting technology and we’ve built an enterprise platform that lets us manage the growing cycle so that you can literally get the most amount of food possible out of the smallest amount of space, energy, water and labor, which all of these things have to be combined. And then you can do that locally so that you don’t have to import it anymore and then no more pesticides and herbicides and things like that. So they’re delicious. They’re good for you, and they’re much better for the environment. Speaker 1 [00:04:53] Most Canadians probably don’t appreciate that, you know, somewhere between 15 and 20 percent of our overall emissions can. Be attached to food production and distribution, so we need to think through how, in fact we do produce, distribute and consume food in a more sustainable way. I’m intrigued that you mentioned the challenge of imported, especially vegetables and fruits, because as food security becomes more of an issue of national security in a lot of countries, we may not be able to depend on the global movement of food as we have in years, even decades past, which means we in Canada are going to need to scale things like vertical farming pretty quickly. Dave, what will be some of the big challenges in scaling up what you’re doing? Speaker 3 [00:05:38] I think that the technology now exists and it is ready for prime time. So because we are now able to grow at commercial scale locally and produce vegetables at a price that is very similar to importing them on a cost per meal basis because you have far less waste and things like that, it is now ready for prime time. So some of the things that I think Canada can do is make the regulations be much more friendlier to enable this. So just for example, we gave, you know, subsidies for green energy. We should be providing subsidies or land use permits to enable this type of farming to happen and happen quickly. If we’re going to invest in a windmill, we’re going to invest in solar. We should be investing in the infrastructure that lets us grow our food locally. And so government policy is going to be absolutely key in having that happen. Speaker 2 [00:06:30] And Dave, what are the types of crops and produce that can be grown with that today? Speaker 3 [00:06:34] So within the cubic farm environment, we grow all of the solid products herbs, microgreens, lettuces, those sorts of things. And our hydro green technology grows live green animal feeds. So literally growing grazing land fodder indoors so that you can feed dairy cow beef cow 12 months a year with fresh green feed and the animals would not only perform better, you use a fraction of the water less than five percent of the water, but the animals that actually emit significantly less methane because they’re able to absorb that feed much more efficiently. So the technology is ready. We just need to support it. I think as a country and get behind it. Speaker 1 [00:07:13] Dave, does this change the geography of food production and farming? Are we going to have food production essentially, if not in our backyards, at least in our communities or closer to our big population centers? Speaker 3 [00:07:25] We need to have it close to our big population centers because we can’t keep doing what we’re doing. California is in a mega drought and it can’t keep exporting all of its freshwater in the form of produce. We’re going to have to do that locally. We can’t keep burning all those fossil fuels transporting all of this food locally. So there’s a food security, a localization and environmental. And then of course, people don’t want to be eating things like pesticides with their food. And so to be able to address all of these issues with this technology. The good news is, is it doesn’t have to cost more. It’s available now and it is time to scale up and we have to do something. One of the things that you mentioned earlier, Teresa, was that we’re going to have a billion more people with our population is going to nearly double in the next 40 years. But as a planet, we’re already using 100 percent of the world’s freshwater that’s available for human consumption and agriculture. We’re using all of our farmlands now, but we’re losing farmlands to soil exhaustion, climate change, urban creep, all of these things. So we’ve got to be able to do far more with the water in the land that we have, and we can’t just keep importing things from far away. So all of these things have come together at this moment. Speaker 2 [00:08:37] What do you think consumers should be thinking about when it comes to their choices? And how do we get them to adopt a more local model? Speaker 3 [00:08:43] Well, the good news is, is that it’s actually better tasting. So I don’t really think there’s many barriers other than now creating enough volume locally of locally grown produce and getting it into the existing supply chains that already exist. So I don’t think it’s going to be that difficult to make the switch. We just need to have enough of it grown locally and people will happily switch because boy, once you taste something that’s come out of a cubic form, you can’t go back. Speaker 1 [00:09:12] Dave, you’re making me want to have a salad like you did for lunch. But for now, thanks for being on the 10 minute take. My pleasure. Speaker 2 [00:09:20] So, John, the future of indoor farming looks extremely promising, and it takes advantage of our underutilized industrial complexes on the periphery of our cities. That sounds like a great idea to me, especially in the face of more volatile, growing seasons and all the other reasons we’ve just talked about more consistent crops, more nutrient rich foods, better tasting foods, lower carbon footprints. What’s not to like? Speaker 1 [00:09:40] Well, I’m also thinking about the export opportunity of the technologies that are involved. We we tend to think of food exports as being tankers full of grains and other food products, but maybe we’ll be supplying AG technology to the world in the decades to come and helping people wherever they may live produce. Their own food more sustainably. Maybe there’s a future episode in there for us, but for this week, that’s the 10 minute take Speaker 2 [00:10:05] and join us again next week for episode one of our special three part climate series. Until then, I’m Theresa Do. Speaker 1 [00:10:12] and I’m John Stackhouse. Talk to you soon. Speaker 4 [00:10:17] Disruptors: The 10 minute take is created by the RBC Thought Leadership Group and does not constitute a recommendation for any organization, product or service. It’s produced and recorded by Jar Audio. For more disruptors content like or subscribe wherever you get your podcasts and visit rbc dot com, slash disruptors.