EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Tank number three of our gasoline tank, he did so and he told me that it was being tested.
And I have the results with me.
The report says, I will read it out, “Sample meets all Canadians Government of Nunavut specifications all except one item, the vapor pressure meets that Canadian standards but slightly below the Government of Nunavut’s specification.”
The vapor pressure relates to the ease of starting engine and looking at the report from the Alberta Research Council, what it says here is the vapor pressure does not meet the Government of Nunavut’s specified value, and the letter I just read the vapor pressure relies to ease of starting engines.
Now we’ve had a lot of spark plug problem, not to mention engines breaking.
Anybody that has any experience in tearing engines apart that are broken, we know what ever goes into the spark plug goes into the engine chambers, the crank case, the cylinders, etc.
Now my question is why this was put in there when it does not meet the Government of Nunavut’s specified value.
Mr. Chairman: Thank you Mr. Netser.
In Coral Harbour the gasoline was distributed from the same distributor.
Mr. Chairman: Thank you Mr. Minister.
Mr. Nester.
Mr. Netser (interpretation): Thank you Mr. Chairman.
I’ve been hearing all winter and I recently purchased a ski-doo in the month of December and when they’re brand new they run very well, and the ski-doo I just bought, I had to buy spark plugs very frequently and for two spark plugs it costs $28, and it states here that it’s below the specs and I said it states 92, but it’s states here that it’s 87.4 so I want clarification on why it’s like that.
Mr. Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Netser.
Mr. Mitchell: Thank you Mr. Chairman, I think the first issue you mentioned was the vapor pressure is slightly low, I think it’s 94. something versus the limit of 95 to the Government of Nunavut specification, but it’s still in side of the CGSB specification.
From what I understand, on the supply of Coral Harbour, the were some difficulties, and what happens when you tend to move gasoline around, you lose vapor pressure slightly, each time it’s moved.
In Coral Harbour, I think the supply was difficult because there was ice.
So what happened was there was a bit more decanting or moving around the gasoline which accounts to the fact the vapor pressure was slightly below the limit by the time it got there, so that’s one part.
The second part would be that this actual difference is not really that significant.
Basically the Government of Nunavut’s specification was set at 95, which is higher than the CGSB limit because, they knew that this kind of thing would happen on the way for that one.
I think you mentioned octane quality.
There are three octane numbers on that spec page.
One of them is research octane number, one is motor octane number and one is called anti-knock index.
The anti-knock index is 92.
The motor octane number is generally about 87 and the research number should be about 96.
I think that was the question’s answer.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Mitchell.
The guy seems to be putting questions in my mouth.
The question that I asked is the octane level that you specified that it was, but in Coral Harbour it is 87.4.
I didn’t ask about the anti-knock index and the other one that you just mentioned.
Mr. Mitchell: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
If you look more closely at the spec page, it actually says that the motor octane number is 87.
Can you please wait for your mic to turn on so we can get everything?
I will ask Minister Simailak, this octane number motor 87.4 and you stated 94.
I would like some clarification on why was there ice build up that was delivered to Coral Harbour in the gasoline?
The page numbers are that there are two pages.
The octane numbers on the investigation page 2 of 297.1, which was indicated.
The other one being page 1 of 2, octane number motor 87.4.
So those are different.
What should this octane number motor be?
You mentioned earlier that it should be 92 but my friend here, Mr. Simailak and I are reading 87.4.
Hon. Peter Kilabuk (interpretation): I just wanted to point that out.
The anti-knock index 92; these two are different.
The octane should be 97.1, the anti-knock index 92.2.
The lowest in Canada should be 91, so it is slightly over than the lowest one.
Chairman Thank you, Mr. Minister.
Mr. Mitchell, did you want to add to that?
Basically, the first line on the page is anti-knock index, that is the average of the research motor octave number.
That is what the specification is on.
It is really hard to get into your level of all these numbers.
My question as I asked earlier is, why did you deliver gasoline that has ice in it, as you indicated earlier?
I didn’t hear him say that.
Maybe, if my colleague could clarify his question.
He stated earlier that the vapor pressure, (interpretation ends) that does not meet the minimum of Government of Nunavut’s specified value.
He said that was done because of ice.
My question is why deliver ice in the gas tank to Coral Harbour.
I guess the misunderstanding came when Mr. Mitchell made a reference to the ice conditions that were around Coral Harbour at the time of delivery.
That was the only reference to any ice.
It was not in the gasoline.
So, what you’re indicating is that you have to hopefully deliver the fuel before the ice freeze up, so that we don’t have to worry about the vapor pressure that is in our tanks.
Is that correct, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mitchell: We don’t actually supply, Mr. Chairman.
The actual shipping arrangements are not Shell Canada’s shipping arrangements, they are done by Woodwards.
What I understand is that the ship that was supposed to go to Coral Harbour had trouble getting there because there was more ice than expected, so we had to change the delivery schedule so that the gasoline that ended up in Coral Harbour went through a couple more steps to get there than was expected.
So, each time the gasoline is pumped off of a vessel into a tank, the vapor pressure drops slightly.
So, from what I understand is, the Coral Harbour supply went through another step, that is why the vapor pressure is slightly lower than the limit.
The limit that was defined by the Petroleum Product Division and Government of Nunavut, it’s a limit that was set to make sure the gasoline would be more than fine.
Could the minister give us the information on the vapor pressure standards for the Government of Nunavut because, it says that the Government of Nunavut vapor pressure specification was deliberately set very high.
How high was it?
The minimum requirement was set at 95.
Mr. Netser: Thank you.
Just going back to the question there.
Mr. Chairman, that’s why we have so many with spark plugs failing because the vapor pressure does not meet the Government of Nunavut pressure specifications.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation) That will be my last question for now.
As indicated earlier, the vapor pressure just slightly lower than the required Government of Nunavut specifications.
But it is still well above the CGSB requirements in the specifications of 67.
Mr. Netser: My apologies Mr. Chairman, that was going to be my last question.
That explains why then, we have problems with our snowmobiles not starting because the vapor pressure does not meet the Government of Nunavut’s specifications for snowmobiles.
Could you put it on the record?
That remains part of the mystery and the reason why we’ve been doing this testing.
Okay, Mr. Chairman, I will admit that there is new language in here that we’re hearing being used which we haven’t normally used in our communication. I apologize if there’s anything that’s confusing members.
I must admit that it has been hard to read the test results because of the language used.
Mr. Chairman, we are trying to find out exactly as to what is causing all of this hardship in different communities because it varies from communities.
It’s not the same in every community, and it is our intent to try and resolve this issue, that’s why we have been trying to do different types of different testing and getting full cooperation.
But however, as I have indicated in the House a number of times over the week, these are still ongoing and this exercise today is part of that process.
Please if there’s something that you don’t understand, which we should try and clarify it more, please state it to us.
Maybe the minister can’t understand his own letters to me about the vapour pressure being related to the use of starting engines, and what we have in our plans, it does not mean that the Government of Nunavut specified value. (interpretation): I am not too sure if he understood that.
I do understand it clearly.
When there was a request by my colleague to do a testing on the fuel tanks, that’s when we started doing the testing and we realized that the vapour pressure standard, it was below minimum the vapour pressure standard.
I understand it clearly and I understand the correspondence I sent to my colleague.
I have a little bit of a preamble before I ask questions.
As you know, there are very expensive machines in Nunavut, like about $10,000 or $11,000 machines.
We don’t have access, I mean when I speak in the House, I always try to speak for those people that are unemployed who don’t make a lot of money, and they depend on their own country food that they bring to the table for their families.
So we don’t have access, all of those accesses like down South, it’s a very touching issue for a regular guy who doesn’t work and who doesn’t make money.
So an $11,000 machine is very expensive for people who depend on Income Support.
Also there have been some complaints from my constituency, but I complained to the minister in January, but I have not seen any specifications from the Sanikiluaq re-supply, but personally I know what is happening down there and I have some complaints from the people that notices a difference from the last year’s re-supply.
So last fall, after re-supply, they noticed that each time, they had to change spark plugs on the ATV every morning, so I think there’s something wrong in that additive. Also the snow machines is also the same thing happening. When you don’t run them over night, next morning they don’t start, so maybe there’s something wrong.
Also I have a sample that I took sometime, with the people saying that it’s not only spark plugs.
I have a piston that was seized about two or three weeks ago.
Also I have some spark plugs that didn’t burn properly, they are black, when they burn properly they turn brown and white in the centre.
There is something in there.
So this is a good example, it’s not only the spark plugs that are happening with the machine.
So I think it’s not only the gas, I ask the guy who gave me, is it ok that I give it away and he said yes, it’s not good anyway.
So if you want to test it you can have it.
My question might be, how do you mix gas before you re-supply it to the communities?
Do you mix it in a refinery, or does it mix before coming up north, or is there any method that you mix the gas before you put it in the communities fuel tanks.
Mr. Chairman: Thank you Mr. Kattuk.
Mr. Anderson: Thank you Mr. Chairman, I will attempt to answer your question at a very broad level.
If you would like more detail about the actual testing methodologies, then I would refer to my colleague, Mr. Mitchell.
The stringent specs are set by the PPD.
We test in the manufactures of the products to insure that all the components are on spec.
We further test in the tank that we use prior to loading tank cars that would go to Churchill.
We load the tank cars, the individual cars are tested.
They are tested at Churchill.
They are tested at the final destination.
I know it’s been mentioned that in some cases there are opportunities to test at 22 different intervals.
That simply doesn’t present itself.
The product is tested at a number of points, where it makes reasonable since to do so along the way.
It’s tested across potentially 25 to 30 different testing parameters, different attributes of the fuel.
Again in this case, pre-delivery, at delivery, and our subsequent investigations, we have found that this product has met all the specifications as set.
Mr. Chairman: Thank you Mr. Mitchell, Mr. Kattuk.
Mr. Kattuk: Thank you Mr. Chairman.
Like I said there very expensive, the new machine.
We don’t have added octane posters in the shop, like in the smaller communities; we have no access to them.
They might be very expensive additive to buy for a regular person.
I want to encourage the minister or Shell to go to communities as soon as you can because people out there losing their snow machines.
I notice in my community that in about three weeks that there are people that have broken down machines.
There are already seven.
I think that the weather is getting warmer so if the weather warmer, like looking at the spark plugs they are not burning well.
I think if we get to the warmer weather I think that there will be no problems.
If you are going to add the additive to the communities I want to encourage you or Shell or the Minister to try to do it as soon as possible because those people are dependent on their machines.
That is the only comment that I want to make.
I want to encourage the Minister or Shell Canada to put additives as soon as possible.
The specific request may be encouraging the different stores in the communities to be able to provide octane boosters.
That is definitely something that we can communicate with the stores and see how we can also make extra supplies available at the local level.
Mr. Chairman, in the communiqué that I had with the member the other day about the scheduling of when the additive will taken to his community, the schedule was revised from March 9 to 10 is now showing when the additive will be taken to his community.
When I complained in January about the gas I said that I grew up with the gas when there was no gas when I was a boy then.
When I got out of school then I started to use gas, but this is the first time the snow machines wouldn’t start in cold weather.
What he told me was that Sanikiluaq’s specification needs to look at Sanikiluaq weather.
Sanikiluaq is actually slightly warmer than other parts of Nunavut.
The gasoline we supply more than meets the requirements of the weather there.
As was stated we should have those additives in the gasoline on March 9, depending on the weather.
I don’t think you will require bottles of octane boosters at the Co-op, or whatever.
I don’t think it really helps.
Mr. Kattuk: Thank you for that information.
I will go on the radio in my community because they are doing polar bear hunting right now.
So I will tell them that there will be someone to make additives on our gas on March 9.
Mr. Alagalak (interpretation): First of all I would like to ask the Minister that I don’t believe that you should be talking too much but I think there were two testing done for two snowmobiles in the Keewatin region.
Were those two snowmobiles brand new?
Yes they purchased two brand new snowmobiles to be used for testing.
Obviously I have heard that once they were filled with gasoline in the garage and then the snowmobile was working and operating very well.
It was done very briefly.
One comment that I would like to state to make it more clearer, Shell Canada, (interpretation end): in my own opinion I will put this apologetic move by Shell Canada, to move into area where they think they can improve the gasoline, which is not.
It’s being moved by your company to apologize to Nunavummiut by adding a solution to their gasoline which is not understood by hunters and a trappers because they haven’t been able to hunt all winter long, especially the trappers in constituency, that hasn’t moved in the community because they’re afraid that they’re going to be stalled out there somewhere because of bad spark plugs, or whatever.
(Interpretation): The hunters are facing very challenging issues and I believe that you should be apologizing to the hunters.
I don’t think you should be apologizing about the fuel re-supply and the octane.
I don’t believe the octane booster is not the real reason why.
The spark plugs for skidoos can be used for a long time.
They are full of soot and the ignition systems stalls and when the engine starts the piston goes way down and then it actually, it starts from the crank shaft.
I apologize to the interpreters for speaking two different languages.
Although I’m very pleased to go through this but we don’t believe, I don’t think it’s the octane boosters.
It seems like they’re not talking about a clarifier or cleaning solution for the gasoline.
Also, I have heard that the gasoline that is being used has gumming problems.
For that reason, the trucks and vehicles, just recently an individual who had just purchased a new vehicle had to get spark plugs four times in one month.
Since the vehicle is fuel injected and the pressure was no good because of the bad fuel and the gumming problem.
When the weather gets cold, it gets stuck.
The stuff in the gasoline makes the gumming problems.
It clogs up the system.
I am very pleased that you are here to resolve this gasoline problem but the hunters and the fox trappers have lost a lot of their potential money that they could have made.
Why is this fuel supply a lot different from last year?
(interpretation ends) It isn’t regardless with what you are providing us with this year; the important thing is unfit for the north gasoline to our time for us to suffer more. (interpretation) It’s not acceptable.
It seems like the minister doesn’t seem to understand how much of a negative impact it has had on the hunters.
I would like to ask another question: if you have considered the gumming problem (interpretation ends) The solution to prevent gumming problems with the gasoline.
This is indicative of the difficulty that we faced from the outset around the investigation of this in that it seems to be a very different problem on a one off basis that we hear about on a quite and infrequent basis, by the way.
We have investigated any and all concerns that we have been asked to investigate through our customers at Petroleum Products Division.
In fact, in automotive applications, there was found to be no spark plug fouling.
In fact, some gasoline pumps have actually been burnt out because they would run out of fuel.
We have heard about a four-stroke here, and a piston here, and let me assure you this in no way resembles the issue that you faced in 2001, we are dealing with a spark plug fouling issue in some vehicles, in some two-cycle engines in some applications.
We have had reports from recreational users as well that suggested they had no problems.
We are committed to finding the root cause of the spark plug fouling issues that you are facing.
Chairman: I’ll have order in the House, please.
Mr. Curley: I was just wondering if the question was raised, and it did not ask the witness to generally speak about it or even minimize the complaints that are being presented to the House.
They have not been addressed, and if he could ignore them, but he simply has to answer the question from a member.
Chairman: Thank you. Mr. Anderson.
I will ask Mr. Mitchell to comment as well.
Gumming is not an issue that we are looking at as we have not been alerted that it has been a widespread issue.
Mr. Mitchell: It’s just to clarify that the gasoline we supplied this year and last year contains a premium dose of a detergent, and this is unlike the gasoline that a different supplier supplied in 2001.
So for both years that we have supplied gasoline at the request of Petroleum Products Division.
What I am talking about that because earlier there was some confusion raised by someone who suggested that we supplied the gasoline and we didn’t.
Anyway, right now, the gasoline re-supply contains a premium level of detergent which prevents deposits in the fuel injectors specifically and in intake systems in general.
Mr. Alagalak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) I understand that.
Tow come then we have a lot of revalve problems in exhaust gauge valve systems all foiled up and locked up, and causing extreme temperatures in exhaust systems in outboard motors in causing improper ignition when the time intake goes on and causing a blowup in the cranking system and pushing the high pressured air from inside the pistons and causing a crackup in the pistons?
How come these are happening because we know some of us are little mechanics, underground mechanics, let’s put it that way, because you need to answer those questions.
We have a big buck stakes in the hunters and trappers because they haven’t been able to rely on their trapping this year because the machine broke up in October and they still haven’t fixed it today because of a lack of money and income which they would have probably received by trapping and hunting.
What are you going to do with that stuff?
What are you going to do with these problems?
The Government of Nunavut has no money to reimburse them for all their costs.
First of all, I would like to say that we have seen or heard of different concerns and just right now the member has stated that they’re having gumming problems.
This is the first time that we’ve heard of this problem.
What we have done is studies on what we’ve seen or heard from the people out there.
I am personally affected by this problem but again I am going to work very closely.
We have ongoing studies.
I would like to make sure that through the studies we revolve the problems.
I hear what Mr. Alagalak is saying about the gumming problems.
Well, I brought it up, and even if you say that you haven’t heard about the gumming problem
(interpretation ends): Shell Canada, they are the professional gas supplier in the world.
They have a way of testing actual gasoline requirements to those who will request to be supplied.
I’m sure any component in the gasoline that it will not work in certain areas of the world would have been detected by chemists in your company. I’m a little disappointed that that hasn’t been done.
My question is, will you supply and compensate hunters and trappers that had bad gasoline this year.
I know the Government of Nunavut will not be responsible for that no more because you did it twice.
I would ask the member to help me understand twice.
Mr. Alagalak: I understand that you were the supplier in the first bad gasoline we had.
Mr. Anderson: Well again, that is some of the misconception and inaccuracy that we’re here to clear up.
We were not the supplier back in 2001.
The gasoline that you have in the system today is the second year of our supply.
So, this is exactly the type of information that we need to clear up.
In terms of the other question with respect to compensation, Shell Canada has and will continue to take direction from it’s customer, the Petroleum Product Division.
We have incurred as a result of working with them in the investigation and in the dosing of MMT into the communities at our own expense as a gesture and source of good will.
Our expenses will exceed half a million dollars by the end of the 9 community re-MMT introducing initiative.
Mr. Alagalak (interpretation): I’m done.
Again, I tabled some photographs of the spark plugs that we have and other engine parts.
When Mr. Anderson was making his statement, he said that they did the inspections right from Churchill to the landed community.
So, during those testings, what types of changes do you see from the origin and by the time it reaches it’s destination.
What types of changes do you see in that time span and what have you found so far.
Basically, that they do all these tests is to make sure that the gasoline is still on spec by the time it gets there.
The actual final tests of the tank in the communities are actually contracted by Petroleum Product Division and run by the Alberta Research Council.
The objective of that is to make sure that the fuel is basically the same product that left the refinery and nothing has changed significantly.
If there are changes then that brings in the question whether or not there was some mix up or whatever.
So, it’s really a quality control thing. It is really to ensure the quality is all the way to the final customer.
We don’t see a lot of changes in the parameters.
We did talk a bit about vapor pressure.