EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Vapor pressure is at the real front end of the gasoline, so when you pump it around, you tend to lose a bit of vapor pressure versus what was put in at the refinery and that’s about the only really significant change.
There are other subtle changes in the results, if you look at one of the sheets, and that due to a variety of reasons, such as the test precision and things like that.
There must have been some change from the origin to the destination.
There must have been some change because we are experiencing problems in our engines.
Why are we having such problems.
Chairman: Mr. Mitchell.
That, quite simply again, is the work of the next number of months to determine the cause of this issue.
We have developed the short term solution with the reintroduction of MMT.
I don’t believe, because of the number of tests that we do throughout the process, that we would have determined had there been a large change in the product specifications from the point of manufacture to the point of storage in Churchill, to the point where it was delivered for its final destination.
If that were the root cause of the problem, that would have been identified back in October or November and that simply isn’t the case.
Why this particular product, in this particular application, in this particular environment after meeting all of the required specifications and more stringent specifications, continues to have spark plug fouling issues, is the work of the next number of months to get to the root cause.
No, it’s not only spark plug problems.
I showed spark plugs, just to show you what it’s doing to the engine parts.
So, the consumers are again going to be paying extra dollars for that additive, but ever since snowmobiles were introduced up here, they know what types of problems there have been, what is good gasoline and what is bad gasoline.
Are you going to be compensating the consumers of Nunavut, or what are you going to be doing.
Mr. Anderson: Again, I can only reiterate that the degree to which the Petroleum Product Division and Shell has worked together to ensure that this grade of gasoline is superior in terms of octane and a number of other attributes has been a painstaking exercise.
This product has met specifications.
We continue to research why in this application it doesn’t seem to meet in two cycle engines.
In some two cycle engines in some conditions has some fouling.
Just to address the issue just very quickly around base gasoline that we produced out of our Scotford Refinery, had there been something more substantially deficient because we supply non-MMT additized fuel to the entire from Thunder Bay to Vancouver.
If this were deficient in some way that would have the effect of seizing engines, we would have tens of thousands of snow machines, and two cycle and ATV engines deficient report across western Canada.
That simply is not the case.
It is not just spark plugs problems; there are engines seizing and broken pistons. (interpretation ends) What is the anti-knock index of the gas after the additive is mixed into it?
After we add the MMT, which we are adding to reduce spark plug fouling problems, the octane of the gasoline will probably go up by half a number and a number, so it will go from approximately 92 anti nock index to 92.5 to 93.
The octane is really not the issue here.
The 92 limit that was put in the specification is basically a super premium already.
In most of Canada the premium is 91.
So the fuel that is supplied to Nunavut in the east is a 92 octane fuel.
It already has a lot of octane in it.
Probably much more of the engines they are using actually needed.
I just want to have the other members to ask questions at this time.
Could the minister just confirm with me that the Government of Nunavut Petroleum Products specifications schedules D, in March 31st, 2004, are they for all of Nunavut, regardless of the region?
Yes, there is only one specs that is applied for all of Nunavut for all of Nunavut’s gas.
For the information of your witnesses I come from Cambridge Bay in the west and it is about 700 miles north of Yellowknife.
So it is fairly far north.
It is very cold there.
It probably averages -35° to -40° Celsius everyday for five or six months.
We don’t seem to be experiencing any problems over there.
I haven’t heard of any.
My colleague from Kugluktuk is further west than myself could probably confirm that.
Hearing the problems that our colleagues from the Baffin and Kivalliq seems to be having with fuel, it leaves me to wonder what is the difference between the fuel products that are supplied in the Kitikmeot versus the fuel products supplied in the Kivalliq and Baffin regions.
I know that there are different contractors so maybe Mr. Anderson or Mr. Mitchell could clarify for me what is the difference is?
I can’t speak to the specific processes that other refineries use, I could only suggest that product would meet the same specifications as stated in the Government of Nunavut’s specifications as we have.
I would add that different refineries within Shell, within industry worldwide have different ways of meeting certain specifications.
There are different feed stocks, in terms of crude oils that they use, there are certain, as we call that the pots and pans that make up the refinery or it can be quite different across different refining centres.
What a specification does is set the end point; this is what the specification has to be.
How you get there is really contingent upon the different assets that you may have in a refinery, the different feed stocks that you use, the different octane sources that you put in.
So the components and the streams into gasoline by refinery may be quite different, and again to be honest, I can’t speak to other suppliers’ methodologies and the units and conversion units they have in their refineries to get there.
Our refinery in Montreal is quite different than our refinery in Edmonton, and we get to that specification in those two cases by very different means.
It seems to me then that, I don’t know how that industry cooperates now.
We live in the part of the country where it’s life and death in some cases.
The snowmobile is really vital to safety of people who are out on the land, hunters in particular, and it might be worthwhile for you talk to your counterparts at Imperial Oil to see what they do or what their refining process is for their products versus with what you guys use.
We don’t have problems in the Kitikmeot, so they are doing something right.
I think that is something that is worthwhile pursuing.
I appreciate that you spent $500,000 of your own money to try to rectify the problem, but the fact remains that it doesn’t seem to be sorting out the problem. I know my colleague here asked earlier, and I will ask again: is Shell Canada or the Government of Nunavut, as you indicated that they awarded the contract to the contractor, so you take your direction from them, would you be willing to compensate the hunters the great expense and lost use of their snowmobile for extended periods of time?
I know those engines cost quite a lot to repair and then they have also lost the use of their snowmobiles for hunting and trapping.
There is a great personal expense.
I know you guys have spent $500,000, but $200 or $300 to some of these hunters and trappers could be equivalent to $500,000, speaking in relative terms.
So I am wondering, for the record, if you could comment on that.
Mr. Anderson: Well again, and I don’t want to sound like a broken record, but this product has met all of the specifications of the CGSB and the more stringent specifications as set out by the Government of Nunavut.
I would go as far as to say; how could I go to my shareholder and say: “We fulfilled a contract in every way possible that we could, we have done all of the specifications, we delivered the product on time, on specification, and now we are compensating for unknowns.”
And I think that the ongoing research that we need to conduct that will get us to the root cause needs to take place before we discuss further any issues around compensation or requirement with our customer, the Petroleum Products Division.
Again, we stand behind the quality of the products that we have supplied.
This unique environment has confronted us with things that I don’t think that anyone could have anticipated.
I will add on the earlier note, with respect to supply into your region and the Imperial Oil supply, as we look at MMT as a short-term solution that we are additizing, I am not sure that Imperial Oil’s removal of MMT was pre-delivery to your region or post-delivery to your region and does MMT provide a solution that we need to look at for next year is it in that supply today; will it not be in there next year if they continue to remove that based on having removed it from the entire balance of the country?
Those are all questions that I think we together with the Petroleum Products Division need to ask as well.
I’ll redirect my question to the Minister then responsible for petroleum products.
Is the government prepared to assist the hunters and trappers and other individuals affected by this fuel problem.
Will you compensate them in terms of repairs to the snowmobiles, lost revenues and anything else they’ve lost because of the fuel problem?
Alone, as the Minister, I am not in a position to make a decision of that nature.
Because of the problem that we have run into, the decision will be made at the Cabinet level for my members information.
Because of the problem that we’ve run into, there appears to be a number of factors, it has been the assignment to our department to find out the root cause of this problem and until such time as I have confidence that the root cause of the problem is known, that I really have in this case not enough tools to present this case to the Cabinet yet.
I appreciate the Minister’s candid comments.
In response, Shell Canada has already indicated that they met the specifications, it seems to me they’re saying that they’re not at fault, but there is a fuel problem so somebody has to be at fault.
I know the contractors could be held at fault, but if they’re saying they’re not, then that means that the Government of Nunavut is somehow responsible for the problem of the fuel.
The Government of Nunavut took the delivery to fuel so it seems to me that some ultimate responsibility has to be assigned to the Government of Nunavut for the delivery of the fuel.
The folks out there who are relying and depending on their snowmobiles are going to be looking to the Government of Nunavut for some serious leadership in this crisis situation so I hope you’ll help, I know you said earlier that you said you take it very seriously and I think the members of this House believe you.
I personally believe that you take this issue seriously and I hope on behalf of the folks that are being affected, that you will look for ways to compensate them so that they get back to the normal life.
Most of us want to enjoy a normal peaceful life up here and not be bothered by all these unforeseen major issues.
To go out hunting and trapping, make some money, go back to town and enjoy their family life and community life.
This puts a great stress on a key sector of our economy as well so it is something has to be looked at very seriously by the government.
I thank the member because that pretty supports the intent of our tests and continuation of wanting to find the root cause of the problem so we can have a better product for our clients and Nunavummiut.
Mr. Chairman, I also thank the member for his comments and note down the member’s comments both from that region and also his concerns for his region.
Hearing all this bad gasoline, it reminds of when Kugluktuk went through the bad gasoline that we experienced in the 80’s.
I can see that other communities are going through with the problems.
When we had the bad gas in our community once I experienced a lot of guys that would go out hunting and they intended to come back right away because of all the snowmobile problems.
You have mentioned, Mr. Anderson, when you use the same or similar gasoline that we use up north, you never had problems in Winnipeg. You should think of the northerners who live up here 24/7, 365 days a year, and live off the land, go out hunting, trapping, fishing, and they depend on what they hunt to keep the food on the table for their families.
You mentioned that you don’t have problems with your snowmobile and I can see why; because you probably don’t use your snowmobile 24/7, or when you go out hunting.
A lot of our hunters use their snowmobiles a lot more than vehicles, or a lot more than people from down south.
If you live up north and you go out hunting a lot, and depend on the hunting a lot, and depend on the wildlife to put some food on the table, you will start to experience these problems, not only with spark plugs.
We don’t normally experience spark plug problems, we also experience pistons problems, bearing problems that can affect the motor from bad gasoline, because if you have good gasoline, you won’t notice these, but my colleague from Cambridge Bay had mentioned that we have not experienced the bad gasoline yet and I hope that we don’t in the future.
I would like to ask Mr. Anderson if he can come up and live in the Arctic, up north, and do some hunting like any other hunters, and maybe you will experience the bad gasoline.
When you live in Winnipeg, you work seven days a week and you probably go out snowmobiling once a week, and that’s how you don’t experience the bad gasoline.  So I would like to ask you, Mr. Anderson, if you can live up north to see if you can experience the bad gasoline, bring your snowmobile, and maybe my colleague can ask you to live in Rankin Inlet, and you will probably find out about the bad gasoline because not living there, you are not going to experience it.
You will have head home, you will drive from the airport to your house not worrying because if you break down, you will phone the tow truck to get your vehicle in the shop, but our hunters, we don’t use the cellular phones up north when we go out hunters, we don’t have any repair shops, we don’t have any place to buy gas, and those are the ones that we worry about when we go out hunting.
I traveled down south on the vehicles and I never worry about breaking down because I take my cellular phone a lot and I try and find out, just in case I break down, who to call.
You have two different cultures to compare, when you’re down south.
You’re not really aware about where to get your gasoline and whether if you break down or not because if your vehicle breaks down you can easily get another vehicle to keep going.
Up in the Arctic, you don’t have that option.
That is why I would like to ask you to come up north and live in the Arctic for at least a year so that you can experience it, if you do that.
It’s a lifestyle that I envy and admire, and if you could talk my boss into a week, I would be happy to do that and take you up on your offer.
You’ve described I think very articulately and very accurately in part the very problem that we face through the investigation.
You’re exactly right, I don’t operate my machine in -45.
Having lived in Winnipeg, I don’t live there today, having previously lived there for 17 years when it was -30, I used to be apprehensive about going out, so I didn’t operate in those kinds of conditions and you’re right, there was always someone close by.
We certainly appreciate the degree to which you rely on the machines that you operate.
Any two-cycle machine, should it be an ATV or a snow machine for business or for recreation, the problem is the snowmobile manufacturers, we’ve gone to refiners all over the Baltic, Helsinki, anyone who supplies into regions that are arctic-like in nature, no one has been able to assist us with any further information on MMT additives, product tested at low temperature under extreme load running thousands of hours more than on a machine than conventional recreational users would be.
We’re breaking new ground with the Petroleum Product Division, in terms of trying to set an even more stringent specification that we know is not only going to meet the requirements toward business and recreational use for two-cycle engines but also, with only one gasoline here, it has to meet the requirements for all automotive as well, ATV’s and 4 stroke outboard.
Again, this is groundbreaking. We’re trying to work very diligently with the Petroleum Product Division to establish these more streamed specifications and in the short term we have a solution.
In the long term I don’t think a solution is very far away.
If that solution includes MMT, we’ll include it.
If it doesn’t we, need to find another solution.
Yes, I know that you are not using your snowmobile seven days a week, because I know people like who work seven days a week don’t have time to use their snowmobiles.
I’m glad that you guys came up here to try and answer some questions.
I hope that you guys will try and fix and straighten things out because where we live, it’s quite expensive to live up north.
You compare the gasoline from the arctic and down south, there is a lot of difference.
When Inuit are going through some problems. they voice their concerns not only because it’s expensive. but because the gasoline that they receive from the oil companies, sometimes they would ask if they are going to replace our engines or not.
I think some of the questions needs to be answered that came out this evening.
I am sure some of the members have some more questions, so I am done.
Committee Motion 003 – 2(2): To Extend Sitting Hours Until the Item in Committee of the Whole is Concluded
Mr. Curley: Thank you, Mr. Curley.
A privileged question, Mr. Chairman.
I move that we keep sitting hours until the item on the Committee of the Whole is concluded.
Mr. Curley made a motion to extend the hours until we complete this.
Mr. Evygotailak was asking questions.
The comments that were made by my colleague, I understand perfectly.
I cannot make any decisions on my own and don’t have that authority when I am here at the witness table.
I just wanted to remind my colleagues.
The investigation that we are doing, I am supporting it until it is completed and the root cause is found; I will support it.
I originally wasn’t going to ask questions, but my constituents in Repulse Bay and I have been told by many people, whose spark plugs are breaking not just on ski-doos, even with vehicles.
There is black exhaust coming out.
I also wanted to state that when Inuit first started using ski-doos, they were quite naïve about how they function or what to do if it breaks down, whether it was a little small thing that was missing because they really have to use the ski-doos.
So in such a short time, Inuit got accustomed to the motor.
They were able to take it apart and put it back together in such a short time.
When they can do that, they can tell you and identify that it is from the gasoline.
It is clear that the root cause is the gas, even though it wasn’t like that last year.
Sometimes, we even ask just by observing, just by looking we can see with our eyes that it is different from last year.
The colour is slightly different.
When people first started using it in Repulse Bay, we ran out of gasoline and they had to bring some in.
It became obvious that the bad gas was no good.
People were saying to me, and the scientists down south can never believe Inuit because they can identify or know if there is a problem because a lot of times they fail to believe Inuit.
It’s been like that.
If they know so much, they can say that the gasoline or fuel is good.
As if though they’re trying to cover up for themselves because money here is at stake because they don’t want to lose money.
The new additive that we are discussing, I fail to believe fully because this year has been extremely cold, in the Kitikmeot region where it’s even colder over there.
Comparing it to the Kivalliq Region and the Baffin and they’re gasoline is perfectly fine.
So it’s not because of the extreme cold weather.
I know you will not believe us right away because we are not qualified mechanics or we don’t have the credentials like southern people do.
I wonder if you have to put in an additive to the gasoline, I want to get an understanding why do you need that additive.
It is because it’s no good maybe the other being why the Inuit cannot be believed.
People make it sound like that Inuit are not credible enough even though they spot those problems just looking at them and seeing them.
If you understand my question.
The people here at the Witness Table here would like to make a supplementary response, they may do so.
The testing we had done in Rankin Inlet, I will speak to that issue first and then respond to his question.
The testing that was done in Rankin Inlet, the results were that the additive had made the spark plugs a lot cleaner and that it had improved the engine and many communities have stated that the spark plugs had build ups.
We do believe them in your constituency and in you region, your region had complained about the bad gasoline.
We first found out that the problem that arose from that area and we do not wish to see this happen again.
We did not just want to know about it, we wanted to do something about it.
In regards to your question about not believing Inuit as experts or not acknowledging Inuit hunters as experts, but this company has been very receptive to us.
We’ve had a very close working relationship.
Shell Canada officials has stated that they respect the hunters and they’re just doing testing why the gasoline is the way it is.
Mr. Chairman, once the test results have arrived, I will provide you with the copies of the results.
I would only add to the honourable minister’s comments, in that we very much do respect the input that we have received, from those on the ground in Rankin Inlet, and we chose to do a field test in Rankin Inlet for that very reason, to have local people assist us with local, and emulate local conditions.
We can do all of the cold box testing that our Ski-Doo manufacturers try to do, but we are not going to be able to simulate -45°C and -65°C with the wind chill unless we are in Rankin Inlet or Iqaluit and doing those tests.
That’s why we did in the field.
I would also add, though, in terms of testing research and methodology and the science behind fuel or fuel related problems, we have some experts 20 year, 25 year fuel people who are constantly surprised with the evidence that would appear in front of them, only to find that the root cause is completed unrelated to what they had initially thought it was.
I am surprised to find that it was not a fuel problem, it was an oil additive problem, not the oil itself, but an additive within the oil, and two-stroke engine oils have a number of additive packages themselves.
So, to speculate as to the root cause before a very in-depth analysis is done on a multitude of variables, I think it would be doing an injustice to trying to find a longer term solution.
Mr. Mapsalak, (interpretation) do you have any further comments?
It’s more a comment than a question, I will make it brief.
It’s obvious that we need to put in an additive to the fuel, then we know it’s not a good fuel.
How long do you expect to do the testing until you get the final results?
Perhaps the minister can respond to me.
We would like to see the results come in as soon as possible from the testing, but the samples we have sent out, there are other testing being done in the field, we are just going to wait for the accumulation of the results.
We would like to at least see the results not too long from now, and once the results come in, I would be able to inform the members.
The reason why is that it takes time for the results to be accumulated.
Mr. Mapsalak (interpretation): I am finished now.
If it’s okay with you, Mr. Chairman, I have a nature call.
I would like a 5-minute break.
>>Committee recessed at 18:04 and resumed at 18:17
Chairman: We can now resume.
We still have the Minister and representatives from Shell Canada at the Witness Table.
My questions relates to a vehicle.