Tag Archives: Ahmed Hussen

Vancouver (Canada), AI data centres, and the Mayor’s 11 AI agents (3 of 3)

AI data centres in Vancouver

One more AI data centre is being planned for Vancouver but first a little history. There was an AI data centre announcement in January 2026, from my February 6, 2026 posting, Note: My February 6 posting was a deepish dive into energy and water vis-à-vis data centres, which included some local nnews,

… as data centres become more important in their real estate markets as this January 31, 2026 article by Kenneth Chan for the Daily Hive could be said to hint at, Note: Links have been removed,

One of downtown Vancouver’s largest office development projects, first planned during the pre-pandemic office market boom, will not proceed as originally approved [emphasis mine], given the prevailing weak office market conditions.

Westbank’s major downtown Vancouver office tower project at steam plant site pivots to hotel, residential, and data centre uses

…

Westbank, a real estate developer, also features in the latest announcement about two more AI data centres (a second one at another Westbank property in Vancouver and a third in Kamloops at an unnamed property), from a May 11, 2026 article by Kenneth Chan for the Daily Hive, Note 1: NVDIA “is an American multinational technology company headquartered in Santa Clara, California” according to its Wikipedia entry; Note 2: A link has been removed from the following excerpt,.

Telus to build massive AI data centres at two Westbank properties in Vancouver

Canadian telecommunications giant Telus is moving ahead with plans to build a major sovereign artificial intelligence (AI) infrastructure network in British Columbia, following overwhelming demand for its first AI supercomputing facility in Quebec.

The Vancouver-based company announced today that it is working with the Government of Canada and local developer Westbank on a proposed cluster of AI-focused data centres designed to keep Canadian AI computing power and sensitive data within the country. The project forms part of the federal government’s Enabling Large-Scale Sovereign AI Data Centres initiative, aimed at strengthening Canada’s domestic AI infrastructure.

Telus notes the three-site B.C. network will eventually scale to more than 60,000 graphics processing units (GPUs) and 150 megawatts of computing capacity by 2032. The facilities are planned for Kamloops, which is expected to launch later this year, and two locations in Vancouver, which will be fully operational before the end of this decade.

The infrastructure will be powered by advanced computing systems from NVIDIA [emphasis mine], including the company’s latest AI hardware and networking technologies. Telus emphasized that Canadian businesses, post-secondary institutions, governments, and other organizations will be able to train and deploy AI models domestically instead of relying on foreign cloud infrastructure.

The announcement comes less than a year after Telus opened its first Sovereign AI Factory in Rimouski, Quebec. According to the company, the facility is already fully booked by customers and has been recognized on the TOP500 list of the world’s fastest supercomputers.

The company’s Sovereign AI Factory platform is designed to support the full AI development process — from training large-scale models to deploying AI applications — entirely within Canadian-owned and operated infrastructure.

“We are incredibly proud to be working with the Government of Canada to help build Canada’s sovereign AI infrastructure [emphasis mine],” said Darren Entwistle, the outgoing president and CEO of Telus, in a statement. Entwistle will retire at the end of June 2026.

…

Both facilities in Vancouver are being pursued as a direct partnership with Westbank.

The first new Vancouver AI data centre facility will be achieved at the 1977-built, six-storey M3 office building at 111 East 5th Ave. — home to a portion of Hootsuite’s headquarters office for more than a decade. It will see an initial launch in late 2026, with a gradual expansion through 2028 to reach its ultimate on-site size of 77,000 sq. ft. data centre — achieved from the full conversion of the building’s office levels and two underground parking levels, plus the creation of a ground-level restaurant to better serve the area’s office workers.

As part of Westbank’s cluster of buildings in this Mount Pleasant area that form the developer’s Main Alley tech campus of mixed-use office and residential buildings, M3 was originally slated for an eventual renovation for its continued and expanded office uses, including the vertical construction of three additional office floors above the 1970s-built structure. But this pre-pandemic plan is no longer being pursued, with the building’s long-term use pivoting to the Telus AI utility strategy.

…

“People toss around the word innovation lightly, but this is a story of true Canadian innovation,” said Ian Gillespie, founder and CEO, Westbank.

…

Canada’s sovereign AI infrastructure, eh? Well, the first AI data centre in Vancouver (announced in January 2026) is expected to come online in 2029 at 150 West Georgia St., formerly 720 Beatty St.

Pushback (and some context)

A May 12, 2026 article by Amir Ali in the Daily Hive provides some context both pro and con (resistance to the Vancouver AI data centres is in the following excerpt), Note: Links have been removed,

….

Telus suggests the project could generate $9 billion in economic activity in the province [emphasis mine], and create over 1,000 construction jobs, with hundreds more in long-term tech and operation roles.

…

In 2024, the Harvard Business Review compiled some data on the environmental costs of AI [emphasis mine].

“The training process for a single AI model, such as a large language model, can consume thousands of megawatt hours of electricity and emit hundreds of tons of carbon [emphasis mine],” the report said.

“All these environmental impacts are expected to escalate considerably, with the global AI energy demand projected to exponentially increase to at least 10 times the current level and exceed the annual electricity consumption of a small country like Belgium by 2026.[emphasis mine]”

The review concluded that AI’s environmental impacts have to resonate with the priorities and interests of local regions.

EarthJustice, a reputable non-profit public interest environmental law organization, also shared some insights on data centres late last month.

“Unchecked electricity demand from data centers threatens to increase health and climate-harming pollution, deplete water supplies [emphasis mine], and undermine our transition to clean energy,” it said.

EarthJustice says that nearby communities suffer from an increase in local air and water pollution, electronic waste, and noise pollution. It also said that data centres require around one to five million gallons of water per day.

“Although less water-intensive technologies are available, most data centers still rely on inefficient evaporative cooling.”

“Data center companies often negotiate secretive, special contracts for discounted power rates with utilities that shift costs onto regular household utility bills,” EarthJustice suggests, and we’ve reached out to BC Hydro for more information relating to local rates.

According to Telus, the Vancouver AI data centres, which work differently from traditional data centres, would be powered by 98 per cent renewable energy. [emphasis mine]

“A closed-loop liquid cooling system will reduce cooling energy consumption by 80 per cent [emphasis mine] compared to traditional data centres.”

“Importantly, in the age of AI, these data centres address Canada’s growing need for security and a Sovereign AI Solution – by providing 100% Canadian controlled infrastructure, data protection, domestic oversight and zero foreign dependency,” Telus said in its media release.

Westbank told Daily Hive that the M3 data centre’s site in Mount Pleasant currently hosts an existing data centre.

“There is no change in use, this is a case of adaptive reuse to support upgraded infrastructure. The urban locations of both data centres allow for the connection to district energy, which is what allows the projects to achieve low carbon outcomes,” Westbank added.

…

Ali’s May 12, 2026 article does a good job of noting the advantages and disadvantages; he also presents some reaction/pushback from politicians and from the community, Note: Links have been removed,

…

Many have weighed in on the development, including new federal NDP Leader Avi Lewis, who said we should be building affordable homes, a network of public grocery stores, electric buses and an east-west clean energy grid.

“Not massive corporate AI data centres unleashed without any democratic debate,” Lewis said in a post on X.

…

Lewis wasn’t the only political leader weighing in.

At the provincial level, Emily Lowan, the leader of the B.C. Greens said while data sovereignty is important, handouts for big AI isn’t the way to get there.

Others responded with shock at the proposed Mount Pleasant location.

…

Some brought up water restrictions, making points about how much water will be needed for these centres. Vancouver City Councillor Peter Meiszner responded to that concern.

Peter Meiszner @PeterMeiszner

Water consumption will be 90% lower than traditional data centres, with plans to incorporate recycled water from BC Place. (source @TELUS)

11:17 AM · May 12, 2026 3,308 Views

Lowan responded to the environmental claims in a statement to Daily Hive Urbanized.

“TELUS’s claim that their centres will be powered by 98% clean energy is dubious at best. We’re already importing American coal-powered electricity to deal with our energy crisis. This energy crisis is caused by drought conditions, which will only be made worse by the extensive water usage of data centres,” she said.

Lowan said, “We need a moratorium on AI data centres.”

“Our government should not be celebrating a handout to TELUS to build AI data centres in the heart of Vancouver. Billionaires are hoarding our wealth, and now, our government is letting them hoard even more of our resources.”

Daily Hive Urbanized heard from Councillor Sean Orr about the development, too.

He said, “If we were to ask the people of Vancouver how we should use our infrastructure, our energy, and our space, would they pick data centres or would they pick something else?”

Orr wondered what the impact would be on the Vancouver electrical grid, and whether the corporations and private companies would be paying for additional infrastructure or whether that cost would fall on residents.

“Currently, my understanding is that data centers have a short shelf life before being out of date with newer chips, and the chips themselves don’t last five years. We are building something that will require billions in assets but may become outdated three years after its built,” Orr said.

“Say what you will about pipelines, but they don’t become irrelevant after three years. Is it sovereign infrastructure to keep building something that is extremely expensive, and becomes outdated a year or two after construction completes?”

“Is it sovereign infrastructure to build something that may become a stranded asset very soon? I believe a bunch of data center construction projects are being paused for these very concerns right now,” Orr said.

…

On the Vancouver subreddit, most of the opposition seems to be in regard to the chosen locations.

“It seems absolutely nutso to use this sort of transit accessible downtown real estate for something that would mostly house computers and generate relatively few jobs,” a Redditor said, adding, “Next to BC Place, that should be a hotel or office tower. You could put a data centre anywhere else in Metro Vancouver. Baffling.”

Someone else asked, “Doesn’t Vancouver already have water problems?”

What BC Hydro is saying

According to BC Hydro, the utility and the Province are taking a “managed and phased approach to serving these large new loads to protect affordability and reliability for residential customers.”

When it comes to high-demand projects like data centres, BC Hydro says there’s a structured and “competitive” process with capped power allocations, rather than unlimited first-come access.

…

[Comments]

AliasCapricious 2 days ago

People complain we have an economy overly reliant on real estate, then turn around and complains about frontier economic infrastructure. The job part isn’t the main thing, but rather Canadian tech companies have the infrastructure needed to be not dependent on US data infra. It keeps our start ups here and thus grow our high-margin tech sector.

The location is somewhat dubious, but these are the sort of thing we need in the next decades. If we are short on water and power we should be doubling down on renewables (wind/solar/hydro) and water infrastructure, since both will be required anyways. Energy demand is what drive further investments in those sectors.

Tin Man 2 days ago

A few years back, the news outlets warned (prepared?) the citizens of the Divided States of America, that there would be “rolling blackouts” due to the high energy demands of local AI data centers.

Is this what B.C. has to look forward to?

Refrigerators, ovens, heating, air conditioners and all the other devices that families depend on will be powered down so that the wealthy owners of these data centers can continue reaping massive wealth?

Jim Bob 2 days ago

No.

We are already looking at water shortages this year. BC Hydro is also under strain. Allowing these data centers to be built here in Vancouver is only going to cause skyrocketing bills for everyone living here.

They should be building these in remote areas, where they don’t need additional cooling and they can build out their own power. Alberta should have plenty of suitable locations. Why not go there?

…

cccccc 2 days ago

Residents are split on this? I’ve yet to see someone supporting it. Bad idea, bad locations, bad use of tax payer money.

….

Steven Zur 2 days ago

In the news this month – Westbank lawsuits and court documents indicating close to insolvent, Westbank towner nearly complete on Joyce Street goes into receivership, and then out of the blue the Federal government is support Telus’s building datacenters on two Westbank properties. Nothing more than a government handout to a poorly managed property development company.

…

Owen 3 days ago

I’d rather see entertainment uses at both locations

…

Sovereign data centres in Canada and a real estate developer in trouble

How can a data centre be made sovereign? That is a tricky question; something I’ve already hinted at. Kyle Bakx’s May 14, 2026 article for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation’s (CBC) news online website details more of the issues,

Canada wants to build data centres that are not just physically located here, but controlled here — a distinction experts say could determine whether the country can reduce its dependence on U.S. tech giants and keep Canadian data subject to Canadian rules.

But as Ottawa reviews more than 160 data-centre proposals to support the growing demands of artificial intelligence, the promise of “sovereign” infrastructure is already running into a harder question: how much control Canada can really have over data centres [emphasis mine] that may still rely on foreign hardware, foreign customers and digital networks that do not always respect national borders.

“This is probably going to be one of the single biggest tech issues that we are going to deal with as a country,” said Ritesh Kotak, a Toronto-based lawyer and technology advisor.

Many countries, including Canada, are heavily dependent on U.S. firms for digital and cloud services [emphasis mine] — the remote computing and data storage offered by technology giants such as Amazon and Microsoft.

…

There are other problems too. For example, data centres are considered energy and water hogs (see my February 6, 2026 posting “AI is an energy/water hog. Where is all the power coming from? plus UN defines new ‘era of global water bankruptcy’, ” which also mentions the January 2026 announcement of the first data centre in one of Vancouver’s downtown buildings being developed by Westbank.

Before moving onto the Westbank issues, you might be interested in this 8 mins. interview (aired May 19, 2026) with Chris Madan, Telus (former) Vice-President of Digital Sales & Service; (current) Vice–President Digital Product and Head of AI Factories..Here’s how the segment is described on the CBC Radio’s Early Edition with Stephen Quinn webspace.

Chris Madan, the Telus head of AI factories, responds to concerns over health and environmental impacts surrounding the three-site AI data centre cluster set for construction in B.C.

Madan is a salesman determined to minimize any concerns and promote the company’s interests. Consequently, the value is in hearing how he deflects all the criticisms. (I don’t have a lot of patience with puffery but it can be useful.)

For a contrasting view, there’s Simon Enoch, Andrew Longhurst, and Rachel Pettigrew’s May 18, 2026 article “Vancouver Is Getting AI Data Centres. That’s Not Good” for The Tyee. While I am more sympathetic to their approach, it is unrelentingly negative and fails to mention any possible benefits.

Noise as a problem with data centres was news to me and is mentioned both in the CBC interview and in The Tyee article.

Now, onto the real estate developer.

Westbank towers in receivership

Both Vancouver properties being rezoned to allow the data centres are being developed by Westbank, which is currently experiencing money difficulties, from a May 12, 2026 posting on cityhallwatch.wordpress.org, Note: Links have been removed,

Westbank tower in receivership (5055-5083 Joyce St)

Westbank’s rental tower at 5055-5083 Joyce Street is now under receivership. KSV Advisory Inc. is the receiver and a number of documents and court filings are available on their website. OPTrust was owed approximately $109,211,965. Secured and unsecured creditors have claims of $292,993,043. We’ll include additional links and details as this story unfolds. Included below are several photos of the rental tower at 5083 Joyce Street and the surrounding context.

…

This May 11, 2026 article by Liezel Once for CMP magazine dives deeper into the developer’s money woes, Note: A link has been removed,

Westbank’s Joyce tower placed in receivership

Court oversight, $274 million in debt, and a former executive’s sworn claims paint a troubling portrait of a once-iconic developer

A 35-storey rental tower in east Vancouver associated with one of Canada’s most prominent development firms has been placed under court-supervised receivership, adding fresh urgency to a deepening cycle of real estate insolvencies.

The B.C. Supreme Court granted a receivership order on April 27, 2026, over two corporate entities — 5055 Joyce Holdings Inc. and 5055 Joyce Property Inc. — tied to a near-complete mixed-use rental development at 5083 Joyce Street in Vancouver, known informally as “Joyce 2.”

The application was brought by OPTrust [Ontario Public Service Employees Union and Government of Ontario pension fund] Joyce Financing Corp., which is owed approximately $109.2 million on a loan that matured without repayment on December 31, 2025.

The project, developed by Vancouver-based Westbank Holdings Ltd. — a firm founded in 1992 by CEO Ian Gillespie that built some of the city’s most architecturally ambitious buildings over three decades, including the Shangri-La hotels in Vancouver and Toronto — consists of 360 residential rental units, roughly 4,500 square feet of retail space, and 87 underground parking stalls.

Leases have already been executed with commercial and residential tenants, and certain units are occupied.

Court filings show OPTrust’s loan originated in May 2021, initially advanced at $40 million and later increased to $85 million.

The financing carried an interest rate that escalated to 11% after September 2024 and was secured by mortgages, personal property security, share pledges, and guarantees from related parties, including Westbank Holdings Ltd. and founder Ian Gillespie personally.

OPTrust issued a demand for repayment on January 13, 2026.

OPTrust, officially the OPSEU Pension Trust, is one of Canada’s largest defined-benefit pension funds, managing over $27.2 billion in net assets as of year-end 2025 and administering retirement benefits for 118,000 members, primarily Ontario public service employees.

…

The receivership is not the only legal matter Westbank is managing.

In a sworn affidavit filed April 29 [2026] in B.C. Supreme Court as part of a continuing breach-of-contract action, former employee Rhiannon Mabberley alleged that Westbank is in a “financially precarious position” and has laid off nearly half of its workforce, and that multiple real estate holdings have been liquidated to cover accumulated debts.

None of these claims have been proven in court [emphasis mine]. Westbank declined to confirm the layoff allegation.

“We cannot comment on matters before the courts, but we would note that none of these claims have been proven,” Westbank spokesperson Ariele Peterson told media.

Mabberley is suing Westbank for $1.2 million she alleges is owed under an employment agreement. Westbank has countered in court that the payment was conditional on project profits that were not achieved.

Her lawyers sought pretrial garnishing orders against Westbank’s corporate bank accounts; an affidavit states that a $1.2 million order ultimately yielded just $32,025.37, which Mabberley says she believes suggests the company has moved funds to protect assets from creditors.

….

For anyone unfamiliar with Vancouver and its relationship to real estate developer’s, it’s an important, some might say vital, one, which may explain why Justin McElroy, the CBC’s local municipal affairs reporter wrote this February 24, 2026 article (CBC news online) about Westbank’s legal fracas with one of its former VPs, Note: Links have been removed,

A lawsuit by a former vice-president of a prominent Vancouver development company appears to be revealing more details of many of its biggest projects taking a turn for the worse.

In December [2025?], Rhiannon Mabberley filed a civil claim against Westbank Project Corp., suing for a breach of contract when she left her role as vice-president of development in the first half of 2025.

Mabberley argued Westbank owed her $1.2 million, based on a previous employment agreement, in her claim.

In its response, Westbank says those payments were “dependent on the profits received by Westbank” on projects she was a part of, and those profits were not met.

The response by Westbank does not go into details as to why those profits were not met.

But an affidavit filed by Mabberley, which was first reported by Bloomberg News, reveals what she says is a text message to her from Westbank founder Ian Gillespie — and provides an intimate and stark commentary on the state of his company.

The allegations laid out in the affidavit and wider statement of claim have not been proven in court.

…

The alleged text was sent by Gillespie to Mabberley in September, four months after Mabberley left Westbank and three months before she took legal action.

In it, Gillespie references several high-profile development projects in Vancouver that are or formerly were under Westbank’s responsibility, and says that they are not profitable, including:

The Sen̓áḵw complex [emphasis mine] at the foot of the Burrard Bridge, which was originally a 50/50 partnership with the Squamish Nation before Westbank sold its share to Ontario Pension Trust [emphasis mine]. Gillespie texts that “the last minute negotiations resulted in me having to accept a 30% haircut from the original price … which itself was 50% less than we had agreed to last year.”

The recently opened Alberni and Butterfly buildings in downtown Vancouver. Gillespie texts that “Alberni still has many unsold units and … Butterfly is well over budget and closings are slow and uncertain.”

The massive Oakridge Park complex, which began in 2019 and has yet to open. Gillespie texts that “Oakridge is way behind schedule.”

The text ends with Gillespie saying he would offer Mabberley $200,000 “and then we can both go our separate ways,” adding that “it’s unfortunate but it’s the reality of the industry these days.”

In a statement, Westbank would not comment on the veracity of the text messages, saying it has not been proven in court.

…

The politics: Westbank, the federal/provincial/municipal governments, and AI data centres

Purely speculation on my part but I wonder if there’s hope that the AI data centres will help Westbank with its current financial woes. Westbank isn’t the only real estate developer experiencing problems as this May 19, 2026 posting on City Hall Watch makes clear,

City Council Preview May 19-20, 2026: Electronic billboards, Developer bailouts (CAC deferrals), 3 Broadway Plan rezonings, Italian Day grant and more

…

Staff are asking Council to again extend CAC payment [Community Amenity Contributions (CACs) are in-kind or cash contributions provided by property developers when Vancouver City Council grants development rights through rezoning.] deadline for 4 downtown tower sites (1450 West Georgia St $8,900,000, 1157 Burrard St $10,600,000, 1640-1650 Alberni St $32,700,000 & 1668-1684 Alberni St $37,041,000). This is the third time the request to extend the timeline for CAC payments has gone to Council, with the last extension set to lapse on May 31, 2026. The new target is suggested as May 31, 2028, which is well into the next term of a future Council. Should Council be allowing agreed-upon CAC payments slide again? Is this another developer bailout? [emphasis mine]

…

Vancouver’s city hall is not the only government lending assistance to developers. Way back in time there was this September 7, 2022 posting on Bob Mackin’s The Breaker pointing to a cozy relationship between Westbank’s Ian Gillespie and the federal Liberal government then lead by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Note: Links have been removed,

Ian Gillespie, the Westbank Corporation CEO, accepted a token 50 cent payment from members of the Squamish Nation during a ceremony under the Burrard Bridge on Sept. 6 [2022], where Prime Minister Justin Trudeau broke ground to begin the four-phase, 11-tower Senakw condo project. [emphases mine]

Squamish Nation members agreed to a 50-50 partnership in 2019 with Westbank to build 6,000 units on 4.7 hectares of Kitsilano Indian Reserve 6 regained through court settlements. Since then, Westbank’s share was reduced to 30% and OP Trust [emphasis mine], the Ontario Public Service Employees Union and Government of Ontario pension fund, now holds 20%.

By 2029, up to 10,000 people could be living in the rental towers on either side of the bridge. A consultant’s estimate from 2019 suggested the deal could generate as much as $12.7 billion in cashflow for the band and developer [emphasis mine].

Trudeau was accompanied by four cabinet ministers, Patty Hajdu (Indigenous services), Ahmed Hussen (housing), Marc Miller (Crown-Indigenous relations) and Jonathan Wilkinson (natural resources). Before the start of their three-day cabinet retreat in Vancouver, Trudeau announced a $1.4 billion loan through Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation to finance half the units, touting it as the largest loan in the Crown corporation’s history [emphasis mine]. CMHC spokesman Leonard Catling said the Rental Construction Financing Initiative is providing $668 million for phase one and $745 million for phase two. The loan is on a 10-year term, fixed interest rate and 50-year amortization.

“While we cannot comment on the interest rate for any specific RCF loan, our interest rate generally is lower than alternative financing available in the market,” Catling said.

Gillespie, a Liberal Party supporter and proprietor of Trudeau’s preferred luxury hotel [emphasis mine], the Fairmont Pacific Rim, sat beside NDP Vancouver-Point Grey MLA David Eby [emphasis mine]. Though the construction site is in the Vancouver-False Creek provincial riding, Eby is the frontrunner to replace John Horgan as Premier this fall [Eby is now Premier of BC]. The Squamish Nation is a partner in the MST Development company with the Musqueam and Tsleil-Waututh nations in the Jericho lands project in Eby’s riding. Some of that land is proposed for an Olympic Village, if the NDP government backs the Canadian Olympic Committee bid for the 2030 Games and the International Olympic Committee chooses Vancouver next May.

Seated nearby were directors of the Squamish Nation’s economic development company, Nch’kay, including Mike Magee, former Mayor Gregor Robertson’s chief of staff [emphasis mine], and NDP insider Joy MacPhail.

…

To sum up, Gillespie/Westbank gets a huge loan at low cost from the federal liberal government and runs into financial trouble a few years later. A former partner agency, OP Trust, forces one of Westbank’s housing projects (not the 11-tower Senakw condo project) into receivership. Meanwhile, Vancouver city hall rezones a couple of Westbank projects so the projects can now house AI data centres. Rather timely, given that there’s a federal Liberal government push for ‘sovereign data centres’ in Canada.

It’s almost like a fairy tale where magical characters pop in and out of the story and wondrous coincidences occur. The Justin Trudeau character transforms into Mark Carney who now leads the federal Liberal government. Gregor Robertson (former Vancouver mayor) transforms into a federal Liberal Minister of Housing [emphasis mine] and Infrastructure and Minister responsible for Pacific Economic Development Canada [emphasis mine]. And of course, there’s the previously mentioned transformation of development projects into housing for data centres at a time when a shortage of housing for people has become a national issue.

The magic doesn’t stop. My May 8, 2026 posting about the 2026 summit notes the presence of Robertson, Eby (current BC Premier), and Ken Sim, current Vancouver mayor at the 2026 Web Summit along with Canada’s federal Liberal Minister of Artificial Intelligence and Digital Innovation, Evan Solomon in what has been touted a great opportunity for local business and startups. Not surprisingly, AI became a major topic of conversation (more about Sim and AI coming in the next subsection).

I have expressed some doubt about the claims made by boosters and politicians about business opportunities and innovation being good for the local economy. It seems I’m not the only one. Dan Burgar, CEO of Frontier Collective.wrote this “Opinion: Vancouver is hosting the future, but we’re not keeping any of it” in a May 19, 2026 posting on the Daily Hive, Note: A link has been removed,

Last week, the second annual Web Summit conference in Vancouver brought over 20,000 people from around the world to the city. They came for our talent, our companies, and our setting. They’ll leave with deals signed, partnerships formed, and ideas that will turn into businesses somewhere else.

That last part is the problem we keep refusing to talk about.

Vancouver is great at hosting innovation. We’re terrible at keeping it.

Slack was built here. It was scaled in San Francisco. Hootsuite, AbCellera, General Fusion, and Clio: every one of them globally significant, and every one of them has had to look outside this city, this province, and often this country for the capital, the customers, and the conditions to grow. The pattern is so consistent it’s stopped being a pattern and started being the model.

…

Burger’s point is well taken (although he doesn’t mention D-Wave Systems). He goes on to suggest this,

…

The Mayor of Vancouver’s office, the Government of British Columbia, and the Government of Canada all have a role to play, and none of them should wait for the others.

Vancouver should treat innovation infrastructure the same way it treats public transit infrastructure: as a non-negotiable public good that catalyzes everything around it.

…

Mayor Sim took another approach at the 2026 Web Summit.

Sim and his AI minions (all 11 of them)

Sim’s missteps at the 2026 Web Summit are in keeping with his current policy of achieving an unbreakable streak (I exaggerate … a little bit) of own goals (even I’m affected by the sports fever of living in a 2026 World Cup city).

For anyone who might like to see a listing for the five months of this year, there’s the Ken SIm webpage on Global News. which as of May 22, 2026 includes these gems, “Report finds Vancouver Mayor Ken Sim misused influence, harassed councillor Sean Orr,” “Vancouver recovery advocate returning honour to city over mayor, council’s actions,” “Vancouver Mayor Ken Sim says comments about councillor Sean Orr [accusing Orr of openly selling drugs on Christmas Day 2026] came from an unverified photo,” “Vancouver Mayor Ken Sim files defamation lawsuit against 2 men,” and more.

I have never really recovered from reading Matt O’Grady’s October 4, 2023 article for Vancouver Magazine “A Year In, How’s Mayor Ken Sim Actually Doing?” It provides an unexpected view of our current mayor,

I’m sitting on a couch in the mayor’s third-floor offices, and Ken Sim is walking over to his turntable to put on another record. “How about the Police? I love this album.”

With the opening strains of “Every Breath You Take” crackling to life, Sim is explaining his approach to conflict resolution, and how he takes inspiration from the classic management tome Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In.

“The way they approach things is, instead of having an adversarial relationship in every decision we look at, imagine you’re two judges on the same side of the table, trying to opine on a very difficult case and get to the best answer,” he says. “We’re just looking for the best answer.”

Suddenly, the office door swings open and Sim’s chief of staff, Trevor Ford, pokes his head in (for the third time in the past 10 minutes). “We have to go. Now.”

“Okay, okay,” says Sim, turning back to address me. “Do you mind if I change while we’re talking?” And so the door closes again—and, without further ado, the Mayor of Vancouver drops trou and goes in search of a pair of shorts, continuing with a story about how some of his west-side friends are vocally against the massive Jericho Lands development promising to reshape their 4th and Alma neighbourhood.

“And I’m like, ‘Let me be very clear: I 100-percent support it, this is why—and we’ll have to agree to disagree,’” he says, trading his baby-blue polo for a fitted charcoal grey T-shirt. Meanwhile, as Sim does his wardrobe change, I’m doing everything I can to keep my eyes on my keyboard—and hoping the mayor finds his missing shorts.

It’s fair to assume that previous mayors weren’t in the habit of getting naked in front of journalists. At least, I can’t quite picture Kennedy Stewart doing so, or Larry or Gordon Campbell either.

But it also fits a pattern that’s developing with Ken Sim as a leader entirely comfortable in his own skin. He’s in a hurry to accomplish big things—no matter who’s watching and what they might say (or write). And he eagerly embraces the idea of bringing Vancouver’s “swagger” back—outlined in his inaugural State of the City address, and underlined when he shotgunned a beer [later reporting indicated a vodka cream soda was shotguneed] at July’s [2023] Khatsahlano Street Party.

…

Flying free to the wind, eh?

Moving onto Sim’s latest gaffe in what appears to be an ill advised attempt at impressing an audience of tech innovators, this happened (you can find the story in the headlines),

Mayor Eats His Words After Admitting He’s Delegating Work to 11 AI Agents (May 17, 2026 article by Krystle Vermes for Futurism)
Vancouver mayor decries ‘misinformation’ after saying he uses 11 AI agents to do work (May 13, 2026 article by Nono Shen for the Canadian Press and published on the CBC news online website)
Vancouver Mayor Ken Sim responds to concerns over his ’11 AI agents’ (May 13, 2026 article by Amir Ali for the Daily Hive)
AI not being used to ‘make city decisions,’ Vancouver mayor clarifies after remarks raise eyebrows (May 13, 2026 article by Andrew Weichel for CTV news online)

For anyone who’d like to hear the story, there’s an 11 mins. interview (aired May 14, 2026) with Justin McElroy, CBC’s municipal affairs reporter for BC..Here’s how the segment is described on the CBC Radio’s Early Edition with Stephen Quinn webspace

Vancouver Mayor Ken Sim is clarifying his comments about having 11 different AI agents doing work for him — but it’s just one of many stories about artificial intelligence that have come this week in Vancouver.

Sim is up for re-election on October 17, 2026. There are seven candidates currently vying to be mayor (Wikipedia entry for 2026 Vancouver municipal election). It should be interesting.

Final thoughts

AI data centres are, generally speaking, not popular. The exception being the folks making money from them or, at least in Vancouver, hoping that their businesses (e.g., Westbank) can be saved by them. There’s been a lot of concern over electricity and water use.

The University of Waterloo’s claim that AI’s climate impact is much smaller than many feared is based on some data from 2016 and earlier. This April 16, 2026 International Energy Agency (IEA) press release about a new report notes this about AI energy use,

…

According to the report – Key Questions on Energy and AI – power consumption per AI task is declining rapidly, with efficiency improving at a rate unprecedented in energy history. However, more people are using AI, and energy-intensive uses – such as AI agents – are on the rise [emphasis mine]. As a result, electricity consumption from data centres is set to double by 2030, and power use from those focused on AI is poised to triple.

…

Sim and his 11 AI agents (personal use only) not withstanding, it would be interesting to know how much AI is being deployed in city departments, including the police, and plans for AI deployment. (Just an idle thought)

While I have been critical of Simon Enoch, Andrew Longhurst, and Rachel Pettigrew’s May 18, 2026 article “Vancouver Is Getting AI Data Centres. That’s Not Good” for The Tyee, they make some useful points about noise (an issue when these centres are in urban areas) and environmental standards.

I expect unfettered enthusiasm and boosterism from the technology community at something like the Web Summit; it’s disconcerting when found in the city’s mayor. But much more disquieting was this, “Far-Right Speakers Given a Perch at Vancouver’s Web Summit,” May 18, 2026 article by Jen St. Denis for The Tyee. (I’ve added a link and an excerpt from the article at the end of my May 8, 2026 posting about the summit.) There were a lot of politicians at the 2026 summit, maybe next time they’ll check with the organizers about who’s being invited to speak.

AI data centres aren’t just a technology story, they’re also an energy story, a water story, a political story, and, in some cases, a neighbourhood story.

ETA May 22, 2026 at 1530 hours: Massive protest march against Vancouver AI data centres tomorrow (May 23, 2026)

I don’t usually write about issues that are this dynamic but Daniel Chai’s May 22, 2026 article for the Daily Hive features news of a protest. Interestingly, there were no protests when the first AI data centre was announced in January 2026. It seems the Web Summit stimulated an opposition movement, Note: Links have been removed,

A huge demonstration against the proposed cluster of AI data centres in Vancouver will take place on Saturday, May 23, and traffic may be impacted throughout downtown.

A group behind the Instagram page @no.ai.vancouver was formed shortly after news broke that Telus was moving ahead with plans to build a major sovereign artificial intelligence (AI) infrastructure network in British Columbia.

This includes new AI data centres at two Westbank properties in Vancouver that could become fully operational before the end of this decade.

“No.ai.vancouver is trying to spread awareness about the impact of AI data centres on the environment, help in halting the construction of these AI data centres, and looking out for the people who call this place home,” said Torin LaRocque, an 18-year-old student living in Vancouver who founded the group.

“I was inspired to create this movement after seeing all the devastation these centres are causing to people living nearby.”

For LaRocque, one of the top negative issues surrounding the proposed facilities is their impact on the environment.

“Telus states that the new AI Data Centres use 90 per cent less energy than the average centre,” said the Vancouver resident. “However, they also state that they will have more than 60,000 GPUs on the conservative side.

“[If] each GPU will process an AI prompt a day, that is still over 1400 litres of water being used a day. Vancouver is already under stage two water restrictions. Why should we let these data centres use the water that Vancouver’s population needs?”

The demonstration on Saturday, May 23, begins with poster-making at Victory Square at 11 a.m., with some supplies provided.

Participants in the protest against the AI Data Centres will meet at Waterfront Station at 1 p.m., with plans to march down Granville Street starting at 1:30 p.m.

The march, which LaRocque said could draw a large procession, will continue over the bridge until it reaches Granville Island.

Officers from the Vancouver Police Department (VPD) will be on site during the demonstration.

…

LaRocque, who describes himself as an initiator of the group, shared that the positive response from the community has been honestly shocking.

“I am confident that if enough people show up and demand change, either by protesting or signing the petition, we can bring this to the city with more than just one person backing it up. The more signatures and protesters we have, the more the City will be unable to ignore.”

The group has also shared a link to a petition calling for a stop to the Vancouver AI Data Centre, which has garnered over 1,400 signatures as of press time.

Daily Hive reached out to the City for comment on the protest, with a representative responding, “The City of Vancouver recognizes and upholds the right to free speech and peaceful protest.” [almost like an AI agent wrote the reply]

…

Should you be interested in going to the protest, Victory Square’s address is: 200 W Hastings St.

The Hedy Lamarr of international research: Canada’s Third assessment of The State of Science and Technology and Industrial Research and Development in Canada (1 of 2)

Canada as Hedy Lamarr

There are some parallels to be drawn between Canada’s S&T and R&D (science and technology; research and development) and Ms. Lamarr. Chief amongst them, we’re not always appreciated for our brains. Not even by people who are supposed to know better such as the experts on the panel for the ‘Third assessment of The State of Science and Technology and Industrial Research and Development in Canada’ (proper title: Competing in a Global Innovation Economy: The Current State of R&D in Canada) from the Expert Panel on the State of Science and Technology and Industrial Research and Development in Canada.

A little history

Before exploring the comparison to Hedy Lamarr further, here’s a bit more about the history of this latest assessment from the Council of Canadian Academies (CCA), from the report released April 10, 2018,

This assessment of Canada’s performance indicators in science, technology, research, and innovation comes at an opportune time. The Government of Canada has expressed a renewed commitment in several tangible ways to this broad domain of activity including its Innovation and Skills Plan, the announcement of five superclusters, its appointment of a new Chief Science Advisor, and its request for the Fundamental Science Review. More specifically, the 2018 Federal Budget demonstrated the government’s strong commitment to research and innovation with historic investments in science.

The CCA has a decade-long history of conducting evidence-based assessments about Canada’s research and development activities, producing seven assessments of relevance:

•The State of Science and Technology in Canada (2006) [emphasis mine]
•Innovation and Business Strategy: Why Canada Falls Short (2009)
•Catalyzing Canada’s Digital Economy (2010)
•Informing Research Choices: Indicators and Judgment (2012)
•The State of Science and Technology in Canada (2012) [emphasis mine]
•The State of Industrial R&D in Canada (2013) [emphasis mine]
•Paradox Lost: Explaining Canada’s Research Strength and Innovation Weakness (2013)

Using similar methods and metrics to those in The State of Science and Technology in Canada (2012) and The State of Industrial R&D in Canada (2013), this assessment tells a similar and familiar story: Canada has much to be proud of, with world-class researchers in many domains of knowledge, but the rest of the world is not standing still. Our peers are also producing high quality results, and many countries are making significant commitments to supporting research and development that will position them to better leverage their strengths to compete globally. Canada will need to take notice as it determines how best to take action. This assessment provides valuable material for that conversation to occur, whether it takes place in the lab or the legislature, the bench or the boardroom. We also hope it will be used to inform public discussion. [p. ix Print, p. 11 PDF]

This latest assessment succeeds the general 2006 and 2012 reports, which were mostly focused on academic research, and combines it with an assessment of industrial research, which was previously separate. Also, this third assessment’s title (Competing in a Global Innovation Economy: The Current State of R&D in Canada) makes what was previously quietly declared in the text, explicit from the cover onwards. It’s all about competition, despite noises such as the 2017 Naylor report (Review of fundamental research) about the importance of fundamental research.

One other quick comment, I did wonder in my July 1, 2016 posting (featuring the announcement of the third assessment) how combining two assessments would impact the size of the expert panel and the size of the final report,

Given the size of the 2012 assessment of science and technology at 232 pp. (PDF) and the 2013 assessment of industrial research and development at 220 pp. (PDF) with two expert panels, the imagination boggles at the potential size of the 2016 expert panel and of the 2016 assessment combining the two areas.

I got my answer with regard to the panel as noted in my Oct. 20, 2016 update (which featured a list of the members),

A few observations, given the size of the task, this panel is lean. As well, there are three women in a group of 13 (less than 25% representation) in 2016? It’s Ontario and Québec-dominant; only BC and Alberta rate a representative on the panel. I hope they will find ways to better balance this panel and communicate that ‘balanced story’ to the rest of us. On the plus side, the panel has representatives from the humanities, arts, and industry in addition to the expected representatives from the sciences.

The imbalance I noted then was addressed, somewhat, with the selection of the reviewers (from the report released April 10, 2018),

The CCA wishes to thank the following individuals for their review of this report:

Ronald Burnett, C.M., O.B.C., RCA, Chevalier de l’ordre des arts et des
lettres, President and Vice-Chancellor, Emily Carr University of Art and Design
(Vancouver, BC)

Michelle N. Chretien, Director, Centre for Advanced Manufacturing and Design
Technologies, Sheridan College; Former Program and Business Development
Manager, Electronic Materials, Xerox Research Centre of Canada (Brampton,
ON)

Lisa Crossley, CEO, Reliq Health Technologies, Inc. (Ancaster, ON)
Natalie Dakers, Founding President and CEO, Accel-Rx Health Sciences
Accelerator (Vancouver, BC)

Fred Gault, Professorial Fellow, United Nations University-MERIT (Maastricht,
Netherlands)

Patrick D. Germain, Principal Engineering Specialist, Advanced Aerodynamics,
Bombardier Aerospace (Montréal, QC)

Robert Brian Haynes, O.C., FRSC, FCAHS, Professor Emeritus, DeGroote
School of Medicine, McMaster University (Hamilton, ON)

Susan Holt, Chief, Innovation and Business Relationships, Government of
New Brunswick (Fredericton, NB)

Pierre A. Mohnen, Professor, United Nations University-MERIT and Maastricht
University (Maastricht, Netherlands)

Peter J. M. Nicholson, C.M., Retired; Former and Founding President and
CEO, Council of Canadian Academies (Annapolis Royal, NS)

Raymond G. Siemens, Distinguished Professor, English and Computer Science
and Former Canada Research Chair in Humanities Computing, University of
Victoria (Victoria, BC) [pp. xii- xiv Print; pp. 15-16 PDF]

The proportion of women to men as reviewers jumped up to about 36% (4 of 11 reviewers) and there are two reviewers from the Maritime provinces. As usual, reviewers external to Canada were from Europe. Although this time, they came from Dutch institutions rather than UK or German institutions. Interestingly and unusually, there was no one from a US institution. When will they start using reviewers from other parts of the world?

As for the report itself, it is 244 pp. (PDF). (For the really curious, I have a December 15, 2016 post featuring my comments on the preliminary data for the third assessment.)

To sum up, they had a lean expert panel tasked with bringing together two inquiries and two reports. I imagine that was daunting. Good on them for finding a way to make it manageable.

Bibliometrics, patents, and a survey

I wish more attention had been paid to some of the issues around open science, open access, and open data, which are changing how science is being conducted. (I have more about this from an April 5, 2018 article by James Somers for The Atlantic but more about that later.) If I understand rightly, they may not have been possible due to the nature of the questions posed by the government when requested the assessment.

As was done for the second assessment, there is an acknowledgement that the standard measures/metrics (bibliometrics [no. of papers published, which journals published them; number of times papers were cited] and technometrics [no. of patent applications, etc.] of scientific accomplishment and progress are not the best and new approaches need to be developed and adopted (from the report released April 10, 2018),

It is also worth noting that the Panel itself recognized the limits that come from using traditional historic metrics. Additional approaches will be needed the next time this assessment is done. [p. ix Print; p. 11 PDF]

For the second assessment and as a means of addressing some of the problems with metrics, the panel decided to take a survey which the panel for the third assessment has also done (from the report released April 10, 2018),

The Panel relied on evidence from multiple sources to address its charge, including a literature review and data extracted from statistical agencies and organizations such as Statistics Canada and the OECD. For international comparisons, the Panel focused on OECD countries along with developing countries that are among the top 20 producers of peer-reviewed research publications (e.g., China, India, Brazil, Iran, Turkey). In addition to the literature review, two primary research approaches informed the Panel’s assessment:
•a comprehensive bibliometric and technometric analysis of Canadian research publications and patents; and,
•a survey of top-cited researchers around the world.

Despite best efforts to collect and analyze up-to-date information, one of the Panel’s findings is that data limitations continue to constrain the assessment of R&D activity and excellence in Canada. This is particularly the case with industrial R&D and in the social sciences, arts, and humanities. Data on industrial R&D activity continue to suffer from time lags for some measures, such as internationally comparable data on R&D intensity by sector and industry. These data also rely on industrial categories (i.e., NAICS and ISIC codes) that can obscure important trends, particularly in the services sector, though Statistics Canada’s recent revisions to how this data is reported have improved this situation. There is also a lack of internationally comparable metrics relating to R&D outcomes and impacts, aside from those based on patents.

For the social sciences, arts, and humanities, metrics based on journal articles and other indexed publications provide an incomplete and uneven picture of research contributions. The expansion of bibliometric databases and methodological improvements such as greater use of web-based metrics, including paper views/downloads and social media references, will support ongoing, incremental improvements in the availability and accuracy of data. However, future assessments of R&D in Canada may benefit from more substantive integration of expert review, capable of factoring in different types of research outputs (e.g., non-indexed books) and impacts (e.g., contributions to communities or impacts on public policy). The Panel has no doubt that contributions from the humanities, arts, and social sciences are of equal importance to national prosperity. It is vital that such contributions are better measured and assessed. [p. xvii Print; p. 19 PDF]

My reading: there’s a problem and we’re not going to try and fix it this time. Good luck to those who come after us. As for this line: “The Panel has no doubt that contributions from the humanities, arts, and social sciences are of equal importance to national prosperity.” Did no one explain that when you use ‘no doubt’, you are introducing doubt? It’s a cousin to ‘don’t take this the wrong way’ and ‘I don’t mean to be rude but …’ .

Good news

This is somewhat encouraging (from the report released April 10, 2018),

Canada’s international reputation for its capacity to participate in cutting-edge R&D is strong, with 60% of top-cited researchers surveyed internationally indicating that Canada hosts world-leading infrastructure or programs in their fields. This share increased by four percentage points between 2012 and 2017. Canada continues to benefit from a highly educated population and deep pools of research skills and talent. Its population has the highest level of educational attainment in the OECD in the proportion of the population with
a post-secondary education. However, among younger cohorts (aged 25 to 34), Canada has fallen behind Japan and South Korea. The number of researchers per capita in Canada is on a par with that of other developed countries, andincreased modestly between 2004 and 2012. Canada’s output of PhD graduates has also grown in recent years, though it remains low in per capita terms relative to many OECD countries. [pp. xvii-xviii; pp. 19-20]

Don’t let your head get too big

Most of the report observes that our international standing is slipping in various ways such as this (from the report released April 10, 2018),

In contrast, the number of R&D personnel employed in Canadian businesses
dropped by 20% between 2008 and 2013. This is likely related to sustained and
ongoing decline in business R&D investment across the country. R&D as a share
of gross domestic product (GDP) has steadily declined in Canada since 2001,
and now stands well below the OECD average (Figure 1). As one of few OECD
countries with virtually no growth in total national R&D expenditures between
2006 and 2015, Canada would now need to more than double expenditures to
achieve an R&D intensity comparable to that of leading countries.

Low and declining business R&D expenditures are the dominant driver of this
trend; however, R&D spending in all sectors is implicated. Government R&D
expenditures declined, in real terms, over the same period. Expenditures in the
higher education sector (an indicator on which Canada has traditionally ranked
highly) are also increasing more slowly than the OECD average. Significant
erosion of Canada’s international competitiveness and capacity to participate
in R&D and innovation is likely to occur if this decline and underinvestment
continue.

Between 2009 and 2014, Canada produced 3.8% of the world’s research
publications, ranking ninth in the world. This is down from seventh place for
the 2003–2008 period. India and Italy have overtaken Canada although the
difference between Italy and Canada is small. Publication output in Canada grew
by 26% between 2003 and 2014, a growth rate greater than many developed
countries (including United States, France, Germany, United Kingdom, and
Japan), but below the world average, which reflects the rapid growth in China
and other emerging economies. Research output from the federal government,
particularly the National Research Council Canada, dropped significantly
between 2009 and 2014.(emphasis mine) [p. xviii Print; p. 20 PDF]

For anyone unfamiliar with Canadian politics, 2009 – 2014 were years during which Stephen Harper’s Conservatives formed the government. Justin Trudeau’s Liberals were elected to form the government in late 2015.

During Harper’s years in government, the Conservatives were very interested in changing how the National Research Council of Canada operated and, if memory serves, the focus was on innovation over research. Consequently, the drop in their research output is predictable.

Given my interest in nanotechnology and other emerging technologies, this popped out (from the report released April 10, 2018),

When it comes to research on most enabling and strategic technologies, however, Canada lags other countries. Bibliometric evidence suggests that, with the exception of selected subfields in Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) such as Medical Informatics and Personalized Medicine, Canada accounts for a relatively small share of the world’s research output for promising areas of technology development. This is particularly true for Biotechnology, Nanotechnology, and Materials science [emphasis mine]. Canada’s research impact, as reflected by citations, is also modest in these areas. Aside from Biotechnology, none of the other subfields in Enabling and Strategic Technologies has an ARC rank among the top five countries. Optoelectronics and photonics is the next highest ranked at 7th place, followed by Materials, and Nanoscience and Nanotechnology, both of which have a rank of 9th. Even in areas where Canadian researchers and institutions played a seminal role in early research (and retain a substantial research capacity), such as Artificial Intelligence and Regenerative Medicine, Canada has lost ground to other countries.

Arguably, our early efforts in artificial intelligence wouldn’t have garnered us much in the way of ranking and yet we managed some cutting edge work such as machine learning. I’m not suggesting the expert panel should have or could have found some way to measure these kinds of efforts but I’m wondering if there could have been some acknowledgement in the text of the report. I’m thinking a couple of sentences in a paragraph about the confounding nature of scientific research where areas that are ignored for years and even decades then become important (e.g., machine learning) but are not measured as part of scientific progress until after they are universally recognized.

Still, point taken about our diminishing returns in ’emerging’ technologies and sciences (from the report released April 10, 2018),

The impression that emerges from these data is sobering. With the exception of selected ICT subfields, such as Medical Informatics, bibliometric evidence does not suggest that Canada excels internationally in most of these research areas. In areas such as Nanotechnology and Materials science, Canada lags behind other countries in levels of research output and impact, and other countries are outpacing Canada’s publication growth in these areas — leading to declining shares of world publications. Even in research areas such as AI, where Canadian researchers and institutions played a foundational role, Canadian R&D activity is not keeping pace with that of other countries and some researchers trained in Canada have relocated to other countries (Section 4.4.1). There are isolated exceptions to these trends, but the aggregate data reviewed by this Panel suggest that Canada is not currently a world leader in research on most emerging technologies.

The Hedy Lamarr treatment

We have ‘good looks’ (arts and humanities) but not the kind of brains (physical sciences and engineering) that people admire (from the report released April 10, 2018),

Canada, relative to the world, specializes in subjects generally referred to as the
humanities and social sciences (plus health and the environment), and does
not specialize as much as others in areas traditionally referred to as the physical
sciences and engineering. Specifically, Canada has comparatively high levels
of research output in Psychology and Cognitive Sciences, Public Health and
Health Services, Philosophy and Theology, Earth and Environmental Sciences,
and Visual and Performing Arts. [emphases mine] It accounts for more than 5% of world researchin these fields. Conversely, Canada has lower research output than expected
in Chemistry, Physics and Astronomy, Enabling and Strategic Technologies,
Engineering, and Mathematics and Statistics. The comparatively low research
output in core areas of the natural sciences and engineering is concerning,
and could impair the flexibility of Canada’s research base, preventing research
institutions and researchers from being able to pivot to tomorrow’s emerging
research areas. [p. xix Print; p. 21 PDF]

Couldn’t they have used a more buoyant tone? After all, science was known as ‘natural philosophy’ up until the 19th century. As for visual and performing arts, let’s include poetry as a performing and literary art (both have been the case historically and cross-culturally) and let’s also note that one of the great physics texts, (De rerum natura by Lucretius) was a multi-volume poem (from Lucretius’ Wikipedia entry; Note: Links have been removed).

His poem De rerum natura (usually translated as “On the Nature of Things” or “On the Nature of the Universe”) transmits the ideas of Epicureanism, which includes Atomism [the concept of atoms forming materials] and psychology. Lucretius was the first writer to introduce Roman readers to Epicurean philosophy.^[15] The poem, written in some 7,400 dactylic hexameters, is divided into six untitled books, and explores Epicurean physics through richly poetic language and metaphors. Lucretius presents the principles of atomism; the nature of the mind and soul; explanations of sensation and thought; the development of the world and its phenomena; and explains a variety of celestial and terrestrial phenomena. The universe described in the poem operates according to these physical principles, guided by fortuna, “chance”, and not the divine intervention of the traditional Roman deities.^[16]

Should you need more proof that the arts might have something to contribute to physical sciences, there’s this in my March 7, 2018 posting,

It’s not often you see research that combines biologically inspired engineering and a molecular biophysicist with a professional animator who worked at Peter Jackson’s (Lord of the Rings film trilogy, etc.) Park Road Post film studio. An Oct. 18, 2017 news item on ScienceDaily describes the project,

Like many other scientists, Don Ingber, M.D., Ph.D., the Founding Director of the Wyss Institute, [emphasis mine] is concerned that non-scientists have become skeptical and even fearful of his field at a time when technology can offer solutions to many of the world’s greatest problems. “I feel that there’s a huge disconnect between science and the public because it’s depicted as rote memorization in schools, when by definition, if you can memorize it, it’s not science,” says Ingber, who is also the Judah Folkman Professor of Vascular Biology at Harvard Medical School and the Vascular Biology Program at Boston Children’s Hospital, and Professor of Bioengineering at the Harvard Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences (SEAS). [emphasis mine] “Science is the pursuit of the unknown. We have a responsibility to reach out to the public and convey that excitement of exploration and discovery, and fortunately, the film industry is already great at doing that.”

…

“Not only is our physics-based simulation and animation system as good as other data-based modeling systems, it led to the new scientific insight [emphasis mine] that the limited motion of the dynein hinge focuses the energy released by ATP hydrolysis, which causes dynein’s shape change and drives microtubule sliding and axoneme motion,” says Ingber. “Additionally, while previous studies of dynein have revealed the molecule’s two different static conformations, our animation visually depicts one plausible way that the protein can transition between those shapes at atomic resolution, which is something that other simulations can’t do. The animation approach also allows us to visualize how rows of dyneins work in unison, like rowers pulling together in a boat, which is difficult using conventional scientific simulation approaches.”

It comes down to how we look at things. Yes, physical sciences and engineering are very important. If the report is to be believed we have a very highly educated population and according to PISA scores our students rank highly in mathematics, science, and reading skills. (For more information on Canada’s latest PISA scores from 2015 see this OECD page. As for PISA itself, it’s an OECD [Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development] programme where 15-year-old students from around the world are tested on their reading, mathematics, and science skills, you can get some information from my Oct. 9, 2013 posting.)

Is it really so bad that we choose to apply those skills in fields other than the physical sciences and engineering? It’s a little bit like Hedy Lamarr’s problem except instead of being judged for our looks and having our inventions dismissed, we’re being judged for not applying ourselves to physical sciences and engineering and having our work in other closely aligned fields dismissed as less important.

Canada’s Industrial R&D: an oft-told, very sad story

Bemoaning the state of Canada’s industrial research and development efforts has been a national pastime as long as I can remember. Here’s this from the report released April 10, 2018,

There has been a sustained erosion in Canada’s industrial R&D capacity and competitiveness. Canada ranks 33rd among leading countries on an index assessing the magnitude, intensity, and growth of industrial R&D expenditures. Although Canada is the 11th largest spender, its industrial R&D intensity (0.9%) is only half the OECD average and total spending is declining (−0.7%). Compared with G7 countries, the Canadian portfolio of R&D investment is more concentrated in industries that are intrinsically not as R&D intensive. Canada invests more heavily than the G7 average in oil and gas, forestry, machinery and equipment, and finance where R&D has been less central to business strategy than in many other industries. … About 50% of Canada’s industrial R&D spending is in high-tech sectors (including industries such as ICT, aerospace, pharmaceuticals, and automotive) compared with the G7 average of 80%. Canadian Business Enterprise Expenditures on R&D (BERD) intensity is also below the OECD average in these sectors. In contrast, Canadian investment in low and medium-low tech sectors is substantially higher than the G7 average. Canada’s spending reflects both its long-standing industrial structure and patterns of economic activity.

R&D investment patterns in Canada appear to be evolving in response to global and domestic shifts. While small and medium-sized enterprises continue to perform a greater share of industrial R&D in Canada than in the United States, between 2009 and 2013, there was a shift in R&D from smaller to larger firms. Canada is an increasingly attractive place to conduct R&D. Investment by foreign-controlled firms in Canada has increased to more than 35% of total R&D investment, with the United States accounting for more than half of that. [emphasis mine] Multinational enterprises seem to be increasingly locating some of their R&D operations outside their country of ownership, possibly to gain proximity to superior talent. Increasing foreign-controlled R&D, however, also could signal a long-term strategic loss of control over intellectual property (IP) developed in this country, ultimately undermining the government’s efforts to support high-growth firms as they scale up. [pp. xxii-xxiii Print; pp. 24-25 PDF]

Canada has been known as a ‘branch plant’ economy for decades. For anyone unfamiliar with the term, it means that companies from other countries come here, open up a branch and that’s how we get our jobs as we don’t have all that many large companies here. Increasingly, multinationals are locating R&D shops here.

While our small to medium size companies fund industrial R&D, it’s large companies (multinationals) which can afford long-term and serious investment in R&D. Luckily for companies from other countries, we have a well-educated population of people looking for jobs.

In 2017, we opened the door more widely so we can scoop up talented researchers and scientists from other countries, from a June 14, 2017 article by Beckie Smith for The PIE News,

Universities have welcomed the inclusion of the work permit exemption for academic stays of up to 120 days in the strategy, which also introduces expedited visa processing for some highly skilled professions.

Foreign researchers working on projects at a publicly funded degree-granting institution or affiliated research institution will be eligible for one 120-day stay in Canada every 12 months.

And universities will also be able to access a dedicated service channel that will support employers and provide guidance on visa applications for foreign talent.

The Global Skills Strategy, which came into force on June 12 [2017], aims to boost the Canadian economy by filling skills gaps with international talent.

…

As well as the short term work permit exemption, the Global Skills Strategy aims to make it easier for employers to recruit highly skilled workers in certain fields such as computer engineering.

“Employers that are making plans for job-creating investments in Canada will often need an experienced leader, dynamic researcher or an innovator with unique skills not readily available in Canada to make that investment happen,” said Ahmed Hussen, Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship.

“The Global Skills Strategy aims to give those employers confidence that when they need to hire from abroad, they’ll have faster, more reliable access to top talent.”

Coincidentally, Microsoft, Facebook, Google, etc. have announced, in 2017, new jobs and new offices in Canadian cities. There’s a also Chinese multinational telecom company Huawei Canada which has enjoyed success in Canada and continues to invest here (from a Jan. 19, 2018 article about security concerns by Matthew Braga for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) online news,

For the past decade, Chinese tech company Huawei has found no shortage of success in Canada. Its equipment is used in telecommunications infrastructure run by the country’s major carriers, and some have sold Huawei’s phones.

The company has struck up partnerships with Canadian universities, and say it is investing more than half a billion dollars in researching next generation cellular networks here. [emphasis mine]

…

While I’m not thrilled about using patents as an indicator of progress, this is interesting to note (from the report released April 10, 2018),

Canada produces about 1% of global patents, ranking 18th in the world. It lags further behind in trademark (34th) and design applications (34th). Despite relatively weak performance overall in patents, Canada excels in some technical fields such as Civil Engineering, Digital Communication, Other Special Machines, Computer Technology, and Telecommunications. [emphases mine] Canada is a net exporter of patents, which signals the R&D strength of some technology industries. It may also reflect increasing R&D investment by foreign-controlled firms. [emphasis mine] [p. xxiii Print; p. 25 PDF]

Getting back to my point, we don’t have large companies here. In fact, the dream for most of our high tech startups is to build up the company so it’s attractive to buyers, sell, and retire (hopefully before the age of 40). Strangely, the expert panel doesn’t seem to share my insight into this matter,

Canada’s combination of high performance in measures of research output and impact, and low performance on measures of industrial R&D investment and innovation (e.g., subpar productivity growth), continue to be viewed as a paradox, leading to the hypothesis that barriers are impeding the flow of Canada’s research achievements into commercial applications. The Panel’s analysis suggests the need for a more nuanced view. The process of transforming research into innovation and wealth creation is a complex multifaceted process, making it difficult to point to any definitive cause of Canada’s deficit in R&D investment and productivity growth. Based on the Panel’s interpretation of the evidence, Canada is a highly innovative nation, but significant barriers prevent the translation of innovation into wealth creation. The available evidence does point to a number of important contributing factors that are analyzed in this report. Figure 5 represents the relationships between R&D, innovation, and wealth creation.

The Panel concluded that many factors commonly identified as points of concern do not adequately explain the overall weakness in Canada’s innovation performance compared with other countries. [emphasis mine] Academia-business linkages appear relatively robust in quantitative terms given the extent of cross-sectoral R&D funding and increasing academia-industry partnerships, though the volume of academia-industry interactions does not indicate the nature or the quality of that interaction, nor the extent to which firms are capitalizing on the research conducted and the resulting IP. The educational system is high performing by international standards and there does not appear to be a widespread lack of researchers or STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) skills. IP policies differ across universities and are unlikely to explain a divergence in research commercialization activity between Canadian and U.S. institutions, though Canadian universities and governments could do more to help Canadian firms access university IP and compete in IP management and strategy. Venture capital availability in Canada has improved dramatically in recent years and is now competitive internationally, though still overshadowed by Silicon Valley. Technology start-ups and start-up ecosystems are also flourishing in many sectors and regions, demonstrating their ability to build on research advances to develop and deliver innovative products and services.

You’ll note there’s no mention of a cultural issue where start-ups are designed for sale as soon as possible and this isn’t new. Years ago, there was an accounting firm that published a series of historical maps (the last one I saw was in 2005) of technology companies in the Vancouver region. Technology companies were being developed and sold to large foreign companies from the 19th century to present day.

Part 2

FrogHeart

Commentary about nanotech, science policy and communication, society, and the arts

Tag Archives: Ahmed Hussen

Vancouver (Canada), AI data centres, and the Mayor’s 11 AI agents (3 of 3)

AI data centres in Vancouver

Westbank’s major downtown Vancouver office tower project at steam plant site pivots to hotel, residential, and data centre uses

Telus to build massive AI data centres at two Westbank properties in Vancouver

Pushback (and some context)

What BC Hydro is saying

[Comments]