Let’s protest country’s lack of innovation

CAnADA rECEivEs A lowly “C” grADE At rECEnt innovAtion wEEk EvEnt

When it comes to dreaming up bogus lawsuits, Canada is among the most innovative countries on Earth.

But sadly, these days our ingenuity, imagination and mental dexterity often seem to end about there. That’s probably why Innovation Week, which wrapped up last week, passed by with barely a whimper.

This occasion was, however, marked by the Conference Board of Canada, which released its annual ranking of western countries judged on a variety of criteria before being handed an overall innovation grade and ranking.

It wasn’t good news. We slipped from ninth among a group of 16 of our peers to a lowly 12th, with an overall grade of C. (Sweden, Switzerland, Denmark and the U.S. took the four top spots, all achieving A grades.)

An area of particular concern is research and development. Public spending in such areas is getting worse and the overall numbers of people involved in research is falling behind other countries.

This isn’t surprising. Our nation seems transfixed on two things: endlessly looking backward to apologize for various past wrongs, and suing and counter suing each other which, in the process, destroys what little faith international investors and homegrown entrepreneurs might retain about this being a good place to set up shop.

Thankfully, the situation isn’t hopeless. We’re still in the game — we got a C not an F, after all — even if Canada isn’t exactly swinging for the innovation fences these days. So, yes, there are indeed glimpses of hope amid the sullen skies of dreary protest, legal manoeuvring and energy-sapping recriminations.

For example, a week ago Friday saw the opening of a plant next to the Shepard Energy Centre in Calgary hosting world-class technology aimed at turning carbon dioxide into useful stuff such as building products and clothing.

It’s the sort of thinking Karl Clark would have approved of.

A century ago, the University of Alberta wasn’t too interested in showering honorary degrees on folks such as David Suzuki. No, back then, the striving young Edmonton institution was more focused on innovation than grandstanding.

So in 1920, university president Henry Marshall Tory — who also led the National Research Council — approached Clark, then a young chemist working as boss of the federal road materials branch, to move to Edmonton to see if some of the gunk being dredged up from the wilds of northern Alberta could be used to pave roads in the rapidly expanding province.

Nope, said Clark, after testing the stuff. It was too unstable for wide use in paving.

But maybe, if he used hot water to separate the oil from the sand, and added some other chemicals, it might have some purpose, other than simply wasting everyone’s time.

The first test plant was in the basement of the U of A’s power plant — an unlikely spot for what would become ground zero in the development of an industry built around the massive deposits of bitumen in northern Alberta.

That successful process of separating heavy oil from sand would lead to billions of dollars in tax revenue for the province and country, countless jobs and massive investment from energy companies across the globe.

These days, the results of Clark’s work are being demonized. Maybe Prime Minister Justin Trudeau might soon have to issue a tearful apology and get his folks to look around to see if there are any memorials to that modest chemist to tear down or rename.

Heck, we could ask Suzuki to make the denouncement while picking up his degree at that same U of A.

Just ignore that odd, wailing sound coming from the basement.