Canadian utilities are set to double the amount of wind, solar, and storage on their grids

This new capacity would add the equivalent of one third of Ontario’s electricity grid.

Electricity will be central to the transition to a low carbon economy. As Canada decarbonizes by switching to clean technologies like electric vehicles (EVs) and heat pumps, research from the Canadian Climate Institute shows that the country will also have to build a bigger, cleaner, and smarter grid.

For electricity utilities across Canada, rapidly rising electricity demand means that not only do they need to build more, they also need to build faster.

In a previous Insight, we looked at how much clean electricity capacity is in the pipeline across Canada. This week’s Insight explores how much clean electricity is on the utilities’ shopping list.

Canada’s growing appetite for electricity

Higher electricity demand requires greater generation capacity. This is not a one-to-one relationship: according to the Institute’s research, a demand increase of 1.6 to 2.2 times means Canada will need 2.2 to 3.4 times more generation capacity.

These estimates are relatively aligned with projections from utilities across the country as well (Figure 1). For example, the accelerated electrification scenario from BC Hydro’s updated Integrated Resource Plan expects that the provinces’ electricity demand will rise by approximately 40 per cent by 2041. In the case of Ontario, the Independent Electricity System Operators (IESO) had to revise their projections just from last year, upping the increase in demand from 60 per cent to 75 per cent by 2050.

In Canada, the responsibility to meet this growing electricity demand is under provincial jurisdiction. How each province procures the necessary supply to meet demand varies, and is largely dependent on how electricity markets are organized.

In most of the country, government-owned, regulated monopolies or Crown utilities are responsible for electricity generation and delivery. But as the demand for electricity has risen along with the availability of cheaper wind and solar energy, these utilities have been increasingly turning to independent power producers to procure new supply. By contrast, Alberta has a deregulated energy market and relies on different mechanisms to connect energy to the grid.

Our analysis focuses on the former: government-owned, regulated monopolies or Crown utilities and their plans for procurement to meet the growing demand for electricity.

Wind, solar, and storage capacity are set to double in seven provinces

Our analysis looked at seven provinces with long-term procurement plans and found that since 2023, nearly 14,000 megawatts (MW) of non-hydro renewable energy generation and storage capacity has been procured or is in the process of being procured.

That’s like adding more than one third the total generating capacity of Ontario’s grid. Together, the planned capacity procurements to date represent almost a doubling of existing wind and solar capacity from these seven provinces.

Ontario currently leads in procurements for the next decade, with a target of roughly 6,800 MW of renewable capacity to be procured by 2030. That makes up nearly half of all the planned renewable procurements in the seven provinces. This figure includes 5,000 MW of new non-emitting capacity that the IESO outlined in two plans from early 2024. However, it is now less clear whether all that capacity will be non-emitting. In December 2024, the government of Ontario raised the targets for their procurements between LT2 through LT4 from 5,000MW to 7,500 MW, but no longer required this capacity to be non-emitting. Assuming that Ontario sticks to a target of around 6,800 MW of renewable capacity, it would more than double the current transmission-connected capacity of all wind and solar power in the province.

A significant quantity of new wind power projects have also recently been selected in Quebec and British Columbia. Both provincial utilities have procured around 1,600 MW of wind capacity each. BC Hydro’s recent procurement is aligned with its recently updated integrated resource plan, and they also plan to have more frequent competitive calls for power in the future. Quebec is also aiming to triple wind power generation with more than 10,000 MW of new wind capacity by 2035.

Manitoba plans to put out a call for power last year for 600 MW of new wind capacity, as part of its Manitoba Affordable Energy Plan.

Other provinces have also identified the need to significantly increase clean electricity generation, but have yet to open further procurement opportunities. Saskatchewan is notably aiming to add 3,000 MW of wind and solar generation to the grid by 2035, and has started with 800 MW of solar procurements in recent years.

New Brunswick put out a request for expressions of interest for 270 MW of renewable generation and storage in 2023. The provincial government has outlined 1,400 MW of wind procurements out to 2033 in their roadmap.

Nova Scotia’s Clean Power Plan is also planning on adding more than 1,000 MW of new wind and 300 MW of large solar projects by 2030, with future procurements likely to be introduced in 2025 and 2027.

Newfoundland has also identified the need for 400 MW of new wind in their 2024 Reliability and Resource Adequacy review, however the details are yet to be released as to how this will be procured.

Several of these procurement programs are increasingly focused on majority-owned Indigenous clean electricity projects. Manitoba’s call for power, for instance, is specifically targeting projects that have at least 51 per cent Indigenous ownership, along with a 25 per cent equity requirement. In B.C., eight out of the nine projects selected for BC Hydro’s most recent call for power included 51 per cent equity ownership held by First Nations.

These additional procurements are encouraging news, and to continue momentum, provinces can introduce timelines or integrate future procurements into resource planning as part of net zero energy roadmaps. Longer-term planning of procurements can give project developers more certainty for future rounds of available funding.

With smart planning, procurements can set up Canadians for a clean electricity future.

Arthur Zhang is a Senior Research Associate at the Canadian Climate Institute

This piece was updated on April 28, 2025 to add additional information related to Ontario’s Long-Term Request for Proposals (LT2 to LT4), pointing out that the programs have been expanded since 2024 and will also include non-emitting generation.

Provinces and territories are making big progress on clean electricity

Planned projects across the country could grow clean electricity capacity by a third

The transition to clean electricity in Canada has made headlines recently due to friction between the provinces and federal government. If that’s all you read, you might be left with the impression that Canada’s clean electric future has stalled out before it started.

But look closer at what the provinces are actually doing: there’s remarkable progress, with more to come. Most provinces are building out their electricity systems with massive investment in new, emissions-free electricity generation.

That’s good news for Canada’s climate goals and economic future. Clean electricity will be critical to meeting the national emissions targets. It will create employment opportunities for skilled, accredited labour. And it’s increasingly a must-have for large business investments across the country.

Canada has a lot of clean electricity—and is about to get even more

Already, Canada is in an enviable position, having one of the cleanest grids in the world. Nearly 85 per cent of electricity in the country is non-emitting. And that number is only set to grow.

Currently, non-emitting electricity projects that are planned or under construction are set to increase Canada’s clean electricity capacity by a third. Data from S&P Global show that if all clean electricity projects currently planned or under construction are successfully implemented, clean electricity capacity would grow by an additional 32 per cent (Figure 1).

Excluding hydroelectricity, the capacity of all other non-emitting technologies is expected to double. The growth in added capacity is expected to largely come from new wind and solar projects, which together contribute to over two thirds of newly added capacity. Future projects are also expected to outpace the decrease in capacity from planned retirements—notably from nuclear power in Ontario—resulting in a net increase of 51,701 megawatts (MW) across the country.

A closer look at provincial and territorial action

So what are each province and territory—who have jurisdiction over electricity—doing? Each has a unique mix of electricity generation and its own market and regulatory structure, which can make the overall picture complex. But make no mistake, clean electricity projects are being planned and under construction across the country (Figure 2). And taking into account the current commitments from provincial and territorial governments, future clean electricity capacity is likely to grow even more.

In Quebec, as a first step in its plan to double electricity generation by 2050, Hydro-Québec will invest up to $185 billion in the coming 12 years alone. This initial investment will focus on improving grid reliability, building out 15,000 MW of new renewable energy capacity, doubling energy efficiency savings and vastly expanding the power grid.

Ontario is planning on building 5,000 MW of new renewable energy and small modular nuclear reactors, renewing hydro and nuclear fleets, improving connections with Quebec’s grid, and developing long-duration storage like pumped hydro—alongside the largest battery storage additions in Canada.

In B.C., the provincial utility started its quest to build 3,000 gigawatt hours of new renewable electricity each year starting in 2028 with a new call for proposals.

In Manitoba, Premier Wab Kinew has directed cabinet to make the province’s grid net zero by 2035 in support of a plan to make the province net zero by 2050, and is planning to double or triple its grid capacity over the next two decades.

Atlantic Canada has a similar story to tell. Newfoundland and Labrador is going all-in on substantial amounts of onshore wind energy. PEI is building out its solar capacity. And New Brunswick and Nova Scotia have agreed to work with the federal government on phasing out the last of their coal fleet.

The territories face tougher challenges than most, and yet important steps are being taken in Yukon, Northwest Territories and Nunavut to help secure clean, reliable, affordable energy.

Saskatchewan has committed to expanding its non-emitting supply to between 40 and 50 per cent by 2030, which would cut emissions from its grid roughly half from 2005 levels. And SaskPower is aiming to add 3,000 MW of renewable energy to the grid by 2035.

And finally, Alberta has hosted the vast majority of Canada’s new wind and solar energy investments for several years running, and became officially coal-free this month. It’s one of the biggest emissions-reduction policy successes in Canadian history, driven in large part by the province’s industrial carbon pricing system. While the government’s recently-announced market and transmission system reforms are creating some uncertainty in the sector, there are helpful changes happening in parallel. For example, recently implemented regulatory changes will enable more energy storage to complement a growing share of renewables on the grid.

Better policy will mean even better results

There’s much more work to be done to support the bigger, cleaner, smarter grids that Canada needs. By 2050, Canada’s electricity capacity needs to grow by 2.2 to 3.4 times bigger than today.

But crucial early steps are already being taken across Canada’s provinces and territories. These actions are putting the country on a trajectory toward ensuring that Canada has the abundant, affordable, reliable power we need, now and into the future.

The progress is unmistakable. We just need to keep building on it.

Jason Dion is Senior Research Director with the Canadian Climate Institute. Arthur Zhang is a Research Associate with the Canadian Climate Institute.

Are the provinces and territories holding themselves accountable for climate action?

Some governments have relatively strong climate accountability laws, some have weaker ones, and a few have none at all.

With great power should come great accountability.

In simple terms, that is the rationale behind climate accountability laws. These laws require governments to show how they will deliver on their climate goals. They establish targets, governance structures, and planning processes, and require regular reports on progress.

In December, as part of Canada’s climate accountability law, the federal government published its first-ever progress report on Canada’s climate plan (and the Canadian Climate Institute responded with its own evaluation).

The federal government was not alone: in the past year, several Canadian provinces and territories issued reports on their own climate progress, including British Columbia, Nova Scotia, and Yukon.

Provincial and territorial climate accountability matters. These governments have the primary responsibility for crucial policy areas—including electricity and land use—and every order of government helps finance and communicate about climate action. The more that governments are aligned, the smoother Canada’s path toward its goals.

But climate accountability in Canada is uneven. No two provinces and territories approach accountability the same way, and the systems that do exist are of varying strength.

Seven provinces and territories have a climate accountability law

In recent years, more provinces and territories have adopted accountability laws. There are seven in place across the country today, excluding the federal law.

These laws differ in their details but are alike in concept. At a minimum, each one requires the government to set emissions reduction targets, establish an action plan to meet the target, and report regularly on its progress.

Five provinces and territories effectively do not have accountability laws.

In Newfoundland and Labrador, the Northwest Territories, and Nunavut, the government has no law at all.

In Alberta and Saskatchewan, the provinces have laws, but these laws say only that the government may set targets and report on them, not that it must. As it happens, neither province has chosen to set a target. Together with Nunavut, these governments are the only ones in Canada without any emissions reduction targets before 2050.

There is also one province that has a partial accountability law. Ontario’s relevant law says the province has to set an emissions reduction target, make a plan, and publish progress reports—but the law doesn’t say when. Ontario has set a target and published a plan, but its progress reports have come irregularly, and it is unclear how much of the plan is still in effect.

However, the fact that there are seven sub-national accountability laws in Canada is still progress; in 2020, only three provinces had them.

Canada’s accountability laws are of varying quality

Climate accountability laws are not all created equal. In a report entitled Marking the Way, the Canadian Climate Institute outlined best practices for climate accountability that can be used to assess the quality of individual accountability laws.

On that score, the accountability laws in Canada are a mixed picture. Some meet nearly all the best practices, while others barely qualify (a selection of best practices is shown in Figure 2).

Every one of these best practices matters, but independent expert advice is particularly valuable because it helps to make climate plans more robust. In the best cases, accountability laws also require an independent assessment of government reports, increasing transparency and encouraging governments to produce rigorous, credible work.

However, this is also one of the weaker areas in provincial and territorial climate accountability. No provincial or territorial law requires an independent body to assess their climate plans or progress reports, although five have independent advisory bodies that provide a range of advice. In contrast, the federal accountability law follows best practice, establishing an advisory body and requiring the independent Commissioner of Environment and Sustainable Development to assess Canada’s progress toward its targets.

In other cases, provinces have demonstrated leadership in adopting best practices.

Notably, PEI goes beyond any other government in Canada in establishing climate change as a whole-of-government priority. Its Net-Zero Carbon Act makes it a duty of the government to adopt policies that are aligned with climate goals and requires “sustainable prosperity”—a concept that encompasses environmental stewardship—to be included in the mandate of every department.

In Nova Scotia, the provincial climate accountability law embodies best practice in another way, setting climate goals that cover mitigation, adaptation, and clean growth. Likewise, British Columbia’s climate law requires the government to report annually on its adaptation measures and produce climate risk assessments every five years.

Various governments put their long-term net zero targets into law, along with their near-term emissions reduction goals. The federal government, Nova Scotia, PEI, and Yukon all have net zero targets embedded in law, while B.C. and Quebec have committed to do the same.

Climate accountability even exists at the municipal level in Canada. Toronto, for example, has proposed an accountability system that embodies several best practices from Marking the Way.

All governments should be held accountable for climate action

Accountability laws need not be uniform to be useful. Federal, provincial, and territorial governments have different resources and responsibilities, so it’s fair that their accountability processes look different. But all governments should hold themselves accountable, and there are clear best practices for them to follow.

Fortunately, the trends across the country are pointing in a positive direction. Today, there are more and better accountability laws in Canada compared to just a few years ago. That race to the top should continue.

Ross Linden-Fraser is a Senior Research Associate at the Canadian Climate Institute

A closer look at the varying climate targets of the provinces and territories

Canada is a patchwork of climate ambitions, and that risks making our progress slower and less cost effective.

There is a saying that the ship of state turns slowly. If that’s true of Canada, imagine how long it takes to steer the flotilla of our federal system. Then try imagining how hard that is when the ships are pointing in different directions.

In Canada, responsibility for climate policy is shared between the federal government, the provinces, and the territories. That is both an advantage and a disadvantage. On the one hand, as the Institute has argued before, Canada is more likely to achieve its climate targets when many people share responsibility for working toward a common goal. On the other hand, the fight against climate change demands collective action, and that is harder when there are multiple decision makers who have different interests.

As this Insight will discuss, Canada’s provinces and territories are at very different stages of climate change planning. While some have set ambitious emissions reductions targets and have plans to hit them, others have made few commitments.

This patchwork of ambitions has worrying implications for climate action in Canada, creating a risk that our progress will be slower, costlier and less effective than if all orders of government work together.

Together, provincial-territorial targets add up to less than half the national target

While the federal government sets national targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, the provinces and territories hold important tools in the fight against climate change, with the best known being electricity policy.

For that reason, an effective Canadian response to climate change demands high levels of intergovernmental cooperation. In an ideal world, the various orders of government would set compatible goals and use their respective policy tools in tandem.

In the real world, the different orders of government disagree about what their goals should be, and how to reach them. One way to see this disconnect is to look at near-term emissions reduction targets.

While the federal government has committed to cut Canada’s emissions by 40 to 45 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030, the collective ambition of the provinces and territories is much lower. If you add up their formal emissions reduction targets, they amount to less than half the national target.

It’s important to consider what this ambition gap does and doesn’t mean. It won’t necessarily prevent Canada from hitting its national targets. The federal government is using its own policy levers, from regulations to carbon pricing to targeted subsidies, as well as a climate accountability process, to point Canada toward its goals.

Nor is it wrong for different orders of government to have varying approaches to climate action. Those differences can even be useful, if they lead to conversations about how to support more coherent and ambitious action across the country.

Instead, the real significance of this ambition gap is that uncoordinated, misaligned climate action will be slower, more costly, and less effective than an integrated approach. Our early estimate of national emissions shows that, while policy progress is accelerating, Canada needs more provincial, territorial, and federal cooperation to hit its target.

How do the provinces and territories stack up on climate action?

There is misalignment among provinces and territories as well. Sub-national governments across the country have taken powerful measures of their own, from the coal phase out in Alberta and Ontario to funding for electric vehicle chargers in Quebec to free heat pumps in Prince Edward Island. But individual measures are not the same as a coherent plan to reduce overall emissions.

As 440 Megatonnes has discussed before, four provinces and territories have not set emissions reduction targets or plans for 2030. Even if these regions are taking action to cut emissions in some areas, their lack of clear targets and credible plans means that falling emissions in one sector could be offset by rising emissions in another.

And while some have expressed a willingness to aim for net zero by 2050, that goal will be very hard to deliver without plans or interim goals. The fact that some of these provinces and territories have the most emissions intensive economies in the country also raises questions about regional fairness.

It’s reasonable for provinces to have different needs and aims. Not every region benefits from readily accessible hydropower, for instance, while some have large oil and gas sectors with stubbornly high emissions. But that is no reason to avoid making plans and taking action.

On the contrary, the most emissions-intense economies are those that will benefit from long-term thinking, since they will be most exposed to economic risks from the transition to cleaner forms of energy.

Everyone has an interest in effective climate action

The year 2030 once seemed far away. Now, that milestone year for climate action can appear uncomfortably close, especially for anyone thinking about how much must change in our energy systems, investment cycles, or regulatory processes. Yet some provinces and territories are not planning emissions reductions in a concerted way, even those that are aiming for net zero in the long term.

This lack of policy certainty benefits neither citizens nor investors. Every province and territory has good reasons to set climate targets and plan for the future, whether for the sake of affordability, competitiveness, or public safety. And the more closely they align those targets with national goals, the smoother the country’s path will be. Canadians may not all be in the same boat, but we are all in the same flotilla.

Ross Linden-Fraser is a Senior Research Associate with the Canadian Climate Institute.

Happy birthday, Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act!

Two years after the adoption of the federal act, climate accountability laws across Canada are accelerating and tracking progress.

It’s much easier to get to the right destination with a good map in hand. When it comes to reducing carbon emissions, climate accountability laws are the map. Well-designed accountability laws “mark the way” toward climate goals by establishing targets, governance structures, and planning processes, all while holding governments accountable by requiring regular stock-taking.

On June 29, 2021, Canada got its own national climate accountability law through the adoption of the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act (CNZEAA). This is a special moment for 440 Megatonnes, since transparent assessments of climate progress are the heart of our project. We’re marking the second anniversary of this important law by taking a closer look at what it has accomplished, what this year has in store for the law, and how other governments across Canada are using climate accountability legislation to drive and track their own progress.

2023 is an important year in the federal accountability process

The principles behind the CNZEAA are simple: set goals, make plans to achieve them, and report on progress along the way. Let’s look at each element in turn.

First, the CNZEAA sets clear goalposts for climate policy, formalizing Canada’s commitment to hit net zero by 2050 and establishing two nearer-term targets for 2026 and 2030. It requires the government to set targets for future years on a predetermined schedule.

Second, the law requires the government to issue plans for hitting each one of its targets. The first of these, Canada’s 2030 Emissions Reduction Plan (or ERP), came out last year.

Third, the government has to publish reports on its progress, with the first one due later this year. Since it’s not best practice for governments to fill out their own report cards, the CNZEAA allows for some external oversight, creating an independent body to advise the government and requiring the Commissioner of Environment and Sustainable Development to report on the implementation of government policy.

The CNZEAA still leaves some important gaps. While it requires the government to publish various reports on emissions and climate change, it contains no requirement to plan for adapting to climate change. Though the act requires the government to consider the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and consult Indigenous peoples, Indigenous groups that participated in the ERP engagement process commented that this process was inadequate. And unlike some of its peers, Canada’s climate accountability law does not require independent assessments of the government’s climate plans or progress reports.

That’s where the Canadian Climate Institute steps in. In 2022, the Institute conducted its own independent assessment of Canada’s 2030 ERP, and this year it will do the same for the federal government’s progress report. Here at 440 Megatonnes, the emissions pathways tracker assesses whether federal policies put Canada on track toward net zero and where there is a need for more action.

Despite some of these shortcomings, after two years on the books we can say that the federal climate accountability law has created the foundation for a cycle of policy planning and course correction. At the provincial and territorial level, it’s a considerably different story.

Three-quarters of Canada’s emissions come from provinces and territories without a legal target for 2030

Only six Canadian provinces and territories have climate legislation that establishes an emissions target or planning process for 2030. A seventh province, Manitoba, has a climate accountability law but its current climate plan only extends to 2027. The remaining provinces and territories don’t have accountability laws, which means that 75 per cent of Canada’s emissions come from provinces and territories without legal emissions targets for 2030. Some of these governments have a target that isn’t set in law or a longer-term net zero target, while others have no target or plan for 2030 at all.

This is a problem because provinces and territories hold some powerful levers in the fight against climate change, including jurisdiction over natural resource development and electricity generation. In provinces without climate accountability laws, there is no formal mechanism to encourage provinces to align policy levers with emissions targets, and no requirement for governments to report transparently on their climate action. Climate progress is not impossible without accountability laws, but it is certainly less likely, and much harder to track.

Fortunately, the Canadian policy landscape seems to be trending toward greater accountability. Just three years ago, only three provinces had climate accountability frameworks; now six provinces and one territory have them. And municipal governments are picking up on the trend. In April, the City of Toronto proposed a “carbon accountability system” that is explicitly intended to follow best practices articulated by the Canadian Climate Institute. It will establish five-year carbon budgets, create a planning and reporting cycle, and outline how the city can—and cannot—use carbon offsets to hit its targets.

Good governance is fundamental to successful climate action

Climate accountability legislation does not promise an easy fix to climate change, since elections can empower governments to change laws or chart a new course. But climate accountability frameworks help to focus governments on the urgent priority of reducing emissions and direct public attention toward where we are and are not making progress. In British Columbia, for example, emissions modelling from the government’s 2021 climate accountability report showed the province was not on track to its targets, which spurred the province to strengthen its climate plan.

As we mark two years of federal climate accountability, we are also marking the broadening use of these accountability frameworks across all orders of government. For the progress-tracking team at 440 Megatonnes, that makes today a milestone well worth celebrating.

Ross Linden-Fraser is a Senior Research Associate with the Canadian Climate Institute.

Last updated October 2023

What’s needed to further amp up heat pumps in the Maritimes

Heat pumps are helping the Maritimes get off oil heating quickly, but there are barriers to broader adoption in the East.

What’s new?

Heat pumps play a significant role in reducing emissions from heating buildings while also reducing energy costs and enhancing resilience to climate impacts (since they provide both heating and cooling). They are widely used in the Maritimes, with the highest uptake of any region in Canada, and future projections point to even further growth in their popularity. But real barriers remain to improve widespread adoption by households still heating with oil throughout the Maritimes. Canada’s latest national greenhouse gas inventory shows emissions from residential heating represented 6 per cent of total emissions in the Maritimes in 2021. A top contributor has been the historical reliance on oil heating, accounting for up to 80 per cent of total residential heating emissions (Figure 1).

Heat pumps are well-suited for the Maritimes

Overall, reducing emissions across residential heating will rely heavily on electrification and switching away from fossil fuels as a heating source. The emissions reduction benefits of electrification are especially pronounced in the Maritimes due its current high reliance on oil heating.

Heat pumps combine the emissions reductions of electrification with the added benefits of remarkable efficiency. They are often twice as efficient as electric resistance heating, and tend to offer significantly cheaper operating costs compared to oil heating. Not to mention, they also provide cooling during the summertime.

The Maritimes’ climate offers optimal conditions for heat pumps, as temperatures rarely reach the extreme cold points where heat pumps can sometimes struggle (though cold climate heat pumps are one option that can operate under conditions below -25 degrees Celsius). This means that heating requirements can be met by heat pumps for most if not all of the winter season. And homeowners who want extra assurance can also install back-up electric resistance heating.

As highlighted in an earlier Canadian Climate Institute case study by Chris Turner, the uptake of heat pumps has grown rapidly in the Maritimes, with heat pumps representing up to 30 per cent of primary heating systems across households.

What’s striking is that even as heat pumps are more widely deployed, they account for only a small share—about 3 per cent—of the total energy used for building heat in the Maritimes, also known the region’s “heating stock.” These two data points help illustrate just how efficient heat pumps can be: representing nearly one-third of primary heating systems while their share of energy use is only one-tenth of that number. (It also helps that heat pumps are often deployed in newer buildings, which are more energy efficient than older ones).

The future of heat pumps depends on deeper implementation

Our analysis of announced policies from federal, provincial and territorial governments with Navius Research finds that the heating stock taken up by electric heating sources across the Maritimes will increase by an average of 30 per cent by 2030 (Figure 2).

As the Maritimes electrifies its building heating systems, heating stock captured by heat pumps could double—if policies are implemented quickly and efficiently. In P.E.I., the increases reflect eight times current levels, going from 1.25 per cent of total heating stock to up to 8.35 per cent by the end of the decade. Increases in heat pump shares will reduce the reliance on oil heating, and provinces such as Nova Scotia could see their existing oil heating stock (46 per cent) shrink by half by 2030 (26 per cent).

But expanding heat pump uptake levels to those in the figure above will depend on a range of factors such as: the types of heat pumps available to install depending on the size and needs of a house; differences in upfront and operating costs across heating technologies; availability of skilled workers trained to install heat pumps; and future prices in electricity compared with the price of fossil fuels.

To address these factors, industry initiatives and supportive government action can help create conditions that will be favorable to a greater transition to electric heating.

Strong policy is driving heat pump adoption

Government policy has played an important role increasing the adoption of heat pumps so far, through programs such as New Brunswick's Total Energy Savings Program. Additional supports recently introduced such as the federal Oil to Heat Pump Affordability (OHPA) program will continue to accelerate uptake. In fact, the analysis above includes the federal OHPA program, which provides rebates up to $10,000 on heat pumps for households relying on oil-burning furnaces.

Provinces have also implemented similar measures. Nova Scotia provides a $5,000 grant under its EfficiencyOne rebates, and offers free heat pumps for low-income households through a $140 million investment. Similarly, New Brunswick offers free mini-split systems for households with annual incomes below $70,000 through its Enhanced Energy Savings Program (a partnership of the provincial government and NB Power). And in P.E.I., free heat pumps are also available for homeowners with family incomes below $75,000. These programs were not included in the analysis, as they were released following the study, but it’s likely that the share of heat pumps could grow even faster than anticipated.

Overall, these supports cover a range of up-front costs for homeowners, including the actual heat pump itself, installation costs, home upgrades required for the heat pump, oil furnace removal, and back-up heating systems.

What barriers do we need to overcome to further increase heat pumps in the Maritimes?

Despite signs of strong market growth, 44 per cent of heating across the Maritimes is still coming from oil heating, and the switch to heat pumps will require addressing additional barriers to displace more fossil fuels. These include long wait times to receive payments from existing rebate programs, labour shortages as the demand for skilled workers for installations increases, and additional financial support for houses that require the installation of back-up heating on top of their heat pump. All of these factors can weaken the confidence of Maritime homeowners to make the switch to heat pumps and slow adoption.

Addressing these barriers and improving existing programs can help build on the impressive progress made so far to get more homes off oil and heated with heat pumps in the Maritimes.

Arthur Zhang is a Research Associate with the Canadian Climate Institute

What a ZEV mandate means for Canada’s charging infrastructure

Publicly accessible charging infrastructure for electric vehicles is going to need to grow more than seven-fold by 2030.

To reduce carbon emissions from Canada’s transportation sector, the federal government’s newly introduced zero-emissions vehicles sales mandate requires that all new light-duty vehicles sold in Canada be electric by 2035, with interim targets for 2026 and 2030. The certainty these targets provide is exactly what’s needed to kickstart a build-out of charging infrastructure—which we will be explicitly referring to in this insight as publicly accessible chargers outside of residences—that can keep those vehicles humming. But to meet future EV demand, a significant amount of publicly accessible charging infrastructure will need to be built out by 2030.

Government and businesses are charging ahead

The good news is, we are already seeing substantial commitments across governments and the private sector towards building the charging infrastructure that will be needed.

Since 2016, the federal government has committed $1.35 billion to build out electric vehicle charging infrastructure, with an objective of adding 85,000 publicly funded chargers to Canada’s network by 2027. Provincial and municipal governments have also established EV charging programs, such as PEI’s Electric Vehicle Charging Funding Program and the City of Toronto’s EV Strategy, which includes pilot projects to install on-street charging stations across the city. Companies are also beginning to make commitments to build out Canada’s charging network. For example, Alimentation Couche-Tard began installing EV charging stations in many of their convenience store locations last year.

To date, these programs have helped build nearly 20,000 publicly accessible charging ports across Canada, with companies such as ChargePoint, FLO, Circuit Électrique and Tesla paving the way. Using the most recently reported data in 2021 from Statistics Canada, Canada’s network is currently used by 238,581 electric vehicles, which translates to a national average ratio of approximately 13 vehicles per non-residential charger (see Figure 1).

The optimal EV-to-charger ratio is a bit of a moving target: it can be expected to grow over time. Right now, the challenge for EV drivers isn’t so much the number of cars lined up in front of charging stations; it’s the coverage and accessibility of chargers across long distances. But as more EVs are expected to take to the road and the average distance between chargers falls, current estimates suggest that a ratio of 24 EVs per charger by 2030 will be viable given that Canada can expect widespread reliance on home charging due to our high share of single family dwellings.

Figure 1: While Canada’s average EV-per-charger ratio is 13, the accessibility of chargers across the country varies.

Going the extra mile

440 Megatonnes has run some numbers to see whether charger installation growth is on track and how many more chargers will be needed by 2030. We used electric vehicle projections from the announced policies scenario under the 2030 Emissions Reduction Plan, modelled by Navius Research for the Canadian Climate Institute, which factors in the proposed ZEV mandate. We also used EV-to-charger ratios from Dunsky’s high residential charging scenario (20 EVs per charger by 2025, and 24 EVs per charger by 2030), which was modelled specifically for the Canadian context (Figure 2).

The federal government’s target of installing 85,000 chargers, without factoring in additional commitments from other governments and the private sector, would be on track to meet the demand for chargers under Dunsky’s 20 EVs-per-charger ratio by 2027. However, as EV adoption is expected to exponentially increase by 2030, publicly accessible charging infrastructure will need to grow to at least 150,000 charging ports to meet Dunsky’s ratio of 24 EVs per charging port. Getting to that goal is going to require a significant build-out of charging infrastructure by governments and the private sector.

Figure 2: The number of publicly accessible charging ports will need to grow significantly to keep up with EV growth.

It’s important to keep in mind that successfully navigating this transition is not just about how many chargers are available, but also where chargers are being installed. A priority should be to ensure equitable access to charging ports. The government can play a larger role in areas where market barriers may prevent private companies from installing chargers. In particular, they can improve access in remote and rural communities as well as in urban spaces that lack access to residential charging, such as high-density residential buildings.

Overall, building out Canada’s publicly accessible charging network to power Canada’s energy transition will require action from all orders of government, as well as businesses. The federal ZEV mandate provides greater clarity on the future demand for charging infrastructure. Now it’s time to step on the accelerator and ensure Canada’s charging infrastructure keeps up—and that it’s available where and when it’s needed.

Arthur Zhang is a research associate with the Canadian Climate Institute and the 440 Megatonnes Initiative.

Why is it so hard to get an electric vehicle in Canada?

A federal sales mandate will make it easier for drivers in all provinces to get behind the wheel of a zero-emissions vehicle.

What’s new

Transportation is the second largest source of carbon emissions in Canada, with almost half of those emissions coming from cars and light-duty trucks. Accelerating the switch from internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles to zero-emissions vehicles (ZEVs) can therefore go a long way to reducing emissions from the sector.

Unfortunately, drivers looking to get in the ZEV fast lane face a major traffic jam. More than half of Canadians say they want their next car to be a zero-emissions vehicles, but they face long wait times and unequal access across the country—with most of the scarce supply going to provinces with their own sales mandates. This presents a major challenge to reducing emissions from the sector, since consumers will keep buying ICE vehicles if there are no available alternatives.

Our analysis shows that the federal government’s proposed ZEV mandate, which would set minimum sales targets for dealers, can make it easier for drivers across Canada to get behind the wheel of a ZEV.

The ZEV mandate explained

In its 2030 Emissions Reduction Plan (ERP), the federal government committed to developing a ZEV sales mandate, requiring that 100 per cent of all new light-duty vehicles sold in Canada be ZEVs by 2035, with interim targets of 20 per cent by 2026 and 60 per cent by 2030. While ZEV shares of new car sales have risen steadily over the past five years—from one per cent of new vehicle sales in 2017 to seven per cent this year—shares will need to triple in the next four years to meet proposed targets.

A sales mandate can help. British Columbia and Quebec already have mandates, in fact, and it’s no coincidence those are the provinces where it’s easiest for drivers to get their hands on a ZEV.

ZEVs for all provinces and territories

There are many benefits of ZEV mandates, but a major advantage is that they can help get vehicles to the people who want them, sooner.

We analyzed projected ZEV sales in provinces and territories using three different scenarios from the federal government’s 2030 ERP (Figure 1). Only the scenario with legislated, developing, and announced policies (ERP Announced) includes the proposed ZEV mandate.

What we find is that, absent a federal ZEV mandate, significant gaps remain across provinces. British Columbia and Quebec—the only provinces with sales mandates—continue to see much higher ZEV shares, and the majority of national sales continue to go to those provinces. More than half of ZEVs end up in those two provinces in the developing scenario, and almost two-thirds in the legislated one, despite the fact they only account for 37 per cent of the Canadian population.

However, with the federal mandate in place, sales increase significantly in all provinces and territories, and are much more equally distributed across the country—almost 60 per cent of zero-emissions vehicles are projected to be sold outside of B.C. and Quebec in 2030.

Figure 1: A mandate increases ZEV sales across all provinces and territories

Getting more ZEVs into Canada

While a federal ZEV mandate means more equitable distribution across the country, it can also help Canada get ZEV supply in the first place.

Although the global supply of zero-emissions vehicles is growing quickly, auto manufacturers are largely prioritizing jurisdictions with some type of sales mandate. Research shows that jurisdictions with ZEV mandates have much higher shares of ZEV adoption and more model choice than jurisdictions without mandates. We see this in Canada, but it’s also true for global markets.

Internationally, China and Europe are leaders, accounting for over 85 per cent of global ZEV sales last year. China has a ZEV mandate in place and Europe has a voluntary sales target, with plans to pass legislation. The United States follows in a distant third, taking home 10 per cent of global EV sales. While the U.S. does not have a national ZEV mandate, 14 states do. And more than 40 per cent of all ZEVs in the country are registered in California, where a ZEV mandate has been in place for decades.

The list of jurisdictions with ZEV mandates is growing rapidly. The United Kingdom plans to release a ZEV mandate by 2024, and at COP 27, over 40 countries committed to working towards a goal for all new passenger vehicles to be ZEVs by 2040 or earlier. While a federal ZEV mandate cannot solve global supply chain issues, it could help Canada compete for scarce global supply.

Making the switch from ICE vehicles to ZEVs—alongside increasing public transit and active transportation—is key to reducing emissions in the transportation sector and achieving Canada’s climate goals. But it can only happen if drivers across Canada can actually get their hands on an elusive ZEV. A federal ZEV mandate can help get cars into Canada and improve access for drivers in all provinces and territories.

Anna Kanduth was the Director of 440 Megatonnes at the Canadian Climate Institute.

Zeroing in on building codes

As B.C.’s example shows, building codes can help provinces make the switch from gas to electric home heating.

Heating equipment can last decades, which means that the technologies homeowners and developers install today can lock-in carbon emissions well into the future. Replacing existing heating equipment will be necessary to achieve Canada’s climate targets, but it can be challenging and costly. A lot of future costs can be saved by ensuring new capital stock is zero-emitting right from the start. Building codes are a concrete way to ensure all new homes and heating equipment meet net zero standards.

British Columbia is getting off gas

Making the switch from fossil fuels to electricity for home heating is a huge part of reducing emissions from buildings. But this transition is harder for some provinces than others. Alberta, Ontario, Saskatchewan, and British Columbia currently rely on gas for more than half of their total heating stock, and households in Atlantic Canada and the North rely heavily on fuel oil. While the federal government has committed $250 million to help households replace heating oil with heat pumps, there is no equivalent federal program targeting gas heating.

Earlier this year, the Canadian Climate Institute and Navius Research simulated the federal government’s 2030 Emissions Reduction Plan. Our analysis of policies already announced by federal, provincial, and territorial governments shows that, of the four provinces that rely primarily on gas for home heating, B.C. will see the fastest transition to electric this decade (Figure 1). What does B.C. have that these other provinces don’t? In addition to relatively cheap and abundant electricity, it’s also the only province in Canada with clear plans for a zero carbon building code.

Figure 1: British Columbia leads comparable provinces in the speed of its transition from gas to electric home heating

In 2021, the Government of B.C. committed to updating the provincial building code so that all new buildings are zero carbon by 2030. It also committed to introducing new efficiency standards so that after 2030, all new heating equipment sold and installed in the province is at least 100 per cent efficient (heat pumps, for reference, can be more than 100 per cent efficient because they use less energy than they produce).

Our analysis shows that with current federal and provincial policy plans–including B.C.’s new building code and efficiency standard–residential gas use in B.C. will decline by 35 per cent this decade, from 60 per cent of total heating stock in 2019 to approximately 39 per cent in 2030.

By 2030, our projections show that gas will quickly be replaced by electric heating and cooling. Together, electric resistance heating and heat pumps will increase from 35 per cent of total heating stock in 2019 to 56 per cent in 2030.

By comparison, policies like the carbon price and rebates for heat pumps apply in Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Ontario, but these provinces have yet to formally commit to zero carbon building codes or stringent appliance efficiency standards. In these provinces, we see much less change over the next decade, with the majority of home heating stock continuing to come from gas. In Alberta, for instance, gas will stay constant over the next decade at around 94 per cent of total heating stock (Figure 2).

Figure 2: Existing policies alone leave gas dominant in Alberta

In short, while federal and provincial incentives for low-carbon heating can lead to incremental change, they are not driving the transformative change needed to reduce emissions from the sector.

Provinces hold the power

Building codes represent a significant opportunity to reduce emissions from the residential sector, and provinces have a critical role to play. While the federal government sets model buildings codes, it’s up to provinces and territories–and in some cases municipalities–to adopt them.

While provincial adoption of federal codes has historically not been guaranteed, the landscape is changing. The federal government has committed to developing a zero emissions model code by 2024 and all provinces and territories have agreed to harmonize their building codes with national ones the following year.

But provinces don’t have to wait for the federal government’s lead. They can forge ahead and commit to stronger codes and standards than minimum federal guidelines.

Provinces can also grant municipalities the flexibility to adopt more ambitious codes than the provincial ones, as B.C. and other provinces have done. For instance, Vancouver is steps ahead of the province, having passed a building by-law in 2020 that requires all new low-rise buildings to have zero emissions space and hot water heating as of this year. The province of Quebec has similarly banned oil heating from all new construction and plans to make it illegal to replace existing oil furnaces with any fossil fuel system.

The longer provinces wait to implement zero carbon building codes and stringent efficiency standards, the harder it will be to reduce emissions from the sector and achieve Canada’s climate targets.

Anna Kanduth was the Director of 440 Megatonnes at the Canadian Climate Institute.