Canada’s federal government is preparing to announce climate targets for 2035 as it faces both demands for more ambitious emission-reduction policies and major backlash against the measures it has already announced.
Under the 2021 Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act, Ottawa must publish targets for 2035 by December 1, and Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault has confirmed that the government will release the proposed targets on schedule. Signatory nations of the Paris Agreement, including Canada, are also expected to announce their 2035 targets at next month's Conference of the Parties (COP) meeting in Baku, Azerbaijan.
The Net-Zero Advisory Body (NZAB) – a group appointed by Guilbeault to help the government find a credible path to net-zero – is proposing that Ottawa set a 2035 target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by between 50% and 55% below 2005 levels, a 10% increase from the current federal target for 2030. Under the Paris climate agreement, countries are expected to ratchet up their targets every five years.
Armed with analysis from the Canadian Climate Institute, NZAB says its proposed reductions are both feasible and affordable. While Canada has made “significant progress” on climate action since signing the Paris treaty in 2015, NZAB co-chair Simon Donner writes in the report, “more aggressive and sustained action is necessary to reach our 2030 emissions targets and to shift to a long-term net-zero pathway.”
The government acknowledges the need for more action to achieve its 2030 goals, let alone to meet its pledge to be carbon-neutral by 2050. However, provinces are balking at tougher measures, and Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre is preparing to fight the next election – expected within the year – on killing the Liberals’ carbon tax.
NZAB also recommends that the federal government establish a maximum cumulative emissions level for the period between now and 2050. This “carbon budget” approach would reflect the country’s ongoing progress better than annual targets, it says.
The advisory body also notes that the targets and budget are net figures. While emission reductions must be the primary focus, Canada can also rely on “negative” emission approaches, including nature-based solutions and purchasing credits from other nations.
The battle over what counts as realistic reduction targets
Some energy analysts question NZAB’s confidence in the feasibility and affordability of its proposed 2035 targets, given the hurdles to implementing the fundamental economic changes that are needed to meet the targets: lack of clear and consistent government policy, lack of capital and a skilled workforce, supply chain challenges in building a clean energy infrastructure, and the political price of adding short-term costs to consumers.
“It’s becoming increasingly clear that there’s a big and growing disconnect between the pace of emissions reductions dictated by climate science and the pace of emissions reductions that’s possible when you look through the lens of social sciences,” says Monica Gattinger, director of the Positive Energy program at the University of Ottawa.
Canada’s ability to reduce emissions is limited by how well it can address the connected implementation challenges, Gattinger says.
“The target needs to be ambitious, but we need to understand how we get there,” says Guilbeault. “I am not a big fan of setting targets where we have no idea how to get there. I think it is counterproductive and discourages people.”
Climate Action Network (CAN), an umbrella group of civil society organizations, argues that the government should aim for a 60% reduction from 2019 levels. The more ambitious target represents a fairer share of Canada’s contribution to the problem as a large emitter, says CAN executive director Caroline Brouillette, speaking in a phone interview. “If Canada doesn’t do its fair share in the global effort to keep us at 1.5 degree, who is going to?” she asks.
But setting more ambitious targets would escalate the political fight that is expected to take centre stage in the next election.
Provincial governments in Alberta and Saskatchewan have been waging a war against Ottawa’s proposed emissions cap for the oil and gas industry, which was promised in the 2021 election by the Liberals but has yet to be finalized.
Premier Danielle Smith’s United Conservative Party (UCP) in Alberta has launched a national advertising campaign denouncing the emissions cap as a de facto limit on production, which the Liberals deny. In 2023, the UCP laid out a climate plan that claims to set “realistic aspirations” of achieving carbon neutrality by 2050. However, Smith’s government has not set any pathway with targets to keep them on track and has virtually shut down new construction in the renewable-power sector.
“A sober assessment is that Alberta is not serious about any meaningful reductions in GHG emissions,” says Martin Olszynski, an environmental law professor at the University of Calgary.
At the UCP convention in November, members will vote on whether carbon dioxide should be considered a pollutant or the "foundational nutrient for all life on Earth.”
The Supreme Court of Canada upheld the federal carbon levy in 2021. The majority ruled that “climate change is real” and that “it is caused by greenhouse gas emissions resulting from human activities and it poses a grave threat to humanity’s future.”
Ontario is also offside with the federal approach, notably Ottawa’s planned net-zero electricity regulations, which would require provincial grids to be carbon-neutral by 2035. The province’s Independent Electricity System Operator has recommended that the province plan for continued use of natural gas for power in order to keep prices down as renewables and nuclear ramp up.
Ontario’s Progressive Conservatives under Premier Doug Ford jettisoned the more ambitious GHG targets set by the previous Liberal government and aim to reduce emissions by 30% below 2005 levels by 2030 – Canada’s original Paris commitment. The Trudeau government, along with other countries, subsequently increased its ambition for 2030, as required by the Paris Agreement.
A spokesman for Environment Minister Andrea Khanjin said that Ontario is focused on its 2030 target and has introduced climate initiatives such as electrification of energy-intensive industrial plants, a clean energy grid and support for the electric vehicle industry.
In October, Ontario lost an appeal of a lawsuit brought by seven young plaintiffs, who argue the province has violated their Charter rights by weakening the climate target and thereby causing harm to youth and future generations.
Ontario’s Superior Court reinstated the case after a lower court judge rejected it, and it now must go to trial.
Correction: An earlier version of this article misattributed the recommendation for Ontario to continue using natural gas.
