A new report by the Fraser Institute is critical of the federal government's plans to decarbonize Canada's electricity grid by 2035, calling them unrealistic and unfeasible.

The study further suggests the massive infrastructure building program required to reduce the proportion of fossil fuels in this country's energy mix from current levels has not been properly taken into consideration.

According to the think tank's Implications of Decarbonizing Canada's Electricity Grid study released on Oct. 29, nearly 81 per cent of Canada’s electricity was generated by carbon-free energy sources, including hydro, nuclear, wind and solar, in 2023.

The task of converting the remaining 19 per cent produced by fossil fuel-powered plants to renewable sources is impossible under existing conditions, according to the report.

"In our study we looked at what it would take to replace Canada's existing fossil fuel based electricity with clean energy sources like hydro, nuclear and wind power," Elmira Aliakbari, director, natural resource studies at the Fraser Institute, and co-author of the study, told Sustainable Biz Canada.

"Our findings show that given existing financial, infrastructure and regulatory realities, achieving this goal within the proposed timeline is very unlikely, impractical and unrealistic."

The report states Canada would need to build the equivalent of 23 major Site C hydroelectric dams, or four nuclear power plants similar in size to Ontario’s Darlington power station, to achieve its 2035 zero-carbon electricity target.

Decarbonization runs afoul of energy project approval process

Given the lengthy approval process involved in the planning and development of major hydro projects, and longstanding public and political resistance to nuclear power development, there is no foreseeable means of building such facilities within the federal government timeline.

The Fraser Institute study cites a 2019 World Bank report that ranked Canada second worst among 38 Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development nations with respect to the time required to obtain permits for new construction projects.

"We have a slow and complex system for approving major energy projects in Canada. This creates significant challenges when we examine timelines to understand how long it takes for projects to meet regulatory requirements, much less the actual construction process involved," Aliakbari said.

"For example, for the case of Ontario's Darlington nuclear project, it took nearly six years to receive federal approval and in the case of Muskrat Falls hydro project in Newfoundland and Labrador, it took more than five years to pass federal environmental assessments.

"This timeline only represents the federal stage of the review process and does not even include provincial assessments, which can also be time consuming."

The report is also critical of the federal government's 2019 Impact Assessment Act which attempted to streamline the approval process but instead "added additional layers of uncertainty and complexity to the review process". This further delays construction of major energy infrastructure projects.

"The unfeasibility of the federal decarbonization timeline is not simply attributable to regulatory obstacles, however, but also to the construction timelines involved in large-scale energy projects," Aliakbari explained.

Aliakbari cites the example of British Columbia's Site C hydro power installation along the Peace River. Construction began in 2015 and the plant is expected to become operational later this year.

Wind, nuclear power also face big hurdles

Similarly, 11,000 large wind turbines would need to be deployed over the next 10 years, which also entails substantial investments in back-up power systems owing to the inherent intermittent nature of wind power.

Construction of wind farms on this scale would utilize over 7,000 square kilometres of land — an area greater than Prince Edward Island — in addition to the extra land and expenses needed for transmission infrastructure.

Although the report does not specifically state nuclear power offers the most viable path to bringing Canada closer to a fully decarbonized energy grid, the implications of the findings support that solution. Building three or four new nuclear power plants would be simpler and faster than 23 Site C size hydro dams, or installing 11,000 wind turbines.

"We have basically explored different clean energy sources and what it would take for Canada to replace its existing fossil fuel-based electricity with those clean energy sources. Our goal was to measure the infrastructure required," Aliakbari said.

"The challenge with nuclear is overcoming public opposition regarding the safety of nuclear power plants. A 2023 survey cited in our report revealed that many Canadians still associate nuclear power with accidents and disasters like Chernobyl, rather than with innovation."

Feds fail to communicate realistic clean energy targets

One of the key aspects of the Fraser Institute study is its implicit message to the federal government to revise its decarbonization goals and give Canadians a more realistic estimate and plan to achieve a fully renewable energy grid.

"We are urging the federal government to pay attention to our analysis and effectively revisit their plans and their targets to make them more attainable. We are also trying to educate Canadians to understand the implications involved in achieving these targets," Aliakbari stressed. "The government has set these targets without communicating to the average Canadian their implications and the associated costs and benefits involved in achieving them. 

"Basically we have been looking at these targets, examining their implications and providing the public with this information. We have already seen that in the case of the government's implementation of the carbon tax, they had a plan to increase the carbon tax to $170 per tonne by 2030. However, they never released any detailed analysis to the public or otherwise communicated the impact of this policy."

"With respect to decarbonizing the electrical grid, the federal targets, the federal government is not communicating the implications of achieving these targets, however ambitious they may be, to the public."