From the Fraser Institute

By Kenneth P. Green

The federal government’s plan to eliminate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from electricity generation by 2050 is impossible in practical terms, finds a new study published today by the Fraser Institute, an independent, non-partisan Canadian public policy think-tank.

Due to population growth, economic growth and the transition to electrified transportation, electricity demand in Canada will increase substantially in coming years. “To meet existing and future electricity demand with low-emitting or zero-emitting sources within the government’s timeline, Canada would need to rapidly build infrastructure on a scale never before seen in the country’s history,” said Kenneth P.
Green, senior fellow at the Fraser Institute and author of Rapid Decarbonization of Electricity and Future Supply Constraints.

For example, to generate the electricity needed through 2050 solely with solar power, we’d need to build 840 solar-power generation stations the size of Alberta’s Travers Solar Project. At a construction time of two years per project, this would take 1,680 construction years to accomplish.

If we relied solely on wind power, Canada would need to build 574 wind-power installations the size of Quebec’s Seigneurie de Beaupre wind-power station. At a construction time of two years per project, this would take 1,150 construction years to accomplish.

If we relied solely on hydropower, we’d need to build 134 hydro-power facilities the size of the Site C power station in British Columbia. At a construction time of seven years per project, this would take 938 construction years to accomplish.

If we relied solely on nuclear power, we’d need to construct 16 new nuclear plants the size of Ontario’s Bruce Nuclear Generating Station. At a construction time of seven years per project, this would take 112 construction years to accomplish.

Currently, the process of planning and constructing electricity-generation facilities in Canada is often marked by delays and significant cost overruns. For B.C.’s Site C project, it took approximately 43 years from the initial planning studies in 1971 to environmental certification in 2014, with project completion expected in 2025 at a cost of $16 billion.

“When Canadians assess the viability of the federal government’s emission-reduction timelines, they should understand the practical reality of electricity generation in Canada,” Green said.

Decarbonizing Canada’s Electricity Generation: Rapid Decarbonization of Electricity and Future Supply Constraints

• Canada’s Clean Electricity Regulations (Canada, 2024a) require all provinces to fully “decarbonize” their electricity generation as part of the federal government’s broader “Net-Zero 2050” greenhouse gas emissions mitigation plan.
• Canada’s electricity demands are expected to grow in line with the country’s population, economic growth, and the transition to electrified transportation. Projections from the Canada Energy Regulator, Canadian Climate Institute, and Department of Finance estimate the need for an additional 684 TWh of generation capacity by 2050.
• If Canada were to meet this demand solely with wind power, it would require the construction of approximately 575 wind-power installations, each the size of Quebec’s Seigneurie de Beaupré Wind Farm, over 25 years. However, with a construction timeline of two years per project, this would equate to 1,150 construction years. Meeting future Canadian electricity demand using only wind power would also require over one million hectares of land—an area nearly 14.5 times the size of the municipality of Calgary.
• If Canada were to rely entirely on hydropower, it would need to construct 134 facilities similar in size to the Site C power station in British Columbia. Meeting all future demand with hydropower would occupy approximately 54,988 hectares of land—roughly 1.5 times the area of the municipality of Montreal.
• If Canada were to meet its future demand exclusively with nuclear power, it would need to construct 16 additional nuclear plants, each equivalent to Ontario’s Bruce Nuclear Generating Station.
• Meeting the predicted future electricity demand with these low/no CO2 sources will be a daunting challenge and is likely impossible within the 2050 timeframe.

Read the full study

Kenneth P. Green

Senior Fellow, Fraser Institute

From the Fraser Institute

By Mackenzie Moir

Canada reported 10.6 MRI machines per million population, ranking us 27th out of 31 universal health-care countries and far behind fifth-ranked Germany (32.5 machines per million population). We see a similar story with CT scanners where second-ranked Australia (78.5 units per million) far outpaces Canada (14.6 units per million population)

Canada’s health-care system is in dire straits. We face an access crisis in primary care, regular rural emergency room closures, and some of the longest waits for non-emergency surgery in more than 30 years. Indeed, the median wait between referral to a specialist by a general practitioner and receipt of treatment was 30 weeks in 2024, the longest on record.

But beyond medical and surgical treatments, Canadians also face significant waits for key diagnostic services.

In 2024, the latest year of available data, patients could expect a 16.2-week wait for an MRI (more than three weeks longer than what they waited in 2023) and an 8.1-week wait for a CT scan (a week and half longer than in 2023).

Of course, these machines are crucial in the diagnosis and monitoring of many different illnesses. As a result, long waits for these machines can result in delays in diagnosis and the advancing of illness that can impact decisions around treatment and potential outcomes.

But why are there delays for this type of basic diagnostic care?

One explanation is that Canada has lower availability of these machines compared to other high-income universal health-care systems.

For example, using the latest available data from 2022 and after adjusting for population age, Canada reported 10.6 MRI machines per million population, ranking us 27th out of 31 universal health-care countries and far behind fifth-ranked Germany (32.5 machines per million population). We see a similar story with CT scanners where second-ranked Australia (78.5 units per million) far outpaces Canada (14.6 units per million population), which ranked 28th of 31.

These data also underscore the wider dissatisfaction among Canadians about how our governments steward our health-care systems. According to a recent Navigator poll, 73 per cent of Canadians want major health-care reform.

In the end, poor access to diagnostic imaging technology can prevent the appropriate triaging of patients and create further delays for scheduled care. Improving access to diagnostic imaging should help reduce delays for care overall and improve the lives of patients and their families.