Unpacking the Growing Cost of Home Heating Bills

From EnergyNow.ca

Bills are one of life’s certainties, and in Canada, so is winter. When combined, the two add up to a growing affordability crisis across the country.

Lots has been said about the rising cost of daily essentials such as groceries and gas, but another factor weighing heavily on Canadians’ pocketbooks is the cost of heating their homes.

According to data from Statistics Canada:

15% of Canadians reduced or had to forgo necessities such as food or medicine for at least one month to pay an energy bill last year. To put that in perspective, based on the number of households there are in Canada today, roughly 2.5 million households had to forgo necessities in 2023.
14% of Canadian households kept their home at an unsafe or uncomfortable temperature because of unaffordable heating costs (approximately 2.3 million households).
High energy prices also caused 10% of Canadian households (approximately 1.7 million households) to be late or unable to pay their energy bills in the past year.

In total, nearly 27% of households (4.5 million households) said it was difficult, or very difficult to meet financial needs in the second quarter of 2023.

These numbers concern us, and we know they are also a big concern for women across Canada who have told us they are adjusting their living conditions to keep costs down.

Engaged women are making trade-offs

Hilary Krauss, a 28-year-old who lives with her partner Mitch in Vancouver, told us that their apartment setting is now fixed at an “affordable” temperature, and they are now bundling up and adding layers of clothing to compensate for lower house temperatures.

Even those who can currently afford their heating bill are considering investing in technology such as solar panels to lower home heating costs over time.

“I want energy security and care about the environment,” said Angela Chung, a Calgary woman who told us she pays $400 per month for her utility bill. “The heating costs for my modest home are exorbitant. If I invest in solar panels, it will have an upfront cost. But I may break even in a decade, saving money in the long run.”

With costs ballooning, and concerns rising about affordability, that drove us to ask what exactly we are paying for in our energy bills.

Taxes are driving up energy costs

The three main components of your heating bill are energy charges, delivery and administration (what you pay utility companies), and various government taxes, including the federal carbon tax.

Used energy (GJ or KWH)
The gigajoules or kilowatt hours of energy you used in the billing period. (This number can be an estimate or exact number.)
Delivery charges
Delivery charges include fixed and variable costs based on the length of your billing period and natural gas consumption. Both charges are often summed on your heating bill under “Delivery Total.”
Rate riders
Provincial utility commissions approve temporary charges/credits. Rate riders adjust for under/over collection of approved costs.
Transmission charge
A fee for accessing high-voltage wires and towers to transmit power from generation plants to distribution systems.
Federal carbon tax
A federal government tax on natural gas consumption.

These numbers vary across Canada based on different energy and home heating sources, so we collected bills from people in Alberta (Calgary and Sylvan Lake), Ontario (Barrie and Whitby) and British Columbia (Vancouver and Victoria) to compare.

Here’s what we found.

(1) Energy cost varies by province, and are rising every year

Just over half of Canadian households that reported having a primary heating system use a forced air furnace (51%) and one quarter (25%) use electric baseboard heaters, so we focused on these two sources.

Of the bills we looked at, people are paying an average of $135 per month to heat their home. With natural gas, the average winter month costs $160, compared to $110 with electricity.

Canadians are facing increased costs year-over-year for both natural gas (up 23.7% in 2023 over the year before), and electricity (up 1.6% in 2023).

The cost of electricity varies across Canada and can be a challenge to compare because there is a wide variation in market and rate structures.

Some provinces use tiered rates that increase or decrease based on usage, some provinces use flat-rate billing, and Ontario uses time-of-use rates where peak hours are billed at a higher rate than off-peak hours.

According to Statista, the average cost per kilowatt hour (kWh) for electricity in Canada is 19.2 cents, with the Northwest Territories paying the most, and Quebec paying the least per kWh.

unpacking the growing cost of home heating bills 2

(2) The carbon tax is nearly doubling home heating costs

The bills we examined show that the carbon tax accounts for 30% of heating costs for those who heat their homes with forced air furnaces that use natural gas.

In Alberta, for example, it costs about $1.80 per gigajoule (GJ) of natural gas, and an additional $3.33 per GJ in carbon tax. This means the tax is greater than the actual energy cost, nearly doubling the cost of a monthly bill.

For every $1 an Ontarian spends on natural gas, they pay an extra $1.66 on the carbon tax, according to the bills we examined. Again, the cost of the carbon tax is greater than the cost of energy used.

unpacking the growing cost of home heating bills 3

In Eastern Canada where home heating oil is the most used heating source, the carbon tax has been exempted (a fairness issue we’ve already explored in depth) so we have excluded it from this analysis.

Carbon tax increases will raise cost further

The federal carbon tax is set to increase by 23% on April 1, 2024, and it will rise every year until it nearly triples by 2030 over today’s rate.

The federal carbon tax was intended to incentivize people to consume less oil and gas, but we know from our national research that more than half of engaged women (52%) feel it isn’t working because it isn’t changing behaviour. It’s also putting undue pressure on remote and rural communities where alternative energy sources are not available.

Home heating is a necessity, not a luxury, and many Canadians do not have options on how they heat their home. With 46% of engaged women across Canada telling us they are concerned about energy affordability, it begs the question: Do you think what you pay for home heating is fair?

Let us know what you think about rising heating costs and these findings, and reach out to tell us how you’re managing the rising cost of living.

Related Topics:#CanadaPoweredByWomen #EnergyNow.CA #HomeHeatingBills #Inflation

Up Next

Trudeau’s climate chief threatens Saskatchewan’s Scott Moe for refusing to collect carbon tax

Don't Miss

Alberta’s Energy Road Ahead Has Never Been More Important: Brian Jean – Minister of Energy and Minerals

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Canada’s Digital ID Drama Heats Up as Regulators Sidestep Parliament

Alberta / 6 hours ago

Media melts down as Danielle Smith moves to end ‘transitioning’ of children in Alberta

Health / 6 hours ago

Dad says 5-year-old develops autism after being forced to get 18 vaccines in 1 day

Alberta

Alberta calling for federal election! Premier Smith demands feds scrap dangerous oil and gas production caps

Published on November 4, 2024

Government of Alberta

Premier Danielle Smith, Minister of Environment and Protected Areas Rebecca Schulz and Minister of Energy and Minerals Brian Jean issued the following statement on the proposed federal oil and gas production cap:

“This production cap will hurt families, hurt businesses and hurt Canada’s economy. We will defend our province, our country and our Constitutional rights.

“Make no mistake, this cap violates Canada’s constitution. Section 92A clearly gives provinces exclusive jurisdiction over non-renewable natural resource development yet this cap will require a one million barrel a day production cut by 2030.

“The evidence is overwhelming. Three reports from reputable firms have shown that these regulations will sucker-punch Canada’s economy, a million barrels cut every day according to S&P Global, $28 billion a year in lost GDP according to Deloitte, and up to 150,000 lost jobs according to the Conference Board of Canada.

“The losses to GDP mean billions a year will disappear from the economy. Billions that won’t be going towards new schools, hospitals and roads, all for a reckless ideological scheme that will not reduce global emissions.

“Ultimately, this cap will lead Alberta and our country into economic and societal decline. The average Canadian family would be left with up to $419 less for groceries, mortgage payments and utilities every month. Canadian parents and workers will suffer while Justin Trudeau outsources the duty to provide safe, affordable, reliable and responsibly produced oil and gas to dictators and less clean producers around the world. We could be the solution. Instead, Ottawa would rather sacrifice our ability to lead.

“Tweaks won’t work. This cap must be scrapped. Alberta’s government is actively exploring the use of every legal option, including a constitutional challenge and the use of the Alberta Sovereignty within a United Canada Act. We will not stand idly by while the federal government sacrifices our prosperity, our constitution and our quality of life for its extreme agenda.”

Energy

Ottawa’s plan to decarbonize Canada’s electricity by 2035 not feasible and would require equivalent of 23 Site C hydroelectric dams

Published on November 3, 2024

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Elmira Aliakbari and Jock Finlayson

The federal government’s plan to make all electricity generation in Canada carbon-free by 2035 is impractical and highly unlikely, given physical, infrastructure, financial, and regulatory realities. So says a new study published today by the Fraser Institute, an independent, non-partisan Canadian public policy think-tank.

“Canada’s federal government has set an ambitious, and, frankly, unrealistic target of achieving complete carbon-free electricity in ten years,” said Jock Finlayson, Fraser Institute senior fellow and co-author of Implications of Decarbonizing Canada’s Electricity Grid.

The study finds that in 2023, nearly 81 per cent of Canada’s electricity came from carbon-free energy sources, including hydro, nuclear, wind and solar. But to replace the remaining 19 per cent which uses fossil fuels, in the next 10 years, would require constructing the equivalent of:

• Approximately 23 large hydroelectric dams, similar in size to BC’s Site C, or 24 comparable to Newfoundland and Labrador’s Muskrat Falls, or;

• More than four nuclear power plants similar in size to Ontario’s Darlington power station, or 2.3 large scale nuclear power plants equivalent to Ontario’s Bruce Power, or;

• Around 11,000 large wind turbines, which would not only require substantial investments in back-up power systems (since wind is intermittent) but would also require clearing 7,302 square kilometers of land—larger than the size of Prince Edward Island—excluding the additional land required for transmission infrastructure.

Currently, the process of planning and constructing major electricity generation facilities in Canada is complicated and time-consuming, often marked by delays, regulatory challenges, and significant cost overruns.

For example, BC’s Site C project took approximately 43 years from the initial planning studies in 1971 to receive environmental certification in 2014, with completion expected in 2025 at a cost of $16 billion.

What’s more, the significant energy infrastructure listed above would only meet Canada’s current electricity needs. As Canada’s population grows, the demand for electricity will increase significantly.

“It is not at all realistic that this scale of energy infrastructure can be planned, approved, financed and built in just 10 years, which is what would be required merely to decarbonize Canada’s existing electricity needs,” said Elmira Aliakbari, director natural resource studies at the Fraser Institute and study co-author.

“This doesn’t even account for the additional infrastructure needed to meet future electricity demand. Decarbonizing Canada’s electricity generation by 2035 is another case where the government has set completely unrealistic timelines without any meaningful plan to achieve it.”

This essay examines the implications of decarbonizing Canada’s electricity grid by replacing existing fossil fuel-based generation with clean energy sources.
In 2023, clean energy sources—including hydro, nuclear, and wind—produced 497.6 terawatt hours (TWh) of electricity, accounting for nearly 81% of Canada’s total supply, while fossil fuels contributed 117.7 TWh (19.1%). To replace this fossil fuel generation with hydro power alone would require about 23 large projects similar to BC’s Site C or 24 like Newfoundland & Labrador’s Muskrat Falls. Using nuclear power would necessitate building 2.3 facilities equivalent to Ontario’s Bruce Power or 4.3 similar to Darlington Nuclear Generating Station.
The process of planning and constructing electricity generation facilities in Canada is complex and time-consuming, often marked by delays, regulatory hurdles, and significant cost overruns. For example, the BC Site C project took approximately 43 years from the initial feasibility and planning studies in 1971 to receive environmental certification in 2014, with completion expected in 2025 at a cost of $16 billion.
Land requirements for new electricity generation facilities are also significant; replacing 117.7 TWh of fossil fuel-based electricity with hydro power, for instance, would need approximately 26,345 square kilometers, nearly half the size of Nova Scotia.
The slow pace of regulatory approvals, high and rising costs of major energy projects, substantial land requirements, and public opposition to project siting all cast doubt on the feasibility of achieving the necessary clean electricity infrastructure in the coming decade to fully replace fossil fuels in Canada.