In a world increasingly shaped by environmental aspirations, Canada has embarked on an ambitious, and, I would argue, unattainable path to drastically reduce emissions by 2030. At the core of this vision lies the electrification of transportation, driven by the widespread adoption of electric vehicles (EVs). To achieve this, Canada must install an astounding 470,000 EV chargers and add 90 gigawatts (GW) of new electricity capacity. This plan, however bold, is fraught with practical challenges, growing public discontent, and a stark contrast with global realities.

While Canada moves aggressively toward this transformation, the world’s largest emitters, China and India, are charting a very different course. These nations continue to rely heavily on fossil fuels, prioritising economic growth and energy security over Western-imposed climate targets. It is within this broader context of global fossil fuel dependency that Canada’s emissions goals must be assessed—and ultimately, questioned.

The Global Context: Fossil Fuel Reliance as Strategy
China and India, the world’s two most populous countries have embraced fossil fuels as the cornerstone of their development. Their energy strategies reflect a pragmatic understanding of the demands of industrial growth and population expansion:
• China: Today, China burns more coal than the rest of the world combined. In 2023 alone, it approved 50 GW of new coal-fired power plants, more than the entire installed capacity of some nations. This underscores its focus on energy security and economic dominance.
• India: Although expanding renewable energy, India relies on coal for over 70% of its electricity generation. For India, fossil fuels are essential to lifting millions out of poverty and sustaining its rapidly growing economy.
Both nations argue that their developmental needs outweigh the urgency of reducing emissions. Their approach contrasts sharply with Canada’s, where our relatively modest contribution to global emissions is used to justify costly and disruptive policies.

The 90 GW Challenge: A Reality Check
The enormity of Canada’s 90 GW target cannot be overstated. Meeting this requirement would mean constructing the equivalent of 90 new 1 GW power plants in under a decade. Even in ideal conditions, this would be an unprecedented feat. In reality, several barriers make such a timeline virtually impossible:
1. Regulatory Delays: Environmental reviews, public consultations, and jurisdictional disputes frequently delay energy projects for years, sometimes decades.
2. Material Shortages: The global race for critical materials, steel, concrete, silicon, and rare earth metals is intensifying due to competing green energy initiatives worldwide.
3. Labour Constraints: Building and maintaining energy infrastructure requires a highly specialised workforce, which is already stretched thin.
The technical and logistical hurdles alone should give policymakers pause.

Public Resistance and Green Energy’s Weak Links
Canada’s green energy policies, presented as a moral imperative, are facing increasing public resistance. This opposition stems from several factors:
• High Costs: The financial burden of EV adoption, infrastructure upgrades, and renewable energy expansion disproportionately falls on taxpayers. Many Canadians see these policies as disconnected from their everyday struggles.
• Grid Reliability: Provinces such as Ontario and Alberta are already grappling with grid reliability issues. Adding 90 GW to accommodate EV charging demands without addressing seasonal variability and peak usage, risks overloading an already fragile system.
• Rural Disparities: Rural and suburban Canadians, who often rely on long commutes, are particularly impacted. EVs remain unaffordable for many, and rising electricity costs exacerbate the disparity.

The erosion of public trust in government policies is a direct result of this disconnect. When sweeping mandates are imposed on an unwilling populace, the risk of political backlash and policy reversals becomes significant, stalling progress altogether.

The Broader Flaws in Canada’s Approach
At the heart of Canada’s emissions target lies a flawed assumption: that public will, and technological advancements will naturally align with ambitious policy goals. This ideological approach overlooks several critical realities:
• Energy Demand: Decarbonising the grid while exponentially increasing demand is inherently contradictory. Fossil fuels currently supply 82% of global energy a dependency that cannot be reversed within a decade.
• Supply Chain Fragility: The production of EV batteries, wind turbines, and solar panels relies heavily on mining and refining processes controlled by China. Ironically, the green energy transition could deepen our dependence on foreign resources, often sourced under questionable labour and environmental standards.
• Global Impact: Even if Canada achieves its targets, the reductions would be dwarfed by continued emissions growth in China and India. Should we risk economic and social stability for what amounts to a symbolic gesture?

The Economic Costs of Ideological Pursuits
Canada’s aggressive push towards a green future as pointed out above is impractical and unaffordable. This transformation is being attempted at a time when the country is grappling with economic pressures caused by unchecked immigration policies. Most incoming migrants lack the skills required to integrate into Canada’s advanced economy and often require prolonged financial support, funded by the existing tax base. These additional burdens make the funding of green initiatives even more untenable.

Moreover, the cultural and philosophical divides between new migrants and the existing population create further challenges. Many of these newcomers come from societies where the emphasis on environmentalism, gender equality, and democratic freedoms is minimal or non-existent. Integrating such disparate values into Canada’s social fabric is not only expensive but also creates friction, undermining the cohesion needed to address collective goals like climate action.

A More Rational Path Forward
It is clear that Canada’s current approach is unsustainable. Instead of ideological policies that impose heavy costs with negligible results, we must adopt a more pragmatic and balanced strategy:
1. Energy Realism: We should modernise existing natural gas and nuclear facilities, ensuring reliable energy without dismantling proven systems.
2. Carbon Capture: Investing in carbon capture technologies allows us to continue using fossil fuels while reducing emissions.
3. Skilled Immigration: Immigration policies should prioritise skilled workers who can contribute to economic growth, rather than adding to public burdens.
4. Global Accountability: Canada must push for enforceable international agreements that hold major emitters accountable. The current system, which exempts countries like China and India, is fundamentally flawed.
5. Incremental Transitions: Gradual adoption of renewables and EVs, incentivised by market dynamics rather than mandates, is the only feasible path forward.

Conclusion: Pragmatism Over Ideology
Canada’s ambitious emissions targets fail to account for the realities of global energy dependency, domestic public opinion, and logistical challenges. Meanwhile, China and India continue to burn fossil fuels unabated, rendering our sacrifices both costly and ineffectual.

A sustainable future requires pragmatic policies that align environmental goals with economic and social realities, ensuring that taxpayers are not left footing the bill for ideologically driven, unworkable plans. Without such recalibration, Canada risks not only failing in its climate ambitions but also undermining its economic resilience and societal stability.