government of canada

Canada’s Green Economy Push: $158 Billion Spent, But Is It Paying Off?

When you think of Canada’s economic future, what comes to mind? For the past decade, the answer has increasingly been “green.” The federal government, alongside provincial leaders, has poured billions into building a clean energy economy, promising not only environmental sustainability but also a wave of new jobs and long-term prosperity. But a recent report is raising serious questions: Is the investment delivering what it promised?

According to a new analysis from The Hub, Canadian governments have spent $158 billion on green economy initiatives since 2015 — yet only created 68,000 jobs. That’s roughly $2.3 million per job, a staggering cost that has economists, policymakers, and voters asking: Are we getting our money’s worth?

Let’s break down what this means for Canada — from the real-world impact on your wallet to the future of the country’s economy.

The $158 Billion Question: Where Did the Money Go?

The $158 billion figure comes from a comprehensive review of federal and provincial spending over the past decade. It includes:

• Subsidies for electric vehicles (EVs) and charging infrastructure
• Investments in wind, solar, and hydroelectric projects
• Grants for energy-efficient building retrofits
• Funding for green hydrogen and carbon capture technologies
• Support for clean tech startups and innovation hubs

The goal? To reduce greenhouse gas emissions, meet climate targets, and transition Canada away from fossil fuels. And on the surface, the spending seems bold and forward-thinking.

But the 68,000 jobs created — while not insignificant — pale in comparison to the scale of the investment. For context, the oil and gas sector alone employs over 200,000 Canadians, according to Statistics Canada, and has historically generated billions in tax revenue.

“We’re spending more than ever, but the return on investment is underwhelming,” says an economic analyst at The Hub. “If we’re going to spend $158 billion, we need to ask: Are we creating sustainable, high-paying jobs — or just funding short-term projects with limited long-term impact?”

This isn’t just a numbers game. It’s about value for taxpayer money — especially as Canada’s budget deficit climbs to C$11.07 billion in the first five months of the 2025/26 fiscal year, with spending outpacing revenues.

Recent Updates: What’s Happening Now?

1. Federal Budget to Focus on Skilled Trades

In a move to address the jobs gap, Jobs Minister Patty Hajdu recently announced upcoming federal budget measures aimed at boosting apprenticeships and skilled trades. The plan includes: - Millions in new funding for apprenticeship programs - Tax credits for workers in high-demand trades - Restrictions on non-compete clauses in federally regulated sectors

This signals a shift: instead of just funding green tech, the government is now trying to build the workforce to support it.

“We can’t build a green economy without electricians, welders, engineers, and technicians,” Hajdu said. “This is about connecting people to good jobs — not just creating buzzwords.”

2. Brampton Transit Gets a $183 Million Boost

In a tangible example of green investment, the Government of Canada, Ontario, and the City of Brampton are investing over $183 million to purchase 136 new buses for Brampton Transit. These include electric and hybrid models, aiming to reduce emissions and improve public transit in one of Canada’s fastest-growing cities.

This project shows how green spending can work — when it’s targeted, local, and tied to real infrastructure.

3. Prime Minister Carney Launches Major Projects Office

In a major policy shift, Prime Minister Mark Carney announced the creation of the Major Projects Office, designed to cut red tape and fast-track large-scale clean energy projects.

“Canada’s new government is moving decisively to build major nation-building projects that create high-paying careers, reduce emissions, and grow our economy,” Carney said.

The office will focus on accelerating approvals for wind farms, solar arrays, hydrogen plants, and grid upgrades — aiming to turn green investments into faster, more visible results.

Context: Why the Green Economy Push Began — and Why It’s Failing to Deliver

The idea of a “green economy” isn’t new. Canada first committed to climate action in the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, but real momentum didn’t begin until the Paris Agreement in 2015. Since then, the federal government has set ambitious targets:

• Net-zero emissions by 2050
• 50% reduction in emissions by 2030 (from 2005 levels)
• 100% zero-emission vehicle sales by 2035

To meet these goals, Ottawa pivoted aggressively — redirecting billions from traditional energy sectors into green alternatives.

But critics argue this pivot came too fast, too soon, without a clear plan for economic transition. As the Fraser Institute recently warned:

“Canada’s economic performance cratered after Ottawa pivoted to the ‘green’ economy.”

The report points to: - Slower GDP growth compared to peer nations - Declining investment in energy and manufacturing - A mismatch between green spending and actual job creation

Meanwhile, climate change itself is now expected to hurt Canada’s GDP more than previously thought, according to Canada’s National Observer. Rising temperatures, extreme weather, and wildfires could cost the economy hundreds of billions in damages over the next 30 years — making adaptation as urgent as mitigation.

This creates a paradox: We need green investment, but we can’t afford to do it inefficiently.

Who’s Winning — and Who’s Losing?

Winners:

• Clean tech startups in cities like Vancouver, Toronto, and Montreal
• Public transit systems receiving new electric buses
• Skilled tradespeople entering green construction and retrofitting
• Renewable energy developers building wind and solar farms

Losers:

• Workers in traditional energy sectors (oil, gas, mining) who’ve seen job losses without clear pathways to retraining
• Taxpayers, who are footing the bill for high-cost, low-return projects
• Rural and remote communities, where green projects often don’t materialize due to high infrastructure costs

There’s also a geographic imbalance. Most green jobs are concentrated in urban centers, while the economic pain of the transition is often felt in resource-dependent regions like Alberta, Saskatchewan, and the Maritimes.

“The green economy can’t be a Toronto or Vancouver story,” says a policy expert from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. “It has to work for all of Canada — or it won’t last.”

The Hidden Costs: Beyond the $158 Billion

While the $158 billion is eye-popping, it doesn’t tell the whole story. Other unseen costs include:

• Opportunity cost: Money spent on green projects could have been used for healthcare, housing, or education
• Regulatory delays: Environmental assessments, Indigenous consultations, and permitting can take years, slowing down job creation
• Market distortions: Heavy subsidies can create “zombie” industries that survive only because of government support, not real demand

For example, the subsidy-driven EV market has seen a surge in sales — but many Canadians still find electric vehicles too expensive, even with rebates. And if the subsidies end, will demand continue?

Then there’s the submarine competition — a $100+ billion military procurement that, while unrelated to green energy, highlights how Canada struggles with large-scale, long-term spending projects. As one analyst put it: “If we can’t deliver 12 submarines on time, what makes us think we can deliver a green economy efficiently?”

(Note: This submarine information comes from supplementary sources and is not verified as part of the core green economy discussion.)

Immediate Effects: What This Means for You

1. Higher Taxes or Lower Services

With a growing budget deficit, the government may need to: - Raise taxes - Cut spending in other areas - Borrow more — increasing national debt

This could affect everything from public transit funding to infrastructure repairs.

2. Job Market Shifts

The green economy is creating niche, specialized jobs — but