Climate
This domain tracks Canada's legislated emissions targets against the official record: Environment and Climate Change Canada's own successive projections, the Parliamentary Budget Officer's independent estimate of the same 2030 shortfall, and two official emissions series — built on different accounting principles — that report different national totals for the same year. Where the record cannot verify a commitment, it says so.
Current snapshot
655
Countability last verified this source’s licence on 2026-07-10.
Read this figure carefully
the target accounting basis — the only series Canada's emissions-target verdicts are measured against
731
Countability last verified this source’s licence on 2026-07-10.
Read this figure carefully
SEEA physical flow account basis; reports a different national total for the same year, by definition — the two official series measure different boundaries
16.4
Countability last verified this source’s licence on 2026-07-10.
Read this figure carefully
target-basis emissions over July-1 population, tonnes per person
304
Countability last verified this source’s licence on 2026-07-10.
Read this figure carefully
physical-flow-account emissions per $M of chained-2017 GDP — the one basis pairing that is residence-consistent
112
Countability last verified this source’s licence on 2026-07-10.
59
Countability last verified this source’s licence on 2026-07-10.
Time-series evidence
National emissions, target accounting basis, Mt CO2e
2005 → 2023 · ECCC — Greenhouse gas emissions projections — Canadian Environmental Sustainability Indicators (2026 vintage; Open Government Licence – Canada) · Statistics Canada — Physical flow account for greenhouse gas emissions
View the data table for National emissions, target accounting basis, Mt CO2e (19 periods × 2 series)
| Period | ECCC — target accounting basis | StatsCan — physical flow account |
|---|---|---|
| 2005 | 759 | |
| 2006 | 752 | |
| 2007 | 778 | |
| 2008 | 760 | |
| 2009 | 700 | 759 |
| 2010 | 738 | 774 |
| 2011 | 755 | 786 |
| 2012 | 742 | 786 |
| 2013 | 747 | 798 |
| 2014 | 721 | 798 |
| 2015 | 746 | 795 |
| 2016 | 715 | 770 |
| 2017 | 719 | 789 |
| 2018 | 730 | 798 |
| 2019 | 722 | 794 |
| 2020 | 660 | 710 |
| 2021 | 665 | 726 |
| 2022 | 709 | 738 |
| 2023 | 655 | 731 |
Emissions by named sector, physical flow account (never summed)
2009 → 2023 · Statistics Canada — Physical flow account for greenhouse gas emissions
View the data table for Emissions by named sector, physical flow account (never summed) (15 periods × 4 series)
| Period | Oil and gas extraction | Electric power generation | Households | Crop and animal production (except cannabis) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2009 | 168 | 104 | 125 | |
| 2010 | 175 | 104 | 125 | |
| 2011 | 183 | 95 | 129 | |
| 2012 | 188 | 91 | 125 | |
| 2013 | 196 | 88 | 132 | |
| 2014 | 201 | 86 | 129 | 69 |
| 2015 | 201 | 84 | 129 | 70 |
| 2016 | 182 | 82 | 127 | 71 |
| 2017 | 192 | 80 | 130 | 71 |
| 2018 | 198 | 71 | 132 | 73 |
| 2019 | 196 | 70 | 134 | 71 |
| 2020 | 182 | 63 | 111 | 72 |
| 2021 | 185 | 63 | 110 | 71 |
| 2022 | 182 | 60 | 115 | 72 |
| 2023 | 182 | 59 | 112 | 71 |
Emissions per person, target accounting basis
2005 → 2023 · ECCC — Greenhouse gas emissions projections — Canadian Environmental Sustainability Indicators (2026 vintage; Open Government Licence – Canada) · Statistics Canada — Population estimates, quarterly
View the data table for Emissions per person, target accounting basis (19 points)
| Period | Value |
|---|---|
| 2005 | 23.5 |
| 2006 | 23.1 |
| 2007 | 23.7 |
| 2008 | 22.9 |
| 2009 | 20.8 |
| 2010 | 21.7 |
| 2011 | 22.0 |
| 2012 | 21.4 |
| 2013 | 21.3 |
| 2014 | 20.3 |
| 2015 | 20.9 |
| 2016 | 19.8 |
| 2017 | 19.7 |
| 2018 | 19.7 |
| 2019 | 19.2 |
| 2020 | 17.4 |
| 2021 | 17.4 |
| 2022 | 18.2 |
| 2023 | 16.4 |
Emissions per unit of output — the economy’s carbon intensity
2009 → 2023 · Statistics Canada — Physical flow account for greenhouse gas emissions · Statistics Canada — GDP, expenditure-based, quarterly
View the data table for Emissions per unit of output — the economy’s carbon intensity (15 points)
| Period | Value |
|---|---|
| 2009 | 423 |
| 2010 | 419 |
| 2011 | 412 |
| 2012 | 405 |
| 2013 | 402 |
| 2014 | 391 |
| 2015 | 387 |
| 2016 | 371 |
| 2017 | 369 |
| 2018 | 363 |
| 2019 | 354 |
| 2020 | 334 |
| 2021 | 322 |
| 2022 | 313 |
| 2023 | 304 |
Provincial emissions, physical flow account
2009 → 2023 · Statistics Canada — Physical flow account for greenhouse gas emissions
View the data table for Provincial emissions, physical flow account (15 periods × 4 series)
| Period | Ontario | Quebec | Alberta | British Columbia |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2009 | 170 | 92 | 265 | 77 |
| 2010 | 179 | 88 | 274 | 81 |
| 2011 | 178 | 90 | 285 | 80 |
| 2012 | 171 | 88 | 291 | 81 |
| 2013 | 172 | 88 | 301 | 82 |
| 2014 | 169 | 86 | 304 | 82 |
| 2015 | 168 | 89 | 296 | 83 |
| 2016 | 167 | 87 | 278 | 83 |
| 2017 | 164 | 90 | 291 | 84 |
| 2018 | 170 | 90 | 292 | 84 |
| 2019 | 170 | 92 | 292 | 82 |
| 2020 | 147 | 80 | 271 | 73 |
| 2021 | 151 | 84 | 276 | 76 |
| 2022 | 159 | 89 | 274 | 77 |
| 2023 | 161 | 89 | 271 | 73 |
What the record says about this domain
Findings
Canada's emissions were 13.7% below 2005 in 2023, short of the 28.8% a straight line to the legislated 2030 target would require by then
Environment and Climate Change Canada reports national emissions of 655 Mt CO2e in 2023 against 759 Mt in 2005 — a reduction of 13.7%. The legislated 2030 target is 40% below 2005 by 2030. On a linear glidepath from the 2005 base to that endpoint, 2023 would sit 28.8% below 2005; the observed reduction is short of that line. The glidepath is Countability's measurement convention — the Government stated an endpoint, not a path, and its own 2030 Emissions Reduction Plan sets out a non-linear pathway this claim does not restate. Emissions are reported roughly fifteen to eighteen months in arrears, so 2023 is the most recent observed year and nothing later has been measured (a published evidence gap records this reporting lag). Measured on the accounting basis the target itself is stated against; Statistics Canada's physical flow account reports 731.3 Mt for the same year on a different basis, and the two are never blended; a published evidence gap names the two bases.
Technical details
Registered commitments
Reduce Canada's greenhouse gas emissions to 20% below 2005 levels by 2026
Issuer: Government of Canada (Environment and Climate Change Canada). Stated in Interim greenhouse gas emissions objective, announced March 2022; restated on ECCC's greenhouse gas emissions projections indicator page.
Latest observed: 13.7 (2023) against target 20.
Reduce Canada's greenhouse gas emissions to 40–45% below 2005 levels by 2030
Issuer: Government of Canada (Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act; 2030 Emissions Reduction Plan). Stated in Canada's Nationally Determined Contribution, July 2021; the 2030 target is the first milestone year under the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act (S.C. 2021, c. 22).
Latest observed: 13.7 (2023) against target 40.
Reduce Canada's greenhouse gas emissions to 45–50% below 2005 levels by 2035
Issuer: Government of Canada (Environment and Climate Change Canada). Stated in Canada's 2035 emissions reduction target, presented December 2024; restated on ECCC's greenhouse gas emissions projections indicator page.
Latest observed: 13.7 (2023) against target 45.
Achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050
Issuer: Government of Canada (Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act). Stated in Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act, S.C. 2021, c. 22, assented to 2021-06-29.
Latest observed: — against target 0.
Institutional benchmarks
Greenhouse gas emissions projections — Canadian Environmental Sustainability Indicators, 2025 vintage
The preceding annual vintage of the same ECCC projection, sourced to Canada's First Biennial Transparency Report under the Paris Agreement and the National Inventory Report 1990–2022. Retained, unedited, so the issuer's successive statements can be read against each other and against what was subsequently observed..
Greenhouse gas emissions projections — Canadian Environmental Sustainability Indicators, 2026 vintage
Environment and Climate Change Canada's own annual projection of national greenhouse gas emissions to 2035, on the accounting basis its targets are assessed against. Two scenarios, published side by side and never combined: 'With measures' includes policies funded, legislated and implemented by federal, provincial and territorial governments up to November 2025, plus the LULUCF accounting contribution; 'With additional measures' adds policies under development but not yet fully implemented, plus the projected effect of nature-based climate solutions and agriculture measures..
Estimating Canada's 2030 Emissions Gap (RP-2526-021-S)
The Parliamentary Budget Officer's independent estimate of the gap between Canada's projected 2030 greenhouse gas emissions and the target legislated under the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act. In the PBO's own words: 'we estimate Canada's 2030 emissions gap could range from 49 megatonnes (Mt) to 102 Mt. That is, projected emissions in 2030 could be 49 Mt to 102 Mt above the legislated target of 40-45 per cent below 2005 levels. This would leave Canada's emissions in 2030 at 33.5 per cent and 31.5 per cent, respectively, below 2005 levels.'.
Where institutions disagree
Where will Canada's greenhouse gas emissions land in 2030?
Environment and Climate Change Canada's own 2026-vintage projection. The 'with measures' scenario — policies funded, legislated and implemented up to November 2025, plus the LULUCF accounting contribution — puts 2030 emissions at 600 Mt. Its 'with additional measures' scenario, adding policies under development plus nature-based climate solutions, puts them at 546 Mt. ECCC publishes levels in megatonnes and does not state a percentage reduction from 2005 for these scenarios. → source
The Parliamentary Budget Officer's independent estimate, published 26 November 2025: the 2030 emissions gap 'could range from 49 megatonnes (Mt) to 102 Mt' above the legislated 40–45%-below-2005 target, which 'would leave Canada's emissions in 2030 at 33.5 per cent and 31.5 per cent, respectively, below 2005 levels.' The PBO publishes a gap in megatonnes and a percentage reduction; it does not publish a 2030 emissions level in megatonnes, nor its own 2005 baseline, in the report's highlights. → source
Magnitude: Not reducible to a single spread, and stating that is the finding. The two issuers publish the same quantity in different units: ECCC in megatonnes of projected 2030 emissions, the PBO as a percentage reduction from 2005 and a gap in megatonnes above the target. Converting either into the other's units requires a 2005 baseline that the PBO does not publish in its highlights and that ECCC revises between vintages (759 Mt in the 2026 vintage, 761 Mt in the 2025 one). Countability does not perform that conversion.
Why they differ: Each issuer states its own method. ECCC projects from its own bottom-up model, with scenarios defined by which policies are counted. The PBO describes its projection as built on ECCC's — 'the most recent emissions projection from Environment and Climate Change Canada, updated using current emissions data, along with ECCC-based estimates of the impacts of recent policy developments' — rather than as an independently constructed emissions model, and it incorporates three 2025 federal policy revisions it names: removal of the consumer carbon price, delayed implementation of the Electric Vehicle Availability Standard, and reconsideration of the oil and gas emissions cap. The PBO further states its estimates 'should be seen as approximate', that it does not account for interactions between those revisions, and that it excludes provincial and territorial policy revisions in the same period. The two vintages are close in time — ECCC's projection reflects policies to November 2025; the PBO reported on 26 November 2025 — but they are not the same object, and neither issuer has restated the other's figure.
Evidence gaps
How many tonnes of greenhouse gas did Canada emit in 2023?
What is missing: Not a missing series — two official series, and no way to reconcile them. Canada publishes national greenhouse-gas emissions on two different accounting bases and they do not agree. Environment and Climate Change Canada reports 655 megatonnes of CO2 equivalent for 2023 on the basis its own targets are assessed against (National Inventory Report emissions excluding net LULUCF flux, plus the LULUCF accounting contribution). Statistics Canada's physical flow account for greenhouse gas emissions (table 38-10-0097-01) reports 731.3 megatonnes for the same year — a difference of 76.3 megatonnes, 11.6% of the ECCC figure. The two are built to answer different questions: the inventory allocates emissions to the territory of Canada under UNFCCC source categories; the physical flow account allocates them to resident Canadian industries and households under the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting, covers only carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide, and excludes land use and waste. Neither is wrong. Neither substitutes for the other.
Consequence: Every emissions target Canada has legislated or announced is stated against the inventory basis, so only that basis can settle whether a target is met. The physical flow account is the only official series that breaks emissions out by province and by industry, so only that basis can say where the emissions arise. No published series does both. Countability measures targets against the inventory basis and reports provincial and industry detail on the physical flow basis, names which basis is in use in every claim, and never blends them or differences one against the other.
Are Canada's emissions falling fast enough this year?
What is missing: No official sub-annual greenhouse-gas emissions series exists for Canada, and the annual one arrives late. Emissions are reported once a year in the National Inventory Report, Canada's submission under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, roughly fifteen to eighteen months after the year it describes. As of July 2026 the most recent observed year is 2023.
Consequence: The interim objective falls due at the end of 2026 and the year it names cannot be observed until roughly 2028. Every statement about whether Canada is on track in the current year is therefore a statement about a projection, not an observation. Countability's pace verdicts are computed against the most recent observed year and say so; the gap between that year and today is stated on every claim rather than smoothed over. This is a structural feature of treaty-compliant inventory reporting, not a Canadian failing — the same lag applies to every Annex I party.
What trajectory would take Canada from its 2035 target to net-zero in 2050?
What is missing: No official projection of Canadian emissions extends beyond 2035. Environment and Climate Change Canada's own projections, published annually, reach 2035 in the current (2026) vintage; the preceding vintage reached 2040. Net-zero by 2050 is enshrined in the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act, and the fifteen years between the end of the projection and the target year carry no published official path.
Consequence: The net-zero commitment is registered here with no compliance verdict. Any pace convention Countability could state over a twenty-four-year horizon with no official trajectory to compare against would be an invention of Countability's own, which is precisely what this platform does not do. The commitment is real, dated, and legislated; what is absent is anything official to measure it against between now and then.
How much electricity does any of Ontario's flagship new plants actually draw?
What is missing: No located public document states any plant's own operating demand. Ontario's connection record states what a station is assessed to supply -- 150 MW at the Windsor battery-plant station, 331.2 MW at the new St. Thomas station -- and no located document states that a plant is its station's only load, or what share of the station's assessed maximum the plant itself uses. The one public document that does state a St. Thomas plant utility quantity is the city's wastewater master plan, and that figure is the municipal planner's own assumption, not the company's statement.
Consequence: Public discussion routinely reads station connection quantities as plant demand. The two are different quantities, and the gap between them is not publicly measurable for any of the register's flagship projects. Any claim of the form 'plant X uses Y megawatts' sourced to a connection document is overstated by construction.
When two users share one published station capacity in Ontario, who holds how much of it?
What is missing: No located Ontario document publishes a per-user split of a shared station capacity. The clearest instance is on the record: Hydro One's Northwest Ontario Needs Assessment states Port Arthur TS #1's capacity (59 MW after refurbishment) and names the two parties it supplies -- Hydro One Distribution and Synergy North -- but its forecast table carries a single combined row, and neither party's share is published anywhere located.
Consequence: Where a shared capacity is approaching its bound, the public record can show that it binds but not whom it binds first. Allocation questions -- whose growth the constraint stops -- are unanswerable from the public record at station grain.
Why can none of Ontario's largest active connection applications be checked against an engineering document?
What is missing: Of the 67 large load applications in the register's population at the 2026-07-10 vintage, 47 carry no posted assessment report -- including all four active applications above 400 MW (707, 695, 550, and 453 MW as the register states them). Posting is a strong tendency, not a rule: some on-hold and withdrawn applications do carry posted reports, so no status explains the boundary. The issuer states unposted final reports are obtainable by email, by application ID.
Consequence: The register's largest live claims are exactly the ones whose stated sizes cannot be checked against any public engineering document. For the northern interface the record bounds at 700 MW, the assessment that would establish a second large claimant's share would be produced by the very process whose posting practice withholds it — and for a live application it may still be in progress. Either way, the join is not public.
What would Ring of Fire mining loads require of Ontario's northern grid?
What is missing: No public document states how much electricity Ring of Fire mining development would draw. A transmission line toward the area is now a designated provincial priority: on 2026-01-28 Hydro One announced that Ontario had designated it to build the Greenstone Transmission Line, a single-circuit 230 kV line from the existing East-West Tie near Nipigon Bay, through Longlac Transformer Station, to a new switching station at or near Aroland First Nation, expected in service in 2032 — in the announcement the province's energy minister described it as 'delivering the energy backbone and infrastructure to unlock the Ring of Fire's vast mineral potential'. That announcement states no megawatt figure for any Ring of Fire load, and neither does the transmitter's own current regional planning cycle: the Northwest Region Needs Assessment of 2025-09-03 and the Scoping Assessment of September 2025 do not name the Ring of Fire at all, while describing the region's demands — 'such as mining operation, data centers, forestry companies and large industrial manufacturers' — as 'distinctive, urgent and ever evolving'.
Consequence: A line is being built toward the deposit and the load it would serve has never been publicly quantified. Public discussion of Ring of Fire development therefore proceeds with a construction commitment and an in-service year but no published engineering statement of the requirement: no load figure, no delivery point for mine demand, no constraint assessment. Any megawatt figure attached to Ring of Fire mining load in commentary has no public engineering source. The gap is now sharper than an absence of interest — the interest is designated, funded and dated, and the quantity is still missing.
Which oil-sands projects ship on the Trans Mountain expansion -- and how much?
What is missing: The Canada Energy Regulator publishes the pipeline system's monthly available capacity, and producers publish company-level shipping commitments. No public record assigns any named project's incremental barrels to that corridor: the project-to-pipeline allocation is contractual and appears in no located public document. Company disclosures establish access and optionality, not project allocation.
Consequence: The public record can say the corridor's capacity and the companies committed to it, but not which production growth it carries. Claims of the form 'project X's barrels fill pipeline Y' are portfolio inference, not public record. A register of claims on this corridor's capacity cannot be built from public evidence at project grain.
How much load is actually forecast at the Ontario stations whose shared limit now governs a connection?
What is missing: The load forecast that drives a published shared-capacity requirement is not published. In the connection assessment for a Cambridge-area data centre, the system operator states that the applicant's updated forecast for three named stations is projected to exceed a stated 400 MW during the study period, and imposes a real-time switching requirement on that basis — while placing the forecast itself in a confidential appendix ("Table 1 of Appendix A (Confidential) shows the updated load forecast"). The assessments behind the finding are in a second confidential appendix. The threshold and the remedy are public; the quantity that crosses the threshold, and the year it crosses, are not.
Consequence: A reader can see that a shared limit is being reached and what the operator will do about it, but cannot see by how much, how soon, or how much of the growth belongs to which load. The same document shows why the distinction matters: the three-station total is a different quantity from the data centre's own ultimate load, which is stated openly and unchanged. Where the forecast is withheld, no one outside the process can test how much headroom remains, or how quickly a build obligation turned into a switching instruction.
How to read the dates on this page
- Data version
- When Countability last published a new version of its record. One date for every page on this site, shown in the box above.
- Reference period
- The period a specific figure or chart point actually measures — a quarter, a month, or a year, as the source series is published. This is what "as of" means everywhere on this page, and it varies figure by figure.
- Source licence verified
- Where shown, the date Countability last read that source’s licence terms word for word — not when the source itself last published. Where a source date is unavailable, none is shown rather than guessed.
Full method, evidence tiers, and licence attribution: Sources & Method.
Related on this site
Other domains
This snapshot is a curated sample of Countability’s method, applied to this domain. See Work with Countability for a commissioned question this page does not yet cover.
Work with Countability Commission a question