Canada’s climate journey is entering a more uncertain phase. Emissions are trending lower, investments continue to flow, and clean technologies remain in play. Yet momentum is clearly weakening. That is the central message of Climate Action 2026: Retreat, Reset or Renew, the third annual report from the RBC Climate Action Institute.
The report paints a nuanced picture. Progress has not stopped. But it has slowed. Policy reversals, economic pressures, and shifting public priorities are weighing on climate ambition at a time when speed matters most.
Canada now faces a defining question: retreat from climate action, reset its approach, or renew its commitment with a sharper focus.
Emissions Are Falling, but Not Fast Enough
Canada’s total greenhouse gas emissions are projected to be 7% lower in 2025 than in 2019, according to RBC’s estimates. That marks real progress, especially after years of volatility during and after the pandemic.
However, this pace remains well short of what Canada needs to hit its longer-term targets. The country has committed to reducing emissions by 40% to 45% below 2005 levels by 2030 and by 45% to 50% by 2035. Current trends suggest those goals will be difficult to reach without stronger policy signals.
Several sectors have reduced emissions intensity:
- Electricity: down 27%
- Buildings: down 19%
- Oil and gas: down 19%
These gains reflect cleaner power generation, improved efficiency, and gradual technology upgrades. Still, absolute emissions reductions remain modest, especially in sectors tied to economic growth and population expansion.
Climate Action Barometer Hits a Turning Point
For the first time since its launch, the Climate Action Barometer declined. This index tracks climate-related activity across policy, capital flows, business action, and consumer behavior.
The drop was broad-based. No single sector drove the decline. Instead, multiple pressures hit at once.
Key factors include:
- The removal of the consumer carbon tax
- The rollback of electric vehicle incentives
- Economic uncertainty and rising trade tensions
- Alberta’s restrictions on new renewable energy projects
Together, these shifts weakened confidence. Businesses delayed or canceled projects. Consumers pulled back on major clean-energy purchases. Climate policy slipped down the priority list for governments focused on affordability and job creation.
While climate action remains above pre-2019 levels, the trendline has clearly flattened.
Capital Flows Hold Steady, but Growth Has Stalled
Climate investment in Canada has leveled off at around $20 billion per year. That figure has barely moved in recent years.
Public funding remains a stabilizing force. Nearly $100 billion in incentives for clean technology and climate programs is already budgeted for deployment through 2035 by Ottawa and the largest provincial governments.
However, private capital is showing signs of caution. Investment declined compared to 2024, driven largely by cooling sentiment toward early-stage climate technologies. Policy uncertainty has amplified investor risk concerns, especially in capital-intensive sectors like renewables and clean manufacturing.
Some bright spots remain. Wind projects on Canada’s East Coast have supported investment flows, even as renewable development slowed elsewhere.
Carbon Pricing Changes Ease Pressure
The federal government eliminated the consumer carbon tax in April 2025, refocusing carbon pricing solely on industrial emitters. The change had a limited impact on national emissions coverage, as only around three percent of agricultural emissions were subject to consumer pricing.
For farmers, the move delivered meaningful financial relief. Many agricultural operations rely on propane to dry grain or heat livestock facilities. Few cost-effective, lower-carbon alternatives exist in rural regions, making the tax a direct burden on operating costs. Removing it eased pressure without significantly weakening the overall emissions policy.
Still, the decision lowered Canada’s climate policy score and sent mixed signals to investors and businesses evaluating long-term decarbonization strategies.
EV Slowdown Signals Shifting Consumer Priorities
Consumer behavior has become a significant hindrance to climate momentum. Electric vehicle adoption slowed sharply in 2025. EVs accounted for just eight percent of total vehicle sales in the first half of the year, down from twelve percent during the same period in 2024. Passenger EVs now make up only about four percent of Canada’s total vehicle stock.
Higher interest rates, the removal of purchase incentives, and uncertainty around future mandates all contributed to the pullback.
- The federal government also delayed the Electric Vehicle Availability Standard, which was set to require EVs to represent 20% of new vehicle sales by 2026. That pause further weakened confidence across the market.
At the same time, not all clean technologies lost ground. Heat pump adoption edged higher, supported by new efficiency funding, particularly in Ontario. The province’s $10.9 billion commitment to energy efficiency programs could support further uptake, even as other consumer-facing climate actions slow.
Public priorities have also shifted. Only about a quarter of Canadians now identify climate change as a top national issue. Cost of living pressures, healthcare access, and economic stability dominate public concerns, reshaping how households weigh climate-related decisions.

Buildings Sector Becomes the New Battleground
The RBC Institute’s 2026 “Idea of the Year” focuses squarely on Canada’s buildings sector, which has quietly become one of the country’s most challenging emissions sources. Emissions from buildings rose 15% between 1990 and 2023 and now represent a larger share of national emissions than heavy industry.
Today, buildings account for roughly 18% of Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions when electricity-related emissions are included. Progress remains slow. Emissions from the sector are projected to fall by just one percent in 2025, a pace that leaves Canada far from its net-zero target for buildings by 2050.
New construction adds to the risk. If projects continue to follow prevailing building codes, emissions could rise by an additional 18 million tonnes over time, locking in higher emissions for decades.

Responsible Buildings Pact Points to a Reset
Against this backdrop, the Responsible Buildings Pact offers a potential reset. Launched in 2024 under the Climate Smart Buildings Alliance, the initiative aims to accelerate the adoption of low-carbon designs and materials across the construction sector.
The pact focuses on scaling the use of mass timber and low-carbon concrete, steel, and aluminum. These materials can significantly reduce embodied carbon in new buildings while strengthening domestic supply chains. The approach is particularly timely as Canadian producers face constraints from U.S. trade tariffs, limiting access to lower-emissions materials.
If widely adopted, the pact could transform how Canada builds homes, offices, and infrastructure. By embedding emissions reductions into construction decisions today, the sector could deliver long-term climate gains while supporting industrial competitiveness.
Electricity Progress Slows After Early Success
Canada’s electricity sector remains one of its strongest climate performers. Emissions have fallen an estimated 60% since 2005, surpassing Paris Agreement targets. Coal phase-outs continue to drive reductions, with more than six terawatt-hours of coal power expected to be removed from the grid this year.
Still, progress slowed in 2025. Uncertainty surrounding Alberta’s renewable energy policies led to the cancellation of 11 gigawatts of planned capacity, roughly half of the province’s existing generation. At the same time, natural gas use rose sharply, offsetting some of the emissions gains from coal retirements.
Canada now faces a dual challenge: doubling electricity capacity while fully decarbonizing it by 2050. Estimates suggest the required investment could exceed $1 trillion, underscoring the scale of the task ahead.

Climate Action at a Defining Moment
The RBC report makes one point clear. Canada has not abandoned climate action, but it has lost momentum. Emissions are lower, capital remains available, and technology continues to advance. Yet policy clarity has weakened, consumer confidence has faded, and investment growth has stalled.
With just 25 years left to reach net zero, the choices made now will shape Canada’s emissions trajectory for decades. Renewed coordination between governments, businesses, and consumers will be essential, along with policies that balance economic realities without sacrificing long-term climate goals.
Canada still has time to reset and renew. What it cannot afford is continued drift.
- ALSO READ: Canada to Launch Sustainable Investment Taxonomy in 2026 to Guide Green and Transition Finance
The post Canada’s Climate Momentum Slows in 2026 Despite 7% Emissions Drop, RBC Report Finds appeared first on Carbon Credits.
Carbon Footprint
Finding Nature Based Solutions in Your Supply Chain
Carbon Footprint
How Climate Change Is Raising the Cost of Living
Americans are paying more for insurance, electricity, taxes, and home repairs every year. What many people may not realize is that climate change is already one of the drivers behind those rising costs.
For many households, climate change is no longer just an environmental issue. It is becoming a cost-of-living issue. While climate impacts like melting glaciers and shrinking polar ice can feel distant from everyday life, the financial effects are already showing up in monthly budgets across the country.
Today, a larger share of household income is consumed by fixed costs such as housing, insurance, utilities, and healthcare. (3) Climate change and climate inaction are adding pressure to many of those expenses through higher disaster recovery costs, rising energy demand, infrastructure repairs, and increased insurance risk.
The goal of this article is to help connect climate change to the everyday financial realities people already experience. Regardless of where someone stands on climate policy, it is important to recognize that climate change is already increasing costs for households, businesses, and taxpayers across the United States.
More conservative estimates indicate that the average household has experienced an increase of about $400 per year from observed climate change, while less conservative estimates suggest an increase of $900.(1) Those in more disaster-prone regions of the country face disproportionate costs, with some households experiencing climate-related costs averaging $1,300 per year.(1) Another study found that climate adaptation costs driven by climate change have already consumed over 3% of personal income in the U.S. since 2015.(9) By the end of the century, housing units could spend an additional $5,600 on adaptation costs.(1)
Whether we realize it or not, Americans are already paying for climate change through higher insurance premiums, energy costs, taxes, and infrastructure repairs. These growing expenses are often referred to as climate adaptation costs.
Without meaningful climate action, these costs are expected to continue rising. Choosing not to invest in climate action is also choosing to spend more on climate adaptation.
Here are a few ways climate change is already increasing the cost of living:
- Higher insurance costs from more frequent and severe storms
- Higher energy use during longer and hotter summers
- Higher electricity rates tied to storm recovery and grid upgrades
- Higher government spending and taxpayer-funded disaster recovery costs
The real debate is not whether climate change costs money. Americans are already paying for it. The question is where we want those costs to go. Should we invest more in climate action to help reduce future climate adaptation costs, or continue paying growing recovery and adaptation expenses in everyday life?
How Climate Change Is Increasing Insurance Costs
There is one industry that closely tracks the financial impact of natural disasters: insurance. Insurance companies are focused on assessing risk, estimating damages, and collecting enough revenue to cover losses and remain financially stable.
Comparing the 20-year periods 1980–1999 and 2000–2019, climate-related disasters increased 83% globally from 3,656 events to 6,681 events. The average time between billion-dollar disasters dropped from 82 days during the 1980s to 16 days during the last 10 years, and in 2025 the average time between disasters fell to just 10 days. (6)
According to the reinsurance firm Munich Re, total economic losses from natural disasters in 2024 exceeded $320 billion globally, nearly 40% higher than the decade-long annual average. Average annual inflation-adjusted costs more than quadrupled from $22.6 billion per year in the 1980s to $102 billion per year in the 2010s. Costs increased further to an average of $153.2 billion annually during 2020–2024, representing another 50% increase over the 2010s. (6)
In the United States, billion-dollar weather and climate disasters have also increased significantly. The average number of billion-dollar disasters per year has grown from roughly three annually during the 1980s to 19 annually over the last decade. In 2023 and 2024, the U.S. recorded 28 and 27 billion-dollar disasters respectively, both setting new records. (6)
The growing impact of climate change is one reason insurance costs continue to rise. “There are two things that drive insurance loss costs, which is the frequency of events and how much they cost,” said Robert Passmore, assistant vice president of personal lines at the Property Casualty Insurers Association of America. “So, as these events become more frequent, that’s definitely going to have an impact.” (8)
After adjusting for inflation, insurance costs have steadily increased over time. From 2000 to 2020, insurance costs consistently grew faster than the Consumer Price Index due to rising rebuilding costs and weather-related losses.(3) Between 2020 and 2023 alone, the average home insurance premium increased from $75 to $360 due to climate change impacts, with disaster-prone regions experiencing especially steep increases.(1) Since 2015, homeowners in some regions affected by more extreme weather have seen home insurance costs increased by nearly 57%.(1) Some insurers have also limited or stopped offering coverage in high-risk areas.(7)
For many families, rising insurance costs are no longer occasional financial burdens. They are becoming recurring monthly expenses tied directly to growing climate risk.
How Rising Temperatures Increase Household Energy Costs

The financial impacts of climate change extend beyond insurance. Rising temperatures are also changing how much energy Americans use and how utilities plan for future electricity demand.
Between 1950 and 2010, per capita electricity use increased 10-fold, though usage has flattened or slightly declined since 2012 due to more efficient appliances and LED lighting. (3) A significant share of increased energy demand comes from cooling needs associated with higher temperatures.
Over the last 20 years, the United States has experienced increasing Cooling Degree Days (CDD) and decreasing Heating Degree Days (HDD). Nearly all counties have become warmer over the past three decades, with some areas experiencing several hundred additional cooling degree days, equivalent to roughly one additional degree of warmth on most days. (1) This trend reflects a warming climate where air conditioning demand is increasing while heating demand generally declines. (4)
As temperatures continue rising, households are expected to spend more on cooling than they save on heating. The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) projects that by 2050, national Heating Degree Days will be 11% lower while Cooling Degree Days will be 28% higher than 2021 levels. Cooling demand is projected to rise 2.5 times faster than heating demand declines. (5)
These projections come from energy and infrastructure experts planning for future electricity demand and grid capacity needs. Utilities and grid operators are already preparing for higher peak summer electricity loads caused by rising temperatures. (5)
Longer and hotter summers also affect how homes and buildings are designed. Buildings constructed for past climate conditions may require upgrades such as larger air conditioning systems, stronger insulation, and improved ventilation to remain comfortable and energy efficient in the future. (10)
For many households, this means higher monthly utility bills and potentially higher long-term home improvement costs as temperatures continue to rise.
How Climate Change Affects Electricity Rates
On an inflation-adjusted basis, average U.S. residential electricity rates are slightly lower today than they were 50 years ago. (2) However, climate-related damage to utility infrastructure is creating new upward pressure on electricity costs.
Electric utilities rely heavily on above-ground poles, wires, transformers, and substations that can be damaged by hurricanes, storms, floods, and wildfires. Repairing and upgrading this infrastructure often requires substantial investment.
As a result, utilities are increasing electricity rates in response to wildfire and hurricane events to fund infrastructure repairs and future mitigation efforts. (1) The average cumulative increase in per-household electricity expenditures due to climate-related price changes is approximately $30. (1)
While this increase may appear modest today, utility costs are expected to rise further as climate-related infrastructure damage becomes more frequent and severe.
How Climate Disasters Increase Government Spending and Taxes
Extreme weather events also damage public infrastructure, including roads, schools, bridges, airports, water systems, and emergency services infrastructure. Recovery and rebuilding costs are often funded through taxpayer dollars at the federal, state, and local levels.
The average annual government cost tied to climate-related disaster recovery is estimated at nearly $142 per household. (1) States that frequently experience hurricanes, wildfires, tornadoes, or flooding can face even higher public recovery costs.
These expenses affect taxpayers whether they personally experience a disaster or not. Climate-related recovery spending can increase pressure on public budgets, emergency management systems, and infrastructure funding nationwide.
Reducing Climate Costs Through Climate Action
While this article focuses on the growing financial costs associated with climate change, the issue is not only about money for many people. It is also about recognizing our environmental impact and taking responsibility for reducing it in order to help preserve a healthy planet for future generations.
While individuals alone cannot solve climate change, collective action can help reduce future climate adaptation costs over time.
For those interested in taking action, there are three important steps:
- Estimate your carbon footprint to better understand the emissions connected to your lifestyle and activities.
- Create a plan to gradually reduce emissions through energy efficiency, cleaner technologies, and more sustainable choices.
- Address remaining emissions by supporting verified carbon reduction projects through carbon credits.
Carbon credits are one of the most cost-effective tools available for climate action because they help fund projects that generate verified emission reductions at scale. Supporting global emission reduction efforts can help reduce the long-term impacts and costs associated with climate change.
Visit Terrapass to learn more about carbon footprints, carbon credits, and climate action solutions.
The post How Climate Change Is Raising the Cost of Living appeared first on Terrapass.
Carbon Footprint
Carbon credit project stewardship: what happens after credit issuance
A carbon credit purchase is not a transaction that closes at issuance. The credit may be retired, the certificate filed, and the reporting box ticked. But on the ground, in the forest, in the field, and in the community, the work continues. It endures for years. In many cases, for decades.
![]()
-
Climate Change9 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases9 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Renewable Energy7 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Greenhouse Gases10 months ago
嘉宾来稿:探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测

