Climate critics are accusing the BC government of continuing to subsidize fossil fuel companies after announcing more funding to help heavy industry clean up carbon pollution.
The province announced $35 million in the coming year for industries adopting cleaner technology or the electrification of their operations to reduce green house gas emissions driving the climate crisis. The funding is derived from a portion of the revenue yielded by the province鈥檚 price on carbon generated by large emitters, which was intended to push companies to find cleaner solutions than burning fossil fuels.
The funding helps B.C. industries speed decarbonization and 鈥渓ead in the global shift to clean energy,鈥� said Adrian Dix, minister of energy and climate solutions, in a statement.
Melissa Lem, president of the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment (CAPE), disagreed.
The province is 鈥済reenwashing鈥� subsidies for oil and gas projects that offer little progress toward meeting B.C.鈥檚 climate targets but pose increasingly great risks to human health, Lem said. The wealthy fossil fuel sector has 鈥渁mple resources鈥� and shouldn鈥檛 get any funding from the province given the industry produces 20 per cent of the province鈥檚 carbon pollution 鈥� second only to the transportation sector, which generates 42 per cent of B.C.鈥檚 emissions.
鈥淭he bottom line is wealthy fossil fuel billionaires do not need money back from the B.C. government to continue to subsidize an industry that's bad for our health,鈥� said Lem.
鈥淚t's like taxing tobacco producers and then giving them the money back to put filters on their cigarettes.鈥�
The continued burning and production of oil and gas is driving 鈥榗limate chaos鈥� in the form of drought, heatwaves and wildfires that have profound impacts on people and communities, she said. The wildfire smoke that regularly blankets big cities and small communities alike aggravates asthma and other lung diseases and increases the risk of heart attacks, Lem said. Seniors and others with existing health conditions are especially vulnerable to extreme weather 鈥� for example, Lem cites the 2021 B.C. heat dome that killed more than 600 people.
鈥淓ssentially, investing in our health care system and the health of people across BC has to come before industry handouts, and that can also mean investing in and subsidizing renewable energy, not more fracking and LNG [projects],鈥� she said.
Oil and Gas gets most funding
In 2024, a total of 37 CleanBC Industry projects received approximately $127.7 million in funding to reduce emissions and introduce innovative technology and electrification to conduct studies and wean operations off fossil fuels.
The city of Vancouver got $8.8 million to expand the capture of methane, a potent greenhouse gas, at its Delta landfill. Cement producer Heidelberg Materials was given $8.1 million for an alternative fuel system to burn solid construction waste, which results in less emissions than using fossil fuels and diverts materials from landfills.
Additonally, Domtar Inc.,formerly Catalyst Paper, was awarded $6.65 million to upgrade technology and reduce emissions from its natural gas boiler at the Crofton pulp mill on Vancouver Island.
However, fossil fuel producers operating in northeastern BC鈥檚 Montney gas field got the lion鈥檚 share of the province鈥檚 clean industry funding. An estimated 76 per cent of the total funding (about $95.3 million) went to a handful of gas companies for carbon capture projects or to hook into the BC Hydro grid instead of burning gas to fuel their operations.
Since 2019, $368 million in CleanBC funding has been awarded to 173 projects. Those projects are expected to reduce 14 million tonnes of planet-warming emissions over a decade, according to the province, which also noted every dollar invested is doubled through additional investments from industry.
All projects are selected through a competitive process and the resulting funding agreements are tied to emission targets. If projects don鈥檛 deliver, the money is returned to the province, a spokesperson for the ministry of energy and climate solutions said in an email to Canada鈥檚 National Observer.
B.C. Green Party Leader Jeremy Valeriote noted the new funding announcement closely follows the province鈥檚 recent awarding of $200 million in subsidies to the Cedar LNG project to electrify its floating export facility.
While the Green Party supports initiatives to reduce emissions, Valeriote said funds would be better spent on measures that benefit B.C. residents and make life more affordable.
鈥淚t's a form of subsidy to some pretty profitable industries that really should be able to stand on their own two feet and do this work,鈥� he said.
鈥淚t could go a long way to making a tangible difference in people's lives that also drives down emissions like public transit and building retrofits that could help rebuild [public] support for climate action,鈥� he said.
Valeriote also questioned the wisdom of investing heavily in carbon capture projects.
鈥淚t鈥檚 not proven technology that鈥檚 been implemented at scale that potentially could be used to justify more fossil fuel expansion,鈥� he said. 鈥淚t鈥檚 a dangerous thing to be putting a lot of investment into when really we need to be reducing emissions.鈥�
The CleanBC Industry Fund offers only 鈥減iecemeal鈥� emissions reductions that aren't going to help meet BC鈥檚 climate targets 鈥� which the province has conceded it is nowhere close to meeting, Valeriote said.
The province is currently expected to miss its 2030 climate targets by half, reducing emissions by 21 per cent rather than the 40 per cent drop from the 2007 baseline as promised. B.C. is also unlikely to meet its 2025 target of a 16 per cent drop, instead projecting a reduction of a little more than two per cent.
The province repealed the consumer carbon tax in March, which resulted in a $2 billion loss for the 2025 budget and led to the province scuttling its electric vehicle rebate program.
The province has ditched the carbon tax without figuring out what it will do to replace it and has not instigated any meaningful climate measures such as the long-promised emissions cap, Valeriote said.
The Greens and NDP agreed to a review of the CleanBC program, and results are expected in the fall, he said. The independent review of the CleanBC program will hopefully prompt the province to revamp its climate action plan so it can actually meet emissions reduction targets and ensure funds are used effectively, he said.
The CleanBC Industrial Fund may be one of many climate programs that don鈥檛 鈥渕ake the cut鈥� following the evaluation, Valeriote said.
Katya Rhodes, a climate policy expert and professor at the University of Victoria, described the CleanBC funding as a 鈥渞evenue recycling mechanism鈥� for the industrial carbon tax rather than an additional public subsidy.
However, she agreed the program likely offers minimal emissions reductions. What鈥檚 more, it isn鈥檛 an efficient use of funds as companies needing to meet BC emissions regulations would have probably undertaken the same projects to mitigate costs of the carbon tax and meet other climate regulations, regardless.
鈥淚t's likely a political acceptability measure that ensures that the industry is not completely opposed to the industrial carbon price,鈥� Rhodes said.
The most effective way to reduce emissions is to employ broad, economy-wide, flexible policies such as BC鈥檚 low carbon fuel standard, the zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) sales mandate, methane regulations and clean electricity standards, as well as the now defunct economy-wide consumer carbon tax, she said.
The policies are 鈥渇lexible鈥� as they set out a desired outcome but allow sectors or companies to determine how they will meet it, she said.
The current political climate and economic concerns generated by US President Donald Trump and his administration 鈥� compounded by ongoing climate misinformation campaigns 鈥� make the likelihood of BC bringing in any radical new regulations to reach its net-zero targets unlikely in the next couple of years, she said.
Raising the carbon pollution tax on industry alone also won鈥檛 help the province achieve its targets. The province needs to retrench and explain climate policies to the public better so initiatives such as the ZEV sales mandate don鈥檛 also get sacrificed.
鈥淭he public mood for the industrial carbon price to grow is very low,鈥� Rhodes said.
鈥淸The province] can work on strengthening our electricity generation advantage in British Columbia and keeping the policies in place so they won鈥檛 be completely removed.鈥�
