Published by The Winnipeg Free Press Saturday, Aug. 23, 2025
Opinion by: James Wilt and Niall Harney
Against the backdrop of the deadly, devastating inferno engulfing northern Manitoba and escalating belligerence from the U.S., a lively debate is playing out over the future of domestic economies and potential nation-building projects in the province and beyond. Some have argued that the province needs more fossil fuel infrastructure to expand Canadian export markets and profit from remaining oil and gas demand.
But a provincial economic strategy based on increased fossil fuel exports would do nothing to address crises of affordability and resilience, and would instead likely worsen them. The dire realities of the climate crisis and trends in global energy transition have changed dramatically in the last few years, undermining claims that doubling down on the status quo is realistic and practical. Investments in climate solutions like upgrading building energy efficiency and heating offer an alternative to resource extraction and export with potential to create more local jobs while adapting our indoor spaces for a more volatile climate.
Investing now in new fossil fuel infrastructure for growing exports is a risky gamble. The International Energy Agency, far from a radical voice, forecasts that global oil and gas demand will peak by 2030, in large part due to China’s rapid and unprecedented electrification which has accelerated dramatically in the last three years. There are now major concerns about looming oversupply and potential price collapses for both oil and gas, which would undercut marginal high-cost producers first, leading to stranded assets and public bailouts.
This trajectory would also risk further entrenching high-polluting exports at a moment when emissions need to be reduced as quickly as possible to reach international targets, with wealthy countries doing their fair share.
The idea that fossil fuel exports could significantly boost the province’s economy is unfounded. Almost all fossil fuel infrastructure requires substantial public subsidies. The Trans Mountain Expansion and LNG Canada typify this, requiring tens of billions of dollars in support with tax breaks, loan guarantees, discounted electricity and much else.
Provincial revenue and employment benefits from building a new pipeline through Manitoba would also be minimal. A new pipeline or export project would likely result in a short-term flurry of construction and engineering jobs — and with it, a bump in income tax revenue — but only a handful of permanent positions once completed. Many oil and gas jobs have been automated away over the last decade and aren’t coming back. With an annual provincial budget of around $25 billion, even new revenues from an export terminal would be a drop in the fiscal bucket.
By contrast, there are many opportunities for low-emissions economic development that can create local jobs while also improving affordability: funding public transit operations, agricultural sustainability programs, curbside composting programs, renewable electricity generation and transmission, and much more.
To focus on just one, consider the enormous potential for building energy-efficiency upgrades and geothermal district heating throughout the province. There are already concerns about meeting growing electricity demand at peak times in coming years. While new generation capacity is essential — ideally via a combination of wind, solar and battery storage — with the rapid pace of electrification currently underway this transition must include reducing the amount of energy required to heat and cool our homes, through retrofits and efficiency measures.
Dollar for dollar, investments in building energy efficiency and geothermal heat pumps create more jobs than fossil fuel projects. The scale of work required to retrofit homes and install district heating systems could be a source of employment for decades; these upgrades are also more likely to employ local workers and firms. They would vastly improve the quality and resilience of buildings, improving comfort, air quality and overall health as we adapt to hotter, smokier summers. Publicly owned buildings — social housing, hospitals, schools, office buildings — would be a place to start.
Of course, the question inevitably arises: where would the money for all this come from? Low-interest loans and grants are required to make deep energy retrofits accessible to more households. Government-supported public banks are best positioned to finance deep-energy retrofits, a model that has been used to great success in other countries. Creating a “green public bank” is a nation-building project Manitoba could champion to the federal government.
Manitoba has a responsibility to leverage its hydro-based electricity sector to greatly accelerate the energy transition and demonstrate to the rest of the country the benefits that come from it. Northern Manitoba, specifically, requires enormous public funding to address urgent needs like housing, health care, education and infrastructure, along with Indigenous-led fire stewardship and ecosystem management. The choice we face is not one between spending and not spending money, but whether money will be spent reactively or preventatively.
Reverting to fantasies of fossil fuel-based prosperity is skating to where the puck was decades ago.
James Wilt is policy development manager at Climate Action Team Manitoba. Niall Harney is senior researcher at the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives – Manitoba, where he holds the Errol Black Chair in labour issues.