‘No new sources’ to replenish Arctic Energy Alliance funds

There is no new money available to plug the gap at an energy efficiency not-for-profit left by a lapse in federal funding, the NWT’s infrastructure minister said this week.

The Arctic Energy Alliance, which is funded through the territorial and federal governments, offers energy efficiency programs to northerners and supports small-scale renewable energy projects.

For example, the group – also known as the AEA – has administered programs helping people to buy wood stoves, evaluate their homes for energy efficiency improvements like better insulation, install solar, or acquire rebates on electric vehicles.

But a large chunk of the AEA’s funding recently evaporated, making it harder to meet demand or keep the same programs in place.

In 2019-20, the Arctic Energy Alliance signed on to a federal program called the Low Carbon Economy Fund that effectively doubled the funding at the AEA’s disposal.

That cash was used to make existing programs better and create some new ones to fill gaps.

The Low Carbon Economy Fund money has now run out and there is no indication it will be renewed or replaced by a similar federal program. That means the AEA is back to “essentially our funding levels from 2018-19,” its boss, Mark Heyck, told MLAs in December last year.

Heyck said the absence of that funding had resulted in the closure of popular programs like those that helped people in smaller communities to acquire wood stoves.

Even as the NWT completes its initial corridor of electric charging stations from Yellowknife to the south, the territory is not budgeting any money for electric vehicle rebates this coming year – deleting the $153,000 it set aside last year.

In the legislature on Monday, infrastructure minister Caroline Wawzonek said the GNWT had raised the disappearing federal funding with Ottawa counterparts.

“I suspect – given the state of affairs in shift, or likely to be in shift shortly, with our federal colleagues – that this is an area we will have to re-examine once we know what the next government’s iteration of priorities might be in Ottawa,” Wawzonek said in response to a question from Frame Lake MLA Julian Morse, referring to the likelihood of a forthcoming federal election.

“We put a lot of money into big infrastructure projects in this department, and I’m not denying that those are important, but a little bit of money to each individual homeowner goes a long way to helping them reduce the cost to their pocketbooks, and that’s the thing that people feel when you make changes for them,” said Morse.

“People aren’t going to notice their costs go down because we put a bunch of money towards this or that infrastructure project. … It’s something that I think is an important area. I think it’s important to residents.”

Earlier that day, Yellowknife North MLA Shauna Morgan had questioned Wawzonek on what she said was a view that energy initiatives are “a luxury we can’t afford.”

“Wasting energy is a luxury we can’t afford,” Morgan said.

“In each year’s budget we devote more and more millions to energy subsidies, electricity rate subsidies, seniors’ home heating subsidies, fuel subsidies for communities in crisis such as Norman Wells.

“These offer much-needed relief but they don’t address any of the root causes of high energy costs, leaving the government on the hook for ever-increasing subsidies. We could reduce the amount of subsidies needed by ramping up our energy efficiency rebates and incentives.”

Morgan gave the examples of a Yellowknife family saving $6,000 per year by insulating a 1970s-era trailer, or a family in Fort Liard saving $600 annually on water and electricity bills through help to buy more efficient appliances.

“With sunsets in federal funding we have significantly reduced our rebate programs, leaving more and more folks choosing inefficient furnaces, boilers, and appliances because they seem cheaper upfront,” she said.

“But it’s costing them much more in the long run. It’s also costing the climate and costing this government. We are sliding backwards.”

From 2024: Greener homes program ‘practically inaccessible’ to northerners
From 2024: Behind the backlog of home energy audits in the NWT

Wawzonek did not disagree, saying the loss of federal funding through the Low Carbon Economy Fund had resulted in a “significant impact.”

However, she said the department did not have an obvious means of replacing that cash and restoring the Arctic Energy Alliance’s former level of service.

“We don’t have other or additional independent funds necessarily to come up with in areas where we could realign,” the minister said.

“Without being able to source some additional funding, it’s difficult to come up at this point in time with a simple answer or simple solution.”

Below, read a transcript of Morgan’s Monday exchanges with the minister.

These exchanges took place in the House on March 3, 2025.

Shauna Morgan: The Arctic Energy Alliance has experienced major funding reductions in recent years and struggle to meet the huge demand from NWT residents, businesses, and community governments for its programs and services. And as of October of 2024, they had actually run out of money for their energy rebate programs and were no longer accepting applications.

Given the reductions in federal money for energy efficiency rebate programs, has the GNWT considered stepping in with territorial money to support those programs, especially where this could directly save the GNWT money in subsidy payments? 

Caroline Wawzonek: We were quite disappointed to see the federal cuts to the Low Carbon Economy funding. That had a significant impact on the Department of Infrastructure and on our energy programs, and particularly with respect to the funding that’s provided to Arctic Energy Alliance. So it was a significant impact on our budget.

We don’t have other or additional independent funds necessarily to come up with in areas where we could realign. Obviously the department’s budgets are under review right now, and certainly I would look forward to answering some questions in that regard. But there was not a new source of funding identified, so other than what is being presented in the main estimates that are before the committee, we don’t have any new sources of funding from which to draw.

Shauna Morgan: There’s also been a huge demand to the Arctic Energy Alliance for home energy evaluations to find efficiencies that could save homeowners money. But there’s been a huge backlog, especially since Covid, due to a shortage of certified energy advisors. What role could the GNWT play in helping to train or bring in more energy advisors to help address this backlog?

Caroline Wawzonek: Without being able to source some additional funding, it’s difficult to come up at this point in time with a simple answer or simple solution. We certainly do look forward to continuing to work closely with Arctic Energy Alliance. They’re a critical partner in terms of delivering programs in this space.

I’d already actually spoken to the member with respect to setting up my own meeting to make sure that we can do what we can to work directly with Arctic Energy Alliance – identify where the shortcomings are, identify if there’s particular communities that have specific needs. … If there’s an opportunity to work, even within schools or within our own training programs for our staff, I’d certainly be open to do that. But if it’s an independent budget line item, again, what’s in our budget proposal right now is on the floor, and it’s unfortunately a bit what it is with the significant drop in federal funding.

Shauna Morgan: One area that the GNWT did manage to find funds in the last year was for Arctic Energy Alliance to work with homeowners in Norman Wells to look for energy efficiency opportunities. So I wonder if the minister could explain what successes or lessons learned have come from that initiative,which we were able to find funding for this past year?

Caroline Wawzonek:  I do have a bit of information with respect to some of the work that was under way in Norman Wells.

I don’t know that we have a full evaluation done or an analysis done, which would certainly be helpful in order to determine what that might look like for others. But there was a program that was undertaken with Arctic Energy Alliance staff for a winterization walkthrough. It really is an opportunity to help particularly folks from low or medium-income households understand some simple solutions.

Examples in that regard would just be even insulating window plastic, which can have a fairly significant impact on heating costs. Weather stripping around doors, similarly, was something that came out of this – which, again, they’re simple solutions, but sometimes those simple solutions don’t cost very much. People just need to be educated.

Again, happy to follow back up, see if there’s other specific items that came after that initiative in Norman Wells, and we’ll make sure to get that out so others can benefit from that.

Shauna Morgan: Is there anything in the government’s business plan that specifically speaks to energy efficiency goals or strategies in terms of buildings, appliances, or vehicles?

Caroline Wawzonek: There is. We do, of course, have commitments to advance the energy strategy and to update that, and the energy strategy is really the all-encompassing approach that we utilize to determine how our government as a whole is going to be approaching energy issues, energy efficiency included.

The Department of Infrastructure is certainly the lead on that, but we’re not alone. Housing NWT also has commitments in their business plan, I understand, with respect to incorporating energy efficiency technologies. And the Department of Infrastructure, again as I had just mentioned, we have within us the responsibility under EV technologies and also supports to Arctic Energy Alliance, which delivers a lot of programs. So in short, the short answer is yes.

Shauna Morgan: I do understand that the business plan speaks to the energy strategy, and there are things contained within the energy strategy. One of those is a goal – at least in the previous iteration of the 2030 Energy Strategy – a goal to increase commercial, residential and institutional building energy efficiency by 15 percent. But can the minister explain what practical steps the government is taking to actually achieve that goal?

Caroline Wawzonek: There’s a number of initiatives that are under way by the government. We have, if I’m not mistaken, in the last five years spent over $60 million in different energy efficiency programs, including renewable heat, renewable energy and, for example, biomass boiler installation, LED lighting replacements in a number of areas.

There’s a push towards some solar energy and being able to interconnect those systems into our existing energy infrastructure, and supporting communities in their efforts to move towards having, again, their own opportunities for district heating, for example boiler installations, and also other energy alternatives that can then feed into our grid and support the grid. So quite a number of things happening in this space.

Shauna Morgan: Can the minister point to evidence that the work under way will actually lead us to achieve the goal of 15-percent energy efficiency reductions? Is that a path that is laid out and quantified, or we’re just hoping that the investment will get us to the 15-percent goal?

Caroline Wawzonek: There are annual reporting requirements from both myself with respect to the energy side but also from my colleague at ECC with respect to our climate change framework. I don’t have them at the tip of my fingers here today, but we do certainly see it as an obligation to report on the progress we’re making in those two areas, and that is tabled here in the House annually.