The public conversation around energy projects often sounds far more settled than it really is. Debates quickly become framed in binary terms, around competing priorities such as economic development versus emissions reductions, pipelines versus renewables, or growth versus conservation.
But recent research suggests that many Canadians are balancing competing priorities at once.
Our Angus Reid study found that a plurality of Canadians do not identify primarily with either a development-first or emissions-first perspective. Instead, they evaluate projects one-by-one, weighing the benefits, costs and tradeoffs.
Nearly half of respondents described themselves as torn when thinking about energy policy. And nearly 40 per cent said they approached energy issues on a case-by-case basis.
Women and men showed almost identical levels of internal ambivalence on these issues. But when forced to choose a side, men were more likely to do so than women.
Nearly half of Canadians who identified as development-first said they also worry about environmental impacts, while more than one-third of those who prioritize emissions reductions also worry about affordability.
A participant in our research captured this complexity well. Canada’s biggest energy challenge, they said, was finding a way to support development that would be “profitable for all Canada” while causing “minimum environmental damage.”
They also argued British Columbians are right to worry about coastal pollution, and that Albertans and Ottawa are right to prioritize being a reliable energy partner. They said it could make sense to set aside project revenue for future environmental cleanup.
Affordability
Affordability emerged as the strongest point of agreement in our study.
Nearly nine in 10 respondents said keeping energy affordable is essential or very important — ahead of creating and protecting jobs, reducing emissions or boosting electricity reliability.
Cost also came through in other parts of the survey.
Canadians want to know whether energy projects will drive up (or down) household costs, who will pay for new infrastructure, whether communities will benefit, and whether the long-term outcomes justify the investment.
Those questions apply to transmission lines, renewable generation, pipelines and nuclear facilities, as well as to the infrastructure required to support new technologies such as artificial intelligence.
Artificial intelligence has become part of daily life for millions of people, yet the infrastructure supporting those tools remains largely out of view.
Supporting AI and digital infrastructure ranked near the bottom of respondents’ energy priorities. When Canadians considered the electricity, water and local impacts associated with large data centres, 53 per cent said they support growth in AI and digital infrastructure but worry about those impacts.
Data centres raise concerns around electricity demand, infrastructure costs, local benefits and environmental consequences: How much electricity will they require, who will pay for the infrastructure, what will communities gain, and what are the environmental consequences?
Trust
Canadians also draw clear distinctions between sources of information.
In our study, 83 per cent of respondents said they trust independent scientists, engineers and technical experts. This compared to 27 per cent trust in energy companies and 16 per cent trust in technology companies and data centre operators.
When asked what would increase their confidence in energy decisions, Canadians pointed to evidence that costs would remain affordable, transparent information about who profits from these projects, and evidence that large electricity users would pay their fair share of infrastructure costs.
Canada has a long list of projects and investments to consider in the years ahead, from energy generation and transmission to data centres.
Our research suggests many Canadians will consider those projects on their individual merits.
Affordability, environmental impacts, energy reliability, local benefits and who pays are all likely to factor into where someone ultimately lands.
Understanding those considerations gives us a better sense of how Canadians are approaching the choices ahead.
Methodology: The research was conducted through the Angus Reid Forum’s Canadian National Omnibus from July 2 to 4, 2026, among a representative sample of 1,512 Canadian adults. Results were weighted to align with Canadian census demographics. Open-ended responses were collected using Rival Technologies’ conversational AI probing technology, which asks tailored follow-up questions to capture greater depth and context from participants.
