There are a number of programs at the federal government level that support making housing more green. I believe that the Canada greener homes grant program was $2.2 billion over about five years, so something like $300 million to $400 million per year. The deep retrofit accelerator initiative that I mentioned was about $200 million over four years, so about $50 million per year. Other retrofit programs at the federal level have been in a similar range, so typically well under $1 billion per year.
It's not on the scale of some of the investments in fossil fuel infrastructure that we hear about, certainly, such as pipeline projects where there's a $20-billion to $40-billion public investment. Those are major infrastructure projects with a different level of investment and support. Of course, the big difference is that those fossil fuel infrastructure investments play a fundamentally different role. They grow fossil fuel production, grow carbon emissions and they potentially generate important benefits for the economy in doing so, whereas energy efficiency programming reduces reliance on energy to begin with, reduces carbon emissions and brings us closer to our long-term net-zero ambitions.
Our main concern, when we see fossil fuel investment, is just carbon lock-in, as we call it. That's the idea that we're investing in projects that may take 10 years just to build out and that make sense only if we're going to continue relying on fossil fuels for another 20 to 30 years after that. It implies that we're planning to continue our fossil fuel consumption at current levels for very long periods of time.