Unless policies or technologies change, the ownership cost of electric vehicles (EVs) needs to decrease by 31 per cent if Canada to wants to reach its sales target of 60 per cent EVs by 2030, according to a new report released Thursday by Parliamentary Budget Officer Yves Giroux.
Last December, the federal government unveiled its Electric Vehicle Availability Standard that outlined zero-emission vehicle sales targets for automakers. The standard requires all new light-duty sales in Canada to be electric or plug-in hybrid by 2035. There are also interim targets of at least 20 per cent of all sales being EVs by 2026 and 60 per cent by 2030.
Those federal government targets come as growth forecasts for auto companies have plateaued and concerns about charging infrastructure persist. The price of EVs has also pushed the cars out of reach for many consumers. According to the Canadian Black Book, the average cost of an EV was $73,000 in 2023.
Maybe don’t put a 100% tarrif on affordable Chinese EVs then?
Hard disagree, we should be reducing our reliance on China, not increasing it.
I agree, but we also need to lower our GHG emissions. Since we refuse to improve urban planning or transit, EVs are a step in the right direction.
Correct, but that doesn’t mean we need the ones designed and manufactured in China. There are already other options designed and manufactured in better countries.
Protecting domestic industries from competing with China does nothing to strengthen it.
If China was playing fair and being a good ally, I’d be okay with that. They aren’t. Their companies regularly engage in everything from dumping to industrial espionage, not to mention the worker exploitation and abuse, and extending into the government interference both internally and externally.
Protecting ourselves from a single country still allows every other country to compete with us.
Switching to cheap EVs does not get us off fossil fuels as much as you think.
Personal transportation only accounts for something like 20% of the total fossil fuel use.
Increasing trade interdependency is a good way to avoid hot conflicts. It’s the principle behind the EU, it’s the principle behind the detente strategy during the Cold War, and it’s the narrative of globalization that has been pushed from the WTO down, ever since we started protesting neoliberal globalization in the 1990ies.
It’s really telling that Chinese EVs (like imported Teslas) were basically considered fine until the prospect of them being affordable to the middle class arose. That’s when we started hearing about labour abuses and fires that only happen with * cheap Chinese* batteries.
It’s not like Tesla has a stellar reputation for quality and reliability. They started powerwall as a way to offload bad/ prematurely failing batteries. Don’t get me wrong, powerwall is a good idea. But pretending like BYD is going to have terrible batteries and that’s why we need tariffs is bad.
China has labour and human rights abuses (eg genocide of Uyghers in Xinjiang [cultural genocide is still genocide]). Imo Canada is doing a better job of reconciling with its history/present of cultural genocide than China is. Canada’s TFW program probably results in lots of horrible abuses that we don’t hear about, but i think this program may be on its way out too. These issues don’t only apply to EVs though.
The only things that’re EV specific are lithium batteries and automotive manufacturing.
EV tariffs are protectionism: We want to protect domestic automotive (and para-automotive) manufacturing capabilities, and our investments in EVs/green tech.
I don’t think 100% tariffs can be justified on EVs alone.
Because they don’t care about their workers ? Do we really want cars made by Chinese slaves ? Like we do with our t-shirts ? Fuck no.
👏 stop 👏 subsidizing 👏 oil
$18B last year in government support for petrocorps.
i would love for my next car to be an EV
It doesn’t need to have 1000km range, or edge to edge touch screens, or anything fancy
Give me something like a subaru impreza, with 300-400km range, and a sunroof.
Give me a Honda fit but electric and make my landlord give me the ability to charge it. Some fancy tech would be nice, but I drive a used economy vehicle for a reason
I think you nailed one of the biggest but least talked about factors in mass adoption. I’d love to get an EV, but the only used ones I could reasonably afford would require daily charging as I’d use well over half a charge per workday and I have nowhere to charge at home or work.
Me too. Like, I drive a shitty ice, but I’d consider a decent upgrade in vehicles, only for an Ev and only with somewhere to charge it. Like, that’s one of the major reasons my wife and I are thinking of switching to renting or buying a house at the end of our lease.
And people like us are necessary for adoption. We’re the “yeah but even they have one and like it” people
I’m still tempted to do a diy conversion to get specifically what I want and nothing else. I have to get my money’s worth out of my bike too though.
The bolt ev and euv is an amazing car I love it and it fits your criteria.
The Bolt was discontinued after the 2023 model. But hey you can buy a new EV Chevy Equinox now starting at $55k >_>
Good news they recently announced they are continuing with a 2025 bolt ev and a 2026 bolt euv.
https://www.motortrend.com/news/next-generation-chevrolet-bolt-coming-2025-mary-barra/ https://insideevs.com/reviews/721006/chevrolet-bolt-everything-we-know/
Sounds like Canada should put a 50% tax on gasoline powered vehicles.
So, I drive an EV already but here’s the rub with just taxing gas powered vehicles.
I still believe some people need (or should use) gas vehicles currently.
The first case is for people who have no access to a charger at their home (primarily condo dwellers, since home owners can easily install them) This should be regulated by the government, every condo should be required to upgrade their parking to include a certain percentage of chargers. We don’t need more chargers at random places around the city like we have with gas stations, vehicles should always be charged wherever they happen to sit overnight.
I’ve had an EV for 3 years now, and I’ve never once needed a fast charger, I’ve never driven more than 400km in a single day so overnight level 2 charging is perfectly fine for me, I even used only the standard wall-socket level 1 charger for 4 months when I first got the car. It was do-able but a bit annoying.
The second case is for long distance drivers and/or towing, if you drive more than 2x your battery range in a day as a normal action then EVs just aren’t yet sufficient for you. This is common if you need to tow heavy things, because the towing range on EVs is absolute shit so 2x that battery range isn’t very far. A ford f150 lightning is fine for hauling your trailer around the suburbs for your yard maintenance business, but if you tow farm equipment a few hundred kilometers a day to different farms, it’s not going to work with the current options.
Third, People who already have vehicles. When you replace it, go EV, don’t bother until then. If you are a low distance driver, when you go to replace your vehicle, buy a used gas vehicle not a new one. EVs make more sense both financially and environmentally the more use they get.
These issues are all getting sorted out (slowly) but we aren’t done with gas vehicles just yet so I’d rather see the taxes on the Gas than on the Vehicle itself.
As a condo owner with an EV, getting a charger installed was only marginally more difficult than if I was freehold. There are already laws in place that require condo boards to respond to charger installation requests and enter an agreement with the owner. I think getting more street parking chargers like they have all over Europe would be a good idea and installing charging bays in all new condo towers should be a requirement for the developer.
A big barrier to EV adoption is also education. I have been asked so many questions about my EV from my neighbours, friends, and families. The dealership wasn’t able to answer like 80% of my questions. I had to do a ton of learning online to understand the features of my car, how it works, how to charge it, when it operates well or poorly etc.
Street chargers would be good. If I recall those laws for requiring condo boards to respond are very recent, and a good start.
You’re absolutely right about the lack of education though. I swear half the people I talk to think the only way to charge one is via an 800v fast charger, and the other half assume my range is about 100km in the winter.
no access to a charger at their home (primarily condo dwellers, since
Harder still for appartment renters. And there’s more of those than there are condo owners.
I was going to agree with you, but I think after reading your points I actually feel the complete opposite. I think if there’s a role for heavy taxation to play it should be on new ICE vehicles, as opposed to on the gas itself. We’re talking about new vehicles here, there are millions of perfectly good used vehicles out there that would fill all the roles you’re talking about. Increasing gas taxes ends up punishing the people who can least afford it. Like the farmers who have to have to haul their equipment hundreds of kilometers between farms, the condo dwellers who aren’t allowed to charge at home, and the renters who can’t afford to install an EV charger, let alone buy a new car. The tax should also go towards making EVs more affordable at the low end (it would be nice to subsidize used EVs but I can see many ways to abuse something like that).
We need to get the percentage of new EVs up today so that tomorrow’s used market is where we want it to be. We can only do that by encouraging those who can afford a new car to pick an EV, not by punishing those who can’t afford a choice.
Are you saying tow trucks shouldn’t exist? How about delivery vehicles for those living in remote areas that can only serviced by ice roads or airplanes?
Canada is a vast nation and most of it doesn’t have rail services … which all run on diesel btw. I understand gov’ts should have been upgrading transportation services over the last 3 decades, but they didn’t, and we can’t do it all overnight to make up for it.
There are regional parts suppliers that have daily/weekly routes that are several hundred kms long. They provide stuff from auto parts, plumbing fittings, and everything in between, often allowing local businesses to get parts quickly without needing to invest in massive warehouses to store larger deliveries or pay extreme delivery fees. These delivery services can be essential to small towns or rural living.
I agree with your points about ridiculous commutes and such, and large cities should defintely be investing in transit and density. Car centric planning is bleeding our cities and our cities are where we should focus improvement.
The first case is for people who have no access to a charger at their home (primarily condo dwellers, since home owners can easily install them) This should be regulated by the government, every condo should be required to upgrade their parking to include a certain percentage of chargers. We don’t need more chargers at random places around the city like we have with gas stations, vehicles should always be charged wherever they happen to sit overnight.
Do ICE vehicles owners have a gas station at their house? Why are EV’s an issue for this but not ICE vehicles? As long as you’re near some form of fast charger, you don’t need a Level 2 charger at home, though it would be nice.
This is a common misconception. Fast chargers are EXPENSIVE. Even the BC hydro owned fast chargers are 35 cents per kwh for level 3 charging, compared to the 10 cents I pay at home with my time of use rate. Private chargers are even more expensive, sometimes as much as $1 per kwh.
It does not make financial sense to use fast chargers as a primary way to charge your EV, they are really only meant to be used for long distance travel where you’re driving 500km+ in a day.
It makes sense that they cost more too, the chargers themselves, the land they use up, and the extra electrical infrastructure to bring in the huge amounts of power they use them all cost money. Just for comparison, a 200 amp house gets around 24kwh of potential throughput, while the latest fast chargers can each draw 350kwh.
It’s far easier to just have a spot you can pull into once a week at your condo, and plug it in, then drive off the next morning with a full battery having paid only $6 for another 450km of range.
The other two posters are 100% right, but I’ll also chime in and say that fast charging all the time is bad for long-term battery health, too.
Not to mention it’s WAY more convenient to just plug your car in when you get home. I remember living in an apartment with no chargers and having to wait for one of the two fast chargers nearby… I’d end up either having to carve out 30 minutes late at night to run out and sneak a charge in, or take a peek out my window every 15 mins to see if one had freed up.
Using fast chargers as Plan A is not a good plan or reasonable expectation.
Have we as a country ever met a climate target? In fairness to our politicians (not really), the O&G industry regulates them and not the other way around. Until that power relation changes, our targets are just greenwashing
AFAIK the only environmental goal that we met was the Montreal protocol and the elimination of chemicals harming the ozone layer.
As a result of the international agreement, the ozone hole in Antarctica is slowly recovering. Climate projections indicate that the ozone layer will return to 1980 levels between 2040 (across much of the world) and 2066 (over Antarctica). Due to its widespread adoption and implementation, it has been hailed as an example of successful international co-operation. Former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan stated that “perhaps the single most successful international agreement to date has been the Montreal Protocol”.
I think we also did something about acid rain for a few decades now but I can’t find any specific agreement. All I know is that I’m in my 40ies and thus old enough to remember it was an issue when I was a kid, and that the US and Canada agreed to do something about it.
Some governments, including those in Europe and North America, have made efforts since the 1970s to reduce the release of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide into the atmosphere through air pollution regulations. These efforts have had positive results due to the widespread research on acid rain starting in the 1960s and the publicized information on its harmful effects.
I don’t know what changed but apparently, we don’t really care about the rest now.
