From Resource Works

Tension grows between ambition and market truths

Host Stewart Muir talks on Power Struggle with Brian Maas, president of the California New Car Dealers Association, and Maas introduces us to a U.S. problem that Canada and B.C. also face right now. “The problem is there are mandates that apply in California and 11 other states that require, for the 2026 model year, 35% of all vehicles manufactured for sale in our state must be zero-emission, even though the market share right now is 20%.  “So we’ve got a mandate that virtually none of the manufacturers our dealers represent are going to be able to meet.”

Maas adds: “We’re trying to communicate with policymakers that nobody’s opposed to the eventual goal of electrification. California’s obviously led that effort, but a mandate that nobody can comply with and one that California voters are opposed to deserves to be recalibrated.” Meanwhile, in Canada, the same objections apply to the federal government’s requirement, set in 2023, that 100% of new light-duty vehicles sold must be zero-emission vehicles, ZEVs (electric or plug-in hybrid) by 2035, with interim targets of 20 per cent by 2026 and 60 per cent by 2030. There are hefty penalties for dealers missing the targets.

Market researchers note that it now takes 55 days to sell an electric vehicle in Canada, up from 22 days in the first quarter of 2023. The researchers cite a lack of desirable models and high consumer prices despite government subsidies to buyers in six provinces that run as high as $7,000 in Quebec.

In the U.S. The Wall Street Journal reports that, on average, electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids sit in dealer lots longer than gasoline-powered cars and hybrids, despite government pressure to switch to electric. (The Biden administration ruled that two-thirds of new vehicles sold must be electric by 2032.) For Canada, the small-c conservative Fraser Institute reports: “The targets were wild to begin with. As Manhattan Institute senior fellow Mark P. Mills observed, bans on conventional vehicles and mandated switches to electric means, consumers will need to adopt EVs at a scale and velocity 10 times greater and faster than the introduction of any new model of car in history.”

When Ottawa scrapped federal consumer subsidies earlier this year, EV manufacturers and dealers in Canada called on the feds to scrap the sales mandates. “The federal government’s mandated ZEV sales targets are increasingly unrealistic and must end,” said Brian Kingston, CEO of the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers’ Association. “Mandating Canadians to buy ZEVs without providing them the supports needed to switch to electric is a made-in-Canada policy failure.” And Tim Reuss, CEO of the Canadian Automobile Dealers Association, said: “The Liberal federal government has backed away from supporting the transition to electric vehicles and now we are left with a completely unrealistic plan at the federal level.  “There is hypocrisy in imposing ambitious ZEV mandates and penalties on consumers when the government is showing a clear lack of motivation and support for their own policy goals.”

In B.C., sales growth of ZEVs has recently slowed, and the provincial government is considering easing its ZEV targets. “The Energy Ministry acknowledged that it will be ‘challenging’ to reach the target that 90 per cent of new vehicles be zero emission by 2030.”  Nat Gosman, an assistant deputy minister in the B.C. energy ministry, cited reasons for the slowdown that include affordability concerns due to a pause in government rebates, supply chain disruptions caused by U.S. tariffs, and concerns about reliability of public charging sites.

Barry Penner, chair of the Energy Futures Institute and a former B.C. Liberal environment minister, said the problem is that the government has “put the cart before the horse” when it comes to incentivizing people to buy electric vehicles. “The government imposed these electric vehicle mandates before the public charging infrastructure is in place and before we’ve figured out how we’re going to make it easy for people to charge their vehicles in multi-family dwellings like apartment buildings.”

Penner went on to write an article for Resource Works that said: “Instead of accelerating into economically harmful mandates, both provincial and federal governments should recalibrate. We need to slow down, invest in required charging infrastructure, and support market-based innovation, not forced adoption through penalties. “A sustainable energy future for BC and Canada requires smart, pragmatic policy, not economic coercion. Let’s take our foot off the gas and realign our policies with reality, protect jobs, consumer affordability, and real environmental progress. Then we can have a successful transition to electric vehicles.”

Back to Power Struggle, and Brian Maas tells Stewart: “I think everybody understands that it’s great technology and I think a lot of Californians would like to have one.  . . . The number one reason consumers cited for not making the transition to a zero-emission vehicle is the lack of public charging infrastructure. We’re woefully behind what would be required to move to 100% environment. “And if you live in a multifamily dwelling, an apartment building or something like that, you can’t charge at home, so you would have to rely on a public charger. Where do you go to get that charged?

“The state’s Energy Commission has said we need a million public chargers by 2030 and two million public chargers by 2035. We only have 178,000 now and we’re adding less than 50,000 public chargers a year. We’re just not going to get there fast enough to meet the mandate that’s on the books now.”

In Canada, Resource Works finds there now are more than 33,700 public charging ports, at 12,955 locations. But Ottawa says that to support its EV mandate, Canada will need about 679,000 public ports. “This will require the installation of, on average, 40,000 public ports each year between 2025 and 2040.”

And we remind readers of Penner’s serious call on governments to lighten the push on the accelerator when it comes to ZEV mandates: “Let’s take our foot off the gas and realign our policies with reality, protect jobs, consumer affordability, and real environmental progress. Then we can have a successful transition to electric vehicles.”

• Power Struggle YouTube video: https://ow.ly/8J4T50WhK5i
• Audio and full transcript: https://ow.ly/Np8550WhK5j
• Stewart Muir on LinkedIn: https://ow.ly/Smiq50UWpSB
• Brian Maas on LinkedIn: https://ow.ly/GuTh50WhK8h
• Power Struggle on LinkedIn: https://ow.ly/KX4r50UWpUa
• Power Struggle on Instagram: https://ow.ly/3VIM50UWpUg
• Power Struggle on Facebook: https://ow.ly/4znx50UWpUs
• Power Struggle on X: https://ow.ly/tU3R50UWpVu

By Dan McTeague

Earlier this month, Donald Trump fulfilled a major campaign promise and struck a blow against environmentalist governance in Canada, all in one fell swoop.

He did this by signing a congressional resolution revoking a waiver granted to California by the Biden Administration that enabled the state to set automotive emissions standards significantly stricter than the national standard. So strict, in fact, that in practice only electric vehicles (EVs) could realistically meet them.

This waiver functioned as a backdoor EV mandate, not just in California, but for all of the United States. That’s because automakers don’t want to be locked out of the most populous state in the union but are also disinclined to build one set of cars for California and another for the rest of the country. Their only option would be to increase their production of EVs, to the exclusion of gas-and-diesel internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles.

Trump has argued, both during his 2024 campaign and since, that the waiver enabled far-left California to saddle the rest of the country with environmental policies it had never voted for and couldn’t repeal. That view helped him win back the White House.

But what does this have to do with Canada? Donald Trump has no power over our own EV mandate. The law of the land in Canada, though it was barely discussed in this spring’s federal election, beyond a last-minute pledge from Pierre Poilievre to reverse it, is still that by 2035, 100 per cent of new light-duty vehicles sold in Canada (including passenger cars, pickup trucks, and SUVs) must be electric.

It doesn’t sound like Mark Carney’s Liberals have any intention of changing course from this Trudeau-era policy — even though new EVs sold in Canada have been falling as a share of overall purchases. To stay on track for 2035, the mandate stipulates, 20 per cent of new cars sold in Canada next year must be EVs. Last year just 13.7 per cent were. And, as Tristin Hopper noted recently, “these sales are disproportionately concentrated in a single province … Of the 81,205 zero-emission vehicles sold in Canada in the last quarter of 2024, 49,357 were sold in Quebec.”

That doesn’t bode well for a national mandate. And Trump’s move further complicates the Liberals’ EV mandate, which has always been presented as an investment opportunity as well as a chance to reduce global carbon emissions. Our federal and provincial governments (particularly Ontario and Quebec) have bet very big on EVs dominating the future. Last year, the Parliamentary Budget Officer estimated that public investment in EVs exceeded $52 billion. Much of that money has gone towards subsidizing the manufacture of EVs in Canada.

Except there just aren’t enough Canadian consumers to justify that expense. The scheme has always hinged on there being a robust EV market south of the border. The Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers Association reminds us that “vehicles are the second largest Canadian export by value, at $51 billion in 2023, of which 93 per cent was exported to the U.S.”

The assumption was that existing avenues of trade would remain essentially unchanged. Even leaving aside concerns about what our future trade relationship with the United States will be, the end of America’s backdoor mandate — and with it, any reason to believe there will be a serious market for EVs in the U.S. — exposes our current EV policies as a bum deal.

Of course, there was never a strong case for attempting to turn Canada into a global EV superpower. There’s a reason Canadian consumers remain skeptical of them. EV batteries don’t perform well in the frigid temperatures for which our country is famous. In cold weather, they charge slowly and then struggle to hold the charge.

Our already-stressed electrical grid isn’t ready for the extra demand that would come with widespread EV adoption, especially considering the Liberals’ desire to progressively decarbonize the grid. And we have nothing like the infrastructure we would need to support this transition.

These roadblocks have now become so obvious that even the automakers, the main beneficiaries of both taxpayer-funded largesse and the mandates themselves, have started saying so. “The fact is these EV sales mandates were never achievable,” read a recent statement by the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, which represents Toyota, GM, Volkswagen, and Stellantis. Ford Canada CEO Bev Goodman has described the mandate as unrealistic and called for its repeal. Kristian Aquilina, president of GM Canada, has said the same.

Whether they realize it or not, our political leaders will have to face up to this reality, and sooner rather than later. Their best option is also the most straightforward one. There’s no reason for us to keep throwing good money after bad money, nor to force an unwanted product on Canadian consumers.

You can do it, Mr. Carney. Repeal the EV mandate.