Automotive
The Harsh Realities of Electric Vehicles in Canada
From EnergyNow.ca
By Lorne Gunter
When it comes to electric vehicles (EVs), the Trudeau government and Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault are putting the policy cart before the technology horse.
If last week’s extreme cold temperatures over most of the country taught us anything, it’s that EVs just aren’t practical (yet) for a country this big and this cold.
The federal Liberals may be willing to risk hundreds of billions of your tax dollars and mine for manufacturing subsidies, purchase subsidies and EV infrastructure to try to force a market for electrics into existence, but Canadians are just not ready to get rid of their internal combustion engines (ICEs). And with good reason.
I heard from a reader in northern Manitoba. He has a Ford Lightning (the fully electric version of the F-150 pickup). When the temperature fell to -40C last week, his truck’s range dropped by half after driving it just 18 kms. He was forced to abandon his work-related trip so he could return home before the charge ran out and he found himself stranded quite literally in the middle of nowhere without heat in the cab.
Another reader, this one from Edmonton, found that not only was his range severely reduced by the cold, but charging time was doubled. His wait at a public fast-charger was two hours instead of one because he had to keep the heat on in his Tesla.
Many charging stations across the country have also been reported to stop working in the extreme cold.
Since this is a country that experiences extreme cold (below -25C) most winters, that makes an EV an unacceptable risk, or at the very least a horrible inconvenience.
Also this week, the highly respected testing magazine, Consumer Reports, said that when temperatures are only as cold as +7C, EVs lose about 25% of their range compared to temperatures of +15C and a third when compared to temps of +25C.
Ranges, of course, are much further diminished when outside temperatures fall below -20C.
Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault says the upcoming Electric Vehicle Availability Standard will encourage automakers to make more battery-powered cars and trucks available in Canada. Automakers will have the next 12 years to phase out combustion engine cars, trucks and SUVs with a requirement to gradually increase the proportion of electric models they offer for sale each year. Dec. 19, 2023
Additionally, Consumer Reports (CR) found that “short trips in the cold with frequent stops and the need to reheat the cabin after a parking pause saps 50% of the range.” That means EVs may be impractical in Canada even for urban commuters or suburban families.
Late last year, CR also concluded EVs are 73% less reliable than gasoline vehicles. As well, they were more expensive to maintain and repair. And when the costs of electricity and home chargers are included, EVs are at least as expensive as gasoline vehicles to refuel.
That puts the lie to Guilbeault’s claim (made in December when announcing his mandate that all new vehicles be EVs by 2035) that while EVs are more expensive to buy, once consumers drive them off the lot, they become much more affordable than gasoline or diesel vehicles.
Not only are EVs more expensive to buy and maintain, because of their weight, they chew through tires about 40% faster. They are more expensive to insure because they cost so much more to repair if they are involved in an accident. They depreciate faster than ICEs. And their batteries lose up to half of their life in four or five years, even if they are fully charged.
All of this explains why car-rental giant, Hertz, announced earlier this month that it was selling its EV fleet – 20,000 cars. They are just too expensive.
Electric vehicles may not be that good for the environment, either.
Many components are, of course, manufactured in China (or by Chinese companies operating elsewhere) using electricity from coal-fired power plants. And this week, Blacklock’s Reporter revealed the federal Fisheries department is reviewing Northvolt, the Swedish battery maker building a heavily-subsidized plant in Quebec, for potential harm to fisheries, wetlands and streams.
The Liberals’ EV mandate is a very, very expensive farce that will likely produce few, if any, environmental benefits.
From the Fraser Institute
During his victory speech Monday night, Prime Minister Mark Carney repeated one of his favourite campaign slogans and vowed to make Canada a “clean energy superpower.” So, Canadians can expect Ottawa to “invest” more taxpayer money in “clean energy” projects including electric vehicles (EVs), the revolutionary transportation technology that’s been ready to replace internal combustion since 1901 yet still requires government subsidies.
It’s a good time for a little historical review. In 2012 south of the border, the Obama administration poured massive subsidies into companies peddling green tech, only to see a vast swath go belly up including Solyndra, would-be maker of advanced solar panels, which failed so spectacularly CNN called the company the “poster child for well-meaning government policy gone bad.”
One might think that such a spectacular failure might have served as a cautionary tale for today’s politicians. But one would be wrong. Even as the EV transition slammed into stiff headwinds, the Trudeau government and Ontario’s Ford government poured $5 billion in subsidies into Honda to build an EV battery plant and manufacture EVs in Ontario. That “investment” came on top of a long list of other “investments” including $15 billion for Stellantis and LG Energy Solution; $13 billion for Volkswagen (or $16.3 billion, per the Parliamentary Budget Officer), a combined $4.24 billion (federal/Quebec split) to Northvolt, a Swedish battery maker, and a combined $644 million (federal/Quebec split) to Ford Motor Company to build a cathode manufacturing plant in Quebec.
How’s all that working out? Not great.
“Projects announced for Canada’s EV supply chain are in various states of operation, and many remain years away from production,” notes automotive/natural resource reporter Gabriel Friedman, writing in the Financial Post. “Of the four multibillion-dollar battery cell manufacturing plants announced for Canada, only one—a joint venture known as NextStar Energy Inc. between South Korea’s LG Energy Solution Ltd. and European automaker Stellantis NV—progressed into even the construction phase.”
In 2023, Volkswagen said it would invest $7 billion by 2030 to build a battery cell manufacturing complex in St. Thomas, Ontario. However, Friedman notes “construction of the VW plant is not scheduled to begin until this spring [2025] and initial cell production will not begin for years.” Or ever, if Donald Trump’s pledge to end U.S. government support for a broad EV transition comes to pass.
In the meantime, other elements of Canada’s “clean tech” future are also in doubt. In December 2024, Saint-Jérome, Que.-based Lion Electric Co., which had received $100 million in provincial and government support to assemble batteries in Canada for electric school buses and trucks, said it would file for bankruptcy in the United States and creditor protection in Canada. And Ford Motor Company last summer scrapped its planned EV assembly plant in Oakville, Ontario—after $640 million in federal and provincial support.
And of course, there’s Canada’s own poster-child-of-clean-tech-subsidy failure, Northvolt. According to the CBC, the Swedish battery manufacturer, with plans to build a $7 billion factory in Quebec, has declared bankruptcy in Sweden, though Northvolt claims that its North American operations are “solvent.” That’s cold comfort to some Quebec policymakers: “We’re going to be losing hundreds of millions of dollars in a bet that our government in Quebec made on a poorly negotiated investment,” said Parti Québécois MNA Pascal Paradis.
Elections often bring about change. If the Carney government wants to change course and avoid more clean-tech calamities, it should pull the plug on the EV revolution and avoid any more electro-boondoggles.
Kenneth P. Green
Senior Fellow, Fraser Institute
MxM News
Quick Hit:
Major automakers are urging Congress to intervene and halt California’s aggressive plan to eliminate gasoline-only vehicles by 2035. With the Biden-era EPA waiver empowering California and 11 other states to enforce the rule, automakers warn of immediate impacts on vehicle availability and consumer choice. The U.S. House is preparing for a critical vote to determine if California’s sweeping environmental mandates will stand.
Key Details:
-
Automakers argue California’s rules will raise prices and limit consumer choices, especially amid high tariffs on auto imports.
-
The House is set to vote this week on repealing the EPA waiver that greenlit California’s mandate.
-
California’s regulations would require 35% of 2026 model year vehicles to be zero-emission, a figure manufacturers say is unrealistic.
Diving Deeper:
The Alliance for Automotive Innovation, representing industry giants such as General Motors, Toyota, Volkswagen, and Hyundai, issued a letter Monday warning Congress about the looming consequences of California’s radical environmental regulations. The automakers stressed that unless Congress acts swiftly, vehicle shipments across the country could be disrupted within months, forcing car companies to artificially limit sales of traditional vehicles to meet electric vehicle quotas.
California’s Air Resources Board rules have already spread to 11 other states—including New York, Massachusetts, and Oregon—together representing roughly 40% of the entire U.S. auto market. Despite repeated concerns from manufacturers, California officials have doubled down, insisting that their measures are essential for meeting lofty greenhouse gas reduction targets and combating smog. However, even some states like Maryland have recognized the impracticality of California’s timeline, opting to delay compliance.
A major legal hurdle complicates the path forward. The Government Accountability Office ruled in March that the EPA waiver issued under former President Joe Biden cannot be revoked under the Congressional Review Act, which requires only a simple Senate majority. This creates uncertainty over whether Congress can truly roll back California’s authority without more complex legislative action.
The House is also gearing up to tackle other elements of California’s environmental regime, including blocking the state from imposing stricter pollution standards on commercial trucks and halting its low-nitrogen oxide emissions regulations for heavy-duty vehicles. These moves reflect growing concerns that California’s progressive regulatory overreach is threatening national commerce and consumer choice.
Under California’s current rules, the state demands that 35% of light-duty vehicles for the 2026 model year be zero-emission, scaling up rapidly to 68% by 2030. Industry experts widely agree that these targets are disconnected from reality, given the current slow pace of electric vehicle adoption among the broader American public, particularly in rural and lower-income areas.
California first unveiled its plan in 2020, aiming to make at least 80% of new cars electric and the remainder plug-in hybrids by 2035. Now, under President Donald Trump’s leadership, the U.S. Transportation Department is working to undo the aggressive fuel economy regulations imposed during former President Joe Biden’s term, offering a much-needed course correction for an auto industry burdened by regulatory overreach.
As Congress debates, the larger question remains: Will America allow one state’s left-wing environmental ideology to dictate terms for the entire country’s auto industry?
In Defeat, Joe Tay’s Campaign Becomes a Flashpoint for Suspected Voter Intimidation in Canada
When it comes to pipelines, Carney’s words flow both ways
Carney’s Hidden Climate Finance Agenda
Study links B.C.’s drug policies to more overdoses, but researchers urge caution
Carney’s budget is worse than Trudeau’s
Governments in Alberta should spur homebuilding amid population explosion
History in the making? Trump, Zelensky hold meeting about Ukraine war in Vatican ahead of Francis’ funeral
-
2025 Federal Election2 days ago
In Defeat, Joe Tay’s Campaign Becomes a Flashpoint for Suspected Voter Intimidation in Canada
-
Alberta2 days agoPremier Danielle Smith responds to election of Liberal government
-
COVID-192 days agoFreedom Convoy leaders’ sentencing judgment delayed, Crown wants them jailed for two years
-
COVID-191 day agoCanada’s health department warns COVID vaccine injury payouts to exceed $75 million budget
-
Duane Rolheiser2 days agoCarney Wins: What now Alberta?
-
Banks2 days agoTD Bank Account Closures Expose Chinese Hybrid Warfare Threat
-
2025 Federal Election2 days agoPost election…the chips fell where they fell
-
Alberta2 days agoHours after Liberal election win, Alberta Prosperity Project drumming up interest in referendum