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 weekās extreme cold temperatures over most of the country taught us anything, itās that EVs just arenāt 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 truckās 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 āshort trips in the cold with frequent stops and the need to reheat the cabin after a parking pause saps 50% of the range.ā 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 Guilbeaultās 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 ā 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, Blacklockās 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 Liberalsā EV mandate is a very, very expensive farce that will likely produce few, if any, environmental benefits.
Automotive
Canadaās EV house of cards is close to collapsing

By Dan McTeague
Well, Canadaās electric vehicle policies are playing out exactly as I predicted. Which is to say, theyāre a disaster.
Back in November, in the immediate aftermath of Donald Trumpās re-election, I wrote in these pages that, whatever else that election might mean for Canada, it would prove big trouble for the Justin Trudeau/Doug Ford EV scam.
The substance of their plot works like so: first, the federal and provincial governments threw mountains of taxpayer dollars in subsidies at automakers so that theyād come to Canada to manufacture EVs. Then Ottawa mandated that Canadians must buy those EVs ā exclusively ā by the year 2035. That way Ford and Trudeau could pat themselves on the back for ācreating jobs,ā while EV manufacturers could help themselves to the contents of our wallets twice over.
But the one variable they didnāt account for was a return of Donald Trump to the White House.
Trump had run on a promise to save America from their own back-door EV mandates. Though Kamala Harris had denied that any such mandates existed, they did, and they were founded on two acts of the Biden-Harris administration.
First, they issued an Executive Order setting significantly more onerous tailpipe regulations on all internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles, with the explicit goal of ensuring that 50 percent of all new vehicles sold in America be electric by 2030.
Second, they granted California a waiver to make those regulations more burdensome still, so that only EVs could realistically be in compliance with them. Since no automaker would want to be locked out of the market of the most populous state, nor could they afford to build one set of cars for California (plus the handful of states which have ā idiotically ā chosen to align their regulations with Californiaās) and another set for the rest of the country, they would be forced to increase their manufacture and sale of EVs and decrease their output of ICE vehicles.
Trumpās victory took Canadaās political class completely by surprise, and it threw a spanner into the workings of the Liberalsā plan.
Thatās because there just arenāt enough Canadians, or Canadian tax dollars, to make their EV scheme even kindaā work. Canadaās unique access to the worldās biggest market ā America ā was a key component of the plan.
After all, vehicles are āthe second largest Canadian export by value, at $51 billion in 2023, of which 93 percent was exported to the US,ā according to the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers Association, and āAuto is Ontarioās top export at 28.9 percent of all exports (2023.)ā
It further depended on Americans buying more and more EVs every year. But since, when given a choice, most people prefer the cost and convenience of ICE vehicles, this would only work if Americans were pushed into buying EVs, even if in a more roundabout way than theyāre being forced on Canadians.
Which is why the plan all began to unravel on January 20, the day of Trumpās inauguration, when he signed Executive Order 14154, āUnleashing American Energy,ā which, among other things, rescinded Joe Bidenās pro-EV tailpipe regulations. And it has continued downhill from there.
Just last week, the US Senate voted to repeal the Biden EPAās waiver for California. Not that thatās the end of the story ā in the aftermath of the vote, California governor Gavin Newsom vowed āto fight this unconstitutional attack on California in court.ā (Though donāt be surprised if that fight is brief and half-hearted ā Newsom has been trying to leave his lifelong leftism behind recently and rebrand as a moderate Democrat in time for his own run at the White House in 2028. Consequently, being saved from his own EV policy might only help his career prospects going forward.)
But itās worth noting the language used by the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, which represents car companies like Toyota, GM, Volkswagen and Stellantis (several of whom, it should be noted, have received significant subsidies from the Liberal and Ford governments to manufacture EVs), which said in a statement, āThe fact is these EV sales mandates were never achievable.ā
Thatās worth repeating: these EV sales mandates were never achievable!
Thatās true in California, and itās true in Canada as well.
And yet, our political class has refused to accept this reality. Doug Ford actually doubled down on his commitment to heavily subsidizing the EV industry in his recent campaign, saying āI want to make it clear⦠a re-elected PC government will honour our commitment to invest in the sector,ā no matter what Donald Trump does.
Except, as noted above, Donald Trump represents the customers Doug Ford needs!
Meanwhile, our environmentalist-in-chief, Mark Carney, has maintained the Liberal Partyās commitment to the EV mandates, arguing that EVs are essential for his vacuous plan of transforming Canada into a āclean energy superpower.ā How exactly? Thatās never said.
These are the words of con artists, not men who we should be trusting with the financial wellbeing of our country. Unfortunately, in our recent federal election ā and the one in Ontario ā this issue was barely discussed, beyond an 11th-hour attempted buzzer-beater from Pierre Poilievre and a feeble talking point from Bonnie Crombie about her concern āthat the premier has put all our eggs in the EV basket.ā
Meanwhile, 2035 is just around the corner.
So we canāt stop calling attention to this issue. In fact, weāre going to shout about our mindless EV subsidies and mandates from the rooftops until our fellow Canadians wake up to the predicament weāre in. It took some time, but we made them notice the carbon tax (even if the policy change we got from Carbon Tax Carney wasnāt any better.) And we can do it with electric vehicles, too.
Because we donāt have the money, either as a nation or as individuals, to prop this thing up forever.
Dan McTeague is President of Canadians for Affordable Energy.
Automotive
EV fantasy losing charge on taxpayer time

From the Fraser Institute
By Kenneth P. Green
The vision of an all-electric transportation sector, shared by policymakers from various governments in Canada, may be fading fast.
The latest failure to charge is a recent announcement by Honda, which willĀ postponeĀ a $15 billion electric vehicle (EV) project in Ontario for two years, citing market demandāor lack thereof. Adding insult to injury, Honda willĀ moveĀ some of its EV production to the United States, partially in response to the Trump Tariff Wars. But any focus on tariffs is misdirection to conceal reality; failures in the electrification agenda have appeared for years, long before Trumpās tariffs.
In 2023, the Quebec government pledged $2.9 billion inĀ financingĀ to secure a deal with Swedish EV manufacturer NorthVolt. Ottawa committed $1.34 billion to build the plant and another $3 billion worth of incentives. So far, per theĀ CBC, the Quebec government ā invested $270 million in the project and the provincial pension investor, the Caisse de dĆ©pĆ“t et placement du QuĆ©bec (CDPQ), has also invested $200 million.ā In 2024, NorthVolt declared bankruptcy in Sweden, throwing the Canadian plans intoĀ limbo.
Last month, the same Quebec governmentĀ announcedĀ it will not rescue the Lion Electric company from its fiscal woes, which became obvious in December 2024 when the company filed for creditor protection (again, long before the tariff war). According to theĀ Financial Post, āLion thrived during the electric vehicle boom, reaching a market capitalization of US$4.2 billion in 2021 and growing to 1,400 employees the next year. Then the market for electric vehicles went through a tough period, and it became far more difficult for manufacturers to raise capital.ā The Quebec government had already lost $177 million on investments in Lion, while the federal government lost $30 million, by the time the company filed for creditor protection.
Last year, Ford Motor Co. delayed production of an electric SUV at its Oakville, Ont., plant and Umicore halted spending on a $2.8 billion battery materials plant in eastern Ontario. In April 2025, General MotorsĀ announcedĀ it will soon close the CAMI electric van assembly plant in Ontario, with plans to reopen in the fall at half capacity, to āalign production schedules with current demand.ā And GM temporarily laid off hundreds of workers at its Ingersoll, Ontario, plant that produces an electric delivery vehicle because it isnāt selling as well as hoped.
There are still more examples of EV fizzleāagain, allĀ pre-tariff war. Government āinvestmentsā to Stellantis and LG Energy Solution and Ford Motor Company have fallen flat and dissolved, been paused or remain in limbo. And projects for Canadaās EV supply chain remain years away from production. āOf the four multibillion-dollar battery cell manufacturing plants announced for Canada,āĀ wroteĀ automotive reporter Gabriel Friedman, āonly oneāa joint venture known as NextStar Energy Inc. between South Koreaās LG Energy Solution Ltd. and European automaker Stellantis NVāprogressed into even the construction phase.ā
Whatās the moral of the story?
Once again, the fevered dreams of government planners who seek to pick winning technologies in a major economic sector have proven to be just that, fevered dreams. In 2025, some 125 years since consumers first had a choice of electric vehicles or internal combustion vehicles (ICE), the ICE vehicles are still winning in economically-free markets. Without massive government subsidies to EVs, in fact, there would be no contest at all. Itād be ICE by a landslide.
In the face of this reality, the new Carney government should terminate any programs that try to force EV technologies into the marketplace, and rescindĀ plansĀ to have all new light-duty vehicle sales be EVs by 2035. Itās just not going to happen, and planning for a fantasy is not sound government policy nor sound use of taxpayer money. Governments in Ontario, Quebec and any other province looking to spend big on EVs should also rethink their plans forthwith.
-
Crime1 day ago
How Chinese State-Linked Networks Replaced the MedellĆn Model with Global Logistics and Political Protection
-
Aristotle Foundation2 days ago
We need an immigration policy that will serve all Canadians
-
Addictions2 days ago
New RCMP program steering opioid addicted towards treatment and recovery
-
Business1 day ago
Natural gas pipeline ownership spreads across 36 First Nations in B.C.
-
Business14 hours ago
EU investigates major pornographic site over failure to protect children
-
Health1 day ago
RFK Jr. purges CDC vaccine panel, citing decades of āskewed scienceā
-
Courageous Discourse1 day ago
Healthcare Blockbuster – RFK Jr removes all 17 members of CDC Vaccine Advisory Panel!
-
Censorship Industrial Complex1 day ago
Conservatives slam Liberal bill to allow police to search through Canadiansā mail