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.

    • sbv@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      4 months ago

      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.

      • BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        4 months ago

        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.

            • masterspace@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              22
              ·
              4 months ago

              What’s suspicious is western car companies refusing to make small cheap EVs that consumers might actually want to buy.

              • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                9
                ·
                4 months ago

                This is a huge factor. It isn’t just the initial costs. A smaller EV is lighter, a simple EV is lighter, this lets it use less energy overall which ultimately means you pay less in electricity.

                Smaller vehicles tend to have smaller tires, which are cheaper. Cheaper vehicles are also cheaper to insure than more expensive ones.

                All these factors combined can easily be the difference between affording a new EV or having to stick in the used ICE market.

            • girlfreddy@lemmy.caOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              4 months ago

              I wrote this for another post but it’s still relative here.

              How many times have we bailed out or given loans/grants to the Big Three?

              • 1979 - Dec. 21- Chrysler receives a $1.5 billion federal loan guarantee, known as the Chrysler Loan Guarantee Act of 1979, the first big US automaker bailout. Source

              • Dec 2008 - President Bush announces a $13.4 billion emergency bailout for GM and Chrysler to be paid by mid-January 2009. (source same as above)

              2018 - Liberal government writes off 2009 $1.1B US loan to Chrysler, plus interest, docs show Source

              • 2023 - Auto industry’s switch to EVs gets $12 billion in loans and grants from the US Energy Department Source

              2024 - Canada’s PBO estimates total corresponding government support (for EV capital and operating expenses) to be up to $52.5 billion Source

        • jasep@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          4 months ago

          Perhaps, but since they’re prohibitively expensive we aren’t buying enough of them.

    • SkyNTP@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Protecting domestic industries from competing with China does nothing to strengthen it.

      • BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        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.

          • BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            Having been to China myself, and seen the inside of multiple factories and worked with multiple experts, no, it’s not happening to every other company.

            Western people simply do not understand the mindset of the Chinese government or populace when it comes to exploitation, corruption, and cheating. There’s a reason why China is having issues with buildings literally falling apart, and why people consider Chinese products to be inferior in quality.

            • thanks_shakey_snake@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              4 months ago

              This is right. There are different categories of exploitation and corruption, and it’s not an apples-to-apples comparison. “Well sure but there’s exploitation everywhere” is the wrong lens to understand this through.

              • msage@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                4 months ago

                But like most companies manufacture their stuff in China… so it’s always China, sometimes with extra steps.

                And while it may be worse there, the literal billions EU/US car manufacturers received and pocketed instead of supporting their own business makes me want to support them even less.

                • thanks_shakey_snake@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  To your first point: Yes, and decreasing reliance on China would be exactly how we could start to counteract that. I think we’re agreeing with each other there.

                  As far as EU/US manufacturers behaving badly… I don’t know enough about that situation to really comment intelligibly, but yeah that also sounds bad.

                • LeFantome@programming.dev
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  There has been a massive move away from China. They are still a major force but the West and China are moving apart. The vehicle tariffs are just an example of that.

                  I would not be surprised to see Tesla factories in Mexico. Chinese manufacturing is increasingly domestic and regional.

      • BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        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.

        • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          4 months ago

          I think 20% is pretty big. Not big enough, but anyone who thinks they’ve done all they need by buying an ev doesn’t understand the situation. So yeah necessary but not sufficient

    • acargitz@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      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.