Cost is the main reason stopping Canadians from buying an electric car: Survey


ev survey

Substation Relay Protection Training

Our customized live online or in‑person group training can be delivered to your staff at your location.

  • Live Online
  • 12 hours Instructor-led
  • Group Training Available
Regular Price:
$699
Coupon Price:
$599
Reserve Your Seat Today

Canada EV Incentives drive adoption toward the 2035 zero-emission target, with rebates, federal and provincial programs boosting affordability amid concerns over charging infrastructure, range anxiety, and battery life, according to a BNN Bloomberg-Leger survey.

 

Key Points

Canada EV incentives are rebates and tax credits reducing EV costs to accelerate zero-emission vehicle adoption nationwide.

✅ Federal and provincial rebates reduce EV purchase prices

✅ Incentives offset range, battery, and charging concerns

✅ Larger incentives correlate with higher adoption rates

 

If the federal government wants to meet its ambitious EV goals of having all cars and passenger trucks sold in Canada be zero emissions by 2035, it’s going to have to do something about the cost of these vehicles.

A new survey from BNN Bloomberg and RATESDOTCA has found that cost is the number one reason stopping Canadians from buying an electric car.

The survey, which was conducted by Leger Marketing earlier this month, asked 1,511 Canadians if they were planning to purchase a new electric vehicle in the near future. It found that just over one in four, or 26 per cent of Canadians, are planning to do so, with Atlantic Canada lagging other regions. On the other hand, 19 per cent of Canadians are planning to buy a gas/diesel/hybrid card for their next purchase. 

Those who aren’t planning on buying an EV were asked what the biggest reason for their decision was. By far, it was the price of these vehicles: 31 per cent of this group cited cost as the main reason for not electrifying their ride. Another 59 per cent of respondents cited it as a concern, but not the main one. Other reasons for not wanting to buy an electric vehicle included lack of infrastructure (18 per cent), range concerns (16 per cent), and battery life and replacement (13 per cent), and some report EV shortages and wait times too.

What’s interesting is that it’s clear that government incentives for EVs are the most powerful tool right now to drive adoption, though some argue subsidies are a bad idea for Canada. When asked if further government incentives would convince them to buy an electric vehicle, 78 per cent of those surveyed said yes.

That’s right. If more governments increased the incentives offered for buying electric vehicles, reaching the goal of only selling zero emission vehicles in Canada by 2035 would no longer be a pipe dream, despite 2035 mandate skepticism from some.

At the moment, only Quebec and B.C. offer government incentives to buy an electric vehicle, even as B.C. charging bottlenecks are predicted. The federal government offers up to a $5,000 incentive, with restrictions including a limit on the total price of the vehicle, and has signaled EV sales regulations are forthcoming. Ontario previously offered a rebate of up to $14,000, however, the popular program was cancelled when the Progress Conservative government was elected in 2018.

The cancellation led to a plunge in new electric vehicle sales in Ontario, falling more than 55 per cent in the first six months of 2019 when compared to the same time period in the previous year, according to Electric Mobility Canada.

It’s no surprise that the larger the incentive, the more Canadians will be swayed to buy an electric car. Perhaps what’s surprising is that the incentive doesn’t even have to be as large as the previous Ontario rebate was. The survey found that seven per cent of Canadians would buy an electric vehicle if they got an incentive ranging anywhere from $5,001-$7,250. A full 35 per cent said a $12,500 or higher incentive would convince them.

The majority of Canadians surveyed said they use their vehicles for leisure or commuting to work. Leisure uses include running errands and seeing friends and family, of which 43 per cent of respondents said was the primary way they used their vehicle. Meanwhile, 36 per cent said they primarily used their car to commute to work.

The survey also found that incentives were more effective at convincing younger people to buy an electric vehicle. Eighty-three per cent of those under the age of 55 could be swayed by new incentives. But for those over 55, only 66 per cent said they would change their mind. 

 

Related News

Related News

Electric truck fleets will need a lot of power, but utilities aren't planning for it

Electric Fleet Grid Planning aligns utilities, charging infrastructure, distribution upgrades, and substation capacity to meet megawatt loads from medium- and heavy-duty EV trucks and buses, enabling managed charging, storage, and corridor fast charging.

 

Key Points

A utility plan to upgrade feeders and substations for EV fleets, coordinating charging, storage, and load management.

✅ Plans distribution, substation, and transformer upgrades

✅ Supports managed charging and on-site storage

✅ Aligns utility investment with fleet adoption timelines

 

As more electric buses and trucks enter the market, future fleets will require a lot of electricity for charging and will challenge state power grids over time. While some utilities in California and elsewhere are planning for an increase in power demand, many have yet to do so and need to get started.

This issue is critical, because freight trucks emit more than one-quarter of all vehicle emissions. Recent product developments offer growing opportunities to electrify trucks and buses and slash their emissions (see our recent white paper). And just last week, a group of 15 states plus D.C. announced plans to fully electrify truck sales by 2050. Utilities will need to be ready to power electric fleets.

Electric truck fleets need substantial power
Power for trucks and buses is generally more of an issue than for cars because trucks typically have larger batteries and because trucks and buses are often parts of fleets with many vehicles that charge at the same location. For example, a Tesla Model 3 battery stores 54-75 kWh; a Proterra transit bus battery stores 220-660 kWh. In Amsterdam, a 100-bus transit fleet is powered by a set of slow and fast chargers that together have a peak load of 13 MW (megawatts). This is equivalent to the power used by a typical large factory. And they are thinking of expanding the fleet to 250 buses.

California utilities are finding that grid capacity is often adequate in the short term, but that upgrade needs likely will grow in the medium term.
Many other fleets also will need a lot of "juice." For example, a rough estimate of the power needed to serve a fleet of 200 delivery vans at an Amazon fulfillment center is about 4 MW. And for electric 18-wheelers, chargers may need up to 2 MW of power each; a recent proposal calls for charging stations every 100 miles along the U.S. West Coast’s I-5 corridor, highlighting concerns about EVs and the grid as each site targets a peak load of 23.5 MW.

Utilities need distribution planning
These examples show the need for more power at a given site than most utilities can provide without planning and investment. Meeting these needs often will require changes to primary and secondary power distribution systems (feeders that deliver power to distribution transformers and to end customers) and substation upgrades. For large loads, a new substation may be needed. A paper recently released by the California Electric Transportation Coalition estimates that for loads over 5 MW, distribution system and substation upgrades will be needed most of the time. According to the paper, typical utility costs are $1 million to $9 million for substation upgrades, $150,000 to $6 million for primary distribution upgrades, and $5,000 to $100,000 for secondary distribution upgrades. Similarly, Black and Veatch, in a paper on Electric Fleets, also provides some general guidance, shown in the table below, while recognizing that each site is unique.

California policy pushes utilities toward planning
In California, state agencies and a statewide effort called CALSTART have been funding demonstration projects and vehicle and charger purchases for several years to support grid stability as electrification ramps up. The California Air Resources Board voted in June to phase in zero-emission requirements for truck sales, mandating that, beginning in 2024, manufacturers must increase their zero-emission truck sales to 30-50 percent by 2030 and 40-75 percent by 2035. By 2035, more than 300,000 trucks will be zero-emission vehicles.

California utilities operate programs that work with fleet owners to install the necessary infrastructure for electric vehicle fleets. For example, Southern California Edison operates the Charge Ready Transport program for medium- and heavy-duty fleets. Normally, when customers request new or upgraded service from the utility, there are fees associated with the new upgrade. With Charge Ready, the utility generally pays these costs, and it will sometimes pay half the cost of chargers; the customer is responsible for the other half and for charger installation costs. Sites with at least two electric vehicles are eligible, but program managers report that at least five vehicles are often needed for the economics to make sense for the utility.

One way to do this is to develop and implement a phased plan, with some components sized for future planned growth and other components added as needed. Southern California Edison, for example, has 24 commitments so far, and has a five-year goal of 870 sites, with an average of 10 chargers per site. The utility notes that one charger usually can serve several vehicles and that cycling of charging, some storage, and other load management techniques through better grid coordination can reduce capacity needs (a nominal 10 MW load often can be reduced below 5 MW).

Through this program, utility representatives are regularly talking with fleet operators, and they can use these discussions to help identify needed upgrades to the utility grid. For example, California transit agencies are doing the planning to meet a California Air Resources Board mandate for 100 percent electric or fuel cell buses by 2040; utilities are talking with the agencies and their consultants as part of this process. California utilities are finding that grid capacity is often adequate in the short term, but that upgrade needs likely will grow in the medium term (seven to 10 years out). They can manage grid needs with good planning (school buses generally can be charged overnight and don’t need fast chargers), load management techniques and some energy storage to address peak needs.

Customer conversations drive planning elsewhere
We also spoke with a northeastern utility (wishing to be unnamed) that has been talking with customers about many issues, including fleets. It has used these discussions to identify a few areas where grid upgrades might be needed if fleets electrify. It is factoring these findings into a broader grid-planning effort underway that is driven by multiple needs, including fleets. Even within an integrated planning effort, this utility is struggling with the question of when to take action to prepare the electric system for fleet electrification: Should it act on state or federal policy? Should it act when the specific customer request is submitted, or is there something in between? Recognizing that any option has scheduling and cost allocation implications, it notes that there are no easy answers.

Many utilities need to start paying attention
As part of our research, we also talked with several other utilities and found that they have not yet looked at how fleets might relate to grid planning. However, several of these companies are developing plans to look into these issues in the next year. We also talked with a major truck manufacturer, also wishing to remain unnamed, that views grid limitations as a key obstacle to truck electrification. 

Based on these cases, it appears that fleet electrification can have a substantial impact on electric grids and that, while these impacts are small at present, they likely will grow over time. Fleet owners, electric utilities, and utility regulators need to start planning for these impacts now, so that grid improvements can be made steadily as electric fleets grow. Fleet and grid planning should happen in parallel, so that grid upgrades do not happen sooner or later than needed but are in place when needed, including the move toward a much bigger grid as EV adoption accelerates. These grid impacts can be managed and planned for, but the time to begin this planning is now.

 

Related News

View more

Sales Of Electric Cars Top 20% In California, Led By Tesla

California EV Sales 2023 show rising BEV market share, strong Tesla Model Y and Model 3 demand, hybrid growth, and ICE decline, per CNCDA Q3 data, underscoring California auto trends and ZEV policy momentum.

 

Key Points

BEVs hit 21.5% YTD in 2023 (22.3% in Q3); 35.4% with hybrids, as ICE share fell and Tesla led the California market.

✅ BEVs 21.5% YTD; 22.3% in Q3 per CNCDA data

✅ Tesla Model Y, Model 3 dominate; 62.9% BEV share

✅ ICE share down to 64.6%; hybrids lift to 35.4% YTD

 

The California New Car Dealers Association (CNCDA) reported on November 1, 2023, that sales of battery electric cars accounted for 21.5% of new car sales in the Golden State during the first 9 months of the year and 22.3% in the third quarter. At the end of Q3 in 2022, sales of electric cars stood at 16.4%. In 2021, that number was 9.1%. So, despite all the weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth lately about green new car wreck warnings in some coverage, the news is pretty good, at least in California.

When hybrid and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are included in the calculations, the figure jumps up 35.4% for all vehicles sold year to date in California. Not surprisingly this means EVs still trail gas cars in the state, with the CNCDA reporting ICE market share (including gasoline and diesel vehicles) was 64.6% so far this year, down from 71.6% in 2022 and 88.4% in 2018.

California is known as the vanguard for automotive trends in the country, with shifts in preferences and government policy eventually spreading to the rest of the country. While the state’s share of electric cars exceeds one fifth of all vehicles sold year to date, the figure for the US as a whole stands at 7.4%, with EV sales momentum into 2024 continuing nationwide. California has banned the sale of gas-powered vehicles starting in 2035, and its push toward electrification will require a much bigger grid to support charging, although the steady increase in the sale of electric cars suggests that ban may never need to be implemented as people embrace the EV revolution.

Not surprisingly, when digging deeper into the sales data, the Tesla Model Y and Model 3 dominate sales in the state’s electric car market this year, at 103,398 and 66,698 respectively. Tesla’s overall market share of battery electric car sales is at 62.9%. In fact, the Tesla Model Y is the top selling vehicle overall in California, followed by the Model 3, the Toyota RAV4 (40,622), and the Toyota Camry (39,293).

While that is good news for Tesla, its overall market share has slipped from 71.8% year to date last year at this time. Competing models from brands like Chevrolet, BMW, Mercedes, Hyundai, Volkswagen, and Kia have been slowly eating into Tesla’s market share. Overall, in California, Toyota is the sales king with 15% of sales, even as the state leads in EV charging deployment statewide, followed by Tesla at 13.5%. In the second quarter, Tesla narrowly edged out Toyota for top sales in the state before sales swung back in Toyota’s favor in the third quarter.

That being said, Tesla’s sales in the state climbed by 38.5% year to date, while Toyota’s actually shrank by 0.7%. Time will tell if Tesla’s popularity with the state’s car buyers improves and it can overtake Toyota for the 2023 crown, even as U.S. EV market share dipped in early 2024, or if other EV makers can offer better products at better prices and lure California customers who want to purchase electric cars away from the Tesla brand. Certainly, no company can expect to have two thirds of the market to itself forever.

 

Related News

View more

Elon Musk says cheaper, more powerful electric vehicle batteries are 3 years off

Tesla Battery Day Innovations detail larger cylindrical EV cells with higher energy density, greater power, longer range, cobalt-free chemistry, automated manufacturing, battery recycling, and lower cost per kWh to enable an affordable electric car.

 

Key Points

Tesla Battery Day innovations are new EV cells and methods to cut costs, extend range, and scale production.

✅ Larger cylindrical cells: 5x energy, 6x power, 16% more range

✅ Automation and recycling to cut battery cost per kWh

✅ Near-zero cobalt chemistry, in-house cell factories worldwide

 

Elon Musk described a new generation of electric vehicle batteries that will be more powerful, longer lasting, and half as expensive as the company’s current cells at Tesla’s “Battery Day”.

Tesla’s new larger cylindrical cells will provide five times more energy, six times more power and 16% greater driving range, Musk said, adding that full production is about three years away.

“We do not have an affordable car. That’s something we will have in the future. But we’ve got to get the cost of batteries down,” Musk said.

To help reduce cost, Musk said Tesla planned to recycle battery cells at its Nevada “gigafactory,” while reducing cobalt – one of the most expensive battery materials – to virtually zero. It also plans to manufacture its own battery cells at several highly automated factories around the world.

The automaker plans to produce the new cells via a highly automated, continuous-motion assembly process, according to Drew Baglino, Tesla senior vice-president of powertrain and energy engineering, a contrast with GM and Ford battery strategies in the broader market today.

Speaking at the event, during which Musk outlined plans to cut costs and reiterated a huge future for Tesla's energy business during the presentation, the CEO acknowledged that Tesla does not have its new battery design and manufacturing process fully complete.

The automaker’s shares slipped as Musk forecast the change could take three years. Tesla has frequently missed production targets.

Tesla expects to eventually be able to build as many as 20m electric vehicles a year, aligning with within-a-decade EV adoption outlooks cited by analysts. This year, the entire auto industry expects to deliver 80m cars globally.

At the opening of the event, which drew over 270,000 online viewers, Musk walked on stage as about 240 shareholders – each sitting in a Tesla Model 3 in the company parking lot – honked their car horns in approval.

As automakers shift from horsepower to kilowatts to comply with stricter environmental regulations amid an age of electric cars that appears ahead of schedule, investors are looking for evidence that Tesla can increase its lead in electrification technology over legacy automakers who generate most of their sales and profits from combustion-engine vehicles.

While average electric vehicle prices have decreased in recent years thanks to changes in battery composition and evidence that they are better for the planet and household budgets, they are still more expensive than conventional cars, with the battery estimated to make up a quarter to a third of an electric vehicle’s cost.

Some researchers estimate that price parity, or the point at which electric vehicles are equal in value to internal combustion cars, is reached when battery packs cost $100 per kilowatt hour (kWh), a potential inflection point for mass adoption.

Tesla’s battery packs cost $156 per kWh in 2019, according to electric vehicle consulting firm Cairn Energy Research Advisors, with some studies noting that EVs save money over time for consumers, which would put the cost of a 90-kWh pack at around $14,000.

Tesla is also building its own cell manufacturing facility at its new factory in Germany in addition to the new plant in Fremont.

 

Related News

View more

Canada must commit to 100 per cent clean electricity

Canada Green Investment Gap highlights lagging EV and clean energy funding as peers surge. With a green recovery budget pending, sustainable finance, green bonds, EV charging, hydrogen, and carbon capture are pivotal to decarbonization.

 

Key Points

Canada lags peers in EV and clean energy investment, urging faster budget and policy action to cut emissions.

✅ Per capita climate spend trails US and EU benchmarks

✅ EVs, hydrogen, charging need scaled funding now

✅ Strengthen sustainable finance, green bonds, disclosure

 

Canada is being outpaced on the international stage when it comes to green investments in electric vehicles and green energy solutions, environmental groups say.

The federal government has an opportunity to change course in about three weeks, when the Liberals table their first budget in over two years, the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) argued in a new analysis endorsed by nine other climate action, ecology and conservation organizations.

“Canada’s international peers are ramping up commitments for green recovery, including significant investments from many European countries,” states the analysis, “Investing for Tomorrow, Today,” published March 29.

“To keep up with our global peers, sufficient investments and strengthened regulations, including EV sales regulations, must work in tandem to rapidly decarbonize all sectors of the Canadian economy.”

Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland confirmed last week that the federal budget will be tabled April 19. The Liberals are expected to propose between $70 billion and $100 billion in fiscal stimulus to jolt the economy out of its pandemic doldrums.

The government teased a coming economic “green transformation” late last year when Freeland released the fall economic statement, promising to examine federal green bonds, border carbon adjustments and a sustainable finance market, with tweaks like tightening the climate-risk disclosure obligations of corporations.

The government has also proposed a wide range of green measures in its new climate plan released in December — which the think tank called the “most ambitious” in Canada’s history — including energy retrofit programs, boosting hydrogen and other alternative fuels, and rolling out carbon capture technology in a grid where 18% of electricity still came from fossil fuels in 2019.

But the possible “three-year stimulus package to jumpstart our recovery” mentioned in the fall economic statement came with the caveat that the COVID-19 virus would have to be “under control.” While vaccines are being administered, Canada is currently dealing with a rise of highly transmissible variants of the virus.

Freeland spoke with United States Vice-President Kamala Harris on March 25, highlighting potential Canada-U.S. collaboration on EVs alongside the “need to support entrepreneurs, small businesses, young people, low-wage and racialized workers, the care economy, and women” in the context of an economic recovery.

Biden is contemplating a climate recovery plan that could exceed US$2 trillion as Canada looks to capitalize on the U.S. auto pivot to EVs to spur domestic industry. Per capita, that is over 8 times what Canada has announced so far for climate-related spending in the wake of the pandemic, according to a new analysis from green groups.
U.S. President Joe Biden is contemplating a climate and clean energy recovery plan that could “exceed US$2 trillion,” White House officials told reporters this month. “Per capita, that is over eight times what Canada has announced so far for climate-related spending in the wake of the pandemic,” the IISD-led analysis stated.

Biden’s election platform commitment of $508 billion over 10 years in clean energy was also seen as “significantly higher per capita than Canada’s recent commitments.”

Since October 2020, Canada has announced $36 billion in new climate-focused funding, a 2035 EV mandate and other measures, the groups found. By comparison, they noted, a political agreement in Europe proposed that a minimum of 37 per cent of investments in each national recovery plan should support climate action. France and Germany have also committed tens of billions of dollars to support clean hydrogen.

As for electric vehicles (EVs), the United Kingdom has committed $4.9 billion, while Germany has put up $7.5 billion to expand EV adoption and charging infrastructure and sweeten incentive programs for prospective buyers, complementing Canada’s ambitious EV goals announced domestically. The U.K. has also committed $3.5 billion for bike lanes and other active transportation, the groups noted.

Canada announced $400 million over five years this month for a new network of bike lanes, paths, trails and bridges, the first federal fund dedicated to active transportation.

 

Related News

View more

CO2 output from making an electric car battery isn't equal to driving a gasoline car for 8 years

EV Battery Manufacturing Emissions debunk viral claims with lifecycle analysis, showing lithium-ion production CO2 depends on grid mix and is offset by zero tailpipe emissions and renewable-energy charging over typical vehicle miles.

 

Key Points

EV lithium-ion pack production varies by grid mix; ~1-2 years of driving, then offset by zero tailpipe emissions.

✅ Battery CO2 depends on electricity mix and factory efficiency.

✅ 75 kWh pack ~4.5-7.5 t CO2; not equal to 8 years of driving.

✅ Lifecycle analysis: EVs cut GHG vs gas, especially with renewables.

 

Electric vehicles are touted as an environmentally friendly alternative to gasoline powered cars, but one Facebook post claims that the benefits are overblown, despite fact-checks of charging math to the contrary, and the vehicles are much more harmful to the planet than people assume.

A cartoon posted to Facebook on April 29, amid signs the EV era is arriving in many markets, shows a car in one panel with "diesel" written on the side and the driver thinking "I feel so dirty." In another panel, a car has "electric" written on its side with the driver thinking "I feel so clean."

However, the electric vehicle is shown connected to what appears to be a factory that’s blowing dark smoke into the air.

Below the cartoon is a caption that claims "manufacturing the battery for one electric car produces the same amount of CO2 as running a petrol car for eight years."

This isn’t a new line of criticism against electric vehicles, and reflects ongoing opinion on the EV revolution in the media. Similar Facebook posts have taken aim at the carbon dioxide produced in the manufacturing of electric cars — specifically the batteries — to make the case that zero emissions vehicles aren’t necessarily clean.

Full electric vehicles require a large lithium-ion battery to store energy and power the motor that propels the car, according to Insider. The lithium-ion battery packs in an electric car are chemically similar to the ones found in cell phones and laptops.

Because they require a mix of metals that need to be extracted and refined, lithium-ion batteries take more energy to produce than the common lead-acid batteries used in gasoline cars to help start the engine.

How much CO2 is emitted in the production depends on where the lithium-ion battery is made — or specifically, how the electricity powering the factory is generated, and national electricity profiles such as Canada's 2019 mix help illustrate regional differences — according to Zeke Hausfather, a climate scientist and director of climate and energy at the Breakthrough Institute, an environmental research think tank.

Producing a 75 kilowatt-hour battery for a Tesla Model 3, considered on the larger end of batteries for electric vehicles, would result in the emission of 4,500 kilograms of CO2 if it was made at Tesla's battery factory in Nevada. That’s the emissions equivalent to driving a gas-powered sedan for 1.4 years, at a yearly average distance of 12,000 miles, Hausfather said.

If the battery were made in Asia, manufacturing it would produce 7,500 kg of carbon dioxide, or the equivalent of driving a gasoline-powered sedan for 2.4 years — but still nowhere near the eight years claimed in the Facebook post. Hausfather said the larger emission amount in Asia can be attributed to its "higher carbon electricity mix." The continent relies more on coal for energy production, while Tesla’s Nevada factory uses some solar energy. 

"More than half the emissions associated with manufacturing the battery are associated with electricity use," Hausfather said in an email to PolitiFact. "So, as the electricity grid decarbonizes, emissions associated with battery production will decline. The same is not true for sedan tailpipe emissions."

The Facebook post does not mention the electricity needs and CO2 impact of factories that build gasoline or diesel cars and their components. 

Another thing the Facebook post omits is that the CO2 emitted in the production of the battery can be offset over a short time in an electric car by the lack of tailpipe emissions when it’s in operation. 

The Union of Concerned Scientists found in a 2015 report that taking into account electricity sources for charging, which have become greener in all states since then, an electric vehicle ends up reducing greenhouse gas emissions by about 50% compared with a similar size gas-powered car.

A midsize vehicle completely negates the carbon dioxide its production emits by the time it travels 4,900 miles, according to the report. For full size cars, it takes 19,000 miles of driving.

The U.S. Energy Department’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy also looked at the life cycle of electric vehicles — which includes a car’s production, use and disposal — and concluded they produce less greenhouse gases and smog than gasoline-powered vehicles, a conclusion consistent with independent analyses from consumer and energy groups.

The agency also found drivers could further lower CO2 emissions by charging with power generated by a renewable energy source, and drivers can also save money in the long run with EV ownership. 

Our ruling
A cartoon shared on Facebook claims the carbon dioxide emitted from the production of one electric car battery is the equivalent to driving a gas-powered vehicle for eight years.

The production of lithium-ion batteries for electric cars emits a significant amount of carbon dioxide, but nowhere near the level claimed in the cartoon. The emissions from battery production are equivalent to driving a gasoline car for one or two years, depending on where it’s produced, and those emissions are effectively offset over time by the lack of tailpipe emissions when the car is on the road. 

We rate this claim Mostly False.    

 

Related News

View more

Canada's race to net-zero and the role of renewable energy

Canada Net-Zero demands renewable energy deployment, leveraging hydropower to integrate wind, solar, and storage, scaling electrification, cutting oil and gas emissions, aligning policy, carbon pricing, and investment to deliver a clean grid by 2050.

 

Key Points

A national goal to cut emissions 40-45% by 2030 and reach economy-wide net-zero by 2050 through clean electrification.

✅ Hydropower balances intermittent wind and solar.

✅ Policy, carbon pricing, and investment accelerate deployment.

✅ Clean energy jobs surge as oil and gas decline.

 

As the UN climate talks draw near, Canada has enormous work left to do to reach its goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Collectively, Canadians have to cut overall greenhouse-gas emissions by 40 to 45 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030 and achieve net-zero by 2050 across the economy.

And whereas countries like the U.K. have dramatically slashed their emissions levels, Canada's one of the few nations where emissions keep skyrocketing, and where fossil fuel extraction keeps increasing every year despite our climate targets.

Changes in national emissions and fossil fuel extraction since 1950, for G7 nations plus Norway and Australia
Graphic by Barry Saxifrage in Sep.15 article,Canada's climate solution? Keep increasing fossil fuels extraction.
Given its track record, and the IEA's finding that Canada will need more electricity to hit net-zero, how will Canada achieve its goal of getting to net-zero by 2050?

As Trudeau seeks to cement his political legacy, these are the MPs he’s considering for cabinet
By Andrew Perez | Opinion | October 25th 2021
In the upcoming online Conversations event on Thursday, 11 a.m. PT/2 p.m. ET, host and Canada's National Observer deputy managing editor David McKie will discuss how cleaning up Canada's electricity and renewable energy can put the country on track to hitting its targets with Clean Energy Canada executive director Merran Smith, Canadian Institute for Climate Choices senior economist Dale Beugin, and WaterPower Canada CEO Anne-Raphaëlle Audouin.

Getting to net-zero grid through renewable electricity
“If we wanted to be powered by 100 per cent renewable electricity, including proposals for a fully renewable electricity grid by 2030, Canada is one of the countries where this is actually possible,” said Audouin.

She says for that to happen, it would take a slate of clean energy providers working together to fill the gaps, rather than competing for market dominance.

“You couldn't power Canada just with wind and solar, even with batteries. That being said, renewables happen to work very well together ” she said. “Hydropower already makes up more than 90 per cent of Canada’s renewable generation and 60 per cent of the country’s total electricity needs are currently met thanks to this flexible, dispatchable, abundant source of baseload renewable electricity. It isn’t a stretch of the imagination to envision hydropower and wind and solar working increasingly together to clean up our grid. In fact, hydropower already backs up and allows intermittent renewable energies like wind and solar onto the grid.”

She noted that while hydropower alone won't be the solution, its long history and indisputable suite of attributes — hydroelectricity has been in Canada since the 1890s — will make it a key part of the clean energy transition required to replace coal, natural gas and oil, which still make up around 20 per cent of Canada's power sources.

Canada's vast access to water, wind, biomass, solar, geothermal, and ocean energy, and a federal government that has committed to climate goals, makes us well-positioned to lead the way to a net-zero future and eventually the electrification of our economy. So, what's holding the country back?

The new reality for renewables
According to Clean Energy Canada, it's possible to grow the clean energy sector, but only if businesses invest massively in renewables and governments give guidance and oversight informed by the implications of decarbonizing Canada's electricity grid research.

A recent modelling study from Clean Energy Canada and Navius Research exploring the energy picture here in Canada over the next decade shows our clean energy sector is expected to grow by about 50 per cent by 2030 to around 640,000 people. Already, the clean energy industry provides 430,500 jobs — more than the entire real estate sector — and that growth is expected to accelerate as our dependence on oil and gas decreases. In fact, clean energy jobs in Alberta are predicted to jump 164 per cent over the next decade.

Currently, provinces with the most hydropower generation are also the ones with the lowest electricity rates, reflecting that electricity has been a nationwide climate success in Canada. Wind and solar are now on par, or even more competitive, than natural gas, and that could have big implications for other major sectors of the economy. Grocery giant Loblaws (which owns brands including President's Choice, Joe Fresh, and Asian grocery chain T&T) deployed its fleet of fully electric delivery trucks in recent years, and Hydro-Québec just signed a $20-billion agreement to help power and decarbonize the state of New York over the next 25 years.

In The New Reality, Smith writes that many carbon-intensive industries, such as the mining sector, could also potentially benefit from the increased demand for certain natural resources — like lithium and nickel — as the world switches to electric vehicles and clean power.

“Oil and gas may have dominated Canada’s energy past, but it’s Canada’s clean energy sector that will define its new reality,” Smith emphasized.

Despite its vast potential to be one of the world's clean energy leaders, Canada has a long way to getting on the path to net zero. Even though the country is home to some of the world's leading cleantech companies, such as B.C.-based clean hydrogen fuel cell providers Ballard Power and Loop Energy and Nova Scotia-based carbon utilization company CarbonCure, the country continues to expand fossil fuel extraction to the point that emissions are projected to jump to around 1,500 MtCO2 worth by 2030.

 

Related News

View more

Sign Up for Electricity Forum’s Newsletter

Stay informed with our FREE Newsletter — get the latest news, breakthrough technologies, and expert insights, delivered straight to your inbox.

Electricity Today T&D Magazine Subscribe for FREE

Stay informed with the latest T&D policies and technologies.
  • Timely insights from industry experts
  • Practical solutions T&D engineers
  • Free access to every issue

Download the 2025 Electrical Training Catalog

Explore 50+ live, expert-led electrical training courses –

  • Interactive
  • Flexible
  • CEU-cerified