Canadian climate policy and its implications for electricity grids

EV Adoption Limits highlight that electric vehicles alone cannot meet emissions targets; life cycle assessment, carbon budgets, clean grids, public transit, and battery materials constraints demand broader decarbonization strategies, city redesign, and active travel.

Key Points

EV Adoption Limits show EVs alone cannot hit climate targets; modal shift, clean grids, and travel demand are essential.

✅ 350M EVs by 2050 still miss 2 C goals without major mode shift

✅ Grid demand rises 41%, requiring clean power and smart charging

✅ Battery materials constraints need recycling, supply diversification

Today there are more than seven million electric vehicles (EVs) in operation around the world, compared with only about 20,000 a decade ago. It’s a massive change – but according to a group of researchers at the University of Toronto’s Faculty of Applied Science & Engineering, it won’t be nearly enough to address the global climate crisis. 

“A lot of people think that a large-scale shift to EVs will mostly solve our climate problems in the passenger vehicle sector,” says Alexandre Milovanoff, a PhD student and lead author of a new paper published in Nature Climate Change. 

“I think a better way to look at it is this: EVs are necessary, but on their own, they are not sufficient.” 

Around the world, many governments are already going all-in on EVs. In Norway, for example, where EVs already account for half of new vehicle sales, the government has said it plans to eliminate sales of new internal combustion vehicles by 2025. The Netherlands aims to follow suit by 2030, with France and Canada's EV goals aiming to follow by 2040. Just last week, California announced plans to ban sales of new internal combustion vehicles by 2035.

Milovanoff and his supervisors in the department of civil and mineral engineering – Assistant Professor Daniel Posen and Professor Heather MacLean – are experts in life cycle assessment, which involves modelling the impacts of technological changes across a range of environmental factors. 

They decided to run a detailed analysis of what a large-scale shift to EVs would mean in terms of emissions and related impacts. As a test market, they chose the United States, which is second only to China in terms of passenger vehicle sales. 

“We picked the U.S. because they have large, heavy vehicles, as well as high vehicle ownership per capita and high rate of travel per capita,” says Milovanoff. “There is also lots of high-quality data available, so we felt it would give us the clearest answers.” 

The team built computer models to estimate how many electric vehicles would be needed to keep the increase in global average temperatures to less than 2 C above pre-industrial levels by the year 2100, a target often cited by climate researchers. 

“We came up with a novel method to convert this target into a carbon budget for U.S. passenger vehicles, and then determined how many EVs would be needed to stay within that budget,” says Posen. “It turns out to be a lot.” 

Based on the scenarios modelled by the team, the U.S. would need to have about 350 million EVs on the road by 2050 in order to meet the target emissions reductions. That works out to about 90 per cent of the total vehicles estimated to be in operation at that time. 

“To put that in perspective, right now the total proportion of EVs on the road in the U.S. is about 0.3 per cent,” says Milovanoff. 

“It’s true that sales are growing fast, but even the most optimistic projections of an electric-car revolution suggest that by 2050, the U.S. fleet will only be at about 50 per cent EVs.” 

The team says that, in addition to the barriers of consumer preferences for EV deployment, there are technological barriers such as the strain that EVs would place on the country’s electricity infrastructure, though proper grid management can ease integration. 

According to the paper, a fleet of 350 million EVs would increase annual electricity demand by 1,730 terawatt hours, or about 41 per cent of current levels. This would require massive investment in infrastructure and new power plants, some of which would almost certainly run on fossil fuels in some regions. 

The shift could also impact what’s known as the demand curve – the way that demand for electricity rises and falls at different times of day – which would make managing the national electrical grid more complex, though vehicle-to-grid strategies could help smooth peaks. Finally, there are technical challenges stemming from the supply of critical materials for batteries, including lithium, cobalt and manganese. 

The team concludes that getting to 90 per cent EV ownership by 2050 is an unrealistic scenario. Instead, what they recommend is a mix of policies, rather than relying solely on a 2035 EV sales mandate as a singular lever, including many designed to shift people out of personal passenger vehicles in favour of other modes of transportation. 

These could include massive investment in public transit – subways, commuter trains, buses – as well as the redesign of cities to allow for more trips to be taken via active modes such as bicycles or on foot. They could also include strategies such as telecommuting, a shift already spotlighted by the COVID-19 pandemic. 

“EVs really do reduce emissions, which are linked to fewer asthma-related ER visits in local studies, but they don’t get us out of having to do the things we already know we need to do,” says MacLean. “We need to rethink our behaviours, the design of our cities, and even aspects of our culture. Everybody has to take responsibility for this.” 

The research received support from the Hatch Graduate Scholarship for Sustainable Energy Research and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

California Gas Car Ban 2035 signals a shift to electric vehicles, raising grid reliability concerns, charging demand, and renewable energy challenges across solar, wind, and storage, amid rolling blackouts and carbon-free power mandates.

Key Points

An order ending new gasoline car sales by 2035 in California, accelerating EV adoption and pressuring the power grid.

✅ 25% EV fleet could add 232.5 GWh/day charging demand by 2040

✅ Solar and wind intermittency strains nighttime home charging

✅ Grid upgrades, storage, and load management become critical

On September 23, California Gov. Gavin Newsom issued an executive order that will ban the sale of gasoline-powered cars in the Golden State by 2035. Ignoring the hard lessons of this past summer, when California’s solar- and wind-reliant electric grid underwent rolling blackouts, Newsom now adds a huge new burden to the grid in the form of electric vehicle charging, underscoring the need for a much bigger grid to meet demand. If California officials follow through and enforce Newsom’s order, the result will be a green new car version of a train wreck.

In parallel, the state is moving on fleet transitions, allowing electric school buses only from 2035, which further adds to charging demand.

Let’s run some numbers. According to Statista, there are more than 15 million vehicles registered in California. Per the U.S. Department of Energy, there are only 256,000 electric vehicles registered in the state—just 1.7 percent of all vehicles, a share that will challenge state power grids as adoption grows.

Using the Tesla Model3 mid-range model as a baseline for an electric car, you’ll need to use about 62 kilowatt-hours (KWh) of power to charge a standard range Model 3 battery to full capacity. It will take about eight hours to fully charge it at home using the standard Tesla NEMA 14-50 charger, a routine that has prompted questions about whether EVs could crash the grid by households statewide.

Now, let’s assume that by 2040, five years after the mandate takes effect, also assuming no major increase in the number of total vehicles, California manages to increase the number of electric vehicles to 25 percent of the total vehicles in the state. If each vehicle needs an average of 62 kilowatt-hours for a full charge, then the total charging power required daily would be 3,750,000 x 62 KWh, which equals 232,500,000 KWh, or 232.5 gigawatt-hours (GWh) daily.

Utility-scale California solar electric generation according to the energy.ca.gov puts utility-scale solar generation at about 30,000 GWh per year currently. Divide that by 365 days and we get 80 GWh/day, predicted to double, to 160 GWh /day. Even if we add homeowner rooftop solar, and falling prices for solar and home batteries in the wake of blackouts, about half the utility-scale, at 40 GWh/day we come up to 200 GW/h per day, still 32 GWh short of the charging demand for a 25% electric car fleet in California. Even if rooftop solar doubles by 2040, we are at break-even, with 240GWh of production during the day.

Bottom-line, under the most optimistic best-case scenario, where solar operates at 100% of rated capacity (it seldom does), it would take every single bit of the 2040 utility-scale solar and rooftop capacity just to charge the cars during the day. That leaves nothing left for air conditioning, appliances, lighting, etc. It would all go to charging the cars, and that’s during the day when solar production peaks.

But there’s a much bigger problem. Even a grade-schooler can figure out that solar energy doesn’t work at night, when most electric vehicles will be charging at homes, even as some officials look to EVs for grid stability through vehicle-to-grid strategies. So, where does Newsom think all this extra electric power is going to come from?

The wind? Wind power lags even further behind solar power. According to energy.gov, as of 2019, California had installed just 5.9 gigawatts of wind power generating capacity. This is because you need large amounts of land for wind farms, and not every place is suitable for high-return wind power.

In 2040, to keep the lights on with 25 percent of all vehicles in California being electric, while maintaining the state mandate requiring all the state’s electricity to come from carbon-free resources by 2045, California would have to blanket the entire state with solar and wind farms. It’s an impossible scenario. And the problem of intermittent power and rolling blackouts would become much worse.

And it isn’t just me saying this. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) agrees. In a letter sent by EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler to Gavin Newsom on September 28, Wheeler wrote:

“[It] begs the question of how you expect to run an electric car fleet that will come with significant increases in electricity demand, when you can’t even keep the lights on today.

“The truth is that if the state were driving 100 percent electric vehicles today, the state would be dealing with even worse power shortages than the ones that have already caused a series of otherwise preventable environmental and public health consequences.”

California’s green new car wreck looms large on the horizon. Worse, can you imagine electric car owners’ nightmares when California power companies shut off the power for safety reasons during fire season? Try evacuating in your electric car when it has a dead battery.

Gavin Newsom’s “no more gasoline cars sold by 2035” edict isn’t practical, sustainable, or sensible, much like the 2035 EV mandate in Canada has been criticized by some observers. But isn’t that what we’ve come to expect with any and all of these Green New Deal-lite schemes?

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

Electric Vehicle Ownership Costs include lower maintenance, repair, and fuel expenses; Consumer Reports shows BEV and PHEV TCO beats ICE over 200,000 miles, with per-mile savings compounding through electricity prices and reduced service.

Key Points

Lifetime EV expenses, typically lower than ICE, due to cheaper electricity, reduced maintenance, and fewer repairs.

✅ BEV: $0.012/mi to 50k; $0.028/mi after; vs ICE up to $0.06/mi

✅ PHEV: $0.021/mi to 50k; $0.031/mi after; still below ICE

✅ Savings increase over 200k miles from fuel and service reductions

Electric vehicles are a relatively new technology, and the EV age is arriving ahead of schedule today. Even though we technically saw the first battery-powered vehicles more than 100 years ago, they haven’t really become viable transportation in the modern world until recently, and they are greener than ever in all 50 states as the grid improves.

As viable as they may now be, however, it still seems they’re unarguably more expensive than their conventional internal-combustion counterparts, prompting many to ask whether it’s time to buy an electric car today. Well, until now.

Lower maintenence costs and the lower price of electricity versus gasoline (see the typical cost to charge an electric vehicle in most regions) actually make electric cars much cheaper in the long run, despite their often higher purchase price, according to a new survey by Consumer Reports. The information was collected using annual reliability surveys conducted by CR in 2019 and 2020.

In the first 50,000 miles (80,500 km), battery electric vehicles cost just US$0.012 per mile for maintenence and repairs, while plug-in hybrid models bump that number up to USD$0.021. Compare these numbers to the typical USD$0.028 cost for internal combustion vehicles, and it becomes clear the more you drive, the more you will save, and across the U.S. plug-ins logged 19 billion electric miles in 2021 to prove the point. After 50,000 miles, the costs for BEV and PHEV vehicles is US$0.028 and US$0.031 respectively, while ICE vehicles jump to US$0.06 per mile.

To put it more practically, if you chose to buy a Model 3 instead of a BMW 330i, you’d see a total US$17,600 in savings over the lifetime of the vehicle, aligning with evidence that EVs are better for the planet and your budget as well, based on average driving. In the SUV sector, buying a Tesla Model Y instead of a Lexus crossover would save US$13,400 (provided the former’s roof doesn’t fly off) and buying a Nissan Leaf over a Honda Civic would save US$6,000 over the lifetime of the vehicles.

CR defines the vehicle’s “lifetime” as 200,000 miles (320,000 km). Ergo the final caveat: while it sounds like driving electric means big savings, you might only see those returns after quite a long period of ownership, though some forecasts suggest that within a decade adoption will be nearly universal for many drivers.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

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

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

Ontario EV Charger Streamlining accelerates public charging connections with OEB-led standardized forms, firm timelines, and utility coordination, leveraging Ontario’s clean electricity grid to expand reliable infrastructure across urban, rural, and northern communities.

Key Points

An OEB-led, provincewide procedure that standardizes EV charger connections and accelerates public charging.

✅ Standardized forms, data, and responsibilities across 58 utilities

✅ Firm timelines for studies, approvals, and grid connection upgrades

✅ Supports rural, northern, highway, and community charging expansion

The Ontario government is making it easier to build and connect new public electric vehicle (EV) chargers to the province’s world-class clean electricity grid. Starting May 27, 2024, all local utilities will follow a streamlined process for EV charging connections that will make it easier to set up new charging stations and, as network progress to date shows, support the adoption of electric vehicles in Ontario.

“As the number of EV owners in Ontario continues to grow, our government is making it easier to put shovels in the ground to build the critical infrastructure needed for drivers to charge their vehicles where and when they need to,” said Todd Smith, Minister of Energy. “This is just another step we are taking to reduce red tape, increase EV adoption, and use our clean electricity supply to support the electrification of Ontario’s transportation sector.”

Today, each of Ontario’s 58 local electricity utilities have different procedures for connecting new public EV charging stations, with different timelines, information requirements and responsibilities for customers.

In response to Minister Smith’s Letter of Direction, which called on the Ontario Energy Board (OEB) to take steps to facilitate the efficient integration of EV’s into the provincial electricity system, including vehicle-to-building charging applications, the OEB issued provincewide, streamlined procedures that all local utilities must follow for installing and connecting new EV charging infrastructure. This new procedure includes the implementation of standardized forms, timelines, and information requirements which will make it easier for EV charging providers to deploy chargers in all regions of the province.

“Our government is paving the way to an electric future by building the EV charging infrastructure drivers need, where they need it,” said Prabmeet Sarkaria, Minister of Transportation. “By increasing the accessibility of public EV charging stations across the province, including for rural and northern communities, we are providing more sustainable and convenient travel options for drivers.”

“Having attracted over $28 billion in automotive investments in the last three years, our province is a leading jurisdiction in the global production and development of EVs,” said Vic Fedeli, Minister of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade. “By making it easier to build public charging infrastructure, our government is supporting Ontario’s growing end-to-end EV supply chain and ensuring EV drivers can confidently and conveniently power their journeys.”

This initiative is part of the government’s larger plan to support the adoption of electric vehicles and make EV charging infrastructure more accessible, which includes:

• The EV ChargeON program – a $91 million investment to support the installation of public EV chargers, including emerging V1G chargers to support grid-friendly deployment, outside of Ontario’s large urban centres, including at community hubs, Ontario’s highway rest areas, carpool parking lots, and Ontario Parks.
• The new Ultra-Low Overnight price plan which allows customers who use more electricity at night, including those charging their EV, to save up to $90 per year by shifting demand to the ultra-low overnight rate period when provincewide electricity demand is lower and to participate in programs that let them sell electricity back to the grid when appropriate.
• Making it more convenient for electric vehicle (EV) owners to travel the province with EV fast chargers now installed at all 20 renovated ONroute stations along the province’s busiest highways, the 400 and 401.

The initiative also builds on the government’s Driving Prosperity: The Future of Ontario’s Automotive Sector plan which aims to create a domestic EV battery ecosystem in the province, expand energy storage capacity, and position Ontario as a North American automotive innovation hub by working to support the continued transition to electric, low carbon, connected and autonomous vehicles.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

UK Petrol Shortages Drive EV Adoption as fuel crisis spurs electric vehicles, plug-in car demand, home charging, lower running costs, zero-emission mobility, ULEZ compliance, accelerating the shift from diesel to battery EVs.

Key Points

Fuel shortages push drivers to EVs, boosting inquiries and sales while highlighting the convenience of home charging.

✅ Surge in EV dealer inquiries and test drives

✅ Home charging avoids queues and fuel shortages

✅ Policy signals: ULEZ expansion, 2030 ICE ban

Sellers of plug-in vehicles say petrol shortages are driving people to adopt the new technology as the age of electric cars accelerates worldwide.

As petrol stations in parts of the UK started running out of fuel on Friday, business at Martin Miller’s electric car dealership in Guildford, Surrey, started soaring.

After what ended up being his company EV Experts busiest day ever, interest does not appear to be dying down. This week the diary is booked up with test drives and the business is low on stock amid supply constraints.

“People buy electric cars for environmental reasons, for cost-saving reasons and because the technology’s great, even though higher upfront prices remain a concern,” he said. “But Friday was one of those moments where people said, ‘Do you know what, this is a sign that we need to go electric’.”

While scenes of chaos play out at petrol stations across the country amid shortages, for many electric vehicle (EV) dealers the fuel crisis has led to an unexpected surge in inquiries and sales, even as some question an electric-car revolution narrative today.

EVA England, a non-profit representing new and prospective EV drivers, reports a rise in electric car inquiries and in interest at EV dealers, particularly in the last week.

“Saturday was bonkers but Friday even surpassed that, it was very strange,” said Miller, who founded his company four years ago. “I’ve now got trade-in cars with no petrol to move them.”

Along with existing factors such as the expansion of London’s ultra-low emission zone, the fuel crisis has proved to be another trigger point, he said. “People were using it as ‘this is the moment where I’m not going to put this off any longer’.”

The EV market is no longer the preserve of innovators and early adopters, he said, with the most popular models the Nissan Leaf, Volkswagen ID 3 and Jaguar I-Pace.

Ben Strzalko, the owner of Electric Cars UK in Leyland, Lancashire, said that as a small business it would take a few months to feel the knock-on effect of the fuel crisis on sales.

But every time there are problems with petrol or diesel, he said they acted as “one more tick for people making that transition to electric cars”.

He said “a lot of electric car owners will be chuffed to bits this last week” being able to plug in their cars at home. And as an EV driver himself, he admitted feeling a little smug as he drove past queues of 20 cars outside petrol stations over the weekend in his Tesla.

Matt Cleevely, the owner of Cleevely Electric Vehicles in Cheltenham, Gloucestershire, which specialises in used EVs, had a surge of inquiries over the weekend and on Monday morning from customers citing the fuel crisis as a reason for switching to electric.

He expects enthusiasm to continue rising, with petrol shortages adding “fuel to the fire”.

Although he feels sorry for non-EV drivers who have been unable to get fuel, he said as an electric car owner it was “very nice” not to have to worry about where to get petrol at the weekend.

“It’s very convenient that we’ve been able to just fuel up on our driveway. It’s one of the biggest pros of having an electric vehicle.”

The National Franchised Dealers Association also said multiple dealers have reported a spike in EV enquiries since the start of the crisis.

The Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders reported “bumper growth” in the sale of plug-in cars in July, reflecting broader global market growth in recent years, with battery electric vehicles comprising 9% of sales. Plug-in hybrids accounted for 8% of sales and hybrid electric vehicles nearly 12%. Also in July, more electric vehicles were registered than diesel for the second consecutive month.

The UK has pledged to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel cars by 2030 and of new hybrids by 2035, a timeline that aligns with expectations that within a decade most driving could be electric.

Warren Philips, the volunteer communities director at EVA England, said the tipping point for EVs had already been reached but the fuel crisis “underlines how electric cars could work for the majority of people”.

He added: “The interest is already there, this just adds to it. And going forward with things like Cop26, with the climate crisis, with the cost of fuel probably going to rise … people will start looking at electric cars where you just skip that entire step.”

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News