Road to electric vehicle targets in Manitoba not smooth, experts say


NFPA 70e Training - Arc Flash

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

  • Live Online
  • 6 hours Instructor-led
  • Group Training Available
Regular Price:
$199
Coupon Price:
$149
Reserve Your Seat Today

Manitoba ZEV Roadblocks highlight EV charging station gaps, rural infrastructure limits, dealership supply shortages, and ZEV mandate timelines, pushing mode shift to transit, cycling, and walking while hampering zero-emission vehicle adoption across the province.

 

Key Points

EV charging gaps, rural access limits, and supply constraints slow Manitoba's progress toward ZEV targets.

✅ Sparse Level 3 fast chargers outside Winnipeg

✅ Rural infrastructure limits long-distance confidence

✅ Dealership supply lags; long pre-order wait times

 

The federal government’s push toward zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs), including forthcoming EV sales regulations, is hitting some roadblocks in Manitoba.

Earlier this year, Ottawa set a sales target to encourage Canadians to choose ZEVs. By 2026, their goal is to have ZEVs make up 20 per cent of new vehicle purchases. By 2035, they want all new vehicles sold to be ZEVs, a target that has sparked 2035 EV mandate debate among industry observers.

READ MORE: Ottawa sets 2026 target for mandating electric vehicle sales

Connie Blixhavn with the Manitoba Electric Vehicle Association (MEVA) doesn’t think Manitoba is on track.

“We’re not, not at all,” she said.

Blixhavn lives in Killarney, Man., and bought an electric vehicle last year. She plans her trips to Brandon and Winkler around the life of her car’s battery, but finds the charging infrastructure to be lacking and unreliable, a challenge echoed by Labrador's lagging infrastructure in Newfoundland and Labrador.

“Brandon is my closest place to get a level three charge, and when they’re not working, it limits where you can go,” she said.

Level three is the fastest type of EV charger, taking about 15-45 minutes to fully charge a vehicle’s batteries.

According to CAA, 68 of the province’s 94 EV charging stations are in Winnipeg. Blixhavn says it limits options for rural people to confidently adopt EVs, even as jurisdictions like the N.W.T. encourage EV adoption through targeted programs.

“I know we’re a big area, but they need to strategically plan where they put these so we all have access,” she said.

ZEVs are often not found on dealership lots – they have to be pre-ordered. One dealership employee told Global News demand far outweighs supply, amid EV shortages and wait times reported nationally, with some customers waiting one to two years for their new vehicle to arrive.

Mel Marginet with the Green Action Centre’s Sustainable Transporation Team is also wary of Manitoba’s ability to meet the 2026 goal, noting that even as experts question Quebec's EV push there are broader challenges. She believes the only way to come close is to change how much Manitobans use personal vehicles altogether.

“If we’re really concerned about the environment, we need to double and triple down on just reducing personal vehicle trips by and large,” she said.

Marginet points to transit, walking and cycling as ways to reduce reliance on driving.

“We depend on personal vehicles a lot in this province, and far more than we should have to,” she said. “My biggest worry is that we’ll take resources away from what we need to build to get people to use personal vehicles less.”

For Blixhavn, the lack of charging stations in her area has caused her to reduce her vehicle use. While she says she’s fine with the extra planning it takes to travel, she believes the lack of infrastructure is preventing Manitobans, especially those in rural areas, from catching up with other provinces, as Atlantic Canada EV interest lags the rest of the country, when it comes to choosing electric vehicles.

Related News

Electric cars won't solve our pollution problems – Britain needs a total transport rethink

UK Transport Policy Overhaul signals bans on petrol and diesel cars, rail franchising reform, 15-minute cities, and active travel, tackling congestion, emissions, microplastics, urban sprawl, and public health with systemic, multimodal planning.

 

Key Points

A shift toward EVs, rail reform, and 15-minute cities to reduce emissions, congestion, and health risks.

✅ Phase-out of petrol and diesel car sales by 2030

✅ National rail franchising replaced with integrated operations

✅ Urban design: 15-minute cities, cycling, and active travel

 

Could it be true? That this government will bring all sales of petrol and diesel cars to an end by 2030, even as a 2035 EV mandate in Canada is derided by critics? That it will cancel all rail franchises and replace them with a system that might actually work? Could the UK, for the first time since the internal combustion engine was invented, really be contemplating a rational transport policy? Hold your horses.

Before deconstructing it, let’s mark this moment. Both announcements might be a decade or two overdue, but we should bank them as they’re essential steps towards a habitable nation.

We don’t yet know exactly what they mean, as the government has delayed its full transport announcement until later this autumn. But so far, nothing that surrounds these positive proposals makes any sense, and the so-called EV revolution often proves illusory in practice.

If the government has a vision for transport, it appears to be plug and play. We’ll keep our existing transport system, but change the kinds of vehicles and train companies that use it. But when you have a system in which structural failure is embedded, nothing short of structural change will significantly improve it.

A switch to electric cars will reduce pollution, though the benefits depend on the power mix; in Canada, Canada’s grid was 18% fossil-fuelled in 2019, for example. It won’t eliminate it, as a high proportion of the microscopic particles thrown into the air by cars, which are highly damaging to our health, arise from tyres grating on the surface of the road. Tyre wear is also by far the biggest source of microplastics pouring into our rivers and the sea. And when tyres, regardless of the engine that moves them, come to the end of their lives, we still have no means of properly recycling them.

Cars are an environmental hazard long before they leave the showroom. One estimate suggests that the carbon emissions produced in building each one equate to driving it for 150,000km. The rise in electric vehicle sales has created a rush for minerals such as lithium and copper, with devastating impacts on beautiful places. If the aim is greatly to reduce the number of vehicles on the road, and replace those that remain with battery-operated models, alongside EV battery recycling efforts, then they will be part of the solution. But if, as a forecast by the National Grid proposes, the current fleet is replaced by 35m electric cars, a University of Toronto study warns they are not a silver bullet, and we’ll simply create another environmental disaster.

Switching power sources does nothing to address the vast amount of space the car demands, which could otherwise be used for greens, parks, playgrounds and homes. It doesn’t stop cars from carving up community and turning streets into thoroughfares and outdoor life into a mortal hazard. Electric vehicles don’t solve congestion, or the extreme lack of physical activity that contributes to our poor health.

So far, the government seems to have no interest in systemic change. It still plans to spend £27bn on building even more roads, presumably to accommodate all those new electric cars. An analysis by Transport for Quality of Life suggests that this road-building will cancel out 80% of the carbon savings from a switch to electric over the next 12 years. But everywhere, even in the government’s feted garden villages and garden towns, new developments are being built around the car.

Rail policy is just as irrational, even though lessons from large electric bus fleets offer cleaner mass transit options. The construction of HS2, now projected to cost £106bn, has accelerated in the past few months, destroying precious wild places along the way, though its weak business case has almost certainly been destroyed by coronavirus.

If one thing changes permanently as a result of the pandemic, it is likely to be travel. Many people will never return to the office. The great potential of remote technologies, so long untapped, is at last being realised. Having experienced quieter cities with cleaner air, few people wish to return to the filthy past.

Like several of the world’s major cities, our capital is being remodelled in response, though why electric buses haven’t taken over remains a live question. The London mayor – recognising that, while fewer passengers can use public transport, a switch to cars would cause gridlock and lethal pollution – has set aside road space for cycling and walking. Greater Manchester hopes to build 1,800 miles of protected pedestrian and bicycle routes.

Cycling to work is described by some doctors as “the miracle pill”, massively reducing the chances of early death: if you want to save the NHS, get on your bike. But support from central government is weak and contradictory, and involves a fraction of the money it is spending on new roads. The major impediment to a cycling revolution is the danger of being hit by a car.

Even a switch to bicycles (including electric bikes and scooters) is only part of the answer. Fundamentally, this is not a vehicle problem but an urban design problem. Or rather, it is an urban design problem created by our favoured vehicle. Cars have made everything bigger and further away. Paris, under its mayor Anne Hidalgo, is seeking to reverse this trend, by creating a “15-minute city”, in which districts that have been treated by transport planners as mere portals to somewhere else become self-sufficient communities – each with their own shops, parks, schools and workplaces, within a 15-minute walk of everyone’s home.

This, I believe, is the radical shift that all towns and cities need. It would transform our sense of belonging, our community life, our health and our prospects of local employment, while greatly reducing pollution, noise and danger. Transport has always been about much more than transport. The way we travel helps to determine the way we live. And at the moment, locked in our metal boxes, we do not live well.

 

Related News

View more

US Crosses the Electric-Car Tipping Point for Mass Adoption

EV Tipping Point signals the S-curve shift to mainstream adoption as new car sales pass 5%, with the US joining Europe and China; charging infrastructure, costs, and supply align to accelerate electric car market penetration.

 

Key Points

The EV tipping point is when fully electric cars reach about 5% of new sales, triggering rapid S-curve adoption.

✅ 5% of new car sales marks start of mass adoption

✅ Follows S-curve seen in phones, LEDs, internet

✅ Barriers ease: charging, cost declines, model availability

 

Many people of a certain age can recall the first time they held a smartphone. The devices were weird and expensive and novel enough to draw a crowd at parties. Then, less than a decade later, it became unusual not to own one.

That same society-altering shift is happening now with electric vehicles, according to a Bloomberg analysis of adoption rates around the world. The US is the latest country to pass what’s become a critical EV tipping point: an EV inflection point when 5% of new car sales are powered only by electricity. This threshold signals the start of mass EV adoption, the period when technological preferences rapidly flip, according to the analysis.

For the past six months, the US joined Europe and China — collectively the three largest car markets — in moving beyond the 5% tipping point, as recent U.S. EV sales indicate. If the US follows the trend established by 18 countries that came before it, a quarter of new car sales could be electric by the end of 2025. That would be a year or two ahead of most major forecasts.

How Fast Is the Switch to Electric Cars?
19 countries have reached the 5% tipping point, and an earlier-than-expected shift is underway—then everything changes

Why is 5% so important? 
Most successful new technologies — electricity, televisions, mobile phones, the internet, even LED lightbulbs — follow an S-shaped adoption curve, with EVs going from zero to 2 million in five years according to market data. Sales move at a crawl in the early-adopter phase, then surprisingly quickly once things go mainstream. (The top of the S curve represents the last holdouts who refuse to give up their old flip phones.)

Electric cars inline tout
In the case of electric vehicles, 5% seems to be the point when early adopters are overtaken by mainstream demand. Before then, sales tend to be slow and unpredictable, and still behind gas cars in most markets. Afterward, rapidly accelerating demand ensues.

It makes sense that countries around the world would follow similar patterns of EV adoption. Most impediments are universal: there aren’t enough public chargers, grid capacity concerns linger, the cars are expensive and in limited supply, buyers don’t know much about them. Once the road has been paved for the first 5%, the masses soon follow.

Thus the adoption curve followed by South Korea starting in 2021 ends up looking a lot like the one taken by China in 2018, which is similar to Norway after its first 5% quarter in 2013. The next major car markets approaching the tipping point this year include Canada, Australia, and Spain, suggesting that within a decade many drivers could be in EVs worldwide. 

 

Related News

View more

California Takes the Lead in Electric Vehicle and Charging Station Adoption

California EV Adoption leads the U.S., with 37% of registered electric vehicles and 27% of charging locations, spanning Level 1, Level 2, and DC Fast stations, aligned with OCPI and boosted by CALeVIP funding.

 

Key Points

California EV adoption reflects the state's leading EV registrations and growth in private charging infrastructure.

✅ 37% of U.S. EVs, 27% of charging locations in 2022

✅ CALeVIP funding boosts public charging deployment

✅ OCPI-aligned data; EVs per charger rose to 75 in CA

 

California has consistently been at the forefront of electric vehicle (EV) adoption, with EV sales topping 20% in California underscoring this trend, and the proliferation of EV charging stations in the United States, maintaining this position since 2016. According to recent estimates from our State Energy Data System (SEDS), California accounts for 37% of registered light-duty EVs in the U.S. and 27% of EV charging locations as of the end of 2022.

The vehicle stock data encompass all registered on-road, light-duty vehicles and exclude any previous vehicle sales no longer in operation. The data on EV charging locations include both private and public access stations for Legacy, Level 1, Level 2, and DC Fast charging ports, excluding EV chargers in single-family residences. There is a data series break between 2020 and 2021, when the U.S. Department of Energy updated its data to align with the Open Charge Point Interface (OCPI) international standard, reflecting changes in the U.S. charging infrastructure landscape.

In 2022, the number of registered EVs in the United States, with U.S. EV sales soaring into 2024 nationwide, surged to six times its 2016 figure, growing from 511,600 to 3.1 million, while the number of U.S. charging locations nearly tripled, rising from 19,178 to 55,015. Over the same period, California saw its registered EVs more than quadruple, jumping from 247,400 to 1.1 million, and its charging locations tripled, increasing from 5,486 to 14,822.

California's share of U.S. EV registrations has slightly decreased in recent years as EV adoption has spread across the country, with Arizona EV ownership relatively high as well. In 2016, California accounted for approximately 48% of light-duty EVs in the United States, which was approximately 12 times more than the state with the second-highest number of EVs, Georgia. By 2022, California's share had decreased to around 37%, which was still approximately six times more than the state with the second-most EVs, Florida.

On the other hand, California's share of U.S. EV charging locations has risen slightly in recent years, as charging networks compete amid federal electrification efforts and partly due to the California Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Project (CALeVIP), which provides funding for the installation of publicly available EV charging stations. In 2016, approximately 25% of U.S. EV charging locations were in California, over four times as many as the state with the second-highest number, Texas. In 2022, California maintained its position with over four times as many EV charging locations as the state with the second-most, New York.

The growth in the number of registered EVs has outpaced the growth of EV charging locations in the United States, and in 2021 plug-in vehicles traveled 19 billion electric miles nationwide, underscoring utilization. In 2016, there were approximately 27 EVs per charging location on average in the country. Alaska had the highest ratio, with 67 EVs per charging location, followed by California with 52 vehicles per location.

In 2022, the average ratio was 55 EVs per charging location in the United States, raising questions about whether the grid can power an ongoing American EV boom ahead. New Jersey had the highest ratio, with 100 EVs per charging location, followed by California with 75 EVs per location.

 

Related News

View more

American wind power congratulates President-elect Biden on his victory.

American Wind Power Statement on Biden highlights collaboration on renewable energy policy, clean energy jobs, carbon-free power, climate action, and a modern grid to grow the economy while keeping electricity costs low.

 

Key Points

AWEA commits to work with Biden on renewable policy, clean energy jobs, and a carbon-free U.S. grid.

✅ AWEA cites over 120,000 U.S. wind jobs ready to scale

✅ Supports 100% carbon-free power target by mid-century

✅ Aims to keep electricity costs low with renewable policy

 

American wind power congratulates President-elect Biden on his victory. "We look forward to collaborating with his administration and Congress, after pledges to scrap offshore wind in recent years, as we work together to shape a cleaner and more prosperous energy future for America, where wind and solar surpass coal in generation across the country.

The President-elect and his team have laid out an ambitious, comprehensive approach to energy policy that recognizes renewable energy's ability to grow America's economy and create a cleaner environment, as market majority for clean energy becomes a realistic prospect, while keeping electricity costs low and combating the threat of climate change as wind power surges across many regions.

The U.S. wind sector and its growing workforce of over 120,000 Americans stand ready to help put that plan into action and support the Biden administration in delivering on the immense promise of renewable energy to add well-paying jobs to the U.S. economy, with quarter-million wind jobs forecast in coming years, and reach the President-elect's 100% target for a carbon-free America by the middle of this century, alongside a 100% clean electricity by 2035 goal that charts the near-term path." - Tom Kiernan, CEO of the American Wind Energy Association.

 

Related News

View more

Nevada to Power Clean Vehicles with Clean Electricity

Nevada EV Charging Plan will invest $100 million in highway, urban, and public charging, bus depots, and Lake Tahoe sites, advancing NV Energy's SB 448 goals for clean energy, air quality, equity, and tourism recovery.

 

Key Points

Program invests $100M in EV infrastructure under SB 448, led by NV Energy, expanding clean charging across Nevada.

✅ $100M for statewide charging over 3 years

✅ 50% invested in overburdened communities

✅ Supports SB 448, climate and air quality goals

 

The Public Utilities Commission of Nevada approved a $100 million program that will deploy charging stations for electric vehicles (EVs) along highways, in urban areas, at public buildings, in school and transit bus depots, and at Red Rocks and Lake Tahoe, as charging networks compete to expand access. Combined with the state's clean vehicle standards and its aggressive renewable energy requirements, this means cars, trucks, buses, and boats in Nevada will be powered by increasingly clean electricity, reflecting how electricity is changing across the country.

The “Economic Recovery Transportation Electrification Plan” proposed by NV Energy, aligning with utilities' bullish plans for EV charging, was required by Senate Bill (SB) 448 (Brooks). Nevada’s tourism-centric economy was hit hard by the pandemic, and, as an American EV boom accelerates nationwide, the $100 million investment in charging infrastructure for light, medium, and heavy-duty EVs over the next three years was designed to provide much needed economic stimulus without straining the state’s budget.

Half of those investments will be made in communities that have borne a disproportionate share of transportation pollution and have suffered most from COVID-19—a disease that is made more deadly by exposure to local air pollution—and, amid evolving state grid challenges that planners are addressing, ensuring equitable deployment will help protect reliability and health.

SB 448 also requires NV Energy to propose subsequent “Transportation Electrification Plans” to keep the state on track to meet its climate, air quality, and equity goals, recognizing that a much bigger grid may be needed as adoption grows. A  report from MJ Bradley & Associates commissioned by NRDC, Southwest Energy Efficiency Project, and Western Resource Advocates demonstrates Nevada could realize $21 billion in avoided expenditures on gasoline and maintenance, reduced utility bills, and environmental benefits, with parallels to New Mexico's projected benefits highlighted in recent analyses, by 2050 if more drivers make the switch to EVs.

 

Related News

View more

Nova Scotia Power increases use of biomass for generating electricity

Nova Scotia Biomass Electricity Policy increases dispatchable renewable generation from Port Hawkesbury and Brooklyn Energy, raising MWh output while critics cite clearcutting, carbon emissions, high costs to ratepayers, and delays replacing Muskrat Falls hydro.

 

Key Points

Policy directing utilities to maximize biomass power as dispatchable renewable supply during hydro delays.

✅ Port Hawkesbury biomass output up 35% year over year

✅ Brooklyn Energy used as dispatchable renewable supply

✅ Critics cite clearcutting, emissions, high ratepayer costs

 

A boiler owned by Nova Scotia Power on the grounds of the Port Hawkesbury paper plant, whose discount power rate request has drawn attention, is burning 35% more woody biomass this year than last. 

The year-to-date figures show 126,810 megawatt hours (MWh) of electricity was generated over the first nine months of 2021 compared to 93,934 MWh for the same period in 2020 and 65,891 MWh in 2019. 

The information is contained in monthly fuel cost reports Nova Scotia Power must make to the Utility and Review Board, which regulates how much consumers ultimately pay for electricity and has received a call for major grid changes in Nova Scotia.

Burning biomass  — which includes everything from low-grade pulpwood to bark, shavings, and wood chip waste from sawmills — for the purpose of generating electricity is only about 22% efficient, even as some coal stations have switched to biomass abroad. Nova Scotia Power’s boiler at Port Hawkesbury supplies about 3% of the total electricity used in the province. 

Citizens concerned about climate change have for years opposed the government classifying biomass as “renewable energy” and have echoed calls to reduce biomass use for electricity, because clearcutting, which releases carbon from the ground, remains the dominant form of harvesting on Crown and private land. That’s despite ongoing work to begin implementing 2018 recommendations from Professor Bill Lahey to move toward a more ecological approach. 

In May 2020, after it became obvious renewable hydroelectricity from Muskrat Falls was going to be delayed yet again, the McNeil government passed an Order-in-Council extending until December 2022 the deadline to generate 40% of electricity from renewable sources as it moved to increase wind and solar projects across Nova Scotia. 

To help with the shortfall, Nova Scotia Power was told to “maximize” its use of biomass at both the facility it owns in Port Hawkesbury and another one in Brooklyn owned by its parent company, Emera.

In a letter to Nova Scotia Power dated May 15, then-Energy Minister Derek Mombourquette, amid debate over independent energy planning, added: “Nova Scotia Power shall also maximize the use of dispatchable renewable electricity from its own facilities, as well as those of renewable electricity power producers in Nova Scotia (excluding COMFIT generation sources).” 

By definition, “dispatchable” excludes wind and hydro sources, which are not available 24/7, though a new attempt to harness the Bay of Fundy's tides is underway. Nova Scotia Power claims the only “dispatchable renewable electricity power producer” in the province is Brooklyn Energy, the 35 MW biomass plant near Liverpool. 

The government capped at $7 million a year how much electricity Nova Scotia Power could buy from its affiliate company. Critics of the deal — such as auditors hired by the regulator and the province’s consumer advocate — say electricity generated by Brooklyn is the most expensive power and question why the province would burden ratepayers with its purchase.

The answer became apparent in September 2020 when then-Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Kelliann Dean appeared before the legislature’s standing committee on Natural Resources and Economic Development to praise the Order-in-Council for helping rescue the forestry industry four months after the closure of the Northern Pulp mill. 

“The change to Renewable Energy Standards (May,2020) is enabling Nova Scotia Power to generate more electricity from wood chips and sawmill residuals by operating two biomass plants at capacity until electricity from Muskrat Falls comes onstream,” she said. “We are using all the policy levers at our disposal to support the sector.”

Nova Scotia Power is not required to report to the UARB how much electricity is being produced or how much biomass is being burned at Brooklyn Energy. The company pleads “commercial confidentiality” when asked by The Halifax Examiner. 

Nova Scotia Power does report how much it spends each month to buy power from independent producers — a small group which includes Brooklyn but excludes all wind farms. That dollar amount has also increased over the past year — from $15.9 million for 10 months ending October 2020 compared to $23.3 million for 10 months ending October 2021. Unfortunately, the lack of transparency makes it impossible to know exactly how much of that increase is attributable to purchasing more biomass.

Radio silence
The current Minister of Natural Resources and Renewable Energy ,Tory Rushton, has the authority to reduce the amount of biomass being burned to generate electricity and by extension, the rate of clearcutting.

With a stroke of the pen, the PC government of Tim Houston could issue another Order-in-Council capping the amount of metric tonnes that could be used in the boilers, or, direct Nova Scotia Power to use biomass only when it is the most economical fuel choice. 

But so far, Rushton has not responded to the Halifax Examiner’s question about whether he intends to make any change to stop “maximizing” the use of biomass to produce electricity.

 The Examiner isn’t the only one pushing the Minister for answers to difficult issues. At noon today, Citizens opposed to a controversial clearcut on Crown land near Rocky Point Lake in Digby County will stage a demonstration outside the Department of Natural Resources and Renewable Energy on Hollis Street. The protest led by members of Extinction Rebellion and the Healthy Forest Coalition is to pressure the government to take action to protect the habitat of the mainland moose, an endangered species that ranges overs the Crown land currently being cut by the Westfor consortium. 

 

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