Tesla prepares to bring its electric cars to South America

Ontario EV Clean Electricity Plan aligns EV adoption with clean power, natural gas phaseout, and grid decarbonization, cutting greenhouse gas emissions. Parties propose net-zero by 2030 as IESO warns rising gas use undermines climate gains.

Key Points

A plan to link EV growth to a cleaner grid by phasing out gas, boosting renewables, and targeting net-zero power.

✅ Parties back EVs; most pledge gas phaseout by 2030

✅ IESO projects quadrupled grid emissions under more gas

✅ Clean power needed to maximize EV climate benefits

Ontario’s political leaders are unanimously promoting electric vehicles (EVs) in their election platforms, even as Ontario's EV charging network remains only partially complete by a recent deadline. But if the electricity that powers those vehicles continues to come from burning fossil fuels, the province won’t reap the full environmental benefit of EVs, the Ontario Clean Air Alliance says.

“If we’re going to get the maximum benefit of electric vehicles, we’ve got to have a clean electricity supply,” said Jack Gibbons, chair of the alliance.

The environmental advocacy group surveyed the province’s Progressive Conservative, Liberal, NDP and Green parties about where they stand on generating electricity from natural gas, a fossil fuel. Only three committed to phasing out Ontario’s gas plants, a step seen as essential for supporting Canada's EV goals over time.

The NDP promised an electricity grid with net-zero emissions by 2030, while federal targets like the 2035 EV sales mandate shape transport electrification as well. The Liberals pledged to bring electricity emissions "as close to zero as possible by 2030.” The Green Party plans to make Ontario’s electricity “emission-free as quickly as possible,” aiming for a gas phaseout by 2030. The Progressive Conservatives did not answer the survey and did not respond to requests for comment from Canada’s National Observer.

Affordability and reliability were the top concerns for all three parties that responded, including the cost of expanding EV charging stations across the province.

Ontario used to get 25 per cent of its electricity from coal-fired power plants, even as 2019 fossil-fuel electricity share remained significant nationwide. However, in 1997, Gibbons formed the alliance to campaign against coal, and the province’s last coal-fired plant closed in 2014, leaving Ontario with one of North America’s cleanest electricity systems. At the time, Gibbons said, transitioning to gas-fired electricity made sense.

Now, Doug Ford’s Progressive Conservatives plan to double-down on gas-fired electricity generation to meet future demand, despite a looming energy storage supply crunch that is reshaping planning. As a result, planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions from electricity generation will more than quadruple by 2030, according to Ontario’s Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO).

If that happens, Ontario will lose 30 per cent of the progress it made by phasing out coal.

“If you have an increasing percentage of your electricity generated with fossil fuels, that undermines the activities of a variety of sectors in the society,” said Peter Tabuns, NDP candidate for Toronto-Danforth and former NDP energy and climate critic. “Ford's position of not committing to greening the system undermines the goals.”

In 2020, the alliance spearheaded a campaign calling on the Ford government to phase out the province’s gas plants. Thirty-two municipalities supported the campaign, and in Northern Ontario, Sudbury eco groups say sustainability is key to the grid's future. Many cities have said they will not be able to meet their own goals to fight climate change unless Ontario stops using fossil fuels for electricity.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

Canada Coal Phase-Out Costs highlight Fraser Institute findings on renewable energy, wind and solar integration, grid reliability, natural gas backup, GDP impacts, greenhouse gas emissions reductions, nuclear alternatives, and transmission upgrades across provincial electricity systems.

Key Points

Costs to replace coal with renewables, impacting taxpayers and ratepayers while ensuring grid reliability.

✅ Fraser Institute estimates $16.8B-$33.7B annually for renewables.

✅ Emissions cut from coal phase-out estimated at only 7.4% nationally.

✅ Natural gas backup and grid upgrades drive major cost increases.

Replacing coal-fired electricity with renewable energy will cost Canadian taxpayers and hydro ratepayers up to $33.7 billion annually, with only minor reductions in global greenhouse gas emissions linked to climate change, according to a new study by the Fraser Institute.

The report, Canadian Climate Policy and its Implications for Electricity Grids by University of Victoria economics professor G. Cornelis van Kooten, said replacing coal-fired electricity with wind and solar power would only cut Canada’s annual emissions by 7.4%,

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s has promised a reduction of 40%-45% compared to Canada’s 2005 emissions by 2030, and progress toward the 2035 clean electricity goals remains uncertain.

The study says emission cuts would be relatively small because coal accounted for only 9.2% of Canada’s electricity generation in 2017. (According to Natural Resources Canada, that number is lower today at 7.4%).

In 2019, the last year for which federal data are available, Canada’s electricity sector generated 8.4% of emissions nationally — 61.1 million tonnes out of 730 million tonnes.

“Despite what advocates, claim, renewable power — including wind and solar — isn’t free and, as Europe's power crisis lessons suggest, comes with only modest benefits to the environment,” van Kooten said.

“Policy makers should be realistic about the costs of reducing greenhouse gas emissions in Canada, which accounts for less than 2% of emissions worldwide.”

The report says the increased costs of operating the electricity grid across Canada — between $16.8 billion and $33.7 billion annually or 1% to 2% of Canada’s annual GDP — would result from having to retain natural gas, consistent with net-zero regulations allowing some natural gas in limited cases, as a backup to intermittent wind and solar power, which cannot provide baseload power to the electricity grid on demand.

Van Kooten said his cost estimates are conservative because his study “could not account for scenarios where the scale of intermittency turned out worse than indicated in our dataset … the costs associated with the value of land in other alternative uses, the need for added transmission lines, as analyses of greening Ontario's grid costs indicate, environmental and human health costs and the life-cycle costs of using intermittent renewable sources of energy, including costs related to the disposal of hazardous wastes from solar panels and wind turbines.”

If nuclear power was used to replace coal-fired electricity, the study says, costs would drop by half — $8.3 billion to $16.7 billion annually — but that’s unrealistic because of the time it takes to build nuclear plants and public opposition to them.

The study says to achieve the federal government’s target of reducing emissions to 40% to 45% below 2005 levels by 2030 and net-zero emissions by 2050, would require building 30 nuclear power plants before 2030, highlighting Canada’s looming power problem as described by analysts — meaning one plant of 1,000-megawatt capacity coming online every four months between now and 2030.

Alternatively, it would take 28,340 wind turbines, each with 2.5-megawatts capacity, or 1,050 turbines being built every four months, plus the costs of upgrading transmission infrastructure.

Van Kooten said he based his calculations on Alberta, which generates 39.8% of its electricity from coal and the cost of Ontario eliminating coal-fired electricity, even as Ontario electricity getting dirtier in coming years, which generated 25% of its electricity, between 2003 and 2014, replacing it with a combination of natural gas, nuclear and wind and solar power.

According to Natural Resources Canada, Nova Scotia generates 49.9% of its electricity from coal, Saskatchewan 42.9%, and New Brunswick 17.2%.

In 2018, the Trudeau government announced plans to phase-out traditional coal-fired electricity by 2030, though the Stop the Shock campaign seeks to bring back coal power in some regions. 

Canada and the U.K. created the “Powering Past Coal Alliance” in 2017, aimed at getting other countries to phase out the use of coal to generate electricity.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Power Generation News

USPS Electric Mail Trucks promise zero-emission delivery, lower lifecycle and maintenance costs, and cleaner air. Congressional funding in Build Back Better would modernize the EV fleet and expand charging infrastructure, improving public health nationwide.

Key Points

USPS Electric Mail Trucks are zero-emission delivery vehicles that cut costs, reduce pollution, and improve health.

✅ Lower lifetime fuel and maintenance costs vs gas trucks

✅ Cuts greenhouse gas and NOx emissions in communities

✅ Expands charging infrastructure via federal investments

The U.S. Postal Service faces serious challenges, with billions of dollars in annual losses and total mail volume continuing to decline. Meanwhile, Congress is constantly hamstringing the agency.

But now lawmakers have an opportunity to invest in the Postal Service in a way that would pay dividends for years to come: By electrifying the postal fleet.

Tucked inside the massive social spending and climate package lumbering through the Senate is money for new, cleaner postal delivery trucks. There’s a lot to like about electric postal trucks. They’d significantly improve Americans’ health while also slowing climate change. And it just makes sense for taxpayers over the long term; the Postal Service’s private sector competitors have already made similar investments, as EV adoption reaches an EV inflection point in the market. As Democrats weigh potential areas to cut in President Joe Biden’s Build Back Better plan, this is one provision that should escape the knife.

To call the U.S. Postal Service’s current vehicles “clunkers” would be an understatement. These often decades-old trucks are famous for having no airbags, no air conditioning and a nasty habit of catching fire. So the Postal Service’s recent decision to buy 165,000 replacement trucks is basically a no-brainer. But the main question is whether they will run on electricity or gasoline.

Electric vehicles are newer to the market and still carry a higher sticker price, as seen with electric bus adoption in many cities. But that higher price buys concrete benefits, like lower lifetime fuel and maintenance costs and huge reductions in pollution. Government demand for electric trucks will also push private markets to create better, cheaper vehicles, directly benefiting consumers. So while buying electric postal trucks may be somewhat more costly at first, over the long term, failing to do so could be far costlier.

At some level, this is a straightforward business decision that the Postal Service’s competitors have already made. For instance, Amazon has already deployed some of the 100,000 electric vans it recently ordered, and FedEx has promised a fully electric ground fleet by 2040, while nonprofit investment in electric trucks is accelerating electrification at major ports. In a couple of decades, the Postal Service could be the only carrier still driving dirty gas guzzlers, buying expensive fuel and paying the higher maintenance costs that combustion engines routinely require. Consumers could flock to greener competitors.

Beyond these business advantages, zero-emission vehicles carry other big benefits for the public. The Postal Service recently calculated some of these benefits by estimating the climate harms that going all-electric would avoid, benefits that persist even where electricity generation still includes fossil-generated electricity in nearby grids. Its findings were telling: A fully electric fleet would prevent millions or tens of millions of dollars’ worth of climate-change-related harms to property and human health each year of the trucks’ lifetimes (and this is probably a considerable underestimate). The world leaders that recently gathered at the global climate summit in Glasgow encouraged exactly this type of transition toward low-carbon technologies.

A cleaner postal fleet would benefit Americans in many other important ways. In addition to warming the planet, tailpipe pollutants can have dire health consequences for the people who breathe in the fumes. Mail trucks traverse virtually every neighborhood in the country and often must idle in residential areas, so we all benefit when they stop emitting. And these localized harms are not distributed equally. Some parts of the country — too often, low-income communities of color — already have poor air quality. Removing pollution from dirty mail trucks will especially help these overburdened and underserved populations.

The government’s purchasing power also routinely inspires companies to devise better and cheaper ways to do business. Investments in aerospace technologies, for instance, have spilled over into consumer innovations, giving us GPS technologies and faster, more fuel-efficient passenger jets. Bulk demand for cleaner trucks could inspire similar innovations as companies clamor for government contracts, meaning we all could get cheaper and better green products like car batteries, and the American EV boom could further accelerate those gains.

Additionally, because postal trucks are virtually everywhere in the country, if they go electric, that would mean more charging stations and grid updates everywhere too, and better utility planning for truck fleets to ensure reliable service. Suddenly, that long road trip that discourages many would-be electric car buyers may be simpler, which could boost electric vehicle adoption.

White House climate adviser Gina McCarthy talks with EVgo CEO Cathy Zoi before the start of an event near an EVgo electric car charging station.
ENERGY

The case for electrifying the postal fleet is strong from both a business and a social standpoint. Indeed, even Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, who was appointed during the Trump administration, supports it. But getting there is not so simple. Most private businesses could just borrow the money they need for this investment and pay it back with the long-term savings they would enjoy. But not the Postal Service. Thanks to its byzantine funding structure, it cannot afford electric trucks’ upfront costs unless Congress either provides the money or lets it borrow more. This is the primary reason it has not committed to making more than 10 percent of its fleet electric.

And that returns us to the Build Back Better legislation. The version passed by the House sets aside $7 billion to help the Postal Service buy electric mail trucks — enough to electrify the vast majority of its fleet by the end of the decade.

Biden has made expanding the use of electric vehicles a top priority, setting an ambitious goal of 100 percent zero-emission federal vehicle acquisitions by 2035, and new EPA emission limits aim to accelerate EV adoption. But Sen. Joe Manchin has expressed resistance to some of the climate-related subsidies in the legislation and is also eager to keep costs down. This provision, however, is worthy of the West Virginia Democrat’s support.

Most Americans would see — and benefit from — these trucks on a daily basis. And for an operation that got its start under Benjamin Franklin, it’s a crucial way to keep the Postal Service relevant.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

EU Renewable Energy Transition accelerates wind and solar growth, slashes fossil fuels and carbon emissions via the ETS, strengthens energy security with LNG diversification, and advances grid resilience toward 2030 climate targets.

Key Points

EU shift to wind, solar, and efficiency that cuts fossil fuels while boosting energy security and grid stability

✅ Fossil fuels at 29% of EU power in 2023, coal and gas down sharply

✅ Renewables hit 44% share; wind 18%, solar 9% and rising

✅ ETS, LNG diversification, and efficiency cut demand and emissions

Europe's energy landscape is undergoing a dramatic transformation, fueled by a surge in renewable energy and a corresponding decline in fossil fuel dependence. This shift, documented in both a report from the energy think tank Ember and the European Commission's State of the Energy Union report, paints a picture of progress, but also highlights the challenges that lie ahead on the path to a sustainable future.

Fossil Fuels Facing an Unprecedented Decline:

Fossil fuels dipped to their lowest point in recorded history, making up only 29% of EU electricity generation in 2023. This represents a significant 19% decrease in both fossil fuel generation and carbon emissions compared to 2022, exceeding even the reductions witnessed during the pandemic. Coal, the dirtiest fossil fuel, saw the steepest decline, dropping by 26%, while gas generation fell by 15%. This decline is attributed to a combination of factors, including:

Increased deployment of renewables: As renewable energy sources like wind and solar become more affordable and efficient, they are increasingly displacing fossil fuels in the energy mix.

Carbon pricing: The EU's Emissions Trading System (ETS) puts a price on carbon emissions, incentivizing generators to switch to cleaner sources of energy.

Geopolitical tensions: The war in Ukraine and subsequent sanctions on Russia have accelerated Europe's efforts to diversify its energy sources away from Russian fossil fuels across the bloc.

Renewables Ascending to New Heights:

Renewable energy is now the dominant force in the EU, as renewables surpassed fossil fuels in the power mix, contributing a record-breaking 44% of the electricity mix. Wind energy leads the charge, generating 18% of electricity – the equivalent of France's entire demand – and surpassing gas for the first time. Solar power also continues to grow, reaching a 9% share, as solar reshapes electricity prices in Northern Europe and hydropower recovered from its 2022 dry spell. This remarkable growth is driven by factors such as:

Favorable policy frameworks: The EU has set ambitious renewable energy targets and implemented supportive policies, including feed-in tariffs and auctions.

Technological advancements: Advancements in wind turbine and solar panel technologies have made them more efficient and cost-effective.
Public support: There is growing public support for renewable energy, driven by concerns about climate change and energy security.

Beyond generation, energy efficiency is playing a critical role in reducing overall energy demand. Electricity demand in the EU fell by 3.4% in 2023, thanks to factors such as improved building insulation and more efficient appliances.

EU on Track to Quit Russian Fossil Fuels:

The report underscores Europe's progress in reducing dependence on Russian fossil fuels. Imports of Russian gas have plummeted to 40-45 billion cubic metres, compared to a staggering 155 bcm in 2021. This represents a remarkable 70% reduction in just one year. This shift has been achieved through a combination of increased LNG imports, diversification of gas suppliers, and accelerated deployment of renewable energy sources.

Overall greenhouse gas emissions decreased by 3% in 2022, putting the EU on track to achieve its ambitious 55% reduction target by 2030. These achievements demonstrate the EU's commitment to climate action and its ability to respond decisively to geopolitical challenges.

Success, But Not Complacency:

Despite the positive developments, the Commission warns against complacency. Energy markets remain volatile, fossil fuel subsidies are rising in some countries, and critical infrastructure vulnerabilities persist, while some advocates call for a fossil fuel lockdown to accelerate the transition. The bloc needs to accelerate renewable energy expansion to reach the legally binding 42.5% target by 2030. Additionally, ensuring affordability and security of energy supply will be crucial to maintaining public support for the transition.

Challenges and Opportunities:

While some countries like Denmark, Finland, and the Netherlands fall short of EU climate and energy goals, others like Spain, Portugal, and Belgium showcase success with renewables. The Commission is taking action with a plan to support the wind industry, where investments in European wind continue, even as it faces challenges from high inflation and increasing competition from China. Additionally, ensuring timely updates to national energy and climate plans is crucial for achieving the EU's overall objectives.

NGOs Urge Faster Action:

NGOs like the Climate Action Network (CAN) express concern about the adequacy of national plans, highlighting the gap between ambition and concrete action. They urge member states to accelerate efforts to meet the 2030 targets and avoid a "lost decade" in climate action. CAN emphasizes the need for more ambitious national energy and climate plans, increased investment in renewables, and accelerated energy efficiency measures.

Europe's energy transition is progressing rapidly, with renewables taking center stage and emissions declining. However, significant challenges remain, necessitating continued commitment, national-level action, and a focus on affordability, security, and sustainability. As 2030 approaches, Europe's green surge must translate into concrete results to secure a climate-neutral future.

Looking ahead, several key areas will define the success of Europe's energy transition:

• Accelerating renewable energy deployment: The EU needs to maintain its momentum in building wind, solar, and other renewable energy sources. This requires sustained clean energy investment, streamlined permitting processes, and addressing grid integration challenges.
• Ensuring affordability and security of supply: The energy transition must be just and inclusive, ensuring that energy remains affordable for all citizens and businesses. Additionally, diversifying energy sources and enhancing grid resilience are crucial to guarantee energy security.
• Enhancing energy efficiency: Reducing energy demand remains crucial to achieving climate goals and reducing reliance on fossil fuels. This requires continued investments in building energy efficiency, promoting energy-efficient appliances and technologies, and encouraging behavioral changes.
• International cooperation: Climate change and energy security are global challenges. The EU must continue to lead by example as renewables exceed 30% globally and collaborate with other countries on technological advancements, policy innovations, and financial support for developing nations undergoing their own energy transitions.

Europe's green surge is a testament to its ambition and collective action. By addressing the remaining challenges and seizing the opportunities ahead, the EU can pave the way for a sustainable and secure energy future for itself and the world.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

Canada Electricity Decarbonization Costs indicate challenging greenhouse gas reductions across a fragmented grid, with wind, solar, nuclear, and natural gas tradeoffs, significant GDP impacts, and Net Zero targets constrained by intermittency and limited interties.

Key Points

Costs to cut power CO2 via wind, solar, gas, and nuclear, considering grid limits, intermittency, and GDP impacts.

✅ Alberta model: eliminate coal; add wind, solar, gas; 26-40% CO2 cuts

✅ Nuclear option enables >75% cuts at higher but feasible system costs

✅ National costs 1-2% GDP; reserves, transmission, land, and waste not included

Along with many western developed countries, Canada has pledged to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 40–45 percent by 2030 from 2005 emissions levels, and to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050.

This is a huge challenge that, when considered on a global scale, will do little to stop climate change because emissions by developing countries are rising faster than emissions are being reduced in developed countries. Even so, the potential for achieving emissions reduction targets is extremely challenging as there are questions as to how and whether targets can be met and at what cost. Because electricity can be produced from any source of energy, including wind, solar, geothermal, tidal, and any combustible material, climate change policies have focused especially on nations’ electricity grids, and in Canada cleaning up electricity is viewed as critical to meeting climate pledges.

Canada’s electricity grid consists of ten separate provincial grids that are weakly connected by transmission interties to adjacent grids and, in some cases, to electricity systems in the United States. At times, these interties are helpful in addressing small imbalances between electricity supply and demand so as to prevent brownouts or even blackouts, and are a source of export revenue for provinces that have abundant hydroelectricity, such as British Columbia, Manitoba, and Quebec.

Due to generally low intertie capacities between provinces, electricity trade is generally a very small proportion of total generation, though electricity has been a national climate success in recent years. Essentially, provincial grids are stand alone, generating electricity to meet domestic demand (known as load) from the lowest cost local resources.

Because climate change policies have focused on electricity (viz., wind and solar energy, electric vehicles), and Canada will need more electricity to hit net-zero according to the IEA, this study employs information from the Alberta electricity system to provide an estimate of the possible costs of reducing national CO2 emissions related to power generation. The Alberta system serves as an excellent case study for examining the potential for eliminating fossil-fuel generation because of its large coal fleet, favourable solar irradiance, exceptional wind regimes, and potential for utilizing BC’s reservoirs for storage.

Using a model of the Alberta electricity system, we find that it is infeasible to rely solely on renewable sources of energy for 100 percent of power generation—the costs are prohibitive. Under perfect conditions, however, CO2 emissions from the Alberta grid can be reduced by 26 to 40 percent by eliminating coal and replacing it with renewable energy such as wind and solar, and gas, but by more than 75 percent if nuclear power is permitted. The associated costs are estimated to be some $1.4 billion per year to reduce emissions by at most 40 percent, or $1.9 billion annually to reduce emissions by 75 percent or more using nuclear power (an option not considered feasible at this time).

Based on cost estimates from Alberta, and Ontario’s experience with subsidies to renewable energy, and warnings that the switch from fossil fuels to electricity could cost about $1.4 trillion, the costs of relying on changes to electricity generation (essentially eliminating coal and replacing it with renewable energy sources and gas) to reduce national CO2 emissions by about 7.4 percent range from some $16.8 to $33.7 billion annually. This constitutes some 1–2 percent of Canada’s GDP.

The national estimates provided here are conservative, however. They are based on removing coal-fired power from power grids throughout Canada. We could not account for scenarios where the scale of intermittency turned out worse than indicated in our dataset—available wind and solar energy might be lower than indicated by the available data. To take this into account, a reserve market is required, but the costs of operating such a capacity market were not included in the estimates provided in this study. Also ignored are the costs associated with the value of land in other alternative uses, the need for added transmission lines, environmental and human health costs, and the life-cycle costs of using intermittent renewable sources of energy, including costs related to the disposal of hazardous wastes from solar panels and wind turbines.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Climate Change News

Nova Scotia EV charging infrastructure remains limited, with only 14 fast chargers across the province. As electric vehicle adoption grows, urgent upgrades are needed to support long-distance travel and public charging convenience.

Nova Scotia EV charging infrastructure

Nova Scotia EV charging infrastructure refers to the province’s public and private network of stations that power electric vehicles (EVs).

✅ Limited availability of fast-charging stations for long-distance travel

✅ Growing demand as EV adoption increases province-wide

✅ Key factor in reducing range anxiety and promoting clean transportation

Nova Scotia’s EV charging network is struggling to keep pace with a growing fleet of electric vehicles. As of today, only 14 public DC fast chargers are operational across the province, a significant shortfall for drivers navigating long distances. This creates not only logistical hurdles but also growing consumer hesitation — particularly as EV sales continue to surge across Canada.

In response, the Canadian government has announced a $1.1 million (US$0.88 million) investment into a new smart-charging pilot program. Led by Nova Scotia Power, this initiative will explore how electric vehicles can better integrate with the local grid using a centralized, utility-managed control system. Up to 200 participants are expected to join the program, which aims to test both smart charging and vehicle-to-grid (V2G) technologies.

These systems allow EVs to act as distributed energy storage, helping to manage electricity demand and improve renewable energy integration — a strategy already being tested in other jurisdictions. For example, Ontario’s charging network expansion has provided a model for scaling fast-charging accessibility. Similarly, British Columbia has recently accelerated its rollout of faster charging stations to support mass EV adoption.

The Nova Scotia pilot will assess local EV charging behaviors, including drivers’ willingness to participate in V2G services based on incentives, driving patterns, and access to clean power. “We know customers want clean, affordable, reliable energy for their homes and businesses,” says Dave Landrigan, VP Commercial at Nova Scotia Power. “Through our electric vehicle smart charging pilot, we will test these technologies to learn how they can benefit all customers, creating clean, smarter options without changing a person’s driving habits.”

The funding comes through Natural Resources Canada’s Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Demonstration program, which supports the development of cutting-edge charging and hydrogen refueling solutions across the country. To date, the federal government has invested over $600 million to support EV affordability and infrastructure deployment, with a particular focus on a coast-to-coast fast-charging network.

At the same time, other provinces are stepping up their leadership roles. In Québec, Hydro-Québec is expanding its EV ecosystem through a strategic partnership with Propulsion Québec, a key industry cluster for sustainable mobility. Their focus includes reliable public charging, clean grid integration, and stakeholder collaboration — all essential factors for scalable transportation electrification.

“In Québec, we are fortunate to be able to make transportation electrification possible by easily replacing gas imported from outside with our clean energy,” said France Lampron, Director – Transportation Electrification at Hydro-Québec. “To do this, we need to develop synergies between various stakeholders in the sustainable mobility sector.”

While Nova Scotia’s current fast-charging availability is limited, the province now has an opportunity to follow a similar trajectory. With funding in place, stakeholder alignment, and public interest growing, the expansion of Nova Scotia EV charging infrastructure could soon match the pace of rising EV demand. As governments and utilities nationwide focus on electrification, Nova Scotia’s pilot may lay the groundwork for a more connected, cleaner transportation future.

Related News

• EV sales continue to surge across Canada

• Ontario’s EV station rollout addresses fast‑charging gaps

• British Columbia rolls out faster charging infrastructure

• Canada’s EV charging networks needed to support coast‑to‑coast adoption

• Electricity Forum News