this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2024
123 points (98.4% liked)

Canada

7218 readers
755 users here now

What's going on Canada?

Communities

🍁 Meta

πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories

πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities

πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer

πŸ’» Universities

πŸ’΅ Finance / Shopping

πŸ—£οΈ Politics

🍁 Social and Culture

Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
123
EV prices need to drop by one third if Canada wants to hit sales targets, says gov't report (www.ctvnews.ca)
submitted 2 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
95 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Unless policies or technologies change, the ownership cost of electric vehicles (EVs) needs to decrease by 31 per cent if Canada to wants to reach its sales target of 60 per cent EVs by 2030, according to a new report released Thursday by Parliamentary Budget Officer Yves Giroux.

Last December, the federal government unveiled its Electric Vehicle Availability Standard that outlined zero-emission vehicle sales targets for automakers. The standard requires all new light-duty sales in Canada to be electric or plug-in hybrid by 2035. There are also interim targets of at least 20 per cent of all sales being EVs by 2026 and 60 per cent by 2030.

Those federal government targets come as growth forecasts for auto companies have plateaued and concerns about charging infrastructure persist. The price of EVs has also pushed the cars out of reach for many consumers. According to the Canadian Black Book, the average cost of an EV was $73,000 in 2023.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 months ago (5 children)

Hard disagree, we should be reducing our reliance on China, not increasing it.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I agree, but we also need to lower our GHG emissions. Since we refuse to improve urban planning or transit, EVs are a step in the right direction.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Correct, but that doesn't mean we need the ones designed and manufactured in China. There are already other options designed and manufactured in better countries.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago (1 children)

And the ones from China still cost less after the 100% tariff

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

And that isn't suspicious to you at all?

[–] [email protected] 22 points 2 months ago (2 children)

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

[–] FireRetardant 9 points 2 months ago

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

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

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

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago

No, that's pretty much in line with America's oil first economy.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[–] jasep 6 points 2 months ago

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

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 months ago (1 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If China was playing fair and being a good ally, I'd be okay with that. They aren't. Their companies regularly engage in everything from dumping to industrial espionage, not to mention the worker exploitation and abuse, and extending into the government interference both internally and externally.

Protecting ourselves from a single country still allows every other country to compete with us.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

So do American and every other companies.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

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

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

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

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

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

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

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

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

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

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

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

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

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

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

God forbid they actually pay people fair wage and manufacture at home.

[–] captainlezbian 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

China or oil? Which do you want to be more dependent on at the moment

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Switching to cheap EVs does not get us off fossil fuels as much as you think.

Personal transportation only accounts for something like 20% of the total fossil fuel use.

[–] captainlezbian 7 points 2 months ago

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

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

Only 20%, that's pretty big for a single source.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

That is what it costs to burn the fuel. How much to mine it out of the oilsands?

Also, the 20% is every year for the lifetime of the vehicle. Do the math another way and what you get is the implication that getting cars off the road now would provide the equivalent of a 200% reduction in annual output or more ( one time ).

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

Increasing trade interdependency is a good way to avoid hot conflicts. It's the principle behind the EU, it's the principle behind the detente strategy during the Cold War, and it's the narrative of globalization that has been pushed from the WTO down, ever since we started protesting neoliberal globalization in the 1990ies.

[–] dogsnest -4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

You can start by tossing all your electronics, then.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Do you understand what reduce means?

[–] dogsnest 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Some of your electronics, then.