HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2021, 9:22 PM
ssiguy ssiguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: White Rock BC
Posts: 10,657
While I don't have a problem for subsidies/rebates for cheaper EVs {ie under $50}, what really pisses me off is that it is so damn elitist.

If the gov't REALLY wants to get us off our ICE addiction then they would offer a similar amount of subsidy/rebate on non-new vehicles for an upgrade to an EV. Depending on the model/battery strength etc, an EV conversion can be done for about $10 to $12k in Canada. That would result in a massive switch over to EVs.

Not only is it fairer to the average person but also vastly superior for the environment. It is far better to reuse than recycle. New cars {including EVs} still produce a lot of GHG emissions in their production. From the coal needed for the steel, to mining, to getting the vehicles to market.........a new EV is just as polluting as an ICE.

Not only would providing assistance for EV conversion have environmental benefits but also huge economic ones. Such conversions would provide LOCAL jobs in every area of the country as opposed to now where all EVs do is provide jobs to Californians at the Tesla plant. Such a plan should also be in place for trucks for smaller and larger trucks with smaller ones probably being battery while long haul being hydrogen.

Until Ottawa/provinces bring in such a plan, rebates will continue to be viewed {and rightly so} as nothing more than a subsidy to the wealthy.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2021, 9:30 PM
ssiguy ssiguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: White Rock BC
Posts: 10,657
As far as getting people to drive less, yes that is ideal but in reality very difficult unless you live in a major urban centre right along a main transit corridor and even then is still difficult except for perhaps commuting options.

I mostly work from home but when it comes to any trip I ALWAYS drive. I am a very strong supporter of transit and use to use it nearly everyday but I haven't boarded a bus/SkyTrain in 4 years except when travelling. Why?.............because I have something that elitists downtown condo owning transit policy wonks don't have.........a dog.

I NEVER leave my dog at home by himself and take him everywhere including my P/T job where I drop him off at my brothers. I can't imagine a time when I will ever use public transit again.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2021, 1:09 AM
Truenorth00 Truenorth00 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 24,183
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssiguy View Post
If the gov't REALLY wants to get us off our ICE addiction then they would offer a similar amount of subsidy/rebate on non-new vehicles for an upgrade to an EV. Depending on the model/battery strength etc, an EV conversion can be done for about $10 to $12k in Canada. That would result in a massive switch over to EVs.
Other than a handful of custom builds and the commercial sector, there is no industrial capacity for mass conversion. And in a battery constrained environment, manufacturers won't support such either.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2021, 1:39 PM
OldDartmouthMark OldDartmouthMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 8,423
Quote:
Originally Posted by Truenorth00 View Post
Not quite each segment, but Guilbeault is suggesting industry wide targets will be legislated. IE. Penalties for any OEM, under the sales target requirement in a given year. Industry wants some consumer support too though. Otherwise, total sales fall. Hence the subsidies.

There's also the EU method of strict fleet wide fuel economy standards measured in gCO2/km:



Personally, I like the European approach. It lets carmakers tailor strategy to strengths. They can electrify higher polluting models. Or they can turn every model into a hybrid to cut emissions. Toyota, for example, can meet requirements, by just selling hybrids exclusively till mid-decade.
It probably makes more sense to base it on a CO2 emissions target vs straight saies percentages, though on the surface it seems like the EU approach would be more complicated to police (but perhaps not, if ghg calculations are done for each individual models anyhow. Then it would just be a case of tabulating and averaging, presumably).

Either way, I prefer the approach whereby emissions are reduced at the cost of the automaker vs giving tax $ out to those who can already afford to buy a new premium vehicle.

I'm thinking that the move Biden just made is affecting Canada's decision on subsidies anyhow... so politics has entered into this even more than it should be.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2021, 2:24 PM
Truenorth00 Truenorth00 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 24,183
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark View Post
I'm thinking that the move Biden just made is affecting Canada's decision on subsidies anyhow... so politics has entered into this even more than it should be.
Not so much the subsidies as the move by several states to institute percentage sales targets. The US federal emissions standards (CAFE standards) are quite similar to the European system. Penalties are lower I believe.

If the US goes through with their discriminatory credits, I think instituting percentages and then giving credits for EVs built in Canada would be a good path to industrial policy on EVs.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2021, 3:03 PM
Truenorth00 Truenorth00 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 24,183
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse View Post
I agree that that would be the most effective policy purely in terms of carbon emissions. However, when I say "best" I also include the mitigation of negative effects such as exasperating inequality.
What's with piling on one expectation after another, just for EVs? Now EVs have to solve inequality?

Where were these expectations for gas cars?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse View Post
While it's inevitable that with every policy there will be winners and losers, making the status quo more costly as a way to push people to change behaviours is problematic when that change is too costly up-front for some of them. EVs should really be a natural fit for lower income people since EVs have a lower overall cost of ownership. But that higher up-front cost can be a barrier.
The status quo is not more expensive. The price of a gas car has not changed at all. Carbon taxes make fuel more expensive, but half the country lives in a province which rebates the carbon taxes, to the point that most lower and middle income families have a net benefit.

These arguments just sound like a whole series of moving goalposts in search of the absolutely perfect policy before anything is put in place at all. I am not sure how we cut emissions, if we don't recognize that every effort needs to be made today, regardless of how imperfect it is. We don't have the luxury of time, to wait for the perfect technology at the perfect price with the perfect policy.

If you don't want to price carbon higher, how do you suggest cutting back on emissions?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse View Post
That being said, subsidies aren't the only way to address the issue. In Europe, apparently some manufacturers have different programs where people buy an EV without the battery (which still accounts for around 1/2 the cost) and leases the battery.
This is called a battery lease. It's actually most popular in China. Look up a company called NIO. They've built hundreds of battery swap stations. And they are the ones now building the swap stations in Europe. Tesla demonstrated battery swap capabilities half a decade ago. But they never took out further. It's never taken off in North America. Culturally, we don't seem to favour the idea, for whatever reason.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2021, 4:14 PM
hipster duck's Avatar
hipster duck hipster duck is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,106
While I don't generally like corporate subsidies, I would like to see our governments encourage EV and EV parts manufacturing. I think this has been missing in our national discussion about EVs. With only a few exceptions like the announcement to convert the former CAMI plant in Ingersoll to build electric delivery vehicles and some discussion but no firm commitments to do something with EVs at Oshawa, I feel like we're being left in the dust and most of Ford and GM's investments in EV manufacturing are in the US.

This is a bit of an oversimplification, but in the last 25 years, the Canadian economy kind of toggled between high oil prices, a high dollar and robust employment in AB with a sluggish Ontario, or low oil prices, a low dollar and robust employment in auto and auto parts manufacturing in Ontario with a sluggish Alberta. For the first time since the early 90s, I fear that we're heading towards bad times for both provinces.

EVs also require far fewer parts, which is not a good thing for our major auto parts companies, like Linamar and Magna.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2021, 5:14 PM
Nouvellecosse's Avatar
Nouvellecosse Nouvellecosse is offline
Volatile Pacivist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 9,001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Truenorth00 View Post
What's with piling on one expectation after another, just for EVs? Now EVs have to solve inequality?

Where were these expectations for gas cars?

I specifically said policy that doesn't exasperate inequality which means worsen it. That's something I expect as a goal for any and all government policies. If I haven't expressed that regarding other policies, it's because I either haven't discussed the policy (like 99% of policies that exist) or I didn't see any possibility that the policy could have that issue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Truenorth00 View Post
The status quo is not more expensive. The price of a gas car has not changed at all. Carbon taxes make fuel more expensive, but half the country lives in a province which rebates the carbon taxes, to the point that most lower and middle income families have a net benefit.
I was simply adding nuance to the suggestion of increasing carbon pricing to explain the benefit of combining that with other policies. If there are already policies in place that credit back the tax to people with lower incomes then that is a great way to lessen the impact since people can save more by reducing their carbon emissions but aren't necessarily paying more if they can't. However, that type of provision wouldn't exist if governments hadn't taken the time to consider how the policy was implemented and what ways it could be altered to avoid worsening inequality.

And obviously there are many potential approaches. If there are ways that we can help people transition to lower carbon lifestyles when upfront cost is a barrier then that deserves consideration.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Truenorth00 View Post
These arguments just sound like a whole series of moving goalposts in search of the absolutely perfect policy before anything is put in place at all. I am not sure how we cut emissions, if we don't recognize that every effort needs to be made today, regardless of how imperfect it is. We don't have the luxury of time, to wait for the perfect technology at the perfect price with the perfect policy.
My goal is and has always been to see policies that reduce carbon emissions (and other environmental issues) without negatively affecting the public, particularly those in the most vulnerable situation like with low incomes. Nothing has changed about that. And yes, I do want policies that are as close to perfect as possible because, you know, finding the best way to accomplish a goal without negative side effects is always the best approach. The idea that we can't bother creating good policies because it's somehow too time consuming is ridiculous. I never suggested we should delay implementation of carbon reduction policies. Policies can be critically evaluated at any point before or after they're implemented and can even change once they're enacted.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Truenorth00 View Post
If you don't want to price carbon higher, how do you suggest cutting back on emissions?
I do want carbon prices to be higher and I clearly agreed that it would be the most effective way to reduce emissions. I simply suggested ways to help the people who need help transitioning. If you're going to reply to a comment and make these kind of accusations, at least actually read it first.

I'm perplexed as to why you would have such a negative reaction to simple policy discussion when I mostly wasn't even disagreeing with you. But I'm sure your future responses will be more sensible. Or, at least I hope so because I frankly don't have the patience for any more of that.
__________________
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." - George Bernard Shaw
Don't ask people not to debate a topic. Just stop making debatable assertions. Problem solved.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2021, 5:31 PM
Truenorth00 Truenorth00 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 24,183
Quote:
Originally Posted by hipster duck View Post
While I don't generally like corporate subsidies, I would like to see our governments encourage EV and EV parts manufacturing. I think this has been missing in our national discussion about EVs. With only a few exceptions like the announcement to convert the former CAMI plant in Ingersoll to build electric delivery vehicles and some discussion but no firm commitments to do something with EVs at Oshawa, I feel like we're being left in the dust and most of Ford and GM's investments in EV manufacturing are in the US.
We are indeed falling behind and now both the provincial and federal government are panicking watching developments south of the border. It's not just the Biden tax credit. Both, Ford and GM have announced massive capital plans to build huge battery manufacturing complexes and new or retrofitted EV assembly lines. Ontario is increasingly being left out.

The federal Liberals have all but ignored industrial policy and thought that relying on general friendliness to EVs would help. They have done a little bit, with providing grants and loans to Lion Electric to build the first battery plant in Canada, in Quebec. And Lion is emerging as a major contender in manufacturing electric school buses. But this really isn't enough. And any federal strategy is virtually useless, if it's not coordinated with Queen's Park and industry.

The Ford Tories have been outright hostile to EVs. From cancelling rebates to actually ripping out installed chargers at GO stations. They are now flat out panicking and pushing rhetoric hard, talking about how Ontario will be a major EV manufacturing centre because of minerals from the North and the auto sector. But they have no strategy. They refuse to spend a penny. They sent three ministers to an announcement on installing chargers at the OnRoutes that is being funded by OPG and Hydro One. Couldn't even cut a token cheque of a few million for chargers. Rhetoric is no substitute for an ideologically driven lack of policy. And if they don't change direction soon, it's over for Ontario. The next 12 months is basically going to determine the next 30-40 years of auto manufacturing. And it's not yet clear that the Ford Tories are capable of fighting for the sector.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hipster duck View Post
This is a bit of an oversimplification, but in the last 25 years, the Canadian economy kind of toggled between high oil prices, a high dollar and robust employment in AB with a sluggish Ontario, or low oil prices, a low dollar and robust employment in auto and auto parts manufacturing in Ontario with a sluggish Alberta. For the first time since the early 90s, I fear that we're heading towards bad times for both provinces.
Indeed we are. And most of government and society is sleepwalking right into it. Very few people understand and accept how quickly this sector is moving and how quickly the knock on effects on industry will be seen. And even fewer of those people, are in government or finance in Canada.

I'm not sure politicians at either level care. Most of the real hits will come late in the decade. And all these folks will be collecting fat paycheques on talk circuit and at think tanks by then. They will not risk upsetting their base while in office. Even if they know industry faces what is being described as an "existential threat".

Quote:
Originally Posted by hipster duck View Post
EVs also require far fewer parts, which is not a good thing for our major auto parts companies, like Linamar and Magna.
Not sure about Linamar, but Magna is pivoting towards contract assembly of EVs. They're even developing an EV parts supply chain. But batteries are ultimately going to determine where the volume EVs are assembled. If there's no battery plants in Ontario, it's game over.

Last edited by Truenorth00; Dec 13, 2021 at 10:30 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2021, 5:32 PM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Coquitlam
Posts: 39,104
Canada to U.S. on EV tax credits: 'No choice but to forcefully respond' if passed
Fri., December 10, 2021

WASHINGTON — Canada suddenly raised the stakes Friday in its ongoing electric-vehicle feud with the United States, threatening a barrage of retaliatory tariffs and a reversal of certain dairy-related trade concessions if Congress approves a controversial incentive for U.S.-made electric vehicles.

In a stern letter to Senate leadership as well as key committee leaders, Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland and Trade Minister Mary Ng promised to impose tariffs on a raft of U.S.-made products if President Joe Biden's tax credit proposal becomes law.

The proposal amounts to a 34 per cent tariff on electric vehicles assembled in Canada and violates the terms of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement, or USMCA, they said — not to mention the affront it represents in a country that's been a U.S. partner in building cars and trucks for half a century.

...

https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/ca...213654270.html
__________________
belowitall
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2021, 5:36 PM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Coquitlam
Posts: 39,104
In face of tax credit, Canadian electric vehicle makers look to U.S. to build
By Ian Bickis The Canadian Press
Posted December 12, 2021


Quote:
Other Canadian electric vehicle companies have also built up manufacturing plants close to home, but increasingly are looking to expand production in the United States as protectionist policies and other pressures help increase the trend toward building where one sells.

“There really is a relationship between where you build and where you sell and that’s particularly the case for EVs,” said Joanna Kyriazis, senior policy adviser at Clean Energy Canada.
https://globalnews.ca/news/8444740/e...manufacturing/
__________________
belowitall
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2021, 8:18 PM
ssiguy ssiguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: White Rock BC
Posts: 10,657
Canada is also falling behind other countries in terms of hydrogen development. Europe, Japan, S.Korea are years ahead of us in terms of infrastructure and production and Australia is well ahead of us in mass production, export deals, and development. Even Chile is beginning to pull ahead of us.

Canada is a world leader in hydrogen technology especially with Vancouver's Ballard which is what the Alstom hydrogen trains run on. We had Hydrogenics but it was bought out by US Cummins and eventually Ballard probably will meet the same fate.

Canada is too busy spending gobs on pipelines and oilsands subsidies. Canada is falling behind in the zero emissions auto sector.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2021, 8:50 PM
DoubleK DoubleK is offline
Near Generational
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,447
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssiguy View Post
Canada is a world leader in hydrogen technology especially with Vancouver's Ballard which is what the Alstom hydrogen trains run on. We had Hydrogenics but it was bought out by US Cummins and eventually Ballard probably will meet the same fate.
Ballard is a world leader in losing money. I honestly wonder how they stay in business.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2021, 10:13 PM
Nouvellecosse's Avatar
Nouvellecosse Nouvellecosse is offline
Volatile Pacivist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 9,001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Truenorth00 View Post
We are indeed falling behind and now both the provincial and federal government are panicking watching developments south of the border. It's not just the Biden tax credit. Both, Ford and GM have announced massive capital plans to build huge battery manufacturing complexes and new or retrofitted EV assembly lines. Ontario is increasingly being left out.

The federal Liberals have all but ignored industrial policy and thought that relying on general friendliness to EVs would help. They have done a little bit, with providing grants and loans to Lion Electric to build the first battery plant in Canada, in Quebec. And Lion is emerging as a major contender in manufacturing electric school buses. But this really isn't enough. And any federal strategy is virtually useless, if it's not coordinated with Queen's Park and industry.

The Ford Tories have been outright hostile to EVs. From cancelling rebates to actually ripping out installed chargers at GO stations. They are now flat out panicking and pushing rhetoric hard, talking about how Ontario will be a major EV manufacturing centre because of minerals from the North and the auto sector. But they have no strategy. They refuse to spend a penny. They sent three ministers to an announcement on installing chargers at the OnRoutes that is being funded by OPG and Hydro One. Couldn't even cut a token cheque of a few million for chargers. Rhetoric is no substitute for an ideologically driven lack of policy. And if they don't change direction soon, it's over for Ontario. The next 12 months is basically going to determine the next 30-40 years of auto manufacturing. And it's not yet clear that the Ford Tories are capable of fighting for the sector.


Indeed we are. And most of government and society is sleepwalking right into it. Very few people understand and accept how quickly this sector is moving and how quickly the knock on effects on industry will be seen. And even fewer of those people, are in government or finance in Canada.

I'm not sure politicians at either level care. Most of the real hits will come late in the decade. And all these folks will be collecting fat paycheques on talk circuit and at think tanks by then. They will not risk upsetting their base while in office. Even if they know industry faces what is being described as an "existential threat".



Not sure about Linamar, but Magna is pivoting towards contract assembly of EVs. They're even developing an EV parts supply chain. But batteries are ultimately going to determine where the volume EVs are assembled. If there's no battery plants in Ontario, it's game over.
All three of the quotes you referenced were by HipsterDuck. Looks like you accidentally attributed the last two to me.
__________________
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." - George Bernard Shaw
Don't ask people not to debate a topic. Just stop making debatable assertions. Problem solved.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2021, 10:30 PM
Truenorth00 Truenorth00 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 24,183
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse View Post
All three of the quotes you referenced were by HipsterDuck. Looks like you accidentally attributed the last two to me.
Fixed. Apologies.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2021, 11:09 PM
whatnext whatnext is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 22,106
Quote:
Originally Posted by theman23 View Post
Scrap rebates. EVs don’t need them. Spend money on charging infrastructure instead so non home owners can realistically buy them.
Yes, I'd rather see governments fund charging stations on every block than hand out rebates to those who buy EVs.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Dec 14, 2021, 3:14 AM
Al Ski Al Ski is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2021
Posts: 400
We need to solve traffic through sensible city design.
EV's will do nothing to solve traffic, they may actually make it worse (like UBER).
"We have more cars but it's OK, they're green!"
So far, just another profit generating greenwashing initiative.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Dec 14, 2021, 4:25 PM
WarrenC12 WarrenC12 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: East OV!
Posts: 21,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Ski View Post
We need to solve traffic through sensible city design.
EV's will do nothing to solve traffic, they may actually make it worse (like UBER).
"We have more cars but it's OK, they're green!"
So far, just another profit generating greenwashing initiative.
Uber makes traffic worse because there are more empty (no passenger) cars driving around serving zero purpose until they get another fare.

If you're referring to autonomous cars, they have the potential to increase the efficiency of vehicle traffic.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Dec 14, 2021, 4:38 PM
Truenorth00 Truenorth00 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 24,183
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Ski View Post
EV's will do nothing to solve traffic ....
Strawman. Nobody has ever suggested EVs would solve traffic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenC12 View Post
If you're referring to autonomous cars, they have the potential to increase the efficiency of vehicle traffic.
Very much debatable. Full autonomy could end up putting sprawl and traffic on steroids. Thankfully, we have time to figure out the impacts and blunt them.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Dec 14, 2021, 4:39 PM
jonny24 jonny24 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Hamilton, formerly Norfolk County
Posts: 1,139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Truenorth00 View Post
It hasn't been a "Dodge" Ram since 2009.

Not relevant to anything, it just bugs me when I see it
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:34 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.