Support strong Canadian climate journalism for 2025
A survey concluded there is widespread opposition to British Columbia's plan to replace fossil fuel-powered vehicles with electric cars. But observers say the survey was crafted to heighten a sense of public discontent, rather than reflect the reality on the ground.
On Thursday, the Canadian Automobile Dealers Association, Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers’ Association and Global Automakers of Canada released a commissioned survey that found half of B.C. residents oppose the province's plan to require that all vehicles sold in the province be low-emissions by 2035. The survey did not include plug-in hybrids. According to the results, four in 10 of the respondents wouldn't consider a zero-emissions vehicle for their next purchase.
A major factor cited in people's opposition is the higher cost of electric vehicles and concern that the rules will increase the price of a car, truck or SUV. The higher cost would be passed on to consumers by manufacturers who will face penalties if they can't comply with the mandate. The results also suggested that people were unsure B.C. has enough charging infrastructure to ensure they could travel through the province.
"The survey illustrates a clear disconnect between the government's regulated zero-emissions vehicle sales requirements and the realities facing British Columbians," said Brian Kingston, president and CEO of the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers’ Association. "Automakers are committed to electrification…but for this transition to succeed, we have to have realistic policies in place."
Previous research, released in September by Ipsos for the Energy Futures Institute, found similar results: 53 per cent of respondents oppose the province's EV mandate. And consumer reporting shows interest in EVs has been flagging.
But clean energy experts say the survey results should be viewed with skepticism and warn the questions are worded to generate the illusion there is more opposition to the rules than actually exists.
"It's very tempting to see the result of a poll and think that's a mirror held up to reality. It is not," said Trevor Melanson, director of communications for Clean Energy Canada, a think-tank based at Simon Fraser University.
"It is people's answer to the exact question, word for word, that you ask them."
According to the automakers' poll, only 15 per cent of respondents knew about the province's EV mandate, which in fact contains a suite of complex regulations that are targeted at car makers.
Beyond the sales mandate, the regulations create a credit system where manufacturers who don't sell a high enough proportion of EVs relative to gas vehicles must purchase credits from others who outdo their EV sales targets, or install charging infrastructure. If they do not, they must pay a $20,000 penalty. The goal is to push carmakers to make more EVs (also known as zero-emissions vehicles, or ZEVs), ultimately pushing down prices for consumers by increasing the number of EVs on the market.
A June analysis by Environmental Defense and researchers at Simon Fraser University found that similar federal rules would cut EV prices by 20 per cent on average compared to business-as-usual.
Those technical details are not accurately represented in the automakers' poll, Melanson said. Take a question that addresses the penalty system, which asks whether respondents knew that vehicle manufacturers "may not be able to provide consumers a gasoline-powered vehicle until enough ZEV are sold or face a $20,000 penalty for each non-ZEV that exceeds the mandated percentage?"
Many carmakers won’t need to pay the $20,000 penalty because they can either build more electric and plug-in hybrid cars, build charging stations or buy credits from another carmaker, Melanson noted.
Another survey question asked respondents if they "believe there will be enough reliable and affordable electricity available in B.C. to support the government's ZEV regulations?" Meeting the target would require the addition of about half the amount of electricity produced by the Site C dam by 2030, it read. Almost 60 per cent of respondents answered they did not believe enough power would be available.
But Melanson said the question paints an inaccurate picture. BC Hydro estimates that the province's current EV sales requirements will only increase power demand by two per cent by 2030. Site C will add about eight per cent to B.C.’s energy supply. As the number of EVs grows over the next 30 years, the utility will have time to improve the grid and increase renewable power generation. Researchers at the University of Victoria have found that B.C. can meet its entire projected future demand for power with renewable energy.
"It is in the interest of the fossil fuel industry to slow down electrification by trying to make it sound harder than it is," Melanson said. "It's misleading."
Editor's note: This story was updated on October 16, 2024 to clarify how the credit and penalty system for carmakers operates.
Comments
This is just another classic case why polls are useless, whether it is something like this or even election polls. Questions can be crafted in a way to sway a desired outcome and also fuels more disinformation on social media. This just go hand in hand with the anti-EV crowd exaggerated claims EVs catch fire frequently compared to fossil fuel vehicles.
Car makers have been in bed with the fossil fuel industry for years and have discouraged EVs since the 90s. Instead of offering consumers mainstream vehicles, car makers have only offered high end vehicles that fewer buy and then wonder why sales are low. It amounts to a con-job by the fossil fuel industry to discourage EVs using any means they can.
Social media disinformation has done such a good job of discrediting main stream media, many only believe the garbage they read on social media and incapable of fact checking. This reminds me of the news item this morning where they interviewed MAGA people, who don't watch or read news from mainstream media, but get their news only on social media.
The major impediment to the purchase of an EV in Canada is the cost. Next is the gigantic size of the vehicles which more often than not carry only one person. EVs available in other markets (non-North American) have access to lower priced smaller EVs, still large enough for a family of four (think Europe). China has, ready to go, a wide selection of less expensive EVs, but Canada and the US, buckling to pressure from the domestic legacy car companies, have raised import tariffs to keep them out. This effectively subverts national policies to facilitate the drastic reduction in fossil fueled vehicles required to counter global climate change. While it is in the short term interests of the legacy car manufacturers to derail the move to EVs, in the end, it will make it much more difficult for them to produce competitively priced EVs. Currently, they are so far behind EV companies in China that they may never catch up. Delay will only worsen this situation.
Batteries are getting better every year with extended range, better chemistries and cold weather performance, and most importantly, decreasing prices.
The EU has tariffs on Chinese EVs, but they are far more reasonable than North America's which are obviously protecting an industry that was outcompeted in China in every way, from EV tech investment to offering a wide range of models and sizes.
Legacy combustion cars face a steep decline no matter what they do, like other sunset industries. Keep in mind that deep investments in mass transit in Asia and Europe forced global car dependency to plateau almost a decade ago. Sticking with giant burner SUVs then trying to replicate them with electric motors and high 5-figure prices is not an economic model that will survive expanded transit coupled with transit-oriented land use and smaller, cheaper EVs that outcompete big burners on operaring costs the moment they are driven off the dealership lot.
If big cars and big prices persist, then car sharing and transit will also persist as an antidote.
Battery prices have already significantly dropped ($153 >$149 US per kWh from 2022 to 2023) and are predicted to drop to $111 by the end of 2024 (and $80 / kWh by 2026. In other words, EVs are expected to reach parity with equivalent ICE vehicles within the next 2-3 years. (See: https://electronics360.globalspec.com/article/21568/ev-battery-prices-t…). And that doesn't take into account EV being less costly to run and maintain than ICE vehicles. In China sales of EVs are more than 50% of all car sales, and increasing fast. The future is clear, ICE vehicles are on their way out.