Thanks to Lorne Gunter of the Toronto Sun for the idea of this blog 
I can hear it now; the hue and cry - the audacity of someone writing that there may be problems with the forced introduction of EVs in Canada. In a recent blog, I summarized the cost of doing what the government mandated for EVs in the marketplace as costing about $75 million per MT of C02 removed. In addition, with the growth in coal-fired plants in China, our drop in the bucket for savings will be more than swallowed up by the giant.
Not opposed to EVs
I am not opposed to EVs. What I question are policies and actions that I may not agree with, and that I see as detrimental to our country, our families and our standard of living.That is my right, as it is your right to have an opposing opinion.
Why the Questions?
Follow the money. My first concern is the cost - some may say, "it has to be done no matter what the cost." I am not suggesting we do not take action, but I do not see there being any cost/benefit analysis of any options. How can we as the citizenry support, or not support a policy or action with no information? $75 million to remove each MT of C02 seems like an awful lot of money and on top of all the other things, how are we going to pay for it? Our debt is already north of $1.2 trillion and the tax grab is just starting - more on that in another blog.
Second, what about the China connection? We cannot, and should not ignore that if we want to do the world a world of good.
Third, I am not into "trust us" from the government. Too many times we see political expediency take over and we end up with a disaster. We get one shot at addressing climate change and I do not see us doing much good. We have not hit one target and we have 7 years left until 2030.
There is our broken healthcare system and the provinces and federal government, at the time of writing this blog, are not even talking about the issue. Governments have had decades to deal with the issue they let it run into the ground.
There are all the climate change targets that have not been met. Need I say anything more? That is enough to provide an idea of why I believe this EV top-down driven mandate is folly. We cannot look back 20 years into the future and say, "what a disaster this was."
Who Can Afford an EV?
So, you want to buy an EV, do you? The matchbox-sized Chevrolet Bolt will set you back about $49,000. From there, you have options that go to $51,000 and then to the top-of-the-line Teslas, in the $ 200,000 range.
Getting a loan to pay for the privilege will cost (including vehicle, taxes and insurance):
Chevrolet Bolt - $ 1,200 per month for 60 months
HyundaiIONIQ5L - $ 1,300 per month for 60 months
TeslaModel3 - $ 1,700 per month for 60 months
TeslaModelS - $ 4,300 per month for 60 months
Some may argue that they do not have to borrow from the bank. I would counter that there is an opportunity cost of the use of the money with no return on your
investment. Opportunity costs are easy to overlook, but understanding missed opportunities are crucial to better decision-making.
I do not believe the government has thought this through. Over the past 3 years, food costs, carbon taxes and other taxes have added about $2,500 to a family's expenses. This year, food costs are calculated to go up $1,100, and we have a new round of taxes coming - think carbon tax, clean fuel tax, CPP and EI increases to contributions - to the tune of $1,200. Get ready to brace yourself for your stash of cash to be reduced by at least $2,300 this year, which is on top of the $2,500 from the past 3 years. A total of $4,800 over four years. Add a car payment of $1,300 per month, and a mortgage renewal at $1,500 per month- I use that amount as that is what a friend got hit with. - and the total reduction to available cash would be $7,600 per month - and I would argue that is at the low end. Is it no wonder we have more than $1.4 million people visiting food banks?
There are Alternatives
There are alternatives that could possibly provide better results. 1. Get rid of the SUV and emissions would be cut in half. That would save us about $6 billion in government spending.
2. Mandate the size of engines that can go into cars. Smaller engines, fewer emissions.
3. Provide incentives to people to buy small cars. They would maintain their choice.
Some may suggest, "you cannot dictate like that in our just society." Well, I smelled the roses, and the government is already taking our freedom of choice away with the EV edict.
My question to you? What are you going to do when you need a new vehicle and the only available is an EV that you cannot afford? Being concerned 4 or 5 years into the future will be too late. We need to be asking the critical questions now.
Coming to the End
I am getting there. To me, these are very scary issues. One, I have no idea how we or our grandkids are going to pay for all of this. I am concerned about what I see as a lack of planning to address our standard of living and lots that is driving us down into the ditch.
And I do not write this to suggest "do not do it." What I suggest is we have one chance to get it right, to do the world a world of good, and right now, I do not see us heading down that path.
Best wishes from Sustainable Circular Economy a boutique firm in Vancouver that helps businesses and First Nation communities do the world a world of good by applying a circular economy lens to decision-making that is focused on recycling, reusing, and repurposing to optimize benefits for the people, the planet and are sustainable.
Sustainable Circular Economy
Wayne Drury is CEO of Sustainable Circular Economy, a boutique firm in Vancouver, Canada, helping businesses and First Nation communities to arrive at environmental solutions that are good for the people and the planet and are sustainable based upon a circular economy lens of reuse, repurpose, and recycle.
 Toronto Sun (7 01 23). Electric vehicles another example of cultish, evangelical thinking by environmentalists.