BC Scraps 2035 Zero Emissions Targets

[Great68]

Suprised that we haven't been talking about this one here yet. I'm not surprised by the rollback, absolutely no one with a brain thought this would be achievable in the timeframe that the province set.

Six years ago, B.C. became the first jurisdiction in the world to legislate zero-emission vehicle sales targets.
Two years ago, it accelerated those targets, mandating that 100 per cent of new, light-duty vehicles sold had to be zero-emission by 2035.

On Tuesday, the province acknowledged it is nowhere close to meeting that goal.

Energy Minister Adrian Dix told reporters he will be introducing legislation next spring to modify those targets and bring them in line with the reality that electric vehicle sales are falling across North America, including in B.C.

“People will know that those current targets, which are at 90 per cent by 2030, and 100 per cent by 2035, are no longer realistic,” he said, blaming the federal government’s ending of its rebate program and the policies of U.S. President Donald Trump for declining EV sales.

Asked what the new targets will be, Dix said he and his team are awaiting a review of the government’s climate plan and will use its findings to work with Ottawa on a new target that he hopes will be implemented across Canada.

In the meantime, he said the province will be introducing regulatory changes that expand the types of vehicles that count toward the target and give manufacturers credit for making efforts such as lowering prices, offering low-cost or no-cost financing, and helping install charging infrastructure.

Despite that, Dix said one action the province will not be taking is the revival of its rebate program for electric vehicles that previously offered $4,000 off the cost of select models. It was paused in May due to stagnating demand and changing economic conditions. Dix said any new rebates should be a federal responsibility.

In January, the federal government ended its own rebate program, that had offered up to $5,000 off select models, and in September announced it was pausing the rollout of its own EV mandate that had been scheduled to begin in the coming months and would require 20 per cent of new light-duty vehicles to be zero emission next year and 100 per cent by 2035.

At the time of the target’s introduction in 2019, then-energy minister Michelle Mungall said that demand was “a lot higher than originally anticipated” with estimates that 17 per cent of all new light-duty vehicles would be zero-emission by 2025. By 2024, it had blown past that target to reach 25 per cent of total sales.

The share of vehicles sold that are zero-emission has fallen since, however, to 15 per cent this past summer, according to data compiled by the Energy Futures Institute.
Trending

Backlash against Tesla owner Elon Musk has helped dampen sales as has the announcements by major manufacturers such as Ford and General Motors that they are backing away from expanding EV vehicle production due to high costs and lower demand from consumers.
Article content

Dix nevertheless insists the province is still on track to meet its 2026 target of 26 per cent of new light-duty vehicles sales being EVs and its goal of installing 10,000 public charging stations by 2030.

Barry Penner, a former B.C. environment minister and the chair of the Energy Futures Initiative, said the problem with legislating targets for EV sales is that the province has neither the electricity nor the charging infrastructure to meet the demand that would come from 100 per cent of new vehicle sales being fully electric.

He said that the government’s mandates are “not in alignment with consumer reality” and voiced his disappointment the province has no intention of bringing back its rebate program for electric vehicles.


“On the one hand, (Premier David Eby) says we need to stand on our own feet, become more independent from the United States. This EV policy is doing the complete opposite. It’s making us import more electricity, and it’s making us purchase vehicles from the United States, like Tesla,” said Penner.


Blair Qualey, CEO of the New Car Dealers Association of B.C., said he had wanted to see the province take a similar step to Ottawa and pause the mandates while it figures out what its next steps are.

He said manufacturers that can’t meet the target of 26 per cent this year will have to either add $20,000 to the cost of each new gas-powered vehicle they sell over the limit they have been set, buy credits from another manufacturer, or reduce the amount of vehicles they provide to dealerships.

“While we’re pleased to see some efforts being made to make it easier for manufacturers to achieve these unrealistic targets, ultimately, we’ve been calling on both the federal government and the provincial government to just pause everything right now, given all of the challenges with tariffs, the economic situation, affordability issues for consumers, and on and on,” said Qualey.


“Manufacturers have had to start restricting the supply of vehicles. It hasn’t quite hit consumers yet, but it’s about to, and that’s going to be at a time when affordability for everybody is such a challenge.”

As for the opposition, energy critic Hon Chan said the problem with having EV mandates is that many people can’t afford them without government support and, while they may work well in the Lower Mainland and on Vancouver Island, they aren’t practical in certain parts of the north or Interior.

He said the government should leave consumers alone and allow them to choose the vehicle that makes the most sense for them.

“If their lifestyle supports an EV, they should purchase an EV, but if their lifestyle or business cannot have an EV, I think they should have a choice,” said Chan.

[mikemhg]

Curious when California will make the above call as well, they by far have the most aggressive targets in the US.

I think Trump has essentially blocked their targets anyways.

[MarkyMark]

This was always a joke anyways, just a date they pulled out of their ass so they could all pat themselves on the back about how they are saving the planet. Welcome to reality.

[supafamous]

Originally Posted by MarkyMark

This was always a joke anyways, just a date they pulled out of their ass so they could all pat themselves on the back about how they are saving the planet. Welcome to reality.

Weren't they just following what Europe was doing and even now Europe realises they can't hit the goal (though they are a lot closer than we are)?

It does feel like 2040 should be a doable target though - that's 14 years of development in battery tech and deployment of more charging etc.

[whitev70r]

Better to try and fail than not trying at all.

I'm OK with the fail ... made some progress in terms of EV's and charging infrastructure. Not anywhere close to perfect but without a push, we'd be like 5-7 yrs back.

[bcrdukes]

"Trying is the first step to failure." - Homer Simpson

[EvoFire]

To the surprise of no one. Even Europe is having challenges with it, the only countries that are really making those steps are Norway and Sweden.

[Harvey Specter]

The target was unrealistic anyway and gov't should let consumers decide if they want EVs rather than shoving them down people’s throats. At some point in the future the majority, if not all vehicles, will be EVs but we’re still a long way from that happening.

[Great68]

Yeahs it's like when the ban on incandescent light bulbs was announced.

By the time the ban was in effect, everyone was already buying LED bulbs anyways because of all the benefits, and the price had come down so much that they were worth the premium (which is not even a premium anymore, they're so cheap).

The question is, would the industry have made such a big shift to producing cheaper LED's if that ban had not been put in place to begin with?

[68style]

I was working as a fleet manager at a fed agency and we spent countless hours changing every workflow you can think of and establishing task forces to meet this mandate federally… on a national meeting once I said to the guy in charge hey you realize 75% of our fleet is 3/4 and 1 tonne trucks of which no such thing exists on market and on top of that you’re getting $6M a year to spend on vehicles nationally and just my province alone it’s going to cost $28M to replace all our vehicles and that’s a conservative number AND assuming that manufacturers suddenly develops BEV 1 tonne trucks out of thin air… we’re wasting our time.

Like 10 seconds of silence and a “well we have to try”

I wasn’t invited to the next strategy call.

[JDMDreams]

Yea it ain't happening unless you are a third world peasant country like China.

China leads the world in EV adoption, with electric vehicles making up almost half of new car sales in 2024.

Global market leadership: In 2024, China sold over 11 million EVs, accounting for almost two-thirds of global EV sales and maintaining its position as the world's largest EV market.

[Manic!]

Originally Posted by Great68

Yeahs it's like when the ban on incandescent light bulbs was announced.

By the time the ban was in effect, everyone was already buying LED bulbs anyways because of all the benefits, and the price had come down so much that they were worth the premium (which is not even a premium anymore, they're so cheap).

The question is, would the industry have made such a big shift to producing cheaper LED's if that ban had not been put in place to begin with?

Exactly. Imagine where we would be if California had not scraped it's EV mandate in the 90's.

Yes, both the former CEO of General Motors (GM), Rick Wagoner, and a later GM president, Mark Reuss, have expressed regret over the decision to cancel the GM EV1 program. Wagoner called it his most-regretted decision, and Reuss has stated it was a mistake that the company should not have made

[SkinnyPupp]

It was a lofty but worthy goal. And no, it should not be left up to consumers necessarily. Yes it will get there eventually, but the sooner, the better.

It's probably too late to keep most the planet habitable beyond 2050 anyway so whatever

Speaking of incandescent bulbs, I still have two 40Ws going that I've been using for over a decade. Yet I've had to replace so many shitty LED bulbs that failed (and CFL was even worse).

[Harvey Specter]

But the issue with the gov't forcing anything these days is that it instantly turns toxic and I think that is one reason for a decline in EV's because it got dragged into the whole anti-woke, anti-left movement.

And as much as the West pushes EVs, you still have countries like India which is probably 100 years away from going fully electric, and the entire continent of Africa, which is also likely a century away. The countries and regions producing the most CO2 will continue to pollute.

[Great68]

Originally Posted by SkinnyPupp

Yet I've had to replace so many shitty LED bulbs that failed (and CFL was even worse).

Totally. Some of the early LED bulbs were really good. I have a few of the first generation Philips bulbs from back in like 2009-2010.
Look like this:

They've been on Astrological timers (on at sunset, off at 11:00pm) so anywhere from 2-7 hours a day, for 15 years. and they're still going strong, not a single one has burned out.

In the race to make LED bulbs cheaper, they certainly don't build them as robust as they used to.

[BIC_BAWS]

Originally Posted by Great68

The question is, would the industry have made such a big shift to producing cheaper LED's if that ban had not been put in place to begin with?

This is a very valid point and as arbitrary as the Zero Emissions target is, it pushed industry to invest and innovate into these technologies. While the infrastructure isn't quite there yet, it's still miles ahead of when Model S's were first introduced.

I think government mandated targets are necessary to push industry to invest meaningfully into these segments.

[donk.]

Originally Posted by 68style

I was working as a fleet manager at a fed agency and we spent countless hours changing every workflow you can think of and establishing task forces to meet this mandate federally… on a national meeting once I said to the guy in charge hey you realize 75% of our fleet is 3/4 and 1 tonne trucks of which no such thing exists on market and on top of that you’re getting $6M a year to spend on vehicles nationally and just my province alone it’s going to cost $28M to replace all our vehicles and that’s a conservative number AND assuming that manufacturers suddenly develops BEV 1 tonne trucks out of thin air… we’re wasting our time.

Like 10 seconds of silence and a “well we have to try”

I wasn’t invited to the next strategy call.

But they arent going to replace all the gas cars on the road by 2035, only new sales. (Before the cancellation of goals)

Real question is, how much was your branch spending annually for new vehicles?
6 mil nation wide gets bc 1mil? So 10 trucks a year at 100k, that gives you 100 EVs by 2035.
If its 28 mil to replace all trucks, sounds like you could have 30% of the fleet electric by 2035. (Assuming they find them in electric)

[GLOW]

Originally Posted by 68style

I was working as a fleet manager at a fed agency and we spent countless hours changing every workflow you can think of and establishing task forces to meet this mandate federally… on a national meeting once I said to the guy in charge hey you realize 75% of our fleet is 3/4 and 1 tonne trucks of which no such thing exists on market and on top of that you’re getting $6M a year to spend on vehicles nationally and just my province alone it’s going to cost $28M to replace all our vehicles and that’s a conservative number AND assuming that manufacturers suddenly develops BEV 1 tonne trucks out of thin air… we’re wasting our time.

Like 10 seconds of silence and a “well we have to try”

I wasn’t invited to the next strategy call.

next strategy call...
random guy in meeting: hey where's 68style? he was identifying risks we need to mitigate
guy in charge: he was disrupting the meeting's "synergy"

[Badhobz]

with the speed the government does anything, you would figure they were all doing it via bicycles and handcarts.

[Great68]

[bcrdukes]

lol RIP 68style