Are Canadians still getting Model 3s right now?

[felixculpas]

While this may be preaching to the converted, here's a petition on the David Suzuki Foundation website:

Has Canada stalled on electric vehicles? Take action!

It's not looking promising that the Feds will introduce a national incentive. Trudeau and CM and her office are mum on the subject so it will probably go right down to the wire/budget. Anything less and I call pandering to the oil industry. Canada is burying it's head in oil and will be a big loser long term. We could be a world leader in renewable energy with all the money that's being thrown at oil.

In October 2017, Canada assumed the co-chair role of the international Electric Vehicle Initiative yet have only played lip service to the EV30@30 concept.

That all said, sales of all vehicles are down pretty much world wide. Dealers are sitting on a lot of inventory and production cuts will soon be in order.

 

[ZooSean]

I 'lived' with a gen 1 (40-80km range) then a gen 2 Volt (60-100km range) for a combined ~100,000km over 5 Ontario winters. A commute of 45 km each way plus workplace chargers (at my old job, not the new one) let me do 97% of those km on full EV only usinguaround 80L of dino juice over 5 +years. Granted I'm maybe more the exception rather than the rule, but a 40-50 kwh pack would honestly be more than enough for me....and I reckon 90% of people that live closer than 50km from their workplace but have home charging.

Throw in superchargers for road trips and you are good to go in my opinion. Yes there will be times you wish you had 500km of range, but for 1/2 the price of the car I'm willing to give up those 1-2 times per year it would benefit me.

Just my $0.02

Aside from the major storm last Monday, the 450km (90%) charge was never needed. Battery size does support different styles of driving and pick up as the computer limits the power output dramatically.

I must say, this AWD version of the 3 (maybe even a stealth P?) is growing on me - this rental is amazing!

However, given 90% of the average commuter driving is in traffic and can hardly use the wow factor w/o the constant threat of getting towed.

The LR RWD is the best car imho for my driving needs of 90% 401 and weekend warrior road trips.

So far all performance, AWD LR, and RWD MR , the PUP will be required, Tesla not even having an option to choose anymore, and just included into base price. Giving that , do you still hope that SR will be provided with no PUP. If PUP will be required for SR RWD as well, then I basically got LR battery for free with the rebate. Why not? Thanks Liberals for that.

Last June, when I decide if I would wait for AWD or even with MR SR , I decided go ahead to purchase. For me , there is no brainer to lose the rebate. And end up getting less equipped car with same price.

 

[Tony_YYZ]

While this may be preaching to the converted, here's a petition on the David Suzuki Foundation website:

Has Canada stalled on electric vehicles? Take action!

It's not looking promising that the Feds will introduce a national incentive. Trudeau and CM and her office are mum on the subject so it will probably go right down to the wire/budget. Anything less and I call pandering to the oil industry. Canada is burying it's head in oil and will be a big loser long term. We could be a world leader in renewable energy with all the money that's being thrown at oil.

In October 2017, Canada assumed the co-chair role of the international Electric Vehicle Initiative yet have only played lip service to the EV30@30 concept.

That all said, sales of all vehicles are down pretty much world wide. Dealers are sitting on a lot of inventory and production cuts will soon be in order.

I always wonder why more countries don't look to Norway as an example of what to strive for. Norway has their *sugar* in order. They are leaders across many metric and just keep striving to do better. I know they are a much smaller country but they seem to have the blueprints to success for the citizens and the country as a whole.

 

[adaptabl]

I always wonder why more countries don't look to Norway as an example of what to strive for. Norway has their *sugar* in order. They are leaders across many metric and just keep striving to do better. I know they are a much smaller country but they seem to have the blueprints to success for the citizens and the country as a whole.

Norway has the funds thru the sale of fossil fuels and it's strategic reserve funds from the sale of those resources. Kind of like the crack dealer uses the profits to get clean at the expense of others. Not really a good model to follow.

 

[adaptabl]

The only reason the rebate was cancelled is to protect every NON-EV manufacturer. The oil industry has test drove Teslas, stripped down Teslas, and shiat their pants at how much fun and joy they're to drive. Any rebate that helps sales of these vehicles is a threat to their Earth destroying dino juice empire.

Ford cancelled the rebates because they were funded by a carbon tax that is very unpopular with voters. EV rebates are also very unpopular with the general public. It was purely political and had little or nothing to do with protecting Non-EV manufacturers.

 

[5_+JqckQttqck]

I always wonder why more countries don't look to Norway as an example of what to strive for. Norway has their *sugar* in order. They are leaders across many metric and just keep striving to do better. I know they are a much smaller country but they seem to have the blueprints to success for the citizens and the country as a whole.

Much easier to get consensus with a smaller geographic area with similar cultural values. Canada is like seven regions stitches together and massively different industries and income inequity. We're still a resource based economy outside of the major urban centers. I don't believe we'll ever have a unified national identity aside from the fact that we're not Americans.

South of the boarder is even worse, they have enough issues of their own social economically yet they turn a blind eye to spend money on the military to secure oil and resources for the mega rich. History is repeating itself over and over.

 

[5_+JqckQttqck]

Ford cancelled the rebates because they were funded by a carbon tax that is very unpopular with voters. EV rebates are also very unpopular with the general public. It was purely political and had little or nothing to do with protecting Non-EV manufacturers.

I disagree, it's unpopular with 30% of voters. That's hardly a majority. The voting system is broken when 30% of votes can win a majority of the governing seats.

 

[adaptabl]

I disagree, it's unpopular with 30% of voters. That's hardly a majority. The voting system is broken when 30% of votes can win a majority of the governing seats.

No way 70% of the public want a carbon tax. If they did the feds would have one yesterday. It is extremely unpopular. Maybe 30% voted for Ford but there are a very large number of voters for other parties that do not want more taxes.

 

[ZooSean]

I disagree, it's unpopular with 30% of voters. That's hardly a majority. The voting system is broken when 30% of votes can win a majority of the governing seats.

The problem is that liberal has many bigger issues than environmental protection. I don’t want my kids to smoke pots, and I don’t want grade 6 kids to learn please their self. We don’t have much choice, do we?

 

[5_+JqckQttqck]

No way 70% of the public want a carbon tax. If they did the feds would have one yesterday. It is extremely unpopular. Maybe 30% voted for Ford but there are a very large number of voters for other parties that do not want more taxes.

You can't expect public services without taxes. It's absurd to complain about not enough schools, day care, hospital beds while cutting funding to them. Taxes are good for the greater society. Privatization is what you get south of the boarder. A sliver of extremely rich people who don't know how to connect to others. A slice of the upper middle class; a slice and a half of the lower middle class; and half a pie of poor, uneducated, working poor who votes for Trump.

Do you want that for Canada?

 

[Tony_YYZ]

Norway has the funds thru the sale of fossil fuels and it's strategic reserve funds from the sale of those resources. Kind of like the crack dealer uses the profits to get clean at the expense of others. Not really a good model to follow.

Canada also sells fossil fuels. Are we using our profits to help better our country?

Much easier to get consensus with a smaller geographic area with similar cultural values. Canada is like seven regions stitches together and massively different industries and income inequity. We're still a resource based economy outside of the major urban centers. I don't believe we'll ever have a unified national identity aside from the fact that we're not Americans.

South of the boarder is even worse, they have enough issues of their own social economically yet they turn a blind eye to spend money on the military to secure oil and resources for the mega rich. History is repeating itself over and over.

This is the unfortunate truth. And with the amount of people who vote in politicians based on party versus country I don't have any hope we'll ever get our act together here.

 

[felixculpas]

Canada's climate gap widens yet again

According to the new report, Canada's actual emissions are projected to be even higher than that: 115 MtCO2 above their 2030 Paris target, or less than halfway to the target.

New report predicts the impact of climate change on Nepal’s mountains may be much worse than we thought.

Unless we get our act together and diversify our energy mix more towards renewables, it won't matter how many EV's we have.

We need to elect politicians that acknowledge and are willing to act on fending off climate change. Slim pickings and too many sheep willing to be led astray.

 

[adaptabl]

Canada's climate gap widens yet again

According to the new report, Canada's actual emissions are projected to be even higher than that: 115 MtCO2 above their 2030 Paris target, or less than halfway to the target.

New report predicts the impact of climate change on Nepal’s mountains may be much worse than we thought.

Unless we get our act together and diversify our energy mix more towards renewables, it won't matter how many EV's we have.

We need to elect politicians that acknowledge and are willing to act on fending off climate change. Slim pickings and too many sheep willing to be led astray.

Unfortunately our actions although important as sympolic will have little effect on a global basis. China, India are producing vast amounts of emissions and growing. The coal fueled electrical generation is increasing daily. If we went 100% EV with clean electrical generation it would barely register as an impact.

 

[pcons]

Canada's climate gap widens yet again

According to the new report, Canada's actual emissions are projected to be even higher than that: 115 MtCO2 above their 2030 Paris target, or less than halfway to the target.

New report predicts the impact of climate change on Nepal’s mountains may be much worse than we thought.

Unless we get our act together and diversify our energy mix more towards renewables, it won't matter how many EV's we have.

We need to elect politicians that acknowledge and are willing to act on fending off climate change. Slim pickings and too many sheep willing to be led astray.

I dont think commuter EVs are really the 'solution', they are the gateway to a lifestyle that allows other changes. Start with EVs and offset commuting emissions, utilize low demand times for charging, and even potentially create a 'smart grid' where connected EVs can be used as a demand based storage (ie, 10-15% of your battery capacity while plugged in could 'go both ways' to offset demand during peak periods).

That's a great start, but when you do something like electrify commercial vehicles which are far more responsible for vehicle based emissions in my opinion, that's when you start to make a dent.

Unfortunately our actions although important as sympolic will have little effect on a global basis. China, India are producing vast amounts of emissions and growing. The coal fueled electrical generation is increasing daily. If we went 100% EV with clean electrical generation it would barely register as an impact.

Yes, other countries may or may not follow what we do, and could very well undo all the hard work to get us there...but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be trying. If we use that logic then; if you have a neighbor that doesn't cut their lawn/take care of the exterior look of their house, you should also just stop cutting the grass because 'his lawn looks like crap anyway, so who cares what mine looks like'....I agree its frustrating when so few work so hard to fix things against seemingly insurmountable opposition, but that doesn't mean we should accept the way things are and not try and make them better.

 

[adaptabl]

You can't expect public services without taxes. It's absurd to complain about not enough schools, day care, hospital beds while cutting funding to them. Taxes are good for the greater society. Privatization is what you get south of the boarder. A sliver of extremely rich people who don't know how to connect to others. A slice of the upper middle class; a slice and a half of the lower middle class; and half a pie of poor, uneducated, working poor who votes for Trump.

Do you want that for Canada?

The issue is Carbon taxes have no impact on the day to day lives of the general public. Maybe there is a long term impact but day to day this is nothing but another tax grab to them. Carbon taxes have nothing to do with general taxation and services to the public.

Carbon taxes are a way to try to change the behavior of the public. I am not sure if that's what our government was elected to do. I am more of a carrot type of person rather than a beat them with a stick type.

 

[5_+JqckQttqck]

The issue is Carbon taxes have no impact on the day to day lives of the general public. Maybe there is a long term impact but day to day this is nothing but another tax grab to them. Carbon taxes have nothing to do with general taxation and services to the public.

Carbon taxes are a way to try to change the behavior of the public. I am not sure if that's what our government was elected to do. I am more of a carrot type of person rather than a beat them with a stick type.

I agree - but at the same time, that stick that people feel is beating on them is also the carrot when the revenues sowed to make the carrot bigger and juicier.

Changing behavior is the goal and additional tax revenue can be directed into programs that improve the overall environment and promote green technology development. A feedback loop that's positive on all fronts. Lets be honest, the oil industry loops has gotten us where we are now with melting glaciers dumping so much trapped methane into the atmosphere. Drastic changes need to happen ASAP.
​

Charge a tax (price increase) on commodity X and people will think twice before wasting it like it's nothing. Look at the US, their gasoline is so subsidized that they don't give a Fudge about emissions and keep buying SUVs and Trucks. Look at Europe, all compact cars that have very low emissions because gasoline isn't heavily subsidized and twice the price it is here per liter.

A tax on something hurtful to the greater society changes behavior however unpopular, it is does make a difference in changing the social norm towards that product - in this case it's carbon emissions (something so vague and intangible) but equals to 2.3kg of CO2 + other gases for every 1L of gasoline burned.

Changing behavior is the goal and people who don't give a Fudge about the environment will ultimate give a fudge about their extra bit of money to buy luxuries with (cigarettes, alcohol, cannabis , (insert any other object here people buy with their additional dollars).

For example:

Water shortage > Cape Town South Africa, water shortage (Day Zero). Within a few months, the public changed their water use behavior and reduced their overall consumption by 50%.​

Health > The ban on smoking indoors / public spaces / high tax on cigarettes - that was effective. Ban of high emission cars and scrap clunker program to reduce smog - that was effective. Why is a tax on Carbon to change people's transportation / energy use any different?

 

[mknox]

I expect other EV sales to tank.

I suspect 2019 will be way down unless the federal government starts a rebate program. 3rd quarter 2018 did very well. 4th quarter 2018 is not looking so good.

Keep an eye on that FleetCarma link I posted in my original message. Those guys do a really good job of tracking and analyzing this type of thing.

 

[mknox]

Trust me you need LR in Ontario, with sub minus 20 C , the battery will be only 50% utilization. You don’t want to get a Tesla with leaf range for sure.

As an owner of Teslas for 6 years now, I have to disagree. There is a fundamental misunderstanding of how cold affects range with EVs. On short trips like your commute or running errands on the weekend, yes, your range will be substantially lower than in summer, but so what? Even the standard range has way more than you will likely use in a typical day, and then you have a "full tank" the next morning anyway. But you can't extrapolate this into what happens on longer drives. Once you get over the initial high consumption hump of warming everything up, the car will cruise along at near summer levels bringing the overall trip numbers down to maybe 15-25% over summer. I regularly drive GTA to Chicago suburbs and have good data to show my winter trip numbers are not a whole lot worse than summer. I do exactly the same number of charging stops summer and winter.

 

[mknox]

I disagree, it's unpopular with 30% of voters. That's hardly a majority. The voting system is broken when 30% of votes can win a majority of the governing seats.

Why do I only ever hear this from left-leaning individuals? Wynn's government got in with even less of the popular vote yet pushed through an unpopular agenda anyway. Now they don't even have official Party status. I think the PCs got a pretty resounding mandate (whether we like it or not).

 

[bijan]

As an owner of Teslas for 6 years now, I have to disagree. There is a fundamental misunderstanding of how cold affects range with EVs. On short trips like your commute or running errands on the weekend, yes, your range will be substantially lower than in summer, but so what? Even the standard range has way more than you will likely use in a typical day, and then you have a "full tank" the next morning anyway. But you can't extrapolate this into what happens on longer drives. Once you get over the initial high consumption hump of warming everything up, the car will cruise along at near summer levels bringing the overall trip numbers down to maybe 15-25% over summer. I regularly drive GTA to Chicago suburbs and have good data to show my winter trip numbers are not a whole lot worse than summer. I do exactly the same number of charging stops summer and winter.

My summer vs winter usage on drives longer than 50km ranges from 51% efficiency at -20C to 85% at 20C.

I drive Montreal to Toronto and need longer and more charging in winter. I did Belleville to Montreal nonstop with 93% charge in October. And barely made it Belleville to Cornwall with 90% charge in January.

Could probably make it with one charge in summer impossible with one charge in winter.

Edit: are your Chicago trips in a model 3 or model s or X? Because with the model 3 being more efficient, heating makes more of a difference in efficiency as a percentage.