Help tesla realize their vision - vote for federal ev incentives!

[Ktowntslafan]

New Government, New Hope For More Electric Cars In Canada?

Good article, but disagree with this:

"Nationwide purchase incentives would seem unlikely, though. The country is under intense pressure to reduce its greenhouse-gas emissions quickly, and there are lower-cost ways of doing so that will have a larger immediate impact."

Norway's model is working, why not copy it?

http://evroadmapconference.com/program/presentations15/OlaElvestuen.pdf

 

[Canuck]

"Though the government committed C$1.2 billion to help clean technology companies succeed, two-thirds of the funds are being directed to the resource sector, still a hugely important sector of the Canadian economy.
While this means electric-vehicle component makers may face a lot of competition for the remaining $400 million, some may be able to find willing partners in the resource sector--for partially-electrified mining or logging equipment, perhaps."

Pumping nearly $1B tax payer dollars into the resource sector under the guise of "clean technology" is actually much worse than the old government. I'd really like to see the audit on how those dollars are actually spent. The remaining pittance left for actual progress towards clean technologies for EV adoption is insulting after the amount given to the resource sector. "Partially electrified mining or logging equipment"? That sounds like the Whistler Olympics hydrogen buses debacle:

BC Transit's $90M hydrogen bus fleet to be sold off, converted to diesel - British Columbia - CBC News

More of the same old, same old, from this new government. No federal EV incentives/rebates for tried and true technology actually driving now on our streets. No, let's give it to the logging/mining industries! (because they contributed to our election campaigns). It would be funny if it wasn't our children's future that is on the line here.

 

[Ktowntslafan]

"Though the government committed C$1.2 billion to help clean technology companies succeed, two-thirds of the funds are being directed to the resource sector, still a hugely important sector of the Canadian economy.
While this means electric-vehicle component makers may face a lot of competition for the remaining $400 million, some may be able to find willing partners in the resource sector--for partially-electrified mining or logging equipment, perhaps."

Pumping nearly $1B tax payer dollars into the resource sector under the guise of "clean technology" is actually much worse than the old government. I'd really like to see the audit on how those dollars are actually spent. The remaining pittance left for actual progress towards clean technologies for EV adoption is insulting after the amount given to the resource sector. "Partially electrified mining or logging equipment"? That sounds like the Whistler Olympics hydrogen buses debacle:

BC Transit's $90M hydrogen bus fleet to be sold off, converted to diesel - British Columbia - CBC News

More of the same old, same old, from this new government. No federal EV incentives/rebates for tried and true technology actually driving now on our streets. No, let's give it to the logging/mining industries! (because they contributed to our election campaigns). It would be funny if it wasn't our children's future that is on the line here.

Maybe you need to put some pressure here:

We'll end on the inevitable suggestion that some electric-car owner needs to get Mr. Butts in a seat.


We'd suggest starting with a Tesla Model S.

- - - Updated - - -

Follow Norway's lead and drop GHG 30%!

http://evroadmapconference.com/program/presentations15/OlaElvestuen.pdf

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/17/business/international/norway-is-global-model-for-encouraging-sales-of-electric-cars.html

I will go first, everyone please join in (if you like):

Catherine McKenna (@ec_minister) | Twitter

Marlo Raynolds (@MarloRaynolds) | Twitter

Gerald Butts (@gmbutts) | Twitter

 

[Canuck]

Maybe you need to put some pressure here:

We'll end on the inevitable suggestion that some electric-car owner needs to get Mr. Butts in a seat.


We'd suggest starting with a Tesla Model S.

- - - Updated - - -

Follow Norway's lead and drop GHG 30%!

http://evroadmapconference.com/program/presentations15/OlaElvestuen.pdf

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/17/business/international/norway-is-global-model-for-encouraging-sales-of-electric-cars.html

I will go first, everyone please join in (if you like):

Catherine McKenna (@ec_minister) | Twitter

Marlo Raynolds (@MarloRaynolds) | Twitter

Gerald Butts (@gmbutts) | Twitter

Unfortunately, they're too busy burning carbon by flying to Paris to take a ride in a Tesla. We'll need wait until they get back from their taxpayer funded site seeing tour, at the conference that is "designed to fail":

"For much of the past year, the main discussion among activists in Europe has not been about whether or not the Paris negotiations will succeed. Instead, the debate has largely focused on whether to give the negotiations any credence at all, or whether it’s time to view the entire UNFCCC process as thoroughly corrupted and hopelessly beholden to fossil fuel corporations and the interests of global capital. "

Is the Paris Climate Conference Designed to Fail? | Common Dreams | Breaking News & Views for the Progressive Community

 

[Ktowntslafan]

Unfortunately, they're too busy burning carbon by flying to Paris to take a ride in a Tesla. We'll need wait until they get back

Twitter is carbon neutral all the way to Paris. No need to wait...

 

[glenhurst]

I'm not Canadian, so my opinion doesn't matter, but I wonder if it would be a good/better use of federal money to provide grants/subsidies for DC fast chargers to communities that want to install them. One source of people's range anxiety (and therefore reluctance to buy an EV) is there are not many places to charge, at least not compared to the number of gas stations. Granted, most people charge at home 99% of the time, but until one owns an EV that isn't really obvious; people still think in terms of how their ICE cars work. But if there were a subsidy for, say, every county to buy & install a DCFC, range anxiety would largely evaporate. The towns & cities that install them would do so as a means of drawing EV owners and their money into their respective communities.

I love Tesla's supercharger network, but it only works for Tesla owners (that's not Tesla's fault, BTW), and they only go where Tesla wants to put them. At an average cost of roughly $50k per charger including installation, $5M would completely pay for 100 of them across the country. Better yet, require the towns & businesses installing them to come up with half the money, to insure they have skin in the game so to speak, and $5M would buy 200 DCFCs. Spread across 3000 miles of Canada coast to coast, that's a charger every 15 miles. No more range anxiety, one less barrier to EV adoption.

 

[Ktowntslafan]

G20 countries spend $450B a year on fossil fuel subsidies, study says

G20 countries spend $450B a year on fossil fuel subsidies, study says - Politics - CBC News

This article posted today...thank-you CBC.

Enough with the insanity!

- - - Updated - - -

Follow Norway's lead and drop GHG 30%!

http://evroadmapconference.com/program/presentations15/OlaElvestuen.pdf

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/17/business/international/norway-is-global-model-for-encouraging-sales-of-electric-cars.html

I will go first, everyone please join in (if you like):

Catherine McKenna (@ec_minister) | Twitter

Marlo Raynolds (@MarloRaynolds) | Twitter

Gerald Butts (@gmbutts) | Twitter

 

[Ktowntslafan]

I'm not Canadian, so my opinion doesn't matter, but I wonder if it would be a good/better use of federal money to provide grants/subsidies for DC fast chargers to communities that want to install them. One source of people's range anxiety (and therefore reluctance to buy an EV) is there are not many places to charge, at least not compared to the number of gas stations. Granted, most people charge at home 99% of the time, but until one owns an EV that isn't really obvious; people still think in terms of how their ICE cars work. But if there were a subsidy for, say, every county to buy & install a DCFC, range anxiety would largely evaporate. The towns & cities that install them would do so as a means of drawing EV owners and their money into their respective communities.

I love Tesla's supercharger network, but it only works for Tesla owners (that's not Tesla's fault, BTW), and they only go where Tesla wants to put them. At an average cost of roughly $50k per charger including installation, $5M would completely pay for 100 of them across the country. Better yet, require the towns & businesses installing them to come up with half the money, to insure they have skin in the game so to speak, and $5M would buy 200 DCFCs. Spread across 3000 miles of Canada coast to coast, that's a charger every 15 miles. No more range anxiety, one less barrier to EV adoption.

Tesla is the EV leader and they are investing in their own proprietary "fast" charging network. As such, I believe taxpayer money spent on a generic "slow" charging network is a waste. Governments need to stimulate demand for ALL EV's through incentives, off invoice, that make them similarly or less expensive then comparable ICE. That's what Norway has done (among other incentives...but this is the crucial one). They lead the world in EV adoption, so why over think it? Just follow their lead:

Christina Bu is head of the Norwegian Electric Vehicle Association, which advocates for both consumers and manufacturers. “People aren’t so green that they want to pay a lot extra to buy an electric,” she said. The Norwegian system works, Ms. Bu said, because “it’s constructed to make the least-polluting cars the most attractive.”

Log In - The New York Times

 

[Ktowntslafan]

Ottawa’s multi-billion payouts to fossil fuels flies in face of G20 pledge

"A damning new report has blown the lid on Canada’s support for fossil fuel industries, totalling nearly $3 billion per year, flying in the face of a G20 pledge to phase such subsidies out six years ago."


http://www.nationalobserver.com/2015/11/12/news/ottawa%E2%80%99s-multi-billion-payouts-fossil-fuels-flies-face-g20-pledge

- - - Updated - - -

“It is tantamount to G20 governments allowing fossil fuel producers to undermine national climate commitments, while paying them for the privilege,” says the report."

http://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/trudeau-first-ministers-scientists-to-gather-to-talk-climate-change/

ENOUGH! TOTAL BS!

- - - Updated - - -

Follow Norway's lead and drop GHG 30%!

http://evroadmapconference.com/program/presentations15/OlaElvestuen.pdf

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/17/business/international/norway-is-global-model-for-encouraging-sales-of-electric-cars.html

I will go first, everyone please join in (if you like):

Catherine McKenna (@ec_minister) | Twitter

Marlo Raynolds (@MarloRaynolds) | Twitter

Gerald Butts (@gmbutts) | Twitter

 

[glenhurst]

Tesla is the EV leader and they are investing in their own proprietary "fast" charging network. As such, I believe taxpayer money spent on a generic "slow" charging network is a waste. Governments need to stimulate demand for ALL EV's through incentives, off invoice, that make them similarly or less expensive then comparable ICE. That's what Norway has done (among other incentives...but this is the crucial one). They lead the world in EV adoption, so why over think it? Just follow their lead:

Christina Bu is head of the Norwegian Electric Vehicle Association, which advocates for both consumers and manufacturers. “People aren’t so green that they want to pay a lot extra to buy an electric,” she said. The Norwegian system works, Ms. Bu said, because “it’s constructed to make the least-polluting cars the most attractive.”

Log In - The New York Times

I agree that L2 30 amp chargers are a waste of money. That's why I said DC fast chargers; you know, the 50kw kind that will give you 150mph of range. I'm glad Tesla is building their SC network--and with every SC that opens the other automakers fall further behind. But Tesla can't do it all, and even if they could, I think it would be healthier overall if many people and businesses were vested in chargers.

 

[Ktowntslafan]

I agree that L2 30 amp chargers are a waste of money. That's why I said DC fast chargers; you know, the 50kw kind that will give you 150mph of range. I'm glad Tesla is building their SC network--and with every SC that opens the other automakers fall further behind. But Tesla can't do it all, and even if they could, I think it would be healthier overall if many people and businesses were vested in chargers.

I respect your thinking, but I feel like charging tech will evolve far quicker then gov $$. Don't want tax $$ going to Beta vs VHS (or Netflix). Best to let the manufacturers sort it out.

 

[Ktowntslafan]

“In the United States, if it’s a legally binding treaty, it has to go through Congress,” she said. “The last thing we want is to have it fail in Congress"

Paris climate conference not about emissions targets: Catherine McKenna - National | Globalnews.ca

My reply on Twitter:

Ktown on Twitter:

 

[Ktowntslafan]

Awesome:

Catherine McKenna on Twitter:

 

[Beckler]

I emailed Cathryn McKenna about EV's - just some questions/ideas about incentives, tesla, subsidies, etc. No reply yet!

 

[Ktowntslafan]

I emailed Cathryn McKenna about EV's - just some questions/ideas about incentives, tesla, subsidies, etc. No reply yet!

That's amazing, thank-you! I guarantee Norway/EV incentives is on their radar. If we all keep up the messaging through to COP21, I'm sure we will have an impact.

 

[Ktowntslafan]

That's amazing, thank-you! I guarantee Norway/EV incentives is on their radar. If we all keep up the messaging through to COP21, I'm sure we will have an impact.

Ktown on Twitter: (feel free to retweet)

BYE BYE Glacier:

Rapidly Melting Glacier Has Enough Mass To Raise Sea Levels By Nearly 2 Feet | ThinkProgress

 

[Canuck]

That's amazing, thank-you! I guarantee Norway/EV incentives is on their radar. If we all keep up the messaging through to COP21, I'm sure we will have an impact.

Nearly $1B to the resource sector for electric vehicles in the logging/mining/oil and gas industries and there's more money for federal EV rebates? I doubt it. This a major screw up with this new government. Once again, I really want to see the audit on how these funds will be spent. It's ironic that we're giving these funds to help extract oil, since oil is part of our resource sector. We have electric technology driving on our roads today but it's practically ignored by this new government except for the token charging stations. What a myopic government. I cringe when I see what is happening globally and see our government's plans. But that's too political and off topic so I won't say anything else. If the States can provide federal EV incentives with their divided government, but we can't with a majority, that says a lot right there.

 

[sitter_k]

Nearly $1B to the resource sector for electric vehicles in the logging/mining/oil and gas industries and there's more money for federal EV rebates? I doubt it. This a major screw up with this new government. Once again, I really want to see the audit on how these funds will be spent. It's ironic that we're giving these funds to help extract oil, since oil is part of our resource sector. We have electric technology driving on our roads today but it's practically ignored by this new government except for the token charging stations. What a myopic government. I cringe when I see what is happening globally and see our government's plans. But that's too political and off topic so I won't say anything else. If the States can provide federal EV incentives with their divided government, but we can't with a majority, that says a lot right there.

Truth!!!!

 

[Ktowntslafan]

Nearly $1B to the resource sector for electric vehicles in the logging/mining/oil and gas industries and there's more money for federal EV rebates? I doubt it. This a major screw up with this new government. Once again, I really want to see the audit on how these funds will be spent. It's ironic that we're giving these funds to help extract oil, since oil is part of our resource sector. We have electric technology driving on our roads today but it's practically ignored by this new government except for the token charging stations. What a myopic government. I cringe when I see what is happening globally and see our government's plans. But that's too political and off topic so I won't say anything else. If the States can provide federal EV incentives with their divided government, but we can't with a majority, that says a lot right there.

Canuck: Trudeau has only been in power for 12 days. I don't understand how you've already got him pegged (and I'm as sceptical as the next guy).

- - - Updated - - -

A difficult timeline

The new Liberal government’s emissions reduction target will not be ready in time for Paris. While Trudeau may yet prove to be Canada’s green Gorbachev, the PM-designate faces an “awful timeline” in May’s words, one that he cannot control.

Trudeau cannot even begin any prime ministerial duties until his inauguration on Nov. 4, and until, then the Canadian government remains in ‘caretaker’ mode, as it has been since the Oct. 19 election.

That leaves Trudeau mere days to pick his new cabinet, delegate various responsibilities, prepare for the Throne Speech, then jet off abroad to the G20 Summit in Turkey on Nov. 15-16, a leader’s summit for the Pacific Rim nations in the Philippines on Nov. 18-19, the Commonwealth Heads of Government Summit in Malta on Nov. 27-29, and finally COP-21 on Nov. 30 – Dec. 11 in Paris.

To top it all, the new PM must also find time to meet with provincial premiers ahead of the Paris talks and hash out a national plan for slashing carbon emissions before COP-21 gets underway.

“There’s a lot that needs to be done before we get to Paris,” said May.

The Liberal environmental platform calls for working with the provinces to establish a framework for reducing Canada’s carbon footprint within 90 days of taking office, meaning that a climate action plan likely won’t be ready until early 2016, well after the Paris talks conclude.

However, the Liberals have also promised to phase out federal subsidies for oil sands industries andinvest in renewable energy sources, roll out tax incentives to promote technological innovation and job creation, and increase the amount of protected marine and coastal areas to five per cent by 2017 and 10 per cent by 2020.

“I think it will take a while to repair the damage of 10 years of Stephen Harper,” said May.

Elizabeth May welcomes Trudeau’s climate truce | National Observer

 

[Canuck]

Canuck: Trudeau has only been in power for 12 days. I don't understand how you've already got him pegged (and I'm as sceptical as the next guy).

I didn't peg him. He pegged himself when his government: "committed C$1.2 billion to help clean technology companies succeed,two-thirds of the funds are being directed to the resource sector, still a hugely important sector of the Canadian economy."

I assume Trudeau is a man of his word and who is true to his commitments. If you are telling me to give him time to undue his commitments, since he's only been in office for 12 days, and when the budget actually comes down, he won't do what he has committed to do, and we will see a federal EV rebate in the budget, well, then I will be pleased, but it seems a strange request for you to make of me.

So, for now, I am taking him at his word. There are other commitments I also hope he will back out of, and soon too, but again that's off topic and too political for here. But if we look at those other commitments, even in the face of much pressure, he appears to be sticking to them. So I think it's safe to assume he will stick to this one.