^{This blog was updated in December of 2025. The orginal version was authored by Nate Wallace.}

Click here to read part 1 first!

Why are EVs still so expensive? Will prices come down?

The biggest reason EV prices remain high in Canada is insufficient supply, especially of affordable models. Automakers prioritize markets like California, China, and the European Union where strong regulations require them to sell EVs, and without an EVAS, Canada is treated as a lower-priority market. This limited supply drives up prices and wait times, leads carmakers to focus on large, high-profit luxury models instead of affordable ones, and results in a very small used-EV market because new EV availability has been restricted for years.

Although the good news is that EVs are already effectively cheaper over their lifetime due to major savings on fuel and maintenance, most buyers focus on the sticker price instead of long-term costs. Carmakers are not helping either, as many have phased out affordable models such as the Chevy Bolt while shifting toward expensive luxury EVs. Meanwhile, manufacturers like BYD in China are already selling fully electric vehicles for the equivalent of $14,000 CAD.

The reality is that EVs can be affordable, but traditional automakers often prefer to sell high-profit gasoline trucks and SUVs, which now make up eight out of ten new vehicles sold in Canada and have contributed to Canada having the worst on-road vehicle emissions profile in the world. Incentives alone cannot fix this problem, since automakers frequently respond by raising EV prices so they get a portion of the subsidy.

A strong EV Availability Standard directly addresses these issues by requiring automakers to supply more EVs, including affordable models, to the Canadian market. Regulation that forces a shift to 100 percent zero-emission vehicle sales by 2035 will push companies to scale production, invest in cost-reducing technology, and bring lower-priced models to Canada, ultimately cutting EV prices by about 20 percent on average and making them far more accessible for consumers.

Will there be enough charging infrastructure?

Canada must expand charging infrastructure, and we are. Thousands of public chargers are being built across the country with federal, provincial, municipal, and private investment. But public charging is only one part of the picture.

Most charging happens at home or at work. Public chargers matter most for long-distance travel, communities without garages or driveways, and equitable access. Charging gaps exist but they’re solvable.

Carmakers claim that without more existing charging infrastructure we will not be able to meet our EV target. Evidence shows that this is false. Our 2023 Report with our partners, shows that expanding public charging universally increases EV market share by only about 1.5%. With the EVAS in place, this number increases significantly. Supply, not charging, is the primary bottleneck.

A strong EVAS improves charging by creating predictable EV demand that attracts private investment. The policy allows automakers to earn compliance credits by funding charging infrastructure, and supporting municipal policies that encourage the installation of charging stations.

Are EV batteries bad for the environment? What about mining?

EV batteries do have environmental impacts, particularly related to mining and manufacturing, but these impacts are significantly smaller than the ongoing damage caused by extracting, refining, and burning fossil fuels. The environmental footprint of gasoline and diesel production is enormous, involving large-scale land destruction, air and water pollution, and the release of billions of tonnes of greenhouse gases every year. In comparison, the materials required for EV batteries are far more limited, and as battery recycling expands, the demand for new mining will continue to decline.

Mining for minerals such as lithium, nickel, and cobalt must be managed responsibly. Environmental Defence supports strong protections for Indigenous rights and local communities, the exclusion of mining from ecologically sensitive areas such as peatlands, and the enforcement of high labour and environmental standards across global supply chains. Ethical sourcing and certification systems can ensure that mining avoids the abuses that have occurred in some parts of the world. It is also important to recognize that the scale of mining required for EVs is small compared to the vast quantities of coal, oil, and gas extracted each year. Unlike fossil fuels, minerals used for batteries can be reused or recovered, which means the need for new mining diminishes over time as recycling systems grow.

Battery manufacturing can be carbon intensive in countries that rely heavily on coal, but this impact is already shrinking. Canada is rapidly expanding EV and battery manufacturing using a much cleaner electricity grid, which reduces the carbon footprint of production. Companies are developing new battery chemistries that use less energy to produce and incorporate more recycled materials. Policies can further reduce emissions by requiring responsible sourcing, cleaner manufacturing processes, and higher recycled content in batteries, all of which strengthen the environmental benefits of EVs.

At the end of their life, EV batteries are not sent to landfills. They can be repurposed for stationary energy storage, where they continue to provide valuable service for many years. Once no longer suitable for reuse, batteries are recycled to recover valuable minerals such as lithium, nickel, and cobalt. This reduces the need for new mining and supports the development of a circular battery economy. Canada is becoming a leader in battery recycling technologies, with new facilities capable of extracting and reusing most of the materials in old batteries.

When all stages are considered, EVs provide a large net environmental benefit. They eliminate tailpipe emissions, dramatically reduce air pollution, and produce far fewer greenhouse gases over their lifetime compared to gasoline vehicles. As Canada’s electricity grid gets cleaner, the environmental advantages of EVs will grow even stronger, while fossil fuel vehicles will continue to pollute every kilometre they are driven.

Will EVs lead to job losses?

No. The transition presents one of the largest economic opportunities in modern Canadian history.

Canada’s auto industry, long centered on the production of gas and diesel vehicles, has stagnated in recent years while global electric vehicle manufacturing is accelerating. With the right policy support, Electric Mobility Canada estimates that up to 600,000 jobs could be created in the e-mobility sector by 2035, a transformative opportunity for a sector in need of renewal.

Despite claims from internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicle manufacturers that the EVAS threatens their survival, evidence suggests otherwise. Research by Équiterre, Environmental Defence and the David Suzuki Foundation shows that even under a stringent EVAS, the industry’s annual profits are projected to rise by 24 per cent between 2023 and 2035.

How far can EVs travel? Is range still a concern?

Range has increased dramatically and continues to improve. The average range of new battery-electric vehicles rose from under 120 km in 2010 to 349 km in 2021, and many current models exceed 400–500 km.

Most Canadians drive less than 50 kilometres per day, which is well below the range of even modest EVs. While range decreases somewhat in winter, it returns in warmer weather. Public fast chargers also support long-distance travel.

Once drivers switch to EVs, range anxiety typically fades. Surveys consistently show high satisfaction with range and winter performance.

What about public transit? Won’t more EVs lead to more congestion and cars on the road?

Electric vehicles are an important tool for reducing emissions, but they are not a complete solution to transportation challenges such as congestion, car dependence, or urban sprawl. We agree that truly sustainable cities cannot rely on every individual owning a personal vehicle. However, it is also true that many Canadians still need cars today, particularly in suburban and rural areas where public transit is limited or nonexistent. In this context, it is essential that people who must rely on cars have access to cleaner options. High costs and limited availability should not prevent Canadians from choosing electric vehicles, especially since Canada currently has one of the most polluting passenger vehicle fleets in the world.

At the same time, improving and expanding public transit is critical. Investments in frequent, reliable, and affordable transit provide real alternatives to driving, especially in denser urban areas. Better transit service, integrated with active transportation networks, helps reduce congestion, lowers emissions, and improves access to jobs and services. Urban design plays a major role as well. Walkable neighbourhoods, protected bike lanes, and infrastructure for e-bikes and other micro-mobility options make it possible for people to replace short car trips with healthier, lower-carbon choices. This is especially important given that the majority of trips in North America are under ten kilometers, distances that can easily be covered by transit, walking, or cycling if the infrastructure is in place.

For the millions of Canadians who still rely on cars because of where they live or work, EVs remain a valuable transitional tool. They significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions from necessary trips and help improve air quality in communities, especially along busy corridors. As cities invest in transit and build more complete, walkable neighbourhoods, the demand for personal vehicles can decline over time. But during this transition, ensuring access to affordable electric vehicles helps reduce emissions from the trips that cannot yet be shifted to other modes.

The most sustainable path forward combines EV adoption for trips that genuinely require a car, strong public transit for longer journeys, and active transportation for short daily travel. It also includes smarter land-use planning that reduces overall travel demand. EVs are necessary, but not sufficient on their own. The long-term goal must be a transportation system that gives people real choices, reduces car dependence, and supports healthier, low-carbon communities.

Why don’t we look at incentives rather than regulations?

We support incentives for the purposes of industrial policy, like the United States implemented under Biden by tying eligibility to having the vehicle made in North America. 

However, there are several reasons why purchase incentives are less effective than the EVAS at driving EV sales: 

• When automakers have their EV sales subsidized, they raise the price of EVs to capture a portion of the incentive instead of lowering the price for you. They then use those subsidies to reduce prices on gas cars. 
• The automaker’s current recommendations are to triple incentives. This costs the federal government more than $54 billion. While the EV standard costs taxpayers nothing. 
• Finally, in most cases, incentives financially benefit people who would buy an electric car anyways, regardless of whether the subsidy exists or not.

One interesting case is that China has increasingly shifted away from purchase incentives as their primary driver for EV sales and instead focused more on regulations. Since 2011, the average retail price for an EV in China has decreased by 47%, while it has increased by 28% in Europe and 38% in the United States.

Comprehensive research regarding the transition to electric vehicles and how the auto industry is fighting against clean car regulations is included in our recent report, Profiting from Pollution.

What about hydrogen or other alternative fuels?

We will not solve transportation emissions with hydrogen cars. First of all, hydrogen fuel cell technology in cars is not commercially ready to scale up fast like battery-electric cars are, in the short window of time we have to dramatically reduce carbon emissions. Secondly, passenger transportation is not appropriate for hydrogen because the technology is too costly and inefficient compared to battery-electric alternatives. For example, to drive the same number of kilometers, the amount of renewable energy needed for a fuel cell vehicle is double what is needed for a battery electric vehicle. Third, most hydrogen created today is not actually green, but in fact created by a carbon intensive process using natural gas (methane) – a fossil fuel.

Synthetic fuels, or e-fuels have been proposed by auto industry lobbyists as a false solution in response to efforts to require the phase out of gas vehicles. E-fuels are made through an expensive process which turns electricity into hydrogen and combined with CO2 to create a liquid fuel that could be pumped in a regular gas car. Put simply, this is just a tactic to keep gasoline cars on the road because no technology exists that would prevent someone from filling up a car with gasoline instead of e-fuels.

Trying to decarbonize cars with e-fuels is like showering with champagne – it would be 43 per cent more expensive for an average driver to fill up with e-fuels instead of gas. E-fuels are also in very short supply, one analysis found that there will only be enough e-fuel in Europe to power 2 per cent of the car fleet by 2035. Trying to use e-fuels in cars takes it away from other applications where it may actually be necessary, such as air travel. This makes it a distraction from real solutions.

Conclusion

Electric vehicles are cleaner, cheaper to operate, and increasingly practical for drivers in every region of Canada—from major cities to rural communities. The main barrier is not technology or infrastructure; it is the lack of strong policy requiring automakers to make EVs available and affordable to Canadians.

A strong Electric Vehicle Availability Standard is essential to unlocking EV supply, improving affordability, and ensuring Canada doesn’t fall further behind other countries in the global clean transportation transition.