Who Killed the Electric Car – Again?

on

The Canadian government has killed a B.C. electric auto company, forcing the owner to shut down and sell his technology and tools to a company in Pakistan.

Canadian and American administrations have said, repeatedly, that they cannot “afford” to take action against climate change because it would damage our (oil-dependent) economy. But, as this action shows, the Harper administration in Ottawa is not really interested in protecting the “economy.” Rather, it is supporting – actually legislating – our continued dependence on the government’s oil-industry supporters, and standing in the way of any opportunity to lead the world in electric vehicle innovation.

It’s hard to believe that this is merely short-sightedness. We have seen, in the last week, the price that industry has paid for investing heavily in old-economy answers: Ford , which has banked its whole future on the sale of gas-guzzling trucks and SUVs, announced an $8.7 billion, second-quarter loss, while Honda, which boasts one of the most fuel-efficient fleets in the world, recorded a $1.67 billion profit in the same period.

Now, at a time when economic, environmental and social indicators all point to the usefulness of small, zero-emission vehicles, Ottawa bans them from the land. It’s a decision destined to be reversed; and when it is, we all will be able to pay a premium for importing this technology BACK from Pakistan, where the philanthropic Harper government must have thought the jobs were more desperately needed.

Related Posts

on
This funding, including significant sums received by MPs, “poses urgent questions for the government”, campaigners say.
on
Marc Andreessen, Ben Horowitz, and Greg Brockman are among the Silicon Valley megadonors reportedly linked to a campaign to influence voters in a state at the heart of the data center boom.
on
As more than a billion gallons of oil and gas wastewater flood beneath Ohio, pollution concerns reach its heated governor’s race.
on
The agency is loosening methane rules while keeping its authority to regulate them. Critics say the stance leaves federal climate law in limbo, inviting a bigger rollback later.