Automotive
Lithium Prices: What They Tell Us About the Popularity of Electric Vehicles
From EnergyNow Media
By Jim Warren
The online database, Trading Economics, indicates that in June 2023 the global price for lithium had risen to $59,212 per tonne. But by November it had fallen by more than half to $27,218. Prices have continued to plummet. As of December 31, lithium was selling for just $18,242 per tonne.
How could this be? Electric vehicle (EV) mandates established in many rich developed countries over the past few years had analysts predicting that if targets were actually met, the world would need 388 new lithium mines by 2035. A Fraser Institute study suggests that getting enough mines built to satisfy all the mandates will be a problem. It takes from seven to ten years to get a mine financed, approved and built.
Canada’s Environment Minister, Steven Guilbeault is certainly trying to drive up demand for lithium. The federal government’s Zero Emissions Vehicle Standard insists that by 2030, 20% of all new passenger cars, SUVs and light trucks sold in Canada must be greenhouse gas emissions free. New battery plants are being handsomely subsidized in Canada to power all of the new electric cars that will presumably be required. With similarly aggressive mandates in Europe and US states led by California there should be heavy demand for lots of batteries and a mountain of lithium.
The most likely explanation for collapsing lithium prices is US consumers’ reluctance to embrace electric vehicles. The Economist reports that EVs accounted for just 8% of new vehicle sales in America this past year. GM was only able to sell 20,000 EVs, but it did manage to sell over half a million fossil-fueled vehicles. Disappointing demand for EVs prompted GM to shelve plans to spend $4 bn to convert one of its plants to electric pickup truck production. Ford has similarly lost enthusiasm for EVs. This past fall it decided to delay plans to invest $12bn in EV production. Companies that make lithium batteries for EVs have responded accordingly. This past fall battery plants in Georgia and Michigan laid off hundreds of employees. Fewer batteries translated into less demand for lithium.
It would appear that EV adoption goals established under Joe Biden’s eye-wateringly expensive green transition initiative (disguised as the “Inflation Reduction Act,”) are not being met. The Biden plan offers tax credits of up to $7,500 for people who purchase EVs. However that hasn’t been a sufficient sweetener. The average EV sold in the US has a $52,000 price tag and that doesn’t account for additional costs like wiring a home charging set up. California, Florida and Texas account for over half of US EV sales and are also responsible for high average sticker prices. Ostensibly virtuous EV buyers in the US have a bit of hypocrisy going on. They’ll happily drive EVs as long as they are full size SUVs. Batteries are heavy which makes EVs heavier than gas and diesel fueled vehicles. And, electric SUVs are especially heavy—heavy enough to increase the chances of deadly collisions. Tesla has apparently created a super-sized SUV, designed for wealthy California drivers, that makes the Hummer look like a toy. And, because they are extra heavy, driving them uses more electricity and it takes extra energy and materials to build them. Furthermore, given that fossil fuels still account for 60% of the electricity generated in the US, EVs are less environmentally friendly than advertised. They are far from being “emissions free.”
EVs are indeed more popular in Europe and China. In Europe 1.5 million EVs were sold this past year and 3.5 million were sold in China. The models sold in China are small, zippy units that don’t weigh much. However, like in the US, around 60% of the electricity consumed in China is generated by burning fossil fuels (mostly coal).
Despite having a copycat EV mandate that mirrors those in Europe, Canadian sales have been even less stellar than what the US has been able to achieve. In 2021, EVs accounted for just 5.3% of new car sales in Canada. Most of them were sold in Ontario, BC and Quebec (55,229) which makes sense—those are the provinces where most Canadians and most climate-alarmed Canadians live. In all the rest of Canada just 7,301 electric vehicles were purchased.
Clearly, the adoption of electric vehicles has failed to meet the overly ambitious targets set by environmentally-friendly policy makers. This result lines up with the litany of missteps and missed targets that have plagued green transition projects over the past two years. The failures include the big decline in demand for new solar and wind power projects and the reversal of greenhouse gas emissions reduction projects in the UK and Europe. An issue this could raise for us in Canada is that Steven Guilbeault might see the international data and worry that his transition plans need to be beefed-up. He could make them even more onerous, expensive and ludicrous.
Alberta
Premier Smith says Auto Insurance reforms may still result in a publicly owned system
Better, faster, more affordable auto insurance
Alberta’s government is introducing a new auto insurance system that will provide better and faster services to Albertans while reducing auto insurance premiums.
After hearing from more than 16,000 Albertans through an online survey about their priorities for auto insurance policies, Alberta’s government is introducing a new privately delivered, care-focused auto insurance system.
Right now, insurance in the province is not affordable or care focused. Despite high premiums, Albertans injured in collisions do not get the timely medical care and income support they need in a system that is complex to navigate. When fully implemented, Alberta’s new auto insurance system will deliver better and faster care for those involved in collisions, and Albertans will see cost savings up to $400 per year.
“Albertans have been clear they need an auto insurance system that provides better, faster care and is more affordable. When it’s implemented, our new privately delivered, care-centred insurance system will put the focus on Albertans’ recovery, providing more effective support and will deliver lower rates.”
“High auto insurance rates put strain on Albertans. By shifting to a system that offers improved benefits and support, we are providing better and faster care to Albertans, with lower costs.”
Albertans who suffer injuries due to a collision currently wait months for a simple claim to be resolved and can wait years for claims related to more serious and life-changing injuries to addressed. Additionally, the medical and financial benefits they receive often expire before they’re fully recovered.
Under the new system, Albertans who suffer catastrophic injuries will receive treatment and care for the rest of their lives. Those who sustain serious injuries will receive treatment until they are fully recovered. These changes mirror and build upon the Saskatchewan insurance model, where at-fault drivers can be sued for pain and suffering damages if they are convicted of a criminal offence, such as impaired driving or dangerous driving, or conviction of certain offenses under the Traffic Safety Act.
Work on this new auto insurance system will require legislation in the spring of 2025. In order to reconfigure auto insurance policies for 3.4 million Albertans, auto insurance companies need time to create and implement the new system. Alberta’s government expects the new system to be fully implemented by January 2027.
In the interim, starting in January 2025, the good driver rate cap will be adjusted to a 7.5% increase due to high legal costs, increasing vehicle damage repair costs and natural disaster costs. This protects good drivers from significant rate increases while ensuring that auto insurance providers remain financially viable in Alberta.
Albertans have been clear that they still want premiums to be based on risk. Bad drivers will continue to pay higher premiums than good drivers.
By providing significantly enhanced medical, rehabilitation and income support benefits, this system supports Albertans injured in collisions while reducing the impact of litigation costs on the amount that Albertans pay for their insurance.
“Keeping more money in Albertans’ pockets is one of the best ways to address the rising cost of living. This shift to a care-first automobile insurance system will do just that by helping lower premiums for people across the province.”
Quick facts
- Alberta’s government commissioned two auto insurance reports, which showed that legal fees and litigation costs tied to the province’s current system significantly increase premiums.
- A 2023 report by MNP shows
Automotive
Bad ideology makes Canada’s EV investment a bad idea
It doesn’t bode well for our country that our economic security rests on tariff exceptions to be negotiated by Liberal politicians who have spent the majority of Trump’s public life calling him a “threat to liberal democracy” and his supporters racists and fascists. Their hostility doesn’t lend itself to fruitful diplomacy. In any event, Trump’s EV rollback and aggressive tariffs will spell disaster for the Canadian EV sector.
What does Donald Trump’s resounding win in the recent U.S. election mean for Canada? Unfortunately, there doesn’t seem to have been much thought about the answer to this question in Ottawa, because the vast majority of our political and pundit class expected his opponent to be victorious. Suddenly they’re all having to process this unwelcome intrusion of reality into their narrow mental picture.
Well, what does it mean?
It is early days, and it will take some time to sift through the various policy commitments of the incoming Trump Administration to unpack the Canadian angle. But one thing we do know is that a Trump presidency will be no friend to the electric vehicle industry.
A Harris administration would have been. But, Trump spent much of his campaign slamming EV subsidies and mandates, pledging at the Republican National Convention in July that he will “end the electric vehicle mandate on day one.”
This line was so effective, especially in must-win Michigan, with its hundreds of thousands of autoworkers, that Kamala Harris was forced to assure everyone who listened that the U.S. has no EV mandate, and that she has no intention of introducing one.
Of course, this wasn’t strictly true.
First, the Biden Administration, of which Harris was a part, issued an Executive Order with the explicit goal of a “50% Electric Vehicle Sales Share” by 2030. The Biden-Harris Administration (to use their own formulation) instructed their Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to introduce increasingly stringent tailpipe emission regulations on cars and light trucks with an eye towards pushing automakers to manufacture and sell more electric and hybrid vehicles.
Their EPA also issued a waiver which allows California to enact auto emissions regulations that are tougher than the federal government’s, which functions as a kind of back-door EV mandate nationally. After all, auto companies aren’t going to manufacture one set of vehicles for California, the most populous state, and another for the rest of the country.
And as for intentions, though the Harris camp consistently held that her prior policy positions shouldn’t be held against her, it’s hard to forget that as senator she’d co-sponsored the Zero-Emission Vehicles Act, which would have mandated that all new vehicles sold in the U.S. be “zero emission” by 2040. During her failed 2020 presidential campaign, Harris accelerated that proposed timeline, saying that the auto market should be all-electric by 2035.
In other words, she seemed pretty fond of the EV policies which Justin Trudeau and Steven Guilbeault have foisted upon Canada.
For Trump, all of these policies can be filed under “green new scam” climate policies, which stifle American resource development and endanger national prosperity. Now that he’s retaken the White House, it is expected that he will issue his own executive orders to the EPA, rescinding Biden’s tailpipe instructions and scrapping their waiver for California. And though he will be hindered somewhat by Congress, he’s likely to do everything in his power to roll back the EV subsidies contained in the (terribly named) Inflation Reduction Act and lobby for changes limiting which EVs qualify for tax credits, and how much.
All of this will be devastating for the EV industry, which is utterly reliant on the carrots and sticks of subsidies and mandates. And it’s particularly bad news for the Trudeau government (and Doug Ford’s government in Ontario), which have gone all-in on EVs, investing billions of taxpayer dollars to convince automakers to build their EVs and batteries here.
Remember that “vehicles are the second largest Canadian export by value, at $51 billion in 2023 of which 93% was exported to the U.S.,” according to the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers Association, and “Auto is Ontario’s top export at 28.9% of all exports (2023).”
Canada’s EV subsidies were pitched as an “investment” in an evolving auto market, but that assumes that those pre-existing lines of trade will remain essentially unchanged. If American EV demand collapses, or significantly contracts without mandates or tax incentives, we’ll be up the river without a paddle.
And that will be true, even if the U.S. EV market proves more resilient than I expect it to. That is because of Trump’s commitment to “Making America Great Again” by boosting American manufacturing and the jobs it provides. He campaigned on a blanket tariff of 10 percent on all foreign imports, with no exceptions mentioned. This would have a massive impact on Canada, since the U.S. is our largest trading partner.
Though Justin Trudeau and Chrystia Freeland have been saying to everyone who will listen how excited they are to work with the Trump Administration again, and “Canada will be fine,” it doesn’t bode well for our country that our economic security rests on tariff exceptions to be negotiated by Liberal politicians who have spent the majority of Trump’s public life calling him a “threat to liberal democracy” and his supporters racists and fascists. Their hostility doesn’t lend itself to fruitful diplomacy.
In any event, Trump’s EV rollback and aggressive tariffs will spell disaster for the Canadian EV sector.
The optimism that existed under the Biden administration that Canada could significantly increase its export capacity to the USA is going down the drain. The hope that “Canada could reestablish its export sector as a key driver of growth by positioning itself as a leader in electric vehicle and battery manufacturing, along with other areas in cleantech,” in the words of an RBC report, is swiftly fading. It seems more likely now that Canada will be left holding the bag on a dying industry in which we’re invested heavily.
The Trudeau Liberals’ aggressive push, driven by ideology and not market forces, to force Electric Vehicles on everyone is already backfiring on the Canadian taxpayer. Pierre Poilievre must take note — EV mandates and subsidies are bad for our country, and as Trump has demonstrated, they’re not a winning policy. He should act accordingly.
-
ESG2 days ago
Can’t afford Rent? Groceries for your kids? Trudeau says suck it up and pay the tax!
-
John Stossel2 days ago
Green Energy Needs Minerals, Yet America Blocks New Mines
-
Daily Caller2 days ago
Los Angeles Passes ‘Sanctuary City’ Ordinance In Wake Of Trump’s Deportation Plan
-
Alberta2 days ago
Province considering new Red Deer River reservoir east of Red Deer
-
Addictions2 days ago
BC Addictions Expert Questions Ties Between Safer Supply Advocates and For-Profit Companies
-
Aristotle Foundation1 day ago
Toronto cancels history, again: The irony and injustice of renaming Yonge-Dundas Square to Sankofa Square
-
armed forces1 day ago
Judge dismisses Canadian military personnel’s lawsuit against COVID shot mandate
-
conflict2 days ago
Putin Launches Mass-Production of Nuclear Shelters for his People