Continuing EV Bloodbath Leaves Harris With A Lot To Answer For

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

Once the ongoing effort by the legacy media to reinvent presumptive Democratic nominee Kamala Harris as a dynamic leader and competent campaigner passes, we will presumably enter the part of the presidential race in which we actually examine her real record on the key issues.

When — or if — that time ever arrives, the vice president will have a lot to explain where energy policy is concerned.

Last week I provided a high-level overview of some of the radical policies Harris has supported over her time in office in California and Washington, D.C. Today, I will address Harris’s advocacy for electric vehicles and buses, and the expanding bloodbath it has helped to create.

Let’s begin with a speech Harris delivered in Brandywine, Maryland on December 13, 2021. There, Harris spoke to an audience including Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm, assorted Maryland officeholders, and workers at the Brandywine Highway Maintenance Facility. As part of her remarks, the vice president delivered a ringing endorsement of electric vehicles and her administration’s plans to try to subsidize them into automotive market dominance.

“The pollution from vehicles powered by fossil fuels has long harmed the health of communities around our country,” Harris said. “But there is a solution to this problem, and it is parked right behind me … electric cars, trucks, and buses — they don’t produce tailpipe emissions that irritate the nose and eyes, that decrease lung function, that increase susceptibility to respiratory illness.”

Harris added: “That means manufacturing millions of electric cars, trucks, and buses right here in our country. That means outfitting thousands of EV — electric vehicle — repair garages, just like this one. And it means installing a national network of EV chargers.”

That speech took place after congress had enacted the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act containing more than $200 billion in clean energy subsidies. Congress passed the Orwellian-named Inflation Reduction Act and its $369 billion in similar subsidies eight months later.

How has all that worked out for America three years down the road? As I pointed out a few weeks ago, every pure play EV maker in the U.S. is now either in bankruptcy or teetering on the brink. Ford reported last week that its EV division, Ford Model e, lost about $50,000 per unit sold during the second quarter, and that was the best quarterly result the company has reported in over a year. Even Tesla has started the year with a pair of disappointing quarterly results amid rapidly slowing consumer demand for electric vehicles.

The Biden-Harris dreams of subsidizing a national fleet of high-speed EV chargers into existence has also come up a crapper. The Washington Post and others reported in April that Granholm’s Energy Department has invested a whopping $7.5 billion to install 5,000 such charging stations around the country but had only managed to activate 7 to that point.

Harris also endorsed a $5 billion EPA-managed program included in the Infrastructure law to fund the adoption of battery electric buses for targeted school systems around the country. Thus far, EPA has released two tranches of federal grants totaling $1.9 billion, but to disappointing results. Of the 389 school districts targeted by the grants, just 23 have reported successful acquisition of a total of 60 buses that have been placed into service. But another 50 of those districts have since withdrawn from consideration by the program.

“EPA anticipates that transitioning to new technology school buses will take time, which is why the project period is two years with an option to extend where needed and justified,” said EPA spokeswoman Shayla Powell.

Oh.

IRA subsidies for EV city buses have created perhaps the worst set of boondoggles of all. The electric buses are so costly, require such high maintenance and have such limited charging ranges that even extremely liberal cities like Austin, Texas and Jackson, Wyoming have quit trying to change over their fleets. The 2023 bankruptcy of heavily subsidized Proterra, the biggest EV bus maker, hasn’t helped.

It is hard to identify any aspect of the Biden-Harris suite of EV-related policies that can honestly be called a success. As her party’s apparent nominee, Harris will have much to answer for — that is, if the media ever gets around to asking the relevant questions.

David Blackmon is an energy writer and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.

Related Topics:#DailyCaller #DavidBlackmon ElectricVehiclesKamalaHarris EVBloodbathKamalaHarris KamalaHarrisEnergyPolicy

Up Next

The highly politicized FBI has lost the trust and cooperation of local law enforcement

Don't Miss

Don’t Buy the Media Lies About Crop Production

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Michigan could be a winner as companies pull back from EVs

Business / 41 mins ago

Deportations causing delays in US construction industry

Crime / 1 hour ago

Canadian teacher showed Charlie Kirk assassination video to young students, said he deserved to die

Automotive

Michigan could be a winner as companies pull back from EVs

Published on September 16, 2025

Todayville

From The Center Square

By Elyse S. Apel

Federal deregulation and tax credit cuts are reshaping the auto industry, as Ford Motor Co. and General Motors Co. scale back electric vehicle production and redirect billions into hybrids and traditional gas-powered cars.

Yet, the Michigan automotive industry could see increased investments from those same companies as they reallocate that funding.

While both Ford and GM previously announced ambitious targets to expand electric vehicle fleets over the next decade, they are now cutting back on electric vehicle production.

That comes in response to federal deregulation of gas-powered vehicles, tax credit cuts, and the prospect of slowing consumer demand.

In August, Ford stated it was canceling plans to build a new electric three-row SUV. Instead, it is turning its focus to hybrid vehicles, including a massive $5 billon investment into a new “affordable” hybrid truck.

GM announced similar plans earlier this month. It will be cutting back electric vehicle production at Kansas and Tennessee plants, anticipating a decline in demand once federal tax credits end Sept. 30.

This all could have a real impact on the electric vehicle industry across the nation and experts are already anticipating that.

A new forecast by Ernst & Young Global Limited now predicts a five-year delay in electric vehicles making up 50% of the new car marketshare. While previous forecasts predicted America would reach that mark by 2034, the new forecast pushed that back to 2039.

“The U.S. faces policy uncertainty, high costs, and infrastructure gaps,” said Constantin M. Gall, the company’s global aerospace defense and mobility leader.

Clean energy advocacy groups are decrying this move away from electric vehicle initiatives, largely blaming the Trump administration.

“The transition to electric vehicles now faces significant roadblocks,” said Ecology Center in an April report. “The Trump administration has rolled back key policies supporting clean transportation.”

It also pointed to a nationwide deregulation of the gas-powered vehicle industry for allowing those to remain “dominant” over electric vehicles.

“These actions prioritize fossil fuels over clean energy, threatening progress toward a sustainable transportation future,” the report stated.

While bad news for electric vehicle supporters, the Michigan automotive industry could be a winner as companies re-shift focus back to gas-powered and hybrid vehicles.

With billions of dollars previously allocated to federal pollution fines and electric vehicle costs now available for investment, GM now plans to increase production at a Detroit-area plant by 2027.

The Michigan-based company also recently announced plans to invest billions into another Michigan plant in Lake Orion Township.

For similar reasons, Ford’s CEO Jim Farley told analysts that the company anticipates monetary savings “has the potential to unlock a multibillion-dollar opportunity over the next two years.”

While Gov. Gretchen Whitmer has long been a proponent for the electric vehicle industry, she did recently emphasize her support for all Michigan-based manufacturing, no matter the type.

“We don’t care what you drive – gas, diesel, hybrid, or electric – as long as it’s made in Michigan,” she said following the GM Orion announcement. “Together, let’s keep bringing manufacturing home, growing the middle class, and making more stuff in Michigan.”

Elyse Apel is a reporter for The Center Square covering Colorado and Michigan. A graduate of Hillsdale College, Elyse’s writing has been published in a wide variety of national publications from the Washington Examiner to The American Spectator and The Daily Wire.

Elyse S. Apel

Automotive

Canadians rejecting Liberal’s EV mandates because consumers are rational

Published on September 5, 2025

Todayville

From Resource Works

By Geoff Russ

Bad policy, not misinformation, is to blame for the decline in EV sales

It was a clever move for federal minister Gregor Robertson to stand in Victoria and blame the oil and auto industries for spreading “misinformation” about electric vehicles.

If people don’t follow a government order, then someone else must have lied to them.

But the truth is simpler, and more uncomfortable for Ottawa and Victoria: Canadians are against aggressive EV mandates because the policies behind them are not based on reality.

Politicians have been pushing electric vehicles (EVs) as a cornerstone of the fight against climate change for years, promising a cleaner future through ambitious mandates and generous rebates.

All of this effort looked good on paper: passing laws, handing out thousands (millions, billions) in subsidies, paving the way for Canada’s transition to an electric future.

But, in real life, it’s just not working out this way.

Why? Because instead of crafting long-term rules based on the realities of infrastructure, cost, and consumer choice, Ottawa rushed ahead with policies that ignored market signals.

They assumed subsidies would keep EV sales flowing indefinitely, only to be shocked when sales plummeted once the rebates dried up.

Canadians are responding rationally to high prices, unreliable charging networks, and impractical mandates.

Not long ago, Ottawa set ambitious, unattainable targets: 20 percent zero-emission vehicle sales by 2026, 60 percent by 2030, and 100 percent by 2035.

British Columbia went further, aiming for 26 percent by 2026, 90 percent by 2030, and 100 percent by 2035.

In theory, it looked achievable. In practice, it’s been a wake-up call.

The numbers tell the story. Statistics Canada reported that EVs accounted for 18.29 percent of new vehicle sales in December 2024. Just four months later, when Ottawa’s iZEV program ran out of funds and provincial rebates ended, that figure crashed to 7.53 percent.

In British Columbia, once a leader in EV adoption, the market share dropped from nearly 25 percent in mid-2024 to 15 percent a year later.

Quebec, long the most EV-friendly province, saw a similar decline when its $7,000 subsidy was slashed nearly in half.

Why? Canadians have been very clear.

Cost is the biggest barrier, according to polls like this one from Ipsos in 2025. But this isn’t the only issue.

Ipsos found 56 percent of British Columbians oppose EV mandates, with even higher resistance among older households and those outside Metro Vancouver. People resent being told they must buy expensive cars they can’t easily charge or fully trust in harsh winters.

Subsidies made high sticker prices tolerable for middle-class families, but when the rebates vanished while mandates and fines remained, buyers walked away.

Barry Penner of the Energy Futures Institute put it bluntly: governments “put the cart before the horse,” demanding widespread adoption before ensuring affordability or infrastructure.

The financial penalties for automakers are steep. Missing federal targets by 10 percent could mean hundreds of millions in fines.

In British Columbia, dealers face $20,000 penalties for every gas-powered car sold over the mandated ratio. Those who can’t comply often buy credits—frequently from Tesla, a California-based company that benefits while Canadian businesses foot the bill. These rules aren’t just hitting “Big Oil”; they’re straining local dealers and sending money abroad.

Infrastructure is another glaring issue. Ottawa estimates Canada has 33,700 chargers today but needs 679,000 by 2040—an average of 40,000 new chargers annually for 15 years, a pace experts call unrealistic.

In British Columbia, Penner notes the province has just 5,000 chargers now and needs 40,000 more by 2030. Meeting the 2035 mandate would also require electricity equivalent to two additional Site C dams, even as B.C. relies on 20 to 25 percent of its power from external sources, often fossil fuels.

Canadians aren’t against cleaner technology—they’re against being forced into choices that don’t fit their lives. The frustration stems from policies that feel disconnected from the realities of cost, convenience, and infrastructure. More blame or moralizing won’t fix this.

Penner has urged governments to “take our foot off the gas and realign our policies with reality.”

That could mean reinstating rebates if mandates persist, investing heavily in charging networks, or setting broader emissions targets that give consumers real choices instead of rigid quotas.

The EV dream will keep stalling unless that happens. It’s not because Canadians don’t know what’s going on; it’s because governments made decisions based on wishful thinking.