Time to Cancel the ZEV Mandate: Freedom, Realism, and the Limits of Ideology
The Case Against EV Mandates: Freedom Can’t Survive Central Planning
In 2019, British Columbia became the first jurisdiction in the world to legally mandate that all new light-duty vehicle sales be zero-emission, projecting a step change: 26% by 2026, 90% by 2030, and 100% by 2035.
Canada soon followed federal mandates in solidarity.
What began as an environmental aspiration has morphed into a policy straitjacket with real consequences. These ZEV mandates aren’t just unrealistic—they erode affordability, penalize rural and lower-income citizens, strain our grid, and infringe on human freedom. It’s time to call their bluff and cancel this program.
Grid Stress: Powering Ideology on an Unplugged Grid
Mandates demand bold rhetoric—but our grid can’t deliver.
The Fraser Institute projects Canada’s electricity demand will surge 7.5–15% with mass EV adoption; BC alone could need an extra 4.4–9.3 TWh annually—roughly equivalent to constructing one new Site C dam.
Energy Futures Institute warns BC may need two additional Site C dams just to meet the 2035 ZEV target—and currently imports ~25% of consumption, largely from U.S. markets, often fueled by fossil sources .
BC already has approximately 5,000 public chargers but requires up to 40,000 by 2030—and closer to 90,000 by 2040, costing Canadians roughly $1.8 billion.
The result? A fragile grid, vulnerable to breakdowns or forced reliance on fossil backups—alone, this is unwieldy bravado masquerading as clean policy.
Equity & Affordability: Whose Wallet is Sacrificed?
These mandates function not as lofty goals, but as stealth taxes:
EVs remain 20–30% more expensive upfront than comparable gasoline models. Dealers will scoop up penalties of up to $20,000 per unsold non-ZEV.
With penalties baked into dealer pricing, consumers—particularly low- and middle-income families—lose out, squeezed into limited, overpriced alternatives.
The detachment from affordability increasingly echoes the infamous “green ghettos” critique: benefits for a privileged few, burdens for many.
What’s more, when we compel purchases, we strip people of autonomy—the very essence of human dignity.
Rural Fallout: When Policy Forgets Place
Forty percent of BC’s population resides beyond city limits. Yet rural areas are clearly second-class citizens in the ZEV arena:
Infrastructure is nearly nonexistent—rural regions lack fast chargers entirely .
Studies show zero-emission adoption must follow infrastructure deployment—not the other way around. Mandates demand the impossible: rural drivers cannot comply
The result: thousands of rural households are effectively excluded or forced into costly adaptation, while cities reap policy rewards.
This is not progress; it is central planning that ignores geography and equity.
Historical Parallels: Mandates That Misfire
Policy coercion—especially in energy and housing—is rife with unintended consequences.
Ethanol Mandates (U.S., 2005–present):
Originally intended to reduce oil imports and emissions, ethanol blending mandates triggered massive corn inflation, food price hikes, and dubious greenhouse results—yet were zealously defended by bureaucrats until public outcry forced reform.
Rent Controls:
Intended to maintain housing affordability, controls led to shortages, reduced maintenance, and ultimately damaged supply. Liberals long noted that well-meaning policy can actually perpetuate scarcity and stagnation.
Hayek’s Critique of Central Planning:
Friedrich Hayek famously warned that planners lack the data required for rational economic design. ZEV mandates, dictated from Victoria and Ottawa, defy that lesson. They presume far-reaching market control, yet lack the adaptability and information to succeed. Hayek’s words remain as relevant today: “Every extension of central planning…leaves less room for individual action.”
Simply put: mandates devalue choice.
Industry & Public Pressure: Reality Is Setting In
Even former allies are raising concern:
Rob Shaw reports that BC is “forced to rethink” ZEV targets as demand stalls and public backlash grows—EV adoption is stagnating at ~19% of sales, well below 26% aim for 2026
The New Car Dealers Association of BC and automakers are publicly urging Ottawa to scrap the mandate, concede realistic timelines, and invest in incentives and infrastructure .
If both industry and consumers are pushing back—the policy’s foundation is shaky.
Freedom, Realism, and Respect for Dignity
Mandates are not silly or irrelevant—they are coercion. They treat Canadians as passive components in a technocratic trial, not citizens capable of choice. This infringes upon our dignity and freedom.
Therefore:
1. Cancel the ZEV mandates. End the compliance rules that penalize both dealers and consumers.
2. Roll out market-based incentives. Redirect funding to point-of-sale rebates, income-based subsidies, or targeted grants—more efficient, less coercive than one-size-fits-all mandates.
3. Prioritize infrastructure and grid upgrades. Guarantee charging is ubiquitous—especially in rural and low-income communities—before imposing regulation.
4. Improve accountability and transparency. Develop a public dashboard of ZEV sales, electricity demand, and infrastructure progress. Regular review ensures responsiveness to real-world data.
Canada and BC do not need ideological car mandates—they need grounded policy: freedom by design.
Liberty, Pragmatism, and Climate Policy Reimagined
ZEV mandates are not benevolent green policy—they are illiberal, elitist mandates that subvert affordability, erode freedom, and weaken rural resilience. They repeat mistakes of ethanol, rent controls, and other overreaches.
We must reject mandates, champion market-informed incentives, and channel public investment into infrastructure that empowers—not compels.
Only then can we protect our grid, respect dignity, and foster a voluntary, realistic path to decarbonization.
The coercive era ends now. It’s time to choose freedom over forced green virtue.