Environment Committee on Nov. 20th, 2025

[The Chair, Liberal, Angelo Iacono]

I call the meeting to order.

Good morning, colleagues.

Today is meeting number 15 of the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development.

This meeting is taking place in a hybrid format and is in public. We have witness testimony for two hours.

For those here in person, please follow the health and safety guidelines on the cards found on the table to prevent audio or feedback incidents.

I'd like the committee to adopt the three budgets distributed by the clerk. These amounts are to reimburse the witnesses for their expenses for appearing, as well as our own logistics costs.

First of all, is it the will of the committee to adopt a budget in the amount of $1,000 for the study of the copper redhorse's critical habitat in the Verchères Islands?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Angelo Iacono]

Perfect. That budget is adopted.

Next, is it the will of the committee to adopt a budget in the amount of $1,000 to consider a draft report on the study of climate and environmental impacts related to the Canadian financial system?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Angelo Iacono]

That budget is adopted.

Finally, is it the will of the committee to adopt a budget in the amount of $38,500 for a study on protecting Canadian residents from extreme weather events?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Angelo Iacono]

That budget is adopted.

Thank you very much, colleagues.

We will continue with the next steps.

The committee is resuming its study of the electric vehicle availability standard. This morning, the committee will hear from the following witnesses.

From the Canadian Charging Infrastructure Council, we have Travis Allan, president and chief executive officer. Welcome.

I'd like to welcome the co-founder and CEO of Edison Motors, Eric Little.

From Greenpeace Canada, we have Keith Stewart, senior energy strategist, by video conference. Welcome.

Witnesses, when you see this yellow card going up, I'm telling you that you have one more minute to complete your thoughts. When we get to this card, you have no more minutes, but finish your sentence. I'll give you time for that.

Thank you very much.

Each speaker will have five minutes for their opening remarks.

We'll begin with Mr. Travis Allan.

The floor is yours for five minutes.

[Travis Allan, President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Charging Infrastructure Council]

Good morning, Mr. Chair and members of the committee.

Thank you for the invitation to appear before you.

My name is Travis Allan, and I'm the president and CEO of the Canadian Charging Infrastructure Council.

We are an industry association that represents over half of the EV charging stations in Canada, and our objective is to expand Canada's charging infrastructure. When we do that, we create jobs, we attract investment and we leverage Canada's clean energy advantages.

Over the coming decades, if Canada is able to achieve its electrification objectives, our industry will commit billions of dollars to the Canadian economy, and as you likely know because you've been studying this matter, transportation is Canada's second-largest greenhouse gas emissions contributor on a sectoral basis and charging is, of course, fundamental to trying to get that under control.

Canadians, when surveyed, will typically tell you that the availability of home or near-home charging and public charging is essential in their decision to adopt an EV, so how we get there is primarily a question of economics. At the end of the day, the charging industry is a commercial business, and particularly when we look at public fast charging, the cost of the newer, faster charging stations that are being deployed all over Canada can be around $125,000 per port. The way that you convince capital providers to fund those stations is by looking at the anticipated demand for EV charging, which is typically measured by the number of vehicles on the road, and, of course, you need to look at the cost factors.

The money that is invested isn't just for the charging stations. In fact, most of it is typically spent on local trades across Canada, like electrical contractors and civil contractors. This is obviously a massive infrastructure project, and the only thing right now that is creating some real headwinds in the space is questions around the regulatory and financing structures that have been put in place to help catalyze this industry.

The specific challenge is that unlike an industry that's in a steady state model, the EV charging industry is being buffeted by trade challenges from our southern neighbours, but it is also being asked to invest not with a one-year return horizon but, typically, with a 10-year return horizon.

We need to forecast not only the charging right now but the charging five to seven years in advance. Whenever those financial models are put together for capital providers, they use the EV availability standard as the floor. That is the regulatory floor that allows them to make appropriate assumptions about the revenue that is required, so if we're going to meet Canadians where they are with respect to charging access, we need to find a way to give capital providers the certainty they need to green-light those investments.

So far, our industry has done very well. We estimate that we have about a million EV drivers in Canada, or folks who've chosen EVs, and we have over 7,500 public charging ports the last time I checked. We have 30,000 public level 2 charging ports, and many residential stations, because that's where most Canadians will charge between 70% to 90% of the time if they have access. This roughly lines up with the ratios that we believe are warranted based on the current stock of electric vehicles. Not only that, but we are on track to continue to achieve the targets under the current EV availability standard if we continue with the rate of investment that has been over 25% for the last five years running.

If the EV availability standard is reduced, that means capital providers will not green-light as many new stations, and the implications can be very significant.

We have done some analysis at CCIC in a recent policy-maker brief and found that if the target is changed from 60% by 2030 to 40%, this is likely to result in a 38% decrease in the number of charging stations that would be built. If that target goes down to 30% by 2030, it is likely to result in a 62% reduction in stations built versus what would have been built under the current targets, simply because there is a cumulative impact. Every year all the way up to the 2030 target, you're seeing fewer EVs sold, which means there's lower demand, so you get non-linear impacts.

[The Chair, Liberal, Angelo Iacono]

Thank you very much, Mr. Allan.

Mr. Little, the floor is yours for five minutes.

[Eric Little, Co-Founder, Chief Executive Officer, Edison Motors Ltd.]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My name is Eric Little.

I am the CEO of Edison Motors. We are building electric hybrid semi-trucks in Golden, British Columbia. That's a rural town. We employ 32. We're a small business, but we are growing very quickly.

We have become one of Canada's fastest-growing clean technology companies. It basically started four years ago in a backyard in Merritt. Now we have a valuation of $300 million Canadian. We're growing and trying very hard to commercialize our technology.

The semi-trucks we build are electric. They are powered exclusively from a battery. This battery powers a suite of train motors, meaning that, quite frankly, this technology was going to happen eventually. We're just very lucky to be able to build it right here in Canada.

What's really important to note is that it is a hybrid. These semi-trucks that we build are powered from a battery, but it is charged throughout its working day by a diesel generator. It basically uses all the benefits of an electric vehicle. You have regenerative braking. By the way, in a traditional semi-truck, you need to burn more fuel to slow down the vehicle because they're just so heavy, so regenerative braking is going to be awesome for this.

Furthermore, the efficiency of the drivetrain itself means that, cumulatively, these vehicles have a 30% fuel reduction. That's a minimum. There will be applications like logging—we're former loggers— where it could be upwards of 90% because you go uphill unloaded and then you come downhill loaded. You can use gravity to produce more energy to charges your batteries. It's really cool stuff.

Fundamentally, the reason I'm here today is while we have all the benefits of building an EV right in Canada, unfortunately, there's a bit of a roadblock in terms of the environmental regulation itself. Under CEPA, there is a very specific regulation called the hybrid alternative engine standard. This does not allow Edison to use a diesel generator engine on an on-road vehicle. Because of this, we've actually been forced as a business to switch totally from hybrids to building traditional trucks, which is not the goal of this committee nor our business because we have thousands of fans and investors that have supported us throughout this journey to build hybrids right here in Canada.

I did provide a brief to the committee. What this really provides is a recommendation pathway to try to address our issue. It's a very simple amendment with two core parts.

The first thing I'd like to say is that we've worked very closely with the department, ECCC. They've been incredibly supportive. They actually helped me write, at least in part.... They provided their support in writing the amendments that I provided the committee.

First and foremost, it's to include EPA-certified diesel generator engines for our trucks. This is really critical because it allows us to not need to recertify an engine that's already certified in Canada. We at Edison really don't understand why we need to recertify a diesel engine that is used to produce electricity already for on-road use. I mean, it's not allowing our commercialization pathway at all. Quite frankly, it's a risk to our business.

Second, what I found very curious about the regulation is that it sunsets in 2027. Technically, as it is written, we cannot build hybrid trucks anyway after 2027. The department has also recommended that we extend this to 2032, which is in line with the U.S. regulations.

Fundamentally, our problem is that we are so tied to U.S. regulations that we, as a Canadian truck manufacturer, cannot build the technology we desire. More importantly, we can't even get an exemption because those exemptions are completely dependent on U.S. regulators and the industry, which means that we can't compete.

I really appreciate your time on this matter and I'm hoping that I can answer as many questions as possible. Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Angelo Iacono]

Thank you very much, Mr. Little.

I'm going to request we suspend for one minute to do some audio testing. Once that is completed, we will resume with the next witness for their allocation.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Angelo Iacono]

We shall resume.

From Greenpeace Canada, we have Keith Stewart, senior energy strategist.

Welcome. You'll have five minutes to do your opening remarks. When you see this yellow sign go up, it's to indicate you have one minute left to speak. When you see this one, I'm asking you to complete your sentence.

Thank you.

[Keith Stewart, Senior Energy Strategist, Greenpeace Canada]

Thank you very much for the opportunity to be with you today to discuss the electric vehicle availability standard.

I'm Keith Stewart. I'm a senior energy strategist with Greenpeace Canada and a sessional lecturer at the University of Toronto, where I teach a course on energy and environmental policy.

The electric vehicle availability standard is an important part of Canada's climate action plan. The transition to electric vehicles helps us keep our air clean and reduces our monthly bills while driving cars that are not only comfortable and reliable, but also cheaper to drive and maintain. All of these benefits are now in jeopardy.

I understand that in this era of elbows up, all discussions of public policy must begin with a hockey metaphor, so please excuse this tortured analogy. If you are serious about winning the Stanley Cup, you don't trade away your star forward because you have a good goalie. By winning the Stanley Cup, I mean fulfilling Canada's international commitment on climate change. The star forward is the electric vehicle availability standard.

Let's start with what the government seems to be getting right. The goalie in this metaphor is industrial carbon pricing. Good goaltending is vital, which is why I think the government should strengthen the existing industrial carbon price and apply the federal backstop in provinces whose regimes don't measure up.

Industrial carbon pricing does some things—like reducing emissions from large industrial facilities—really well. I'd refer you to the stellar work of the Canadian Climate Institute on how it can do those things even better. However, there are necessary things it doesn't do well, like convincing North American car companies to make affordable electric vehicles rather than gas-guzzling SUVs or getting solar panels on the roofs of your constituents' homes.

To return to my hockey metaphor, even if you have a great goalie, you are never going to win a game, much less the cup, unless somebody scores on the opposing net. I'm concerned that the current government is considering trading away all of our goal scorers. The consumer carbon tax is retired, and the Impact Assessment Act is on the injury list thanks to Bill C-5, which can exempt fossil fuel megaprojects from environmental laws. It also appears that our star defencemen, the oil and gas emissions cap and north coast oil tanker ban, are on the trading block as part of a potential grand bargain to enable a massive new oil sands pipeline.

We're here today to talk with the star forward who's currently riding the bench—the electric vehicle availability standard. It's time to put a retooled EVAS back in the game so it can reduce greenhouse gas emissions, make electric vehicles more available and affordable for consumers and future-proof Canada's auto sector. These are my top three recommendations for the revised EVAS.

First, prioritize a strong Canadian availability standard over harmonizing with the Trump administration or even the Biden-era vehicle emission standards. You could reward domestic assembly through extra partial credits for vehicles assembled in Canada and/or with a battery manufactured in Canada.

Second, keep the 2030 and 2050 targets. This will send a strong signal to vehicle manufacturers that we are joining the world outside Trump's America in electrifying transportation, so they can skate to where the puck is going.

Third, build in measures to make EVs more affordable. This could include extra credits for affordable electric vehicles. This will offer carmakers greater flexibility while doing more to drive EV affordability and address that top barrier to adoption.

Thanks for your time. I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have.

[The Chair, Liberal, Angelo Iacono]

Thank you very much, Mr. Stewart.

We will begin now with the questions from the Conservative side.

Mr. Ellis Ross, the floor is yours for six minutes.

[Ellis Ross, Conservative, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Little, congratulations. Four years ago, you started this initiative, and that's probably when I met you as an MLA in the B.C. legislature. I couldn't understand why the provincial and federal governments were not actually supporting your cause, because it was one of the most exciting ones I, and all the other MLAs, had come across in a long time. Now, MPs actually agree. It seems like a bit of an oxymoron that the title of this hearing is basically the EV availability standard, but the regulations currently are not making your vehicle available for a number of reasons.

Congratulations, there. Well done. You've done incredible lobbying work. What is the next big step to make sure your vehicle is available for all Canadians in the industrial sector?

[Eric Little]

That's a great question. Quite frankly, we've worked very hard with the department, as well as, of course, MPs with their suggestions. I'm no regulator by any means and very new to changing policy, but we have identified very easy pathways that allow us to use a diesel engine already certified in Canada without a need for recertification. This amendment would allow us to do this.

There are many approaches, one of which could be simply creating a Governor in Council request, which would allow this amendment to go through without even creating legislation; but, you know, there are many ways to skin the cat. Ultimately, my goal is to make sure that we can use already certified diesel engines in Canada that aren't on-road certified and put them in our trucks so that we can get to market and get these incredible vehicles on the road and into the hands of Canadians. We have incredible demand for them. We already have thousands of paid pre-orders, and we're building a factory in Golden to be able to meet this demand. It's extremely exciting.

[Ellis Ross, Conservative, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

It is exciting. You talked about the amount of emissions that each truck will take off our climate on an annual basis, as well. It's interesting, however, that the exemptions that we're looking for are actually tied to U.S. regulators. We don't have anything here in Canada to actually approve a product of yours, which is basically off-the-shelf technology. I mean, we're not talking about anything that needs extraordinary new regulations or legislation. It's all there. It's just that the whole thing put together hasn't been considered yet as a whole. Can you expand on the connection to U.S. approval?

[Eric Little]

In Canada, we are under the EPA standards. Of course, this means that we have to utilize EPA-compliant engines. This is a very narrow market. There are not many players, and, as a Canadian company, we're building for North America, with export potential as well, which is very exciting. What that means is that, if we wanted to get a special exemption to build our vehicles, which does not align of course with CEPA—our regulations here in Canada—we would have to actually ask U.S. regulators and the U.S. companies they represent to change and allow this exemption to go through. This is incredibly burdensome because, quite frankly, U.S. companies will not allow a new competitor. I mean, that's not how they roll.

We are trying to create a very simplistic pathway for regulators in Canada to allow CEPA to change, to accommodate for this really exciting technology, which is basically an existing, already certified Canadian diesel generator engine to be used in an on-road application.

[Ellis Ross, Conservative, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Our relationship with the United States is not great at this point, so your ask is not very politically timely. How long would it take? You've been at this for four years, trying to get governments to change the regulations to accept what is basically already approved technology. If we put an urgent request on this to government, how long do you expect it would take for this to be resolved?

[Eric Little]

Well, if we were to do the exemption pathway, there is a high probability that it would not be allowed. As I've mentioned, the companies that exist down there, the OEMs, which see us as a competitor, would most likely not allow us to enter their market. Furthermore, what I think is the real crux of the issue is that we are reducing greenhouse gas emissions and trying to do our best, but our technology is so unique that regulators haven't even considered putting a diesel electric generator engine in a truck. We're the only ones in North America doing this pathway while everyone else just uses standard diesel engines.

We're working hard to educate regulators. I believe that this could be a really unique Canadian approach by making an amendment to our CEPA regulations.

[Ellis Ross, Conservative, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

There seems to be a bit of a conflict. As a Canadian who wants to build our nation up, get the economy going and get the jobs going, you're doing incredible work. You have incredible success, so thank you for that, but it seems that we're actually asking the U.S. regulator to basically approve your standards. At the same time, they have market considerations too that they'd like to protect. Those things seem to offset each other, and all the negative impacts are actually directed at a company like yours. Am I kind of correct in that?

[Eric Little]

Certainly. Furthermore, as you know, there are only really two heavy-duty truck manufacturers in Canada—Edison and Paccar, the plant in Quebec. We have both been hit by this new 25% tariff. Therefore, it's clear that we will not be able to export.

[The Chair, Liberal, Angelo Iacono]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Grant, the floor is yours for six minutes.

[Wade Grant, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for coming forward on this important topic.

I want to start off by thanking Mr. Little—it's the second time that we've met each other—and thanking my friend Mr. Ross, who introduced us the last time you were on the Hill.

I'm from British Columbia as well, on the other side of British Columbia in Vancouver. I really commend you for the innovation that you're seeking in this small business, and I hope you continue to have success.

I know that you've been working with Environment and Climate Change Canada as you move this product to market. I want you to talk about the work you've done with them. I know you had the NEM authorization yesterday, which I'm sure you're very happy about. What other steps are needed to move forward?

[Eric Little]

It's very exciting to know that Edison now has its national emissions mark authorization. This is a big step in our business, because now the department sees us as very much understanding the current regulations and being able to apply a mark onto our vehicles once they are ready for sale.

The next step would be to submit letters. They're called C-Us. One is for the vehicle itself, which I can only submit once I get the national emissions mark. With that hurdle behind us, I look forward to submitting this soon.

Furthermore, because of our hybrid engines—in this case it's a Scania 9-litre that we get from Sweden, which is EPA certified—I have to submit another letter of C-U for this particular engine. This essentially describes all of its basic fundamentals, its GHG emissions and some more information on specifications, which is different from what you need to do for a traditional truck. If it's already a compliant engine, I don't need to submit that letter. It is an additional layer or step that I need to comply with, but I'm more than happy to do so.

I really want to tell the committee that Environment Climate Change Canada staff have been incredible to work with, especially after all this publicity caused throughout this issue we're having, and we're getting incredible support. I'm really happy to bring the committee some recommendations they've made to try to address this issue with this amendment to the regulation. We're really pleased by this, and I hope to continue to work really well with the ECCC as we get permission.