Environment Committee on Nov. 20th, 2025

[Wade Grant, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Thanks, Mr. Little.

Mr. Allan, how does the existence of a federal mandate guaranteeing future sales volume de-risk investments and help attract the necessary private capital to support the rapid building out of the charging infrastructure that we need?

[Travis Allan]

I have a dual role. I work with this industry association, and I work on capital raising, particularly around this industry. That's something that I think about a lot: How do we convince private capital to really crowd into this space, build jobs and build infrastructure in Canada?

The most important thing on the revenue side is to try to predict accurately how many people will be charging. For example, for a public fast-charging station, your customers are battery electric vehicle drivers and likely in the future to be plug-in hybrid electric vehicle drivers. Those vehicles have larger capacity and can charge at speed. They're not internal combustion engine vehicles or hybrids that cannot plug in. That's really the core market you're trying to pick. If you can predict that, you can basically estimate your revenue multiple years in the future.

The EV availability standard sets a rough floor you can use to calculate how much demand you're going to have. That lets you figure out the revenue and the financial model for your charging station. It's the most fundamental policy.

[Wade Grant, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Mr. Little, has the department given you a timeline for approval once you file the application for your vehicle?

[Eric Little]

Not at this time. It did take us nine months to get from our initial ask to getting our national emissions mark, which I find was quite lengthy. That being said, it's our first time around the bus.

Based on conversations I had with the department yesterday, we are still waiting for managerial approval to potentially expedite our engine C-U letter, which is incredible news. That being said, no firm timeline has been provided.

In terms of making this amendment, I have never really changed a regulation before, so I'm looking forward to your thoughts and concerns there.

[Wade Grant, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Mr. Stewart, the electric vehicle availability standard includes plug-in hybrid EVs in the early phase. How is the strategic inclusion of these vehicles essential for bridging the gap and facilitating ZEV adoption?

[Keith Stewart]

It helps with the people who are concerned about whether or not they're going to be able to get access to a charger. As your previous question said, this is a chicken-and-egg problem. Without the security of an EVAS, it's hard to build the charging infrastructure, and without the charging infrastructure, people aren't going to buy the vehicles.

I think hybrids are really good examples, as you're going through the transition for people who might be worried about the availability in their area and might not be able to charge at home, of how to provide some of that flexibility.

There actually are a lot of flexibility mechanisms built into this regulation already. I think a lot of thought and consultation went into it, and that's why I would really hate to see it thrown out or gutted.

[Wade Grant, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

I think that's my time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Angelo Iacono]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Bonin, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Patrick Bonin, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Stewart, can you elaborate on why we need an EV strategy, rather than just relying on automakers to have their own strategy or even carbon pricing?

[Keith Stewart]

I'm old enough to remember when the vehicle manufacturers resisted seat belt laws, saying that was going to destroy the industry, and then it was catalytic converters that were going to destroy the industry. They're a very conservative body and they like to stick with what they know, which makes sense. They also like to keep competitors out. I think, as one of your previous panel members was saying, these guys like to keep out the competition and the alternative. That's why we needed laws for seat belts and for catalytic converters.

They're going to resist change whenever they can, because they want to stick with what they know. For the industrial carbon price or even the old-fashioned CAFE standards, they're really good at tweaking and getting incremental change in the existing system, but when you're trying to actually change the system, like a switch from gas-powered vehicles to electric vehicles, you need a much more comprehensive approach.

This point was made really well by one of the other panellists. He said they will build the number of chargers that they know are going to be guaranteed based on the number of vehicles in this law, and in the same way, companies always say they want certainty to make long-term investments. This provides that long-term incentive. It says, “This is where we're headed. If you make these investments, you're not going to lose your money.” That's really important, and I think Canada should stick to its guns on this and move forward with that transition to electric vehicles, which is happening all around the world.

Donald Trump is trying to hold it back, but if we're looking to expand our trade and integrate more with the rest of the world, we need to skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it is right now or where Donald Trump is trying to put it.

[Patrick Bonin, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

In your opinion, is it still possible for Canada to implement an ambitious zero-emission vehicle standard, even if the U.S. President no longer takes that route?

[Keith Stewart]

We don't want to get left behind. There is this possibility that Canada, if we align with the Trump administration—and who knows what will happen next down south—we could end up as this backwater in terms of vehicles, because electric vehicles are simply better in so many ways. Look at the rapid adaptation not just in places like Europe but also in the global south. That's where the technology is going. If we want to be able to trade more with those places, there's that element, but this is also key to achieving our climate objectives.

After oil and gas production, the transportation sector is the second-largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the country. If we don't electrify, we're not going to be able to really get at those emissions in any kind of deep way.

The passenger vehicles are relatively easy because that technology is now available. It's spreading around. We have to bring in more affordable vehicles here. It's amazing that in Europe there are like 21 EVs available under $40,000, and here, I think there's only one. If we design this law right, we can actually get those affordable vehicles here.

It's also fascinating to see that, even in other sectors of transportation, like heavy-duty trucks, we're beginning to electrify those as well. That's great to see, and Canada should be sticking with the leaders on this, not the laggards.

[Patrick Bonin, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Can you expand on the issue of affordability? I think you talked about the possibility that the standard might even be improved and that there would be more affordable vehicles on the market.

[Keith Stewart]

Electric vehicles started as a niche market for rich people in Silicon Valley. We need to actually make them like the workhorse, the family vehicle that everyone can afford. I think those vehicles are available in the rest of the world. They're hard to find here.

For instance, the B.C. government just announced some changes, and I wasn't terribly delighted with all of them, but one thing they're going to look at offering is partial extra credits for vehicles under a certain price point. Basically, there's an incentive for car manufacturers to start building those here and putting them on the market. They're exploring ways of providing 0% financing for vehicles, again, under a certain market...so you're making sure that these cars are available to your average working family and not just to the wealthy. We shouldn't have polluting cars for poor people and clean cars for rich people. That's not the kind of Canada we want to have.

[Patrick Bonin, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

You mentioned that industrial carbon pricing could not compensate for this standard being abandoned.

Can you comment on that?

[Keith Stewart]

Industrial carbon pricing does some things really well, but when you look at something like trying to change the types of vehicles on the road, the small increase or the chain shift in price that's going to happen to the manufacturers doesn't make such a big difference in the types of cars they build because the main emissions are coming from what they use in the vehicle.

The fact that there's an industrial carbon price doesn't affect Ford in any way over the lifespan of the vehicle; it's just in the making of the vehicle. Whereas, if you're actually the driver, you save an enormous amount of money in fuel costs over the life of the vehicle because electricity is just a lot cheaper than gas for the consumer, and you benefit if it is an electric car. If you're the manufacturer, you don't benefit if it is an electric car.

[The Chair, Liberal, Angelo Iacono]

Thank you very much.

Ms. Anstey, the floor is yours for five minutes.

[Carol Anstey, Conservative, Long Range Mountains, NL]

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Little, for joining us today and also for pushing through with this technology. I'm an entrepreneur myself, and I know there are many challenges in your journey.

I am from Newfoundland and Labrador, from a very rural area, where there's a lot of resource development. There are a lot of industries that depend on heavy trucks to stay competitive. They're under immense pressure financially right now.

I believe there's an affordability component also built into your product. I just wanted to give you an opportunity to expand a bit on that for the benefit of the panel, just so that they know the fullness of what your technology can offer consumers and people in small businesses.

[Eric Little]

That's fantastic. Thank you very much for the opportunity to talk about the technology's benefits.

From a financial perspective, the fuel reduction is quite significant. It's 30% of fuel consumption, which is essentially one of the highest costs of operating a truck. This can account for $30,000 to $50,000 a year per operator. This is a pretty significant savings, and we want to be able to pass that on to the consumer.

What's great about our technology is that it doesn't influence payload. As you know, a truck really is paid for by what it can carry, and because of our drivetrain and how it works, it has a very small battery and a small diesel engine. It's about a third smaller than a traditional diesel engine. Therefore, there is no compromise on payload, which is an advantage that BEVs or fully electric vehicles would never have. We're quite pleased that we can offer no range anxiety to the consumer who is used to filling up the tank with diesel, while still providing a 30% reduction in operating cost.

Don't get me started on maintenance. Our system doesn't have a whole bunch of mechanical parts, gears and drivetrains. It's just motors directly at the wheels. This means that there could be upwards of 50% in maintenance savings. Once we actually get permission to sell our vehicles in Canada, I look forward to being able to share, with you and our fans, what those true numbers are.

[Carol Anstey, Conservative, Long Range Mountains, NL]

Thank you, and I appreciate your passion about your product.

You also talked in your opening remarks about being a major contributor to your community where you operate. You talked about being a logger, and I thought about a community in my riding of Hampton. It's the single employer. It's a logging community.

I think there are also implications if you don't continue to get what you need from the government to continue to move forward, not just for your business but also for the community where you're employing several people. I think it's important that we all understand the implications. If you're not able to continue to move forward, if you continue to face barriers and roadblocks, what are the implications of that?

[Eric Little]

The implications are pretty dire. As a company, we've invested roughly $10 million into our local community of Golden, B.C. The population is roughly 600 full time. It obviously swells with the beautiful skiing we have in the region and with the hiking we have in the summertime. Golden, B.C., if you aren't aware, is very close to Banff. This is a very beautiful part of the country. We're in the heart of the Rocky Mountains. We've actually scaled our business quite dramatically over the last year, going from eight to 32 full-time employees. Our pathway is actually going to 50 next year, and up to 70 employees once we reach full production with our new facility currently under construction.

This would be a huge blow to the community, which has really embraced us over the last year. We relocated there from Merritt, B.C, in April. It would be a shame for us to not be able to produce these electric trucks in Canada.

[Carol Anstey, Conservative, Long Range Mountains, NL]

Can you articulate to us the investment you've made? You've gone through this for nine months. What resources have you poured into this in terms of time and energy to try to get this to move forward? Do you think there's been an opportunity cost to your business, as you've had to focus on trying to get this changed when you could be diversifying your business and investing it in other places?

I just want you to expand a little bit on that thought.

[Eric Little]

It's more than just the time and labour associated with us hiring specialists and people in administration to help us navigate the regulatory environment, which is very complex. What really impacted our business was the fact that we had to pivot from hybrids exclusively to building a mechanical truck, which is not the spirit of what we're trying to do at Edison. It's in the name: We're “Edison” Motors. We're an electric vehicle maker, but because of the regulations, we are forced to make a typical traditional truck with a 15-litre engine.

[The Chair, Liberal, Angelo Iacono]

Thank you, Mr. Little.

Mr. St‑Pierre, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Eric St-Pierre, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Mr. Stewart, many provinces are backtracking when it comes to electric vehicles: Quebec did so recently. At a time like this, should the federal government retain its EV availability standard as adopted?