Canada’s transition to light-duty zero emission vehicles (ZEV): opportunities, challenges, and policy directions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Light-duty passenger vehicles in Canada account for over 11% of Canada’s total greenhouse gas emissions (GHG). In 2021, as a crucial step to reduce transportation-related GHG emissions, Canada set a target to reach 100% zero-emission light-duty vehicle (ZELDV) sales by 2035. This paper focuses on exploring the current status of Canada’s ZELDV transition and analyzing its readiness to achieve set ZELDV sales targets. Furthermore, this study critically reviews the key challenges faced during this transition, and potential solutions. A SWOT analysis was conducted to identify potential strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats under different themes, including political, environmental, economic, social and technological aspects. Finally, necessary policy interventions along with the road ahead for Canada’s ZELDV transition were discussed in detail. Reports show that while ZELDV sales are growing, particularly in provinces such as Quebec, British Columbia, and Ontario, challenges persist related to the high purchase cost of vehicles, range anxiety, grid overload, and lack of infrastructure. Although over $1.8 billion has been allocated towards alternative fueled vehicle infrastructure in Canada, there are no clear targets or a roadmap to meet the future infrastructure demand. Using worldwide case studies as benchmarks, this paper suggests that Canada’s refuelling infrastructure needs to be expanded to meet future demand. Furthermore, this study highlights the potential of adopting different ZELDV technologies based on locally available resources and energy sources and the findings suggest that Quebec and British Columbia are on track for 2035 targets, while other provinces require substantial advancements in ZELDV adoption and infrastructure to meet federal goals. Finally, this study highlights necessary policy changes required for the ZELDV transition in Canada in making well-informed decisions on infrastructure planning and fund allocation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".