Featured Image

(LifeSiteNews) — A couple years ago I heard a story from a man who grew up in the eastern block of the Soviet Union.

He told me how when he was young boy and the communists took control, one of the first things they did was nationalize the automobile industry. His father had been saving for years to buy a car, but when he finally had the money to buy one, he couldn’t, because you had to register an accusation form with the party, and wait for the state to get you a vehicle when it was available.

The father did so, and then went about trying to keep his family alive in the new hell-scape that was the U.S.S.R.

Ten years later a man who looked very much like a KGB agent, drove up to the house they were staying in and asked the father for his name. After saying his name, the man handed him a set of keys, and said “Here is your car, comrade.” The father then had to drive the man back to the office, because he didn’t come with another vehicle. That is what it will be like to get a car in Canada in 2030, except you will not get one until 2040 or later, if ever.

For the better part of three decades I’ve been hearing about how battery technologies are advancing in leaps and bounds, and soon, just over the rainbow, there will be perfect batteries that charge instantly and never wear out: just like the perpetual motion machine; magnetic, wirelessly charged batteries; dry cell batteries; and nuclear batteries. All these technologies have been fantasized about for decades, and the “greenies” have been telling us how we will never need coal or natural gas power, because in the grand green utopia of 2030, everything will be electric powered, with self contained power cells charged by the power of love.

Unfortunately, I live down here in reality, and leave the science fiction to Star Trek.

Yes, some of these technologies may be out there, like magnetic induction charging, but it isn’t what the kitten-eyed sales man pitched it as, and I’m not going to go down the rabbit hole of what technologies may or may not have been “suppressed” from the market.

No, I’m hear to tell you the hard practical real-world truth about electric vehicles (EVs), their batteries, and how Canada is not Norway.

One would think all of this would be obvious, but the liars in government want you to think we are just like Norway … or at least they want to make us into what they have deceived themselves into believing Norway is.

In my last piece I mentioned the new proposed regulations on vehicle manufacturing and imports in Canada. There is a lot of material in the regulations that could be covered, but one item I didn’t bring up before, that I thought Canadians should be aware of for just how ridiculous it is, is how we are compared to Norway as justification for the regulations.

The regulations document states: “Pickup trucks, SUVs, and hatchbacks with two-wheel drive and four-wheel drive options are all available as ZEVs now, with even more coming in the next few years. Electric vehicles can be driven in very cold weather. ZEVs are common in countries with cold winters like Norway, w[h]ere over 70 percent of new car sales are ZEVs.”

There are four key points in this one comparison that fail basic critical analysis.

  • Land area
  • Population
  • Temperature
  • Commonality & Availability

Land area

It would be absurd to attempt to compare travel distances, times, and frequency of travel of the 2nd largest country in the world by land area, to the 69th largest. Add in the topography of Canada versus Norway, and you can’t help but laugh at the idea.

If they wanted to compare EV usage based on land area, they should have stopped at Alberta. Norway’s land area is 385,207 km2 with about 5 percent water, which is about half that of the province of Alberta, which is 661,848 km2 with about 3 percent water.

The travel distance between the major populated areas of Calgary and Edmonton is about 300 km, over fairly even terrain, while the distance between Oslo and Bergen is 463km on uneven indirect terrain. But if they compared Norway to Alberta, then I guess they would be accused of cherry picking their data.


Canada’s Population is roughly 7 times that of Norway. The logistics of importing, manufacturing, distributing, and maintaining EVs with such a large population over a landmass roughly 31 times that of Norway, is incomparable, and it is ludicrous to suggest that we would be able to get our numbers per capita up to Norway’s by 2030 or even 2040.

This presents a task that is totally outside the realm of possibility for a naturally evolving market. They would have to kidnap workers from other sectors and force them onto a grueling 16-hour per day work schedule. Fortunately, that doesn’t appear to be part of the agenda, since the Liberal government’s “just transition” agenda prefer oil and gas workers become “janitors.”

Again, a more realistic goal would have been to take each province separately, and suggest making it the goal for Alberta. Norway’s population is estimated at being 5,456,582, while Alberta’s is estimated at 4,500,917. While there would still be concerns, having a million less people spread over twice the area, it would make it a far more realistic comparison. Better to aim 100 meters out, than to shoot for the moon.


The lowest recorded temperature in Norway’s most densely populated area is -32°C, and that is being “liberal” with the data (pun intended). Since I’ve got a theme going, let’s compare that to Alberta. Alberta’s second most populated city, Edmonton, has almost double the population of Oslo. Norway’s most densely populated city. Edmonton has gotten down to -42°C. A 30-minute drive outside Edmonton, it was -48°C. Calgary didn’t fair much better, at -40°C. If you drive out closer to where I live, in the south of Alberta, it got as low as -54°C. That is pretty close to the popsicle temperature for charged EV batteries (-60°C). These cold temperatures are not unusual. I’m talking about a difference in temperature from Alberta to Norway of 20 degrees. In my last piece I mentioned how a Christmas cold snap sent it down to -37°C with a -50°C standing wind. Imagine driving head on at 70-kilometers an hour with winds of those temperatures battering  your car. Not hard to see the batteries hitting that fatal -60°C temperature. These kinds of temperatures usually happen at least twice a year in Alberta.

Most EV batteries are some form of lithium and charging lithium-ion batteries, which at anything lower than freezing can result in permanent damage. I previously mentioned that this alone presents a potentially catastrophic problem.

By the sound of it, the Trudeau government expects Canadians to not only pony up for the $40k+ purchase price of these EV vehicles, but also the untold costs of having a heated garage in their already impossible-to-afford house, or keep their vehicle running for weeks at a time and upgrade the power outlets for 500-volt charging. Unless of course you wish to wait a week for your truck to charge.

While manufacturing defects and failures are not likely in a few thousand vehicles, what about when they start cranking them out faster than is reasonable, to meet demand for 35 million people? Tesla was fined for hiding the fact that EV battery efficiency lowers as the temperature lowers (as much as 50% at a meager -20C), and that the risk of a complete discharge of your batteries compounds as the temperature dips lower.

A complete discharge of a lithium-ion battery demands a replacement of the battery. If you consider the vehicle maintenance and mechanical knowledge of the average Canadian, then the epic levels of psychopathy required to believe that 100 percent EVs is a sane agenda for Canada becomes quite clear.

Commonality & Availability

The last comparison between Norway and Canada, isn’t so much a silly comparison, as it is just an outright lie. The fact that the authors in the Liberal government who came up with these regulations have no concern about concealing their lies, shows a level of contempt for the populace that makes one justifiably angry. The authors stated “ZEVs are common in countries with cold winters like Norway, w[h]ere over 70 percent of new car sales are ZEVs.”

This is a lie because by no stretch of the imagination can the use of EVs be considered “common” in Norway. The definition of common being:

1. Belonging equally to or shared equally by two or more; joint.

2. Of or relating to the community as a whole; public.

3. Widespread; prevalent.

According to recent statistics, just 20 percent of registered vehicles in Norway are fully electric. When 80 percent of the vehicles are not EVs, I hesitate to refer to the ones that are electric as “common.”

Moreover, the reason the numbers are even that high is because the Norwegian government has been using carrots and whips to force the numbers up since 1990. That is 33 years of trying to force the market to change. 33 years to get to 20 percent acceptance. 33 years to do what the Trudeau Liberals want to do in 7. With 7 times the population, 31 times the land mass, and about 31 times the number of vehicles.

Don’t get me wrong, some of those carrots were pretty sweet: no import fees; no sales tax; free parking; no toll roads; private driving lanes; and personalized vanity, virtue-signaling license plates.

All of these things seem great, and in fact push people to buy EVs, but you have to look at it from the other side as well. If you chose not to buy an EV, you were heavily taxed, couldn’t take faster and better maintained roads, and were socially stigmatized for being “selfish.” You were also forced to live with lower income because of all the fees associated with a traditional automobile, thus subsidizing the EV class to live off of your back. And don’t forget, these carrots for EVs inevitably become whips, as traditional vehicles are phased out. You will not have your free roads anymore once everyone is in an EV.

Finally, availability isn’t what the authors of the regulations say it is either. If 70 percent of new vehicles sold in a country are EVs, and 80 percent of existing vehicles are not EVs, then that means that both sides are on waiting lists. Norway doesn’t have the manufacturing plants to produce all the EVs to meet a 70 percent demand. The regulations prevent non-EVs from making up more than 30 percent of the sales. This means the 80 percent non-EVs are getting older and older, staying on the roads longer and longer, producing more and more of the so-called environmental damage of which the greenies are so afraid.

When people need new cars, it doesn’t mean they need a new EV, it means they need a new car. So, they either get on the waiting list for one of the 30 percent, because they can’t bring them in fast enough at a 30 percent rate of import, or they get on a waiting list for the 70 percent, because they can’t manufacture EVs fast enough. If it took them 33 years to sell 647,000 EVs, how long do you think it will take them to replace the other 4.8 million vehicles? And that is just Norway. Forbes also tells us how Norwegians are already waiting years to get their EVs, so try to imagine how long you will be waiting in Canada.

This is all an insulting and moot point anyway considering that even if all the vehicles in Canada and Norway suddenly disappeared tomorrow, it wouldn’t make up for the amount of pollution put out by a single container ship trudging across the Atlantic. What conclusion can anyone draw from any of this other than that the Canadian government and its allies are all part of an apocalyptic death cult, incapable of self-reflection, critical thinking and basic reasoning.