Power cost not the only EV problem
Re: “Hidden costs of running an electric vehicle,” letter, Oct. 22.
The main impediment to electric-vehicle ownership isn’t two-tier hydro prices. Even at tier-two charging, an EV is still much cheaper than gassing up a conventional vehicle.
The main obstacle to EV adoption is the high purchase and depreciation costs. Even with government incentives, the true cost of ownership is out of reach for most people.
Next is the hidden cost of the shrinking battery pack. Over time, the storage capacity of the battery pack diminishes — a lot. In fact, some manufacturers document that a 40 per cent reduction in storage capacity during the warranty period is normal and not grounds for a repair or replacement.
When the battery-pack capacity shrinks to a certain point, it will need replacing, and that can easily cost $10,000. This is one of the reasons EVs depreciate so rapidly.
Another issue with electric vehicles is proprietary charging stations. The charging networks are very limited, and then you have to go to the one that’s compatible with your type of plug/charging system. We wouldn’t tolerate proprietary gas pumps, so why haven’t governments forced standardization in charging networks and EV plugs?
I think most people would be willing to go electric, and put up with some inconvenience, to save the planet. Now we just need the cost to be competitive, the battery pack’s capacity to be properly warrantied and universal charging networks.
S.I. Petersen
Nanaimo
EV drivers should pay higher power rates
Re: “Hidden costs of running an electric vehicle,” letter, Oct. 22.
First of all, it is not the job of B.C. Hydro and, by extension, the taxpayers of B.C. to subsidize the operation of electric vehicles.
Quite the opposite — any charging station that is sold in this province and installed at a residence should be taxed above and beyond current taxation rates, and require a permanently wired installation and permit from the electrical branch, complete with a meter.
The power usage could be monitored and a higher rate than basic subsidized electrical service could be applied.
I take exception to the fact that some who can afford to pay $35,000 or more for an electric car should feel entitled to have all the taxpayers of B.C. subsidize their driving.
There are a lot of people who work at minimum-wage or low-paying jobs or multiple jobs who can barely afford their monthly electricity bill, never mind the luxury of an electric car.
Mike Wilkinson
Duncan
Sailboat makes more sense than rowboat
Re: “Olympian offers to row Thunberg to Victoria,” Oct. 23.
While I’m sure many appreciate Adam Kreek’s offer to row Greta Thunberg to Victoria, let’s be honest here. This is an attention-grab for Mr. Kreek at the expense of Ms. Thunberg’s realistic options to visit our region.
Are we really so bereft of options that we must have this eight-hour spectacle of putting a young person in a survival suit and subjecting her to uncomfortable self-promotional bravado in what is, by her assertion, a time-starved agenda?
We have a reasonable and quick (especially as it is to be windy) option: a sailboat. One might have heard of them. Greta is apparently quite familiar.
James Davison
Victoria
Fossil-fuel critics need reality boot camp
Re: “Olympian offers to row Thunberg to Victoria,” Oct. 23.
This is almost funny. The amount of energy, including fossil fuel, that is used in manufacturing one of those Whitehall Spirits — which, by the way, are wonderful boats, I highly recommend them to everyone — is significant, as it is with most artifacts of the modern world, including the yacht that carried Greta Thunberg across the Atlantic.
This is another clear illustration of the hypocrisy employed by most “save the climate” activists.
The modern world is a monument to the convenient and widespread exploitation of energy, of which fossil fuels constitute a large portion. Remove them from the equation and our society would revert to something before the Middle Ages — perhaps even earlier. People who believe this would be a good thing are indulging in sentimental nonsense.
Olympic rower Adam Kreek and Greta need a weekend in reality boot camp, where they could be denied all the conveniences of modern life that depend on the efficient exploitation of petroleum and its derivatives.
And they should be joined by the hordes who protest against fossil fuels, as if their elimination were an easy, or even possible, choice.
Michel Murray
Saanich
Three in a bed at the old Pier-Head
Canadians who stayed tuned in to the election results late enough on Monday night were probably disappointed by the party leaders’ closing speeches. The Quebec-based leaders were orderly and precise; Monsieur Bernier accepted his humiliation graciously; Monsieur Blanchet was fittingly exuberant about the separatist Bloc Québécois’s performance.
Then came the New Democrat Party leader addressing a very enthusiastic packed hall in Burnaby. Despite having lost 20 seats from the 2015 election number of 44, Mr. Singh was giving a victory speech.
He spoke about soon achieving his party’s ultra-expensive aims and ambitions by working with the new Liberal minority government.
As this strange celebratory speech was drawing to a close, the cameras switched to Mr. Scheer approaching Conservative Party headquarters in Regina, but he had hardly begun to speak when the focus switched to Mr. Trudeau in Montreal.
For a short while, there were three leaders on a split screen, all talking to their supporters. This was a perfect vignette of how the leaders’ debates and most of the campaign had unfolded, with three of them talking over each other. It reminded me of an old sea shanty: “Three in a bed at the old Pier-Head, It’s Liverpool town for me.”
When the broadcasters figured out how to handle this Montreal curveball, the speeches from the two main protagonists were equally disheartening, and not what Canadians needed to hear.
More angry campaign rhetoric from both of them, with no indication of working together, as will have to be the case in a minority government.
Bernie Smith
Parksville
Canadians rejected PPC rhetoric
I am deeply grateful to all Canadians today. Nowhere across this land divided by many ideologies was credence given to the vitriol of the far-right xenophobes.
The stunningly wonderful indifference to the rhetoric of the People’s Party of Canada is the best outcome possible in this election. Therein lies the source of our country’s light, which shines on the fractured world.
We can work out the complicated path forward together — both nationally and on the world stage — since we stand on this amazing and essential common ground of reason and compassion.
Leslie Gillett
Victoria
Polling stations illustrate Quebec law
Now that the election is over, it’s a good time to reflect on the similarities between voting procedures and Quebec’s law on the separation of church and state.
What did you notice in the polling station when you voted? Did you notice the absence of political materials and logos and colours that are identified with a political party?
Election workers and candidates’ representatives are not allowed to wear clothing with a colour that can be identified with a particular party. If candidates’ representatives are wearing any symbols indicating their political affiliation, whether buttons, logos or clothing, they must be removed before entering the polling station.
The reason? Polling stations must appear neutral and impartial. The presence of symbols can be perceived as trying to influence the vote.
This idea is similar to Quebec’s law on “laïcité,” the separation of church and state. This law requires state employees in positions of authority not to wear religious symbols at work. They can be worn going to work, but at work, they must be removed.
People must feel that the government authorities they are dealing with are neutral, impartial and free of religious perspective. The wearing of religious symbols can be perceived as the person in authority having a religious bias.
Symbols are important.
Louise Manga
Victoria
Send us your letters
• Email: letters@timescolonist.com
• Mail: Letters to the editor, Times Colonist, 2621 Douglas St., Victoria, B.C. V8T 4M2.
Letters should be no longer than 250 words and may be edited for length, legality or clarity. Include your full name, address and telephone number. Copyright of letters or other material accepted for publication remains with the author, but the publisher and its licensees may freely reproduce them in print, electronic and other forms.
