The Township of Lake of Bays plans on adding electrical vehicle charging infrastructure within its borders.
Stephen Derraugh with Economic Development in the Township, told councillors that “EV technology is being adopted by more and more Ontarians and Muskokans’, and the demand for charging infrastructure in Lake of Bays is increasing. Due to the lack of Level 2 and 3 chargers within the region, Lake of Bays is not well-positioned to support resident or seasonal EV drivers.”
Derraugh was suggesting a mix of Level 2 and Level 3 chargers with Level 3 chargers being faster, which he said were ideal for locations such as walking trails or near restaurants or shops where drivers only need to stop for a short period. “It is important to have a mixture of both levels of chargers that accurately correspond with the length of time that users are already spending at Electric Vehicle (EV) Chargers in Lake of Bays,” he stated in his report to council. “The Township has an opportunity to establish its place as a leader in this societal transformation through the provision of EV charging infrastructure.”
He said the Township would lease the land to the provider. “Through a lease agreement or other suitable legal agreements, the Township could permit EV Charger companies to install and operate their chargers for public use on Township owned property while the Township provides the land.”
Council gave staff the green light to issue a request for proposals to “engage Electric Vehicle (EV) charger providers in developing a comprehensive strategy and tactical plan focused on Electric Vehicle (EV) infrastructure, installation, and maintenance on Township-owned properties suitable for EV charging stations.”
Don’t miss out on Doppler!
Sign up here to receive our email digest with links to our most recent stories.
Local news in your inbox so you don’t miss anything!
Click here to support local news
Patrick Flanagan:
“…As to EVs being heavier than comparable ICE vehicles because of the battery weight, could you point us to your sources of information about road damage and accident severity? A comparison with the oversized pickup trucks that currently fill our roads would be particularly useful…”
How’s this, Patrick?
“Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., recently said, ‘EVs are typically much heavier compared to similarly sized, gas-powered vehicles, which will put additional strain on America’s transportation infrastructure. The American Society of Civil Engineers warns that an increase in EVs could substantially reduce the lifespan of roads and bridges, necessitating further investment in infrastructure.”
As to the potentially more lethal outcomes of collisions with EVs–It’s all physics.
Safety experts [at the University of Nebraska] tested an EV on a guardrail system. In each case, the guardrails failed: “…at a test facility in Nebraska, where examiners took a 3.6-ton Rivian R1 and sent it into a metal guardrail at 62 mph, first head on, then at an angle.
Both times it “ripped through” the guardrail and continued into what would have been lanes for oncoming traffic, the report revealed.
The conclusion was simple: making vehicles much heavier means “a lot more force” is required to redirect the vehicle.
University of Nebraska professor Cody Stolle, told the [Washington] Times, “We found these guardrail systems don’t have great compatibility with these [electric] vehicles yet.”
The heavier vehicles also could cause more damage to other vehicles in collisions.
The report said an insurance institute expert confirmed the weight provides more protection to those inside the EV, but at the expense of anyone in another vehicle involved in an accident.
The weight differences are significant. The report said the Tesla Model Y is more than 4,400 pounds while the similar size gas-powered Honda Accord is 3,300. Kia makes multiple SUVs, with the gas model weighting 3,900 pounds and the EV unit nearly 6,500…”
“Two cool shorts standin’ side by side. Tack it up now.” Remember that?
Having been born in the mid 40’s and growing up in the 50’s, I missed a lot of the souped up flat heads running on places like the Novar Flats. The Fords and Mercs. The big Hudsons and Monarchs.
Lots of us were there at the birth of the muscle car era. Maybe not so much in Huntsville, though we did have some local talent. After big games they would rumble circuits on Main Street ’til they could find a parking spot at the Tasty Cream.
We all knew where to find a drag-strip and watch those “cool shorts” run. Cayuga, St. Thomas. Sometimes as far as Motorcity Speedway in Detroit. Get as close as you were allowed. Smell the fuel and traction burns. Listen to the roar of those wild horses. Watch or anticipate the Christmas tree flash down to green. Look for the elapsed time and top speed of that quarter mile and prepare for the next. Hope for some ‘rails’ to run.
But the electric car is meant to save the world or at least contribute greatly to the saving. As he story goes. Insurance rates on such vehicles must be quite low as nobody seems to want to steal them. You will stay home most evenings just to get the cheap hydro rate. Which will eventually end and road tax will be applied to hydro bills? Most vehicles will be new because it seems no one wants a used electric.
But an era will have passed. No need to “Tack it up now.” When the tree flashes green, there will just be acceleration. Oh ! they do accelerate! The crowd, if there still is one, will have to be thrilled by a whine akin to two mix-masters on steroids. Something new to thrill the crowds?
Cue B.B. King and his song “The Thrill is Gone.” For some of us anyway.
Sigh.
Erin Jones, sorry I didn’t address every part of your misinformation.
As to the infrastructure issue, it is clear that electricity capacity must be increased in the next few decades to meet the increasing demand from EVs, heat pumps and increased population. But others have already thought of that. See, for example, https://natural-resources.canada.ca/sites/nrcan/files/Executive%20Summary%20ICF_English.pdf which quantifies the increase in demand and notes that providers are making plans to supply it.
As to those with a vested interest in getting us to buy EVs, that category includes everyone who wants the planet to survive. Everywhere in the world, there is a recognition that we need to get away from using fossil fuels, and switching to EVs is a small part of that. I do wonder why so many people are influenced by those who have a vested interest in stopping us from buying EVs.
As to EVs being heavier than comparable ICE vehicles because of the battery weight, could you point us to your sources of information about road damage and accident severity? A comparison with the oversized pickup trucks that currently fill our roads would be particularly useful.
And just because there was a switch from electric to gas vehicles 100 years ago, that does not preclude the world from switching back now. There have been some changes in the past century.
Concerning taxation. The time will come when all vehicles will upload their mileage to a govt platform which will apply taxes based upon that vehicles use age on the roads. Once tax income from gasoline purchased impact the public purse we can all be sure that there will be a process to replace the existing methods. The govt will get its revenues.
Hi Patrick,
I’m not an “EV hater” (almost bought one, myself). I just think they are not “ready for prime time” nor is our infrastructure prepared to meet the electrical demand (which you failed to address). You say that I am spreading a “litany of misinformation” but, are you sure that you are not being misinformed by those who have a vested interest in getting us to buy EVs? You also failed to address the increase in road damage due to the weight of the battery packs, along with the possible increase in lethal road accidents because of same. There is a reason why automobiles switched from electric to gasoline powered when they first started to be manufactured many decades ago–and it wasn’t because John D. Rockefeller bribed Henry Ford and other auto manufacturers.
Before accepting anything in Erin Jones’ litany of misinformation about EVs, one might fact-check using credible sources, such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency at https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/electric-vehicle-myths which covers several of them.
Having owned an EV for almost 3 years, I am aware that cold weather affects the range of an EV, just as it does an ICE vehicle. In Chicago, there are roughly 25,000 EVs, but it makes the news when a dozen or two cannot get to a charger because the driver didn’t plan ahead. If one is stuck in traffic, the heater in an EV works fine without the motor running, unlike in an ICE. Again, in the winter it makes sense for drivers of all types of vehicles to plan ahead.
EVs do catch fire, and the fires can be hard to extinguish. But the studies that I’ve seen show that the number of ICE fires per 1,000 cars is at least 10 times higher than the number of EV fires per 1,000. Of course, a single EV fire that burns down a building is enough to make the headlines and excite the EV haters.
EV vehicles are Justin Trudeaus dream of a pollution free world.
Trudeau cannot differentiate between the real and fantasy worlds that exist only in his mind.
He’s self centered and childish. The perfect politician. We will all pay the price?
I agree with all the critical comments on EVs: 1) In addition, the overall pollution from EVs is worse than that of Internal Combustion Engines (ICEs) when you add in the additional pollution from mining for and manufacturing the batteries. 2) Children (virtual slaves) are being used in impoverished nations to mine the minerals used in manufacturing EV batteries. 3) Real world experience is showing that EVs are just not practical in northern climates (see the mess in Chicago when it got very cold in January, and last year’s highway mess in Virginia; when there was a huge tie-up due to heavy snow. The people in battery powered cars couldn’t even keep warm, while they waited for rescue–unlike those who were able to run their heaters in ICE vehicles and were able to start them up when delivered more fuel, unlike EVs which had to be towed away to charging stations. 5) EVs make for much heavier vehicles (because of the very heavy battery packs) than the same size ICE vehicles. Has anyone calculated the additional cost to repair roads damaged by the additional weight? 6) How much more traffic mayhem will there be from colliding with the much heavier EV vehicles? 7) Since the Chinese are the number one manufacturer of EVs, we are subsidizing the Chinese automotive industry, at the expense of our own domestic auto manufacturing. 8) There is the real possibility that the battery pack could explode in the EV owner’s garage and burn the house down (as has already happened on the U.S. east coast, with relatively few EVs on the road). 9) Those who are cheer leading for EVs have not added in the calculated cost of replacing our aging electrical grid to accommodate complete conversion to EVs. Electrical engineers, when consulted, say that it cannot happen without major “beefing up” of our electrical grid–at an enormous cost; It would be much more cost-effective to “beef up” our public transportation sector.with a much smaller investment in it, rather than the infrastructure necessary for EV conversion 10) Makes much more sense to wait for hydrogen powered vehicles. They are non-polluting (water vapour is the lone emission from the tail pipe) and do not require many changes to our current ICE vehicle infrastructure. .
Waste of money. Its too cold in the north here because of winter. Electric cars do not work well in the cold. Charging is not very fast and I’ve heard that people are breaking these chargers to take the copper out.
Of course our taxes have to increase but setting aside $400.000 for the future expansion of the library is a little much.the hours of operation should be looked at.we have 2 libraries in the township paying out 2 salaries for 2 librarians.why not consider splitting the duties of 1 librarian for both locations.
We have plenty of space in the Dwight area that’ could be used at very little cost ,the school, seniors building, the community centre.
The library brings in very little revenue.
So it sounds like the Township might make a small amount of money from the lease agreements.
Hopefully they will not be using tax dollars to subsidize charging stations.
I’ve been wondering, how do EV’s contribute to the current “road tax” embedded in fuel tax added at the pump? This currently works well as it is proportional to the amount of fuel purchased, hence proportioned automatically so that drivers who use the roads more, pay more for the upkeep. This is a simple way to do it and It leaves the collection of this tax to a few large fuel supply companies so the actual collection is easy.
Is this tax now embedded in the rate for charging an EV at a charge station? Maybe so many $ per KWH used or some such system? It needs to be as regardless of if it is an EV or a Gas guzzler the vehicle uses the same road and creates the same potholes that need to be fixed along with other road maintenance. This would mean that the $/Kwh would be higher at a charger than at a home or industry to cover road maintenance.
Could some person “in the know” of these systems perhaps enlighten us with this information? The approximate dollar amounts, the method of applying and collecting the necessary tax?
How would it work if a person charges their EV at home, from their home account? This could be an issue that complicates the collection of the tax for roads.