The full agenda — with receipts

Federal opening remarks typically signal how Ottawa frames transit and infrastructure spending priorities for the year ahead — watch for cues on ZETF successor funding, procurement rules, and whether zero-emission bus targets remain on the same timeline. For charging professionals, this sets the political backdrop for every technical session that follows.

A municipal mayor's keynote is worth watching for what it reveals about the gap between federal ZEB mandates and the on-the-ground reality of a mid-size transit agency's depot electrification budget, land constraints and grid capacity. Burlington's experience is a useful proxy for hundreds of similarly sized Canadian systems facing the same infrastructure math.

Framing transit as national security is a novel funding argument, not yet a proven policy lever — the session should clarify whether this translates into actual capital commitments or remains rhetorical. Charging infrastructure planners should listen for whether 'crisis-ready networks' implies redundant power supply and resilience requirements beyond current depot design standards.

ZETF is the single largest federal program shaping zero-emission bus and charging deployment in Canada, so a province-by-province outcomes comparison is a rare chance to see real deployment data rather than projections. Differences by agency size matter directly to charging vendors — small agencies face different utility, capital and depot constraints than large ones, and procurement strategy should follow suit.

Equity and ridership data gaps directly affect where charging infrastructure and service expansion get prioritized, since route planning decisions increasingly compete for the same capital as electrification. Anyone sizing depot or on-route charging investment should care how agencies are weighting these newer data inputs against traditional ridership counts.

RNG is a direct competitor to electrification for agencies weighing near-term decarbonization against battery-electric capital costs and grid readiness, so this session's life-cycle and cost data matters for anyone building the business case for charging infrastructure investment. The key question: under what fleet size, route profile or timeline does RNG win out over electrification, and where do the two coexist rather than compete.

No description provided — attendees should judge relevance based on the announced speaker and topic once confirmed.

Hydrogen fuel cell buses remain a niche compared to battery-electric in Canadian fleets, so this session's real test is whether 'hydrogen as a service' and de-risked contracting models can scale procurement volume rather than stay pilot-bound. For charging infrastructure planners, the relevant question is how agencies split capital and depot design decisions between hydrogen and electric pathways once contracts move past pilot stage.

Buy Canadian requirements tied to federal transit funds directly affect charging equipment and bus supply chains, potentially reshaping vendor selection and lead times for agencies procuring under CPTF or Building Communities Strong Fund. The open question is whether domestic manufacturing capacity for chargers and EVSE components can actually meet mandated timelines without inflating costs or delaying deployment.

Inductive charging has struggled to move beyond pilots due to interoperability and cost barriers versus plug-in conductive systems — this session should clarify whether standards have matured enough for multi-vendor deployment. Retrofitting existing buses instead of buying new ones is the more consequential angle for fleet operators watching capital costs, since it changes the total cost calculus for switching charging methods mid-fleet-life.

No description provided — value depends on whether the closing speaker addresses concrete next steps or funding commitments rather than a general summary.

Day two opening remarks typically recap day one takeaways and set the agenda for more technical or funding-focused sessions ahead — worth attending mainly for any new announcements not covered on day one.

Arc flash exposure and PPE gaps are real liabilities as depots electrify, yet most transit agencies lack certified training pipelines for high-voltage charging work. For charging professionals, the question is whether standardized safety curricula and workforce credentials can keep pace with deployment schedules, or whether labor shortages become the next bottleneck after infrastructure.

Poster sessions surface early-stage data and pilot results that haven't yet made it into vendor pitch decks — often the most honest read on what's actually working in the field. Worth scanning for niche findings on charging reliability, utility coordination, or fleet performance that won't appear in mainstage talks.

The 2:1 bus-to-charger ratio and full depot rebuild have become industry defaults, but they're expensive assumptions rarely stress-tested against smart charging and existing grid headroom. This session matters because if 1:1 replacement is viable without capital-intensive teardown, it changes the capex math for every agency currently budgeting for electrification.

Hydrogen and other zero-emission technologies have accumulated years of pilot data but little fleet-wide adoption, and the gap is rarely about the technology itself — it's risk allocation, procurement rules, and who eats the cost of failure. Charging professionals should listen for concrete barriers named here, since the same scaling friction often applies directly to depot charging rollouts.

Academic research clusters shape which technical standards, safety protocols, and workforce pipelines eventually reach commercial deployment, so how they're funded and structured matters to anyone relying on that pipeline for talent or R&D partnerships. The real questions here: what funding models actually sustain multidisciplinary EV/zero-emission research beyond initial grants, and do the new transit-focused degree programs address the specific technical gaps charging and fleet operators report today? Anyone competing for public research dollars or hiring from these programs should care how 'success' is being defined.

No description provided — the value here depends entirely on the speaker's platform and what signal they send on industry direction, funding, or policy.

No description provided — closing keynotes typically frame takeaways for the conference; substance depends on who's speaking and what commitments or data they bring.