Seems like another bait article intentionally-espousing an unpopular/wrong/un-held position to elicit "engagement" IYAM, basically trolling the readers. If not

Seems like another bait article intentionally-espousing an unpopular/wrong/un-held position to elicit "engagement" IYAM, basically trolling the readers. If not and the journalist were authentically dim, then leave it to the pessimism of British MSM to smear FUD like Nutella on specific, immediate, essential solutions to an existential emergency so we can delay, bikeshed, and hand-wring about how ICEs, burning FFs, and net positive GHGEs are so much better than all this EV claptrap. In the larger picture, it seems like there's always a social opportunist who will automatically espouse the opposite of a prevailing-but-sensible view to garner some sort of following.. like flat earthers but without meetings or conventions.