Pretty frustrating that they compare cobalt and rare earth to sustainability concerns for biomass and fossil fuels. Neither are required. To use Tesla as an exa

Pretty frustrating that they compare cobalt and rare earth to sustainability concerns for biomass and fossil fuels. Neither are required. To use Tesla as an example (because that's what the article used): Tesla's Model Ses originally had no rare earth magnets whatsoever in their motors, being induction motors, and Lithium Iron Phosphate batteries, used for most of Tesla's cars in China (where that chemistry is more common), use zero Cobalt. Plus in both cases, the substances aren't used up and destroyed as in fossil fuels but reused again and again, hundreds or thousands of times (and at end of life can be recycled), making the problem literally orders of magnitude less dramatic than with fossil fuels. It's really frustrating that it's so common to try to shoe-horn electric cars into the old narrative, but it's just a completely different story as fossil fuels. That isn't to say you CAN'T have problems with ethical mining, or ethical anything, but it just is not anything at all like the problems associated with fossil fuels. It doesn't make sense to collapse a complete different set of issues into the existing narrative, and to do it to generate clicks is reprehensible. You would think, with a title like "lost history of the electric car," they would do a small amount of research around lithium ion chemistry and rare earth metals and actually inform the viewer instead of repeating tired misconceptions that the semi-informed have.