> But in banning ICE cars and mandating the use of EVs, policymakers are explicitly betting on the truth of three crucial claims: > EVs will lead to “profou

> But in banning ICE cars and mandating the use of EVs, policymakers are explicitly betting on the truth of three crucial claims: > EVs will lead to “profound” reductions in CO2 emissions Seems so, okay. > EVs are now, or will soon be, cheaper than, and operationally equal to, ICE cars No, why? The governance bodies can ban fossil fuel vehicles and let the people figure out what they want to replace it with, if anything. This is not a required assumption (maybe required if you want to get re-elected, but I'm not even sure of that). > There is a diminishing role for the automobile in modern times; in effect, there is a generational realignment in how citizens seek personal mobility. How about "the regulation will diminish the role of the automobile"? The law doesn't have to be reactive. It can drive change, too, and a lot of people want that change.