> The point, which is very well known at this point, is that manufacturing EVs actually causes much higher emissions than ICE cars. In other words, at time of p

> The point, which is very well known at this point, is that manufacturing EVs actually causes much higher emissions than ICE cars. In other words, at time of purchase, buying an EV is worse for the environment than buying an ICE car. At the point of purchase, buying a reusable water bottle is worse for the environment than buying a disposable water bottle. This is not a complete argument. > Since EVs are cleaner to drive but not manufacturer, it takes time for EVs to emit less emissions overall. That's what I have mentioned and the chart in page 6 mentions. It takes tens of thousands of miles of use for EVs to have less cumulative emissions than ICE cars. Vehicles last about 12 years on the road (on average in the USA). Average miles per year is over 12,000. It seems like your argument implies that EVs very very easily save emissions over their life, and probably massively since they will pay for their own emissions 4 or 5 times over their life. This assumes that EVs don't have a longer life on the road than gas vehicles, but it is reasonable to think they could last longer. > So this is just one component that shows EVs are not strictly better. No, it absolutely does not show that. It shows that you can arbitrarily pick a moment in time where an individual EV is behind in terms of emissions, but that over the average life they are STRICTLY BETTER. If on average they are strictly better, then net they are strictly better (this is how averages work). > Given people usually buy new cars fairly frequently, it's very possible that EVs are a wash in terms of environmental impact This is a very stupid thing for you to say. You don't get to just make up nonsense and draw conclusions from it. This isn't something you get to just say 'people like buying cars, therefore they won't drive them enough to save emissions'. You have to look at data and extrapolate from the data, and the data says you are just being ridiculous. The data is very clear, and you aren't even remotely close to being correct. It's extremely easy to check this. You don't care though, because you want to try to get to the conclusion that EVs are bad, rather than try to figure it out. Watch how easy it is to check: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/19/business/electric-vehicles-carbon-footprint-batteries.html#:~:text=%E2%80%9CAll%20studies%20agree%20that%20electric,faster%20you'll%20recoup.%E2%80%9D https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/19/business/electric-vehicle... All studies agree ... electric vehicles save between 50 and 70 percent CO2