This is the kind of comment that sounds "wise" and "realistic". But it's important to think a bit deeper.

Existing electricity generation goes to powering existing consumers. We'd burn those fossil fuels whether or not we bought more electric cars. Electric cars are a new electricity consumer. So the source of energy for this additional electricity is what matters.

In 2022, 83% of new electric capacity was from renewable sources. [1]

We can quibble about timing issues. For example, there's a lot of solar energy during the day but electric cars are often charged at night. But it's clear that renewable energy and electric cars are rising together.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_renewable...

Not exactly. Power plants + EV is more efficient than burning gas in an ICE. Plus you remove the pollution from population centers. And of course the EV will get greaner over its lifespan as electricity production is transitioned away from fossil fuels.

This is factually inaccurate. EVs from a fossil fuel grid are still cleaner than internal combustion (“well to wheel”). The grid keeps getting cleaner every year, a combustion vehicle burns petroleum its entire life.

An ICE vehicle will always and forever run on fossil fuels. An EV may start its life getting electricity generated from fossil fuels but can get its power from whatever the generation changes to

This is level 1 thinking. Go a bit deeper buddy, you can do it!

Efficiencies of Scale is a thing, as is specialization of technology.

Power plants can run at near constant rpm, and power thousands of households; inspections of emissions equipment and practices at that site can be enforced and fixed. Versus the same thousands of cars, a few have a check engine light on, a few have a leaking oil gasket, a few have a worn out ignition system, some of them bought contaminated gas. Any parking lot oil stain disproves you.