Yeah, because everyone will either buy used fossil fuel cars or buy new electric cars that are refueled with electricity that was produced by burning fossil fuels. Unless we discover a different way to generate electricity, we will come to the conclusion that our energy demands outstrip our energy production. The discovery would have to be something amazing though, like cold fusion.
I mean you can try slapping a solar panel on your Tesla but it won't generate enough electricity in a day to move a car.
2035 seems optimistic. Especially with with all the undiscovered oil reserves. Who needs a life-nurturing environment when you can save money?
The current EV technology causes more damage to the environment when compared to the gasoline vehicles. Mining Lithium, Cobalt and Nickel has devastated ecologically sensitive areas of the world. If you have a doubt regarding this, then please visit Norilsk or the Democratic Republic of Congo. And it is not just the batteries. Most of the electricity that is used to run these EVs come from burning fossil fuels - natural gas, or even more polluting fuels such as coal, lignite or naphtha. EVs seems to be more polluting than gasoline vehicles at this point.
It is undeniablethat nickel, cobalt, and lithium extraction has a negative impact on the environment. Two striking instances of ecological destruction are the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Norilsk. But surely there's no harm in pushing the boundaries, giving the situation a closer look, and delving further into the long-term consequences?
Renewables are seeing a fast transformation in the field of energy production, signaling a change. It is important to weigh the potential for cleaner, sustainable energy against the short-term environmental costs associated with EV production. Although it is a transitory problem, EVs emit more pollution than gasoline-powered cars. The environmental equation will probably shift in favor of EVs as clean energy sources are gradually deployed.