> These artisanal mines, which account for up to a quarter of the country’s production, have been found to be dangerous and employ child labour.

That per se, however deplorable, doesn't destroy the Earth like oil. This part of the article is not comparing equal categories of harm, which is an error of critical reasoning.

> To begin with, about half the lifetime carbon-dioxide emissions from an electric car come from the energy used to produce the car, especially in the mining and processing of raw materials needed for the battery.

The ratio indicating how the CO2 is split between production and operation is not informative. Only the absolute amounts matter.

An fossil-fuel-burning car doesn't feature clean production just because the CO2 it produces over its lifetime of operation happens to dwarf the CO2 emitted in its production.

Since the operational CO2 emission of an EV is low, it actually looks quite good that this low emission over its operational lifetime is only matched by the emission in production; one might expect it to be substantially surpassed.

Some of the emission in the production of an EV, including all the mining, comes from the use of fossil burning equipment which could, in principle, be replaced by electric equipment.

> Once on the road, the carbon dioxide emissions of EVs depends on the power-generation fuel used to recharge its battery. If it comes mostly from coal-fired power plants, it will lead to about 15 ounces of carbon-dioxide for every mile it is driven—three ounces more than a similar gasoline-powered car.

Where the electricity comes from isn't a function of the car; that is just stupid. The electric vehicle is not specifically dependent on coal.

If the electricity comes mostly from coal-fired plants, you likely have your idiot politicians to thank, and other forces that keep the fossil fuel industry cemented in place.

Of course, the engineers who work hard to deliver electric cars to the world do not envision them being run by coal power.

While we are at it, why don't we count the CO2 emitted by all the concrete that goes into a hydro dam, and so on.

> Even without reference to the source of electricity used for battery charging, if an EV is driven 50,000 miles over its lifetime, the huge initial emissions from its manufacture means the EV will actually have put more carbon-dioxide in the atmosphere than a similar-size gasoline-powered car driven the same number of miles.

{citation needed}

This smells made up, and doesn't quite jive with the earlier claims that the production CO2 of an EV is so low that it's comparable to the operational CO2.

> It is egregious that EV subsides are funded by the average tax-payer so that the rich can buy their EVs at subsidized prices.

The average tax payer breathes air. If your neighbors drive EVs, that's good for you, even if you don't.

Author forgot to say how EV's are stealthily quiet and sneak up on children and animals to run them over. Oh, and what about the risks of electrocution, the poisonous ozone generated by electric arcs that occur in motors, and other bogeymen. Right, and the tires of an EV still shed carbon, and if that weren't bad enough, you will still have to change the wiper blades, which are made of vulcanized rubber that can't be recycled. And think of the VOC emissions from the windshield wiper fluid; if a kid drinks that stuff, they can go blind!