If you support a policy but oppose its prerequisites, then you’re either a fool or a fraud. Or maybe both.

A realistic and sensible electric-car policy would support reliable, safe, environmentally friendly power to charge them — which means plants fired by nuclear power and fracked gas.

And it would endorse the safe, clean and humane extraction of the necessary minerals, which probably means deep-seabed mining.

If you’re against those things, you’re not being realistic and sensible, and your policy proposals — or demands or mandates, which is what the calls for electric cars have become — should be ignored and even mocked.

[Count me in for the latter. I don’t have any issues with EVs, as long as people can choose to buy them or not. But I do take issue with the idea that they are “greener” than IC cars, especially considering the extensive mining it takes to build them and the disposal problems at the end of their life cycles. The motive for enviros isn’t so much a “greener” planet but the elimination of personal choice, autonomous travel, and consolidation of humanity into megalopolises rather than decentralization. A decentralized populace is much tougher to control. — Ed]