We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Somebody here posted that some greenie told them that electricity was clean, and came from the wall. I picture lots of mice in the walls on treadmills, powering generators. But even those mice have to be fed.
It sounds like you've done this before. How well does it work? :-)
One part of this equation is the pollution. It is easier to control emissions from a single source than from many.
Having said that, this whole electric cars are a boondogle for now and maybe for a long time. They have their advantages, but with the subsidies, people who do not buy them are helping to pay for their development and sales. One of the cool things about regular capitalism (as opposed to the kind we now practice), is that the cost of development of new technologies is usually born by the wealthier since they are the ones who buy the new toys first when they are very expensive. Later, the price comes down because of economies of scale and better production, then the "unwashed" get in the game - reaping the benefits of the development paid for early purchasers. Of course, if it turns out to be a bad idea, then in general, only the wealthier people are stuck with a lemon, not everybody.
Collectivism not only spreads any gains but also the pains and since the giverment is the decision maker, there are likely to be a lot more pains than gains.
I've heard card carrying PETA members claim that "if you have to eat meat, at least buy it at the supermarket so no amimals get killed making it".
After that one, I am willing to believe any claimed idiotic statement from greenies.
Electric cars run on grid current, which means mostly coal. True enough. If CO2 were meaningful in the climate, which it ain't, managing the CO2 production at the coal plant would be easier than managing CO2 in every gas engine, but it's stupid to manage CO2 anyway.
There are other, real pollution issues with coal and even with natural gas or nuclear power, and with gas or diesel engines. Electricity can come from hydro or solar, but not at reasonable cost. IF (big IF) electricity can be generated cheaper and cleaner than using petroleum fuels, AND IF battery ranges could be extended quite a lot, THEN electric cars would make sense. Even now, if the batteries were cheaper and had decent legs, the energy element actually favors electricity from coal or other sources over petroleum fuels. It's the other elements -- range, time to refuel or recharge, cost -- that are keeping conventional vehicles more practical than electrics. Engineering will produce answers better than politics will.