Well most EVs are heavier thus are more hazardous to other vehicles and drivers. They are heavier so do more road damage. They are more hazardous to emergency workers who have to deal with the hazardous materials and the greater fire and electrocution risks. The batteries and electronics components are hazmat so will have to dealt with locally. Globally, the raw material extraction then manufacture of the base components, primarily in places like China, is extremely environmentally damaging. Once the useful life of such components and vehicles is used up some can be recycled at great expense but other portions have to be stored in long term hazmat storage facilities. The carbon fiber and nano carbon fiber used in the frames and bodies of many of these vehicles, to help offset some of the greater mass of the battery, is currently considered hazmat so has to be stored in long term secure facilities. No one knows what to do with most of it, a situation similar to the dilemma associated with the carbon fiber primary structures of wind turbines. Much of that crap may have an environmental half life of millions of years or more. Then charging the EV batteries will require greater grid density of outlets and place a greater strain on the regional power grid. Just as with powering AI, the gas lighting continues about how increasing EV use won’t or doesn’t increase the cost of electricity to average consumer. Possibly the largest public gas lighting effort currently under way that is conveniently flying under the complicit MSM’s radar. Please explain the economic principle where increased demand without comparable increased supply doesn’t increase cost? No mystery at all why Kansas is considering increased fees. And I’m sure Waste Management ( aka Big Green) is busy lobbying conversely for more EV use without offset fee or penalty,

After all they have continually attempted to corner much of the government contract market for handling and storing such waste. What a system…