Hasbeen, did you see Ford v Ferrari movie? I thought it was pretty good.

Yes, cost and disposal of batteries needs to be discussed much more

Chris I believe that, if we are still allowed private ownership of transport, ultimately it will be the full circle, & back to steam power. The steam will be generated by a chip of nuclear material, installed for the life of the vehicle on the assembly line.

We had a big kerfuffle last night on the news about a big hydrogen plant to be established near Gladstone. They did not fully disclose the means of generating the hydrogen, but it is just another way of milking the taxpayer of subsidies, which ever way is used. It is not economically viable, & is no more ecologically helpful than plant based ethanol.

Any current technology using electricity to generate this problem material has a net loss of near or above 50% loss on the energy input to the energy contained in the hydrogen produced. The losses in converting electricity to hydrogen, then the hydrogen back to electricity are huge. It makes more sense to use the electricity to power the cars, but not as much sense as to use petroleum. Using the steam conversion of natural gas method produces even more CO2 than simply burning the gas in an engine.

It doesn't take all that much math to be able to see that CO2 can not do what the warmists claim it does, so we must have millions who know it can't happen. I wonder why they go along with the scam?

Hydrogen will never be a source of energy. Unlike coal, oil or natural gas, hydrogen rarely occurs naturally – it must be manufactured, and that process consumes far more energy than the hydrogen fuel can recover. It's also dangerous; and environmentally unsound: for every ton of hydrogen generated 9 tons of fresh water would be removed from the area.

Also hydrogen cars cannot be parked in underground car parks.
My son's father in law in the UK managed a factory building busses.
They started building hydrogen buses and had to rebuild the roof of the factory.
Gave that business away, the fuel cell lifetime was too short.

However that was an aside, four years ago at the AGM of Royal Dutch Shell the CEO
announced the company had formed a development group to study how the
company is to exit the oil industry !
A google search revealed a number of steps have been made on that path.
British Petroleum have aslo made similar moves.
Their stated reason is that it has become do difficult to finance
exploration and development of new oil fields. It just wasn't worth it.

Then perhaps, no coincidence, a couple of years later all the motor
companies started announcing their electric car plans.
Do you think someone had a word in their ears ?

A lot of people are using ex EV batteries as home batteries with their
solar cells for off grid systems as they still have a lot of useful life left.

There is no way of turning every vehicle in the World to other than fossil fuel. Life itself is dependent on carbon, its consumption and discharge. Take India with a population of 1,390,537,387 people, to put everyone of them on electric bikes, will reduce their standard of living.

Joesphus, they are all on bikes now so do they reduce their standards?
With low cost bikes I don't think it would make much difference either way.
There are companies already recycling batteries and in the future I
would expect it to become more productive. There will be no progress
in Australia on that business as it is too small at present.

It is said that EVs will become same as ICs by 2025 but---.
The cheapest at present is the MG at $42,000. It is Chinese made as
they bought the company.

Here was a laugh, California is banning petrol lawn mowers, edge cutters,
whipper snippers etc etc.