Josephus, all the things you mention are just p%$%^dling load compared
to cars. As the change to EVs takes off the governments will have no
problem getting Nuclear or coal powered stations built.
Already by that time it will be obvious that
"When the Wind Doesn't Blow----"
Something else will be installed. Even now over 50% want nuclear.

No one wants to go back to freezing in the dark. (like Europe).

Yawn.

A few facts for the fact free zone perhaps.

"So on the basis of recent studies, fossil-fuelled cars generally emit more than electric cars in all phases of a life cycle. The total life cycle emissions from a fossil-fuelled car and an electric car in Australia were 333g of CO2; per km and 273g of CO2; per km, respectively. That is, using average grid electricity, EVs come out about 18% better in terms of their carbon footprint.

Likewise, electric cars in New Zealand work out a lot better than fossil-fuelled cars in terms of emissions, with life-cycle emissions at about 333 g of CO2; per km for fossil-fuelled cars and 128g of CO2; per km for electric cars. In New Zealand, EVs perform about 62% better than fossil cars in carbon footprint terms."
http://theconversation.com/climate-explained-the-environmental-footprint-of-electric-versus-fossil-cars-124762

So the higher the renewable energy generation in a country the greater the benefit of electric vehicles.

No brainer really, except for the brainless that is.

What have electric cars got to do with reducing co2 generation ?

Has been,
Just as a point of interest the pneumatic systems in Sydney used mostly double rotor car superchargers as air pumps, I forget which breed.

The conversation, come on SR.