Yay so we can switch to batteries that produce more carbon emissions in their production than the fuel the vehicle is spitting out. Ultimately just make the problem worse if you think about it.
It appears to be quite a nuanced picture.
Put a bunch of hydro, nukes, solar or wind in the mix and you're rapidly down to 200 or 300 gCO2/kWh. Nobody's ambition for 2030 ought to be as high as 500 gCO2/kWh electricity, if that's what you're expecting we're screwed.
I've always been slightly sceptical about the claims, just because the costs are so high. If you assume money is a reasonable proxy for energy then the high acquisition costs imply more emissions.
Everything points to money being a very poor proxy for energy. Part of our problem with climate change is that energy is usually one of the smallest contributors to cost, making incredibly wasteful supply chains economically preferable.
https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/figures/correlation-...
It needs to become normal (and desirable) to walk and cycle short journeys, and to take public transport - especially in urban areas that currently suffer from poor air quality and congestion.
And are you saying that production of electric cars produces significantly more emissions than petrol?
The actual production of an EV _can_ result in more emissions (along the whole supply chain) than petrol cars, yes.
Although the vast majority of car manufacturers (and supply companies) are geared up for producing petrol cars and not EVs, so it's no real surprise that _right now_ electric cars aren't as efficient to build.
The more that electric cars are produced, and the more that Li-ion/solid-state batteries are developed, the better the picture will be at the building stage.