Technically correct but missing the point. Conventionally, burning things, PV, wind, etc. are all classified as "creating energy" even if it makes thermodynamics pedants unhappy.

>yes, the rich nations might get a head start, but they represent such a small fraction of emissions.

Not really for automotive emissions. The US alone accounts for almost half the world's road CO2 emissions.

Its not practical. The extra energy costs act like a high tax.

It might make sense, for a while with aircraft, or for a classic car that rarely gets used, but would be too expensive for developing nations to use when they have other options. They'd save lots of money by using the same energy directly in newly built (or converted) EVs.

I really hate this "overnight" argument, because it's used to avoid starting. Nobody claims that we can switch to EVs over night. We could however switch to only producing EVs in like two to five years and fifteen to twenty years later almost all cars could be EVs. That's plenty of time to fortify the electric grid for the extra demand and build adequate numbers of charging points for people without garages.