[willio58]

I don’t think that year figure changing really matters though.

Let’s say Germany halves its CO2 output in 25 years instead. What does that mean? Does it mean we should all stop buying EVs now and just buy combustion engine vehicles for eternity? Nope.

[bartislartfast]

The biggest environmental concern always cited for EVs is the source of electricity, which has a decent chance of being renewable, going forward. Fossil fuel ICEs have zero chance. They will always be dirty.

The second biggest concern is mining for the lithium used in EVs, which hopefully soon will be a much smaller concern as Sodium batteries become the norm. Again, there is a risk we could still be mining lithium in 20 years, but it's a risk rather than a certainty.

[aseerdbnarng]

It might mean the switch to EVs are insufficient if it bakes in unrealistic expectations of future benefits. The cost and subsidies to EVs might be better spent elsewhere. I’m not making a comment on pro/against EVs only that the cited paper makes an assumption I believe to be overly optimistic

[nine_k]

Germany halving its CO2 output would be commendable, but likely not enough to offset even a moderate increase of CO2 production by China, India, and the growing economies of Africa and Asia. They just can't afford switching to electric processes unless solar / wind plus storage, or nuclear, is a clearly and significantly cheaper option. (Which it is not yet.)