Good point, but big power plants are more efficient (thermal efficiency). So there is some reduction in energy emissions, just not as much. Maybe not enough to compensate for the emissions cost of new materials and mining battery materials.when you consider where that energy came from in the first place (typically fossil), they are less efficient, full stop. Unless or until we use renewables, EVs are worse for the environment, even though they have zero tailpipe emissions
The only published research I've seen about it (and I'm not in the field, I don't follow the field closely, so take that with a giant grain of salt) concluded that EVs contribute more CO2 than a comparable IC in the majority of places in the US. I don't remember the numbers, but they had it broken down by what percent of coal and natural gas it takes to break even. IIRC the only places in the country that passed the test were in the West where they have a large percentage of solar and hydro. Obviously that should change over time as we integrate more renewables, but I was mostly just trying to point out that "EVs pollute less" has become sort of a heuristic for thinking green, when in reality the subject is complex. And it's more complicated by the fact that every asshole who owns a Tesla wants their car to go 0-60 in 3s, which, you know, takes the same amount of power whether it's gas or battery. "Gas guzzler" is such a pejorative lobbed at SUV/pickup drivers (and not without reason), but nobody who drives a sports car EV should get to use it. And yes, the mining and recycling of batteries is another topic that hasn't gotten a lot of attention that is also non-trivial. I only know enough to know that I don't know much about it. But my wife, who's well-placed at GM, tells me that it's one of those issues that Musk just says, "Fuck it, we'll figure it out later," while legacy companies worry about litigation and shit.