> EVs still cause massive inefficiency in infrastructure and living. They require obscene amounts of energy to make and run (just less obscene than similarly oversized ICEs).
Maybe, but there's no sense in optimizing for those things in the midst of a climate crisis. Yes, if we could flip a switch and everyone could start cycling, that would help the climate crisis enormously, but there is no such switch and in reality it would be completely reorganizing our society which is not a viable project in the timeframe the climate demands.
> They cause local and global pollution.
They cause less pollution per passenger mile than the average diesel bus.
> The only upside is they are so inefficient they might induce the public to buy grid storage directly.
They are strictly more efficient than the status quo, and especially where it counts: miles traveled per unit carbon emission. This is the overriding concern.
> Places like istanbul or toronto prove that it can be done in less time than an EV transition will take (and in toronto's case in the face of massive political opposition).
Istanbul and Toronto are more densely populated than almost anywhere in the United States. Of course public transit investment works there. Moreover, they're individual small places--we're talking about public transit infrastructure for the entirety of the United States--there aren't enough public transit infrastructure firms in the world to get that done, and developing experienced people to do that work takes decades and considerable expense.
> Getting the political will starts with not concern trolling with lies every time it comes up.
I would say that smugness and self-righteousness from the anti-car people is the biggest obstacle to political will. I don't think the people bringing a dose of reality to the anti-car party are doing any meaningful harm.