ICE has thousands of uses, they aren't just for cars.
An example? Up above the treeline, there are communities relying on diesel for power.
Solar is a no go, with months of darkness. Wind turbines are hard to maintain at -50C, and snow and ice can impede them.
Even electric cars can only cover some of car use-cases, both due to range and refuel time issues.
Expect ICE in 2050 still.
And in most places, electric cars take petrol out of the car, and instead, see things like coal or natural gas burned, to make the electricity to charge them.
> And in most places, electric cars take petrol out of the car, and instead, see things like coal or natural gas burned, to make the electricity to charge them.
This is true, but also a good thing, while you present it as at best a wash and possibly a negative.
Coal powered EVs are better than gasoline ICEs in most situations, and nobody has a 100% coal grid anymore so the benefits are even greater. There's lots of reasons why but the main one, which is relevant to this conversation as well, is the inefficiency of ICE compared with electric motors.
What is more green? Coal or natural gas plants, AC lines that lose some power, building transformers, using AC to DC converters for all our power supplies, refining rare earth minerals to make decaying chemical cells, and using brushless motors (I think?) versus oil drilling with huge machines, refineries, transport and risks of oil spills, and building combustion engines? ICE looks like it can be way more efficient.
Yes. It's actually one of the things that makes EVs greener. A lump of valuable metals in one relatively easy to access and pure form is a lot greener thing to have than a decade of combusted fossil fuels.
