Same goes for solar panel/roof installation, backup battery installation, burying power lines to improve storm resilience, etc. There's no shortage of infrastructure that needs to be built to modernize our system.
Trying to artificially protect jobs in one industry while there's a huge labor shortage in much more productive things like infrastructure modernization or housing construction seems like the antithesis of an efficient market.
Agreed. In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, my family lived without electricity for two weeks. We depended on our gasoline-powered truck to procure food and water, transport an ailing grandmother for medical care, and generally survive.
If we and others had depended on the existing electrical infrastructure to power our vehicles, we would have been completely screwed. A chaotic, uncomfortable situation would have become truly dangerous.
I appreciate that use of your vehicles was essential for you during the aftermath of Katrina. But I don't think emergency situations are a good enough rational for using a gasoline-powered car every day. As in many computer science problems, there are benefits from treating the worst case (e.g. medical transport after a natural disaster) and the average case (e.g. commuting to work) separately.
In general, I suspect electric is better in the average case, and gasoline in the case of emergencies. We see this with household power: most people power their houses with electricity, but may use a gas backup generator. For the similar reasons, we should probably drive electric cars to work but continue using gasoline-powered ambulances.
Trying to artificially protect jobs in one industry while there's a huge labor shortage in much more productive things like infrastructure modernization or housing construction seems like the antithesis of an efficient market.