>>Charging an electric vehicle through a charger tied to the grid requires fossil fuels.

That's a function of where the power is coming from. In MA (where I am) power generation is billed separately from power conduction. I've been able to sign up for a renewables/solar/wind-only plan. It's marginally more expensive than the standard (which is nat gas with some renewables mixed in - as the state requires a minimum). So, a contrary example that disproves your absolutist statement.

That said, for consumption, it's more a matter of what sources are used to power your grid. If it's coal, driving a Tesla is not an environmental 'win'.

And I'd agree on lithium being a major issue. I tend to see CA's 2035 deadline as something that might push automotive battery technology. There are already quite a few contenders for grid-scale energy storage that do NOT use lithium - but those are stationary (I'd guess one of the 'flow' chemistries will win there but WTH do I know?)