While you are right that opposition to oil companies is as old as time, you are wrong if you are suggesting that oil companies do not have a vested interest in stopping the development of EVs. Look at any major O&G company's financial statements and their most profitable division is the "downstream" division, which is where the refined products are located. The most important refined products are "transportation fuels" which includes gasoline.
Also, major O&G companies, through the API, are the biggest funders of climate change skepticism, anti-EV campaigns, and supporters of methane recapture, carbon taxes and higher gas taxes. Why would O&G companies support methane recapture and higher taxes? Simple, gas and carbon taxes are consumption taxes paid by the customer, not them, so they don't give a shit. Methane recapture is literally paying Exxon to put back into the ground what they emitted for free!! When I was an Econ major in college, my very conservative econ professor would call the releasing of methane a "negative externality" that Oil companies should pay for through taxes. Only in America would we allow a company to charge us for the right to fix the problems they caused.
I don't disagree that EV production is not a clean process, but it is still cleaner than O&G development. Now, I would take this more seriously if the Auto and especially the O&G industries, were investing in developing ICEs that worked on natural gas, or hydrogen fuel cells. Problem is, the amount of R&D spent on this is miniscule, mainly because they are not commercially viable. EVs are, because battery tech has leapfrogged them in the last 5 years.
Finally, why can't Exxon, Chevron, Shell or BP invest in battery technologies? They definitely got the money. If they don't its because they are too busy paying out dividends to trust fund brats (no its not widows and orphans, and if it is a widow, its a Rockefeller).
While you are right that opposition to oil companies is as old as time, you are wrong if you are suggesting that oil companies do not have a vested interest in stopping the development of EVs. Look at any major O&G company's financial statements and their most profitable division is the "downstream" division, which is where the refined products are located. The most important refined products are "transportation fuels" which includes gasoline.
Also, major O&G companies, through the API, are the biggest funders of climate change skepticism, anti-EV campaigns, and supporters of methane recapture, carbon taxes and higher gas taxes. Why would O&G companies support methane recapture and higher taxes? Simple, gas and carbon taxes are consumption taxes paid by the customer, not them, so they don't give a shit. Methane recapture is literally paying Exxon to put back into the ground what they emitted for free!! When I was an Econ major in college, my very conservative econ professor would call the releasing of methane a "negative externality" that Oil companies should pay for through taxes. Only in America would we allow a company to charge us for the right to fix the problems they caused.
I don't disagree that EV production is not a clean process, but it is still cleaner than O&G development. Now, I would take this more seriously if the Auto and especially the O&G industries, were investing in developing ICEs that worked on natural gas, or hydrogen fuel cells. Problem is, the amount of R&D spent on this is miniscule, mainly because they are not commercially viable. EVs are, because battery tech has leapfrogged them in the last 5 years.
Finally, why can't Exxon, Chevron, Shell or BP invest in battery technologies? They definitely got the money. If they don't its because they are too busy paying out dividends to trust fund brats (no its not widows and orphans, and if it is a widow, its a Rockefeller).