In the dirtiest case -- a combined-cycle power plant. Those gets between 50% and 60% of the available chemical energy in the fuel, which gets reasonably close to the peak theoretical efficiency of the Carnot cycle.

The average internal combustion engine gets less than half that. High efficiency diesel gets close, but still falls short.

So, in the best case for gas vehicles, on the highway, an electric vehicle uses fossil fuels somewhere about twice as efficiently as a gas car. On top of that, an electric vehicle recharges its batteries when it brakes, and spends no energy when idling, which is important for city traffic, and (for buses) when stopping frequently at stops.

Counting the full life cycle of an electric vehicle, including recycling the batteries, they're between 30% and 50% more efficient.

On top of that, a power plant has room for larger and more effective air scrubbers, and ejects whatever pollution those miss relatively far away from major population centers, improving air quality.

And, now that it's becoming cheaper to build new solar plants than to keep existing coal plants running, electric vehicles get cleaner with no additional work over time, while gas keeps spewing fumes near the places that people live.

Not trying to be a wise ass but look: “Charging stations are powered by whatever the power grid runs on, which might include oil, coal, and natural gas. If you want to ensure that your car is powered by renewable energy, you'll need to seek out charging stations that are powered by wind or solar.”

So I don’t see how this is any better or doing what they keep saying it is intended to do.

Not to mention the energy that is used to mine the lithium and other things that these battery operated cars require.