Net positives mean something, though. We want a 10/10 solution, but saying an achievable 6/10 is the same as no change at all is exactly what the people who oppose us want us to think. That if we can’t get rid of every car on the road, we might as well have done nothing. That’s terrible! Of course we can make things incrementally better!

We all want cars to generally go away from what should be walkable areas. Replace them with public transit and bikes and just walking. That kind of culture shift is going to take generations. Less smog and carbon dioxide being spewed into the air is a good thing. (Provided the trend towards solar and wind power continues.)

It’s easier because I can make the decision myself and I can do it without much planning or coordination. I replace my car periodically anyway, so there may be no real difference (in my case my ice car was nine years old and I needed something for my teens to use, so an EV was the logical choice)

Modifying a city for walkability takes many years, decades, even assuming everyone else agrees, politicians are supportive, and there is some sort of budget. We can’t afford to just wait for the ideal solution

Assuming people get electric vehicles when their combustion cars reach end of life and not just trading in a four year old SUV for its electric variant, the I think it is.

Ignoring the ideal wherein privately owned vehicles decrease over time, of course. Continued development of EVs will be a benefit in terms of battery technology and motor efficiency, among other things.