Whether you are digging a hole for the metal (steel), or rubber (tire), or melting glass, all takes energy. Looking at just the SMALL difference of how it stores the energy is completely missing the point. That is rounding error comparing to the total energy consumed in creating that car.
The amount of cost to create the car is in tens of thousands (USD). The cost of fuel is in thousands over the life of the car. That alone should tell you that the cost of creation of the car consumes an order of magnitude more resources. Just maintenance cost alone exceeds the fuel cost over the life of the car. Energy is the currency of nature. You can't avoid it. The tens of thousands spend goes into creating yet more pollution. The car salesman use his commission to take his kids to dinner, that is yet more energy consumed... The car maker use his income to fly to Disney, that is yet more energy consumed.
Want to be less an energy hog? Buy the cheapest of anything. The less it cost, the less resource was consumed in creating it.
That is completely untrue - all of it, I'm afraid. Costs and energy used to create are not related in the manner you suggest. And you forgot to cite the source for EV's being much worse polluters
I
did not say EV is a worst source of polluter. I suspect they are but I did not say that. I have such suspicion because battery (lithium, nickel) is so harmful to the environment so much so that you can not dispose normally.
What I did say was: since EV is made like other vehicles, all the pollution factors are the same except for how they store energy. How energy is stored is a small fraction of the pollution as compare to other pollution done during manufacturing of the car, during disposal of the car, and the maintenance of the car, so forth. Thus, you are working on improving just the rounding error.
I fail to see how a modified drive-energy storage would make manufacturing of the windshield more "e-friendly", and would make the manufacturing of the leather seat e-friendly... Those other things consume far more energy than merely moving the car during it's expected life.
As I said in my analogy, if you keep the guts of the $5 DT830B DMM, and get a new $60 probe. Yeah, that helps - it got more accurate. But most of the other factors remain.
EDIT - corrected two spelling errors.