I was expressing incredulity at your requiring a citation. It's pathetic to pretend that I was expressing incomprehension just to make yourself feel better.
1. I said that an ICE car burns its own weight in fossil fuels each year, while an EV's battery is not consumed and the materials are permanently available. You said "uh no". But you didn't counter by demonstrating that an ICE vehicle doesn't burn its own weight, nor by demonstrating that an EV's materials are in fact consumed. Instead you talked about:
a. the energy and byproducts costs of resource extraction. This is obviously orthogonal to the point I was making, and additionally, as you presumably meant the energy and byproducts costs for Li, you are ignoring the vastly greater energy and byproduct costs of resource extraction for fossil fuels
b. the small percentage of batteries that "are recycled" -- but this is because you're choosing a dumb denominator -- all the EV batteries in existence. Obviously, only a tiny fraction of EV batteries have reached end of life, because battery packs last at least a decade, if not longer, and ten+ years ago, there only a tiny number of EVs on the road. As EVs batteries eventually reach EoL for mobility applications, they'll go into less demanding static applications (re-use) and eventually be recycled when they reach EoL for static applications too. But that's at least 20 years from now
2. Oh, you want to talk only about *current* drilling and only about *oil*? The latter is arguable but reasonable, but the former is totally unreasonable. Why should we ignore the environmental impacts of past oil spills when accounting for the externalities of oil extraction for cars? Do you think that oil from, say, Piper Alpha or Deepwater Horizon wasn't used to create petroleum and diesel for cars?? This absolutely is part of the cost of oil usage, and it's not like we don't continue to have oil spillages. As for Turkmenistan, you're the one being dumb here -- these are fossil fuel fields that produce *oil that is used for petroleum products for cars*, as well as other oil products, as well as natural gas. The methane is a direct byproduct of oil extraction for cars.
3. You say irrelevant, but your previous comment does not demonstrate *why* it is irrelevant that Li is extracted in far smaller quantities than oil. It's directly relevant. Even if Li extraction created more byproducts or used more energy per-kg or per-barrel than oil extraction, the fact that the amounts involved are so much smaller means that oil extraction is many many times worse. And the fact is, Li can be recycled at all, and oil cannot, which further advantages Li over oil. I don't know what part of this doesn't compute for you.
Pretending that you're above swearing doesn't make you morally superior, it makes you a pathetic fucking hypocrite. You swear, I swear, and you can take your tone policing, fold it till it's all sharp corners, and shove it right up your jacksie. I couldn't give a fuck whether you approve or disapprove of my writing style. I am still waiting for you to demonstrate why you think that oil extraction is less impactful than lithium extraction, whether in relative or absolute terms. I imagine it'll be a fruitless wait, but if you wanted to come back with some data to back up your (frankly absurd) position, go right ahead.