I'm not sure if this is what's being insinuated, but just to clarify; I am not a climate change denier in any sense of the word, and I completely agree that we need to be conscious of our CO2 emission as well as the environmental impacts of our technology. However, I am not hasty to jump into a "new" technology like massive batteries that require tons of Lithium mining that is turning out to be just as destructive as what we are replacing.
That's why I believe the best thing we can do is to balance our use of resources between all capabilities. Little bit of oil, little bit of Lithium battery, little bit of electricity. Going all-in on one technology just ends up with the problem we have now, which is massive over-consumption of one resource.
I'm definitely onboard with doing our best to clean the environment and reduce our footprint -- I just think we should focus on the real threats, and not the small-time stuff. In my opinion, the OP's article and what the EU commission did, is small-time stuff. It's a super minor blip on the map of what is destroying our environment. Let's get tough on the heavy hitters! I just don't see anyone willing to do it. It's easy to hit the mice, but no one wants to go after the major elephants.
Either way, my original reply was poorly worded. I'm glad I got called out so I could explain it a bit better.