electric vehicles may at first glance may appear "green", but delve a bit deeper and it isn't quite as clear cut as is made out.
Many people keep looking at the "dirty oil vs clean electric" arguement, and manufacturers like to keep the focus there (they have a vested interest - they want to sell the things).
The problem is you have to look at the bigger picture, and look at the whole-life cycle of the product.
Steel has to be mined (as iron), thus producing carbon. Then you have to transport it for processing, producing more co2. And then processed etc. Think of all the material on a bike - steel, plastics, rubber etc., and the carbon produced HAS to be quantified.
Many of these "green" electric vehicles use Rare Earth motors. Rare Earth is mined largely in third world countries (China being a primary source). RE is treated with all kinds of toxic chemicals and acids which is allowed then to flow to rivers, lakes and land (including farmland). Maybe we're simply swapping one form of pollution for another?
With that, you have to compare energy use like for like over a period of years ie if a petrol bike with say a 5gallon tank has economy of 30mpg then 5gallon x 30mpg = 150 miles per tank and quantify the carbon produced. And add up how many charges an electric machine needs for the same distance (how much co2 per charge).
At the end of its life, that bike requires disposal, and what do we do with all the batteries/motors/electronics? dismantling? re-cycling? transport to some specialist centre?
All the carbon produced HAS to be quantified before you can truly say that one technology is better than another, unfortuneately a woefully insufficient level of R&D has gone into that.
Quite apart from that, the infrastructure for alternative systems has to be in place as well (ie, charging points).