Critical thinking is always a good thing. Misinformation is not. Some people and at least one major political party have recently argued that EVs may, in fact, not be better than traditional gas cars, if at all. That is plain wrong. 
While EVs may be more resource-intensive to build, in large part because they are heavier thanks to large batteries, it is crucial to remember that the lifecycle emissions of EVs are quite a bit lower than those of gas-fueled cars. For instance, the break-even point when the extra initial emissions from manufacturing are cancelled out by the much lower emissions from use is between 13,500 and 21,300 miles, depending on the experts who analyze this (such as the Union of Concerned Scientists). That translates into the fact that just two years of driving an EV will make up for its initially greater carbon footprint. In yet other words, a gas car typically puts out 4.5 times more carbon pollution than a typical electric car.
Of course, the sustainability aspect depends on what type of fuel the local utility producing the electricity for EVs uses. If that is a heavy mix of coal and gas, that is obviously not as good as if more renewable energy sourcing is involved.
As for the mining issues often mentioned with EVs, that is a problem. An EV requires more than six times the mineral that a traditional gas-fueled car does. However, this can and should be addressed by mining discussions, best practices, and potentially legislation. 
No cars are good for the planet. This is a matter of what is the lesser of “two evils.” The answer to that is EVs.
Companies interested in ESG should shift purchases from traditional gas-fueled vehicles to EVs. Note that major vehicle users such as FedEx are implementing this shift already. FedEx expects to have an all-electric parcel delivery and pick-up fleet by 2040. Most Americans (81%) also expect to buy EVs in the future. The future is here, but we should also not forget the importance of driving less in general and using public transportation when possible.