

possibly an attrition tactic? If they completely destroy the bridge, then Russia might just abandon it and transport stuff there via plane/boat instead. Damaging it just enough that it’s cheaper to fix than to set up a new supply chain, over and over, could be more costly in the long run, and regularly divert construction resources. Not to mention the impact that constantly disabling the bridge could have on Russian civilians in the area - i.e. “how is Ukraine always damaging this bridge?”
Could also be psychological - having the bridge there and hitting it over and over and over sends a pretty clear message.
Even with the lithium mining, an EV will reach “pollution parity” with a comparable sized ICE vehicle anywhere from 6 months to 5 years on the road, largely depending on what is powering the electrical grid (coal fired electricity being the 5 year), with the average being 1-2 years. That means that an EV from 2023 on average has caused less total pollution than an ICE vehicle of the same age.
On top of that, there has been significant progress made in recycling these batteries so that less lithium needs to be mined, as well as using other metals such as sodium, both sodium ion and sodium iron batteries are commercially available.