[Number 3]

Well the argument is around the word "mandate".

No governmental agency in the US has mandated electric vehicles. It's that simple. Even CARB has not mandated EVs. As California often does, they simply mandate the desired outcome which is ZEV (ZERO Emission Vehicles) and let the actual businesses do whatever it takes or invent but their choice. That way California can, when or if it blows up, blame the automakers for not inventing something.

In the Federal sense, what has been mandated is emissions/fuel economy (one and that same as if you burn gas or diesel or even hydrogen you create emissions). But again, they have not told anyone how to do that.

From a timing and investment standpoint as well as customer acceptance due to features, functionality and existing infrastructure, a BEV is the most practical solution. So, in a roundabout way, BEV looks like it has a mandate. But by the definition of the word, and the existing CARB and Federal Regulations, a BEV has NOT been mandated. Yep, it's weaselly as they know the auto makers know that the solution will MOSTL LIKELY be a BEV. Automakers could all select FCEVs as this solution. It even fixes one of the major issues with EVs and that is charging time. But everyone in this discussion knows Hydrogen doesn't work. It may someday, but certainly not in the next 10 years. Heck GM is the deepest of any OEM in Fuel Cells other than they don't have a car in production as even GM sees FC as an industrial power source, not a means of propulsion.

One of my favorite engineering mantras is given enough time and money I can do anything. Problem is there isn't enough time or money to invent a ZEV that isn't a BEV or FCEV.

But to be clear, the mandate is emissions not EVs. EVs are just the easiest and quickest way to meet that mandate.