Why Bjorn Lomborg is wrong about climate change

I’ve mentioned Bjorn Lomberg before. He’s not a climate “denier” or even a climate change skeptic.  But he does raise some issues and for that he’s worth listening to.  In the vid above, Mallen Baker takes on Lomborg, but even in this take down, he acknowledges that some of Lomborg’s points are valid.
Eg, Electric Cars: many people think, I guess, that EVs are great, because they don’t have any Co2 emissions.  But that’s not true.  It depends on where the electricity comes from. An Australian EV is much less green than a French EV, because we have mostly coal-fired electricity and they have mostly nuclear powered.  So in today’s Australia, an EV is only 10-30% better than a petrol engined car.  Baker’s point here is rather a quibble.
Ditto on the Arctic vs Antarctic ice loss issue.  Lomborg’s point was not to say that they balance out.  But do say that the climate alarmists say that ice is being lost in both, whereas (it seems) it’s being lost in the Arctic and gained in Antarctica (I seem to recall some debate on this but I’m not going to go there for now).