A big group of people who know a lot about energy said that cars that don't use gas, called electric vehicles or EVs, helped stop the world from using too much oil last year. But even though more people used these cars, the air was still dirty because there were very bad weather conditions like droughts in some places. This made it hard to make clean energy from water, so people had to use coal and gas instead. Some countries did a good job using wind and solar power, but others still needed oil and gas for electricity. The group of experts think that the world will need less oil soon because more cars will be electric and cleaner ways to make energy will keep growing. Read from source...

1. The title of the article is misleading and sensationalized. It implies that EV sales dented oil demand last year, but emissions still rose due to an exceptional shortfall from the climate crisis. This suggests a contradiction between EV sales and oil demand, which is not accurately reflected in the article's content.
2. The article uses vague terms such as "exceptional" and "brighter picture" without providing clear definitions or evidence for these claims. These words are meant to evoke emotional reactions from readers rather than inform them objectively about the situation.
3. The article focuses on the increase in emissions in 2023, but does not provide a comparison with previous years or projections for future emissions. This creates a false impression that the climate crisis is worsening rapidly, without considering the long-term trends and progress made by clean energy technologies.
4. The article credits renewable energy deployment as the main driver of the drop in hydropower and coal-to-gas switching, but does not acknowledge the role of EVs in reducing oil demand. This is an important omission, as EVs are one of the most effective ways to decrease fossil fuel consumption and emissions.
5. The article cites the IEA's predictions of a peak in global oil demand by 2028, but does not question the validity or reliability of these forecasts. This is problematic, as the IEA has been criticized for being too optimistic about the pace and scale of clean energy transitions in the past.
6. The article ends with a mention of the U.S.'s "dirty grid" problem, but does not offer any solutions or recommendations on how to address this issue. This leaves readers with a pessimistic outlook on the situation, rather than inspiring them to take action or support clean energy initiatives.