I'm 95% sure this is a troll, but I'll bite regardless.
Let's imagine a world in which climate change isn't a thing. We can continue to burn oil as fast as we want, and are unrestricted by any amount of fossil carbon being released into the atmosphere.
Economically, we lived in that world until about a decade ago. Back in 2010, contracts were being let to refurbish all of the old coal plants, new North sea oil was being brought online, and new gas plants built.
But even back in those heady days, people were still building new wind farms, because they're cheaper. It's actually significantly cheaper to built wind power than to invest in new fossil fuels. No decades of building a power plant, no concrete and steel in its construction. We're moving economically away from fossil fuels not because we have to, but because large energy companies have realised it's more profitable.
If you buy a new diesel fleet today, you'll end up in a situation ten years down the line where buying fuel is so expensive that it's actually cheaper to switch to electric. We reached the tipping point for new fleets about two years ago. There's a reason ScotGov has decided to wire the network, because in the long term it's easier.
If you want to live in a fantasy world where climate change isn't happening, then go ahead. But even so, you'll find switching to electronic processors, and renewable energy, and air source heat pumps happen around you, because they're cheaper. Pulleys and cogs are yesterday's technology.
Now. Climate change is real. It is happening. We, as a society, are releasing huge amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. I could find you a hundred thousand peer-reviewed articles and studies backing me up. I could find government policies and reports from companies that would find it infinitely easier to not switch to renewables, and they're switching anyway because we have to. CO2 in the atmosphere does warm it up, and does release methane and other compounds which speed up the problem. Climate change is happening and being a dinosaur and claiming 'the science isn't certain and experts aren't all in agreement' doesn't help.
Yes, you might not feel the effects living in a temperate country, but if you don't believe in it then why don't you start investing in houses in Fairbourne, or farmland on the Sahel.
So, given the switch to electric everything is happening, and given climate change is a very real threat, why not embrace the switch. It's cheaper to run trains under the wires. In a system that has been around since before any of our grandparents were born, it makes sense to switch early to take advantage of long term cost savings.
Also, some minor points.
Aluminium is smelted mostly these days by large hydro facilities. It's renewable power.
Embedded carbon in steel and concrete is an issue, however in the medium term, technologies are being developed to tackle this. Embedded carbon in a train isn't an issue for a piece of kit that will last 40 years and far outweigh that in terms of carbon saved by not driving in cars everywhere.
Your points 7 and 8 are not wrong, but so far off the mark they're ridiculous. If you look at embedded carbon in a wind farm and a battery compound, you'll find a significant carbon reduction versus the lifetime of a coal or gas power plant.
Why are you advocating for steam. There's a reason nobody uses it any more. It's dead end technology.
As mentioned above, skepticalscience.com, or wherever else you want to find 'evidence' to back up these claims, is not a valid source. There is very good research out there about the lifetime carbon impacts of entire energy grids, from ore and manufacture to recycling. There is also an abundance of academic research on hydrogen as a fuel, both positives and negatives, as well as the real impact of carbon in the atmosphere.
