your point is right on, but you are still missing the point a bit. Like RTI pointed out (but not in so many words) it takes two barrels of crude to make one of gas. The rest (that other barrel) is used for other stuff (plastics, other fuels, medicine....). You are right that a gas powered car will need a lot more barrels of crude over the life of a gas powered car and there is no need to assume the electric will need more to be build but since for every two gallons of crude that is needed to build the car there is also more or less a free gallon of gas that comes with it, the car will be able to run for a while without needing more crude to make more gas.

His analysis is also missing two more things that the gas could still be used (i.e. a power plant that uses gas for example t make some of the electricity) and maybe the gas that is not used can be used for something else (refined differently) so better used.

His economics is also not completely sound. He looks at something like this and thinks the price of crude is fixed and if you throw away the gas the rest will need to make up the difference (for example double in price). But that is not completely true since gas is one of the major driving forces in the price of crude. If gas were to become worthless the price of crude would also drop by a lot. In the end each component will be priced depending on the component price that makes sense like it is now and not as a % o f the total price of a barrel.