If the point is the last paragraph, then sure yes to both, sort of, kind of. Because the US, today, cannot produce 2 million affordable trucks w/o ICE. The 'yes' sounds great for goals for the future...That's the thing: I didn't discuss "necessity" and I didn't invite "necessity" to the conversation. That was you, inviting that rude asshole in here where it doesn't belong except perhaps in narrow focus.
I'm talking about "necessary to a goal" not "necessary first for any other goals to be considered".
The goal of trucks is to have a big vehicle that can see far, go over adverse terrain, and haul stuff easily. Sometimes also to be "loud".
This is the discussion not of whether truck; truck or not as you please. This is the issue of "can we truck without ICE", or "can we crypto WITHOUT burning the world for it". The answer to both is "yes".
As far as goals of trucks, probably 75% of those trucks are single person commuter vehicles, with a primary goal of "status"...one can tell by the shiny, unblemished looks as the lone driver is spotted on the highway/road going to their job in a building.
I have a year 2000 Ford F250, V10 gas burner. It spends the vast majority of its time hooked up to a 2-horse trailer, hauling back and forth from relatively close-by shows and clinics, and the rest as a construction/utility vehicle. I bought it in 2005 with 8k miles on it and today it has all of 41,000. I'd love to have an electric truck but can't justify the expense given how little use it would see. I'll just have to keep on destroying the planet...
I use my truck even less than you do, now-a-days.. I won't be replacing it for several years. But maybe for you, someday, take a look at the new F150. It's all electric, as powerful as two teslas, can power your entire house for a week, and has infinite torque for towing the entire planet behind you.