icowden
Squire
It's because you are measuring string. The "break even" point depends on the mix of the fuel being used for electricity generation, so if that changes the break even point changes. What we can say, unequivocally, is that we have removed tailpipe emissions by switching to BEV. Thus any changes made to electricity generation benefit the entire BEV estate.They are merely estimates. Still, scientists, climatologists and other experts can't seem to agree and there are wildly varying estimates, even recently. There are many variables as pointed out, but there seems to be no clear consensus or standard to measure against.
Unfortunately our Government has decided it is the best way to do things. If they wanted to reduce car use, they would reopen some of the Beeching stations, run far more trains and subsidise the railways to ensure that ticket prices are low. Bring back the goods wagon to take bicycles and suitcases etc. Subsidise busses so that more areas are served more effectively, more of the time. Tax cars more harshly to move people to public transport.Besides, i don't buy into all this breaking even bullshit. A car is fantastically convenient, jobs and economy rely on this convenience and individual mobility but is a terribly inefficient way to travel, 1-2 tonnes of metal moving about to move and deposit 150 - 200 lbs of human meat and bone around is wasteful no matter what powers it...
This will involve raising taxes significantly either on individuals or businesses (or both). The Conservatives are not interested in this as their core belief is in low taxation. Labour might be, but they tend to be too busy in-fighting, and even they recognise that "we are raising taxes" isn't a vote winner.