The issue with government environmental and economic data is it depends on the agenda being pushed. Meaning the data is observed and delivered in such a way to delivery the outcome it wants. Review the CBO scoring of government budgets. It's even worse in environmental data: review the CCP-which was ruled by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional-the many arguments against it's implementation was that power plants had surpass the regulatory goal because of the shale boom of natural gas which the Obama Administration nor EPA foresaw. The environmental tax credits that Tesla was selling was based on a fictitious number made up by the EPA no different that the social cost of carbon-which many regulations are based on-or the infamous 1.5 C. All these number fail to give a complete picture of the pros and cons of decision which is why we get situations like this. When theory meets application, application always wins.
The issue with government environmental and economic data is it depends on the agenda being pushed. Meaning the data is observed and delivered in such a way to delivery the outcome it wants. Review the CBO scoring of government budgets. It's even worse in environmental data: review the CCP-which was ruled by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional-the many arguments against it's implementation was that power plants had surpass the regulatory goal because of the shale boom of natural gas which the Obama Administration nor EPA foresaw. The environmental tax credits that Tesla was selling was based on a fictitious number made up by the EPA no different that the social cost of carbon-which many regulations are based on-or the infamous 1.5 C. All these number fail to give a complete picture of the pros and cons of decision which is why we get situations like this. When theory meets application, application always wins.
EVs are good for hauling leaves though!