Government’s fleet transition to all BEV – a cosmetic measure to disguise the collapsing private BEV sales market?
The UK government recently announced its intention to replace the entire British Public Service Vehicle (PSV) fleet; converting them all to Battery Electric Vehicles (BEVs) by 2027.
The objective being reported for this is the pursuit of government’s Net Zero decarbonisation aims.
This enforced transition will inevitably necessitate the replacement of large numbers of perfectly-serviceable internal combustion engine powered vehicles (ICEVs) long before the end of their useful lives.
Driving Sense / The Alliance of British Drivers (ABD) has, however, already published evidence that even taking the most optimistic view, the wholesale replacement of UK ICEVs by BEVs will have – at best – little to no positive environmental impact, and at worst,a significant negative impact globally [Ref.1].
One (perhaps the only?) positive outcome of this measure will be to boost the availability of UK used (largely commercial) ICEVs — ensuring continued plentiful supply of such vehicles for some years to come.
However, there are manifold downsides:
1 In comparison with the fuel-fill-up times of ICEVs, BEVs having charging cycles varying from many tens of minutes to hours.
2 A consequence of this is that a single ICEV cannot be replaced by a single BEV. In many cases for high mileage, constant-use vehicles such as police cars, two or more BEVs will be required to ensure availability of a backup vehicle which is ready for immediate use, replacing fully energy-depleted ones.
3 ABD’s own evidence indicates that the typical lifespan of a BEV is about half that of an ICEV; so this is a “double-whammy” — more shorter life-span BEVs will be required per ICE vehicle replaced.
4 Due to the extended charging times,the infrastructure and space requirements for BEV charging installations are much greater than those for 5 minute fill-up ICEVs.
5 The BEV charging infrastructure is already being described as unfit-for-purpose, and needing decades of investment at current levels to reach anything even approaching adequacy.
6 BEVs are considerably more expensive than a like-sized (but invariably considerably lighter, being heavy Li-ion battery free) ICEV.
7 This represents both additional vehicle purchasing costs and increased wear-and-tear to the UK’s roads.
8 For some classes of vehicles that must have consistent all-weather performance and load-carrying capability (e.g., fire engines, salvage vehicles, snow ploughs) no satisfactory analogous BEV exists either currently, nor will exist in the foreseeable future [Ref 2].
9 While BEVs may not be any more prone to spontaneous fire outbreaks than ICEVs, BEV Li-ion batteries, once alight,are essentially uncontrollable and inextinguishable, very rapidly emitting life-threatening toxic fumes and have, in effect, to be left to burn themselves out.
10 It is informative to note that the charging of BEVs is not permitted on the Parliamentary estate due to this very fire risk [Ref 3].
11 Latest minerals resource research calls into question as undeliverable the entire Net Zero strategy [Ref 4]
12 The question must be asked whether this measure has been announced as a smokescreen to massage BEV sales figures and cover up plummeting private BEV sales?
References:
1. https://abd.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Cradle_Grave_Report_-Final_JULY2023.pdf
2. https://order-order.com/2025/05/09/khans-electric-eco-fire-engine-has-not-been-used-once/
3. https://order-order.com/2025/04/30/parliament-scraps-electric-car-charging-points/
