But this is nothing new. After all, the first EV's were around a hundred years ago, and the problems are well understood.. By engineers, if not politicians.
Either we solve the problem as a country or we cancel the ban on new ICE from 2040. Hydrogen won't have the time to build an infrastructure, and if people are forced to drive hybrids, then they will be plugging them in overnight.
I'll happily have a V8 instead of a 'Leccy, but not if the government persist with taxing the arse out of one and subsidising uptake of the other. That would seem stupid. Which brings us back to the problem - we can't subsidise leccy if we can't cope with demand, but without subsidy, take up will be limited or nonexistant.
Subsidy, for the above purposes, can be taken as the tax on petrol that is not applied for electric cars. Either we move to a pay per mile scheme for all vehicles - in which case how does that get retrofit to older cars and what of the privacy concerns - or we'd have to remove tax on petrol, which will make the green lobby explode in a fit of champagne socialist rage and leave the chancellor needing to cut 1/8th of his spending.
So, what do we do? Going nuclear and upgrading leccy infrastructure seems like thhe only viable alternative, and that means starting today with a lot more generative capacity, putting an end to windmill and solar panel development - if you've paid squillions for umpteen new nuke plants, you are going to run them to end of life. I'm not sure that's a sellable idea of the future either. So what is?