Cebr Analysis of 2030 Ban

26  Centre for Economics and Business Research Summary Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR) figures (£Bn) Total Car Motorbike LGV HGV CO2e, driving emissions 64.7 37.7 0.7 19.8 6.5 Air quality emissions 11.2 4.5 0.1 5.7 0.9 CO2e, vehicle manufacture -32.5 -21.5 -1.1 -8.9 -1.1 Time spent refuelling/recharging -46.5 -25.6 -0.4 -12.9 -7.5 Fuel (resource cost only) -34.9 -17.1 -0.3 -13.3 -4.3 New vehicles -187.8 -98.0 -7.2 -67.2 -15.4 Infrastructure Investment Costs -98.5 n/a n/a n/a n/a Total Car Motorbike LGV HGV Benefits 75.9 42.2 0.8 25.4 7.4 Costs 400.3 162.3 9.0 102.2 28.2 Total Car Motorbike LGV HGV BCR 0.19 0.26 0.09 0.25 0.26 NPV -225.9 -120.1 -8.2 -76.8 -20.8 Total Car Motorbike LGV HGV BCR (excl. new vehicle costs) 0.36 0.66 0.43 0.73 0.58 NPV (excl. new vehicle costs) -38.1 -22.1 -1.0 -9.6 -5.4 In standard appraisal, where the majority of impacts are measured in monetary values, the value for money category is primarily informed by one of two metrics: the Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR) and the Net Present Value (NPV). These metrics provide a primary indication of the extent to which a proposal is expected to represent value for money. Both metrics are used to express the relationship between the Present Value of Costs (PVC) and the Present Value of Benefits (PVB) The BCRs capture the ratio of present value benefits and present value costs. A BCR of greater than one indicates that the benefits outweigh the costs, whereas a BCR below one indicates the opposite: the costs outweigh the benefits. Unlike the BCR, the NPV does not measure the likely benefits relative to the likely costs. Instead, it measures the total impact on societies welfare of a proposal. It is simply the sum of all benefits net of costs. The overall BCR of 0.19 above represents that total costs are just over five times those of total benefits. For motorbikes, for instance, this ratio is much lower, indicating that the costs of the bans on motorbikes are over 10 times the associated benefits.’ .