Your model/analysis is again based on a Petrol ecology. Petrol is a wasteful way to produce energy. There is no way around it. BTW you would be lucky to get 33% out of a coal (or fossil-based) Power plant but I can let you have it. You do have to start somewhere and since our cars are themselves heavy polluter it does make sense to use the available electricity produced by the electrical system to charge them ... Electric Cars simply rely on electricity whatever it source be it wind, coal , sun or atom-based. So this analysis is flawed...
I could grant you that battery ( I don't know much about magnet) and perhaps magnet manufacturing are is at this juncture energy intensive... The notion of equating energy to petrol thus non-green is ingrained but many countries are weaning themselves from Petrol ...An example is Germany and they are looking at 80% from renewable ( non-Petrol) by 2050 which is even in Human terms around the corner: 30 years away. Today France derives 75% of its Electricity from Nuclear 3/4 !!!! from nuclear ... Something about which the USA was for a time a leader but has fallen so far back it is beyond appalling for such a energy-intensive culture ....No! Nuclear comes with its own problems but the energy density of it is IMO very attractive and IMO should be considered in a country such as the USA...
Now the emotion attached to cars is understandable but not a "natural" thing. It has come to be part of the American culture, perhaps as much as buying a horse or a carriage might have been in the past. At the core of it is the freedom it bestows its owner, that of going anywhere anytime.. This can and will change. in many countries mostly European and even in some American cities ( Manhattan) owning a car is seen by many , even well-heeled as superfluous.
Again the subsidies you are talking are not for Tesla. I am not knowledgeable about subsidies but you would be quite surprised to know how much fossil itself is subsidised to the tunes of $52 Billions a year perhaps more, Forbes ( not a magazine you would equate with Liberals ) has recently estimates the real subisdiary to be more than $200 Billions as per this article https://www.forbes.com/sites/ucener...el-subsidy-youve-never-heard-of/#18ea9631652b .
Those more knowledgeable are free to correct and educate me on the matter) ... I believe the amount for renewable is much less ... about 15.4 Billions...
Here in the us we still use mostly fossil fuel to produce electricity. The only thing that makes charging an electric car make sense is if it's done off peak hours. I've studied renewable energy in engineering school, and worked for Vestas Wind Turbines designing their Nacelle and Hub factory in Brighton CO so I'm very much for renewable energy technology that actually makes sense.
Nuclear doesn't make sense at all for many reasons. I'd rather have coal to be honest.
I still maintain that if you think a Tesla makes environmental sense you're deluding yourself. It's just not as simple as the fact it doesn't burn gas.