The disadvantage of taxing based on fuel is that it mostly benefits newer cars, generally owned by the richer groups in society. People barely able to afford a car are hit by a pollution tax they can hardly work around, because it's either "pay the fuel tax" or "get another job", and despite the so-called labour shortage, that's not as easy as it seems if you're not educated.

In terms of taxing pollution the Dutch system is actually quite reasonable, because there's barely any green energy being produced in the country compared to the old fossil fuel plants. All that "green" electricity is just a piece of paper that says the joules come from some hydro plant in Norway, but they don't actually come from a green source, of course. If you can charge your car by solar panels, you'll be much better off.

Taxing by distance actually taxes road use rather than fuel exhaustion, which is a much better way to tax for road maintenance in my opinion. The heavy electric cars do a much bigger number on the roads than grandma's city car from twenty years ago.

In an optimal system, both taxes would be combined and balanced. However, the government has shown that it will abuse any data it collects for other purposes, and balancing things isn't one of the government's strong suits either. It's sad, really.