Leaderboard

Well if I agreed with you then we’d both be wrong. I stand by my well documented 13 years in the energy industry, specifically, this part of the industry. I’ve been through the audits of the company because of what Enron did. Many/Most for-profit energy companies have to go through those audits yearly. I’m not saying that for profit companies shouldn’t run the grid. I’m saying that they shouldn’t be able to set the grid rules and that there must be competition. Stand by your wrong statements all you like. The Forbes link disagrees with you.

Again, you’re wrong. Solar hasn’t been 3 times the cost of traditional generation for years. Same for wind. Additionally, the fossil fuel industry gets loads of subsidies too in the form of socializing external costs. I worked in the energy industry for over 13 years. I can go buy wind power for my home right now at equal or lesser cost than coal or gas. Furthermore, a significant amount of those high California costs is the result California’s decades long boondoggle of selling their grid off to private for-profit companies to run, those companies putting profits ahead of reliability and upgrades, and way back when forcing blackouts to drive up energy prices through market manipulation. California is still trying to catch up on years of grid neglect. And we’ve seen what can happen when you turn a power grid over to a for profit company in Texas.

Well that's simply, flat out, false. I'm not sure if you're intentionally lying because of your anti-green agenda or if you're simply using data from 15+ years ago. LCOE is the levelized cost of generation after all of the construction, generation, maintenance, and decommissioning of a project is completed. Basically every dollar that goes into building, running, and then tearing down that generation. It's reflected as dollars per megawatt hour. Projected LCOE in the U.S. by 2025 (as of 2020) $/MWh Plant Type Min Simple Average Capacity weighted average Max Solar photovoltaic (PV) 29.75 35.74 32.80 48.09 Geothermal 35.13 37.47 37.47 39.60 Combined cycle 33.35 38.07 36.61 45.31 Wind, onshore 28.72 39.95 34.10 62.72 Hydroelectric 35.37 52.79 39.54 63.24 Combustion Turbine 58.48 66.62 68.71 81.37 Ultra-supercritical coal 65.10 76.44 NB 91.27 Advanced Nuclear 71.90 81.65 NB 92.04 Biomass 86.19 94.83 NB 139.96 Wind, offshore 102.68 122.25 115.04 155.55 Those are 2025 estimated numbers, but they're based on today's numbers and a prediction on the direction of costs. However, this time last year On-Shore Wind and Photovoltaic both fell below fossil fuels in lifetime costs. Solar And Wind Costs Continue To Fall As Power Becomes Cleaner (forbes.com)

Pre-emptive response (because I gotta go to work and do not know when Ill be able to respond back) Keeping it real... Let's be honest about the choices of cars we used.... It does not matter what CUV from Ford we are going to use to compare it to the Mach E... NOBODY that is thinking about buying a base 26 000 dollar Escape is thinking about upgrading to a 40 000 dollar Edge let alone a 50 000 dollar Mach E. (double the price of a base Escape...) Like I said...lets keep it real. The would be Escape Hybrid owners might want to jump to a Mach E. Ditto for a would be Edge owner. Would be SE Hybrid Escape ($28 000) owners is still far away from their dreams of owning a BEV. They know that. They wouldnt be upgrading to an Edge let alone to a Mach E. THAT is why I went with an Escape, or an Edge, that had a price tag of 8 000 dollars MORE than what was given to us as an example. 34 000 dollars is a SE plug in hybrid or Titanium Hybrid Escape. 36 000 dollars is a SEL Edge... Then the next in line Edge is at 40 000 dollars.... You folk could now decide what numbers to us that makes this kind of exercise more logical...

And THEN...there are MORE variables to consider. THIS lovely example we are currently at, is with folk who drive AVERAGE miles per year. And obviously, EV tech is still in the adoptive phase... Back to my point... there are folk who exceed that amount by quite a lot. And in Quebec, yes Quebec, California is NOT the center of the universe.... That price difference between gasoline and electricity just accelerates the savings... Its no surprise that EVs are more expensive still, than their ICE counterparts. At THIS point in time, its if you want to make the change or not. Its if you WANT to adopt EV tech, or not. It does not take a thesis to discover that fact.

That is BS, Washington is almost 100% green energy and we still average 6 cents per kilowatt even after shutting down our coal, almost all gas and nuclear power generation. Your anti-science, anti-green agenda has blinded you to the fact that most people are not out to hurt society but make it better and working together through better ways of doing things. This could get ugly political if you really wanted to have pointed out to you the false destructive nature of not having a balance of government basics with for profit business. Democracy was on a balance not on a dictator wanna be with greed for the 1%. The last 4 years had the biggest destructive waste of burdening the tax payers while moving wealth to the 1% and look at the results. Texas had people die and poor getting 5 digit power bills to stay warm. FAILURE on way too many fronts and California is the same digging out from failure on for profit excess of 1%. Green Energy is not the fault of higher prices nor was it the fault of power generation when you do not have redundancy and proper preparation of services by ensuring from extreme lows to highs the power plants can run. Greed pure and simple was the fault. Solar panels are at a point that we very well could generate power at night as well. The improvements of technology will make fossil fuels needed much less. A Solar Panel That Works at Night? That May Soon Be a Reality | The Weather Channel - Articles from The Weather Channel | weather.com

Did a small job for the father of a buddy's girlfriend. Buddy was there, asked if I was working on any new car projects. I told them both I started working on my '64 Grand Prix, and the guy said 'That was my first car; my father bought it new then handed it down to me when it was 10 yrs old. It was turquoise with a turquoise interior." I replied 'My '64 is my first car, too.' Came home this afternoon and saw on a FB group a story/link to a very original '64 GP on eBay, turqoise/turquoise.

Why even compare to a decade old vehicle though? You can't buy one new for a "savings" comparison, like what's being discussed. Also, no. Did you look at anything other than exterior measurements? The MachE is much more similar to an Escape everywhere inside.

Driving advice....looks like this dude could use a Mach E or an Escape to replace this crown vic, assuming he escaped this accident.

Well... you took the lowest priced Escape in your example. I said that the Mache E is closest to the Edge rather than the Escape. It dont matter. But Id say...if you want to be TOTALLY unbiased (because your views on climate change is certainly telling when you are explaining that it will take 17 years to pay off the difference in savings) Id say, people just dont buy base vehicles anymore, so it dont matter what vehicle we choose to compare the Mach E to. But Id say, an Escape lease or even a sale would be closer to the low to mid 30 000 dollar range. While the Edge's base starting price is already to 32 000, Id say an Edge lease or sale would be about the same as the Escape which would be mid 30 000s. Never you mind that the Edge creeps up to where the Mach E resides in price... It dont matter, Ill give you an increase of 8 000 dollars in your lovely example. Then...Ill go on and use QUEBEC as an example rather than California. The price difference for our NEW example remains constant, even when CDN prices are to be used. BUT...where as YOU live in lovely, sunny California, I live in frigid Quebec. (Well, at least during winter...) 20 cents per kw/h. You'de be shocked (pun intended) to learn how low we get to have our electricity. ALL RENEWABLE... Find out. It be a fun exercise. Our gasoline prices.... Ill tell you this one. 1.23-1.26 CDN dollar per LITER. times 4 equals (because there is 4 US gallons to a metric liter. 5 CDN dollars per gallon. 5 CDN dollars per gallon. If you want to, you could do an exchange rate, but that disadvantages you even further. Like I said...the drama of "taking x amount of years to" is not as...dramatic as one seems to make it. @ccap41 https://carbuzz.com/compare/ford-edge-vs-ford-escape-2021-se-awd-vs-ford-mach-e Like I said, the Mach E is right smack in the middle of the two. Keep in mind that I said 1st generation Edge. The 2nd gen Edge grew a little while I also think this generation Escape also grew a little from the previous gens. It dont matter. Its all semantics anyway.

Interior volume is pretty close to the Escape, and slightly smaller, actually. Here's actually a pretty good comparison of the two vehicles. https://cleantechnica.com/2020/07/17/ford-mustang-mach-e-vs-ford-escape-cost-of-ownership-specs-features/

So what are your calculations on payoff for the two mentioned vehicles? At what point is the Mach E actually saving the user money?

Is electric that much near you? I’m at like 14c/KwH total, and I’m on renewable energy.

That looks like a '95-97. The '90-94 was very similar, but had a fixed quarter window in the rear door and squarer headlights, the '95-97 had slightly rounded grille and headlights and a new dashboard. I've always liked these, I had a silver '97 rental I drove to my 10th high school reunion in Marathon, Fl back in '98. My Dad's last new car was a silver blue '96. All the '90s TCs had the 4.6 except for the 1990, which was the first year of this design but had the carryover 5.0, with the new modular 4.6 coming in for '91.

Also could come in handy for a young driver in the family down the road......

A trio of the Commercial Truck Co Model A-10 electrics showed up in Portland OR for sale. Pretty decent shape for being from 1912- must've spent decades in a structure. $5000 for all 3.

Stands entirely to reason that a groups of operators that are "abusing" a BE vehicle are going to do the same with an IC vehicle.

@David I like the chick peas better as hummus. I like the lima beans better in purist form. I just had some tonight. So good.

February 11 I see the rounded Town Cars every now and then, but how often does one see these formal, boxy ones with that real thin opera window in the rear sail panel? On Atlanta's north side, in Sandy Springs, GA. Probably a 4.6 V8. Spotless.

I find it hard to tire of garbanzo beans, and especially lima beans. Not only that, they're really good for you.

The price difference doesn't change very much even when vehicle price changes a dramatically. This makes an EV econobox an oxymoron because the drivetrain is a going to add $15K to a $15K car, whereas in a luxury car that costs $80K anyway the drivetrain adding $20K may not matter that much. This is why Tesla's business model of focusing initially on performance luxury worked whereas BMW's i3 or VW& eGolf... well... didn't.

Simple math... (1) The Mach E starts at $42.8K before subsidies and rebates, a comparably equipped Escape SE is $26.6K. That is a $16.2K price difference. (2) If you drive gingerly, the Escape SE will average 30 mpg combined. That'll cost you $1,667 in gasoline a year to operate at $4 a gallon if you drive the typical 12,500 miles annually. (3) The Mach E gets 305 miles from 88 KWh usable of battery capacity. That means it'll need 3,607 kWh to cover 12,500 miles if you drive gently. At $0.20 / kWh it'll cost you $721 in electricity to operate if you charge at home, off peak and at residential rates. Using commercial charging stations will cost a two to four times more -- $1,442~$2,884. Conclusion: At best it'll take you 17 years to break even on your $16,200 investment in the all electric drivetrain (with savings of $949 a year). At worst you'll spend nearly $20,000 more in charging fees over that 17 years. Regardless, if you drink Global Warming hogwash, you may gladly buy an electric car today. We have no shortage of such individuals in California and/or people who buy EVs so they can hang out with their Green buddies. But... they aren't buying Hybrids anymore.

As 1 of the top 4 auto corporations by sales, I think toyoter is actually being the most realistic about the near future market. No mass market OEM is going to be 100% electric by 2030, sales are still catastrophically low overall, and toyoter's pace (WRT the reported 2025 BE models) is fine, time-wise, to enter the so-called "party".

Totally agree with your thinking, you know how the auto has been cared for and all the quirks if any, better to buy it out than buy an unknown used. Nice is that you can always if you so choose upgrade the head unit with a modern one if you want the latest Blue Tooth Android/Apple play system and anything else not currently in your auto. I love the Pioneer head unit I have in my SS, so nice to have my phone connected in the auto.

Private purchase. And I want to have the bike in my hands before I hand over the check.

That is one DUMB AND DUMBER SET OF GEARS. Ducatis have a desmodromic valvetrain -- where the valves are opened AND closed by cam followers without the use of springs -- which is dumb enough given that their motors DO NOT rev higher than competing designs while having very destructive behaviors when are out of spec due to poor adjustment or wear. Piston speeds rather than valve float are is the rpm limiting factor in modern engines; nobody else uses desmodromic valvetrains because it sucks! But, driving the cams exclusively via spur gears is dumber than dumb. This is heavier and higher friction than with a roller chain or belt drive. Do they last longer? Theoretically they might, but with chain drives rated for 300,000 miles and most motorcycles seeing less than 30,000 it is totally unnecessary. To make matters worse, when chains or belts wear (they stretch a tiny bit) a tensioner keeps everything tight and slop free. When gears wear (as everything wears) there is no way to take the slop out without replacing them.

You won't have to be... the costs of all autos is increasing dramatically. So much so that even Hyundai and Kia dealers are putting $10,000 of superfluous upcharges on the Palisade and Telluride. Did you ever think you'd see the day where a big Kia crossover could have Additional Dealer Markup slapped on it?

The math is accurate and the numbers I used are truthful and transparent. $0.20 is approximately the price per kWh in CA. $4 per gallon is the price of gasoline in CA. In parts of the country where electricity rates are $0.11 per gallon, gasoline is also $2.60 a gallon -- those also happen to be sensible states where they are not mandating power generation using expensive renewables or subsidizing "green" vehicles. When you use a commercial charging station you are paying two to four times the cost of electricity because, they companies who put in and maintain that stuff has to make money. At 25% utilization (which is better than average) each commercial charger is making maybe $30~40 a day. Not much considering that it costs tens of thousands of dollars in equipment and labor to put that stuff up. It is no different from gas stations making about $2~4 per fill up over what they pay for the gas they sell. The difference being that a car occupies a fuel pump for 2~3 minutes during refueling whereas it occupies charging station for 2~3 hours, hence the margins have to be higher. The point is that the price premium of the EV drivetrain can be seen as a $15,000~20,000 pre-payment on fuel (or energy). How long it takes for an ICE vehicle to catch up to that is the gasoline cost per mile minus electric cost per mile multiplied by the number of miles driven a year. 17 years is about right -- "about" being the key word. What is anti-science is the Climate Change BS itself. There is no reason to believe that the climate is in anyway abnormal given that we are NOT seeing the warmest weather in the history of the planet or even the last 5000 years. Not only that, but the fact that the Earth had be frozen to the tropics with CO2 at 8~10x today's level and warmer during umpteen periods with half the CO2 in the air throws the argument that CO2 is a significant contributor to climate patterns into the BS category. Science is not a belief system in people who claim to be scientists; science is a system of empirical observations. I do care about pollution and the future, I simply do not consider CO2 emission a pollutant or something we need to reduce at all.