Escape, Edge, TC to be Killed

[jpd80]

Here’s another thing to consider - Northern hemisphere has 70% of the worlds land mass and 90% of the earths which in turn population accounts for the majority of man made pollution.

 

In contrast, the southern hemisphere has 10% of the worlds population and only 30% of the earths land mass, it’s clear that only a fraction of the total pollution comes from below the earths equator. I know that there is some mixing across the equator but a lot of the pollution and resultant climate damage is occurring in the northern hemisphere. I think this is why the climate change  conversation is a lot more extreme in USA, Europe and Asia - they will have to do much of the heavy lifting.

Edited September 6, 2023 by jpd80

[Sherminator98]

10 minutes ago, paintguy said:

So you are for forced change and willing to deal with unintended consequences? maybe a late model auto restoration service might be worthwhile. Remember in the 70s restoring a 60s car was radical.

 

Forced change came in the form of downsizing of vehicles in the 1980s (that was popular, remember?), added safety equipment, downsized engines etc

 

All I hear is no we can't do that and we need more hybrids-when that isn't going to fix things...its more of the same of what we've been doing.

 

Its a mindset change and people take it very personally when things change and throw up stops because its an inconvenience to them. 

 

It might seem like I'm radical hard on for EVs, but that isn't the case-short term its not the case, but 7 years from now, you'd be better be offering more EVs

[Sherminator98]

15 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

Correct but as electric power emission reduce, it reduces the power industry % but also increases the % of vehicular emissions even though the quantity does not increase.

Pre 2020, the percentage of passenger vehicle emission was about 10% of the total but when you lump in transportation, that includes trucks, trains and maybe ships. That in itself makes the pull out of passenger vehicles quite difficult- something the green advocates would probably prefer…

 

Some info from the EU

 

 

[jpd80]

53 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

 

Some info from the EU

 

 

Yes, thank you that proves my point exactly because EU got going on emissions over 30 years ago from power, industry and domestic  as well as agriculture. A reduction in all of those to around 60% of what they were in 1990s, definitely drives up those transport emissions.

 

Also EU is arguably  densely populated region with efficient road and rail transport, the rail network alone is now either efficient freight diesels or electric trains. The diesel freight trains take a lot of trucks off the road.

 

I doubt that those kinds of efficiencies would be possible across the vastness of the US, maybe in regional population areas but there’s a ton more trucks, trains, and planes so not an equal comparison to the EU.

 

More statistics here,

Edited September 6, 2023 by jpd80

[AM222]

24 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

Correct but as electric power emission reduce, it reduces the power industry % but also increases the % of vehicular emissions even though the quantity does not increase.

Pre 2020, the percentage of passenger vehicle emission was about 10% of the total but when you lump in transportation, that includes trucks, trains and maybe ships. That in itself makes the pull out of passenger vehicles quite difficult- something the green advocates would probably prefer…

Another thing most people forget are the mining of several raw materials required to make batteries and how these are transported. Just imagine if the number of EVs being built quadruples. Hopeful they come up with better cheaper more environmentally friendly tech soon.

 

[jpd80]

8 minutes ago, AM222 said:

Another thing most people forget are the mining of several raw materials required to make batteries and how these are transported. Just imagine if the number of EVs being built quadruples. Hopeful they come up with better cheaper more environmentally friendly tech soon.
 

Correct, the hard rock lithium is mined in Australia and sent to China for refining, China will probably switch from importing raw product to using its own sourced mined feedstock.

[mackinaw]

37 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

....Forced change came in the form of downsizing of vehicles in the 1980s (that was popular, remember?), added safety equipment, downsized engines etc.....

 

Forced downsizing of passenger cars in the 80's gave rise to SUV's and full-size pickups of the 2000's.  Americans like their vehicles BIG.

[akirby]

8 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

 

All I hear is no we can't do that and we need more hybrids-when that isn't going to fix things...its more of the same of what we've been doing.

Nobody is saying no we can’t do that.  We’re just saying that widespread BEV adoption will be slower than some expected and if you go all in on 100% BEVs and ignore hybrids then you’ll simply be keeping more less efficient ICE vehicles on the road.  It’s one thing to force adoption of something that is viable, but due to price and lack of public charging BEVs are only viable for a subset of the population and that’s not going to change quickly.  It will take years of infrastructure upgrades and at least one more generation of batteries and production volume.

 

Why not do everything possible to reduce emissions TODAY while still working towards BEVs.  More hybrids won’t stop development of BEVs and once they’re viable you’ll see buyers naturally transition.  
 

And with that I’ll get off the soapbox.

[Sherminator98]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

Nobody is saying no we can’t do that.  We’re just saying that widespread BEV adoption will be slower than some expected and if you go all in on 100% BEVs and ignore hybrids then you’ll simply be keeping more less efficient ICE vehicles on the road.  It’s one thing to force adoption of something that is viable, but due to price and lack of public charging BEVs are only viable for a subset of the population and that’s not going to change quickly.  It will take years of infrastructure upgrades and at least one more generation of batteries and production volume.

 

Why not do everything possible to reduce emissions TODAY while still working towards BEVs.  More hybrids won’t stop development of BEVs and once they’re viable you’ll see buyers naturally transition.  
 

And with that I’ll get off the soapbox.

 

The point I was trying to make is that you need to set a goal and try and meet it.

 

I agree with your saying, but I think the thing we are dealing with is that most automakers are seeing dollar signs when it comes to EVs-they should be more profitable than ICE due to being less complex to design and build. Plus not to mention the bump in stock pricing due to investors thinking they'll be like Tesla with stock prices. 

 

But also with the timeline, from a purely Ford perspective, I think they can just update what they currently have till say 2035, when EV infrastructure should be far better.

 

The biggest unknowns are the build out of charging stations nationwide and how much pricing will come down with additional battery production in North America. We should have a better feel for that in 5 years. 

 

[Sherminator98]

10 hours ago, AM222 said:

Another thing most people forget are the mining of several raw materials required to make batteries and how these are transported. Just imagine if the number of EVs being built quadruples. Hopeful they come up with better cheaper more environmentally friendly tech soon.

And the refining of Oil and its transportation doesn't do the same thing? Not including other geopolitical issues. 

 

Eventually/hopefully battery recycling will make the production closed looped so its just localized to its region. 

[Deanh]

12 hours ago, mackinaw said:

 

Forced downsizing of passenger cars in the 80's gave rise to SUV's and full-size pickups of the 2000's.  Americans like their vehicles BIG.

and Ford went all in on that as well....how did THAT work out..?....

[Rick73]

12 hours ago, mackinaw said:

 

Forced downsizing of passenger cars in the 80's gave rise to SUV's and full-size pickups of the 2000's.  Americans like their vehicles BIG.

An unintended consequence of making exceptions, which were then used to circumvent the original intent.  The same is happening now with BEVs, just differently.  Environmentalist are so focused in getting everyone to drive an electric car that they can’t see the forest for the trees, and worse yet are influencing politicians to make ineffective policies.

 

Switching or trading one type of energy for another only saves the difference between them, it does not eliminate the consumption.  Reducing consumption at point of use can be as effective or more so.  Obviously if we traded gasoline cars for EVs fueled from nuclear or renewable energy, then overall transportation efficiency wouldn’t matter much.  However, reality is that we are decades from that, maybe longer.  In the mean time we are ignoring low-hanging fruit.

[Deanh]

3 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

And the refining of Oil and its transportation doesn't do the same thing? Not including other geopolitical issues. 

 

Eventually/hopefully battery recycling will make the production closed looped so its just localized to its region. 

thats a large discussion...where exactly does an Electrics car "fuel" come from ?...and lets be real here, BEV is in its infancy in comparison with ICE so there WILL be more issues, and IMO significant ones....will be interesting (  course well all be dust ) to circle back when BEV has the century or so history that ICE does. I feel theres gonna be some DOOZIES. And thats not mentioning foreign dependence on materials and the environmental impacts of mining and the abuse of human rights, things that Oil is significantly more innocent of 

[DeluxeStang]

5 hours ago, Deanh said:

and Ford went all in on that as well....how did THAT work out..?....

I was growing increasingly concerned with Ford's renewed emphasis on trucks and SUVs that started about 5 years ago. But they've hedged their bets with trucks by offering things like the maverick hybrid. 

[Deanh]

5 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

I was growing increasingly concerned with Ford's renewed emphasis on trucks and SUVs that started about 5 years ago. But they've hedged their bets with trucks by offering things like the maverick hybrid. 

another big issue is how much the pricing across the board has escalated....the Maverick came at the right time...especially a hybrid for basically 20 k...although thats changed somewhat inthe last couple...

[Andrew L]

14 minutes ago, Deanh said:

another big issue is how much the pricing across the board has escalated....the Maverick came at the right time...especially a hybrid for basically 20 k...although thats changed somewhat inthe last couple...

 

Car prices have gotten out of control new and used.  When I was searching for my beater SUV I have now (2004 Aviator) some of the SUVs and Wagons out there were priced outrageously.  At some point these manufacturers need to start building something affordable again.  I get it profits will take a hit but they can't have EVERYTHING be a premium product.  I feel like there's a real opportunity to start offering some nice base model cheaper cars.  Interest rates are way up too, I saw an article where some people almost have mortgage sized payments for their cars which is absurd.

[Deanh]

54 minutes ago, Andrew L said:

 

Car prices have gotten out of control new and used.  When I was searching for my beater SUV I have now (2004 Aviator) some of the SUVs and Wagons out there were priced outrageously.  At some point these manufacturers need to start building something affordable again.  I get it profits will take a hit but they can't have EVERYTHING be a premium product.  I feel like there's a real opportunity to start offering some nice base model cheaper cars.  Interest rates are way up too, I saw an article where some people almost have mortgage sized payments for their cars which is absurd.

I truly believe its why the Maverick succeeded so well ( well at least initially, time will tell ) ....it was a product people liked and it was AFFORDABLE,.....

[DeluxeStang]

1 hour ago, Deanh said:

I truly believe its why the Maverick succeeded so well ( well at least initially, time will tell ) ....it was a product people liked and it was AFFORDABLE,.....

The maverick is one of the few affordable cars with character and that feels like the team who worked on it gave a shit. We love ours, my only complaint is after about a year, and 5k miles, the interior has picked up a few noises. But that's the case with most affordable cars. 

[jasonj80]

54 minutes ago, Deanh said:

I truly believe its why the Maverick succeeded so well ( well at least initially, time will tell ) ....it was a product people liked and it was AFFORDABLE,.....

Ford also has 1 vehicle under $30,000. so people loyal to Ford have one choice. It also helps it was a great product when it came out.

Buick has 2

Chevrolet has 5

Honda has 3
Toyota has 5 
Hyundai has 5

Kia has 6

VW has 3
Nissan has 7 (1 Electric)

 Ford has major cost issues and they need to figure that out if they ever hope to hit their margins.

[Sherminator98]

12 hours ago, Andrew L said:

 

Car prices have gotten out of control new and used.  When I was searching for my beater SUV I have now (2004 Aviator) some of the SUVs and Wagons out there were priced outrageously.  At some point these manufacturers need to start building something affordable again.  I get it profits will take a hit but they can't have EVERYTHING be a premium product.  I feel like there's a real opportunity to start offering some nice base model cheaper cars.  Interest rates are way up too, I saw an article where some people almost have mortgage sized payments for their cars which is absurd.

 

There are several factors at play here with pricing.

 

First off the elimination of many older cars with cash for clunkers back 10-15 years ago. 

 

Then add in that manufactures are much better about over producing products then they where 30 years ago when some plants where left open just basically as a jobs program for the UAW, which hit the supply of used cars and helped drive up the costs of them. 

 

Then add in the rise in price of vehicles-someone coming out of a three-four year old F-150 and trading it in for a newer one that has gone up in price helps increase the price of used cars

 

But even with that, it doesn't seem to be an issue-just look at how stupid people have been with Bronco ADMs and other cars over the past few years. Too many people focused on monthly payment, but also keep in mind many Americans are flush with cash from COVID and people aren't behind on their bills either, and well cars are far easier to recover then a house when it comes to be people defaulting on them. I also think this the reason why Ford was raising pricing on the Bronco like they have been-it cut into the dealer ADMs

 

I know the used car market is broken when I can sell a farted out 2010 Fusion Hybrid with 215K miles on it for $3500. 

 

 

[Deanh]

15 hours ago, jasonj80 said:

Ford also has 1 vehicle under $30,000. so people loyal to Ford have one choice. It also helps it was a great product when it came out.

Buick has 2

Chevrolet has 5

Honda has 3
Toyota has 5 
Hyundai has 5

Kia has 6

VW has 3
Nissan has 7 (1 Electric)

 Ford has major cost issues and they need to figure that out if they ever hope to hit their margins.

thats a great perspective...I do question the popularity of some of those units though..Buick and Nissan for instance...not sure price helps crap...

[Rick73]

15 hours ago, jasonj80 said:

Ford also has 1 vehicle under $30,000. so people loyal to Ford have one choice. It also helps it was a great product when it came out.

Buick has 2

Chevrolet has 5

Honda has 3
Toyota has 5 
Hyundai has 5

Kia has 6

VW has 3
Nissan has 7 (1 Electric)

 Ford has major cost issues and they need to figure that out if they ever hope to hit their margins.

Great point.  One of the best features of most affordable (to buy) vehicles is that they are also more fuel efficient, hence better for environment.  Even without hybrid powertrain, the most efficient ICE cars are relatively affordable.  Some of these like Corolla offer hybrid option at a reasonable cost that improves fuel economy to 50 MPG range.  Problem is demand for affordable cars is limited during good economic times, and improves mostly when economy struggles.

 

https://www.caranddriver.com/features/g15382442/best-gas-mileage-nonhybrid-cars-gasoline-nonelectric/
 

List below:

 

• Nissan Sentra: 33 mpg
• Acura Integra: 33 mpg
• Kia Forte: 34 mpg
• Volkswagen Jetta: 35 mpg
• Nissan Versa: 35 mpg
• Toyota Corolla: 35 mpg
• Kia Rio: 36 mpg
• Honda Civic: 36 mpg
• Hyundai Elantra: 37 mpg
• Mitsubishi Mirage: 39 mpg

[Texasota]

On 9/5/2023 at 10:22 PM, mackinaw said:

 

Forced downsizing of passenger cars in the 80's gave rise to SUV's and full-size pickups of the 2000's.  Americans like their vehicles BIG.

And nothing was forced on us in regards to anemic small engines. Inefficient V8s were replaced with more powerful and more efficient small displacement turbocharged engines. The market will always find a way to satisfy customer demand. Capitalism is truly amazing.

[Deanh]

sidebar...just came across this...good for a chuckle..is this just a case of bad translation???? .MILAN — Carmaker Stellantis believes inside combustion engine (ICE) automobiles might be on the highway till 2050, making it essential to comprise their carbon emissions till they’re lastly changed by totally electrical ones.

[akirby]

2 hours ago, Texasota said:

And nothing was forced on us in regards to anemic small engines. Inefficient V8s were replaced with more powerful and more efficient small displacement turbocharged engines. The market will always find a way to satisfy customer demand. Capitalism is truly amazing.

Are you sure about that?  I remember a 6.6L Trans Am only putting out only 189 hp in the mid to late 70s.  Everything from 75 to the 90s was pretty anemic.  The move to more and more power and efficiency didn’t really start in earnest until the turn of the century.