Ford CEO: Vertical Integration Will Increase with Move to EVs

[silvrsvt]

Everyone is ignoring the elephant in the room-the CAFE requirements are getting more onerous so manufactures are offering hybrids to help make them. Ego, only reason people are buying hybrids is because they are making more of them and they don't really require any change in driving behavior without really improving CO2 emissions or saving money overall. If you compare the Escape for example, it costs 5K more to save $400 a year in gas and put out 1.2 ton less Co2 over the year. Yeah I get that newer products are coming standard with hybrids, but that is more about CAFE then anything else. 

[Rick73]

When a person trades a 20 MPG vehicle for a Camry that gets +/- 50 MPG, they reduce  CO2 by more than in half immediately; as in right now, this year, not in future years when the grid becomes green.  As often the case, perfect is the enemy of good.  Being pragmatic is not a bad thing.

[silvrsvt]

11 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

When a person trades a 20 MPG vehicle for a Camry that gets +/- 50 MPG, they reduce  CO2 by more than in half immediately; as in right now, this year, not in future years when the grid becomes green.  As often the case, perfect is the enemy of good.  Being pragmatic is not a bad thing.

 

Unless your going from a truck to a Camry, that isn't going to happen. 

[CurtisH]

31 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

 

Unless your going from a truck to a Camry, that isn't going to happen. 

To be fair, our 2011 Edge averaged a little under 22 mpg over the life of the vehicle.  If we had purchased a hybrid Camry, it would have reduced CO2 by about as much as Rick73 said.  

[Rick73]

“they don't really require any change in driving behavior without really improving CO2 emissions ”

 

You make the first part seem like it’s a bad thing, when most buyers see it as good.  The second part, stating hybrids don’t reduce CO2, is just wrong.  Objectively hybrids burn less fuel and therefore produce less CO2.  That’s fact based.  If someone wants to argue that is nor enough, it’s a different discussion.  

[Rick73]

10 minutes ago, CurtisH said:

To be fair, our 2011 Edge averaged a little under 22 mpg over the life of the vehicle.  If we had purchased a hybrid Camry, it would have reduced CO2 by about as much as Rick73 said.  

My classic Mustangs averaged well under 20 MPG.  Still own one, though I’m not trading for a Camry no matter what.  Point is there are a lot of cars still driving around that can be replaced with hybrids short-term and reduce CO2 faster.

[silvrsvt]

8 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

“they don't really require any change in driving behavior without really improving CO2 emissions ”

 

You make the first part seem like it’s a bad thing, when most buyers see it as good.  The second part, stating hybrids don’t reduce CO2, is just wrong.  Objectively hybrids burn less fuel and therefore produce less CO2.  That’s fact based.  If someone wants to argue that is nor enough, it’s a different discussion.  

 

In an apples to apples comparison using the Escape 1.5L and HEV there isn't a huge improvement...so if your upgrading from an older vehicle, you'd still improve either way.

 

Here is using the camry example for the past 10 years...the 2024 actually produces more CO2 when using the 2.4L then it did in 2018

 

[akirby]

23 minutes ago, CurtisH said:

To be fair, our 2011 Edge averaged a little under 22 mpg over the life of the vehicle.  If we had purchased a hybrid Camry, it would have reduced CO2 by about as much as Rick73 said.  

Even my 2013 Fusion only averaged 22.  Prior to that my Fusion and Lincoln LS and Edge all got 17 mpg.  Lots of 20-22 mpg vehicles still on the road.

[Rick73]

12 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

 

In an apples to apples comparison using the Escape 1.5L and HEV there isn't a huge improvement...so if your upgrading from an older vehicle, you'd still improve either way.

 

Here is using the camry example for the past 10 years...the 2024 actually produces more CO2 when using the 2.4L then it did in 2018

 

We are discussing improvements by using “hybrids”.  The 2024 Camry hybrid is rated 170 grams per mile (based on 52 MPG), which is lowest number there.  I honestly don’t know what you’re trying to say that contradicts that improvement.  

[silvrsvt]

9 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

We are discussing improvements by using “hybrids”.  The 2024 Camry hybrid is rated 170 grams per mile (based on 52 MPG), which is lowest number there.  I honestly don’t know what you’re trying to say that contradicts that improvement.  

 

And its what do you define as an improvement...either way buying a new car vs a car that is 5-10 years old will normally improve/cut back on CO2 (which is a function of burning less fuel). Your just moving the goalposts

[Texasota]

Why does this remind me of the movie Groundhog Day?

[akirby]

38 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

 

And its what do you define as an improvement...either way buying a new car vs a car that is 5-10 years old will normally improve/cut back on CO2 (which is a function of burning less fuel). Your just moving the goalposts

Good grief - on the 2024 the hybrid is 5.7 vs 9.3 barrels.  Even using Core math that’s still a significant improvement.  Not sure why you keep saying hybrids aren’t an improvement.

[Rick73]

11 minutes ago, Texasota said:

Why does this remind me of the movie Groundhog Day?

With all due respect, it’s a necessary evil.  There are people with idealistic agendas that spin information in ways to influence people who don’t know better.  It is the duty and responsibility of those who are qualified and know the difference to point it out as a way to educate.  Whether readers agree or not, or do more research, is entirely up to them.  If not called on false information, or more commonly wrong assumptions, where will we end up when misinformation is left unchallenged?  Both BEVs and hybrids have pros and cons, and I see nothing wrong with making informed decisions based on facts.

 

 

[akirby]

18 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

With all due respect, it’s a necessary evil.  There are people with idealistic agendas that spin information in ways to influence people who don’t know better.  It is the duty and responsibility of those who are qualified and know the difference to point it out as a way to educate.  Whether readers agree or not, or do more research, is entirely up to them.  If not called on false information, or more commonly wrong assumptions, where will we end up when misinformation is left unchallenged?  Both BEVs and hybrids have pros and cons, and I see nothing wrong with making informed decisions based on facts.

 

 

It’s not necessary to do it here when it’s been said over and over already.  If they don’t understand it the first 2 times then you’re not changing anyone’s opinion by repeating it.  I’m just as passionate about misinformation and I’m guilty of repeating myself too but at some point you just have to let it go.

[Rick73]

Goal is not to change mind of person who is repeatedly wrong, it is to educate others with open minds; bystanders reading both sides of issues.

[Rangers09]

3 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

Everyone is ignoring the elephant in the room-the CAFE requirements are getting more onerous so manufactures are offering hybrids to help make them. Ego, only reason people are buying hybrids is because they are making more of them and they don't really require any change in driving behavior without really improving CO2 emissions or saving money overall. If you compare the Escape for example, it costs 5K more to save $400 a year in gas and put out 1.2 ton less Co2 over the year. Yeah I get that newer products are coming standard with hybrids, but that is more about CAFE then anything else. 

 

Those figures are all hypothetical, here is some real data and facts from an actual Escape owner, comparing a 23 PHEV and a 19 Titanium.

 

Capital Cost

Yes, the PHEV costs more than a similar ICE Escape, however our Govt does not provide grants to ICE vehicles. The $7,000 we received from the Federal & Provincial Govt are deducted at the dealership, therefore the net additional capital cost for purchasing an Escape, was virtually zero.

 

Therefore, in our case, the Escape did NOT cost $5K more.

 

Fuel Economy

We have now driven the vehicle for about 1,550 miles and recently filled the tank for the first time. It took 6.6 gallons, most of which was used during a road trip where charging wasn't available. This provided a very respectable 230.5 mpg. In similar driving conditions, DW's 2019 Escape got about 23.7 mpg

 

CO2

Based on our current mileage of 1,550 and 6.6 gallons of gas, I believe we have contributed about 150 lbs of CO2 with the gas use. Since our local power is over 98% hydro and other renewables, we do not contribute any CO2 from our electric use.

 

DW's 2019 Escape would have used about 65.4 gallons of gas for a distance of 1,550 miles. I note this is based on actual driving results when using that vehicle, not some hypothetical EPA estimate. Her previous Escape would have contributed 1,486 lbs to cover 1,550 miles. Therefore our CO2 savings are 1,336 lbs with a distance of 1,550 miles.

 

Since the annual CO2 figures are probably based on 12,000 miles, when I extrapolate our results, I get an actual CO2 savings of 4.6 tons. Considerably higher than your stated 1.2 tons.

 

Fuel Cost

Our total fuel cost for the 1,550 miles was $51.87. With the 2019 Escape, the fuel cost would have been $514, so our savings were $462.13. When calculating our electricity cost, I used our higher rate of 14.08c per kWhr, coming up with a cost of $69.84. In 5 months, we have only driven 1,550 miles and still saved almost your stated annual savings of $400.

 

Since the annual savings are again probably based on 12,000 miles, extrapolating our savings to date, our annual savings should be $3,037.08. These savings are also realise without any increased capital cost.

 

I am aware that others will experience different results based on driving habits, electricity/fuel costs and Govt grants, but these are facts based on currently owning a PHEV Escape and previously a 2019 ICE Escape.

 

 

[akirby]

1 hour ago, Rick73 said:

Goal is not to change mind of person who is repeatedly wrong, it is to educate others with open minds; bystanders reading both sides of issues.

You can do that the first time you post.  Repeating it doesn’t help.

[silvrsvt]

 So apparently people are being confused by what I was saying and not actually reading what I said-

 

The point I was trying to make was, at least in the Escape's situation, the difference between the HEV and 1.5L in Co2 and gas mileage isn't that great

 

Furthermore, using how many barrels of oil being used is terrible metric, if you look at fuel costs its about $500 a year difference for 2 barrels using the Fueleconomy.gov figures. Which works out to less than 10 bucks a week, which would make the pay back for a HEV harder to justify because of the additional cost they are in some products. 

 

The other point that was missed is that newer cars have been reducing CO2, once again using the Escape as an example:

 

And fuel economy as a metric:

 

So over 20 years we went from 22 combined to 30 combined with a reduction of 105 gpm in CO2

 

Fuel Economy doesn't show a huge improvement from a cost perspective because once you hit the 20-25 mark it doesn't make a huge improvement, as seen with the Escape

As you can see this with the Explorer over the years

 

Edited November 18, 2023 by silvrsvt

[akirby]

Do hybrids get better fuel economy and pollute less than their non hybrid counterparts?

 

Yes.  Undeniably.  Might be a lot, might be a little but it’s better.  Cost depends on a lot of factors including rebates.

 

 

[Rangers09]

40 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

 So apparently people are being confused by what I was saying and not actually reading what I said-

 

The point I was trying to make was, at least in the Escape's situation, the difference between the HEV and 1.5L in Co2 and gas mileage isn't that great
 

 

 

As a owner, based on our actual experience, I again dispute that the difference between an HEV (not PHEV) and a similar 2.0L ICE Escape is not that great.

 

Based on a road trip with the 23 PHEV Escape last summer, we had no ability to plug it in and charge, therefore it was operated entirely as an HEV. During the 2 week trip, we used about 1/2 tank of gas, whereas the 2019 Escape would have used 2 tanks of gas for the same trip. Didn't calculate actual fuel used, so this is based on the car's fuel gauge.

 

So again, in our actual experience, in HEV Mode, the Escape does get significantly improved mileage over a 2019 2.0L Escape. The difference between our 2018 1.5L Escape and the 2019 2.0L Escape was < 1 mpg.

[Texasota]

4 hours ago, Rangers09 said:

 

Fuel Economy

We have now driven the vehicle for about 1,550 miles and recently filled the tank for the first time. It took 6.6 gallons, most of which was used during a road trip where charging wasn't available. This provided a very respectable 230.5 mpg. In similar driving conditions, DW's 2019 Escape got about 23.7 mpg

 

This is my results since picking up my Escape PHEV from the dealership. Not nearly as good as yours, Ranger09, but we did a circle tour of Lake Superior with no charging along the way.

 

[jpd80]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

Do hybrids get better fuel economy and pollute less than their non hybrid counterparts?

 

Yes.  Undeniably.  Might be a lot, might be a little but it’s better.  Cost depends on a lot of factors including rebates.

 

 

The other confounding fact is that CAFE is based on highway mpg test cycle where there’s

less speed differential compared to the city cycle.

 

I looked at Ford Escape FWD with 1.5 EB (27/34/30) vs 2.5 Hybrid (42/36/39)

so comparing highway cycle, there’s only 2 mpg difference that CAFE records

but on the city cycle, the difference is 16 mpg, a big change that CAFE ignores…..

 

So has the government fallen into the trap of using a historical system that doesn’t recognise

significant increases in fuel economy simply to maintain consistent  statistical records?

Never underestimate government bureaucracy…….

Edited November 19, 2023 by jpd80

[akirby]

30 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

The other confounding fact is that CAFE is based on highway mpg test cycle

Try again.

 

[jpd80]

29 minutes ago, akirby said:

Try again.
 

I’m enlightened…..

So its in gallons per hundred miles and more like a function of the combined fuel economy

with 55% coming from city and only 45% coming from highway cycle.

 

So the hybrid Escape getting combined 39 mpg is a significant improvement over the 1.5 EB with 30 mpg 

that’s really worth something to Ford and why the RAV4 hybrid is probably more important to Toyota than

Escape is to Ford since it sells so many RAV4s each month (38,000 in September?)

Edited November 19, 2023 by jpd80

[jpd80]

I guess that’s the point, CAFE limits are more important to manufacturers that the actual fuel savings to buyers.

Getting more buyers to embrace hybrids will sustain or prolong the ICE side of the business while BEVs improve.