I am torn. Bronco vs. Daily Driving a Guzzler

[Bruzer22]

When large entities, whether it's government, corporations, etc, have convinced you that you are the problem, their PR has done their job.

The only debate should be if the cost of fueling your vehicle is a concern.

Sponsored

 

[senatorPOPS]

Stop drinking the Kool aid. You tell me how a battery that is mined from the ground by large non EV vehicles. Batteries only last 10yrs max then what the battery doesn't just vanish ie batteries setting in land filled, don't get me started on the hazardous materials in the batteries and where do you think the electric that charges your battery comes from. Before anyone says wind or solar check out why CA has roiling brown out. short answer not enough wind and solar to supply demand. My opinion but what do I know

other option in perfect world, my plan if I can wing it financially
Bronco dedicated off road rig

The environmental impact from a manufacturing standpoint is larger for EVs, but the overall impact from ownership is much less. It’s not kool-aid. There are plenty of studies out there investigating this. I’m not personally on any side of the argument, but we have to be fair about both. People have their own reasons for wanting what they want, it’s good to have options and in time, manufacturing will get better as well as less costly.

 

[greatlakes]

The Bronco looks cool - internal debate over .

Actually, my other car has a V-8 with absolutely zero emission controls so, in comparison, the Bronco will be environmentally friendly.

 

[Mason1646]

Life is full of trade offs - something that many have forgotten in the past two years. If this is something that is troubling your conscience - first don't let it, but if that doesn't work either take public transit, ride a bike, or get a Prius. If you can't stomach any of the above, then you have come to realize that life is more than numbers and it is okay - rather good - to enjoy the various blessings God has given while recognizing that there are tradeoffs to everything. You have to figure out if the supposed environmental impact will cause you to lose more sleep than driving a Prius will. There is not a wrong answer, and all of us are constituted a bit differently. If its troubling you, then don't get one. A vehicle isn't worth a troubled conscience - even if the conscience is wrong.

With that said, buy a Bronco and drive the crap out of it. And eat cake and fried chicken on occasion even though your doctor tells you not to. Life is to be lived in the world not in an excel spreadsheet.

 

[Silver-Bolt]

If your environmental concerns are that strong, your Bronco is going to keep you up at night.

 

[mikec426]

Join the Prius forum.

Man, the snark is real on this forum!

To answer the OP, no, not bothered. My previous daily driver was a Tundra that got 14.5 mpg so getting 17 right now is an improvement. I’ve thought about getting a little Civic to drive back and forth to work… I even did it for a while when I had an hour commute. Now it’s 15 minutes. So…

 

[AZ_BRONC]

I bought my kid a 55 mpg Toyota Camry hybrid so I could sleep at night about owning my Bronco. And our family’s biggest daily driver gets in the 30’s.

Actually, I’ll be getting a mile or two better mileage with the Bronco than my current 4Runner. Your decision to drive a 20mpg vehicle instead of a 40 mpg vehicle that also requires mostly fossil fuel created electrical charging and the chemicals and minerals requires to build and some day decommission massive batteries will have 0.0000000% impact on the globe we live on. Sleep well.

 

[fuesting]

Not trying to start a climate change debate...
So I am stoked about the Bronco. It was the first car in a long time that made me consider swapping out my Subaru. I found a lot of cars recently follow the same bland look and the Bronco checks all the boxes for me from a design standpoint. For practicality reasons I need the 4 door as I am the usual driver of people and stuff for holiday, ski, beach, etc trips. I never forgot that the Bronco being a box on wheels and thus never going to be great on gas but this extended wait time has allowed me to continually contemplate the responsibility of driving said box 45min to work each way on top of trips. I know EVs have their own environmental impacts but it does feel selfish to DD a Bronco while it largely isn't being used off road. Any one else have this internal debate? How are you wrestling with this?

I think I understand your train of thought but can you provide more clarity on these statements? "...continually contemplate the responsibility of driving said box.." Responsibility to who/what? "...but it does feel selfish to DD a Bronco..." Selfish against whom? If your answer lies outside of you and your family, you are thinking about this all wrong IMO. I would suggest you stop beating yourself up over things like this. If you want to actually make a difference with the climate or environment, there are so many other things people should do first; again IMO.

 

[King Luis]

Volvo has release a report a few weeks ago comparing the CO2 emissions impact of the XC40 electric versus ICE. from mining for batteries to building engines, Volvo is able to directly compare both equally as Volvo build both cars and they are both the same just different powertrains.

long story short, the ICE XC40 can be manufactured, shipped, driven to 150,000km and it would equal the same amount of CO2 emissions as the electric XC40 being built and shipped. that includes the mining and shipment of batteries, parts, etc for both vehicles. not just being built in the factory.

this is something a lot of companies cannot report on as they don't build two equal vehicles in the same plant. here's a link to the report. https://www.volvocars.com/images/v/...electric-light/volvo-cars-LCA-report-xc40.pdf

 

[BC overlanding]

I'm with you, both from an environmental point and just from a basic cost point. Driving a Bronco vs something way more fuel efficient is (some quick napkin math, say a gallon each way, 10 gallons a week, 500 gallons a year at $3 so ~$1500 a year) a bit of money, almost cell phone bill money.

If I didn't live 8 miles from where I work, it would definitely be a consideration.

you are only saving the difference not the whole amount
Vehicle 1. DD 28 mpg
Vehicle 2. Bronco 2.7 18mpg
difference 10 gallons

The environmental impact from a manufacturing standpoint is larger for EVs, but the overall impact from ownership is much less. It’s not kool-aid. There are plenty of studies out there investigating this. I’m not personally on any side of the argument, but we have to be fair about both. People have their own reasons for wanting what they want, it’s good to have options and in time, manufacturing will get better as well as less costly.

I agree if you want to pay say 10k more for a EV that will take 10 yrs to get back the cash over price of gas vehicle have at it.
Sure that manufacturing of EV will lower prices, but that still doesn't stop batteries from setting in land fields. The materials in the batteries NEVER biodegrade just there polluting the earth forever so how is that better then gas. I am all for not polluting earth jus think EV over gas is just trading one bad thing with another that all

 

[Theherofails]

LOL.

My entire life of driving won't even match one private jet flight to Davos. LET THEM EAT CAKE.

 

[senatorPOPS]

I agree if you want to pay say 10k more for a EV that will take 10 yrs to get back the cash over price of gas vehicle have at it.
Sure that manufacturing of EV will lower prices, but that still doesn't stop batteries from setting in land fields. The materials in the batteries NEVER biodegrade just there polluting the earth forever so how is that better then gas. I am all for not polluting earth jus think EV over gas is just trading one bad thing with another that all

Agreed, recycling needs to get better along with a lot of things. We need to show corporations that it’s profitable so they invest in better technology, not much else we can do from a consumer standpoint.

 

[Monster1926]

Volvo has release a report a few weeks ago comparing the CO2 emissions impact of the XC40 electric versus ICE. from mining for batteries to building engines, Volvo is able to directly compare both equally as Volvo build both cars and they are both the same just different powertrains.

long story short, the ICE XC40 can be manufactured, shipped, driven to 150,000km and it would equal the same amount of CO2 emissions as the electric XC40 being built and shipped. that includes the mining and shipment of batteries, parts, etc for both vehicles. not just being built in the factory.

this is something a lot of companies cannot report on as they don't build two equal vehicles in the same plant. here's a link to the report. https://www.volvocars.com/images/v/...electric-light/volvo-cars-LCA-report-xc40.pdf

Is the ev Xc40 being driven 150k or it’s the same just being produced and shipped without being driven?

 

[thatspecialbeat]

Better than running a leaf blower for a few minutes a day.

https://www.edmunds.com/about/press...ick-up-trucks-says-edmunds-insidelinecom.html

 

[BlueOvalBandit]

It's funny, wood pellet power plants are considered "green energy" because they're carbon "neutral" by replanting what they cut down. Clear cutting old growth and replanting new saplings is not what I call "neutral" but it helps people sleep.

A lot of it is "creative" accounting. Nuclear lately is the hot topic in CA and being sold as not CO2 neutral because it's serviced by fossil fuel vehicles... I mean WTF, nothing is by that standard but it's selectively applied.

Sponsored