Ford must be SERIOUS -Ed Bagley Jr. backs FORD

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
15 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Ford must be SERIOUS -Ed Bagley Jr. backs FORD

Steven Lough
Who would have thought...  just 5 years ago...  such advertising...WOW
!  I love it !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KtdOu6xIQY&feature=player_embedded

--
Steven S Lough
President: Seattle EV Associatin
206 524 1351
WEB: www.seattleeva.org

_______________________________________________
| REPLYING: address your message to [hidden email] only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| OPTIONS: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ford must be SERIOUS -Ed Bagley Jr. backs FORD

Dave Hymers
That's it, Ford has won. GM's Volt ads compared to this ? ha !
I'd like to think its because Ford really does get it, time will tell.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/private/ev/attachments/20110111/3010d5db/attachment.html 
_______________________________________________
| REPLYING: address your message to [hidden email] only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| OPTIONS: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ford must be SERIOUS -Ed Bagley Jr. backs FORD

Jack Murray
In reply to this post by Steven Lough
well, that's what you do when you are big and WAY BEHIND others with no real product, SELL HOPE AND PROMISES you don't have to deliver on, to get people to NOT buy the others products.  Ford is still a slug eating the green, not yet a butterfly flying above it.

But yes, amazing the marketing turn around,
the "buzz" is getting louder now, some real competition,
looks like there are real buyers for these EVs.
And if gas prices continue their climb, more to come.

--- On Tue, 1/11/11, Steven Lough <[hidden email]> wrote:

> From: Steven Lough <[hidden email]>
> Subject: [EVDL] Ford must be SERIOUS -Ed Bagley Jr. backs FORD
> To: "EV Discussion List RCVR" <[hidden email]>
> Date: Tuesday, January 11, 2011, 8:45 AM
> Who would have thought...  just
> 5 years ago...  such advertising...WOW
> !  I love it !
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KtdOu6xIQY&feature=player_embedded
>
> --
> Steven S Lough
> President: Seattle EV Associatin
> 206 524 1351
> WEB: www.seattleeva.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> | REPLYING: address your message to [hidden email]
> only.
> | Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
> | UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> | OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
> | OPTIONS: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
>

_______________________________________________
| REPLYING: address your message to [hidden email] only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| OPTIONS: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ford must be SERIOUS -Ed Bagley Jr. backs FORD

brucedp
This post was updated on .
In reply to this post by Steven Lough
http://www.plugincars.com/ed-begley-jr-becomes-ford-ev-hitman-106656.html
Ed Begley Jr. Becomes Ford’s EV Hitman
By Brad Berman  Jan 10 2011
The 2011 Detroit Auto Show and 2011 Computer Electronics Show have
given Ford the chance to spread a lot of good news about its electric
car plans. In the past few days alone, the company has unveiled its
all-electric Ford Focus Electric ...

In an apparent good-cop-bad-cop strategy, Ford has assigned the
quintessential tree-hugging goody-goody Ed Begley Jr. to deliver bad
news to its competitors. In a new Ford-produced video, he provides
lots of good information about the company’s electrification strategy,
but in two instances, he throws barbs at the two leading EV makers:
Nissan and General Motors.

After a self-loathing ding on tree-hugging Birkenstock-wearers in the
first few seconds, Ed says that Ford’s home charger, available from
Best Buy, is 30 percent cheaper than the other guys. Then he says that
the Focus Electric can charge in just over three hours (by virtue of
its 6.6 kW charger). At 2:12 into the video, he quips, “I could
mention cars that take twice that time, but I’ll LEAF that alone.”
(That’s an obvious reference, and a corny pun, aimed at the Nissan
LEAF’s 3.3 kW charger, which is twice as slow.)

Thirty seconds later, he characterizes Ford’s approach as a whole
solution and complete plan with a full range of gas and electric
choices. “Not like some other companies trying to cram all their
customers into one type of electric car,” Begley adds.

What does he mean by that?  ...
You know the EV space is really heating up when the man most known for
tree hugging goodness is called into service to hack away at the
competition. Ford has been relatively quiet during the Chevy Volt
[pish] and Nissan LEAF days of 2010, but it seems ready to throw down
the gloves. And you have to admit that Ford has a great strategy ...
Let the carmakers duke it out for EV bragging rights. We consumers can
only benefit. [Copyright ©2011 PluginCars.com]
...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Series_hybrid#Series_hybrid
[pish = plug-in series hybrid: GM's Volt is a pish, not an EV]






http://electric-vehicle-discussion-list.413529.n4.nabble.com/Honda-Fit-EV-demonstration-program-in-LA-CA-td3208470.html

{brucedp.150m.com}
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ford must be SERIOUS -Ed Bagley Jr. backs FORD

EVDL Administrator
In reply to this post by Steven Lough
"Butterflies?  Nice.  Oh look, a blue one!"  <cringe>

Sorry, while I'm not an expert and am pretty much on the periphery of the
media, I have some notions of what makes an ad work, and there isn't much of
it in this one.

In my book, this ad is a facepalm.  I rather hope no one sees it, because I
fear it will do more harm than good to the image of EVs. While it doesn't
have the creepy quality of the infamous EV1 toaster ad, it's one of the most
amateurish, blandest, longest-winded ads I've ever seen, for any product.

This seems more like an internal Ford training video presentation than
something intended for public viewing.  The target audience isn't at all
clear, unless it's Florida retirees, thanks to the presence of an older
spokesperson.  I know he means well, but outside of the the hobbyist EV
community, who knows who Ed Begley Jr is?  

The ad has no particular emotional message.  There's nothing to grab the
viewer's heart or gut.  Nor does it do much to grab the viewer's head.  The
rational arguments are pretty weak, and lost among a blizzard of irrelevant
verbiage.  Why on earth would you start off an EV ad by talking about how
great the company's ICEs are?  Why bring up Ford's hybrids, which don't
sell?

Worse, it insults EV buyers.  Why, for goodness sake, would they marginalize
and trivialize us as "Mr. Socks with the Birkenstocks" and "those [few] who
are ready to charge into the electric world"?

The production quality is excruciating.  It's embrassingly amateurish, about
what you'd expect from a college TV production project.  It's huge and
clunky.  The music drones on and on with the endless jabber, formulaic and
repetitive.  Somewhere inside this clunky 3 minutes and 20 seconds might be
a passable 30 second spot, but good luck finding it.  

Visually, it's static.  What few visual effects they use are hackneyed and
stilted.  

And BUTTERFLIES?   Seriously?  

This ad doesn't make me think of Ford as committed to EVs.  Quite to the
contrary.  I already knew that their EVs would be quick and dirty
conversions, just like their gas-only hybrids that haven't sold.  This $1.98
ad just reinforces that low-budget image.  

Leaf may have its limitations, but when it comes to actually selling it to
real world customers, the Nissan folks are doing a lot of things right.  

They started by making the leaf a car that's exclusively an EV, like the
Prius was exclusively gas hybrid.  (Yes, I know they're using an existing
platform, but the Leaf is visually unique.)  Unlike Ford's (and Honda's)
proposed EVs, there is no version of the Leaf that you can put gasoline
into, and that's a good thing.  The Leaf has an instant visual EV and
"green" identity and image.  

And Nissan have produced ads for it that build on this image by speaking to
the heart as much as (or more than) the head.  They're high voltage, well
targeted ads with the budget that comes from a fully committed company.  

I'm actually starting to believe that Nissan is in EVs for the long run.  
Ford?  Serious?  Not on the evidence presented here.  Nissan's polar bear
knocks this out of the water, so to speak.

David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
EVDL Administrator

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
EVDL Information: http://www.evdl.org/help/
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Note: mail sent to "evpost" and "etpost" addresses will not
reach me.  To send a private message, please obtain my
email address from the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ .
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


_______________________________________________
| REPLYING: address your message to [hidden email] only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| OPTIONS: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ford must be SERIOUS -Ed Bagley Jr. backs FORD

Ken Fry
I have to agree with David: this add seems incredibly hokey, and frankly, I would not want a car that has a gauge that reads in butterflies.  The ad is also over-the-top re Ford getting it and others not getting it.  They even mention having been doing hybrids for 10 years... but fail to mention that they did not develop that technology.  

Huge oversell in my view, as is their ad that calls the Focus "zero CO2 emissions".  If people are aware that we use 23 watt cfc bulbs to reduce our carbon emissions from the alternative 100 watt incandescent bulbs, then how can they seriously think electric cars are emission-free?  It boggles the mind.

Model for model, as clearly shown by the EPA tests of the 2002 RAV4 EV, electric cars emit roughly half the CO2 of a conventional car.  That is something to crow about!  Going from 3.7 tons per year down to zero sounds like snake oil, pure and simple.

Given that you can not underestimate the gullibility of the public, I suppose this ad campaign will do well, and I'll have to up my doses of Tums.  

 

         
Think Big.
Drive Small.  
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ford must be SERIOUS -Ed Bagley Jr. backs FORD

Rick Beebe
In reply to this post by EVDL Administrator
On 01/11/2011 03:03 PM, EVDL Administrator wrote:
> This seems more like an internal Ford training video presentation than
> something intended for public viewing.  The target audience isn't at all
> clear, unless it's Florida retirees, thanks to the presence of an older
> spokesperson.  I know he means well, but outside of the the hobbyist EV
> community, who knows who Ed Begley Jr is?  

I wonder if it's something they came up with to play in the Ford booth
at the Detroit Auto Show. I agree that it doesn't play like anything you
should see on TV. To me it has a 'trade show' air about it.

> The ad has no particular emotional message.  There's nothing to grab the
> viewer's heart or gut.  Nor does it do much to grab the viewer's head.  The
> rational arguments are pretty weak, and lost among a blizzard of irrelevant
> verbiage.  Why on earth would you start off an EV ad by talking about how
> great the company's ICEs are?  Why bring up Ford's hybrids, which don't
> sell?

Hey, I've bought two of them! :-) Don't you think blue butterflies will
sell cars? No?

I guess they wanted to show that fuel efficiency is a prime focus at
Ford. Aside from the Leaf, do any other Nissan vehicles talk about the
polar bear?

> I'm actually starting to believe that Nissan is in EVs for the long run.  
> Ford?  Serious?  Not on the evidence presented here.  Nissan's polar bear
> knocks this out of the water, so to speak.

I agree about Nissan. They are, at the moment, a one-trick pony though.
I agree that Ford is pretty cautious about entering the market, but they
are talking about several different vehicle types including the Focus EV
and the electric Transit. Plus plug-in versions of the Focus and Escape
hybrids. Of course they only exist in prototype form now, but I'm
somewhat more optimistic than you about them.

--Rick

_______________________________________________
| REPLYING: address your message to [hidden email] only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| OPTIONS: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ford must be SERIOUS -Ed Bagley Jr. backs FORD

Doug Weathers
In reply to this post by Ken Fry

On Jan 11, 2011, at 1:39 PM, Ken Fry wrote:

> Huge oversell in my view, as is their ad that calls the Focus "zero CO2
> emissions" ...  how
> can they seriously think electric cars are emission-free?  It boggles the
> mind.

Well, they ARE emission-free.  The car does not emit pollution.

>
> Model for model, as clearly shown by the EPA tests of the 2002 RAV4 EV,
> electric cars emit roughly half the CO2 of a conventional car.  

No, electric cars don't emit CO2, or any other pollutant.  No more than your microwave oven or computer does.

Now, producing electricity USUALLY produces pollution or has a negative environmental impact.  It is, however, possible to generate electricity with minimal impact, with solar and wind and biofuels.  (Some would add nuclear power to that list but I don't want to reopen that can of worms here.)

This comes up on the list periodically.  My take:

The car is zero emission, like any other electric appliance.  By definition.  End of story.  Otherwise your TV would have a vent stack running up through the ceiling, like your furnace or toilet.

Emissions?  We don't talk about the emissions from appliances, we talk about how energy efficient they are.  And while the numbers differ depending on the study, EVs are about twice as energy efficient as ICE vehicles.  EVs win, as you point out.

Besides, people talk about power plant emissions instead of tailpipe emissions as if that was a BAD thing!  Don't we want the emissions to happen somewhere away from all the people?  Plus, the emissions controls on a big power plant are much tighter than on the equivalent fleet of cars.

Also, over time more of our electricity will be generated by non-polluting sources, whereas every gallon of gas burned will always and forever produce 20 pounds of CO2 (until the oil runs out, of course).

Finally, if you want to talk about the pollution emitted by building the non-polluting power sources (like solar panels), I call "foul".  Nobody talks about the pollution generated by extracting, refining, transporting, storing, and dispensing gasoline, so it's not fair to ignore this cost for ICEs while counting it for EVs.  And it seems obvious that any such comparison would only make EVs look better.

> Going from 3.7 tons per year down to zero sounds
> like snake oil, pure and simple.

Measured at the vehicle, this is entirely correct.

--
Doug Weathers
http://www.gdunge.com
"There is no easy way from the Earth to the stars." - Seneca
"We choose to go to the Moon and do the other things - not because  
they are easy, but because they are hard." - John F. Kennedy


_______________________________________________
| REPLYING: address your message to [hidden email] only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| OPTIONS: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ford must be SERIOUS -Ed Bagley Jr. backs FORD

Lyle-3
In reply to this post by EVDL Administrator


I can definitely see how some long time members of this list may view Ford and this ad as lacking commitment and insulting. Afterall, in recent history, Ford's previous EV products left many out in the cold.  

The Ford ranger EV was sold mainly to government agencies.  Then ford stopped supporting still-operational vehicles whether thru end of vendor life or hoped for government contract re-negotiation, so these agencies were left without maintenance and repair options.  Eventually thru neglect or lack of interest these same vehicles found their way onto DRMO lots for consumer purchase but little mainenance material or replacement parts for any die-hard ev fan.

The Think was discontinued and the factory left to fend for themselves in staying operational.

The Escape hybrid marketed in 2006 has experienced almost no continued marketing support since its debut.

I am a diehard Ford owner and even I am on the "I'll wait and see" approach whether Ford is truly committed to EV.


     

_______________________________________________
| REPLYING: address your message to [hidden email] only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| OPTIONS: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ford must be SERIOUS -Ed Bagley Jr. backs FORD

Dennis Miles
Gentlemen and Ladies,
      I have said it before and I will keep saying it until "IT Happens;"
There are two infrastructures in place for ICE cars and the equivalent need
to be established for Electric cars for there can never be a viable
marketplace without BOTH of them.

FIRST: is a substantial, widespread fuel supply network, Gas and Diesel are
in place; Electric Recharging is not as yet,(Although it has been started,
there is a lot of progress yet to be accomplished as obviously the
installation and purchase prices are obscene,  and no one with an EV should
have to pay $4500 for the equivalent to what a RV owner can get for $ 125
(240 V.@ 30A.).[a dryer outlet installed!]

SECOND: is a well trained and equipped and widespread availability of
service and repair, not just at selected Dealerships, Everywhere one can get
an ICE auto fixed should be able to service and repair an EV also.
Apparently at this time if you want more than a car wash or tire pressure
check you must take your EV to the Dealer"s service shop. Or "Do it
yourself." A friend bought a new car for Thanksgiving, Seven items required
a day each for the dealer to make them right under warranty. a tire, two
engine sensors, a replacement electric window motor, adjusting the Emergency
brake, a SLI battery replacement, and a power steering pump. Almost three
weeks to get it all fixed. BUT the nearest EV dealership is 245 miles away
(Much more of a nightmare!) Would you buy what you cannot fix yourself if
service is over 200 miles away?

I am a believer in EV and I have worn the EV Grin many times in the many EV
I have had but would I recommend one to a Driver who is not a mechanic with
EV training? NO !    Not until there a lot more EV service Agencies
available. We need to change that !  (Will you help me ? )


Regards,
*Dennis Lee Miles*   (Director)     *E.V.T.I. inc*.
*www.E-V-T-I-Inc.COM <http://www.e-v-t-i-inc.com/>    *(Adviser)*
EVTI-EVAEducation Chapter
*
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The "Stone Age" didn't end because they ran out of Stones;
       It ended because they started using their Brains !
 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 12:10 AM, lyle sloan <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
> I can definitely see how some long time members of this list may view Ford
> and this ad as lacking commitment and insulting. Afterall, in recent
> history, Ford's previous EV products left many out in the cold.
>
> The Ford ranger EV was sold mainly to government agencies.  Then ford
> stopped supporting still-operational vehicles whether thru end of vendor
> life or hoped for government contract re-negotiation, so these agencies were
> left without maintenance and repair options.  Eventually thru neglect or
> lack of interest these same vehicles found their way onto DRMO lots for
> consumer purchase but little mainenance material or replacement parts for
> any die-hard ev fan.
>
> The Think was discontinued and the factory left to fend for themselves in
> staying operational.
>
> The Escape hybrid marketed in 2006 has experienced almost no continued
> marketing support since its debut.
>
> I am a diehard Ford owner and even I am on the "I'll wait and see" approach
> whether Ford is truly committed to EV.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> | REPLYING: address your message to [hidden email] only.
> | Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
> | UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> | OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
> | OPTIONS: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
>



--
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/private/ev/attachments/20110112/b9d35bf0/attachment.html 
_______________________________________________
| REPLYING: address your message to [hidden email] only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| OPTIONS: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ford must be SERIOUS -Ed Bagley Jr. backs FORD

Douglas A. Stansfield-2
Dennis,

Does it really only cost $125 to have a Nema plug installed in Florida?  I
cannot even begin to have a Nema Plug installed in my garage up in NJ for
that little.

Doing my part based on your "roll out" initiative referenced below.


Sincerely;

Douglas A. Stansfield
President
www.TransAtlanticElectricConversions.com
973-875-6276 (office)
973-670-9208 (cell)
973-440-1619 (fax)

ELECTRIC CAR PRODUCERS





-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf
Of Dennis Miles
Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2011 4:18 AM
To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List
Subject: Re: [EVDL] Ford must be SERIOUS -Ed Bagley Jr. backs FORD

Gentlemen and Ladies,
      I have said it before and I will keep saying it until "IT Happens;"
There are two infrastructures in place for ICE cars and the equivalent need
to be established for Electric cars for there can never be a viable
marketplace without BOTH of them.

FIRST: is a substantial, widespread fuel supply network, Gas and Diesel are
in place; Electric Recharging is not as yet,(Although it has been started,
there is a lot of progress yet to be accomplished as obviously the
installation and purchase prices are obscene,  and no one with an EV should
have to pay $4500 for the equivalent to what a RV owner can get for $ 125
(240 V.@ 30A.).[a dryer outlet installed!]

SECOND: is a well trained and equipped and widespread availability of
service and repair, not just at selected Dealerships, Everywhere one can get
an ICE auto fixed should be able to service and repair an EV also.
Apparently at this time if you want more than a car wash or tire pressure
check you must take your EV to the Dealer"s service shop. Or "Do it
yourself." A friend bought a new car for Thanksgiving, Seven items required
a day each for the dealer to make them right under warranty. a tire, two
engine sensors, a replacement electric window motor, adjusting the Emergency
brake, a SLI battery replacement, and a power steering pump. Almost three
weeks to get it all fixed. BUT the nearest EV dealership is 245 miles away
(Much more of a nightmare!) Would you buy what you cannot fix yourself if
service is over 200 miles away?

I am a believer in EV and I have worn the EV Grin many times in the many EV
I have had but would I recommend one to a Driver who is not a mechanic with
EV training? NO !    Not until there a lot more EV service Agencies
available. We need to change that !  (Will you help me ? )


Regards,
*Dennis Lee Miles*   (Director)     *E.V.T.I. inc*.
*www.E-V-T-I-Inc.COM <http://www.e-v-t-i-inc.com/>    *(Adviser)*
EVTI-EVAEducation Chapter
*
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The "Stone Age" didn't end because they ran out of Stones;
       It ended because they started using their Brains !
 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 12:10 AM, lyle sloan <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
> I can definitely see how some long time members of this list may view Ford
> and this ad as lacking commitment and insulting. Afterall, in recent
> history, Ford's previous EV products left many out in the cold.
>
> The Ford ranger EV was sold mainly to government agencies.  Then ford
> stopped supporting still-operational vehicles whether thru end of vendor
> life or hoped for government contract re-negotiation, so these agencies
were

> left without maintenance and repair options.  Eventually thru neglect or
> lack of interest these same vehicles found their way onto DRMO lots for
> consumer purchase but little mainenance material or replacement parts for
> any die-hard ev fan.
>
> The Think was discontinued and the factory left to fend for themselves in
> staying operational.
>
> The Escape hybrid marketed in 2006 has experienced almost no continued
> marketing support since its debut.
>
> I am a diehard Ford owner and even I am on the "I'll wait and see"
approach

> whether Ford is truly committed to EV.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> | REPLYING: address your message to [hidden email] only.
> | Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
> | UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> | OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
> | OPTIONS: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
>



--
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/private/ev/attachments/20110112/b9d35bf0/attac
hment.html
_______________________________________________
| REPLYING: address your message to [hidden email] only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| OPTIONS: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

_______________________________________________
| REPLYING: address your message to [hidden email] only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| OPTIONS: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ford must be SERIOUS -Ed Bagley Jr. backs FORD

Zeke Yewdall
If you can do it yourself, or if you have an electrician friend who will
give you a special rate, yes.  I could do either... but for the average
public, to go out and hire an electrician for $75 to $100/hr, probably more
like $400+ for a relatively simple addition of a $40 socket -- if it's
pretty near the electrical service.  I think that many people will find that
charging at home is way more convenient than going to a charging station
anyway once they get used to it... for me the closest gas station is 12
miles away, and I'm always making trips JUST to get gas for vehicles that
otherwise wouldn't go that far.    I have at least 5 vehicles that usually
don't go farther than that from home.

I think the lack of service is the bigger real roadblock... most people
don't know anything about their car, so having a service center
knowledgeable about it is key.

Z



On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 6:40 AM, Douglas A. Stansfield <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> Dennis,
>
> Does it really only cost $125 to have a Nema plug installed in Florida?  I
> cannot even begin to have a Nema Plug installed in my garage up in NJ for
> that little.
>
> Doing my part based on your "roll out" initiative referenced below.
>
>
> Sincerely;
>
> Douglas A. Stansfield
> President
> www.TransAtlanticElectricConversions.com
> 973-875-6276 (office)
> 973-670-9208 (cell)
> 973-440-1619 (fax)
>
> ELECTRIC CAR PRODUCERS
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On
> Behalf
> Of Dennis Miles
> Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2011 4:18 AM
> To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] Ford must be SERIOUS -Ed Bagley Jr. backs FORD
>
> Gentlemen and Ladies,
>      I have said it before and I will keep saying it until "IT Happens;"
> There are two infrastructures in place for ICE cars and the equivalent need
> to be established for Electric cars for there can never be a viable
> marketplace without BOTH of them.
>
> FIRST: is a substantial, widespread fuel supply network, Gas and Diesel are
> in place; Electric Recharging is not as yet,(Although it has been started,
> there is a lot of progress yet to be accomplished as obviously the
> installation and purchase prices are obscene,  and no one with an EV should
> have to pay $4500 for the equivalent to what a RV owner can get for $ 125
> (240 V.@ 30A.).[a dryer outlet installed!]
>
> SECOND: is a well trained and equipped and widespread availability of
> service and repair, not just at selected Dealerships, Everywhere one can
> get
> an ICE auto fixed should be able to service and repair an EV also.
> Apparently at this time if you want more than a car wash or tire pressure
> check you must take your EV to the Dealer"s service shop. Or "Do it
> yourself." A friend bought a new car for Thanksgiving, Seven items required
> a day each for the dealer to make them right under warranty. a tire, two
> engine sensors, a replacement electric window motor, adjusting the
> Emergency
> brake, a SLI battery replacement, and a power steering pump. Almost three
> weeks to get it all fixed. BUT the nearest EV dealership is 245 miles away
> (Much more of a nightmare!) Would you buy what you cannot fix yourself if
> service is over 200 miles away?
>
> I am a believer in EV and I have worn the EV Grin many times in the many EV
> I have had but would I recommend one to a Driver who is not a mechanic with
> EV training? NO !    Not until there a lot more EV service Agencies
> available. We need to change that !  (Will you help me ? )
>
>
> Regards,
> *Dennis Lee Miles*   (Director)     *E.V.T.I. inc*.
> *www.E-V-T-I-Inc.COM <http://www.e-v-t-i-inc.com/>    *(Adviser)*
> EVTI-EVAEducation Chapter
> *
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> The "Stone Age" didn't end because they ran out of Stones;
>       It ended because they started using their Brains !
>  +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 12:10 AM, lyle sloan <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > I can definitely see how some long time members of this list may view
> Ford
> > and this ad as lacking commitment and insulting. Afterall, in recent
> > history, Ford's previous EV products left many out in the cold.
> >
> > The Ford ranger EV was sold mainly to government agencies.  Then ford
> > stopped supporting still-operational vehicles whether thru end of vendor
> > life or hoped for government contract re-negotiation, so these agencies
> were
> > left without maintenance and repair options.  Eventually thru neglect or
> > lack of interest these same vehicles found their way onto DRMO lots for
> > consumer purchase but little mainenance material or replacement parts for
> > any die-hard ev fan.
> >
> > The Think was discontinued and the factory left to fend for themselves in
> > staying operational.
> >
> > The Escape hybrid marketed in 2006 has experienced almost no continued
> > marketing support since its debut.
> >
> > I am a diehard Ford owner and even I am on the "I'll wait and see"
> approach
> > whether Ford is truly committed to EV.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > | REPLYING: address your message to [hidden email] only.
> > | Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
> > | UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> > | OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
> > | OPTIONS: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
> >
>
>
>
> --
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
>
> http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/private/ev/attachments/20110112/b9d35bf0/attac
> hment.html<http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/private/ev/attachments/20110112/b9d35bf0/attac%0Ahment.html>
> _______________________________________________
> | REPLYING: address your message to [hidden email] only.
> | Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
> | UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> | OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
> | OPTIONS: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
>
> _______________________________________________
> | REPLYING: address your message to [hidden email] only.
> | Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
> | UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> | OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
> | OPTIONS: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/private/ev/attachments/20110112/868df9ab/attachment.html 
_______________________________________________
| REPLYING: address your message to [hidden email] only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| OPTIONS: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ford must be SERIOUS -Ed Bagley Jr. backs FORD

Ken Fry
In reply to this post by Doug Weathers
Hi Doug,

You've edited my text and then responded to your edited version.  
> Huge oversell in my view, as is their ad that calls the Focus "zero CO2
> emissions" ...  how
> can they seriously think electric cars are emission-free?  It boggles the
> mind.

This makes it sound as if Ford thinks their vehicles are emission free, which they do not.  The well-to-wheels approach to evaluating car GHG emissions (and resource depletion efficiency) was written into CAFE law almost at its inception, and all the manufacturers (and environmental scientists) are well-aware of the value of thinking in full-life-cycle terms.  The people who (like me) design electric cars are completely aware of the method and appreciate that, given current technology, electric cars cause the emission of roughly 1/2 the GHG of a conventional vehicle.  The EPA analysis is not incorrect, as you seem to be implying.  

If we are to reduce CO2 emissions, reduce resource consumption, free ourselves from petroleum and its security issues, we must look seriously, (not in cutesy sound bites) at how we use energy and how we generate electricity.  When Nissan calls its LEAF a 367 MPGe vehicle or Chevy calls its Volt a 230 mpg vehicle (or Ford calls it car zero CO2 emission) they are giving false impressions, and are going against serious environmentalists, engineers, and scientists.  The early LEAF and Volt announcements were met with profound and widespread skepticism.  That is not good for the electric car industry.  It makes the vendors look like snake oil salesmen.  

When you have a world acutely aware of the CO2 consequences of a 23 watt bulb, you cannot expect people to ignore the effects of the 150,000 motor in a Tesla.  

Electric cars are not a panacea.  They are a very good step in the right direction, that should be taken seriously, rather than promoted by fantastic sound bites.  The use of the Focus will create 3.6-3.8 tons of CO2 per year.  If we realize that the grid is dirty, and improve the grid, we can eventually change that to 3.0 and then 2.5 etc.  If we pretend that everything is OK, as we have been doing, then the DOEs projections of more coal burning in the future will come true.  If we stick our heads in the sand and believe that the grid is clean, we have no hope of making serious CO2 reductions.    
   
>>No, electric cars don't emit CO2, or any other pollutant.  No more than your microwave oven or computer does.<<
While you may not think about your computer's contribution to climate change, the fact is that many (perhaps most) educated, environmentally aware, people do.  (Thus the familiar energy star stickers.)
Companies across the world have green initiatives to reduce CO2 footprints, and in virtually every case, reduction of electrical consumption is a key part of the strategies.  

>> Plus, the emissions controls on a big power plant are much tighter than on the equivalent fleet of cars.<<
This is not true as far as I can tell.  If you look at the NOx limits for existing coal-fired plants, you find that they are lax.  While cars have been getting cleaner and cleaner by legal requirement, and have a relatively short life, power plants have a long life and are grandfathered.  

>>Emissions?  We don't talk about the emissions from appliances, we talk about how energy efficient they are.<<

You can speak for yourself, but global warming is a serious issue for many of us.  I am acutely aware of the emissions caused by my appliances, as are many people.  Is a natural gas furnace a better environmental bet that resistance heating?  Yes.  No one of who thinks seriously about the environment and resource depletion thinks that burning coal at 30% efficiency remotely is better than burning natural gas locally at over 90% efficiency.  Coincidentally, a gas furnace is also far less expensive to operate.  We should all be making these analyses.  Resource depletion, for many people, is a secondary issue in comparison to climate change.  The consequences of running out of one of our many fuels is minor in comparison the potential consequences of climate change.  And while we can let the market decide what resources we will deplete over time, we cannot do this re climate change, which requires a large and relatively immediate reduction in CO2 production.  

In either case, however, the CO2 emissions caused are a good indication of both efficiency and emissions.  An efficient EV like the RAV4 EV causes half the emissions of an inefficient one, like the UPSP explorer.  CO2 emissions are directly related to the amount of fuel burned: the explore cause the burning of twice as much coal (natural gas, etc) as the Toyota.  As a society, we would be foolish to ignore the differences in electric vehicles, and consider them all to be “zero emissions”.    

When Ford specifically mentions CO2 in their ad, they are evoking GHG concerns.  (CO2 is not a classic point source toxic emission that causes local smog.  CO2 is a product, not a byproduct, of combustion.)  The concern is global.  To then say that the vehicle is emission free (on a linguistic technicality) is close to fraud, because they are attempting to give the impression that the vehicle has no effect on GHG, which is flat wrong.  If they use the words "tailpipe emission", then they are at least technically correct, but such usage also (responsibly) draws attention to the fact that there are other forms of emissions, that are less obvious.  

Google is well-aware that their operations cause ton upon ton of CO2 emissions.  You don't see them advertising that Google has "zero CO2 emissions", merely because it is linguistically correct that their servers do not emit CO2 from their cooling fans.  Making such a claim would be unethical.  
       
Every electrical appliance causes CO2 emissions.  Big appliances cause a lots of CO2 emissions.
 
   
Doug Weathers wrote
On Jan 11, 2011, at 1:39 PM, Ken Fry wrote:


Well, they ARE emission-free.  The car does not emit pollution.

>
> Model for model, as clearly shown by the EPA tests of the 2002 RAV4 EV,
> electric cars emit roughly half the CO2 of a conventional car.  

No, electric cars don't emit CO2, or any other pollutant.  No more than your microwave oven or computer does.

Now, producing electricity USUALLY produces pollution or has a negative environmental impact.  It is, however, possible to generate electricity with minimal impact, with solar and wind and biofuels.  (Some would add nuclear power to that list but I don't want to reopen that can of worms here.)

This comes up on the list periodically.  My take:

The car is zero emission, like any other electric appliance.  By definition.  End of story.  Otherwise your TV would have a vent stack running up through the ceiling, like your furnace or toilet.

Emissions?  We don't talk about the emissions from appliances, we talk about how energy efficient they are.  And while the numbers differ depending on the study, EVs are about twice as energy efficient as ICE vehicles.  EVs win, as you point out.

Besides, people talk about power plant emissions instead of tailpipe emissions as if that was a BAD thing!  Don't we want the emissions to happen somewhere away from all the people?  Plus, the emissions controls on a big power plant are much tighter than on the equivalent fleet of cars.

Also, over time more of our electricity will be generated by non-polluting sources, whereas every gallon of gas burned will always and forever produce 20 pounds of CO2 (until the oil runs out, of course).

Finally, if you want to talk about the pollution emitted by building the non-polluting power sources (like solar panels), I call "foul".  Nobody talks about the pollution generated by extracting, refining, transporting, storing, and dispensing gasoline, so it's not fair to ignore this cost for ICEs while counting it for EVs.  And it seems obvious that any such comparison would only make EVs look better.

> Going from 3.7 tons per year down to zero sounds
> like snake oil, pure and simple.

Measured at the vehicle, this is entirely correct.

--
Doug Weathers
http://www.gdunge.com
"There is no easy way from the Earth to the stars." - Seneca
"We choose to go to the Moon and do the other things - not because  
they are easy, but because they are hard." - John F. Kennedy


_______________________________________________
| REPLYING: address your message to ev@lists.sjsu.edu only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| OPTIONS: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
Think Big.
Drive Small.  
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ford must be SERIOUS -Ed Bagley Jr. backs FORD

AMPhibian
In reply to this post by Zeke Yewdall
I'd say with the limited number of EV's that will be available in the near future and their limited range anyone buying them will be near their dealer, where they can be serviced, which I rather doubt they will need much of anyway.  It's an EV after all.
Zeke Yewdall wrote
 

I think the lack of service is the bigger real roadblock... most people
don't know anything about their car, so having a service center
knowledgeable about it is key.
   
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ford must be SERIOUS -Ed Bagley Jr. backs FORD

Dennis Miles
In reply to this post by Douglas A. Stansfield-2
OK,Doug,
    Your right my estimate was 10 years out of date a call to a local
electrician profuced a reply to drop a NEMA plug installed within 10 feet of
the main Electrical Panel with a 40 amp 220 breaker, wire in conduit on
surface of wall  and socket got me an estimate of about $450. Still that is
1/10 of a Coulomb Industries Charging Station and installation. Of course a
hobyist doing it himself without a permit would be considerably more
reasonable. (Yes, I know that is not recommended by the UBEW; they
say,"Wiring is NO Hobby!")
Regards,
*Dennis Lee Miles*   (Director)     *E.V.T.I. inc*.
*www.E-V-T-I-Inc.COM <http://www.e-v-t-i-inc.com/>    *(Adviser)*
EVTI-EVAEducation Chapter
*
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The "Stone Age" didn't end because they ran out of Stones;
       It ended because they started using their Brains !
 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 8:40 AM, Douglas A. Stansfield <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> Dennis,
>
> Does it really only cost $125 to have a Nema plug installed in Florida?  I
> cannot even begin to have a Nema Plug installed in my garage up in NJ for
> that little.
>
> Doing my part based on your "roll out" initiative referenced below.
>
>
> Sincerely;
>
> Douglas A. Stansfield
> President
> www.TransAtlanticElectricConversions.com
> 973-875-6276 (office)
> 973-670-9208 (cell)
> 973-440-1619 (fax)
>
> ELECTRIC CAR PRODUCERS
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On
> Behalf
> Of Dennis Miles
> Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2011 4:18 AM
> To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] Ford must be SERIOUS -Ed Bagley Jr. backs FORD
>
> Gentlemen and Ladies,
>      I have said it before and I will keep saying it until "IT Happens;"
> There are two infrastructures in place for ICE cars and the equivalent need
> to be established for Electric cars for there can never be a viable
> marketplace without BOTH of them.
>
> FIRST: is a substantial, widespread fuel supply network, Gas and Diesel are
> in place; Electric Recharging is not as yet,(Although it has been started,
> there is a lot of progress yet to be accomplished as obviously the
> installation and purchase prices are obscene,  and no one with an EV should
> have to pay $4500 for the equivalent to what a RV owner can get for $ 125
> (240 V.@ 30A.).[a dryer outlet installed!]
>
> SECOND: is a well trained and equipped and widespread availability of
> service and repair, not just at selected Dealerships, Everywhere one can
> get
> an ICE auto fixed should be able to service and repair an EV also.
> Apparently at this time if you want more than a car wash or tire pressure
> check you must take your EV to the Dealer"s service shop. Or "Do it
> yourself." A friend bought a new car for Thanksgiving, Seven items required
> a day each for the dealer to make them right under warranty. a tire, two
> engine sensors, a replacement electric window motor, adjusting the
> Emergency
> brake, a SLI battery replacement, and a power steering pump. Almost three
> weeks to get it all fixed. BUT the nearest EV dealership is 245 miles away
> (Much more of a nightmare!) Would you buy what you cannot fix yourself if
> service is over 200 miles away?
>
> I am a believer in EV and I have worn the EV Grin many times in the many EV
> I have had but would I recommend one to a Driver who is not a mechanic with
> EV training? NO !    Not until there a lot more EV service Agencies
> available. We need to change that !  (Will you help me ? )
>
>
> Regards,
> *Dennis Lee Miles*   (Director)     *E.V.T.I. inc*.
> *www.E-V-T-I-Inc.COM <http://www.e-v-t-i-inc.com/>    *(Adviser)*
> EVTI-EVAEducation Chapter
> *
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> The "Stone Age" didn't end because they ran out of Stones;
>       It ended because they started using their Brains !
>  +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 12:10 AM, lyle sloan <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > I can definitely see how some long time members of this list may view
> Ford
> > and this ad as lacking commitment and insulting. Afterall, in recent
> > history, Ford's previous EV products left many out in the cold.
> >
> > The Ford ranger EV was sold mainly to government agencies.  Then ford
> > stopped supporting still-operational vehicles whether thru end of vendor
> > life or hoped for government contract re-negotiation, so these agencies
> were
> > left without maintenance and repair options.  Eventually thru neglect or
> > lack of interest these same vehicles found their way onto DRMO lots for
> > consumer purchase but little mainenance material or replacement parts for
> > any die-hard ev fan.
> >
> > The Think was discontinued and the factory left to fend for themselves in
> > staying operational.
> >
> > The Escape hybrid marketed in 2006 has experienced almost no continued
> > marketing support since its debut.
> >
> > I am a diehard Ford owner and even I am on the "I'll wait and see"
> approach
> > whether Ford is truly committed to EV.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > | REPLYING: address your message to [hidden email] only.
> > | Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
> > | UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> > | OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
> > | OPTIONS: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
> >
>
>
>
> --
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
>
> http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/private/ev/attachments/20110112/b9d35bf0/attac
> hment.html<http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/private/ev/attachments/20110112/b9d35bf0/attac%0Ahment.html>
> _______________________________________________
> | REPLYING: address your message to [hidden email] only.
> | Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
> | UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> | OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
> | OPTIONS: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
>
> _______________________________________________
> | REPLYING: address your message to [hidden email] only.
> | Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
> | UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> | OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
> | OPTIONS: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
>



--
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/private/ev/attachments/20110116/9c36fbeb/attachment.html 
_______________________________________________
| REPLYING: address your message to [hidden email] only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| OPTIONS: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev