Did That Colorado Station Sign Say Gas for Only $1.69? Yes, It Did
Key topics
As gas prices plummeted to $1.69 at a Colorado station, a lively discussion erupted around the future of electric vehicles (EVs) versus traditional internal combustion engine (ICE) cars. Some commenters, like alephnerd, pointed out that ICE sales are recovering now that EV subsidies are being phased out, while others, like bombcar, lamented that EVs remain pricier than their ICE counterparts. The debate highlighted varying perspectives on EVs' long-term cost-effectiveness, with some, like coldpie, arguing they're significantly cheaper to own, while others, like bluGill, noted that breaking even on the upfront cost difference can take tens of thousands of miles. Amidst the discussion, a consensus emerged around the lightly-used EV market being a sweet spot, with commenters like Rover222 and rtkwe advocating for buying used EVs to avoid initial depreciation hits.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Very active discussionFirst comment
23m
Peak period
68
0-6h
Avg / period
18.3
Based on 73 loaded comments
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Dec 11, 2025 at 10:01 AM EST
26 days ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Dec 11, 2025 at 10:24 AM EST
23m after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
68 comments in 0-6h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Dec 15, 2025 at 8:59 AM EST
23 days ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
I like EVs but I think that in most markets they're at the same point today that hybrid cars were in the 2010s - proven, but still a difficult financial sell in the short term due to high upfront costs for consumers.
[0] - https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/combustion-engine-ca...
> usually not the only vehicle either
It doesn't seem like EV or not would make a difference for whether to have more than one vehicle? My wife and I have shared one car, first ICE and now EV, for more than a decade and it didn't make a difference in our habits.
It's like some weird 3rd-hand sour grapes. Yes they bought the EV but they don't care about it being an EV! Which matters, for reasons...
Oil and Gas doesn't even want to make investments that trump is pushing, because all those green subsidies and programs will likely come roaring back in a few years. The government may be gerrymandered and senate locked into a tight battle between red and blue, but consumer sentiment is purely popular vote. The trend is pretty clear that consumers want to get away from fossil fuels.
I think this is a false dawn. EV sales in Germany have rebounded strongly after the removal of subsidies [1].
"Germany was the largest contributor, with more than 434,600 new EV registrations and one of the strongest growth rates in the bloc, up 39.4% year-on-year"
EU EV sales are up in 2025 in comparison with 2024 [1]
"Battery electric vehicles accounted for 16.4% of newly registered cars in the EU during the first ten months of 2025, according to figures from the European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association (ACEA). That compares with 13.2% over the same period in 2024."
1. https://www.euronews.com/business/2025/11/25/the-electric-tr... 2. https://ev-database.org/uk/#group=vehicle-group&av-1=1&av-23...
Would be an interesting promo, I guess.
Do you all realize how catastrophic this is?
So given that, I am thankful that President Trump Is following the lead of environmentalists.
SF NIMBY aren't environmentalists, they are obstructionists.
Now for a true scotsmanism - actual environmentalists overwhelmingly support nuclear power, expansion of wind and solar, and geothermal where it is easy to get to, and not too destructive to drill for.
I've not surveyed the population that travels to burningman, but I doubt they are all against sustainable energy, but I've never been, so I don't know.
Environmentalist is a discipline, not a personality type.
1. Sierra Club
2. WWF
3. 350
4. Nature Conservancy
5. Environmental Defense Fund
Okay, now let's do "$org nuclear energy":
https://www.sierraclub.org/nuclear-free
https://wwfeu.awsassets.panda.org/downloads/wwf_position_sta...
https://350.org/solutions-series-nuclear/
https://www.nature.org/content/dam/tnc/nature/en/documents/C... (pro-nuclear, these must be the only Real Environmentalists)
The EDF opposes nuclear energy projects in practice https://environmentalprogress.org/edf but is otherwise generally ambivalent in statements
Therefore, I have to say that a quick survey of the data shows that I am correct. Feel free to use an LLM agent to replicate this human analysis.
and cheaper gas is basically trump policies.
i think we should ban gas and let other countries take over (with gas) /s
Interestingly one policy Trump actually controls: he has cut the rate of adding stocks to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve in half. From Dec '24 to Dec '25 they added only 19 million barrels, compared to the 40 million barrels added in the prior year, despite Trump campaigning on filling the SPR "right to the top". The last, and only, administration that has topped off the SPR was Obama.
Of course, if you fuel off of something like solar or natural gas you can do far better, but a lot of people are just stopping at the point they have electric and then patting themselves on the back as superior.
https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/attach/2015/11/Clean...
I don't think making up a smug EV owner is a very substantial comment. I haven't. met anyone who thinks like this. I imagine most people with electric vehicles would be happy if their energy came from cleaner sources.
Sorry, just being smug with some inconvenient facts.
So gas is cheaper, but you are spending more. This is not a story about gas prices, this is a story of consumer manipulation, dark patterns, monopolistic practices, etc.
"In 2019, shortly after Buc-ee's opened their first store in Alabama, the company was sued for "setting unfair pump prices", because they were selling gasoline to the customers for less money than it costs to buy and transport it to a retail outlet. While it is common within the United States for larger gas station chains to use a pricing strategy where gas is used as a loss leader to draw customers and encourage the sale of other goods, the practice is banned under Alabama state law."
_wiki
Meh. Snacks are expensive at every gas station; it's the market-decided price of convenience, not "monopolistic practices". Just get gas cheaper at Buccees and then get snacks cheaper at your nearby market if you want to optimize for price, nobody is stopping the money-conscientous consumer from doing that.
https://coloradosun.com/2025/09/26/colorado-suncor-water-dis...
People love to hate on the oil companies (and there is good reason to do so), but they love cheap gas far more than that.
Just goes to show that most people are parrots and not actually using their head when stating arguments.
[1]https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/leafhandler.ashx?f=m&n=pet...
https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/realprices/
It's changed much in the last couple of years, so surely it's changed much in the last 50 years.
It is so bad that the state has implemented fence line monitoring. [1]
As someone who lives in Colorado, I'd be happy to see Suncor go. Especially now that I just learned the oil they're refining is Canadian tar sand oil.
[0] https://coloradosun.com/2024/02/05/colorado-suncor-air-pollu... [1] https://cdphe.colorado.gov/public-information/air-quality-an...