Here's the deal...
I apologize for letting this derail the discussion.
Here's the deal, it is an open conversation. If you don't like the comments then ignore them or report them or send a DM instead of posting a public screed that just creates more of distraction.
The energy costs that we are discussing are directly related to state and local policy and driven by political, social and and environmental factors, even if we don't get into (for good reason) the actual politics of any of it.
I wasn't joking when I said "leave California", nor was I joking when I responded to the comment regarding many who flee the mess they created bringing the same mentality to their new home. It is contextually relevant to the prices every one here is posting.
Tankless water heaters?
They work in moderate climates but are not well suited to high delta T.
They cost exponentially more and are extremely expensive to maintain due to burner fouling.
They fair very poorly with intermittent demand (clothes washers, dishwashers). They must be power vented, which is fine for a tight building envelope where the furnace or existing storage water heater is power vented, but it is another cost if replacing a convection vented storage heater.
Electric models to replace electric tank water heaters. Same issue, they can't do large Delta T and are expensive to purchase and install (due to current demands). They don't make economic sense in most cases for the small savings in operating cost (heat loss to stored water).
Smaller point of use electrics (in place of whole home tank style electric) may make sense from a convenience of installation standpoint (lower current requirements) but are still not cost effective.
Like anything else here the "EPAs" efficiency comparison numbers are mostly nonsense based on idealized testing parameters and also don't take into account the cost of installation, maintenance or the fact that the typical tankless install delivers lower temperature water than the storage tank style.
That is my take.