Skittish at the prospect of further losses, the Chinese government has taken action. On Saturday, the country’s largest brokerage firms agreed to establish a fund worth 120 billion yuan ($19.4 billion) to buy shares in the largest companies listed in the index. Beijing has also lowered interest rates, relaxed restrictions on buying stocks with borrowed money, and imposed a moratorium on initial public offerings. The country haseven relied on propaganda to encourage the public to hold onto their shares for patriotic reasons.
LI-ion is ready to ramp up production right now. My guess is Toyota knows if LI-ion takes off and costs continue to drop they can just pivot to that pretty easily, whereas they would be the 1st mover to hydrogen.
I live in Scotland and we currently produce around 40% of our electricity with windmills
If we controlled our own destiny (instead of Westminster/London) ramping the basic level up to 100% would be a doddle
After you reach 100% you can either export it, store it, or give it to the industry/transport sectors
The easiest option is option 3
Windmills are like those donkey pumps in Texas, they just sit there a pump out money, the big difference is that windmills "last forever" and create zero pollution
I live in Scotland and we currently produce around 40% of our electricity with windmills
If we controlled our own destiny (instead of Westminster/London) ramping the basic level up to 100% would be a doddle
After you reach 100% you can either export it, store it, or give it to the industry/transport sectors
The easiest option is option 3
Windmills are like those donkey pumps in Texas, they just sit there a pump out money, the big difference is that windmills "last forever" and create zero pollution
Interesting Trump is in the news, remember when he tried to block that windfarm in Scotland ioverseeing his golf course? Said it was an eyesore.
Storage technology is improving rapidly (as costs of LI-ion goes down) so for places like Scotland 100% in the future could be a possibility.
It's just a tough sell economically to some. While there is the immediate energy savings, you have a lot of industry/infrastructure being disrupted. All the jobs in oil, coal, power plants, car maintenance/repairs, fueling infrastructure, etc. Can go on and on. Solar and wind create jobs but not on the level of those industries.
As far as Westminster/London, we have a lot of those issues here. A lot of battles going on between solar and the utilities, the utilities know solar isn't far away from being scaling and they want a piece of the pie and/or to limit it rather than just let their monopoly die. Everyone loves the free market until it starts fucking with their money.
BTW Eek.....Even the Saudi's are starting to wakeup to the value of renewables. Not because they give a crap about the planet or anything but their electricity consumption (they burn oil for it) is skyrocketing and wasting cheap oil when you can sell it on the open market isn't very smart. People just leave their ACs on all day over there because it is so cheap.
Obviously the desert is ripe for PV panels.
Obviously the desert is ripe for PV panels.
The windmills are becoming so efficient here that they get switched off when it gets too windy.
The grid can't handle the huge surge in output so they sit there on the hill with their vanes pointing into the wind until the wind drops.
There's been a lack of infrastructure investment here since the 1980s and the Jocks started looking seriously at Independence
London doesn't want us getting too far ahead of the game since we may be quitting the UK in a few years
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-13253876
In contrast, countries like Holland who were smashed to pieces in WW2 and were all half starved are now romping ahead of us in the global economy. They have a comparable population... the big difference is they run their own country
The grid can't handle the huge surge in output so they sit there on the hill with their vanes pointing into the wind until the wind drops.
There's been a lack of infrastructure investment here since the 1980s and the Jocks started looking seriously at Independence
London doesn't want us getting too far ahead of the game since we may be quitting the UK in a few years
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-13253876
In contrast, countries like Holland who were smashed to pieces in WW2 and were all half starved are now romping ahead of us in the global economy. They have a comparable population... the big difference is they run their own country
Given the high costs of fuel in the UK and other parts of Europe, if EVs can begin to scale production they should have more demand over there. With our cheaper fuel costs there isn't really the demand in the US yet. When gas is 6-8 bucks I'd think there would be greater consumer demand as long as the vehicles were at cost parity with IC engines.
I know infrastructure wise tesla has put a lot of charging stations in Europe despite the fact they only have sold a few thousand cars a year there, so maybe they see that as a big future market.
http://www.globalpetrolprices.com/gasoline_prices/
Up to date gas by country....Greece shouldn't be too worried, nobody there will be able to afford a car soon enough but the rest of those countries ripe for EV penetration.
Chop, any updates on DNR? Tough to time but oil shouldn't go too much lower.
Up to date gas by country....Greece shouldn't be too worried, nobody there will be able to afford a car soon enough but the rest of those countries ripe for EV penetration.
Chop, any updates on DNR? Tough to time but oil shouldn't go too much lower.
At the beginning it's going to be like the Satellite TV or the mobile phone market or when computers first started to become affordable
Patchy users and patchy coverage
Then there will be the mini explosion of users and too many companies trying to cash in
Then those companies will boom/bust depending on a combination of luck product design and timing and the bigger better players will emerge from the rubble
Somewhat agree but the automotive business is a lot less disruptive than other tech. We haven't had a new American automotive company in almost 100 years until TSLA. It's a really capital intensive business compared to something like mobile phones or personal computers.
That is actually a little problematic long-term I think because once we find a technology that we think we can mass produce/sell then we're just going to run with that (i.e LI-ion) and it might stifle innovation for further breakthroughs after because we've scaled tech and manufacturing for LI-ion that the newer technology just won't be able to compete on economics. The first to scale kinda becomes the default innovation in a way.
This happened with internal combustion, we made the manufacturing process so efficient that it couldn't be disrupted or challenged for many years.
[h=1]24M Technologies Launches Cheaper-to-Produce Lithium-Ion Cell[/h]
19
27
The claim is that the batteries will cost 50% less to produce than current lithium-ion batteries, and by 2020 the cost would fall below $100 per kilowatt hour, which is considered the threshold for mass adoption of electric vehicles. Today, the estimates of battery costs range wildly between $300 per kilowatt-hour and $500 per kilowatt-hour.
Because the battery is the most expensive part of an electric car, like the Tesla Model S or the forthcoming Chevrolet Bolt, lowering the cost of the battery significantly could have a big impact.
Yet-Ming Chiang, a professor at Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a co-founder of A123 Systems Inc., has been working on the battery since 2010. The company has received $50 million in private financing as well as a $4.5 million grant from the U.S. Department of Energy. It currently has cells being tested by customers outside of the lab.
“Currently we are negotiating the manufacturing plant and location with our strategic partners,” said Mr. Chiang. The first commercial application will be for electric grid storage, due out in 2017, he said. Mr. Chiang said the company also has had discussions with automakers about using the cells for electric vehicles.
The announcement comes less than a week after Tesla said it was forming a partnership with Jeff Dahn, a leading lithium-ion battery researcher at Dalhousie University in Nova Scotia in order to lower battery costs.
Claims of dramatic improvements in energy density are common in the battery world. But often successes at the laboratory level have big faults.
“If I were to place my own dollars on something not being hype, it would be Yet-Ming Chiang’s product,” said Venkat Viswanathan, a battery researcher at Carnegie Mellon University. “Having said that, it is very, very ambitious.”
The innovation is in how the cell is assembled instead of the basic chemistry. Batteries have positive and negative electrodes and an intermediary conductor called the electrolyte. The battery design for 24M increases the width of the electrodes by five times, greatly increasing the amount of energy-storing material and reducing the non-active materials, like copper and electrolytes.
It’s not a new idea. Thicker electrodes can store more energy, but traditionally it has been very hard to get power into and out of cells like these. It wouldn’t work for an electric car. But the manufacturing process allows for the electrons to move through the cell more freely.
- [h=2]24M[/h]
- [h=2]BATTERIES[/h]
- [h=2]ELECTRIC CARS[/h]
- [h=2]LITHIUM-ION[/h]
19
27
- By
- MIKE RAMSEY
- CONNECT
The claim is that the batteries will cost 50% less to produce than current lithium-ion batteries, and by 2020 the cost would fall below $100 per kilowatt hour, which is considered the threshold for mass adoption of electric vehicles. Today, the estimates of battery costs range wildly between $300 per kilowatt-hour and $500 per kilowatt-hour.
Because the battery is the most expensive part of an electric car, like the Tesla Model S or the forthcoming Chevrolet Bolt, lowering the cost of the battery significantly could have a big impact.
Yet-Ming Chiang, a professor at Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a co-founder of A123 Systems Inc., has been working on the battery since 2010. The company has received $50 million in private financing as well as a $4.5 million grant from the U.S. Department of Energy. It currently has cells being tested by customers outside of the lab.
“Currently we are negotiating the manufacturing plant and location with our strategic partners,” said Mr. Chiang. The first commercial application will be for electric grid storage, due out in 2017, he said. Mr. Chiang said the company also has had discussions with automakers about using the cells for electric vehicles.
The announcement comes less than a week after Tesla said it was forming a partnership with Jeff Dahn, a leading lithium-ion battery researcher at Dalhousie University in Nova Scotia in order to lower battery costs.
Claims of dramatic improvements in energy density are common in the battery world. But often successes at the laboratory level have big faults.
“If I were to place my own dollars on something not being hype, it would be Yet-Ming Chiang’s product,” said Venkat Viswanathan, a battery researcher at Carnegie Mellon University. “Having said that, it is very, very ambitious.”
The innovation is in how the cell is assembled instead of the basic chemistry. Batteries have positive and negative electrodes and an intermediary conductor called the electrolyte. The battery design for 24M increases the width of the electrodes by five times, greatly increasing the amount of energy-storing material and reducing the non-active materials, like copper and electrolytes.
It’s not a new idea. Thicker electrodes can store more energy, but traditionally it has been very hard to get power into and out of cells like these. It wouldn’t work for an electric car. But the manufacturing process allows for the electrons to move through the cell more freely.
This happened with internal combustion, we made the manufacturing process so efficient that it couldn't be disrupted or challenged for many years.
An amazingly simple gearless transmission was invented in 1923 and GM bought the patent for 100,000 dollars (A lot of money back then)
They never produced a single unit, not one
An amazingly simple gearless transmission was invented in 1923 and GM bought the patent for 100,000 dollars (A lot of money back then)
They never produced a single unit, not one
Yeah, that is 1 great thing about today it is much harder to suppress new and disruptive technology.
I see your point about a gearless transmission but in general a big obstacle that EVs face is there is already a perfectly fine product in the marketplace. Something like VCR, DVD, Smartphones, etc. When these first cameout they were extremely expensive and the quality was poor compared to later versions, when an EV comes out it is expensive/poor quality but you already have regular cars in the market place that are perfectly suitable. This means it has to get to a certain threshold of quality before becoming commercially viable that a lot of other technologies didn't have to initially have.
This is why when quality/cost improve, I could see the EV becoming widespread faster than people think.
http://waitbutwhy.com/2015/06/how-tesla-will-change-your-life.html
Check this out if you got some time to kill. Maybe a little too biased/bullish but cool writeup on Tesla/EVs
DNR is a long term hold. It's not one of those short position type plays.
When oil took the dive it was a good opportunity to get into a great stock at a great price.
Ive been in and out of DNR for over 15 years. It was the very first stock I ever bought .
I know these people . They are very conservative but smart people .
There's an article on his torque converter here
He replaced the 45hp engine with a 10hp engine and drove around London with 10 people loaded in the vehicle
Then he towed a lorry up a hill with his 10hp car. Then he chocked the car with 6inch blocks of wood in front of the wheels and drove over them
His original "production" car had a 6hp engine in a standard chassis
He replaced the 45hp engine with a 10hp engine and drove around London with 10 people loaded in the vehicle
Then he towed a lorry up a hill with his 10hp car. Then he chocked the car with 6inch blocks of wood in front of the wheels and drove over them
His original "production" car had a 6hp engine in a standard chassis
Musk was broke in 2010 dumping everything he had into tesla
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2010/06/22/business/22sorkin.html?referrer=
Nother good read
http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-elon-musk-spacex/
world needs more more dreamers willing to fail like him vs the super corrupt money hoarders almost all the smart elite are..
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2010/06/22/business/22sorkin.html?referrer=
Nother good read
http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-elon-musk-spacex/
world needs more more dreamers willing to fail like him vs the super corrupt money hoarders almost all the smart elite are..
