Roughing the Punter

Go Back   Roughing the Punter > Main Forums > General Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #11  
Old 03-05-2014, 09:28 AM
WarDekar WarDekar is offline
Friend of RTP
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,330
Default

Clearly CM misses it, too- TSLA is doing more than just manufacturing cars, far more. They are also providing batteries to *other* car manufacturers. They are also starting to provide batteries for solar storage. This is in line with Elon's investments in that area (Solar City being the big one, which he is chairman of and helped his cousins found).

A long term play here is that people (and cities, and states, and whoever!) can actually *store* energy. This is currently not possible. The electricity that you're using right now is being generated somewhere else, right now. There is no way to store electricity in the grid. TSLA's battery technology has the potential to be a complete game changer.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 03-05-2014, 09:51 AM
Craps Master's Avatar
Craps Master Craps Master is offline
Moderator-The Chip Count
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 810
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WarDekar View Post
Clearly CM misses it, too- TSLA is doing more than just manufacturing cars, far more. They are also providing batteries to *other* car manufacturers. They are also starting to provide batteries for solar storage. This is in line with Elon's investments in that area (Solar City being the big one, which he is chairman of and helped his cousins found).
Thatís all reflected in the price. They donít just provide batteries to other car manufacturers, they provide design and technology as well.

Quote:
A long term play here is that people (and cities, and states, and whoever!) can actually *store* energy. This is currently not possible. The electricity that you're using right now is being generated somewhere else, right now. There is no way to store electricity in the grid. TSLA's battery technology has the potential to be a complete game changer.
I doubt itís going to be Tesla that does this. Tesla doesnít even make itís own battery cells; Panasonic does. If you want to ride the power storage wave, isnít Panasonic a better buy? Tesla buys cells from Panasonic and assembles batteries that are optimized for automobiles, not for grid power storage. Perhaps Solar City will be doing that, or maybe Panasonic will. Youíre also going to be up against a titanic wall of Koch Brothers legislative BS to get any kind of formalized distributed grid storage system in place that will allow private Tesla owners to participate in such an arrangement.

Either way, though, when Tesla comes out with 4th and 5th generation models, mass market models, it makes Tesla more relevant for what youíre talking about and it puts 10x or 100x or 1000x as many electric cars on the street. Thatís what I was interested in when I bought TSLA.

I do agree that power storage is going to be a major element of power and energy in the next 50 years; itís absolutely crucial for most forms of alternative energy. I donít think the likely scenario is that people use litium-ion or other similar, portable technologies in a distributed network to achieve that, though. I think that solar interests will develop much larger, centralized storage solutions. Do you have any idea how much energy you can store in a magnetically confined ionized gas? A lot, but weíre not going to see that in vehicles anytime soon IMO.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 03-05-2014, 01:12 PM
WarDekar WarDekar is offline
Friend of RTP
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,330
Default

Didn't say it wasn't reflected in the price, but it's certainly something that JC, et. al don't realize that TSLA is doing.

Of course they are doing much more than just batteries, but that is on my mind right now because of this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/27/au...-car.html?_r=0

From my understanding of this they will no longer be relying on Panasonic. They are pushing battery technology forward at a much faster pace than any of the other players in the field have (because of the incentive to actually do so).

I have friends that work for Solar City and have talked about the convergence of Elon's 3 major properties (SCTY, TSLA, SpaceX) and storage technology is going to be a huge part of this. Also TSLA currently supplies SCTY with the storage batteries, so I think you're wrong in that perhaps SCTY is the company that gets them into the home/business, but TSLA will be the one with the technology selling/licensing it to them:

Quote:
“The average wait is eight months? That’s crazy,” said Elon Musk, chairman of SolarCity and CEO of Tesla Motors, which is selling lithium-ion battery packs to SolarCity.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/uciliawa...-battleground/

For reference:

Quote:
In 2012, the average annual electricity consumption for a U.S. residential utility customer was 10,837 kWh, an average of 903 kilowatthours (kWh) per month
http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=97&t=3

That is only ~30 kWh per day. The Model S has 60 kWh and 85 kWh capacity options, right now. Battery technology is only going to improve, and once electric cars and possibly solar power is ubiquitous, every home with a car will have days of backup power stored in their garage, ready to be used by their home to stay off the grid, or pump power back into the grid, or whatever, instead of it going to waste right now (I believe solar powered homes can go to a negative meter usage by putting power back onto the grid but I'm unsure of the specifics and if there are caps) if the demand doesn't need it.

I think if we could pick Elon's brain on this his vision is much more of a distributed power storage option than a centralized one, and there are plenty of reasons that is better and I can't really see many a centralized one would be (outside of corporate interests of course, which knowing the US I guess is where we'll end up- clearly they've already centralized the internet to large degrees).
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 03-05-2014, 01:20 PM
The Chaperone's Avatar
The Chaperone The Chaperone is offline
Marmalade, I like marmalade ...
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Bank of America Stadium
Posts: 6,065
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WarDekar View Post
I believe solar powered homes can go to a negative meter usage by putting power back onto the grid but I'm unsure of the specifics and if there are caps
They can put excess power back onto the grid, but they cannot profit from it so there is no real motivation. It's total bullshit.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 03-05-2014, 01:46 PM
WarDekar WarDekar is offline
Friend of RTP
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,330
Default

Yeah that indeed is bullshit.

In searching for Elon's thoughts on the power grid I came across this article:

http://qz.com/180978/why-you-could-s...rom-elon-musk/

Which makes the case for the car batteries as "a mobile fleet of electrical grid storage."

FTA:

Quote:
By 2028, Morgan Stanley (which, it must be said, is among the most bullish of all Wall Street banks when it comes to the car company) estimates there will be 3.9 million Tesla vehicles on US roads. They will have a combined energy storage capacity of 237 gigawatts, some 22% of today’s US production capacity and nearly 10 times larger than all US grid storage that exists today.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 03-05-2014, 01:50 PM
WarDekar WarDekar is offline
Friend of RTP
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,330
Default

Also one convergence idea I've heard from somewhere/hypothesized on myself because of some scifi movie I don't know, using SCTY tech combined with SpaceX tech to capture solar energy in space and somehow pipe it back down to earth.

Though I have limited understanding of solar technology, I believe a lot of the energy gets lost as it is reflected and absorbed in the atmosphere on it's way down. Also in space it would be possible to have orbiting satellites that maintain a perfect angle towards the sun at all times further maximizing the efficiency.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 03-05-2014, 07:24 PM
Craps Master's Avatar
Craps Master Craps Master is offline
Moderator-The Chip Count
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 810
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WarDekar View Post
I have friends that work for Solar City and have talked about the convergence of Elon's 3 major properties (SCTY, TSLA, SpaceX) and storage technology is going to be a huge part of this. Also TSLA currently supplies SCTY with the storage batteries, so I think you're wrong in that perhaps SCTY is the company that gets them into the home/business, but TSLA will be the one with the technology selling/licensing it to them:

That is only ~30 kWh per day. The Model S has 60 kWh and 85 kWh capacity options, right now. Battery technology is only going to improve, and once electric cars and possibly solar power is ubiquitous, every home with a car will have days of backup power stored in their garage, ready to be used by their home to stay off the grid, or pump power back into the grid, or whatever, instead of it going to waste right now (I believe solar powered homes can go to a negative meter usage by putting power back onto the grid but I'm unsure of the specifics and if there are caps) if the demand doesn't need it.

I think if we could pick Elon's brain on this his vision is much more of a distributed power storage option than a centralized one, and there are plenty of reasons that is better and I can't really see many a centralized one would be (outside of corporate interests of course, which knowing the US I guess is where we'll end up- clearly they've already centralized the internet to large degrees).
OK, but you could actually launch a rocket with the energy storage capabilities of ionized gas: battery-powered rockets charged by solar energy. I donít think the technology is really all that far away.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 03-05-2014, 08:56 PM
WarDekar WarDekar is offline
Friend of RTP
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,330
Default

I assume you're talking about this:

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2...khatchadourian

Which I'm all for the research of. However, this is decades away from any practical consumer value, and possibly longer. Energy storage technology is needed NOW. I'm not sure why you think this is an "either/or" proposition. I'm providing evidence why your investment in TSLA is a good thing and has value that most idiots like JC don't see. Unfortunately your attempts to change the conversation abruptly (antagonize?) add nothing without actual thought and reasoning.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Craps Master View Post
Who knows, but I have no intentions to sell until 2016 or 2017. I’m banking on Elon Musk’s long game.
I'd bank on that, too. With your ionized gas obsession, getting out in 2016 or 2017 probably isn't the play.

Last edited by WarDekar; 03-05-2014 at 08:59 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 03-06-2014, 09:55 AM
Craps Master's Avatar
Craps Master Craps Master is offline
Moderator-The Chip Count
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 810
Default

Depends on the opportunity cost. TSLA was a great play, is probably still a good play, and likely will be a +EV play in 2017, but my current opinion and the opinion I held when I bought it is that it won’t be much better than an index fund at that point, if at all. If there’s no compelling reason to stay in TSLA at that juncture, I’m out. If your Koch-free fantasyland where the American public can use cars to serve as a distributed grid storage system has any chance to become a reality, maybe I’ll reevaluate. I just don’t conflate what should happen with what the reality of our catastrophic brand of American capitalism is going to dictate.

Your link is also not what I’m talking about. That appears to be nuclear fusion. I agree nuclear fusion is going to be a game changer, but who knows when it will become a reality. All I’m talking about is using plasma to store energy. I was in school… a long time ago now, but one of my professors even back then was doing research on magnetically confined plasma. The reality of using it for power storage is not that far off. In fact, I’d say the technology already exists. It’s just a matter of putting all of the pieces together. Taking underutilized technology and bringing it to the market is one of the very things at which Elon Musk excels; Tesla, Solar City, and SpaceX were all based on refining existing technology to improve efficiency of use by way of incremental innovation, not revolutionary innovation. I doubt he would overlook superior energy storage solutions for the likes of Solar City and, instead, rely on a vastly more inefficient network of car batteries.

Let’s just say I just disagree on the degree to which electric vehicles or their component technologies will play in the future of power storage. The main hurdles are not even technological, but cultural and legislative. If those barriers didn’t exist we could already have such a distributed storage network, but they do exist, and by the time they’re dealt with (if ever), better solutions will exist.

Interesting side note, the difficulty of achieving fusion is precisely because it takes so much energy to ignite a fusion reaction. The core of the Sun is ~28 million ļF, heated partially by fusion, but the fusion didn’t start in the Sun until the core reached ~18 million ļF. In other words, the plasma therein builds up and stores a huge amount of energy prior to fusion ignition. Nothing else on Earth short of atomic bonds (which requires nuclear reactions to use) comes close to this capacity to store energy. When you’re talking about the long game of setting up a level of solar production and storage that can start to make a meaningful contribution to the power consumption of human civilization (and eventually fuel 100% of human power consumption), you’re going to run out of raw materials for the likes of electrochemical batteries.

Technologically, these things aren’t as far off as they seem. Legislatively, maybe they’ll never show up.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 05-18-2014, 12:59 AM
The Chaperone's Avatar
The Chaperone The Chaperone is offline
Marmalade, I like marmalade ...
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Bank of America Stadium
Posts: 6,065
Default

This stock peaked on 3/7/2014 and has lost over 20% of its value since then. You guys are worse than Jim Cramer.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are Off
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:19 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.