8 Energy Storage Stocks that Can Expect Explosive Growth 89 comments
-
Font Size:
-
Print
- TweetThis
In August of last year I wrote an article titled "Grid-based Energy Storage: Birth of a Giant." Over the last 12 months I've written a series of follow-on articles that discuss the principal classes of manufactured energy storage devices and the companies that are making or planning to make products for smart grid energy storage applications. My entire archive of articles on the energy storage sector is available here.
One of the biggest problems I've encountered over the last year has been a dearth of reliable third party information that can help investors understand the breadth and depth of the business opportunity, and sift through the frequently contradictory claims of energy storage device manufacturers that plan to target the smart grid as a principal market. Since energy storage investors are generally well-informed and frequently opinionated, most of my articles have lengthy comment streams that round out my perspective and are usually more interesting than the articles themselves.
Two weeks ago I ran across a story on greentechgrid that said NanoMarkets LLC, a leading market research firm from Glenn Allen, Virginia, was predicting that the global market for storage batteries and ultracapacitors on the smart grid would grow from its current level of $326 million to $8.3 billion by 2016. Since the market size and growth rate estimates were very impressive and I track many of the companies identified in the greentechgrid story, I contacted NanoMarkets to see if they would send me a complimentary copy of their report.
A little over a week ago I received a copy of NanoMarkets 102 page report titled "Batteries and Ultra-Capacitors for the Smart Power Grid: Market Opportunities 2009-2016." I've been like a kid in a candy store ever since. While the $2,995 report is a little pricey for individual investors, it's a must read for institutions and other large investors that are analyzing opportunities in the energy storage sector. It's also a wonderful planning tool for companies that are developing go to market strategies for manufactured energy storage devices. Individuals who want to better understand how the smart-grid market is likely to develop and grow over the next several years can gain important insight from a free June 2009 NanoMarkets white paper titled "Plug In to Materials Trends for Smart Grid Applications." NanoMarkets has agreed to offer a $500 discount on the full report to my readers who contact Robert Nolan (rob@nanomarkets.net) and mention this article.
Unlike forecasts from storage device manufacturers and stock market analysts who tend to focus on how a particular product, technology or company might fit in an emerging market, NanoMarkets approached the issue of smart grid storage from the end-user's perspective; meaning that they identified the customer's needs first and then focused on the companies that had cost-effective solutions for those needs. The principal near-term applications identified by NanoMarkets are:
- Load leveling and power quality systems to protect commercial and industrial users from brief power interruptions that cost an estimated $75 to $200 billion per year in lost time, lost commerce and damage to equipment;
- Peak shaving systems to help commercial and industrial users manage their electricity costs under variable utility tariffs and help utilities manage generating assets to minimize waste;
- Transmission and distribution support systems to help utilities reduce grid congestion, defer upgrades and minimize waste; and
- Renewables integration systems to help power producers, utilities and end users cope with the inherent variability of wind and solar power and better match peak wind and solar output with peak demand.
In evaluating the likely development path for energy storage devices on the smart grid, NanoMarkets considered a variety of competing technologies including pumped hydro, compressed air, flywheels, chemical storage batteries, ultracapacitors and superconducting magnets. They ultimately concluded that:
- Pumped hydro and compressed air had limited growth potential because of geographical and geologic constraints;
- Flywheels and superconducting magnets were not likely to be widely used beyond niche applications because of their cost and complexity; and
- Absent a revolutionary breakthrough in cycle life and cost, lithium-ion batteries will have limited application in the smart grid.
From my perspective one of the most refreshing aspects of the NanoMarkets report was their belief that storage systems for the smart grid will be chosen based on fundamental cost-benefit analysis. Equally important was their conclusion that emerging technologies would increase the overall demand for storage and result in rapidly increasing revenue for all product classes. So instead of facing a situation where an emerging technology takes sales away from an established technology, each class of technology can expect rapid sustained growth over the entire forecast period. When the forecasts for individual product classes are stacked on top of each other, it's easy to see why I believe the smart grid storage market will reach explosive growth rates by 2016. The following graph provides a consolidated summary of NanoMarkets' forecast for each of the principal battery classes over the next eight years.
I can't begin to do the NanoMarkets report justice in the limited confines of a financial blog. They thoroughly discuss the economic drivers and development path for each of the principal smart grid markets; carefully review each of the energy storage technologies that have significant potential in the smart grid market; identify the leading developers of energy storage devices for the smart grid; and break their sales forecasts down by both specific applications and geography. If NanoMarkets' forecast is even close to being right, the next decade will be a period of explosive growth for:
- Sodium battery manufacturers like NGK Insulators (NGKIF.PK) and General Electric (GE) that can look for annual revenue in their sub-sector to grow by $1.3 billion over the next eight years;
- Supercapacitor manufacturers like Maxwell Technologies (MXWL) that can look for annual revenue in their sub-sector to grow by $1 billion over the next eight years;
- Lead-acid battery manufacturers like Enersys (ENS), Exide (XIDE) and C&D Technologies (CHP) that can look for annual revenue in their sub-sector to grow by $2.4 billion over the next eight years;
- Lead-carbon battery manufacturers like Furukawa Battery (FBB.F), Axion Power (AXPW.OB) and Firefly that can look for annual revenue in their sub-sector to grow by $2.75 billion over the next eight years; and
- Flow battery manufacturers like ZBB Energy (ZBB) that can look for annual revenue in their sub-sector to grow by $499 million over the next eight years;
For energy storage investors who truly want to understand where the smart grid energy storage device market is today and how it is likely to develop through 2016, the NanoMarkets report could well prove to be the soundest investment of all.
DISCLOSURE: Author is a former director Axion Power International (AXPW.OB) and holds a large long position in its stock. He also holds a small long positions in Enersys (ENS), Exide (XIDE) and ZBB Energy (ZBB).
Related Articles
|
-
The Seeking Alpha 100
See allThe top 100 stock
market authors
selected for publication
Seeking Alpha 100 » -
Fastest Climbers
Authors with the largestSee all
increase in followers
in the last 7 days
Fastest Climbers » -
Top Commenters
Top commenters,See all
as ranked by their peers
Top Commenters » -
Top Instabloggers
The 100 most active
Instabloggers.-
1
David Fry
-
2
TraderMark
-
3
Don Dion
-
4
Cliff Wachtel
-
5
Mike Havrilla
Top Instabloggers » -
1
-
Top StockTalkers
Top
StockTalkers.-
1
David Fry
-
2
Cliff Wachtel
-
3
Mike Havrilla
-
4
David White
-
5
Hedged In
Top StockTalkers » -
1
This article has 89 comments:
Thanks again for your articles and efforts. I did notice that Exide received a Federal grant which they say will be used to build a new factory dedicated to producing PbC batteries using Axion Power's carbon cathode assemblies. All that they need to do now is demonstrate that PbC is an acceptable alternative to Lithium for electric vehicles(EV).
seekingalpha.com/artic...
I do disagree that PbC would not be a viable alternative for PHEVs or even PBEVs. My electric vehicle is hauling 600 pounds of lead which is equivalent to 15,000 watt hours if measured by the 20 hour rate. At best I have only 12,000 watt hours (80% Depth of Discharge ) available and going that deep is not in the best interest of those batteries. If the PbC batteries hold the same amount of power I could get an additional 10% of power since Axion Power claimed it could deplete a PbC battery to 90% over 1,600 cycles without failure. That coupled with the fact that PbC batteries have half the weight of conventional AGMs, those watt hours would give me a greater range that conventional. PbCs can also be recharged at a much higher rate than conventional AGMs so on a long trip (with the proper facilities) stopping for an hour lunch would give a recharge of 10,000 watt hours in one hour of charging. That would almost double the range.
Finding space to place those batteries is a challenge but I am not interested in the problems. I am interested in the solutions. Humans have a tremendous talent for overcoming problems, especially minor technical design issues. If a car were designed around the power system and power storage instead of the *needed* luxuries, we could solve that issue in days. If I were hauling 300 pounds of lead/carbon instead of 600 pounds and a fast recharge time, my travel would be dirt cheap and such a system would solve all of my travel requirements.
Axion Power and Exide need to find a demonstration car (mine is available) to show that PbC is a better solution for PHEVs than Lithium. I have already arranged to have two charging stations available to me for my longest trip and could easily demonstrate the feasibility of PbC based long range transportation (~150 miles)
For EV owners like you who are willing to deal with size and weight issues, lead-carbon would probably work quite well. It is also expected to work well for pickup, van and SUV conversions. For OEM automakers, I think it will be a harder sell. In any event I'm delighted to hear that you'd like to give it a go.
Back in the 70's such a system was proposed but so adamantly opposed by the generating industry that they killed a bill mandating a parallel privilge to those available to industry for the residential user . The Senate refused to go to conference with the House Bill unless the section was removed.
Gib=ve the residential consumer such an option of low cost electricity and they will run their dryers and washing machines with an off peak timer. Refrigerators could be so designed to effect real savings as can hot water systems. Europe does this with ease and no complaints. Why not we? Greed not public service.
I reccommend that you check out my latest Instapost about how fast the US national debt is increasing. There, I sum up many categories of debt, and also provide you a link to a site that tracks the debt. Really frightening stuff.
I really don't give a hoot about having a medallion next to my Mayascribe name, or gaming the site to have the most posts so I can have a hoard of followers. But, for finding this site I should get a bazillion thumbs up. If you choose to go to the site, please make a comment there. Why would I ask you to do this, because you have a lot of followers, and they should be made aware the "clock" that counts the many varieties of debt that could still potentially swallow our financial system. Make sure you scroll down and check the US currency and derivatives clock. It's only @ $644.5 trillion! If this is true, the US government is hoodwinking us all.
Mayascribe, sometimes we would rather ignore the numbers, but they're real and rising rapidly. So I'll follow your lead and post the link myself:
usdebtclock.org/
Is this correct or do you still feel ACPW has value at current levels?
back in 1993-94 dominion installed a dual-metering system in my house. in peak-demand periods the secondary circuit (which was billed @ a higher per kwh charge) was turned off by a signal from the power company, but could be overridden by the user.
i had them connect my water heater, hot tub & clothes dryer to the secondary, as these were thermal-storage or optional items.
they presented this option to me as an experiment they were running/ i have no idea how many of my neighbors also took advantage.
after a while they came around & retrieved their equipment & i heard no more about it. always wondered why they didn't continue as it is a great way to avoid use of high operating cost peaking power.
> jack
For a great example of huge lost productivity, how many productive cumulative man-years would you care to figure are lost every MINUTE in America due ONLY to traffic signals that perform on old-fashioned timers instead of on actual traffic use patterns in each location, thus forcing us to wait unproductively in our cars at stoplights while not one car goes through a timer controlled intersection......some... for minutes at a time! Multipy that by millions of times each day. And, this is 30 years after computers were fully integrated into business and gov't(someday go to a railroad terminal as see how effective it is in using this technology to control traffic...it can be done and done well!) It is not improved for cars because we citizens don't complain about it because we think no one(gov't) will listen. And, we are right due to having the wrong type of human philosophy in charge. That is what must change for us to have any hope at all.
We fully deserve to reap what we have stupidly and lazily sown.
On Aug 16 12:55 PM Bindlepete wrote:
> The real change for lower cost electricity, via load leveling, wil
> arrive when the Regulatory agencies from FERC on down to the State
> levels demand that the consumer/homeowner be given an option for
> realistic time of day metering.
>
> Back in the 70's such a system was proposed but so adamantly opposed
> by the generating industry that they killed a bill mandating a parallel
> privilge to those available to industry for the residential user
> . The Senate refused to go to conference with the House Bill unless
> the section was removed.
>
> Gib=ve the residential consumer such an option of low cost electricity
> and they will run their dryers and washing machines with an off peak
> timer. Refrigerators could be so designed to effect real savings
> as can hot water systems. Europe does this with ease and no complaints.
> Why not we? Greed not public service.
1. There are countries that has a much advance electric grid system than US , to start with Switzerland (a country you John knows well), but for sure Germany, Denmark or Spain where the percentage of eolic or solar energy is over 15% of total....AND THIS COUNTRIES ARE NOT IN A COMPULSIVE BUYING OF GRID BATTS.
2. If something is moving around grid batteries for sure it has to be right now than some of them (Spain is the case i know) are over the theoretical 20% of variable energy producers, efforts are focused more in electronic controls, automatization in balancing networks and exchanging between them or with other countries networks.
3. The new non variable thermosolar plants (base in mirror beams concentrated in heating salts to molten state +500C) are taking "in furore" the energy future in Spain, they are stable, acts like classic thermal (oil gas or coal), avoids the problem of night generation, qualify for carbon credits (a substantial amount of money in future projects to be considerated) and avoid the problems of multiple small and variable entry points into the grid, as far i remember in Arizona is one of this kind under construction right now.
4. There has to be the additional demand before and to that there is no grid available, the electric grid expansion of US means many billions dollars to invest. that are not there, Obama green New Deal is perhaps offering no more than 2% of the total future investments.
5. A question John : are there studies (other than Nano materials) that supports in the same time frame the increase in electric use that a 8.3 billion means ?
Sorry fellows I don´t see it so soon at least.
Regards
JPods networks are a paradigm shift in urban transportation from cars (moving a ton to moving a person) to computer controlled networks of ultra-light 'horizontal-elevators'. These networks automate repetitive commuter range transport using 7-15% of the energy required by cars. Solar-collectors mounted over the rails gather about 5,000 to 12,000 vehicle-miles of power per mile of rail per typical day. The grid and radical expansion of alternate storage devices will be required level out the cyclical pattern of solar-collection.
Here is an article on the paradigm shift: seekingalpha.com/artic...
Time to take advantage of short term panic to buy stocks with long term revenue growth.
Q: How do centralized fast response energy storage and decentralized fast response storage coexist?
Ali Nourai: In terms of frequency regulation, for the time being it would primarily be done at substation level - it needs a few years to establish itself to that point. Altair Nano has a trailer of batteries that will be operational and be leaders in the next two or three years.
(the whole article is good)
www.nextgenpe.com/arti.../
***
AEP has a good deal of actual installed energy storage experience. At this point in the game, I'd rather have that *one* quote from Dr Nourai than any high priced investment report. If the report doesn't cover Altairnano then it has a hole in it big enough to throw a cat though. Ali Nourai is Manager of Distributed Energy Resources for American Electric Power (AEP) and Chairman of the Electricity Storage Association.
"Altair Nano ... leaders in the next two or three years".
That is from one of the country's leading experts on grid energy storage.
marketquant, the report does in fact have a section on Altair, as it does for each of the principal lithium ion developers. The last sentence say "Like all lithium-ion applications, lowering costs to compete with other technologies will be a key to success in grid storage applications."
I heard Ali Nourai speak at Storage Week and his fondness for lithium-ion is based on an assumption that cheap lithium ion batteries will be developed for the automotive sector over the next couple of years. For reasons discussed at length in my earlier articles, I am less sanguine about the likelihood of that outcome over the next decade. If Ali Nourai's basic assumption proves to be wrong, Vinod Khosla's fundamental law of economic gravity will prevail and the utility applications for lithium-ion will not develop.
Alti already has a breakthrough in cycle life -- which means a simultaneous breakthrough in cost if you think about it. The Alti grid system has an expected calendar life exceeding 20 years!
link: www.nextgenpe.com/arti.../
Nourai says that storage is very expensive, but that it is very, very, cost effective if you achieve multiple benefits from a single storage device. He also mentions "used" batteries to lower the cost.
So AEP becomes the *third* big utility company to say positive things about Alti's grid system.
Time will tell if Mr. Nourai is right or wrong. Time will also tell whether the utilities that serve the other 99% of Americans follow AEP's lead or do their own investigations and justify their decisions to their own boards of directors and public utility commissions.
There is no question in my mind that AEP is a thought leader, but the current opinion of one executive that is based on expectations of massive future price reductions does not settle the issue; just as a forecast by a market research firm does not settle the issue.
Regardless of what we say today the future will make itself clear, and probably surprise all of us in the process.
Secondly, another point he made is that if distributed energy generation at the customer level gets to 20% or more then the grid becomes more unstable (i.e. clouds passing overhead causing hundreds of inverters to almost simultaneously switch back over to grid power). It's not just him though, the NIST/IEEE smart grid designers are already designing to solve this problem because policy (funding) is clearly pushing this problem into existence as fast as the greens can pass renewable energy portfolio standards. Aided by free-falling poly-silicon prices, this pig is going to start flying soon!
I worry about the maturity and the stability of technology in this market. Yes, lots of prospects, but no too many unsettled questions.
Thomas Brennan: As John points out, only one of the electrodes in the PbC battery is replaced by carbon. The weight therefore will not be half of the traditional lead acid battery but more like 2/3 for equivalent capacity.
Crocodile: AXPW has also worked on carbon doped lead electrodes and it is unclear to me right now if the XIDE deal revolves around the pure carbon electrode or the mixed lead / carbon electrode. John, maybe you can shed some light on that. Both East Penn and Furukawa are using mixed lead / carbon technology according to a Sandia presentation at the latest Energy Storage Association meeting. The other pure play PbC play is Firefly Energy. They are behind in the race compared to AXPW it would appear, but with AXPW aligning themselves with XIDE, another major lead acid company may start talking to Firefly.
marketquant: Thank you for the good reference. It should be added that AEP also have looked at Na NiCl2 batteries (they also go under the name Zebra batteries). They are similar to NGK's NaS batteries but without some of the short fall of that technology. Currently the only manufacturer is MS-DEA in Switzerland (close to the Italian border, if you want to take a drive, John), but GE recently bought some of the rights to the technology and is building a factory in New York. GE's primary application is said to be hybrid locomotives, but when you consider that a locomotive takes 1MWh of batteries and can discharge them at 2MW, it is not far fetched to consider them for grid applications as well.
Crude Oil T...: Instead of adding these names to TAN, maybe we need a Smart Grid ETF, as in addition to energy storage we are starting to see a bunch of interesting companies that aims to 'glue' the smart grid together.
connorport, Seeking Alpha encourages contributors to refrain from commenting on stocks that trade for significantly under $1 unless there is a specific reason for the price decline.
Albert DeKoven, I would encourage you to review the deep history and think about all the risks and problems that Axion's insiders overcame for the shareholders. If they didn't take the easy path or give up when times were incredibly tough, they're certainly not going to do so when the goal is in sight.
Crocodile, energy storage investing has historically been one part economics and three parts ideology. Right now a combination of factors are working to change that dynamic. The A123 IPO will pull wall street's attention to the sector in a whole new way and when the hard core economics and financial analysts begin taking a hard look at "who is going to buy the product" I expect the pricing metrics and multiples to come more into line with reality. We are finally seeing mainstream media questioning the PHEV pricing issue. We're also seeing intensely analytical work from people like McKinsey pointing out that HEVs save consumers money for each ton of carbon they abate while PHEVs are only slightly more expensive than nuclear plants for each ton of carbon they abate. Over the long term, I'm convinced that economics will win out over ideology.
whidbey, it's an emerging investment market where there seems to be a fundamental disconnect. The established companies with facilities, product lines and customers currently trade at massive discounts to the new technology developers that have none of the above. The pendulum is starting to swing the other way and since last November the "cheap technology" companies have performed far better than the "cool technology" companies, but there is still plenty of upside in the "cheap technology sector."
BatteryUser, there are really only two batteries that use carbon as an integral part of the electrochemistry, Axion's PbC and Furukawa's Ultrabattery. Firefly is using a lightweight carbon foam to replace the lead grids that have historically been used as current collectors, but as far as I know the carbon foam is a structural element that does not play an active role in the electrochemistry. Firefly is working with C&D Technologies (CHP) as their manufacturing partner, but as I understand it, Firefly is handling all of the marketing and customer support functions itself.
One of the big problems with ETFs is they usually define a sector and then use a metric like market capitalization for weighting and in the storage sector some of the biggest market capitalizations belong to companies that live hand to mouth. Until the market gets to a more reasonable equilibrium, an ETF that invested heavily in storage might have some problems. For now, anyway, I think it's probably a stock pickers market.
On Aug 17 05:27 PM Albert DeKoven wrote:
> John is blind to the cons His judgement is clouded by the millions
> of shares he owns and he has positioned himself to make millions
> more if enough people believe the technology will evolve exactly
> the way he assumes it will. This is certainly not an ojective article
> weighing the risks of this type of investing. I think there is a
> better chance of AXPW going bankrupt or going private screwing the
> shareholders.
On Aug 17 05:27 PM Albert DeKoven wrote:
> John is blind to the cons His judgement is clouded by the millions
> of shares he owns and he has positioned himself to make millions
> more if enough people believe the technology will evolve exactly
> the way he assumes it will. This is certainly not an ojective article
> weighing the risks of this type of investing. I think there is a
> better chance of AXPW going bankrupt or going private screwing the
> shareholders.
Cost effectiveness!!?? Hard core economics!!?? Think about it this way, PV is too expensive, and wind has no transmission to get those green electrons to the customers -- but it don't matter none John!!! Cost effectiveness takes a back seat to CO2 and green policy (and gov't money). *Every* PUC meeting, FERC hearing, or energy committee testimony that I see NEVER addresses whether this stuff is more cost effective than something else -- they only care about how quickly they can *mandate* it to happen and (somewhat) about the cost slope to the rate payers. "Cost effectiveness" has already been thrown out of consideration -- Renewable Portfolio Standards are a requirement and fast responding energy storage is the only "zero carbon" solution to the obvious stability problem caused by RPS.
> The A123 IPO
This will be great! The hoopla over A123 will bring oodles of attention to the sector -- and then perhaps people will find out that the Altairnano based Prius conversions being testing by DOE-AVTA get better mpg than the A123 conversions.
On Aug 18 08:47 AM John Petersen wrote:
> Battman, the $34 million in government money was earmarked for "Exide
> with Axion" and it all has to be used building manufacturing facilities.
> In other words, it won't make a difference in terms of day-to-day
> operating liquidity. I also think it's too early to predict how much
> Federal money will end up on which company's balance sheet. There's
> no question that Axion will need to raise more money, but small companies
> are like small children in third world countries: they die of dysentery
> far more frequently than starvation. After six lean years where the
> money was always there when needed, I have no big concerns over Axion's
> ability to attract adequate capital at this point in its development.
As i see it, natural gas is the current 'incumbent' for load shaving, and its price/availability is quite competitive,
If unlimited funding were available for lithium ion battery plants today, the plants could not be completed until 2012 at the earliest. Even if the battery factories were built, the planned production of the world's lithium mines would not be adequate to fill the supply chain. If you want to look toward 2020, the dynamic may change, but the change will be neither cheap nor instantaneous. The utility industry will not put it's needs on hold because a battery sub-sector isn't ready yet and won't be ready for a decade.
Lithium ion technology may prove to be all you hope it will be, but it is not going to happen quickly and unless lithium ion battery costs collapse, they will not be used for anything other than extreme cycling environments.
Let's get real here, on the one hand you tell me that lithium is going to work marvelously in PHEVs where the batteries will last for 10 to 15 years and on the other you tell me about all the used batteries that will be available to utilities.
Which is it?
I'm now not sure if this might be a better idea than XIDE -- obviously the two are partners and will move together. I own a bit of both now. But I'm thinking the .ob now has more potential to double first.
Axion seems rock solid at the $1.70 level. You may be correct about the moving averages, John. I have a bid in now.
I agree with Ari5000 about Axion. The chance of Axion doubling is better, if only because so few shares trade every day.
Still believe we're in for a correction, and hopefully the A123 offering will stymie any downside risk.
www.princeton.edu/~ssuccar/caesReport.html
Does the report support their conclusions with any data or citation?
Samir
At the end of the day, Seeking Alpha is for investors who want to put their money to work and if they can't invest in a technology, it's not worth talking about except in the "competition" section of a disclosure document.
If they can bring it out @ the target price of $23,000 I think the Volt is going to be a very hard sell. In fact even GM is thinking that way already! See this article in Auto Car:
www.autocar.co.uk/News.../
I can't seem to find out what flavor the batteries are going to be, but my guess is they won't be Lead Carbon? If anyone knows please post it here.
www.nytimes.com/2009/0...
It's a very cute car.
Huh? The ISO-NE energy storage pilot program is on schedule. MISO has changed their regulations to enable energy storage (5 min dispatch). NYISO approved "limited energy storage resource" and is working to "maximize their market participation". The Alti battery is commercial in the PJM. ERCOT permitted the AEP battery after wrangling with their reg structure. CAISO is the only laggard, so maybe that's why you heard so much about it in sunny California, but even they have promised progress. FERC Order 890 is making all of this happen.
As an aside, present value calculations show that an 80% efficient $1,000/kWh device (Alti's is 90% efficient) is *already* profitable in the PJM and NYISO. This is before Nourai's "multiple benefits" is even considered. Hard core economics! :-)
> you tell me about all the used batteries that will be available to utilities
Dr Nourai said it in his interview. As *you* say, he is a "thought leader" on energy storage. I don't have to defend anything on that.
I expect GM will be asking Obama for a few more Billion to rescue the VOLT from the fate of the EV1.
Don, it's amazing what happens to the purchase price when you step away from the idea of a PHEV like the Volt and go to a sensible mild hybrid like the CR-Z. Then again the CR-Z doesn't promise 230 mpg ;-)
It may be the DOE funding delay whereby everyone is waiting for them to cough-up some money for submitted projects. Again, the only real holdout has been CAISO, and Beacon tried to get FERC to light a fire under them, but CAISO took a hard-line resistance and prevailed at the FERC. Basically, they were too busy to make the changes right away, but they are going to eventually.
> factories
I don't know about near term auto demand. For grid batteries I hope there is enough capacity to "seed" these ISO projects and smart grid projects. Maybe factory capacity is why Nourai said 2 or 3 years.
BTW, did you get the email that I sent?
On Aug 18 02:53 PM Don Harmon wrote:
> I am not so sure? One would expect NiMH, but the Japanese have been
> heavily looking to Taiwan for LiFePO4 ? I like the car very much,
> and at a price tag half of what GM is asking for the VOLT, I think
> once again the Japanese are going to kick our ass!
>
> I expect GM will be asking Obama for a few more Billion to rescue
> the VOLT from the fate of the EV1.
Regarding Japan & LiFePO4, they primarily specialize in the smaller format cell mfg. in Japan, although the interestingly make most of the high tech robotic equipment that the Taiwanese use now to mfg. the larger format cells!
Honda has set up a JV with GS Yuasa called "Blue Energy" to make Lithium batteries.
Vanadium Redox Flow Batteries thefraserdomain.typepa...
The Vanadium Battery
www.treehugger.com/fil...
They are using hydro as peaking power (our CHEAPEST power is for PEAKING!).
They can produce power from the idling generators within 15 seconds (plug that into your regulation issue data bank).
However, what I wanted to reremind you of is that the Columbia and Snake with their 15-20 dams generate 50% of the hydro power in the US.
There are numerous (100's) steep, deep and long canyon-feeding opportunites for pumped hydro storage; three significant ones which can probably be googled. Grand Coulee's existing pumped hydro capacity is some 300 MW.
I have not read the pumped hydro reports you mention, but the manner in which the current dams are being operated as PEAKING POWER, and the fact that hydro is 20% of our US capacity (if not use), makes me wonder about how the planners are really planning and writing, etc.
By the way, LOT'S OF T&D CAPACITY must also be underutilized if this is how the Bonneville Power et.al. folks regulate dam generation.
www.hydroworld.com/ind...
The consequences of not doing it will forever resonate in the history books as the generation that gave away our national treasure. I am 60 years old and my last stand in this life is to see America again as proud producer of quality products that will benefit all of our citizens and hopefully also be purchased by the developing countries as a model of eco-efficiency and skill in what we do best.
And what is that elusive American ingenuity best at doing ? Exactly what really needs to be done and doing it with private capital and not Government handouts. I am not hopeful that all the money our new President is handing out in Grants for green energy projects is going to do anything other than fund the construction of a few manufacturing plants that may have nothing to manufacture? What we all know, innately as Americans, is that the Government cannot run a business, and this is obvious to even the children who are going to bear the burden of our desperate attempts to make everything less severe by spending trillions of dollars that we don't have and never will be able to pay back!
Why not take the trillions we spend on Iraq and Afghanistan (no return on this investment) and put that money into American infrastructure? I mean a "new kind of infrastructure" - let's go UP above all the existing roads we have already built and paid for. Let's add another layer of progress using existing proven technology to make it happen. Let's use our great financial banking system to encourage private investors to fund this concept and build new private enterprise companies to manage and sell the idea to the public and make a profit on doing it. Let's employ millions of Americans who are out of work now in the auto industry, and anyone who can contribute, to build the next layer of the U.S. Highway system - the next "level" in what surely has to be obvious to every person that I know.
It's called PRT and it's not talked about much. Other more politically motivated policies and lobbyists tend to prevail in Washington as usual. So, what is PRT you ask? It's short for "Personal Rapid Transit". Why PRT - why not ? It can be built above existing U.S. Highways & Interstate Highways only 14 ft. above grade and using existing magnetic & other electric hybrid rail propulsion, combined with solar panels mounted above the whole route, you can have a zero carbon transit system that can be built starting now!
Why would we want to do this? Because it's just not practical for all of us to drive across the U.S. unless you have a Jack Kerouac complex or you like the idea of playing Easy Rider! Let's face it, some may enjoy this and you can still drive that route on the road below you, but the majority of folks would probably opt for the elevated route via computer controlled private cabins. You see this idea has all the potential that the airlines once had......you can buy first class or coach for your trip. You can take your pets (or your cattle) with you because there will be special cargo modules that will go to your destination. Isn't this like Amtrak you say? Not even close - this is infrastructure married to the internet in it's pure form. This is the Next Big Thing!
Dig it, you have private enterprise funding different segments to the Trans Continental PRT, and competing with one another on fares, comfort, special offers, club cars, limousine cars, etc. Just think of the good old fashioned competition here and all of this creates more damn jobs than the WPA en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... and don't we need a program like this right now?
Between 1935 and 1943, the WPA provided almost 8 million jobs. Between 2009 and 2015 we could provide almost five times that (or 40 million jobs) if the program got started? Remember, this is NOT a Government funded program - it's up to the banks and the venture capitalists to roll their own on this one!
I leave you with an article I hope you read and look forward to constructive ideas along these lines: seekingalpha.com/artic...
Let's put America back to Work NOW!
In a world where 6 billion people are working overtime to earn their piece of the lifestyle 500 million of us take for granted, the idea that we can continue to waste any natural resources must be crushed. It may not have all the convenience we've come to expect from a car, but it beats the heck out of moving large segments of our population to electric bicycles.
www.reuters.com/articl...
Now what in the phone could be behind that? Hmmmmm.
On Aug 16 12:55 PM Bindlepete wrote:
> The real change for lower cost electricity, via load leveling, wil
> arrive when the Regulatory agencies from FERC on down to the State
> levels demand that the consumer/homeowner be given an option for
> realistic time of day metering.
>
> Back in the 70's such a system was proposed but so adamantly opposed
> by the generating industry that they killed a bill mandating a parallel
> privilge to those available to industry for the residential user
> . The Senate refused to go to conference with the House Bill unless
> the section was removed.
>
> Gib=ve the residential consumer such an option of low cost electricity
> and they will run their dryers and washing machines with an off peak
> timer. Refrigerators could be so designed to effect real savings
> as can hot water systems. Europe does this with ease and no complaints.
> Why not we? Greed not public service.
In Canada, Noront NOT) found some also. www.steelguru.com/news...
"Chemists happy when vanadium blue"
By Mitchell Zimmer
Thursday, April 9, 2009 communications.uwo.ca/.../
"What is Vanadium" www.largoresources.com...
MIT "Giant leap for clean energy" www.youtube.com/watch?...
As I learn more and more about the mind-numbing debt the US is building, the greater concern I have for this nation's future.
Don, the Paris plan to share EV "city cars" is also a wonderful idea. They have a great rapid transit system into town and a very nice subway system, but getting around once you're in central Paris can be a bit of a pain. It also doesn't hurt that French gasoline prices are pretty close to the $6 per gallon I pay in Switzerland.
Well, are you 60% right according to this?
(quote from WardAuto.com)
"Battery-only technology will dominate the initial phase of electrified-vehicle proliferation, according to a major manufacturer of charging stations and battery-testing equipment.
Plug-in hybrids and extended-range electric vehicles are outflanked by “a shocking number of full EVs” currently in development, says Kristen Helsel, director-EV solutions at California-based Aerovironment Inc.
“I thought (the majority) would be plug-ins,” Helsel tells Ward’s in an interview. “By our numbers, 60% are full EVs vs. plug-ins.”
subscribers.wardsauto..../
Some data and thoughts:
I spoke at length to Better Place last Sunday, and they are focused only on well defined geographical areas that they can cover, on an economic and practical level, with recharging and battery swap stations, such as Copenhagen, San Francisco Bay, and Israel. I believe that the "Paris" plan is independent of Better Place even though I was told that there will be a Better Place car, designed and to be produced by Renault, with an easily accessed battery compartment introduced at the Frankfurt Auto Show next month. If you consider that Better Place was created in Israel and funded initially by a large grant from the Israeli national utility company you can see that many concepts can be accomodated in the EV world.
One of the biggest problems for recharging and swapping batteries is scale. Unless you can harmonize batteries not only by size and shape but also by electrochemistry you face the a market killing problem of the Beta/VHS type.
It seems to me that recharging stations can be versatile in their availability of sockets, plugs, and power delivery much more cheaply than battery makers and coach builders can, or will want to be, be versatile even with their geometries and sockets. I'm one of those who laughs out loud each time a movie space explorer simply plugs his "tricorder" into an alien or ancient "computer" and gets the data immediately. Imagine what battery technologies and chemistries may look like in just a generation and then try and convince yourself to raise the money to build recharging and swap stations in a standard pattern.
Jack, I actually think the better place model has a good chance of working in Copenhagen, Israel and Hawaii because the gas prices are high, the travel distances are short and at least Denmark has a 100% tax on new cars that will be waived for EVs. There's no way of telling what will happen in the PRSF. As you point out, it's all going to boil down to battery cost, interchangeability and massive scale. Unfortunately, I suspect that selling batteries to Better Place may prove as profitable as selling almost anything to WalMart. You get immense volumes and little tiny margins that will make it almost impossible to bring a profit to the bottom line. I'm glad that none of the companies I like are in line for that business.
Policy makers have put forward the following plans and ideas: metro congestion charges (EVs exempt, London), HOV lanes (EVs exempt, California), high vehicle property tax (EVs exempt, Germany 5 years), sales tax rate (EVs get low or zero rate, Israel and Denmark). I'm not sure if this list is totally accurate -- it's mostly from memory, but you get the idea. And I haven't even rolled out the energy security / national security and trade balance issues of the energy situation.
It's only just begun -- it *will* be a "bargain" to essentially subsidize EVs in these ways for several years to come (i.e. with low market penetration). Your price/performance argument is up against a juggernaut of policy wonks -- you will be behind for at least 4 or 5 innings or so (i.e.for years).
There will be absolutely no correction of any size as long as the dollar continues to crumble. Monetary printing and backstopping and stimulus can continue indefinitely under this administration, cash for cars, cash for houses cash for banks, cash for anyone with access. The Fed only has one play in its playbook: inflate -- even when the world needs to deflate.
I think this only creates an even better scenario for batteries and energy -- as commodities will indirectly benefit from all the stimulus.
Look, if you went into a casino - you'd probably lose if you play long enough. But bring in your own money printer -- and you can play forever, no matter how much the odds are stacked against you. The Bearish crowd does not understand that the Fed is willing to print forever. It is long term destructive but very very good for the short term -- and that's all Obama or any president needs. If the next 4 years turn out better than they should -- why would any politician care if the decisions lead to utter destruction 9 years out or beyond?
Would you sacrifice your own job to do "what's right"?
I agree that standard hybrids ("parallel" hybrids) will not benefit from a plug because the battery will be rather small. But PHEVs that are "series" hybrid (i.e. range extended EV which have the same single electric drive system as an EV) will obviously benefit from a plug because the battery will be much larger. You'll see a few malls and grocers offer special parking with charging as an eco-friendly promotion. Park in front and display your green bling!
However, I think that if those PHEVs (and EVs) are slow charging then the market for them will not get much beyond a low level (e.g. "island" buyers, "green" buyers, certain fleet buyers, and technology/vanity buyers) -- a low single digit percentage of the market. I think general consumers will balk at the multi-hour charge times. The "holy grail" will be 10 minute fast charge as suggested by recent Aerovironment statements.
Given everything we've heard and read about an over-stressed grid, I'm not sure how the electric utilities are going to react to a variable 100 kw load for each charging station that can do a 10 minute charge on a 15 to 25 kWh battery because, after all, a 225 Amp load on a 440 Volt circuit is immense. But I guess the utility industry has faced other challenges of a comparable nature and will deal with this one too if necessary.
Thus this system would provide "multiple benefits from a single storage device" to potential customers: (1) PHEV/EV charge, (2) integrate renewables, (3) smart grid distributed storage, (4) energy arbitrage, (5) transmission and generation upgrade deferral, and so on. Nifty huh?
Looks like another policy exemption is needed. :-)
Pay attention John, one point of AV's design is to eliminate the highly variable load issue.
Actually I remember someone at a CPUC meeting saying that since (1) you can't get generation permitted near anything, and (2) you can't get transmission upgrades permitted near anything, then (3) the only solution is energy storage. Eliminate the competition and storage is the price/performance leader!
I've recently talked to a Progress Energy guy who just finished a multi-million dollar sub-station installation for a customer who wanted higher power quality -- I'm willing to bet that permitting energy storage would have taken far less time and perhaps less money.
With a little imagination you could see EV taxis sitting at charging stations awaiting deployment. Or California EV drivers responding to one of those "energy alerts" on the radio and going to the charging stations to SELL some power back to the grid! (ok, fantasy on that last one)
Regarding East Penn and Furukawa Battery, what customers and what applications are they selling UltraBattery? I assume East Penn secured $32.5M award by demonstrating a strong pipeline of prospective customers. Separately I read that Furukawa is currently producing the UltraBattery. So this leads me to ask for who and for what applications and what kind of volumes and growth rates they are seeing? Are any large US car OEM's re-visiting UltraBattery? Is EPRI (Electric Power Research Institute) planning any pilot or demonstration testing of UltraBattery for SmartGrid applications? If so what are the promising applications EPRI is thinking? Scott
On Aug 16 11:41 AM John Petersen wrote:
> Thomas, the credit for this article really belongs to you and all
> the other readers who follow my work. NanoMarkets gave me a copy
> of their report because I promised to write about it. Apparently
> they thought that getting their product in front of my readers made
> for a fair trade. After meeting a lot of folks at Storage Week who
> claimed to be regular readers, I think they made a smart move. I
> suppose we'll know for sure if they offer me other reports in the
> future. While I expect good things from the Exide/Axion alliance,
> it's important to remember that there is an immense difference between
> EVs and PHEV (cars with plugs) and HEVs (which don't have plugs).
> Like lead-acid, lead-carbon is a large and heavy battery and those
> traits will make it a suboptimal choice for cars with plugs. Where
> I expect lead-carbon to shine is in micro, mild and full HEVs that
> don't have plugs and only need 1 to 2 kWh of battery storage, because
> when the total is that small, the size and weight differences are
> very modest. I did the calculations in:
>
> seekingalpha.com/artic...
The ARRA battery grants announcement included $32.5 million for East Penn to manufacture the Ultrabattery and $34.3 for Exide to manufacture the Axion PbC. As I understand it both applications were supported by a number of first tier of automotive OEMs who are under extreme pressure to meet EU new emission standards and revised US CAFE standards over the next couple of years.
For everything you ever wanted to know about micro hybrids read the following:
seekingalpha.com/artic...
seekingalpha.com/artic...
seekingalpha.com/artic...
seekingalpha.com/artic...
The projects Beacon is doing right now will provide information to all of its testing partners that will enable them to decide whether the benefits outweigh the costs. We probably won't know the answer to those questions for several years.
The specific sentence from the NanoMarkets report that I summarized said:
"Other forms of storage such as flywheels and superconducting magnets have also been tried, but because of cost and system complexity issues these will not likely be considered for large-scale applications."
They're not my words. They're the words of the report.
I'll lend you a name for your printing machine, "The Event Horizon."
government meddling in the form of busing (which was in fact a complete failure) caused the flight to the suburbs in the first place; that is on your federalism-loving head, not mine; now you are trying to make me feel guilty while you force those same people you displaced to suburbs back into the urban areas by artificially increasing transportation costs? the law of unintended consequences is absolute-- it is your fault, period.
seekingalpha.com/artic...
Please let me correct your assertion ("there are really only two batteries that use carbon as an integral part of the electrochemistry, Axion's PbC and Furukawa's Ultrabattery. Firefly is using a lightweight carbon foam to replace the lead grids that have historically been used as current collectors, but as far as I know the carbon foam is a structural element that does not play an active role in the electrochemistry". Besides our carbon foam providing a high surface area for the active chemistry, the foam plate induces a radically new and transformative effect on the chemistry itself. Sulfaton as a failure mode is eliminated. I'll be presenting on this in my speech at the upcoming 8th Annual NanoBusiness Alliance Summit in Chicago on September 10th.
Regards, Mil
On Aug 18 01:04 AM John Petersen wrote:
> marektquant, I don't think we have any disagreement over the benefits
> of storage. But the cost effectiveness of any technology depends
> first and foremost on the cost and absent a plunge in lithium-ion
> battery prices, the "cost" part of "cost effectiveness" is going
> to be a problem except in rare cases that put extreme cycling demands
> on a battery. As for materials prices, I'll be interested to see
> what happens when the global economy begins to recover.
>
> connorport, Seeking Alpha encourages contributors to refrain from
> commenting on stocks that trade for significantly under $1 unless
> there is a specific reason for the price decline.
>
> Albert DeKoven, I would encourage you to review the deep history
> and think about all the risks and problems that Axion's insiders
> overcame for the shareholders. If they didn't take the easy path
> or give up when times were incredibly tough, they're certainly not
> going to do so when the goal is in sight.
>
> Crocodile, energy storage investing has historically been one part
> economics and three parts ideology. Right now a combination of factors
> are working to change that dynamic. The A123 IPO will pull wall street's
> attention to the sector in a whole new way and when the hard core
> economics and financial analysts begin taking a hard look at "who
> is going to buy the product" I expect the pricing metrics and multiples
> to come more into line with reality. We are finally seeing mainstream
> media questioning the PHEV pricing issue. We're also seeing intensely
> analytical work from people like McKinsey pointing out that HEVs
> save consumers money for each ton of carbon they abate while PHEVs
> are only slightly more expensive than nuclear plants for each ton
> of carbon they abate. Over the long term, I'm convinced that economics
> will win out over ideology.
>
> whidbey, it's an emerging investment market where there seems to
> be a fundamental disconnect. The established companies with facilities,
> product lines and customers currently trade at massive discounts
> to the new technology developers that have none of the above. The
> pendulum is starting to swing the other way and since last November
> the "cheap technology" companies have performed far better than the
> "cool technology" companies, but there is still plenty of upside
> in the "cheap technology sector."
>
> BatteryUser, there are really only two batteries that use carbon
> as an integral part of the electrochemistry, Axion's PbC and Furukawa's
> Ultrabattery. Firefly is using a lightweight carbon foam to replace
> the lead grids that have historically been used as current collectors,
> but as far as I know the carbon foam is a structural element that
> does not play an active role in the electrochemistry. Firefly is
> working with C&D Technologies (seekingalpha.com/symbo...)
> as their manufacturing partner, but as I understand it, Firefly is
> handling all of the marketing and customer support functions itself.
>
>
> One of the big problems with ETFs is they usually define a sector
> and then use a metric like market capitalization for weighting and
> in the storage sector some of the biggest market capitalizations
> belong to companies that live hand to mouth. Until the market gets
> to a more reasonable equilibrium, an ETF that invested heavily in
> storage might have some problems. For now, anyway, I think it's probably
> a stock pickers market.
Our sulfation advantage has been discussed and covered in numerous media and was one of the key reasons Firefly won the 2007 "R&D 100" Award and the 2007 Wall Street Journal "Technology Innovation" Award; both worldwide awards in the category of "Energy".
Our white paper has been downloadable off the home page of our web site for a couple of years now: www.fireflyenergy.com/... . For the discussion on sulfation, please refer to pages 13-14.
If you'd like a copy of the Scientific paper presented at the LABAT conference, email to my attention: admin@fireflyenergy.com and I'll send it to you.
Of the three carbon technologies you've listed, the only one that improves on wh/kg and wh/liter is the Firefly technology, since we don't reduce or eliminate the energy-storing chemistry in our negative carbon foam plate like in the Furukawa or Axion approaches respectively. Those other two approaches actually achieve in many applications lower numbers than classic lead acid batteries (numbers presented by both companies at last year's European Lead Acid Battery conference in Warsaw). Perhaps a tabular comparative would illustrate this more clearly,and could be a subject for one of your future articles, which we'd be happy to contribute to it.
Regards, Mil
On Aug 26 12:35 AM John Petersen wrote:
> Mil, it's great news for me that Firefly is getting sulfation limiting
> effects from the carbon foam electrode. This is the first time I've
> heard someone from Firefly discuss that particular feature and I'm
> delighted to have the clarification. When you have more detail such
> as a white paper or presentation that you're willing to share, I
> would love a copy.