John Lounsbury

PHEVs and EVs: Plugging into a Lump of Coal

John Petersen - - -

Thanks for your comment in reply. I was hoping you wouldn't tell me to go read the whole report. I'll bookmark it for later. (Sigh.)

PHEVs and EVs: Plugging into a Lump of Coal

John Petersen - - -

Thank-you for keeping the latest in front of usd.

The McKinsey chart was eye-opening. I am reminded though, as I read the comment stream, that the debate often evolves to two sides: (1) the views of those grounded in the present and (2) the visionaries.

The McKinsey chart is an excellent snapshot. But it is no more. It is a snapshot with a time stamp. The snapshot in 10 years will be radically different, and in 20 years totally changed again. For those who wonder what I am talking about, think about what would have been the 10-year plan for computer technology in 1975, then 1985 and again in 1995. The three plans would seem to have come from different planets.

I think that making even five year projections for utility energy, as well as transportation energy, is particularly difficult at this time. I do think that nuclear energy expansion in the U.S. is not a difficult thing to support because it is a relatively small portion of our electrical generation capacity currently and we can always use it through plant end of life, even if other generation technologies become more widely utilized.

It would be interesting to know what assumptions went into the McKinsey analysis. I doubt that they included the ancillary costs (such as environmental) of each of the options, because no one knows (as far as I can determine) how to do that in Euro or dollar terms. However, whatever the assumptions, many will be totally obsolete and incorrect in a few years. (Refer to my computer technology analogy.) The menu for cost of carbon reduction is a moving target. I expect the target is moving far faster than most of us can imagine today.

Lead-Carbon: A Game Changer for Alternative Energy Storage

John Petersen - - -

I can only echo the praise of other commenters. You have so expanded my horizons in the energy storage business and in getting a much better understanding of the various technologies.

Thanks again.

Lithium Unicorns and Alternative Energy Storage

John Petersen - - -

Thanks for this article. It addresses a question I posed a couple of weeks ago in another comment. When you look at the abundance of lithium in the earth's crust, it is similar to lead, nickel and other metals. The question then is cost of recovery. I see that is now under discussion. Good job.

Alternative Energy Storage Stocks: Review and Outlook

John Petersen - - -

This update is terrific. I hope you keep monitoring the vital signs of this vital developing area thoughout 2009 and beyond.

DiggerUK - - - Thanks for the "open letter". I thought that was the case but I do appreciate the confirmation.

billp37 - - -

Useful information about a solarthermal application. Thanks.

To all - - -

I have been daydreaming about a hybrid photovoltaic-thermal generating system. It is a generating facility that levels electrical production across 24 hours and multiple days by using PV when the sun shines and stores the thermal energy for generation in other hours. The idea is based on the waste of thermal energy when doing PV and the waste of PV energy when collecting thermal energy.

Confession: I don't have the foggiest idea about what such a configuration might look like.

Questions:

1. Is this, like many day dreams, a fantasy?

2. Is there any merit to having an integrated facility or would seperate thermal and PV generators make more sense?

Enough dislosure about my daydreams.

Happy New Year to all.

Alternative Energy Storage: It's All About Price vs. Performance

John - - -

I really anticpated your answer because I have read much of what you have written. So let me suggest Plan B: Can you keep pushing this question as a challenge and maybe some reader will seize the challenge and add to the discussion.

I recognize that the questions I ask, if thoroughly addressed, would be worthy of a Ph.D. thesis in Economics or Materials Science.


On Dec 26 03:02 PM John Petersen wrote:

> John, it's one thing for me to talk about what the finished products
> costs are and another entirely to estimate what they might be. That
> kind of work requires detailed manufacturing expertise that I simply
> don't have. In a perfect world, the various manufacturers would publish
> white papers about their relative costs and expected future economies.
> But it's hard enough right now trying to get to reliable costs per
> kWh. This baby is changing fast and I'm sure the rules we have today
> won't apply forever. So the best I can do is try to keep on top of
> developments and talk about what is, rather than what might be.

Alternative Energy Storage: It's All About Price vs. Performance

Correction - - -

I wrote "...you have been effectively against the monument."

Insert the word "pushing": ...you have been PUSHING effectively against the monument.

Entirely different implication. Sorry.

Alternative Energy Storage: It's All About Price vs. Performance

John Petersen - - -

At the risk of putting the cart before the horse (this suggestion may be too early to be anything more than a temporary stab at the subject), do you think that an analysis attempting to separate different cost effects for emerging generation and storage technologies could be done? Let me make a list to clarify what I mean by different types of estimated cost factors:

1. Scalable costs that will come down with volume production and usage.

2. Fixed costs that have no economy of scale.

3. Costs that might have reverse economy of scale (higher raw material costs based on scarcity facing higher demand, for example).

4. Costs that face the risk of lowered recoverability through obsolescence (by a leap-frogging technology change).

I realize that what I am asking is monumental if tackled comprehensively, but you have been effectively against the monument. Can you keep trying to focus on these issues in manageable pieces as you continue your work?

My comments here are prompted by the comment stream discussion of uranium availability (Vienna and billp37) and use of thorium (kewlhand) and the mention of Li-ion-phosphate technology (Road Runner). I am aware of this technology which Valence (VLNC) is working on. There are other alternative lithium based systems from Altair Nano (ALTI) and A123 Systems (privately held). The mention of EEstor (nickgogert) raises the question: how does this relate to the BoostCap technology from Maxwell Technology (MXWL)?

John, if you continue your sofar excellent efforts, the parameters of energy storage technology and the intersection with new generation technologies can only become clearer. Thanks for doing what you are doing.

Alternative Energy Storage: It's All About Price vs. Performance

As John Petersen states in the title, its all about cost vs. performance. I would like to see an analysis of cost for expanding nuclear (construction and maintenance, including uranium mining and processing) vs. other alternatives. What projections can be made for the future availability and cost of uranium? I hate to cite Vienna because of the language chosen in the comment, but it is claimed that uranium will be exhausted in 50 years. Is that known reserves? What are the possibilities of further reserves being discovered? Is this like peak oil, where we really don't know when the peak will occur, but are getting a better idea of peak cheap oil.

John Petersen continuously tries to assess the future cost profiles of emerging technologies, but these are merely estimates ("guesstimates"). I think he has made it clear he does not have a crystal ball regarding such things as technology evolution in battery chemistries and potential economies of scale for a wide variety of still rather primitive commercializations of solar (thermal and photovoltaic), wind, geothermal, tidal and wave hydropower, etc.

Discussion of the entire future energy paradigm is still proceding on the level of hunches. John Petersen is providing an excellent service in summarizing the rationale of various efforts underway, but, as he has made clear in his excellent series of articles, this entire area is still in gestation - it hasn't even reached infancy, in my opinion.

John, I hope you have the patience to stay with this subject and keep your perspectives regarding developments in the energy storage area in front of us for some time to come.

Alternative Energy Storage Needs to Take Baby Steps Before It Can Run

John Petersen - - -

I have been sending Holiday comments to SA authors that have provided me with valuable information this year that I have not been getting elsewhere. You are one of those authors. I hope you will stay with your writing efforts for a long time. Storage is the keystone for energy technology and energy distribution.

One presently unknown factor is how environmental factors will influence the economics of EV and HEV. For example, carbon taxes, in any form, will shift the economic calculus. We just don't know yet what is coming in that area.

America Must Rebuild Domestic Battery Manufacturing Infrastructure

Mark Goldes and paulk8756 - - -

I gave you both a thumbs up rating because you both added significant value to the discussion, even though I disagreed with some of your points. This is the way I personally rate comments. I guess some may vote thumbs down if they disagree with something. That's the only way I can rationalize the negative rating for Mark's comment. I vote based on the quality of the argument and the contribution to the discussion.

America Must Rebuild Domestic Battery Manufacturing Infrastructure

Two apologies - - -

1. To John PetersEn

2. To Bicycles

America Must Rebuild Domestic Battery Manufacturing Infrastructure

John Peterson - - -

You are providing a great service with your provocative and thorough discussion of battery technology issues. Discussion by commenters has been great.

That being said, it seems that battery technology (and energy storage in general) is too widely viewed as being "mature" with few new discovery prospects. Philosophically, I believe that, in general, the unkown is much larger (infinitely larger?) than the known. I see no reason to assume this does not include energy storage. May I remind you that the lack of vision regarding future prospects for discovery is not new. In the late 19th century there was a proposal to close the U.S. Patent Office since "everything of value had been invented".

Finally, I firmly believe that the small battery lithium ion business (cell phones up through electric scooters/bycycles) has a huge growth curve in the coming years.

Disclosure I have long positions in ABAT and CBAK.

The Heart of Cleantech Sells at 50% Discount to the Broader Market

John - - -

Steve Milunovich's inflection point chart is interesting. I have had this sequence on a scrap of paper for some time. It has occurred to me that there may be some useful lessons in how investment markets have responded to these historic "stimuli". Although I haven't developed a thorough analysis as yet, the following list shows some interesting relationships.

Economic Revolution 1: Railroads, 1830's
Contemporary Crashes, 1847-1857, rolling through Europe to U.S.
Major attribution - Railroads (RR)
Economic Revolution 2: Steel & Electricity, 1870's
Contemporary Crashes, 1873, Europe, U.S.
Major attribution - RR, Real Estate (RE)
Economic Revolution 3: Oil & Mass Production, early 1900's
Comtemporary Crashes, (a) 1907, U.S. and (b)1929, U.S.
Major attribution - (a) RR, Coffee and (b)Stocks, RE
Economic Revolution 4: Technology, 1970's
Contemporary Crashes, (a) 1974, World and (b) 2000-2002, U.S.
Major attribution - (a) Stocks, RE and (b) Tech
Economic Revolution 5: New Energy, early 2000's
Contemporary Crashes, 2008-?, World
Major attribution - Credit Bubble (Banking), RE

Interesting points:

1. There was a market crash early in all revolutions (except the first) that were not directly related to the revolution.

2. Crashes associated with a specific economic revolution occurred later in that revolution process, and sometimes after the start of the next revolution.

3. One revolution (railroads) had a legacy of repeated bubbles and crashes

This means that investment strategies for the seemingly undervalued storage sector must look forward to a potential bubble down the road.

One additional note: There has been a credit cycle (banking)involvement in all economic (and stock market) cycles, but often secondary to another prime mover, especially in the biggest crashes. What is different in 2008 is the real estate cycle effect on the economic cycle has been overshadowed by collapse of a mountain of highly leveraged debt derivatives.

The Heart of Cleantech Sells at 50% Discount to the Broader Market

John - - -

I like the forward prospects for CBAK, especially since the risk that their rapid facility investment is a temporary overbuild is mitigated by a Chinese government financial backstop.

Disclosure: I have started buying CBAK during the past five months and have owned ABAT for almost a year.