Seeking Alpha

Axion Power Host's  Instablog

Axion Power Host
Send Message
Inactive.
  • Axion Power Concentrator 207: Feb. 10: Axion Power PbC Batteries Continue To Demonstrate Effectiveness For Railroad Applications Norfolk Southern 266 comments
    Feb 10, 2013 8:19 AM | about stocks: AXPW

    Latest News, Articles and Presentations...

    Dr. Ed Buiel, Axion's CTO until the end of 2010 -- A link to an archive of his comments on yadoodle about the PbC battery and much more. Invaluable commentary! Thanks to 481086 for putting the list together.

    Axion Power PbC Batteries Continue To Demonstrate Effectiveness For Railroad Applications -- Axion completed shipping its high-performance PbC batteries to Norfolk Southern Corp. (NYSE:NS), one of North America's leading transportation providers, for use in Norfolk Southern's first all electric locomotive - the NS-999.

    Axion Power Residential Energy Storage HUB Certified to UL, CSA Standards -- Axion receives UL certification and CSA Standards for their Residential Energy Storage HUB.

    "ePower's Series Hybrid Electric Drive - Unmatched Fuel Economy for Heavy Trucks" -- by John Petersen. Discusses the potential fuel savings for ePower's Hybrid electric drive for class 8 trucks using Axion's PbC batteries.

    "Axion Power - A Battery Manufacturer Charging Forward" -- by John Petersen. This is an excellent summation on Axion Power's history. It is a good starting point for introducing Axion Power to friends and family.

    13th European Lead Battery Conference, ELBC -- Sliderocket of John Petersen's presentation at the ELBC.

    Dr. Ender's Dickinson's Presentation on Axion's PbC -- Link to his slideshow at the 13th ELBC.

    Axion Power's 3rd Quarter Report and Press Release -- Seeking Alpha also published the transcript of the conference call here.

    RoseWater Joins Queen's University on Energy Storage Study -- Testing will determine the effects of residential energy storage systems on local power grids.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Axion Power Weighted Moving Average Prices and Volume:

    (updated thru 02/9/2013)

    My VWMA price chart over the last week has seen a solid re-test of the 200-day VWMA by the 10-day which fell to the 200-day and then turned up. At Friday's close, my VWMA values were $.3257 for the 10-day, $.3190 for the 50-day and $.3213 for the 200-day. Barring a major change in market behavior, the spread between the 10-day and the 200-day should continue to widen and we can expect the 50-day to move up through the 200-day sometime next week.

    (click to enlarge)

    The last week had exceptionally low volume with a moderate price uptrend. The 10-day moving average fell decisively through a baseline volume trend that began in November 2011. I believe this is the first solid proof of seller exhaustion. There may be a few bullets in the armory, but the days of relentless selling seem to be history.

    (click to enlarge)

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Axion Power Monthly Volume versus FINRA Short Percentage:

    In late January I wrote an Instablog about the precipitous decline in reported FINRA short sales as a percentage of total trading volume. Over the last two weeks that trend has accelerated and the percentages for the month of February and the last four weeks are solidly in single digits. I view this graph as another confirmation of seller exhaustion. The big uglies are history and it looks like everybody who really wanted to sell already has.

    John Petersen's instablog here.

    (click to enlarge)

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Axion Power Concentrater Comments:

    (click to enlarge)

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Links to important Axion Power research and websites:

    The Axion Power Concentrator Web Sites, created by APC commentator Bangwhiz. It is a complete easy-to-use online archive of all the information contained in the entire Axion Power Concentrator series from day one, including reports, articles, comments and posted links.

    Axion Power Wikispaces Web Site, created by APC commentator WDD. It is an excellent ongoing notebook aggregation of Axion Power facts.

    Axion Power Website. The first place any prospective investor should go and thoroughly explore with all SEC filings and investor presentations as well as past and present Press Releases.

    Axion Power Intra-day Statistics. HTL tracks and charts AXPW's intra-day statistics.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------
    Be sure and either follow the Axion Power Host ID on Seeking Alpha or click the check-box labeled "track new comments on this article" just ahead of the comments section!
    --------------------------------------------------------------------
    WARNING: This is a troll free zone. We reserve the right to eliminate posts, or posters that are disruptive.

    Enjoy!

    Disclosure: I am long OTCQB:AXPW.

Back To Axion Power Host's Instablog HomePage »

Instablogs are blogs which are instantly set up and networked within the Seeking Alpha community. Instablog posts are not selected, edited or screened by Seeking Alpha editors, in contrast to contributors' articles.

Comments (266)
Track new comments
  • carlosgaviria
    , contributor
    Comments (798) | Send Message
     
    Primero!!!!!
    10 Feb 2013, 08:30 AM Reply Like
  • BugEYE
    , contributor
    Comments (195) | Send Message
     
    Bravo, Carlos!
    10 Feb 2013, 08:38 AM Reply Like
  • Futurist
    , contributor
    Comments (2113) | Send Message
     
    Well done Carlos.
    Alas I had no opportunity for the big prize today. Now if the Big Kahuna would get up earlier I might have had a sprinters chance.
    10 Feb 2013, 05:12 PM Reply Like
  • Axion Power Host
    , contributor
    Comments (497) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » Be sure to check out the updated charts and commentary from JP in the header.
    10 Feb 2013, 08:31 AM Reply Like
  • Mayascribe
    , contributor
    Comments (10511) | Send Message
     
    JP: Thanks for updating the charts! The FINRA short percentage is a real big tell.
    10 Feb 2013, 08:39 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30456) | Send Message
     
    If it was just a short volume decline I'd be less confident than I am with the combination of a volume decline and a short decline at the same time.

     

    PS – fourth again.
    10 Feb 2013, 08:54 AM Reply Like
  • Mayascribe
    , contributor
    Comments (10511) | Send Message
     
    AXPW word of the day:

     

    Coir /ˈkɔɪr/ is a natural fibre extracted from the husk of coconut and used in products such as floor mats, doormats, brushes, mattresses, etc. Technically, coir is the fibrous material found between the hard, internal shell and the outer coat of a coconut. Other uses of brown coir (made from ripe coconut) are in upholstery padding, sacking and horticulture. White coir, harvested from unripe coconuts, is used for making finer brushes, string, rope and fishing nets.
    10 Feb 2013, 10:50 AM Reply Like
  • jpau
    , contributor
    Comments (843) | Send Message
     
    http://bloom.bg/Wb0VeI

     

    thought this might be interesting
    10 Feb 2013, 12:05 PM Reply Like
  • Futurist
    , contributor
    Comments (2113) | Send Message
     
    Thanks for the video. Very interesting. As soon as I want a dreamliner beneath my crotch I will test ride one. :-)
    10 Feb 2013, 05:20 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30456) | Send Message
     
    A thermal runaway on a Brammo could make you true rarity – a Darwin Award winner who lived to tell his own gene pool improvement story.
    10 Feb 2013, 05:39 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10178) | Send Message
     
    Not so sure John.

     

    Thermal runaway is most likely to happen closer to peak load. It'd take one heck of a tough guy to go through that level of procreation reduction assurance and keep the two wheeled operating table under control without pain killers.
    10 Feb 2013, 07:32 PM Reply Like
  • JRP3
    , contributor
    Comments (8605) | Send Message
     
    Yes it's much more comforting to have a sheet metal tank of flammable liquid between your legs sitting over a hot chunk of metal. I'm sure nothing ever goes wrong with that setup....
    http://bit.ly/YSJu38
    11 Feb 2013, 08:34 PM Reply Like
  • wtblanchard
    , contributor
    Comments (2435) | Send Message
     
    EPRI’s View on Emerging Technologies
    On February 4, 2013, in Blog, by Richard T. Stuebi

     

    http://bit.ly/UUeGl6

     

    Based on this:

     

    January 1, 2013
    Emerging Technologies Enable “No Regrets” Energy Strategy
    By Arshad Mansoor, EPRI

     

    "Achieving a balance between affordable and sustainable electricity while improving reliability is a challenge unlike any the electricity sector has faced since its inception. Technology innovations in key areas such as energy efficiency, smart grid, renewable energy resources, hardened transmission systems, and long-term operation of the existing nuclear and fossil fleets are essential to shaping the future of electricity supplies."

     

    http://bit.ly/Y3z5AA

     

    Check out
    "The inspection robot is capable of crawling over conductor shield wires and carrying a payload to allow autonomous inspection of transmission corridor segments up to 80 miles long at least twice annually. Courtesy: EPRI"
    10 Feb 2013, 02:17 PM Reply Like
  • bazooooka
    , contributor
    Comments (3465) | Send Message
     
    Likely a re-post; but Tesla news isn't all rosy anymore.

     

    http://nyti.ms/UUUkIv
    10 Feb 2013, 06:08 PM Reply Like
  • froggey77
    , contributor
    Comments (2813) | Send Message
     
    This was a lead in article published two days before the first one bazooka just posted. (Stalled Out on Tesla’s Electric Highway)

     

    A Detour on the Road to an Electric Future
    By JOHN M. BRODER

     

    http://nyti.ms/X1cOSF
    10 Feb 2013, 09:06 PM Reply Like
  • JRP3
    , contributor
    Comments (8605) | Send Message
     
    Uh oh, Tesla vehicle logs may tell a different tale.

     

    "NYTimes article about Tesla range in cold is fake. Vehicle logs tell true story that he didn't actually charge to max & took a long detour."

     

    http://bit.ly/UZwTOn
    11 Feb 2013, 08:40 PM Reply Like
  • CO3
    , contributor
    Comments (252) | Send Message
     
    Stay tuned ...
    The REAL story to be revealed 140 characters at a time.

     

    lmao
    11 Feb 2013, 10:36 PM Reply Like
  • LT
    , contributor
    Comments (5519) | Send Message
     
    electric car sales to double

     

    http://bit.ly/VP7hjU
    10 Feb 2013, 08:19 PM Reply Like
  • Stefan Moroney
    , contributor
    Comments (2662) | Send Message
     
    In the auto industry that's like saying I am going to double the number of cars I have from 1 to 2.
    10 Feb 2013, 08:27 PM Reply Like
  • JohnM121
    , contributor
    Comments (472) | Send Message
     
    Nothing surprising for us, but it's getting some WSJ coverage:

     

    "Should businesses and families have to pay higher electricity rates to underwrite the cost of wind energy they don't even use?"

     

    "The dispute is over what constitutes a "commensurate" benefit. Interstate Power and Light says it doesn't use the wind power, so it shouldn't pay for it. The green lobby and FERC counter that rate payers benefit from the overall "reliability" of the electric grid.

     

    But this is like arguing that Oklahomans should pay to fix potholes in Manhattan because this enhances the national transportation system. In any case, wind power is one of the least reliable sources of electricity due to its intermittency. In states like Colorado, wind has to be backed up by coal or natural gas plants, not the opposite. "

     

    http://on.wsj.com/WYBDSj
    10 Feb 2013, 08:40 PM Reply Like
  • froggey77
    , contributor
    Comments (2813) | Send Message
     
    OT
    Kepler Space Telescope Data Reveals Billions Of Earth-Like Planets Near Earth

     

    http://huff.to/Z4jeGG
    10 Feb 2013, 09:30 PM Reply Like
  • froggey77
    , contributor
    Comments (2813) | Send Message
     
    A study done on the Leaf.

     

    How do extremely cold temperatures affect the range of an electric car?
    Posted on January 31, 2013 by Megan Allen

     

    http://bit.ly/Z4kCJy
    10 Feb 2013, 09:44 PM Reply Like
  • Renzo
    , contributor
    Comments (353) | Send Message
     
    Nice find Froggy, Isn't this rich?

     

    "What can those with electric cars do? Our EV Champions have been discussing this and many other things on their Participant Blog. Some of the suggestions are alternative ways to heat the EV, driving without using any heating (except when it is essential for safety) and trying to find ways to get in as much charging between drives as possible."

     

    Does my Tesla come with GoreTex gloves?
    10 Feb 2013, 11:12 PM Reply Like
  • Stilldazed
    , contributor
    Comments (2150) | Send Message
     
    Hey 86,
    The article froggey77 linked to says they are discussing alternative ways to heat the cabin of an EV. Maybe your cousin with the wood burning stove in the Volvo could call them up?
    10 Feb 2013, 11:32 PM Reply Like
  • froggey77
    , contributor
    Comments (2813) | Send Message
     
    Renzo
    An electric blanket.....or ...
    You could, just start a fire in the battery pack. ;-D
    10 Feb 2013, 11:38 PM Reply Like
  • 481086
    , contributor
    Comments (3442) | Send Message
     
    Way ahead of ya brother... Version 2 is now called the "Twiggerator" and apparently my (half) cousin's already in talks with them. Cool thing is the thing can also burn Sterno, pistachio husks, or even spent cat litter in a pinch. So he's getting lots of inquiries. Everybody sees big potential of course, but the one stumbling block is still the emissions. Seems it spews ash everywhere fairly wickedly whenever you crank it up. Soon's they get that part licked though he's sure it's going to take off. Fingers crossed here...
    11 Feb 2013, 05:04 AM Reply Like
  • Stilldazed
    , contributor
    Comments (2150) | Send Message
     
    86,
    I should have known, true innovators never stagnate. ;-)
    11 Feb 2013, 12:45 PM Reply Like
  • bangwhiz
    , contributor
    Comments (2250) | Send Message
     
    Glad I wasn't stuck on a road somewhere in a EV during this past weekend's blizzard!
    10 Feb 2013, 11:12 PM Reply Like
  • LT
    , contributor
    Comments (5519) | Send Message
     
    VW introducing a new platform where components are the same on virtually all models....the big thing is avoiding recalls /warranties....so now this is in components, but with the failure of AGM is s/s applications...
    If I were TG, I would be all over this. Because it will apply to batteries soon.
    11 Feb 2013, 06:47 AM Reply Like
  • D. McHattie
    , contributor
    Comments (1844) | Send Message
     
    Apple iCar.

     

    http://bit.ly/VPLLtl

     

    You know how everyone has a restaurant idea and thinks they could run a successful restaurant but 90% of them fail within 5 years?

     

    It seems that in the rarified world of successful executives the grand delusion is not restaurants but autos.

     

    These execs experience success in 1 industry and they think they're geniuses who can revolutionize any industry.

     

    They pick autos because they all think they're 'car guys' because they have the money to buy an expensive car.

     

    It seems some Apple execs are under the same grand delusions as Elon Musk.

     

    D
    11 Feb 2013, 10:08 AM Reply Like
  • LT
    , contributor
    Comments (5519) | Send Message
     
    10:43 AM Jefferies defends Tesla Motors (TSLA -3.2%) with a note which points out that most Tesla Model S owners seem more impressed with the car than the New York Times reporter who muddled through the charging process on an extended trip. The firm boosts its price target on TSLA to $45 a share on its view the EV automaker will report that it's on track to meet stated FY13 productions goals. Comment! [Consumer]
    11 Feb 2013, 10:56 AM Reply Like
  • siliconhillbilly
    , contributor
    Comments (2357) | Send Message
     
    Jefferies boosts its price target for TSLA, BEFORE the earnings are announced? WoW! That's confidence! Or something :-)
    11 Feb 2013, 11:17 AM Reply Like
  • tripleblack
    , contributor
    Comments (13589) | Send Message
     
    We members of the turtle family are quite familiar with the carniverous squids, of which Jefferies is a smaller example...

     

    When they pump something, its a good time to hide your wallet.
    11 Feb 2013, 11:24 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10178) | Send Message
     
    SiHB, In poker that's called a "tell".
    11 Feb 2013, 11:24 AM Reply Like
  • SMaturin
    , contributor
    Comments (2305) | Send Message
     
    It seems to me that Apple has more sense than to try to jump into the auto industry. Despite years of pundits claiming Apple would soon sell big-screen TV's, they have not done so. They know there is no profit for them in that mature and competitive industry.

     

    Apple wants to sell the high-margin gadgets, software and the app/delivery ecosystem that connect to all our other toys, houses and cars via the cloud. They will revolutionize the connectivity, but they are not going to "reinvent" the automobauble.
    11 Feb 2013, 11:33 AM Reply Like
  • DRich
    , contributor
    Comments (4825) | Send Message
     
    >SMaturin ... I could see Apple developing an in-dash iPhone6/navigation system. Let's hope they don't use their own mapping system. They could buy Nokia just for their maps.
    11 Feb 2013, 11:41 AM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (18444) | Send Message
     
    (AXPW): Intra-day, all my experimental inflection point calcs are going negative. Don't know if we'll end up this way though.

     

    Through 11:43,
    Min. Pr: 0.3200, Max Pr: 0.3395, VW Avg. Tr. Pr: 0.3304
    # Trds: 30, MinTrSz: 300, MaxTrSz: 34500, Vol 190550, AvTrSz: 6352
    # Buys, Shares: 11 34950, VW Avg Buy Pr: 0.3384
    # Sells, Shares: 19 155600, VW Avg Sell Pr: 0.3286
    # Unkn, Shares: 38 0, VW Avg Unk. Pr: 0.0000
    Buy:Sell, 1:4.45 (18.3% "buys")

     

    So, attempts to rise are met by sellers hitting the bid so far.

     

    Experimental,
    HardToLove
    11 Feb 2013, 11:55 AM Reply Like
  • froggey77
    , contributor
    Comments (2813) | Send Message
     
    It appears later this week they will announce when the release is to be scheduled.

     

    http://on.mktw.net/X2QRm9

     

    NEW YORK (MarketWatch) - Tesla Motors TSLA -2.93% is likely to announce this week the exact date of the auto firm's fourth-quarter results, the company told MarketWatch. The electric car company will not release earnings on Monday or this week. "The company hopes to announce the exact date of the earnings release this week," said Shanna Hendriks, Communications Manager for Tesla. "Any announcement so far has been purely false speculations." The Silicon Valley-based company designs, manufactures and sells electric cars and components. Shares for the firm were down 3% today in trading.
    11 Feb 2013, 12:59 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30456) | Send Message
     
    Since the SEC filing for "Large Accelerated Filers" like Tesla that have market capitalizations of $700 million or more is March 1st, I'll take February 28th in the release date pool.

     

    The complexity of annual audits is proportional to the amount of business done and the number of accounts that need to be checked, confirmed and analyzed. Any time a company has a significant change in its business operations, delays in getting the paperwork ready for the auditors are inevitable. Since Tesla usually announces a date a couple weeks in advance, I'm not looking for much before the end of the month.
    11 Feb 2013, 01:12 PM Reply Like
  • mrholty
    , contributor
    Comments (1106) | Send Message
     
    You cynic. ;) I agree but I think they try to bury much of it on a Friday night.

     

    I'll take Friday the 22nd in the late PM say 5 or 6ish EST.

     

    Off to roll my Tesla puts to March that I bought Friday morning expecting an announcment this morning. This weekends article was nice.
    11 Feb 2013, 01:16 PM Reply Like
  • froggey77
    , contributor
    Comments (2813) | Send Message
     
    JP
    I guess I don't understand the filing set up.
    I thought they had 40 days for large accelerated filers to do the Q report and 60 for the annual report.
    If you have a moment please enlighten me.
    11 Feb 2013, 09:08 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30456) | Send Message
     
    Form 10-Q is filed for the first three quarters of the year and Form 10-K is filed for the full fiscal year. There is no requirement to report the fourth quarter separately from the year. The current vogue is to describe the year end filing as "fourth quarter and fiscal year" but the timing is based on Form 10-K requirements.
    12 Feb 2013, 06:59 AM Reply Like
  • froggey77
    , contributor
    Comments (2813) | Send Message
     
    Announcement of the, some day this week, to be released announcement, of when the earnings for the Q will be reported.

     

    Oh. What fun watching Tesla is!

     

    NEW YORK (MarketWatch) - Tesla Motors TSLA -3.14% is likely to announce this week the exact date of the auto firm's fourth-quarter results, the company told MarketWatch. The electric car company will not release earnings on Monday or this week. "The company hopes to announce the exact date of the earnings release this week," said Shanna Hendriks, Communications Manager for Tesla. "Any announcement so far has been purely false speculations." The Silicon Valley-based company designs, manufactures and sells electric cars and components. Shares for the firm were down 3% today in trading.

     

    JP did call a delayed report.
    11 Feb 2013, 01:13 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30456) | Send Message
     
    I didn't call it a delayed report because anything before the close of business on March 1st will be timely.

     

    I said there was nothing from Tesla to support the market's expectation that today would be the date. What happens is that some clerk at Brand Y looks at prior filing dates and comes up with an estimate of the likely release date. That clerk's estimate then magically morphs into a market expectation.

     

    Tesla's been pretty good about giving the market a two week notice before an earnings release. Their silence told me that the Yahoo clerk's estimate was way off base.

     

    I have to admit, however, that I did enjoy the NYT article and blog. I guess the next cool option will be Tesla branded range anxiety jumpsuits from NorthFace, Patgonia or Marmot.
    11 Feb 2013, 01:23 PM Reply Like
  • 481086
    , contributor
    Comments (3442) | Send Message
     
    Don't forget the bundled twig business either! That one's sure to really catch fire...
    11 Feb 2013, 01:53 PM Reply Like
  • froggey77
    , contributor
    Comments (2813) | Send Message
     
    Sorry about the double post.
    I'm having internet/ computer/ SA problems today.
    11 Feb 2013, 02:26 PM Reply Like
  • D Lane
    , contributor
    Comments (1529) | Send Message
     
    SA seems to have some bugs today.
    11 Feb 2013, 02:29 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (18444) | Send Message
     
    A volume, daily shorts and fails-to-deliver instablog is up for any with an interest.

     

    http://seekingalpha.co...

     

    HardToLove
    11 Feb 2013, 01:49 PM Reply Like
  • froggey77
    , contributor
    Comments (2813) | Send Message
     
    GM Discusses Chevy Volt 13-Mile Range Drop in Frigid Temps
    (It's an estimate and will vary with the temp.)
    The Volt also has an active TMS In the NYT article thecar had less than a half charge when parked. To avoid bricking the TMS shuts off when parked to stop from draining the battery. there was a 72% loss over night. I wonder what it would have been if it had been fully charged before parking?
    It was having about a 30% reduction in range while driving.

     

    http://bit.ly/156MywI

     

    Note the comments

     

    That’s about right. Here in NJ firends of mine that have Volts are telling me they are getting 25-27 miles or electric range during this recent cold spell. Meanwhile my ActiveE is only getting about 70 miles down from a reliable 95-97 in optimum conditions.

     

    I would like car manufacturers to plan a “cushion” in their battery sizing when designing these cars. For instance, we see now from experience that heavy usage of HVAC in the cars drains roughly 13 miles of range, (a 30% hit to the all electric range)
    11 Feb 2013, 02:43 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30456) | Send Message
     
    A 13 mile loss on a 38 mile advertised range is a little over a third.
    11 Feb 2013, 02:48 PM Reply Like
  • 481086
    , contributor
    Comments (3442) | Send Message
     
    I guess I still sorta like the idea of having a few E-only miles to get you to the grocery store in your heavy hybrid during a fuel crisis, but otherwise I've fully come around-- adding battery beyond that to any vehicle makes increasingly little sense.
    11 Feb 2013, 02:59 PM Reply Like
  • 481086
    , contributor
    Comments (3442) | Send Message
     
    I'd say this is closer to what we'll eventually converge to:

     

    http://bit.ly/156PyZY

     

    http://bit.ly/Y5bDAZ
    11 Feb 2013, 03:04 PM Reply Like
  • jakurtz
    , contributor
    Comments (1888) | Send Message
     
    Tesla and Musk Tweets are getting to be just too much fun...

     

    http://bit.ly/156ULku

     

    http://seekingalpha.co...
    11 Feb 2013, 03:40 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30456) | Send Message
     
    It's too much fun for words. Put a human behind the wheel and he does human things.

     

    http://yhoo.it/1283LGr

     

    Yellow flag against Elon for unsportsmanlike conduct.

     

    I guess he never learned that a smart businessman never picks a fight with somebody who buys ink in barrels.
    11 Feb 2013, 03:48 PM Reply Like
  • Milhouse
    , contributor
    Comments (414) | Send Message
     
    I think he was emboldened by his scrap with TopGear, but the New York Times is an entirely different animal. They are not likely to appreciate the terms he is and will continue to use like "fake".

     

    Maybe everyone will have a new boogeyman to blame for the failure of the electric car: THE LIBERAL MEDIA (said in a spooky voice with thunderclap in background).

     

    Who was it last time around? The oil companies and big three automakers, I think.
    11 Feb 2013, 03:53 PM Reply Like
  • Renzo
    , contributor
    Comments (353) | Send Message
     
    The smell of burning Musk is...unpleasant.
    11 Feb 2013, 06:04 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30456) | Send Message
     
    I'm still trying to wrap my mind around Musk's assertion that they always data-log the media to make sure that road tests are conducted in accordance with Tesla's instructions.

     

    If testers are given that much instruction before they get their hands on the car how much value does a Car of the Year Award really have?

     

    Seriously, when the road tests are rigged what's left to believe?
    11 Feb 2013, 06:16 PM Reply Like
  • JRP3
    , contributor
    Comments (8605) | Send Message
     
    You have it backwards. Tesla, and Nissan, both caught Top Gear fixing the tests to make it look as if the vehicles "ran out of juice". With Tesla the logs showed the car had plenty of charge when Top Gear showed it being pushed into a garage, and Nissan logs showed that Top Gear started their trip without a full charge.
    11 Feb 2013, 08:50 PM Reply Like
  • froggey77
    , contributor
    Comments (2813) | Send Message
     
    The thing that came to me was:
    Musk saying the reporter deviated from the route. T his would mean the route was approved by Tesla. Which I presume includes the hotel stay and that there would be no plug overnight.
    Musk did not say they had approved a hotel with a plug but the reporter did not use it. (He did not mention this part at all.)

     

    Also
    Musk is claiming the extended detour was through Manhattan. He does not say if this was going North (First day) or South (second day) While he ran short but made it going North. South was not a problem at all.

     

    Manhattan area is not in the part where the guy ran out of power. He went North to NY past Manhattan and to a charging station. He charged but not fully. The next day he ran out on the way back to the same charging station North of NY. (After getting a partial charge at the diner.)
    javascript:pop_me_up2('http://nyti.ms/14OUXDZ')

     

    Numbers 4 through 8 is the story of him running out.
    Manhattan is #3 and #9
    Musk is being misleading.
    11 Feb 2013, 10:04 PM Reply Like
  • Milhouse
    , contributor
    Comments (414) | Send Message
     
    I agree, froggey. Whatever detour he made through Manhattan was probably not the problem, as he charged up just North of there.

     

    The problem seems to be that he stopped in CT with 90 miles of range, and by the time he left the next morning, he had only 19 miles of range.

     

    No software fixes can make the batteries perform in cold weather, unfortunately.
    11 Feb 2013, 10:15 PM Reply Like
  • billa_from_sf
    , contributor
    Comments (370) | Send Message
     
    I also noticed that.

     

    He charged up north of Manhattan heading north, and he ran out of juice heading south.

     

    After he had driven north of Manhattan, he super-charged up, drove further north, charged up again after staying in a motel, started driving south, and then ran out of juice.
    11 Feb 2013, 10:27 PM Reply Like
  • Oz_Rob
    , contributor
    Comments (520) | Send Message
     
    John it is not about making sure the Media review is done according to Tesla's liking, the data logging is so that Tesla can fact check a claim. Like when Top Gear showed and claimed that the car ran out of charge and required a push back to the garage when in fact at no time did either Top Gear car have less then 50 miles of remaining range. The media can make whatever claims they like but if they claim it ran out after x miles but in fact it was driven 30 miles further then that, and if they claim it was given a max range charge but in fact they only charged it to 80% should they not be called on their deceptive journalism?
    11 Feb 2013, 10:55 PM Reply Like
  • froggey77
    , contributor
    Comments (2813) | Send Message
     
    Oz
    Top Gear would have run out the battery had they tried to run a full test. They stopped rather than hurt the battery.
    The court threw out Tesla's suit. Tesla tried again and the suit was thrown out again.
    Should Tesla not be called on nonsense lawsuits?
    What about Musketeers who repeat false nonsense?
    12 Feb 2013, 12:40 AM Reply Like
  • Oz_Rob
    , contributor
    Comments (520) | Send Message
     
    The judge agreed that the segment was potentially misleading, the case was not thrown out because the claim was frivolous it was dismissed because did not consider that Tesla had proven that the report had resulted in compensable damages. They didn't push the car back into the garage with 50 miles of range left to protect the battery, they did it because they felt it made good television, it was a race course a few miles around, with 50 miles left there is no reason to slow down but even if they only had 5 miles left they could have slowed down and completed the current lap before returning for a charge, they chose sensationalism over reality.
    12 Feb 2013, 12:59 AM Reply Like
  • froggey77
    , contributor
    Comments (2813) | Send Message
     
    Oz
    Possibly not the first time but it was dismissed the second time for being frivolous.

     

    Tesla libel suit against Top Gear fails again
    http://aol.it/13TAIon#

     

    " Tesla and the company's lawyers are nothing if not determined. After a judge smacked down the electric vehicle manufacturer's libel suit against the BBC and Top Gear for comments made about the range of the Tesla Roadster, the automaker rallied with a second, amended lawsuit. It didn't take long for the the same judge to nix the new case, too, saying the amendment was "not capable of being defamatory at all, or, if it is, it is not capable of being a sufficiently serious defamatory meaning to constitute a real and substantial tort."

     

    That sound? It's the smack of the judicial backhand."
    12 Feb 2013, 01:27 AM Reply Like
  • JRP3
    , contributor
    Comments (8605) | Send Message
     
    "No software fixes can make the batteries perform in cold weather, unfortunately. "

     

    In fact they can to some degree. When the Roadster was first released it used a large amount of power when just sitting overnight. Later updates fixed that. Model S users have mentioned different levels of power use depending on the software version they have. The issue is being worked on. Additionally part of the problem is the car is reporting lost range in the cold, probably because of reduced voltage readings in lower temperatures, but after driving a bit and warming up some of that displayed range is returned.
    So yes, the car does lose some range in the cold over night, probably more than it should, which will be corrected, and it's reporting even more than is actually lost, which will also be corrected.
    However, even with those issues, this car could have made the trip if it had been charged fully when the opportunities were available.
    12 Feb 2013, 09:04 AM Reply Like
  • 481086
    , contributor
    Comments (3442) | Send Message
     
    http://bit.ly/VSEUiP

     

    Here's an account of another person's cold weather adventure/trip with a model S... with some points of congruence with the Broder piece.. bottom line to me seems to be, in any electric car, one only has so many KWh of stored energy to play with. On mild days or short trips it's not really a problem... 250 mile road trips in real winter weather? That's pushing it, and there are likely going to be serious compromises--drive slow, bundle up, bring plenty of charging adaptors, plan for extra time etc etc. It seems for now, such trips are going to require almost the same level of detailed pre-flight planning, weather briefing, and consumption/range calculations as is found in aviation. Issues with extreme temps and ranges are just going to be the nature of the beast for now, and the sooner that is owned up to honestly, the better I should think it would be for everyone.
    12 Feb 2013, 02:20 PM Reply Like
  • jakurtz
    , contributor
    Comments (1888) | Send Message
     
    Having to drive without heat in a $100k car...that is as funny as Wyle E. Coyote running off the cliff looking down and realizing their is nothing but air beneath him. It cracks me up.

     

    Maybe they should install a button that keeps the heat on in lieu of power steering and power breaks.
    12 Feb 2013, 02:41 PM Reply Like
  • Mayascribe
    , contributor
    Comments (10511) | Send Message
     
    48: That's one hell of a story. Too the point where I'd invite hell right into my car to keep me warm. What a freaking hassle.

     

    But the Teslaphiles will argue that if one properly planned their trip, none of these aggravations would have ever happened.

     

    You're right, taking a Tesla out for a vacation trip beyond home charging range is akin to pre-flight planning, but far worse. Far more complex. The well-told story you linked is a Tesla un-plugged version of not being able to plug in. Never a spur of the moment side trip without calculation? And what happens if you miss an exit off a freeway, or turnpike?

     

    Do I really want to spend my vacation time waiting...waiting for my car to charge? Do I really want to buy every plug adapter out there?

     

    Taking a 600 mile from home vacation is inviting a vacation of waiting and relying on others, and most of those others seem clueless as to what a Tesla needs.

     

    Wouldn't expect to ever see a Tesla with skis on top.

     

    How demeaning as it has been suggested that those owning a $100,000 Tesla should probably rent a car, rather than use that $100,000 car for a prolonged vacation.

     

    Ummm...additionally, one can be arrested for driving too slow...to save power.
    12 Feb 2013, 10:57 PM Reply Like
  • JRP3
    , contributor
    Comments (8605) | Send Message
     
    In case anyone missed it these are early days of a new technology. The trip she "planned" was poorly planned and not well researched. No one is claiming that EV's can do any trip at any time without any issues. Poor planning leads to thousands of people running out of gas each day, in well established ICE technology. Why would anyone think the same should never happen in an EV?
    13 Feb 2013, 09:41 AM Reply Like
  • SMaturin
    , contributor
    Comments (2305) | Send Message
     
    In case anyone missed it, electric cars are a century-old technology that has repeatedly failed in the market place for all of the reasons pointed out by Regina Gasser in her horrifying blog post first noted above by Agent 86:

     

    http://bit.ly/VSEUiP

     

    Replacing lead acid technology with lithium does not get rid of the many disadvantages of battery-powered automobiles in our petroleum-based economy.

     

    History of the Electric Vehicle: http://bit.ly/YroL4b

     

    "Acceptance of electric cars was initially hampered by a lack of power infrastructure, but by 1912, many homes were wired for electricity, enabling a surge in the popularity of the cars. At the turn of the century, 40 percent of American automobiles were powered by steam, 38 percent by electricity, and 22 percent by gasoline. 33,842 electric cars were registered in the United States, and America became the country where electric cars had gained the most acceptance..."

     

    "After enjoying success at the beginning of the century, the electric car began to lose its position in the automobile market. This was brought about by a number of developments. By the 1920s, improved road infrastructure was being created between American cities; in order to make use of these roads, vehicles with greater range than that offered by electric cars were needed. The discovery of large reserves of petroleum in Texas, Oklahoma, and California led to the wide availability of affordable gasoline, making gas-powered cars cheaper to operate over long distances. Electric cars were limited to urban use by their slow speed (no more than 24–32 km/h or 15–20 mph[15]) and low range (30–40 miles or 50–65 km[15]), and gasoline cars were now able to travel farther and faster than equivalent electrics."
    13 Feb 2013, 11:46 AM Reply Like
  • Milhouse
    , contributor
    Comments (414) | Send Message
     
    Interesting. I thought hybrids were a new invention.

     

    " In 1897, electric vehicles found their first commercial application as a fleet of electrical New York City taxis, built by the Electric Carriage and Wagon Company of Philadelphia, was established. Electric cars were produced in the U.S. by Anthony Electric, Baker, Columbia, Anderson, Edison, Studebaker, Riker, and others during the early 20th century. In 1911, the first gasoline-electric hybrid car was released by the Woods Motor Vehicle Company of Chicago. The hybrid was a commercial failure, proving to be too slow for its price, and too difficult to service."

     

    http://cnnmon.ie/WJal2S
    13 Feb 2013, 12:11 PM Reply Like
  • SMaturin
    , contributor
    Comments (2305) | Send Message
     
    Cue the Santayana quotes:

     

    “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”
    —Life of Reason, Reason in Common Sense, Scribner's, 1905, p. 284

     

    “Fanaticism consists in redoubling your effort when you have forgotten your aim.”
    —Life of Reason, Reason in Common Sense, Scribner's, 1905, p. 13
    13 Feb 2013, 12:30 PM Reply Like
  • froggey77
    , contributor
    Comments (2813) | Send Message
     
    SM
    Quotes? OK how about the POTUS:

     

    "We need a 10 X better battery."

     

    To bad he didn't figure that out 4 years ago.
    13 Feb 2013, 07:51 PM Reply Like
  • Stilldazed
    , contributor
    Comments (2150) | Send Message
     
    JRP3,
    Yes it is early days in the reuse of this technology. I do disagree that the trip wasn't well planned. She said that the charging stations for the trip were planned out, were not as stated and pointed out the need for better infrastructure. My wife and I each travel over 100 miles a day for work, even here in SoCal in the summer with AC use I would have range anxiety and would not have her drive an electric vehicle. My wife is like 95% of drivers, get in and go and don't check oil or anything else unless the check engine light comes on (I manage to check under the hood twice a week for her). The article author was much better organized and knowledgeable than the other 95%. This tells me that there is a learning curve to use these vehicles and that figuring range is more of an art than a science.
    13 Feb 2013, 08:31 PM Reply Like
  • JRP3
    , contributor
    Comments (8605) | Send Message
     
    She took the trip with inaccurate information. If I plan a trip in an ICE counting on a gas station at the 300 mile mark and it's closed or out of order, and there are no others within range, I'm stuck. People run out of gas every single day, obviously because of poor planning. Does that prove that ICE technology isn't ready? Higher speed charge points are limited in some areas, a fact that is changing quite rapidly.
    EV's are certainly not the right vehicle for many people now, that doesn't mean that they aren't the right vehicle for many others.
    14 Feb 2013, 08:57 AM Reply Like
  • Renzo
    , contributor
    Comments (353) | Send Message
     
    In context, the "many others" an EV is right for is a relative few. Which is why, in times of limited funds and massive public debt we shouldn't be forcing EV's on the public by expensive subsidies, ZEV quotas and nonsensical milage efficiency targets. Those who find them beneficial, inexpensive and efficient can buy them and enjoy on their own dimes.

     

    There is no greater public good served by governments anointing EV's as special.
    14 Feb 2013, 12:27 PM Reply Like
  • JRP3
    , contributor
    Comments (8605) | Send Message
     
    The tax rebate for EV's is not expensive. You may not like it for whatever reasons but for the 20,000 Model S's that will be sold this year it amounts to about 50 cents per US citizen. Moving this technology forward does serve the public good in the eyes of many people, certainly more so than many other subsidies that no one here ever complains about.
    Since an EV can easily handle the majority of most peoples driving needs, and most households have more than one vehicle, EV's are actually right for a large number of people.
    15 Feb 2013, 08:00 AM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (18444) | Send Message
     
    JRP3: "about 50 cents per US citizen"

     

    That's a slippery slope POV, IMO. I think honesty would include the subsidies from all the other sources that lead to a supposed viability and market acceptance of a "pure" EV.

     

    We can start with A123 and so many other DOE "investments".

     

    The counter argument of "but we also subsidize ..." is not germane. Each should first be cast in a doubtful light and then evaluated on its own merits. Then we could aggregate all the subsidies required for a particular the political goal.

     

    I'll state categorically that the subsidies that lead to a Tesla are way more than $0.50/citizen. Who's battery they use is irrelevant - it's the subsidies to the industries that need government support establishing the environment that makes a Tesla seem potentially viable that does the majority of the harm, with little things like "only $0.50/citizen" being doled out in onesies and twosies so the impact looks small.

     

    Regardless of all that, this discussion of an issue that is only marginally germane to the purpose of the APCs is quite tiresome.

     

    We are investing in (AXPW) here, mostly, and most of the discussion re Tesla is only of marginal utility, specifically only the battery issues which might affect AXPWs future.

     

    Beating the drum for Tesla, per se, is a waste of everybody's time here. An occasional passing remark and assertion that espouses your fervor is certainly acceptable, as is the occasional (well, it's been a bit more, but ...) passing disparagement of Tesla's future, product or whatever.

     

    If you are a considerate participant, you will let it die down a bit.

     

    MHO,
    HardToLove
    15 Feb 2013, 08:52 AM Reply Like
  • JRP3
    , contributor
    Comments (8605) | Send Message
     
    I will point out that I rarely ever start the off topic discussions. If you really don't want to hear my thoughts about Tesla or other EV's you must first instruct all the others who post on such topics to never bring them up, as they do, repeatedly. I'm not going to play by special rules simply because you don't like my viewpoint.
    16 Feb 2013, 09:07 AM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (18444) | Send Message
     
    "simply because you don't like my viewpoint."

     

    I don't recall that being the subject of my post. Nice try at skewing away from my point. I'm surprised.

     

    HardToLove
    16 Feb 2013, 10:01 AM Reply Like
  • JRP3
    , contributor
    Comments (8605) | Send Message
     
    And your response skews away from my point that I don't start the topics and am only replying to others' posts. Since I don't start the topics in the first place why am I being singled out and not all the others who perpetuate the discussion? Since the only difference is that I'm the only one taking the opposite point of view you'll have to forgive me it I assumed that's why you were addressing only me. To put it another way, not one single person who repeatedly posts anti-EV and anti-Tesla viewpoints has been told to stop or tone it down.
    I have no problem playing by the rules if they are applied evenly.
    17 Feb 2013, 09:00 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30456) | Send Message
     
    The CNBC interview is far worse than the tweets.

     

    http://yhoo.it/UZSypD

     

    Put a human behind the wheel and he does human things.
    11 Feb 2013, 04:30 PM Reply Like
  • D. McHattie
    , contributor
    Comments (1844) | Send Message
     
    I want to know 2 things:

     

    1) how many miles was the detour?
    - detours are extremely common especially if one is travelling an unknown route whether they use their gps or not

     

    2) how fast exactly did he drive and for how many miles?
    - 10 miles above the speed limit isn't much, that's the typical speed I drive on the highway
    - what's the point of having this kind of car if you can't drive above the speed limit?

     

    D
    11 Feb 2013, 04:55 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10178) | Send Message
     
    I haven't listened to him enough to know if he always stutters that much. He sure seemed labored searching for the right responses to do damage control.

     

    Anyway, my take away is, Jeeze do I really want a car that might put me in a bind every time there is a detour or I make a wrong turn? I think extended range PHEV's are the better choice vs pure EV's and many of the full range auto companies are saying the same thing.

     

    PS I'm not a fan of either based on current battery economics.
    11 Feb 2013, 05:08 PM Reply Like
  • billa_from_sf
    , contributor
    Comments (370) | Send Message
     
    In the original NY Times article, the driver stated explicitly that he drove the speed limit in the right lane while everyone else whizzed by him and that he drove the designated route without deviation.

     

    Musk is calling the guy a liar, which is quite an accusation.

     

    My guess is that Musk will fake the vehicle logs if they are ever published.

     

    JRP3 can jump in here and say Musk is more believable the reporter.
    11 Feb 2013, 05:27 PM Reply Like
  • froggey77
    , contributor
    Comments (2813) | Send Message
     
    IIndelco
    Musk is a horrible speaker.
    I don't know how he impresses people so much.
    He clearly does impress people. I just don't get it.
    11 Feb 2013, 06:12 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10178) | Send Message
     
    Froggey, I know it's important to have a highly placed corporate official speak to the public in certain crisis situations. He just didn't come across as being as credible as one might hope as far as the company is concerned. The content of his defense was not without flaws either. I happen to think he should have taken more of a "This is not a perfect solution for everyone" stance. Let's face it, We all recognize that buying the right vehicle takes some effort in the areas of assessing our current and future needs along with an understanding of what's available.
    11 Feb 2013, 06:43 PM Reply Like
  • JRP3
    , contributor
    Comments (8605) | Send Message
     
    Musk often stutters. Words can't keep up with the speed of his brain.
    11 Feb 2013, 08:52 PM Reply Like
  • JRP3
    , contributor
    Comments (8605) | Send Message
     
    Regardless of what the logs say the reporter admitted he did not start with a full charge, did not charge long enough when he stopped at a charger, took a detour, and did not plug in over night. Since the car was completely capable of making this trip successfully the only reason it didn't was because of the operator.
    11 Feb 2013, 08:55 PM Reply Like
  • JRP3
    , contributor
    Comments (8605) | Send Message
     
    "Nick Judd ‏@nclarkjudd

     

    @elonmusk Are you saying that Tesla reps did not field multiple phone calls from Broder throughout his drive? http://nyti.ms/UZSq9w"

     

    "Elon Musk ‏@elonmusk

     

    @nclarkjudd Yes, we called to inquire why he was blatantly ignoring our advice. It was like he had no desire for a good outcome."

     

    http://bit.ly/WVXXe8
    11 Feb 2013, 09:06 PM Reply Like
  • jakurtz
    , contributor
    Comments (1888) | Send Message
     
    I can't wait to buy my next $80,000 car and have the company call me and tell me how and where to drive it. I will feel so free and invigorated. The reviwer was driving 54 miles an hour on the highway with the heat-off in sub-freezing weather...stupid fellow, didn't he know he could only drive 45mph and not have eaten for the past 24 hours so as not to add additional weight to the carriage.
    11 Feb 2013, 10:12 PM Reply Like
  • LabTech
    , contributor
    Comments (1780) | Send Message
     
    "In the original NY Times article, the driver stated explicitly that he drove the speed limit in the right lane while everyone else whizzed by him and that he drove the designated route without deviation."

     

    Billa,
    That's not exactly true. What he said was that when he realized the battery was draining faster than he expected, he then moved over to the right lane and drove 10 miles "under" the speed limit, which was 65.
    Great to know you've got this amazing car, that can go from zero to 60 in a few seconds, but if you are driving on the highway, on long trips, you have to drive 55 mph, with the cruise control on and the heat turned off, or you'll never make it to the next charging station!
    11 Feb 2013, 10:41 PM Reply Like
  • LabTech
    , contributor
    Comments (1780) | Send Message
     
    Jakurtz,
    Actually, I think the article says that the Model S he was driving totaled out at a little more than $100,000, but hey, maybe you should get the $80,000 version and use the rest of the money to buy thermal gloves, boots and a snow suit for driving the car in the winter! :-)
    11 Feb 2013, 10:46 PM Reply Like
  • froggey77
    , contributor
    Comments (2813) | Send Message
     
    Elon has posted is that they had real time surveillance on him?
    And informed him of that fact by calling him (if not before.)
    It may be part of the disclosure I'm not saying this is nefarious.

     

    What I am saying is for this guy to go ahead and do stupid things knowing there is a complete record. Either the guy is completely crazy or Musk is lying his teeth out.
    As Musk has a history of playing fast and loose with the truth I expect it's him but It's a lawsuit. (Libel) Not the first time Musk has been taken to court for that. (Settled out of court)

     

    Then Tesla was fully aware he had not plugged in the vehicle at night.
    No mention about contacting him for that?

     

    Elon didn't mention it at all in the interview.
    That seems like it would have been a biggie. Far more so than saying the guy drove 10 mi and a bit more over the speed limit for a time.
    Especially since this was the time he actually ran out of power. Not when he was supposed to on the extended detour in Manhattan.
    11 Feb 2013, 11:18 PM Reply Like
  • froggey77
    , contributor
    Comments (2813) | Send Message
     
    " Regardless of what the logs say the reporter admitted he did not start with a full charge, did not charge long enough when he stopped at a charger,"

     

    Let's see the reporter states he got enough charge for 185 mi.

     

    His route was 79 mi that evening and a planned 46 mi back to the charger. Total 125 mi. A 60 mi cushion.
    Yet as he did not go for a full charge he was negligent?

     

    " took a detour, and did not plug in over night. Since the car was completely capable of making this trip successfully the only reason it didn't was because of the operator. "

     

    Yes the driver/operator did not know the car would lose 72% of its battery charge at night.
    Tesla who approved of the trip and the route and were watching him in real time; would know he was not plugged in.
    Elon stated they contacted him about deviating from his route and for driving 10 or so mi over the speed limit.
    Yet did not tell him or contact him about this?

     

    Sure I believe that.
    12 Feb 2013, 01:14 AM Reply Like
  • BugEYE
    , contributor
    Comments (195) | Send Message
     
    JRP3,
    "Musk often stutters. Words can't keep up with the speed of his brain."

     

    You should warn people before commenting this low. I was eating something and choked.
    12 Feb 2013, 05:14 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10178) | Send Message
     
    JRP3, Thanks. I'd not heard him speak before this.
    12 Feb 2013, 08:01 AM Reply Like
  • JRP3
    , contributor
    Comments (8605) | Send Message
     
    Bugeye,
    I thought some of you would enjoy that one :)
    12 Feb 2013, 09:11 AM Reply Like
  • thotdoc
    , contributor
    Comments (1839) | Send Message
     
    Stuttering is most often related to anxiety and intense personal harshness. An alternative, that someone's brain is working so fast that their mouth cannot keep up, suggests mania, also the result of intense personal harshness. An alternative is a physiological deficit.

     

    Mania and grandiosity are related. Grandiosity is often not recognized until one's ideas continue to fail over the long haul...no matter the interim success. An example is "I can take all these performance enhancing drugs, keep it from everyone...though I do it in front of others...and win 7 Tours". Sometimes it takes a long time for things to play out. It's better to not put people up on pedestals.

     

    I do not follow Musk. I do partially remember his quote that stated that the battery makers lied to him...or were not truthful.

     

    That he built this vehicle without understanding the true limitations of the batteries, suggests overconfidence, at the least. This is the kind of decision that when it blows up, hurts one's image.
    12 Feb 2013, 12:13 PM Reply Like
  • D. McHattie
    , contributor
    Comments (1844) | Send Message
     
    I'm wondering why the logs haven't been published in their raw form.

     

    I did a quick google search of 'Tesla log' and saw that you can easily get the log from the car with a USB thumb-drive.

     

    Also, some enterprising Tesla owner has made his own log parser.

     

    Publishing the raw logs would allow people to parse it themselves and publish their own interpretations rather than having to rely on Tesla's analysis of the logs.

     

    D
    13 Feb 2013, 11:23 AM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (2807) | Send Message
     
    D. - We all know a 140 character Tweet has more truthiness than boring pages of numbers, right? Numbers are like, you know, "lies, damned lies, and statistics." Tweets are, like, TRUTH.

     

    As John Keats would have written today:

     

    "Tweets are truth, truth Tweets," – that is all
    Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.

     

    (updated Ode to a Californian Meme)
    13 Feb 2013, 01:42 PM Reply Like
  • froggey77
    , contributor
    Comments (2813) | Send Message
     
    D
    Yeah I figured that would take all of ten minutes. Elon could have released them for the CNBC interview.
    After all they were watching him in real time according to Musk.
    I don't believe they were not recording at the same time.

     

    This is all about getting the spin right.
    13 Feb 2013, 07:59 PM Reply Like
  • froggey77
    , contributor
    Comments (2813) | Send Message
     
    D
    I spent far too much time working it all out for you. but it's rather tedious . As I have worked it out I'll include it but the reality is if the NYT's article isn't true it should be and I'll give you better proof.
    I have on more than one occasion thought the people on the Tesla motor forum were far more balanced than the totally blind fanatics we get on SA.
    Even so I was shocked at this.
    50 pages of reasonably balanced discussion on the NYT article.
    Some flames some saying it's about time Tesla acknowledged it.

     

    http://bit.ly/X6GhxR

     

    The first comment by
    I have on more than one occasion thought the people on the Tesla motor forum were far more balanced than the totally blind fanatics we get on SA.
    Even so I was shocked at this.
    50 pages of reasonably balanced discussion on the NYT article.
    Some flames some saying it's about time Tesla acknowledged it.
    I've just started reading it.

     

    http://bit.ly/X6GhxR

     

    The first comment by Mycroft
    I thought it was a very fair article and his experience matches many who've seen their range drop ridiculously fast while parked overnight in freezing weather. Tesla needs to be more forthcoming in their cold climate information as well as installing more superchargers in the northern climes.

     

    Here is the rather tedious answer to your question
    1) how many miles was the detour?
    Rumor 2 mi.

     

    2) how fast exactly did he drive and for how many miles?
    I put together an answer from the article the map and a tweet or two. (This is the NYT's side)

     

    There is a map with miles and times.
    But the the author on one occasion at least didn't record the time when he stopped but rather when he got back it the car after a 'short' break. So depending on whether he collected info before charging or after in one instance he averaged just under 40 or just under 80mph

     

    Note :
    Broder, the author, seems to believe 242 is a full charge.
    I don't believe is a range mode full charge. But I've heard 252, 270 and 300 mi for a full range charge.

     

    Map
    http://nyti.ms/X6GhO8

     

    Article
    http://nyti.ms/Ya1nr4

     

    1.
    He got the car with "full" charge at 11:00 am (Range mode or not he may not know.)

     

    2.
    12:24 pm First charge at supercharger 114mi
    12:24 - 11:00 = 1hour 24 min
    That millage and distance works to about 80mph.
    Speed limit +10 I assume.

     

    Charged 49 min. 242 mi available
    Left at 1:13

     

    "As I crossed into New Jersey some 15 miles later, I noticed that the estimated range was falling faster than miles were accumulating. At 68 miles since recharging, the range had dropped by 85 miles, and a little mental math told me that reaching Milford would be a stretch. "
    (25% greater loss of range than actual millage.)
    This is the point he stated he started driving slower and using less heat.
    So probably 80 for the first 68mi slowing down lowering the heat etc until he reached 54mph with climate control on 1.

     

    "Nearing New York, I made the first of several calls to Tesla officials about my creeping range anxiety. "

     

    3.
    3:49 pm Manhattan.133 mi
    1:13 to 3:49 is 2hours 36min Includes 'short' break in Manhattan. For easy math assume 23 min break.This would be 60mph average. But some was probably 80 the rest increasingly slower.

     

    Clearly Broder has stated he was aware he had a range problem before New York/Manhattan. To take a major detour after realizing this would be deliberate move.
    On CNBC Musk said he took a long detour in Manhattan.

     

    (Rumor says 2 mi.) After 2 or so hours on the road without much heat he probably was looking for a pit stop also something warm to drink.

     

    Note:
    The assignment was to checkout the SC network, not to checkout the car. He could have gone to a Tesla dealership within a few mi. I assume he could have charged there.

     

    Maximized range to SC station.
    "About 20 miles from Milford, less than 10 miles of range remained. I called Tesla again, and Ted Merendino, a product planner, told me that even when the display reached zero there would still be a few miles of cushion."

     

    Note:
    Later when a Tesla rep told he can leave despite the range gauge saying he did not have have enough power is when Broder was stranded. (Not enough cushion)

     

    At some point after Broder got to Manhattan Musk claims Tesla called Broder to see why he was goofing around speeding 10 + mph. and Taking a detour. Possibly this was 2 calls as the speeding was early on and why would he call about a detour in Manhattan when he has already left?

     

    4.
    5:45 pm Supercharger 73 mi Plus the 133 before Manhattan Total 206 mi Charged 58 min
    5:45 - 3:49 = 1:56
    He averaged 40mph (Rush hour may have been part of the problem.)

     

    5.
    9:45 pm Groton 79 mi range 90
    I drove, slowly, to Stonington, Conn., for dinner and spent the night in Groton, a total distance of 79 miles. When I parked the car, its computer said I had 90 miles of range, twice the 46 miles back to Milford.
    (Stoningham is not on the map nor did he take stats there. Judging by the numbers: each way was 16.5 miles extra driving)

     

    He left the SC station with185 miles of predicted range.
    He intended to end in Groton 79mi (including dinner in Stoningham) and drive 46mi back to the SC station in the AM.

     

    79 + 46 = 125mi except there are planned range estimate was 185 so he planned 60 mi of extra range. 50% extra.

     

    At 8:30 am he had 25mi of range. 72% loss overnight. Which was not enough to get to the SC station. He contacted Tesla who found a charger in a different direction than the SC.

     

    6.
    I think he made a math error here. while he has written 11 mi here.
    When he gives the millage to where the car dies and the SC I think he forgot this was a separate entry.
    9:55 am Norwich 11 mi driven
    A slow charger he estimates an hour later a Tesla rep said he had enough range to reach the SC station despite the dash reading 37 mi and he had 57mi to go. (46 from Groton to the SC station plus backtracking the 11 he just drove to Norwich)

     

    7.
    12:30 pm flatbed to SC
    The car died at 51mi. This is one error. It was 51 mi from Groton only 40 mi from Norwich. This is 17mi short of the SC station.

     

    8.
    2:40 pm SC station
    68 mi this also assumes Groton as the starting point and ignores Norwich and the millage at the spot where picked up by the flatbed towtruck.
    80 minutes charge range estimate 216mi

     

    9.
    5:25 pm Tesla dealership 71 mi estimated range 124 mi
    216 - 71 = 145 should be left 124 are left. 21 mi difference.
    71 mi driven an extra 21 miles of range was lost
    33% lost.

     

    If anybody read this far thanks.
    14 Feb 2013, 02:28 AM Reply Like
  • Futurist
    , contributor
    Comments (2113) | Send Message
     
    Froggy,
    All I can say after reading that post is:
    Obsession is not just for the rich and powerful. :-)

     

    I'm not sure why you did all that work but I enjoyed it.
    14 Feb 2013, 06:47 AM Reply Like
  • JRP3
    , contributor
    Comments (8605) | Send Message
     
    Or you can just read the response from Elon, with log data. The only thing you need to look at is this graph, which shows the reporter stopped charging at only 28% of charge on his last leg, where he subsequently ran out of charge.

     

    http://bit.ly/12OaYvu

     

    I think even most of the most rabid Tesla haters have to acknowledge that putting only 28% of fuel into any vehicle and then running out is either complete stupidity or a purposeful attempt to do so. Seriously how many of you would be carrying on like this if someone only put 28% of potential capacity in their gas tank and then ran out? Who are the blind fanatics exactly?
    14 Feb 2013, 09:04 AM Reply Like
  • Mathieu Malecot
    , contributor
    Comments (1235) | Send Message
     
    confirmation bias
    14 Feb 2013, 09:21 AM Reply Like
  • froggey77
    , contributor
    Comments (2813) | Send Message
     
    "Who are the blind fanatics exactly? "
    People who accept 6 tenths of a mile of "driving around in circles" in an unfamiliar parking, lot at night, looking for an open charger as evidence of trying to kill the car?

     

    People who think having to drive at 60 mph for 100 mi out of 200 with the heat low to get there?

     

    People who look at Musk's data and can see he is lying too.

     

    182 is when Broder figured out he was in trouble.
    Musk states that's when he set the cruse to 54 and the Climate control to 1. It does not say exactly when he slowed down. actually he had been driving below the speed limit for 50 or so miles at that point.

     

    Yeah it took a new driver a while to figure out how much heat cost him and the he lowered the temp in stages to under 65f.
    My relatives would not have been happy.

     

    PS Where are the Quality control audio tapes of these calls? Rather than a he said she said this or that?
    14 Feb 2013, 02:41 PM Reply Like
  • JRP3
    , contributor
    Comments (8605) | Send Message
     
    He never fully charged the car, never. His last charge before he ran out of charge was only to 28%. If he had put in even a reasonable amount of charge he could have blasted along as fast and with as much heat as he wanted. Open your eyes.
    By the way CNN is doing the exact same trip right now with no problems at all, without suffering in the cold, without creeping along, and with extra range remaining. How is that possible? They charged the friggin car properly!
    http://cnnmon.ie/12K4WaK
    15 Feb 2013, 08:05 AM Reply Like
  • nakedjaybird
    , contributor
    Comments (2840) | Send Message
     
    Words from a battery guy about the Boeing 787 Li battery fiasco:

     

    More explicit was advanced battery maker Enersys ENS -0.81%, which puts its products into everything from submarines to helicopters. The company has generally avoided heavy investments into the lithium-based batteries that are at the center of Boeing’s problems, and one analyst asked whether the high-profile issues with the Dreamliner will lead to any change in the way it approaches the technology. Enersys CEO John Craig gave a pretty lengthy answer (emphasis ours):

     

    "As you know, our investments in lithium have been modest. They’ve been small. And part of the reason for that is because, you’ve heard me say in the past, when you look at economics associated with lithium, not just the cell, the cell goes from, let’s say, $200 to $270 per kilowatt hour, the total battery cost, in my opinion, has been high and it’s going to get higher. And the reason I think it’s going to get higher is because in those applications, you’re going to find that added protection is needed. I’d give you an example of one. With — the lithium-ion batteries, there’s different — there’s probably 12 or 13 different types of lithium-ion batteries. So when you look at the particular one that we used in Boeing and that one is one that does have conditions that can cause problems.

     

    I think what you’re going to see in the future, that from our end on it, those designs, you need to assume they’re going to catch fire.

     

    And when they do, they need to be in a container not to allow it to cause damage to other areas. I mean, that’s lithium technology. It does have a condition called thermal runaway. That’s nothing new. I mean, the computer industry, the cellphone industry has experienced it in the past. The auto industry, to a lesser extent, has seen some problems with it, too. So you have to be very careful from the design standpoint on it. The other side of the fence, I think it’s a great technology for certain applications that the premium associated with it is that the people are willing to pay. They should pay. As an example, your cellphone or the satellite. And our area of expertise in this is really, into satellites, is putting it on the proton rockets and it’s putting into select military applications and into select telecommunications applications. But that’s technology that is different and needs to be treated differently than a traditional asset."

     

    http://on.wsj.com/Xs5bYr

     

    Note: assuming the Li batteries WILL CATCH ON FIRE is one thing; CONTAINING THE FIRE is another thing; and then most importantly in flight is MAINTAINING POWER TO WHATEVER THE FAILED BATTERY NO LONGER PROVIDES.

     

    Now we are getting somewhere. Or are we??
    11 Feb 2013, 04:31 PM Reply Like
  • LT
    , contributor
    Comments (5519) | Send Message
     
    Below is the paragraph that catches my eye....they have better tech now but only use it in high dollar apps....like satellites. They want to be paid dearly for it.

     

    "They should pay. As an example, your cellphone or the satellite. And our area of expertise in this is really, into satellites, is putting it on the proton rockets and it’s putting into select military applications and into select telecommunications applications. But that’s technology that is different and needs to be treated differently than a traditional asset."
    11 Feb 2013, 04:52 PM Reply Like
  • LT
    , contributor
    Comments (5519) | Send Message
     
    gonna add one more line to my post....

     

    Boeing brought these problems on themselves...they rushed this plane to mkt. and tried to build it cheap by using cheap components.
    They were short on engineers all the way through and it cost them in delays, redesign, and now safety.
    There are places to reduce costs, and places to spend extra. There are other companies who have done the same thing.
    11 Feb 2013, 04:55 PM Reply Like
  • B19
    , contributor
    Comments (5) | Send Message
     
    Transport category aircraft have multiple redundant systems. If you lose 1 component, another will provide backup.
    11 Feb 2013, 10:54 PM Reply Like
  • nakedjaybird
    , contributor
    Comments (2840) | Send Message
     
    b19 - so let's separately package up a redundant bunch of potential fires and drive them around the air, just in case they may burn, which we are going to assume..........and also contain.
    11 Feb 2013, 11:56 PM Reply Like
  • froggey77
    , contributor
    Comments (2813) | Send Message
     
    B19
    I was surprised that the two battery packs don't seem to back each other up.
    A scram jet dropped down and powered up the electronics in the Demo/Prototype? Dreamliner that had a battery fire.
    I don't know what backs up the power in the ones they are building now.
    12 Feb 2013, 12:09 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10178) | Send Message
     
    Just wanted to make one point, again, based on this Panasonic NiMH battery article. Note this comment as it's a strength of PbC vs AGM. There is money to be saved by not having to place the battery in the passenger compartment or the trunk. Large conductor runs cost money.

     

    "Designed to be connected in parallel with the main lead-acid battery, the system is based on the new D-size nickel metal hydride battery cells. It is possible to place the new system in the engine compartment alongside the main lead-acid battery, which has the potential to reduce cable connection resistance and make wiring much simpler.

     

    To achieve this, Panasonic has created battery cells capable of enduring high temperatures: it has improved battery design in areas such as the electrolyte and polar plates. The maximum charging/discharging temperature has been vastly improved from 60C to 75C: meaning the system can be installed within the engine compartment."

     

    And my favorite comment.

     

    "Currently, start-stop systems rely on a single lead-acid battery to deal with the electrical needs of the vehicle: including restarting the engine and running the air conditioner. According to Panasonic, this places the battery under too much load pressure. "

     

    http://bit.ly/WfvIHi
    11 Feb 2013, 05:20 PM Reply Like
  • froggey77
    , contributor
    Comments (2813) | Send Message
     
    February 11, 2013
    Tesla Motors Announces Date for Fourth Quarter & Year-End 2012 Financial Results

     

    PALO ALTO, CA -- (Marketwire) -- 02/11/13 -- Tesla Motors, Inc. (NASDAQ: TSLA) announced today that it will post its financial results for the fourth quarter and calendar year ended December 31, 2012, after market close on Wednesday, February 20, 2013. At that time, Tesla will issue a brief advisory release via Marketwire containing a link to the fourth quarter 2012 Shareholder Letter, available on the company website. Tesla management will hold a live Question & Answer (Q&A) session at 2:30pm Pacific Standard Time (5:30pm Eastern Standard Time) to discuss the Company's financial and business results and outlook.

     

    What: Tesla Motors, Inc. Fourth Quarter and Year-End 2012 Financial Results Q&A Conference Call
    When: Wednesday, February 20, 2013
    Time: 2:30pm Pacific Standard Time / 5:30pm Eastern Standard Time
    Shareholder Letter: http://bit.ly/XxMrDn
    Webcast: http://bit.ly/XxMrDn (live and replay)
    Live Call: (877) 312-5519 / (760) 666-3771 (International)

     

    Approximately two hours after the call, a digital recording of the Q&A session will be available for a period of two weeks following the date of the call. To access the recording, please dial in to one of the following numbers using the conference ID shown.
    11 Feb 2013, 06:20 PM Reply Like
  • Stefan Moroney
    , contributor
    Comments (2662) | Send Message
     
    For students of PJM ancillary services, a 207 page set of slides:

     

    http://www.pjm.com~/media/training/c...
    11 Feb 2013, 09:38 PM Reply Like
  • Stefan Moroney
    , contributor
    Comments (2662) | Send Message
     
    Sorry, I forgot PJM urls are too long ...

     

    http://tinyurl.com/cpj...
    11 Feb 2013, 10:43 PM Reply Like
  • D Lane
    , contributor
    Comments (1529) | Send Message
     
    This from 2012 has likely been posted before but I'm not sure:

     

    Why baseload power is doomed by Chris Nelder

     

    "A persistent myth about the challenges of integrating renewable power into the grid is that because solar and wind are intermittent, grid operators need to maintain full generation capacity from “baseload” plants powered by coal and nuclear. Recent real-world data and research shows that not only is this not true, but that baseload capacity is fundamentally incompatible with renewables, and that as renewables provide a greater portion of the grid’s power, baseload generation will need to be phased out."

     

    http://smrt.io/14OTgGy

     

    This article argues that we will be transitioning from baseload power to renewable--plus on-demand natural gas-fired peaking generators.
    The article provides an overview of the current NA grid--with maps.
    11 Feb 2013, 09:43 PM Reply Like
  • Futurist
    , contributor
    Comments (2113) | Send Message
     
    D Lane,
    Maybe I'm reading the available data wrong. certainly I don't concur with the author.
    It seems to me that he is saying this , by pharaphrasing:

     

    If you overbuild the renewable energy base, then you will not need baseload pwer by oil, NG, nuclear, or other sources.

     

    I don't see anything that approaches a real world solution. The article supports a "we overbuild and we waste money" attitude in this article.
    11 Feb 2013, 10:23 PM Reply Like
  • froggey77
    , contributor
    Comments (2813) | Send Message
     
    D Lane
    Bill Gates is a believer in global warming The link is to an interview of him.
    He says the economics of intermittent energy is terrible. in addition to the renewables you have to add the cost of energy storage. (Also really bad) He is investing in start up companies for both purposes. The point being he thinks these companies could possibly lower the costs so it possible for this to power the world without making it unlivable.

     

    http://bit.ly/XEQobi
    March 2012..... 47 min

     

    It was worth my time.
    12 Feb 2013, 12:00 AM Reply Like
  • D Lane
    , contributor
    Comments (1529) | Send Message
     
    Thanks guys!

     

    I don't see much in the article I posted about cost-- a major weakness to the article in my opinion. Nevertheless, there are certainly a lot of folks (renewable supporters admittedly) who believe a smarter grid will be better and less wasteful, not more wasteful. They do cite some evidence as in the links in the article and the experience of Germany and Texas.

     

    froggey--this particular article does not highlight storage, as much as new modeling tools and better information enabling a smarter grid. And the need for new incentives and a new framework: "grid companies have disincentives to innovate"

     

    No doubt the premise underlying all of this is that burning fossil fuels is no longer tenable. The costs to quality of life are simply too high. I don't think it will be cheap or easy to make the transition but it has to be done. And it is exciting!

     

    Certainly the first place to start is eliminating waste of energy.
    12 Feb 2013, 10:00 AM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (18444) | Send Message
     
    02/11/2013: EOD stuff partially copied from the instablog (up in about 1 hour)
    # Trds: 43, MinTrSz: 300, MaxTrSz: 34500, Vol 262950, AvTrSz: 6115
    Min. Pr: 0.3200, Max Pr: 0.3395, VW Avg. Tr. Pr: 0.3302
    # Buys, Shares: 24 107350, VW Avg Buy Pr: 0.3325
    # Sells, Shares: 19 155600, VW Avg Sell Pr: 0.3286
    # Unkn, Shares: 0 0, VW Avg Unk. Pr: 0.0000
    Buy:Sell 1:1.45 (40.8% “buys”), DlyShts 39950 (15.19%), Dly Sht % of 'sells' 25.67%

     

    On the traditional TA front, another day of interesting action suggesting a move is near. Looking at volume over the last 7 days, the “cupping” continues. Those readings, in thousands were: 248, 212, 76, 79, 148, 170 and 263.

     

    We also had another day of increased volatility to support that seen two days ago which first suggested a coming move of some kind. Today's was more volatile, having a 6.09% spread, $0.32 - $0.3395. The volume distribution in price ranges was well distributed:
    $0.3200-$0.3245, 041400, 15.74%, VWAP $0.3227, 09:30-10:59
    $0.3279-$0.3299, 049700, 18.90%, VWAP $0.3288, infrequently throughout the day
    $0.3300-$0.3330, 134400, 51.11%, VWAP $0.3304, frequently throughout the day
    $0.3379-$0.3395, 037450, 14.24%, VWAP $0.3394, 09:30-11:02

     

    It looks like a bell curve distribution. We closed pretty-much at the mid-point of the day's range.

     

    Price briefly penetrated the 200-day SMA from Friday of $0.3208, but only 7,900 shares at 10:59 after trading ~43K at $0.3300-$0.3301, and price moved right back to $0.3379.

     

    As we might expect with this intra-day volatility, the oscillators I watch are mixed, mostly neutral in their readings and not to be relied upon at this time. Three remained consistent in their disagreement: stochastic continued to weaken to just below neutral; the DI+ component of the ADX (still low at 21) continued to rise (but DI+ is still below 30 at 27); the MFI reversed course again and is just below the overbought area, reading ~67.2. So there's not yet consistent suggestion of a trend up. Only the MFI, which is supposed to be leading is saying a move up is likely.

     

    I think we are now entering medium-term consolidation and trying to exit that status. Last time we got there, we exited pretty quickly. My experimental 13-period Bollinger bands are showing a $0.018 spread, $0.3156-$0.3336, so the intra-day VWAP is near to pushing on the upper limit. The conventional expectation would be for a move towards the center around $0.3250. The standard 20-period readings are $0.3033 and $0.368. This would suggest a movement to ~$0.337 from our current levels, using conventional wisdom.

     

    My original rising support is around $0.314. With the volatility seen twice in the last four days, I wouldn't be surprised to see this support tested soon. The 50-day SMA is right there too - $0.3149.

     

    On my experimental stuff, daily shorts up a little bit, average trade size is right back to the longer-term averages and what I think is roughly the middle of retail trade sizes. We had 10 trades of >= 10K spread throughout the price range of $0.3220-$0.3395. The larger trade sizes have been showing up for three days now. Buy percentage weakened, overall, in spite of a small move up in VWAP.

     

    My original experimental inflection point calculations are all weakening and I believe are suggesting price wants to weaken. My newer ones are in the same state. None have completed the “pattern” I want to see yet. But I think they are edging closer to that set up. If my prior assessment that we should move a bit lower, briefly break support and recover quickly is correct, I don't think they'll make the full signal. These calculations have, in the past, warned of even small moves a day or two in advance of the occurrence of those moves. With the support line, the 50-day SMA and my experimental Bollingers where they are, I can't imagine a large move down will occur.

     

    Details of “Dly Sht % of 'sells'” and inflection points omitted here.

     

    HardToLove
    12 Feb 2013, 08:07 AM Reply Like
  • Stefan Moroney
    , contributor
    Comments (2662) | Send Message
     
    ZBB commissions its commercial residential application in Hawaiil:

     

    http://bit.ly/X4W1hE
    12 Feb 2013, 08:52 AM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (18444) | Send Message
     
    Stefan: Good catch. Something I had opined on in the past apparently overlooked a significant factor:

     

    "stores regenerated power from the elevator braking system"

     

    I had considered only the balance issues and completely overlooked that possibility.

     

    So PbC apparently could, indeed, be a reasonable player in the elevator space.

     

    HardToLove
    12 Feb 2013, 11:21 AM Reply Like
  • DRich
    , contributor
    Comments (4825) | Send Message
     
    >Stefan Moroney & H.T.Love ... The elevator is a perfect example of why I've thought that Axion's PbC combined with a ZBB would be a good match. Depending on how much energy you want to consume to keep the metal at optimum temperature (& SOC) the PbC could accept current much faster than ZBB can and the PbC battery component would act as a buffer in the transfer of power to the main ZBB system. More power captured, less alternative (grid or internal) power consumed by the metal.
    12 Feb 2013, 12:07 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (18444) | Send Message
     
    DRich: So if the ZBB can't accept all the braking energy, same problem and solution as on locos? Resistor banks?

     

    HardToLove
    12 Feb 2013, 02:27 PM Reply Like
  • DRich
    , contributor
    Comments (4825) | Send Message
     
    >H.T.Love ... I don't think an elevator has the same problem with mass on grade that a locomotive has, so resistor banks probably aren't required. Just cut the circuit or run what the battery won't take to ground. My idea of the function of the PbC in an application like this is more like a roadway storm water still pond. A huge inrush is accepted and discharged in higher volume at a more controlled, slower rate.
    12 Feb 2013, 02:38 PM Reply Like
  • magounsq
    , contributor
    Comments (990) | Send Message
     
    Methinks thou doth protest too much!

     

    "The chief technology officer J B Straubel told him that his story was "a good lesson" .... "Hopefully you’ll give us a little slack in that we put in the East Coast stations just a month ago." And he suggested that Broder may have also lost some range because of the weather, admitting Tesla's battery can lose up to 10 percent of its efficiency in the cold. "

     

    http://bit.ly/WibAEn

     

    http://onforb.es/Z7K9Bn
    12 Feb 2013, 10:25 AM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (18444) | Send Message
     
    Joining the usual MM IDs today, we see FANC show up on both sides - first pushing the ask side down. So we have, apparently, jostling to sell by ARCA, TEJS, ATDF, FANC (asks range from $0.327-$0.3259 now) as I've seen them stepping the ask lower.

     

    On the bid side, NITE has held steady at $0.3205 while ATDF, and now FANC leap-frog each other by hundredths of a penny, currently seeing them at $0.321 & $0.3211.

     

    HardToLove
    12 Feb 2013, 11:12 AM Reply Like
  • LT
    , contributor
    Comments (5519) | Send Message
     
    Are the MM's pushing it lower to fill another buy order ?
    12 Feb 2013, 01:45 PM Reply Like
  • LT
    , contributor
    Comments (5519) | Send Message
     
    Interesting article on Tesla...mkt. share in Silicon Valley:

     

    http://bit.ly/Z7XFVH
    12 Feb 2013, 12:18 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10178) | Send Message
     
    Sorry if this was posted. BA and the crew are looking at dendrites as a possible cause.

     

    Microscopic Crystals Studied by NTSB in 787 Battery Probe

     

    http://bloom.bg/159lH3l

     

    Could be, but then again.

     

    http://bit.ly/WiyBHm
    12 Feb 2013, 12:24 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30456) | Send Message
     
    One of my favorite explanations comes from Lewis Larsen, the co-developer of the Widom-Larsen theory who argues that a small subset of thermal runaway events in lithium-ion batteries may result from low-energy nuclear reactions.

     

    http://bit.ly/Z80Ahe

     

    Mr. Larsen initiated a correspondence stream with me a couple years ago and while the physics are way out of my depth, NASA Langley's work in the area suggests that Larsen might be on to something important.

     

    http://1.usa.gov/Y70SOI
    12 Feb 2013, 12:44 PM Reply Like
  • Renzo
    , contributor
    Comments (353) | Send Message
     
    Count me a skeptic, still. The NASA article sounds generally cautious and reasoned, but statements like "several labs have blown up studying LENR and windows have melted, indicating when the conditions are "right" prodigious amounts of energy can be produced and released." sound a little apocryphal.

     

    I think we're still a long way from the extraordinary proof required for such claims.
    12 Feb 2013, 01:19 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30456) | Send Message
     
    Larsen is also skeptical and the materials I linked explain the reasons for his skepticism. He has suggested that LENRs could help explain observed events that are not otherwise explainable.

     

    Last time I checked, all scientific inquiry begins with the apocryphal and matures with time, experimentation and experience. I'm just curious enough to have an open mind on this particular topic.
    12 Feb 2013, 01:40 PM Reply Like
  • 481086
    , contributor
    Comments (3442) | Send Message
     
    It probably doesn't help either that at higher altitudes, there's a bit more stray ionizing cosmic radiation zorching around...
    12 Feb 2013, 02:27 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10178) | Send Message
     
    Thanks John. Interesting read.

     

    And some more future world maybe stuff.

     

    Researchers developed cheap, strong lithium-ion battery

     

    "Researchers at USC have developed a new lithium-ion battery design that uses porous silicon nanoparticles in place of the traditional graphite anodes to provide superior performance."

     

    http://bit.ly/YaCm0T
    12 Feb 2013, 02:52 PM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (2807) | Send Message
     
    JP, interesting PP from Lattice Energy. Unlike most
    'frikkin' majic" energy solutions, it may actually have some (possibly huge) potential. The physics are beyond me, too. I'll send this to a PhD in fusion research to see if I can get some feed back.
    12 Feb 2013, 02:57 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30456) | Send Message
     
    The much more widely and wildly E-Cat work by Rossi is based in large part on the Widom-Larsen theory. It's beyond me, but interesting.
    12 Feb 2013, 04:09 PM Reply Like
  • Renzo
    , contributor
    Comments (353) | Send Message
     
    No offense was intended to you or Dr. Larsen. I'm no more qualified than anyone else here to comment on the theoretical possibility of low energy nuclear reactions occurring in a crystal matrix. LENR researchers clearly are going to have difficulty with skeptics, considering its association to "cold fusion" and controversial claims by Rossi about his E-Cat machine.

     

    Having NASA say LENR is "real" carries significant weight but anecdotal ("apocryphal" was probably too strong) accounts of explosions from massive energy release make me think first of the GM lithium battery explosion, not nuclear transmutation. OTOH, Larsen's theory about lithium battery fires is, indeed, interesting and I'll look forward to reading more about it.

     

    As far as LENR being a potential energy source, I'll continue to be politely skeptical until there are confirmed reports of appropriate, nuclear-level energy production and elemental transmutation of reactants.
    12 Feb 2013, 06:32 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30456) | Send Message
     
    I wasn't offended in the least and agree wholeheartedly that going from a working theory to a product is immensely complicated. Larsen seems to be taking a very low-key and sensible approach. He's not out pounding the table or promising the moon, sun and stars, but he does believe the theory explains many known events that can't be explained by other approaches. Personally I hope the crazies like Rossi are right and we can power the planet with 1% of today's nickel production, but I'm not going to open my wallet anytime soon.
    12 Feb 2013, 06:40 PM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (2807) | Send Message
     
    Renzo, absolutely be skeptical; I am. "Cold fusion" and Rossi are frauds, and I am not "blessing" LENR. It does look interesting enough (to me) to learn a little more, that's all.
    12 Feb 2013, 08:13 PM Reply Like
  • Futurist
    , contributor
    Comments (2113) | Send Message
     
    Rick,
    As always I appreciate your skeptical grounded approach. This is very interesting stuff. Can't wait to hear the technical side of the story from someone who can explain it to me in words not over three syllables.
    12 Feb 2013, 09:26 PM Reply Like
  • SMaturin
    , contributor
    Comments (2305) | Send Message
     
    Rick,

     

    I have always been puzzled by and leary of the whole concept of cold fusion.

     

    Suffice it to say that "Cold fusion" too easily can shade into "Con fusion."
    13 Feb 2013, 12:59 AM Reply Like
  • nakedjaybird
    , contributor
    Comments (2840) | Send Message
     
    Yup.

     

    So what's so horrible about a little ole dendrite?

     

    Well, just one little ole dendrite that "burns" itself off: not much, maybe.

     

    But when it also "creates" a hole in the separator(s) allowing a short between two plates: somewhat more of a problem.

     

    And when that short drains the remaining stored energy of the whole cell: well, Houston, we've got a potential problem.

     

    And when the whole battery (all the other connected cells also completely discharge thru this little ole simple short: well, Houston, we have a really big problem.

     

    Now, when that battery voltage is 4v, or 32v, or 48v, or 96v, etc., we get differing ultimate results, time dependent, of course.

     

    Celgard used to help 40 years ago.

     

    http://bit.ly/Z81lXu

     

    PS: driving a nail thru one cell to create a short and the dissipation of one cells' energy is one thing; dissipating the energy of the whole string of attached cells of the battery, is another.

     

    Elementary, dear Watson. (? - is that correct?)
    12 Feb 2013, 12:52 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (18444) | Send Message
     
    IIRC, "Elementary my dear Watson".

     

    HardToLove
    12 Feb 2013, 02:02 PM Reply Like
  • LT
    , contributor
    Comments (5519) | Send Message
     
    Lead surplus or shortage ? prices rising
    http://seekingalpha.co...
    12 Feb 2013, 01:48 PM Reply Like
  • Stefan Moroney
    , contributor
    Comments (2662) | Send Message
     
    We are now six months out from TG's statement that BMW may start fleet testing in the next six (6) months and a top five (5) Asian OEM had started accelerated testing based on BMW's data.

     

    One of these days, hopefully, we will wake up to a fleet testing announcement.
    12 Feb 2013, 02:17 PM Reply Like
  • DRich
    , contributor
    Comments (4825) | Send Message
     
    >Stefan Moroney ... Always the optomist, Eh! I've learned nothing if not this about the company; Axion schedules things in Friedman Units.
    12 Feb 2013, 02:23 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (18444) | Send Message
     
    I predict the paint will be dry in one more Friedman unit. :-\

     

    HardToLove
    12 Feb 2013, 02:30 PM Reply Like
  • Milhouse
    , contributor
    Comments (414) | Send Message
     
    Is the beginning of fleet testing something they (Axion) would make an announcement about? I think the statement from TG concerning fleet testing before was made during a conference call, so he may announce it has started during another cc, but I would doubt that we would see a press release.

     

    My hope is that it has already started, and we just don't know about it yet...
    12 Feb 2013, 02:34 PM Reply Like
  • mrholty
    , contributor
    Comments (1106) | Send Message
     
    Personally, I don't think we'll ever here about fleet testing.

     

    I wonder if it will simply be quiet until we see them in a car.
    12 Feb 2013, 02:34 PM Reply Like
  • Stefan Moroney
    , contributor
    Comments (2662) | Send Message
     
    IMO - I believe it is a material development and even if the associated company is not announced, Axion will have to make a public announcement that one of the OEM relationships has moved into fleet testing.

     

    Then again, that's just my opinion.

     

    At one time, I felt that ZBB would never make another announcement and they are starting to come out of their shell and announce commissioning of projects. Many of these projects were initially discussed about two years ago. Just an idea of how long it takes to implement these complicated engineering solutions.
    12 Feb 2013, 02:39 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30456) | Send Message
     
    I tend to think that advancing to fleet testing might be required disclosure in a periodic report, but probably wouldn't require a press release or other formal interim announcement. When you factor in the business reality that an OEM will probably want to keep things as quiet as possible until they're ready to say something, fleet testing might very well begin in stealth.
    12 Feb 2013, 02:54 PM Reply Like
  • Mayascribe
    , contributor
    Comments (10511) | Send Message
     
    JP: "...fleet testing might very well begin in stealth."

     

    Stealth is something we shareholders don't want to hear. But then again, having just read again the Notes And More From The July 2012 Shareholders Conference, TG indicated that there was STRONG interest from several smaller OEMs.

     

    All goes to wonder where did the last shipment of activated carbon go? Most certainly, TG did not import activated carbon from Japan to let it lay around inactive.
    12 Feb 2013, 03:05 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (18444) | Send Message
     
    Maya: "Stealth is something we shareholders don't want to hear".

     

    "Stealth" is something we wouldn't be able to hear.

     

    But with the sleuthing everyone does, I guess some import/export documents might tell us when a bunch of batteries were shipped, no?

     

    That is, IIRC, we can see outgoing too?

     

    HardToLove
    12 Feb 2013, 03:16 PM Reply Like
  • Stefan Moroney
    , contributor
    Comments (2662) | Send Message
     
    If the argument is that it is a material development that must be disclosed, Axion should use it for every bit of PR that it is worth, but leave the particular automaker's name out of it.
    12 Feb 2013, 03:19 PM Reply Like
  • Mayascribe
    , contributor
    Comments (10511) | Send Message
     
    HTL: I haven't been able to source export bills of lading, without paying for the service.
    12 Feb 2013, 03:26 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (18444) | Send Message
     
    Maya: Rats! You'd think if we can get freebies for import, similar s/b for exports too. I wonder why the discrepancy in that.

     

    Oh well.

     

    HardToLove
    12 Feb 2013, 03:33 PM Reply Like
  • D-inv
    , contributor
    Comments (4221) | Send Message
     
    It is unclear to me whether a "fleet test" is a material business development. It would do nothing more than indicate continuing potential for future sales. A design win would be a different matter altogether.
    12 Feb 2013, 04:00 PM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (3103) | Send Message
     
    Interesting and important topic, D-inv. "material business development" can have several definitions--legal, business, investor, etc. Picking business for now---iindelco, in your experience, what does being included in a fleet test typically say about the odds a new component will be ordered for production? 99%? 50%? 10%?
    12 Feb 2013, 04:24 PM Reply Like
  • Alphameister
    , contributor
    Comments (1428) | Send Message
     
    Instead of fleet testing announcements, we get fleeting test announcements!
    12 Feb 2013, 05:58 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30456) | Send Message
     
    With fondest respect Alphameister, I don't think any business process that drags out longer than a medieval prince's quest to overcome the seven deadly sins can be fairly described as *fleeting.*
    12 Feb 2013, 06:05 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10178) | Send Message
     
    Mr I, Let's just say it depends on the reason for the test fleet. There are a multitude of reasons to do fleet testing. There are fleet tests for approved programs that have designated launch windows in the corporate business plan. These could be anything from refreshes to full blown new platforms. If you're on one of these you're pretty much in unless something goes wrong with your offering or the system in the vehicle. Generally a low probability as everything has already been tested to death.

     

    They also do other types of fleet testing. They might be doing it for development of "future world" technology. Or they might be doing it for cost improvements. Or maybe they are doing it to be ready for changing government regulations like CAFE standards changes or EPA changes. Also they could be doing it to insure suppliers by having added sources for key components or a back up plan for a higher risk technology. Here they might book shelve the component and its data for possible future needs.

     

    So as you can see there are many many different reasons for fleet testing with odds at your 99% level down to far lower levels. In the case of PbC I doubt they would have one solution but they might. They might be comfortable with PbC as long as two or more suppliers had the ability to supply them. Or they might be happy with PbC as a primary choice with NiMH or lithium as a back-up.

     

    Please understand these are just some of the things going on and there are many other possibilities. They hold things very close to the chest because product plans are more effective in garnering sales if you're ahead of your competition in your target market.

     

    Sorry for the complex answer but unfortunately we just don't know. I will take a guess though. I'm guessing they are going to test this all the way to a win for a platform. I'm also going to go all in betting that they will use this technology to leverage the other players for as long as they possibly can. There is nothing like the fear of lost business to get the creative juices flowing.
    12 Feb 2013, 06:10 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30456) | Send Message
     
    After ELBC 2010 I was convinced that there was more than a little theatre in BMW's joint presentation with Axion. It was a warning shot across the bow for the entire industry.

     

    At ELBC 2012 BMW did it again by talking about lithium-ion as a potential solution to their problem.

     

    http://bit.ly/VZtF7s

     

    BMW clearly wants the entire industry to rise to the micro-hybrid challenge. So far I don't think BMW is getting the response it wants and it will probably have to award a contract or two before the dawdlers get the message.
    12 Feb 2013, 06:17 PM Reply Like
  • Alphameister
    , contributor
    Comments (1428) | Send Message
     
    Sorry, JP, the play on words was just too irresistible! ;) Let's hope our cause holds more promise than that of the medieval prince! I could do with a bit of greed satisfaction this year!
    12 Feb 2013, 06:41 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10178) | Send Message
     
    John, Agreed.

     

    I just don't see a drop dead perfect solution for the variants in lower level vehicle electrification. I think that's why we see some of the various implementation strategies today and they are all less than optimum. I also think this will continue to be the case as I don't see Lithium ion and NiMH coming down to the targeted cost levels they would like. The worst for me is AGM. I think it's a scam at best.

     

    I'd give anything to see Axion's cost breakdown to figure out it's potential when scaled. I'm sure they can be far better than they are currently given their operations and buying power at this point in time. As I indicated before, I think BMW and the others pretty much know where Axion's cost could migrate to as well. Whenever I see the troll action pointing out a calculated sell price based on the first NSC contract I just have to laugh. Like it has anything to do with where they can take this thing.
    12 Feb 2013, 07:23 PM Reply Like
  • bazooooka
    , contributor
    Comments (3465) | Send Message
     
    Agreed; I bet ZBB will be in the mid .40s soon. I too wish AXPW would toot the horn a bit at least to help the pps before the capital raise next quarter.
    12 Feb 2013, 07:38 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30456) | Send Message
     
    Even with a high carbon price assumption, the savings from avoided lead costs come out fairly close to the incremental carbon and grafoil costs in the PbC. So at least on the back of a napkin, the bill of materials is a wash and the entire price difference is attributable to value added activity.

     

    A while back I wrote an article on economies of scale in general and experience curve effects in particular.

     

    http://bit.ly/R7kVPi

     

    According to BCG "for every doubling of cumulative production volume, the marginal cost of value added activities falls by 10 to 30 percent." We're at a point where cumulative PbC production is well under 10,000 units. With that starting point, the first double is 20,000, the second will be 40,000 the third will be 80,000, the fourth will be 160,000, the fifth will be 320,000, the sixth will be 640,000 and the seventh will be 1.3 million.

     

    By the time PbC production ramps to levels that are relevant to the auto industry, we can look forward to a series of at least six or seven value added cost reduction cycles of 10% to 30% each.

     

    If you start with a value added cost of $400 at the 10,000 cumulative unit level, a 10% experience curve effect would cut the value added cost down to $200 over the first million units. A 30% experience curve effect would cut the value added cost down to $32 over the first million units. That leaves plenty of room for a highly profitable Axion and some very happy customers.
    12 Feb 2013, 07:38 PM Reply Like
  • 481086
    , contributor
    Comments (3442) | Send Message
     
    I can't help but keep coming back to this:

     

    Incumbent LA or AGM can't really satisfy the duty cycle of simple SS.

     

    Solutions that actually *can* satisfy the duty cycle of simple SS are currently too expensive to be worth it. ==> simple SS just isn't worth the candle unless, 1) the candle gets cheaper, or 2) the gas savings $ of SS is increased, justifying the more 'spensive candle.

     

    The way to get to #2 is to either move SS up the range in vehicle size (SS on an SUV saves more gas than SS on a basic 4pax economy car), thereby justifying the price of the needed battery, OR, move more of the fleet further to the right deeper into micro-hybrid territory and even mild-hybrid territory, achieving greater fuel savings, thereby justifying the more expensive battery solutions that are called for...

     

    Either way it would all seem to still favor PbC as a sound solution for some of the segment, but by every increment they can achieve to make it cheaper than the (li-ion, nimh, supercap) alternatives, it *should* win that much more of the pie...
    12 Feb 2013, 07:44 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10178) | Send Message
     
    Thanks John, I had read your article.

     

    I think much of this opportunity is in the bag if Axion finds the right partner(s). Others already have the buying power and scaled operations like logistics and AGM manufacturing capacity that is more efficient than Axion's. So much of what Axion needs to optimize their value added stream is already industrialized.The only development might be in the sheet sintering process. Less so in the electrode assy line as my guess is that there are others that have stronger manufacturing expertise in automotive (No disrespect intended). Well if Axion would give up electrode assy which I feel they would given the right opportunities in certain markets. JMO.
    12 Feb 2013, 08:44 PM Reply Like
  • billa_from_sf
    , contributor
    Comments (370) | Send Message
     
    If an AGM manufacturer has to buy PbC from Axion and presumably mark it up in the end product it sells to an OEM, the AGM manufacturer's pricing model could adversely affect PbC's penetration into the market, no?

     

    IOW, if a PbC anode costs an AGM manufacturer more than a Pb anode, and if OEMs place an inviolable limit on battery cost, and the AGM manufacturer's markup schedule is such that they feel they are eating a cost the OEMs should pay for a PbC battery, then Axion would be caught in the middle of situation not of its making.
    12 Feb 2013, 09:20 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30456) | Send Message
     
    I think the ultimate challenge will be staying patient until Axion has a design win in hand. If they walk into a potential partner looking for the capacity to win an OEM contract, the potential partner will hold the key cards. If they walk into the same potential partner with an OEM contract in hand, the bargaining dynamic is very different.

     

    Premium products are funny things because everybody can and should win. If Axion sells electrode assemblies to a battery manufacturer at a fair price, there's no reason the manufacturer can't earn more per unit than they would doing everything in house.

     

    GE automakers will pay up to get what they need. They may whine and complain but they'll. still pay. It doesn't have to be a zero sum game.
    12 Feb 2013, 09:21 PM Reply Like
  • Futurist
    , contributor
    Comments (2113) | Send Message
     
    Very true John,
    But I thought the comment by Alpha was exceedingly clever.
    But I like the clever humor this board provides.
    12 Feb 2013, 09:30 PM Reply Like
  • billa_from_sf
    , contributor
    Comments (370) | Send Message
     
    Makes sense, John.

     

    Thanks.
    12 Feb 2013, 09:36 PM Reply Like
  • carlosgaviria
    , contributor
    Comments (798) | Send Message
     
    Morning Mr John.

     

    I Do not understand why the ELBC 2012 BMW presentation ignores the tests being conducted with AXION POWER PbC Tech.

     

    Have a good day-Carlos

     

    Mr Obama yesterday said:
    13 Feb 2013, 06:06 AM Reply Like
  • carlosgaviria
    , contributor
    Comments (798) | Send Message
     
    Sorry:
    Yesterday President Obama said: The USA need ten times more powerful batteries. (That I understood).
    13 Feb 2013, 06:08 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10178) | Send Message
     
    Billa, I think both Axion and any potential partners in automotive and other potential markets would understand the requirements of the end user market before agreements were signed to make sure the contents of the agreement would support their business assumptions. In the case of automotive they would already know about where they would need to come in on price because the auto company would already know pretty well the approximate cost of manufacturing as I indicated in a prior post. Auto companies sign long term contracts which would include things like first year pricing and annual cost reductions on the value added portion of the manufacturing process. The supplier might augment any agreement accordingly to manage risk. In the end contracts are like snow flakes and there would be some give and take between the ultimate tier 1 supplier and the auto maker. Axion would be most likely a tier 2 supplier in this arrangement. All the parties need to get something they deem favorable or the dotted line does not get signatures. Being obvious on the last statement.
    13 Feb 2013, 06:49 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10178) | Send Message
     
    John, I'd surely not argue your points. Leverage good - empty pockets bad. And the automakers have lots of leverage as well. Even if they want PbC they will use the AGM, NiMH and lithium ion cards during negotiations. TG will need all his skill sets to optimize any agreements for sure. And he obviously better have done his homework to understand his competitors offerings. But all I'm saying you already know and then a lot more.

     

    In the end it's all about how competitive PbC is in the intended application(s). The ultimate wild card.
    13 Feb 2013, 06:57 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30456) | Send Message
     
    Carlos> BMW's decision to present jointly with Axion in 2010 was one of the most extraordinary events I've ever seen. They wrapped their arms around the PbC technology before there was a PbC product. I've spent the last two years looking for another example of an OEM going to that extreme with unique product and haven't been able to find one. If you look at their presentation in 2012, it discusses the generic potential of lithium-ion, but doesn't even get close to identifying specific chemistries or producers.

     

    If BMW's goal is to spur the lead-acid battery industry to action by identifying its technology options, then identifying new threats to lead's supremacy is more effective than repeating old ones.

     

    In 2010 BMW could talk about the PbC without leaking much information about its product development plans. The dynamic was very different by 2012 when the testing was done and the test results were already out for peer review.
    13 Feb 2013, 07:20 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30456) | Send Message
     
    It looks like my 50-day VWMA will cross up through my 200-day VWMA tomorrow. Here are the numbers.

     

    50-day $0.320458
    200-day $0.320465

     

    Since the spread between the SMA 50 and the SMA 200 is a little wider, that cross will take a couple more days but should happen this week.
    12 Feb 2013, 05:04 PM Reply Like
  • bazooooka
    , contributor
    Comments (3465) | Send Message
     
    Hopefully we spike here. Valentines week seems to be low volume. I hope we repeat the Feb/March 2011 and not the 2012 version.
    12 Feb 2013, 07:35 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30456) | Send Message
     
    Enersys just announced an alliance with Ioxus to develop and market "products to address regenerative braking and energy recovery in the material handling markets, and other major markets, including the UPS bridge to generator markets, the automotive and heavy truck critical and cold start markets, and the energy storage/power conditioning markets."

     

    http://yhoo.it/XHSAyD

     

    We are now three for three with the big boys admitting that their best products don't have the charge acceptance required for critical emerging storage applications.
    12 Feb 2013, 05:26 PM Reply Like
  • DRich
    , contributor
    Comments (4825) | Send Message
     
    >JP ... And yet, three for three, know that the solutions are not working. Do you think the industry thinking is that they can develop a solution that is just good enough and economical to get them 3 years of service?

     

    I've noticed that none (that we know of) have been willing to adopt (or even test) Axion's business model for integration into their product line. If ever there was a company that would be in my top 2 manufacturing partners it would be Enersys (ENS) for their leadership in transportation, ex-auto. A natural fit for Axion.
    12 Feb 2013, 05:47 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30456) | Send Message
     
    NIH is a very strong force in technical circles and rock stars never like to be eclipsed by a garage band, but sometimes things just work out that way.

     

    After ELBC I wrote an Instablog on Sheffield University's modeling of the Ultrabattery. While my goal at the time was to show where the Ultrabattery fell into the universe of potential solutions to the DCA problem, their modeling also did a great job of showing where a pair of AGM-ultracapacitor combinations fell into the universe of potential solutions.

     

    http://bit.ly/SqgaBZ

     

    http://bit.ly/YeSjrq

     

    If you think back to the DOE grant application that Brishwain got under the FOIA, we know that the PbC has 13,000F of capacitance. I'm going to have to do some trolling about to see if I can develop a more bullet-proof understanding of the AGM-ultracap solutions, but I think this may be a very major development.
    12 Feb 2013, 05:54 PM Reply Like
  • Milhouse
    , contributor
    Comments (414) | Send Message
     
    What strikes me as odd in all this is that the ultracap solution for ss is no solution at all, and they should already know this.

     

    In one of the previous conference calls, Maxwell's CEO specifically said that there would be close to 1 million PSA cars on the road in Europe with the Continental ultracap-battery system by the end of 2013. He said that all the cars are diesels, specifically because "diesels are notoriously difficult to start in cold weather", which they are. He said the system has performed flawlessly and the customers are very happy with it, but did not say anything about their going into regular gasoline cars.

     

    As everyone on these boards knows, it is the hotel load and not the engine starting which causes all the problems. Seems strange that both Exide and Enersys are ignoring this.

     

    *unless they are developing these systems in the hope of eventually incorporating the PbC for the battery side.
    12 Feb 2013, 06:04 PM Reply Like
  • DRich
    , contributor
    Comments (4825) | Send Message
     
    >Milhouse ... I don't think Enersys (ENS) or Exide (http://bit.ly/Qem9C8) are ignoring anything but Axion. I believe they are in search of a minimalist solution that keeps after-market sales while both existing manufacturing capital assets & sales margins remain as intact as possible. The rush to use Maxwell in various solutions is, I believe, because of that Continental win. Axion has no customer base .... sigh ... so it is invisible and can be ignored.

     

    Nothing internally developed has failed miserably, yet. At least to the point they are forced to change their own product line. It took Maxwell (http://bit.ly/W5tLuA) quite a while to score a design win in autos and only after several years of supplying to small customers in other industries. The current solution is to find a "bolt-on". Buying electrodes from Axion would lower margin by having to share and cost them idle equipment & Sq. Ft. of factory floor. Worst, it would not have been an "in-house" widget. An admission of some sort of defeat for managements along with a blow to technological prowess.
    12 Feb 2013, 06:37 PM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (2807) | Send Message
     
    Millhouse, I certainly can see some potential benefits using a ultra-cap for starting diesels. I drove a diesel VW for a decade, and sub-20 F starting was problematic.
    12 Feb 2013, 08:18 PM Reply Like
  • D-inv
    , contributor
    Comments (4221) | Send Message
     
    Questions. I understand ultra-caps are expensive and have a high self discharge rate. Are they more expensive than a PbC? Does the PbC self discharge as fast as ultra-caps? If not, would a PbC not be a better energy storage solution for starting diesels than ultra-caps?
    12 Feb 2013, 08:37 PM Reply Like
  • Milhouse
    , contributor
    Comments (414) | Send Message
     
    I don't think the PbC battery even discharges as fast as your garden-variety lead-acid battery does, so as a starter battery it probably wouldn't be worth it.
    12 Feb 2013, 08:58 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30456) | Send Message
     
    D-inv>, Maxwell sells its BoostCap cells for about $.02 per Farad. That means the Maxwell piece of the system they developed with Continental is about $48. On top of the Maxwell slice you have the cost of the AGM battery and the related control electronics to make the components play nice together. In a 12 volt system, the Maxwell BoostCap adds 416F of capacitance.

     

    In the Axion-GM grant application, there was a parenthetical reference that said the PbC offers 13,000F of capacitance in a 12-volt system. Hopefully somebody who knows more than me can help flesh out the importance of that difference.
    12 Feb 2013, 09:30 PM Reply Like
  • D-inv
    , contributor
    Comments (4221) | Send Message
     
    Mil ... I have the impression the PbC accepts charge at a much higher rate than AGM or FLA and discharges faster than AGM/FLA but has lower specific energy and hence stores less energy.
    12 Feb 2013, 09:51 PM Reply Like
  • D-inv
    , contributor
    Comments (4221) | Send Message
     
    Thanks, JP. It appears ultra-caps hold a price advantage in the diesel starting application if an AGM is used for lighting-ignition-etc.
    12 Feb 2013, 09:54 PM Reply Like
  • Milhouse
    , contributor
    Comments (414) | Send Message
     
    D- My understanding from what Ed Buiel was saying was that FLA discharges at a very high rate and recharges at a very low rate, but that PbC discharges and recharges at roughly the same rate, which is somewhere in-between.

     

    I thought FLA was discharge at 1000amps and recharge at 10amps and the PbC was about 150 for both, but I may be remembering this incorrectly.

     

    Do these numbers make sense? 1000 amps sounds like a lot to me now that I read it...
    12 Feb 2013, 10:00 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30456) | Send Message
     
    D-inv> ultracaps have significant advantages for cranking loads but are pretty useless when it comes to the hotel loads that are 90% of the total energy demand in an engine off event.

     

    Millhouse> The PbC can discharge every bit as quickly as an AGM, but as D-inv noted it has less total stored energy.
    12 Feb 2013, 10:04 PM Reply Like
  • Milhouse
    , contributor
    Comments (414) | Send Message
     
    OK, but in a s/s system like the one that BMW is testing, the PbC would be used as a starter battery as well as running hotel loads?

     

    I thought we had all agreed that the most likely setup was a PbC battery for hotel loads connected to a FLA battery just to run the starter. I would assume that would be cheapest.
    12 Feb 2013, 10:10 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30456) | Send Message
     
    Axion prefers a small flooded starter battery under the hood with a larger PbC in the trunk for hotel loads. If the flooded battery doesn't have to do anything else, the combination should offer years of reliable service. An ultracap would be superfluous.
    12 Feb 2013, 10:31 PM Reply Like
  • D-inv
    , contributor
    Comments (4221) | Send Message
     
    "I thought FLA was discharge at 1000amps and recharge at 10amps and the PbC was about 150 for both ...."

     

    Interesting. Dr.B did indeed say LAB could discharge at 1,000 amps and recharge at 10 amps. I had not remembered that. OTOH, his reference to PbC indicated that it could easily both charge and discharge at 100A, indicating comparability in charge and discharge rates at 100A. Info from other sources, though, indicate PbC can accept higher ampere charge rates. For instance, DOE awarded Axion a $150K grant last June for work on a PbC system with 150A charge and another former Axion employee once suggested charge tolerance in excess of 300A for short periods. But, the PbC is an asymmetric device that is part ultra-cap and part battery and could exhibit some difference in charge and discharge rate limits.
    12 Feb 2013, 10:43 PM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (2807) | Send Message
     
    D-Inv, I think an ultra-cap for diesel starting would not necessarily be fully charged. I envision pushing the ignition circuit, the ultra-caps fully charge from the battery in 30 seconds (if it is really cold),then all that energy is released VERY quickly to get the diesel spinning very fast very quickly. The ultra-cap is for concentrating the energy, not storing the energy overnight.

     

    If my scenario for an ultra-cap is practical, a PbC does not fit in well. Of course, my scenario may be nonsense, too.
    12 Feb 2013, 11:21 PM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (2807) | Send Message
     
    Millhouse, reports are the PbC self discharges significantly faster than a standard LAB.

     

    PbC has many good properties, but long term energy storage (the "airport test") probably is not one.
    12 Feb 2013, 11:23 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (18444) | Send Message
     
    John: "...less total stored energy"

     

    IIRC, that's offset, to a large degree though not 100%, by a wider usable SOC range without damage to the battery?

     

    I keep thinking that in many applications, as you and others have mentioned, that it's not as big a disadvantage as it would appear at first glance.

     

    The self-discharge rate, IIRC, is the real show stopper for some applications?

     

    HardToLove
    13 Feb 2013, 06:36 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30456) | Send Message
     
    The PbC's self discharge rate of ~1% a day is high compared to an AGM battery, but it's meaningless in most applications.

     

    If you own a car then you'll occasionally leave it sitting idle for a few weeks while you go on vacation. That won't happen in the context of a commercial end user like a railroad, trucking company or commercial facility. When I asked ePower whether self-discharge was a concern, they explained that by the time they started the tractor and got the engine warmed up to operating temperature the batteries were already back up to full SOC.

     

    When you think about how batteries are used, automotive is unique because nobody else leaves assets sitting idle when they could be productive.
    13 Feb 2013, 07:35 AM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (18444) | Send Message
     
    02/12/2013: EOD stuff partially copied from my instablog (up in about an hour?).
    # Trds: 47, MinTrSz: 100, MaxTrSz: 23930, Vol 269141, AvTrSz: 5726
    Min. Pr: 0.3200, Max Pr: 0.3300, VW Avg. Tr. Pr: 0.3215
    # Buys, Shares: 17 61639, VW Avg Buy Pr: 0.3236
    # Sells, Shares: 30 207502, VW Avg Sell Pr: 0.3208
    # Unkn, Shares: 0 0, VW Avg Unk. Pr: 0.0000
    Buy:Sell 1:3.37 (22.9% “buys”), DlyShts 12439 (4.62%), Dly Sht % of 'sells' 5.99%

     

    On the traditional TA front, I <think> the move I've been expecting is beginning. We had the larger price spreads two days out of the last 4 with “cupping” volume 7 days and slightly higher volume again (+ ~ 6K) today, continuing the “cupping” in the volume. We've gotten a high which couldn't go above the prior close coming after this stuff too. Finally, all the oscillators I watch are in agreement – all weakening. Only Williams %R, at -100, is at an extreme where we look for reversal. That can go low and recover though without seeing any change in price direction for a long time. We have many occurrences of that on the charts.

     

    I expect tomorrow or the next day to see price penetrate the 200-day SMA, $0.3198 at EOD today. This should put us in position to test the rising support of our “grind up” channel, around $0.315. It's not uncommon to get a bit of overshoot even if a bounce off support occurs. Whether it would “bounce” the same day or the next couple days, if it is going to, I can't say. Since we really have no idea of who the sellers are right now we can't even make a SWAG about their potential behavior or reasons, other than raking some off the table.

     

    I do think we have a good handle on potential buyers though – Axionista or not. If they have been following either the discussions and news here in the APCs, or following the charts, they certainly have reason to see any dip as a good buying opportunity. The question is whether the bottom-feeding mentality is dominant or John's thoughts on “those days are pretty much over” holds sway. For me, it's the latter.

     

    This seems supported by the rising trading channel, which hadn't been seen for a long time, apparently holding strong since November of last year. CAVEAT: in a PM with one of the regulars a possible (but I don't judge it as likely yet) ascending broadening wedge was identified. These break down 73% of the time, per Bulkowski. Reminder: I don't see it as likely yet and it's pretty early in development. For now I think the rising trading channel is the path being followed.

     

    On my experimental charts stuff, daily short volume and percentage retreats again, average trade size stays right there in the mid-range of what I believe to be retail, buy:sell weakens substantially, and we continue to see numbers of trades above what had been seen for a while that are sized >= 10K – today 16 of them.

     

    These were mostly “sells” in the $0.3200-$0.3250 range (3 “buys”). They totaled 206K @ VWAP of $0.3210 and represented 76.55% of the day's volume. The questions become ”does several days of larger blocks trading, increasing volume, in this sideways-to-lower scenario indicate the nearing end of the sellers”, or “is it indicating increased selling to come”, and/or “will it spook some less determined longs to dump or trigger stops”.

     

    I think the directional answer may be in my experimental inflection point calculations, which continue to weaken. The development of the pattern signaling a down move is much stronger now in my original version. The versions designed to consider other stuff to help eliminate some of the “flakiness” seen in the original are also showing a likely down move.

     

    Details of “Dly Sht % of 'sells'” and inflection points omitted here.

     

    HardToLove
    12 Feb 2013, 06:38 PM Reply Like
  • bazooooka
    , contributor
    Comments (3465) | Send Message
     
    HTL,

     

    Your getting pretty good at this. We might indeed break .35 cents if the stars align as you're reading them =)
    13 Feb 2013, 12:17 AM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (18444) | Send Message
     
    Bazooooka: If the expected break below the support and rebound back into the channel occurs, I expect consolidation is over at this price level and we might just blow right by $0.35, after a very brief period of indecision.

     

    My reasoning is that a majority of those that bought lower to trade out at a profit will want to reload and those that bought higher and are cutting losses should be near getting done.

     

    Let's not forget that we had huge volume during the 1/7-1/17 period, ~6.544MM shares (with one 614K "buy" at $0.35), when we ran as high as $0.38. Since then we've traded ~3.563MM shares. Some unknown percentage of those buyers will be "strong hands".

     

    These latter will be keeping shares out of the market at these price levels. The "traders", that should be getting their long positions nearing exhaustion now, will not all get back in at the lowest price. Some may even want to see momentum up begin before recharging.

     

    *Some* may have been recharging during this consolidation.

     

    This means they should be reloading at a higher price than the $0.27-$0.29 area of ~12/12/12-1/4/12 and, e.g if a 20% gain is desired, their sell target should be higher than it was this selling cycle. And though John may pooh-pooh it, I've wondered, and suggested for a while, that some well-capitalized MMs may get short-term long positions to generate profit. I've studied videos by an Aussie professional trader that describes the patterns indicating MM accumulation and selling. My best *guess* is that we've been seeing some of this activity exhibited in our chart patterns.

     

    Experimental and MHO,
    HardToLove
    13 Feb 2013, 07:16 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10178) | Send Message
     
    HTL, I think we fell off the other side of the cup and on to the saucer. ;)

     

    We're back in Sleepy Hallow and it's not candy night..
    13 Feb 2013, 12:55 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (18444) | Send Message