Seeking Alpha

Axion Power Host's  Instablog

Axion Power Host
Send Message
Trying to learn stuff
  • Axion Power Concentrator 208: Feb. 13: Axion Power PbC Batteries Continue To Demonstrate Effectiveness For Railroad Applications Norfolk Southern 267 comments
    Feb 13, 2013 4:28 PM | 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. (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.


    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 (267)
Track new comments
  • Kabam!
    13 Feb 2013, 04:30 PM Reply Like
  • Nice job Milhouse. Keep getting off early for 4:30 cocktails and you can win this prestigious award more often :-)
    13 Feb 2013, 09:05 PM Reply Like
  • Your comments are both humorous and suspiciously close to the truth.


    But, I was happy to win this at least one time...another item off my bucket list.
    13 Feb 2013, 10:34 PM Reply Like
  • Anybody heard from Jon Springer? Last I heard he was under the weather, about a week or so ago.
    13 Feb 2013, 04:33 PM Reply Like
  • SD: He's still under the weather, but hopeful as of this A.M.


    13 Feb 2013, 04:42 PM Reply Like
  • Hi SD & fellow Axionistas,


    Feels like I'm getting in about average of 90 minutes of "work"/SeekingAlpha time per day. New insta I put up yesterday was posted with zero research after promising it over two weeks ago to someone. Needless, to say, behind on everything and trying to catch up on obligations as I can.


    [[[Not sure why it is I'm "under the weather" but hope The Weather Channel will find no need to name this storm (er... as Foghorn Leghorn would say... "that's a joke son!")]]]
    13 Feb 2013, 07:44 PM Reply Like
  • Wow, made third place. Closest I've ever been to first.
    13 Feb 2013, 04:36 PM Reply Like
  • Labtech: a three-bagger is better than a one-bagger any time! :-))


    Keep trying and you'll get a four-bagger!


    13 Feb 2013, 04:43 PM Reply Like
  • HTL,
    It was just luck that I happened to check the concentrator shortly after APH put up the link...or was it?
    Actually, I think the reason I checked it was that I felt a sudden disturbance in the Force, as if a million EV vehicles suddenly cried out and then were silent after the State of the Union address last night. :-)
    13 Feb 2013, 10:14 PM Reply Like
  • I'm hoping that now being 9 hours ahead will give me a competitive advantage in the race to be number one.
    14 Feb 2013, 02:13 AM Reply Like
  • Still: JS fired up a new African investment themed Insta just yesterday.




    Are others seeing a difference in this blog's page layout? The Insta header all to the right border, and the comments all to the left border?
    13 Feb 2013, 04:38 PM Reply Like
  • Looks normal to me!
    13 Feb 2013, 04:42 PM Reply Like
  • Maya: I don't see any change ... You might need to clear cache or somthing?


    13 Feb 2013, 04:47 PM Reply Like
  • Normal to me as well Maya. Only difference I see on this concentrator is someone didn't take their normal 4th post position!
    13 Feb 2013, 04:49 PM Reply Like
  • Thanks, HTL. I deleted everything, hit Restart, and we're back to normal. Probably some lurking Honduras issues ;-)


    Interesting volume spike and size of trades at the end of the day. Nice to see a 100K buy.
    13 Feb 2013, 04:59 PM Reply Like
  • Maya: It was a sell @ $0.3201 when bid ask was $0.3200/$0.3210.




    13 Feb 2013, 07:31 PM Reply Like
  • HTL: My cheapo Zecco Trading gamer platform is now called Trade King. I'm beginning to think Trade King is even a more cheapo-cheapo trading platform.


    The trade on my screen went off as "green," which should be a buy.
    13 Feb 2013, 07:51 PM Reply Like
  • Maya: The prior trade was $0.32 x 5K, so it was a move up.


    14 Feb 2013, 05:00 AM Reply Like
  • The 5k at .32 was me.


    I apologize for bottom feeding but at least we know that 5k is in good hands, right?


    I actually wasn't going to buy any more at all until an event but I have dry powder that I'd like to use. Thinking now that I may just buy 5k every month for awhile regardless of price.


    14 Feb 2013, 06:43 AM Reply Like
  • D. McHattie: You did "good". If you hadn't been there to soak up that 5K @ $0.32, it might have gone at a lower price. At that time, 15:41:33-15:41:47, 30K traded at $0.32, all "sells". Bid/ask was $0.32/$0.321. ... At least you didn't overpay! ;-))


    So you may have extended "consolidation" by a day - who knows. :-))


    14 Feb 2013, 07:38 AM Reply Like
  • HTL: Well today the 100K volume trade came up as colored black!
    14 Feb 2013, 03:47 PM Reply Like
  • Maya: ADVFN shows "unknown" as bid/ask was $0.295/$0.305. It was the same price as the prior, which was lower than the one prior to that - $0.3001. So black would be correct I guess.


    14 Feb 2013, 03:52 PM Reply Like
  • HTL & Maya,
    Thanks for the update, hope he gets well soon.
    13 Feb 2013, 04:55 PM Reply Like
  • SPIDER tales (ZBB has been involved at some level with them)


    In First Test, U.S. Military’s SPIDERS Microgrid Uses 90% Renewable Energy
    February 12, 2013 Tina Casey




    Links to Sandia site:


    Links to


    SPIDERS Passes the Test: Operational Demonstration Summary



    which includes this "makes you wonder" ...


    "Not everything was lollipops and cherries. The Air Force in-kind contribution of a flow battery flopped. It would seem that some sort of energy storage medium will be required to make intermittent energy production viable for uninterruptible power. It was reported that the schedule and communications never synchronized with the SPIDERS efforts. Cost effective, reliable energy storage remains the Holy Grail of the micro-grid challenge. Air Force, next time, just write a check"
    13 Feb 2013, 06:37 PM Reply Like
  • >wtblanchard ... Sounds like they need an "energy storage medium" device that can catch & release intermittent quickly because it seems a flow battery is a little slow on the uptake. I believe someone has such a quick response device available ... I hope.


    HELLO, Mr. Dantam. HELLO, Rosewater. I think someone ought to make a call on whoever supplied that flow battery and/or the SPIDER.
    13 Feb 2013, 07:55 PM Reply Like
  • Uh-oh.


    >Dan Nolan at the DOD Energy Blog noted that the flow battery >storage component of the system did not perform as expected, but >other than that the demonstration seemed to go well.


    Today's ZBB PR noted that they had shipped an EnerStore to that same joint base.
    13 Feb 2013, 08:19 PM Reply Like
  • I don't think its as bad as it sounds, but I hope it will be addressed on the call today.
    14 Feb 2013, 08:50 AM Reply Like
  • I was 15-20 minutes late getting on the call. Not sure if mgt addressed it earlier, but thanks for asking the question. If I had been them, I would have addressed it in opening.
    14 Feb 2013, 12:02 PM Reply Like
  • Come on BMW fix that crappy energy storage system you have. IMO makers that are pure higher end cars should be embarrassed being below average. Then again perhaps this class of owners has higher expectations. But T and their Lexus div. sure does stand out.


    Lexus, Porsche tops J.D. Power reliability rankings again; domestics close quality gap

    13 Feb 2013, 07:15 PM Reply Like
  • 02/13/2013: EOD stuff partially copied from instablog (up in the A.M.).
    # Trds: 31, MinTrSz: 100, MaxTrSz: 100000, Vol 247690, AvTrSz: 7990
    Min. Pr: 0.3200, Max Pr: 0.3270, VW Avg. Tr. Pr: 0.3214
    # Buys, Shares: 11 36690, VW Avg Buy Pr: 0.3245
    # Sells, Shares: 19 201000, VW Avg Sell Pr: 0.3208
    # Unkn, Shares: 1 10000, VW Avg Unk. Pr: 0.3208
    Buy:Sell 1:5.48 (14.8% “buys”), DlyShts 33300 (13.44%), Dly Sht % of 'sells' 16.57%


    We now have a very short-term descending triangle formed by three days of $0.32 lows with descending highs. Since Bulkowski deals with longer-term stuff, I shouldn't cite him here. But if I did, it wouldn't be bullish.


    We formed a Black Marubozu candlestick, described as “an extremely strong bearish candlestick pattern”, but it's in the low reliability category and requires confirmation, per, Essentially, this is in agreement with Bulkowski, who says it “acts as a continuation candle 53% of the time, which I consider "near random.””


    I'm not seeing anything making me want to bet on the other 47% occurring.


    Although volume weakened a bit today (down about 21K) it's still “strong” relative to recent consolidation volumes, being well above the “bottom” of the cup pattern formed by the volume highs. This is NOT suggesting that we have bottomed. Daily short sales almost tripled in spite of the lower volume but are still only a small percentage.


    Just FYI: average trade be much weaker if the single 100K trade (a “sell @ $0.3201 @ 15:43:04) had not occurred. We would have ended with 30 trades with an average trade size of 4,764, into the lower range of what I think is retail. We also would have end with a big volume drop. As it is, we show an average trade size near the higher end of what I believe is retail.


    Including that 100K trade, we had only 8 trades >= 10K.


    The 200-day SMA at EOD is $0.3193. I expect price to challenge this tomorrow. I've mentioned before the behavior I expect, near-term, so I'll forgo iterating that here. The 50-day SMA is $0.3162 at EOD. It'll take a few days more for the fabled “Golden Cross” to occur. So I don't expect any “bounce” without at least a touch of our rising channel support, currently ~$0.3165 as near s I can judge.


    All oscillators, except the MFI, are below neutral and going more bearish. The MFI is headed there. Stochastic is into oversold, where it will remain for some days I think. Williams %R is maxed (or “minimumed? ;0) out at -100%, also an oversold indicator. As mentioned before, it's often an indicator of reversal but often (with our stock) leaves that area with no price appreciation occurring.


    My experimental 13-period Bollinger band now has a $0.0125 spread. Can we say SPROING? With a price spread today of 0.844%, I think we better learn how to pronounce that. As mentioned before, I do expect an overshoot of the rising support.


    On my experimental charts stuff, just a few notes. The three averages for buy:sell are all trending down now, but still in a normal range around the 50% mark. I believe my experimental inflection points are now signaling lower – the pattern has progressed to the point that I have only a very small amount of uncertainty left in my mind now.


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


    EDIT: Reposted to fix some omissions.
    13 Feb 2013, 07:51 PM Reply Like
  • Author’s reply » I updated the link in the header to HTL's most recent Axion Power Intra-day Statistics located under "links to important Axion Power Research"
    13 Feb 2013, 08:46 PM Reply Like


    Cheap, Strong Lithium-Ion Battery Developed
    Feb. 12, 2013 — 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.


    The new batteries -- which could be used in anything from cell phones to hybrid cars -- hold three times as much energy as comparable graphite-based designs and recharge within 10 minutes. The design, currently under a provisional patent, could be commercially available within two to three years.
    13 Feb 2013, 08:57 PM Reply Like
  • Oh goody! Another world changing lithium ion battery innovation that should be available in just a couple years. A couple decades is much closer to the truth.
    13 Feb 2013, 09:07 PM Reply Like
  • Alpha5,
    Thanks for the link.
    All I can say is this. After 5 years of learning the hard way about battery development I will bet my life's savings that 2-3 years turns into 6-10.
    13 Feb 2013, 09:10 PM Reply Like
  • With current commercial available cathodes, electrolyte and shell, I just do not believe 300% energy density claim even if we could find an anode material weighting zero.


    from the link above:
    "Future research by the group will focus finding a new cathode material with a high capacity that will pair well with the porous silicon nanowires and/or porous silicon nanoparticles to create a completely redesigned battery."
    13 Feb 2013, 10:32 PM Reply Like
  • In an effort to get federal funding to support their research, they omitted that it goes off like a rocket when charged above 10 amps and that there is a 70% dropoff in energy storage when operated +- 5 degrees from 70F.
    14 Feb 2013, 02:20 AM Reply Like
  • Alpha5,
    Gotta love the column next to the story that has all the world changing headlines going back to 2008 for Lithium-Ion battery development. Some are similar to this article. New and improved!!
    Different day, same hype.
    14 Feb 2013, 05:26 AM Reply Like
  • Stilldazed, Excellent point.
    14 Feb 2013, 11:31 AM Reply Like
  • Yeah, but "porous silicon nanoparticles"! That's the ticket! Where do I sign up? Oh... wait...
    14 Feb 2013, 02:38 PM Reply Like
  • Tesla has put out part of the log.

    I'm going to sleep but here are a couple of obvious and easy points


    The reporter Broder said the 12 volt LA battery was dead. Elon shows readout of Li ion battery and says not dead....?
    Note available range on second graph says Zero mi available. Maybe not dead not usable either.


    The assignment was to use SC stations and show how the SC would free the Model S from slow charging. Charging elsewhere defeats the purpose of the review.
    Elon shows us the slow chargers he could have gone to.


    Elon says Broder went on a long detour through Manhattan giving his brother a ride. He dos not show any evidence but says Broder gave his brother a ride. (I heard that along with a 2 mi rumor.
    The evidence hr did show us was a .6 mi ride "in circles" around a "small parking lot". where the SC is located.
    A different view of the chargers in each link. This was at 5:45 on the eastern edge of the time zone I have no doubt it was dark I have no idea of the light situation and it seems there are only 2.




    Frankly 6 tenths of a mile? This is Elon's "Proof" of deception???


    " he drove in circles for over half a mile in a tiny, 100-space parking lot. When the Model S valiantly refused to die, "
    Yeah valiant .6 mi if he seriously tried around the block once or twice would have done it.


    I rarely say this but OMG!
    14 Feb 2013, 04:18 AM Reply Like
  • I'm interested to read NYTs response.


    Some of elon's complaints seem valid, such as the 45mph v. 55mph discrepancy. To me, 55mph is still limping but it appears the author was exaggerating for dramatic effect.


    14 Feb 2013, 07:15 AM Reply Like
  • The simple fact that the reporter only charged to 28% on the last leg, where he subsequently ran out of charge, tells you all you need to know. He did not even put "half a tank" into the car, not one single person here would blame an ICE vehicle if someone did the same. This was obviously a hatchet piece, and Broder got caught. The logs show he was less than truthful about a number of his claims. You can nitpick all the details you want and come up with any conclusions you wish, but it can't change the truth.
    14 Feb 2013, 09:12 AM Reply Like
  • you must consider all the data. and it's source. JRP3, you continue to select data points that strengthen your position while ignoring everything else.


    you seem to have at least acknowledged that Tesla vehicles "aren't for everybody" with a big "yet" disclaimer. so when. when is it for everyone? who is going to buy this "car of the year" and keep the company in business? how many potential customers are turned off by a CEO basically saying your service complaints are your fault?
    14 Feb 2013, 09:25 AM Reply Like
  • JRP3, he stopped the Norwich charge at 28% because it was a low-charge station and he was trying to get enough charge to get to the supercharger so he wouldn't have to wait around for 8 hours charging the car. The facts are: the est. range the vehicle told him when charging at any station was way-off by 1/3 or more. And when he stopped at the hotel overnight the est. range lost 75%. Those are facts that Musks shining distraction of the logs can and do not dispute.


    The only thing in the log that disputes anything about Broder's blog is the temp gauge and the speed. You can see in Musks log the temperature settings were only ever increased directly after Broder recharged the battery, when Broder began seeing the battery depleting too fast you can see he turned the temp settings way down. On speed, oh shoot, Broder said 54mph, the log says he was going 60 for a 100 mile stretch but further along on the trip he was going 54 for over 50 miles (human error, but nothing that changes the issues). Once again you can see when he recharged he thought he was actually allowed to drive highway speeds and have a comfortable temp. setting in the cabin, shame on him for attempting such extravagance.


    Musk has nothing and he should be sued for libel.
    14 Feb 2013, 10:04 AM Reply Like
  • So after re-reading the article, and the comments and charts from Mr. Musk, I basically see this as a reporter who wasn't sold on EVs before he took this trip and a car that is not ready for long trips in the cold without an owner who is very patient and willing to sit at a charging station no matter how long it takes. Yes, the reporter went faster than he was supposed to (which is a joke to most people who drive a lot on the interstate, since most people drive at least 10 mph over the posted 65 mph speed limit on I95), but so does everyone else. He should have waited longer to charge the car at Milford, but at the same time, if you've got 50 miles to go in the morning, and the car says you still have 90 miles of charge left when you go to bed, you don't anticipate that it's going to read 25 miles of range in the morning. There also seems to be a disconnect between what was supposed to be happening at the Norwich station. The reporter "claims" that he was told he needed to plug the car in for an hour to "restore" the power that was lost overnight. I took this to mean that the battery still had the 90 miles of power in it, but it needed to be warmed up enough to get it back out. The response from Mr. Musk seems to be that he needed to recharge the battery at Norwich and he should have just kept doing it at the slow charger until it was above what was needed for the return trip to Milford, plus some extra for heat and lost from cold on the trip. So apparently the battery really did "lose" 75% of its charge sitting overnight in the cold without being plugged in. That is something that anyone who is going to stay at a hotel with this car, where it can't be plugged in, should keep in mind.
    So all in all, it was a poor test drive, by someone who wasn't sold on EVs going into the test drive, but it did show that anyone who isn't going to follow all the rules for getting the best mileage out of the battery pack, or be willing to wait hours and hours during the day for charging, shouldn't buy this or any other EV.
    14 Feb 2013, 12:34 PM Reply Like
  • Maybe EV's are Goldilocks cars. Not too hot and not to cold but drive em when it's just right. Tesla for the rich of course!

    14 Feb 2013, 01:21 PM Reply Like
  • Tesla: It's not just transportation. It's a whole new way of life.
    14 Feb 2013, 01:24 PM Reply Like
  • Renzo, thats right. And a new lifestyle is something that is gaining momo! For me, its riding my bike to work or catching the bus. For some, it will be watching the range-o-meter. No more waste, baby!
    14 Feb 2013, 01:28 PM Reply Like
  • Renzo,
    On a Tesla vacation there would be plenty of time to smell the roses. A nice relaxing, no pressure for a timetable or anxiety vacation.
    14 Feb 2013, 01:28 PM Reply Like
  • He stopped at 28% even though his range showed less than he needed to make the drive. If he had started his trip using Range Mode, and charged it fully in Range Mode at the next stop, as someone who owned Model S would, he would have had enough charge to make the trip. It's as simple as that.
    The trip is being done again by CNN, and also a group of Model S owners, I have no doubt they will complete it successfully at reasonable speeds and in a comfortable climate. If a number of people are able to do the trip that this reporter failed to complete, who exactly is ultimately at fault?
    15 Feb 2013, 08:13 AM Reply Like
  • Jrp3
    It seems they told the same thing to Consumers Reports.
    The reporter had exactly the same problem. He didn't charge the car with range mode. He had 88 mi left it unplugged overnight in the cold..(Probably not as cold he only lost 30 miles of 88 VS 65 for Broder.) They told him the car would recalibrate and add the miles back in.


    Rapid charging at a Tesla EV "Supercharge" station
    ConsumerReports.orgBy Consumer Reports News | – Tue, Jan 29, 2013 10:00 AM EST



    ... "If "driving green" wasn't enough, there's this bonus: Tesla owners can use the fast chargers for free. In the Northeast region, in addition to the Connecticut venue, Tesla has also installed a "supercharging station" at a rest area in Delaware. The idea is to enable a Model S owner to drive from Boston to Washington, D.C., while "filling up" only twice. So far there are also six other such stations along the most-traveled highways in California.


    To give it a shot, I set off on a Friday afternoon with a full charge, which in this case was an indicated range of 240 miles. After 60 miles I arrived at the Milford Supercharging station, with my indicated range down to 160 miles after a mixed route of rural country roads and highway. Another factor here was the chilly ambient temperature: it was 30-degrees out. Cold weather and cabin heat always cut into battery range. After 45 minutes, I was back at full charge with a seemingly robust 242 mile range. I figured it was enough for my typical local driving, as well as getting back to work."


    He didn't get a range mode charge? Twice? Was he trying to run it out?


    "Overall, the car was a delight throughout the weekend, with quiet and immediate acceleration, athletic moves in the corners, a solid-yet-supple ride, and plenty of room for the family. It's hard not to get mesmerized by the 17-inch touch-screen display. Though it's the sole interface for the audio system and other common vehicle functions, it's easy to use and responds quickly to taps.


    As my excursion reminded, this is one car that draws a crowd fast. If you're an early adopter, you might as well get used to answering questions from curious strangers and getting admiring glances.


    The night before my voyage back to work, I had 88 miles left, according to the car's computation. I knew that would be cutting it pretty close, so I planned on a 30-minute supercharging session in Milford to gain some juice and added peace of mind. But while parked outside my house overnight, the temperature dipped and so did the indicated range, which now read only 58 miles. "


    88 mi? That's less than Broder.
    What? he left it unplugged over night? He clearly had evil intent!


    "(Yes, a little range anxiety began to set in.) How can 30 miles evaporate just like that? According to Tesla, the car's computer takes into account the freezing temperature and readjusts the remaining range. The company also said that, upon restarting, the battery warms up and the computer once again updates the range."


    Why does this sound suspiciously familiar?


    " I didn't notice it adding miles to the range but the range remained steady for most of my 28-mile drive back to the supercharger. I connected to the charger with 50 miles on the meter and after 30 minutes, I was back to 150 miles—more than ample range to get back to our East Haddam test track."


    Perhaps Elon would like to explain why the would tell this to consumers Reports yet deny telling Broder the same thing?


    " who exactly is ultimately at fault? "


    I would say Elon has made a problem for Tesla and the market seems to agree with me.
    15 Feb 2013, 10:54 AM Reply Like
  • The market is giving Tesla a pullback after a large run up, I know you'd like to ascribe it all to the NYT article but that's unlikely. In any case it's simply a blip on the radar.
    It's no secret that the car drops range over night in the cold. It's also no secret that the Roadster did this initially as well. It's also no secret that the drop was subsequently reduced in later updates, just as it will be with the S.
    Regardless, even with the loss, if the car had been properly charged, even in standard mode, Broder would have made it.
    16 Feb 2013, 09:15 AM Reply Like
  • I've often thought the people At the Tesla Motor Club were more sane then the rabid deniers that attack all who point out any EV flaws.


    Any way I ran across this thread
    Thread: NYT article: Stalled on the EV Highway
    50 pages with many Model S owners.


    More of them admit there is a problem that they wish Tesla would address than those that try to flame Broder the writer.


    Also many are ticked that they had to find out about the loss of range in the cold much as Broder did, The hard way. Only they paid $100,000 for the privilege.


    first comment
    "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."
    14 Feb 2013, 04:29 AM Reply Like
  • You can try and spin this as much as you want. The reporter lied about a number of points and he got caught. The trip could have easily been completed using only the superchargers.
    14 Feb 2013, 09:13 AM Reply Like
  • Jrp3 OK reporter Lied about 54 maybe, as the logs are supplied by Tesla.


    By the logs
    He drove an average speed of under 60 mi per hour with an average temp about 69, and barely made the SC station.
    133 + 73 = 206mi.
    Including the 6 tenths of a mile attempt to kill the car in the parking lot.


    Yeah serious spin from Elon's data.
    14 Feb 2013, 03:06 PM Reply Like
  • He never once fully charged the car. That's all he needed to do to complete the trip. Anyone not competent enough to grasp that basic concept should certainly not own an EV.
    15 Feb 2013, 08:15 AM Reply Like
  • I've already answered above with the CR (Consumers Reports) article.
    15 Feb 2013, 10:59 AM Reply Like
  • I can see it now. A patent for EV's where you punch in your departure time after parking and the app. goes to the weather forecast and comes back with a range of expected mileage availability when you return. Or you can have your car call you if the forecast changes and lets you know in advance you're in trouble.


    Sleep tight! ;)
    15 Feb 2013, 11:09 AM Reply Like
  • No, that has nothing to do with this trip. Broder never fully charged the car, and even if he had only done a full standard mode charge the second time he would have made it.
    He never charged the car properly.
    He never had the heat as cold as he claimed.
    He never traveled at the low speeds he claimed.
    He tried to rationalize the differences with tire size and suggesting the CC can't hold a steady speed, both are false. The Model S, with it's strong regen, always holds a very tight speed on CC.


    I realize none of that matters in the face of your irrational hatred for Tesla and EV's. Luckily others can see through it. As a number of other news organizations and individuals continue to recreate this trip successfully, it will become more and more obvious what happened. Once again Tesla is getting great free press.
    16 Feb 2013, 09:23 AM Reply Like
  • Hey MAYA!


    Woke up this morning, you were on my mind ...



    because I got to thinking the "grind up" was a little long in the tooth and recalled you had mentioned EWT wave 1 starting. I know just enough about EWT to know they would expect a corrective wave 2 somewhere on the path and, IIRC, a Fib 31.8% or 50% re-trace would be expected? This wouldn't be the end of the grind, just a breather before wave 3 up should start.


    Any thoughts as to when, how much and/or how long from your experience?


    14 Feb 2013, 05:25 AM Reply Like
  • HTL: I'm off to the dentist right now; later today I'll get back.
    14 Feb 2013, 08:47 AM Reply Like
  • 1/3 to 1/2 on finance. then up seems likely course. the technical s here are just priming in anticipation of news.


    not maya :)
    14 Feb 2013, 08:50 AM Reply Like
  • HTL
    Thanks for the song.
    14 Feb 2013, 03:13 PM Reply Like
  • HTL: Yes, we do appear to be in the third Elliott Wave leg up. One can easily, on a one year chart, see the five legs down that occurred since last April and May highs. Just as easily, one can see that since November, we've seen two higher highs, with higher lows.


    But this time around, I'm not so sure EWT will apply for several reasons, both negative and positive; the coming capital raise is the largest negative factor, any OEM fleet testing announcement(s), or a successful rollout of Norfolk's 999 yard switcher, or kick butt fuel savings being announced from ePower, or any grid application announcement, or even another, larger grant from Uncle Sam, as positive reasons that could blow holes in any EWT analytics.


    I haven't studied up on EWT for a couple of years, but one thing I do recall is that EWT analysis is harder to implement with penny stocks that need to raise capital, even though back in November, knowing a cap raise was coming, I was convinced that the low was a perfect fit for EWT analysis.


    I agree with Mathieu's below comment, in that without any forthcoming news from New Castle BEFORE the cap raise, that AXPW will drop with the cap raise, and then that should be the end, the "forever" bottom so to speak, which I can easily see being near the November low.


    As things stand now, it does appear we are consolidating and retracing, but I doubt we get a 31.8% retracement, as that would take us to a share price of $0.2523.
    14 Feb 2013, 03:41 PM Reply Like
  • Thanks Maya!


    Hope the visit to the dentist went well!


    14 Feb 2013, 03:55 PM Reply Like
  • i know it's selfish, but i want mid twenties again.
    16 Feb 2013, 11:06 PM Reply Like
  • (AXPW): Just pushed through the 200-day SMA, $0.3188 ATM.


    14 Feb 2013, 11:23 AM Reply Like



    EDIT: OT but cute as a button.
    14 Feb 2013, 01:04 PM Reply Like
  • California sets 50MW target for grid energy storage:
    The new decision also certifies energy storage as “preferred resources,” alongside energy efficiency, demand response and distributed generation resources, in California's Energy Action Plan, which tells utilities in which order they’re to buy the power and energy resources they need.
    14 Feb 2013, 01:11 PM Reply Like
  • Very interesting.




    All in all, it’s a “much-needed market signal that energy storage will be considered as a key asset class to help California address its long-term local reliability and environmental quality needs,” according to Janice Lin, executive director of the California Energy Storage Alliance (CESA). CESA’s member list includes some heavyweights in batteries (LG Chem, Panasonic, Saft)


    I was hopeful until I saw that this may be an "insider's club" for supplying any battery storage for this project.


    After looking on the CESA website, Axion is not listed as a member. They do have such impressive companies as Lightsail, Beacon Power, and A123 listed, so maybe we don't want to be on that list after all.



    Thanks for the link, D
    14 Feb 2013, 01:23 PM Reply Like
  • Good points Milhouse. No doubt Axion would have a very heavy lift to get involved in this market anytime soon--nevertheless its a good sign for AXPW in the macro sense.
    14 Feb 2013, 01:31 PM Reply Like
  • New Battery University Program to Train Workforce to Lead Fast-Growing Industry
    San Jose State University, CalCharge launch new continuing education program


    PR Newswire (
    14 Feb 2013, 04:53 PM Reply Like
  • Haven't had a chance to listen to the replay, but evidently the ZBB call today wasn't received enthusiastically? At least, not by the market as of 1 PM EST.
    14 Feb 2013, 01:15 PM Reply Like
  • It was the results not received well ... the call didn't make much difference ... down before the call, down after the call.


    I suspect the China stuff not being very encouraging, with mentions of losses, didn't help.


    Lots of uncertainty as to how much, when, and with whom financing will be.


    Much opportunity, but do you stay in business, not bought out, without massive "dilution" long enough to really profit?


    Sound familiar?
    14 Feb 2013, 01:59 PM Reply Like
  • Too well.
    14 Feb 2013, 04:07 PM Reply Like
  • I didn't catch it either, therefore I am clueless as to how to respond. Still I am inclined to hold and trust my earlier DD.
    14 Feb 2013, 01:30 PM Reply Like
  • Did anyone else have a problem with Seeking Alpha systems today? I began experiencing several issues shortly after discontinuing tracking of APC 206, APC 207 out of irritation at investigating new comments there only to find new Tesla noise.
    14 Feb 2013, 02:01 PM Reply Like
  • D-Inv: I had sporadic "An error has occurred try again" when clicking "likes". I also had a few "404 not found" when going to mailbox or clicking through links to new comments. Seems to have cleared up over the last hour or so.


    14 Feb 2013, 02:08 PM Reply Like
  • Congress Asking the Right Questions on FOIA


    Freedom of Information, Open, Accountable Government, Government Matters

    14 Feb 2013, 02:02 PM Reply Like
  • The latest thoughts by Robert Appel


    Here is an update on AXPW, which we placed on the unofficial Watch List:
    The company is making steady inroads into the electric railroad market, but this market is slow and ponderous. The day will ultimately come when their booked orders in this sector will enable them to self-finance, but that day is not here yet.
    They are also continuing to explore the whole-house backup market but this market also is ponderous and slow to enter. We have heard unconfirmed rumors that their experiments with hybrid diesels (where the guts of a diesel trailer are
    literally yanked out and replaced with an Axion-based hybrid system) has been extremely successful, offering sufficient increase in fuel economy to payback the conversion within 2 years; a major accomplishment and a large potential market. This in turn opens the door to third party financing, which makes the
    market sector very interesting.
    Overall, however, while all these developments further confirm our (previously reported) assertion that the tech is real, the fact remains that management’s track record remains sloppy and the company should be going back to market to raise funds (again) very soon. That is a serious caution which remains very high
    risk for very high reward. If this company is ever to become successful, one would expect either a buyout or a management change would be required.
    14 Feb 2013, 02:26 PM Reply Like
  • >DL, Appreciate you keeping us updated with what he has to say, thanks.
    14 Feb 2013, 02:42 PM Reply Like
  • Looking forward to the purchases by his followers when he eventually turns bullish at a pps north of $1.00!
    14 Feb 2013, 02:48 PM Reply Like
  • I'm looking forward to proof he knows what he's talking about when he bad-mouths management by displaying an understanding of the product applications.


    "... where the guts of a diesel trailer ..."


    Yep. My last diesel trailer guts were apparently removed before I got. Not even evidence of there ever having been one.


    Thank god lifting a pen is so much easier than actually managing a company through the awful tribulations of start-up to commercialization or many hacks like this one would be adding to our national debt load as they collected unemployment compensation. Second article in a row he could get correct facts and took the opportunity to suggest management change, *IIRC*.


    MH, and likely uninformed, opinion,
    14 Feb 2013, 02:57 PM Reply Like
  • Seemed a little better informed this time.


    Still, he impugnes management without giving any reason.


    'Sloppy'? How so?


    I also think it's an invalid stretch to conclude that management will need to change in order for the company to become successful. I would argue the opposite.


    14 Feb 2013, 03:16 PM Reply Like
  • Axion management has by appearances performed quite well in developing several potential applications as well as manufacturing capacity. OTOH, marketing the product has left something to be desired. It is not clear to me that incumbent management has the skill set needed at this point in time.
    14 Feb 2013, 03:38 PM Reply Like
  • D-inv .... I concur
    14 Feb 2013, 03:40 PM Reply Like
  • D. McHattie: "'Sloppy'? How so?"


    Must be referring to those nickels they threw around like manhole covers. If they'd have picked up after themselves so the nickels weren't left on the floor ...


    14 Feb 2013, 03:58 PM Reply Like
  • One solid deal and management will look like geniuses...
    14 Feb 2013, 04:07 PM Reply Like
  • A123 spins ....


    Micro-hybrid Energy Storage: One or Two Battery Solution?
    Posted by Angela Duren on Thu, Feb 14, 2013



    "Micro-hybrid vehicles with start-stop are forecasted to become main-stream by 2017 and thus LFP 12V starter batteries are positioned to capture a share of this market. With a first generation battery in production and a second generation battery set to launch this spring, A123 can provide proven technology for a single battery solution with less mass, less package space, and less complexity than other competing solutions."
    14 Feb 2013, 02:36 PM Reply Like
  • Wtb: they forgot to mention the most import aspects to the auto industry: less cost, followed by second-source. This assessment (mine) based on the deployment of AGM in current s/s incarnations, suggests longevity, reliability and customer satisfaction are not high on their list right now. Since the Chinese bought them, maybe second-source and reliability are not expected?


    14 Feb 2013, 02:46 PM Reply Like
  • WTB: Seems we keep hearing the pricing of around $270 - $300 as an acceptable cost for a two battery system in stop/start cars, as this AONE article suggests. I can't figure out how this is achievable in using a lithium phosphate battery, coupled with a lead acid battery, including all the ancillary costs such as temperature control, housing, wiring, and a battery management system.


    I am most certain that the PbC + a small cranking battery would cost far more than $270 - $300, even by the year 2017 -- the time frame of the linked article.


    My concern is growing that Axion's PbC is not as cost competitive as we have been led to believe. If we get deep into March or early April, without some sort of OEM announcement, I fear Axion is going to whiff on the stop/start market.


    I covet the notion that OEMs someday will be forced to use PbC technology, due to the AGMs being inadequate, EPA requirements, etc., but I'd far rather have OEMs choose the PbC as the best cost competitive, viable option.
    14 Feb 2013, 03:11 PM Reply Like
  • I would be [even] more concerned if A123 was still a US company. Will be interesting to see what traction they get in the massive China auto market, which I've largely discounted for AXPW (for any future in sight)
    14 Feb 2013, 03:25 PM Reply Like
  • Maya: I have to say I am shocked that you said this, it sounds more like me:


    "My concern is growing that Axion's PbC is not as cost competitive as we have been led to believe. If we get deep into March or early April, without some sort of OEM announcement, I fear Axion is going to whiff on the stop/start market."
    14 Feb 2013, 03:30 PM Reply Like
  • >Maya ... I'd put the time frame for an auto OEM out to no later than September for any hope of being in a 2015 model and Dec-Feb 2014 for a 2016 model. Personally, I don't think autos are going to turn to the PbC for anything anytime soon. For whatever the reason, and I can think of several, they are tied to lithium & AGM for being the only "at scale" solution. It will take consumer recognition of weakness, failure, whatever of the system to explore different offerings which could be many, many years away. Which begs the question; Where will PbC commercial development be then?


    I don't like the auto industry ... so, I'm a little jaundiced in my view. I can hope I'm wrong and that is really the best I can hope (not a viable investment thesis) for. I've always considered it as a bonus if it ever worked out and not something to count on.
    14 Feb 2013, 03:47 PM Reply Like
  • LT: I knew that comment would be controversial. I'm still in the frame of mind that Axion will pull something off, and that an OEM announcement will soon be coming.


    Or, that ePower or Norfolk will come through will resounding evidence that the PbC is the beast we all believe it to be.


    As I wrote last July after the Shareholders Conference, AXPW's largest forward problem is in taking on the behemoths, as well as the monstrous sums the DOE granted toward lithium, in gaining recognition.
    14 Feb 2013, 04:00 PM Reply Like
  • Price risk is real - the Li-ion solutions are small and while expensive on a $/kWh basis, they are not that costly in absolute terms - the number i had heard for a 2 battery solution was $250...


    "Looks to me as though the opportunity is driving firmly towards Axion - the risk now looks to be pricing vs Li-ion - some very low prices being talked about out there - A123 at $250 for a S/S battery, for instance. "


    I don't know if any profit is being made at these levels, but that's another debate. The fact is, everyone is looking hard at start/stop (NiMH, Li-ion) and they are desperate to get a piece of the action - and these technologies are at scale, and perceived by OEM's as no-risk (can't get fired for choosing IBM type thinking). I'm assuming Axion has a lot of head room to get the cost to a point where the risk of adoption is worth it - with markets this size, you don't need to be making too many $/battery to be a very happy investor.
    14 Feb 2013, 04:30 PM Reply Like
  • Maya: Has any auto company announced the adoption of a combination FLA and Li-ion battery for SS? Or any other auto use? I haven't heard of anything.


    Without any company supplying a Li-ion solution to ANY global scale auto maker for SS, why would I suppose the target price is anything more then a auto industry "threat number" to push battery suppliers to squeeze their margins?


    It's like the "new, magical 3X lithium chemistry that is only 1 or 2 years away from large scale use!" When? Sure ;-(
    14 Feb 2013, 04:31 PM Reply Like
  • The Li-ion battery in the combined solution being contemplated by OEM's is only 4.5Ah - these batteries can accept/discharge pulses at 30C - which gets to 135A of DCA. This takes 4*4.5Ah pouches at $20/pouch - plus packaging and controls etc and a standard SLI at $50. It's really quite similar in thinking to a combined SLI/Ultracap solution.


    A full 12V Li-ion stand-alone battery for start-stop would be $500-$600 but this is unlikely for the foreseeable future - only A123 has adequate CCA performance at 0F, and bad performance at -20F.
    14 Feb 2013, 04:54 PM Reply Like
  • I get the impression that the auto industry views stop-start as a temporary stopgap until someone, anyone comes up with a battery they can build pure EV's around.


    Consequently AGM, flawed as it is, suits them fine as they continue hoping against hope that a magic battery chemistry will be discovered.


    Meanwhile, my opinion is that ePower, NSC, truck APUs, and possibly behind the meter applications are the best chances for PbC near-term.


    If an auto manufacturer does surprise the world with a commitment to stop-start using PbC, those of us on this board who do not have a heart attack when we hear it will be rich.
    14 Feb 2013, 05:09 PM Reply Like
  • Thanks WTB, That was a fair assessment. Regarding cost they touched on it and one cannot blame them for playing the "We'll get there someday" card.


    Concerning weight and space, which they touched on, there is little doubt that it is important. The auto companies have been spending a ton of money on R&D to make advances in this area.



    There is little doubt in my mind that the auto companies would like a single battery lower mass solution for their needs. As of right now nobody has been able to merge the price/performance in this area. So what are they willing to settle for?


    Also like to know how small they can go with the flooded LAB if they are migrating toward high compression 3 cylinder engines? And how small can they go with the PBC battery based on selecting some unknown to us engine off time? Maybe down sizing in all these areas gets them closer to their target cost with a flooded/PbC hybrid once PbC is scaled.


    Oh, And one other thought to ponder that's been discussed before. If they are going "Drive By Wire" are they comfortable with a one battery solution if they are cutting the engine while the vehicle is in motion? Or will they insist on redundancy?


    Sure would be nice to get ones hands on some of this future world data at the auto companies. But alas.......
    14 Feb 2013, 05:10 PM Reply Like
  • Billa: "anyone comes up with a battery they can build pure EV's around."


    With the recent announcements of a couple major Asian auto manufacturers that they are shifting to more hybrid models, I think they have figured it's folly to wait for the battery improvements they need.


    The natural side-effect is that if such a battery does appear, we then have, effectively, to start the whole EV push scenario all over from near to ground zero.


    So any major adoption numbers will still be many years, if not a decade or so, from the time of the announced "we got what you need".


    And that means many years for things to happen that might, again, make the EV fall out of favor.


    14 Feb 2013, 05:24 PM Reply Like
  • Not so sure about that - people in the industry are beginning to point to micro-hybrid as the long term, stable position for the auto industry - largely driven by the advances on the ICE - the incremental benefit cost to go beyond micro-hybrid is simply not there. There are even some OEM's beginning to point out that on a full life cycle basis, an advanced ICE with micro-hybrid technology is better for than EV - and certainly more attractive to them from a business model perspective. And they do need the higher DCA performance for regen braking.


    Axion has absolutely nailed the market opportunity - in fact probably will be better, for longer, than they could have imagined even a year or so ago. This reality, however, is now drawing out the competition.
    14 Feb 2013, 05:24 PM Reply Like
  • SHB: What we do know is that JCI is pursuing that arrangement.


    Price squeezing is a terrific notion. WalMart does it all the time, even to my Honduran archeologist pal, who made it through every hurdle to sell his award winning noni tea products in Central American WalMarts, except price, and quantities needed from his mountaintop "useable forest" -- he couldn't make enough product to suit WalMart's needs.


    Axion's issue is kind of the same, in that they can't get economies of scales going in their favor because they flat out can't make millions of batteries at the New Castle plant. Therefore, a third party, another battery maker, is mandatory to be involved. So we end up with three parties wrangling about price. A large battery maker will be wrangling with Axion for the best price for electrodes and carbon sheeting, and then the OEM will then be wrangling with the battery maker for the lowest possible finished unit price.


    Surely you know this, but I think this Catch 22 needs to be reiterated, as was described last July after the SC.


    A lot of unknowns will have to be sorted through before any major OEM will agree to allowing Axion to sell their wares to a battery maker, and then the battery maker to sell complete units to the OEM.


    The benefits of vertical integration are compromised.


    Further, I'm unsure how Axion could convince, or rather, guarantee pricing years out, because what Axion uses are commodities.


    Even though I was bass ackwards in reading the chart, the site I put up last week regarding US importation of activated carbon, is one, albeit nebulous, way to track costs. I'm clueless how to track costs for the "coir" of coconuts. The price of lead is easy to follow.


    All we have to go on so far is the per unit price of PbCs sold to Norfolk, and to the Navy.
    14 Feb 2013, 07:42 PM Reply Like
  • I'm not sure I agree with your analysis Maya.
    Sure you can say that having a manufacturing partner will cause unknown issues as to cost. But the AGM manufacuring plants are already in existence in greater numbers than Lithium. Since no new factories need to be built ,lithium can't compete in the long term. The excess capacity of lithium plants is no where close to the ability of existing AGM lines to produce the PbC. This gives the PbC another cost advantage.


    I am concerned as the next shareholder about the future. I have written a couple of times about TG having said more than he should. But that doesn't mean the product isn't what it is proving to be. The Best most economical battery for high charge acceptance and discharge on the market. Forget S/S for a moment. Rail, Trucks, and the PowerCube can support Axion to unknown heights.


    S/S is on the Horizon. Axion only needs 10% of the S/S market to be fabulously successful. The high end large accessory laden vehicles ( high end market) that get the worst gas mileage and pollute the most make up that 10% of the market. They want what works. I can give more time for that to be proven true.
    14 Feb 2013, 08:48 PM Reply Like
  • festein,
    "The Li-ion battery in the combined solution being contemplated by OEM's is only 4.5Ah - these batteries can accept/discharge pulses at 30C - which gets to 135A of DCA. This takes 4*4.5Ah pouches at $20/pouch - plus packaging and controls etc and a standard SLI at $50. It's really quite similar in thinking to a combined SLI/Ultracap solution.


    I don't think 4*4.5ah LFP battery will do the job. You see, 4 3.2V 4.5ah battery can hold 4*3.2*4.5=57.6 wh energy hypothetically, that is 57.6*3600=207360 Joules energy ( I don't know under how many Cs A123 rate their battery, if not 30C then the energy could be profoundly less). And a typical S/S event defined by BMW: 12V discharge at 100A for 60 seconds would require 12*100*60=72000 joules. That is to say, for every typical S/S event, the discharge/charge depth of 4 4.5ah LFP battery pack is about 35%.


    A123's mighty battery could sustain 2000 100%depth charge/discarge cycles (again I do not know under how many Cs 2000 cycles achieved. If not 30C, the number may be substantially less) . Though I don't know how many cycles can be achieved under 35% depth, my guess it is between 6000 (>=2000/35%) to 10k. Regretfully even 10k S/S cycles could only provide a mircohybrid S/S car one year of hypothetical life ( assume 40 S/S events everyday 250 days/year).


    In the past, PbC achieved 40k cycles without the starter battery and 100k with a starter battery. I always suspect that small starter battery is not only for the airport scenario but also for the longevity of such system.


    If some OEMs want to go with A123, the realistic number of batteries should at least triple in my opinion if all my calculations above are correct.
    15 Feb 2013, 12:46 AM Reply Like
  • (AXPW): Another 100K goes late-day, this time at $0.30. Looks like it should be a "sell". Bid now $0.295 x 10H, 2.5K, 2.5K and ask $0.305 x 2.5K (FANC - at the low offer almost all day). UBSS 48K (originally 50K) at $0.31.


    14 Feb 2013, 03:04 PM Reply Like
  • HT:


    It does appear that the industry has come to the realization that current chemistries, JRP3's evangelism notwithstanding, will not support EV's in the near term.


    Something about ePower that sticks in my mind is the huge downsizing they can achieve in their genset because electric motors naturally generate so much more torque than ICEs do.


    Does PbC have a role to play in serial automotive hybrids? Or does the 80,000 gvw truck application lend itself uniquely to that treatment?


    I ask because ISTM that whacking down an automotive ICE by going serial would generate huge mileage increases on top of stop-start.
    14 Feb 2013, 09:17 PM Reply Like
  • Billa: you're probably asking the wrong guy. From a high altitude, I don't see why it wouldn't scale up or down. But we do need to keep in mind that the variability of driving patterns, terrain, climate, ... might require a larger number of batteries to achieve the gains. That added weight offsets some of the gains. This could be countered some by changing the engine management strategy though.


    I would think having a fixed-rpm on the engine would not be appropriate for a large percentage of the potential end-users. So some loss of the potential gains would be experienced as the engine had to move out of its "sweet spot" to provide additional power for variable lengths of time and load.


    Regardless of all that, there should still be appreciable gains in a very high percentage of applications and across a broad swath of end-users.


    I think what Wrightspeed is doing with class 3-6 trucks, using a CPST MT and batteries and their proprietary drive-train does demonstrate the feasibility and savings available via the serial hybrid approach for smaller motive applications. Right now the MT is too expensive for most private passenger applications, IMO, making the traditional (diesel) engine the best choice. Gasoline engine would be my second choice in this case.


    15 Feb 2013, 05:53 AM Reply Like
  • I expect the weight penalty of PbC would not work in hybrid cars.
    15 Feb 2013, 08:31 AM Reply Like
  • I tend to agree that lithium-ion will be the battery of choice in both heavy and mild hybrids. It will not, however, be the battery of choice in simple stop-start and micro-hybrids that will represent the vast bulk of the automotive market for years to come.
    15 Feb 2013, 09:05 AM Reply Like
  • Hard to say at this point since the promise of PbC in SS has yet to be realized in the real world. I certainly hope it is but I'm still hanging most of my PbC hopes on other applications at this time.
    16 Feb 2013, 09:27 AM Reply Like
  • My Hoover is in full gear today...
    14 Feb 2013, 03:33 PM Reply Like
  • O.R.: I put in a late-day order @ $0.299 x 25K. Didn't care if I got them, really. Anyway, 8K traded right around me while there were no other presented bids or asks at that price. I presume an intra-broker trade took it.


    What I really wanted to see is how serious UBSS was about the $0.30 ask they still showed and to force ATDF to bump from $0.298 if they wanted the shares.


    14 Feb 2013, 04:26 PM Reply Like
  • A guy is repeating the NYT article route/
    He is tweeting the test. Tesla is reported to be reposting.
    The writer is


    Peter Valdes-Dapena
    Autos writer @CNNMoney.
    New York, NY ·



    Unfortunately it is in the mid 40s instead of thirties.
    It takes a lot less energy to keep a vehicle at 70 when its 44 than it does at 34.


    Someone has asked what the speed and Climate control settings are.
    As this person will undoutably use the range mode which Broder did not as Tesla states is to be avoided. He shouldn't have a problem.
    I wonder if he will arrive in the dark at the parking lot? The sun sets much later this month than last. If it is dark I wonder if he will have trouble finding the Super Chargers?
    This is my conjecture for the claimed by Elon a .6 mi attempt to kill the battery.
    14 Feb 2013, 04:10 PM Reply Like
  • Another reporter is in the car.
    CNN's Abigail Bassett


    Senior Writer,
    Writes on cars as well as other things.



    Update: They are using range mode for charging so the have 270 miles range where as Broder avoided it as "Tesla states" it hurts the battery,
    He only had 242 mi range available. Plus it's 10-15 degrees warmer.
    14 Feb 2013, 04:52 PM Reply Like
  • I predict all this heat and light is going to illuminate one big fact to a lot more eyeballs: Batteries are uh, problematic as fuel-tanks, and thus the EV, though not without its virtues, is a bit more fussy and not quite as hassle-free as widely promised...
    14 Feb 2013, 05:03 PM Reply Like
  • "He only had 242 mi range available. Plus it's 10-15 degrees warmer. "


    No, he chose not to fully charge the car. Plus he was alone, not carrying a passenger. They will complete the trip successfully, with charge remaining, since they operated the vehicle properly. Imagine that.
    15 Feb 2013, 08:35 AM Reply Like
  • Jrp3


    "No, he chose not to fully charge the car."
    True he chose not to do something the owners manual states will harm the car.
    Clearly He has EVil intent.
    Interestingly Consumers Report did the same thing and finished the day with 2 mi less than Broder which they left unplugged on a cold night.
    They may be setting Tesla up as well. I think you should look into it.


    "Plus he was alone, not carrying a passenger.'


    Do you think the weight of a passenger in a 4,000 pound vehicle that is driving highway, all the way, will make a vast difference.?
    I suspect it will be the same as a 15 mph 6/10 of a mile attempt to kill the battery.


    " They will complete the trip successfully, with charge remaining, since they operated the vehicle properly. Imagine that."


    Yes after charging the car to the point where the oners manual says is harmful to the battery.
    Never drive as fast as the speed limit.
    Never put the heat above 72 degrees.


    I wonder if they gave those same rules to Broder? Or any other reporter?
    PS only drive on Warm days.
    15 Feb 2013, 11:18 AM Reply Like
  • Broder only needed to do a full Standard charge at the second stop to complete the trip.
    Range Mode is there for a reason, to be used when needed. The button for it is right next to the one for Standard Mode. Occasional use of Range Mode will not damage the battery.
    The technical reason is that holding the voltage at an elevated level for extended times accelerates electrolyte solvent breakdown. A Range Mode charge before taking off on a trip does not hold the voltage high for an extended time since it will drop as soon as you start driving. No I don't expect the general public to know that. I do expect Model S owners to understand that occasional use of Range Mode is not detrimental, and they do.
    16 Feb 2013, 09:34 AM Reply Like
  • Atlantic Wire on the Musk fiasco.



    Sorry to those who are bored with the story, I find the train wreck riveting.
    14 Feb 2013, 04:21 PM Reply Like
  • "Update: And indeed, earlier today, Broder told Daily Intel's Joe Coscarelli that he got lost looking for the charging station. "I was circling the parking lot in the service plaza looking for the unmarked and unlighted Supercharger port in the dark. I was not trying to drain the battery." At the speeds shown in the logs, Tesla says Broder spent around five minutes driving around the service plaza before stopping. If he was deliberately trying to drain the battery, he did not stick to the endeavor for very long."


    They have some stuff I hadn't noticed.
    14 Feb 2013, 05:33 PM Reply Like
  • ZBB 10-Q now available:
    14 Feb 2013, 04:48 PM Reply Like
  • ZBB Energy's CEO Discusses F2Q13 Results - Earnings Call Transcript

    15 Feb 2013, 09:41 AM Reply Like
  • Here is a thought. We know the PbC is perfectly capable of both starting and hotel loads as presently designed. What seems to be a hang-up is the "airport parking lot / 2 week vacation" scenario.


    That is, about 1%/day charge loss when not in use. But that isn't really a big deal.


    Call it a 500Whr PbC. 21 days x 0.01(1%) x 500 Whr = 105 Whr. It is actually less because the rate of capacitive energy loss decreases as the cell voltage drops. The chemical energy loss shouldn't be any worse then in an AGM LA cell.


    Supplying 100 Whr over 500hrs (5Whr/day or 0.2 Watts continuous) is a walk in the park for most rechargeable battery chemistries. 8 alkaline primary D cells could easily do it one time!


    A 2 lb Li-ion or 3-4lb NiMH battery should do it. This is about "large lap top" size and weight. Also, because of the low discharge rate of the aux battery, it can be placed any place convenient (lower peak temperature) in the car and have #18 wires running to the PbC. Remember, 0.2W at 12V is 17mA. That's 17/1000 Amp. Not a wire burner!


    All this is if we want to maintain the same SOC as the PbC battery had when the car was parked. But the PbC will start the car at fraction of 100% SOC. The actual aux battery might easily be 1/2 the size calculated above.


    Therefore I just don't see needing a whopping second battery to back up a full sized PbC when a trickle charge is all that is needed. $50 aux battery? $30? Almost trivial.


    Say, a high production volume (cheap), 50Whr, 12V rechargeable battery would be great for all types of home projects! Sweet :-)
    14 Feb 2013, 05:13 PM Reply Like
  • Sounds like a great question for Ed Buiel. So Ed, what do you think?
    14 Feb 2013, 05:23 PM Reply Like
  • SiHiBi.... very worthy discussion IMHO... seems to me lots of innovative ways to skin the airport test cat... trickle solar charger, auxiliary handcrank/footpump generator for low-battery starts... (plug it into your cigarette lighter, stomp on it several times, turn the crank a couple of minutes etc to plus up the PbC) ... or again, if a move is ever made to 48V system, involving a bank of small PbCs, just can't believe there won't be enough energy in there, even after a month, to crank the engine...
    14 Feb 2013, 05:25 PM Reply Like
  • I'd say, if your going to spend over a month away. A jump is not a big deal. In the north it happens with regular LA.
    With PbC once the car is started, it's a non issue. This would be true with anything up to and including a PHEV.


    Only with EVs, it is a big deal.
    There is far more charging required and no other options.
    14 Feb 2013, 06:27 PM Reply Like
  • kinda my thoughts too froggey77... obviously though nobody wants their car going completely dead ... alarm, clock, navdata systems shutting down completely and having to be reset etc... so the vampire drain is certainly something to be mindful of for all carmakers I would think... but again, over the course of a month, how much energy is really being lost by the PbC due to self discharge? And even if it is a significant factor, are there other measures to mitigate this that might be simple and cheap? The footpump generator idea was really just kind of a toss-off, but with the ability of the PbC to take a healthy charge rate, maybe not so far-fetched..something like that could be devised and carried in the trunk along with the jack and spare... could even be a handy thing to have for lots of occasions...
    14 Feb 2013, 06:39 PM Reply Like
  • We wouldn't be starting from 100% SOC, but 80% SOC which is where the battery is kept for start-stop, correct? Subtract 1%/day for 21 days and we're down to 59%? Where does that put us on the linear sloped voltage curve?


    But I really like where you are going with this.
    14 Feb 2013, 06:43 PM Reply Like
  • This would add a bit of complexity, but there could also be a selector switch in the cockpit to select "charge mode for long term parking" or some such---a mode that would ensure that the battery is taken up to 100% SOC and left there when the key is removed. Anyway, fun to speculate a bit here on the many possibilities OEM's could use to overcome the self-discharge issue, if they were so motivated, but clearly, they're going to do what they're going to do, and there's not much we can really do about it beyond jawjacking, as is our wont...
    14 Feb 2013, 06:59 PM Reply Like
  • User43, We'll put in a feature where you let the vehicle know you'll be parking at the airport for an extended stay and have it charge to 100% on the way to the airport. Not so much to ask vs telling an owner you have to plan your entire trip and not deviate if it's a long one like with an EV. I think people could handle that. Well most could!
    14 Feb 2013, 07:01 PM Reply Like
  • Iindelco: better to adopt what OTR trucks do - monitor battery and auto-start the engine to bring charge back up when battery gets low enough. Cheap, effective, minimal change, uses existing technology, ...


    Downside: run time would be short so engine never gets fully warmed up - increased (but minimal in the long-haul?) wear and short-term higher emissions. Fuel state could be a required additional monitoring point (user defined?).


    IOW, apply the KISS principal.


    15 Feb 2013, 06:07 AM Reply Like
  • HTL, I thought the same thing regarding starting the engine to recharge the battery. Just worried about the liability of having a car decide to start up on its own without knowing the infinite number of conditions that might be occurring in its proximity.


    Don't want an application where fluffy, or worse, is in a sealed garage and the car battery becomes a priority as one example.


    Maybe A "battery tender" type app. where you leave your special starter with a service or the neighbor and you're responsible for making sure the vehicle is in a location where it can be started by said responsible party. 5 bucks a start at the airport as some kid drives around on a scooter and looks at the vehicle before ignition. Key designed to be a close proximity starter. Easier money than I made as a youngster.


    Anyway,"If there's a will there's a way."
    15 Feb 2013, 06:57 AM Reply Like
  • Unfortunately it is more complicated. The PbC battery has self discharge and the vehicle loads are somewhere in the 10-20 mA range but can be 100-150mA for systems like OnStar that periodically transmits/receives even through the car is off. As the PbC battery discharges, the voltage drops so you are losing cranking capability as the SOC drops and the positive plate is forming PbSO4 which increases internal resistance. Now you through in a CCA test at -20C and it is very unlikely you will start the engine. Unfortunate set of conditions but automakers have to design for all scenarios.
    15 Feb 2013, 08:21 AM Reply Like
  • I've been waiting for a discussion along this line, convinced that there ought to be a relatively simple fix for this one-off limitation of the PbC. Thanks for taking the lead here, SHB.
    15 Feb 2013, 11:51 AM Reply Like
  • HTL: Well, duuhh. That is just way too simple. Can't work. Not complicated enough. Way too cheap :-)


    Why didn't I think of it?


    The best part is that the car owner would never actually see it happen! ;-)
    15 Feb 2013, 01:34 PM Reply Like
  • EBuiel: Thanks for the real world view. All good points.
    15 Feb 2013, 01:37 PM Reply Like
  • I'll admit, I've never really understood the airport test in real world practice. I mean, I understand the argument in principle, but I don't know of any major storage garage or airport terminal where, if you leave your car for a long time and the battery goes dead, that doesn't have personnel available to give your car a jump. I lived in Chicago, when I was just out of college, and I stored my car in a parking garage. Several times the battery went dead because I hadn't driven the car in a month or more. I'd walk down to the attendants, they would drive up to my car, jump it, and I'd be on my way. Airports have people for this as well. So unless you are storing your car at home for long periods of time, I just don't see this being the big issue that the automakers make it out to be. Maybe it's a bigger deal now, with all the electronics in new cars, but it never was before. IMHO.
    15 Feb 2013, 01:55 PM Reply Like
  • Is the two-battery solution out?


    I was under the impression that PbC would work just fine for SS if the starter battery for cold starts was simple SLA and SS functionality ran off the PbC.


    Even if the PbC ran down completely, it would be fully charged almost immediately after the cold car was started.
    15 Feb 2013, 02:31 PM Reply Like
  • Billa,
    No, Axion believes in the two battery solution and is pushing for it. There are just some who argue that two batteries are an inconvenience of space or cost and that a one battery system is still best. I was just pointing out that the PbC could be used as a one battery solution 99% of the time.
    15 Feb 2013, 02:42 PM Reply Like
  • LT:




    Instead of carrying around jumper cables or having a high school kid patrol airport parking lots to jump-start PbC SS cars, just carry around a cheap SLA battery for cold starts (built in) and, voila, problem solved!
    15 Feb 2013, 02:57 PM Reply Like
  • LabTech and Billa, Unfortunately it is was it is until the industry decides to change it. They have a requirement which deems that a car should start over some temperature range after some duration sitting and Axion is not going to change the requirement.


    If I had SS I'd rather have the PbC and adapt accordingly vs having an AGM that doesn't deliver on its promise a few weeks after I pull off the dealers lot. But that's just not how it is. Maybe it'll change?
    15 Feb 2013, 03:38 PM Reply Like
  • iin:


    Do we know that for sure?


    Two-battery seems like such a simple solution.
    15 Feb 2013, 03:55 PM Reply Like
  • What we know for sure is that there will be a horserace, Axion will be in the running, and Axion will have a head start because it's been paying attention to the stop-start market for over three years while Johnny Come Lately was busily chasing other opportunities.
    15 Feb 2013, 04:19 PM Reply Like
  • Billa, Well I don't have access to future business plans but the industry has supported the "Airport Test" requirements for some time in the primary markets.


    Two battery has any level of complexity depending on how they are integrated and the battery types. As I posted before mass and volume are very important to the automakers. As such it's the biggest negative of a two battery solution after perhaps cost. And that's why even though the automakers are spending a ton of money on mass reduction effort they are still supporting LABs to date. They work great for starting and they are relatively cheap. However once you start going to more exotic electrification they start to show weakness outside of their traditional role of starting the vehicle or just doing some small auxiliary support while the engine is off.


    I've research quite a bit across many auto makers and nobody has a great solution yet. As such there are different paths being taken in the interim. So maybe Axion gets some apps. But the autos would still like something lighter and less costly......always. And I've not seen any data that tells me they are willing to compromise on the "Airport Test".
    15 Feb 2013, 04:20 PM Reply Like
  • I guess we just have to wait and see.


    PbC obviously wins hands down over AGM for SS functionality, but LAB for cold starts (only) seems to be the most reasonable price an OEM would have to pay to get it.


    They are learning with Li-ion, for example, that all their wishes can't be realistically fulfilled. Maybe one will decide that a small single-purpose LAB is a compromise worth making to get PbC's DCA and hotel capabilities.
    15 Feb 2013, 04:33 PM Reply Like
  • Billa, Yep we'll have to wait and see. Thus far my feelins are that what the automakers have run with, AGM, is nothing more than a regulatory/industry consumer rip off. Perhaps that's why the US regulators are not giving credit for it. Also many automakers have not embraced it. I think some know that it's just not worth the potential consumer backlash.


    BTW there are some two battery systems out there so it's not being totally ignored. Maybe it's just going to take a little time for the automakers to understand the lithium ion guys aren't coming to the rescue. Could be where BMW is at. Tested and waiting just a little longer before they go with their backup plan.


    PS If the Chinese, that are tooled already to some level for lithium ion power batteries, can't get lithium ion down to a level where it just makes too much sense for for electrification of autos what's the chances that it's coming from the South Koreans, Japanese, Europeans or Americans? Not happening unless we see some huge Merlin event. How often have you seen Merlin??? ;))
    15 Feb 2013, 04:48 PM Reply Like
  • A usual response from big guns in an industry is to loss-lead your small competition out of business, but with the fast ramp and huge s/s volumes everyone is expecting, I don't see how that would be realistically possible here. at least for longer than a very short window. Lose, say, $50 on each of 10 million OEM batteries and that's a $500 million loss. Per year. Ouch. I don't see how anyone has the muscle to weather that for long, even when spread among several players.


    IIRC, A123 was selling below cost and look where it got them. The industry's recent bk stains have to be high up in everyone's mind, including the buyers'. Hey, they really, really want low cost supplies but sustainable ones, too. And that means there has to be at least some profit built in. Unless a government is willing to underwrite the losses to the tune of hundreds of millions of $ per year. I doubt the US or EU countries want to do that, anymore. Not sure about the Asians.
    16 Feb 2013, 03:07 PM Reply Like
  • A123 didn't go bankrupt when it did because of pricing. It was the manufacturing issue (and that it wasn't discovered for a relatively longtime hence massive cost of recall) that killed them.


    Not to say they might not have still bit the bullet, but it would have taken a lot longer.
    17 Feb 2013, 11:52 AM Reply Like
  • WTB, Agreed that that was part of the equation. Plus they tooled up for too many fly swatters and there were not enough flies.


    I think the capacity issue was their biggest problem. If they had enough flies and they only had a short term issue (the recall) someone would have jumped in to keep them whole at a price.
    17 Feb 2013, 11:59 AM Reply Like
  • I'm probably on the wrong track but the last couple of days trading looks like price suppression by someone who bought a moderately large block and is using it to knock the price down at the end of the day. He may be hoping that a new financing at a low pps will set up the opportunity to make a large buy at a low price. Any thoughts?
    14 Feb 2013, 05:33 PM Reply Like
  • Growsmart: no conclusion can be reached by me, but see my post below, which will be up in a few minutes that you might use to make a judgement.


    14 Feb 2013, 06:09 PM Reply Like
  • Growsmart, No way to know but it sure looks like someone is on a mission. Isn't taking much in the way of volume either. Axion's past over the last few years sure leaves investors skittish. Can't blame them.
    14 Feb 2013, 06:16 PM Reply Like
  • WSJ a rather scathing piece


    More or less starts with Tesla set up the reporter as 'EVs can't be considered vehicles for long distance travel in the first place'. Then goes on to talk about the entire industry as a waste. The reporter agrees.

    14 Feb 2013, 05:45 PM Reply Like
  • GII Releases New Market Research Reports on Supercapacitors


    "The default option for grid batteries today is lead-acid, accounting for more than 55% of revenues from grid batteries currently. By 2018, this share will decline to around 30% as new grid battery technologies become commercialized. The lead-acid battery will itself get an upgrade; carbon electrodes, promising a 4x performance improvement. In addition, the ultrabattery, with combination lead/carbon electrodes will compete for grid-storage markets. In 2018, lead-carbon batteries/ultrabatteries will generate around $300 million in revenues."


    "Although lithium-ion batteries are receiving considerable attention, it is immature and high cost and its current growth relies on government subsidies. When subsidies disappear, sodium-sulfur and Zebra batteries will be a better deal for power companies and large end users than lithium-ion. The best hope for lithium batteries is where a supplier who is committed to lithium sells it as part of a comprehensive solution such as for smart buildings. Jonson Controls and SAFT are doing this. Revenues from lithium batteries are expected to reach $775 million by 2018."



    And OT. An Axionista for sure!

    14 Feb 2013, 06:26 PM Reply Like
  • >iindelco ... Thanks! I love reading rosy scenarios and really like the ones that seem reasonable to me. Call it confirmation bias. Still, I'm much more interested to know where the starting point is. I've been really, really bad at that.
    14 Feb 2013, 06:35 PM Reply Like
  • DRich, I must admit that for me the NSC timing has been my biggest miss. I sure expected a feel for a thumbs up or down via initial testing on the NS999 by now. Also thought a Rosewater sale right after UL approval was in the bag. So I guess I fall into the really bad category on timing as well.


    It'd be a real hoot if the truck rebuild app. took the lead.


    I think the government lithium distribution has been causing some of the madness. What a distraction from finding real solutions. And I thought it was suppose to be a stimulant. The BS depresses the heck out of me! :(
    14 Feb 2013, 06:54 PM Reply Like
  • >iindelco ... It was railroads that got me into Axion and I've sort of convinced myself that rails would lead. I have had faith that Norfolk Southern was a lot more gung-ho about NS999. A case of self delusion maybe because I've always known that dirty little secret when it comes to switchers ... the majors don't buy switchers.


    Anyway, my other interest in Axion (marine is in the mix but slower than utilities) that I saw was for trucking. Looks like it might it stands a chance at "Customer No. 1". Nothing would make me happier but right now I be happy if Axion sold batteries the "The Scooter Store".
    14 Feb 2013, 07:47 PM Reply Like
  • DRich, Nah. The ALABC is gonna handle all those markets for its members with carbon additives.


    "The new program is expected to: (1) continue analysis of how carbon is able to improve performance of lead-acid batteries; (2) intensify and diversify development of new lead-carbon designs and technologies that can compete with other chemistries in most recent and emerging applications; and (3) aggressively demonstrate the application of these batteries for use in new HEV, automotive and energy storage battery platforms, as well as other specific applications such as electric cranes, hybrid boats, and e-bikes."



    PS Not sure the old rule about switchers will carry forward with new EPA regs and fuel prices going forward. Was OK when they could just take their obsolete OTR stuff and use it as a switcher but perhaps those days are ending soon. Given their limited turf and duty cycle big ole engines running all the time is not going to work and batteries might make more sense. Wait let me check how the green snail is coming!
    14 Feb 2013, 08:24 PM Reply Like
  • >iindelco ... Yea, that old adage may change because the backlog of gensets is piling up. I don't view this as a new break-through technology but the best choice that as closely as possible carries the status quo forward with the advances made in diesel engine efficiency.


    Good, bad or indifferent, truly "NEW" tends to scare people. We shall see when NS999 finally starts rolling sometime this year (?) and whether Norfolk Southern works it with a mind to sell it (even if it's only to itself) or treats it like a curiosity.
    14 Feb 2013, 09:04 PM Reply Like
  • "or treats it like a curiosity."...


    I would think if once the thing works, and keeps on working for them, if it "persists in its activities", it will be pretty dang hard for anybody at NS to ignore and dismiss. I can imagine the in-house skepticism to be off the charts---both wide in extent and fairly entrenched throughout the organization... But once the corporeal 999 starts to actually prove itself, and further shows no signs of dying (in defiance of all sage prediction), it's going to get noticed, and talked about, and it's going to be a big deal. The skeptics will be converted into new believers, and there's nobody wants to spread the word like a new believer.. ;)
    14 Feb 2013, 09:19 PM Reply Like
  • Maybe NSC is dragging their feet because some contractual obligation related to 999's predecessor before PbC came on the scene has to expire before they can move forward.


    They unveiled the old 999 with so much fanfare, maybe there were follow-on payments related to the grant(s) that got them there or some sort or purchase obligations with expiry dates attached.
    14 Feb 2013, 09:33 PM Reply Like
  • maybe exide or enersys has embedded moles engaging in various flavors of subtle mischief and monkey-wrenching ;)
    14 Feb 2013, 09:36 PM Reply Like
  • Nice to see Axion's name listed at the bottom of that GII story


    Very funny, 48.
    14 Feb 2013, 09:41 PM Reply Like
  • DRich, I'm with 48. I can't imagine anyone at a tier 1 RR taking on a task like the NS999 and the OTR storage unit having sold it as a curiosity. I would think they'd have envisioned multiple sites where, given it meeting targeted performance criteria, they would need a reasonable number of them. And we can't ignore the prospects of a possible product line either.


    I understand your "NEW" perspective having worked for large industry. Sometimes it's like pulling teeth.
    14 Feb 2013, 09:42 PM Reply Like
  • >481086 ... We shall see, but winning converts to battery switchers could be several years. Switching is just one of those nuisance chores that has to be done. I think the real push would be for the OTR because that is where the money is made. The NS999 is a good test bed for the OTR and could be proof of concept to those roads that make a living with switchers. I don't know how Norfolk Southern hedges their oil but an increase here could speed things along.
    14 Feb 2013, 09:46 PM Reply Like
  • DR, I totally bow to my betters here when it comes to anything railroad... I was talking more about (what I imagine to be) a high level of general skepticism there regarding any and all forms of battery propulsion whatsoever... I would be most surprised, given at least the history of the first go around, that there isn't a lot of that. Now, if the new 999 with Axion inside can actually defy those negative expectations and prove itself as an actual producing piece of machinery, I should think many there will be amazed and intrigued and impressed, perhaps even convinced and enthusiastic, as in "holy crap, the thing actually works!" and "we'll I'll be damned, those batteries are really doing the job and holding up, what are they again?" I'm sure the tendency on the part of the head-shed will be to want to suppress any noises and downplay excitement until they're absolutely, positively sure they have a winner, but again, if the batteries are perceived at the deckplate level to finally be the "real deal", I should think the word's definitely going to get around that something big and different is afoot..
    14 Feb 2013, 10:21 PM Reply Like
  • >481086 ... Fingers & Toes are crossed ... and, to date, I haven't run out of stars to wish upon.
    14 Feb 2013, 10:38 PM Reply Like
  • DRich
    As I recall there are environmental rules of both emissions and noise that are coming down the pike. Which was part of the reason NSC started this.
    14 Feb 2013, 10:54 PM Reply Like
  • >froggey77 ... Yes, there are environmental rules coming. Yes, regulation is one big reason NSC started. There are other solutions. Some are new & floundering and some are variations on the status quo. The latter are those that are in production. What the future holds ... I don't know ... I hold Axion.
    14 Feb 2013, 11:26 PM Reply Like
  • "What the future holds ... I don't know ... I hold Axion. "


    Me too.
    14 Feb 2013, 11:57 PM Reply Like
  • "... someone who bought a moderately large block and is using it to knock the price down at the end of the day. He may be hoping that a new financing at a low pps will set up the opportunity to make a large buy at a low price."


    Certainly possible.
    14 Feb 2013, 06:28 PM Reply Like
  • Tesla tow truck driver unaware of this hoopla, offers opinion:


    "It didn't appear that the gentleman driving the car wanted it to not work," Ibsen told me. "I don't think he had any desire to stand freezing on the side of the road."


    The tow truck driver also said there were no towing instructions, and that the tow job was, "tricky,"

    14 Feb 2013, 06:36 PM Reply Like
  • Since we had two days in a row of 100K block trades at the same price, $0.30, I was looking to determine what the mechanics might be and what scenarios we might envision.


    2/14 b4 100K:
    Buy: 106264, $0.3161 VWAP
    Sell: 092928, $0.3073 VWAP
    Unk: 001100, $0.3150 VWAP


    2/14 after 100K
    Buy: 022400 $0.3000
    Sell: 127710 $0.3002
    Unk: 000000


    2/13 b4 100K
    Buy: 036690, $0.3245 VWAP
    Sell: 086000, $0.3218 VWAP
    Unk: 010000, $0.3208 VWAP


    2/13 after 100K
    Buy: 00000
    Sell: 15000 $0.3202 VWAP
    Ukn: 00000


    We see aggregate volumes before the 100K block that would satisfy the trade volume on both days.


    If we assume that a long wants out at $0.30, the "riskless" way for an MM to satisfy this (probably good and important?) customer, is to sell short into the market and then buy the shares from the customer. With the VWAPs prior to the sale above the 100K trade price of $0.32, this is certainly possible and maybe even likely.


    However, we don't see daily short sales (37.6K today, 33.3K yesterday) that support this. I don't know, but I can imagine that a broker-owned MM might be in control of these shares from the start through a simple transfer from the owning broker to the MM desk of the broker (OR, is it possible that the broker and the owned MM are considered one and the same from the regulatory system's POV?). Is this legal? It's certainly technically possible with computers and facilities provided by the DTCC now.


    An alternate explanation is that the MM was long some (or all?) the necessary shares in his portfolio. In this case the shares in the MM portfolio can be sold to the market at the higher VWAP and then the shares purchased from the customer. Again, a riskless (for the day) scenario. But this would require that John's assertions about MMs being averse to being long do not hold in all cases.


    Since the 100K today was not at a presented bid or ask price, we must assume the trade went off "behind the curtain" and was pre-arranged either intra or inter-broker.


    If the 100K was a buy by an MM customer, we should have seen lower VWAPs prior to the trade as the MM will (should?) not buy high and sell low. Their standard M.O. is the reverse of us retailers: they sell high and *then* buy low.


    So I conclude that we have a long exiting, and doing so with the aid of his broker/MM because the quantity/price combination is never *presented* on the bid or ask side before the trade is made.


    I don't think this is an attempt to manipulate the price lower because the rational way to do that would be to hammer the bid, which would mean breaking the 100K into many smaller pieces so that a constant rat-a-tat-tat could be done throughout the day.


    What we see instead is yesterday with a price that remained in range of recent, VWAP $0.3214, even though the buy:sell was 1:5.48. Today, VWAP was $0.3054 and buy: sell was 1:1.71.


    Have I overlooked anything? Other possible explanations? I love my TFH, but I try to keeps it's influence somewhat reasonable.


    14 Feb 2013, 07:01 PM Reply Like
  • "I don't think this is an attempt to manipulate the price lower because the rational way to do that would be to hammer the bid, which would mean breaking the 100K into many smaller pieces so that a constant rat-a-tat-tat could be done throughout the day."


    HTL, Any possibility they are passing shares from one account to another as they have limited shares? Perhaps they have already positioned themselves for the hoped for next finance round, let's say SS, and they now have retained just enough to play a shell game?


    BTW, What causes more psychological distress, Hammering the bid or a big ole block under the market? I think both are pretty damaging but we've been talking about "Big Uglies" for so long maybe the fluffing of the feathers to appear big applies here?
    14 Feb 2013, 07:24 PM Reply Like
  • Iindelco: "... Any possibility they are passing shares from one account to another ..."


    I don't know the legalities of that. Disregarding that ...


    Collusion between customers (or even a single customer with multiple accounts - colluding with himself as your query implies ;) of the same brokerage would be certainly easy to do and and difficult for regulators to detect. This would result in an intra-broker trade - no short flag required if the broker handled it. It could even be done inter-broker with no flag required. And regardless of number of brokers involved, if it was a single customer no change in net worth occurs, other than small fees.


    "and they now have retained just enough to play a shell game"


    Certainly possible. But they would have to have more than 100K (Duh!) or short flags would be needed, if the T+3 settlement is in play, on the second day. We didn't see this, so they have more than 100K if this is going on.


    "What causes more psychological distress ..."


    My opinion only: a war of attrition causes more stress. We've seen those effects right here on our "home turf". The occasional one-off big block trade seems to be taken in stride, *usually*, regardless of price direction, and especially when price has not been in long decline, which is the case since early November. I don't recall that 614K trade on 1/16 ruffling many feathers. Being currently in a sustained up trend, where we might expect both profit taking and loss prevention to appear when the top has been passed, should make a couple (or more) 100K trades even less stressful.


    This presumes that we've all learned something in these APCs. Forewarned is forearmed? This is not self-stroking, but I've been saying to expect the (small?) move down for a little while. When I see what I expect, it causes me little stress. This IS self-stroking - I was gratified to see price do today what I said it would do today. Back to normal mode for me ... What we need to see next for me to remain comfortable is some rebound in the near-term. Until that fails to appear, I remain in my comfort zone.


    MO in a nutshell: John has it right, supported by the way I interpret my stuff, that the really ugly "big uglies" are past history. What's left now doesn't have the power to inflict near as much damage as we saw in the past.


    15 Feb 2013, 06:54 AM Reply Like
  • Thanks HTL, All plausible thoughts.


    BTW, An off topic but odd thing I've seen on another stock. I've seen trades on USU where the mm's appear to be matching trades and the quoted transaction is 0.xxxx5 USD. That's all we need is trading going on in thousandths of a penny.


    All these little BS things to give the house even more advantages. :(


    PS I laughed when I saw the 25k share offer at .299 yesterday with plenty offered at .30. Thanks for the chuckle but now I at least understand the motive! I do similar fact finding things on occasion myself. ;-O
    15 Feb 2013, 07:15 AM Reply Like
  • Iindelco: "offer at .299"


    Mine was a bid.


    15 Feb 2013, 07:20 AM Reply Like
  • HTL, Understood. Sorry I was not clearer. I recall what you were looking to test.
    15 Feb 2013, 07:25 AM Reply Like
  • Just noticed a typo: "above the 100K trade price of $0.32" s/b "above the 100K trade price of $0.30".




    15 Feb 2013, 10:00 AM Reply Like
  • IIRC, JP reported SS holding 1.2+ million shares at 12/31. 100K sells out of the blue late in day on 02/13. 02/13 - 02/28 includes 12 weekdays. 12 X 100K shares = 1.2 million shares. Co-inky-dink or no?
    14 Feb 2013, 07:15 PM Reply Like
  • A couple observations regarding flipping (if it is even happening) into the new deal, if you play with some of the variables, such as the look-back period (e.g., 30 days, 40 days, etc.) and the haircut (e.g., 10% for a public deal, 20% for a private placement that gets registered quickly, etc.). I'm NOT saying I think these are what the variables will be, just playing with the numbers a bit to see what it might tell us about flipping behaviour, if anything.


    The 30-day volume weighted average closing price is now $.3392. A 10% discount to that is $.3053, which is above some significant selling today and the closing price of $.3000. Wouldn't make economic sense for a flipper to sell here if they expect a deal with 30-day/10% haircut terms tomorrow. So some combo of "no deal yet" and look-back and discount difference is part of their current behaviour.


    And a 20% discount to $.3392 is $.2714, which would provide the current flipping floor (again, assuming 20% is the appropriate number, which it might not be at all, of course). It would drop, though, if we keep trading around here or lower, as the 30-days-ago prices that will drop out of the calc are a bit higher.
    14 Feb 2013, 08:25 PM Reply Like
  • MrI: good analysis, IMO. Sort of fits with John's statements in the recent past that the buyers now control what happens going forward: continued bottom-feeding mentality will not help anyone but the financiers, in the short-term. OTOH, being willing to take the long-term look and act on your belief in the company, it's products, it's future returns, it's ... just as with any other *normal* stock investment may benefit everyone now.


    But I do understand the concern about future financing. Each of us must stay in our comfort zone even f it reduces some long-term gain.


    15 Feb 2013, 07:06 AM Reply Like
  • Thanks, HTL. Just wanted to arm some folks with some of the numbers.


    Looked to me like our seller was taking an early vacation today. Curious to see what happens next Tues and Weds.
    15 Feb 2013, 05:14 PM Reply Like
  • MrI: I was surprised to see price "stable" $0.3050-$0.3100 so early (the first to low trades were only 1.1K - 1K @ $0.2970 and 100 shares at $0.2290 - ETrade is reimbursing me for that one already).


    Like you, I want to see what we look like mid-week next, *with* a little volume thrown in again.


    If we're pushing on that rising resistance (formerly support) around $0.32x that soon, I'm going to be getting some good vibes out of it I think.


    I hope you, and all of us here, have a good long weekend!


    15 Feb 2013, 05:32 PM Reply Like
  • I think the stability was due to our seller taking the whole day off, to start his holiday weekend early. Hopefully he's done for good, but we won't get a good idea until Weds at the earliest, IMO.


    OT: For me, it's fun to speculate about why we don't already have a funding deal announced. Lot's 'o permutations. Whole long weekends' worth and more. Have a good one. My girlfriend and I have a contract on a new house so we'll be busy getting ready for the move. No major snags yet, so that's good.
    16 Feb 2013, 01:34 AM Reply Like
  • Mr. I, Good luck to you and your better half on the move. Always a hassle until the payoff.
    16 Feb 2013, 06:58 AM Reply Like
  • iinde, thanks. By design, we have been incredibly patient with the process, because it has such an important goal. Looked at over 240 houses over 7 months, while living in an apartment since we sold our house so quickly. Our buying realtor has been such a trooper that we bought her a coat for Christmas.


    Hmmm...patience worth it for such a large expected reward...
    16 Feb 2013, 11:01 AM Reply Like
  • Mr. I, Easier after the first time because your have a better feel for your needs and how to satisfy them based on the amenities of the house/location. Unfortunately having more detail on your wants makes you more particular and thus.......


    PS Sounds like you should have given her a gift certificate for a pair of shoes as well! Anyway, Glad the search is behind you. I bet she sure is.
    16 Feb 2013, 11:23 AM Reply Like
  • Jalopnik talks to the Towtruck driver


    Tow Truck Driver At Center Of Tesla Controversy Unaware Of Controversy


    I wonder how horrible this guy's life is about to become?


    NYT Broder response
    That Tesla Data: What It Says and What It Doesn’t


    "I drove normally (at the speed limit or with prevailing traffic) when I thought it was prudent to do so. I do recall setting the cruise control to about 54 m.p.h., as I wrote. The log shows the car traveling about 60 m.p.h. for a nearly 100-mile stretch on the New Jersey Turnpike. I cannot account for the discrepancy, nor for a later stretch in Connecticut where I recall driving about 45 m.p.h., but it may be the result of the car being delivered with 19-inch wheels and all-season tires, not the specified 21-inch wheels and summer tires. That just might have affected the recorded speed, range, rate of battery depletion or any number of other parameters. Tesla’s data suggests I was doing slightly more than 50 over a stretch where the speed limit was 65. The traffic was heavy in that part of Connecticut, so cruise control was not usable, and I tried to keep the speed at 50 or below without impeding traffic.
    Certainly, and as Tesla’s logs clearly show, much of my driving was at or well below the 65 m.p.h. speed limit, with only a single momentary spike above 80. Most drivers are aware that cars can speed up, even sometimes when cruise control is engaged, on downhill stretches."


    If Broders conjecture that the tires are different sizes: (Which IIRC is correct the 21's are bigger) then the speed would be explained and his average speed and high speeds would be much lower.


    Adding the millage from the NYT piece asn subtracting out the miles on the flatbed I come up with 521mi driven.
    Looking at the graph from Tesla I put it at 540miles (Counting the fuzzy Little dots makes my eyes water.)
    Which would fit. Smaller tires = more turns per mi, This would read as Higher speeds and greater distances.


    According to The Atlantic Wire
    Google Maps claims, with a stop in Manhattan, the trip would take around 500 miles.
    14 Feb 2013, 09:07 PM Reply Like


    "On Thursday morning, CNNMoney's Peter Valdes-Dapena, embarked on his own Washington D.C. to Boston journey in a Tesla Model S."


    Would be interesting to know if temperatures are similar, but sure it will all come to light.


    Those who are interested can following his Twitterings/Tweets/Twits: not sure what they call them.
    15 Feb 2013, 02:29 AM Reply Like
  • Metro
    Temp was 10 - 15 degrees warmer.
    They were told to range charge.
    They were told to drive between 60 and 65. (Below the speed limit)
    I don't believe they followed the same road. They took a longer rout that avoided the worst of the Rush Hour. I don't know how this effected things as the hours were different.
    I assume they had less traffic as they got to the station sometime around 8pm VS 5:45pm for Broder. I could be wrong and they had more traffic.
    15 Feb 2013, 11:38 AM Reply Like
  • It's amazing what happens when you eliminate the human element and follow the Tesla script to the letter. The PR event goes off without a hitch, just like Tesla wanted it to. It's not journalism, but it is proof positive that the press can be managed.
    15 Feb 2013, 12:37 PM Reply Like
  • Froggey77,
    They also charged for a longer period of time at the second stop and they didn't park the car overnight, in the cold, and then try to drive it back to the charging station the next day. That's the part that has never been explained as far as I'm concerned. Since "conditioning" the battery the next day did nothing to restore the lost energy, the only other conclusion I can come to is that the Model S needed to use that much energy to power all of its hotel load until the next morning. Maybe with all the computers and other electrical systems in the car, it just uses a lot of juice, even when it's sitting. You wouldn't notice this if you've got the car plugged in overnight and are slow charging, but if I'm correct, I wonder if there is any published information on how much electricity you will use up on a daily basis to just run the car's hotel load and how that number is affected by heat or cold?
    15 Feb 2013, 10:14 PM Reply Like
  • There are a few issues with the power loss. There is some loss from regular vampire loads, there is also some more loss from keeping the pack at a stable temperature in the cold, and there is some "loss" that isn't actual loss but is reported as such because of the lower voltage reading from the pack in the cold. Using the pack some while driving will warm the pack a bit and "return" some of that "loss". Sitting still running the heater to "condition" the pack and "return" range is a terrible idea. If someone at Tesla told him that they need to be retrained. As with every company not every employee is an expert. Also, Tesla does need to reduce the vampire losses, just as they eventually did with the Roadster. Software updates to the rescue.
    16 Feb 2013, 09:44 AM Reply Like
  • Lab
    Here is a reporter for Consumers reports.
    What he says is nearly identical to what Broder says.
    (The whole situation was about what Broders was.)



    ..." while parked outside my house overnight, the temperature dipped and so did the indicated range, which now read only 58 miles. (Yes, a little range anxiety began to set in.) How can 30 miles evaporate just like that? According to Tesla, the car's computer takes into account the freezing temperature and readjusts the remaining range. The company also said that, upon restarting, the battery warms up and the computer once again updates the range. I didn't notice it adding miles to the range but the range remained steady for most of my 28-mile drive back to the supercharger. I connected to the charger with 50 miles on the meter and after 30 minutes, I was back to 150 miles—more than ample range to get back to our East Haddam test track."


    He unlike Broder was at home. He could have run a cord out to the car called in late and been fine. Yet he drove off based on what the company states. This is what Broder states also. He drove off based on what the company said.


    As a reporter What should you do? "I spent hours sitting in a restaurant waiting to get enough energy and was late to work because I think the company is a bunch of liars So the car made me waste half a day?"
    (I would love to peek into a alternate universe and see Elon responding to that article. LOL LOL)
    Or do you follow directions and report on it?


    Except it didn't work for Broder.


    Frankly it sounds like such a silly answer I can't believe he made it up.
    It's possible he read it from elsewhere.


    Here is a Model-S owner who also says it doesn't work.
    (The # signs are where I censored her to avoid SA problems)


    "The only gripe I have about my actual car is that it was difficult to estimate how much we were losing on range. It felt as if electrons were just seeping out of everywhere, despite extremely conservative driving (being honked at by passing semi trucks) and turning off the heat. I'm continually told that I'm not actually losing the energy, that it is just my range changing based on environmental factors, but I call" #########. " I have not once seen my range go up once the battery has warmed up -- on the other hand, it seems to use energy in order to heat the battery up and cause my range to go down even more quickly."


    This is what I would expect
    "to use energy in order to heat the battery up and cause my range to go down even more quickly."


    No Musketeer Has come out and said I called the company and the idea of range increases while warming is bogus.
    If the info didn't come from Tesla where did it come from?


    Those two could have been working together but not CR (Consumers Reports)
    A grand conspiracy would have to include CR.


    This does not prove that's what happened.


    Elon directly called the guy a liar in not following Tesla's directions.
    And the quality control tapes of the calls should be unambiguous.
    So where they?


    As there is no proof either way.
    So I started looking at other pieces of info.


    Here is the link to the Tesla motor club thread on the NYT article.
    I spot checked up to page 50 which was before Elon posted his proof. Far more than half the comments said there was a large portion of truth in the article.
    After Elon posted 'proof' I expect they lined up behind him but I haven't checked.


    Tesla model S clearly does lose range in the cold. It clearly will lose range, if you leave it unplugged half charged overnight, in the cold.
    I read someone who said it would lose the same number of miles if half charged which would be a much smaller percentage. (I don't know if this is correct or not.)
    The thing about half charge is to avoid the bricking issue Tesla now has the TMS shut off, if the car is turned off and the battery is half or less full.
    In the cold the TMS (Reported by Model-S owners at about 3kWh a day normally) would be much higher in the overnight cold temps Broder reported.


    The only discrepancy I see about that part is a 'He said She said' kind of argument.
    I expect Tesla has tapes but what can you do?
    No proof. Who do you want to believe?
    Did He do what they told him or go against it?


    For EVangelists there is no question St Elon never lies, even tho he did.
    16 Feb 2013, 01:52 PM Reply Like
  • Little problem using em' in the cold in billion dollar planes but they will be fine in cars.


    Pentagon stands by use of lithium-ion batteries on F-35 fighters


    "DellaVedova said there had been some irregularities with the lithium-ion batteries not starting properly in cold temperatures that were being addressed, but no issues affecting flight safety had come up during years of testing."

    14 Feb 2013, 09:13 PM Reply Like
  • Germany Set to pull the Plug on Green Energy.

    14 Feb 2013, 10:14 PM Reply Like
  • OH Elon (Lilting voice)


    If I wanted to know what Tesla said to Broder not having a Model-s how would I set it up?
    Same place Milford Supercharging station
    Same range I was back at full charge with a seemingly robust 242 mile range.
    Same temp it was 30-degrees out.
    Same condition 88 mi range (2mi off Broders 90 mi) unplugged temp dipped at night (Not sure how far.)
    Only lost 30 mi of range.
    He called Tesla Gee what did they say?
    Oh one other condition I would want some one who was honest and people trust and unaffected by the news coming out now. Of course that could only have been done and posted before this present problem.How could this happen?


    Serendipity I guess.


    Rapid charging at a Tesla EV "Supercharge" station
    ConsumerReports.orgBy Consumer Reports News | – Tue, Jan 29, 2013 10:00 AM EST



    ... "If "driving green" wasn't enough, there's this bonus: Tesla owners can use the fast chargers for free. In the Northeast region, in addition to the Connecticut venue, Tesla has also installed a "supercharging station" at a rest area in Delaware. The idea is to enable a Model S owner to drive from Boston to Washington, D.C., while "filling up" only twice. So far there are also six other such stations along the most-traveled highways in California.


    To give it a shot, I set off on a Friday afternoon with a full charge, which in this case was an indicated range of 240 miles. After 60 miles I arrived at the Milford Supercharging station, with my indicated range down to 160 miles after a mixed route of rural country roads and highway. Another factor here was the chilly ambient temperature: it was 30-degrees out. Cold weather and cabin heat always cut into battery range. After 45 minutes, I was back at full charge with a seemingly robust 242 mile range. I figured it was enough for my typical local driving, as well as getting back to work."


    He didn't get a range mode charge?


    "Overall, the car was a delight throughout the weekend, with quiet and immediate acceleration, athletic moves in the corners, a solid-yet-supple ride, and plenty of room for the family. It's hard not to get mesmerized by the 17-inch touch-screen display. Though it's the sole interface for the audio system and other common vehicle functions, it's easy to use and responds quickly to taps.


    As my excursion reminded, this is one car that draws a crowd fast. If you're an early adopter, you might as well get used to answering questions from curious strangers and getting admiring glances.


    The night before my voyage back to work, I had 88 miles left, according to the car's computation. I knew that would be cutting it pretty close, so I planned on a 30-minute supercharging session in Milford to gain some juice and added peace of mind. But while parked outside my house overnight, the temperature dipped and so did the indicated range, which now read only 58 miles. "


    What? he left it un plugged over night? He clearly had evil intent!


    "(Yes, a little range anxiety began to set in.) How can 30 miles evaporate just like that? According to Tesla, the car's computer takes into account the freezing temperature and readjusts the remaining range. The company also said that, upon restarting, the battery warms up and the computer once again updates the range."


    Why does this sound suspiciously familiar?


    " I didn't notice it adding miles to the range but the range remained steady for most of my 28-mile drive back to the supercharger. I connected to the charger with 50 miles on the meter and after 30 minutes, I was back to 150 miles—more than ample range to get back to our East Haddam test track."


    Oh really? (Sarcastic font)


    Elon You did what? To the pooch? You dog .. wait no, that's not right.
    15 Feb 2013, 02:36 AM Reply Like
  • Froggey, what's the point? The CR driver never ran out of power, even though he too never used a full charge in Range Mode.
    15 Feb 2013, 08:52 AM Reply Like
  • The point they told him not to worry about the gage not reading right either.
    when Broder left Norwich as you have posted often in multiple threads he left with only 37 miles and he had a 60 mile trip in front of him.
    He said Tesla told him he could.


    Elon has stated, but not offered proof (Such as those quality control monitoring tapes you run into when you call companies)
    That Broder acted directly against what the Tesla reps had told him. Yet in exactly the same situation Tesla told the CR reporter the same thing Broder reported.


    Which is why I started with:
    "If I wanted to know what Tesla said to Broder not having a Model-s how would I set it up?"


    Tesla stupidly told Broder to go ahead despite his not having enough range. It worked for CR not for Broder.


    Tesla's fault not Broder's
    15 Feb 2013, 11:51 AM Reply Like
  • If Tesla told him to take off with less range than he needed then yes that is their fault. However if Broder had simply done a full Standard charge at the previous stop, not even a full range charge, he never would have been in that position.
    That's Broder's fault, not Tesla's.
    16 Feb 2013, 09:47 AM Reply Like
  • Jrp3
    "However if Broder had simply done a full Standard charge at the previous stop, not even a full range charge, he never would have been in that position.
    That's Broder's fault, not Tesla's. "


    True in the grand scheme of things. The CR guy did the same and in Broder's case he was going to dinner elsewhere. Charging even an extra 15 min is sometimes inconvenient. It was for both of them, I expect this will happen a lot next winter if all goes well for Tesla.
    Thinking about it; the chances of stopping to charge, even for half an hour after a long trip, to the relatives or somewhere kids want to go, would not go over well.
    Relatives first.
    16 Feb 2013, 10:25 PM Reply Like
  • Savings not worth the risk. So do you think NS is going to consider lithium ion in loco's after this? What about other players and apps?


    Dreamliner rival ditches controversial batteries



    Edit: One other report indicated reverting to NiCd.
    15 Feb 2013, 07:21 AM Reply Like
  • The amount of power required in and out of the battery is challenging for lithium ion thermally. If you take a hot summer day and then apply the 30 minute charge/discharge requirements NS is talking about, either the Li battery will have to be bypassed or the life will drop dramatically. Not good choices...
    15 Feb 2013, 08:27 AM Reply Like
  • Perhaps this explains all the other 787 battery replacements reported having had lesser damage.


    I'm actually quite surprised they were willing to take this much risk on such an important platform. Seems they should have validated this on a more limited scale or in conjunction with a backup plan.
    15 Feb 2013, 11:45 AM Reply Like
  • "The amount of power required in and out of the battery is challenging for lithium ion thermally."
    Depends on the chemistry and required C rates. Nanophosphates and titanates are on a par with PbC as far as I can tell.
    16 Feb 2013, 09:50 AM Reply Like
  • I had planned to leave Tesla alone until they released their earnings next week but some opportunities are just too tempting to resist.

    15 Feb 2013, 09:28 AM Reply Like
  • Thanks for giving us that article. I think now most of our Tesla diatribe can probably migrate over there and leave this APC in peace. I know I can get a much funner frothier reaction commenting there. :-)
    15 Feb 2013, 11:02 AM Reply Like
  • Thank you, JP, for giving readers here an alternative platform to discuss Tesla, NYT reporter, etc.
    15 Feb 2013, 11:19 AM Reply Like
  • Just doing my part to try and keep the APC neat and clean.


    So far the statistics on the new article include 1,993 page views and 46 comments, which gives the readership a preliminary 98% sensibility ratio.
    15 Feb 2013, 11:21 AM Reply Like
  • If you want to argue with these people, then go right ahead. It is becoming clear to me why you are a lawyer and I am not.


    To me, it's like arguing about someone's religion; there is no way to get around "faith". Faith in a man, faith in a company, faith in a product.


    They don't want to take a good look behind the curtain, but many of us do, and appreciate your explaining it in terms we can understand.
    15 Feb 2013, 11:41 AM Reply Like
  • I don't want to argue with them, but I do want to build a record that reasonable men can interpret for themselves. I'd respectfully submit that nobody can read my articles and the comment sections with an open mind and see how the most critical comments bear any reasonable relation to the facts.
    15 Feb 2013, 12:41 PM Reply Like
  • John,
    Cute quote. :-)
    That being said, as one can see from the comments following your article, the true Tesla believers are always going to ignore the arguments about what is the best use of government resources for an energy policy and go straight to why it's a fun car to drive. You would hope that the more environmentally leaning group would understand more, but most have already hooked their wagon to the EV horse and so anything that attacks that belief cannot be supported, no matter how much sense it makes.
    Personally, I still hope Tesla is successful and ends up selling lots of cars and employs lots of people. I just don't believe my tax dollars should go towards helping someone buy a $100,000 toy.
    15 Feb 2013, 12:59 PM Reply Like
  • People who cannot tell the difference between loving a product and paying a reasonable price for a stock deserve what they get. None of the commentary even begins to make a case that Tesla's stock is fairly valued. An investor who reads the article and all of the associated commentary can only come to one rational conclusion – Tesla acolytes are completely irrational and the stock should be avoided at all costs.
    15 Feb 2013, 01:10 PM Reply Like
  • I have a theory that few of the 'Tesla acolytes' are actually Tesla employees in one way or another.


    The latest rage is 'Social Media Marketing' and I think SeekingAlpha and other blogs are crawling with new practitioners of this black art.


    It would make sense that a bleeding edge guy like Elon would have armies of these people on the payroll.


    15 Feb 2013, 04:06 PM Reply Like
  • One of the funnest conspiracy theories is that applicants for Tesla's summer internship program are given iPads and then judged for several months on the quality and effectiveness of their communications skills.
    15 Feb 2013, 04:21 PM Reply Like
  • That's rich, lmao.
    15 Feb 2013, 05:28 PM Reply Like
  • John,
    I am sorry. I read your article and tried to read the comments. None of them really kept on point about the article. The first 100 comments made my penis hurt so I quit reading.
    Sorry I couldn't continue but I bet you understand. May God be with you in your quest. You will need it.
    15 Feb 2013, 10:33 PM Reply Like
  • Fut, one of the best comments ever.


    From the bottom of my Axionista heart I thank you.


    15 Feb 2013, 10:43 PM Reply Like
  • Nobody ever reads the comment sections except EVangelicals who like to see their name in print because it proves their existence (or worthiness for Tesla's summer intern program ;-)


    So far it looks like the article will get a lot of traffic over the long weekend. I just hope investors who got sucked up in the hype consider the facts carefully in advance of Tesla's earnings release.
    16 Feb 2013, 07:14 AM Reply Like
  • I won't be commenting on it there since I'm not allowed, and frankly not even motivated since it's just more of the same.
    The large amount of support for Tesla comes from owners of their product, which suggests to me the company just might be successful. This latest NYT adventure is simply more free press for Tesla, and all the subsequent successful trips that are being made will expose the NYT piece for what it was.
    16 Feb 2013, 09:55 AM Reply Like
  • It's not a question of whether the product or the company will be successful. The issue is whether a successful company will ever build a big enough business to justify a $4.4 billion market capitalization. The stock is currently priced at a level that cannot possibly be justified by business fundamentals for years. That's what makes it a suckers bet. At $4 to $6 I'll be pounding the table on Tesla as a good speculative stock.
    16 Feb 2013, 11:03 AM Reply Like
  • Good luck John!...put your flak jacket on!


    Over 300 comments and counting.
    The usual suspects and of course the usual gang of trolls..getting easier and easier to spot.
    16 Feb 2013, 03:04 PM Reply Like
  • I wonder how many of them have secured their summer internship?
    16 Feb 2013, 03:55 PM Reply Like


    Many will be given iPads for the auditions but few will be chosen.


    16 Feb 2013, 04:26 PM Reply Like
  • Battery Maker Reimburses Feds after Audit

    15 Feb 2013, 11:28 AM Reply Like
  • Airbus ditches lithium batteries:

    15 Feb 2013, 12:22 PM Reply Like
  • 02/13/2014: EOD stuff partially copied from instablog (up sometime later).
    # Trds: 74, MinTrSz: 100, MaxTrSz: 100000, Vol 450402, AvTrSz: 6087
    Min. Pr: 0.2990, Max Pr: 0.3240, VW Avg. Tr. Pr: 0.3054
    # Buys, Shares: 35 128664, VW Avg Buy Pr: 0.3133
    # Sells, Shares: 37 220638, VW Avg Sell Pr: 0.3032
    # Unkn, Shares: 2 101100, VW Avg Unk. Pr: 0.3002
    Buy:Sell 1:1.71 (28.6% “buys”), DlyShts 37600 (8.35%), Dly Sht % of 'sells' 17.04%


    I posted a separate comment about the second consecutive day with a late-day 100K trade @ $0.30 trying to figure out what seems the most likely scenario.


    Yesterday (Wed.) I said I expected the price to challenge the 200-day SMA in the next day or two and that I didn't expect any bounce without a challenge to our rising support line. I mention this only because I get comfort when things act as I expect – it suggests I have a handle on what's going on and I might suffer with fewer incorrect decisions.


    Anyway, price challenged the 200-day SMA ($0.3181) and blew right past it and our rising support, an “overshoot” as I've been suggesting would occur. So now we need (want) to see a bounce up occur, hopefully in just a few days. We can't reliably assess the effect or number of any remaining 100K block trades we've seen. So there is some risk that it won't come back as quickly to the rising support (now resistance ~$0.318) as we might have expected (hoped for?). If there is more to go, the MMs should be holding price >=$0.30 so they can short at the higher price and then cover their short position (possible – evidence doesn't indicate they are shorting) with the 100K block. Since tomorrow is Friday, we might not see any evidence of this – the MM might be more cautious about shorting into the long weekend or the seller might be thinking of the long weekend.


    The 50-day SMA ($0.3157) is going to go flat for a day or two if price stays flat in this range. This puts the “Golden Cross” out about two more days – middle of next week looks likely if price stays flat. It'll be interesting to see if it provides any immediate (a couple of days?) boost in price from a TA sentiment change.


    As would be expected, the oscillators I follow reacted strongly – all went decidedly more negative in attitude. Stochastic went to extremely oversold at a %K reading of ~1.28, as did RSI at ~29 while Williams %R fought the trend and went up slightly to -97.53%. Keep in mind while we were in that long down trend we didn't see price respond by moving higher very often after %R suggested that was in the cards. However, just before we started our up trend, %R did bottom 5 days before we began our grind up and a subsequent %R low reading was eventually (11 days) followed by price moves up, so this is a change from what often happened in the down trend – usually only small rises were seen of short duration. Our up moves were generally longer and stronger.


    The big spike in volume makes me think we've seen capitulation and are now positioned for the up move to begin. We were 92K above the 25-day average, which included some high-volume days from the second through third weeks of January. It was also almost double the prior days volume, missing only by ~47K. We should spend no more than a few days “basing” before seeing an attempt to move back to the trading channel area, where I expect we'll see a pause. That should be around the $0.325 area if it takes a week.


    On my experimental charts stuff, average trades size moved solidly to the mid-point of what I think is “retail” (bear in mind the 100K trade - ~22% of the days volume). Even discounting that, we'd be in the low mid-range I think, at 4.8K.


    A pleasing sign, to me, is the continued deterioration in the correlations of the long-term trend lines for the price down to the 56%-58% range. At some point I need t add some shorter-term trend lines to track the new trend because the long-term ones will be too old and slow moving to be of any use.


    My experimental inflection point calculations continue to move more strongly towards a negative attitude. But they did their job and gave a signal, by my interpretation, a couple days before the move down fully developed and gave me the confidence to say it would happen in a day or two. So now I switch to watching for a signal of coming upside.


    Details of “Dly Sht % of 'sells'” and inflection points omitted here.
    15 Feb 2013, 12:51 PM Reply Like
  • NEC begins Mass Production of Home Energy Storage Systems in Kofu


    Press Release: NEC Corporation – Thu, Feb 14, 2013



    See also:


    Quick Google search didn't turn up anything easy ... but I didn't dig very hard.


    On the other hand ... even less available, but showing where they're spending some $$:


    Feb. 13, 2013, 9:00 p.m. EST


    Mitsubishi Electric Corporation Unveils Six New Technologies at Annual R&D Open House

    15 Feb 2013, 01:55 PM Reply Like
  • Looks like the home energy storage space is getting crowded, and of course every product offers integration with solar, wind, generators, etc.


    Rosewater's squeaky-clean power solution seems to be unique, but high-end homes might be a rather limited market.
    15 Feb 2013, 02:41 PM Reply Like
  • And on the Utility Side ... Italy style:


    NEC And Acea To Provide Energy Storage Systems For Rome Smart Grid Project
    February 15, 2013 Nicholas Brown




    "an agreement to develop innovative lithium-ion battery storage systems to be implemented in Acea’s primary and secondary power substations. "
    16 Feb 2013, 02:40 AM Reply Like
  • I'm sure the Italians will pick the best technology. Some of the Italians.


    "Fried Green Tomatoes?"


    Italy makes 'Mafia' arrests over Sicily wind farms



    PS In English Mafia translates to congress.
    16 Feb 2013, 06:51 AM Reply Like
  • Even good CEO's walk into walls on occasion.


    Ghosn Backtracks On “10 Percent By 2020″ EV Sales Claims

    15 Feb 2013, 05:36 PM Reply Like
  • Who could have foreseen such an embarrassing outcome?
    15 Feb 2013, 05:55 PM Reply Like
  • It's down right shocking.
    15 Feb 2013, 06:33 PM Reply Like
  • Well, either he backtracks or he starts pairing it with bankruptcy, lol.
    16 Feb 2013, 01:14 AM Reply Like