Seeking Alpha

Axion Power Host's  Instablog

Axion Power Host
Send Message
Trying to learn stuff
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 (337)
Track new comments
  • 481086
    , contributor
    Comments (3308) | Send Message
     
    Oh the humanity!
    18 Feb, 11:00 AM Reply Like
  • RBrun357
    , contributor
    Comments (779) | Send Message
     
    Hopefully this will be the concentrator that brings a significant order announcement!
    18 Feb, 11:03 AM Reply Like
  • wtblanchard
    , contributor
    Comments (2283) | Send Message
     
    More likely one that argues about the definition of "significant" :-)
    18 Feb, 11:42 AM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (16953) | Send Message
     
    Wtb: but will it be a minor or significant argument?

     

    HardToLove
    18 Feb, 12:09 PM Reply Like
  • DRich
    , contributor
    Comments (4335) | Send Message
     
    Lance meet windmill. Into the lists we shall tilt.
    18 Feb, 12:12 PM Reply Like
  • wtblanchard
    , contributor
    Comments (2283) | Send Message
     
    Seeking Alpha getting more bad pub

     

    (see David Einhorn suit http://seekingalpha.co... reference in previous APC) recently, though in fairness they did eventually take action:

     

    Galena Biopharma Pays For Stock-Touting Campaign While Insiders Cash Out Millions

     

    Adam Feuerstein
    02/12/14 - 05:54 PM EST

     

    http://bit.ly/1jCg4QU

     

    See also reactions (and further links, e.g., company response):

     

    Galena Biopharma pounded in wake of stock-scheme allegation
    Feb 12 2014, 18:27 ET

     

    http://seekingalpha.co...

     

    Galena Biopharma responds on stock-promotion allegation
    Feb 14 2014, 17:53 ET

     

    http://seekingalpha.co...
    18 Feb, 11:53 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29176) | Send Message
     
    It doesn't surprise me a bit that The Street is more than happy to try and heap a bit of shame on Seeking Alpha. They are, after all, vigorous competitors.

     

    While Seeking Alpha works very hard to avoid that kind of problem and I think they do a remarkable job overall, no system is perfect. I'm a bit of a hard-liner and believe anonymous contributions detract from overall quality, but that view and $5 will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks.
    18 Feb, 12:08 PM Reply Like
  • wtblanchard
    , contributor
    Comments (2283) | Send Message
     
    Labtech posted in the previous APC on the same topic ... here's the NY Times take:

     

    Caribbean Islands Agree to Swap Diesel Power for Renewable Sources
    By DIANE CARDWELLFEB. 6, 2014

     

    http://nyti.ms/1fdYvqi

     

    "Mr. Lilienthal said that creating microgrids fueled by renewable energy is still too expensive for most of the United States, but that it made sense for the Caribbean and remote places like Alaska.

     

    “There’s tens of thousands of islands burning diesel fuel that’s really destroying their economies because it’s so expensive,” he said. “This is just the beginning.”

     

    Tens of thousands? Hadn't thought about it being that big ... though how many of them can afford the capital investment to "get over the hump?" On the other hand, how can they afford not to make it happen? Or will most of them just sell out to the less civic minded Richard Bransons of the world???

     

    I've added a "Carbon War Room" google alert ... something to keep on the radar.
    18 Feb, 12:25 PM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (2463) | Send Message
     
    Seems to me that the missing component might just be nicely arranged financing, which turns a insurmountable capital hurdle into palatable monthly pymts.

     

    We've seen that in retail, how about for wholesale/big projects? Don't at least some of these island republics have a decent credit rating?
    18 Feb, 01:17 PM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (2463) | Send Message
     
    Kinda surprised some of the big boys don't get into this model. Someone like a Blackstone. Sounds like the potential mkt's prob big enough for them to care, with a chance to securitize the paper, which means fee income which means high ROEs. And lots of buyers looking for steady long-term cash flow. Maybe the developing mkt fears are holding the model back.
    18 Feb, 04:22 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8492) | Send Message
     
    Worldwide unique large-scale modular battery storage system being built in Aachen

     

    "What makes M5BAT distinctive is its modularity, which enables it to optimally combine a variety of battery technologies. It uses high-output lithium ion batteries for short-duration discharge, high-temperature batteries for medium-duration discharge, and lead-acid batteries for short- and medium-duration discharge."

     

    http://bit.ly/1h1QgfG
    18 Feb, 12:38 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8492) | Send Message
     
    Nah, They're crap.

     

    Battery/supercapacitor combinations approach the performance of an ideal battery

     

    http://bit.ly/1jOsnwY
    18 Feb, 01:31 PM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (2463) | Send Message
     
    "Obama Requests New Rules for Cutting Truck Pollution"

     

    http://nyti.ms/1jOF9LZ
    18 Feb, 02:42 PM Reply Like
  • Patrick Young
    , contributor
    Comments (847) | Send Message
     
    Yes. highly positive for ePower and therefore Axion. I think the bottom line is lead-carbon is the single best technology for power-dense applications, and Axion owns the IP in this space.
    18 Feb, 02:51 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8492) | Send Message
     
    "...it's a win-win-win."

     

    Sounds like a winner. Hey "change" is good. He could use one of those.
    18 Feb, 02:54 PM Reply Like
  • danpm4life
    , contributor
    Comments (81) | Send Message
     
    Thanks for the post Mr I. I agree with Patrick’s comment with regards to e-Power & AXPW. It also appears that Obama’s on relatively solid ground with his executive powers in announcing the next round, beginning 2019, of standards for reducing carbon pollution in heavy trucks.

     

    “Although Mr. Obama has been harshly criticized by Republicans who say he has abused his executive power, in the case of carbon pollution he has the legal authority under the 1970 Clean Air Act, which requires the E.P.A. to regulate any substance designated as a pollutant that harms or endangers human health. In 2009, the E.P.A. determined that carbon dioxide, emitted in large quantities from tailpipes and smokestacks, meets that definition.”

     

    Since “Mr. Obama noted that heavy-duty trucks represent just 4 percent of all vehicles on the highways but generate 20 percent of the carbon pollution produced by the transportation sector.” It may be worthwhile to have e-Power work with their business partner, Cummins, to help find a way to track & report carbon savings using the e-Power hybrid drive train & Cummins engine.

     

    While the “…Cummins ISB6.7 diesel engine complies with 2017 EPA emissions standards…”, would the ISB6.7, combined with the e-Power hybrid, using the PbC®, meet or exceed the 2018 EPA emissions standards? What, if any, correlation is there to increased mpg & reduced carbon pollution?

     

    In any event, both Cummins & e-Power should have discussions about how to meet/track carbon reductions for 2018 & for Obama’s 2019 & beyond order, to comply with his latest executive power mandate. My concern is that a trucker neighbor of mine recently told me that California does not renew licenses for big rig trucks, manufactured before 2007, on Ca roads. Since my neighbor has been in the trucking business for over 30 yrs., I didn’t think to ask him if there was proof of a newer compliant engine, would 2006 & earlier trucks be eligible for CA roads? Or what about out of state licenses, were they permitted?

     

    In any event, I think a blanket rule, based on the age of the truck, vs. engine age and/or emissions, applied nationwide, would have a devastating effect on sales for the e-Power’s hybrid drivetrain repower effort, using Axion’s PbC®. Can any truckers, or CA E.P.A. types confirm or refute the CA 2007 chassis vs. engine question?
    18 Feb, 09:44 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29176) | Send Message
     
    The general rule is that a repower must meet emissions standards for the year the chassis was built. I *believe* that installing a 2010 model drivetrain and emissions package in 2005 model chassis would be sufficient to meet the California standards, but that's primarily an issue for the truck operator.

     

    As a practical matter we're focusing on newer engines across the board because we want to become a Cummins authorized OEM and they can't make or sell engines that don't comply with the latest emissions standards.

     

    The CO2 emissions of a diesel engine are constant – 19.4 pounds per gallon. A tractor that hauls a 20 ton cargo and gets 6 mpg will be rated at 120 ton miles per gallon while a tractor that hauls the same cargo and gets 9 mpg will be rated at 180 ton miles per gallon.

     

    If our drivetrain demonstrates the ability to improve the fuel economy of a given engine by 40% to 60% tighter fuel economy standards will be good for our business.
    19 Feb, 07:13 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29176) | Send Message
     
    Correction: Diesel fuel is 22.2 pounds (10 kg) per gallon instead of the 19.4 I originally quoted.

     

    http://1.usa.gov/1g5JtoL
    19 Feb, 07:52 AM Reply Like
  • danpm4life
    , contributor
    Comments (81) | Send Message
     
    Thanks John for the update & reference. Does the weight of the cargo have any part of the carbon pollution equation for trucking?

     

    I previously hadn’t heard/read that e-Power wants to become a Cummins authorized OEM.

     

    That make sense & they would make a good business partner. It also explains the Cummins special “tune up” attention to the e-Power truck. Will an authorized Cummins OEM limit your market to those trucks that previously had a Cummins engine? Or can the e-Power repower kit & Cummins engine work if it’s replacing another engine such as one from Caterpillar or Peterbilt?

     

    Finally, I remember reading a previously referenced document that said that e-Power was planning to sell up to 10 kits a month by the end of 2014. Does that number still look doable?
    19 Feb, 07:41 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29176) | Send Message
     
    While the trucking industry has traditionally thought in terms of miles per gallon, the 2017 EPA standards are based on the mass of emissions from moving a ton of cargo over a distance of one mile (grams of CO2 per ton-mile) and the final NHTSA standards are based on gallons of fuel needed to move a ton of cargo over a 1,000-mile distance (gallons per 1,000 ton miles). While the rules are way too complex to summarize in a comment, or for that matter an Instablog, the 2017 fuel economy standards work out to about 6.3 mpg for a day cab tractor and 7.6 mpg for a sleeper cab.

     

    Class 8 tractor chassis are quite standardized and it's not at all unusual to see engines from different manufacturers installed on identical chassis. We really don't care what engine was used in the original powertrain because we take it all back to the chassis anyway.

     

    I've been very careful to avoid planning, or for that matter estimating, future sales numbers because we simply don't know what the market reception will be. I think we could staff up to handle a volume of ten units per month by the end of the year, but there's no way to predict whether we'll see demand at that level, or something significantly lower or higher.

     

    The only thing I know for sure is we're tuning in our first prototype and working on our second. If things move slowly with customers we plan to build out a fleet of 10 demonstrators with our own money. If customer orders start flowing in because our initial demonstrations had good results, we may be so busy building tractors for customers that we don't have time to build additional demonstrators. That would be a nice problem to have.
    19 Feb, 07:58 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8492) | Send Message
     
    Your data will get the wheels spinning at the odds makers base in Nevada. Or would that occur in some financial district?

     

    Oh, and you might like to teach TG your skill set on how you just predicted ePower future sales!
    20 Feb, 10:00 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29176) | Send Message
     
    Helmuth von Moltke the Elder famously said, "[No] plan of operations extends with any certainty beyond the first contact with the main hostile force." Since we won't have first contact until the sleeper cab is running the way we want and we're willing to turn the keys over to a fleet operator, I'll avoid the temptation to climb out on a limb and predict the inherently unpredictable.

     

    Mercifully I have a luxury that Tom doesn't have. My stockholders will accept "I don't know yet" as an answer.
    20 Feb, 10:16 AM Reply Like
  • mrholty
    , contributor
    Comments (729) | Send Message
     
    Your comment is a nicer version of:

     

    Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the mouth

     

    - Mike Tyson
    20 Feb, 11:46 AM Reply Like
  • siliconhillbilly
    , contributor
    Comments (2083) | Send Message
     
    JP: it also depends on how hot the fuel is :-)

     

    Any sane description would be based on mass/mass ratio, such as kg/kg .
    20 Feb, 05:31 PM Reply Like
  • danpm4life
    , contributor
    Comments (81) | Send Message
     
    “…we may be so busy building tractors for customers that we don't have time to build additional demonstrators. That would be a nice problem to have.”

     

    Ditto that! Since e-Power is the only non-NDA company, with potential multiple repeat orders for Axion’s PbC®, in sight for 2014, that would be a problem I’d love to see accelerated. Thanks again for the breath of fresh “non-NDA” air.
    21 Feb, 04:22 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29176) | Send Message
     
    We're in a very different position from most of Axion's customers because we want to sell a product directly to end-users who don't know we exist and who don't understand our product. We have no reputation to protect and no competitors who even care what we're doing. When we make our first sales, it's pretty likely that our customers will want to take public credit for being forward thinking environmentally conscious businessmen who are taking reasonable risks to make the world a better place. I like being in a business where NDAs won't be all that important, but I certainly understand why they're critical to the other guys.
    21 Feb, 06:11 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8492) | Send Message
     
    "...and no competitors who even care what we're doing."

     

    Since you've got Cummins attention I think you're probably underrating the industries tendency to watch out for its place at the table.
    21 Feb, 07:52 AM Reply Like
  • greentongue
    , contributor
    Comments (700) | Send Message
     
    Speaking of Cummins ... how did that gathering go?
    Any impressions? Any impressed?
    21 Feb, 08:04 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29176) | Send Message
     
    We won't take truck to Cummins until we've worked our way through control issues to make sure that all our key components are playing nice without programming conflicts. Cummins has been down a couple times this week to get the engine settings optimized. As of yesterday it was running like a top and putting out all the horsepower and torque we wanted. Now we need to resolve a control issue in the generator because we're getting everything we want from the engine but the power output of the generator is lower than the specifications say it should be, but a good 20 kW higher than we were getting from the Deere.

     

    We are very pleased with the rate of progress, but we won't rush into a show-off tour until we're getting everything we want from the integrated system. Mercifully the component suppliers want it as bad as we do and their technical support has been tremendous.
    21 Feb, 09:03 AM Reply Like
  • jveal
    , contributor
    Comments (666) | Send Message
     
    Thanks for the update JP!!
    21 Feb, 09:15 AM Reply Like
  • RBrun357
    , contributor
    Comments (779) | Send Message
     
    JP,

     

    Does ePower have an idea on how many man hours they believe it will take to perform a complete conversion of an ePowered drive system once all the bugs are worked out?

     

    Also, regarding all of the issue resolution they are currently going through, are these expected to be eleminated on future conversions so the debugging and tune up process is minimal?

     

    Thanks
    21 Feb, 09:59 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29176) | Send Message
     
    It's too early for us make install time estimates because we're at the top left hand corner of the learning curve and everything we're doing is a first experience. That means we have to identify an issue, resolve it and then learn whether there are any more issues that need to be resolved. It's a painstaking process the first time you traverse a particular path. Once a trail is blazed and we understand the lay of the land, things should get a lot easier because we'll understand the things that need to be done and we can integrate them into our process as standard operating procedures. We would like to get retrofit times down to two weeks for a two man crew. For now, our GAANT chart is very loose because we have to rely on our supplier's engineering teams to resolve our issues with their products.

     

    The work we're doing today won't need to be repeated and it will eventually lead to a system that we can sell in kit form. But everything that's worth doing is worth taking the time to do right.
    21 Feb, 10:17 AM Reply Like
  • Stilldazed
    , contributor
    Comments (2046) | Send Message
     
    JP,
    I like the "But everything that's worth doing is worth taking the time to do right." attitude!!

     

    I have worked at places with the "hurry up, we don't have time to do it right, but there's always time to do it over" attitude and it sux.
    21 Feb, 11:11 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29176) | Send Message
     
    Marathon is a subsidiary of Regal Beloit (RBC) which carries a $3.25 billion market cap. Cummins (CMI) is a $26.6 billion company. They are both bending over backwards to support our development work because we ask them first, pay attention to their advice and take the time to do it right. The instant we start cutting corners or ignoring advice, one or both will cut us off at the knees because neither can afford customers who don't pay close attention to detail.
    21 Feb, 11:24 AM Reply Like
  • Stefan Moroney
    , contributor
    Comments (2424) | Send Message
     
    I can only imagine the tediousness of doing the same process over and over and finding new bugs, but at the same time the satisfaction of figuring out one bug and moving on to the next issue.

     

    Hope the process comes to a swift conclusion so you can put it on the road and begin this process with the day cab.
    21 Feb, 11:27 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29176) | Send Message
     
    When you make a major system upgrade like a new engine you're not doing the same process over. You are starting an entirely new process with different equipment.

     

    We are not dealing with bugs. We are making an engine do something that it wasn't programmed to do when it was made and we're mating it to a generator that wasn't programmed for this particular engine.

     

    While the weather hasn't been kind for on road testing of the sleeper, our work on the day cab is running ahead of schedule.

     

    The process will take the time it takes, but it will be the work of days or weeks as opposed to months or years.
    21 Feb, 01:00 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8492) | Send Message
     
    If only someone would invent a battery for a reasonable price that would accept a quick charge so they could keep the AC on. Perhaps a combo ultracapacitor/LAB that could scale quickly w/ little investment. Nah, that's a crap plan.

     

    Ford’s Big Plans for Auto Start-Stop Technology

     

    "The one element that did concern me a bit: the system that Ford’s engineers have developed won’t keep climate control systems running when stopped. I asked how often the typical driver doesn’t use one of these systems; I didn’t really get an answer to that question, but rather an explanation of how the driver can choose between using the auto start-stop or maintaining a level of heat/air conditioning (auto start-stop can be disabled by the driver). I’m thinking that the typical Ford customer might need some education on this… or maybe something like a typical hybrid’s display of current fuel efficiency as a challenge to balance out comfort and gas savings. Of course, suppliers may also develop new batteries that make this point moot."

     

    http://bit.ly/1gf4usQ
    18 Feb, 03:34 PM Reply Like
  • nogoodslacker
    , contributor
    Comments (817) | Send Message
     
    Ford is certainly aware of the PbC. If they choose to go with a different technology, that tells me the PbC is either too expensive, too difficult to integrate with currently available components, too difficult to produce at scale, or it doesn't work as well as we presume. Or, they are just using start/stop technology as green wash and they don't really expect anyone to acutally use it.
    18 Feb, 03:51 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8492) | Send Message
     
    NGS, In all actuality for base SS the two battery system is probably too expensive. We need wait for the next level of electrification for it to make sense IMO.

     

    BTW, It's green wash.
    18 Feb, 03:54 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29176) | Send Message
     
    The real answer is more cynical. The automakers know:

     

    1. Only a small percentage of owners will bring their car in for service if the stop-start system isn't working properly;
    2. When a customer does bring a car in for service, a good top up charge will restore stop-start functionality for at least a few days and put the customer in the position where he has to make a second, third or fourth service appointment; and
    3. If the customer is really persistent, they can put in a replacement battery for $150.

     

    When they weigh the cost of upgrading 100% of the cars against the cost of servicing a tiny percentage, the service cost is a significantly lower number.

     

    Right now the automakers are playing a game. The rules of the game will change as soon as States modify their inspections to include stop-start functionality. That isn't likely in the next year or two, but it's certain within five years or so.
    18 Feb, 04:15 PM Reply Like
  • Patrick Young
    , contributor
    Comments (847) | Send Message
     
    ?????If I bought a new car and the A/C broke down on a regular basis, I would hire a lawyer and camp my ass at the dealership until someone refunded my money!!!!!!!!
    18 Feb, 04:17 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29176) | Send Message
     
    Most stop-start systems disable themselves automatically when the temperature is too low or too high because they don't want drivers freezing or baking.

     

    The reason stop-start problems don't draw much in the way of owner complaints is the gradual fade of stop-start system functionality. For the first couple weeks the engine turns off at every light, then it's every other light, then it's once or twice a day and eventually never.

     

    As long as the car still starts and takes you where you want to go, is it really worth the hassle of making an appointment and bringing it in for service?

     

    For a large majority of customers, the answer is apparently no,
    18 Feb, 04:38 PM Reply Like
  • LabTech
    , contributor
    Comments (1769) | Send Message
     
    Interesting. I posted a reply on the website about Axion and the 2010 joint presentation with Ford and BMW. I looked, and it was there shortly afterwards. Now it is gone. I guess the author didn't want people to know that Ford dropped the ball on this.
    18 Feb, 04:52 PM Reply Like
  • tripleblack
    , contributor
    Comments (13386) | Send Message
     
    So long as the user can elect to defeat the SS system, or the car automatically does so, it is NOT like other emissions control systems where their failure is a "big deal". If one thinks about this aspect, it explains a lot of things.
    18 Feb, 04:58 PM Reply Like
  • 42itus1
    , contributor
    Comments (203) | Send Message
     
    >John Petersen,

     

    "Right now the automakers are playing a game. The rules of the game will change as soon as States modify their inspections to include stop-start functionality. That isn't likely in the next year or two, but it's certain within five years or so."

     

    You seem to be deferring this question of functionality to individual states, rather than it being a Federal Trade/Commerce, NHTSA, EPA concern. If it is going to be left to the states, other than State's Attorney General's, then I would respectfully suggest that "IT" will will NEVER be resolved. The only incentive for auto OEM's to implement Stop/Start, incurring added expense, would be if the Stop/Start strategy would help them achieve credit towards meeting CAFE standards and GHG reductions. Those are Federal mandates (for the most part). My reading/research has the Fed's giving a paltry credit for Off-Cycle strategies and it is not currently a part of the Testing Cycle defined by EPA and NHTSA. Until Start/Stop (Off-Cycle) strategies are truly recognized by the Fed's the States won't have much to beef about.

     

    I absolutely agree the auto OEM's are playing a game, actually several games, when it comes to Start/Stop. I have asserted the above perspective about Start/Stop and the associated Federal requirements several times in the past. Thus far the Fed's are obviously very cynical/critical of automotive's S/S strategies and that is as it should be. I am not totally confident that the OEM's won't succeed in gaming the Fed. Regulators on this but I am Pleased with Guvmnt's efforts thus far. This is also why I have such difficulty with the criticism of Mr. Granville not landing automotive implementations of the Organic CARBON lead (PbC) battery. ( I wish Axion would trademark Carbon Lead [CPb], as well)
    18 Feb, 09:01 PM Reply Like
  • big_bear
    , contributor
    Comments (47) | Send Message
     
    Sounds like we're 4-5 years out....great! (<code>SARCASM GOES HERE</code>)
    18 Feb, 11:28 PM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (2463) | Send Message
     
    LabTech, ur post appeared just a lil while later. The author even replied to ur post and one other, with:

     

    "Thanks so much for your input – very interesting! I’ll dig into this further, including sending questions along for the engineers to the Ford PR folks…"
    19 Feb, 10:02 AM Reply Like
  • LabTech
    , contributor
    Comments (1769) | Send Message
     
    Mr Investor,
    Thanks for the update.
    19 Feb, 02:25 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (1222) | Send Message
     
    This sort of consumer activism had teeth when citizens could take the time off to protest. Now it's just a ridiculous suggestion and everyone knows it - because everyone knows you have to get back to work to pay your tax bill or lose everything you thought you owned in court. Yeah, keep voting for them Rs and Ds who have you by the shorts. That'll work insanely well.
    21 Feb, 10:06 PM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (2463) | Send Message
     
    Looks like 350k shares was bid at 10 cents. 270k shares left.
    18 Feb, 03:36 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (16953) | Send Message
     
    MrI: There's our "white knight", since ARCA was slack today. Thanks CSTI investor!

     

    HardToLove
    18 Feb, 03:38 PM Reply Like
  • Patrick Young
    , contributor
    Comments (847) | Send Message
     
    I feel like the battery space is like Congress. They will try everything else before they adopt the necessary (right) plan. We hold the ownership of the "right" solution.
    18 Feb, 03:52 PM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (2463) | Send Message
     
    Well, the PIPErs left 120k of the order unconsumed. So we had about the total vol that we average when there's no new hot topic here and buyers aren't real active.
    18 Feb, 04:15 PM Reply Like
  • Patrick Young
    , contributor
    Comments (847) | Send Message
     
    No new hot topic?!? We just heard that a top 5 auto manufacturer that is Asian is rolling out a model with a "lead carbon" battery. Stock hardly budged. If I told you there was a 50% chance of a blizzard, you might buy some rock salt.
    18 Feb, 04:20 PM Reply Like
  • JohnM121
    , contributor
    Comments (341) | Send Message
     
    I bought some salt today, I never really expected it would go for $ 0.098/unit again. Some day we'll have a pouring rain.
    18 Feb, 04:33 PM Reply Like
  • DRich
    , contributor
    Comments (4335) | Send Message
     
    >Patrick Young ... I'm not buying even the remote possibility that an Asian auto manufacturer is rolling out a lead carbon battery with an Axion inside. I've probably got enough rock salt on hand from previous years.
    18 Feb, 04:34 PM Reply Like
  • greentongue
    , contributor
    Comments (700) | Send Message
     
    When they actually announce "Axion Inside" then, we'll get some movement. Till then, same old thing.
    18 Feb, 07:21 PM Reply Like
  • Stefan Moroney
    , contributor
    Comments (2424) | Send Message
     
    DRich - I'm with you, but wouldn't it be something if a production contract for Kia was on TG's gantt chart and led him to his "significant" statements.

     

    Sweet dream, I know.
    18 Feb, 09:41 PM Reply Like
  • DRich
    , contributor
    Comments (4335) | Send Message
     
    >Stefan Moroney ... I can't say a slot on that gantt chart is totally impossible but I'd be absolutely shocked for many reasons.
    18 Feb, 10:09 PM Reply Like
  • Stefan Moroney
    , contributor
    Comments (2424) | Send Message
     
    Me too, but everybody says I don't say anything nice, lol
    18 Feb, 10:11 PM Reply Like
  • obieephyhm
    , contributor
    Comments (1548) | Send Message
     
    It is with regret that I take a temporary leave from the concentrator pool. A death in the family will have me on the road and dealing with limited connectivity issues starting the day after tomorrow.

     

    I'll hone-up my speed-reading skills and attempt to catch up when I get back from the wilds of the Great Lakes.

     

    Be well, all and try to remember, this money stuff isn't always the most important thing in life . . .
    18 Feb, 06:37 PM Reply Like
  • jveal
    , contributor
    Comments (666) | Send Message
     
    obie, sorry to hear of your loss. Hope you have a safe trip in all of this winter weather.
    18 Feb, 06:54 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8492) | Send Message
     
    Obieephyhm, Sorry to hear of the loss of your family member. Be safe during your travels.
    18 Feb, 08:15 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (16953) | Send Message
     
    Obieephyhm: Sorry to hear of the family loss.

     

    Thoughts are with you.

     

    HardToLove
    19 Feb, 09:18 AM Reply Like
  • SMaturin
    , contributor
    Comments (1986) | Send Message
     
    In these mini-ice-age months, here is a new drool-worthy EV:

     

    Lito Sora electric motorcycle arrives with integrated touchscreen and GPS
    http://bit.ly/1eOjriX
    18 Feb, 07:14 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8492) | Send Message
     
    The Cali folks looking to use battery tender cars in populated areas to shut down the diesel locos for periods of time. Organization overseeing some of this assessment activity is the Center for the Commercial Deployment of Transportation Technologies (CCDoTT)

     

    RHAM-UP

     

    http://bit.ly/1gCIDxO
    18 Feb, 08:23 PM Reply Like
  • DRich
    , contributor
    Comments (4335) | Send Message
     
    >iindelco ... I wonder if anyone has priced out a 100 ton Li-on battery pack with a BMS? What does 200 to 600 HP of supercapacitors cost?

     

    Wow, that's like 50 to 60 miles (depending of which yard is called the bottom of the Pass) and on a 2% to 3.5% grade climb all on battery power dragging & pushing 10K tons. Well, it is only 40 miles in heavily settled areas. Still rather ambitious.

     

    I remember reading about this project back in 2009 or 2010. With the present problem the railroads have with battery heat in both LA & Li-on after several years of testing, I rather doubt someone in CCDoTT had really thought this thing through when he wrote this. I kinda doubt if the whole project can get done for $3.5M in 18 months. I can believe this tender might cost $5M to $7M each and I can believe UP & BNSF will not buy any.
    18 Feb, 09:28 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8492) | Send Message
     
    DRich, I suspect it might have started with these guys, you may remember the prior post/discussion, but I'm not interested enough on that point to go chicken or egg document hunting. BTW, they will haul it up to 150 miles.

     

    http://bit.ly/YdXT7I

     

    If you were a successful rail company would you drag a 100 ton lithium ion battery through a heavily populated area? You'd have to be nuts.

     

    BTW, is cost a concern at this level? It is Cali.
    18 Feb, 09:42 PM Reply Like
  • DRich
    , contributor
    Comments (4335) | Send Message
     
    >iindelco ... If it worked .... then I could see the railroads using it. It would be just another hazardous cargo load. Even in Calf. cost matters to the rails and the argument here would be a walk-in-the-park to get a regulator to reject. Just bring a laptop & show one of those cars burning and imagine a fire 10,000 times larger with toxic clouds and capable of melting the surrounding cargo or locomotives.
    18 Feb, 10:21 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8492) | Send Message
     
    Dat looks like a PowerCube to me. Did they just borrow an Axion picture? Too funny.

     

    http://bit.ly/1fwWi5t
    18 Feb, 08:50 PM Reply Like
  • tahoe1780
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    and... http://bit.ly/1gToTWc
    18 Feb, 09:50 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8492) | Send Message
     
    Tahoe, not a surprise there. The Chinese have been actively pursued to joint the ALABC and as such would be somewhat knowledgeable about the benefits of adding carbon to the negative active material in a LAB. Type and method, well they will partner or be on their own there.
    19 Feb, 07:43 AM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (2463) | Send Message
     
    Maybe that company is connected to the Asian guy who was on the conf call 18 months ago or whatever. He sounded like a businessman looking for battery info to me.
    19 Feb, 11:21 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8492) | Send Message
     
    Mr. I, Could be. At first I was hopeful Axion found a distribution channel. Then I saw they were Chinese. Then I saw their caption on the PowerCube.

     

    HTL's skit comes to mind. "Never mind". We've already been to the bowels of the earth for money. No sense looking to sell there as well.
    19 Feb, 11:53 AM Reply Like
  • D-inv
    , contributor
    Comments (3768) | Send Message
     
    IF available at scale, would it be outlandish to think appropriate carbon nanotube fiber cabling could find a home in 48V vehicles, ePower trucks, electric locomtives, etc.?

     

    http://bit.ly/1htIIa0
    18 Feb, 10:11 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8492) | Send Message
     
    Might I suggest a conductive carbon sheet with microporous carbon coating in a hybrid LAB. Get rid of the copper current collector and the two layers of corrosion barrier in each of the negative electrode layers. Then it becomes a question of what to bond to for the current path between layers and cells. Details details.

     

    Oh, sales, that's right. Well maybe later.
    18 Feb, 10:52 PM Reply Like
  • SMaturin
    , contributor
    Comments (1986) | Send Message
     
    Potentially useful and scalable technology.
    http://bit.ly/1oQzN3o

     

    But how safe is working with spun CF in large quantitiies?
    http://bit.ly/1oQzN3q

     

    It could end up being the 21st century asbestos.
    19 Feb, 03:10 AM Reply Like
  • SMaturin
    , contributor
    Comments (1986) | Send Message
     
    Here is an interesting paper with hard data.

     

    http://bit.ly/1nMDXps
    19 Feb, 03:31 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8492) | Send Message
     
    SMaturin, Ah yes, very nice. That someone is working on it should be of no surprise given the characteristics of such a component.

     

    Hey, maybe if they can get the price down low enough they can convert the US penny back to Cu and take the more valuable Zi back out. Save the penny! :-P
    -

     

    And yeah, I thought about the risks of where we will end up with all this nano stuff since I have a son "tooling up" in his aspiration to work in a sector at this level. I think as time progresses we will learn, as you suggest, more about the good, the bad and the down right ugly concerning the materials created along with how they are made and applied. We always do, in time. Not that we apply that knowledge evenly or fairly.
    19 Feb, 08:00 AM Reply Like
  • Stefan Moroney
    , contributor
    Comments (2424) | Send Message
     
    10M to this small company

     

    http://bit.ly/1hu0rOA
    19 Feb, 12:38 AM Reply Like
  • LT
    , contributor
    Comments (4416) | Send Message
     
    definitely one to watch stephan.
    19 Feb, 03:40 AM Reply Like
  • User 393748
    , contributor
    Comments (177) | Send Message
     
    Re Magna's CEO and the comment about the auto industry preparing itself for full EVs.

     

    There are those in the battery science field that recognize the resource limitation issue with using lithium in batteries. Resource constraints with lithium and the recognition that more energy density and power density are going to be required for mass EV-PHEV
    adoption, densities that the current state of Li-Ion battery technology fail to provide, have led to research into other chemistries such as Magnesium based battery chemistries (IIRC, iindelco recently made mention of Mg batteries) and what are known as Super Iron battery chemistries.

     

    Magnesium is regarded as promising due to its being quite available as a resource, safer, and cheaper than lithium. Super Iron batteries use iron salts and can provide high voltage, high storage capacity, and are less toxic than other current chemistries. Using irons salts is also much cheaper and more available that lithium or even cobalt. Some super iron chemistries have been shown to have a storage capacity of up to 485 mAh/g.

     

    In both the magnesium battery and the super iron battery, more than one electron per atom can be stored, whereas only one electron per atom can be stored with a Li-Ion battery. This extra storage capacity easily doubles the energy storage that is possible with Li-Ion chemistries.

     

    But, as with all these battery chemistries, they still have many technical challenges. Magnesium batteries require much more research on finding a suitable cathode material and the development of a stable electrolyte, one that does not form a blocking layer on the electrodes. Some super iron battery
    chemistries that have been tried exhibit differing electrochemical potentials between the different elements that make up the chemical composition of the battery. These differing potentials cause a rapid breakdown in some of the elements in those particluar chemistries and can create hydrogen gas inside of the battery.

     

    So, it is still very much an open question as to what will eventually be the commonly used battery chemistry employed in any EV/PHEV vehicles in the years ahead. Current indications are that it will be years before this question may have an answer.

     

    However, even if other such chemistries take the place of Li-Ion batteries, we are still presented with the same problem as is seen with current Li-Ion batteries, and that is the immediate issue of scale. This would be the task of going from a working laboratory experimental chemistry that can be shown to be a successful
    proof of concept, to a working, durable, reliable, and safe battery for small scale applications, such as laptops, smart devices, etc. Of course, the next stage would be scaling any such batteries up to being suitable and safe for large energy and power applications, such as for EV/PHEV vehicles. Going from small scale to large scale is not as easy as it may seem to be.

     

    Over the last 25 years, we have achieved significant success with using Li-Ion batteries in small scale applications with relatively modest energy requirements, but we are in the process of ascending a steep learning curve as industries set out to utilize
    Li-Ion batteries in EV/PHEV vehicles which are inherently a large energy and power application. We will face this same issue with the use of any other alternative battery chemistries for large scale requirements.
    19 Feb, 03:38 AM Reply Like
  • alsobirdman
    , contributor
    Comments (356) | Send Message
     
    @user - We don't know anything about you yet, but you sure seem to know your battery chemistry. I appreciate your insight. Confirms just how tough it is to reach the lofty goals that are being thrown around by folks who don't know any better, and also shows that at least for the foreseeable future, a solution to many battery needs already exists in our PbC.
    19 Feb, 08:20 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8492) | Send Message
     
    User 393748, your posts are a welcome addition to this forum. As others have already mentioned, the sharing of your wealth of knowledge here is very much appreciated.

     

    BTW, I did see some articles over the last year or so indicating Toyota has been working with magnesium due to its potential in future battery designs. Not that this is probably an exclusive effort in the auto industry or other sectors.
    19 Feb, 08:24 AM Reply Like
  • User 393748
    , contributor
    Comments (177) | Send Message
     
    Toyota has been putting alot of effort into magnesium battery research. In January of 2013, Toyota and ALS at Berkeley announced a project to develop soft x-ray testing equipment designed to allow for an in-depth view into the performance
    characteristics of magnesium battery chemistries. With this x-ray equipment, they hope to solve the electrolyte problem in Mg battery chemistries.
    20 Feb, 12:59 AM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (1222) | Send Message
     
    there is no resource limitation with lithium
    21 Feb, 08:32 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8492) | Send Message
     
    Edmund, Perhaps not today. But think of the ramifications if automotive was successful in making transportation far more electrified with storage becoming dependent on lithium based chemistries. And where is all the easily recoverable lithium located that is supporting today's pricing. Also, who gets first crack at supply assurance, automotive with on average maybe 4 % margins or electronics and other various thingys that have to died for margins?

     

    If it was a given that lithium ion was safe and a given in supply T wouldn't be moving as they are.

     

    Look at how the press is jumping up and down about battery supply w/ Tesla's usage. Compared to T they are a fly dropping when it comes to needing to assure supply and the level needed. And when it comes to building supply chains T has to do the heavy lifting and Tesla is just a little dude taking advantage of social and economic anomalies thus far.
    21 Feb, 08:47 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (1222) | Send Message
     
    Lithium will never be safe. It's exactly that which makes it exciting. Like uranium: Great promise and great tragedy await.

     

    I heard something about a flexible unbreakable fabric battery you could wear today. Absolutely indestructible, they say. Based on lithum chemistry, no less! Answer to the world's problems!

     

    Sorry, buddy, we know all we need to know about lithium. And uranium. Next up?
    21 Feb, 10:57 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8492) | Send Message
     
    USCAR has added an RFPI for 48 VDC advanced batteries. As usual the target specs exclude lead chemistries from being potential solutions in the area of mass. Since the specs contain lots of stretch goals this should not be a surprise.

     

    http://bit.ly/My58Vx
    19 Feb, 08:39 AM Reply Like
  • Mathieu Malecot
    , contributor
    Comments (956) | Send Message
     
    so, march looking like a good month for AXPW. losing sellers and a conference call... brazenly optimistic.
    19 Feb, 08:42 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8492) | Send Message
     
    "...brazenly optimistic"

     

    Yes. I'd say.
    19 Feb, 11:14 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29176) | Send Message
     
    AGRION Intel has identified Axion as one of the "25+ of the Most Innovative Young Companies in America."

     

    http://bit.ly/1fyGu2b
    19 Feb, 09:09 AM Reply Like
  • Patrick Young
    , contributor
    Comments (847) | Send Message
     
    Too bad ePower didn't make the Transport category.
    19 Feb, 10:39 AM Reply Like
  • Patrick Young
    , contributor
    Comments (847) | Send Message
     
    >JP On Axion's "Technology" tab on their website, says, "have been...fabricating a series of material and design evaluation prototypes that range from single cell to multi-cell batteries." I take it to mean they have fabricated prototypes that are of different sizes. Therefore, the Kia battery being "small format" is not evidence against it being a PbC, no?
    19 Feb, 10:48 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29176) | Send Message
     
    I suspect that particular discussion is really old and needs to be updated.
    19 Feb, 12:04 PM Reply Like
  • Stefan Moroney
    , contributor
    Comments (2424) | Send Message
     
    Unfortunately, there are many claims of Axion that are old and need to be updated as to what the current status is or whether the "initiatives" are still ongoing.

     

    I would encourage management to do so.
    19 Feb, 01:35 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (1222) | Send Message
     
    Always the same 13 guys like your comments. heheheh.
    21 Feb, 08:33 PM Reply Like
  • Stefan Moroney
    , contributor
    Comments (2424) | Send Message
     
    Ed,

     

    Tell me about where Axion stands then ... hmm, are you picking black or red?

     

    I've been playing the Axion casino for awhile. Too bad it's been a perennial loser.
    22 Feb, 12:22 AM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (16953) | Send Message
     
    02/18/2014: EOD stuff partially copied from blog (up now).
    # Trds: 82, MinTrSz: 246, MaxTrSz: 99000, Vol: 879226, AvTrSz: 10722
    Min. Pr: 0.0975, Max Pr: 0.1010, VW Avg. Tr. Pr: 0.0999
    # Buys, Shares: 30 298538, VW Avg Buy Pr: 0.1004
    # Sells, Shares: 52 580688, VW Avg Sell Pr: 0.0996
    # Unkn, Shares: 0 0, VW Avg Unk. Pr: 0.0000
    Buy:Sell 1:1.95 (33.95% "buys"), DlyShts 260308 (29.61%), Dly Sht % of 'sells' 44.83%

     

    The average of the lowest 20 VWAPs times 80% today is $0.0778 vs. $0.0779, $0.0779, $0.0779, $0.0779, $0.0779, $0.0779, $0.0779, $0.0779 and $0.0779 on prior days. 80% of today's VWAP is $0.0799 vs. $0.0816, $0.0846, $0.0836 $0.0881, $0.0902, $0.0922, $0.0899, $0.0930 and $0.0873 on prior days. These are potential prices for the next tranche of shares to the PIPErs.

     

    Today's low, high, VWAP, trade volume, and daily short sales moved -2.50%, -5.08%, -2.08%, -56.18% and -39.37% respectively. Price spread today was 3.59% vs. 6.40%, 9.52%, 3.49%, 16.06%, 17.07%, 9.90%, 10.60%, 10.71% and 16.86% on prior days.

     

    We had two notable trades that were out of trend: 1500 and 1300 share trades at the open for $0.0975 each ...

     

    Larger trades (>= 15K) ... totaled 517,676 shares, 58.88% of days volume, traded at a VWAP $0.0999 ...

     

    ... Regarding the inverted cup and handle ... We now have confirmation with a second close below that price ... Well, we got a “white” knight” in the form of a 300K bid at $0.10 at 15:33. Without this I believe our close would have been sub-$0.10. Thank you to the investor trading through CSTI market-maker for saving our bacon today ...

     

    On the traditional TA front, we have three days of lower highs and lows now. Stochastic sank deeper into oversold today and Williams %R is still on track to get there soon. RSI continues to weaken, now below neutral at ~45, but it's been below neutral since Thursday last. RSI and momentum continue to be hesitant about making a strong trend, flipping this way and that, but generally making a very gradual movement towards lower. ADX and related weakening is becoming slightly more pronounced.

     

    A possible hopeful sign, albeit a weak one IMO given current conditions and past behavior, is that volume was lower today. Maybe we'll stabilize here for a day or two, but I'm not all that optimistic about that.

     

    Two days now we've traded completely below my longer-term descending resistance (formerly support). Worse, we are separating from it as price descends faster than the line, ~$0.0028/week.

     

    More and the usual in the blog here.
    http://seekingalpha.co...

     

    HardToLove
    19 Feb, 09:13 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8492) | Send Message
     
    Yes, The government has force fed the market with tax dollars the few systems that are out there. The clear winner indeed. Governments are always right because they have all the answers. You get that when you are not influenced by special interests.

     

    Lithium ion "clear leader" in utility-scale battery energy storage apps

     

    http://bit.ly/1jcgtKv
    19 Feb, 11:19 AM Reply Like
  • Stilldazed
    , contributor
    Comments (2046) | Send Message
     
    Hi ii,
    Take the Li-on batteries and put them in an underground vault so there is little temp variance for good charge acceptance and voila, instant swimming pool when they pull a Boeing. (snark-snark)
    19 Feb, 11:51 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8492) | Send Message
     
    Another sign as we look to the auto market to possibly install PbC. It's big weakness is certainly counter this trend. However we need to remember that price is still very important.

     

    Could the Next GM Pickups Have More Aluminum?

     

    http://bit.ly/1cqx4Zb
    19 Feb, 12:32 PM Reply Like
  • Patrick Young
    , contributor
    Comments (847) | Send Message
     
    Our AGRION top 25 Li-ion colleague, STEM has the following pricing according to
    http://bit.ly/1alY2ig
    "Patel says a 54-kilowatt system costs about $100,000, though California state incentives cover about 60 percent of that price."
    How does this compare to PbC for the same amount of peak power?
    19 Feb, 01:21 PM Reply Like
  • Stefan Moroney
    , contributor
    Comments (2424) | Send Message
     
    Also interesting from your article PY -

     

    "But thanks to a $5 million fund financed by Clean Feet Investors, Stem will offer customers no-money-down installation of battery storage in exchange for monthly fee paid out of the savings on utility bills. Such lease deals unleashed an explosion in residential solar systems and Patel expects to see a similar result in battery storage. Stem has orders for 6 megawatts’ worth of systems and Patel expects that to jump to 15 megawatts over the next year."
    19 Feb, 01:40 PM Reply Like
  • D-inv
    , contributor
    Comments (3768) | Send Message
     
    Availability of project financing could be a hindering factor for Axion PbC sales. Axion's PR announcing the $320k PbC sale in November noted 40% downpayment received with P.O.
    19 Feb, 01:56 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8492) | Send Message
     
    D-inv, Was just going to post a thought on the same possibility.

     

    There have been a few articles about the banks being interested in the energy storage sector but not yet knowing how to assess the factors required for their risk assessments. One bank was even going so far as to have a storage system installed so they could get a better understanding of the sector. IIRC Solar City also has access to financing so they can wrap everything up in one package. Does seem to be a factor in the ability to sell into the residential market at least.
    19 Feb, 02:36 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29176) | Send Message
     
    Jigar Shah, the former CEO of Sun Edison and the Carbon War Room recently published a book titled "Creating Climate Wealth" where he devoted a lot of attention to the importance of combining renewables and financing into packages that don't require substantial front-end capital outlays. The ability to sell "solar as a service" and for that matter "storage as a service" can be very important for end-users who simply want a reliable monthly bill and aren't sitting on piles of cash to fund capital intensive installations.
    19 Feb, 03:25 PM Reply Like
  • ARGE
    , contributor
    Comments (707) | Send Message
     
    Well if a power cube can generate $18K+ in revenue per month in frequency regulation, it seems that financing and leasing them are likely options.
    I don't have an idea what it cost to build one, but 40 would generate about $8M a year...Axion would never need financing again (well until the $50M massive build out.)

     

    http://yhoo.it/1eDaYjd
    19 Feb, 04:46 PM Reply Like
  • nogoodslacker
    , contributor
    Comments (817) | Send Message
     
    ARGE, In the last concentrator, had the idea that Axion should deploy some revenue-generating cubes using the $2M in inventory they have laying around. JP told me it was a dumb idea, so I guess he knows best.
    20 Feb, 08:40 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29176) | Send Message
     
    Businesses live or die by their available working capital. A couple million in inventory can be cycled several times a year and support several million in annual revenue. If you turn that inventory into a capital asset the turnover period becomes several years instead of several months.

     

    Whenever you build a capital asset you have to be able to answer the question "Where will the replacement working capital come from?" Companies that have a hard time attracting substantial additional capital on attractive terms should never move money from the working capital section of the balance sheet to the PP&E section.

     

    A few years ago Beacon Power drove itself into bankruptcy by spending all of its available capital on heavily leveraged company owned frequency regulation facilities. Once the money was committed to assets with a 10-year payback, there was nothing to support current overhead. Building company-owned PowerCubes makes sense if you want Axion to engage in the power business. It makes no sense if you want it to engage in the battery manufacturing business.
    20 Feb, 08:58 AM Reply Like
  • nogoodslacker
    , contributor
    Comments (817) | Send Message
     
    JP, I would agree with you if anyone was lining up to buy those batteries that are sitting in inventory. If they use existing inventory, they don't have to replace capital, they just have to replace inventory when the sales do eventually come. When the verifiable orders are in the pipeline, raising capital will not be so big a challenge.

     

    Plus, it can only help them to have a few more demonstrators out there to prove their claimed value proposition.
    20 Feb, 09:07 AM Reply Like
  • ARGE
    , contributor
    Comments (707) | Send Message
     
    Must of missed that one, just seems to me if you sell a PbC you eat for a day, if you lease one and revenue share in the FR, then you eat for 5 years of so.
    20 Feb, 09:12 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29176) | Send Message
     
    Think your way through the numbers.

     

    A million dollar investment in a PowerCube will generate $200,000 of annual revenue. After maintenance, operating costs and depreciation, it might contribute $100,000 a year in gross profit. At that rate it would take $80 million of PowerCube investments to reach break-even.

     

    While Axion doesn't have $80 million, an investment of that magnitude in electrode fabrication facilities would support $200 million of electrode sales per year. At a 25% gross margin that's a $50 million contribution to overhead as compared with an $8 million contribution from a comparable investment in PowerCubes.

     

    Do you want to be in the battery business or the power business?
    20 Feb, 09:29 AM Reply Like
  • nogoodslacker
    , contributor
    Comments (817) | Send Message
     
    My whole point is not for them to get in the power business. But, if you are in the business of building and selling power cubes and you have $2M worth of batteries sitting around waiting to sell, why not plug them in to the grid while you wait for the customers. They earn nothing sitting on the shelf.
    20 Feb, 09:55 AM Reply Like
  • Mathieu Malecot
    , contributor
    Comments (956) | Send Message
     
    NGS... are the batteries waiting around to be sold?

     

    if you saw a capex in the millions of dollars with a ROI of 10% for a company with a market cap this small what would you think?

     

    i know i'd invest in a larger company. i'm here on safari.
    20 Feb, 10:16 AM Reply Like
  • D-inv
    , contributor
    Comments (3768) | Send Message
     
    Content of TG's letter to shareholders needs to be read carefully. The sentence of your interest, ARGE, appears to be, "In 2013, PJM's revenue payments per MW averaged more than $18,500.~ net per month after expenses, at a conservative 80%~ participation rate. "

     

    Just what does that say? It is a statement on rate of payment, not level of payment. Applying that metric to Axion's New Castle PowerCube (PC) one immediately finds that size parameters of the PC are not matched with MW power streams. Some conversions and assumptions are required. According to Axion's registration/entry of the device with DOE's Energy Storage Database (May 2013), the PowerCube has a rated power capability of 500kW and can operate at that level for 30 minutes. The second entry in that database (Jan 2014) gives a rated power of 100 kW. Taken together those database entries might be taken to indicate that 20% of PC capacity is made available for FR service and 80% reserved for Axion.

     

    Bottom line. Might be best to interpret TG's statement as one indicating the rate of payment received per reference unit of power provided when Axion participates, not actual revenue realized.
    20 Feb, 10:19 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29176) | Send Message
     
    At September 30th Axion's inventories included $1.13 million of raw materials, $1.91 million of work in process and $0.43 million of finished goods. There are no stacks of batteries sitting on shelves and if you convert the inventories into PowerCubes then you won't inventories to support the manufacturing of more batteries.

     

    Until somebody finds a nifty way for Axion to create huge piles of cash without selling stock at distressed prices building company-owned PowerCubes is the worst possible capital spending plan.
    20 Feb, 10:24 AM Reply Like
  • ARGE
    , contributor
    Comments (707) | Send Message
     
    JOhn with those number, you are right it doesn't make sense, but if those are the numbers who would want a power cube in the first place?
    Who would send a cool Mill to buy something that cost $100k to maintain and operate? I also don;t think Axion is spending a million to make something it sells for a million.
    Now if I were building a factory or a data center and I would cut my capital expenditure in 1/2 and generate $80,000 a year from something that would normally cost me $20k I would have a hard time saying no.
    How about we get in the money making business for a change, and do both.
    20 Feb, 03:30 PM Reply Like
  • Stefan Moroney
    , contributor
    Comments (2424) | Send Message
     
    D-inv - to be quite frank, why the hell would you attempt to interpret a TG statement anymore ... I can tell you one thing, I don't bother. Better to just say you come from Missouri, show me something ... anything to justify the story.
    21 Feb, 12:24 AM Reply Like
  • D-inv
    , contributor
    Comments (3768) | Send Message
     
    :-) Trying to be helpful to the potentially less wary, Stef, as well as contribute to objective, open assessment of Axion management.
    21 Feb, 10:56 AM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (1222) | Send Message
     
    Any income from "the grid" for the price of having clean pure instant reliable power is icing on the cake. These PbCubes seem to be set up to sell themselves. Why aren't they flying off the shelf?

     

    And, why, if it's that straight-forward to make money making something only you know how to make, why isn't AXPW funding itself?
    21 Feb, 08:44 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8492) | Send Message
     
    Well it doesn't appear that Axion's Net Zero energy storage demonstrator gave them a leg up on this more substantial program.

     

    Saft to Deliver Li-ion Battery Containers to Tri-Technic Inc. for Fort Hunter Liggett Energy Storage

     

    " The Fort Hunter Liggett energy storage unit was designated as a “Net Zero” pilot installation by the Department of Defense (DOD), which signifies that it will only consume as much energy as it produces. The battery system will store energy for later use when the base’s solar power field generates more electricity than demand. Tri-Technic selected Saft as part of its contract with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Sacramento District to provide the base with a 1.25 MW battery energy storage system."

     

    " The contract marks Saft’s first large battery energy storage system (BESS) installed in a DOD facility. As part of its ongoing objective to conserve resources, Fort Hunter Liggett is planning to install a third solar photovoltaic unit in 2014."

     

    http://bit.ly/1bMybVb
    19 Feb, 03:15 PM Reply Like
  • D-inv
    , contributor
    Comments (3768) | Send Message
     
    Also did not help with securing orders for the Philadelphia Navy Yard net zero energy project or the Ft. Mead energy project.
    19 Feb, 03:22 PM Reply Like
  • greentongue
    , contributor
    Comments (700) | Send Message
     
    If they are looking for "battery energy storage system" then the PbC is not the best fit. Doesn't mean that it wouldn't also be included, just not as the primary.
    19 Feb, 09:28 PM Reply Like
  • siliconhillbilly
    , contributor
    Comments (2083) | Send Message
     
    If it is guvmint money, the politics count more than the science. And the DoD spending is definitely guvmint money! "Demonstration projects" are mostly pork for local jobs, in this case disguised as "green" energy development grants.
    24 Feb, 12:26 PM Reply Like
  • WayneinOregon
    , contributor
    Comments (836) | Send Message
     
    OT - For anybody with an interest in TBI (traumatic brain injury). At the 7:23 mark, the following video (from CBS News 60 Minutes) describes how a remarkable man is trying to raise private funds for state of the art TBI clinics for veterans. The brain scanning technology looks amazing.

     

    http://bit.ly/1mum5V8
    19 Feb, 06:29 PM Reply Like
  • Stefan Moroney
    , contributor
    Comments (2424) | Send Message
     
    Looks like another good ASME paper

     

    http://bit.ly/1jS4GDT
    20 Feb, 12:23 AM Reply Like
  • greentongue
    , contributor
    Comments (700) | Send Message
     
    How is ePower addressing the thermal management and cooling requirements of their batteries?
    Obviously the ambient temperature has been unusually low lately but the system was tested previous to this winter.
    Are there temperature monitors in the battery packs? Has there been thermal spikes during breaking or it this only an issue with train sized breaking?
    20 Feb, 08:05 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29176) | Send Message
     
    The batteries are packed into four separate boxes and well ventilated, but we haven't seen any reason to build active thermal management systems (yet).
    20 Feb, 08:14 AM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (16953) | Send Message
     
    Greentongue: continuing the pedantic thread started elsewhere :-)) "... spikes during breaking".

     

    Our PbCs don't "break"!

     

    He-he.

     

    HardToLove
    20 Feb, 09:22 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8492) | Send Message
     
    Thanks Stefan. From the same author.

     

    Electrochemical and Thermal Run Away Analysis of a Lithium-Ion Battery for Use in Hybrid Locomotives

     

    http://bit.ly/1gNLjZs
    20 Feb, 04:53 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8492) | Send Message
     
    BTW, Two of the authors from your paper are team members on some of these initiatives.

     

    Northern Illinois University

     

    Engineering gets $1 million grant to make locomotives leaner, greener

     

    http://bit.ly/1gNZei8
    20 Feb, 05:46 PM Reply Like
  • 481086
    , contributor
    Comments (3308) | Send Message
     
    Just to get a feel for the heat that might be generated... I went back to the charge acceptance white paper and took a look at the internal resistance graph on page 7... the bottom of the resistance well is about 5 milliohms, with a fairly healthy portion of the range below 6 milliohms. Note that with the advent of the continuous roll sheeting process, I believe internal resistance was improved somewhat, but still to be conservative, I should think 6 milliohms would be a good value to work with...

     

    Power loss, and thus rate of heat generation, by this internal resistance is equal to the instantaneous current squared times the resistance... So at the very heaviest current events--say 200 amps in or out... we're looking at 200^2 x 0.006 = 240 Watts. And that's per battery. But of course generally only at that high level for a few seconds or so.

     

    But with 14 batteries per box, under heaviest cycling load, you could see max instantaneous heat generation on the order of 3,360 Watts. Now that could warm things up pretty quickly if that kind of current were sustained for any real length of time. But as we know, that's not really the mode the batteries are going to be operating in, rather I would think they would be supplying a little boost here, absorbing a little deceleration there, maybe climbing a hill for a minute or two... and only really hitting those max currents when either the accelerator is floored like maybe when passing traffic, or hard braking to a full stop, or of course dealing with any steeper, longer hills..

     

    So for the vast majority of the time, especially cruising, the batteries probably aren't really doing too much work, and so shouldn't be generating problematic amounts of heat..

     

    If we say 50 amps is a more typical current flow, then the power dissipation goes way down to: 50^2 x 0.006 = 15 Watts per battery, or 210 Watts for each box of 14. A *lot* more manageable.

     

    And again, this is not continuous, and I would think should really only come into play when for whatever reason the batteries are forced to work hard for extended periods...

     

    John, when you guys do get the rig out on the road pulling full loads and are able to start really giving it a workout it will be interesting to hear if any thermal issues actually start arising. I have a feeling that with your design, one that uses the batteries in almost their perfect role, and only leans on them truly hard for short instances, that unless it's repeated steep hills in scorching summer heat, that thermal management issues will be minimal. Would love to find out, when the time comes, that that's true. Something additional that should be touted over Li-ion...
    21 Feb, 12:31 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29176) | Send Message
     
    Even with 4,000 watts of heat generation, the impact is negligible by the time you spread that heat trough 700 pounds of battery mass.
    21 Feb, 01:07 PM Reply Like
  • 481086
    , contributor
    Comments (3308) | Send Message
     
    Whoa now, let's not go getting all calorimetric and stuff about it, okay? ;)
    21 Feb, 01:55 PM Reply Like
  • 481086
    , contributor
    Comments (3308) | Send Message
     
    Ok, very well, (I know the board is just dying for this... ;)

     

    26.650 joules/mole-K for lead @AW 207 g/mole
    8.52 joules/mole-K for carbon @AW 12 g/mole
    4181.3 joules /(kg·K) for water

     

    So if we guesstimate for simplicity that our 700 lbs of battery mass is made up of (by weight) one third lead, one third water, and one third carbon, it would have an aggregate specific heat of:

     

    (1/3) 4181 + (1/3) 129 + (1/3) 710= 1673 joules / kg-K for the composite mass.

     

    700 lbs / 2.2 lbs per Kg = 318 Kg per box.

     

    So the overall total heat capacity per box is 1673 x 318 = 532,000 Joules per degree Kelvin.

     

    Or, since a degree Kelvin = 1.8 degree F then it would be 532,000 divided by 1.8 gives approx 296,000 Joules to raise the temperature of the box of batteries by one degree F.

     

    So, at 4000 Watts, which is 4000 Joules per second... it would take about 74 seconds or a minute and a quarter to raise the temperature 1 degree F. So five minutes at full tilt would raise the temp by only about 4 degrees F. So really, the truck would have to be going up and down some pretty steep hills I would think, working the batteries very hard, and doing this for a while, to generate an appreciable temperature gain.

     

    Basically it would take an hour of extreme such duty to raise the temperature 50F. And that is in the absence of any cooling mechanism. I would think just some airflow through the box at road speed would do plenty to keep it under control...
    21 Feb, 02:42 PM Reply Like
  • RBrun357
    , contributor
    Comments (779) | Send Message
     
    48'

     

    I truly did enjoy that!

     

    Thanks
    21 Feb, 02:56 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29176) | Send Message
     
    I did too, but the ratio is more like 70% lead, 20% water and 10% carbon.
    21 Feb, 03:00 PM Reply Like
  • froggey77
    , contributor
    Comments (2791) | Send Message
     
    Barely being able to follow 48's argument ... Personally I'd put a thermometer (or sensor) in the box and see if it heated up.
    21 Feb, 03:06 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (16953) | Send Message
     
    Great discourse 48! Explains why I tend to issue so much hot air too - as I aged and my mass increased I also increased my specific heat (caloric) capacity.

     

    In order to maintain good health with a core temperature within normal ranges I need a lot of air flow.

     

    :-))

     

    That's my story and I'm stickin' to it!

     

    HardToLove
    21 Feb, 03:21 PM Reply Like
  • 481086
    , contributor
    Comments (3308) | Send Message
     
    John, if 70/20/10 is really the true ratio then I'm thinking the composite specific heat would be more like:

     

    (0.70 x 129) + (0.20 x 4181) + (0.10 x 710) = 997 joules / Kg-K

     

    which multiplied by the 318Kg total gives: 317,000 joules / K or 176,000 joules per degree F

     

    So at 4000 joules per second means it takes about 45 seconds at full tilt to raise the temp 1 degree F or roughly +80F in one hour vice +50F, so perhaps the potential to be a little more of an issue, but again that is for a sealed box with no cooling at all and at max continuous electrical load. Neither of which condition will really obtain in actual operation.

     

    So I think the main conclusion remains valid: That given the nature of the duty cycle and the superior characteristics of the PbC, thermal issues aren't too likely to be too big of a challenge...
    21 Feb, 03:55 PM Reply Like
  • 481086
    , contributor
    Comments (3308) | Send Message
     
    Thanks HTL, now I know it may be of only marginal utility, but heck it's way more fun (and more spiritually rewarding) than beating up yet again on them poor misunderstood PIPeRs!
    21 Feb, 04:05 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (16953) | Send Message
     
    48: What we can't account for is "hot spots". Spread of heat will not be uniform through the masses. Air flow will likely be disturbed as well.

     

    So a margin of safety, probably baked up by instrumentation at the most problematic spots would be needed to effectively apply your calculations to a real-world scenario.

     

    HardToLove
    21 Feb, 04:17 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8492) | Send Message
     
    "So a margin of safety, probably baked up by instrumentation..."

     

    What an appropriate slip of the fingers!

     

    BTW, Didn't NSC make mention of thermal management concerns in their packaging? This is not to imply that the two designs have common challenges. But heat in extreme climates is generally a challenge for all battery chemistries showing up in performance or life metrics.
    21 Feb, 04:23 PM Reply Like
  • Mathieu Malecot
    , contributor
    Comments (956) | Send Message
     
    to control air flow you need to prevent movement of batterys; ie racks.
    21 Feb, 04:24 PM Reply Like
  • D-inv
    , contributor
    Comments (3768) | Send Message
     
    Enlightening first approximation, 48~. Among the known unknowns one would need to consider in refining that approximation is resistance and mass of cabling used to connect PbCs within each box. I'm thinking cables capable of carrying > 236 amps are pretty heavy (copper?,) but maybe not (aluminum?).
    21 Feb, 04:31 PM Reply Like
  • Retired Aviator
    , contributor
    Comments (1421) | Send Message
     
    4000 watts would be like 3 or 4 hair dryers, no?
    21 Feb, 04:55 PM Reply Like
  • Retired Aviator
    , contributor
    Comments (1421) | Send Message
     
    The boxes are pretty low so if you introduce vented air flow it will be tricky to exclude rain, dirt kicked up, and road salt which could be bad news for a box containing $5000 worth of batteries.
    21 Feb, 04:59 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (16953) | Send Message
     
    R.A: Super-cool (literally and figuratively) air scoops atop the cab with ducting to divert moisture and carry almost nothing but air ought to do the trick.

     

    HardToLove
    21 Feb, 05:05 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8492) | Send Message
     
    RA, They have various rubber hoses you can utilize to vent air while excluding water entry. You can run the opening to a safe place or favorable orientation. Obviously these will impact air flow so you have to compensate.

     

    You can also do some nice things with vent holes/splash diverters and drains.
    21 Feb, 05:10 PM Reply Like
  • 481086
    , contributor
    Comments (3308) | Send Message
     
    We can haz nice things??
    21 Feb, 05:15 PM Reply Like
  • Retired Aviator
    , contributor
    Comments (1421) | Send Message
     
    HTL> "almost nothing but air"

     

    No bird poop from up there, you promise?
    21 Feb, 05:27 PM Reply Like
  • siliconhillbilly
    , contributor
    Comments (2083) | Send Message
     
    I recall that in ionic conduction, the resistance drops as the temperature rises. My brief research just now seems to verify that memory.

     

    So if the current (or part of it) is transferred by ionic conduction (H+ ions), part of the resistance has a negative temperature coefficient. That is, the resistance DROPS as the temperature rises. So as the cell temp rises, the R part of the I x I x R will be reduced and so will the heat produced.

     

    Figuring out how big an affect this has is above my pay scale ;-)
    24 Feb, 12:46 PM Reply Like
  • 481086
    , contributor
    Comments (3308) | Send Message
     
    The internal resistance graph I quoted from the white paper is for 26C... it would be lovely to see additional graphs for a few different temperatures... at -10,0,10,20,30,40, 50, 60C etc... but then of course, a lot of things would be lovely...
    24 Feb, 12:53 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (16953) | Send Message
     
    02/19/2014: EOD stuff partially copied from blog (up now).
    # Trds: 117, MinTrSz: 100, MaxTrSz: 110000, Vol: 1885454, AvTrSz: 16115
    Min. Pr: 0.0950, Max Pr: 0.1030, VW Avg. Tr. Pr: 0.0981
    # Buys, Shares: 49 821450, VW Avg Buy Pr: 0.0991
    # Sells, Shares: 67 1043492, VW Avg Sell Pr: 0.0974
    # Unkn, Shares: 1 20512, VW Avg Unk. Pr: 0.0975
    Buy:Sell 1:1.27 (43.57% "buys"), DlyShts 563000 (29.86%), Dly Sht % of 'sells' 53.95%

     

    The average of the lowest 20 VWAPs times 80% today is $0.0777 vs. $0.0778, $0.0779, $0.0779, $0.0779, $0.0779, $0.0779, $0.0779, $0.0779 and $0.0779 on prior days. 80% of today's VWAP is $0.0785 vs. $0.0799, $0.0816, $0.0846, $0.0836 $0.0881, $0.0902, $0.0922, $0.0899 and $0.0930 on prior days. These are potential prices for the next tranche of shares to the PIPErs.

     

    Today's low, high, VWAP, trade volume, and daily short sales moved -2.56%, 1.98%, -1.75%,114.44% and 116.28% respectively. Price spread today was 8.42% vs. 3.59%, 6.40%, 9.52%, 3.49%, 16.06%, 17.07%, 9.90%, 10.60% and 10.71% on prior days.

     

    There were trades I considered notable, due to the influence of my TFH ...

     

    Larger trades (>= 15K) occurred on 29 of the 117 trades today, 24.79%. These totaled 1,203,954 shares, 63.85% of days volume, and traded at a VWAP $0.0981. 11, 37.93% of these 29 trades ...

     

    On the traditional TA front, the string of lower highs is broken (even excluding those $0.1029 and $0.1030 trades, we have a $0.1018 high, above yesterday's high of $0.101). The string of lower lows is intact though.

     

    Stochastic has flattened out in oversold today and Williams %R got there today. RSI continues to weaken, down to ~42 from ~45, below neutral since Thursday 2/13. MFI continues to be hesitant about making a strong trend, now going flat and momentum has finally started decisively down, now at 0.965. ADX and related weakening went from a slightly more pronounced downward trend to flat. MACD and it's histogram has gone negative.

     

    Yesterday I mentioned a possible hopeful sign, albeit a weak one IMO given current conditions and past behavior, was that volume was lower and I said maybe we'll stabilize here for a day or two, but I wasn't all that optimistic about that.

     

    A lower close, below $0.10, with rising volume today shoots that hope down.

     

    Three days now we've traded completely below my longer-term descending resistance (formerly support) and, as I mentioned yesterday, we are separating from it as price descends faster than the line, ~$0.0028/week.

     

    The best, and closest, chance for support remains my medium-term former descending resistance. Three days ago it was at ~$0.0927, AFAICT, and descending at ~$0.003/week, so it should be around $0.0925 now ...

     

    More of the usual in the blog here.
    http://seekingalpha.co...

     

    HardToLove
    20 Feb, 09:12 AM Reply Like
  • Mathieu Malecot
    , contributor
    Comments (956) | Send Message
     
    technically this stock looks worse over the last week than it has in months. i am interested in how (if at all) things turn around.
    20 Feb, 10:19 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8492) | Send Message
     
    Four possibilities. More is better! ;-P

     

    A. Repetitive sales or a crystal clear signed contract verifying a path to them.

     

    B. A partnership.

     

    C. See A and B.

     

    D. All of the above.
    20 Feb, 11:43 AM Reply Like
  • Stefan Moroney
    , contributor
    Comments (2424) | Send Message
     
    Mathieu,

     

    This stock has been technically broken for years. The only reason the subset of people that actually have heard the Axion name is b/c of John's prolific writing. Otherwise ... well, everyone here knows about Axion's ability to communicate.
    21 Feb, 12:28 AM Reply Like
  • 481086
    , contributor
    Comments (3308) | Send Message
     
    The simple fact is, Axion really did go public way too early. By about a decade. We know there are good reasons for why it did, and the validity of those remain true. But it is what it is, and here we are. The other stubborn truth is that the energy storage business and the battery business... have been just absolute lethal killers: Grudge purchases only. Regulatory sclerosis. Jabba the OEM's where each year barely oozes along with all the viscosity of lukewarm tar. So far, it's all been nothing but an endless valley of suffering where money goes to get lost and then die.

     

    Maybe the stars are finally aligning, maybe the big pieces are finally, finally coming into place... the railroads and their emissions targets...the grid storage markets and their long awaited mandates, the whole renewables charade, the automakers and their endless games...trucks and their anti-idling laws... maybe maybe maybe.

     

    Storage has simply been the crappiest sector known to man. Money, profits, and ROI have all been deathly allergic to it.

     

    It's been like waiting for the mother of all ice-jams to break. We all know it's coming, but for years it's been nothing but creaking and groaning. Slow grinding and gnashing of floe on floe with no perceptible forward movement... just waiting. Endless waiting. And tea leaf divining. It's all going to break someday, with some great thundering rumble, as tons and tons and tons of stubborn mass finally starts movement at last. The grid storage buildout. The locomotive orders. The serial hybrid truck revolution. The island energy liberation campaign. The second generation SS/MH wave... It's all coming someday. Someday.

     

    There is water, at the bottom of the ocean. Subterranean currents only. Until that day. Same as it, ever was...
    21 Feb, 05:23 AM Reply Like
  • Stefan Moroney
    , contributor
    Comments (2424) | Send Message
     
    "Grudge purchases only" ... very true.
    21 Feb, 10:32 AM Reply Like
  • Mathieu Malecot
    , contributor
    Comments (956) | Send Message
     
    Stephan i like 52 week lows, CMXI ring a bell? as long as i like a product i can get behind shares and ignore price for awhile.
    21 Feb, 04:25 PM Reply Like
  • D Lane
    , contributor
    Comments (1175) | Send Message
     
    Its been a long time since I've heard anything from Wrightspeed, the hybrid truck power train company. Looks like an article surfaced this week.
    http://bit.ly/1h1y8m5

     

    Wrightspeed is NOT targeting the same market as ePower but they are interested in doing retrofits. A similar business model it appears. One of the most interesting things about them is their use of a micro turbine. I believe CPST is the supplier.

     

    I forget who is supplying their batteries, quite possibly it is A123.
    20 Feb, 09:25 AM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (16953) | Send Message
     
    D Lane: CPST is the MT supplier. But keep in mind that Wrightspeed is agnostic as to the genset. So we can expect some percentage of their sales to be sand an MT.

     

    However, from my very first tracking of them I felt they would be the first auto-type application that would achieve some reasonable volume and that some appreciable percentage of that volume would have MT gensets.

     

    So far, I think that's playing out as they have shipped some drivelines to Europe, IIRC.

     

    HardToLove
    20 Feb, 12:27 PM Reply Like
  • D Lane
    , contributor
    Comments (1175) | Send Message
     
    Thanks HTL. Interesting that the writer seems enthralled by the microturbine and makes no mention that alternatives are available from Wrightspeed.

     

    No doubt the author is long CPST :-)
    20 Feb, 12:58 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (16953) | Send Message
     
    D Lane: May be because, like me, they followed Ian Wright from before he got any state money and made a street-legal demo roadster using a Cappy C-30.

     

    It's easy to overlook that.

     

    HardToLove
    20 Feb, 01:10 PM Reply Like
  • ARGE
    , contributor
    Comments (707) | Send Message
     
    I didn't see how much one cost???
    Or pay back time.
    It does speak to JP's idea that trucks and bicycles are good for battery power but cars are just not worth it.
    20 Feb, 04:13 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29176) | Send Message
     
    Let's clarify the thesis a bit. Pure battery powered vehicles make sense when the unladen weight is no more than 70% of the laden weight. That makes bicycles and motorcycles attractive. It's a very tough equation for cars, trucks and trains.

     

    As vehicle weight increases, batteries almost always make sense as efficiency devices, rather than fuel tank substitutes. In other words hybrid drive is the answer.
    20 Feb, 04:25 PM Reply Like
  • JamesBBecker
    , contributor
    Comments (158) | Send Message
     
    Funny thing about the article. They claim 44 mpg "equivelant from a cost perspective".

     

    That's a pretty strange way to put things. I'm guessing what they really mean is that they mostly run on electricity - and only use the generator once in a while to recharge.

     

    In which case, they've really built an electric storage tank. And then use grid power for some percentage of operation - and then talk about equivelant MPG as per cost of grid power.

     

    They do sort of tell you the cost. They claim a savings of 3000 gallons per year, and $3.50 diesel gives $10k/yr savings. They then claim payback of 3-5 years which means a $30k - $50k adder above what a normal retrofit would cost. Roughly comparable to ePower, but on a smaller platform that uses less fuel.
    20 Feb, 09:43 PM Reply Like
  • D Lane
    , contributor
    Comments (1175) | Send Message
     
    James, regarding grid power and Wrightspeed:

     

    "All told, the system allows for all-day range, and drivers never have to pull over and plug in, unless they want to. When not in service, or as an alternative, the Route systems do allow plugging in."
    http://bit.ly/1h1y8m5

     

    Anyone notice that they are claiming much higher regen than competitors? 400 hp vs 50 (see the graph) . What kind of battery breakthrough is allowing for that?
    21 Feb, 11:19 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8492) | Send Message
     
    More capacity for us.

     

    Someday, but not in 6 months.

     

    Lead acid battery market dominated by EAST PENN Manufacturing Co. Inc., EnerSys Inc., GS Yuasa Corp., and Johnson Control Inc

     

    " One of the major drivers in this market is the development of AGM lead acid batteries..."

     

    http://bit.ly/1hbrKbY

     

    We need a train train. And I still think that's an ePower mascot on the cover. Going to strike if it ever warms up long enough. Oh well, another one hatching in the shop.

     

    http://bit.ly/17e1FXV
    20 Feb, 03:16 PM Reply Like
  • ARGE
    , contributor
    Comments (707) | Send Message
     
    I thought snakes were out, as well as the inaccurate unicorn Pegasus.
    How about a Camel with wheels passing a gas station?
    20 Feb, 07:42 PM Reply Like
  • greentongue
    , contributor
    Comments (700) | Send Message
     
    Monty Python-Horse Coconuts?
    http://bit.ly/OikTVZ
    21 Feb, 08:10 AM Reply Like
  • ARGE
    , contributor
    Comments (707) | Send Message
     
    Carried by an African Swallow!
    http://bit.ly/NhNr0B
    21 Feb, 09:19 AM Reply Like
  • wtblanchard
    , contributor
    Comments (2283) | Send Message
     
    New Axion Blog entry ... seem to be appearing every 2 weeks:

     

    California's Solar Demands Reshape Grid's Energy Load

     

    http://bit.ly/1gNnPnj
    20 Feb, 03:20 PM Reply Like
  • greentongue
    , contributor
    Comments (700) | Send Message
     
    A way to "say what's on the desk" without violating any NDAs.
    20 Feb, 07:32 PM Reply Like
  • Patrick Young
    , contributor
    Comments (847) | Send Message
     
    >greentoungue
    Exactly
    20 Feb, 09:10 PM Reply Like
  • DRich
    , contributor
    Comments (4335) | Send Message
     
    >wtblanchard ... I sure wish Axion could blog about a project or something relevant to the company. Sigh!

     

    The opportunity & news we know about. At least it is something and we now know they know ... but ... Oh!, well sigh again.
    20 Feb, 03:31 PM Reply Like
  • Patrick Young
    , contributor
    Comments (847) | Send Message
     
    I believe these press releases are intended to suggest what projects Axion is working on in a general sense without actually violating an NDA.

     

    "Caribbean solar"

     

    "California energy storage"
    20 Feb, 03:46 PM Reply Like
  • DRich
    , contributor
    Comments (4335) | Send Message
     
    >Patrick Young ... I'll believe that when I see a sale ... anything in any size for any purpose will do. 'Til then I'll resist the urge to go to New Castle myself and picket the front gate with a placard ( I've several ideas for what it could say), but I'm getting bored enough.
    20 Feb, 03:55 PM Reply Like
  • Patrick Young
    , contributor
    Comments (847) | Send Message
     
    Hahaha! "picket the front gate".

     

    I think that would be a first in corporate America.

     

    In any case, this forum is more visible to both the company and the world than any picket line could be.
    20 Feb, 04:00 PM Reply Like
  • Stefan Moroney
    , contributor
    Comments (2424) | Send Message
     
    As discussed, any benefit of the doubt or "political capital" was spent a long time ago.
    20 Feb, 05:41 PM Reply Like
  • wtblanchard
    , contributor
    Comments (2283) | Send Message
     
    Will Crowdsourced Loans for Rooftop Solar Overtake Third-Party Ownership?

     

    A new Sungage-Mosaic partnership could challenge the dominant solar services providers.

     

    Herman K. Trabish
    February 19, 2014

     

    http://bit.ly/1gNxaeO

     

    "A key part of the Sungage plan is a smaller down payment calculated to compete with low- and zero-down TPO programs. For an average, well-sited system, the down payment can be less than $1,000."

     

    ...

     

    "TPO programs have demonstrated that institutions will invest in bundled rooftop solar portfolios. The question now is whether Mosaic’s crowd of investors will be as enthusiastic about this more complicated structure as it has been about large individual installations. Ross and Mansier say they are confident in the Massachusetts and New York solar markets, where Sungage's installer partners tell them opportunities are opening up."
    20 Feb, 03:56 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29176) | Send Message
     
    These things are not crowd sourced. They're just another flavor of CDO where institutions can participate in a pool of solar panel loans.
    20 Feb, 04:32 PM Reply Like
  • wtblanchard
    , contributor
    Comments (2283) | Send Message
     
    Wonder if perhaps the headline writer wasn't the article's author.

     

    But the important point here is that new financing and competition to finance is happening. Now if we can just some storage included in these "cookie-cutter" offerings ...
    20 Feb, 07:19 PM Reply Like
  • Ranma
    , contributor
    Comments (1254) | Send Message
     
    Who did the afternoon share dump? Why don't the PIPErs take it easy now?
    20 Feb, 03:59 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29176) | Send Message
     
    My pet theory is that one of the PIPE investors is particularly aggressive on the sell button and that seller's behavior forces the other three to be equally aggressive or get less than their fair share. My numbers also suggest that the most aggressive seller will be out of the game by the end of this month. Then we'll get a clearer view.
    20 Feb, 04:36 PM Reply Like
  • dance621
    , contributor
    Comments (162) | Send Message
     
    Another way of looking at when the PIPE investors will be gone is to look at comparative volume numbers. Before June last year volume was somewhere around the 200k daily mark according to yahoo charts. Now we are averaging about 1 million. I never could get my head around the double count on the OTC market concept but that is 800k more shares changing hands on a daily basis or approx 200 million more shares than would have been expected. Now I have my suspicions about the pipe investors. It would be easy for them to have "friends" trading shares so that the extra volume allows them to execute their 15%. But with a lack of news since June to drive volume I can easily imagine over 100M real shares leaving large portfolios. How many are they supposed to have had so far in total?
    20 Feb, 05:27 PM Reply Like
  • dance621
    , contributor
    Comments (162) | Send Message
     
    And by the way, I sense a real uneasiness on the board. The sort of edginess you would find in rehab. Investors waiting patiently but deep down really knowing every time they check, that there is not going to be a sale reported. These fluff press releases are like methadone at the clinic. A poor imitation of a heroin high we all crave. It wouldn't have been so bad if TG had not continually told up he was holding. Come on TG. If you got it. Just an 8-ball will do.
    20 Feb, 05:31 PM Reply Like
  • dance621
    , contributor
    Comments (162) | Send Message
     
    In fact the more i think about it the more it makes sense. If you have 200k volume before the PIPEs then logically you would see a maximum of 50% increase in volume as the PIPEs are restricted in the percentage they can sell. The only way they could have raised the volume to 1M daily is to have a third and fourth party trading shares creating artificial volume. Now they wont be creating more volume than they need to.

     

    The frequent low volume early in the day before the volume picks up is just usual trade taking place. The artificial trades kick in when they are ready and presumably are closely followed by sales from the PIPE investor who orchestrated it.

     

    PS anyone else suddenly really interested in curling? I must be getting old.
    20 Feb, 07:50 PM Reply Like
  • JamesBBecker
    , contributor
    Comments (158) | Send Message
     
    This has actually been explained several times.

     

    Each PIPEr can sell 15% of daily volume. There are three PIPErs - which adds up to 45% of volume.

     

    But.... It turns out that each share they sell is double counted, so every time a PIPEr sells 10 shares, another PIPEr can sell 15% of 20 shares.

     

    Added together, the three sellers can pretty much sell all they want, assuming a little bit of initial volume.
    20 Feb, 09:20 PM Reply Like
  • dlmca
    , contributor
    Comments (316) | Send Message
     
    Will we get into the $0.08 - $0.09 range?

     

    Sure feels like it

     

    Wish we had more conference calls. Only thing that gets TG saying anything - and then mostly half truths at best

     

    We hang We add
    20 Feb, 05:39 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8492) | Send Message
     
    Dlmca, This order?

     

    We add We hang.
    20 Feb, 06:15 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8492) | Send Message
     
    EaglePicher Receives Contract from Erigo Technologies to deliver a Flexible Microgrid Energy Storage System for DoD applications

     

    http://on.wsj.com/1mfuEiW
    20 Feb, 06:27 PM Reply Like
  • wtblanchard
    , contributor
    Comments (2283) | Send Message
     
    Old news ... not sure why this one is dated 2/19 ... see

     

    http://bit.ly/1dTZj3B

     

    dated Jan 8, which is still the "lead" article on their news tab:

     

    http://bit.ly/TS9ufZ
    20 Feb, 07:15 PM Reply Like
  • greentongue
    , contributor
    Comments (700) | Send Message
     
    "The three tiers of batteries included in the 386 kWh BESS system will be Li-Ion, lead-acid and nickel-iron to deliver an appropriate balance of rapidly available energy and total power."
    No mention of lead-carbon so whomever is competing against then will have a leg up.
    20 Feb, 07:24 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8492) | Send Message
     
    A familiar graph near the end.

     

    Power beyond the battery

     

    http://bit.ly/1d87g0N

     

    Edit: Hey that was something different. When I first posted it there was a minus 1 in the like box. Must be an AGM manufacturer coming to the concentrators.
    21 Feb, 12:28 AM Reply Like
  • Stefan Moroney
    , contributor
    Comments (2424) | Send Message
     
    Lol - I just realized I was in the header for posting a link ... Axion really needs something better than bs speculation to talk about.
    21 Feb, 12:58 AM Reply Like
  • DaveT
    , contributor
    Comments (159) | Send Message
     
    On allencaron.com our PR co has a new Corporate Backgrounder for AXPW, hurrah, unfortunately they have actually provided us with one for a different company ... "Paragon Shipping Inc. (Nasdaq: PRGN), or Paragon or the Company, is an international shipping company specializing in the transportation of drybulk cargoes. ..."

     

    If only their PR was as rigorously tested as the batteries are being!
    21 Feb, 05:19 AM Reply Like
  • tripleblack
    , contributor
    Comments (13386) | Send Message
     
    The phrase "Timely and accurate Axion public reactions" is an oxymoron. Including a paid PR company in the mix just adds a dash of bitter spice to it, and serves to underline the "moron" syllable.
    21 Feb, 05:48 AM Reply Like
  • tripleblack
    , contributor
    Comments (13386) | Send Message
     
    LOL, make "reactions""relations".
    21 Feb, 06:50 AM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (16953) | Send Message
     
    02/20/2014: EOD stuff partially copied from blog (up now).
    # Trds: 114, MinTrSz: 50, MaxTrSz: 80000, Vol: 1744714, AvTrSz: 15305
    Min. Pr: 0.0910, Max Pr: 0.0994, VW Avg. Tr. Pr: 0.0954
    # Buys, Shares: 35 343210, VW Avg Buy Pr: 0.0966
    # Sells, Shares: 77 1386504, VW Avg Sell Pr: 0.0951
    # Unkn, Shares: 2 15000, VW Avg Unk. Pr: 0.0963
    Buy:Sell 1:4.04 (19.67% "buys"), DlyShts 3508000 (20.11%), Dly Sht % of 'sells' 25.30%

     

    The average of the lowest 20 VWAPs times 80% today is $0.0775 vs. $0.0777, $0.0778, $0.0779, $0.0779, $0.0779, $0.0779, $0.0779, $0.0779and $0.0779 on prior days. 80% of today's VWAP is $0.0763 vs. $0.0785, $0.0799, $0.0816, $0.0846, $0.0836 $0.0881, $0.0902, $0.0922 and $0.0899 on prior days. These are potential prices for the next tranche of shares to the PIPErs.

     

    Today's low, high, VWAP, trade volume, and daily short sales moved -4.21%, -3.50%, -2.76%, -7.46% and -37.70% respectively. Price spread today was 9.23% vs. 8.42%, 3.59%, 6.40%, 9.52%, 3.49%, 16.06%, 17.07%, 9.90% and 10.60% on prior days.

     

    Larger trades (>= 15K) occurred on 38 of the 114 trades, 33.33%. These totaled 1,174,761 shares, 67.33% of days volume, and traded at a VWAP $0.0952. 6 of these ...

     

    On the traditional TA front, the lower highs returned today and he string of lower lows is intact. We now have three of the last four days with lower highs and four of four with lower lows. Our low penetrated my descending intermediate-term support, ~$0.092(?) today, but came right back to, and above, it. Our close of $0.0926 was just above it, so it did offer support today at least.

     

    Stochastic is flat in oversold again and Williams %R is flat in oversold as well. RSI continues to weaken, down to ~38, just above oversold of 30. MFI continues to be hesitant about making a strong trend, remaining generally flat, and momentum accelerates its down move, down at 0.9078 from yesterday's 0.965. ADX and related weakening is going from flat to weakening again. MACD and it's histogram are negative and accelerating downward, along with the average now.

     

    Four days now we've traded completely below my longer-term descending resistance and.

     

    The chance for support remains my medium-term former descending resistance, which we penetrated and recovered to above it for the close today. Four days ago it was at ~$0.0927, AFAICT, and descending at ~$0.003/week, so it should be around $0.092 now. Friday's behavior will be important and give us a sign as to if we may get support, or not, at this level.

     

    The low buy percentage today, 19.7%, ... I think today began the scenario I'd been expecting when I said “If the buy percentage collapses, which I think it will soon, daily short sales percentage and price will both fall, maybe more heavily than it's already falling”. If this is the start of the scenario, my descending support won't hold and we'll sink on down into at least the $0.08xx area again.

     

    More stats, comments and the usual in the blog here.
    http://seekingalpha.co...

     

    HardToLove
    21 Feb, 09:05 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29176) | Send Message
     
    While I don't normally comment on HTL's straight TA stuff, I think it's important to remember that we're on the cusp of a major change in the supply and demand dynamic.

     

    In my February 1st workbook, I estimated Parsoon's remaining inventory at 4.6 million shares including their 1/28/14 balance, the February 1st true up and the March pre-installment.

     

    http://bit.ly/1bkFygB

     

    Since January 28th, total reported volume has been 24.25 million shares. If we assume that Parsoon has been our most aggressive seller and their sales represent 15% of reported volume, they're down to their last million shares and should be out of the game by the end of next week.
    21 Feb, 09:22 AM Reply Like
  • D-inv
    , contributor
    Comments (3768) | Send Message
     
    Petersen has hypothesized accelerated conversion of secured notes to explain the share outstanding count disclosed in Axion's latest S-1 filing. Accelerated conversions to that extent could lead to full retirement of one of the PIPErs senior convertible notes on payment of "true up" interest March 3.

     

    An alternative explanation for 196,584,591 shares outstanding in late January without reliance on the accelerated conversion assumption has been presented.

     

    Absent more accelerated conversions than already disclosed in Axion SEC filings, something on the order of 8.6 million more shares will be issued Feb. 28, ~5.6 million in late March, and ~2.7 mil. in April. Price or volume failures between now and April would change the share issues as would accelerated conversions by either PIPErs or Axion (which is now possible).

     

    :-) Which assumed conversion schedule is most applicable should be apparent by March 3 or 4.
    21 Feb, 12:43 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29176) | Send Message
     
    Gee, I never saw that spreadsheet. Care to give the rest of us a link so that we can see whether your hypothesis holds any water at all?
    21 Feb, 01:09 PM Reply Like
  • alsobirdman
    , contributor
    Comments (356) | Send Message
     
    If the buying continues today, they may be out by EOD, lol.

     

    I have seen 10, 100K+ orders today, and quite a few 50K+. Can't read anything into that but at least somebody is optimistic today.
    21 Feb, 02:03 PM Reply Like
  • RyanfBell
    , contributor
    Comments (70) | Send Message
     
    When could we expect our next round of financing to go off, we have had the big uglies run out of share's before to end up going no were.

     

    Who is soaking up all these shares that came into the market through the pipers, can the majority be long term axionistas or just more of the same looking to play the ill manipulate the market and take what I can until some news comes out that solidifies axion.

     

    As a long term axion holder I wouldn't sell into this market unless the bombs are literally dropping on my head. So what makes it any different after they are out of shares.
    21 Feb, 10:38 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29176) | Send Message
     
    If you think back, the big uglies pounded out the last of their shares in December 2012 and Axion did the 2013 offering in early February, so the market barely had a moment to catch its breath.

     

    The same dynamic repeated in early 2013 where the 2012 investors were barely done selling before the market started to panic about the immediate need for more money.

     

    In it's last 10-Q Axion said current resources will be adequate to carry operations into the beginning of Q4. So more financing will be necessary sometime in the next seven months, but it isn't necessary next month.

     

    It should be fascinating to watch as the supply and demand dynamic shifts from unlimited supply at almost any price to constrained supply at prices the Axionistas think reasonable.
    21 Feb, 10:58 AM Reply Like
  • Nicu Mihalache
    , contributor
    Comments (1014) | Send Message
     
    John aren't there some years errors in the first paragraph? (like 2012 -> 2011 and 2013 -> 2012)
    21 Feb, 12:02 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29176) | Send Message
     
    The years are right, but I did over-simplify who sold and when.

     

    The most determined selling from the big uglies came in 2011 when Special Sits and Quercus were both hitting the stock hard. In early 2012 we had brief respite before the 2012 investors, Blackrock and Manatuck Hilll started selling. It was really a shame because it initially looked like the two big boys were stable holders.

     

    http://bit.ly/R5OAEA
    21 Feb, 12:22 PM Reply Like
  • Nicu Mihalache
    , contributor
    Comments (1014) | Send Message
     
    So we had an offering in Feb. 2013 and another one three months later in May 2013?
    21 Feb, 12:30 PM Reply Like