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 (288)
Track new comments
  • kevin lemm
    , contributor
    Comments (89) | Send Message
     
    It's early and the first thing I do is check for news. It's pay day today, I will add more AXPW at this price.
    9 Apr, 05:49 AM Reply Like
  • RuggedDC
    , contributor
    Comments (194) | Send Message
     
    Hey ho!
    9 Apr, 06:18 AM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (1489) | Send Message
     
    good morning all - beautiful day here in NJ
    9 Apr, 07:47 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8848) | Send Message
     
    Mr. congeniality. Past photo op, thinking about how to stir up the trucking industry.

     

    http://bit.ly/1g6Uscs
    9 Apr, 08:46 AM Reply Like
  • froggey77
    , contributor
    Comments (2768) | Send Message
     
    Ah the good old days.
    9 Apr, 07:54 PM Reply Like
  • greentongue
    , contributor
    Comments (740) | Send Message
     
    I wonder how much of the detected market manipulation is in play here? Who would benefit from a low purchase price prior to the announcement within 44 days?
    9 Apr, 08:51 AM Reply Like
  • tripleblack
    , contributor
    Comments (13444) | Send Message
     
    It would be interesting to know which potential strategic partner stood up Axion at the altar before the PIPEr incident...

     

    Once the notes are settled, is there an opportunity there?
    9 Apr, 09:04 AM Reply Like
  • nogoodslacker
    , contributor
    Comments (869) | Send Message
     
    tripleblack: Assuming there actually was a potential strategic investor at the negotiating table, even more useful would be to know how onerous were the terms they were seeking. They must have been pretty bad if a PIPE convertible notes deal was the less damaging of the two options.

     

    PIPERS got 40% of the company for about $9M. Unless they start showing some sales before this summer, any new investor (strategic or otherwise) is going to point to that and want something similarly lucrative. If sales do start rolling in soon, they could do a little better. My expectation of the best they can get this year would be something like $20M for 50% equity stake. That would be a premium over today's share price.
    9 Apr, 09:36 AM Reply Like
  • jveal
    , contributor
    Comments (652) | Send Message
     
    NGS,
    If my memory serves me correctly, Tom alluded to refusing to take a deal that would basically give up control of the company to an investor. The PIPE deal, even though it sold enough shares to equal about 40% of the company, the PIPEers did not retain the stock. Those of us who were able bought more stock at these discounted prices. It diluted our previous holdings but allowed us to average down to a point that I am almost in the green with my total investment. When the PIPEers were selling, I saw it as an opportunity to come as close as I could to actually putting money in the company itself. Many of us will only be able to directly invest in a company at an IP launch.
    9 Apr, 09:47 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29549) | Send Message
     
    The PIPErs didn't get any interest in Axion because they pounded their shares out the door as quickly as possible.

     

    That dynamic left Axion's future in its own hands and the hands of its public stockholders.

     

    If a strategic investor had bought even half the number of shares that were ultimately issued to the PIPErs, it would have gained effective control of Axion in one fell swoop.

     

    Laymen think of control in terms of 51%. The reality in public companies is that anyone with more than 20% ownership steers the ship. That's why SEC rules treat holders who own more than 10% as affiliates and holders who own more than 20% as control persons.

     

    Axion had its fair share of tribulations when one big dog (a/k/a Quercus) had enough control to call all the shots. After a management team has survived that dynamic once, it understands why it's better to dance with the devil for dollars than to sell its soul to a white knight for a few dollars more.
    9 Apr, 09:47 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8848) | Send Message
     
    " They must have been pretty bad if a PIPE convertible notes deal was the less damaging of the two options."

     

    For which parties?
    9 Apr, 09:47 AM Reply Like
  • D-inv
    , contributor
    Comments (3917) | Send Message
     
    "Assuming there actually was a potential strategic investor at the negotiating table, even more useful would be to know how onerous were the terms they were seeking. They must have been pretty bad if a PIPE convertible notes deal was the less damaging of the two options. "

     

    Pretty bad terms is one possible explanation. Another is that TG was excessively optimistic and gambled that imminent sales revenues and/or grant awards would bolster share prices and lead to issue of far fewer shares than were actually needed (in absence of expected grant award and sales).
    9 Apr, 10:35 AM Reply Like
  • LabTech
    , contributor
    Comments (1766) | Send Message
     
    Well, you knew it was only a matter of time before SEPTA figured out that Li-ion batteries alone don't work well enough at capturing all the energy from a braking train. So in steps Maxwell to fix the problem. If only there was a battery available that could have done both. Too bad size was an issue.

     

    http://bit.ly/1g72ulH
    9 Apr, 09:44 AM Reply Like
  • Stefan Moroney
    , contributor
    Comments (2494) | Send Message
     
    Bummer, another win that doesn't include Axion. I can't believe that every footprint for this application doesn't have enough room for an appropriately sized PC.

     

    In any event, 30 some-odd days. Tick tock on the clock.
    9 Apr, 10:02 AM Reply Like
  • wtblanchard
    , contributor
    Comments (2387) | Send Message
     
    Viridity Energy Announces Selection of Saft and Envitech to support SEPTA Recycled Energy and Optimization Project
    SOURCE: VIRIDITY ENERGY JUN 20, 2011

     

    http://bit.ly/1g7807L

     

    Viridity was involved, and possibly knew us well enough, but I don't remember exactly when the PowerCube was announced ... seem to recall right after Thanksgiving whichever year ... maybe 2011?

     

    But that was before the better production processes, and who knows what price we were offering?

     

    Wonder how much space the Ultracaps will take up?

     

    Gotta figure Maxwell much more trusted at this point than AXPW to be around to service/replace.

     

    I'm a little surprised we haven't heard about more of these deals with other transit agencies across the US and internationally. Of course getting any kind of infrastructure projects done has been hard to accomplish since the "Great Recession" or depending on your Political blame gaming echo chamber (either side), while Obama has been President. Of course the whole FERC regulation thing hasn't been a ball of efficiency fire either, but I suppose most of us think that these thing should be so obvious, but when there's huge money involved, and lawyers involved ...

     

    But to read the PR, the economics should have been a slam dunk.

     

    Wonder how those economics change with the Utlracaps in the picture?
    9 Apr, 10:21 AM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (2484) | Send Message
     
    wtb, I have been under the impression that ultra/super caps are hugely expensive, so are used sparingly. For example, IIRC their use in auto s/s is limited to something like a max of 12 seconds of discharge, or else the bill goes way up. I could easily be off on the exact numbers, but prob not on their direction.

     

    I suppose their use in this project would also be for very short bursts?
    9 Apr, 10:31 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8848) | Send Message
     
    So they have room for lithium ion and ultracap banks but not PbC? How much of that capacity do you think they are actually getting advantage from in the first installation given they are already talking about battery life?

     

    All hail the lithium ion God.
    9 Apr, 10:44 AM Reply Like
  • Patrick Young
    , contributor
    Comments (958) | Send Message
     
    More importantly, why is the only green project in Pennsylvania going to companies that don't manufacture anything in the state of Pennsylvania.
    9 Apr, 10:47 AM Reply Like
  • Patrick Young
    , contributor
    Comments (958) | Send Message
     
    >iindelco ABB is in charge. They have their reasons.
    9 Apr, 10:49 AM Reply Like
  • wtblanchard
    , contributor
    Comments (2387) | Send Message
     
    >iin ... good points. Maybe also a good reason there haven't been a bunch of new projects yet ... really need to give this time to figure out the true economics of the "life" of any one project. As taxpayers, we should expect no less I suppose, which makes it trickier to fund lots of prototypes of various sorts to make more rapid progress ... in the long run. Sadly, making real strides in energy storage is in our national interest from a climate change standpoint ... somebody really needs to get some magic bullets soon to China and India ...

     

    I wonder if this SEPTA project is even still on AXPW's radar ... whether we just gave up or figured it was just too soon to devote any of our scarce personnel resources to battle possibly a stacked deck, and maybe a deck that won't pay off really significantly for anyone for another 5? years ...

     

    In the mean time, if only we could get a few PowerCubes in the field (even sacrificing some "margin") to start building a record. The one Axion owns is nice, but as JP is fond or pointing out, customers may not totally buy the "company data" and prefer to see some coming from independent sources (preferably SEVERAL independent sources.)

     

    Of course ePower should be a huge reputation-al help over the next 3 years, and God willing, so will NSC (and eventually BN too, right VW?)
    9 Apr, 11:15 AM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (17328) | Send Message
     
    WTB: The 'Cube data s/b available from both PJM and Viridity.

     

    HardToLove
    9 Apr, 11:26 AM Reply Like
  • Mayascribe
    , contributor
    Comments (9608) | Send Message
     
    WTB & iindy: IIRC, Axion Power likely wasn't an option for the SEPTA project because Axion was still in R&D phase. Further, the automated carbon sheeting line still hadn't been invented.

     

    Pretty sure, Axion just flat out wasn't yet ready for prime time when SEPTA was bidding this project.
    9 Apr, 11:36 AM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (2484) | Send Message
     
    In the near term, the Bysolar project up and running should also help visibility/credibility for prospective customers, as TG eluded to last week.
    9 Apr, 11:39 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8848) | Send Message
     
    WTB, I also worry about customer concerns re: the PowerCube data given it's under Axion administration. There is a reason, in many cases, people do 3rd party testing for credibility.

     

    I sure hope they are following up w/ SEPTA. If for no other reason than to learn about customer perceptions and needs while assessing how others are doing.

     

    Concerning coal. As John had indicated, if we don't use it someone else will.

     

    http://bit.ly/171ZDHq

     

    http://bit.ly/LoK8zM

     

    Edit: Oh yeah. I think black works.

     

    http://bit.ly/1g7kYTb
    9 Apr, 11:42 AM Reply Like
  • wtblanchard
    , contributor
    Comments (2387) | Send Message
     
    "as TG eluded to last week" ...

     

    This explains a lot.

     

    TG keep eluding when he should be alluding :-)
    9 Apr, 11:44 AM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (2484) | Send Message
     
    wtb, funny, I changed it from alluded to eluded. coulda used a 'meaning checker." at least i didn't use "deluded."

     

    iinde, hopefully prospective customers either have access to PJM's records regarding the PC's performance---scores, response times, $ pymts, etc., or PJM's verification of Axion's claims.
    9 Apr, 12:28 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (17328) | Send Message
     
    SA errors prevent blog update - will try again later. This is Tuesday's - I'm current when the blog goes up.

     

    04/08/2014: EOD stuff partially copied from blog (up when SA permits).
    # Trds: 180, MinTrSz: 17, MaxTrSz: 82400, Vol: 1482262, AvTrSz: 8235
    Min. Pr: 0.1691, Max Pr: 0.1850, VW Avg. Tr. Pr: 0.1747
    # Buys, Shares: 54 356136, VW Avg Buy Pr: 0.1760
    # Sells, Shares: 126 1126126, VW Avg Sell Pr: 0.1743
    # Unkn, Shares: 0 0, VW Avg Unk. Pr: 0.0000
    Buy:Sell 1:3.16 (24.03% "buys"), DlyShts 223389 (15.07%), Dly Sht % of 'sells' 19.84%

     

    ARCA was in and out all day, very frequently and very aggressively, undercutting the offer on each appearance.

     

    The average of the lowest 20 VWAPs times 80% today is $0.0884 vs. $0.0865, $0.0848, $0.0831, $0.0819, $0.0816, $0.0812, $0.0807, $0.0800 and $0.0792 on prior days. 80% of today's VWAP is $0.1397 vs. $0.1468, $0.1505, $0.1522, $0.1399, $0.1332, $0.1338, $0.1337, $0.1261 and $0.1361 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 -6.06%, -4.64%, -4.78%, 8.46% and -41.07% respectively. Price spread today was 9.40% vs. 7.78%, 11.30%, 14.22%, 5.88%, 19.76%, 14.20%, 14.23%, 10.67% and 6.71% on prior days.

     

    The larger trades (>= 15K) occurred on 23 of the 180 trades, 12.78%. These 525,450 shares were 35.45% of day's volume, and traded at a VWAP of $0.1759. 5 of these ...

     

    The other 157 trades, 87.22% of the day's trades, traded 956,812 shares, 64.55% of the days volume. The VWAP was $0.1740. 49 trades ...

     

    Continuing yesterday's “long-term bullish, short-term not so much” theme, it's not too soon to tell that we're dropping now. We've now had three consecutive days of lower highs and VWAPs, and volume on this down day rose, indicating strength in the down move. Buy percentage was again down substantially. Yesterday I said I believed we'd be shortly testing the strength of $0.18 as a support level and I believed it would fail to hold. Today's close was $.172. If we close again below $0.18, which is likely, we confirm we've moved at least back into the trading channel we left on 4/3. Support for the channel is down at $0.15 and there's a potential pause provided by a sideways move bottom around $0.16, but it does not have any indication of strength because volume was low and when we exited we went down on rising volume.

     

    Regarding short percentage yesterday I said it was low enough that I suspected lower pricing and even lower short sales percentage to show up and buy percentage should also taper off. Today short percentage moved from 27.24% to 15.07%, we know what pricing did already, and buy percentage dropped from 38.2% to 24%. This trend is not over yet I think.

     

    On the traditional TA front the upward pressure is completely gone. ...

     

    The newer [inflection point calculations] version's chart pattern, increased it's weakening bias.

     

    HardToLove
    9 Apr, 10:38 AM Reply Like
  • dlmca
    , contributor
    Comments (335) | Send Message
     
    WTB

     

    eluding vs. alluding

     

    Good one

     

    Thanks - just what I needed right now
    9 Apr, 12:17 PM Reply Like
  • Al Marshall
    , contributor
    Comments (502) | Send Message
     
    Bloomberg tease and (link to) article on supercapacitors:

     

    TECH: The future of battery-powered electrical devices "lies with devices called supercapacitors," Leonid Bershidsky writes. "They are a cross between a battery, which charges slowly and holds a lot of energy, and a capacitor, which is the exact opposite, charging and discharging extremely fast."

     

    http://bv.ms/PRRF0s
    9 Apr, 12:22 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8848) | Send Message
     
    Johnson Controls : wins “Sustainable Product of the Year” award

     

    " The 48-volt Micro Hybrid battery was developed in Glendale, Wis. by engineers at Johnson Controls, a global multi-industrial company with established core businesses in the automotive, building and energy storage industries."

     

    " Unlike traditional hybrid vehicle systems, which add thousands of dollars of cost to a vehicle, the Micro Hybrid will add just hundreds of dollars."

     

    http://bit.ly/1g7x6n7
    9 Apr, 01:15 PM Reply Like
  • Mayascribe
    , contributor
    Comments (9608) | Send Message
     
    iindelco: That's a big improvement price-wise over what I recall from JCI's 5+5+5 program, which IIRC, had the goal of creating a 48v +12v starter battery configuration that cost just over a $1000.

     

    Suddenly, I'm not as worried as I was about JCI's future in the battery biz.
    9 Apr, 01:31 PM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (2484) | Send Message
     
    The only thing new here is the award. JCI's effort is the same, best I can tell. Here's the link in the article:

     

    http://bit.ly/PS8Cbg

     

    Same graphic and verbage we've seen for awhile now. Includes:

     

    "The total cost to manage the battery and incorporate it into the vehicle is also significantly less than an HEV."
    9 Apr, 01:39 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8848) | Send Message
     
    Maya, Tis' why I indicated more than a few times that the auto's would never pay for PbC the prices that have been bantered about around here. And it's why Axion could never supply automotive out of their heavily dated LAB plant. Just way too expensive. So we really don't know what the real costs of the PbC would be once it was properly industrialized. You can bet BMW does.
    9 Apr, 01:58 PM Reply Like
  • nogoodslacker
    , contributor
    Comments (869) | Send Message
     
    Lithium that can handle high charge rates, like 10C-rated A123 nanophosphate cells, are still up around $600/kWh at the cell level. Not sure how JCI is keeping costs under $1k if it includes BMS system, unless they are going with cheapo 2C lithium cells (~$300/kWh) and giving up some charge acceptance.

     

    PbC costs about the same per kWh as the best lithium, but you get some savings out of not needing a BMS and the benefit of working well over a wider temperature range. Overall PbC can perform somewhat better at a similar cost to high quality lithium cells, but size/weight are potential drawbacks.
    9 Apr, 02:16 PM Reply Like
  • LabTech
    , contributor
    Comments (1766) | Send Message
     
    IINDelco,

     

    I would point out that it is the "Wisconsin Sustainable Business Council's "Sustainable Product of the Year."

     

    i.e. an award given out by a bunch of businessmen in Wisconsin. Not exactly the same thing as winning a national or international award. IMHO.
    9 Apr, 05:12 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8848) | Send Message
     
    LabTech, understood.

     

    Besides, the best award is a contract. I'd take one of those over Axion's Frost and Sullivan.
    9 Apr, 05:23 PM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (2484) | Send Message
     
    Where's our poet 48 when we need'em?

     

    Frosty, the Sullivan
    Was a very nice award
    But what does he mean
    In regards to green?
    Put'm back in his drawer
    9 Apr, 05:33 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8848) | Send Message
     
    Mr. I, Looks like we have a board full of artists. Let's hope Axion can break the "starving" connection that is usually attached to the title. ;-I
    9 Apr, 05:50 PM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (2484) | Send Message
     
    iinde, I think I lost the Great Limerick Slam of 2012 to SM.
    9 Apr, 05:52 PM Reply Like
  • SMaturin
    , contributor
    Comments (2139) | Send Message
     
    ii,

     

    Given how "overweight" many of us are in AXPW, perhaps a little "starving" wouldn't hurt.

     

    Axionites Obesitus. Dangerous disease. Leads to limerick incontinence.
    9 Apr, 07:39 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8848) | Send Message
     
    SMaturin, Axionites Obestus w/ limerick incontinence. LOL

     

    All manageable with Biggus Contractus.
    9 Apr, 07:56 PM Reply Like
  • bazooooka
    , contributor
    Comments (2351) | Send Message
     
    ii,
    Are you to the point of thinking the PbC might not find a niche in auto at all? Would the oems finance Axion to achieve cost savings or is it now a matter of Axion being on their own to get costs down?

     

    Heck, some on this board suggest that lithium is almost as cheap or will be; not to mention the autos always like to market the "sexy" stuff.

     

    At some point Axion will miss their auto window entirely since I doubt the autos oems will double back on design decisions once they lay their roadmap for the next decade (which surely is occurring already).
    10 Apr, 06:55 PM Reply Like
  • bazooooka
    , contributor
    Comments (2351) | Send Message
     
    Hmm, "hundreds of dollars" would mean mass adoption since ROI could happen in a few years assuming people spend $2000-$4000 annually on fuel.
    10 Apr, 07:10 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8848) | Send Message
     
    Bazooooka, I am not at the point where I feel the autos have given up on PbC. I do however feel my original target timing for when the PbC might make its way into an application is probably slipping some. This because Axion has not yet announced a partnership or a license agreement and TG has once again done his silence routine.

     

    I do not think the autos will directly fund Axion. If they want it and the technology can be supplied at the right price point they will find a way to get a tier 1 supplier to support their needs. It's their structure and while they will make exceptions, I cannot think of a reason why they would deviate from this structure for PbC.

     

    I do not think there is a "window" per se as the electrification of certain vehicle functions will come in many layers over a lengthy period. I tried in the past to give some reasoning as to why this is. With each layer the energy storage system requirements will change, so really it's about finding the niche where the PbC satisfies the needs and also proves to be the most compelling/competitive solution. The various solutions have their strengths and weaknesses just like the PbC. There are no stand out solutions and it continues to be a real dog fight with Axion certainly, from a tech. standpoint, being in the race but due to it's position not being the favorite contender by a long shot. Being financially strong and having something tooled/proven already gives advantages. Axion is a Cinderella story...maybe.
    10 Apr, 07:40 PM Reply Like
  • Stefan Moroney
    , contributor
    Comments (2494) | Send Message
     
    "Axion is a Cinderella story...maybe." It's becoming a spinderella story ... sales are coming ... no sales? this time I mean it, sales are coming ...
    11 Apr, 01:14 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (1489) | Send Message
     
    Regulations have become increasing noxious, because the masses of voters, lacking understanding because they are too busy learning "political" correctness and their "educators" are too busy teaching same, are too easily manipulated into adopting impatience and combativeness as their natural stance as against our businesses and thus in the service of the State. Do NOT ask even one of these molded shills to kill a steer, much less nurture one to market, whether to enjoy a steak or the fruits of many a hard-working food-supplier.
    29 May, 05:49 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (1489) | Send Message
     
    hmmm, I wonder, under the renewed regime, can we go off on tangents? omg, did I just get labeled again? I'm so sorry, APH. Please forgive me!
    29 May, 05:53 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (1489) | Send Message
     
    I apologize for my use of omg. Would omG be more acceptable, I wonder?
    29 May, 05:57 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8848) | Send Message
     
    Talk about the pendulum effect. The state agencies swinging from one extreme to the other.

     

    Vernon battery recycler denied permission to resume lead smelting

     

    http://lat.ms/1g7ANcm
    9 Apr, 01:44 PM Reply Like
  • Billion003
    , contributor
    Comments (131) | Send Message
     
    I was tongue tied during the conference call when trying to ask a related question. I think the PbC battery very much has its place in the market. I think it will succeed. But I wonder if some of the slow build of interest is simply the social fashion and infatuation of Lithium Ion chemistry. That's where the hipness is.
    And our modern society is all about uninformed hipness. To my mind, it is the reason billions of taxpayer dollars were wasted on so many bogus energy tech start-ups in the past 6 years. Many doubted the efficacy of these now defunct companies from the beginning and were shouted down as "doubters."
    My poorly worded conference call question was not in regard to how clean the Axion plant was but was intended to address the possible future hurdles in regard simply to lead batteries as a whole in a society blindly or excessively taken with Lithiun Ion chemistry - "the next big thing."
    Broadly, this overblown euphoria of the "it can do everything" (though it really can't) Lithium Ion chemistry may be blinding or misdirecting the eye of informed consideration of Axion's "rapidly-being-proven" workhorse capabilities.
    But it should be said, the EPA does not like lead.
    12 Apr, 12:21 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8848) | Send Message
     
    Billion003, I think your perspective and concerns are spot on. It is IMO recognized by many Axionistas as being a concern and why you'll see some level of frustration here in the areas of lithium ion and government winner picking. It's recognized lithium ion has it's place but it's also frustrating to witness forced exclusion which is why you see a level of sarcasm here concerning the manner at which technologies are selected for various apps.
    12 Apr, 12:40 PM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (2484) | Send Message
     
    003, Axion even mentioned awhile back that perceptions about li ion were a problem (just assumed by prospective customers to be the right solution), but it started to crack. The Kia announcement prob widened the crack at least a lil more. The first wins are the hardest.
    12 Apr, 12:42 PM Reply Like
  • Mayascribe
    , contributor
    Comments (9608) | Send Message
     
    Mr I: New to me is how much less this costs than I had previously known. This board has previously discussed how putting together 3 16v PbCs would be somewhat competitive if JCI's 48v+12v costs just over $1000.

     

    What JCI is saying, costing hundreds of dollars, is noticeable news to me, and adds credence to why TG has "backburnered" the automotive sector.
    9 Apr, 01:50 PM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (2484) | Send Message
     
    Maya, IIRC, JCI said previously their effort would run something like $1,200 all-in. I think this article has confused the battery only cost with the system cost. Here's the whole section from JCI's website:

     

    "When comparing batteries, a 48 V Micro Hybrid costs hundreds of dollars [undefined---$400, $600, $1,300?] as opposed to thousands of dollars for an HEV battery. EV batteries can cost more than 10,000 dollars.

     

    The total cost to manage the battery and incorporate it into the vehicle is also significantly less than an HEV."
    9 Apr, 02:04 PM Reply Like
  • D-inv
    , contributor
    Comments (3917) | Send Message
     
    "... 3 16v PbCs would be somewhat competitive if JCI's 48v+12v costs just over $1000."

     

    IMS, 4 12V PbCs of typical auto starter battery size produced at scale could cost ~$800 or less, Maya. Prices bandied about on the APCs usually pertain to truck battery sizes (30H, 30HT) as opposed to a group 27 battery.
    9 Apr, 02:11 PM Reply Like
  • Mayascribe
    , contributor
    Comments (9608) | Send Message
     
    Mr I: Good point. Ancillary costs....
    9 Apr, 04:59 PM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (2484) | Send Message
     
    Maya, it's just so darn hard to do apples to apples comparisons with battery solutions. Typical MO for article authors is to leave out a description of exactly what they're talking about, and that is critical with batteries---cell, or packs, or systems? Current prices or if/then prices? Disposal costs or revenues taken into acct? Operating temperature ranges? Recharge rates? And on and on and on...

     

    Seems like it outta be simple, but with no consistently applied communication standards, unfortunately, it ain't.
    9 Apr, 05:23 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29549) | Send Message
     
    I wonder how JCI will handle the recycling of batteries that combine both lithium-ion and lead acid in the same case. At a minimum, manual disassembly will be required to separate the lithium-ion and control electronics from the recyclable lead-acid components.

     

    What a wonderful way to destroy the recycling value of your products.
    9 Apr, 05:29 PM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (2484) | Send Message
     
    Maybe JCI can just ignite the lithium and thereby go straight to re-smelting the lead, lol. Recycling in a can.

     

    We finally found a use for a used li-ion battery.
    9 Apr, 05:39 PM Reply Like
  • tripleblack
    , contributor
    Comments (13444) | Send Message
     
    Iindelco: I think the JCI combo looks like a "good idea" to some lesser lights with the auto OEMs. Keeps the "batteries are warranted and recycled by their manufacturer" arms length relationship they prefer with their batteries and tires.

     

    Of course, Tesla is going the opposite direction (I wonder if EM will be announcing his very own gigatire factory next?). He's painted himself in a corner, and is now upending the can of paint over his head.
    9 Apr, 05:59 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8848) | Send Message
     
    TB, Hundreds can mean just that. Nine hundreds? Three hundreds? Oh, It's a battery supplier and we know their propensity to NOT be upfront about anything. Twelve hundreds?

     

    Remember the battery guys that just scammed GM.

     

    Tesla red paint I suspect. He's gonna be red in the face for sure on this one.
    9 Apr, 06:36 PM Reply Like
  • festein
    , contributor
    Comments (78) | Send Message
     
    The Li-ion is in one case, the lead acid in another. Think they expect that the Li-ion can be separated out at recycling facility by anomalous weight (lighter than it should be). Better be able to, as a Li-ion getting into a LAB recycling will end in explosion.
    9 Apr, 11:44 PM Reply Like
  • Ranma
    , contributor
    Comments (1422) | Send Message
     
    Check out what happened to ADMP last Dec after a reverse split to uplist to NASDAQ while raising money at the same time. The stock went through the roof!

     

    Will AXPW be able to do this by some time next year? Or even this year with some big train or auto wins?

     

    http://bit.ly/PSAhc2
    9 Apr, 04:17 PM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (2484) | Send Message
     
    I'm all for a reverse split to get an uplisting to NASDAQ, but only after some more positive stuff, like announcements from the company and continuation of the stk price rise. When done well, can be very beneficial. What a wonderful thing if Axion could do it with the next capital raise. Not holding my breath, but you never know.

     

    The bad name for reverse splits comes from those companies that do it to maintain a listing.
    9 Apr, 04:31 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29549) | Send Message
     
    The same thing happened with Ener1 back in 2008.

     

    When a company does a reverse split to maintain a market listing, the market does not react well.

     

    If a company can combine a reverse split with new funding and a listing upgrade, the market response is usually quite positive.
    9 Apr, 04:31 PM Reply Like
  • Mayascribe
    , contributor
    Comments (9608) | Send Message
     
    Actually, Ener1 did very well right after the reverse split. I made a lot of money, and in part funded my gamer account with the profits, before JP convinced me to bail.

     

    After I bailed, maybe a few weeks later, Ener1 went downhill, and eventually went kaput.
    9 Apr, 04:58 PM Reply Like
  • SMaturin
    , contributor
    Comments (2139) | Send Message
     
    (CYTK) did an RS last summer to get uplisted, at the same time or soon after they reported several positive events in drug trials, including a collaboration with Amgen. The stock popped after that, but has been back down since, although I am still in the green and accumulating.

     

    It has been one of my favorites in the biotech space, and still has plenty of room to run as a long term investment, with an excellent pipeline of novel drugs. Larry Smith covers it and had a positive report on his subscription site today.
    9 Apr, 05:31 PM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (2484) | Send Message
     
    Another example: OHRP did a reverse split to get an uplisting to NASDAQ last year. Stk initially went up 60%, then 400%, then back down to today's 100% gain. Overall, very beneficial move. Probably helped them place the stk deal they just did, too.
    9 Apr, 05:37 PM Reply Like
  • Stefan Moroney
    , contributor
    Comments (2494) | Send Message
     
    I expect Cytomedix CMXI will likely do it as well.
    9 Apr, 06:59 PM Reply Like
  • danpm4life
    , contributor
    Comments (85) | Send Message
     
    While Pacific Ethanol (PEIX) is the only company I've held that was subject to a reverse split, I thought it interesting shareholders voted for a Reverse Split (RS) range, from 1 for 2 up to 1 for 15, and that it would only apply to publically traded shares. 1 for 15 won, bringing the post RS price close to $2- a share. Treasury Shares authorized but not issued, were not impacted by the RS. PEIX just raised over $28m @ $16 a share using a minimal # of their pre-RS shares.
    10 Apr, 02:47 AM Reply Like
  • bazooooka
    , contributor
    Comments (2351) | Send Message
     
    I like how CMXI has handled their cash need. TG should take notes. Then again there must be "sizzle" to sell or nobody buys the steak.
    11 Apr, 08:30 AM Reply Like
  • Stefan Moroney
    , contributor
    Comments (2494) | Send Message
     
    "Then again there must be "sizzle" to sell or nobody buys the steak."

     

    My biggest issue here. Maybe there is none and we are just too slow to get the message.
    11 Apr, 01:15 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (1489) | Send Message
     
    Seriously, the CMXI pump has to go.
    29 May, 06:00 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (17328) | Send Message
     
    SA won't work, but I figured I can at least get the charts available.

     

    Original version: http://bit.ly/PSBr7v

     

    New version: http://bit.ly/PSBrnO

     

    I'm mulling whether it's worth the effort to get stuff completely off SA.

     

    HardToLove
    9 Apr, 04:24 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (17328) | Send Message
     
    Good ol' SA! They claim it's my browser! Last time it did this I changed nothing and later things just started magically working.

     

    Disgusted!

     

    HardToLove
    9 Apr, 04:49 PM Reply Like
  • tripleblack
    , contributor
    Comments (13444) | Send Message
     
    It's not just you, HTL...

     

    SA has gremlins on their gremlins.
    9 Apr, 05:01 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (17328) | Send Message
     
    TB: I'm about to de-gremlim myself.

     

    Raw form, but here's Monday's post. Don't have all the links and the pretty characters yet, but it was easy to get started.

     

    I did a quick test and the html I loaded will link to other files.

     

    The migration has begun.

     

    http://bit.ly/PSIm0v

     

    Ignore the crude nature - I just want to first make sure it works for others and then I'll decide whter to free myself.

     

    Thanks,
    HardToLove
    EDIT: link to original chart
    http://bit.ly/PSBr7v
    and newer version
    http://bit.ly/PSBrnO
    9 Apr, 05:07 PM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (2484) | Send Message
     
    AXPW's short interest for 3/31/2014 settlement is now available. It was unchanged from 3/14/2014 at 598k shares (literally only 162 shares less than last time, which suggest no churn).
    9 Apr, 05:14 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29549) | Send Message
     
    FWIW, my running total on the Concentrator comments currently stands at 79,991, so 80,000 is just around the corner.
    9 Apr, 06:26 PM Reply Like
  • Mayascribe
    , contributor
    Comments (9608) | Send Message
     
    Wow!

     

    Around 60,000 comments ago we learned that NSC did a PO for PbCs. And we still don't have a green goat. I would never have fathomed that.

     

    I also would never have fathomed back then that Axionistas would own most of Axion Power by spring 2014.
    9 Apr, 06:42 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29549) | Send Message
     
    Thanks Dad.
    9 Apr, 08:37 PM Reply Like
  • VictorG45
    , contributor
    Comments (40) | Send Message
     
    Does anybody know how many stockholders Axion has?
    9 Apr, 08:39 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29549) | Send Message
     
    IIRC, Tom Granville said Axion has several thousand holders if you count all of the people who hold shares in brokerage accounts. The number of record holders is closer to 500, but that's because all shares in brokerage accounts are registered in the name of CEDE & Co, the street name for Depository Trust Company.
    9 Apr, 08:55 PM Reply Like
  • Mayascribe
    , contributor
    Comments (9608) | Send Message
     
    Would be a nice Father's Day present to learn, or better to witness, the 999 rolling by then.

     

    For kicks, my prediction for total APC comments the day the 999 rolls publically is 91,999. ;-)

     

    Thanks hugely for tracking the number of comments over the years.
    9 Apr, 09:44 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29549) | Send Message
     
    That's my OCD prone inner accountant coming out. I just don't feel fulfilled unless I'm closely tracking something;-)
    10 Apr, 06:41 AM Reply Like
  • dlmca
    , contributor
    Comments (335) | Send Message
     
    79,997
    10 Apr, 06:42 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29549) | Send Message
     
    It was actually 80,005, but who's counting?
    10 Apr, 06:44 AM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (17328) | Send Message
     
    New blog work-around for SA's limitations (I've been referred to "Contributor Success") - how will they fix a problem related to size (it Matters! :-)) Their bias is towards "Short Attention-span Theater" I guess) and failures if you change the title?

     

    I don't believe they even care about one like me.

     

    Anyway ...

     

    http://bit.ly/R5g9UV

     

    HardToLove
    10 Apr, 06:46 AM Reply Like
  • greentongue
    , contributor
    Comments (740) | Send Message
     
    Back on 6 Apr, 01:23 PM RBrun357 asked:
    JP,

     

    I imagine you made it back to Tampa by now? I think I remember reading you were planning on being up north until around Sunday? I trust your trip was fruitful??
    ====

     

    Was there anything, that wasn't under the non-disclosure blanket, you could tell us?
    10 Apr, 07:47 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29549) | Send Message
     
    I told RBrun357 that I expected Jay to send out a stockholder update later this week and it would be unprofessional for me to engage in idle gossip with friends before hand.
    10 Apr, 07:54 AM Reply Like
  • alsobirdman
    , contributor
    Comments (362) | Send Message
     
    OMG, how many times does John have to say that he will say something when he is able.
    10 Apr, 08:18 AM Reply Like
  • greentongue
    , contributor
    Comments (740) | Send Message
     
    It would just be nice if "update later this week" was before market close.
    10 Apr, 02:01 PM Reply Like
  • Futurist
    , contributor
    Comments (2127) | Send Message
     
    Tesla responds to "lemon law" claim
    http://bit.ly/1g95Kgq

     

    It appears Tesla is taking the high road and not falling into a video war with Wisconsin's "lemon law king".
    10 Apr, 08:55 AM Reply Like
  • wtblanchard
    , contributor
    Comments (2387) | Send Message
     
    Recent Altoonaworks Facebook comments:

     

    Ashley Marshall Looks like they slowed down on the rebuilds of these.
    11 hours ago

     

    AltoonaWorks There are so many units sitting around the shop right now in various stages of rebuild, it's insane. There are also quite a few units in for routine work. This winter was harsh.

     

    For the record, on this page: http://on.fb.me/R5ST9q
    10 Apr, 10:35 AM Reply Like
  • D-inv
    , contributor
    Comments (3917) | Send Message
     
    Very interesting, William. Thanks.
    10 Apr, 12:05 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (1489) | Send Message
     
    I believe these GP-50 units are the most likely to become PbC-powered OTR units. Other GP-38s are good for conversion.
    10 Apr, 03:57 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (1489) | Send Message
     
    http://bit.ly/wj5Nkr

     

    The list of rebuilds to road slugs continues to grow.
    10 Apr, 04:16 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8848) | Send Message
     
    Certainly an application where weight does not give lithium ion an advantage.

     

    Work Done:
    - ...
    - Approximately 25 yards of concrete added for ballast
    - ...
    10 Apr, 04:28 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (1489) | Send Message
     
    25 yards of concrete is about 100,000 pounds, which is just 8000 lbs less than I "ballparked" for a similar conversion (APC318).

     

    I would guess it is also in the ballpark of the total weight added by a PbC conversion, with room for a few hundred more batteries than the goat will carry.

     

    I know concrete costs next to nothing, but it does absolutely nothing but add weight. Whereas a pound-for-pound battery conversion would cut fuel costs, help the environment and give them NSC both a competitive edge and green publicity.

     

    IMO, NSC is preparing for a herd of goats.
    10 Apr, 05:24 PM Reply Like
  • wtblanchard
    , contributor
    Comments (2387) | Send Message
     
    OT: They don't teach math like they used to ... and that's a good thing given that we're being overtaken in math skill by so many other countries. Check out the Course Intro Video here:

     

    http://bit.ly/R5ZIrz

     

    "Street-Fighting Math

     

    Teaches, as the antidote to rigor mortis, the art of educated guessing and opportunistic problem solving."
    10 Apr, 11:08 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8848) | Send Message
     
    Now this should really stimulate the storage industry. Or maybe like watching trading today in AXPW it's a depressant?

     

    NovoFuel and Genport to Analyze Requirements for Development of Optimized Renewable Energy System to Support Cannabis Cultivation

     

    "A typical one room indoor facility can use up to 10kW of power, which is a tremendous burden on the local power utilities; this situation has already caused power outages and brown-outs in certain Colorado municipalities. The most scholarly treatment of this issue is a report written by Evan Mills, PhD, of the University of California and the DOE: "Energy up in Smoke: The Carbon Footprint of Indoor Cannabis Production."

     

    http://on.wsj.com/1gQ0eP3
    10 Apr, 11:54 AM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (17328) | Send Message
     
    IIndelco: Surely you aren't suggesting that AXPW might inadvertently hit a new "high"?

     

    HardToLove
    10 Apr, 12:46 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8848) | Send Message
     
    HTL, lol. It's a "token" possibility. 8-I
    -
    On a more serious note, is the trading today telling us anything? Change a comin'? ( Fire up the TFH and give us some possibilities.)
    10 Apr, 01:05 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (17328) | Send Message
     
    Iindelco: Yesterday's blog post said we're going back below $18.

     

    We had a lot more MM's active and aggressive on the offer: WABR, NITE, ARCA, ... and other occasional interlopers.

     

    To get around SA's FUBAR, I made a new blog, in case you missed it.

     

    The new version of the inflection point calcs are decidedly emphatic.

     

    http://bit.ly/R5g9UV

     

    HardToLove
    10 Apr, 01:22 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8848) | Send Message
     
    Thanks HTL. I'd read it but found today's action interesting and thought it might further bolster some view of "the short term future".

     

    So it's down we go as the higher probability.
    10 Apr, 01:38 PM Reply Like
  • isthisonebetter
    , contributor
    Comments (233) | Send Message
     
    HTL, anywhere near $18 sounds phenomenal to me ;)
    10 Apr, 06:31 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (1489) | Send Message
     
    I thought HTL was a bit aggressive with that offer as well.
    10 Apr, 06:39 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (17328) | Send Message
     
    ITOB & EM: To one that's brain-dead from fighting, in succession, ice storms, getting caught up, SA gremlins when finally caught up, ...

     

    $1800.00 would've passed muster!

     

    :-))

     

    HardToLove
    11 Apr, 05:22 AM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (1489) | Send Message
     
    Pass the muster!
    11 Apr, 05:46 AM Reply Like
  • Patrick Young
    , contributor
    Comments (958) | Send Message
     
    I encourage everyone who is currently invested in AXPW (or thinking about it but sitting on the sidelines) to hit the gym this weekend, keep a bottle of aspirin handy, and avoid fatty foods. We don't want your shares passing to anyone who isn't in this thing for the long haul. I can't believe how long it's been since this company did anything that was both "significant" and "good" (NSC joint announcement in October last year) but the charts say that we may finally be out of the woods.
    10 Apr, 01:24 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8848) | Send Message
     
    What’s the Dark Side of Microgrids?

     

    http://bit.ly/1gQDZsx
    10 Apr, 02:46 PM Reply Like
  • D Lane
    , contributor
    Comments (1229) | Send Message
     
    I'm guessing firefighters in the know prefer to see lead-acid energy storage vs. lithium ion.
    10 Apr, 02:53 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8848) | Send Message
     
    D Lane, you got that right.

     

    TOXCO plant fire some time ago.

     

    http://bit.ly/tLMbw6
    10 Apr, 03:37 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (1489) | Send Message
     
    +28000 - Happy Birthday to me!
    10 Apr, 03:52 PM Reply Like
  • Mathieu Malecot
    , contributor
    Comments (969) | Send Message
     
    Happy birthday, thanks for you many contributions!
    10 Apr, 04:45 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8848) | Send Message
     
    Happy birthday Edmund! May your self purchased present bear you a return which delivers with it a big ole' smile.
    10 Apr, 05:06 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (17328) | Send Message
     
    Happy birthday Edmund. We're close - mine was yesterday.

     

    However, I refuse to acknowledge the need for them to continue to just continue my status quo - so I, being hard-headed - don't celebrate any longer. As if that would make them stop ...

     

    HardToLove
    10 Apr, 05:59 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8848) | Send Message
     
    And a happy birthday, belated, to you as well HTL. May you not recognize many more happy and healthy events in the future. Shhh!
    10 Apr, 06:04 PM Reply Like
  • carlosgaviria
    , contributor
    Comments (783) | Send Message
     
    Edmund:
    Feliz día!!
    Saludos-Carlos
    10 Apr, 07:39 PM Reply Like
  • Futurist
    , contributor
    Comments (2127) | Send Message
     
    My birthday today. The plethora of spring birthdates here, indicates a lot of parents were on vacation and having fun in late summer. No need for date nights.
    http://bit.ly/1kQaACA

     

    This is my 6th birthday celebrating with AXPW in my portfolio. I had expected to buy myself something very nice with some of the profits by now. Patience can still be learned at any age.
    11 Apr, 07:53 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8848) | Send Message
     
    Happy birthday Futurist. LOL

     

    "Also supporting the proposed date night: The Norwegian Institute for Teen Sex."
    11 Apr, 11:25 AM Reply Like
  • Patrick Young
    , contributor
    Comments (958) | Send Message
     
    On a day when the market, particularly tech, is down heavily and broadly, trading in AXPW doesn't look so bad.
    10 Apr, 03:56 PM Reply Like
  • maplecorner
    , contributor
    Comments (23) | Send Message
     
    Yup, I had 2 stocks up today, AXPW and DVN. Everything else down. Not too worried though.
    10 Apr, 04:37 PM Reply Like
  • growsmart
    , contributor
    Comments (160) | Send Message
     
    John & HTL, any comments on today's volume and price action?
    10 Apr, 05:01 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (17328) | Send Message
     
    Growsmart: the most significant thing, for me, is the high stopped dead at a descending resistance I establishied yesterday, which will be in the blog in about 30 minutes ... If SA doesn't screw me up *again*.

     

    Yesterday's close confirmed move back into the channel below $0.18 nd today's close again confirmed it.

     

    In spite of the low volume, ARCA, WABR, ATDF (of course!), NITE were quite active and aggressive ... once they all stopped waiting to see if the bids were going to chase them up. That ended about noontime. Then we transitioned from a bias to buy to a bias to sell and we ended with 32.9%/67.1% buy/sell.

     

    I remain negative on the near-term action and I've not even started today's EOD construction yet!

     

    HTH,
    HardToLove
    10 Apr, 06:06 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29549) | Send Message
     
    A couple days of low FINRA percentages (mid-teens) leave me convinced the supply side is tightening quickly, but I really won't be certain that the PIPErs are completely gone until I see several days in single digit percentages. At this point I don't really worry about them because I have to assume that a big chunk of the recent volume is holders who bought in the $.09 and $.10 range and can't resist a quick double.
    10 Apr, 06:07 PM Reply Like
  • bazooooka
    , contributor
    Comments (2351) | Send Message
     
    I'd think the PIPErs are gone just by looking at volume. Also, many have mentioned Axion is immune from macro events. Today suggests that Axionistas sit on their wallet when the rest of their portfolio is red. If indeed a minor recession is at hand that won't help AXPW on terms of volume or new investors. It likely doesn't help the NS types in moving too quickly either. ZBB already down 66% from its high and the whole sector went from hot too cold. Not sure if it correlates but I doubt the sector helps us at this point.
    10 Apr, 06:44 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8848) | Send Message
     
    RES Americas announces operation of company’s first energy storage system

     

    "RES Americas conceived, developed, and constructed the energy storage system, which it will own and operate. Located in Sunbury, Ohio, just outside of Columbus, the system is comprised of a +/-4MW (8MW total range)/ 2.6MWh lithium battery that will provide a service called “frequency regulation” to PJM, the largest grid operator in North America.

     

    The project utilizes lithium iron phosphate, an inherently safe variant of lithium battery chemistry, and consists of two containers that house batteries weighing approximately 20 tons each, as well as a third container that converts the direct current output to alternating current for the grid. The equipment was supplied by BYD America."

     

    http://bit.ly/1gR9lPF
    10 Apr, 05:45 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (17328) | Send Message
     
    BYD! Man that sounds familiar. ISTR they bought one of our taxpayer-funded companies, didn't they? A123?

     

    Well, at least we're exporting something *too* China - US$s.

     

    HardToLove
    10 Apr, 06:08 PM Reply Like
  • wtblanchard
    , contributor
    Comments (2387) | Send Message
     
    Not (directly) mated with either wind or solar ... just straight Frequency Regulation, homey.

     

    http://bit.ly/1kQtSb5
    11 Apr, 10:12 AM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (1489) | Send Message
     
    @iindelco: I feel safe saying there is no such thing as "inherently safe" lithium batteries. In fact, lithium-based batteries are inherently unsafe. Some are safer than others, certainly.

     

    It also depends a lot on what you use them for!!!

     

    Battery: lithium iron nano-phosphate™ cells from A123 Systems

     

    http://bit.ly/R7bJNm
    10 Apr, 06:13 PM Reply Like
  • JohnM121
    , contributor
    Comments (362) | Send Message
     
    There are designs for much saver nuclear power plants that have been on the shelf for decades. I wonder if this writer would use the phrase "inherently safe" with nukes.
    10 Apr, 07:28 PM Reply Like
  • nogoodslacker
    , contributor
    Comments (869) | Send Message
     
    >>I feel safe saying there is no such thing as "inherently safe" lithium batteries. <<

     

    Edmund, you are misinformed. Lithium Iron Phosphate is very safe; it is not subject to thermal runaway like other lithium chemistries. You can overcharge and overdischarge it without worrying about fire (though you can ruin your battery). It is also cheaper than PbC on a per kWh basis.
    11 Apr, 10:01 AM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (1489) | Send Message
     
    It's a matter of degree, ngs. Li-Fe-PO are probably the best of the breed right now for safety, as long as you don't mind the slight downgrades in performance.

     

    They still have lithium in them.
    11 Apr, 10:17 AM Reply Like
  • nogoodslacker
    , contributor
    Comments (869) | Send Message
     
    Edmund, Not sure what you mean by "they still have lithium in them." It is not the lithium that makes certain chemistries unsafe but what the lithium atoms are bonded to. Also not sure why you think it is a performance downgrade. A123 LiFePO4 can accept a 10C charge rate and 30C discharge rate, though those are more pricey than your basic LiFe batteries.
    11 Apr, 10:28 AM Reply Like
  • D-inv
    , contributor
    Comments (3917) | Send Message
     
    "feel safe saying there is no such thing as "inherently safe" lithium batteries."

     

    Really reliant on others re - chemistry info, so reacting to an apparent conflict between above statement and claims made a number of years back by Altair Nanotechnologies with respect to its Lithium titanate batteries. Claims included capacity of the battery to sustain punctures/penetration by nails without explosion or fire.
    11 Apr, 10:39 AM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (17328) | Send Message
     
    NGS: You may have a point: one of the pathways to thermal runaway is the internal shorts created by the growth of dendrites and the oxygen supplied by the electrolyte.

     

    Sans the dendrite, the chance of internal short is reduced or eliminated. But sans the electrolyte being able to supply oxygen, the thermal runaway is harder to achieve.

     

    Absence of one or the other would reduce the chance of catastrophe. I think the most dangerous is the electrolyte portion.

     

    HardToLove
    11 Apr, 12:17 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (1489) | Send Message
     
    You're splitting hairs and I'm using a broader brush, ngs. The lithium is the problem; lithium metal (all the alkali metals) reacts with air and water - putting out the fires Li-batteries start can be difficult to impossible.

     

    All the Li batteries at some SOC contain lithium metal - hence the organic electrolytes - adding another layer of danger.

     

    Despite the drumbeat of "lithium batteries are safe", the fact is many have been killed or disfigured by them. They're like the pit bulls of the battery world - unstable and unpredictable. Just ask the parents of the dozen or so children who have died from eating a button cell. Just ask the owners of laptops; we are just waiting for just one of them to go poof in a plane. Or at 80 mph on a crowded interstate. When, not if.
    11 Apr, 12:58 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (1489) | Send Message
     
    It's only fair I qualify that. There are many Li-based batteries chemistries I don't know enough about, some minimize or may even eliminate completely the metal form of lithium, I don't know about the latter, but perhaps the Li-Ti does. That would be the basis for enhanced safety and diminished performance. It is still very reactive stuff or it wouldn't make such a great starting material for batteries. OR FIRES!!!

     

    p.s. I love my Li-battery tools - especially knowing I can drop them the instant they light up. Haven't had a problem yet, though. Keeping my fingers crossed.
    11 Apr, 01:42 PM Reply Like
  • nogoodslacker
    , contributor
    Comments (869) | Send Message
     
    Edmund, by your reasoning, the sodium in table salt should burst into flame when I add it to my soup. A lithium ion is not the same as elemental lithium.
    11 Apr, 02:35 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (1489) | Send Message
     
    You misunderstood - I said exactly the opposite. But maybe you've found a way to kick it up a notch!

     

    OTOH, your "reasoning" would seem to ignore the fact that many "lithium ion batteries" do in fact burst into flame.
    11 Apr, 02:53 PM Reply Like
  • nogoodslacker
    , contributor
    Comments (869) | Send Message
     
    Edmund, you said that ALL lithium chemistries are unsafe. I simply pointed out that LiFePO4 chemistry is not flammable like some of the other chemistries and that it is not the lithium that causes the violent reactions in the ones that do--it is the particular lithium-salt plus the flammable oxygen-producing electrolyte that makes them dangerous. LiFePO4 does not have this problem. I can point you to a hundred youtube videos where LiFePO4 cells are punctured, shorted, overcharged, and all sorts of other abuse and they never burst into flame; they may get hot, melt, vent gasses, etc., but they do not go up in flame.
    11 Apr, 03:23 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (1489) | Send Message
     
    I knew engaging you was a mistake. I said no such thing. I said no lithium batteries were inherently safe and I stand by that statement.
    11 Apr, 03:38 PM Reply Like
  • nogoodslacker
    , contributor
    Comments (869) | Send Message
     
    Edmund, then you should just say that NO battery is inherently safe, including PbC. If you short out a battery, it will get hot and make smoke.

     

    I will be perfectly happy if you do not try to engage me. But I will continue to correct misinformation where I see it.
    11 Apr, 03:43 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (1489) | Send Message
     
    In fact, the lithium is the root of the problem; you just don't get it.
    11 Apr, 03:47 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (1489) | Send Message
     
    ngs, "If you short out a battery, it will get hot and make smoke."

     

    And is that what's happening to these lithium batteries? Folks are shorting them out on purpose?

     

    No, that's not the problem. The problem is spontaneous combustion of lithium batteries. A one-in-200,000 failure rate triggered a recall of almost six million lithium-ion packs used in laptops manufactured by Dell and Apple. Collectively, perhaps a failure rate of 1 in 10 million across the lithium battery space (per DOT).

     

    Meanwhile, there are 1000s of millions of lead-acid batteries sitting around calmly, occasionally being over-charged with high amperage, or discharged with same - all through every sort of weather and condition, subjected to high shock and thermal fluctuations. And guess what? Zero spontaneous combustion.

     

    I leave it up to you to decide which is more appropriately called an "inherently safe" battery.
    12 Apr, 02:34 AM Reply Like
  • Nicu Mihalache
    , contributor
    Comments (1028) | Send Message
     
    Guys, take a look at those Chinese LiFePO4 battery (Headway 38120 3.3V cell) tortured in most imaginable ways. The conclusion is that they are "pretty damn safe".
    http://bit.ly/1kfXUX2
    12 Apr, 03:21 AM Reply Like
  • metroneanderthal
    , contributor
    Comments (1500) | Send Message
     
    Wonder if this was Envia's third party testing and validation?
    12 Apr, 05:56 AM Reply Like
  • Nicu Mihalache
    , contributor
    Comments (1028) | Send Message
     
    neanderthal, while there is no way I can validate that video (until I buy some B456 :p cells and get bit more agressive than that with them - depending on the weight balance, they may end up where the gas tank is now on my future electric go kart, i.e. in between my legs - better be sure they can take any kind of abuse), but LiFePO4 are well known for their stability, be it thermal, electrical and mechanical (including puncture)

     

    your reaction vaguely recalls me that of a Musketeer confronted with bits of evidence from outside the reality distortion field ;)
    12 Apr, 06:59 AM Reply Like
  • nogoodslacker
    , contributor
    Comments (869) | Send Message
     
    Edmund, my whole point is that you are lumping ALL lithium batteries into one category. I am simply saying that this is not true of all lithium chemistries. LiFePO4 lithium chemistry is no more susceptible to spontaneous combustion than a PbC would be. Sure you can short it out and make it get hot, but it does not have the problem with thermal runaway that produces a self-sustaining combustion. No battery or any other energy storage device is inherently safe.
    12 Apr, 10:32 AM Reply Like
  • nogoodslacker
    , contributor
    Comments (869) | Send Message
     
    Nicu, nice to see that someone else gets it. There are hundreds of videos like that on youtube. If you did that to a LiCo battery, it would turn into a fireball.
    12 Apr, 10:34 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29549) | Send Message
     
    LiFePO4 is a good deal safer than other lithium-ion chemistries, but it's still an order of magnitude or two more hazardous than lead-acid. The reason is pretty simple. the combustion energy potential of a lithium-ion battery is about 4X the energy storage potential. I have had conversations with independent abuse testing labs and while it takes more to force iron phosphate over the line, once the line is crossed you can still get big boom.
    12 Apr, 10:50 AM Reply Like
  • nogoodslacker
    , contributor
    Comments (869) | Send Message
     
    JP said >>while it takes more to force iron phosphate over the line, once the line is crossed you can still get big boom. <<

     

    That's just flat out wrong, but I'm through trying to explain it here. Interested parties can read up on it for themselves.
    13 Apr, 03:44 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29549) | Send Message
     
    Gee, who do I want to believe? The lead researcher at of one of the biggest lithium-ion battery testing laboratories in North America who shared his videos or an anonymous message board poster who can't even share shadow puppets? Hmmm, who to choose, who to choose?

     

    I have seen the video. Don't try to baffle me with BS.
    13 Apr, 04:15 PM Reply Like
  • KCtwo
    , contributor
    Comments (12) | Send Message
     
    I hate to rain on you parade, but lead-acid batteries are major safety hazards. 6000 injuries annually due to improperly jump-starting cars. (They produce hydrogen which does indeed go "boom". They also contain sulfuric acid, which blinds):
    http://bit.ly/1lYlbgk

     

    There are _plenty_ of other studies.
    http://bit.ly/1lYlcRe

     

    and
    http://bit.ly/1lYlcRg

     

    Here is an impressive fact "...32% of motor vehicle battery were a direct result of a motor vehicle battery explosion."
    I could pull hundreds of similar articles with a simple web search. "Shadow puppets"? I don't think so.

     

    The main reason that Li-Ion (and specifically LiFePO4) are safer than lead-acid batteries is that Li-Ion batteries don't emit copious amounts hydrogen and oxygen because, unlike lead-acid, they are hermetically sealed.

     

    And exactly how many injuries have there been due to LiFePO4 "explosions." Two, three, four, maybe five? - total. No arm-waving allowed. Just the facts. Show me the thousands that were injured.
    13 Apr, 05:24 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29549) | Send Message
     
    Lead acid batteries only form hydrogen gas if they're abused by customers or mechanics who violate the manufacturers express safety instructions and charge them too rapidly in a confined space

     

    Globally there are several hundred million lead-acid batteries in use and the customer stupidity rate is beyond miniscule. The alleged safety of LiFePO4 can't begin to hold a candle to lead-acid.

     

    I guess Carroll Wright got it right. Figures don't lie but liars do figure.
    13 Apr, 05:31 PM Reply Like
  • Stilldazed
    , contributor
    Comments (2096) | Send Message
     
    I think it can be agreed by all that any battery type has potential dangers under certain situations. Human error is certainly one of those situations that must be applied to all. Even when the human error is with system engineering as was the case with the Dreamliner. Most car battery dangers (for LAB) are a combination of poor maintenance (not keeping water in the battery) and improper jump starting (cable reversal and or not grounding to a metal engine piece instead of the neg battery post).
    13 Apr, 05:44 PM Reply Like
  • KCtwo
    , contributor
    Comments (12) | Send Message
     
    Under normal _and_ abnormal conditions, lead-acid batteries emit hydrogen gas.
    http://bit.ly/1sXJwXz
    (Science does not care whether you believe it or not.)

     

    Simple fact. Again, I can produce many citations with a simple web search. How many have you produced?

     

    If you think about it, that is precisely why there are so many lead-acid battery explosions. Even the spark caused pulling the sticker off of the top of a newly purchased lead-acid battery has caused an injury. All it takes is a spark.

     

    They have produced millions of LiFePO4 cells, mainly for cordless tools, but also for other uses. (They even use them in race cars for a drop in replacement for the lead-acid battery. Imagine that.) If they were so dangerous, you would think there would be one or two fatal accidents, wouldn't you?

     

    As Stilldazed commented, any device which holds energy has some degree of inherent danger. However, overstating the relative dangers of LiFePO4 versus lead-acid is likely a losing argument.

     

    Couldn't find even one or two fatal LiFePO4 "explosions" eh? Didn't think so.
    13 Apr, 06:36 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29549) | Send Message
     
    Flooded lead-acid batteries emit hydrogen gas in modest quantities that quickly dissipates if the battery is not stored in an enclosed space with no air flow.

     

    AGM batteries do not emit hydrogen gas under normal circumstances and neither does the PbC.

     

    Get your facts straight before posting here because the Axion Power Host has the ability to delete comments from trolls who provide false information.

     

    As I said, I've seen the videos from a major independent testing laboratory where a single LiFePO4 cell blew the double doors open in a 100 square foot testing chamber. Your safety talk is ignorant nonsense based on internet searches. My discussions of the hazards are based on first hand information from safety testing experts.
    13 Apr, 06:46 PM Reply Like
  • KCtwo
    , contributor
    Comments (12) | Send Message
     
    I'd hoped you would read the last item I posted. (You really must read up on lead-acid and AGM if you are going to intelligently discuss them.)
    Here it is again:
    http://bit.ly/1lYIYwr

     

    A quote from the above _scientific_ _peer_ _reviewed_ paper:
    "Outgassing occurs even with the use of VRLA AGM cells, though at lower levels."
    They emit _less_ hydrogen, but far from zero, even when they are not being abused. The recombination is not perfect. Thus, they still will blow up when a spark is made anywhere near the vents. Hydrogen has explosive limits of 4% to 75%. Can't get much more explosive than hydrogen.

     

    I would imagine that PbC would behave something akin all other lead-acid batteries, and would very likely emit hydrogen. Any literature saying otherwise? Please post and I will read up.

     

    Still no citations eh? Fatalities? Still just arm-waving?
    13 Apr, 07:30 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29549) | Send Message
     
    APH> THIS BALL IS IN YOUR COURT!

     

    Pointless discussions like this one violate my "Life is too short rule."
    13 Apr, 07:46 PM Reply Like
  • nogoodslacker
    , contributor
    Comments (869) | Send Message
     
    I'd like to see the paper where your "lead researcher" has made LiFePO4 go "boom." You have to heat it to nearly 8000 C to make the oxygen molecules separate from the iron phosphate to get anything like a "boom" but I guess you think that is a realistic scenario.
    13 Apr, 08:46 PM Reply Like
  • nogoodslacker
    , contributor
    Comments (869) | Send Message
     
    KCtwo, don't bother trying to convince him. He heard all he wants to know from a "lead researcher" at a cocktail party. Bashing any form of lithium is just part of his campaign to pump Axion no matter the facts. Now he is trying to get APH to delete your comment because you dare to disagree with him.

     

    The incident he refers to at GM where a prototype battery exploded because it was being tested under extreme overcharge, which caused gas production in an enclosed space, which then ignited. It was the gas that ignited, not the lithium battery, and there was no fire. If you overcharge lead acid in an enclosed place and then strike a spark, you will get the same effect from the hydrogen gas.
    13 Apr, 08:51 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29549) | Send Message
     
    APH> THE BALL IS STILL IN YOUR COURT.

     

    But it is good to have NGS showing his true colors.
    13 Apr, 08:57 PM Reply Like
  • renim
    , contributor
    Comments (1054) | Send Message
     
    FWIW

     

    suzuki'e ene charge seems to spread to more suzuki vehicles http://bit.ly/1gtzhVI
    for instance the swift, http://bit.ly/1gtzet9

     

    presumably, it's lithium ion battery is still considered safe enough to be within the passenger compartment. (but not robust enough to be in the cramped engine department)
    13 Apr, 11:37 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8848) | Send Message
     
    The passenger compartment would be the best place from a crashworthyness standpoint as well as minimizing the temperature extremes. It however is not the best place should any type of thermal event occur since the highest cost incident would involve hurting a person. The engine compartment is the harshest environment for temperature extremes obviously.

     

    Mercedes has actually started insulating the engine compartment in some manner to keep the engine closer to peak operational temperature after it is turned off claiming savings in doing so.

     

    Many are opting for the trunk but space is precious and the conductor lengths are a negative.
    14 Apr, 12:07 AM Reply Like
  • nogoodslacker
    , contributor
    Comments (869) | Send Message
     
    JP. If you are so sure about my motives, please explain why just a few comments down, I actually make a comment that would favor PbC over lithium. If anyone wants to know my motive, here it is: I am long 75,000 shares of Axion and holding--a relatively small stake compared to many of you. I got into this stock, in part, because a lot of the positive hype about PbC from two years ago, some from this concentrator, some from the mouth of Thomas Granville. Since then, I have become more attuned to the risks of this stock going forward and am less likely to believe hype without sales to back it up. I try to correct hype and misinformation where I see it so people can assess the risk from all angles. At the request of APH, I will refrain from further discussion of relative safety of Li vs Pb in batteries but people should look into it for themselves before believing what they read here.
    14 Apr, 08:58 AM Reply Like
  • D Lane
    , contributor
    Comments (1229) | Send Message
     
    Thanks NGS
    I appreciate your point of view and John's as well.
    14 Apr, 09:02 AM Reply Like
  • renim
    , contributor
    Comments (1054) | Send Message
     
    ii
    http://nkbp.jp/1f2naka

     

    a very mild hybrid from Suzuki,
    looks like Ene-charge but with a belt-driven ISG (but still less than 2kW)
    23 Apr, 03:23 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8848) | Send Message
     
    Suzuki services the lower end of the market so anything they add has to be of real value. Few games will be played at that level.

     

    "Suzuki plans to commercialize the new technology first by employing it for a compact car. The company is now sure that it can complete the development of the new technology but still struggling with the costs of the parts used for the system. And it intends to commercialize the new system by solving the problem as soon as possible."
    23 Apr, 08:41 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29549) | Send Message
     
    BYD was the company Buffett invested in back in 2008. The outfit that bought A123, Ener1 and Fiskar was the Wanxiang Group.
    10 Apr, 06:14 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (1489) | Send Message
     
    The same BYD that I sold VALE to buy two days ago. :) If I could just make two good shots in a row...sigh
    10 Apr, 06:23 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (17328) | Send Message
     
    Thanks John. maybe I'm thinking of that bus company then that's been pursuing a California effort. I don't know anymore - brain overload.

     

    HardToLove
    10 Apr, 06:37 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (1489) | Send Message
     
    http://bit.ly/R7HTs1

     

    Byd vs Tesla, round 16? There isn't a juicier nuttier CEO fight out there than Musk vs Wang - now five years plus these two have been egging each other in public. China vs America.

     

    I don't think there's any competition. Byd is not simply a car company or a bus company. It is an alternative energy company. It is China dreams incorporated. Think alternative energy rocket to the moon. Nobody needs alternative energy like China. India. Asia. China pollution is a grim reaper for billions, like a Fukushima a day. Americans cannot imagine their pollution.

     

    BYD = TSLA X 10 in the next two years.
    10 Apr, 09:55 PM Reply Like
  • D Lane
    , contributor
    Comments (1229) | Send Message
     
    HTL
    Yup, its the bus company. BYD is a lithium ion battery firm that has made a big investment in electric buses. They are currently the worldwide leader in electric bus sales, although their product is not proven over time. In the US they compete with Proterra (UQM motor buses).
    11 Apr, 09:08 AM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (17328) | Send Message
     
    Wednesday's EOD stuff (Thank you SA!)

     

    04/09/2014: EOD stuff partially copied from blog (up now).
    # Trds: 127, MinTrSz: 60, MaxTrSz: 100000, Vol: 1549619, AvTrSz: 12202
    Min. Pr: 0.1750, Max Pr: 1.1839, VW Avg. Tr. Pr: 0.1856
    # Buys, Shares: 51 550047, VW Avg Buy Pr: 0.2002
    # Sells, Shares: 76 999572, VW Avg Sell Pr: 0.1775
    # Unkn, Shares: 0 0, VW Avg Unk. Pr: 0.0000
    Buy:Sell 1:1.82 (35.50% "buys"), DlyShts 399643 (25.79%), Dly Sht % of 'sells' 39.98%

     

    ARCA was again aggressively in and out all day. They were accompanied in this effort again by WABR, ATDF, NITE, CSTI, ... I was surprised price held as well as it did. The buy percentage is telling the true story, along with a low daily short percentage.

     

    The average of the lowest 20 VWAPs times 80% today is $0.0904 vs. $0.0884, $0.0865, $0.0848, $0.0831, $0.0819, $0.0816, $0.0812, $0.0807 and $0.0800 on prior days. 80% of today's VWAP is $0.1485 vs. $0.1397, $0.1468, $0.1505, $0.1522, $0.1399, $0.1332, $0.1338, $0.1337 and $0.1261 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 3.49%, 0.00%, 2.54%, 4.54% and 78.90% respectively. Price spread today was 5.71% vs. 9.40%, 7.78%, 11.30%, 14.22%, 5.88%, 19.76%, 14.20%, 14.23% and 10.67% on prior days.

     

    The larger trades (>= 15K) occurred on 31 of the 127 trades, 24.41%. These 943,090 shares were 60.86% of day's volume, and traded at a VWAP of $0.1791. 10 of these trades ...

     

    The other 96 trades, 75.59% of the day's trades, traded 606,529 shares, 39.14% of the days volume. The VWAP was $0.1792. 41 trades ...

     

    After three consecutive days of lower highs and VWAPs, and volume rising on yesterday's down day, indicating strength in the down move, we finally got very small breather. The low was higher, the high was flat and the VWAP was up along with volume. But the volume move was inconsequential (~70K shares). Even buy percentage improved. Unfortunately the recent “I believed we'd be shortly testing the strength of $0.18 as a support level and I believed it would fail to hold” has been proven on target. Yesterday's close was $.172 and we closed again below $0.18, which I said was likely, so we confirmed we've moved at least back into the trading channel we left on 4/3. Again, support for the channel is down at $0.15 and there's a potential pause provided by a sideways move bottom around $0.16, but it does not have any indication of strength because volume was low and when we exited we went down on rising volume.

     

    Short percentage yesterday moved from 27.24% to 15.07%. Today it recovered a bit, in line with the buy percentage recovery from 24% to 35.5% today. Everything working as expected here.

     

    For the third consecutive day there was no last-minute price manipulation attempt.

     

    On the traditional TA front there's still no sign of upward pressure.

     

    Did I mention my new trend line? Originating at the high of 3/10, $0.23 and having touches now at 4/3, 4/4 and 4/7, we have a confirmed falling resistance in play. All are with “good” volume and two of those days' buy percentages (non-traditional metric) were relatively good (50.54%, 54.09% and 38.16% respectively). Good volume and good buy percentages provided the best opportunity to break above resistance and it didn't happen. Two of those three days were up days too.

     

    Today had the return of late-day weakness, but it wasn't pronounced and with just one day of it we can't decide if it's a trend yet.

     

    The newer version's chart pattern reduced it's weakening bias. This does not indicate an upward move, but just suggests the rate of descent may not pick up steam.

     

    All the usual in the blog here.
    http://seekingalpha.co...

     

    HardToLove
    10 Apr, 06:32 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (17328) | Send Message
     
    I see a typo crept in to the 4/9 post. Should be:
    Max Pr: 0.1850
    # Buys, Shares: ..., VW Avg Buy Pr: 0.1820
    VW Avg. Tr. Pr: 0.1791

     

    The rest looks OK. Same got into the blog and will be noted and corrected there too.

     

    HardToLove
    11 Apr, 05:18 AM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (1489) | Send Message
     
    I checked out AXPW at stockta.com and they have a lot of bullish indicators.

     

    I look at the chart myself and I see that after that initial spike March 5-8 (was it ever decided why exactly we had the spike? Kia lead-carbon announcement?) the pps settled back to 0.15 and since then has slowly moved up rather than fading. That looks bullish to me!
    11 Apr, 05:54 AM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (17328) | Send Message
     
    EM: Of course. I've documented the six consecutive days of last-minute trades substantially higher that price ranges going into the close. Every day only a few and of small volume.

     

    A bullish look is what they re designed to provide.

     

    The good and bad news is that they stopped a few days ago and the price highs and range have begun the "natural progression" down.

     

    HardToLove
    11 Apr, 09:14 AM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (1489) | Send Message
     
    Once again, the devil is in the details for the day.
    11 Apr, 03:01 PM Reply Like
  • froggey77
    , contributor
    Comments (2768) | Send Message
     
    By John Goreham G+ 2014-03-31 13:25
    Myth busted - Electric vehicles cost more to maintain than gas cars do
    http://bit.ly/1gQrpJJ

     

    He points out that in 5 years the average buyer will spend less on maintenance for a Prius than the "Maintenance nearly free" Leaf. Also some higher priced cars have free maintenance as it is backed into the car as opposed to Tesla.

     

    The author participates in the comment section.
    10 Apr, 10:32 PM Reply Like
  • D-inv
    , contributor
    Comments (3917) | Send Message
     
    Question. Anyone care to estimate amount of working capital required to support production for the toll contract (flooded lead acid batteries)?
    10 Apr, 10:39 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (1489) | Send Message
     
    http://reut.rs/1ggz8op

     

    Sony says: STOP USING YOUR VAIO!

     

    Battery fire hazard!!

     

    btw, I never saw the word "lithium" in any of the articles. Cover-up?
    11 Apr, 04:18 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29549) | Send Message
     
    I did get a grin out of the fact that the batteries were from Panasonic, just like somebody else we know.
    11 Apr, 07:13 AM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (1489) | Send Message
     
    There have been a number of laptop recalls due to lithium battery fires over the past few years. Neither Sony nor Panasonic make crap products and they have had much practice. Yet, seemingly incredibly, here we are once again; What's the Deal, Neil???
    One has to consider the wisdom of BANNING LITHIUM BATTERIES, laptops, Teslas, and all other products containing them, from any place where fires would be unwelcome. Like aircraft. Or garages connected to multi-family residences.
    11 Apr, 09:00 AM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (17328) | Send Message
     
    04/10/2014: EOD stuff partially copied to the concentrator.
    # Trds: 46, MinTrSz: 135, MaxTrSz: 15500, Vol: 240209, AvTrSz: 5222
    Min. Pr: 0.1750, Max Pr: 0.1900, VW Avg. Tr. Pr: 0.1782
    # Buys, Shares: 15 79009, VW Avg Buy Pr: 0.1797
    # Sells, Shares: 31 161200, VW Avg Sell Pr: 0.1774
    # Unkn, Shares: 0 0, VW Avg Unk. Pr: 0.0000
    Buy:Sell 1:2.04 (32.89% "buys"), DlyShts 38509 (16.03%), Dly Sht % of 'sells' 23.89%

     

    I see a typo crept in to the 4/9 post (yesterday's). I corrected ...

     

    ARCA was in pre-market with a $0.249 offer and never moved it until 12:02, when some volume and bid/ask movement began to appear together. They plopped down an $0.18 offer ahead of ATDF and NITE. But it wasn't going to be easy for them today as we again have untoward aggression (he-he) by WABR: $0.179 offered four minutes later and $0.178 three minutes after that. Fortunately those offers and ARCA's $0.18 were taken and ARCA was back to $0.249 until 12:36 when ARCA again jumped ahead of the line with a $0.178 7K offer. Twenty-one minutes later a buyer finally stepped up and ARCA was out of the market.

     

    Something to keep in mind, maybe, is that NITE had a 200K offer at $0.21 at 12:32 and sat on it for the rest of the day. I suspect this will be hanging around hoping to get a push back up where they can unload. My take is that a drop lower will compel them to cut their losses and we'll see all or parts of that 200K being dissipated at either lower offers or silently hitting bids, which we can't see unless the offer happens to be visible at the time and the shares are sold from that aggregate volume.

     

    The average of the lowest 20 VWAPs times 80% today is $0.0929 vs. $0.0904, $0.0884, $0.0865, $0.0848, $0.0831, $0.0819, $0.0816, $0.0812 and $0.0807 on prior days. 80% of today's VWAP is $0.1425 vs. $0.1485, $0.1397, $0.1468, $0.1505, $0.1522, $0.1399, $0.1332, $0.1338 and $0.1337 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 0.00%, 2.70%, -0.54%, -84.50% and -90.36% respectively. Price spread today was 8.57% vs. 5.71%, 9.40%, 7.78%, 11.30%, 14.22%, 5.88%, 19.76%, 14.20% and 14.23% on prior days.

     

    These metrics were affected by two trades at the open for 2,000 and 700 shares at $0.19. There's five more I'll want to examine too. But for these two, removal ...

     

    The largest trades today were 15K and there were only two, both at $0.18.

     

    On the typical TA charts it will appear that we're trying to push up again, but with low volume. However, if we remove those six trades (four of which occurred in the first half-hour) totaling only 12.7K, we see that we topped right at $0.18 with some volume in the number and quantity of the trades. With a low of $0.175 that would yield a “gravestone doji”, not a good sign. That doji is not a guarantee that we'll move lower, but it is very suggestive when combined with the traditional and ...

     

    On the traditional TA front there's still no sign of upward pressure. No sign of downward pressure either. With very low volume, none of this is surprising.

     

    Today's high exactly touched my descending trend line. Keep in mind the high was established by two abnormal, for today, trades described above. Also keep in mind that no substantial number of trades or volume occurred anywhere above $0.18, our old sideways trading channel resistance.

     

    Late-day weakness continued to evidence itself, although still not pronounced. Two consecutive days though – might bear watching.

     

    The newer [inflection point calculations] version's chart pattern, which reduced it's weakening bias yesterday, has resumed it's trend of suggesting weakening prices near term. Contrary to yesterday's “just suggests the rate of descent may not pick up steam”, today suggests it is picking up steam.

     

    All the usual is in the blog here.
    http://seekingalpha.co...

     

    HardToLove
    11 Apr, 09:04 AM Reply Like
  • Retired Aviator
    , contributor
    Comments (1481) | Send Message
     
    Okay, I'm going to stir up the pot a bit with this post. Hope it doesn't agitate anybody too much. The reason is to bounce this PM I received off of the more knowledgeable here than myself to see whether we have something to worry about.

     

    Background: I was digging through some ancient concentrators and found a no longer active commenter who was very critical of PbC technology and also versed in battery chemistry. He claims that even though the carbon (negative) electrode eliminates the sulfation problem, the lead (positive) electrode will still sulfate to the point of dooming the PbC. So I PM'ed this guy to explain further and the following is what he replied. Thoughts?

     

    "When I read Axion's [2011] white paper, it very carefully avoids the topic of sulfation on the positive plate. Of course, since the negative plate is replaced with carbon, the sulfation on the negative plate is eliminated, and they emphasize that quite heavily.

     

    When you charge lead-acid, the positive turns to lead dioxide and the negative plate turns to sponge (elemental) lead. Both the positive and the negative plate turn to lead sulfate when the battery is discharged. They become identical. (You can actually reverse charge a lead-acid battery.)

     

    During the charge, because hydrogen is lost, the positive plate gets fully charged first, leaving the negative plate partially charged. This leaves an increasing fraction of the lead sulfate in place on the negative plate during each charge cycle. You must overcharge the battery to fully charge the negative plate. (This has its own set of issues.)

     

    In the PbC battery, _if_ you fully charge the battery, you don't have a sulfation problem. However, if you _don't_ fully charge the battery, then you leave lead sulfate in place on the positive plate, which, given time, will form hard sulfate. It is inevitable, and also basic chemistry.

     

    You don't _ever_ fully charge the battery in a hybid vehicle. Your goal is to leave the battery at a state of charge (SOC) of 50% to 80%. Lead-acid has been proven to fail in hybrid duty because of this. PbC will suffer the same fate.

     

    The reason that Axion is destined to fail is the PbC technology itself. It reduces a couple of problems of lead-acid, but in doing so it loses in specific energy and gains in cost per kwh. It also does not allow a "drop-in" for a 12 volt lead-acid because the cell voltage is too low. (You get an 11 volt or a 15 volt.)

     

    LiFePO4 _does_ drop-in for a 12 volt, costs less per kwh, and has better specific energy.

     

    The PbC is just a hole in which foolish investors will drop money. It just has no hope against li-ion.

     

    This "charge acceptance" is basically another word for specific power. Li-ion cells are commercially available with more than 20,000 watts/kg of specific power. 4,000 w/kg is common place in li-ion. In terms of "charge acceptance" li-ion can accept more than 200C in so-called "charge acceptance". (40C is commonplace in li-ion. I believe Petersen is bragging about PbC achieving something like 10C of charge acceptance.)

     

    There are hardly any PbC test results because Axion gets an NDA before they sell them to anyone. If they were proud of the results, then the NDA would not be required."
    11 Apr, 09:25 AM Reply Like
  • JamesBBecker
    , contributor
    Comments (172) | Send Message
     
    RA: In science and engineering, there are two concepts. Theory and Data.

     

    Your comment (from your third party) is heavy on theory. And then says that no data is available.

     

    I believe that this is not quite the case. BMW has published test results of the PcB and found a very long life with comparably fast charging as compared to traditional lead acid.

     

    Furthermore, the power cube must also reside at a partial state of charge as well. As the cube does not know from moment to moment if they should absorb charge or release it for the regulation to work. Apparently, the power cube has been working fine for some time without failure.

     

    Lastly, the comparison to LiOn is rather disingenuous. It ignores price. A lithium Ion battery set that runs at 10C and has a long life (let alone 20C or 50C) is somewhere near 3X the cost of the PcB on a kwh basis - and that's before adding all of the control electronics that PcB doesn't require.
    11 Apr, 09:54 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29549) | Send Message
     
    It's a convenient theory that conflicts with experience for both the PbC and the Ultrabattery. Lead-sulfate does form on the positive electrode, but it does not form as hard crystals. The failure mechanism for positive electrodes in lead-acid batteries is grid corrosion that leads to a loss of structural integrity. The positive plates literally fall apart. AFAIK, Axion is the only company that's ever devoted significant effort to developing more durable positive plates that don't corrode.

     

    It's absolutely correct that PbC is not a drop in for straight lead-acid because of its declining voltage curve. The PbC will only function properly in electrical systems that have been designed to take advantage of its strengths and compensate for its weaknesses. If you need the strengths of the PbC for micro-hybrids, electric locomotives and hybrid heavy trucks, you design electronics to suit the battery.

     

    Cost per kWh is a straw man argument, as is energy density.

     

    The big issues with all lithium-ion chemistries are the battery management system, power electronics and temperature management systems. The cells may be comparably priced, but the electronics and temperature control systems are not and the costs aren't linear. The ancillary battery pack costs start at 3 to 4 times cell costs for small packs and eventually fall to about 1/3 of cell costs as you get to very large packs.

     

    A typical 80 Ah lead-acid battery has 960 watt hours of energy capacity, or 3.46 million watt-seconds. A heavy cold weather starter load is 700 amps, or 8,400 watts. If you grind the starter for 30 seconds you'll use 252,000 watt-seconds of energy or about 7% of the battery's capacity. If the engine starts after a couple seconds, which is what happens in newer cars with fuel injection, you'll use closer to 1% of the battery's capacity. Starter batteries are sized for the power requirements of the application so total energy is meaningless.

     

    If lithium-iron phosphate was an acceptable substitute for lead-acid in terms of performance or price, somebody in the auto industry would be using it already. That's not happening and the only automakers that are even talking about maybe using lithium-ion in micro-hybrids are the early launchers of 48-volt systems.
    11 Apr, 10:16 AM Reply Like
  • geopark
    , contributor
    Comments (254) | Send Message
     
    Thanks RA and all, just what I've been needing, a good old Aqua Velva Slap in the morning.
    11 Apr, 10:28 AM Reply Like
  • nogoodslacker
    , contributor
    Comments (869) | Send Message
     
    RA, I can state for a fact that this person is flat out wrong about what charge rate Li-ion cells can accept. The very best Li Polymer can discharge at 40C, but if you try to charge them at that rate you better up your fire insurance. LiFePO4 is the only relatively safe Li-ion chemistry and the best charge rate cells available are A123 nanophosphate cells that can be charged at up to 10C rate, but those cells don't come cheap, at about $750/kWh. Basic LiFePO4 can be bought cheaper than PbC (I can buy it retail from China for about $300/kWh), but you are limited to about 2C charge rate on those.
    11 Apr, 10:38 AM Reply Like
  • markmang
    , contributor
    Comments (2) | Send Message
     
    RA, I am really surprised to read the comments from someone who seems knowledgeable about batteries regarding the "charge acceptance" of lithium-ion cells. There are no lithium-ion cells capable of a 40C charge rate, let alone 200C! Is this guy confusing discharge rate with charge rate? Does he naively assume that if it boasts a power capability (discharge) of 40C it can also charge at that rate?
    11 Apr, 12:25 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (17328) | Send Message
     
    R.A.: Did the third party consider that Axion use a less acidic electrolyte? That it does not suffer "stratification? That the Hydrogen ions go, IIRC, into the carbon and are released to recombine so no losses accrue due to gasification? That Axion employed electron microsopy to examine the positive electrode (anode?) and designed a different grid (includes raised channels) and barriers to help reduce sulfation and gain other benefits?

     

    That's way more than I know, but it is what I recall - let's hope my memory is correct.

     

    HardTpLove
    11 Apr, 12:27 PM Reply Like
  • Futurist
    , contributor
    Comments (2127) | Send Message
     
    Yeah,
    I remember this poster from long ago. His argument never made sense. The rest of the battery wore out before positive plate sulfication was ever a problem. ISTR that this poster worked for a lithium company and was a huge pain since he always wanted to make arguments based on his specialized knowledge that nobody (including himself) could back up with evidence. Except that he would then change the discussion as opposed to admitting he was wrong.
    But hey, I guess his arguments are still getting some play.
    11 Apr, 02:02 PM Reply Like
  • Billion003
    , contributor
    Comments (131) | Send Message
     
    Possible he's trying to build doubt to drive the stock down to load up?
    Today looks like a high of .18+ and a low of about .161.
    I continue to watch.
    11 Apr, 03:51 PM Reply Like
  • Futurist
    , contributor
    Comments (2127) | Send Message
     
    Just so you know that poster never had any inclination to "load up". His agenda was to protect the lithium advantage, as he saw it.
    11 Apr, 05:29 PM Reply Like
  • bazooooka
    , contributor
    Comments (2351) | Send Message
     
    You dug up a long buried skeleton... =)
    11 Apr, 08:16 PM Reply Like
  • Retired Aviator
    , contributor
    Comments (1481) | Send Message
     
    Thank you to all who responded! The finer points of battery chemistry remain quite above my head, but I did try. I know this was unpleasant but if the PbC has an Achilles' heel we're better off to figure it out now rather than suffer it as an unexpected news release sometime down the line.

     

    Positive electrode potential issues do haunt me. I think PbC positive electrode failure is not a yes or no proposition but a question of when. None of us believes a PbC battery will last forever, so the question is how long will it last? Nobody seems to know, but we do know that certain demanding applications will mean sitting at PSoC for lengthy periods as well as hard cycling conditions.

     

    Methinks a grid-connected Cube is not one of those applications so I don't think we can conclude much from the PJM connected Cube at New Castle. The grid surely keeps the batteries pretty well topped off. They perform FM on a split second basis and then quickly get recharged, blackout or brownout notwithstanding. But those are rare.

     

    Motive power is different as the ICE being on or regen braking are necessary to top off the PbCs' voltage. So what happens if an ePower truck climbs a couple thousand feet of elevation, drawing heavily on batteries with not much braking, and then the driver shuts it off to go into the motel for 10 hours? That's 10 hours at PSoC and possibly much accelerated deterioration of the positive electrode.

     

    Perhaps, though, ePower could simply advise operators to run the ICE for a few minutes parked to recharge the batteries before shutting the truck off? Maybe a solution could be that simple, especially with a voltage meter on the dash and perhaps an idiot light or buzzer for low voltage upon ignition being switched off. Would truckers make a habit of getting the battery pack voltage up before shutting it off? With a battery string that costs $20k to replace I do believe that kind of diligence could reasonably be expected.

     

    So I think that at least for some applications diligence in maintaining a high state of charge as much as practicable +should+ mean getting an acceptable lifespan out of PbC if positive electrode deterioration proves a bigger problem than expected. With luck it won't even be a problem but I'm not convinced of that yet. At $20k replacement cost, service life is certainly a critical factor in the payback calculation. I think the same could be said for most if not all potential PbC applications. Again thanks for all the input.
    12 Apr, 01:40 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8848) | Send Message
     
    RA, I was wondering if fleets would do the refresh charges on battery packs in the vehicle IF the design allowed for easy opportunity to do this. I think if the duty cycle and driving pattern allows for this the answer would be yes if the economics proved to be advantageous. Perhaps something for ePower to query the industry players on and include in the package if it increases the value to the customer. Trucking fleets are probably a wee bit more attentive to the cost/unit of work than the average passenger car driver.
    12 Apr, 08:25 AM Reply Like
  • Futurist
    , contributor
    Comments (2127) | Send Message
     
    I believe you are making a mountain out of a molehill. Keep in mind that these batteries are replaced with every overhaul of a class 8 truck. They are lead acid and do have a failure date ( albeit a longer life).
    To not believe that the PowerCube at New Castle has been a testing center and proving ground since 2011 simply belies logic. With all the testing done on the PbC, your argument is that somehow a long term problem exists, which has been kept secret, and companies like ePower and NS simply are in the dark.

     

    This kind of talk is not productive since it is not based on fact or science.
    12 Apr, 08:59 AM Reply Like
  • Retired Aviator
    , contributor
    Comments (1481) | Send Message
     
    iindy> If you mean a plug-in refresh option yes maybe that would make sense. I am very hopeful that it wouldn't be necessary as a normal maintenance measure.

     

    IIRC on the test trip to Iowa and back the PbC batteries were every bit as charged upon return as when they left. A thousand miles or something. OTOH when they tried test runs with LAB, the batteries were in bad shape quickly and needed lengthy plug in charging after just hours of duty on the road.
    12 Apr, 09:20 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8848) | Send Message
     
    RA, Only intending to point out that we know that a plug in refresh operation exists and this, to us, provides unknown improvements in battery efficiency and durability. IF these improvements are sufficient enough to entice fleet operators to include the refresh routine into their PM schedule it would behoove Axion and ePower to design the system to allow for inclusion of this routine in the operators PM schedule if they so desire. Most fleet operators are sharp people and will take advantage of technology that makes sense.
    12 Apr, 09:39 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (29549) | Send Message
     
    The trip from Florence to Iowa was about 660 miles each direction and both legs took just a hair under 10 hours. Anything longer, and safety rules would have required an overnight rest for Mario.

     

    So far ePower has not seen anything that suggests a refresh charge will ever be required. Because of the way the system works and balances itself, the transmission will shift to a lower gear before the batteries reach a 50% to 60% state of charge. When it comes to long grades that cause other trucks to downshift, ours will do exactly the same thing. Once you have a downshift, the load on the batteries is eliminated.

     

    In our system, the batteries do the boost work for small grades that conventional trucks can take at 65 mph. They don't provide miles of boost on steep grades.
    12 Apr, 09:46 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8848) | Send Message
     
    John, Something to discuss w/ Axion and keep an eye on as you go through the durability learning curve. Certainly, while other parties have beat the s^%t out of the PbC and you can gain a pretty high level of confidence from their efforts, there will be lessons learned that might offer opportunities to tune your system.

     

    Me, I'm just waiting to hear the data once you get through the list of things preventing you from getting the rig(s) out there and putting sufficient miles on to gain a level of confidence to indicate Approx. x miles per gallon w/ this level of opportunity. The numbers shared over a longer period have jumped around because the platform is immature and numerous persons are sharing perceptions at different points in time as voices have yelled from the audience, "Are we there yet?" The obvious differences that happen when one decides not to work under the Klingon cloaking device.
    12 Apr, 10:29 AM Reply Like
  • greentongue
    , contributor
    Comments (740) | Send Message
     
    "Are we there yet?"
    Seriously, the ePower truck taking so long gives a window on why trains and cars are. If we have a source of information that is not "under the Klingon cloaking device", why would we not want all the details we can get?

     

    Timelines are bantered about here all the time. Hard facts from a real world source makes speculation closer to the truth.
    12 Apr, 11:35 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (8848) | Send Message
     
    Greentongue, True. But we do need to respect the supplier(s) of the information recognizing that they will share what they can in a time frame suitable to them. Asking any more is not appropriate and could lead to a tightening of the information supply line. We'd like to know more for sure but we need to recognize we should not and quite frankly cannot expect to make progress pushing on a rope.
    12 Apr, 12:03 PM Reply Like
  • Patrick Young
    , contributor
    Comments (958) | Send Message
     
    Another knockoff.

     

    http://bit.ly/1kQsXXU
    11 Apr, 10:06 AM Reply Like
  • markmang
    , contributor
    Comments (2) | Send Message