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 (348)
Track new comments
  • metroneanderthal
    , contributor
    Comments (1425) | Send Message
     
    can't resist being first, sorry no links, sightings, or words of wisdom.
    1 Jun 2014, 08:50 AM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (19538) | Send Message
     
    Well, Metro, first in the concentrator, first in the hearts of your countrymen, and - Congrats - first in an ePower trauck (Neanderthal spelling).

     

    Now we *know* you're connected from *waaaay back! :-))

     

    HardToLove
    1 Jun 2014, 09:45 AM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (3127) | Send Message
     
    Good morning, metro.
    1 Jun 2014, 09:05 AM Reply Like
  • ARGE
    , contributor
    Comments (724) | Send Message
     
    Beat me Metro, but it will not be the first time I have been called #2;-)
    1 Jun 2014, 09:05 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    Trojan Battery Showcases Smart Carbon(TM) Line of Advanced Lead Acid Batteries at Intersolar Europe

     

    http://bit.ly/1rybv1V
    1 Jun 2014, 09:58 AM Reply Like
  • DRich
    , contributor
    Comments (4819) | Send Message
     
    Maybe a good complimentary back-end product for an Axion front-end FR and line sag configuration.

     

    I wonder if mixed battery power stations coupled with renewable power sources actually will replace many Peaker Plant & spinning reserves. The economics are still very complicated & hard to work out to justifying the technology change.
    1 Jun 2014, 10:12 AM Reply Like
  • mrholty
    , contributor
    Comments (1135) | Send Message
     
    Personally, I'd like Trojan's website. A good summary of the products/etc and a form to fill out if you want more info.
    2 Jun 2014, 12:41 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    No matter what you are working on make sure you mention Tesla. A nation of name dropping writers.

     

    This Algae Battery Could Power A Tesla With 200X The Charge

     

    "Tesla pledged to use U.S. materials only, which does cut the cost. Still, it’s got to be more than what it costs to grow and use algae powered batteries, right? Right, according to Freeman. He says he only needs $1,500 for the prototype and that he can have his algae battery ready for mass production for a mere $5,000 by this summer."

     

    http://bit.ly/1ryghwr
    1 Jun 2014, 10:21 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    East Penn again. Seems to rhyme.

     

    Lead-Carbon Natural Gas Hybrid Project Highlights Cost-Effective Technology

     

    ALABC Partners with Natural Gas Companies to Demonstrate Highly Efficient, Low Cost HEV

     

    http://bit.ly/1u5n3aF
    1 Jun 2014, 01:54 PM Reply Like
  • WayneinOregon
    , contributor
    Comments (1110) | Send Message
     
    Based on their history, I sometimes wonder if Axion (TG) and East Penn may have some kind of gentleman's (or gentlewoman's) agreement on various matters, making some of our discussions on patent infringement, etc. immaterial. It's not difficult for me to imagine an expanded relationship at some point, most likely at a time Axion's core business takes off.
    1 Jun 2014, 02:17 PM Reply Like
  • DRich
    , contributor
    Comments (4819) | Send Message
     
    >WayneinOregon ... East Penn has been my favored stalking horse for a N. American manufacturing partner.
    1 Jun 2014, 02:22 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    WayneIO, we have evidence that there are some working agreements between East Penn and Axion. How this relates to anything past, present or future as it relates to the PbC technology I could only guess.

     

    My fear is that given margins in the batter business it may be very difficult to satisfy 2 parties ROI expectations in scaling the technology for broader adoption. As I have mentioned before I would have no difficulty giving up the auto market for limited return to get access to a scaled mfg base.

     

    Echo, Automotive Stinks! Government sponsored jobs programs.
    1 Jun 2014, 02:52 PM Reply Like
  • Nicholas Chen
    , contributor
    Comments (2799) | Send Message
     
    I don't know if it's been explained if it makes a difference to East Penn whether they manufacture an UltraBattery or PbC. Other than a few grants they've gotten for the UB.

     

    Since they would have to license both techs, they should be happy with whichever one wins the day.
    1 Jun 2014, 02:53 PM Reply Like
  • greentongue
    , contributor
    Comments (974) | Send Message
     
    Would make the transition from UB to PbC easier if East Penn did both.
    1 Jun 2014, 04:35 PM Reply Like
  • 481086
    , contributor
    Comments (3431) | Send Message
     
    What I'm still confused about is if there is any potential conflict between EastPenn's duties to CSIRO with respect to efforts to commercialize/market the UB (and for that matter what the depth, breadth, and nature of those duties truly are) and EastPenn's relationship/partnership with Axion, inasmuch as Axion's prime purpose is to commercialize and market its own lead-carbon battery, one that, while it may not compete directly with UB in all applications, nevertheless does share some significant overlap. For could it not be said that UB and Axion's Powercubes more or less are intended to compete directly with each other for the stationary storage market?

     

    If so, how happy can CSIRO be that EastPenn continues to nurture (to whatever extent) Axion's health and ambitions (and thus PbC's)?
    1 Jun 2014, 07:38 PM Reply Like
  • DRich
    , contributor
    Comments (4819) | Send Message
     
    >481086 ... I've wondered that myself. The dilemma with me is that EP has never stated or advertised whether the UB has a capacitance rating or is just a "better" lead carbon AGM. Thus, I don't think the two devices are direct competitors.

     

    Axion, in my opinion, is not a battery to be used for long / medium duration stationary storage ... at least, not by itself. That makes no sense to me. The shining properties of the PbC is quick absorption of, what to other chemistrys, would be overcharge current that would just get shunted to ground & lost and high current discharge that should be sustained over many minutes because of the energy sink. That last characteristic is just my guess because we've never been officially informed of the rise time of the capacitor ... or, for that matter, the actual capability of the capacitance functionality. I do believe TG once actually said the battery would react with full power in 50 ms (?).

     

    Anyway, the really big reason that I've thought of (and don't know) that could block my idea is what agreement EP has with CSIRO. Just another thing to speculate about. What fun.
    1 Jun 2014, 08:34 PM Reply Like
  • 481086
    , contributor
    Comments (3431) | Send Message
     
    D, I appreciate your added thoughts. It's certainly something that in the fullness of time will hopefully be untangled for us. But it does seem to all get a bit more complicated though with the (apparent) increased cooperation we are seeing between ALABC and EP in the automotive space. I imagine in all of it that there's plenty more going on which doesn't meet the eye. I just wish we were seeing more of Axion's name in the mix...
    1 Jun 2014, 09:55 PM Reply Like
  • DRich
    , contributor
    Comments (4819) | Send Message
     
    >481086 ... Just as an alternative way to look at it from the automotive stand point. Let's just say auto OEM's have been testing (and failing) with carbon paste AGM's since 2005 (an arbitrary year chosen due to passage of Federal EPA target then). CSIRO has demonstrated, without any real rigor, the Honda Civic. A desperate search to what is good enough is on. It is now time to market and/or test whatever choices are left to the industry and that is the UltraBattery ... there is no other choice to make.

     

    I guess it is still possible that a different system configuration or new additive might show. The OEM are likely to take the word of the industry even as the railroads took Enersys word that they had the solution. That didn't work out so well
    1 Jun 2014, 10:43 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    IIRC the ALABC has yammered on at great length about the capacitive aspect of carbon additives in the NAM of LABs and the Ultrabattery w/o giving any details.

     

    That being said, Axion has not published anything on their greatest strength either.

     

    I must admit that I remain perplexed about the ALABC's cloak and dagger games about what they can offer in this area as well. They exist in denial IMO. Such is the position of having to bow down to a controlling interest.
    2 Jun 2014, 12:00 AM Reply Like
  • greentongue
    , contributor
    Comments (974) | Send Message
     
    I wonder if Axion can make the carbon plates for the UltraBattery? Wouldn't that be interesting? After all they want to provide the plates for other peoples' batteries eventually.
    2 Jun 2014, 08:19 AM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (19538) | Send Message
     
    GT: IIUC, they are completely different constructions and would have different steps, maybe certain equipment, processes, ...

     

    I can't see any long-term benefit to Axion from doing that sort of thing.

     

    MHO,
    HardToLove
    2 Jun 2014, 12:35 PM Reply Like
  • wtblanchard
    , contributor
    Comments (2410) | Send Message
     
    MAY 30, 2014

     

    AQUION ENERGY REFUNDS DEBT WITH LOAN FROM TRINITY, CAPX

     

    http://bit.ly/1u5oCFN

     

    "Aquion has raised more than $100 million and may seek additional capital later this year or early next year."

     

    “It was more favorable terms,” Pearson said, declining to disclose borrowing costs. “Just like with a home mortgage, the overall deal made more sense to refinance.”

     

    "... will begin shipping its aqueous hybrid ion batteries by the end of this quarter, Pearson said.

     

    The stackable units, which use saltwater to conduct electricity, each hold 1.7 kilowatt-hours of energy. They’re designed to hold charges for several hours and may be drained and recharged daily."
    1 Jun 2014, 02:08 PM Reply Like
  • siliconhillbilly
    , contributor
    Comments (2754) | Send Message
     
    I am still waiting for information on internal cell impedance, idle "leakage" (self discharge) and round trip efficiency. "1.7kWh of energy" is bordering on no information at all.

     

    My thought is that the Aquion cell has relatively low voltage and high internal impedance. That implies slow charging and slow discharging to keep efficiency anywhere near tolerable.

     

    Useful for some energy storage applications but not even remotely competitive with the PbC for higher power use.
    2 Jun 2014, 03:28 PM Reply Like
  • wtblanchard
    , contributor
    Comments (2410) | Send Message
     
    Is self discharge likely to be an issue for the application it's aimed at?

     

    "designed to hold charges for several hours and may be drained and recharged daily"

     

    Is the key word daily and not even "several hours?"

     

    The EnerVault battery iindelco references below has a round trip efficiency that's not so hot according to MIT article:

     

    A Battery Made of Iron Could Improve the Economics of Solar and Wind Power

     

    A new type of flow battery could allow renewable-energy developers to store power until it’s most valuable.

     

    By Kevin Bullis on May 28, 2014

     

    http://bit.ly/1p1FDym

     

    "One significant drawback to the technology is that it’s less than 70 percent efficient—30 percent of the electricity used to charge the battery is lost (many batteries are better than 90 percent efficient). The company says the economics still work out, but such a wasteful battery might not be ideal for large-scale renewable energy. More solar panels would have to be installed to make up for the waste.

     

    Enervault says that when the batteries are produced commercially at even larger sizes than the current demonstration model, they will cost just a fifth as much as vanadium redox flow batteries, which have been demonstrated at large scales and are probably the type of flow battery closest to market right now"

     

    ======================...

     

    Here's another article on in from Forbes ... sorry if it's already been posted. Fairly long and some interesting details on flow batteries.

     

    5/30/2014 @ 11:15AM |15,977 views
    EnerVault Unveils First Of Its Kind Iron-Chromium Megawatt-Scale Flow Battery

     

    http://onforb.es/1p1FFGg

     

    "This past week, EnerVault – a company which has developed a unique iron-chromium redox flow battery technology – dedicated its utility-scale Turlock demonstration storage project in California’s Central Valley. This redox flow battery storage system can deliver one megawatt-hour of energy from a 250 kW battery that can perform at that rated level for four hours.

     

    ...

     

    Funded in part by over $4.7 million from the US Department of Energy and $476,000 from the California Energy Commission, the project is meant to demonstrate the feasibility of iron-chromium redox flow batteries as reliable utility-scale storage resources.

     

    ...

     

    The system does indeed respond in seconds – but you wouldn’t think of using this system merely for ancillary services or frequency regulation.

     

    ...

     

    I don’t have to have a factory. All I need to build is the cells and stack – there is no gigawatt factory required. I am going to be the big energy storage guy because the tanks come from a supplier, the pumps come from a supplier. Power conditioning and controls – all arrive at the job site with my cells and stacks, so I don’t have to inventory. I have a very cash efficient business model, with 80% as pass through. We will make an announcement shortly with respect to a partner who can build these facilities at low cost. This scales rationally and fairly easily – there’s no $5 billion gigafactory.

     

    "
    2 Jun 2014, 04:09 PM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (3127) | Send Message
     
    I talked with Aqueon today. They have product for sale. I will be getting some technical info and quotes tomorrow. He mentioned a price of about $1000 for the 1.7 kwh battery. In comparison, 3 x $357 = $1071, and still is 0.2 kwh short.

     

    They mentioned the slow charging and discharging attributes. I mentioned perhaps making dual system with carbon lead batteries, which he thought was quite interesting, and recommended an inverter from Outback that should work.

     

    As siliconhillbilly said, it is very different than the Axion product. Too bad the two companies apparently are not talking to each other; they are both near Pittsburg.
    2 Jun 2014, 11:10 PM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (3127) | Send Message
     
    sili, it is a 48v battery, and has an extended voltage range, somewhat similar to the bio-carbon. It is also slow to charge and discharge.
    2 Jun 2014, 11:25 PM Reply Like
  • Patrick Young
    , contributor
    Comments (1947) | Send Message
     
    Rick, that's outstanding. I can't believe they aren't talking to each other either. That's totally unacceptable. I imagine you didn't spend more than an hour of your time to get someone on the phone and make this important introduction the idea of a partnership with lead-carbon. That being said, we want to partner with the long-duration storage technology that has the best value. I for one am not sure whether that is Aquion, but given that the companies are in a similar weight class, with non-competitive technologies, they seem like a good partner.
    3 Jun 2014, 10:09 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    Meralco pilot-testing solar microgrid system

     

    "Buencamino said Meralco has not yet found a technical partner for the project. Meralco is considering working with or at least having initial learnings from California-based Tesla Motors, which presently makes electric vehicles and their corresponding battery packs. There are other possible providers such as Virginia-based AES Corp., Buencamino said, although he noted that AES’ present roster of products may be too large for Meralco’s micro-grid pilot.

     

    “It is completely solar with storage for 1 megawatt,” Buencamino said. “The idea is that, in the morning you have power and you charge the energy storage. At night, you use the power stored in the batteries.”"

     

    http://bit.ly/1u5x5Zr
    1 Jun 2014, 03:18 PM Reply Like
  • rgholbrook
    , contributor
    Comments (116) | Send Message
     
    Sunday OT - Tomorrow is Apple’s WWDC, a conference aimed at software developers. It basically tells the world what software/platform updates are being implemented for Apple devices. Something that has not been talked about a lot but might be interesting is Apple may adopt NFC (Near Field Communication) in some devices. NFC is basically tech that allows your device/smart card to talk with another device/smart card by touching or swiping.

     

    Axionistas who have had to live with a "lead is dead" mind-set in the investment world should take heart that the same wall street crowd also wrote off NFC a while back. Several beaten down stocks could leap on an announcement of the tech's adoption. For people in general, the tech would effect everything from purchases made by tapping your cell phone to swiping an ID badge.
    1 Jun 2014, 04:13 PM Reply Like
  • rgholbrook
    , contributor
    Comments (116) | Send Message
     
    UPDATE: Apple did annouce they are designing NFC into the iPhones. Appears the paint drying days are over for investors in the NFC sector.

     

    http://bit.ly/1nrpOjR
    8 Jun 2014, 06:33 PM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (3221) | Send Message
     
    I've mentioned that I find Axion's mention of selling to investors one of the most intriguing things I've heard in a long time from Axion.

     

    In the January letter to shareholders, Axion said, "various investor groups seeking fixed income revenue streams", and on the last conf call, TG said, " similar to an investment in a REIT for example" and he mentioned site selection.

     

    The folks here have been really good at investigation of all things Axion. I could use your help in learning about the subject above.

     

    I just started looking myself. After a quick google search, I found this from 2012, about certain ways to finance the Renewable Energy mkt at large. Just started reading it. I've only gotten to Section 1.3, but that one was especially helpful:

     

    http://1.usa.gov/1nV7P6c

     

    Some of you guys are champion investigators. I look forward to seeing what you come up with (something new to look into! yay!). Thanks in advance!
    1 Jun 2014, 07:09 PM Reply Like
  • pascquale
    , contributor
    Comments (144) | Send Message
     
    This week?
    http://bit.ly/1oLWcRe
    1 Jun 2014, 11:10 PM Reply Like
  • pascquale
    , contributor
    Comments (144) | Send Message
     
    I meant this week:)
    http://bit.ly/1qejSeB
    8 Jun 2014, 09:55 PM Reply Like
  • User 393748
    , contributor
    Comments (439) | Send Message
     
    In one of the PDF files that I have on the Furukawa UltraBattery, it is mentioned that their UB was being tested by auto OEMs in Japan and abroad. At the bottom of the file, it is stated that it is a translation from japanese to english of a technical document issued in November of 2008.

     

    Does anyone know if Kia has manufacturing facilities in North America for the Kia Soul?
    2 Jun 2014, 12:19 AM Reply Like
  • Futurist
    , contributor
    Comments (2109) | Send Message
     
    The Kia Soul is produced in South Korea. The only cars produced by Kia in N. America are the Optima and Sorento. I believe the plant in Georgia was designed for expansion
    http://www.kmmgusa.com
    2 Jun 2014, 07:52 AM Reply Like
  • User 393748
    , contributor
    Comments (439) | Send Message
     
    Thanks, I wasn't sure of the answer for that question.
    2 Jun 2014, 08:15 AM Reply Like
  • User 393748
    , contributor
    Comments (439) | Send Message
     
    Mr Investor -->> Your comment "something new to look into!" was basically what I was thinking after reading the Circuit Court's ruling on FERC Order 745.

     

    Since then, I have been trying to get some research done on the Demand Response situation. So far, demand response is a bit of a mess.

     

    The number of subjects that one has to get familiar with in order to keep up with this stock are ever increasing.
    2 Jun 2014, 01:19 AM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (3221) | Send Message
     
    User 39, I don't know enough about DR to know what role it might play in the PC's 20% 20 yr IRR example as shown on their 1/31/2014 ltr to shareholders, as the benefits' $s are not broken out. Best I can tell, it's probably a small component:

     

    1) Axion always emphasizes FR, not DR, anyway.
    2) I think DR and Demand Charges are separate things, but I could easily be wrong. I think DC is something completely under the user's control---lower your peak usage, and your elec bill goes down. The PC can provide this benefit. So out of the benefits of FR, DC, DR, UPS, etc., only DR may be impacted by the CC's ruling, and then only if the state in question does not have, and will not have, a comp scheme in place for it.

     

    Corrections welcome.
    2 Jun 2014, 09:40 AM Reply Like
  • User 393748
    , contributor
    Comments (439) | Send Message
     
    Mr Investor -->> Your synopsis sounds about right.

     

    The Circuit Court's ruling is confined to demand response. It appears that there has been DR for over ten years now, but the changes made via FERC Order 745 affected the DR market in such a way as to cause the utility contingent to challenge it and head to Court. I have to read up some more on this so I can find out how the DR market previous to Order 745 was changed in detail by Order 745.

     

    Before reading the entire CC decision, I had already read the posts on how DR was not really Axion's market. But I thought that since I don't know that much about the FR & DR markets, et al, that continuing to read up on DR was as good a place as any to begin. It will help in order to form an overall big picture of all these storage related markets.

     

    Now that I have done a small amount of research on it, it is apparent that the utility industry is not totally onboard with DR as it is currently being envisioned by the regulators. Knowing at least this much, I will have something to compare the progress of the developments and acceptance of FR, et cetera.
    3 Jun 2014, 02:44 AM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (4047) | Send Message
     
    Here's my understanding following early efforts to pick this apart: (btw, I would very much appreciate any input/correction/sugge... that makes this more accessible to laymen such as myself)

     

    Demand Response is not an application for any battery. It is probably better called demand-shifting or load-shifting. At its most basic, DR is a incentivized program to encourage power customers to shift their demand to off-peak times. A successful DR program lowers peak demand. The use of the word 'Response' has to do with power consumers responding to a signal, where the signal is the cost of the electricity in real time, where the cost of the electricity is in turn determined by the incremental cost of generation. Since power generation is increased by bringing on-line the next least costly means of generation, the closer to peak the higher the cost per kwh. DR makes a lot of sense; done right, we all save money. OTOH, DR has nothing to do with efficiency, nothing to do with conservation or alternative energy.

     

    Perhaps the customer who chooses to have a PowerCube may be able to manage their demand, lower their peak demand, save some money in that manner. Thus far, we have not seen any data on this capability or how it might interfere with the income the investor might otherwise obtain from continuing to provide FR, which is apparently the sensible market.

     

    Basically, governments have screwed up the grid with incentives for alternative energy and we are all paying more for power as a result. Everything they touch gets screwed up, IMO. I fear for our children as the State gains ever-more power. I'd like to think one of my grandkids will design a power-saving device for the people - to replace the Constitution the current ruling class has trampled.

     

    So, there are two basic potential markets for storage technologies on the grid:
    (1) Frequency Regulation - grid-stabilizing, efficiency-promoting, power-saving application that requires energy storage/delivery on a timescale measured in minutes and MW; the faster the technology can store/deliver, the better, as less power is needed the faster the situation is stabilized; e.g., alternative energies like solar and wind are not steady, a gust of wind or a passing cloud will create a peak that must be shaved or a valley that must be filled; FR is a 24-hour need as demand is constantly shifting on a short-term basis as well.
    (2) Grid-scale Storage - much larger scale storage = hours and TW. For example, daytime energy, like solar and wind, being stored for nighttime usage. Essentially this is all about replacing fossil fuel generators with energy storage technologies filled by non-fossil-fueled technologies.

     

    The former (FR) would seem to be a foot in the door to the latter, I was thinking. Nope, not even a toe-nail.

     

    IIUC, in 2012 the US consumed about 3,000 billion kWh (2/3 of total) from coal and natural gas power plants.

     

    If we wanted to replace JUST the fossil fuel-generated power in the US, we would need to fill and empty 2 x 3,000 x 1,000,000,000/365 = 16 billion PbCs on a DAILY basis.

     

    That's 27 million PowerCubes, one for every ten people in the country.

     

    Grid-scale storage is not going to use supercabatteries. All the supercabatteries that could imaginably be needed for millisecond frequency response would not amount to a spoonful in the grid storage bucket.
    3 Jun 2014, 11:26 AM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (3127) | Send Message
     
    Edmund, batteries can have some important roles in DR. Industrial customers get a demand charge equal to their highest momentary demand over the month. Maximum load can be very "spiky" depending on large motor starts and random events happening simultaneously. Elevators might be an example. If batteries can absorb that demand for a few minutes, it can have a substantial impact on the bill.

     

    DR also includes deferring immediate power consumption, such as air conditioning and refrigeration.
    3 Jun 2014, 11:37 AM Reply Like
  • D-inv
    , contributor
    Comments (4848) | Send Message
     
    IINM, Axion's New Castle Power Cube was integrated into the PJM grid for FR service strictly through demand response mode, i.e. - frequency regulation service was provided "behind the meter" by temporarily suspending or reducing off-take of power from the grid. The PC was engineered to supply power to the grid.

     

    IOW, one means of FR is a subset of DR service.
    3 Jun 2014, 12:17 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (4047) | Send Message
     
    I thought so, too, Rick, but I now think that peak demand shaving takes the PowerCube out of the FR market for the time and it's a net loss. Possibly if the controller (say Viridity or PJM) was able to make that DM adjustment on the fly it might work? In any case, at this time, it seems that the supercabattery PC economic case is not augmented by DM, suggesting that there just isn't a lost market opp there.

     

    That might not apply to a more typical battery system, such as a flow battery for example, which might be too slow to do FR but, having a lot of Demand Management capability, would need to depend on that side of the economic equation. That's the tough side.

     

    I think these very large grid storage battery systems will be very slow to evolve. While State regulators might be requiring storage plus, it isn't much; mostly toenail clippings. Perhaps the point of the requirement was to force them to bring FR capacity into the equation, not grid storage. They are truly worlds apart and the former is a big problem now.
    3 Jun 2014, 12:22 PM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (3127) | Send Message
     
    Edmund, the economic balance between FR and DR is basically just a financial optimization. If one's very high temporary demand would cause an increase of many thousand dollars, that usually beats an hour or two of FR revenue. Good power forecasting algorithms are essential. A "dumb" battery system just listening to the utility is going to be far, far from optimal revenue. (Duh, the utility wants to pay as little as possible). My conversations with Axion and Rosewater people indicated they were not even trying to forecast and optimize.

     

    I've done some breakevens like this on this in the past, but I do not feel like digging them out. From memory, occasional DR is hugely profitable if done rarely. FR allows the expensive system to used on a more frequent, but lower paying, protocol.
    3 Jun 2014, 01:32 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    Rick> Have you considered the impact of weather variability in modeling the usefulness of solar, or for that matter solar coupled with storage, in a DR application?

     

    ISTM that a business with predictable daily peaks could do a lot to shave those peaks with storage, even storage that's also used for FR.

     

    Where I have a question is the SolarCity model where the solar power will be fed into the batteries with algorithms that take off the peaks. What I'm wondering is what happens to the demand charges on cloudy days when there's little or no solar to offset energy use or reduce the peaks?

     

    I don't know that there's an easy answer, but it's a very fun question.
    3 Jun 2014, 01:40 PM Reply Like
  • D-inv
    , contributor
    Comments (4848) | Send Message
     
    Correction. "The PC was engineered to supply power to the grid" should have read, "... not engineered to supply power to the grid."
    3 Jun 2014, 01:44 PM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (3127) | Send Message
     
    JP - I haven't tried modeling on-grid solar with DR and FR.

     

    Predictable demand fluctuations are fairly easy. Unpredictable demand coupled with unpredictable supply (solar) becomes very challenging.

     

    System-wide control is very important, and non-trivial to implement. One can slow down or stagger elevator up-starts to a slight degree. One can let the A/C temperature go up a degree or two. You might be able to let a big freezer go up a few degrees. Some industrial processes can be modified, for example, large smelting operations might slow down the heat rise. All of these alterations have potential costs (product degradation, employee/union push back, etc. ) that have to be carefully evaluated. It is a whole lot more than parking a container full of batteries in the parking lot to do it right. One really needs some smart math people to be on the team.

     

    BTW, my comments about forecasting were more about utility forecasting - what will be the price of FR or DR be in two hours, or six hours. Do you want to commit availability for FR tomorrow afternoon, or will tomorrow's DR will be extremely lucrative? Companies that do this digest continually the marginal power prices (in 15 minute increments), knowledge of utility generators on line, weather, weather, known human events such a big sporting events, etc.

     

    Big sporting events usually cause a spike in demand - all the TVs, more frequent refrigerator openings, more air conditioning, more microwave heating, etc. Plus the stadium demand itself. Really, this isn't a joke.
    3 Jun 2014, 02:00 PM Reply Like
  • raleigh731
    , contributor
    Comments (306) | Send Message
     
    A couple decades ago, a municipal water works watched the demand for water peak during commercials during a superbowl (caused by the increased flushing taking place!) :-)
    3 Jun 2014, 04:53 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (4047) | Send Message
     
    Model A: PowerCube of 600 batteries is in place doing frequency regulation. ASSUME you know exactly when your company is going to peak its 15-minute usage. Further ASSUME that on either side of that 15-minute peak usage the company returns to typically low usage rates. At the beginning of the 15 minutes you retrieve control of your PC from Viridity FR duties at 80% SOC. ASSUME you can make use of the residual power in the Cube regardless of the voltage, down to 20% of capacity, for a total of 80-20=60% of PC capacity. 0.5 kWh * 600 PbC * 0.60 = 180 kWh, or 720 kW for 15 minutes.
    hmmm, that's a lot of power, so maybe I am underestimating the role a PC could play in lowering (peak) demand charges.
    Then again, you give the PC back to Viridity at 20% SOC and they have to charge it back to useable SOC at a slower rate to prevent undoing the peak-shaving you just finished. More likely you would have to take the PC off frequency regulation duties for a much longer period than 15 minutes. Maybe hours per day every day.
    I don't have a good enough grasp of the two markets to have much faith in any of my calculations or conclusions, though. That said, I think TG Viridity BySolar et.al. do have the knowledge and DM isn't part of the economic case for the PC and THAT is the bigger reason why I say that there's not likely a big market app lost by not playing it.
    4 Jun 2014, 08:08 AM Reply Like
  • Larry Meade
    , contributor
    Comments (111) | Send Message
     
    I am glad to see that we will have more time to respond to the reverse stock split.

     

    I, along with my wife and oldest daughter, are in our last day of a week in Paris and about half way through our three weeks in France.

     

    Tomorrow,we head to the west part of France for our last ten days. The trip has been fun, but very busy.

     

    We will top off our trip this week by celebrating birthdays as my wife and I have birthdays three days apart.

     

    Best wishes to all.
    2 Jun 2014, 02:00 AM Reply Like
  • froggey77
    , contributor
    Comments (3269) | Send Message
     
    Happy B day Larry! In Paris no less. Good for you. Have fun.
    2 Jun 2014, 05:02 PM Reply Like
  • Valleywood
    , contributor
    Comments (853) | Send Message
     
    Gasoline Mileage Increases in Autos:

     

    The Little Engine That Can?

     

    http://ti.me/1iLgKSz
    2 Jun 2014, 09:07 AM Reply Like
  • WayneinOregon
    , contributor
    Comments (1110) | Send Message
     
    Thanks VW, interesting article, including the reference to an 88 lb 3-cyl engine by Nissan.
    ---
    Jalopnik declared that 2014 will be the “year three-cylinder engines stop being weird,” and, presumably, wimpy. --- The Mini Cooper and the Fiesta SE both get highway mpg ratings in the 40s, and they’re not underpowered, with 134 and 123 horsepower, respectively. The new Mini does 0-60 in 7.4 seconds, 2.3 seconds faster than its 4-cylinder-powered predecessor.
    ---
    When I see articles like this, including some of the amazing mpg forecasts, I can't help but wonder if the foregone conclusion that stop/start is the future may not necessarily be as foregone as many presume.
    2 Jun 2014, 01:16 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (19538) | Send Message
     
    WiO: But s/s still benefits, in the same ratio I would think, regardless.

     

    Actual gals saved might be less for each s/s event, but the percentage improvement should still be similar.

     

    Regulators constantly raise the bar from whatever the new achieved levels are.

     

    MHO,
    HardToLove
    2 Jun 2014, 01:27 PM Reply Like
  • Billion003
    , contributor
    Comments (293) | Send Message
     
    Good last point.
    2 Jun 2014, 06:10 PM Reply Like
  • froggey77
    , contributor
    Comments (3269) | Send Message
     
    This seems like a good place to add this.

     

    http://yhoo.it/1nJ0U2D
    Big power-plant pollution cuts are ordered

     

    "The Obama administration unveiled a plan Monday aimed at cutting carbon dioxide emissions from power plants by nearly a third by 2030. "
    2 Jun 2014, 07:42 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    Billion003, yes but they don't raise it based on pure science. They raise it based on their own influence or their gang. Not always but far too often.
    2 Jun 2014, 09:14 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (4047) | Send Message
     
    All most politicians care most about, once getting elected to "serve" (as they like to say) is getting re-elected so they can continue to be served the highest level of perks. The only way to change the "perk motive" is term limits.
    4 Jun 2014, 10:00 AM Reply Like
  • DRich
    , contributor
    Comments (4819) | Send Message
     
    >Edmund Metcalfe ... Not that your last comment has much, if any, relevance to the subject matter of the forum, the idea of term limits is, and has been, ingrained in our form of government since the beginning. We do have these things called elections. The fact most (the majority) people see no reason to be involved in politics themselves (save the complaining) is why you might perceive things don't work well, when just the opposite is true.
    4 Jun 2014, 10:17 AM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (19538) | Send Message
     
    Edmund ... http://seekingalpha.co...

     

    HardToLove
    4 Jun 2014, 10:29 AM Reply Like
  • Tampa Ted
    , contributor
    Comments (2652) | Send Message
     
    Looks like ZBB missed a chance with Schneider Electric and Flextronics:

     

    http://bit.ly/1iLk93D
    2 Jun 2014, 09:24 AM Reply Like
  • wtblanchard
    , contributor
    Comments (2410) | Send Message
     
    Redflow is more of a "pure play" move for Schneider ... no inverter "conflicts." Wonder if Redflow will be yet another acquisition for Schneider down the road ... though so tiny the financial press would probably hardly notice.

     

    I think Schneider and ZBB submitted 2 different (city) proposals to the state of Connecticut in their big Microgrid initiative responding to Sandy that was awarded last year, and neither made the final cut. Of course any number of reasons could have caused that "failure" ... but I assumed that Schneider would "carry a lot of water" and was surprised they didn't get at least one.
    2 Jun 2014, 09:46 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    Enervault again.

     

    New Battery Technology Could Offer Cheap Renewable Energy Storage

     

    http://bit.ly/1iLoIep
    2 Jun 2014, 09:49 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    Gives an idea of what the peak charges can be for electricity which will force considerable adoption of storage, curtailment or both.

     

    Quarry cuts power bill with solar, battery combo

     

    http://bit.ly/1iLQMOQ
    2 Jun 2014, 12:11 PM Reply Like
  • DRich
    , contributor
    Comments (4819) | Send Message
     
    >iindelco ... Now there is a great site for an Axion Powercube backed by whatever battery they already plan on using. I bet they never heard of Axion (Quarry or PV installer) and don't know how many fewer storage batteries they could get by with or extend to life of the battery bank.

     

    Just another inconsequential opportunity passed by in the ever present & on-going whale hunting expedition.
    2 Jun 2014, 12:23 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    Can you feel it? :-I

     

    http://bit.ly/1iLRBaf
    2 Jun 2014, 12:15 PM Reply Like
  • DRich
    , contributor
    Comments (4819) | Send Message
     
    Really iindelco? Approaching mid-day and less than 35k shares traded, the exciting part is the search an ever lower prices to entice someone to buy.
    2 Jun 2014, 12:50 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    DRich, It's building! Can't you just feel the energy being transferred up into the lip of the dumpster? Hold on tight!

     

    BTW, I agree with you concerning the fit for PbC in the last application. Axion needs agreements to sell into some of these apps with local distributors in some fashion. This is not a Vani Dantam expertise IMO.
    2 Jun 2014, 01:09 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (19538) | Send Message
     
    DRich: Earlier it was a search for buyers at higher prices as 6 of 7 trades at $0.1624 were 100 shares. Then the 10K at that price went, and the fishing stopped. 9:40-10:18.

     

    Then NITE and ATDF got in a bid slugfest (looked like multiple buyers from each MM) as they jacked bids from $0.1501 to $0.1528, where they ceased the struggle, in 27 consecutive steps as they leapfrogged each other from 10:02-11:40.

     

    All this and we've traded $6,659.8070 worth of shares.

     

    Meanwhile, the offers were slower to respond until ATDF and NITE got a little feisty, 11:41-12:00. But they only moved from $0.1624 to the low at $0.1589 in 5 steps, coming back to $0.159.

     

    I'm looking to see who caves late in the day today.

     

    B/a $0.1528 since 11:40 and $0.159 since 12:00.

     

    61.7% buys.

     

    HardToLove
    2 Jun 2014, 01:13 PM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (3127) | Send Message
     
    A question for JP:

     

    AFAIK The only information released by Axion regarding the reverse split and reduction in authorized shares is Form 14A, final version 5/29/14. Clearly there are various points of view on it. Is management legally allowed to respond to discussions or add supplemental information? I would have thought with the resistance discussed here (even ignoring my posts) they would like to campaign for their point of view.

     

    Obviously, they cannot discuss privileged or insider information. Is Axion's silence a strict legal obligation, or simply discretionary by choice of management?
    2 Jun 2014, 01:13 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    All written proxy soliciting materials have to be submitted to the SEC before they're used. It would be inappropriate to do anything beyond another explanatory letter like the one we saw in early May.

     

    Axion has retained the right to hire a proxy solicitation firm subject to a fee cap of $25,000, but if a proxy solicitation firm is hired, they'll probably limit their activity to making phone contact with larger holders instead of taking a scattergun approach.
    2 Jun 2014, 03:17 PM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (3127) | Send Message
     
    Thanks, JP.
    2 Jun 2014, 11:26 PM Reply Like
  • Nicholas Chen
    , contributor
    Comments (2799) | Send Message
     
    Microcap more than doubles on an aerospace contract worth about their market cap.

     

    http://seekingalpha.co...
    2 Jun 2014, 01:18 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    JP is quoted.

     

    Can Calif. rule in energy storage?

     

    http://bit.ly/1iM4Is4
    2 Jun 2014, 01:21 PM Reply Like
  • JohnM121
    , contributor
    Comments (520) | Send Message
     
    Also notable:
    "Hardware companies are not for sissies," said Stepien, who spent most of his career in the semiconductor industry. "This is not $10 million, find some guys, feed 'em energy bars and caffeinated soda and have them pound out code. This is five years of work and trying to make the laws of chemistry work for you. It takes some time to get it right."
    2 Jun 2014, 01:55 PM Reply Like
  • WayneinOregon
    , contributor
    Comments (1110) | Send Message
     
    Thanks Iindelco, very good article in providing perspective on the emerging energy storage market.
    ---
    "So, late last year, the state Public Utilities Commission codified yet another improbable and world-beating goal. It asked the state's three biggest utilities to add 1.325 GW of energy storage capacity by 2020. That's twice as much grid storage as existed in the world when the rule was written.

     

    ... the Long Island Power Authority has made a request even larger than California's, for 1.6 GW of grid-level storage, partly to replace older power plants that are nearing the end of their lives."
    ---
    (And then a tidbit we all know quite well)
    Venkat Srinivasan, an energy storage researcher at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, says the industry shorthand is that it takes 10 years and at least $100 million to build an energy storage company.
    2 Jun 2014, 02:03 PM Reply Like
  • greentongue
    , contributor
    Comments (974) | Send Message
     
    Barclays Just Threw Gasoline on the Fire that is the Battle Between Utilities and the Solar Industry
    http://bit.ly/1p1r6T6

     

    There will be battery demand, Axion should get some of it.
    2 Jun 2014, 02:43 PM Reply Like
  • Tampa Ted
    , contributor
    Comments (2652) | Send Message
     
    Green Charge Networks continuing to make noise, I wonder if VD has made that cold call yet?

     

    "Meanwhile, some of the largest independent system operators in the country are instituting market rules that are attracting storage projects. PJM Interconnection, which serves a swath of 13 states from Illinois to Kentucky, has added 87 MW of grid storage since late 2012, with an additional 294 MW on the drawing board."

     

    Been connected to PJM since November 2011 ... but not another installation as part of the 87MW added since 2012? ... what gives?
    2 Jun 2014, 06:18 PM Reply Like
  • LabTech
    , contributor
    Comments (1778) | Send Message
     
    Stefan,
    "Been connected to PJM since November 2011 ... but not another installation as part of the 87MW added since 2012? ... what gives?"

     

    Yes, been wondering the same since I read that. My guess is that they've added 87MW of long term storage and not FR, but I don't know that for certain. I think Axion is going to have a hard time selling directly to electric regulatory companies. They are better off targeting the end users, like in the NJ sales, and electric companies that are bringing online new PV or wind and need FR for smoothing. IMO.
    3 Jun 2014, 01:46 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    Video of the recent open house in "El Tuna".

     

    NS-999 footage starts at 12:32.

     

    http://bit.ly/1nIfaIW
    2 Jun 2014, 01:54 PM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (3127) | Send Message
     
    Nice to see it exists.
    2 Jun 2014, 02:23 PM Reply Like
  • Patrick Young
    , contributor
    Comments (1947) | Send Message
     
    What's with all the muscle cars outside the shop?
    3 Jun 2014, 10:19 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    Patrick, If you consider that there is a concentration of locomotive gear heads in the audience......well....... kind of a life thing.
    3 Jun 2014, 10:28 AM Reply Like
  • dance621
    , contributor
    Comments (205) | Send Message
     
    Mr Petersen, promise not to ask you daily, but took great interest in your comments on last APC 338 about the testing of the cabs. I am wondering, this being first monday n' all after those comments, was the sleeper cab out today getting data or is she being tinkered? Thanks.
    2 Jun 2014, 06:39 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    Except for a drop in engine speed that occurs during heavy acceleration and should be a simple adjustment, the drivetrain is behaving the way we want it to and we're encouraged. The last few days we've been fighting air brake problems that make us reluctant to load up serious weight. Hopefully the neighborhood garage will be able to fix the brakes tomorrow morning. It feels good to be irritated by "truck issues" instead of "drivetrain problems."
    2 Jun 2014, 06:50 PM Reply Like
  • FocalPoint Analytics
    , contributor
    Comments (6282) | Send Message
     
    Your mention of breaking surfaced a question. Can you control the amount of regenerative breaking with your electric drivetrain?
    2 Jun 2014, 08:11 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    Our regenerative braking acts as the primary stopping force. Secondary mechanical brake systems are used to augment the regenerative braking for emergency stops.
    2 Jun 2014, 08:20 PM Reply Like
  • FocalPoint Analytics
    , contributor
    Comments (6282) | Send Message
     
    I was thinking more in terms of the potential effects of regenerative breaking when driving in icy conditions. I was thinking more along the lines of can the strength of the regenerative breaking system be augmented by the operator if he (or she) thinks its necessary?
    2 Jun 2014, 09:46 PM Reply Like
  • Deamiter
    , contributor
    Comments (165) | Send Message
     
    FocalPoint Analytics, maybe I misunderstand the basis for your question, but it sounds like you think that regenerative braking would be better than air brakes in icy conditions.

     

    In every case (except, perhaps, using a parachute) the braking force must be transmitted through the wheels to the road in order to slow the vehicle. While the magnitude of the force can be tweaked by a control system (i.e. pumping the brake or anti-lock brakes are much more effective than simply skidding) regenerative braking won't allow faster stopping in icy conditions than similar use of air brakes.

     

    If more braking than the regenerative braking system can apply is needed, the air brakes are added, but the air brakes will always be able to lock up the tires on their own. In other words, there's no advantage to pumping the regenerative braking into overdrive since the air brakes can stop the truck by themselves.

     

    The regenerative braking is helpful as it saves fuel, but it's not helpful in that it could stop a truck faster than air brakes in any particular set of conditions.
    2 Jun 2014, 10:13 PM Reply Like
  • FocalPoint Analytics
    , contributor
    Comments (6282) | Send Message
     
    Thanks Deamiter… Sorry I used the wrong word there… I did not mean augment, I meant the ability to delimit the power of the regenerative breaking. I was thinking that an operator might like to be able to reduce the power of the regenerative breaking or reduce its strength under icy road conditions.
    2 Jun 2014, 11:01 PM Reply Like
  • Sohkubo
    , contributor
    Comments (98) | Send Message
     
    I apologise FPA, I know I'm adding nothing of value but after five times it's driving me crazy.

     

    "regenerative breaking" --> "regenerative BRAKING"
    3 Jun 2014, 02:07 AM Reply Like
  • FocalPoint Analytics
    , contributor
    Comments (6282) | Send Message
     
    hehehe Thanks Sohkubo… I am definitely having trouble with words today… at least I did not say degenerative braking… :)
    3 Jun 2014, 02:22 AM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (19538) | Send Message
     
    FPA: Your question about braking modulation is a good one. Under icy conditions the needs is often minimal braking to avoid lock-up, which increases the likelihood of skidding and/or jackknifing.

     

    Ditto for controlling application of power in those conditions when taking a grade - minimal torque necessary to keep moving without breaking traction is desirable. I presume for now that the driver-operated throttle would allow this.

     

    Braking might be handled similarly? If less braking is needed can the operator apply a small amount of throttle to reduce the regenerative braking?

     

    Great question you posed IMO.

     

    HardToLove
    3 Jun 2014, 08:57 AM Reply Like
  • Deamiter
    , contributor
    Comments (165) | Send Message
     
    Good points -- I can't claim to know for sure about the ePower implementation, but the Tesla and similar electric vehicles do slowly ramp the regenerative braking with the gas and brake pedals. They usually apply increasing braking as pressure is removed from the "gas" pedal allowing both acceleration and light deceleration without moving your foot back and forth from gas to brake pedals.

     

    If more braking is needed, pressure on the brake pedal slowly increases the regenerative braking to the system's maximum capacity, then starts to incrementally add physical brakes for harder stops.

     

    In other words it's just as you'd prefer -- not simply on or off, but tied to pressure on the pedals just as we've learned to expect from mechanical brakes.
    3 Jun 2014, 09:50 AM Reply Like
  • Tim Enright
    , contributor
    Comments (1345) | Send Message
     
    Professional drivers use engine brakes on a regular basis and use the mechanical brake as little as possible. Most engine brakes have many levels of braking all select-able by the driver. My recommendation is that you not try to automate this too much as the drivers expect to control this themselves. Including shutting it off when the road is slippery... IMO
    3 Jun 2014, 11:22 AM Reply Like
  • FocalPoint Analytics
    , contributor
    Comments (6282) | Send Message
     
    Thanks for the patience guys. That was exactly what I was wondering.
    3 Jun 2014, 03:11 PM Reply Like
  • D Lane
    , contributor
    Comments (1706) | Send Message
     
    Check this out:
    http://bit.ly/1p2x1ax

     

    "An unusual pairing of the Advanced Lead Acid Battery Consortium and a group of natural gas vehicle advocates displayed an NGHV Ram 1500 pickup at ACT Expo 2014, with NHHV standing for natural gas hybrid-electric start-stop vehicle.
    . . .
    East Penn supplied the truck’s 12-volt advanced lead-carbon battery."
    2 Jun 2014, 10:27 PM Reply Like
  • greentongue
    , contributor
    Comments (974) | Send Message
     
    "improved sustainability as lead-carbon batteries are recyclable at a rate of 98% – “no other battery chemistry recycles or comes close to this recycling rate;”"

     

    Interesting that is what they focused on.
    3 Jun 2014, 08:10 AM Reply Like
  • D-inv
    , contributor
    Comments (4848) | Send Message
     
    " lead-carbon batteries are recyclable at a rate of 98% – 'no other battery chemistry recycles or comes close to this recycling rate;'"

     

    Gee, wonder how lead-acid compares.
    3 Jun 2014, 12:53 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (19538) | Send Message
     
    06/02/2014: EOD stuff partially copied from new blog (up now).
    # Trds: 26, MinTrSz: 100, MaxTrSz: 13000, Vol: 77384, AvTrSz: 2976
    Min. Pr: 0.1506, Max Pr: 0.1696, VW Avg. Tr. Pr: 0.1598
    # Buys, Shares: 18 44315, VW Avg Buy Pr: 0.1619
    # Sells, Shares: 8 33069, VW Avg Sell Pr: 0.1570
    # Unkn, Shares: 0 0, VW Avg Unk. Pr: 0.0000
    Buy:Sell 1.34:1 (57.27% "buys"), DlyShts 30515 (39.43%), Dly Sht % of 'sells' 92.28%

     

    Today we had a “reversion to the mean”! Yep, we went right back to very low volume of trades and shares, which was certainly “mean”! ;-)

     

    Under these conditions, the trading breakdown by time, price, traditional TA indicators ... are of marginal use at best. So I'll forgo most of my usual examinations. But the numbers are here.

     

    Yesterday's improved volume on a down day prompted me to say “I believe is the start (and maybe end too?) of the “leg down” to ~$0.1550 or so (we hit $0.1530 today) that I've been yammering about ...” and “The thing I want to mention here about the “leg down” is that we don't know if it's ended. Today's volume was large enough that we might have seen a quick exit by all those that wanted to do that”. I then touched on the $0.15-$0.18 trading channel, $0.15 might provide only weak support, and I ended with “ So if the leg down isn't over, we should expect $0.15 to be tested and I'm not hugely optimistic that it would hold”.

     

    I mention all this only because it appears the “leg down” is still in progress, we hit $0.1506 today, VWAP dropped another 2.57%, lower high, low, volume, ...

     

    Today's low, high, VWAP, trade volume, and daily short sales moved -1.57%, -3.64%, -2.57%, -92.24% and -40.07% respectively. Price spread today was 12.62% vs. 15.03%, 5.26%, 5.56%, 3.49%, 5.77%, 5.17%, 4.85%, 12.50% and 17.61% on prior days.

     

    The day's three highest-priced trades were $0.1690 x 1000, 0.1696 x 100 and 0.1696 x 3600. The first two at 9:30 and the last at 14:03. All were buys.

     

    The “fishing” by MMs to lure buyers was “heavy” today as we had six of seven trades at $0.1624 (in the first 48 minutes) for 100 shares: five consecutive 100 and then 10K and then 100 again. Price subsequently moved lower.

     

    We also had the normal EOD “paint” as the last trade at 15:59:53 was a buy of 100 shares at $0.1684 when the prior trades were three sells at $0.1601 (4K and 5K, these two at 15:45 and 15:58) and $0.1640 for 8K shares at 14:28.

     

    If we had any volume it would be a pleasure to see the buy percentage come back from yesterday's 6.81% to 57.27% toady. Without volume all it means is that the MMs managed to move some high-priced shares ($0.1619 buys VWAP vs. $0.1570 sells VWAP) and, based on short percentage, maybe even short them and then cover at a lower price.

     

    Regarding my newer inflection point calculations, two days ago broke the trend ...

     

    The usual, but a bit less, is in the new blog for June here.
    http://bit.ly/1pCptxL

     

    HardToLove
    3 Jun 2014, 08:46 AM Reply Like
  • Billion003
    , contributor
    Comments (293) | Send Message
     
    "This just in." News on hybrid cars.

     

    http://cnb.cx/1pCqS7y
    3 Jun 2014, 08:57 AM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (3127) | Send Message
     
    Here's a poll:

     

    a) Do you thing the Reverse Split actions are going to pass? Not what is your opinion about it, but will it pass?

     

    b) If the Reverse Split does not pass, will TG still be Chairman and CEO at the end of the year?

     

    My guess is if the RS passes, TG will keep his job.
    3 Jun 2014, 09:25 AM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (3127) | Send Message
     
    forgot the link: http://svy.mk/1osi4xr
    3 Jun 2014, 09:45 AM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (3127) | Send Message
     
    So far, in 5 minutes, there is exactly one response in every option.
    3 Jun 2014, 09:50 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    Unless I've missed something in my research, it looks like the reverse split and authorized share reduction should pass by an overwhelming margin.

     

    Voting procedures in public companies are complicated by the fact that most stockholders own shares through brokerage firms, rather than in registered form.

     

    Stockholders like me who own shares in registered form vote those shares directly and a failure to vote has the same effect as voting AGAINST all proposals.

     

    Stockholders who hold shares in brokerage accounts do not vote their shares directly. Instead they instruct their broker on how their shares should be voted. If a broker receives explicit instructions from his client he must follow those instructions. If a broker does not receive explicit instructions, he will ordinarily vote for FOR all proposals that are not described in NYSE Rule 452.10(1)-(21).

     

    http://bit.ly/1pCHFrb

     

    While the reverse split and authorized shares are important issues for some commenters, the NYSE Rules treat them as routine matters where brokers do not need express instructions to vote FOR a proposal.

     

    The proxy statement for last year's stockholders meeting included director elections and executive compensation proposals, which are treated as non-routine matters under Rule 452. Roughly 35 million shares voted on those proposals.

     

    The proxy statement also included an authorized share increase and auditor ratification which are treated as routine matters under Rule 452. Roughly 93.6 million shares voted on those proposals.

     

    http://1.usa.gov/1pCHFrd

     

    Given the number of shares that have been absorbed by the market over the last four years, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to learn that 200 million shares are held in brokerage accounts. In the absence of a mass uprising, I think approval is a done deal. I also think it's the only sensible path forward.
    3 Jun 2014, 11:01 AM Reply Like
  • abcd9876
    , contributor
    Comments (69) | Send Message
     
    I agree with JP on this - voting against board proposals is a losing battle unless there's few big shareholders ready to team up. In Axion's case, the ownership is too distributed for such uprising to happen, so imho this is a done deal barring a last minute activist investor or hostile takeover scenario. That said, boards usually try to get a FOR % much higher then needed, if possible, they will try to get 90% plus in favor of their proposals. Such an outcome would hinge upon near future sales + price appreciation.
    3 Jun 2014, 11:19 AM Reply Like
  • Shirleyr
    , contributor
    Comments (123) | Send Message
     
    My shares are held in a brokerage account and I voted For it. It doesn't make sense to go against the CEO if you own shares of the company he manages. In my opinion, I wouldn't buy shares of a company if I didn't think the management was competent. Interesting to see what appears to be bitterness here around T. G. I expect it on the Yahoo Message board. I don't look at it anymore because it's downright vicious and unprofessional.
    3 Jun 2014, 02:56 PM Reply Like
  • greentongue
    , contributor
    Comments (974) | Send Message
     
    There is money at stake. Not everyone is playing "The Up Side".
    3 Jun 2014, 07:35 PM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (3127) | Send Message
     
    There have been 41 responses to the poll. 85% think the proposals will pass, but this non-random, self-selected, very small N is not inherently reliable. I suspect the true number is higher.

     

    Given JP's discussion above regarding voting, I think it is a virtual certainty the proposals will pass.

     

    link to the results: http://svy.mk/1pDVOnP

     

    Interesting experiment. In July we'll learn the truth. :)
    3 Jun 2014, 09:24 PM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (3127) | Send Message
     
    Just so we are all on the same page, I see approval of the RS and TG remaining in charge inevitable, unless there is a major, substantive change in the facts. Further editorializing will have no impact on the outcome, so I won't.

     

    Have a great day.
    4 Jun 2014, 01:00 PM Reply Like
  • PbC Believer
    , contributor
    Comments (258) | Send Message
     
    No argument on those conclusions.
    4 Jun 2014, 01:30 PM Reply Like
  • D-inv
    , contributor
    Comments (4848) | Send Message
     
    "It doesn't make sense to go against the CEO if you own shares of the company he manages. In my opinion, I wouldn't buy shares of a company if I didn't think the management was competent."

     

    The first 3 - 4 years I bought shares there was no reason to question competency. But, that was then and have since parried my position markedly. The business still holds considerable potential with appropriate change in marketing policies (which I seek).

     

    Incidentally, as in your case my shares are held through brokerage accounts. Customary practice at the brokerage is notice to clients on means and methods to vote shares on all corporate issues put to shareholders. The brokerage does NOT vote shares held on behalf of others.
    4 Jun 2014, 05:13 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    Your broker will vote your shares FOR "routine" proposals like reverse splits and authorized share matters. The reason is pretty simple. Retail holders are not the most reliable voters in the world and without giving brokers the authority to vote the shares held in client account there would be quorum failures all over the place.

     

    NYSE Rules are very specific on the issue.

     

    Your broker will follow your instructions if you give them, but if you don't respond your silence will be treated as a vote FOR the proposal.
    4 Jun 2014, 05:36 PM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (3127) | Send Message
     
    JP, you keep referring to NYSE rules. Do they apply to OTC stocks?
    4 Jun 2014, 06:07 PM Reply Like
  • D-inv
    , contributor
    Comments (4848) | Send Message
     
    "Your broker will vote your shares FOR "routine" proposals like reverse splits and authorized share matters."

     

    Your prior statement in that regard is what prompted my question to my broker today and posting of their reply to me. There is no effort to mislead anyone here, only to report facts of my conversation with my broker.
    4 Jun 2014, 08:59 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    I guess we'll know in early July. In the meantime I'll base my conclusions on clear wording of the NYSE Rules instead of a second-hand conversation with a street broker who may or may not know what he's talking about.
    4 Jun 2014, 09:28 PM Reply Like
  • Patrick Young
    , contributor
    Comments (1947) | Send Message
     
    JP, is voting open now?
    5 Jun 2014, 10:19 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    You won't be able to vote until you get your proxy materials. That should happen before the end of next week.
    5 Jun 2014, 10:20 AM Reply Like
  • D-inv
    , contributor
    Comments (4848) | Send Message
     
    "I guess we'll know in early July. In the meantime I'll base my conclusions on clear wording of the NYSE Rules instead of a second-hand conversation with a street broker who may or may not know what he's talking about. "

     

    Could be I'm mistaken, but I expect the only thing we'll learn in July about the shareholder solicitation is the number(s) of shares voted with no real information as to who voted them or how.

     

    No harm in doing one's own due diligence.
    5 Jun 2014, 10:24 AM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (3127) | Send Message
     
    JP, I'll ask again: Do the NYSE rules apply to Axion, or do OTC stocks have different rules for voting?
    5 Jun 2014, 10:27 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    D-inv> 121.9 million shares were eligible to vote at last year's annual meeting. – http://1.usa.gov/1nScc4C

     

    Roughly 29% of the eligible shares (~35 MM) voted for the election of directors while over 75% of the eligible shares (~94 MM) voted for the change in authorized capital.

     

    http://1.usa.gov/1pCHFrd

     

    The reason for the massive difference between the two numbers is that a change in authorized capital is "routine" under NYSE Rules while the election of directors is "non-routine."

     

    Rick> The NYSE Rules do not expressly apply to Axion, but all brokerage firms base their policies and procedures on the NYSE Rules because anything less would be an administrative nightmare.
    5 Jun 2014, 10:51 AM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (3127) | Send Message
     
    thanks,JP
    5 Jun 2014, 11:11 AM Reply Like
  • Shirleyr
    , contributor
    Comments (123) | Send Message
     
    My broker notifies me to vote. If I don't then it says they will according to the management recommendation. Also, I want to correct a previous post where I said I voted for increased authorized shares with AXPW. That was another company. You do know how I will vote when it's time.
    5 Jun 2014, 12:27 PM Reply Like
  • geopark
    , contributor
    Comments (332) | Send Message
     
    I hold AXPW shares with three brokers. Today Interactive sent me a link to vote. I checked both my Morgan Stanley and Scottrade accounts and no voting instructions had yet arrived.

     

    I have/will be voting all my shares for the RS and share authorization reduction.
    5 Jun 2014, 08:01 PM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (3127) | Send Message
     
    There are 52 responses now. The "pass" vote remains in the 80-85% range. A written previously, "inevitable".
    5 Jun 2014, 11:10 PM Reply Like
  • PbC Believer
    , contributor
    Comments (258) | Send Message
     
    John,
    You say that "... a change in authorized capital is "routine" under NYSE Rules ..." but I have a friend who is a high level corporate lawyer and her first reaction after reading the two proposals that Axion has asked us to vote on was that they are not the usual proposals presented to shareholders by management in such matters.

     

    Again this was just her initial response, and I decided not to press it further. She said that normally (which I take to be a synonym to "routinely") the authorized shares and the already issued shares are split in the same ratio and that If management then wants to increase the authorized they ask for a specific change to that amount. This is not what Axion has done and so this vote is perhaps "not routine".

     

    John, are these proposals truly "routine" and in your opinion can the brokers legally treat them as such? I hope so.
    6 Jun 2014, 08:45 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    All I did was read NYSE Rule 452 which enumerates 21 specific matters where a brokerage firm cannot vote without instructions from its account holders.

     

    http://bit.ly/1pCHFrb

     

    Since the list of non-routine matters does not include reverse splits or changes in authorized capital my first read is that both matters should be treated as routine. That being said, I've never represented a broker dealer and don't have any experience parsing and interpreting NYSE rules that regulate broker-dealer conduct.

     

    Since I'm not representing Axion or anybody else in this matter I have not formed or expressed a professional opinion.
    6 Jun 2014, 09:13 AM Reply Like
  • PbC Believer
    , contributor
    Comments (258) | Send Message
     
    John, I'm sure that you can appreciate my difficulty in differentiating between your professional opinions and those that are otherwise. Probably a good idea for you to dodge this particular "tar baby".
    6 Jun 2014, 10:36 AM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    Lawyers have to be very careful to avoid expressing professional opinions on matters of law to people who are not their clients. I don't mind giving an off the cuff impression, but when a commenter asks for an opinion on a matter of law you can bet I'll dodge a direct answer because anything else violates my life is too short rule.
    6 Jun 2014, 11:51 AM Reply Like
  • PbC Believer
    , contributor
    Comments (258) | Send Message
     
    John,
    Here is the legally dangerous contradiction that I see.

     

    Axion states clearly in the 14A that if I do not vote my shares those shares will be counted as a NO vote.

     

    You are saying that if I were to make the conscious decision to not vote my shares with the expectation that they will be counted as a NO vote, the broker will unilaterally take it upon itself to effectively change my intended NO vote to a YES vote.

     

    Why does that seem so wrong to me?
    6 Jun 2014, 01:23 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    The Proxy Statement is directed to record holders of common stock, people who hold shares in registered form.

     

    When brokerage firms send proxy materials to their clients, they must include a cover letter in the form specified by NYSE Rule 451 that explains how they intend to vote the shares in their custody in the absence of specific instructions.

     

    I'd have a hard time arguing that a brokerage firm customer was not given adequate or proper notice when the cover letter for the soliciting materials lays it all out in black and white.

     

    In any event, this is standard operating procedure for all public companies.
    6 Jun 2014, 01:34 PM Reply Like
  • PbC Believer
    , contributor
    Comments (258) | Send Message
     
    John,

     

    I think that in Court it would be determined that the stated promise given by the company as to how a failure to vote will be treated trumps the day to day general rules of the NYSE. The proxy materials rule how the situation is to be handled, not the NYSE.

     

    Wanna bet?
    6 Jun 2014, 01:57 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    I can tell you what the universal practice is among public companies. Unless and until the rules and the generally accepted procedures change, I would not suggest that a court case would survive summary judgment.
    6 Jun 2014, 02:03 PM Reply Like
  • PbC Believer
    , contributor
    Comments (258) | Send Message
     
    John,
    That sounds like an opinion to me or am I confused again?
    6 Jun 2014, 02:12 PM Reply Like
  • PbC Believer
    , contributor
    Comments (258) | Send Message
     
    What "universal public company practice" are you referring to?
    6 Jun 2014, 02:14 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (4047) | Send Message
     
    Good grief, man, what a straw man.

     

    PbC, If you really want to vote "No" why not do that instead of putting yourself in the "dangerous" position of being misinterpreted?

     

    Even I understand this. So I'm guessing very few can "appreciate" your difficulty. Other than the fact that you seem to be trying to finagle some enjoyment out of putting yourself into it and are having a difficult time doing it.

     

    As for your "friend" whom you don't want to "press" - one instantly wonders exactly what sort of "friend" is that, perhaps an imaginary one? - I suggest you go back to that "corporate lawyer" and "press" them, instead of "pressing" folks here whom you have "difficulty" trusting. I mean, seriously, what are you trying to gain here?

     

    Go get an unimaginary lawyer before you get yourself in trouble.
    6 Jun 2014, 02:15 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (4047) | Send Message
     
    Me having some "high level" fun on Friday.
    6 Jun 2014, 02:20 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (4047) | Send Message
     
    Like this if you think I'm having too much fun
    6 Jun 2014, 02:20 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (4047) | Send Message
     
    Like this if you think PbC Believer is, as he suggests, "confused again".
    6 Jun 2014, 02:20 PM Reply Like
  • Rick Krementz
    , contributor
    Comments (3127) | Send Message
     
    PbCB - I think you may be stepping over the "politeness" line...just a word to the wise.

     

    Perhaps you want to take this up with your own broker to make sure your vote gets registered how you want. Or pay a securities attorney of your choice a few hundred dollars an hour to explain the issues to you.
    6 Jun 2014, 02:23 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    I'll try to keep this real simple for you.

     

    Investors who own shares in registered form are "stockholders" Their rights are defined by Delaware law.

     

    Investors who own shares in brokerage accounts are "beneficial owners." Their rights are defined by SEC regulations, NYSE rules and the policies of DTC, which is the holder of record for all shares deposited in brokerage accounts.

     

    Companies only have a legal duty to communicate with their stockholders. The duty to communicate with beneficial owners rests with the custodians for those investors.
    6 Jun 2014, 02:43 PM Reply Like
  • PbC Believer
    , contributor
    Comments (258) | Send Message
     
    Thanks John,

     

    Some of your followers do not understand the possible consequences of this voting contradiction so I will end it here.

     

    EM was rude and demeaning in his comments - that's not acceptable.

     

    Rick somehow feels that I was impolite, if so, it was not intentional.
    6 Jun 2014, 04:02 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (4047) | Send Message
     
    Her snideness gets a pass, but my directness gets deleted? Interesting policing, APH.

     

    Let me try again in a more politic manner.

     

    PbC, Please name even one of the "your followers [who] do not understand" that you refer to. Surely, you can't be referring to yourself (I definitely said that nicely)?

     

    IMO, this entire thread is a slick attempt on PbC's part to be insulting without being censored again.

     

    TGIF.
    6 Jun 2014, 04:47 PM Reply Like
  • greentongue
    , contributor
    Comments (974) | Send Message
     
    or to "keep fear alive".
    6 Jun 2014, 07:14 PM Reply Like
  • Billion003
    , contributor
    Comments (293) | Send Message
     
    Many here have a similar view of the R/S - New Issuance that the lawyer you mentioned has. The final result leads to big changes for existing present shareholders.
    7 Jun 2014, 10:59 AM Reply Like
  • Billion003
    , contributor
    Comments (293) | Send Message
     
    Interesting volume so far today. Market open 30 minutes. My info shows two separate trades of 100 shares. Roughly $17 each.
    3 Jun 2014, 09:57 AM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (19538) | Send Message
     
    Through 10:13, MMs fishing, 110 shares and then 7 x 100 shares all buys at $0.1699 as they look to unload?

     

    No other trades.

     

    HardToLove
    3 Jun 2014, 10:17 AM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (19538) | Send Message
     
    BTW: CSTI has 160K on offer at $0.17. That should cap today's upside unless a really anxious buyer is looking to get a chunk.

     

    HardToLove
    3 Jun 2014, 10:21 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    HTL, Saw the 160K offer yesterday as well. Do not recall if it was there last week at all.

     

    Given current volume and bot only trading we seem to be waiting for something...anything. Maybe Putin can help...err...
    3 Jun 2014, 10:32 AM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (19538) | Send Message
     
    Iindelco: A quick check only found the BNC bid of 160K late last month.

     

    The CSTI offer appeared as you said yesterday for the first time AFAICT.

     

    HardToLove
    EDIT: BTW, ATDF best on both sides. Every once-in-a-while ATDF withdraws the $0.1699 offer for a few seconds, exposing the $0.17 x 160K offer, and then puts the $0.1699 offer back on.

     

    Really trying to scalp I guess.
    3 Jun 2014, 10:37 AM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (19538) | Send Message
     
    Eh, that's BNCH bid of 160K.

     

    HardToLove
    3 Jun 2014, 11:11 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    EPA Draft CO2 Regulations Provide Flexibility, but Greater Role for Demand Response and Smart Grid Needed

     

    http://bit.ly/1otk8Fl
    3 Jun 2014, 01:56 PM Reply Like
  • Tampa Ted
    , contributor
    Comments (2652) | Send Message
     
    Storage's role in assisting with EPA carbon regulations. Sure would be nice if TG could craft a vision for people to get behind until the future catches up.

     

    http://bit.ly/1pDcUSZ

     

    http://1.usa.gov/1otvbOI

     

    http://bit.ly/1otvlpw

     

    "49 investors managing $800 billion in assets sent a letter to the EPA touting the "economic opportunities" from regulating carbon pollution in a flexible way."

     

    "We invest across many sectors of the economy and are excited about an approach that goes beyond improvements at power plants. We are also encouraged that the proposed rule will allow states to build on the successful renewable energy and energy efficiency policies already in place around the country," wrote the investors."

     

    Maybe we could get a few crumbs from the $800 billion in assets being managed.
    3 Jun 2014, 02:36 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    "Maybe we could get a few crumbs from the $800 billion in assets being managed."

     

    Significant crumbs?
    3 Jun 2014, 02:57 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    I'd be more than happy to settle for a rounding error on $800 billion.
    3 Jun 2014, 03:00 PM Reply Like
  • Billion003
    , contributor
    Comments (293) | Send Message
     
    Speaking personally, I can only accept "regulating" carbon dioxide as a proxy for increased efficiency and if it increases energy independence - at a reasonable and competitive cost. The broader end-of-the-world, secularly religious Armageddon-like scenarios (the political wellspring from whence they perennially emerge) bothers me.

     

    Can I say that on the now "Happy Axion APC?"
    3 Jun 2014, 03:48 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    Billion, I can only accept it in the name of efficiency if labeled DIRECTLY as for that purpose. The way they are doing it now allows for nefarious players like Al Gore to take advantage of the system for personal gain. I do not accept feel good outcomes from bad policy. It should be labeled as a scam if it is one.
    3 Jun 2014, 03:53 PM Reply Like
  • Billion003
    , contributor
    Comments (293) | Send Message
     
    Though I realize this isn't the place for this topic its been a slow APC week. Plus, the board decorum sheriff (and the NSA, et.al.) are probably watching.

     

    iindelco, Agreed, but (honest) programs for energy independence take time to come to fruition - like the as yet begun Keystone Pipeline - it'll come slowly but will have the direct result you allude to.
    Though I wouldn't want to let the American public off-the-hook for, themselves, not moving to reduce their usage.

     

    And to use a couple of 'southernisms,' its "ain't" just Al Gore (singularly) that "got religion." Its coming from the central office now. "All hail..."

     

    OK...end of subject.
    3 Jun 2014, 04:20 PM Reply Like
  • 42itus1
    , contributor
    Comments (232) | Send Message
     
    I hope so!
    3 Jun 2014, 04:39 PM Reply Like
  • Billion003
    , contributor
    Comments (293) | Send Message
     
    Hey, I was just responding.
    3 Jun 2014, 05:47 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (4047) | Send Message
     
    Shouldn't be forgotten: Demand Response is all about saving the grid and saving money. DR does nothing for energy efficiency or carbon dioxide emission. In fact, since base load is coal and peak load is not, DR incentives essentially act in support of coal.
    4 Jun 2014, 09:39 AM Reply Like
  • Billion003
    , contributor
    Comments (293) | Send Message
     
    John Peterson,
    How are the adjustments to the power management of the ePower truck system done? Is it a computer controlled module's software that is being fine tuned?
    3 Jun 2014, 03:53 PM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (3221) | Send Message
     
    Can you tell I'm an investor, first, lol? I think things like investor appetite and sector investment trends and indicators mean a whole lot to AXPW. Anyone notice ZBB today? Very interesting article this afternoon in the Street.com about investor interest in the alt energy sector heating up:

     

    http://bit.ly/1pDnycu

     

    "This sector [alternative energy and energy-saving infrastructure] is in play with the bulls, and money is quickly flowing into other names as traders look to find the next big winner."
    3 Jun 2014, 03:59 PM Reply Like
  • Tampa Ted
    , contributor
    Comments (2652) | Send Message
     
    Interesting commentary. One positive for ZBB is they do try to tell the story.
    3 Jun 2014, 04:12 PM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (3221) | Send Message
     
    Helps to be a non-penny stock off the OTC, too, otherwise you automatically get passed by the vast majority of dollars looking for an alt energy home.

     

    Nice to hear that, on the customer side, you have prospective PC investors looking for fixed income revenue streams, and at the same time you have potential AXPW investors looking for alt energy plays.
    3 Jun 2014, 05:05 PM Reply Like
  • brianfscott
    , contributor
    Comments (51) | Send Message
     
    This concentrator has become unhelpful and I am checking out. Thanks to JP, VW and HTL especially, I will see you on the other side. To those who with great fanfare announced they have sold all their shares I ask, "Why are you still here? Do you think you continue to add value to the conversation?" I am holding my shares, plan to vote "Yes" on the RS and tuning out the static and waiting for sales. I also think the devil we know in TG is better than the devil we don't know. Best of investing success to all!
    3 Jun 2014, 06:12 PM Reply Like
  • GambleAholic
    , contributor
    Comments (272) | Send Message
     
    brian, sorry to read you're checking out, as have several other helpful posters. your comments are not only spot-on but i think shared by the soft-spoken or silent vast majority. good luck to all axion longs.
    3 Jun 2014, 10:06 PM Reply Like
  • Retired Aviator
    , contributor
    Comments (2856) | Send Message
     
    "To those who with great fanfare announced they have sold all their shares I ask, "Why are you still here? Do you think you continue to add value to the conversation?"

     

    I have sold more than half of my position but still have a very large position. I want to be in when great news comes which is unpredictable as to when.

     

    To answer your question, there is excellent reason for somebody who has completely sold out to stay abreast of Axion developments here on APC. That reason is to perhaps reestablish the position later under certain conditions.

     

    I believe that unless a clear path to sales propels the stock, the looming financing, uplisting and reverse split are more likely to crater the market cap than not. It is logical with that belief to try to reestablish my overweight after that happens. While "bottom picking" has its risks, so does having a huge position with a reverse split and equity financing looming.
    4 Jun 2014, 12:21 AM Reply Like
  • alasmaci
    , contributor
    Comments (17) | Send Message
     
    Ford and Samsung announce start-stop system:

     

    Ford and Samsung's SDI group today announced research on new battery technology designed to trim weight and improve efficiency on cars, trucks, and other automobiles. At an event here in San Francisco, the two companies showed off a new dual-battery system that combines lithium-ion with lead-acid batteries to extend the life of the lead-acid battery on cars with start-stop engines.

     

    http://bit.ly/1pDDknu

     

    Apologies if this has been previously noted.
    3 Jun 2014, 06:19 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    Thanks alasmaci, I saw the title but didn't open it thinking it didn't relate to Axion. It sure does. PBCs' lack of mfg scale, weight and size are real weaknesses in this area for sure. Now what are the LAB suppliers going to do? Fight with real tools or continue to try to fake it and fade away at some point?

     

    JCI already announced mass reduction initiatives in their LAB offerings and they have lithium ion. We have seen the ALABC doing nothing more than offering Ultrabattery while recently fretting over the additives not getting them to where they need to be.

     

    Invested or not if you're interested in the area stay tuned. Threats continue being made to pick sides by the OEM's. I'll note there is no clear winner. Axion remains an interesting odd duck in automotive with no recent public hugs at all.
    3 Jun 2014, 06:43 PM Reply Like
  • Tampa Ted
    , contributor
    Comments (2652) | Send Message
     
    ii - what does your gut tell you is the answer to why this is so?

     

    "Axion remains an interesting odd duck in automotive with no recent public hugs at all."

     

    Is it only: "PBCs' lack of mfg scale, weight and size are real weaknesses in this area for sure."

     

    And are these deal breakers?
    3 Jun 2014, 09:23 PM Reply Like
  • DRich
    , contributor
    Comments (4819) | Send Message
     
    >Stefan Moroney ... The uniqueness of the product, the lack of scale (small plant & no mfg. partner) and poor financials are, I believe, real deal breakers with the autos. I know that would be the case with me if I had the auto sectors' problems and I had anything that looked like a viable alternate.
    3 Jun 2014, 09:38 PM Reply Like
  • renim
    , contributor
    Comments (1624) | Send Message
     
    > Stefan
    perhaps, but hasn't AXPW's mfg scale and product performance improved materially since when they did have Exide as a partner?
    3 Jun 2014, 10:53 PM Reply Like
  • 42itus1
    , contributor
    Comments (232) | Send Message
     
    >Stefan Moroney, I too am interested in iindelco's perspective on this question if he is comfortable responding.

     

    Though you weren't asking me I thought, I would chime in. Some on the APC are dissatisfied because there is a lack of specs on the PbC, of which I am one, but the Auto OEM's offer even less in the way of public disclosure as to what they are looking for in the way of batteries. The premise that implementation of stop-start vehicles was to be simple, straight forward or actually 'incentivized' has been very, very mistaken. John Petersen speaks of Gen 1 SS and Gen 2 SS as we read of varying iterations of SS. The battery may be one of the last pieces of the stop-start puzzle and actual battery requirements will depend on many variables in addition to the stop-start function. Until the Auto OEM's settle on the degree of vehicular electrification and gov't finds a means of including the SS function as benefiting fuel/GHG efficiency it seems even those in the know can't legitimately claim the PbC is the best or only reasonable solution.

     

    Therefore, we keep waiting!
    3 Jun 2014, 11:21 PM Reply Like
  • festein
    , contributor
    Comments (78) | Send Message
     
    For micro hybrid, very small (Ultra High Power) li-ion cells are at scale, through multiple well resourced OEM supplying companies, and the entire package (incl LAB starter battery) costs around $230. This is the low risk/low cost approach for high DCA performance.
    4 Jun 2014, 03:14 PM Reply Like
  • 42itus1
    , contributor
    Comments (232) | Send Message
     
    >festein, Oversimplifying a query or a response works to get whatever answer one wants, but it means very little.
    4 Jun 2014, 03:58 PM Reply Like
  • User 393748
    , contributor
    Comments (439) | Send Message
     
    Ultra High Power lithium based batteries are not "low risk."
    4 Jun 2014, 09:51 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    Been away for a few. Taking a brief respite which I'm sure the board appreciates! Share some of my perspective tomorrow.

     

    Unless we get a significant sale, then we'll talk about cake and ice cream flavors.
    5 Jun 2014, 06:52 PM Reply Like
  • 42itus1
    , contributor
    Comments (232) | Send Message
     
    >iindelco, I'm glad you took some time for yourself, Please don't make a habit of it! The board does not appreciate your absence according to the minutes of the last meeting I attended.

     

    Without your extreme pertinent/apropos web search capabilities this blog would be terribly boring. Yes, I am kissing A$$, cuuz I didn't like your absence. The only acceptable excuse for future time off is tending to family needs and I hope nothing pressing has surfaced on that front.

     

    Welcome Back!
    5 Jun 2014, 09:18 PM Reply Like
  • Tampa Ted
    , contributor
    Comments (2652) | Send Message
     
    I agree with 42. I have seen the cynical gravitation and I am inline with it. What can I say?
    5 Jun 2014, 11:50 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    Stefan &42itus1, let's talk about what the article tells us. First it tells us what John pointed out long ago and we pretty much have come to understand well as a group. The second generation LABs are not a very good solution for SS and they are even less adequate as more vehicle functions are revised in the drive to further electrify the high power processes in the vehicle. The intent being get these devices off the ICE as a direct power source so it can be optimized to the new expectations driven by various interests. Ford is, in a politically correct way, saying in public what John shared as a result of his various travels where he already was hearing concerns about how LABs are performing in their new role which again is again getting harder and harder.

     

    Second Ford is talking about weight. With the new proposal Ford is showing that they have not figured out how to eliminate the LAB and they are looking at a two battery solution which in this case happens to be lithium ion as the second energy storage device. This tells me the two battery solution Axion worked on is still a live program in the industry BUT as Ford has pointed out there is still reach to get to a point that works. This after ten plus years. BTW, this kind of highlights why we saw the article from JCI talking about building a lower weight LAB with the understanding that the manufacturers would alter the specifications for this device at some point in future vehicles.

     

    These IMO are two important points that I took away from the article.

     

    (Next post to include some thoughts about how this might relate to the PbC for automotive to generate some discussion as it relates to Axion in this sector.)
    6 Jun 2014, 10:42 AM Reply Like
  • Tampa Ted
    , contributor
    Comments (2652) | Send Message
     
    ii - appreciate your thoughts.
    6 Jun 2014, 10:52 AM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    When I think about the implications of the Ford news I tend to think of the positive and negative data points and how they relate to what my thoughts were about Axion's chances to find a place in the sector prior to reading the article. One of the biggest positives is that Ford is looking at going back to a 2 battery architecture for some of their future segment/market needs. Since this is the primary architecture Axion worked on I am happy this remains a solution in the industry. We can say this industry and not just Ford because for these types of core systems automakers cannot afford to island themselves with each having discrete solutions. The OEM's and the supply base cannot afford such solutions and this is why we see industry groups that tend to steer whole sectors into fairly common directions. This is not to say there will not be some uniqueness to independent solutions but there will be common overriding group think.

     

    The second positive is that we are getting confirmation that the automakers still appear not to have found the magical mythical solution for energy storage that would exclude LABs for some of their larger market segments. We need to understand that this is still a prototype path that looks promising but still has reach built in. As such, while they chose to make a public announcement on this path, they still have other irons in the fire. They have to because they cannot afford holes in their futures product plans.

     

    Now the negatives. First we see Ford sharing that their primary path is one that excludes PbC in the place where we see it as a solution for at least one part of Fords product matrix. So we remain without a more recent public hug. Second we know that the industry continues to see mass reduction as one of their overriding goals. This is one of Axion's weaknesses for sure. How much? We don't know because we don't know how much energy storage each company needs for their partially unique needs. Finally, but this is a concern for me and can't be directly garnered from the article, I think the PbC remains less than a slam dunk low cost solution for one or more market segments. This meaning it's strengths vs it's weaknesses do not come at a cost that makes anyone, as of yet, just ignore the weaknesses and run with it. I will however caution that this could be real or it could be because of pressures placed on the industry by other interested parties such as regulators. I don't know. What I do know is automotive and governments would love for a perfectly obvious solution for their various needs that excluded lead if the new solutions didn't bring equivalent or worse risks. I think regulators would take the leap now but the industry is not fully convinced and they will not/can not run their business on smoke and mirrors.

     

    I think, just trying to assign a simple better or worse grade on Axion's chances in the sector which is hard to do, that the direction Ford is taking in this segment along with where they are at in their development program that this is over all a slight positive for Axion. Why? The direction they are taking supports PbC inclusion because it can accept it's biggest weakness which relates to the airport test. We're still in the game. I might feel a little less positive IF the markets were more homogeneous in their needs. They are not and so there will be many solutions. And the markets are giants so even a few percent of inclusion can be life changing for a small company. Oh, in addition, the Hyundai announcement on third generation LAB testing also adds to my positive thoughts on the Ford information because of the system architecture. So we are seeing 2 energy storage device requirements with no clear "one solution" path. We're still in the game but I can't place odds for sure.
    6 Jun 2014, 12:38 PM Reply Like
  • Mr Investor
    , contributor
    Comments (3221) | Send Message
     
    iinde, thx for your thoughts. Welcome back from SnarkLand, lol. ;^P

     

    I will add that, especially for big volume apps like auto, Axion wants to only be the carbon electrode supplier. So if JCI or anyone else wants to try to decrease the weight of LABs, that could be very good for Axion with their light-weight electrode---as long as some form of their electrode is still plug n play for the lower weight LABs. Heck, let the others do the R&D on their dime this time. All this would re-start the clock as far as R&D and testing, though, I imagine, so I'm not holding my breath. 2020, maybe, if that ever happened?

     

    At this point, I don't have a problem w/ Axion entertaining offers for the 2-battery PbC solution business, but that's only based on what very little we know. What did Axion spend on R&D overall, so far? $70mil+? Sold. I'll gladly hang my AXPW investment thesis on PC, ePower, NS and 48v-maybe, and other, plus $70mil cash. I'm not pretending this will happen, though, at least anytime soon, and who would pay that kind of dough for something that hasn't yet gotten any order traction from end-users? Maybe this kind of house-rearranging will be up to the next CEO, like DiGiacinto.

     

    My other thought is from what JP said the Ford guy said at the 2012 ELBC: they are going with cheaper-but-doesn't-work over the alternative. So makes me scratch my head how they think li-ion is going to satisfy their cheaper approach. Maybe it doesn't and won't, but is the only thing available at scale so it eventually wins anyway.
    6 Jun 2014, 12:55 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    Good points Mr I,

     

    Never underestimate the pressures automotive is under to save a penny. Almost never, above a statistically acceptable level, is safety compromised but everything else is fair game when it comes to saving money.
    6 Jun 2014, 01:01 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    42itus1, Thanks for your kind and smile inducing thoughts.

     

    I could share a story about how it took me about 6 hours with numerous visits and a change of suppliers to get 2 tires put on my wife's vehicle. In a nut shell, I ended up with 4 new tires with the other 2, which were perfectly good, discarded after 4 days of visits and phone calls. The reality is that I wanted nothing, not one thing, special and that this was the worst example of how badly broken our educational/social system is at far too great a level I have ever witnessed. I mean numerous people working in a department that are dysfunctional to the point where they can't remember a metric like tire size after they put the phone down but wait 15 minutes or more before they ask again. And no I was not rude but my frustration had to be showing after the third day. I am greatly saddened.
    6 Jun 2014, 01:16 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    Wanted to include this GCC article on the Ford lithium ion battery for the proposed 2 battery system because it shows the unit next to a LAB so you can get a sense of scale.

     

    http://bit.ly/1okSix0
    6 Jun 2014, 01:45 PM Reply Like
  • H. T. Love
    , contributor
    Comments (19538) | Send Message
     
    Iindelco: looks like a communication port (RJ-45?) on the front of the Samsung. I presume this is to "manage" all the issues that can be expected? E.g. high temp operation, rates of charge/discharge, ..., cell balancing (do they need that too?).

     

    I suspect the battery is a wee bit more expensive?

     

    HardToLove
    6 Jun 2014, 01:51 PM Reply Like
  • John Petersen
    , contributor
    Comments (30629) | Send Message
     
    It does seem worthwhile to remind everybody that the article headline is "Ford and Samsung outline R&D efforts for next-generation non-hybrid battery technology; dual-battery systems and lightweight Li-ion"

     

    Last time I checked it takes a while to move from R&D to a fully tested and validated commercial battery product. Then it takes a second while to build facilities to manufacture the new device in relevant volumes.
    6 Jun 2014, 02:07 PM Reply Like
  • iindelco
    , contributor
    Comments (10233) | Send Message
     
    HTL, Yes, It does look like the BMS and necessary communications are included in the battery pack itself. Little doubt they still have a cost issue and there in lies the "reach". As one component anyway.

     

    I had read awhile back that some Japanese suppliers were even starting to pack the BMS in their portable device battery packs because people were taking the packs out and using them in other devices and this was causing issues as you can well imagine. So they wanted the BMS married to the cells to reduce their liabilty.
    6 Jun 2014, 02:20 PM Reply Like
  • KillaCycle
    , contributor
    Comments (636) | Send Message
     
    I read the article and it looks to me that they have already done the R&D, testing, validation, etc. and are about to put the li-ion dual battery system in their cars quite soon:
    "Ford suggested the dual battery system might go into production soon."
    http://bit.ly/1okSix0

     

    They show an example of an actual li-ion car battery:
    http://bit.ly/1ollsvY

     

    This article has a very interesting inset reference to a study which concludes:
    "...it is expected that by 2025, lithium-ion batteries will be implemented in some 48V dual-battery systems..." It appears that li-ion is the chemistry of choice for dual battery, at least in the referenced study.

     

    Also in this article they make forward-looking statements about R&D in the area "ultra-lightweight" li-ion batteries. This separate, but related R&D area could take many years, perhaps forever, just as you have noted is the general case for such R&D projects.
    6 Jun 2014, 03:55 PM Reply Like
  • Axion Power Host
    , contributor
    Comments (523) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » PbC Believer: You have crossed into personal disparagement and bring nothing to this venue.
    3 Jun 2014, 06:59 PM Reply Like
  • SMaturin
    , contributor
    Comments (2268) | Send Message
     
    Wow. Radical mastectomy on the APC!

     

    What an elegant surgical approach. Thanks, APH, for excising the disease and leaving a healthy discussion alive.
    3 Jun 2014, 07:10 PM Reply Like
  • dastar
    , contributor
    Comments (274) | Send Message
     
    Thanks for taking appropriate action APH. I was actually contemplating sending you a message about this.
    3 Jun 2014, 07:23 PM Reply Like
  • Patrick Young
    , contributor
    Comments (1947) | Send Message
     
    Thank-you APH!
    4 Jun 2014, 10:30 AM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (4047) | Send Message
     
    I know, it adds nothing of singular import, but can we tweak the analogy ex post facto just a bit? Radical wart removal, perhaps?
    6 Jun 2014, 05:27 PM Reply Like
  • SMaturin
    , contributor
    Comments (2268) | Send Message
     
    That depends where on the anatomy the wart is located.

     

    I stand by my original analogy.
    6 Jun 2014, 05:30 PM Reply Like
  • Edmund Metcalfe
    , contributor
    Comments (4047) | Send Message
     
    You must be a "leg man". omG, that's definitely going to be short-lived.
    6 Jun 2014, 05:34 PM Reply