Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
  • Watch Out for the Silver Bubble  [View article]
    Lengthen the timeline to 30+ years, and it looks like copper, gold, and california land is in a bubble. Silver has a ways to go to catch up. Not to say it won't go down in the meanwhile, but to call a return "toward" a rational relationship is a bubble is naive.
    Jan 12, 2011. 11:26 AM | 9 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Myth of Peak Oil Demand and the Example of Loma Prieta  [View article]
    I would hope that your enthusiasm has driven you and your friends to enter engineering school and pursue these goals by working to design and build these alternatives you find crucial to the future. Alternately,.....
    Dec 14, 2010. 12:00 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Common Sense in Energy Storage Investing  [View article]
    Your outlook is even more constrained than my own. You said:

    "The big problem with most commodity metals is that the ore qualities have been declining for many decades and where we once mined 5 or 10 tons of ore to get ton of copper, we mine 50 or more tons of ore today to get the same ton of metallic copper. Mining, moving and processing continually increasing volumes of ore to get the same metal output is a game we can't possibly win. Using those resources in batteries we can't recycle is sheer lunacy. "

    Why would the the mineral resources in batteries not be recyclable, albeit at a ridiculous energy penalty? Have I missed something? Is this actually worse than I ever imagined?
    Apr 26, 2010. 02:20 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Common Sense in Energy Storage Investing  [View article]
    Battery life is rarely computed on the high discharge rates and deep cycles the customer is likely to use on an EV. This cuts battery life by an order of magnitude, making EV battery recycling business mandatory.

    Most (all?) of the cost of commodities is energy input to collect and refine them. To think that energy can go up and other commodities not is naive.
    Apr 26, 2010. 09:26 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • 220 Billion New Reasons to Be a Plug-in Vehicle Skeptic  [View article]
    If EV can't even get 100% of the golf cart market, then how can they ever expect to have any of the OTR market? The golf course is the ideal location for electric, and still there are gas powered ones. Before electric, there will be CNG, and before CNG perhaps butanol.
    Apr 22, 2010. 03:25 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Set-Up for a Coal Shortage  [View article]
    oh you cynic
    Mar 13, 2010. 09:03 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Ener1, Exide: A Tale of Two Battery Companies  [View article]
    economic shakeouts are when low efficiency manufacturers can no longer hide, and finally shutter the doors. Perhaps this is the beginning.
    Feb 17, 2010. 09:01 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Did Cash for Clunkers Cost Too Much?  [View article]
    Cash for clunkers. We took economic assets, valued at $3B, and destroyed their value. I knew their were no engineers in Washington, and it appears there are no economists.
    Nov 20, 2009. 10:01 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Rapid Transition to Grid Enabled Vehicles Not Possible or Desirable  [View article]
    Thank you for the logically crafted article. Another issue to roll into the argument is that (generally) the manufactured cost of goods are about 20% energy, meaning that the $/kwhr storage can also be expressed to include energy consumed to produce the product, kwhr/(kwhr storage). The illogical production of storage systems that over their lifetimes consume more energy in production than they can (save) is one that only a bureaucrat can embrace.

    Keith .
    Nov 20, 2009. 09:55 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Market to Shine on Solar Industry Through 2011  [View article]
    Uh oh, I just checked the FPL specs for their big projects just completed. It looks like the connected cost is actually over $7.00 per watt! I'm shocked, shocked I tell you! That means that after you add up all the CO2 released into the atmosphere from the production of the cells, the construction of the plant, the allocated construction of all the equipment used, mining, transportation etc, that a PV plant will release 300 tons of CO2 per connected kw, and reduce emissions by 2 tons per yer per kw, so the cells will have to operate without maintenance for over 150 years just to break even! Heavens no! I am shocked!
    Oct 30, 2009. 03:45 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Market to Shine on Solar Industry Through 2011  [View article]
    If you can connect 1kw of solar capacity to the grid for $1.00, the overall balance is this:

    CO2 generated to produce all the energy to install 1kw: 75 tons
    CO2 avoided per year based on 300days, 8 hours, 75% output: 3 tons

    So to break even at $1 per kw connected to the grid will only take 25 years to break even on the CO2 balance.
    Oct 30, 2009. 11:25 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Cap and Trade Would Sink the U.S. Economy  [View article]
    Jack, it's "climate change" now, not "global warming", get with the program.

    On Oct 29 03:14 PM john s. gordon wrote:

    > bubbette -
    > maybe it is all the methane being released by the methane hydrates
    > under the permafrost as the permafrost melts due to warming caused
    > by CO2.
    > soon the fabled northwest passage (sought since the 16th century)
    > around the north of canada will be ice free due to global warming.
    > boon to shipping. same with the northeast passage around the north
    > of russia. icebreaker constructors better watch out - like the buggywhip
    > mfrs in 1900 you are doomed.
    Oct 29, 2009. 05:13 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Cap and Trade Would Sink the U.S. Economy  [View article]
    We need more nuclear power for the long term. We need to preserve our high carbon fuels (NG, coal, oil) for transportation fuel only. We need to permit spent fuel reprocessing in the US. We need to permit alternate fuel cycle reactors.

    On Oct 29 12:08 PM ProLogic wrote:

    > @ keithfeather -- We probably do need more nuclear power for the
    > short run.
    > But what will we do with all of that nuclear waste for the long run?
    > This radioactive material takes thousands of years to decay, and
    > the decay product remains highly toxic forever.
    Oct 29, 2009. 12:14 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Cap and Trade Would Sink the U.S. Economy  [View article]
    Help me CO2 the only gas on our "pollutant list" that is required for life to exist on this planet, or are there others as well?

    At 400 ppm it's disasterous, at 200 ppm, we can't grow enough food for the people already here, and at 0 (bet there are some "caring folks" who think this would be a goal) all life ends.

    On Oct 29 11:49 AM ProLogic wrote:
    > with carbon pollution?
    Oct 29, 2009. 12:04 PM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Cap and Trade Would Sink the U.S. Economy  [View article]
    Go back to 1979, muzzle Carter on nuclear power moratorium, transition ot 100% nuclear power and all electric power. In lieu of that, start building them now as fast as possible.

    On Oct 29 11:49 AM ProLogic wrote:
    > What would cap-and-trade opponents offer as an alternative to deal
    > with carbon pollution?
    Oct 29, 2009. 11:56 AM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment