baird

Market to Shine on Solar Industry Through 2011

Keith,

So you want to give us the detailed documentation on this, last I checked the DOE website two years was the energy breakeven for the average pv panel, not sure about the co2 numbers though.


On Oct 30 03:45 PM keithfeather wrote:

> 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

Solar: Energy's New Growth Sector

Actually when you consider the externalized costs, particularly of coal, solar makes a lot of sense even at current panel/system prices.


On Sep 19 09:19 AM Ferdinand E. Banks wrote:

> Americans prefer oil and coal. What kind of statement is that? As
> for solar, some of it makes a lot of sense, and a lot of it makes
> no sense at all.

Nissan’s Leaf: First Big Mistake Right Out of the Blocks

Schweizer,

Where oh where does electricity cost $1/kwh , in Moab ut where I spend winters it's 8c/kwh and in the Adirondacks where I live rest of the year it's 15cents/kwh during the day and the night off-peak rate is about 5cents.


On Aug 05 06:55 AM Schweizer wrote:

> The dirty little secret is that all of these EVs need to be recharged
> and tests have shown that to replace the energy consumed equates
> to 1 kilowatt-hour for every 4 miles driven. Right now electricity
> off the grid is in the $1/kwh cost range, so these cars cost 25-cents
> per mile to drive just for energy. So to go 30 miles costs $7.50
> in electricity vs. going 30 miles in a economy car cost about $3
> right now (gas). That's a steep premium to pay to make a "green"
> statement considering all the other tradeoffs (range and sticker
> price) one would need to make.

An Unpleasant Comparison: Demographics and Deflation

All true from an economic point of view however the implications for environmental quality due to ever increasing numbers searching for the "good life" are sobering. And I'm not talking about the usual tree hugger issues of snail darters, etc but big time environmental degredation which will be painfully obvious to all of our children and future generations.


On Jul 09 01:52 PM DWStein wrote:

> This is a very important subject that only gets attention periodically.
> So, thank you for brining it up.
>
> Imigration policy is very, very important to the continued prosperity
> of our country. We need a comprehensive policy that deals both with
> security and population growth. We should be letting people emigrate
> to this contry, but only the people we want.
>
> Tired, hungy and poor is a wonderful policy, but it needs to be brought
> into the 21st century. We need to know who is coming through our
> borders, we need to get them into the system properly, and we need
> to fully enfranchise them. Let us also not kid ourselves. Let's
> be transparent and agree that people with real capital (educationaly
> and/or monitarily) should be given priority.
>
> There is nothing more dangerous, in the long term, than having a
> seperate society within a larger society. Large poplutions without
> a significant stake in the future of the broader society are inherantly
> unstable. Just look at Europe's struggles with their muslim population.
>
>
> As the boomers retire, we are going to need freesh blood, period.
>
>
> Any fraternaty/sorority alumni might recognize the phrase, "Give
> 'em a bid. We need the dues!"

Poisoning the Green Shoots

This incredible experiment on planet earth obviously has no precedent, we've had the pedal all the way down and now it's through the firewall. It ain't complicated folks there's way too many of us and that's growing quickly to what "final" number who knows. And everyone wants to live the "good life" not just the clueless in the developed countries. It's not complicated but of course we still don't get it, without question we're way beyond sustainability and far into defcon omega or whatever is the ultimate alert status. Very sad prognosis and worst is it didn't have to be.


On Jun 07 09:35 AM fran wrote:

> greed and excessive population growth do influence this earth greatly.
> huxley covered such a situation in his book-"brave new world". a
> model does exist to ameliorate the poison, but brings with it other
> ailments as tradeoffs[ SOMA, FEELIES, HATCHERIES, etc].
> come to think, we've almost socio-engineered our way there with little
> forethought. or is there more forethought/plan than we realize?
>
>
> could THE CLUB OF ROME still exist?

Understanding What Buy and Hold Really Means

With respect and I do generally respect your opinions just how does even an enlightened investor do valid research on individual equities? Way too many uncertainties not to mention outright misinformation to ever accomplish this in my opinion.


On Apr 29 02:21 AM Steven Hansen wrote:

> an old advisor once told me it is not so much the stock as the sector.
> once you identify the sector, the selection of the stock becomes
> relatively easy.
>
> my point is performing sectors keep changing. and now today we are
> faced with a unpredictable future. in a long running bull market
> everything is moving up (of course at different rates) so buy and
> hold works no matter how lazy you are.
>
> the bottom line is that i review my sectors monthly, and take action
> as required.
>

The Plug In Vehicle Scam

I haven't read all the comments so forgive me if this has been mentioned however according to various reputable sources some 80% of the worlds population will live in/near cities. Obviously mass transit could have major impacts with these high density centers however it also seems that phev could fit nicely into these incipient arcologies. Further, many/most of us in developed countries have more than one vehicle and it seems to me that for daily/urban/suburban drivers one phev could fill an important non ice niche economically.


On Apr 28 10:28 AM Ferdinand E. Banks wrote:

> Sorry Mr Petersen, but too many smart people have told me that there
> is a future for plug in vehicles. They didn't tell me however how
> many of these items will be on the road in e.g. 2030, and in what
> countries. In any event, although 'scam' is one of my favorite words,
> I don't think that it belongs here.

Looking Back in Order to Look Ahead

FEB,

I too am very puzzled about why Afghanistan makes any sense, even less than Iraq. Large scale military actions to eliminate "terrorist" strongholds will always be counterproductive, whatever Obama is he's not stupid, go figure. Maybe just a head fake to let everyone know he's not "weak" but I suspect that for all of O's feel good exterior inside he's about as tough as they come.


On Apr 04 08:51 AM Ferdinand E. Banks wrote:

> Some of this is very interesting. After reading the latest Newsweek
> I came to the conclusion that the big oil price increase contributed
> more to the bad news than I thought, however that price has now descended
> to a healthier level, and President Obama seems to have mobilized
> the enthusiasm of the people in the back room for a problem solving
> exercise.
>
> At the same time, his desire to continue the war in Afghanistan strikes
> me as insane, and I hope that the other G20 participants try to talk
> some sense into him. I also hope that the promise to give money to
> the IMF (and probably the World Bank) was only a promise and not
> the real thing. If they really need money they can sell their headquarters
> in Washington to the Hilton Hotel people and
> operate out of a toilet in the White House.

Even Thin Solar Can't Weather Silicon Glut - Barron's

Responsible,

With respect, go to West Virginia and look at the mining operations or any forest on the east coast, try to eat the fish, check mercury levels in your body, co2 emissions, etc, then tell me coal is cheaper. This has always been the problem with coal, the market simply doesn't price the externalized costs. BTW your other numbers in favor of coal are off too by about an order of magnitude.


On Mar 29 02:52 PM Repsonsible Citizen wrote:

> We'll It simple , Solar produced electrcity is still 28 times the
> cost of Coal electricty . Even with tax credits , goverment subsidies
> it still comes out to about 22 tmes the current cost , in this economy
> 97% of America simply cant afford solar even if they wanted to .
> My Electric company offered me 20% of my Electric to be generated
> by there Solar division my monthly bill would have gone up from
> around $100 to $400 I said NO Thank You! And thats Just 20% solar
> cost , at that rate 100% would be OVER $2000 a month . Someday Solar
> will come down maybe to say 3 times the cost of coal , then in a
> better economy I'm sure most people could be convinced or shamed
> into going All solar but for now and into the forseeable future
> Solar will be a great idea thats just NOT practical for the vast
> majority of people.

WSJ: Kansas Furthers Already Atrocious Market Myths

Yes and the 6-9billion unit gorilla no one will talk about is global population. While it's true that population trends in the developed countries are flat to down most of the world is undeveloped where birth rates are high and death rates are down. The argument that after the planet is all "developed" population will stabilize is specious at best, by that time we're all cooked.


On Mar 24 08:25 AM chistletoe wrote:

> The key to Wall Street's sales pitch is
> the very basic assumption that over the long haul, growth is inevitable.
>
>
> Now that the planet has reached or exceeded the maximum human population
> which it can support, and food and water supplies are threatened,
>
> now that oil and other forms of energy have reached and passed<br/>their
> peak production,
> this is a highly suspicious assumption.
>
> for generations to come,
> one can reasonably predict economic retraction.
> Where, then, should one invest?
>
> Not stock. Not bonds.

Pension Shortfalls: Yet Another Time Bomb

China,

It's not just the unions, it's all of us who refuse to face some very simple problems in arithmetic, apparently we prefer to scream at each other across the political/philosophical chasms like school children in the locker room. Look at the projections for just social security, medicare and medicaid at about 2040, it's not difficult to understand we either have to reduce the rate of growth of these and any future health care programs and/or raise contribution limits or go bankrupt. It's not complicated, it's a matter of having a bipartisan intelligent adult conversation, but that's very unlikely to happen unless we the people require it of our "leaders"


On Mar 25 09:27 AM China Expert wrote:

> Lets face it..... the unions "want" and the politicians will "give"
> until the very last day when the problem because a national catastrophe
> !
>
> Neither the unions, politicians or public think about future problems
> since their only focus is "ME" and "NOW" !

Wind Turbine Energy: How It Works and Stocks to Watch

Clearly matching real time load requirements with wind availability is a key issue and there are some interesting methods being explored to store energy which may mitigate this problem to some extent, we shall see.


On Mar 22 10:40 AM billp37 wrote:

> "The reason is that in Texas, and most of the United States, the
> hottest days are the least windy. As a result, wind turns out to
> be a good way to save fuel, but not a good way to avoid building
> plants that burn coal. A wind machine is a bit like a bicycle that
> a commuter keeps in the garage for sunny days. It saves gasoline,
> but the commuter has to own a car anyway.
>
> But neither wind nor solar power can be used to meet surging energy
> demands. And, while wind may be a low-cost resource when it is blowing,
> no renewable resources will provide for the large "base load" resources
> that Colorado needs the most.
>
> An economic analyst claims he's done the numbers and wind energy
> is costing the Victorian Government far more money than any wind
> turbines could generate.
>
> In addition wind is very unreliable, it cuts in and cuts out, so
> you have to have backup for it, so the costs are somewhat in excess
> of that crude depiction of the premium price you have to pay for
> wind.
>
> "Oh, well they just cut in and cut out. Windfarms on average operate
> for 25 per cent of the time, but they only operate when the wind
> is blowing, so when the wind isn't blowing they're not available.
> I think it was well publicised in South Australia a wek or so ago
> when they had a heatwave of 42 or so degrees and suddenly none of
> the windfarms were operating, or only operating at very low level
> and one of them caught fire. Wind is not and cannot be reliable.
> You can rely on it to be there when you need it only 10 per cent
> of the time," he says."
>
> Links to articles found here.
>
> www.prosefights.org/wi...
>
>
>

The Bull Case for Big Oil

Best to stick with some diversification IE XLE


On Mar 17 08:42 AM epeon wrote:

> I agree with the basic thesis that oil is going to go higher. However,
> COP has a very high percentage of its business from natural gas.
> And, frankly, I am not so bullish on natural gas. I, therefore,
> do not like COP. A different major would be a better choice for
> me (I own BP, for example).

Does Wind Power Produce More Carbon Emissions than Coal?

Well you know the old song- figures don't lie but liars sure do figure.

Still Searching for Rock Bottom in Markets

Ummm a group of "outsiders" , surely you jest.