Energy Storage Opportunities vs. Irrational Expectations [View article]
John, I agree completely about the demand curve for lithium trending towards smaller vehicles, tools and devices where the the size and weight versus cost equation is different than that in cars, trucks, trains or non-motive applications where the size and weight are less critical and the cost for lithium becomes excessive versus acceptable alternatives. Also as demand grows for lithium end product so will demand rise for lithium raw materials which will add to cost and slow the cost reduction curve that is expected from new production and technology. Net net is that it may be a while before mass produced all electric cars are competitive with ICE.
On the other hand hybrid cars, trucks and trains are price competitive now and will continue to grow in use as is pointed out in comments above. A good lead acid alternative to lithium is attractive for these uses since the wieght difference may only be 50 or 60 pounds in a car while the price difference should (barring huge technological changes) be well worth the weight penalty. Apparently Axion and Firefly both think they have such lead acid alternatives coming soon.
But comparing only lithium and LAB ignores the other technologies out there including NiMH and others. Efforts are ongoing to reduce the cost and increase the performance of these technologies as well, of course, and the ultimate winners are not clear. What is typically true, as John points out here and in other posts, is that the winner is not always the best technology. First a rising tide lifts all boats and the near term increasing demand may make lots of winners in this field who do not necessarily have the "best" technology. Secondly a technology is one part of a big puzzle. Management is crucial, financing, good sales force, manufacturing capacity, etc. So the long-term winners will likely be more contingent upon the synergy and competence of the entire company rather than the specific technology. Short-term winners, most of the companies in the field. Long-term winners, well financed companies with good management and good production / sales teams. Warren Buffet likes to say he buys managment teams, not companies. For the long-term that is usually the way to go.
Energy Storage Opportunities vs. Irrational Expectations [View article]
On the other hand hybrid cars, trucks and trains are price competitive now and will continue to grow in use as is pointed out in comments above. A good lead acid alternative to lithium is attractive for these uses since the wieght difference may only be 50 or 60 pounds in a car while the price difference should (barring huge technological changes) be well worth the weight penalty. Apparently Axion and Firefly both think they have such lead acid alternatives coming soon.
But comparing only lithium and LAB ignores the other technologies out there including NiMH and others. Efforts are ongoing to reduce the cost and increase the performance of these technologies as well, of course, and the ultimate winners are not clear. What is typically true, as John points out here and in other posts, is that the winner is not always the best technology. First a rising tide lifts all boats and the near term increasing demand may make lots of winners in this field who do not necessarily have the "best" technology. Secondly a technology is one part of a big puzzle. Management is crucial, financing, good sales force, manufacturing capacity, etc. So the long-term winners will likely be more contingent upon the synergy and competence of the entire company rather than the specific technology. Short-term winners, most of the companies in the field. Long-term winners, well financed companies with good management and good production / sales teams. Warren Buffet likes to say he buys managment teams, not companies. For the long-term that is usually the way to go.