wind4me

Positioning for 2010: 10 Seeking Alpha Contributors Ready Their Portfolios

its easy for me (APWR) is going to blast 2010 and 2011 as the wind side ramps in China!

2009: A Banner Year for My Clean Energy Stock Picks

too bad U did NOT own (APWR) only up 350% for the 2009 year.........watch APWR soar into late 2013 as the WIND SIDE ramps big time over 2010 and 2011.........
www.Wind4me.com

GE to Plant Its Big Wind Turbines in Oregon

(GE) is already partnering with (APWR) for the largest gearbox factory for Asia

www.Wind4me.com


On Dec 11 10:45 AM a. palmer jr. wrote:

> Whatever it amounts to, wind and solar energy are fairly free energy.
> Free from the perils of the middle east and our unfriendly neighbors
> that supply oil. I say fairly free because it does cost something
> in the manufacture and upkeep of facilities. But I think the overall
> cost of this in money and human lives will be much better than with
> oil and coal. And if we do it right it will amount to less unemployment
> for Americans. I hope GE doesn't export the manufacture of it's wind
> equipment to China like it does it's other electronics.

Finding Opportunities in Wind Energy

(APWR) sure has had a great run in past 2 months
www.Wind4me.com

On Oct 29 08:19 AM John Cordes wrote:

> apwr

Because You Asked: "U.S. Renewable Energy: A Self-Inflicted Crisis in the Making"

why even worry about USA energy policy???? we dont have one so why worry about it ??? I will stick with China which just passed a law that requires China Electricity companies to have to buy ALL renewable energy! (APWR) is the player
www.Wind4me.com

What Is Solyndra’s Cost per Watt?

why would anyone buy that high of a cost solar player??? I will stick with my China Wind, Solar, Geothermal, Biomass, and Hydropower diversified green player (APWR)
www.Wind4me.com


On Dec 23 05:20 PM Jigar Shah wrote:

> Solyndra is a young company that doesn't have the luxury of the Walton
> family backing them as First Solar did. Therefore, they are going
> public a year before they probably should (or more like Evergreen
> did). Once their their plant is online they can probably only achieve
> $2/Wdc COGS moving lower from there.

Some House Cleaning

too bad U did not just hold (APWR) for the next '''First Solar of China'''' move coming into 2010

Five Cleantech Predictions for 2010

keep an eye on (APWR) as the Chinese land mega billion deals and next up will be announcing the Nevada Wind Turbine Plant!!!
www.Wind4me.com

My estimates up for 2010, 670 million run rate from 320 million

The Nuclear Industry Will Settle for 25-30 New Plants by 2030

give me 12 billion that it will cost to build a USA reactor and then give me the money it will costs to pay 2000 High Paid workers to maintain and run that Nuke Unit and I could build thousands of Wind Turbines

one megawatt wind is 1.75 million per megawatt
one megawatt Nuke is 12 Million per megawatt

got a few BILLION laying around U dont know what to do with, U too can build a Nuke for 10 billion-12 Billion......sorry, this aint the answer! ((and I was a Nuke for 20 years!)


On Dec 21 10:57 AM Davewmart wrote:

> 'don't forget we do not yet have a resolution to the high-level waste
> problem.'
>
> There are a number of designs for new reactors which will use the
> 'waste' as fuel, with the little that remains being radioactive for
> much, much less time.
> If we are serious about reducing CO2 emissions then nuclear power
> is many times as cost effective as even wind power, and solar power
> is far worse.
> For a start, due to intermittency you need a lot of back-up for so-called
> 'renewables' so you are effectively building in fossil fuel burn
> for about 60 years, as in practise this is done by gas or coal burn.
>
> If you are only running these fossil fuel plants some of the time
> you can't do it very efficiently, so just improving the effiency
> of fossil fuel plants would save much more emissions more effectively
> than building wind turbines or solar power.
> Here is the actual situation in Germany, which at vast expence has
> hardly decreased it's CO2 emissions, in contrast to nuclear France,
> which has around half the emissions of Germany:
> www.spiegel.de/interna...
>
>
> Both solar and wind are far better resources in the US compared to
> Germany, but the gulf in lcost effectiveness of CO2 emissions per
> ton is far too large to be bridged by this.

The Nuclear Industry Will Settle for 25-30 New Plants by 2030

when China can build a Biomass plant for 86 Million for 150MW elec plant, BIOMASS should go up now!
www.Wind4me.com

On Dec 21 03:31 PM Davewmart wrote:

> Electricity is much more efficient than oil for running cars.
> This means that you could replace all the oil used for private cars
> in the State with only around as many nuclear plants as the US has
> at present, about 100, leaving oil and gas to run trucks.
> Another 100 or so would make a huge hole in the amount of coal needed,
> and the huge amounts of pollution that produces.
> The Chinese build a nuclear reactor from the first shovel of dirt
> in around 4 years, at a cost of around $4bn
> So if the first reactors in the States in a series build were complete
> in around 2017, then in 20 years building to a not much more onerous
> shedule than built the first of the US's present fleet of one-off
> reactors, then at around one reactor a month the US would have almost
> elimated the need for oil imports - it is still a substantial producer,
> and made a huge hole in carbon emissions with both oil and coal use
> greatly reduced.
> The present fleet can be upgraded and maintained fairly indefinitely,
> andnew reactors are designed for an 80-100 year life.
> Another 20 years of not very vigorous expansion could see fossil
> fuel use and CO2 emissions becoming marginal.
>
> The rational use of incentives to proimotee caulking in houses and
> the use of air heat pumps which muiltiply the effectiveness of electricity
> for heating and coooling would provide even more spectacular progress.
>
>
> We already have almost all the technology we need, we just need to
> apply it and not get distracted by fads.

The Nuclear Industry Will Settle for 25-30 New Plants by 2030

we should be copying the French design that works.........or, we should just build Biomass plants from China!!! (APWR) just announced a 86 Million 150MW Biomass plant in Thailand, CHEAPER than dirty coal!
www.Wind4me.com


On Dec 21 08:51 AM Ferdinand E. Banks wrote:

> Well, let's see here. Adding 30 or 40 new reactors to the present
> number in the US, assuming that they are 1000 MW(e) might be OK.
> The important thing though is to get the new generation (Gen 4) of
> reactors constructed and deployed.
>
> When this will be done remains to be seen. I was at a conference
> on nuclear in Europe recently, and heard some things that I did not
> want to hear - namely that the hustlers from the European Union Energy
> Directorate are heavily involved. Take my advice and keep them and
> the IEA out of the US program.

Copenhagen Results Boost Renewable Energy Outlook

I sold (AMSC) way too early.......my bad, great story but very RICH valuation

(APWR) has 1/4 of the PEG ratio of AMSC and about 1/20th the P/E, I like VALUE with GROWTH vs too high PEG and P/E ratio like AMSC.........of course AMSC left without me, willl U let APWR leave without you???
www.Wind4me.com


On Dec 21 09:13 PM captainccs wrote:

> If you like APWR you should LOVE American Superconductor (AMSC).
> I do.

A-Power Secret Weapon in Global Wind Power==Chinese Banks

my estimates for 2010 are 670 Million from 320 million currently
www.Wind4me.com

my Target Price end of 2010 is $38, my target price end of 2011 is $58, so $20,000 today gives U $58,000 end of 2011, U decide who knows the story and who is going to benefit and profit!

Copenhagen Results Boost Renewable Energy Outlook

U """LOVE""" APWR but then U typed U took your profits on (APWR)..........a trader never wins, only going to chase from now on heh ???


On Dec 21 09:45 AM Alphameister wrote:

> I love APWR and do expect to make a lot more money on it, but I agree
> with captainccs that China does what is good for China as opposed
> to feeling a compelling need to save the world from the sun.

Copenhagen Results Boost Renewable Energy Outlook

geeez, I have already ''''Announced'''' the Nevada 1100MW plant that will add another 2 billion revenue stream to (APWR) by 2015
Why would APWR be building a Wind Plant manufacturing facility in Nevada??? Answer:: California REQUIRES all new power be 30% renewable energy!!!!

Watch for 2nd BILLION USA WIND FARM to be announced BEFORE end of 2010 first quarter!!! Have U read my quarterly estimates for 670 Million for 2010??? Owning (APWR) as a very VERY long position is like taking candy from babies!


On Dec 21 01:49 PM Kelvin Schulle wrote:

> my sources tells me Nevada announcement may come earlier than many
> expected.