User 283977

Why Lead-Carbon Batteries Will Deflate the Li-ion Bubble

John, first of all thank you for your articles. They have served as a focal point for a lot of very interesting discussions on battery technology. I have learned a lot about this subject area from your series of articles and the readers comments.

Something I have been wondering about for some time concerns the articles concentration on the valuation of lead-carbon technology for micro, mild and full hybrid electric vehicles [HEVs] and grid connected energy storage applications. Is there some reason why you have not talked about the replacement market for lead-carbon technology with respect to conventional lead car batteries?

I believe the foot-print for lead-carbon batteries is the same as conventional lead battery technology. It seems to me that a significant portion of the replacement battery market would be interested in replacing their conventional lead battery technology with a battery that would last, according to your first chart, four times longer. It also seems that the much higher number of available charging cycles would provide an important differentiation point, particularly for vehicles sold in climates requiring winterized vehicles. Even if it was sold at a reasonable premium it would still seem to be a bargain, and a battery maker offering such a product would be likely to gain market share relative to companies without such an offering.

High reliability (ease of mind) was the selling point of the premium priced "Die-Hard" batteries, a selling point that even extended to the replacement battery market in climates not requiring winterization.

So, is there a consumer market for lead-carbon technology irrespective of their potential use with micro, mild and full hybrid electric vehicles [HEVs] and grid connected energy storage applications? If so, is there a way to estimate the size of that market? If that market is large, might that be one of the reasons Exide (XIDE) is so interested in AXPW?

Energy Storage: Chrysler - A123 Alliance Likely to Spark Interest in Sector

I believe the crux of John's article is that the emergence of an A123 IPO will attract more investments into the battery sector.

Look closely at the list of bullet points John has provided, particularly his incremental Vs. disruptive technology, volume of exotic raw materials, and the emphasis on cost benefits points. Those speaking points speak volumes when considered in the context of John's excellent series of articles in this area.

The Chrysler deal in conjunction with ATVM funding should prime the current battery technology sector. In the course of doing that, an A123 IPO will also prime the Lead-Acid new, disruptive technology area with its non-exotic raw materials requirements and its potential cost benefits.

In other words, the Chrysler deal is the now, while Lead-Acid (AXPW), a potential disruptive technology is the near future. The only negative I see for A123 is that the deal is with Chrysler, the weakest of the automotive Big 3. However, given the ATVM, an A123 IPO should be an investment opportunity. Holding it depends on how your crystal ball sees the future.

I own AXPW because I totally agree with John that Lead-Acid could be a disruptive technology. Consequently I am long on AXPW.

Huge Incentives for Energy Storage in Today's House Bill

If even half of that seed money becomes available its going to cause a sea change in the Energy storage industry. It does indeed look like we are witnessing the beginning of a serious national energy policy. This is amazing. Thanks John!

Li-ion Batteries: A Speculative Field of Dreams

Nice QED John.

Lithium Unicorns and Alternative Energy Storage

I suspect the answer is that the entire automobile industry actually believes that electric vehicles will never be a large part of their market. They probably think of electric vehicles as a niche market designed to rip off the greens but with low sales volume.

If a serious move is going to be made to electric / natural gas vehicles in the near future, its going to have to be done by regulatory mandate. This was how the switch to non-leaded gas occurred, and this was the reason vehicles now have somewhat effective emission control systems. If the government is serious about moving America away from its dependence on foreign oil, government has to make it happen. That means the entire US market has to be changed, US and foreign vehicle imports. The only force that can effect all vehicle sales is the government.

Alternative Energy Tax Credits for the Storage Sector

Thank you for your reply John. I figured the government would finally come around to the position that they could not let GM and Ford go bankrupt. Made some money on that bet :)

I also expect that part of the conditions on any loan will be a stronger commitment towards the production of electric vehicles. So, I've been looking for battery technology stocks. The upside potential for AXPW seems plausible and substitutive while the downside risk is quite small given the stocks current price. I wish more of Seeking Alphas authors were as knowledgeable as you. Your on my Authors reading list. Thanks for the knowledge!

Alternative Energy Tax Credits for the Storage Sector

Just looked at AXPWs 10Q… Looks kind of scary....