ECD Fan

Is Fiat and Chrysler's Pullback on Electric Cars Bad News for A123 Systems?

Mr. Douglas Korthof is misinformed. Cobasys (formerly known as GM Ovonic, now sold to SB LiMotive) ruined the entire 2007 hybrid production of GM by supplying leaking NiMH batteries. Li-ion, being a volume technology, trumps NiMH for EVs on all metrics, including costs:

ecdfan.blogspot.com/20...

Balance Sheet Wars: U.S. Solar Companies vs. Chinese Government

No, scale is not the most important deciding factor of cost reduction in the long run. There are other, probably more important factors, like technology and management. First Solar's production was just 20MW in 2005, when it made about 9%-10%-efficient modules at $1.60 a Watt. Unisolar last year made over 100MWs of their 6-7%-efficient modules at about $2.00 per Watt. So 5x the scale can still result in 25% HIGHER cost.

First Solar's "problem" is that the Chinese competition is hurting their gross margin (they make somewhat more expensive product, but at a higher efficiency, which more than compensates by reducing balance-of-system costs). Unisolar's problem is more fundamental - it is their technology and management. No scale will solve Unisolar's cost problem.

ecdfan.blogspot.com/20...

China Kicks off Renewable Energy Drive with Wind Farms

I don't think that information has been disclosed, but see my reply to Mr. Lifton:

seekingalpha.com/insta...

"Dear Mr. Lifton: Your article is factually incorrect. In the March 2009 quarter, First Solar produced 220MWs (and shipped just 196MWs) worth of solar product, thus, their annual capacity is already over 880MWs (45% more than your concocted "608MW in 2010").

See:
ecdfan.blogspot.com/20...

First Solar uses very little Te per Watt. Using your "68 tons per 1GW," even at the inflated price of $200 per kg, results in just 1c per Watt. First Solar's manufacturing costs in the March 2009 quarter were 93c per Watt, thus they can grow with their CdTe technology quite a bit and still bankrupt every other high-cost PV producer in the process!

So why do you continue to spread misinformation about things you don't understand?"

So, here you go. Tellurium is about $0.01 per Watt out of $3.50 per Watt. Your understanding appears incorrect.


On Aug 12 09:25 AM yellowhoard wrote:

> ECD,
>
> How much of FSLR's $3.50 per watt cost comes from tellurium?
>
> It's my understanding that they are desperate to lock up as much
> tellurium supply as possible right now while prices are relatively
> depressed.
>
> With the Chinese locking up tellurium production in most of the world,
> won't FSLR be dependent on the graciousness of the ChiComs?

China Kicks off Renewable Energy Drive with Wind Farms

Dear Mr. "Kelvin Schulle:"

You are, as usual, misinformed. There is no evidence that "U.S. commercial rooftop BIPV demand picked up in recently months." And, obviously, you are not aware of any such evidence.

The statement that companies "like Energy Conversion Devices (ENER) are ramping up production" is also false, as ENER is actually shutting down production, and suffering from massive unsold inventory buildup.

ecdfan.blogspot.com/20...

Also, the statement that ENER "tied knot with Johns Manville (JM), a leading global manufacturer of an extensive line of energy-efficient building products, to deliver PV system to commercial rooftops" is misleading as the JM's brochure talks of crystalline as well as thin-film alternatives (and ENER makes only thin-film)

www.specjm.com/files/p...

You can learn more about the "knot" here:

ecdfan.blogspot.com/20...

Finally, your statement about "First Solar also entering rooftop BIPV market either by an acquisition or developing its own technology" reveals your absolute ignorance about First Solar's business. They do not need acquisitions or new developments to dominate the rooftop and or BIPV business at this point (all they need is to reduce their gross margins) - they have announced a rooftop installed cost of $3.50 per Watt (see SCE's 250MW commercial rooftop project). Compare to Unisolar's $6.50 per Watt:

ecdfan.blogspot.com/20...

Berkshire-Owned Roofing Giant Johns Manville Inks Deal with Energy Conversion Devices

Trane250: Yes, read about him here:

ecdfan.blogspot.com/20...

Of course, there is "new" management in town now:

ecdfan.blogspot.com/20...

and

ecdfan.blogspot.com/20...

and

ecdfan.blogspot.com/20...

Berkshire-Owned Roofing Giant Johns Manville Inks Deal with Energy Conversion Devices

Zenfar: Good to know! Can you tell us then why SunPower's panels (not installations) are the highest-efficiency panels eligible for incentives in California and command 20%-25% share in the Californian PV market (depending on how you measure it) vs just 0.1%-1.0% for Unisolar/SIT, according to the CSI database?

ecdfan.blogspot.com/20...

Berkshire-Owned Roofing Giant Johns Manville Inks Deal with Energy Conversion Devices

Hey, Zenfar: you sure SPWRA is thin film?

Now, regarding this planted article: Hehe, competition! SIT, as you know, is United Solar Ovonic’s largest customer, and is being “acquired” by ECD for much less than the unsold inventory stuck in SIT’s warehouses. SIT's spiel was laminates on TPO membrane (I believe). And the bitumen roofing offering already comes from Tegola Canadese, another Unisolar OEM. Ms. Tholen has much to learn: “Silicon solar panels are more expensive for integrating into roofing systems, she added. Most of them also are glass panels that require racks to support them.” Nope, just the opposite. Unisolar’s installed cost is $6 per Watt or more, while crystalline can be now had for $4 per Watt for large rooftop projects. In the mean time, Unisolar sports a 0.1% to 1% market share in California (depending on how one calculates it), according to the CSI database:

ecdfan.blogspot.com/20...

Contract Silicon Price Falls 50%, Close to Spot Price

My, my. I wonder how these "new developments" affect ENER:

ecdfan.blogspot.com/20...

Energy Conversion Devices Buys a Solar Integrator

Fred: Well, tell us about the other side of "roofing, solar, and tax law." There is no sweet spot for an overpriced product ($2.92 per Watt for a 6.3%-efficient module, ex works for March 2009 qtr, $6 per Watt, at best, installed cost) that degrades beyond belief, heats up the roofs (increasing HVAC costs, wasting up to 20% of the PV electricity generated), and makes roof repairs harder. And tell us about Magco's blind spot:

ecdfan.blogspot.com/20...

Energy Conversion Devices Buys a Solar Integrator

Oh, forgot to add the amazing long-term efficiency degradation:

ecdfan.blogspot.com/20...

Energy Conversion Devices Buys a Solar Integrator

Low efficiency is not the only Unisolar problem. Unisolar's product is costly ($6 per Watt, at best, installed cost). And it heats up the roof in hot climates (unlike regular panels which cast shadows and improve ventilation) as its solar reflectance is just 30%.

In fact, Unisolar may be giving away their PV systems for free these days:

ecdfan.blogspot.com/20...

All you need is to hold the right government office.

The real specialty of SIT and the benefits it brings to Unisolar are revealed here:

ecdfan.blogspot.com/20...


Read all about this and more at ecdfan.blogspot.com/

The Tellurium Supply Conjecture and the Future of First Solar

To Mr. Lifton: If you made the first working phase-change device, maybe you can tell us why every phase-change device "made" after yours is definitely NOT working. Also, based on your words, phase-change memory predates DRAM: it was not until 1970 that the newly formed Intel company publicly released the 1103, the first DRAM (Dynamic Random Access Memory), the memory now used in every PC and most other computing devices. Maybe you can tell us how that memory sidestepped the "solid state electronics developments" needed for phase-change memory.

My modest tribute to the Charlatan Extraordinaire, focusing just on his PV solar swindle, can be found here:

ecdfan.blogspot.com/20...

To Vienna: Some people read and write articles, and become defensive when their "beliefs" are contradicted by the facts Other people seek the truth.

The Tellurium Supply Conjecture and the Future of First Solar

To Mr. Lifton: A small lesson in economics: In a world of infinite resources, prices will be close to zero. In a world of limited resources, higher prices will lead to higher capex and R&D, creating new technologies and extraction methods that will lower costs and increase both probable and proven reserves. We did not run out of oil last year. And neither did we 30 years ago. And won't in the next 30 years. Same with tellurium.

To yellowboard: Phase-change memory is a techno-Ponzi. It was "invented" 40 years ago by the Charlatan Extraordinaire. Nobody has been able to commercialize it after all these years and millions wasted. NASA looked at the BAE's 4Mbit monstrosity (supposedly commercial since 2006), and found that the thing can't even remember the bits right. And Numonyx has no commercial product, despite their claims (if they did, where is the public datasheet?). A certain team within Samsung is still feeding the press false stories about their "perfect RAM." You can learn more about the techno-Ponzi here:

ecdfan.blogspot.com/20...

To Vienna: If you don't know, why are commenting? I suggest you learn first.

The Tellurium Supply Conjecture and the Future of First Solar

To Mr. Lifton: Your article states "First Solar is predicted to get to a manufacturing capacity of 608 MW in 2010; this means it will need 39 tons of tellurium in 2010." As I said, First Solar already reported 880MW effective annualized capacity in the March 2009. How have tellurium prices reacted to that "unexpected" demand surge? Care to tell us? Or isn't it the case that the "predictions" and sources you are using are as uninformed as the conclusions you are reaching?

Now, if there were any impending shortages of tellurium, why are tellurium prices where they are as we speak? Using your own assumptions for tons per 1GW and assuming an inflated $200 per kg price, tellurium is still just 1c per Watt. Don't you understand the implication? The implication is that even if some unimaginable demand or supply shock drives tellurium prices up 20x, that will still increase First Solar's manufacturing costs by only 26c per Watt or so, so the March 2009 manufacturing cost per Watt would have increased from 93c to $1.19 per Watt, the projected 2012 costs would increase from 65c-70c per Watt to 91c-96c per Watt, and projected 2014 costs would increase from 56-63c per watt to 82c-90c per Watt (read the recent Analyst Day presentation slides). For comparison, United Solar's a-Si manufacturing costs are about $2.00 per watt ($2.30 or so, if we adjust for the 6.3% efficiency vs First Solar's 10.4%+ efficiency, which causes higher balance-of-system costs). And all the rest of the thin-film players are having hard time getting below $1.50 per Watt (or adjusted to $1.60-$1.80 for their lower conversion efficiencies of 6%-9%). Do you now understand how low cost First Solar's manufacturing process is? Do you now understand why your "tellurium supply conjecture" is misguided and irrelevant, at least as far as First Solar's production capacity and cost of manufacturing are concerned?

As a commodity "expert," you should have learned by now that reserves and production respond to pricing. Thus, "peak tellurium" and "peak oil" are obvious fallacies.

The Tellurium Supply Conjecture and the Future of First Solar

Dear Mr. Lifton: Your article is factually incorrect. In the March 2009 quarter, First Solar produced 220MWs (and shipped just 196MWs) worth of solar product, thus, their annual capacity is already over 880MWs (45% more than your concocted "608MW in 2010").

See:
ecdfan.blogspot.com/20...

First Solar uses very little Te per Watt. Using your "68 tons per 1GW," even at the inflated price of $200 per kg, results in just 1c per Watt. First Solar's manufacturing costs in the March 2009 quarter were 93c per Watt, thus they can grow with their CdTe technology quite a bit and still bankrupt every other high-cost PV producer in the process!

So why do you continue to spread misinformation about things you don't understand?