Seeking Alpha

froggey77

froggey77
Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View froggey77's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Coupons For Tesla [View article]
    Galt
    Two months after Elon said they would not need more money They did a raise and the stock price went up.


    Q2 2012 transcript on July 25.

    "Elon Musk - Chairman, Product Architect, and CEO
    Yeah. Actually, I think that there is arguably some merit to raising incremental funding just to protect against an unforeseen event. I do want to emphasize that our cash flow projections require no funding raise at all. If we do not raise any funding, we can reach cash flow positive with decent margin. That’s not to say that there isn’t some merit in raising a little bit funding maybe, just to increase the cushion. That’s something that we’re debating internally, and something that we may do. But I do want to emphasize it’s not something we have to do. "
    etc.
    The next day J. Petersen wrote an article saying Tesla would need a raise by the end of the Q. Oct !.
    In late Sept Tesla announced a raise.
    The stock fell from 29 to 27 and went up after the deal was finished.
    The word was that they were about to breach covenants on the govt loan and the govt. forced them to do the raise. (I can't confirm or deny.)

    6 months after the raise.
    Q1 2013 Earnings Conference Call May 7, 2013

    "Elon Musk - Chairman, CEO, and Product Architect
    Sure. Well, we don't have any plans right now to raise funding. Potentially we expect to be – we were positive cash flow in Q1 and we expect to be there relatively sort of neutral on cash flow in Q2. But if it was possible, we could be optimistic about raising a round, but we have spent no time on that at all. So if we were to do a round, it would be for the reasons that you mentioned which is to ensure that if there was some unexpected supply interruption, some sort of risk event, but should potentially protect against a portion of your event that there could be some merit to doing a round."

    Price was around $76 on May 6. based on the claimed strength the stock hit $87 on May 13. On May 17 at $91 Tesla announced the raise (they were not considering) was completed. it dropped back to $87 in a few days. (It's lowest since and a bounce to $110 and further there after.)

    Interestingly it is believed Tesla was again about to fall afoul of the loan covenants and Tesla used over half the money to get out of the govt. loan for a higher priced loan. (Which makes the covenant explanation probable. IMO)

    Short term I expect it weakens the short case long term i don't think it maters. Paulo is considering using the hype to go short and get in at a higher price. Which sounded like a good idea to me.
    Apr 29, 2015. 04:36 PM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • U.S. Shale Oil: A Grand Parade Of Cost Improvements [View article]
    Kieth
    "oil & gas will spike upward however renewables will be more economical and take the market share. "

    A decade would not be long enough to make such a change. Synfuels are a niche at present. Bio gas from waste is more polluting to use than oil.


    Electric Cars May Not Be Better For The Environment In Places Where Power Comes From Coal
    http://huff.to/1xVPRYc
    WASHINGTON (AP) — People who own all-electric cars where coal generates the power may think they are helping the environment. But a new study finds their vehicles actually make the air dirtier, worsening global warming.
    Ethanol isn't so green, either.
    "It's kind of hard to beat gasoline" for public and environmental health, said study co-author Julian Marshall, an engineering professor at the University of Minnesota. "A lot of the technologies that we think of as being clean ... are not better than gasoline."
    ...

    "The study finds all-electric vehicles cause 86 percent more deaths from air pollution than do cars powered by regular gasoline. Coal produces 39 percent of the country's electricity, according to the Department of Energy.
    But if the power supply comes from natural gas, the all-electric car produces half as many air pollution health problems as gas-powered cars do. And if the power comes from wind, water or wave energy, it produces about one-quarter of the air pollution deaths.
    Hybrids and diesel engines are cleaner than gas, causing fewer air pollution deaths and spewing less heat-trapping gas.

    But ethanol isn't, with 80 percent more air pollution mortality, according to the study.
    "If we're using ethanol for environmental benefits, for air quality and climate change, we're going down the wrong path," Hill said.

    From the study by the National Academy of Sciences
    http://bit.ly/1Qxb1TM
    Life cycle air quality impacts of conventional and alternative light-duty transportation in the United States

    NG is cleaner than gas powered cars (60% of the pollution)
    Renewable sources such as wind, wave and PV are cleaner yet at 25%

    Very little oil goes into electricity.
    NG does and yes it's a growing amount and percentage.

    However a switch to EVs is not possible in under a decade.
    123K cars with a plug were sold in the US last year a bit over half were EVs the rest were hybrids with a plug. There are single model gas buggies that outsell the total plugins.
    Yes its growing, but a mass conversion is not even close. Or likely possible. Presently batteries are very material and energy intensive.
    possibly carbon batteries will be built some day but that is a someday thing.
    Apr 26, 2015. 03:12 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Oil And Solar Divergence Does Not Make Sense [View article]
    Netbluesky
    WhateverWorks, is mostly correct.
    "virtually no power plants are equipped to use oil as fuel."

    Petroleum is used to produce about 1% of the electricity on the US grid.

    The fossil fuel used for electricity generation is mostly coal.
    Second is NG
    Oil is used on some islands and refiners co-generate heat for refining and electricity is an add on benefit and sold on the grid.

    EIA
    http://1.usa.gov/TasNhy
    >>>

    What is U.S. electricity generation by energy source?

    In 2014, the United States generated about 4,093 billion kilowatthours of electricity.1 About 67% of the electricity generated was from fossil fuels (coal, natural gas, and petroleum).

    Major energy sources and percent share of total U.S. electricity generation in 2014:

    Coal = 39%
    Natural gas = 27%
    Nuclear = 19%
    Hydropower = 6%
    Other renewables = 7%
    Biomass = 1.7%
    Geothermal = 0.4%
    Solar = 0.4%
    Wind = 4.4%
    Petroleum = 1%
    Other gases < 1%
    >>>
    Apr 17, 2015. 08:13 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Ripping The Shorts' Faces Off! [View article]
    Good call Paulo.
    Apr 8, 2015. 02:24 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla Asymmetry - Part 5 [View article]
    Cecil
    "Nonsense. They just announced the shuttering of 5 coal fired plants around Beijing to be replaced with Nat Gas in parallel to upping targets for EVs."

    Well for the most part no. they are planning to use SNG (Synthetic Natural Gas) from Coal.

    http://bit.ly/1G7RFBk
    China plans to build 50 coal gasification plants in less populated northwestern parts of the country, using the gas produced to generate electricity in the more populated areas, where smog is prevalent. Two coal gasification pilot plants have been built, three more are under construction, and 16 have been approved for construction, while the rest are in various planning stages."
    ...
    "These plants are part of China’s plan to alleviate air pollution in its smoggiest cities by reducing coal use in these areas by 2017, instead using gas from coal produced miles away. According to the Chinese state-owned power companies, these plants are considered “clean energy” or “new energy.” To achieve cleaner air in the cities through gasification, net carbon dioxide emissions will increase, while water scarcity may result from a gasification process that uses a great deal of water."

    http://bit.ly/1G7RF4e
    The analysis shows when coal-based SNG is used for cooking,
    power generation, and steam production, life-cycle energies are
    20–108% higher than all competitive pathways, with a similar
    rate of increase in life-cycle CO2 emissions. The CNG car using
    domestic NG or imported LNG can reduce CO2 emissions by 5–14% compared to the conventional gasoline car. If CNG car uses
    SNG, the life-cycle CO2 emission will increase by 180–220% compared to the gasoline car and by 160–240% compared to the BEV pathway.

    "Not that Nat Gas is great but they are not as stupid as you are hoping to imply. "

    No That's not what I meant:
    "The idea that they would be sold in China to cut air pollution is ridiculous.
    I wonder when their govt. will figure it out? "

    What I meant was that unlike the US gov.t who insist on these "Green" subsidies that create pollution despite the National Academies telling they are causing more smog with BEVs. The Chinese will figure it out and cut the subsidies that are proven to be counter productive.
    Apr 2, 2015. 07:19 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla Asymmetry - Part 5 [View article]
    PVGO

    "In large cities the coal plants are 1. far away from population with 2. smoke stacks designed to inject pollution into the atmosphere at over several hundred feet . Cars? Right in the middle of everything, on every street, burning fossil fuels 24/7, exhaust at ground level. Smog. Gotta love diesel fumes, yummy.
    Yes, electric cars help the enviroment, and they definitevly help city enviroments, where millions of people live. "

    Yeah it just all goes away right?

    China's Pollution Is Creating Dangerous Smog in the U.S.
    http://bit.ly/1G7JPYf

    China second largest source of Great Lakes mercury pollution
    http://bit.ly/XebLOu

    Even as drought continues, California gets ‘second-hand smog’ from Asia, researchers say
    http://nydn.us/1G7JPYj
    California is suffering from "second-hand smog" drifting in from Asia and other places, researchers said on Tuesday, even as the state's prolonged drought has made air quality worse.
    About 10% of ozone pollution, the main ingredient in smog, in the state's San Joaquin Valley farm region comes from other countries, mostly in Asia, said Ian Faloona, an atmospheric scientist with the University of California, Davis.
    "What's happening upwind strongly affects what's happening downwind," Faloona said. If California were a human body, the area around the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco would be the mouth, "breathing in air from across the Pacific Ocean," he said.

    I'm not impressed your smokestacks are much of an answer to EVs increasing global air pollution by multiples.
    Apr 2, 2015. 05:19 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla Asymmetry - Part 5 [View article]
    Iepvk

    A new study from the National Academies of Science

    CBS/AP December 16, 2014, 10:43 AM
    Think electric cars are truly green? Not if their power comes from coal

    http://cbsn.ws/1CaIp7N

    " The key is where the source of the electricity all-electric cars. If it comes from coal, the electric cars produce 3.6 times more soot and smog deaths than those powered by gas, because of the pollution made in generating the electricity, according to the study that is published Monday by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science (PNAS). They also are greater producers of heat-trapping carbon dioxide that worsens global warming, it found.
    The study comes out as the International Energy Agency issued a report finding that global demand for coal will "continue marching higher," breaking the 9-billion-ton level by 2019. China, India and other Asian countries are expected to drive demand, the report said, while the United States and Europe will see declines. "
    .....
    " The PNAS study examines environmental costs for cars' entire life cycle, including where power comes from and the environmental effects of building batteries.
    "Unfortunately, when a wire is connected to an electric vehicle at one end and a coal-fired power plant at the other end, the environmental consequences are worse than driving a normal gasoline-powered car," said Ken Caldeira of the Carnegie Institution for Science, who wasn't part of the study but praised it. "
    ...
    <The study finds all-electric vehicles cause 86 percent more deaths from air pollution than do cars powered by regular gasoline. Coal produces 39 percent of the country's electricity, according to the Department of Energy.

    But if the power supply comes from natural gas, the all-electric car produces half as many air pollution health problems as gas-powered cars do. And if the power comes from wind, water or wave energy, it produces about one-quarter of the air pollution deaths.

    Hybrids and diesel engines are cleaner than gas, causing fewer air pollution deaths and spewing less heat-trapping gas.

    But ethanol isn't, with 80 percent more air pollution mortality, according to the study.

    "If we're using ethanol for environmental benefits, for air quality and climate change, we're going down the wrong path," Hill said. >

    The idea that they would be sold in China to cut air pollution is ridiculous.
    I wonder when their govt. will figure it out?
    Apr 1, 2015. 05:29 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Model S demand in China still a work in progress [View news story]
    Peter

    "Froggey, your August CR article was followed by another in October. Their Model S reliability score did not go down."

    In the first link I provided the 2015 report card which had the repair rate as 3 Average.

    However in 2013 they had a 5 Excellent
    That was lowered in 2014 to 3 Average
    (and 3 again in 2015.)
    So the reliability rating was lowered from 2013 to 2014 but no change from 2014 to 2015.
    Mar 28, 2015. 05:38 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Model S demand in China still a work in progress [View news story]
    Update to my above comment
    From Consumers Report in August 2014:

    http://bit.ly/1mDGW3o

    "Based on last year’s big auto-reliability survey, we gave the Tesla Model S a score of average, based on input from 637 owners of 2012 and 2013 models. By September, Consumer Reports will be analyzing this year’s reliability survey, which will also include the 2014 models. It will be interesting to see how the Model S will score after we tabulate the new data.

    Given the number of bits and pieces Tesla has replaced on our car, it might be tempting to guess that its reliability score will go down. The reality is, it might—depending on the frequency and severity of problems reported by our subscribers and whether they show that reliability is below average.

    Bear in mind that the experiences with our test cars are purely anecdotal and never factor into our reliability ratings. After all, it's a sample size of one.

    Along with the rest of the motoring world, we anxiously await the conclusions of our latest reliability analysis due this fall."

    I'm sure True Delta has a much smaller following and would consider Consumers to be a better reflection of the reliability
    Mar 27, 2015. 08:49 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Model S demand in China still a work in progress [View news story]
    Jim
    Reliability is not a test that Consumer reports gives.
    Rather that is a survey given to the owners (After the fact) and as such is not part of the ratings.
    It is a separate issue.
    http://bit.ly/17TBpon
    Consumers report

    Tesla's present REPORT CARD
    Test score: 99
    Reliability: Average (3 out of 5)
    Overall MPGe*: 84
    Price as tested: $89,650

    the first cars built had a lot of hand work and apparently had excellent quality. Rumor had it that the later cars in 2012 were not as reliable.
    in 2013 I don't know what Consumers reliability ratings was.

    True Delta had Tesla's reliability ratings as in the worst 1% for 2013.

    I'm not sure how many cars are in either survey.
    Mar 27, 2015. 08:19 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Kandi Tech reports FY14 results [View news story]
    It's not myths at present, which is where we are. Someday EVs will be cleaner to drive but at present, no. China has in the last 10 years built more coal plants than all of the US grid. These coal plants designed to last for a minimum of 40 years. In thirty years EVs might be a good idea in China. When they turn off most of the coal plants and use something cleaner; be it nukes, wind, wave etc you will have an argument. Until then you are pushing a dirty answer.
    Dreams of the future are nice but we breath the air of the present.
    Mar 23, 2015. 06:06 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Kandi Tech reports FY14 results [View news story]
    What KANDI is all about
    Your All-Electric Vehicle May Not Be So Green, Study Says
    (Assuming a coal powered grid which China is mostly coal.)
    http://nbcnews.to/1Fb27nN
    "The study finds that overall, all-electric vehicles cause 86 percent more deaths from air pollution than do cars powered by regular gasoline.
    But if natural gas produces the electricity? Half as many deaths as gasoline cars.
    Wind, water or wave energy? One-quarter.
    Hybrids and diesel engines are also cleaner than gas.
    But ethanol isn't, with 80 percent more deaths. "

    Seriously EVs in China are a disaster for the environment.
    But until the Chinese Govt. figures that out KNDI may be a good place to make money.
    Mar 20, 2015. 09:54 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Dark cloud over China auto market [View news story]
    "If, by your definitions, coal is a baseload plant,"

    I never said coal is base load by definition I said:
    Base load is the minimum amount of energy needed over a period. Anything above that is not baseload.

    " and West Virginia is mostly coal, what's providing the extra power during on-peak hours if coal can't throttle?"

    This has gotten silly.

    All extra power above the minimum is not base load. That does not mean that coal plants can't throttle I've give you an example of coal plants that go from 20% t0 80% they are not doing baseload beyond the minimum.

    >In the case of pumped hydro. Spending the 30% round trip loss would be cheaper than the 50% efficiency loss from operating the USC boilers at 48% efficiency vs. the 24% efficiency of running subcritical boilers.>

    Your 24% is way off. From the EPA
    "The average efficiency of fossil-fueled power plants in the United States is 33 percent and has remained virtually unchanged for four decades. "
    http://1.usa.gov/IGHgua

    For 4 decades the US average has been well above that figure. Long before Supercritical and Ultracritical boilers were conceived.

    "Another means by which the state's utilities match supply with demand is by pumped-storage hydroelectric units."

    This is idiotic of course if you have supply of a cheap enough source you can do pumped hydro. Nobody said you could not. That's a far cry from saying they are putting too much energy in the grid so you can use free energy to charge EVs for free on waste energy the want to get rid of. This is energy being used for storage for use later by the grid.

    Sorry this has gone on too long. If you can't see the difference between an idiotic waste and useful energy. it's clearly beyond my ability to educate you.
    I'll shut off this comment stream now. I expect others are as tired of reading your nonsense as I.
    Mar 20, 2015. 07:30 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Seadrill Partners' DCF Has Hit A Near-Term Plateau [View article]
    Thanks PP
    I didn't know where to look.

    >
    The Rig Facilities contain customary events of default, such as failure to repay principal and interest, and other events of defaults, such as:

    cross-default to other indebtedness held by both Seadrill and its subsidiaries and by the Company;
    >
    And:
    >
    "OPCO’s financing agreements contain cross-default clauses which are linked to other indebtedness of Seadrill. In the event of a default by Seadrill under one of its other credit facilities, the Company could be adversely affected by the cross-default clauses, even if Seadrill cures any such default."
    >

    So I would have to say yes.
    Mar 16, 2015. 05:16 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Seadrill Partners' DCF Has Hit A Near-Term Plateau [View article]
    I'm new to MLPs and have a basic question.

    If SDRL goes BK what happens to SDLP?
    I recently was told that SDLP would go BK also.
    Which I'd not heard before.
    Mar 16, 2015. 03:42 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
2,813 Comments
1,171 Likes