Has Brocade Gone Up Too Far Too Fast? [View article]
Puzzling how much stress you were under, since doubling down on BRCD near $4.70, in this environment, is as close to a no-brainer as they come; still congratulations on your profit. Hope you picked up some January options about that time as well...just in case. Seems that Ellison saying at one time he wasn't interested in BRCD is a pretty weak point for dismissal as regards ORCL as a current potential acquirer. With the trend towards consolidation and the new dynamics set by the DELL/HP dustup over PAR, even after a 20% rise off the lows, risk/reward for BRCD is still highly favorable. BRCD's solid customer base and continued technological innovation, imo, more than compensate for weak mngt. execution as regards Foundry integration.
Another Manic Monday: Greenspan Finally Agrees With Me [View article]
Ahh, the blissful ignorance of the clueless. Bush and the stupid Republicans were a disaster, spent like drunken WallStreet hedge fund traders, but Obama has taken a bad situation and made it 3 X worse! What you fail to understand is that the Piper has to be paid, the more money you print to try and escape the natural consequences of the a bubble deflation, just makes the eventual payday that much worse. Unfortunately, the point of no return has been reached and exceeded, far exceeded in fact. We can never repay the debt we owe, we can never possibly grow our way out of this debt. Bernanke is desperately attempting to ward of a deflationary spiral, but it will be to no avail. You likely have no idea the hardship which is racing for America...but don't worry, you will soon enough; we will see if you are still singing Obama's praises when you finally realize how much worse he has made things.
Generex: Reverse Split Not Approved [View article]
I'm not currently a shareholder either, though I did ride this puppy up in 2006 for a nice profit. As for CEO Gluskin's salary, sure does seem excessive to me, for a small biotech on the verge of delisting and in an ever more precarious financial situation. I have continued to follow GNBT, but mostly for AE37 not Oral-lyn. Lack of faith in mgt., expectation of R/S, relatively small inst. ownership numbers, and the lack of insider purchases at the recent lows have kept me safely on the sidelines. I might consider taking a new position in GNBT once the looming financial 'problem' is addressed, on excellent news,...or possibly were the sh/pr to drop to around 10 cents p/share.
Arena's Potential is Still a well-kept Secret [View instapost]
Response to John Tucker, PhD -
Of course 'best' case scenario is roughly the 10% US population you alluded to, all on Lorcaserin - however, that would be over 30 million scripts, which I think is a stretch; considering the percentage of obese Americans, maybe not though.
Obesity rate among US children is apparently 17%, and I am not certain whether Lorcaserin will be approved for use by those under 18 yrs of age. I agree that, and wisely so, the US population may have become much more cautious regarding taking drugs in general; so overall adoption may be lower, and rate of adoption may be slower than some are expecting.
Statistics seem to indicate 34% of US population is obese, but instead of roughly 110 million, lets back out say 17 million children, which leaves us around 95 million obese adults. Further, to be conservative, let us say the adult obese population in America is only 90 million - this is a figure I have run across in the past I believe.
It seems reasonably conservative, that once approved and marketed for awhile, Lorcaserin could expect to capture maybe 10% of this target population in any given year. This would be approx. 9 million prescriptions per year. I doubt Lorcaserin will be available for less than $70 per month - the author projects a monthly prescription price of approx. $90. Here alone we have between $7.5 billion and $9.7 billion in sales - Arena is to receive 31.5% of Eisai’s annual net product sales, and the purchase price will increase on a tiered basis to 36.5% on the portion of annual net product sales exceeding $750 million. So we have over $2.5 billion coming to Arena if we go with the more conservative figure of $70 per month for Lorcaserin.
Figuring roughly 25 million adult Americans with diabetes, of which approx 50% are obese (50% of men, and 70% of women), and of course under the care of a physician - one can assume the physicians treating these individuals will be especially motivated to propose Lorcaserin relatively quickly following approval - here we have a target population of over 12 million Americans for whom Lorcaserin use may become the standard of care. These people aren't just obese, but they are obese diabetics who are well aware of the serious nature of their disease and cognizant of the increased health complications their obesity entails.
Then there are the roughly 90 million Americans who aren't technically obese, but are 'just' overweight. All things considered, including the epidemic nature of obesity in America and the resultant associated medical costs involved - 15 million scripts per yr. doesn't seem unreasonable. At a conservative $70 per month, 15 million prescriptions equates to roughly $12.5 billion in sales. At the higher figure of approx. $90 per month, the yearly sales are roughly $16.5 billion. Per Eisai partnership agreement, this equates to somewhere between roughly $4.5 billion and $6 billion to Arena's bottom line. Even if these figures are 50% too optimistic, we have from $2.25 to $3 billion in sales to Arena just from U.S. sales - of course there is the potential for sales to the rest of the world yet to be considered.
Any way one looks at it, shares of Arena at $6 still represent one of the few easily recognizable potential 10-baggers out there right now. As per my earlier comment, if one just extrapolates the current share price of CELG, with a bit under $3 billion in sales, to Arena with $3 billion in sales - one could assume a share price for Arena of somewhere in the vicinity of $200.
Arena's Potential is Still a well-kept Secret [View instapost]
Outstanding article.
A post on the YHOO ARNA board has indicated that if one assumes only $ 9 billion in sales, instead of the possibly $18 billion alluded to in the article, this would be roughly $3.25 billion in revenue to Arena's bottom line. If one then considers that Celgene @ $53 p/sh, with sales of near $3 billion and over 450 million shares out, compared to Arena's 100 million - one could then roughly extrapolate a comparable sh/pr for ARNA of around $200.
Of course this isn't exactly 'apples to apples', as CELG has roughly $6.50 in cash, but it is close enough to realize how undervalued Arena shares are at $6, and what the true potential for share price appreciation, assuming Lorcaserin approval, is eventually for Arena; again this is based on just $9 billion in sales, not the $18 biillion alluded to in the article.
Assuming no major setbacks and successful Lorcaserin adoption in the marketplace, I can see shares of ARNA easily racing past $60 after a few years on the market...even exceeding $200 if Arena stays independent and Lorcaserin proves as popular as phen-phen was at one time.
Former Sequenom Executive Charged With Faking It [View article]
Derek is the perfect contrarian indicator, not to mention apparently starved for attention. Anyone remember his neg. call on DNDN just before it went from under $ to over $50?? LOL
When Derek negative on your long position is as good as good an indicator of future profits as one can get.
Is Arena’s Lorcaserin More Valuable Than Dendreon’s Provenge? [View article]
Safety appears to definately favor Lorcaserin, but my suspicion is that the total pie as regards Americans who will be willing to take a drug for weight loss is too optimistic; not to mention those who will be willing to pay $1200 per year, likely out of pocket, for one which offers such marginal efficacy. A real shame that Lorcaserin didn't demonstrate at least equal efficacy to Qnexa. Those physicians uncomfortable with phentermine, not to mention topiramate, likely won't be comfortable with Qnexa. Apparently, the vast majority of prescriptions written for weight loss currently, are for phentermine though. The seriously obese need to lose quite a bit more than 5 percent of body weight, so I wonder if there is really a large market there; the diabetic segment is interesting though.
As regards an investment, it seems a partnership for VVUS is largely priced in the share price already; not so for ARNA which continues to stagnate in the low $3 range. Institutions don't seem to be accumulating, and Arena's continued high short interest and cash reserves lend credence to the shorts apparent expectation of dilution. Arena is going to need a BP partnership for Lorcaserin, assuming approval, to bankroll an effective media campaign. It seems that BP, at least to date, is unwilling to place bets which hinge on a completely unpredictable FDA. With a 'surprise' partnership announcement, one could argue the resultant short stampede would send Arena's share price into the teens, at least briefly. Real question is how big a market is there for an apparently very safe but marginally effective weight loss drug? My guess is scenario #3 is closer to what we can expect from an approved Lorcaserin. I know Dendreon's Provenge, it is a revolutionary advancement; Lorcaserin is no Provenge.
Wouldn't a sovereign wealth fund along the lines of China or Saudi Arabia's have the muscle to indeed 'corner' the market? Apparently, a number of countries such as China have demanded physical delivery for safe keeping by themselves. Also, were such to occur, it would cause the so-called worthless paper certificates of producers to explode in value as the true situation would force the value of their in the ground reserves into the stratosphere.
Thomas Blakeslee...'open access article originally published Sept 23,2009'
The hydrogen initiative is stalled. The hydrogen fuel cell cars work fine but no good solutions have been found to the problems of where to get the hydrogen, how to deliver it and how to store it. 95%< of our hydrogen is made from natural gas, which is abundant on earth and already distributed at 1/3rd of the price of gasoline. Three recent breakthroughs have made natural gas a very interesting fuel:
1. Ceramic fuel cells that can make electricity from natural gas at 60% efficiency.
2. ANG: Adsorption stores natural gas at low (500 psi) pressure in compact tanks.
3. A glut of cheap natural gas caused by new shale drilling/extraction techniques.
The fuel cell breakthrough is particularly important because it means a car can generate its own electricity more efficiently than a massive power plant! Big plants typically average 30% efficiency, so a 60% NG fuel cell hybrid is twice as efficient as an electric vehicle charged from the grid. That means half as much fuel is consumed.
Twice as efficient as an electric car is saying a lot because electric cars are already three times more efficient than conventional cars. This is because internal combustion engines are less than 30% efficient verses 90% for electric motors. Natural gas fuel cell cars are thus about six times more efficient than today’s cars. Using 1/6th as much fuel means pollution is also 1/6th . But NG is inherently very clean. and has 30% lower carbon content and virtually no sulfur, mercury, volatiles, and Nox so pollution is way less than 1/6th.
Since NG fuel cells have a warm up time, the hybrid batteries must have enough capacity for all-electric operation until warm up is complete. After warm up, the fuel cell keeps the batteries charged and the batteries provide power for peak loads and acceleration and recapture energy on braking. A Prius uses 16.8 kW for continuous 70 mph driving on a level road. The fuel cell must be able to supply this much power for steady driving.
Natural gas is already distributed by pipeline to homes all over the US, so home refueling is possible. Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) is already used to run five million vehicles worldwide. Pump prices for CNG are about one third of the price of gasoline in spite of the expensive ($350k), 3600 psi pumps and fittings currently used for delivery. The pipeline cost of natural gas is only 1/4th of the cost of crude oil with the same energy content. If much simpler, 500 psi Adsorbed Natural Gas refueling is adopted, prices could be reduced even further.. Cost per mile for a NG fuel cell hybrid would currently be only 1/18th of present cars but could be reduced even further with low pressure ANG refueling!
ANG fuel tanks contain activated carbon “sponges” that adsorb 160 times their own volume of natural gas. They can be made from Corn cobs , which have a network of nanoscale passageways that remain after carbonization. One gram of this material has as much adsorbing surface area as a football field. When natural gas is adsorbed on a carbon surface it ceases to act like a gas. Dense storage at low pressure makes it possible to hide the much smaller tank inside the car's frame. Even if we kept the existing CNG high pressure storage, the tripled efficiency would allow fuel cylinders only 1/3rd as large as present CNG tanks.
So an NG fuel cell hybrid is a lot like a Chevy Volt with a fuel cell replacing the range extender (engine/generator) and a much smaller battery. Its battery only needs to be large enough to run the car during warm-up of the fuel cell, currently about 15 miles. The Chevy Volt's 40-mile battery is rumored to cost $5000, so the NG car's 15-mile battery would cost $3125 less. Incidentally, at these battery prices a 400-mile range pure electric car would need $50,000 worth of batteries! Clearly, small batteries with range extenders are the way to go until we have a significant battery breakthrough. Pure electrics have other problems too: A 110v, 20A household plug can only supply 2.2 kW which means that, unless you add 220v service, 10 hours of home charging will only take you 10 x 2.2 x 4 mi/kW = 88 miles.
Natural gas today is primarily a non-renewable, fossil fuel. But people have already begun selling renewable gas into the pipeline. Landfills, manure piles and sewage plants that used to release significant amounts of methane into the atmosphere are now selling it as green gas. Biomass< and garbage can also be gasified to add to the supply. The energy balance of grass biomethane production is 50% better than annual crops now used.
Though the US power grid uses significant hydro power and other renewables, CO2 emissions are still almost twice as much per kilowatt-hour as a 60% efficient NG fuel cell. In 2007 the US power grid emitted 605 grams/kWh. A NG fuel cell emits only 327 grams. At 4mi/kWh that translates to about 151 grams per mile for a grid charged car verses 82 for the NG fuel cell car.
Someday the grid could be cleaned up so that electric cars charged from it are cleaner than NG fuel cell hybrids. EIA data makes it easy to track our progress towards this goal: In 1996 we emitted 627 grams of CO2 per kWh and by 2007 this was reduced to 605 grams. That’s a 2-gram per year decrease. If we continue at that rate, it will take 139 years to equal what we can do now with a NG fuel cell. Recent years show even less progress. There was no improvement between 2006 and 2007. Plugging into the grid is, unfortunately, a bit like plugging into a lump of coal.
Infrastructure expansion also favors natural gas. Gas pipelines cost half as much to build as ugly overhead electric transmission lines of the same power capacity. Gas also has one fourth the transmission loss of electricity and much cheaper energy storage. Depleted gas fields and salt caverns are already storing 4.1 Tcf of gas in the US. At 60% efficiency this could produce 1,970 gigawatt-hours of electricity. A very cheap battery!
Fuel cell developers are in a race to commercialize suitable fuel cells. The first products using NG fuel cells are home CHP electricity generators that use their waste heat to make hot water. The fuel cells in these units produce only 2 kW but they can startup from an idle state in 5 or 6 minutes. Scaling up to 15 kW and adapting to the tough environment of a car could take years. Another company is developing a fuel cell range extender that is fueled by methanol. Methanol has only half the energy density of gasoline but, because of the high efficiency<, fuel tanks would still be smaller than current gasoline tanks.
“Price at the pump” is the one thing that seems to get voters excited. Reducing fuel cost/mile by a factor of 18 with a fuel that is 97% from North America while using corncobs should generate some excitement. The hydrogen initiative should be immediately redirected to focus instead on a fuel that is plentifully available, transportable and storable.
Appreciate your articles John, and specific response.
I noticed after the fact that the #2 excerpt I listed may have given an inaccurate impression as it ended with this phrase: "but silicon-based anodes have so far not been stable enough for practical use."
I am sure you read the whole article, but for those who didn't, I wanted to make clear the researchers apparently solved that problem.
I actually cited that section for the part re. a theoretical 10-fold capacity increase over more traditional graphite. Also, indicated further in the article is the following: "Electrical measurements of the new composite anodes in small coin cells showed they had a capacity more than five times greater than the theoretical capacity of graphite."
*Fascinating developments..thought you and your readers would find interesting. Who knows what is coming down the pike a ways or just around the corner.
Excerpt:
(1)..ScienceDaily (Mar. 14, 2010) — A new high-performance anode structure based on silicon-carbon nanocomposite materials could significantly improve the performance of lithium-ion batteries used in a wide range of applications from hybrid vehicles to portable electronics.
(2)..Existing lithium-ion batteries rely on anodes made from graphite, a form of carbon. Silicon-based anodes theoretically offer as much as a ten-fold capacity improvement over graphite, but silicon-based anodes have so far not been stable enough for practical use.
Isis Sell-Off: Investors Jumping to Conclusions [View article]
Considering ISIS cash and IP, they are getting dangerously cheap to retain their independence. Whether this is typical 'blood-in-the-water' short activity, or major holder divestiture, I hope the sh/pr continues to drop towards $8.
There is nothing wrong with one-trick ponies, providing your entry point presents an favorable risk-reward equation.
Biotech is the most hazardous niche in the market due to several factors, not the least of which is the tremendous manipulation potential often afforded by low-float, low cash, zero profit (usually) companies which populate this sector. SEC is a joke, and what few rules there are, are routinely ignored...leaving the specialty short funds free to wreak havoc with near impunity about any time they wish. It is all about extensive due dilligence, proper risk-reward analysis, proper position sizing and entry point, trading around a core or profit taking, and patience patience patience; in short, successful biotech speculation requires extreme discipline - a trait which most retail investors simply lack.
Why China Can't Dump U.S. Treasuries [View article]
The thought that 'we' need each other, that we have China by the balls becuase they can't go anywhere else with their money is absurd. But instead of argue the point, instead I will advise you to just watch what transpires in the coming months; come back near the end of 2010 and write again about how China can't dump their treasuries...what a foolish article.
Has Brocade Gone Up Too Far Too Fast? [View article]
Another Manic Monday: Greenspan Finally Agrees With Me [View article]
Generex: Reverse Split Not Approved [View article]
Arena's Potential is Still a well-kept Secret [View instapost]
Of course 'best' case scenario is roughly the 10% US population you alluded to, all on Lorcaserin - however, that would be over 30 million scripts, which I think is a stretch; considering the percentage of obese Americans, maybe not though.
Obesity rate among US children is apparently 17%, and I am not certain whether Lorcaserin will be approved for use by those under 18 yrs of age. I agree that, and wisely so, the US population may have become much more cautious regarding taking drugs in general; so overall adoption may be lower, and rate of adoption may be slower than some are expecting.
Statistics seem to indicate 34% of US population is obese, but instead of roughly 110 million, lets back out say 17 million children, which leaves us around 95 million obese adults. Further, to be conservative, let us say the adult obese population in America is only 90 million - this is a figure I have run across in the past I believe.
It seems reasonably conservative, that once approved and marketed for awhile, Lorcaserin could expect to capture maybe 10% of this target population in any given year. This would be approx. 9 million prescriptions per year. I doubt Lorcaserin will be available for less than $70 per month - the author projects a monthly prescription price of approx. $90. Here alone we have between $7.5 billion and $9.7 billion in sales - Arena is to receive 31.5% of Eisai’s annual net product sales, and the purchase price will increase on a tiered basis to 36.5% on the portion of annual net product sales exceeding $750 million. So we have over $2.5 billion coming to Arena if we go with the more conservative figure of $70 per month for Lorcaserin.
Figuring roughly 25 million adult Americans with diabetes, of which approx 50% are obese (50% of men, and 70% of women), and of course under the care of a physician - one can assume the physicians treating these individuals will be especially motivated to propose Lorcaserin relatively quickly following approval - here we have a target population of over 12 million Americans for whom Lorcaserin use may become the standard of care. These people aren't just obese, but they are obese diabetics who are well aware of the serious nature of their disease and cognizant of the increased health complications their obesity entails.
Then there are the roughly 90 million Americans who aren't technically obese, but are 'just' overweight. All things considered, including the epidemic nature of obesity in America and the resultant associated medical costs involved - 15 million scripts per yr. doesn't seem unreasonable. At a conservative $70 per month, 15 million prescriptions equates to roughly $12.5 billion in sales. At the higher figure of approx. $90 per month, the yearly sales are roughly $16.5 billion. Per Eisai partnership agreement, this equates to somewhere between roughly $4.5 billion and $6 billion to Arena's bottom line. Even if these figures are 50% too optimistic, we have from $2.25 to $3 billion in sales to Arena just from U.S. sales - of course there is the potential for sales to the rest of the world yet to be considered.
Any way one looks at it, shares of Arena at $6 still represent one of the few easily recognizable potential 10-baggers out there right now. As per my earlier comment, if one just extrapolates the current share price of CELG, with a bit under $3 billion in sales, to Arena with $3 billion in sales - one could assume a share price for Arena of somewhere in the vicinity of $200.
Arena's Potential is Still a well-kept Secret [View instapost]
A post on the YHOO ARNA board has indicated that if one assumes only $ 9 billion in sales, instead of the possibly $18 billion alluded to in the article, this would be roughly $3.25 billion in revenue to Arena's bottom line. If one then considers that Celgene @ $53 p/sh, with sales of near $3 billion and over 450 million shares out, compared to Arena's 100 million - one could then roughly extrapolate a comparable sh/pr for ARNA of around $200.
Of course this isn't exactly 'apples to apples', as CELG has roughly $6.50 in cash, but it is close enough to realize how undervalued Arena shares are at $6, and what the true potential for share price appreciation, assuming Lorcaserin approval, is eventually for Arena; again this is based on just $9 billion in sales, not the $18 biillion alluded to in the article.
Assuming no major setbacks and successful Lorcaserin adoption in the marketplace, I can see shares of ARNA easily racing past $60 after a few years on the market...even exceeding $200 if Arena stays independent and Lorcaserin proves as popular as phen-phen was at one time.
Former Sequenom Executive Charged With Faking It [View article]
When Derek negative on your long position is as good as good an indicator of future profits as one can get.
Is Arena’s Lorcaserin More Valuable Than Dendreon’s Provenge? [View article]
As regards an investment, it seems a partnership for VVUS is largely priced in the share price already; not so for ARNA which continues to stagnate in the low $3 range. Institutions don't seem to be accumulating, and Arena's continued high short interest and cash reserves lend credence to the shorts apparent expectation of dilution. Arena is going to need a BP partnership for Lorcaserin, assuming approval, to bankroll an effective media campaign. It seems that BP, at least to date, is unwilling to place bets which hinge on a completely unpredictable FDA. With a 'surprise' partnership announcement, one could argue the resultant short stampede would send Arena's share price into the teens, at least briefly. Real question is how big a market is there for an apparently very safe but marginally effective weight loss drug? My guess is scenario #3 is closer to what we can expect from an approved Lorcaserin. I know Dendreon's Provenge, it is a revolutionary advancement; Lorcaserin is no Provenge.
Cornering Gold: True or False? [View article]
Will Plug-In Vehicles Be Obsolete Before They Are Profitable? [View article]
www.evworld.com/articl...
The Remarkably Efficient Natural Gas Fuel Cell -
Thomas Blakeslee...'open access article originally published Sept 23,2009'
The hydrogen initiative is stalled. The hydrogen fuel cell cars work fine but no good solutions have been found to the problems of where to get the hydrogen, how to deliver it and how to store it. 95%< of our hydrogen is made from natural gas, which is abundant on earth and already distributed at 1/3rd of the price of gasoline. Three recent breakthroughs have made natural gas a very interesting fuel:
1. Ceramic fuel cells that can make electricity from natural gas at 60% efficiency.
2. ANG: Adsorption stores natural gas at low (500 psi) pressure in compact tanks.
3. A glut of cheap natural gas caused by new shale drilling/extraction techniques.
The fuel cell breakthrough is particularly important because it means a car can generate its own electricity more efficiently than a massive power plant! Big plants typically average 30% efficiency, so a 60% NG fuel cell hybrid is twice as efficient as an electric vehicle charged from the grid. That means half as much fuel is consumed.
Twice as efficient as an electric car is saying a lot because electric cars are already three times more efficient than conventional cars. This is because internal combustion engines are less than 30% efficient verses 90% for electric motors. Natural gas fuel cell cars are thus about six times more efficient than today’s cars. Using 1/6th as much fuel means pollution is also 1/6th . But NG is inherently very clean. and has 30% lower carbon content and virtually no sulfur, mercury, volatiles, and Nox so pollution is way less than 1/6th.
Since NG fuel cells have a warm up time, the hybrid batteries must have enough capacity for all-electric operation until warm up is complete. After warm up, the fuel cell keeps the batteries charged and the batteries provide power for peak loads and acceleration and recapture energy on braking. A Prius uses 16.8 kW for continuous 70 mph driving on a level road. The fuel cell must be able to supply this much power for steady driving.
Natural gas is already distributed by pipeline to homes all over the US, so home refueling is possible. Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) is already used to run five million vehicles worldwide. Pump prices for CNG are about one third of the price of gasoline in spite of the expensive ($350k), 3600 psi pumps and fittings currently used for delivery. The pipeline cost of natural gas is only 1/4th of the cost of crude oil with the same energy content. If much simpler, 500 psi Adsorbed Natural Gas refueling is adopted, prices could be reduced even further.. Cost per mile for a NG fuel cell hybrid would currently be only 1/18th of present cars but could be reduced even further with low pressure ANG refueling!
ANG fuel tanks contain activated carbon “sponges” that adsorb 160 times their own volume of natural gas. They can be made from Corn cobs , which have a network of nanoscale passageways that remain after carbonization. One gram of this material has as much adsorbing surface area as a football field. When natural gas is adsorbed on a carbon surface it ceases to act like a gas. Dense storage at low pressure makes it possible to hide the much smaller tank inside the car's frame. Even if we kept the existing CNG high pressure storage, the tripled efficiency would allow fuel cylinders only 1/3rd as large as present CNG tanks.
So an NG fuel cell hybrid is a lot like a Chevy Volt with a fuel cell replacing the range extender (engine/generator) and a much smaller battery. Its battery only needs to be large enough to run the car during warm-up of the fuel cell, currently about 15 miles. The Chevy Volt's 40-mile battery is rumored to cost $5000, so the NG car's 15-mile battery would cost $3125 less. Incidentally, at these battery prices a 400-mile range pure electric car would need $50,000 worth of batteries! Clearly, small batteries with range extenders are the way to go until we have a significant battery breakthrough. Pure electrics have other problems too: A 110v, 20A household plug can only supply 2.2 kW which means that, unless you add 220v service, 10 hours of home charging will only take you 10 x 2.2 x 4 mi/kW = 88 miles.
Natural gas today is primarily a non-renewable, fossil fuel. But people have already begun selling renewable gas into the pipeline. Landfills, manure piles and sewage plants that used to release significant amounts of methane into the atmosphere are now selling it as green gas. Biomass< and garbage can also be gasified to add to the supply. The energy balance of grass biomethane production is 50% better than annual crops now used.
Though the US power grid uses significant hydro power and other renewables, CO2 emissions are still almost twice as much per kilowatt-hour as a 60% efficient NG fuel cell. In 2007 the US power grid emitted 605 grams/kWh. A NG fuel cell emits only 327 grams. At 4mi/kWh that translates to about 151 grams per mile for a grid charged car verses 82 for the NG fuel cell car.
Someday the grid could be cleaned up so that electric cars charged from it are cleaner than NG fuel cell hybrids. EIA data makes it easy to track our progress towards this goal: In 1996 we emitted 627 grams of CO2 per kWh and by 2007 this was reduced to 605 grams. That’s a 2-gram per year decrease. If we continue at that rate, it will take 139 years to equal what we can do now with a NG fuel cell. Recent years show even less progress. There was no improvement between 2006 and 2007. Plugging into the grid is, unfortunately, a bit like plugging into a lump of coal.
Infrastructure expansion also favors natural gas. Gas pipelines cost half as much to build as ugly overhead electric transmission lines of the same power capacity. Gas also has one fourth the transmission loss of electricity and much cheaper energy storage. Depleted gas fields and salt caverns are already storing 4.1 Tcf of gas in the US. At 60% efficiency this could produce 1,970 gigawatt-hours of electricity. A very cheap battery!
Fuel cell developers are in a race to commercialize suitable fuel cells. The first products using NG fuel cells are home CHP electricity generators that use their waste heat to make hot water. The fuel cells in these units produce only 2 kW but they can startup from an idle state in 5 or 6 minutes. Scaling up to 15 kW and adapting to the tough environment of a car could take years. Another company is developing a fuel cell range extender that is fueled by methanol. Methanol has only half the energy density of gasoline but, because of the high efficiency<, fuel tanks would still be smaller than current gasoline tanks.
“Price at the pump” is the one thing that seems to get voters excited. Reducing fuel cost/mile by a factor of 18 with a fuel that is 97% from North America while using corncobs should generate some excitement. The hydrogen initiative should be immediately redirected to focus instead on a fuel that is plentifully available, transportable and storable.
Vehicle Electrification: Sticker Shocks, Delays and Manufacturing Capacity Forecasts [View article]
I noticed after the fact that the #2 excerpt I listed may have given an inaccurate impression as it ended with this phrase: "but silicon-based anodes have so far not been stable enough for practical use."
I am sure you read the whole article, but for those who didn't, I wanted to make clear the researchers apparently solved that problem.
I actually cited that section for the part re. a theoretical 10-fold capacity increase over more traditional graphite. Also, indicated further in the article is the following: "Electrical measurements of the new composite anodes in small coin cells showed they had a capacity more than five times greater than the theoretical capacity of graphite."
Best to you and keep up the great articles.
Vehicle Electrification: Sticker Shocks, Delays and Manufacturing Capacity Forecasts [View article]
"Battery Boost: Lithium-Ion Anode Uses Self-Assembled Nanocomposite Materials to Increase Capacity"
*Fascinating developments..thought you and your readers would find interesting. Who knows what is coming down the pike a ways or just around the corner.
Excerpt:
(1)..ScienceDaily (Mar. 14, 2010) — A new high-performance anode structure based on silicon-carbon nanocomposite materials could significantly improve the performance of lithium-ion batteries used in a wide range of applications from hybrid vehicles to portable electronics.
(2)..Existing lithium-ion batteries rely on anodes made from graphite, a form of carbon. Silicon-based anodes theoretically offer as much as a ten-fold capacity improvement over graphite, but silicon-based anodes have so far not been stable enough for practical use.
Isis Sell-Off: Investors Jumping to Conclusions [View article]
How Not to Pick Biotech Stocks [View article]
Biotech is the most hazardous niche in the market due to several factors, not the least of which is the tremendous manipulation potential often afforded by low-float, low cash, zero profit (usually) companies which populate this sector. SEC is a joke, and what few rules there are, are routinely ignored...leaving the specialty short funds free to wreak havoc with near impunity about any time they wish. It is all about extensive due dilligence, proper risk-reward analysis, proper position sizing and entry point, trading around a core or profit taking, and patience patience patience; in short, successful biotech speculation requires extreme discipline - a trait which most retail investors simply lack.
Why China Can't Dump U.S. Treasuries [View article]
But instead of argue the point, instead I will advise you to just watch what transpires in the coming months; come back near the end of 2010 and write again about how China can't dump their treasuries...what a foolish article.
GDP Rises to Highest Level Since 2003 [View article]