(wow) Words Of Wonders Level 2433 Answers – Albert Einstein once said, “If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it enough.” So when the editor of Batteries International asked if I could provide a two-page analysis of plug-in vehicles and present my numbers in a way that any open-minded adult could follow, understand, and verify through an internet search, I jumped at the chance. The challenge article was published in their winter edition yesterday.
Since these numbers have a profound impact on the energy storage industry and the expected growth of electric car projects that have gone wrong like the pending IPO of Tesla Motors, I decided to reprint the article here and then comment on how they are. and provide observations. . A number of cautious investors.
(wow) Words Of Wonders Level 2433 Answers
While vigilante gurus loudly proclaim that electric cars will save the planet by reducing oil consumption and CO2 emissions, the numbers tell a different story; These plugins are all plugins and have no steak. The result is bogus hunting, a wild goose chase industry based on false assumptions.
Ps Plus, Ps Now Merged Service Revealed, Goes Live In June
Let me explain how I came to this conclusion. On December 31, 2009, Forbes published an opinion piece titled “Systemic Overload,” which questioned whether the battery industry is overstretching global production capacity. The third paragraph says:
“By 2015, the new plants will have the global capacity to produce 36 million kilowatt-hours of battery capacity, enough to power 15 million hybrid cars or 1.5 million fully electric cars,” says Deutsche Bank.
While the article asked if there would be takers for all these batteries, the capacity estimate made me wonder “in a world that wants to save fuel and reduce CO2 emissions, but can only produce 36 million kWh per year hour to produce a battery that is the highest and highest batteries. the best for batteries.” What is used?
I hate unanswered questions. So I put my computer down and went to work. For a few minutes, I wondered if anyone in Brussels or Washington DC had a calculator and understood elementary school math.
Today In Mississippi June 2016 4 County By American Mainstreet Publications
The math was simple, but the answers were surprising, at least to me. The sweet and simple conclusion is that the venerable Prius-class hybrid is five to six times more efficient than its plug-in cousins in reducing overall gas mileage, and in the US seven to 10 times more efficient in reducing CO2 emissions. .
In other words, plug-in cars are not planet-savers, if they are expensive, sold to gullible journalists and intellectually lazy regulators. As a protection they are unimaginable waste.
I am agnostic when it comes to the link between CO2 emissions and global warming. I don't know enough to be sure.
I'm not a little agnostic because six billion people on this planet want and take for granted a small slice of the lifestyle of our 500 million.
Spoilers Main) I've Finished The Spreadsheet I Started Two Years Ago, Listing Every Named Character In Asoiaf And Their Status By The End Of The Series. (links To Spreadsheet In Album) :
Throughout recorded history, the poor have toiled in ignorance, unaware that there is more to life than just getting by.
Thanks to information and communication technologies, dirt is out of the bag, and half of the world's poor know what is good. The biggest challenge of this century is creating a seat at the table for six billion new consumers.
Achieving this goal without dire environmental consequences and catastrophic conflict will require a comprehensive solution to shortages of water, food, energy and all the good things known to man.
Using 100 percent of the world's projected battery generation capacity to build plug-in cars would save less than five hours of oil production and CO2 emissions per year. I don't understand how any reasonable person would consider such a large scale to justify the looting of rare mineral wealth.
Gme Price Action
In my opinion, the plug-in car industry is committing its first big scam of the new millennium by using vehicle comparisons instead of fleet comparisons.
The most interesting aspect of this analysis is that battery chemistry and cost are irrelevant. If you use Li-ion, NiMH, or even lead-acid batteries instead, the numbers don't fare much better. If you cut battery costs and make really cheap plug-in cars, they don't do any better. These factors may change the cost-benefit analysis for an individual driver or vehicle, but they do not change the cost-benefit analysis for our planet. Believing that we can conserve a relatively abundant natural resource like oil by robbing it of rare minerals like aluminum, copper, lead, rare earth metals, and even lithium is the same nonsense as making batteries for plug-ins.
A major flaw in the logic of EV evangelists is their insistence that all analysis stop at the fifth step; As far as plugins go, it looks reasonable to the casual observer. In the real world, sound energy, economic and industrial policies determine the sixth comparison of fleet performance where the house of cards collapses. Over the next few years, global investment in advanced battery, plug-in vehicle and charging infrastructure plans will exceed $20 billion. A one to two percent reduction in global oil consumption by 2020 would be the best possible outcome.
My basic philosophy comes from the founder of value investing, Benjamin Graham, who noted, “In the short run, the market acts like a voting machine, but in the long run, it acts like a weighing machine.” The numbers convince me that the plug-in dream business model is doomed because the concept is fundamentally flawed; I understand the hype cycle, I know that markets can be irrational for long periods of time, and I know that irrational markets can attract opportunistic traders who are smart enough to enjoy the music's death and go home.
Watch ‘bloomberg The Open' Full Show (12/01//2022)
For those who can't resist a joke and a joke, my favorite for Best in Show awards is France's SAFT Groupe (OTC: SGPEF ). I don't write about SAFT regularly because it is not registered with the SEC, a well-known company that was the second beneficiary of the ARRA battery production subsidies announced by President Obama last August. Like other ARRA grant recipients, SAFT received a $299.2 million award to its US joint venture with Johnson Controls (JCI) and a separate award of $95.5 million to Saft America.
SAFT has diversified revenue from selling batteries to military and industrial customers. As a result, SAFT made a profit of €28.9 million on sales of €559.3 million in 2009 and had shareholders' equity of €306.8 million at the end of the year. Despite its solid track record, SAFT has a relatively modest market cap of €730.5 million, trading at 1.3 times trailing sales, 25.3 times earnings and 1.3 times net worth, plus anticipated funding from a DOE grant is equal.
For “best of home breed,” my favorite is A123 Systems (AONE), which just edged out SAFT for the top spot on the ARRA battery grant list with $249.1 million. The A123 also plans to borrow up to $233 million under the DOE Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing (ATVM) loan program.
On the back of a successful IPO last September, A123 ended 2009 with $528.2 million in equity and a clean balance sheet, but lost $85.8 million on revenue of $91 million. A123's market capitalization of $1.7 billion equates to 18.2 times trailing sales and 2.3 times DOE grants in equity and anticipated funding. While the A123 doesn't offer SAFT-class value, it's head and shoulders above other domestic lithium-ion battery developers, especially in light of its continued efforts to push its plug-in vehicle stakes into the utility market. industrial
Mcc 21 Team Averages!
Ener1 (HEV) has always struck me as a company that could go either way, but will disappoint investors who bought in at high valuations. Ener1 ranks fifth on the list of ARRA battery grants with an award of $118.5 million. He also applied for a loan under the ATVM program but did not complete his due diligence. Because the ARRA battery grant requires matching funds of 100% of the grant amount and any ATVM loan requires matching funds of 25% of the loan amount, management recently warned that the company would need $150 million in additional capital before the dust settles. .
Ener1 ended 2009 with a $3.7 million working capital deficit and $116.2 million in equity, but its balance sheet included $13.2 million in intangible assets and $51 million in goodwill. Since both values seem extremely speculative in the context of a company that lost $51 million on sales of $34.8 million in 2009, I believe potential investors will focus on Ener1's $51 million net worth. did For analytical purposes.9 million. Based on 30 years of experience with investors who want to invest in my clients, but have brass knuckles in price negotiations, my biggest concern is that Ener1 is trying to justify a lot of real net book value to big investors who know that Grants and loans cannot be closed without adequate funds.
If it succeeds in its planned IPO, I'd rank Tesla Motors two spots below A123 because it doesn't have much diversification potential.