Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to johnstevens77,Bhoddhisatva,scotia,Anonymous,Cornytiv34, for Donating to support the site

Musk endeavours

The Big Picture Place
dspp
Lemon Half
Posts: 5884
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:53 am
Has thanked: 5825 times
Been thanked: 2127 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#96885

Postby dspp » November 19th, 2017, 10:43 am

The quoted shale economics for positive at $25/bbl look very iffy to me. See viewtopic.php?f=16&t=3646.

The paradigm of trans-continental door-to-door by truck looks iffy to me. It relies on the underlying assumptions that a) battery charge/discharge losses are lower than HV grid losses; b) rubber/asphalt rolling losses are less costly than iron/iron losses; c) rail cannot be run effeciently at intermodal points. It is Buffet vs Musk. I think Buffet is right on this one and I expect the last 100 - 250 miles to be road with the exact economic shipping radius by road being a locally-context-dependent matter. Longer freight transport for serious volumes/weights will more likely revert back towards rail/water, i.e. away from road rather than towards road. I am expecting trans-continental and inter-continental rail to grow.

At present I see 10-20 yr timescales as a minimum to get to the centre of the battery adoption curve (EV and fixed grid storage, i.e. RE substitution of fossils). The implication is that lighter/more prolific oil reservoirs that can reach end-of-plateau in this timescale need not (yet) be discounted in valuations. Heavier/slower reservoirs should be discounted. Why do you think Canadian tar sands are in trouble - other people have made the same timescale calc.

I am very unsure whether Musk will last the journey. In many ways I wish him well. o2000 makes extremely valid points re trading issues.

regards, dspp

tjh290633
Lemon Half
Posts: 8209
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:20 am
Has thanked: 913 times
Been thanked: 4097 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#96930

Postby tjh290633 » November 19th, 2017, 2:51 pm

I think that you are correct on the rail v.road question. Railways are looking at OHL electric with diesel power if the train continues onto unelectrified lines. Battery power could be used for "last mile" movements, and the battery recharged when next under the wires.

If Musk is going to get 500 mile range, then his truck will be hauling a lot of weight around. It is bound to affect payload. Containers make more sense, and if the battery runs down, then switch to a fully charged rig to continue the journey. I assume that the batteries have to be under the trailer to make sense.

TJH

odysseus2000
Lemon Half
Posts: 6366
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:33 pm
Has thanked: 1535 times
Been thanked: 959 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#97028

Postby odysseus2000 » November 19th, 2017, 9:50 pm

Some interesting points, to which I would like to add the following:

If your are a big mover of things in competition with other big movers of things you are most likely operating on relatively low margins, such that any reduction in your costs that you can avoid passing on will dramatically raise your bottom line.

If we compare the capital costs, maintenance and depreciation of a diesel to an electric truck we find:

Diesel Pros:
Well established technology

Diesel Cons:
Directly coupled to price of crude, only way to guarantee price is via hedging.
Politicians can change the emission rules at any moment causing changes in depreciation.
Complicated engines and transmissions that are expensive to maintain
Requires highly skilled driver.
Re-fuel times are 20 minutes-ish, usually can not be done while unloading due to fire risk.

Electric cons:
Unknown technology
Depreciation of batteries is not yet well quantified.

Electric pros:
Much simpler technology, Tesla guarantee 1 million miles as can run on 2 of four engines and minimal brake pad wear, plus various other lower costs such as wind screen replacement
Well defined vehicle location, battery status, transferable to management over internet, useful for knowing state of charge, position of vehicle for routing to mega charges and/or in case of emergency etc.
Vehicle reaches cruise speed much faster than diesel
Recharge times are 20 minutes-ish, and can be done while unloading.
No sensitivity to geo-political effects on price of oil.
Vehicles much safer with ability to stop safely if driver suffers medical emergency, not possible to jack knife.
Overall running costs at least several % less than diesel.
Potential for AI driving.

So if you are a fleet manager in direct competition with others do you stick with diesel, believing electric won’t live up to hype and risk having your lunch taken by a competitor who switches if you are wrong? Meanwhile running the risk that your existing stock of diesel tech will depreciation much more quickly than you imagined?

Trains

There have already been successful demonstrations of battery powered rail in the UK and as batteries become cheaper and better the need for diesel declines and/or over head wires & diesel declines. As with trucks a lot of the economics comes down to margins. Diesel and over head rail are both high maintenance. If you go for over head lines, there is a lot of redundancy and additional overheads if you also maintain a diesel engine and associated infra-structure, much less if you can get rid of both the diesel and the overhead lines.

If you are operating long rail networks and a country or State (in the US), decides to outlaw diesel then you are forced to convert to electric. Meanwhile if you are moving less coal and less oil your business is declining and you will likely want to reduce your overheads quickly. If you can’t do that then you face losing business to electric trucks. Currently trucks are handicapped by the limited number of drivers, if AI works and/or the training requirements for electric trucks are decreased, the rail industry will face serious door-door competition.

I am of course talking my own book here, but as far as I can tell the case for electric is overwhelming due to the new battery technology, made yet more certain by the number of car manufacturers who are phasing out petrol and diesel engines while a number of countries including the UK have set times for when the sale of such new vehicles will be prohibited.

Finally, there is the question of whether Musk has enough capital and this is regularly brought up as a reason to short the stock. The problem with this argument is that the advantages of electric are imho so large that the chance of some large partner wanting to come into Tesla with money for a stake look like a poison pill for shorters and we have already seen a small stake taken by a chinese corporation.

Regards,

PeterGray
Lemon Slice
Posts: 847
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:18 am
Has thanked: 782 times
Been thanked: 343 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#97097

Postby PeterGray » November 20th, 2017, 9:15 am

A fairly selective set of pro and cons there, Ody!

You might add that it doesn't take 20 min to fill a lorry fuel tank, and has Musk really claimed you can recharge 500 miles worth of lorry batteries in 20 mins? If so the hardware is going to have to be quite something, which raises the other major pro of HC for lorries - there is a well established network of refuelling stations for them. There is a long, and massively expensive way to go to provide anything similar for EV lorries.

In the future, as others have said, a combination of a return to more railway use and local distribution, both with an increased role for electricity seems the likely outcome. The issue you and I differ over the is the rate at which that can happen.

You also raise the issue that the cost of diesel is linked to the price of crude (just as, of course, the cost of EV is linked to the price of the raw materials used in the batteries - which is likely to increase).

However, that raises the issue that if oil use declines, and prices fall as you predict then the cost of diesel with also fall - which will tend to favour increased diesel powered transport, and slow the whole process of EV take up.

Peter

Howard
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2178
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 8:26 pm
Has thanked: 885 times
Been thanked: 1017 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#97117

Postby Howard » November 20th, 2017, 10:16 am

This may be a naive suggestion, but will it be possible to put Musk type batteries in trains?

So instead of having to put overhead power lines along the whole track, the train is charged at the beginning of the journey and every 200 miles or so it is recharged by a section of overhead power lines. And of course it is recharged during unloading.

Of course it might also be possible to put pantographs on the top of lorry convoys and have overhead wires over parts of motorways?

Would that help extend range for both type of transport?

Perhaps this approach could be used for HS2? Is it a sensible idea?

regards

Howard

woolly
Lemon Pip
Posts: 68
Joined: November 7th, 2016, 10:21 am
Has thanked: 19 times
Been thanked: 21 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#97125

Postby woolly » November 20th, 2017, 10:47 am

I agree with the other posters who think Buffett has called this one right - for hauling large tonnages over long distances rail is incomparable. Battery-powered vehicles perform worst in long-distance, steady speed scenarios, where regenerative braking and instant torque isn't used - exactly the same conditions that suit rail best. Stop-start driving in cities where pollution is a major concern is where battery power is ideal (buses!). So I would have thought in a hydrocarbon-free future a train of containers slowly recharging as they are towed across a continent, ready to disembark and drive themselves from the freight depot to their final destinations would seem to be a better use of self-piloting EV technology in the HGV sphere... Don't forget there is also a convincing case for EV trucks powered by hydrogen fuel cells for those places not served by rail (and/or possibly hydrogen trains?).

I didn't see any actual truck unveiled in the presentation either - just a convincing computer mock-up which if it was anyone but Musk would be dismissed as vapourware. I mean, I've been seeing convincing evidence of the Millennium Falcon for 40 years now, and even recent sightings of a full-size model reported in Surrey, but that doesn't mean it's actually in production!

Meanwhile China is making great strides in EVs (see http://www.ev-volumes.com/country/total ... e-volumes/) where BYD, another long-term Buffett bet, far outsells Tesla and has recently opened electric bus and truck factories in North America that are actually making products.

Musk is a great act to watch and I, too, desire his products and wish him well, but he strikes me as much more PT Barnum than Steve Jobs.

odysseus2000
Lemon Half
Posts: 6366
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:33 pm
Has thanked: 1535 times
Been thanked: 959 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#97128

Postby odysseus2000 » November 20th, 2017, 10:51 am

Peter Gray
You might add that it doesn't take 20 min to fill a lorry fuel tank, and has Musk really claimed you can recharge 500 miles worth of lorry batteries in 20 mins? If so the hardware is going to have to be quite something, which raises the other major pro of HC for lorries - there is a well established network of refuelling stations for them. There is a long, and massively expensive way to go to provide anything similar for EV lorries.

In the future, as others have said, a combination of a return to more railway use and local distribution, both with an increased role for electricity seems the likely outcome. The issue you and I differ over the is the rate at which that can happen.

You also raise the issue that the cost of diesel is linked to the price of crude (just as, of course, the cost of EV is linked to the price of the raw materials used in the batteries - which is likely to increase).

However, that raises the issue that if oil use declines, and prices fall as you predict then the cost of diesel with also fall - which will tend to favour increased diesel powered transport, and slow the whole process of EV take up.



Refueling times for lorries are quite a bit longer than most folk think and the driver has to be paid while doing the job. The procedure is that the driver must take his lorry to the pump, get out and then start pumping. Diesel fuel froths easily so it can't be put in that quickly. When you add up all the time the estimate that Musk gave of 20 minutes is not that far off imho.

Yes, the recharge time was quoted at 20 mins, which was noted was about the time taken in mandatory stops for truck drivers and while re-fueling the driver can have his break. Yes, Mega charging stations will have to be built, but with a 500 mile range many deliveries and returns can be done on a single charge. The technology of lithium batteries is evolving rapidly and is now creating a range of power battery tools that perform comparably to corded devices but are much easier to use. As an example the guy who owns several units near me put in a secure perimeter fence to insurance specifications with hardened steel fittings. One morning he came in to find that these defences had been compromised, the police saying this had been done with a cordless grinder. The loss went into many thousands and would have been impossible without the thieves being able to quickly cut their way in.

My personal experience with lithium ion batteries has so far been mixed. The more expensive systems I have in Apple products have worked flawlessly for years, but many of the drills and such I own have failed due to one or more of the cells breaking. Whether this is due to bad batteries or bad chargers I don't know, but so far the drills I have have been more reliable with nickel metal hydride technology, but lithium ion battery tools when good dramatically out perform them. Thankfully it is not too hard to replace the lithium ion batteries nor create ones own charger if the supplied charger is destroyed by a failing lithium cell. Looking at more recent power tools it seems that many are now lasting much longer, so perhaps lithium ion battery technology is maturing.

Personally I think railways are yesterdays technology, being too expensive and too constricted in their routes and requiring too many changes of loads, but we shall see.

The cost of diesel is linked to the price of crude but also to the politicians mind. I expect diesel use to drop rapidly because of all the taxes that politicians will put on it as well as outright bans on diesel engined vehicles in many cities. London has already begun this with cars and I see it as certain that they will soon begin to target lorries. By contrast lithium batteries are highly recyclable such that the price of lithium is likely to fall.

Regards,

odysseus2000
Lemon Half
Posts: 6366
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:33 pm
Has thanked: 1535 times
Been thanked: 959 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#97131

Postby odysseus2000 » November 20th, 2017, 10:58 am

Howard
This may be a naive suggestion, but will it be possible to put Musk type batteries in trains?

So instead of having to put overhead power lines along the whole track, the train is charged at the beginning of the journey and every 200 miles or so it is recharged by a section of overhead power lines. And of course it is recharged during unloading.

Of course it might also be possible to put pantographs on the top of lorry convoys and have overhead wires over parts of motorways?

Would that help extend range for both type of transport?

Perhaps this approach could be used for HS2? Is it a sensible idea?



There have been several practical examples of lithium ion trains in the UK and elsewhere.

Currently overhead lines are favoured, but much of the network was built and planned before the improvements in battery technology. There is a new overhead railway line system going in near me, the cost of which must be high given how many folk are involved. Personally I think overhead lines are obsolete and won't last for long. I doubt a private company not supported by tax payers would be going ahead with over head lines now, but....

Regards,

odysseus2000
Lemon Half
Posts: 6366
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:33 pm
Has thanked: 1535 times
Been thanked: 959 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#97135

Postby odysseus2000 » November 20th, 2017, 11:08 am

wooly
I agree with the other posters who think Buffett has called this one right - for hauling large tonnages over long distances rail is incomparable. Battery-powered vehicles perform worst in long-distance, steady speed scenarios, where regenerative braking and instant torque isn't used - exactly the same conditions that suit rail best. Stop-start driving in cities where pollution is a major concern is where battery power is ideal (buses!). So I would have thought in a hydrocarbon-free future a train of containers slowly recharging as they are towed across a continent, ready to disembark and drive themselves from the freight depot to their final destinations would seem to be a better use of self-piloting EV technology in the HGV sphere... Don't forget there is also a convincing case for EV trucks powered by hydrogen fuel cells for those places not served by rail (and/or possibly hydrogen trains?).


It will all come down to cost.

Is a rail with all its fixed overheads lower cost than road transport?

One can argue that it is and for now that argument is right, but I am far from clear that this will stay this way.

Yes, Musk may be promotor with out substance and yes the Chinese have really taken to electric propulsion and are making huge advances.

There are a lot of risks in all of this which makes investment decisions difficult, but as I currently see things the folk who will come out worst are the guys believing that nothing will change and that existing technology will prevail for generations.

What ever happens it is an exciting time for folk interested in transportation and although there are huge risks making this sector not one for widows and orphans there are some large opportunities too, both to the upside and the downside.

Regards,

woolly
Lemon Pip
Posts: 68
Joined: November 7th, 2016, 10:21 am
Has thanked: 19 times
Been thanked: 21 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#98055

Postby woolly » November 23rd, 2017, 9:37 am

It will all come down to cost.
Hi Ody - Absolutely, but also: who pays?
Car owners and taxpayers subsidise road haulage (someone estimated a large truck does 250000 more damage to roads than a car but of course pays nowhere near that multiple in road tax) - I know, rail is also subsidised but it's a complex equation. More traffic on rails = less overloaded road system? The key thing is road and rail aren't mutually exclusive and both will be revolutionised by coming changes.

Electrification is a huge expense, but then so is electrifying a vast network of recharging stations, and batteries remain the costliest part of an EV.

And self-driving - surely trains are ideal for that too? It would technically be possible right now to make the entire rail network driverless, but there is understandably entrenched resistance from all those whose livelihoods depend on a manned network. I doubt the road industry is just going to roll over either - look at the problems Uber is having in London. Why Musk doesn't turn his prodigious energy to improving the existing rail industry rather than the potty Hyperloop is I suspect down to his pioneer-type psychology more than anything.

As an aside: if the oil industry is going to be a shadow of its former self, where does the bitumen for the roads come from?

With all exciting techy ideas there are too many unknowns for long-term bets - firms who actually ship products would seem to be the sensible option (so until Tesla's production rate and build quality problems are solved and TSLA's p/e falls to a rational level I'll stick with AAPL...)

dspp
Lemon Half
Posts: 5884
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:53 am
Has thanked: 5825 times
Been thanked: 2127 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#98109

Postby dspp » November 23rd, 2017, 11:14 am

woolly wrote:As an aside: if the oil industry is going to be a shadow of its former self, where does the bitumen for the roads come from?


If you dig back into the TOD archives you will find this and many other similar issues discussed.

http://www.theoildrum.com/

enjoy :)

dspp

odysseus2000
Lemon Half
Posts: 6366
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:33 pm
Has thanked: 1535 times
Been thanked: 959 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#98335

Postby odysseus2000 » November 23rd, 2017, 9:45 pm

woolly

Hi Ody - Absolutely, but also: who pays?
Car owners and taxpayers subsidise road haulage (someone estimated a large truck does 250000 more damage to roads than a car but of course pays nowhere near that multiple in road tax) - I know, rail is also subsidised but it's a complex equation. More traffic on rails = less overloaded road system? The key thing is road and rail aren't mutually exclusive and both will be revolutionised by coming changes.

Electrification is a huge expense, but then so is electrifying a vast network of recharging stations, and batteries remain the costliest part of an EV.


It will all come down to cost.

If road can be made cheaper than rail, then the railways will be abandoned, if not railways will continue.

There are several issues with rail that i are covered, but another is management. THE costs in terms of capital expenditure to build an electric over head wire system is huge as is the ongoing maintenance. Batteries by comparison are much cheaper & more flexible, but rail management, even after battery trains have been demonstrated is pushing on with over head lines. 50 & more years ago it was a great technology as were trams, but it is now obsolete but the railways are not adapting. This kind of behaviour is what killed Kodak, nearly killed IBM, destroyed mass market U.K. car making... & many other industries that failed to recognise secular change & tried to carry on as if nothing had changed.

The ideas of putting railways in tunnels like the hyperloop is not new, but it is only now becoming technically possible. If the railways want to stay competitive they need to develop advanced rail networks.

Yes, as I have said many times, Musk is high risk & not suitable for most investors. If the model 3 fails Tesla is very expensive, if it succeeds, Tesla is very cheap. That kind of divergence is only suited to folk who know how to deal with it, most investors/traders won't. But to ignore completely puts any market participant in a situation where he or she could be blindsided by some new development that suddenly strikes at the economics of what currently seam safe blue chips. So e.g. If Walmart do partner with Tesla, and get their shipping costs well down it wil give them a substantial advantage over other supermarkets who don't. In any potential industrial revolution there will be losers that before it seemed unsinkable.

Regards,

TUK020
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2039
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 7:41 am
Has thanked: 762 times
Been thanked: 1175 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#98704

Postby TUK020 » November 25th, 2017, 9:51 am

Interesting. Is there a inherent conflict in what you are saying, O2000?

On the one hand you are saying it will be driven by cost alone
odysseus2000 wrote:It will all come down to cost.
If road can be made cheaper than rail, then the railways will be abandoned, if not railways will continue.


Then you immediately go on to say that the industry is not adapting
odysseus2000 wrote: 50 & more years ago it was a great technology as were trams, but it is now obsolete but the railways are not adapting.


I read somewhere that there had been a consultants report indicating that ripping up a commuter rail line and replacing it with dedicated bus lanes would result in 7-8 x the peak traffic capacity. Can't remember the source.

There is an interesting analogy with the transition of telephony infrastructure from circuit switched to packet switched as the traffic migrated from predominantly voice to data.

While there may be clear cost advantages for a newer technology, sometimes the complexity, sunk cost, and regulatory environment (and don't mention industrial relations) mean that it will take decades (centuries?) for this to play out in reality. By which time the whole thing might be overtaken by some disruptive technology (flying drones anyone?)

tuk020

tramrider
2 Lemon pips
Posts: 128
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 5:09 pm
Has thanked: 151 times
Been thanked: 45 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#98735

Postby tramrider » November 25th, 2017, 11:39 am

odysseus2000 wrote:50 & more years ago it was a great technology as were trams, but it is now obsolete but the railways are not adapting.


Trams are not obsolete. In the right sized city, they are a better answer than metros and buses.

You might be interested in the case of Nanjing in China where a new tram system has been built with battery powered trams that recharge quickly at each stop, with a short section of overhead wire, while the passengers are loading and unloading. This meets many of your recommendations now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trams_in_Nanjing

There is a picture here showing the overhead electric rail attached to the tram stop.

http://primove.bombardier.com/fileadmin/_processed_/5/2/csm_6458_L_496276d498.jpg

Tramrider :-)

TUK020
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2039
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 7:41 am
Has thanked: 762 times
Been thanked: 1175 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#98765

Postby TUK020 » November 25th, 2017, 1:35 pm

tramrider wrote:
There is a picture here showing the overhead electric rail attached to the tram stop.

http://primove.bombardier.com/fileadmin/_processed_/5/2/csm_6458_L_496276d498.jpg

Tramrider :-)

A bit OT. Up until a couple of years ago, I use to travel extensively on business, and see many sights like this. On my return to Heathrow, I often used to stand in the immigration queue, or waiting for luggage, contemplating the question of how we define what classifies as a first world city.

woolly
Lemon Pip
Posts: 68
Joined: November 7th, 2016, 10:21 am
Has thanked: 19 times
Been thanked: 21 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#100423

Postby woolly » December 1st, 2017, 10:25 am

Exciting times - two recent news items that make me realise that battery tech is getting better fast and that widespread clean, non-polluting transport may indeed happen in our lifetimes:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12 ... alia-elon/

Look at the tiny footprint and absolute simplicity of the plant - maintenance would be almost a non-issue. And I'd imagine such arrays could come online faster than Dinorwic or the fastest gas turbine to meet peak demand.

The other article deals with battery-powered planes - I would never have imagined this was possible but there you go:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... plane-2020

If fossil fuels are to be replaced with renewables the total global storage needs would have to be about on a par with global energy consumption - is this feasible or would the total battery volume be something like the size of the moon? Battery tech is obviously key, but to connect all these batteries and provide massive current where it's needed (heavy transport recharging stations) there will still be a need for a vastly upgraded national/international grid whose maintenance / installation cost would dwarf the cost of electrifying railways - anyone know any good companies in this arena worth looking at?

Enjoying the oil drum - thanks...

dspp
Lemon Half
Posts: 5884
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:53 am
Has thanked: 5825 times
Been thanked: 2127 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#100442

Postby dspp » December 1st, 2017, 11:13 am

woolly wrote:If fossil fuels are to be replaced with renewables the total global storage needs would have to be about on a par with global energy consumption - is this feasible or would the total battery volume be something like the size of the moon? Battery tech is obviously key, but to connect all these batteries and provide massive current where it's needed (heavy transport recharging stations) there will still be a need for a vastly upgraded national/international grid whose maintenance / installation cost would dwarf the cost of electrifying railways - anyone know any good companies in this arena worth looking at?

Enjoying the oil drum - thanks...


re TOD: No worries, my pleasure.

re storage: I don't know where you get my numbers from. My modelling, and my back-of-envelope calculations both come out into the same area, which is that you need about one week of storage for a (typical) western economy (using UK as proxy). In turn that yields the following:

To understand the scale of the construction challenge if there are assumed [from the calculations I allude to above] to be 100 storage sites on the HV grid [of the UK] with each site containing 10GWh of storage then each site will need approximately ten buildings of five-storeys each with a footprint of 10,000m2 (i.e. 1ha), with each building containing 200,000 storage units of approximately 5kWh each at a density of approximately 20kWh per m2 of floor space. Assuming a 50% allowance of unbuilt land surrounding each building for safety reasons then storage sites will be approximately 20 ha per site. To put that into perspective a typical HV substation such as feeds the Bournemouth & Poole conurbation of is approximately 4 ha in area and supports approximately 400,000 people. [Basically what I am describing is about 100 storage sites at each of the main grid nodes, and most of those are located adjacent to existing power stations which have sufficient land in the vicinity. This in turn works out to be about the output from one Tesla/Panasonic gigafactory dedicated to the UK over a 14-year build-out period. Through to about 80% renewables penetration the HV grid build-out is fairly modest if done this way, and directionally going this route is about cost-neutral to the 80% point was the other interesting conclusion].

Regarding companies/funds/etc that make good investment propositions to play this area without taking on excessive risk, and which are accessible to a PI, I have really struggled. And I am in the energy sector so I am as well placed as anyone. The main issue I struggle with is how to manage the risks.

regards, dspp

odysseus2000
Lemon Half
Posts: 6366
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:33 pm
Has thanked: 1535 times
Been thanked: 959 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#100560

Postby odysseus2000 » December 1st, 2017, 3:10 pm

FRed Bloggs

Risks? Simples to sort that one out! Remember in the gold rush, the picks and shovels guys made the most money? Buy into cable manufacturers and copper producers. There can be no growth in electrical energy generation and distribution without those guys. The power can be generated any way you like eco friendly or not. Fact is, electricity distribution needs cables and copper.***

*** Edited to add, cross country cables in grid distribution are aluminium, I understand.


Yes, this is a well known & oft quoted investment tactic.

But a few years back I tried this approach with Apple. Sure the odd supplier had done okay, but most of them are quasi commodity suppliers who operate at low margins. From my research the best way to prosper with Apple was to buy Apple equity.

The trouble now though is that we don't know who will be analogous to Apple or if there will be one dominant player & if that dominant player is Tesla it has already run a long long way & trades on a high multiple. However, if the model 3 sells in volume it is very cheap, if the model 3 fails it is very expensive & one can add similar comments for the semi, solar roofing, battery storage etc.

For an aggressive investor/ trader the way to manage risk is by price action & even then one risks selling out & not re-entering if the equity runs hard.

In revolutions like this it is hard to avoid risk. If your in you are at the mercy of some bad unexpected event, if you are out you are at the mercy of some very favourable events causing you to miss big moves.

It will be a doddle in hindsight, it always is, but from where we are now it is hard.

Regards,

ReformedCharacter
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3120
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:12 am
Has thanked: 3591 times
Been thanked: 1509 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#100787

Postby ReformedCharacter » December 2nd, 2017, 12:49 pm

ReformedCharacter wrote:I've been waiting with anticipation to see the first Falcon Heavy launch. That has 27 Falcon engines and reminds me of the joke by Werner von Braun who described an early first stage multi-engine rocket test as 'Cluster's Last Stand'.

RC


'SpaceX founder and chief executive Elon Musk tweeted Friday that his red Tesla Roadster will head for deep space on the maiden flight of the company’s Falcon Heavy rocket as soon as next month, and do it to the tune of David Bowie’s “Space Oddity.”'

https://spaceflightnow.com/2017/12/02/s ... ft-rocket/

I hope 'Great Balls of Fire' doesn't prove to be a more appropriate tune...

RC

odysseus2000
Lemon Half
Posts: 6366
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:33 pm
Has thanked: 1535 times
Been thanked: 959 times

Re: Musk endeavours

#104376

Postby odysseus2000 » December 15th, 2017, 1:55 pm

Canadians offer huge incentive to buy electric trucks. HAT tip to Smartertrader on twitter for link:

https://electrek.co/2017/12/14/tesla-se ... ssion=true

Regards,


Return to “Macro and Global Topics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests