Great post. Now my brain hurts.OT:
There is no economic case for it. There just isn't. The fuel is more abundant but fuel rod fabrication costs are higher, which offsets it. The waste rods are more hazardous to handle and reprocess (due to the very thing that resists proliferation, U-232 - and its proliferation resistance can be bypassed, turning a proliferation hindrance into a proliferation benefit). You can run it as a breeder, and create less waste, but you can do the exact same thing (only more effectively) with U-238, and we generally don't do that either. Yes, every new thorium reactor design makes all sorts of "we're super economical and safe" argument, but so does every new uranium reactor, and in general, they're all BS in practice.
(These sorts of claims tend to cause nerdy but non-industry-savvy people to glob onto them as the Next Big Thing - you see the same thing as well with various types of "trendy" uranium reactors, like PBMRs)
The simple problem is the very nature of fission. Whatever method you use. Fission creates every isotope on the table lighter than your fissile material (and indirectly, some heavier ones). Most of these are exceedingly toxic, in vanishingly small quantities. But you're simultaneously creating new byproducts with every chemical property in existence in your fuel rods - solids, liquids, gases, things that readily convert between different states, things that corrode various other things (whatever you make your reactor out of, you're also generating its worst enemy), etc. On top of that you're simultaneously bombarding your reactor (solid structures and working fluids) with an intense neutron flux, which is first off changing what it's made out of, via neutron capture, and secondly altering its crystal structure, which not only can severely harm its material properties, but can also store energy inside of it which can be released suddenly (Wigner energy), depending on the material. And you can't just use whatever materials you want to make it, because you also have to take into account how they're going to affect fission inside the reactor.
The economics problem is far worse than the physics and engineering, however. The lead times on reactor construction and necessary operating lifespans are so long that if you get your demand or price forecasts at all wrong, you're totally screwed. Nuclear power has also undergone something extremely rare in industry: a negative learning curve. That is, the more you deploy the tech, the more expensive it gets. In the case of nuclear, it's due to the process of learning all of the things that you didn't forsee that start to affect your reactor with time, and new hazards or costs that you didn't expect previously. The way to overcome this is with new reactor generations, but then with each new generation, you reset your learning curve and have to start over from scratch. And then we come back to the lead-time problem - you've invested countless billions before you discover what you did wrong.
Nuclear power has always had far more support on K-Street than Wall Street. Many of the most expensive structures on Earth are nuclear reactors. The price is mind-boggling - even with government subsidies (like the US indemnifying reactor operators from catastrophic damage liability - no insurer would ever insure them without that). And it doesn't even pair well with renewable power - response times to increase or decrease generation are usually slow, and they have to run at high capacity factor to get even their already-poor economics, while renewables need to pair with generation sources that throttle up and down.
In general, the "you can't fight climate change without nuclear power" advocates' arguments are almost always "argument via incredulity". Aka, of the form "I can't imagine deploying that much renewables power!". Well, sorry, but that just means that your imagination sucks.The simple fact is, you can build more renewable power capacity - paired with peaking, storage, and HVDC for reliability - for much cheaper and faster than you can with nuclear. One's incredulity doesn't change economic reality.
... and that's all I have to say on the topic.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable
- Thread starter AudubonB
- Start date
I don’t think Moody’s is capable of TSLA upgrades, only downgrades.
Doing nothing would basically mean “buy more”
Dan Detweiler
Active Member
Not a chance. They'll just look to the next debt payment as the catalyst that will expose Tesla's cash flow issue and lead to bankwupcy.
Dan
StreetInsider - 2 hours ago: Tesla (TSLA) Demand Concerns Are Overblown, Baird Says Buy Ahead Of Q1 Delivery Release
CNBC - 1 hour ago: Here are the biggest analyst calls of the day: HP, Tesla, Best Buy, General Electric, Boeing
CNBC - 1 hour ago: Here are the biggest analyst calls of the day: HP, Tesla, Best Buy, General Electric, Boeing
Words that match Musk - Dusk, Tusk, Busk, Husk
the cool ones which ended up as memes - dusk, tusk
choose one ..tusk (well I'm from SA, elephants remind me of home)
so if Tusk still means Europe GF4, then we clearly are living in a Simulation
the cool ones which ended up as memes - dusk, tusk
choose one ..tusk (well I'm from SA, elephants remind me of home)
so if Tusk still means Europe GF4, then we clearly are living in a Simulation
I haven’t been able to keep up with all of the posts over the last few days, so apologies if these scenarios have already been discussed, but my question is what happens in each case to SP if today’s event is:
1. official launch of Model 3 leasing program, with deatails on pricing terms, start date, etc.
2. Confirmation of financing secured for China GF
3. Joint venture or some other deal with GM or MB for production of drivetrains
I ask because what I have read seems to cover an extraordinarily wide range of possibilities, with recent price action apparently anticipating something that will invigorate those currently on the sidelines (like me). No 3 above certainly would get me to pull the trigger. No 2 not so much, and No 1 would just make my head spin trying to figure out if it were based upon increased production capability (positive) or response to reduced demand (likely negative to SP, at least short term).
1. official launch of Model 3 leasing program, with deatails on pricing terms, start date, etc.
2. Confirmation of financing secured for China GF
3. Joint venture or some other deal with GM or MB for production of drivetrains
I ask because what I have read seems to cover an extraordinarily wide range of possibilities, with recent price action apparently anticipating something that will invigorate those currently on the sidelines (like me). No 3 above certainly would get me to pull the trigger. No 2 not so much, and No 1 would just make my head spin trying to figure out if it were based upon increased production capability (positive) or response to reduced demand (likely negative to SP, at least short term).
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
FYI: When I started reading to catch up on this thread shortly after Market Close, I was 16 pages behind.
Now, i'm 21 pages behind, and the Pre-market opens in just over an hour.
P.S. we're up in Frankfurt already...
Okay, I just caught up on this thread 10 min ago. I've run marathons AND gotten a full night's sleep in less time.
Tonight was just the marathon.
Pre-market 319.35 +4.61 (1.46%)
Can we open above the Upper-BB?
321.83EDIT: Nope
- Opened @ 318.92
- expect to test support at the 50-200d MA (316.xx rge)
- then move up to about 329 for the intraday high
- NOT AN ADVICE!
EDIT2:
- Intraday Low (so far) is 314.91
- tested yesterday's closing SP (314.74)
Last edited:
The filing requesting a show cause order stated that willfulness is not required. Had that filing been incorrect on its face, the judge would have declined to issue the order.
Words that match Musk - Dusk, Tusk, Busk, Husk
the cool ones which ended up as memes - dusk, tusk
choose one ..tusk (well I'm from SA, elephants remind me of home)
so if Tusk still means Europe GF4, then we clearly are living in a Simulation
According to some regex work on /usr/share/dict/words, here's all words that resemble Musk:
abelmusk bemusk brusk brusque busk cusk dusk flusk fusk husk lusk mask masque mosk mosque musk muskadel muskallonge muskallunge muskat musk-cat musk-cod musk-deer musk-duck musked muskeg muskeggy Muskego Muskegon muskegs muskellunge muskellunges musket musketade musketeer musketeers musketlike musketo musketoon musketproof musketries musketry muskets muskflower muskgrass Muskhogean muskie muskier muskies muskiest muskified muskily muskiness muskinesses muskish muskit muskits musklike muskmelon muskmelons muskogean Muskogean Muskogee Muskogees muskone muskox musk-ox muskoxen muskrat musk-rat muskrats muskroot musk-root musks musk-tree Muskwaki muskwood musk-wood musky rusk tusk
Krugerrand
Meow
Between never and forever.
According to some regex work on /usr/share/dict/words, here's all words that resemble Musk:
abelmusk bemusk brusk brusque busk cusk dusk flusk fusk husk lusk mask masque mosk mosque musk muskadel muskallonge muskallunge muskat musk-cat musk-cod musk-deer musk-duck musked muskeg muskeggy Muskego Muskegon muskegs muskellunge muskellunges musket musketade musketeer musketeers musketlike musketo musketoon musketproof musketries musketry muskets muskflower muskgrass Muskhogean muskie muskier muskies muskiest muskified muskily muskiness muskinesses muskish muskit muskits musklike muskmelon muskmelons muskogean Muskogean Muskogee Muskogees muskone muskox musk-ox muskoxen muskrat musk-rat muskrats muskroot musk-root musks musk-tree Muskwaki muskwood musk-wood musky rusk tusk
One phrase generated by A.I
What the fusk ?
Elon previously talked about GF3 stage 1 costing $2bn so when Elon mentioned on the Q4 call that stage 1 capex would only be $0.5bn to get to 3k per week I was confused and thought he may have misspoken. Recent news has made the situation clearer though and I'm starting to think the GF3 deal may be much better than we have been told so far.
- We now know Tesla targets completion of GF3 stamping, body, painting and assembly lines by September this year. This must be the $0.5bn stage 1 Elon and JL Warren Capital research are referring to. I can see how these production lines could cost $0.5bn if Tesla uses Grohmann and is extremely capital efficient, but I don't see how it is even remotely possible for Tesla to also build the entire factory and infrastructure for such a low amount.
- So how do we explain the fact that Tesla doesn't appear to be paying for construction and infrastructure costs? We know Tesla is accounting for its $141m land purchase in Shanghai as a prepaid lease rather than capex (they stated they have a 50 year lease). Could it be that the entire factory will be built and paid for by Shanghai and Tesla will rent it, potentially for free? Nio also made a deal with Shanghai for its factory; Shanghai will build Nio's factory & rent it to Nio for free for 5 years & discounted for another 5 years. Shanghai is also backing local debt to finance half of Nio's $650m equipment capex.
- How do we get from $0.5bn to the initial $2bn capex guidance from August and the $2bn loan? We now know GF3 lines for seats, powertrain and motors are targeted for March next year - from Sep-19 to Mar-20 i guess these will all be imported from California/GF1. I presume "Powertrain" includes battery modules and packs. I think next year we are also likely to see a ramp beyond 3k 3s per week. I think these are what can cost Tesla a further $1.5bn to get to its full $2bn loan.
- We have also seen reports of a $5bn total investment. Beyond 2020, Y production and further expansion could take the factory to a total $5bn investment.
Alternatively, much of the payment for stage 1 capex could be on very favourable payment terms, so most of the construction payments are not actually made until 2020. However I don't think Elon's $0.5bn capex guidance really makes sense if it's only so low because they haven't actually paid for it yet.
Last edited:
All these guessing of positive news or reveal regarding the mystic announcement tonight...
but
WHAT IF Elon finally announces that the Shorts were right all along, Tesla can't pay for the bonds tomorrow, so they are announcing bankwuptcy today ?!?
OK, OK, no need to push or shove, I'll show myself out
but
WHAT IF Elon finally announces that the Shorts were right all along, Tesla can't pay for the bonds tomorrow, so they are announcing bankwuptcy today ?!?
OK, OK, no need to push or shove, I'll show myself out
MartinAustin
Active Member
Tesla Universal Supercharger
SC V3 adapts the Supercharger network by adding CCS, so that any electric car can use it. (Billing required of course)
Last edited:
You got enough anti matter to make a waffle or something?
All these guessing of positive news or reveal regarding the mystic announcement tonight...
but
WHAT IF Elon finally announces that the Shorts were right all along, Tesla can't pay for the bonds tomorrow, so they are announcing bankwuptcy today ?!?
OK, OK, no need to push or shove, I'll show myself out
Is that cat typing from a sofa, or from Toilet Seat?
I am almost certain that today’s news will be a buy the rumor/sell the news event (Not advice). As much as I am tempted to trade on the swing in the short term, I suspect that the overall stock momentum will bounce it back up just as fast and I will miss it.
Psssh…
Their Z80 Softcard for the Apple II introduced in the late 70's was quite successful in to the 80's
Their mouse and peripheral division produced some very popular products in the 90's
Their current Surface stuff is doing pretty well.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
