Numbers like this must terrify legacy auto...
-
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
Took advantage of today's doldrums to make the annual contributions to our Roth IRA's and immediately loaded up on TSLA in the 8's. Ready for this spring to pop. Or not. I can wait.
2daMoon
Mostly Harmless
Didn't we already know this a year or so ago?
Tesla applies to build cathode factory next to Giga Texas
Tesla has applied to construct a new building next to Giga Texas that will manufacture cathodes for its electric vehicle (EV) batteries. According to a copy of the application first shared by Electrek, the project […]driveteslacanada.ca
They did some site prep, then have used that space for temporary storage while the Gigafactory was built.
Rumor was the material supply from the Carolinas dried up due to mining permit hassles for the supplier and Tesla postponed the construction.
That permit was called "Bobcat" this one is called "Cathode",
It could be a separate land area, or it occurs to me "Cathode" might be part of "Bobcat", i.e. the same chunk of land.
That does beg the question:- Who or what is "Bob"
Last edited:
If you've followed my posts, you'd know that I'm a big fan of Elon Musk, and Tesla. Tesla is by far the largest holding in my portfolio and I have a great deal of confidence in it's future. I'm a fan of Musk because he takes on the most difficult, most important and most transformational engineering/business/production challenges on the planet. He manages to put together and lead teams of incredibly skilled, capable talent and motivate and lead them to accomplish things most consider impossible. (different point-but I want to study his management methods, it's more than "first principles" to make this happen).
I have a great deal of respect for what he has accomplished with Tesla auto. He saw transportation-based CO2 emissions as a driver of climate change and identified that as a problem he felt should be addressed. Rather than demanding bans on other technologies, on punitive taxes, or on handouts for his business, he took the ultimate free-market approach. He built a superior product that people actually wanted to buy. Teslas are flat out cool cars, for their performance and technology. For greatly simplifying production and the ownership experience by eliminating so many unnecessary systems and complexity, and offering the convenience of "fueling" by plugging in at your house. Oh, and offering a vehicle with far fewer components to wear out and thereby offering a much longer-life vehicle. He also greatly reduces our dependency on foreign oil. This reduces a huge transfer of revenue from our economy-a transfer that all too often goes to countries with a terrible record on human rights and that generally don't like us very much. Oh, and helps with CO2 emissions as well. My point there is that these are cars that appeal as cars, not just to those that have climate change as their primary priority. I believe Elon Musk has done more to reduce CO2 emissions than anyone on the planet, with that approach.
Autonomous driving is an amazing technology and so incredibly revolutionary, bringing something I had given up on seeing in my lifetime. I've been watching FSD videos for the last year-the progress across releases is pretty amazing, and while we might not "be there" yet, I'm convinced that yes, it's coming. And from an engineering and production standpoint, IMO Tesla is the only company taking an approach that will put a viable, cost effective approach in the hands of individual purchasers. And while it's "not there yet" in some edge cases, from what I've seen it certainly looks viable on interstates, to the point that I believe true autonomy should be allowed on rural interstates with FSD now. Would love to kick back and take a nap or read on a cross-country trip.
Third accomplishment-SpaceX. He is doing with a private company what previously took the resources of a nation-state. And not just doing the same thing, but far more, an order of magnitude less expensively and moving far more quickly.
Robotics, solar energy production, grid level power storage, the list goes on. Perhaps equally exciting to me, he has made science and engineering interesting and exciting to a new generation. I grew up in the days of Apollo/Saturn V and the moon landings, which had a major impact in deciding to get into engineering. And Musk said what few have-that manufacturing is hard, and that that is where true breakthroughs are required in so many ways.
Now, regarding power and shifting NG-based heating and cooking to electric. We have finite power generation and transmission facilities. Well, we have finite capacities across all sorts of areas. So, where do we get the most "bang for the buck" in terms of CO2 emissions? By converting home heating from NG to electric? Or by converting personal transportation? We can add more solar power and do both? Well, first solar panel production is resource constrained and only growing so rapidly. And with renewables comes the need for grid-scale energy storage. Build more Megapacks? Sure I like that. Only thing is, that takes batteries. Batteries that are desperately needed to get EVs on the road. Build more Megapacks now and you leave that many more ICE vehicles on the road in the immediate future. Oh, and delay Cybertruck, something I don't want to see happen, both as an investor and as someone that wants one.
It's about priorities. My supposition from an emissions standpoint is that we should focus on electric vehicle production and utilize our currently limited electrical and battery supply for that purpose to get the most bang for the buck in terms of CO2 reduction (correct me if I'm wrong). Gasoline is a less efficient fuel from multiple standpoints than NG. Drilling, refining, transportation and combustion all lead to CO2 emissions, and (correct me if I am wrong) a gallon of gas results in far more CO2 (and other) emissions that the equivalent energy content of NG. And of course, NG does not have to be delivered from a foreign source.
On a related note, I question home solar vs "industrial" (large-scale, "grid level") solar. Solar panels and the related hardware, wiring, disconnects, inverters are all resource and manpower intensive to produce and install, as well as expensive. Grid level solar provides economies of scale you don't see with home solar. I believe per KwH, a Megapack is far less expensive than a Powerwall. Homes are rarely designed from the ground up to optimize solar panel placement. Size, solar incidence, potentially shaded due to trees or neighboring structures. And of course they primarily provide power, specifically backup/nighttime power, to only one home. Per dollar spent and per solar panel, I suspect that there is a lot more efficiency in grid level solar, which provides power to all consumers, not just those that can afford the cost of home solar. In order to make electricity based home heating cost competitive with NG in high-cost areas it's important to keep it as efficient and low-cost as possible, specifically to avoid burdening lower-income citizens with excessive heating costs. Which I think IS doable, as solar/storage scales, as we see economies of scale-and as a company with the innovation and focus on excellence and design for manufacturing of Tesla makes it happen. But-that will take time-where does it make sense to focus our priorities in the meantime? Oh, really looking forward to seeing what Tesla does along the lines of highly efficient home-scale heat pump systems-that will really help make electric heating competitive with NG. And with Tesla's focus on manufacturing innovation and design for manufacturing, I think they can come up with not just a more efficient heat pump system than current manufacturers, but a less expensive one as well.
Sorry for the long-winded post, needed to make my thoughts clear, which I failed to do before.
Last edited:
And the loss they will have in Q1 if RIVN does not rise a lot.
Hadn’t really thought about it, but the windfall from Rivian was so big, is it possible the correction is big enough to actually cause Ford to post a loss for Q1? That would be truly oddball.
I wonder how quickly these guys are going to divest. They can’t move too fast or it’ll tank the whole thing.
StealthP3D
Well-Known Member
Even if Ford were able to unload their entire stake in Rivian at current prices this quarter, they would still have to book a big loss since they've already booked the appreciation through December 31 as profit.
Amazon? No way. They will not post a loss because of RIVN impairment. Even with the RIVN gains backed out, AMZN still posted around $5 EPS, beating the Wall Street estimate of $3.78.
Ford on the other hand is screwed. Yes, if RIVN stays this low or goes lower, Ford will post massive losses the rest of the year.
Personally I hope RIVN goes to $20 or below just to see how AMZN and F react. AMZN will just batten down the hatches. F is dead, they should be back below $10 a share before the year is out if not lower.
While this is true, home solar and batteries delivers a lot of advantages to the household, including the ability to ride through grid outages.
Grids are sized for peak power demand, and household solar and batteries can reduce peak demand reducing the need to invest in grid upgrades.
NG has the additional problem of methane leaks which causes a lot of the short term climate change on a 1-10 year timeframe.
Domestic supply of NG is particularly problematic as there is a large gas network, that can be prone to leaks.
I recognise in cold climates with often low seasonal solar and wind replacing NG for hot water and heating might not be easy.
This is one reason why the Tesla home HVAC product might be important.
Households can probably start by trying to become more energy efficient, better house design, better insulation, led lighting, etc.
Ideally home and or grid solar would be "sized for winter", this video is relevant:-
Things are more difficult in colder climates with less sunlight in winter, difficult, but not impossible,
Amazon has 500mil shares. Times 5 =2.5bil profit. So any impairment greater than 2.5 billion would send them negative. Rivn was $103 on Dec 31 and Amazon claimed 10billion gain. It's $62 today, not sure at what point they get to a 25% loss on the 10b, but it's gotta be close.
Sudre
Active Member
I want to point out that my all electric geothermal furnace is cheaper than my gas furnace was. I also shifted my electrical burden with solar. Our electric provider is now offering plans that allow customers to get better MUCH better rates if they shift power usage away from the Duck Curve so I am now hoping Tesla gets this shortage of Powerwalls solved.And yet, 40% of our electricity is produced by natural gas and another 19% by coal. Shifting heating from NG to electric puts a further burden on our electrical generating and distribution capacity-capacity that we will need for our electric cars.
Electricity in the U.S. - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)
The major fuel/energy sources and their contribution to annual U.S. electricity generation.www.eia.gov
Not to mention that in some (most?) markets electric heating is the most expensive heat source, putting a further burden on homeowners, particularly lower-income ones.
Tesla has not started on an HVAC system so i won't go into this much as it will probably all get deleted anyway but I have to point out you are completely wrong about electric heat being more expensive. Picking the wrong furnace (of any fuel) is more expensive.
Ford‘s loss on Rivian will be just like their gains on Rivian, just paper constructs. It won’t affect cash flows or anything important until they sell. Their stock might get hammered a little, but operationally it’s no different.
The “Profits” they had to record are a bit of a joke though because if they try and cash that in, the effect it’ll have on Rivian’s share price would make Musk’s sales last November look like a walk in the park. I think they have no choice but to hang on to the shares and maybe quietly liquidate the position over a long period.
I don't think this has been mentioned, Tesla is rolling out FSD 10.10 Beta. It has a bunch of improvements as well as the removal of rolling-stops.
www.notateslaapp.com
2021.44.30.15 Official Tesla Release Notes - Software Updates
Tesla software update 2021.44.30.15 (FSD Beta 10.10) includes Full Self-Driving (Beta) Suspension, FSD Beta v10.10 Release Notes, Full Self-Driving (Beta), Driving Visualization Improvements, Cabin Camera.
www.notateslaapp.com
Those rule are intended for NEW developments, where modern all electric appliances combined with proper insulation standards massively reduces power/heating/cooling requirements. And it permanently removes the gas usage&leaks(!) from this area.
To the economics:
Wide deployment due to the required basic code requirements will heavily compress pricing differences. And especially for the sticker price, not just TCO.
And depending on energy prices you at least have the option to self source your power.
To the ecological concerns:
Properly installed heat pumps will have a COP (gain factor) > 3 and induction cook tops are about twice as effective as gas fired ones. So as long as the power in the plant is generated at around 1/3 efficiency, you should at least break-even from a CO2 standpoint (which should basically be every one but the oldest fossil plants, with combined gas going up to 60%) So your heating/cooking gas can just be used in the power plant, where it additionally gets a proper exhaust treatment.
Using gas in a few centralized locations is also more efficient from a supply perspective. Less leaking pipelines, lower leak percentage due to higher flow rates, less delivery drives to remote locations.
But now you have the opportunity to move away from fossil fuels over time, without out throwing away massive infrastructure!
Regarding feasibility:
I don't have the numbers for the US but in Germany switching all cars to EVs overnight would increase total electricity consumption by just ~20%, So we're already using insane amounts of electric power.
Additionally most EV and heating is off-peak and mostly able to load-shift. Therefore no additional expansion of the transmission structure should be required, with plants running on slightly higher load at non peak times.
Last edited:
I’m not so sure Tesla can make something that’s significantly more efficient than what’s already on the market. I replaced my natural gas heating with a geothermic heat pump 8 years ago (even before I bought my first Tesla). This kind of heat pump have a COP of 5, meaning for every kWh of electricity they deliver 5 kWh of heat. That’s probably already very close to what’s thermodynamically possible. You can even cool the house (not in my case because I didn’t want to replace my radiators) semi-passively (basically just needing energy for circulating water and glycol).
They might not be able to increase energy efficiency, but with commonality of components from car manufacturing & energy they'll reach much better scaling efficiency.
We are in the process of getting an air-source heat pump installed for heating and water.
With the expected savings from gas and more use of electricity it is expected to save us considerable amounts of money, exactly how much depends on energy costs. The calculated cost savings we have been given are based on energy prices last year, and don't include contribution from our solar panels. The recent wholesale fuel price rises have increased electricity, and especially gas prices, with more expected in the coming year.
As we have roof top solar power (4KW system), the savings should be higher for us. In the middle of winter we only get a kWh or so a day, but spring and autumn solar should provide a considerable portion of our heating needs and in spring autumn and summer much of our hot water needs as well.
Payback time without UK government subsidy is less than 20 years, with subsidies it is under 5 years. It should also increase the value of the house, both because it will have lower energy bills and because the energy rating of the house has moved to a 'B' rating, which is good for our size of property, with the current mad state of UK house prices, that value increase could possibly cover the cost of the system.
It will feel good to have got rid of another source of CO2 in our lives.
The scheme is finishing end of March, from what I understand take rate has been low, mostly new builds where the cost of installation is less. The government also require a survey from a qualified engineer to size the system, this cost is about £1000 up front even if you decide not to go ahead with the heat pump install. The way the subsidies work mean that you need about £10,000 - £15,000 to pay for the system, then you get the subsidy over 5 years. This precludes most people from considering this because they don't have that sort of money laying around.
The experience has driven home to me how difficult it will be for the UK to convert over from using gas for domestic heating. At the current rate it would be more than 300 years, even most new builds (about 90% I think) are still being fitted with gas central heating. almost no chance of the UK being net zero CO2 by 2050, or even 2100 due to domestic heating.
With the expected savings from gas and more use of electricity it is expected to save us considerable amounts of money, exactly how much depends on energy costs. The calculated cost savings we have been given are based on energy prices last year, and don't include contribution from our solar panels. The recent wholesale fuel price rises have increased electricity, and especially gas prices, with more expected in the coming year.
As we have roof top solar power (4KW system), the savings should be higher for us. In the middle of winter we only get a kWh or so a day, but spring and autumn solar should provide a considerable portion of our heating needs and in spring autumn and summer much of our hot water needs as well.
Payback time without UK government subsidy is less than 20 years, with subsidies it is under 5 years. It should also increase the value of the house, both because it will have lower energy bills and because the energy rating of the house has moved to a 'B' rating, which is good for our size of property, with the current mad state of UK house prices, that value increase could possibly cover the cost of the system.
It will feel good to have got rid of another source of CO2 in our lives.
The scheme is finishing end of March, from what I understand take rate has been low, mostly new builds where the cost of installation is less. The government also require a survey from a qualified engineer to size the system, this cost is about £1000 up front even if you decide not to go ahead with the heat pump install. The way the subsidies work mean that you need about £10,000 - £15,000 to pay for the system, then you get the subsidy over 5 years. This precludes most people from considering this because they don't have that sort of money laying around.
The experience has driven home to me how difficult it will be for the UK to convert over from using gas for domestic heating. At the current rate it would be more than 300 years, even most new builds (about 90% I think) are still being fitted with gas central heating. almost no chance of the UK being net zero CO2 by 2050, or even 2100 due to domestic heating.
I doubt there is a lot of commonality because there’s an order of magnitude difference in power requirements:
Apparently a Model 3 requires 2kW thermal power using resistive heating, and about 750W of electric power using a heat pump. This is a COP of 3, which is typical for air heat pumps.
My home (not big, certainly not by US standards, and very well insulated, certainly by US standards) requires 15kW thermal power (so almost 10x what the Model 3 heat pump provides). It uses 3kW electric power with a COP of 5, uses 3-phase power and probably doesn’t have any inverters. Tesla still has to release a 3-phase power wall.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
