Where is the CRASH!

[GRG55]

Re: Where is the CRASH!

GRG,

Hybrid batteries are in the same technology line as laptop batteries.

I believe they are mostly NiMH (Nickel Metal Hydride), and starting to shift to LiI (Lithium Ion).

I can't wait to see the first hybrid erupt in flames a la Sony:

Check out:

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=72134

And of course there is the battery memory issue. I haven't looked into it, but even my assiduous management of battery use yields unusable laptop batteries in 2 years, I wonder how the hybrids will fare?

The 8 year replacement lifetime could possibly be very optimistic.

And again, the ecological footprint for these batteries is quite nasty.

These are fairly expensive battery technologies I think (at least by what it cost me to replace my Sony laptop battery after less than 3 years). The battery bank in a hybrid car must be fairly large and costly - hence the higher purchase price (that plus lower unit production volumes).

I suppose the warranty is the trick. If the batteries don't go the 8 years then Toyota or Honda pick up the tab. In fact, as an owner you probably want the battery pack to fail before 8 years...

[metalman]

Re: Where is the CRASH!

hey, mega, where are ya? where's our pal dan charts? or do they only come out to bust balls on up days. the itulip calls look spot on to me. teh boyz have been a'rampin' but strong whiff of recession is sending them a runnin'

"All 10 economic sectors are in negative territory, with energy (-2.5%) being the worst performer today."

http://www.reuters.com/article/stock...12013120071019

[c1ue]

Re: Where is the CRASH!

These are fairly expensive battery technologies I think (at least by what it cost me to replace my Sony laptop battery after less than 3 years).

GRG,

A lot of that cost is also Sony.

I had Vaio's in the past; after the 3rd hard drive failure in 2 years, I have given up that product line completely.

Thinkpads and my present Toshiba Satellite are not so ergonomic or pretty, but then again have been much more reliable.

[Jim Nickerson]

Re: Where is the CRASH!

hey, mega, where are ya? where's our pal dan charts? or do they only come out to bust balls on up days. the itulip calls look spot on to me. teh boyz have been a'rampin' but strong whiff of recession is sending them a runnin'

"All 10 economic sectors are in negative territory, with energy (-2.5%) being the worst performer today."

http://www.reuters.com/article/stock...12013120071019

If my data are correct, as of the close of Friday 10/19/07, from their recent intraday highs the DJI is off -4.95%, the SPX -4.79%, the Nasdaq -3.84%, the MID -5.14%, the RUT -6.74%, and the VGY -8.43%. The last two's highs were back around 7/13/09 and these indices did not participate in the new highs achieved by the others between 10/9 and yesterday for the the NDX.

If one is bearish, which I am, then certainly this pullback is better than continued new highs, but it is not spit in the ocean with regard to anything resembling a real correction.

[FRED]

Re: Where is the CRASH!

We promised you 1000 points off the DOW shortly after the relief rally in Dec. 2007 that took the dow over 13,400. Not even a month later it's under 12,400.

Happy now?

[jk]

Re: Where is the CRASH!

We promised you 1000 points off the DOW shortly after the relief rally in Dec. 2007 that took the dow over 13,400. Not even a month later it's under 12,400.

Happy now?

the amazing part to me is how well gold has been holding up while equities tank.

[c1ue]

Re: Where is the CRASH!

the amazing part to me is how well gold has been holding up while equities tank.

I suspect the hedgies are active in the gold arena.

It is very interesting that GOOG, AAPL, and GLD all did poorly 2 days ago when the overall market was about even.

[mcgurme]

Re: Where is the CRASH!

I'm an enthusiastic lurker here, who has a particular interest in discussions related to resource depletion, peak oil, and etc. I feel compelled to comment on the following:

One way $200 oil is possible without high levels of wage inflation is if a new auto industry can be built in the US. Can you imagine a U.S. economy eventually looking more like Germany's today? The US goes back to doing what it used to do best, not attempting to compete with Asian auto manufacturers who improve on US technology at lower wage rates, but instead inventing the next generation of automobile technology, this time with public/private investment following a new industrial policy (think METI USA). Such a transformation of the US economy will require JFK style leadership and 1960s space race mentality.

The difference between the US and Germany (and almost every other country) is that we almost solely rely on automobiles as means of transportation. In Germany, a large portion of daily transit for people is taken care of by a combination of walking, biking, and public transit.

I do not believe that simply "pimping up" our auto industry will solve the problems. The energy requirements for our current addiction to the automobile are simply too massive. The US currently consumes more energy per year than is absorbed by photosynthesis in a year (I am trying to locate the chart that showed this, but not coming up with it right now). Biofuels are not the answer.

And, the following chart from the DOE shows a different and also sobering look at how much the nuclear industry would have to be scaled up to match current petrol use (at least 5 fold):


How long does it take to build a nuclear reactor? Now imagine building out to 5 times as many as we have. Feasible in the next 10-20 years? Hardly likely. Even if we triple the mileage of personal automobiles by going the entirely electric route (e.g. plug in hybrids), thereby reducing the needed electric infrastructure build out to only about 2X what we have now, it would be an amazing accomplishment to both transform the entire fleet of USA automobiles AND build all of the necessary nuclear capacity, within a timeframe where we are not entirely crippled by the high cost of oil. For those thinking this is merely a "technological hurdle", think again. Build out of nuclear will have huge issues with "not in my back yard".

The only way we can solve this energy crisis is by authentic demand destruction, meaning consuming less energy for personal transport (among other things). This will include compaction of our cities, massive public transport, and alternatives like electric-assist bikes for short trips. Other countries are already doing these things - and still energy demand is rising!

Therefore, I don't see how the auto industry can be transformed in the way implied. In the future, automobiles are likely to be a luxury item for "special occasions", unless someone comes up with a truly revolutionary and inexpensive technology for replacing all current means of powering them. It seems increasingly unlikely that it will occur in time.

Morgan

[mcgurme]

Re: Where is the CRASH!

Your desire is very laudable, but the $8000 premium would have bought a lot of barrels of oil. Also, the acids and reactants in your batteries have gigantic ecological footprints.

Actually, this is one small bright spot. Battery technologies are rapidly improving to have less and less of an ecological footprint. Lithium Iron Phosphate batteries are the latest development, and have no toxic compounds, longer life than any other battery technology, low manufacturing costs (except the overhead for ongoing legal and patent battles), low weight, high current output, and etc. Many car manufacturers are having a serious look at this technology, and it is highly likely that it will be used in cars by around 2010-2011.

I know all of this because I use one of these batteries now for my everyday commute (on an electric-assist bike, which gets the equivalent of 500 mpg in energy quantity used, and 1,000 mpg relative to dollar costs). It replaced Nickel metal hydride batteries (which replaced lead acid batteries). It's not just a pipe dream, it's a real technology available now...

Morgan

[mcgurme]

Re: Where is the CRASH!

Finally, a discussion on iTulip I can really contribute to! Hurray.

On your hybrid, what type of battery technology does it use and what sort of service life do they have? My experience with lead-acid auto batteries is they usually have to be replaced every 3-4 years. The battery pack in a hybrid sounds like a big ticket item to replace (?) and given vehicle depreciation I am wondering if we eventually end up with a fleet of hybrid cars that are worth less (or no more) than the cost of the battery replacement. The closest analogue I can think of is the price of general aviation aircraft. The cost of an engine overhaul is substantial, so the value of used light aircraft is highly correlated to the time remaining (operating hours) before overhaul.

Here's a chart (from my own website, http://cycle9.com) showing lifetime costs for different available battery chemistries:
For more info about where the numbers came from, see here.

The bottom line is that when the the auto manufacturers switch to LiFePO4 (which they are presently researching), the lifetime of the batteries will be at least 12X more than lead acid, and even much better than the NiMH currently used in the Prius. (I owned a Prius from '02-'06, great car, but not good for offroad driving).

Morgan

[FRED]

Re: Where is the CRASH!

The Next Market Bubble is Here Already
Jan. 17, 2008 (The Seattlest)

The mass insanity of the housing bubble over the last few years has pretty fully revealed itself by now. One need only visit our good friends over at Seattle Bubble to read about the increasing devastation. On Jan. 15, Tim posted the big news: according to the Northwest Multiple Listing Service (NWMLS), King Co. finally posted negative year-over-year median closing prices on housing. According to the same report, active listings are up in the YOY comparison (51%) and pending sales are down (by 33% YOY), both records. In other words, the market is flooded, demand is down, and housing prices are falling.

more...

[mcgurme]

Re: Where is the CRASH!

GRG,

Hybrid batteries are in the same technology line as laptop batteries.

I believe they are mostly NiMH (Nickel Metal Hydride), and starting to shift to LiI (Lithium Ion).

I can't wait to see the first hybrid erupt in flames a la Sony:

No current laptop that I'm aware of uses NiMH, they're nearly all Li Ion. NiMH is too heavy.

And no car manufacturer will use LiIon batteries for the reasons you mention. Too much explosive potential.

But they WILL use Li Fe PO4, which does not have the explosion problems, at all. It is a highly safe and stable chemistry.

And compared to oil extraction or nuclear production, the ecological footprint of manufacturing these batteries is miniscule.

Morgan

[FRED]

Re: Where is the CRASH!

I'm an enthusiastic lurker here, who has a particular interest in discussions related to resource depletion, peak oil, and etc. I feel compelled to comment on the following:

The difference between the US and Germany (and almost every other country) is that we almost solely rely on automobiles as means of transportation. In Germany, a large portion of daily transit for people is taken care of by a combination of walking, biking, and public transit.

I do not believe that simply "pimping up" our auto industry will solve the problems. The energy requirements for our current addiction to the automobile are simply too massive. The US currently consumes more energy per year than is absorbed by photosynthesis in a year (I am trying to locate the chart that showed this, but not coming up with it right now). Biofuels are not the answer.

And, the following chart from the DOE shows a different and also sobering look at how much the nuclear industry would have to be scaled up to match current petrol use (at least 5 fold):


How long does it take to build a nuclear reactor? Now imagine building out to 5 times as many as we have. Feasible in the next 10-20 years? Hardly likely. Even if we triple the mileage of personal automobiles by going the entirely electric route (e.g. plug in hybrids), thereby reducing the needed electric infrastructure build out to only about 2X what we have now, it would be an amazing accomplishment to both transform the entire fleet of USA automobiles AND build all of the necessary nuclear capacity, within a timeframe where we are not entirely crippled by the high cost of oil. For those thinking this is merely a "technological hurdle", think again. Build out of nuclear will have huge issues with "not in my back yard".

The only way we can solve this energy crisis is by authentic demand destruction, meaning consuming less energy for personal transport (among other things). This will include compaction of our cities, massive public transport, and alternatives like electric-assist bikes for short trips. Other countries are already doing these things - and still energy demand is rising!

Therefore, I don't see how the auto industry can be transformed in the way implied. In the future, automobiles are likely to be a luxury item for "special occasions", unless someone comes up with a truly revolutionary and inexpensive technology for replacing all current means of powering them. It seems increasingly unlikely that it will occur in time.

Morgan

Great post and welcome.

The thesis of the Next Bubble for a radical transformation of US energy infrastructure is that managing demand destruction during a debt deflation will demand it. Else the US could wind up in a demand deficit situation like Japan's, except that a chronic demand deficit for a net debtor like the US is currency deprecatory and inflationary.

We agree that pure electrics will require massive government investment. (See What Killed the Electric Car.)

The old nuclear "not in my back yard" goes out the window in the crisis and with new, safer nukes.

Oil demand in OECD countries has been declining since 2004.

[Rajiv]

Re: Where is the CRASH!

You should also look at this European (Finnish) technology using chargeable air aluminum battery - Ab Europositron Oy

Europositron technology

Partanen Europositron technology overcomes the existing difficulty and electropositive metal ions are reduced to metal through analytic and catalytic reactions in normal temperature and with a calculated electrical current. The flow resistance of the solution and the required excess voltage are taken into account.

The creation of aluminium hydroxide is eliminated and recharging for large number of cycles is possible. The technology applies to all existing methods of battery production including spiral wound sandwich examples. Another advantage of the Partanen Technology is that there is no "memory" effect as is found with many existing versions of today's batteries.

Thus batteries of various sizes can be manufactured with the following calculated performance characteristics:

Energy Density/Volume: 2100 Wh/litre

Energy Density/Weight: 1330 Wh/kg

Cycle Life: 3000+ cycles

Minimum Working Temperature: - 40C

Maximum Working Temperature: +70C

Life: 10-30 years

Discharge Rate: Adjustable


A good example of the difference the Partanen Technology would have is EV 1 by General Motors.

The total weight of the car without batteries is 816 kg. With the batteries the weight goes to 1550 kg. The power supply consists of 26 Lead-Acid batteries of 53 Ah each, which weigh 736 kg i.e. almost half of the total weight of the car. Without recharge the EV 1 runs 145 km on highway and in city traffic about 115 km.

With a Partanen technology battery weighing 60 kg, and with a volume 40 liters it would have a capacity of 80 kWh. Installed in a 816 kg EV 1 it could run 870 km on highway and 690 km in the city traffic.

[GRG55]

Re: Where is the CRASH!

We promised you 1000 points off the DOW shortly after the relief rally in Dec. 2007 that took the dow over 13,400. Not even a month later it's under 12,400.

Happy now?

Delirious.:p