.

[Coffeeguyzz + 454]

Mr. Warnick, 

Yes, that article on Wyoming wind is a good one for discussion, but the details that have been omitted are every bit as important - if not more so - than the info presented in that sophisticated fluff piece sympathetic to the whirleys.

I refer you to the very last sentence in the article to shed light on the author's mind set.

 

That article quite relevantly touches upon the recent Texas experience, although the differences are informative as well.

 

The vast amount of that wind-driven electricity, Mr. Warnick, is destined for 'Green consumers' in other states, notably California.

Upthread, I have made reference to 'out of market' influences that greatly bolster the Wind industry.

States all around the country are mandating their utilities to purchase ever-increasing amounts of electricity from Renewable (sic) sources.

That is, forcing consumers, via their government regulated utilities - to enter into PPAs (Power Purchasing Agreements) for X amount of dollars/Megawatthour, for Y amount of years.

This is 100% socialistic (fascist?) practice when government backed companies are having customers funneled to them.

All the while, the $23/Megawatthour Tax Credits keep pouring in. (This is precisely why Warren Buffet is the nation's biggest wind producer, as well as a large owner of Transmission lines, along with buying up local utilities. This is classic vertical integration a la J. D. Rockefeller only using the extreme naivete of the American people by which he may further enrich his bottom line).

 

At the very least, the Cowboy State's politicians ought not to roll over and accept actions like Oakland's preventing upgrades at its port facilities so Wyoming cannot ship their coal to waiting customers in Asia.

 

While attention is regularly put upon those ebil hydrocarbon pipelines, barely one word is published on the bitter fights farmers have been waging to prevent ùnwanted overhead power lines to cross over their land.

Just tough shit for them when we gots a Planet To Save.

 

As that sophisticated propagandist who wrote that Wired article claims, the Planet is Doomed, Doomed, I'm tellin' ya, unless we continue to hurtle backwards into Medieval conditions while our global competitors continue to build 100s of massive  new coal plants ... and laugh at us all the way.

 

Maybe we deserve to go back to a subsistence existence as we - collectively - are losing any shred of self-protecting common sense.

[Gerry Maddoux + 3,627]

Great article that Mr. Warnick posted and equally important commentary that you added, Coffeeguyzz. As usual, you offered your commonsense, workaday knowledge to a complex problem. 

As prelude, I make my income from oil & gas. Years ago I sold transmission right-of-way to a large wind farm. I've regretted it since, mainly because it runs against my grain--it is one ugly son-of-a-buck. 

But to be the devil's advocate, let's just muse for a moment that all the wind greenies are right: the only way to save the planet is by subsidizing/incentivizing/handing out free money to the wind energy billionaires until every wind corridor in America is dotted with windmills. In the process, Wyoming, which is as the article states already producing 15X the energy it needs, becomes the "Electricity State," rather than the Cowboy State. Electric lines are stretched along the Union Pacific ROW all the way from the Laramie Gangplank to Sacramento--at the Gangplank there's room only for I-80, the railroad, and electric lines. So all throughout the wind corridor of the central portion of the United States are constructed additional power lines threading their way from the hundreds of thousands of wind turbines to all points east and west. I mean, it's a maze coming out of a destroyed landscape, an awful distortion of some once-beautiful landscape.  

But what if they're right? What if this horrible disfigurement of America results in so much green energy that it powers the whole country? In the process, of course, it shuts down the shale basins, the source of America's voluminous natural gas, but what if this is a good thing, forcing countries to which America exports LNG to actually erect their own wind farms? What if in the areas that are more suitable, solar farms are erected instead? Say massive solar farms along with wind farms in the Sahara, or the Negev? The world might look funny from up above but what if all those greenhouse gases plummet and California cools off and the wildfires stop and the air turns clear and all the asthma goes away and people are happy and the omni-mood skyrockets because everyone had a part in saving the planet?

If you pour enough money into almost any endeavor, no matter how outrageous, it picks up enough momentum to change the world. So what if in ten years we're living in a world full of wind machines and solar farms, quadrupling the electricity we use now in the demand of EV's to be charged, the all-electric homes to be cooled and heated, and also workplaces? It's dystopian, sure, but in America, at least, we're importing what oil and gas we absolutely have to have in order to produce a few plastics and the weather hasn't changed because of all the wind farms. After all, the Sooners are dead already, the Boomers are going soon, and why don't we just assume that the greenies are right? On this forum, at least, they seem so damn confident! To me that's annoying, but to opportunists there's money blowing in from the southwest.

I mean, what if? That's what Mr. Biden and Mr. Buffett and Mr. Anschutz and Mr. Musk are banking on. It's a global experiment that has been so effectively inculcated into so many receptive minds that no one but old people with a selfish interest in oil & gas doubt it. It has become the Universal Idea, the Grand Plan, the Utopia. Disenfranchised oil & gas people are signing on by the hundreds. I don't personally think it will work, but even I have to ask the question. What if?

[turbguy + 1,391]

12 hours ago, Dan Warnick said:

It would appear that WY does have wind turbines:

Wyoming Confronts Its Wind-Powered Destiny

Not as many as other parts of the States, perhaps, but they do have them.  That's a good article on many of the details necessary for a good discussion.

 

This 504 MW (nameplate) project is planned, about 8 miles south of my home.  Right by an existing transmission line.  There are two coal units in Craig, CO being retired, so the line will have the capacity. And the main line of the UPRR is right there, too.

https://www.railtiewind.com/

Needless to say, there's a lot of local objection to the project.

I would much rather have preferred to have a mailing address of Tie Siding, WY, than Laramie.

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,537]

5 hours ago, Gerry Maddoux said:

Great article that Mr. Warnick posted and equally important commentary that you added, Coffeeguyzz. As usual, you offered your commonsense, workaday knowledge to a complex problem. 

As prelude, I make my income from oil & gas. Years ago I sold transmission right-of-way to a large wind farm. I've regretted it since, mainly because it runs against my grain--it is one ugly son-of-a-buck. 

But to be the devil's advocate, let's just muse for a moment that all the wind greenies are right: the only way to save the planet is by subsidizing/incentivizing/handing out free money to the wind energy billionaires until every wind corridor in America is dotted with windmills. In the process, Wyoming, which is as the article states already producing 15X the energy it needs, becomes the "Electricity State," rather than the Cowboy State. Electric lines are stretched along the Union Pacific ROW all the way from the Laramie Gangplank to Sacramento--at the Gangplank there's room only for I-80, the railroad, and electric lines. So all throughout the wind corridor of the central portion of the United States are constructed additional power lines threading their way from the hundreds of thousands of wind turbines to all points east and west. I mean, it's a maze coming out of a destroyed landscape, an awful distortion of some once-beautiful landscape.  

But what if they're right? What if this horrible disfigurement of America results in so much green energy that it powers the whole country? In the process, of course, it shuts down the shale basins, the source of America's voluminous natural gas, but what if this is a good thing, forcing countries to which America exports LNG to actually erect their own wind farms? What if in the areas that are more suitable, solar farms are erected instead? Say massive solar farms along with wind farms in the Sahara, or the Negev? The world might look funny from up above but what if all those greenhouse gases plummet and California cools off and the wildfires stop and the air turns clear and all the asthma goes away and people are happy and the omni-mood skyrockets because everyone had a part in saving the planet?

If you pour enough money into almost any endeavor, no matter how outrageous, it picks up enough momentum to change the world. So what if in ten years we're living in a world full of wind machines and solar farms, quadrupling the electricity we use now in the demand of EV's to be charged, the all-electric homes to be cooled and heated, and also workplaces? It's dystopian, sure, but in America, at least, we're importing what oil and gas we absolutely have to have in order to produce a few plastics and the weather hasn't changed because of all the wind farms. After all, the Sooners are dead already, the Boomers are going soon, and why don't we just assume that the greenies are right? On this forum, at least, they seem so damn confident! To me that's annoying, but to opportunists there's money blowing in from the southwest.

I mean, what if? That's what Mr. Biden and Mr. Buffett and Mr. Anschutz and Mr. Musk are banking on. It's a global experiment that has been so effectively inculcated into so many receptive minds that no one but old people with a selfish interest in oil & gas doubt it. It has become the Universal Idea, the Grand Plan, the Utopia. Disenfranchised oil & gas people are signing on by the hundreds. I don't personally think it will work, but even I have to ask the question. What if?

What if? That is a very interesting question. Mr Maddoux we only need to look back to where this all started. I only bring this up due to the fact last night I watched a old movie named Rain Man,a very old movie with Cruise and Hoffman.

One of the opening scenes was Wind farm disgusting to see, a pariah on the landscape...That was 1988, and yes that is how long this tech has been on the move. After 25 plus years where are we today, 4 trillion dollars spent perhaps far more, Texas faces a massive power outage,California is facing rolling Brown outs and this Green Energy Business CONSORTIUM has the public beginning to believe massive power outages are a needed way of life. The absurdity is mind numbing.

One has to ask themselves where would the US be today if we had chosen to invest 4 trillion into fission or fusion tech, in a by far different place that I can assure you.

The auto mfgs to have spent billions and billions attempting to create a EV that the public will accept. To date all those resources have been wasted, Toyota th re world leader in EV tech since 1992 has little intrest in the field. They know first hand it is unsustainable.

Telsa is merely a fad,speed bump that would not exist if not for carbon credits, and federal tax credits.

Biden once again has taken the US down the path to nowhere, a endless black hole for sums of money that would stagger the mind...

Now I ask you, what fool would invest into a bridge going nowhere after 30 yrs...

Odd I do not feel any better after that, yet it needs to be said. They say it is not civilized to put someone on the spot for there actions, I do believe it is time for that childish notion to fade into history.. Before this country fades into history.

 

 

 

Edited March 16, 2021 by Eyes Wide Open

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

15 minutes ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

What if? That is a very interesting question. Mr Maddoux we only need to look back to where this all started. I only bring this up due to the fact last night I watched a old movie named Rain Man,a very old movie with Cruise and Hoffman.

One of the opening scenes was Wind farm disgusting to see, a pariah on the landscape...That was 1988, and yes that is how long this tech has been on the move. After 25 plus years where are we today, 4 trillion dollars spent perhaps far more, Texas faces a massive power outage,California is facing rolling Brown outs and this Green Energy Business CONSORTIUM has the public beginning to believe massive power outages are a needed way of life. The absurdity is mind numbing.

One has to ask themselves where would the US be today if we had chosen to invest 4 trillion into fission or fusion tech, in a by far different place that I can assure you.

The auto mfgs to have spent billions and billions attempting to create a EV that the public will accept. To date all those resources have been wasted, Toyota th re world leader in EV tech since 1992 has little intrest in the field. They know first hand it is unsustainable.

Telsa is merely a fad,speed bump that would not exist if not for carbon credits, and federal tax credits.

Biden once again has taken the US down the path to nowhere, a endless black hole for sums of money that would stagger the mind...

Now I ask you, what fool would invest into a bridge going nowhere after 30 yrs...

Odd I do not feel any better after that, yet it needs to be said. They say it is not civilized to put someone on the spot for there actions, I do believe it is time for that childish notion to fade into history.. Before this country fades into history.

Please quit emphasizing California's tiny rolling blackouts while ignoring the massive ones in Texas. Yes both occurred, Both were due to unprecedented exceptional weather events. Both could have been managed better. In hindsight, both could have been prevented with a fairly small amount of foresight and planning. But the causes were different, and the Texas blackout were much more severe by any measure, with more than 100 times as many customer-hours of blackout. The proximate cause of the Texas blackouts was freeze-off of the NG power supply (with a prior cause of over-agressive cowboy emphasis on free markets and minimized regulation). The proximate cause of the California blackouts was loss of two NG power plants (with a prior cause of over-aggressive greenie retirement of NG plants).

Mostly by sheer luck, California has an easy path to recovery, as we almost had enough power and we now know how to fix it. By contrast, Texas does not yet have a simple solution to their 100-times-worse problem.

California still several a really big problems, and I won't complain if you mention them or even if you blame our mismanagement of them on greenies or libtards. However,  rolling blackouts are either a complete non-problem or a minor problem. Our big problems are wildfire management, water management, and air pollution.

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,537]

2 hours ago, Dan Clemmensen said:

Please quit emphasizing California's tiny rolling blackouts while ignoring the massive ones in Texas. Yes both occurred, Both were due to unprecedented exceptional weather events. Both could have been managed better. In hindsight, both could have been prevented with a fairly small amount of foresight and planning. But the causes were different, and the Texas blackout were much more severe by any measure, with more than 100 times as many customer-hours of blackout. The proximate cause of the Texas blackouts was freeze-off of the NG power supply (with a prior cause of over-agressive cowboy emphasis on free markets and minimized regulation). The proximate cause of the California blackouts was loss of two NG power plants (with a prior cause of over-aggressive greenie retirement of NG plants).

Mostly by sheer luck, California has an easy path to recovery, as we almost had enough power and we now know how to fix it. By contrast, Texas does not yet have a simple solution to their 100-times-worse problem.

California still several a really big problems, and I won't complain if you mention them or even if you blame our mismanagement of them on greenies or libtards. However,  rolling blackouts are either a complete non-problem or a minor problem. Our big problems are wildfire management, water management, and air pollution.

Your thoughts, https://calmatters.org/environment/2020/08/california-2020-rolling-blackouts-explainer/

One basic question to start, why is California so short on power? A 30% undercut is rather significant.

Edited March 16, 2021 by Eyes Wide Open

[turbguy + 1,391]

18 minutes ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

One basic question to start, why is California so short on power? A 30% undercut is rather significant.

 

Perhaps it is all the illegal immigrants, running air conditioners full blast while charging their Teslas?

[Symmetry + 109]

14 minutes ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

Your thoughts, https://calmatters.org/environment/2020/08/california-2020-rolling-blackouts-explainer/

One basic question to start, why is California so short on power? A 30% undercut is rather significant.

Unrelated to the thread, different problems, different state.

I understand that this forum will enjoy mocking a blue state when discussing a red state problem.  Red oil price losers love to mock the winners, and employ "what about" illogical arguments such as this.

 

 

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

1 minute ago, turbguy said:

Perhaps it is all the illegal immigrants, running air conditioners full blast while charging their Teslas?

No, it's all the espresso machines at the Starbuck's and the heaters for the hot tubs.

[Symmetry + 109]

2 minutes ago, turbguy said:

Perhaps it is all the illegal immigrants, running air conditioners full blast while charging their Teslas?

If it wasn't for those damn immigrants I would be able to afford a Tesla!

 

[Symmetry + 109]

2 minutes ago, Dan Clemmensen said:

No, it's all the espresso machines at the Starbuck's and the heaters for the hot tubs.

I personally like my tub hot, but the air cool, so I run the air condition and tub heater at the same time...

That's mostly a joke, but I do feel bad when I use the oven during the summer with the A/C on.

Edited March 16, 2021 by Symmetry

[surrept33 + 609]

On 3/14/2021 at 11:19 AM, turbguy said:

Yup. One of the factors in this event was increased demand, which is a function of population growth. 

Yup, Increased storage of dry nat gas can be highly beneficial.

Yup.  Fossil generation is going to be required for at least 2 decades.

And, yup, renewables will continue to penetrate in Texas,

Yeah, pretty much this. Renewables and storage are just going to get cheaper (worldwide), if nothing else because of economies of scale, and regulations related to decarbonization. It's going to balloon in the next 15 years, I think, we have barely seen anything yet.

 

Just look at lithium battery production for example (which will help both distributed grids with EV cars and grid storage).  Many countries have already announced ICE bans in the future (California one of them, along with PV mandates on all new construction. this will need a lot of grid and microgrid spend).

EU, as part of the European Green Deal, is about to go on a building spree to meet decarbonization targets.

One of the historic bottlenecks, cobalt, is probably not going to be the bottleneck forever as it gets phased out:

Here is how much cobalt is being used these days.

NMC622 is already in a lot of EV installs in the US, 811 is being introduced into the market, 955 (9 parts nicklel, 0.5 parts cobalt will probably by 2025). 

 

[Ecocharger + 1,374]

10 hours ago, Gerry Maddoux said:

Great article that Mr. Warnick posted and equally important commentary that you added, Coffeeguyzz. As usual, you offered your commonsense, workaday knowledge to a complex problem. 

As prelude, I make my income from oil & gas. Years ago I sold transmission right-of-way to a large wind farm. I've regretted it since, mainly because it runs against my grain--it is one ugly son-of-a-buck. 

But to be the devil's advocate, let's just muse for a moment that all the wind greenies are right: the only way to save the planet is by subsidizing/incentivizing/handing out free money to the wind energy billionaires until every wind corridor in America is dotted with windmills. In the process, Wyoming, which is as the article states already producing 15X the energy it needs, becomes the "Electricity State," rather than the Cowboy State. Electric lines are stretched along the Union Pacific ROW all the way from the Laramie Gangplank to Sacramento--at the Gangplank there's room only for I-80, the railroad, and electric lines. So all throughout the wind corridor of the central portion of the United States are constructed additional power lines threading their way from the hundreds of thousands of wind turbines to all points east and west. I mean, it's a maze coming out of a destroyed landscape, an awful distortion of some once-beautiful landscape.  

But what if they're right? What if this horrible disfigurement of America results in so much green energy that it powers the whole country? In the process, of course, it shuts down the shale basins, the source of America's voluminous natural gas, but what if this is a good thing, forcing countries to which America exports LNG to actually erect their own wind farms? What if in the areas that are more suitable, solar farms are erected instead? Say massive solar farms along with wind farms in the Sahara, or the Negev? The world might look funny from up above but what if all those greenhouse gases plummet and California cools off and the wildfires stop and the air turns clear and all the asthma goes away and people are happy and the omni-mood skyrockets because everyone had a part in saving the planet?

If you pour enough money into almost any endeavor, no matter how outrageous, it picks up enough momentum to change the world. So what if in ten years we're living in a world full of wind machines and solar farms, quadrupling the electricity we use now in the demand of EV's to be charged, the all-electric homes to be cooled and heated, and also workplaces? It's dystopian, sure, but in America, at least, we're importing what oil and gas we absolutely have to have in order to produce a few plastics and the weather hasn't changed because of all the wind farms. After all, the Sooners are dead already, the Boomers are going soon, and why don't we just assume that the greenies are right? On this forum, at least, they seem so damn confident! To me that's annoying, but to opportunists there's money blowing in from the southwest.

I mean, what if? That's what Mr. Biden and Mr. Buffett and Mr. Anschutz and Mr. Musk are banking on. It's a global experiment that has been so effectively inculcated into so many receptive minds that no one but old people with a selfish interest in oil & gas doubt it. It has become the Universal Idea, the Grand Plan, the Utopia. Disenfranchised oil & gas people are signing on by the hundreds. I don't personally think it will work, but even I have to ask the question. What if?

One "what if" we know for certain... if ICR's are banished by government decree (and that is the only way they could disappear), and only EV's are permitted to drive the highways of the nation, the demand for scarce material inputs into EV batteries will push up the price tags on these glorified golf-carts beyond the reach of most Americans, and force the vast majority of folks into sharing space in electrified mass transit electro-trains and electro-buses. Someone tell me how that makes for a higher standard of life for the poor masses in this or any other country. Before we swallow this castor oil and wave goodbye to the American dream of self-independent transportation, we better make darn sure that the sales-people for climate alarmism know what they are talking about.   And they apparently do not.

Edited March 17, 2021 by Ecocharger

[turbguy + 1,391]

1 hour ago, Ecocharger said:

One "what if" we know for certain... if ICR's are banished by government decree (and that is the only way they could disappear), and only EV's are permitted to drive the highways of the nation, the demand for scarce material inputs into EV batteries will push up the price tags on these glorified golf-carts beyond the reach of most Americans, and force the vast majority of folks into sharing space in electrified mass transit electro-trains and electro-buses. Someone tell me how that makes for a higher standard of life for the poor masses in this or any other country. Before we swallow this castor oil and wave goodbye to the American dream of self-independent transportation, we better make darn sure that the sales-people for climate alarmism know what they are talking about.   And they apparently do not.

Have you driven or ridden in a Tesla?

Believe me, it is NOT a "glorified golf-cart".

Yes, they are expensive. 

Yes they can be an inconvenience to recharge for long trips. 

Yes, they cannot heat or cool the interior without effecting range. 

Yes, they can fulfill the needs of a large portion of many driver's requirements. 

That said, a Tesla may not fulfill yours.

 

[Ecocharger + 1,374]

28 minutes ago, turbguy said:

Have you driven or ridden in a Tesla?

Believe me, it is NOT a "glorified golf-cart".

Yes, they are expensive. 

Yes they can be an inconvenience to recharge for long trips. 

Yes, they cannot heat or cool the interior without effecting range. 

Yes, they can fulfill the needs of a large portion of many driver's requirements. 

That said, a Tesla may not fulfill yours.

 

There is a difference between expensive and prohibitively expensive. We have seen the "expensive" form already, that is, too expensive for a poor person to get one either fresh off the line or from a second-hand lot. Yet to come is the "prohibitively expensive" level, when the battery inputs get priced out of range for the average consumer. Getting past the hundred million production level will show us that.

Edited March 17, 2021 by Ecocharger

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

1 hour ago, Ecocharger said:

One "what if" we know for certain... if ICR's are banished by government decree (and that is the only way they could disappear), and only EV's are permitted to drive the highways of the nation, the demand for scarce material inputs into EV batteries will push up the price tags on these glorified golf-carts beyond the reach of most Americans, and force the vast majority of folks into sharing space in electrified mass transit electro-trains and electro-buses. Someone tell me how that makes for a higher standard of life for the poor masses in this or any other country. Before we swallow this castor oil and wave goodbye to the American dream of self-independent transportation, we better make darn sure that the sales-people for climate alarmism know what they are talking about.   And they apparently do not.

Consider the Tesla Model 3, which is priced at $37,000. There is no stock ICE of a lower price that can beat this model 3 in the quarter mile or 0-60 mph. Try it yourself. pull up next to one at a stop light and rev your engine. When the light turns green, it will leave you behind. It also handles better than just about any ICE at or below (or well above) its price range, because it has AWD and a very low center of mass. (and a great suspension). Now that your ICE has been sufficiently humiliated, go try to find an ICE that costs less than the $142,000 model S plaid+ that can beat it. 0-60 in 1.99 seconds, 200 mph top speed, 1020 HP. Let's not talk about the Tesla Roadster, due next year.

Now back to reality. most consumers don't need to go 0-60 that quickly, they just want to go to grandma's and to the grocery store in the equivalent of a $20,000 Corolla. Tesla is not down there yet because they are production-limited and selling every Model 3 and Model Y they can make in their maxxed-out factories.   Wait a couple of years, and their Chinese factory will probably start making a $20,000 model.   With the exception of the cost of the battery, an EV is a much cheaper and simpler vehicle than an ICE. Battery prices are still dropping like crazy. Tesla now makes the low-end versions of the Model Y with LFP batteries: no Cobalt required.

[turbguy + 1,391]

2 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

There is a difference between expensive and prohibitively expensive. We have seen the "expensive" form already, that is, too expensive for a poor person to get one either fresh off the line or from a second-hand lot. Yet to come is the "prohibitively expensive" level, when the battery inputs get priced out of range for the average consumer. Getting past the hundred million production level will show us that.

You could be right.  Expressing your opinion is your freedom.

We shall see.

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

3 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

There is a difference between expensive and prohibitively expensive. We have seen the "expensive" form already, that is, too expensive for a poor person to get one either fresh off the line or from a second-hand lot. Yet to come is the "prohibitively expensive" level, when the battery inputs get priced out of range for the average consumer. Getting past the hundred million production level will show us that.

Getting past the 100 million level will be a challenge, since the total world yearly vehicle production is now about 92 million/yr.

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,537]

If Tesla can maintain 50% of its market share just two yrs ago it will be amazing. Automotive platforms run in 4 year cycles. Change is inevitable.

Tesla’s U.S. Model 3 Sales Drop 25% In Q4 – Peak Model 3 Came And Went

https://www.torquenews.com/1083/tesla-s-us-model-3-sales-drop-25-q4-peak-model-3-came-and-went

Tesla’s Stock Tumbles Amid Sales Worries and Market Volatility

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/05/business/tesla-stock-price.html

Tesla losing ground in Europe should trouble investors, strategist says

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/15/tesla-losing-ground-in-europe-should-trouble-investors-strategist-says.html

[surrept33 + 609]

43 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

There is a difference between expensive and prohibitively expensive. We have seen the "expensive" form already, that is, too expensive for a poor person to get one either fresh off the line or from a second-hand lot. Yet to come is the "prohibitively expensive" level, when the battery inputs get priced out of range for the average consumer. Getting past the hundred million production level will show us that.

Tesla is going to come out with a $25000 car soon. There are plenty of <$10000 EV cars in China (though you may not want such a car unless you live in a city).

BEVs are fundamentally far more mechanically simpler than ICE, a lot more of the cost is the batteries, but it isn't likely going to be constrained by cobalt at all. 

Keep in mind due to the phasing out of diesel in Europe, this effect is about to happen particularly with European car manufacturers.

 

EV models by car manufacturer:

So I think we've just seen the very beginning of a changeover. 

Everyone knows those manufacturers will need more batteries, which is also why the EU is ratcheting up battery manufacturing and tax incentives for lithium and nickel. The supply o these will likely have to double every 3-4 years to meet demand. 

The two fastest growing markets for both automobiles and energy, China and India have both either announced ICE bans in the future (India) or seriously considering it (China) in order to improve air quality. These all have an effect on the long term calculus of what car manufacturers bet on. 

Edited March 17, 2021 by surrept33

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

4 minutes ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

If Tesla can maintain 50% of its market share just two yrs ago it will be amazing. Automotive platforms run in 4 year cycles. Change is inevitable.

Tesla’s U.S. Model 3 Sales Drop 25% In Q4 – Peak Model 3 Came And Went

https://www.torquenews.com/1083/tesla-s-us-model-3-sales-drop-25-q4-peak-model-3-came-and-went

Tesla’s Stock Tumbles Amid Sales Worries and Market Volatility

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/05/business/tesla-stock-price.html

Tesla losing ground in Europe should trouble investors, strategist says

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/15/tesla-losing-ground-in-europe-should-trouble-investors-strategist-says.html

The Tesla haters publish these stories every quarter. Tesla's sales are cyclical for a reason, and will remain so until the two big new factories (Texas and Germany)  come online. Tesla has a customer for every car that comes off the production line, and the customer gets an e-mail with that car's VIN when the car is produced (no dealers, remember?) For the first month of the quarter, the Fremont factory produces European Teslas (different charger plug)  for European customers. These are then shipped to Europe, which takes awhile, so there are no sales in the first month. the next two months the factory builds the US Teslas and delivers them quickly. When the German factory (Giga Berlin) comes online, it will handle Europe and this cycle will (mostly) end.

In addition, a lot of Tesla customers waited for the higher-priced and bigger Model Y, and purchased it instead of a model 3. The demand for the model 3 is (probably) still there, but there was not enough production capacity for it and the Model Y at the same time.

[turbguy + 1,391]

When Tesla start providing factory-direct rebates, let me know.  

Then I'll know they are producing more than the market will bear, just like Ford GM, or Chrysler.

Chrysler invents it.

Ford brings it to market first.

GM makes at actually work.

Edited March 17, 2021 by turbguy

[Ecocharger + 1,374]

42 minutes ago, Dan Clemmensen said:

Consider the Tesla Model 3, which is priced at $37,000. There is no stock ICE of a lower price that can beat this model 3 in the quarter mile or 0-60 mph. Try it yourself. pull up next to one at a stop light and rev your engine. When the light turns green, it will leave you behind. It also handles better than just about any ICE at or below (or well above) its price range, because it has AWD and a very low center of mass. (and a great suspension). Now that your ICE has been sufficiently humiliated, go try to find an ICE that costs less than the $142,000 model S plaid+ that can beat it. 0-60 in 1.99 seconds, 200 mph top speed, 1020 HP. Let's not talk about the Tesla Roadster, due next year.

Now back to reality. most consumers don't need to go 0-60 that quickly, they just want to go to grandma's and to the grocery store in the equivalent of a $20,000 Corolla. Tesla is not down there yet because they are production-limited and selling every Model 3 and Model Y they can make in their maxxed-out factories.   Wait a couple of years, and their Chinese factory will probably start making a $20,000 model.   With the exception of the cost of the battery, an EV is a much cheaper and simpler vehicle than an ICE. Battery prices are still dropping like crazy. Tesla now makes the low-end versions of the Model Y with LFP batteries: no Cobalt required.

What are production numbers now? The total worldwide is about 3 to 5 million? That is just a drop in the bucket. We use how many hundred millions of ICR vehicles per year, quite a few. Replacing those with EV's will put huge demands on limited scarce battery inputs, and put them out of reach for most people.

[Ecocharger + 1,374]

17 minutes ago, surrept33 said:

Tesla is going to come out with a $25000 car soon. There are plenty of <$10000 EV cars in China (though you may not want such a car unless you live in a city).

BEVs are fundamentally far more mechanically simpler than ICE, a lot more of the cost is the batteries, but it isn't likely going to be constrained by cobalt at all. 

Keep in mind due to the phasing out of diesel in Europe, this effect is about to happen particularly with European car manufacturers.

 

EV models by car manufacturer:

So I think we've just seen the very beginning of a changeover. 

Everyone knows those manufacturers will need more batteries, which is also why the EU is ratcheting up battery manufacturing and tax incentives for lithium and nickel. The supply o these will likely have to double every 3-4 years to meet demand. 

The two fastest growing markets for both automobiles and energy, China and India have both either announced ICE bans in the future (India) or seriously considering it (China) in order to improve air quality. These all have an effect on the long term calculus of what car manufacturers bet on. 

When you start replacing hundreds of millions of vehicles, the scarce battery inputs will skyrocket in price.....not realistic.

[Ecocharger + 1,374]

43 minutes ago, Dan Clemmensen said:

Getting past the 100 million level will be a challenge, since the total world yearly vehicle production is now about 92 million/yr.

Replacing hundreds of millions of existing vehicles will be too much of a challenge.