Energy Storage Could Emerge As The Hottest Market Of 2022

[Meredith Poor + 883]

The Irena Slav story with this title emphasizes rising costs for lithium, nickel, and cobalt.

Storage solutions presently appearing on the market don't use those metals.

https://essinc.com/

https://formenergy.com/

One of these is an iron chloride flow battery and the other an iron/air battery. Both use common and cheap materials. The ESS batteries are in production and installations are ongoing.

"...the total energy storage market will double in size in 2021 to reach 56 GWh, with that number expected to increase by 17x in 2030." The storage market will have to be the TWhs by 2030. These numbers are a gross underestimation of demand projection over the next ten years.

[Starschy + 211]

ABB has Power Storage for at least 20 years available. Not cheap solution of course.

But the Switch to electric Cars will generate troubles. By -20 C the Distance falls from 300 km to 100 km. Ask Russian Customers.

[markslawson + 1,042]

23 hours ago, Meredith Poor said:

...the total energy storage market will double in size in 2021 to reach 56 GWh, with that number expected to increase by 17x in 2030." The storage market will have to be the TWhs by 2030. These numbers are a gross underestimation of demand projection over the next ten years.

 

6 hours ago, Starschy said:

ABB has Power Storage for at least 20 years available. Not cheap solution of course.

Had seen the iron flow battery stuff around before and looked at the announcements on the site linked by MP. Its pretty clear that the technology is still struggling. I dunno what the problem is but its been a few years now and the announcements are still about tests and demonstrations. Back in 2019 there were reports that the companies in the area had trouble attracting capital. Couldn't find anything more recent bar more articles explaining the technology and the occasional test. Seems like its still Lithium for a time, at least.

[Meredith Poor + 883]

1 hour ago, markslawson said:

Had seen the iron flow battery stuff around before and looked at the announcements on the site linked by MP. Its pretty clear that the technology is still struggling.

https://essinc.com/ess-inc-contracts-with-enel-green-power-espana-to-deliver-17-energy-warehouse-long-duration-iron-flow-battery-systems/

Is this what you mean by 'struggling'?

[markslawson + 1,042]

On 1/21/2022 at 12:03 PM, Meredith Poor said:

Is this what you mean by 'struggling'?

Meredith mate, go and look at the announcement you've cited, sit down and think.. Its been years and basically all they seem to have is that Spanish contract (plus another, see later) announced in September, the monetary value of which is not specified and is for a comparatively small output.. as this article says its output is 90kW of peak power.. not much, in other words. But the story gets even wilder. Look at this article. These guys now have a NYSE listing, but all they can really point to is a "net loss of US$51.3 million for Q3 2021, and just under US$300 million for the nine months ended 30 September". Look further down the article and you will find these statements..

"ESS Inc also signed a framework agreement with Softbank’s renewable energy subsidiary SB Energy to deploy 2GWh of flow batteries between now and 2026, with the first system already delivered to an SB Energy project in California. 

ESS Inc said in its financial results statement that it has identified a global pipeline of opportunities in excess of US$8 billion from now to 2027. This is based on named projects with customers ESS has already been in talks with and signed non-disclosure agreements to discuss. That includes projects and deals booked, awarded and in negotiation."

I use to be a business journalist. The talk about a framework agreement and "global framework of opportunities" is so much flim flam. The company seems to have that other California project and that's it. That said, vast losses seem to be a pre-requisite for success on the securities market for tech companies. Just look at Tesla. With few journalists or others prepared to look at the company critically this could go on for years. Its a tech bubble. Anything with batteries in it gets a boost on the stock exchange. Anyway, that was interesting.. thanks for pointing it out..     

 

[Meredith Poor + 883]

6 hours ago, markslawson said:

Just look at Tesla.

Tesla lost money for a long time. When I drive down the streets where I live, I see Teslas. Since I live on the Space Coast, I watch Space X rockets launching weekly. Talk to me about Artemis, or Blue Origin.

Flim flam or otherwise, either something works or it doesn't. If what you mean by 'struggling' is simply finding customers for a demonstrably workable technology, this is different from something that is fundamentally unproven or unreliable. I've worked for companies on projects that took several years to gain market acceptance. We could demonstrate working boxes all day. That didn't mean we had customer mind share sufficient to close the deal.

[markslawson + 1,042]

11 hours ago, Meredith Poor said:

Tesla lost money for a long time. When I drive down the streets where I live, I see Teslas. Since I live on the Space Coast, I watch Space X rockets launching weekly. Talk to me about Artemis, or Blue Origin.

Tesla is still unable to justify its share price on an reasonable industrial metric - price/earnings ratios and so on - by several orders of magnitude - and in fact doesn't make its money from selling EVs. Its profit comes from selling the regulatory credits it generates by selling the EVs at a loss. Weird huh? I had wondered how it had manged to stay afloat. See this article . Sure the start of any tech breakthrough can be difficult but you can only tell so much from media stories and there are certain warning signs you should heed. The iron battery stuff has warning signs a plenty. However, there may well be money to be made from buying and selling the shares. Lots of rich tech enthusiasts out there willing to ignore the warmings. Anyway, thanks for the discussion. We've taken it about as far as we can.. leave it with you.. 

[El Gato + 251]

On 1/19/2022 at 6:32 PM, Meredith Poor said:

The Irena Slav story with this title emphasizes rising costs for lithium, nickel, and cobalt.

Storage solutions presently appearing on the market don't use those metals.

https://essinc.com/

https://formenergy.com/

One of these is an iron chloride flow battery and the other an iron/air battery. Both use common and cheap materials. The ESS batteries are in production and installations are ongoing.

"...the total energy storage market will double in size in 2021 to reach 56 GWh, with that number expected to increase by 17x in 2030." The storage market will have to be the TWhs by 2030. These numbers are a gross underestimation of demand projection over the next ten years.

So what's the degradation level over the life of the Battery? (all batteries have this issue, ask anybody who has owned a cordless power tool ;))  And like our Russian friend says, how well does it work in the cold? There's a reason lead acid Batteries in vehicle have a Cold Cranking Amps rating(CCA). The cart is Wayyyy to far aheqad of the horse. The Japanese and Korean automakers will be making bank when all the American automakers switch to all electric Mfg., and they still make ICE cars. Go 600 mi on a charge in Dec in the Minnesota winter, and I might have interest. Till then pffffft.

[Meredith Poor + 883]

57 minutes ago, El Gato said:

So what's the degradation level over the life of the Battery? (all batteries have this issue, ask anybody who has owned a cordless power tool ;))  And like our Russian friend says, how well does it work in the cold? There's a reason lead acid Batteries in vehicle have a Cold Cranking Amps rating(CCA). The cart is Wayyyy to far aheqad of the horse. The Japanese and Korean automakers will be making bank when all the American automakers switch to all electric Mfg., and they still make ICE cars. Go 600 mi on a charge in Dec in the Minnesota winter, and I might have interest. Till then pffffft.

The batteries we're referring to here are stationary power storage, not those in vehicles. Since these would tend to charge and discharge continuously, they would stay warm. In any case, the tanks and electrolytic cell can be housed in a well-insulated building.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

On 1/24/2022 at 3:03 PM, markslawson said:

Tesla is still unable to justify its share price on an reasonable industrial metric - price/earnings ratios and so on - by several orders of magnitude - and in fact doesn't make its money from selling EVs. Its profit comes from selling the regulatory credits it generates by selling the EVs at a loss. Weird huh? I had wondered how it had manged to stay afloat. See this article . Sure the start of any tech breakthrough can be difficult but you can only tell so much from media stories and there are certain warning signs you should heed. The iron battery stuff has warning signs a plenty. However, there may well be money to be made from buying and selling the shares. Lots of rich tech enthusiasts out there willing to ignore the warmings. Anyway, thanks for the discussion. We've taken it about as far as we can.. leave it with you.. 

Your data and the article you linked are a year out of date, par for the course with you. Tesla made $4 billion ex-credits last year.

https://tesla-cdn.thron.com/static/WIIG2L_TSLA_Q4_2021_Update_O7MYNE.pdf?xseo=&response-content-disposition=inline%3Bfilename%3D"tsla-q4-and-fy-2021-update.pdf"

Edited February 5, 2022 by Jay McKinsey

[markslawson + 1,042]

13 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Your data and the article you linked are a year out of date, par for the course with you. Tesla made $4 billion ex-credits last year.

Jay - I see you're still smarting from all the time I caught you out. But okay, this time, you backed up abuse with some facts, so you are learning, and I see that Tesla is, finally, making money from selling cars, with the sale of regulatory credits a nice earner on top of that. I take your point. However, as I noted, the actual earnings per share in no way justify the company's share price - but that means its being treated as a tech stock. In other words its earnings are irrelevant. One interesting point to note from the material you cite is that if you look down to page 30 you'll see the broader group includes energy storage and generation (batteries and solar panels).. this business doesn't count for much besides the car making but it seems to me from the figures that side of the business is losing money. Interesting..  

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,132]

On 1/24/2022 at 3:03 PM, markslawson said:

Tesla is still unable to justify its share price on an reasonable industrial metric - price/earnings ratios and so on - by several orders of magnitude - and in fact doesn't make its money from selling EVs. Its profit comes from selling the regulatory credits it generates by selling the EVs at a loss. Weird huh? I had wondered how it had manged to stay afloat. See this article . Sure the start of any tech breakthrough can be difficult but you can only tell so much from media stories and there are certain warning signs you should heed. The iron battery stuff has warning signs a plenty. However, there may well be money to be made from buying and selling the shares. Lots of rich tech enthusiasts out there willing to ignore the warmings. Anyway, thanks for the discussion. We've taken it about as far as we can.. leave it with you.. 

Not a complete nay sayer, but watch Sandy Munro recent where he goes over the INSANE debt levels of the USA/German/JPN car makers... Literally hundreds of BILLIONS.  Tesla???  None.  Rather easy when EVERY car, well NEARLY every car they sell is being subsidized $7000 per copy....

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

12 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Not a complete nay sayer, but watch Sandy Munro recent where he goes over the INSANE debt levels of the USA/German/JPN car makers... Literally hundreds of BILLIONS.  Tesla???  None.  Rather easy when EVERY car, well NEARLY every car they sell is being subsidized $7000 per copy....

 

Most of the INSANE debt of which you speak is actually working capital for financing and leasing. They are making more off of those loans than what they cost. The more money they can borrow and re-lend the bigger the business. That's the problem when you listen to engineers who don't actually understand the business side of the company.

Edited February 7, 2022 by Jay McKinsey