Posted on 02/11/2021 1:41:15 AM PST by nickcarraway
The average energy investor is by now well aware of the sector's monumental shift from fossil fuels to renewable energy. Coal-powered power plants have been shuttering at an alarming clip as the price of electricity from natural gas and renewables undercuts them while wind and solar generation continue to gain the ascendancy.
But nowhere has this change been as dramatic as the transport industry, with EV titans such as Tesla Inc. (NASDAQ:TSLA) and NIO Ltd. (NYSE:NIO) now commanding substantially higher valuations than their imposing ICE brethren, General Motors (NYSE:GM) and Ford Motors (NYSE:F). Indeed, the global EV sector now carries a higher valuation than the global ICE sector despite accounting for less than 3% of new vehicle sales in 2020.
It's a situation eerily reminiscent of the thousands of buggy and whip companies that were rendered obsolete in the early 20th century.
But now, a section of Wall Street says the situation is a lot more dire than that.
Morgan Stanley has argued that traditional ICE makers are destined to become money-losers as early as 2030.
MS' analyst Adam Jonas says the market may be ascribing zero or even negative value for ICE-derived revenues at GM and Ford and has listed a variety of factors that are likely to transform the companies' once-profitable assets into potentially cash-burning and loss-making businesses.
Pivoting to EVs
Morgan Stanley is hardly alone in its very dim outlook of the traditional auto industry.
A recent survey on institutional investors by the investment firm has revealed that 17% of respondents think ICE technology has no zero or negative value today, while 60% have rated ICE technology as only slightly positive. Just 23% think gasoline and diesel tech still carries a significant positive value. Related: Oil Prices Slip On Large Gasoline Build
(Excerpt) Read more at oilprice.com ...
You only get that “profit” because the utilities are FORCED to purchase your generated power WHETHER IT NeeDS IT OR NOT.
Will own nothing in heavan either.
Not true. I can just leak the surplus into the grid and get nothing for it.
Or, I can get another energy supplier and opt into a tariff based on split time of use - buying electricity would get more expensive in daylight hours but would be very cheap at offpeak times.
But, my current supplier is currently wanting to get in on the act and is very interested in setting up a new tariff where I would sell them the excess from solar and they use it to service peak demand, and I top my battery up between 2am and 4:30am at a discount.
For a country that prides itself on entrepreneurism and capitalism, America seems fantastically anti-choice, backward and restrictive when it comes to commercialising next-gen utilities.
It’s the same with telecoms. The UK is nowhere near as innovative as some other countries, but even ten years ago I had four completely different high speed internet technology options on top of the state sponsored copper infrastructure. With over 60 suppliers to choose from.
And I live way out in the sticks. I talk to American colleagues and they’re about as spoiled for choice as the UK was... in 1996.
You got the idea in your moniker, MrChips, but it can not be used like cow chips or Buffalo chips but horse apples, I am told, makes a dang good pie
You mean 8.32kW hours right?
We used 50kW hours per day ave. last month with no A/C loading. - so.. your solar rig is about 1/6 of my normal usage and we heat with Gas.
It’s nice, but honestly, your set up is small potatoes compared to the demand. I will still follow up as my Mom’s place is more ideal for this sort of supplemental solution.
Please freepmail info on your panels. Thanks micb
I have a friend who has built a commercial system, himself, which is completely off grid.
It works, but mostly because he was able to scrounge panels and parts, such as inverters, from other systems.
His battery system is old-school deep cycle lead acid (again, scrounged, not retail)
He would gladly trade everything for grid access, but it is not an option.
The main problem is the extremely time-consuming maintenance, especially of the battery system.
This is in one of the most favorable places in the world for solar power... SW Arizona.
I love to see solar power become more affordable for an off-grid power source, which is where it shines.
I would love to see it competitive as an alternative to the grid for residential use.
Your analysis needs to be done as a cash-flow, net present value to make a real comparison on cost.
The non-monetary value you are getting makes plenty of sense, and is important for any decision maker.
Ok, that’s what I thought you meant. I agree.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.