Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

AstroPower, Inc. (APWRE) Message Board

  • sunfundasst sunfundasst Oct 16, 2000 4:18 PM Flag

    Below $4.00

    AstroPower was founded by Astrosystems. The
    original parent company, Astrosystems, traded for a while
    at about $2.00. Astrosystems dissolved, after
    spinnning off AstroPower, in the last vew years paying its
    shareholders something like a total of $4.00

    I do not
    remember the details. I learned about Astrosystems through
    my shares in Astropower and I have been a fan ever
    since.

    The history of ENER is older and more volatile.
    I
    am thinking about giving ENER another go, but I do
    not think there is, presently, a large market for
    their hydrogen storage efforts.

    In the past
    their amorphous cells were not competive with most
    cells in their efficiency.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • >>I am thinking about giving ENER another
      go, but I do not think there is, presently, a large
      market for their hydrogen storage efforts.

      In the
      past their amorphous cells were not competive with
      most cells in their efficiency. <<

      While
      the efficiency of the thin film amorphous PVs is
      lower than conventional PV materials, it has improved
      dramatically and is now almost as high as conventional PV was
      not too long ago. Furthermore, UniSolar's product
      continues to produce power even in low levels of ambient
      light, so that in most applications installations of
      similar peak capacity will actually deliver more kWh over
      the day because performance doesn't drop off as
      drastically in early morning and late afternoon
      hours.

      I would strongly disagree with you over hydrogen
      storage markets. ENER's specific fuel cell technology
      aside, the technology offered by Ballard and others is
      very ripe and ready to go. The hurdle is no longer
      fuel cells, it's the fuel. No one has yet been able to
      produce a reformer that is reliable, cheap, and
      compact/light enough to do the job with conventional fuels.
      Compression and cryogenic liquification are both too
      dangerous and too energy intensive for practical widespread
      use. Only ENER's solid hydride method has been shown
      to have the right balance of storage density,
      safety, and charge/discharge kinetics, all in a low
      volume platform that can be customized to fit anywhere
      into a vehicle. The market for fuel cells in
      transportation won't ever get started without it.

      I
      really didn't want to spam here. My apologies to the
      board for doing so...I felt like I had to bring up ENER
      to defend my earlier point from Indiantiger's
      attack, and from there it lead to more unanswered
      questions. For what it's worth, I am an investor and
      believer in APWR as well, and while there will be
      competition between the two, I don't see success for either
      of them mutually exclusive of success for the other.
      I'm more than happy to discuss ENER but suggest any
      questions about it might be better pointed to the
      appropriate board.