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

Linn Co, LLC Message Board

jj27713 83 posts  |  Last Activity: Jul 8, 2016 8:41 AM Member since: Jan 11, 1999
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    Fuel Cells to be Mainstream by 2065

    by randywackpack Jun 16, 2016 12:45 PM
    jj27713 jj27713 Jun 16, 2016 4:15 PM Flag

    Hi Bill,
    Tesla is definitely fighting headwinds in this regard. This, too, is a problem for many of the majors. There are about 10 all-EV models on the market each with varying sizes, ranges and price points. None seem to have found a sweet spot with buyers. Yet, as you correctly note, the automakers have to push some kind of high mileage/low CO2 emission cars or they can't meet the upcoming targets.
    Nissan has acknowledged the criticisms of low range, upped their range by 50% and is being met with the same criticism of low range. Honda was stung by the poor sales of their Insight ten years ago after being burned by the econuts, yet they are trying again to sell a better Insight...only to fall into the same trap as before ie. if you only would build it, they will buy. Ooops...burned again. The gasoline prices are going to remain low for some time to come. People still love the big trucks and SUV's. 500 HP sport cars as well.
    So what good choices do the majors have? Not many. Continue to drop prices and offer new models and more incentives and hope the market will bite. Tesla doesn't have any alternate gasoline vehicles to balance against, yet Tesla has a real chance to make some fiscal headway with its upcoming Model 3 at an MSRP of ~35K. Musk is way more driven than most of the majors CEO's. This incredible drive and creativity is Tesla's very big advantage. At this point I don't own TSLA, but I would bet on this company for price appreciation more than any other going forward. That said, I do see the price as currently overextended on hopes of a very positive Model 3 success story. If you own it, I would definitely consider using options to reduce the risk of a pullback in price.

    IMHO: As much as Musk derides fuel cells, I can see a smidgen of a possibility of a hydrogen fuel cell extender option down the road...


  • Reply to

    Fuel Cells to be Mainstream by 2065

    by randywackpack Jun 16, 2016 12:45 PM
    jj27713 jj27713 Jun 16, 2016 3:04 PM Flag

    Hey randy,

    What have I been saying for the last decade? Red never liked it ether. Unfortunately when you look closely at the large picture, it will take another 20-30 years before fuel cells make any significant dent in the percentage of non-FC motive powerplants. This is not rocket science, but technology and economics...which rule over fantasy and wishful thinking on a regular basis.
    We just have to be patient with this stock. The biggest threat is the all electric car for the time being and FC's seem to be way behind in this regard. Hydrogen seems to have a lot of drawbacks for most any energy storage application - grid, stationary or mobile - and doesn't yet offer enough advantages to overcome.


  • Reply to

    Germany to go all electric also by 2030!!!!!!!!

    by jaketen2001 Jun 15, 2016 11:41 PM
    jj27713 jj27713 Jun 16, 2016 10:06 AM Flag

    Yes I noticed the rest of the story was missing, too. Thank you for posting it. Efficient investors want to know all the facts...

  • jj27713 by jj27713 Jun 16, 2016 10:03 AM Flag

    I am going to offer a prognostication here...
    There has been no news of any consequence that I can find as to why the stock price has been falling so much and so fast. Five, six, seven days of distinct selling have occurred with few buyers at any level so far. There is some significant support at ~$ 10.00 that might provide some relief and I could be a buyer of another portion of stock at this level IF I have some confidence that he selling has abated here. Earnings are forecasted to be somewhat lower than last quarter by a few cents, but I think the adjustment to a lower stock price has more than been accommodated at $10 a share.
    My concern remains that there might be something someone else knows that I don't about why the sell-off is occurring. But a return of 5.6% would be a nice motivation.
    I can't believe that a 'Brexit' concern is the cause for this selling...


  • Reply to

    CTL Acquires ElasticBox

    by pinnacleport604 Jun 14, 2016 7:46 PM
    jj27713 jj27713 Jun 15, 2016 9:52 AM Flag

    For now, Mr. Market doesn't agree with you.

  • Reply to

    Nissan's Fuel Cell Approach

    by jj27713 Jun 14, 2016 1:10 PM
    jj27713 jj27713 Jun 14, 2016 2:48 PM Flag

    Yes. The article says that the heat from the hydrogen stack powers the reformer. So what comes to mind is an SOFC approach. Perhaps the automaker has decided that a medium sized battery pack provides the first ten minutes of driving until the stack warms up? Not much good for short trips, I agree. Nissan has not shown as much interest in FC's as other automakers, preferring to focus on hybrid electrics instead. Maybe Nissan has come across something with promise. Ill have to keep an eye on follow-ups to his announcement.

  • Reply to

    India planning for H2

    by jaketen2001 Jun 14, 2016 7:33 AM
    jj27713 jj27713 Jun 14, 2016 1:50 PM Flag

    The India 'experiment' with it grid is a very interesting study in priorities to say the least. India has jumped on the 'low carbon' philosophy, but is all mixed up in how that should be accomplished. It is well known that India burns a lot of fossil fuels and cellulosic fuels that contribute very detrimentally to their air pollution. The big problem is that they have installed very little anti-pollution controls to the emissions. So in addition to having deficient, unreliable power the air is unnecessarily polluted.
    To compound the problems, India is installing a lot of solar PV and a lot of wind power to meet the insatiable electric generation demands and are clearly adding stress to the existing grid which is not being upgraded prior...or at least meet the highly variable output of wind and solar. As a result, the grid is actually failing more often now than it ever did before.
    The effects are frustrating the Indian populace more than ever. Now they are being promised more power, more green power, and they ramp up their expectations to upgrade their living standard only to find out that the grid can be even more unstable. India could spend money much more efficiently by adding a dozen more strategically placed coal plants with full emission controls and upgrade the transformers, substations and grid than spending so much money of solar and PV according to many experts. By putting the cart before the horse ie. PV and wind generation ahead of the grid upgrades they are only making a bigger mess of the already poor stability of the existing grid.
    You should stay in touch with the grid news from India. It's almost comical to watch the struggle to find the most efficient solutions to the power needs, the pollution reduction needs, the government politics, the money and the 'climate change' discussions. The whole concept that a lot of inexpensive, reliable power will lift India into the 21st century is almost lost to them it seems...

  • Nissan today showed off a fuel cell system that could overcome the main drawback of current hydrogen fuel cell systems: how to get the hydrogen to the car. Nissan’s system uses readily available ethanol alcohol. An on-board “reformer” converts the ethanol to hydrogen. In the fuel cell stack, the hydrogen is converted to electric power.

    “In August, we will have a prototype you can drive,” Nissan EVP Hideyuki Sakamoto promised the reporters at Nissan’s global headquarters in Yokohama. The first commercial cars powered by the system are expected around 2020.

    According to Renault -Nissan Alliance Director Kazuhiro Doi, the system will provide low running cost equivalent to electric vehicles, along with the long range and quick refuel time of gasoline engine vehicles.

    The system reuses the heat generated in the hydrogen stack to power the reformer, which the company expects to give the new system a thermal efficiency rating of up to 60%, meaning that 60% of the fuel is converted into forward motion. Gasoline engines commonly have a thermal efficiency of between 25% and 30%, with 40% considered the ultimate goal.

    Ethanol is usually made from sugarcane, or corn, and it has been available throughout the world for thousands of years. In countries like Brazil, ethanol already is used more than gasoline. In other markets, ethanol is routinely added to gasoline. One drawback of the new system is that in the reforming process, CO2 is generated. Nevertheless, Nissan calls its system “Carbon-Neutral,” because CO2 is neutralized while growing the crops the ethanol is derived from. The system is expected to be cheaper than current fuel cell systems, due to the fact that it needs no rare metals as a catalyst, and because no expensive high-pressure hydrogen tank is necessary. The fuel, a 50:50 ethanol/water mix, is less dangerous than gasoline. Theoretically, the car could be powered with a bottle of whiskey in a pinch, but Doi cautioned that doing so could gum up the works.

  • jj27713 jj27713 Jun 10, 2016 1:34 PM Flag

    I am active with GDX and GLDX. Today isn't the 'best' example of protection, but so far the ETF's are doing much better than I would have expected. More time will help to provide a better answer to my questions.

  • jj27713 jj27713 Jun 10, 2016 11:05 AM Flag

    Yes, I can feel your concerns and I agree with your expectations of a significant market drop soon.
    I did purchase some gold ETF's (~4% of the portfolio that is not in cash) over the last 4-5 weeks and they have been very good at countering declines in my non-gold equities. Surprisingly so. This is my first foray into using gold stocks as a hedge, so I can't say this is a foolproof way to minimize losses. But I an very interested in watching what happens...

  • jj27713 jj27713 Jun 10, 2016 10:46 AM Flag

    So ash,
    You have had another 14 days to ponder. Did you reach any conclusions? I still see TGP as under pressure and the last two days just seems to confirm...though I don't really know why it is hurting so much.

  • Reply to

    Mark my words,

    by smnorgy Jun 6, 2016 10:19 PM
    jj27713 jj27713 Jun 8, 2016 10:54 AM Flag

    You throw around the 'free' word very liberally.
    There is no 'free'. Your car and PV system would cost you plenty in terms of up front costs, maintenance costs and replacement costs. Not to mention lost opportunity costs for your money. Then there is the high likelihood that you would be charged a 'fee' for not drawing your fair share of power from the grid.
    Move to a hydrogen upgrade and your costs just tripled...
    Free? Really?

  • Reply to

    trust but verify

    by jaketen2001 Jun 7, 2016 10:58 AM
    jj27713 jj27713 Jun 7, 2016 1:14 PM Flag

    China has been rife with violations of employment promises and IP protection. They can treat almost every foreign company with great disdain as they know that to be globally competitive, non-domestic companies need the benefit of China's low wage structure and diminished environmental regulatory status. It has been a rude awakening for 1000's of companies that have moved some/all of their manufacturing/services to China. To 'trust' China has been a huge mistake for many companies...

  • Reply to

    Mark my words,

    by smnorgy Jun 6, 2016 10:19 PM
    jj27713 jj27713 Jun 7, 2016 1:08 PM Flag

    There is no rule whatsoever that says that this board is to remain pro or con. None. It is a board for free exchange of ideas as long as they don't violate Yahoo's rules of content. That's all.
    BTW, that was a sarcastic question in case you missed it.

  • Reply to

    Mark my words,

    by smnorgy Jun 6, 2016 10:19 PM
    jj27713 jj27713 Jun 7, 2016 12:59 PM Flag

    OK. Thanks for clearing that up.
    Since you here 'promoting' BLDP 25 times as much as pk, and when pk is merely skeptical of some of the statements made within, it seems only quite reasonable to ask if you are being paid to talk long when you are asking whether pk is paid to talk short...don't you think?
    If you don't want people to make judgemental comments about you, you shouldn't make judgemental comments about them.

  • Reply to

    Mark my words,

    by smnorgy Jun 6, 2016 10:19 PM
    jj27713 jj27713 Jun 7, 2016 9:40 AM Flag

    Are you paid to talk long?

  • Reply to

    Breakfast for deniers

    by jaketen2001 Jun 6, 2016 7:44 AM
    jj27713 jj27713 Jun 6, 2016 11:34 AM Flag

    That's BS Jake. Stop drinking the Kool-Aid.
    There are fewer cold weather temperature records set each year than warm weather records. The trend is ever so slightly to fewer cold records set with each passing year. If 'climate change' causes extreme cold weather, then we would be seeing it in the records...but we don't. That argument is just another lie told to you by the alarmist bunch that can't be backed up with any data.
    If the records are showing that complications from colder weather (and please note that the last winter in Britain was not anywhere near record cold) is killing more people than complications from warmer weather, then the pendulum is still swung to the side that warmer weather will cause LESS excess deaths than colder weather. And, heck yes, I would be in favor of burning more fossil fuels right now to help prevent excess cold weather deaths.
    I am not yet immune to death and human suffering. You seem to think that 160 people dying in a country of 1144 million is more of a problem than 9000 dying in a country of 66 million... Where exactly is the logic in that?

  • Reply to

    Breakfast for deniers

    by jaketen2001 Jun 6, 2016 7:44 AM
    jj27713 jj27713 Jun 6, 2016 10:02 AM Flag

    Please check the news and expand your knowledge of the big picture...
    (From the BBC)
    An estimated 9,000 people died last winter in England and Wales as a result of living in a cold home, a university study has suggested.
    It found a fifth of the 43,900 excess winter deaths in 2014-2015 were caused by low indoor temperatures, BBC Panorama has learned.
    Cold homes increase the risk of respiratory infections, heart attacks and strokes, the researchers said.
    Ministers say £1m has been invested to help those who are ill from cold homes.

    'Entirely preventable'

    The University College London (UCL) study calculated that 9,000 deaths was the highest number for 15 years.
    Each year, the Office for National Statistics calculates the number of additional deaths which take place in winter, caused by interrelated issues, including falls, viruses which are more prevalent in winter and cold indoor temperatures bringing on or exacerbating illness.
    Researchers took those statistics and the English Housing Survey, which collects information about the condition and energy efficiency of housing, and extrapolated the number of deaths occurring in the coldest homes.
    Dr Jessica Allen, whose team conducted the study, told BBC Panorama: "This was not the coldest winter on record. People dying from cold homes are a result of high fuel prices, low incomes and poor insulation. It's entirely preventable.
    "If that was an epidemic of some disease there would quite rightly be people marching in the streets and causing an outrage, but this is because of the cold."
    This is the highest 'excess death from cold' number reported in the last 15 years. Meanwhile the cost of electricity has risen to a record high primarily due to fighting 'climate change' with expensive AE's and closing down inexpensive fossil fuel energies.

  • Reply to

    Breakfast for deniers

    by jaketen2001 Jun 6, 2016 7:44 AM
    jj27713 jj27713 Jun 6, 2016 9:18 AM Flag

    And 9000 people died from being too cold in Britain last year. It was blamed on 'fuel poverty' in a cold winter season ie. not having enough cheap power to heat their homes. Maybe the heat deaths in India might have been prevented if there was enough cheap power to provide air conditioning?

  • Reply to

    Total Ancient Aliens

    by jaketen2001 Jun 1, 2016 11:23 PM
    jj27713 jj27713 Jun 2, 2016 1:39 AM Flag


    The source of King Tut’s blade has long been theorized to be a cosmic object, but the technology to confirm its relation to meteors has until now proven insufficient. Now, using X-ray fluorescence spectrometry, the researchers determined the ornamental dagger’s composition to be mainly iron and nickel with minor traces of cobalt, matching other iron-based meteorites.
    I find this a bit comical. As an analytical chemist, I can tell you with surety, that the means to determine that the knife was made from meteoric materials is, and has been, available for more than 80 years. Indeed, the X-ray fluorescence technique has been available for 45 years. I was using it in 1976. This is clearly a case of no one doing any proper forensic analysis on the knife until now...90 years after the knife's discovery.

    It is true that XRF is a non-destructive method of analysis, so it is preferable to actually sampling a portion of the blade to determine the elemental concentrations. Nonetheless, XRF determination could have been done 40 years ago. The real interest in this article is that the researchers were able to pinpoint one of the very few meteorites that the metal could have come from by comparing samples all of the known meteoritic debris that has been discovered in Egyptian territory.

    Nevertheless, thanks for posting this interesting article.

0.11970.0000(0.00%)May 23 4:00 PMEDT