True. The bonds they sold last time are now rated "junk". It seems to me they will have to accept very unfavorable terms, if they go that way. What are the chances they offer shares?
Somebody said, "don't count your money while you're sitting at the table."
I think that was wise advice.
That's true. Many drivers could use less. If you want to assume a 1/4 charge then you need 250 sq ft, or 125 sq ft in ideal conditions. These are only approximate numbers, but they are fair and reasonable.
Of course another question arises. How many drivers will be able to park the car at home all day. One answer could be panels installed at peoples workplaces. Another would be larger panels so a partial charge could be done in a few hours.
The point was to get the number or array size back in the ball park.
(Not all bears are haters, or anti science)
The solar panel area required would be on the order of 1000 square feet for a full charge. This will vary a lot depending on season and latitude and weather. Under ideal conditions 500 square feet could do it.
Another way to highlight my view is to ask this question: Would the condition of the atmosphere be improved if we waved a magic wand, and tomorrow morning every motor vehicle in the world had been turned into an EV? But no change is made to anything else. The grid is still the same, and is allowed to receive new and cleaner power sources at whatever rate we can achieve. Will the air be better in a month, a year, or 5 years?
Now another question: Would the atmosphere be improved any more, or any sooner, if the magic wand replaced every fossil fuel power plant with wind, solar, hydro, or ocean wave generators, but all the worlds vehicles stay the way they are? In this case we are allowed to replace ICE cars with EVs at whatever rate people choose. Will the air be better in a month, a year, 5 years etc?
I think the answers to these questions reveal that fixing the grid would make a much bigger positive difference. And EVs alone hardly do anything. But because it is a gigantic project to repower the whole world, and relatively easy to build EVs, we are getting the EVs first, before they can really help much.
Ideally, the magic wand would invent environmentally desirable batteries, convert the grid to renewables, and convert most vehicles (except cool collector cars) into EVs. But this is the real world.
How do you charge your EV?
I don't take issue with your disapproval of the lobbying tactics of the energy companies. I never said they were good guys. But I hold the end users responsible for whatever survival the companies enjoy, and for whatever pollution is caused by burning the fuels. Any company is a helpless goner, if consumers refuse to use their product.
You are correct. The problem is only with EVs that do use the grid to charge, and then only until the grid is clean. There are some advances in alternative, renewable energy, so at some point in the future we could get it right. And hopefully somebody will develop a battery, or other means of storage, that isn't awful to dispose of when it's dead.
My question is, when will we reach the point when victory can honestly be declared? I'm sure you don't think we are there yet. And I hope you can agree that most power used to charge EVs now is from the grid, and that the grid is far from where we want it. It's going to take a long time even if people wholeheartedly support the effort.
So I'd say the study is relevant now. We agree in our hope to get off coal and change the energy economy so that eventually a new study will give us a better report. I just don't want people to be satisfied with a their Prius, Leaf, or Tesla, and think because they plug it in every night they have done all that is needed. Especially, if they only have a tiny token size array on their roof, or no array.
I see the drivers of the cars causing the pollution problem, whatever fossil fuel is burned to release the energy. If people don't want the pollution, or if they don't want the oil and coal companies, all they have to do is start walking instead of driving cars. Those companies could be wiped out and gone, if people had the will to stop using the energy they sell. We choose what we do. The cars and oil companies don't hold a gun to our heads.
And EVs are coal burners unless EV owners are willing to shell out another 80k for a big enough array of panels to charge them.
The disruptive technology effect is already priced in. That's old news. The market knows that already. Now, if it doesn't start disrupting in an obvious way, and doesn't start making money doing that, it will eventually roll over and sell off. Stocks move up on new information that was unexpected, or a lot better than expected. The reward for doing what the market already has priced in is to get tanked, or at best to be allowed to go sideways.
Of course natural gas is a fossil fuel and I'm including it. What I meant was, Unless you have a huge array of panels, the only thing you accomplish by driving an EV instead of a gas car is to shift the fossil fuel burning from the car's engine, to the power plant.
If it's that obvious, I have a suggestion for you. Get all the cash you can by maxing out your credit cards and taking out a home equity loan. Then buy all the TSLA shares you can afford on margin.
The effort should be on better ways to generate electricity to charge the batteries. Without that, better batteries hardly accomplish any improvement in the overall situation.
Montana is right about the fees.
Another thing is that you are in a poker game, and Goldman is one of the other players at the table. Goldman has 3 aces, and thinks the other players are stupid and gullible. So he advises anyone with two pars or less to raise. He also recommends that anyone with a full house or 4 of a kind should fold.
I think EV's may be a good idea where the electricity is from nukes. You still have a waste battery problem, though. There are no easy answers.
You are right. Maybe take a look at some spreads. There are many ways to use options beyond simply buying them outright. It's more complex than trading stock, and you need to study the various plays carefully. There are some important things to know.
A battery pack from a Tesla car, would need to be adapted or run through additional equipment to sell back to the grid. The inverter must deliver exactly 60 cycles and these must be in phase with the grid's cycles. Also the voltage needs to be regulated so the current flows the right way at a rate the battery can deliver safely. Any home system that sells power back does this, so it's not a big deal. It's just a detail that adds to the process of using a weak car battery that way. You can't just "hook it up".