I am talking about a situation that a nationwide solar policy is not possible for homesites because of trees.
And then some of the solar advocacy that is going around is not realistic.
And it's not just the expense of cutting down trees but the benefit of the trees in summer heat. Hardwood trees shade the house in summer but allow sunlight through in winter. Also, trees have water evaporating out of the leaves and that is a very cool shade.
We could require "ground source heat pumps" for new residential construction.
We could give tax breaks for "ground source heat pumps".
We could outlaw new two-story houses in sunbelt areas
The problem would be every homesite in suburbia cutting down their trees. The demand on the A/C would increase.
Favoring solar panels is silly when the homesite can have trees and "ground source heat pumps".
That's very close to what I have been proposing.
Tourist trollies could be powered by fuel cells and then not need the overhead wires. Also, the tourist trolly can use central refueling and so there's no problem. And the result is zero tailpipe emission.
Of course if light rail is to use fuel cells then that's even a bigger market
I call it passive geothermal because it's not a connection to a hot spring. It just taps into regular underground temperature. Someone said "ground source heat pump" and that's okay. I've also heard of "geothermal wells" and that from a Nobel prize winner in an interview.
The Musk idea of connecting solar panels to batteries is a good idea. But solar panels on housetops works best in desert climates. For instance, Olmstead parks are famous for how cool they are in summertime and that's the use of hardwood trees.
No, those who think that solar panels will work on every housetop are looking for a simple answer to make a perfect world.
Passive geo-thermal will work for every house as a system that aids the heating and A/C.
Hardwood trees shading the house in summertime aid the A/C. Those trees have water evaporating out of the leaves. There's a big difference between natural shade and artificial shade
Both solar power and wind power require surface area.
Solar panels on every house top will not work because the favorable effect of hardwood trees is lost. (Hardwood trees shade the house in summertime but let sunlight through in wintertime.)
Every house could have a passive geo-thermal system that just aids the primary systems.
Solar power and wind power could be set up in remote areas where there is no land cost and no demand for power. Then that power could be used to make hydrogen from water and even from sea water. And then the hydrogen could be carried to major markets by ship. The water dripping out of the tailpipes is no longer sea water and goes into the local ecosystem.
A simple first step is an international ban on coal burning power plants. This requires availability of liquefied natural gas and that market is developing. Then there's the choice of burning the natural gas or using it in fuel cells. This is no zero pollution but less pollution than burning coal
Why does T go down when the dollar goes up ? And why does it go up when the dollar goes down ?
I suppose that it is trading like a bond and going down on the threat of higher interest rates.
Oh, if book value and earnings are two separate situations then the company can appear to be profitable when it has really fallen behind.
If book value gain/loss is combined with earnings then the business becomes more difficult.
Forgot to mention the part about less leverage available with rising interest rates and because of the increased expense of the leverage.
The funny thing is the matter-of-fact profitable business based on investing in securities. The size of the business can drop drastically but it's still profitable. Of course that depends on a liquid market. If a company got margin calls (beyond its cash) but was unable to sell the securities then that would bankruptcy.
On second thought, an open-end mutual fund like TLT and a closed-end mutual fund like ACG are not valued at book value. They can have values greater or less than net-asset-value.
To be valued at book value would require a portfolio of bonds but then who is going to leverage those bonds for you ? IB is the only place I know for leverage greater than standard leverage.
How about a mReit that is valued according to the current mortgage rate and nothing else ? Well, take into account the actual mortgage bond values, interest expenses, and the value of hedges and that is being valued at book value.
Well, that's what TLT does except TLT is not leveraged or hedged.
And so take a look at ACG and that is leveraged and hedged. But the interest rate is about half what NLY pays and actually less than half.
Another idea is that AGNC went to a monthly dividend.
Or CMO is floating rate mortgages that should rise with interest rate increases but no sign yet of rising.
There are floating rate loans like BKLN but the interest rate is only about 4%. However, floating rate senior loans in closed-end-funds are often leveraged and pay up to about 7%. Then the idea here is that the floating rate loans will increase in value as interest rates go up. The problem is credit quality which is mostly BB to B and so the value of the loans is unpredictable but mostly good if stock earnings are good.
In general, another thing to know is that interest rate increases for the purpose of reducing inflation sometimes support the values of long term bonds while reducing the value of short term bonds. However, we are hearing about interest rate increases in response to good job numbers with no inflation actually in sight. Well, doesn't matter, if the Fed increases interest rates then they must be giving up on an inflation target.
Run to the stock market ? Well, watch real carefully to see if U.S. multi-national companies are hurt by the strong dollar. Of course there are companies with mostly domestic business like telecommunications companies. International stocks ? Well, Germany, South Korea, and Taiwan stock investments gets exporters and exporters benefit from a strong dollar
Tesla is built from the ground up. They have their own manufacturing plant. There is a little problem with their car in that it is built using traditional construction methods and doesn't reduce weight enough.
Apple is said to have a car built for it by a contract manufacturer. This is going nowhere. They might brand a BYD Chinese car or something like that but their technology will be so far behind the BMW i3 that who would want to call it an Apple-technology ?
The best thing that they could do is a marketing agreement with BMW concerning the i3 and i8. The BMW i3 is the first mass-produced carbon fiber car. It's a lightweight chassis that makes the electric vehicle possible. Everything else will fall on its face
And Apple because they are a software company is going to be a great car company ?
It's Bosch that created the electronic car. And they've been doing it since about 1960.
It is actually Tesla that highly developed a redundant electric vehicle battery pack.
Fuel Cell cars are on the way. They weigh less than electric vehicles, they have more range than electric vehicles, and they re-fuel faster than electric vehicles. Hydrogen goes in a fuel tank at 5000 psi and that runs an electric motor. There's no heavy batteries.
Lotus and Corvette were lightweight cars before the arrival of carbon fiber tubs. (The Tesla Roadster is Lotus chassis technology while the Tesla Sedan is not.)
The first mass-market carbon fiber car ? I would say that it's the BMW i3. Other carbon fiber cars have been low production supercars.
Now where is Apple ?
Well, the software-defined car has already begun having problems.
One example, traction control systems prevent wheelspin and allow powerful cars with normal size tires. However, preventing wheelspin is not getting the power down and if the power can't be put down then what is it for ? The traction control system has just allowed the marketing of more powerful cars rather than a usefulness of powerful cars.
Otherwise, a powerful car with a four-wheel-drive system can put the power down.
Another example, electronic stability control can straighten up a slide but if a slide at mid-curve is immediately straightened up that results in a spin-out. A slide at mid-curve must be carried all the way to the end of the curve.
Electronic control of fuel injection and ignition has worked very well. Electronic brake force distribution has worked well.
And enormous advancement in cars is happening with the chassis. And it's the very strong and very lightweight carbon fiber tub. The so-called tub is the mid-section of the chassis that holds metal structures that reach to the front and rear suspensions.
BMW already built the Apple cars, the i3 and the i8. These cars have the mid chassis section made out of carbon fiber and they are way ahead of anything else.