A good use for the fuel cell. Using otherwise wasted byproduct hydrogen for power generation at a chlorine plant. Although the one megawatt is a small fraction of the power that this chemical plant likely uses, it still is a great recovery solution of that otherwise 'lost' power.
I think the recent trading at the $1.60 level is being watched closely. As it looks to me, the stock may have a hard time rising, and staying above, the $1.60 level. A holder of a large share position might have been convinced of that as well and opted to get out and find a better risk investment for now.
No Randy. Battery powered vehicles are Ballard's primary competitor in the new propulsion space whether you acknowledge that or not. You have to know your competition...
The fact that the share offering price was ~20% below last market close shows that Ballard as a company and a product is still weak and with lots of uncertainties present among owners and buyers. Despite the plethora of optimist comments, the company growth is still modest in terms of sales and profits and apparently will remain so for the next several quarters.
Ballard continues to burn through significant cash and occasionally needs to replace it with SO's as they are apparently non-sustainable with existing sales and service income, yet. Buying some future cash flow was interesting, but it sure cost the investors...
One of their biggest competing technologies/competitors, TSLA, still supports a very optimistic stock price with investors that is holding up despite pressure from media sceptics...
"What would we do without blue to interpret all our news for us? It all looks positive except for a little bit of dilution."
It looks like the market doesn't agree with you, red. What is wrong with all those market people anyway? How could so many of them be on the other side of the coin?
What are we going to do without red interpreting everyone else's interpretations?
Let's see how many batteries you use now...
Maybe shavers, smart phones, dumb phones, power tools, yard tools, flashlights, watches, computers, GPS, camera, stud finders, laser levels, solar lights, automobiles, car keys... Yeah, I'm sure you don't use any of those bad batteries...
Is the Earth in partial demise? Do you have proof? Or is that just speculation?
I understand how you feel. I would be worried, too. If this chemistry was used in the Tesla would it triple the Tesla range to 840+ miles?
Range expected to increase from 75 miles to 250 miles...
To prove previous assertions that the next-generation Leaf could get more than “400 km” (250 miles) on Japan’s optimistic test cycle, a video was shown to shareholders of a Leaf driver who goes on an easygoing drive with 417 km on the odometer, and returns with more than 200 km remaining.
Whether Nissan will produce a 250–plus mile Leaf perhaps by 2018-2019 has yet to be announced, but the clear implication based on this and previous reports is it will.
If so, it will be made possible as the automaker is testing “new materials and chemistry solutions in order to make thinner, lighter weight and less costly batteries.”
CenturyLink Inc. (NYSE: CTL) was downgraded to Neutral from Overweight at JPMorgan. The firm also lowered the price target down to $35 from $42 in the call, after a $31.88 close. CenturyLink has consensus analyst price target of $37.00 and a 52-week range of $31.51 to $45.67.
Teekay LNG Partners L.P. (NYSE:TGP) will next issue their quarterly earnings announcement on 2015-08-06. Brokerage firm analysts surveyed by Zacks research are estimating earnings of $0.53 per share. This is the consensus number calculated from the 3 polled analysts taken into consideration by Zacks. Institutions and investors alike will be closely monitoring estimate revisions of the EPS numbers leading up to the expected results date.
Stock Price Target
Sell-side firms covering the equity are estimating that the stock will reach $41 on a short-term basis. This is the mean estimate based on the 3 brokerage analysts surveyed by Zacks. The most bullish analyst sees the stock reaching 45 while the most conservative target is set at $37.
By simplifying the analyst ratings into a 1 to 5 scale where 1 represents a Strong Buy and 5 a Strong Sell, Teekay LNG Partners L.P. has a rating of 2.83 . This is the arithmetic mean of all the analyst estimates taken into consideration by Zacks. When the same analysts were polled three months ago, the rating was at 2.83.
Item2): What I don't understand is why you think that the Earth might never before been free of ice in the past? The Earth has been ice-free at the poles before through most of the Paleozoic and most of the Eocene. Tropical conditions existed and dinosaurs lived above the Arctic circle. But from the late Eocene, the temperatures have continued to cool for tens of millions of years. (Why? No-one knows...) Ice at the poles began occurring as a long string of ice ages occurred. As time went by, the ice began to remain at the poles longer and longer until it began to last through an entire interglacial warming period. During all this time plant and animal life flourished and evolved.
The take away here is that the Earth never has been known to go through a runaway warming period despite temperatures many degrees on average warmer, with the poles free of ice and with CO2 levels a factor of ten higher than today.
Currently, the global temperatures are about in the mid range of the latest interglacial and are in the same place as the last three interglacials. They are down 1-1.5 degrees from the highest they have been since this current interglacial began.
At the current rate of melting Greenland alone will take more than 1000 years to melt and Antarctica much longer...maybe never by some estimates. All we 'know' about polar ice is from a tiny interval of 33 years of decent satellite measurements...which is absolutely nothing in terms of time scales that are geologic in length. And even with that puny database we have experts on each side claiming completely opposite theories and timeframes of predictions.
Heavy metals, particulates, NOx, radioisotopes...these are real, human caused pollutants. CO2? Virtually nothing compared to the others. The others have huge evidences of being detrimental. CO2 has huge evidences of being beneficial.
I, too, agree those are big numbers. But the atmosphere is also very big and there is a massive CO2 removal system called the ocean. It constantly dissolves to CO2 which leads to more diatoms which leads to more calcium mineral precipitation which leads to more removal as carbonate minerals in the crust.
Since the whole carbon cycle thing strives for equilibrium, the more CO2 in the atmosphere leads to faster precipitation rates and mineral formation. When you consider that of all the CO2 put into the atmosphere in the last century by man has only 'possibly' changed the pH of the ocean by 'possibly' 0.1 pH units you can see how powerful the ocean-atmosphere equilibrium system is. The BIG problem is that some scientists view the PH change of 0.1 units as significant where many other scientists say it is well within normal ranges.
So is the excess CO2 really causing a catastrophic problem or is it well within normal operating ranges? Remember that it has been determined many times that the current levels of CO2 is at the very low end of geological historical levels. The Earth didn't end when CO2 was at levels of 5000 ppm and was flush with sea and land life and was maybe 1 degree warmer globally than today.
So, yes, in our tiny 200 year temperature and CO2 monitoring history, we are seeing some changes due to man. But in that same history we are supporting 6 billion more people and truly thriving, too. Are the changes really detrimental to the health and well-being of the 7 billion people on the Earth now? I see no evidence that it is... Now non-CO2 pollution is truly a problem and we are taking big strides to control that as we should. The China and India problems of high pollution have probably peaked and will be on a long downhill reduction from now on.
But CO2 as a 'pollutant'? That is about the most trivial problem there is in the overall scheme of things.
That is my point, blue. Ballard currently appears to have no fundamental grand plans that are showing up anywhere in a way that could massively benefit them. Not automotive power plants. Not hydrogen infrastructure. Not hydrogen supplies. Not big pockets. Not vehicles.
The EV industry seems to have made much more substantial progress along these lines. Therefore, the EV population and growth rates are much higher.
Hence my question... What are your plans Ballard?
The jump from the carbon zinc battery to the alkaline to the Ni-Cad to the NiMH and finally to the lithium have all been major advances. There are about ten very promising new chemistries on the lab bench now that have the potential to up the energy density 2-5 times the current lithium chemistries...meaning multiples of todays range are possible down the road.
Yes, EV's may not be for everybody. Maybe not you. But millions have been sold throughout the world to date in one form or another. The numbers vastly outrun hydrogen vehicles and so do the filling stations. They are a major force to be reckoned with.
Ballard's plans might be to get the state of Nevada to begin installing hydrogen fueling stations for future FCV vehicles powered by Ballard stacks, blue.
From the Reno Gazette...
Gov. Brian Sandoval and NV Energy unveiled the Nevada Electric Highway on Tuesday, a network of charging stations planned along U.S. Route 95 that would finally make it far easier to drive sparsely populated, mostly desert route between Reno and Las Vegas with an electric vehicle.
Though only about 1,400 electric vehicles are registered in Nevada, the state has been paying close attention to EVs lately because of Tesla Motors. The electric-car maker is building its giant battery "gigafactory" outside of Reno. So the state's fortunes will be tied to the success of electric cars.
Officials thought making charging easy along the only major highway connecting the state's two largest cities would be a good place to start.
"We've all driven this road before and have anxiety (even) with getting gas," said Sandoval. "Now we can have confidence to charge our electric vehicles and drive them from place to place (in Nevada)."
The state has 150 charging stations installed so far. The Nevada Electric Highway initiative will kick off by adding five more by November. What makes those five stations especially crucial is where they'll be located. In addition to connecting the northern and southern parts of the state for electric vehicle owners, the Electric Highway is also expected to link rural areas and bring business to those communities from EV owners who make the stop to charge their cars.
Here's the competition Ballard. What are your plans?
CA, alone, has over 4200 EV public and fleet charging stations (outside the other 10 million residential charging points, of course). In the US there are already over 50,000 charging points. That's almost 1/3 the number of all the gasoline stations. By 2020 the number of non-residential charging points will exceed the number of gas stations in the US (~150,000) . How many H2 fueling stations will there be?