Originally published on RenewEconomy. Investment bank Morgan Stanley says it has been overwhelmed by the response to its recent analysis which suggested that the falling costs of both solar modules and battery storage presented a potential tipping point that would encourage huge numbers of homeowners and businesses in the US to go off grid. The
Going Off Grid Nears Tipping Point, Morgan Stanley Reports was originally published on CleanTechnica.
To read more from CleanTechnica, join over 50,000 other subscribers: Google+ | Email | Facebook | RSS | Twitter.
A new, next-generation solar cell material that’s capable of emitting light as well as converting light into electricity has been developed by researchers at Nanyang Technological University (NTU). The cells themselves glow when electricity is run through them, and, according to the researchers, the coloring of this emitted light can be easily and cheaply altered.
New Solar Cell Material Is Solar Cell By Day & Light Panel By Night was originally published on CleanTechnica.
To read more from CleanTechnica, join over 50,000 other subscribers: Google+ | Email | Facebook | RSS | Twitter.
Norway can take the lead to end energy poverty with its new mandates for renewable energy investment and sustainable development. These mandates can and should call for transitioning energy access investment away from large-scale centralized energy investments to small scale, distributed clean energy investments. Norway and others have already committed over $1B in funding announced during the Rio +20 meeting in 2012, now it is time to figure out how to put that money to work. In doing so, Norway can lead the world in ending our failing approach to energy poverty.
Addressing energy poverty has been a 40-year wait. During that time span, the World Bank, India, and others have promised the poor a connection to the electricity grid. In India’s case every 5-year plan is littered with broken promises and the poor wait in the dark. As a result the world’s population is growing at about the same rate as the population gaining access to electricity – meaning 1.3 billion people are permanently left behind if something doesn’t change. What’s worse, nearly 2.5 billion people today considered “electrified” receive only a few hours of electricity per day.
The reasons for this failure are many. Beyond corruption alone, grid extension is expensive, cumbersome, and slow. But we have an opportunity to change all that. With a twenty-year track record and recent cost reductions, it is well acknowledged today that distributed renewable energy is the fastest, cheapest and most effective means of delivering on the world’s energy access goals.
But it’s not just us that believe distributed renewables are the solution to energy poverty. The International Energy Agency (IEA) has made clear in a series of reports the only way to reverse energy inequality is to rely heavily on small scale distributed energy infrastructure in rural areas. However, current investments by governments, public institutions, and multi-lateral banks involved in the United Nations Sustainable Energy for All (SEFA) are heavily skewed towards investments in large scale centralized power plants and grid extension. But a new way forward, catalyzed by the convergence of distributed renewable energy and mobile phone technology is emerging.
Today, three out of every four new mobile phone subscribers live in emerging markets. Just as mobile phones leapfrogged landlines across the developing world, distributed renewable energy is leapfrogging the grid, in part to power these off grid mobile customers. More importantly, mobile operators are not earning enough profit on these customers because over 500 million mobile phone customers don’t have a place to charge their phones at home. Support of this 21st century approach requires investment.
Entrepreneurs have solutions to this problem that can save families money and their lives. Already the off grid solar lighting market in sub Saharan Africa is growing at a 95% compound annual growth rate according to Lighting Africa. In Bangladesh, Grameen Shakti and others are deploying 30,000 to 40,000 solar home systems every single month. But despite this initial success, a stifling lack of access to finance so acute it can take years for entrepreneurs to raise the money to test their ideas is holding back our ability to end the travesty of energy poverty.
Luckily small amounts of venture capital from Khosla Impact, Solar City, and other mainstream, hard-nosed investors has changed the sector in the past 6 months. But private sector capital is not enough in infrastructure. That’s why twenty of the world’s leading off-grid clean energy entrepreneurs are requesting $500 million in financial commitments from leading public institutions to help them deliver on the world’s energy access goals. The group’s efforts have been backed by CEOS of more than 25 leading civil society organizations from around the world. This money has already been pledged by Governments around the world by Norway’s own Energy+ work. Now it is time to actually unlock this money not just pledge it.
So, many people are coming together to create a parallel track to the false hope of building polluting power plants and extending the existing electricity grid infrastructure to the poor. We are asking the Norwegian Sovereign wealth fund shift 5% of its total fund or ~$50B to renewable energy, and that at least 1% of that be provided to off-grid renewables. This money would not be a subsidy. It would be provided to mainstream capital providers to leverage their expertise and provide a compelling return back to investors – just like was done with microfinance.
We have a once in a generation opportunity to do something that matters. The eradication of energy poverty is an essential step to the empowerment of women, education of children, effectiveness of health care, and attainment of the millennium development goals. There are over one billion reasons for Norway to help us make this happen. We’re asking them to help us bring the world from darkness to light.
Jigar Shah is author of Creating Climate Wealth: Unlocking the Impact Economy, 2013 Icosa Publishing. Shah unlocked the multi-billion dollar worldwide solar industry with a business model innovation (Power Purchase Agreement), not a new technology. This model created SunEdison, the largest solar services company worldwide. Jigar Shah has shown that business model innovation applied to the biggest challenge of our lifetime – climate change – will unlock a $10 trillion dollar new economy.
After SunEdison was sold in 2009, Jigar served through 2012 as the first CEO of the Carbon War Room —the global organization founded by Sir Richard Branson and Virgin Unite to help entrepreneurs address climate change. SunEdison and Carbon War Room proved that we could make positive change through business and financial model innovation in many industries. Today, as CEO of Jigar Shah Consulting, he works with global companies in a multitude of industries to deploy existing clean energy solutions fueled by new business models.
Image Credit: Norwegian flag with typical norwegian red wooden house with sod roof via Shutterstock
Norway Can End Energy Poverty was originally published on CleanTechnica. To read more from CleanTechnica, join over 50,000 other subscribers: Google+ | Email | Facebook | RSS | Twitter.
Brighter and more resilient LEDs can be created via the use of a new processing technique developed by researchers from North Carolina State University. The improvements are achieved by coating the semiconductor material gallium nitride (GaN) with a layer of phosphorus-derived acid. “By coating polar GaN with a self-assembling layer of phosphonic groups, we were
Brighter, More Resilient LEDs Via New Processing Technique was originally published on CleanTechnica.
To read more from CleanTechnica, join over 50,000 other subscribers: Google+ | Email | Facebook | RSS | Twitter.
Lisanne Boling, EnergyTrends.org Vermont, Pennsylvania and California ranked as the most friendly to renewable energy according to new rankings from EnergyTrends.org. EnergyTrends.org’s ranking system takes not only state policies into account but also energy consumption and generation data. Other factors considered include growth of renewable energy, state programs for renewable energy, and other factors. Bonus
EnergyTrends.org Ranks Renewable Energy Leaders was originally published on CleanTechnica.
To read more from CleanTechnica, join over 50,000 other subscribers: Google+ | Email | Facebook | RSS | Twitter.
Admittedly, this article is jumping off of an article that is ~3 weeks old, which is probably ancient in the world of investing, but I think it’s still useful and interesting for the underlying points.
At the end of February, Adam Jonas of Morgan Stanley projected that Tesla stock could go up to $320 within 12 months, one of the higher estimates on the table, while John Lovallo of BofA Merrill Lynch had its target at $65. Kirk Lindstrom, decided to examine the arguments behind each case over on Seeking Alpha.
Jonas’ $320 was a doubling of Morgan Stanley’s previous target price of $153! From the article:
Key assumptions are:
“Tesla’s annual sales to reach almost 400,000 units by 2020, and around 1.1 million units by 2028.” This would give Tesla a global market share of roughly 0.9% by 2020.
The new “Gigafactory” will cut the cost of the battery nearly in half: “With full-scale battery operations, Tesla battery packs used in the Model S, which currently cost over $15,000, could eventually cost close to $100 per kilowatt hour (kWh), or around $8,500 apiece.”
Much arm-waving about the benefit of being in the Silicon Valley with a lot of us smart people: “Tesla is Ideally Positioned to Lead the Autonomous Cars Segment.”
Opportunity in Energy Storage for the Home and business markets. “Electric utility demand in the US is currently a $400 billion business and a $2 trillion business globally. Morgan Stanley believes the opportunities in this space are boundless.”
Lovallo, meanwhile, thought that there wouldn’t be demand for anywhere close to 500,000 Teslas by 2020. Furthermore, he noted:
“We believe it is important for investors to remember that Tesla is an auto manufacturer, first and foremost, which is an inherently capital intensive business…. In our view, the Gigafactory investment will translate to even more capital intensity and add further pressure to margins and returns.”
Now, Lindstrom then went further and examined how much growth Tesla really needs to see in order to compete with leading competitors (or the closest thing to them) — Mercedes and BMW.
If we assume that Tesla can meet the bullish forecast for 400,000 cars by 2020, that would put it at number 33 in a world ranking of auto production by manufacture for 2012 according to The International Organization of Motor Vehicle Manufacturers, or OICA.
1.1 million units would place Tesla in 20th place, several slots below Daimler AG (OTCPK:DDAIF) (Mercedes) at #12 and BMW at #14, which I believe are Tesla’s main competition.
Unlike Tesla, BMW is already building over two million autos a year at a profit, while paying a 3% dividend.
According to Bloomberg, BMW has a market cap of 53,917 million euros (about US$74B), with a 2.98% dividend yield and a PEG ratio of 2.5.
If you believe Tesla can grow earnings by 52% a year for five years, then you can make a case based on PEG that it will grow into its current valuation and it would look cheap compared to BMW if it could pay a 3% dividend. Growing earnings at over 50% a year for five years is difficult, especially when the competition is so large.
Indeed, as much as I think Tesla can disrupt the auto industry, that’s essentially betting that almost everything goes right, which is a risky bet. I think I’d take the stance Elon took last year: Tesla investors are putting a lot of faith into Tesla achieving some very considerable targets.
Do I think Tesla won’t achieve them? No, I think Tesla will. But I also wouldn’t put my money on a stock based on such large growth that is based on so many difficult things going well. As much as I am a Tesla fanboy and think I will buy a Tesla someday, I don’t think I could justify such assumptions when there are so many other, safer buys out there.
Before closing, there were a handful of comments under the article that I wanted to highlight. Here’s a big one from user 6012571:
MY roommate’s boyfriend works at TSLA and he’s been selling his shares since they hit $120. Since they have restrictions on the stock they have to wait unitl the restictions come off. He, and I, and her, laugh all the way to the bank.. I bought at $40 and sold out at $180 with no regrets. He has told me all of the other employees dump the stock the first chance they get and are buying condos, houses, ect… NOT TESLA CARS. WALL ST can be so dumb.
Here’s a simple but elegant one, from NetworkBob:
A $30B market cap for a company that produces less than 40K automotive units annually is a stretch.
Here’s on on the other side, from Ford Prefect 1969:
This whole Ford is better than Tesla conversation brings to mind a funny story told by Steve Jobs around the time of his return to Apple.
It went something like this:
“So they told me Apple is like a ship with a hole in the bottom, and they asked me…. could I help to steer it in the right direction”
Tesla is the hole in the bottom of the ship called the auto industry. It really does not matter how big the industry players currently are or what direction they turn in, until such a time as they can address the fact that Tesla is producing vehicles that are far more advanced and desirable and far better value for money in their class, Tesla will continue to flood the ship.
It is not a question of what Tesla is worth. The burden of proof now rests on whether F, GM, TM, etc will be worth anything at all a decade hence.
One thing is for sure, TSLA will be worth a lot more in 10 years time than it is now. The same cannot be said for any other member of the balance of the auto industry.
Another from him:
Not sure that it matters that Tesla does not currently compete with Ford.
It will do, imminently in auto industry timescales, and Ford is nowhere near ready for that.
This: http://bit.ly/1gAn52z
Is a screen grab from a Tesla recruitment video hosted on Vimeo.
It is not a Model S and it fits the description of the Model E. It probably is an early CAD rendering of it.
This thing at $35K with free long distance travel, no pain at the pump and not for profit servicing I think will more than challenge anything from Ford that starts with a base price in excess of $20K and make a laughing stock of the C-Max, Lincoln hybrids and Fusion energi products at around the same sticker price.
It will take a while for Tesla to gain mega scale production, but I cannot see anything on the horizon to prevent Tesla behaving as a monopoly and absorbing market share absolutely as fast as practicality and cash flows permit. That is another problem for the current crop of big auto. Tesla’s business model allows it to expand cash flow positive in excess of 50% annually and I believe 100% without burning any cash.
Evidently it also has as much access to capital as it wants. $2bn is nothing, I was amazed that it asked for so little. I am sure $5 bn would have been no problem either. Think on that when in less than 2 years Tesla reports that it has a million reservations for the car in the picture above.
That is the risk Ford and others are facing, the auto market is Tesla’s playground now. That much is clear for the sake of looking. Relative production volumes at the dawn of massive change are a smoke screen.
DeepValueLover gets to the heart of the matter, imho:
If Tesla’s current price is based on the rate of growth then why is the price 2.56 higher than that pace of growth?
…and that is with Tesla growing earnings at 100% per year.
The stock price is ~2x the value of future growth.
There will be a SEVERE pullback…probably this year.
But I’ll also at Ford Prefect 1969‘s response to that comment:
@DeepValueLover
I think the starry eyed shorts will be SEVERLEY disappointed.
There may well be a gradual tapering of earnings multiples over a period of years. Set against that is the fact that the forward looking statements of this company are ridiculously conservative.
The big money knows it, that $2bn of bonds targeting $360 is big money.
Here are the market caps for a handful of auto companies as I write this (all values are in USD):
And here are 2013 vehicle sales for those companies (in millions) as well as a 500,000 estimate for Tesla in 2020:
Is Tesla Stock Worth $65, $320, $229, or… ? was originally published on EV Obsession.
Results for my poll on what will be the “Top-Selling Electric Car In US & Europe In 2014″ are in. The winner for both locations isn’t a big surprise, but it’s interesting to see how the splits turned out, and the differences between the US & European results. Have a look: US Nissan Leaf 56.64%
Top-Selling Electric Car In US & Europe In 2014 Will Be… was originally published on CleanTechnica.
To read more from CleanTechnica, join over 50,000 other subscribers: Google+ | Email | Facebook | RSS | Twitter.
Can We Harness Ocean Waves to Power Your Home? from Experiment on Vimeo.
Wind energy experts have harnessed the movement of air to produce cheap electricity. The movement of water, waves, is another source of energy being explored and utilized.
To use wave energy to create electricity, one realizes the force of water.
Marcus Lehmann, who is 80% to his $9,622 wave energy funding goal with just 2 days left, inquires, “Can we solve future energy and freshwater crises with the Power of Ocean Waves?”
Marcus and his team clearly think it could help. “Our engineering team at UC Berkeley is developing a new Wave Energy Converter that is able to efficiently harvest this energy,” he writes.
“With your support, we can continue our development towards a first pilot plant in the ocean and want to reward our Top 50 backers with special Thank-You-Packages (details at end of the page)!”
Apparently, this isn’t the same old wave energy technology we’ve been covering for years, and the crew thinks it can be economically competitive. Furthermore, the team already has a prototype:
In our wave tank laboratory, we have developed a proof-of-concept-prototype and have successfully tested the functionality and ability of the converter to cancel waves and generate power.
While solar and wind power are currently cheaper and are more abundant, wave energy also has some advantages. “The main advantage of Wave Energy over Solar and Wind Energy is its high availability, reliability and higher power densities (Solar: 0.3 kW/m2, Wind: 3 kW/m2, Waves: 30 kW/m).”
Here’s more on the funds the team is pursuing and what they will be use for:
Budget Overview
The budget will be used for:
1. Hydraulic Pumps – Two competing power take-off technologies will be tested separately: a) industrially available double acting reciprocating linear cylinder pumps, and b) large scale diaphragm type pumps.2. Carpet Material – Carpet materials will be purchased from an industry partner and expert in elastomers.
3. Wave Gages – In order to evaluate the efficiency of the prototype under various sea states, the essential values that are to be determined experimentally are the wave height before and after the device and the generated flux. This will be measured with Wave Gages and a non invasive Electromagnetic Flowmeter.
4. Magnetic Flow Meter – For high accuracy real time measurement of the system’s performance, a magnetic flux measurement instrument will be purchased.
Head on over to the “experiment” page to chip in!
Wave Energy Project Looking For Support — Crowdfund It! was originally published on CleanTechnica. To read more from CleanTechnica, join over 50,000 other subscribers: Google+ | Email | Facebook | RSS | Twitter.
Risk is about both the probability of something bad happening and how bad that bad thing is. And the decision to take a risk or not involves weighing all of that with the benefits that come from the action you want to take. We’ve built our electric grids in quite a risky way. Some might
Terrorists Could Put US Out Of Electricity For 1½ Years, Solar Power Could Help Grid Security Considerably was originally published on CleanTechnica.
To read more from CleanTechnica, join over 50,000 other subscribers: Google+ | Email | Facebook | RSS | Twitter.
