dimitrig said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

Your 3rd paragraph is super spot on. I remember when we thought market factors would democratize China. Wrong. Instead of them moving toward us with their values they are using capitalism to try to win the world over toward their values. That's another value proposition in favor of targeted tariffs.

---

Unlike us, the Chinese make a point of not pushing their values on their trade partners or allies, they believe that their political system is tied to their own cultural values, norms and history and not necessarily transportable. This is a departure from Mao's time when communism was viewed as an internationalist/universal movement. This is also a big difference with the US and western countries, as we believe that our current value system is superior to all others and should be imposed on the rest of the world.

China's mixed system of industrial capitalism and socialism has delivered for them, having lifted them out of poverty and created an 800 million strong middle class.

---

Are you kidding? The entire point of the Belt and Road initiative is to give China dominant leverage over other countries. And I think North Korea, Hong Kong and Taiwan (not to mention China's other neighbors) would be surprised to learn that China was agnostic about other country's political systems.

If the US wanted to impose its values on the rest of the world, we could - by force. How many countries win wars (like the US did in WWII and just leave)?

And in terms of the second bolded statement, how would you assess that statement in relation to political Islam or for that matter Russia? You're a big defender of Putin's Russia and Hamas (political islamists). Do you think their respective policies seek to push their preferred values and political systems on his neighbors? If not, how do you explain the historical expansion of Islam by force/jihad?

I understand that you don't like the noecon approach. It failed, so that fair. But to suggest that the US is the only country that had those goals - or that the US is particularly worse than other countries - is just wrong.

---

Leave after WW2?

There are STILL American military bases in Japan and Germany.

---

Not to mention Panama Canal,
We have our own Belt and Road all over the world.

This is xenophobia we are reading.
Really crazy, uninformed MAGA type stuff.
Dude grew up on John Wayne heroism.
The myth of Americana. Our lore. Our self image.

Tequila, what kind of global travel have you done? And London/Rome/Bora Bora don't count.

dimitrig said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

Your 3rd paragraph is super spot on. I remember when we thought market factors would democratize China. Wrong. Instead of them moving toward us with their values they are using capitalism to try to win the world over toward their values. That's another value proposition in favor of targeted tariffs.

---

Unlike us, the Chinese make a point of not pushing their values on their trade partners or allies, they believe that their political system is tied to their own cultural values, norms and history and not necessarily transportable. This is a departure from Mao's time when communism was viewed as an internationalist/universal movement. This is also a big difference with the US and western countries, as we believe that our current value system is superior to all others and should be imposed on the rest of the world.

China's mixed system of industrial capitalism and socialism has delivered for them, having lifted them out of poverty and created an 800 million strong middle class.

---

Are you kidding? The entire point of the Belt and Road initiative is to give China dominant leverage over other countries. And I think North Korea, Hong Kong and Taiwan (not to mention China's other neighbors) would be surprised to learn that China was agnostic about other country's political systems.

If the US wanted to impose its values on the rest of the world, we could - by force. How many countries win wars (like the US did in WWII and just leave)?

And in terms of the second bolded statement, how would you assess that statement in relation to political Islam or for that matter Russia? You're a big defender of Putin's Russia and Hamas (political islamists). Do you think their respective policies seek to push their preferred values and political systems on his neighbors? If not, how do you explain the historical expansion of Islam by force/jihad?

I understand that you don't like the noecon approach. It failed, so that fair. But to suggest that the US is the only country that had those goals - or that the US is particularly worse than other countries - is just wrong.

---

Leave after WW2?

There are STILL American military bases in Japan and Germany.

---

Are you unaware that after WWII, the US and other victors literally occupied Japan, Germany, France, and other areas? Are we still occupying or administering those places?

In terms of military bases, they are there by invitation and formal alliances. Not as occupying forces. And when asked to leave (Okinawa), the US leaves.

For you to gloss over that distinction is absurd.

concordtom said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

Your 3rd paragraph is super spot on. I remember when we thought market factors would democratize China. Wrong. Instead of them moving toward us with their values they are using capitalism to try to win the world over toward their values. That's another value proposition in favor of targeted tariffs.

---

Unlike us, the Chinese make a point of not pushing their values on their trade partners or allies, they believe that their political system is tied to their own cultural values, norms and history and not necessarily transportable. This is a departure from Mao's time when communism was viewed as an internationalist/universal movement. This is also a big difference with the US and western countries, as we believe that our current value system is superior to all others and should be imposed on the rest of the world.

China's mixed system of industrial capitalism and socialism has delivered for them, having lifted them out of poverty and created an 800 million strong middle class.

---

Are you kidding? The entire point of the Belt and Road initiative is to give China dominant leverage over other countries. And I think North Korea, Hong Kong and Taiwan (not to mention China's other neighbors) would be surprised to learn that China was agnostic about other country's political systems.

If the US wanted to impose its values on the rest of the world, we could - by force. How many countries win wars (like the US did in WWII and just leave)?

And in terms of the second bolded statement, how would you assess that statement in relation to political Islam or for that matter Russia? You're a big defender of Putin's Russia and Hamas (political islamists). Do you think their respective policies seek to push their preferred values and political systems on his neighbors? If not, how do you explain the historical expansion of Islam by force/jihad?

I understand that you don't like the noecon approach. It failed, so that fair. But to suggest that the US is the only country that had those goals - or that the US is particularly worse than other countries - is just wrong.

---

Leave after WW2?

There are STILL American military bases in Japan and Germany.

---

Not to mention Panama Canal,
We have our own Belt and Road all over the world.

This is xenophobia we are reading.
Really crazy, uninformed MAGA type stuff.
Dude grew up on John Wayne heroism.
The myth of Americana. Our lore. Our self image.

Tequila, what kind of global travel have you done? And London/Rome/Bora Bora don't count.

---

It is remarkable how uniformed some liberals are. Who is currently in control of the Panama Canal? Maybe google that.

Ironically, we are days away from the 25th anniversary of the US literally giving back the canal to Panama and peacefully walking away from a huge strategic and economic asset. How do you not know this?

VW is planning to close not 1, but 3 factories in Germany. This is unprecedented in their 83 year history.

Ask them why.

We can't compete with an economy base that demands $15/hour.
I think that's probably 75% of it.

Whether it's steel or cars or whatever.

It certainly doesn't help that China subsidizes certain industries, but we do too. China also steals technology tgat they shouldn't.

I am in no position to comment on these last factors, but the labor cost structure for ALL inputs (raw materials to design to manufacturing) seems obvious.

Cal88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

VW is planning to close not 1, but 3 factories in Germany. This is unprecedented in their 83 year history.

Ask them why.

---

Because of very high energy costs.

---

Their labor costs are twice the industry average.

Cal88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

VW is planning to close not 1, but 3 factories in Germany. This is unprecedented in their 83 year history.

Ask them why.

---

Because of very high energy costs.

---

Yeah, no.
You cannot boil down a globally competitive auto market to this.

DiabloWags said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

VW is planning to close not 1, but 3 factories in Germany. This is unprecedented in their 83 year history.

Ask them why.

---

Because of very high energy costs.

---

Their labor costs are twice the industry average.

---

The Euro has dropped significantly in the last decade, reducing their labor cost differential, what has changed this decade is energy costs.

simplistic analysis.

China has made it very difficult to register new ICE engines.
They don't want the pollution, and they want energy independence, free of importing oil.
They're making the shift to the new energy market, and they are beating everyone there.

It's now cheaper for them to have electric cars than ICE cars. Imports from foreign brands are plummeting. There were something like 100 new Chinese car companies, but many have not made it. The best are surviving and it doesn't include VW Group and others.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2024-07-09/china-s-batteries-are-now-cheap-enough-to-power-huge-shifts

That article was last July. Electric is cheaper in China. The same cost curves will apply to the USA. Check out lithium price chart and examine new reserves markets like Thacker Pass in Northern Nevada. While USA discusses, China does. So we are slower. But, it's coming.

And new battery tech is coming, too. It's not just LFP. These improved cheaper compositions will make grid storage cheaper, too. Grid Batteries are cheaper than peaker plants. Already.

That you showed a broken underwater gas line to explain why old cost structure firms are losing, globally, to new cost structure firms is, well, inaccurate, incomplete.

USA may choose tariffs to cling to the higher cost item, and that would be its choice.

But perhaps I didn't give you proper credit. You wrote:

Quote:

---

what has changed this decade is energy costs.

---

You're right! The Chinese cost for energy has declined!

There's lots more coverage of these stories.

Coal replaced wood.
Oil replaced coal.
Renewables are replacing oil.

concordtom said:

---

simplistic analysis.

China has made it very difficult to register new ICE engines.
They don't want the pollution, and they want energy independence, free of importing oil.
They're making the shift to the new energy market, and they are beating everyone there.

It's now cheaper for them to have electric cars than ICE cars. Imports from foreign brands are plummeting. There were something like 100 new Chinese car companies, but many have not made it. The best are surviving and it doesn't include VW Group and others.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2024-07-09/china-s-batteries-are-now-cheap-enough-to-power-huge-shifts

That article was last July. Electric is cheaper in China. The same cost curves will apply to the USA. Check out lithium price chart and examine new reserves markets like Thacker Pass in Northern Nevada. While USA discusses, China does. So we are slower. But, it's coming.

And new battery tech is coming, too. It's not just LFP. These improved cheaper compositions will make grid storage cheaper, too. Grid Batteries are cheaper than peaker plants. Already.

That you showed a broken underwater gas line to explain why old cost structure firms are losing, globally, to new cost structure firms is, well, inaccurate, incomplete.

USA may choose tariffs to cling to the higher cost item, and that would be its choice.

But perhaps I didn't give you proper credit. You wrote:

Quote:

---

what has changed this decade is energy costs.

---

You're right! The Chinese cost for energy has declined!

---

Half of the people in our backward country still think that electric cars are a fad that will never catch on and that we need to drill for more oil to lower their gas prices because they live in some backwater isolated from the rest of the world.

dimitrig said:

---

concordtom said:

---

simplistic analysis.

China has made it very difficult to register new ICE engines.
They don't want the pollution, and they want energy independence, free of importing oil.
They're making the shift to the new energy market, and they are beating everyone there.

It's now cheaper for them to have electric cars than ICE cars. Imports from foreign brands are plummeting. There were something like 100 new Chinese car companies, but many have not made it. The best are surviving and it doesn't include VW Group and others.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2024-07-09/china-s-batteries-are-now-cheap-enough-to-power-huge-shifts

That article was last July. Electric is cheaper in China. The same cost curves will apply to the USA. Check out lithium price chart and examine new reserves markets like Thacker Pass in Northern Nevada. While USA discusses, China does. So we are slower. But, it's coming.

And new battery tech is coming, too. It's not just LFP. These improved cheaper compositions will make grid storage cheaper, too. Grid Batteries are cheaper than peaker plants. Already.

That you showed a broken underwater gas line to explain why old cost structure firms are losing, globally, to new cost structure firms is, well, inaccurate, incomplete.

USA may choose tariffs to cling to the higher cost item, and that would be its choice.

But perhaps I didn't give you proper credit. You wrote:

Quote:

---

what has changed this decade is energy costs.

---

You're right! The Chinese cost for energy has declined!

---

Half of the people in our backward country still think that electric cars are a fad that will never catch on and that we need to drill for more oil to lower their gas prices because they live in some backwater isolated from the rest of the world.

---

It's not until very recently that EVs have closed the gap with ICE in range and value. I think as well that they're only cheaper than ICEs in China, other manufacturers have not yet closed that gap.

dimitrig said:

---

concordtom said:

---

simplistic analysis.

China has made it very difficult to register new ICE engines.
They don't want the pollution, and they want energy independence, free of importing oil.
They're making the shift to the new energy market, and they are beating everyone there.

It's now cheaper for them to have electric cars than ICE cars. Imports from foreign brands are plummeting. There were something like 100 new Chinese car companies, but many have not made it. The best are surviving and it doesn't include VW Group and others.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2024-07-09/china-s-batteries-are-now-cheap-enough-to-power-huge-shifts

That article was last July. Electric is cheaper in China. The same cost curves will apply to the USA. Check out lithium price chart and examine new reserves markets like Thacker Pass in Northern Nevada. While USA discusses, China does. So we are slower. But, it's coming.

And new battery tech is coming, too. It's not just LFP. These improved cheaper compositions will make grid storage cheaper, too. Grid Batteries are cheaper than peaker plants. Already.

That you showed a broken underwater gas line to explain why old cost structure firms are losing, globally, to new cost structure firms is, well, inaccurate, incomplete.

USA may choose tariffs to cling to the higher cost item, and that would be its choice.

But perhaps I didn't give you proper credit. You wrote:

Quote:

---

what has changed this decade is energy costs.

---

You're right! The Chinese cost for energy has declined!

---

Half of the people in our backward country still think that electric cars are a fad that will never catch on and that we need to drill for more oil to lower their gas prices because they live in some backwater isolated from the rest of the world.

---

Funny, you say that at this moment. My best friend is currently driving from Denver to Orlando. He stayed in Little Rock last night and was in Oklahoma and Kansas before. He sent me pictures of all the abandoned little towns and said he could understand how people voted for Trump. Outside of Oklahoma City it was just totally depressing with abandon cars all over the place. Maybe there would be a gas station and a little place to get some food, but otherwise, this part of the country is not doing well.

Cal88 said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

concordtom said:

---

simplistic analysis.

China has made it very difficult to register new ICE engines.
They don't want the pollution, and they want energy independence, free of importing oil.
They're making the shift to the new energy market, and they are beating everyone there.

It's now cheaper for them to have electric cars than ICE cars. Imports from foreign brands are plummeting. There were something like 100 new Chinese car companies, but many have not made it. The best are surviving and it doesn't include VW Group and others.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2024-07-09/china-s-batteries-are-now-cheap-enough-to-power-huge-shifts

That article was last July. Electric is cheaper in China. The same cost curves will apply to the USA. Check out lithium price chart and examine new reserves markets like Thacker Pass in Northern Nevada. While USA discusses, China does. So we are slower. But, it's coming.

And new battery tech is coming, too. It's not just LFP. These improved cheaper compositions will make grid storage cheaper, too. Grid Batteries are cheaper than peaker plants. Already.

That you showed a broken underwater gas line to explain why old cost structure firms are losing, globally, to new cost structure firms is, well, inaccurate, incomplete.

USA may choose tariffs to cling to the higher cost item, and that would be its choice.

But perhaps I didn't give you proper credit. You wrote:

Quote:

---

what has changed this decade is energy costs.

---

You're right! The Chinese cost for energy has declined!

---

Half of the people in our backward country still think that electric cars are a fad that will never catch on and that we need to drill for more oil to lower their gas prices because they live in some backwater isolated from the rest of the world.

---

It's not until very recently that EVs have closed the gap with ICE in range and value. I think as well that they're only cheaper than ICEs in China, other manufacturers have not yet closed that gap.

---

Think Moore's Law.

Longer range
Shorter charge times
Longer lifespan
Less weight
Less cost

The curves are all there.

By the way…Lithium prices spiked during Covid but has since continued downward. New mining supply will be coming online, globally. And, as said, new compositions may involve cheaper element inputs, like sodium-ion batteries.

Batteries could comprise 25-40% of the total cost of a car.
Batteries are declining.

In China, 40-60% of all cars sold are EV.
They are cheaper than ICE cars.

China makes 60% of global EVs

The trends are there.

Quote:

---

Think Moore's Law.

Longer range
Shorter charge times
Longer lifespan
Less weight
Less cost

The curves are all there.

---

had to look it up..
> Moore's law is the observation that the number of transistors in an integrated circuit doubles about every two years. Moore's law is an observation and projection of a historical trend

Winning the Battery Race: How the United States Can Leapfrog China to Dominate Next-Generation Battery Technologies

The United States battery industry has fallen dangerously behind the global leaders. The main thrust of the U.S. policy response to the battery crisis must be the urgent commercialization of next-generation technologies where the United States can actually enjoy a competitive advantage.

Introduction
The United States battery industry has fallen dangerously behind the global leaders. A cornerstone of the modern economy, batteries are essential and ubiquitous across consumer electronics such as cellphones, military equipment such as drones, and clean energy products such as electric vehicles (EVs) and power grid storage installations.

Over the past decade, China has come to dominate this critical industry. Across every stage of the value chain for current-generation lithium-ion battery technologies, from mineral extraction and processing to battery manufacturing, China's share of the global market is 7090 percent.1 Japan and South Korea, once world leaders in battery technology and production, now hold minority market shares, and the United States is in a distant fourth place. As a result, the United States almost entirely relies on Asian imports for the batteries widely used today.

link to the rest of the paper:

https://carnegieendowment.org/research/2024/10/winning-the-battery-race-how-the-united-states-can-leapfrog-china-to-dominate-next-generation-battery-technologies?lang=en

concordtom said:

---

I'm going to a neighbor's now. We bought 10 425w solar panels at $125 each. He has a Chevy volt and charges it for free at home. We are doubling the capacity so it charges faster.

Install on a shed with a cheap EG4 inverter. He rarely has to pay for energy elsewhere.

I'll be doing same in 2025.

---

What state and type of area is this in? Most people living in urban or even suburban areas don't have this as an option, not to mention the technical know how to do the installation themselves.

BearGoggles said:

---

concordtom said:

---

I'm going to a neighbor's now. We bought 10 425w solar panels at $125 each. He has a Chevy volt and charges it for free at home. We are doubling the capacity so it charges faster.

Install on a shed with a cheap EG4 inverter. He rarely has to pay for energy elsewhere.

I'll be doing same in 2025.

---

What state and type of area is this in? Most people living in urban or even suburban areas don't have this as an option, not to mention the technical know how to do the installation themselves.

---

California suburbia.
I have two houses. Concord and new Auburn. The latter is 5 acres. The former is .3 acres.

Both can benefit, though more land the better.

I've taken classes to gain an education in electronics AND solar.
Soon, stores like Home Depot odor solar will exist. We transport switched from horses to cars, it was just as foreign, so don't let that be a barrier for you.

It's happening!!!
Because it's cheaper!

Cal88 said:

---

Winning the Battery Race: How the United States Can Leapfrog China to Dominate Next-Generation Battery Technologies

The United States battery industry has fallen dangerously behind the global leaders. The main thrust of the U.S. policy response to the battery crisis must be the urgent commercialization of next-generation technologies where the United States can actually enjoy a competitive advantage.

Introduction
The United States battery industry has fallen dangerously behind the global leaders. A cornerstone of the modern economy, batteries are essential and ubiquitous across consumer electronics such as cellphones, military equipment such as drones, and clean energy products such as electric vehicles (EVs) and power grid storage installations.

Over the past decade, China has come to dominate this critical industry. Across every stage of the value chain for current-generation lithium-ion battery technologies, from mineral extraction and processing to battery manufacturing, China's share of the global market is 7090 percent.1 Japan and South Korea, once world leaders in battery technology and production, now hold minority market shares, and the United States is in a distant fourth place. As a result, the United States almost entirely relies on Asian imports for the batteries widely used today.

link to the rest of the paper:

https://carnegieendowment.org/research/2024/10/winning-the-battery-race-how-the-united-states-can-leapfrog-china-to-dominate-next-generation-battery-technologies?lang=en

---

Thank you!!

I will say, regarding tariffs.
For every cheap solar panel and battery we import tariff free, we get 25+ years benefit out of it.
People fear we become entirely reliant upon the exporter, but only for new installations. We would be able to burn old tech if necessary. We would be able ramp up production, albeit at a higher cost.

In my opinion, we should take advantage of the low cost supplier and enjoy the benefits immediately.

There are other products we could import that could be dangerous, for if an immediate shutoff, trouble. I don't see solar panels as the same. Like, if China suddenly ended exports, it's not like we have no more energy.

A nation that burns oil imports is IMMEDIATELY reliant upon More imports! Not so with panels.

Do you have solar water heaters? Last time I looked into it, they are (were) even more efficient than photovoltaic panels.

concordtom said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

concordtom said:

---

I'm going to a neighbor's now. We bought 10 425w solar panels at $125 each. He has a Chevy volt and charges it for free at home. We are doubling the capacity so it charges faster.

Install on a shed with a cheap EG4 inverter. He rarely has to pay for energy elsewhere.

I'll be doing same in 2025.

---

What state and type of area is this in? Most people living in urban or even suburban areas don't have this as an option, not to mention the technical know how to do the installation themselves.

---

California suburbia.
I have two houses. Concord and new Auburn. The latter is 5 acres. The former is .3 acres.

Both can benefit, though more land the better.

I've taken classes to gain an education in electronics AND solar.
Soon, stores like Home Depot odor solar will exist. We transport switched from horses to cars, it was just as foreign, so don't let that be a barrier for you.

It's happening!!!
Because it's cheaper!

---

That's very cool that you took those classes. Not many people have that skillset.

.3 acres is actually a large lot by California urban and suburban standards. On a lot that size, I think it would be hard to have a separate shed/solar array, so you're talking rooftop and likely major panel upgrades. Obviously, its easy on 5 acres.

I have nothing against solar or batteries. I have both (rooftop solar and Tesla powerwall) as well as a an EV and hybrid. I did that because I could afford it and the cost of the cars/solar/batteries was heavily subsidized to the point that it makes economic sense for me. I think I'm an outlier - most people aren't in my situation. And certainly most people are not in yours where they can self install.

And much of this is heavily regulated, both in terms of installation, connecting to the grid, etc. Still pretty confusing and, candidly, overwhelming for most consumers. And then when you make a financial decision like I did when installing solar, the government/utilities change the rules by surcharging solar (i.e., making it more expensive for me than I projected).

Bottom line - I don't think its cheaper yet. And that's in California where electrical/gas prices are high, partly because our government wants it that way to make renewables appear to be more affordable . In other states, electricity from gas/coal is much cheaper.

I agree that battery technology is the key. Both for cars (cost/range) but also for some of the larger storage solutions for the grid (e.g., a Tesla Megapack). To me the latter is the most interesting long term possiblity.

Auto manufacturers are doing a 180 on EV. There isnt a week that goes by where a major auto maker is either cutting back on their investment in EV production or their actually off-loading assets that had gone into EV.

Cal88 said:

---

Do you have solar water heaters? Last time I looked into it, they are (were) even more efficient than photovoltaic panels.

---

No. I understand they are de facto in Mexico, but it's not something I have. I'm on well so the water is cold and would benefit from going through a solar tank before the water heater.
Good point.

BearGoggles said:

---

concordtom said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

concordtom said:

---

I'm going to a neighbor's now. We bought 10 425w solar panels at $125 each. He has a Chevy volt and charges it for free at home. We are doubling the capacity so it charges faster.

Install on a shed with a cheap EG4 inverter. He rarely has to pay for energy elsewhere.

I'll be doing same in 2025.

---

What state and type of area is this in? Most people living in urban or even suburban areas don't have this as an option, not to mention the technical know how to do the installation themselves.

---

California suburbia.
I have two houses. Concord and new Auburn. The latter is 5 acres. The former is .3 acres.

Both can benefit, though more land the better.

I've taken classes to gain an education in electronics AND solar.
Soon, stores like Home Depot odor solar will exist. We transport switched from horses to cars, it was just as foreign, so don't let that be a barrier for you.

It's happening!!!
Because it's cheaper!

---

That's very cool that you took those classes. Not many people have that skillset.

.3 acres is actually a large lot by California urban and suburban standards. On a lot that size, I think it would be hard to have a separate shed/solar array, so you're talking rooftop and likely major panel upgrades. Obviously, its easy on 5 acres.

I have nothing against solar or batteries. I have both (rooftop solar and Tesla powerwall) as well as a an EV and hybrid. I did that because I could afford it and the cost of the cars/solar/batteries was heavily subsidized to the point that it makes economic sense for me. I think I'm an outlier - most people aren't in my situation. And certainly most people are not in yours where they can self install.

And much of this is heavily regulated, both in terms of installation, connecting to the grid, etc. Still pretty confusing and, candidly, overwhelming for most consumers. And then when you make a financial decision like I did when installing solar, the government/utilities change the rules by surcharging solar (i.e., making it more expensive for me than I projected).

Bottom line - I don't think its cheaper yet. And that's in California where electrical/gas prices are high, partly because our government wants it that way to make renewables appear to be more affordable . In other states, electricity from gas/coal is much cheaper.

I agree that battery technology is the key. Both for cars (cost/range) but also for some of the larger storage solutions for the grid (e.g., a Tesla Megapack). To me the latter is the most interesting long term possibility.

---

good on you!

I imagine you can calculate a break even time frame on your panels + batteries. I hear 7 years is common for many. Long run is where solar wins, not Year1. I know you know this, so don't understand why you say it's not cheaper.

My concord property actually has a 3-car garage in the rear. The problem is trees.


You say that most people aren't in our positions where we can take advantage of this new energy technology. True! But utilities are already going that route. Take a look at a satellite view of NW of Blythe, CA. Or Desert Center, CA. The vision of devoting huge swaths of land is happening.

Grid scale battery locations (like PG&E Moss Landing, CA) already exist, and they are only going to multiple. Why? Because it's cheaper.

But I love that the tech is modular. Meaning, anyone with a small plot can benefit.

I laugh at the fact that PG&E is engaged in so much tree limb cutting. This makes them more expensive than a little guy like me. I don't have that overhead. So, my mini setup will be cheaper that theirs even though they have massive economies of scale.

DiabloWags said:

---

Auto manufacturers are doing a 180 on EV. There isnt a week that goes by where a major auto maker is either cutting back on their investment in EV production or their actually off-loading assets that had gone into EV.

---

That's too bad.
I suppose they can lobby government and hide behind a veil of tariffs.
But that doesn't mean petrol and ICE are going to out-survive the new tech that is coming, that is here.

smh said:

---

Quote:

---

Think Moore's Law.

Longer range
Shorter charge times
Longer lifespan
Less weight
Less cost

The curves are all there.

---

had to look it up..
> Moore's law is the observation that the number of transistors in an integrated circuit doubles about every two years. Moore's law is an observation and projection of a historical trend

---

Yes. This is not that.
But the theme is similar: don't like the price-performance mix now? Just wait (time) and it'll be better, cheaper next year, in 3 years, in 5 years, etc.

That's how it was with PC sales. This won't be as dramatic, but the curves are there.

DiabloWags said:

---

Auto manufacturers are doing a 180 on EV. There isnt a week that goes by where a major auto maker is either cutting back on their investment in EV production or their actually off-loading assets that had gone into EV.

---

They just overestimated the demand. It is still growing.

"U.S. EV market share reached a new high of 8.9% in Q3 2024.

EV sales were up 11% year-over-year, totaling 346,309 sales in the third quarter. Tesla's U.S. EV market share fell to 48%. General Motors reported a 60% increase in EV sales year-over-year, compared to a 12% for Ford."

Source:
https://caredge.com/guides/electric-vehicle-market-share-and-sales#:~:text=U.S.%20EV%20market%20share%20reached,to%20a%2012%25%20for%20Ford.

concordtom said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

Your 3rd paragraph is super spot on. I remember when we thought market factors would democratize China. Wrong. Instead of them moving toward us with their values they are using capitalism to try to win the world over toward their values. That's another value proposition in favor of targeted tariffs.

---

I kinda like $400 65" flat panel WiFi TVs.

But what are you afraid of here?

Quote:

---

Instead of them moving toward us with their values they are using capitalism to try to win the world over toward their values.

---

Are they going to brainwash you into speaking Cantonese?

---

Yes, but will you let the homeless guy with the $400 65" flat panel WiFi TV keep sleeping in your yard and using your electricity?

We're paying DEARLY for cheap consumer products in the US.

dimitrig said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

Auto manufacturers are doing a 180 on EV. There isnt a week that goes by where a major auto maker is either cutting back on their investment in EV production or their actually off-loading assets that had gone into EV.

---

They just overestimated the demand. It is still growing.

"U.S. EV market share reached a new high of 8.9% in Q3 2024.

EV sales were up 11% year-over-year, totaling 346,309 sales in the third quarter. Tesla's U.S. EV market share fell to 48%. General Motors reported a 60% increase in EV sales year-over-year, compared to a 12% for Ford."

Source:
https://caredge.com/guides/electric-vehicle-market-share-and-sales#:~:text=U.S.%20EV%20market%20share%20reached,to%20a%2012%25%20for%20Ford.

---

Only a $1 Billion dollar "mistake" by GM.

General Motors to Sell Stake in Lansing EV Battery Plant to LG Energy

DiabloWags said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

Auto manufacturers are doing a 180 on EV. There isnt a week that goes by where a major auto maker is either cutting back on their investment in EV production or their actually off-loading assets that had gone into EV.

---

They just overestimated the demand. It is still growing.

"U.S. EV market share reached a new high of 8.9% in Q3 2024.

EV sales were up 11% year-over-year, totaling 346,309 sales in the third quarter. Tesla's U.S. EV market share fell to 48%. General Motors reported a 60% increase in EV sales year-over-year, compared to a 12% for Ford."

Source:
https://caredge.com/guides/electric-vehicle-market-share-and-sales#:~:text=U.S.%20EV%20market%20share%20reached,to%20a%2012%25%20for%20Ford.

---

Only a $1 Billion dollar "mistake" by GM.

General Motors to Sell Stake in Lansing EV Battery Plant to LG Energy

---

They didn't lose any money on this investment.