danno

23 Comments

    • ON: Fri Sep 19th 09:10 AM
      Commented on:
      Geodynamics: Steady Progress Towards a New Source of Renewable Energy
      This better be extraordinarily hot rock with a nearby superheated source, because hot rock alone in a closed loop system almost never works for very long because the heat from the rock dissipates rapidly. If this was such a good location, then Ormat would be all over it. This is a much harder endeavor and business than the author or investment banks know or would admit. Moreover, how close is this source from the grid? That's pretty important.
      View article »
    • ON: Fri Sep 19th 09:03 AM
      Commented on:
      Index Watch: 6 New Clean-Tech Stocks to Join CELS
      Yawn. CELS is such a bozo index, if one really looks at this index and what has done in the past, then one realizes it's totally worth ignoring. This is an index that loaded up on grain ethanol stocks at one point, added stocks that announced that they were delisting, or even had only 2% of its business in renewable energy (thank you Eurotrust). When you look at the quality of the stocks in CELS (e.g., CPST, FCEL, AVR) it's quite apparent that the these guys not only don't know what they're doing but the future returns will stink as bad as past returns. Note to author: engage brain before writing.
      View article »
    • ON: Wed Sep 10th 12:23 PM
      Commented on:
      Time For Another Look At Geothermals?
      Waste Brine is actually now becoming a valuable asset as firm are now using it as a cheap source of lithium (much cheaper than mining it). I don't consider the waste to be a long-term problem - and in fact, perhaps a long-term bi-product with economic value.
      View article »
    • ON: Thu Aug 28th 20:47 PM
      Commented on:
      The Trouble with Chinese Solar Companies
      Mr. Cordes: Does it bother you that virtually all the Chinese PV companies (withe the exception fo Suntech which owns some decent IP) are pursuing exactly the same strategy of vertical integration with increasingly little to differentiate them? Seems to me that's a recipe for price driven commodity market where the only "winners" are the low-cost producers. And who knows whether profitability in the sector then will ever earn a positive EVA?

      It seems to me that Q-Cells is quickly losing it's technological edge and will have to compete more directly with it's Chinese peers, and that Evergreen has licensed away a good deal of the upside of this market. What can you see in the Chinese and Taiwanese PV companies that is anything that supports a strong 3-5 year outlook (i'm not talking about these short-term trading chumps, but for investors)? I certainly don't see the R&D and innovation to suggest that they will be able to compete on any basis except prices which scares the bejesus outta me.
      View article »
    • ON: Mon Aug 4th 16:15 PM
      Commented on:
      Is Ormat About to Close a Billion Dollar M&A?
      Not so fast guys, there is now a hot market for waste brine as a source of lithium - so no government subsidies are really at issue here. Boy, if you really want to look at subsidies look at oil, coal, and bio-fuels. I've never seen any fuels subsidized more than these.

      Second of all, the main constraint to expansion here is getting talented people in quantity - imagine bidding against Total, BP, and Schlumberger, for every engineer.
      View article »
    • ON: Fri Jun 27th 14:42 PM
      Commented on:
      Is VeraSun a Good Buy?
      What a bloody genius this guy is. Does he ever really look at the big picture?
      Verasun only exists because of egregious government pork to the agribusiness lobby.

      1) grain-based fuels are highly destructive to soils, and the watershed from all the fertilizer run-off and eutrophication.
      2) They consume massive amounts of water.
      3) ethanol from sugarcane is far, far more economical, but prohibited from importing by the sugar lobby and the likes of Verasun thereby filching taxpayers and hurting the economy.
      3) Are, at best, energy neutral since they consume as much energy to make as they provide to vehicles.
      4) Put additional pressure on food prices and drive up inflation and feed the unrest in developing countries where corn is a staple.
      5) what a tax on the poor and the rich for a select few!


      View article »
    • ON: Wed Jun 11th 10:22 AM
      Commented on:
      Wind Energy ETFs Blowing Our Way
      what kind of "Index" would have >13% in 1 stock? that's just plain moronic.
      View article »
    • ON: Fri May 23rd 21:48 PM
      Commented on:
      Two Water ETFs Actually Correlated to Market Tide
      There is no correlation to water because the indexes are have such limited to exposure to water which is, in most cases, a lousy business to invest in. if you look at these companies in detail, it's clear that there is little or no investment strategy here other than to take investors' money with a nicely marketed "theme" product.
      View article »
    • ON: Fri May 23rd 20:50 PM
      Commented on:
      Solving the Energy Problem Without Nuclear
      What planet have you been living on? Wake up and smell the coffee (or the emissions)!

      The large Asian countries are commissioning a few utility-scale coal-fired plants PER WEEK. (not to mention disastrous mega projects like 3 Gorges). If this trajectory goes on for the next decade (as China, India, Vietnam, Korea, Indonesia currently plan), then it's all over in terms of the global warming end-game. There is NO energy source which can satisfy that demand. Of course, you would probably like to have millions die from respiratory illness, mercury poisoning, mining accidents, and global warming. Gee the French don't seem to have too many safety problems with nuclear. Moreover, why the heck does waste have to be stored safely for 100,000 years? That's idiotic. At the rate we're going we won't even have 2 centuries left. Finally, if you don't think that we can develop the technology to safely eliminate the waste in the next 100 years, let alone the next 1000 years, you have no faith in science. We were basically in the dark ages in the year 1000 give or take a century or two (O.K. my mastery of history dates sucks).

      Amory is a very smart guy, but only about 1 of 50 of his ideas are worth uttering in public or escaping his ivory tower. The only problem is one can never tell when the brilliant one is coming so you have to put up with a lot of, shall we say, less than impressive thoughts.
      View article »
    • ON: Tue May 20th 12:48 PM
      Commented on:
      Diving Into the Water ETF
      Hmm, this just goes to show that even a cursory review of the water ETFs quickly casts doubts on their value as in investment.

      Let's look at the fundamentals.

      1) many of these companies have minimal exposure to the water business and therefore it's not going to be a key driver of their stock prices.

      2) the water sector is phenomenally difficult place to make money or earn a return above the cost of capital.
      - it's tough to raise prices as a utility.
      - you can't cut people's water service off when they don't pay without getting lynched.
      - the companies that have low-tech products like pipe and valve makers typically get much of their revenue from oil and chemical plants.
      - pipe and valve makers are screwed because these are commodity products get killed by high energy and materials prices buy they sell mostly to cash-strapped municipalities that buy via an RFP process which 90% determined by how low the price is. "My valve is better than yours"? Gimme a break.

      Even when you look at Layne Christiansen or Flowserve, you'd really struggle to find much exposure to water either.

      - Water utility companies have a disastrous history in developing countries (see Suez, Vivendi, Veolia) and get their systems nationalized, etc.

      - Calgon Carbon is subject to intense competition from China and has management NOT "smarter than your average bear."

      - Desalinization is running into big problems because it uses a ton of energy (costly) and creates some significant environmental hazards. It's good for places that have cheap energy (Libya, Persian Gulf) but otherwise it's a long way from being a good long-term solution. It just sounds sexy to investors.

      - Millipore has almost zero exposure to water.
      - Water utilities tend to never earn their cost of capital

      - At the end of the day, I doubt you really could make an investment worthy water index because there are so few quality companies that can can grow and have high exposure to the sector or to some macro trend like increasingly scarce water. It's a nice idea in concept, but very, very tough to achieve an investment fund worthy of the theme. That said it's an easy way to market a "theme" that will grab unsophisticated investors' attention and money. I'm sure the product providers are laughing all the way to the bank.

      FYI Water companies worth a look are Biotreat in Singapore or Eurodrip in Europe - but those are very speculative.
      View article »
    • ON: Fri May 16th 08:51 AM
      Commented on:
      PowerShares WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW) Holdings
      Actually, I take that back. PZD is diversified way beyond alternative energy so it's not a pure-play energy ETF. It's a good ETF, but it's not a good direct comparison to PBW. QCLN is a good comp to PBW, but it's no better, in fact, its worse. I'd have to stick with GEX as a better direct comp.
      View article »
    • ON: Fri May 16th 08:48 AM
      Commented on:
      PowerShares WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW) Holdings
      This ETF is a nice short-term investment, but the strategy for long-term sucks. There's no investment merit here and the risk-adjusted return is poor. If you have to pick so many companies in the same sector then you get too many losers. Seems like there's a lot of stocks here that have little to do with altnernative energy, are in bio-fuels from food crops, or just plain lousy companies. I'd have to agree, that GEX, or PZD, or even the new solar ETFs (for trading) blow this puppy out of the water.
      View article »
    • ON: Sun May 11th 13:49 PM
      Commented on:
      Choosing the Best Industry ETFs
      Given her recommendations, she obviously hasn't done enough evaluation of these ETFs especially beyond the prospectus. Does she understand the weighting models, the actual companies, etc? No. Does she look at the history and gaffes of what these funds have in their portfolios? No. Does she understand the rules and risk management approaches of these indexes? No. I say that because if she did, she wouldn't dare recommend half of these ETFs. Saying that you've done your homework is one thing. Actually doing it is another thing. As the teacher, I'd give her homework a grade of 'D'.
      View article »
    • ON: Fri May 2nd 08:26 AM
      Commented on:
      Are 'Socially Responsible Investing' Funds Worthwhile?
      This guy has no idea what the heck he's talking about. There are lots of studies showing that SRI can and often does outperform from Citibank, Rabobank, and a variety of other organizations. Doesn't look like this guy did much research at all. Amateurs shouldn't be writing columns - especially when they defame a whole class of investing. Having been at treasury level at a major Fortune 500 company as well, I also know that SRI did actually change our behavior.
      View article »
    • ON: Thu Apr 24th 21:50 PM
      Commented on:
      Shining Light on Solar ETFs
      These are ideal for trading to get exposure on upside or downside moves. But I think pretty lousy long term investments. 80% of the companies in the sector won't survive 8 years and your losers will wash out your winners. Just like Mainframe computers, cellular handset makers, disk drives, etc. A lousy long term investment proposition but ideal to capture the ups and downs in the short run.
      View article »
Loading...
Symbols:
Authors:
Quick Links:
Contribute an Article Become a Seeking Alpha Contributor

Transcripts

More Transcripts»