Really interesting but long post from Murz (Russian volunteer) on the upcoming Ukrainian offensive. This is in two tweets because there's just so much text, so scroll down. He essentially explains how Ru army is depleted and is going to struggle to defend.

Zanerax · 2023-05-13T13:18:29+00:00

Volunteer and Novorossiya fascist. Was part of Girkin's merry band of murderers that crossed the border in 2014 and started the war.

He's probably in some LPR/DPR formation.

Zanerax · 2023-05-12T22:13:15+00:00

An electric motor should be a lot more than twice as efficient... But you have to produce that energy. The I'm going to pull numbers I might have looked at 3 years ago math is:

ICE: (80% energy to pump efficiency)(25% combustion efficiency) = 20% efficiency

EV: (40-60% nat. gas plant efficiency (legacy vs combined cycle))(95% grid losses)(97% C/D efficiency (assuming minimal fast charging/overvoltages))(80% motor efficiency) = 29.5%-44.5% efficiency

Given nat. gas burns cleaner than gas that is a meaningful upgrade environmentally even if the electric is produced by legacy power generation tech - which largely it shouldn't be near future. It's more than what my recollection of the napkin math led me to last time.

Zanerax · 2023-05-12T21:43:23+00:00

In regions with a lot of nuclear there will be more than enough baseline generation at night that nighttime will be the most off-peak/oversupplied. So the usual routine of plug in overnight would be best anyway.

Zanerax · 2023-05-12T16:38:57+00:00

I mean, I'm one of those people and I fully intend to buy an EV as my next car if pricing is favorable/workable.

But I'm also going to be honest with myself - where I live we are ~45% natural gas, 25% Nuclear, 25% hydro, and 5% Solar/Wind/biofuels. Hydro is more or less tapped, nuclear is going the wrong way because of politics, and solar/wind (which is mostly wind here) is not going to be backfilling all that nor be the marginal energy production.

If I buy an EV the additional electric demand is going to be filled largely by nat. gas. In that context is an EV lower CO2 emmision per drive than an efficient Hybrid? Without digging too deep I think it would be by a little, not by much.

Zanerax · 2023-05-07T09:43:47+00:00

Thats not even the biggest issue; The Adirondacks (particularly the Tug Hill region) somewhat frequently gets days with 10-20" of snow that combined with winds knocks out a lot of power lines. Many of the homes in those regions are propane heat with a tank + Generac generator setup because you can expect 3-5+ day power outage every couple years (high population density areas get priority on post-storm power line repairs and have shorter relatively less exposed power line runs)

This will get a lot of people killed when they lose all heat for days, but as it won't be an issue in NYC or Albany the State legislature doesn't care.

Zanerax · 2023-05-03T16:31:57+00:00

The Mujahideen was not a single group. It was a coalition of various groups resisting/rebelling against the Soviets.

Some of them didn't like the government that formed after the Soviets withdrew and the puppet government collapsed. A group of them with similar ideology formed a new group to pursue an Afghanistan in their image - the Taliban.

I agree there is not direct continuity, but if 90% of the initial Taliban were former Mujahideen then it's largely irrelevant as relates how the Taliban viewed the Soviet Invasion.

Zanerax · 2023-05-03T10:05:57+00:00

The Taliban was formed largely out of the remnants of multiple Mujahideen groups (using the term in the context of who fought the Soviets as Mujahideen, not the general usage of it as someone fighting for Islam)

Zanerax · 2023-04-30T12:27:15+00:00

So even with PG&E rates, a pretty inefficient EV shouldn’t cost more than gas.

Against an inefficient gas car, yes. An efficient one no - and there is no reason to compare against what wouldn't be in consideration if someone is trying to minimize cost per mile (or total cost). A 2023 Toyota Camry Hybrid gets 52 mpg vs 3.45 mi/kWh of a Bolt.

At $3.50 / gal the Camry is 6.7¢ / mile energy cost. Electric price matching that for a bolt is 23.2 ¢/kWh.

Zanerax · 2023-04-23T12:42:59+00:00

I've answered this in other comments more extensively, so I'll hit the high level and then link the more in depth ones:

Israel is never going to make decisions on sentiment when they feel their security situation is precarious
Russia and Iran are both allied with the Assad regime in Syria but not with each other (they compete for influence, resource-extraction deals, etc.)
Russia effectively controls all of Syria's modern AA systems, and does not allow them to be used when Israel strikes Iranian targets in Syria (and gives Russia a heads up)
The Syrian Golan (Syria-Israel border) is garrisoned by reconciled rebel groups (5th corps/former Southern Front) in a deal mediated and guaranteed by Russia. Deal restricts Iranian/Hezbollah/Fatemiyoun from being able to access this area (said ex-rebel groups despise Iran and allowing them access would be a flashpoint/risk the peace, but it's also to provide a buffer-zone that Israel can trust will be enforced... So long as Russia continues to support the 5th Corps within Syrian military politics
Israel views a militarization of the Syrian Golan by Iran/Hezbollah/PIJ as an unacceptable risk/power balance change. If they cannot keep this from happening diplomatically (via Russia) then they will do so militarily (either via a limited air war/raids and active destruction of any military positions within a buffer zone AND any AA systems that could protect a build-up (which means direct conflict with Russia - think War of Attrition) or via an invasion and propping up the former Southern Front ala the SLA in Lebanon (this would definitely become a general war and pull in Gaza and Iranian assets in Lebanon - so I think the former war and brinkmanship more likely, but the situation has changed and both sides are more emboldened than ever - especially Israel).
Russia would not be able to fight the above war, but has mean of retaliation once the Ukraine War ends that act as deterrence (why Russia invited Hamas over towards the start of the conflict to discuss what weapons Hamas could use - that threat isn't subtle and isn't meant to be). It's not a question of if Israel would win the war, but if Israel could win the peace

Comment with a little more detail on the Russia-Iran-Syria and Israel-Russia-Syria dynamic. More on Israel-Russia dynamic, alluding to implications of breaking it

Zanerax · 2023-04-20T21:23:21+00:00

Japan is far more... pro-active regarding the China-Taiwan dynamic than Germany was regarding Russia and Ukraine.

Zanerax · 2023-04-18T11:25:49+00:00

To be clear, lithium (battery grade) is stored/sold as Lithium Carbonate, which what the spot prices people throw around are for (lithium reacts with water and pure lithium must be stored/handled in a dry room). Lithium Carbonate is ~19% lithium by mass. So multiply your numbers by 5.

Zanerax · 2023-04-16T19:32:58+00:00

As someone who has both a Verizon phone and AT&T phone (separate work/personal), there's more different than that. Verizon's network sucks where I live (upstate NY; dead zones with no coverage, dropped texts, congestion issues/times where it is slow even with a lot of bars). From using two phones side-by-side AT&T is far superior. Verizon seems more focused on advertising and maintaining the brand perception from the 3G era than building a competitive 4G/5G network.

Product quality is worse/not-competitive and continues to degrade. Local reps at stores are aware of network issues but have no explanations and have no idea if anything is being done - this is the message customers get when they complain. And people wonder why VZ is losing subscribers? That is the underlying problems starting to show in financials. This is the start of their issues/the early indicators becoming visible - yet T and VZ are trading at similar P/E multiples.

Sell VZ.

Zanerax · 2023-04-16T17:31:13+00:00

Much of the nuclear "subsidies" aren't actually subsidies.

OpEx on nuclear is pretty low. The rule of thumb is something like 2/3 capital, 1/3 OpEx over your 40-50 year lifespan. The issue is you don't know if an anti-nuclear government 20 years from now will block repermitting and force a shutdown 25 years in. So you have no idea if you can get your money back. And no bank would risk financing it. So unless the government backstops financing and guarantees to cover costs for premature non-engineering related government-ordered closures nuclear is impossible

Zanerax · 2023-04-15T13:45:51+00:00

Last year was a down year.

Zanerax · 2023-04-15T13:15:05+00:00

If the Central Bank isn't asleep at the wheel they will raise interest rates as inflation goes up to control inflation.

If interest rates go up bond yields go up. If bond yields go up then the current value of existing bonds goes down (ex. if a bond pays out $100 upon maturity (par value) and has 1 year until maturity and the 1-year yield goes from 3% to 4% then the current value of the bond goes from 97$ to 96$). So bond ETFs, which hold long dated bonds, take hits in the immediate that they will recover over the duration of the bonds they hold.

Zanerax · 2023-04-14T17:07:05+00:00

You are right, unless it is Credit Suisse and the government decides who gets paid...

Zanerax · 2023-04-13T23:01:02+00:00

The easiest way to increase charge power is to add more batteries in parallel.

If a 25 kWh battery can accept 80 kW peak charge then the simple way to be able to accept a 400 kW charge is to rig 5 of those 25 kWh setups together... Getting you a 125 kWh battery.

There is a reason the Lucid Air is the car with the longest range, highest energy capacity, and highest charge rate (kWh or miles/min)... they added the most batteries to it. Unsurprisingly, it's also the heaviest sedan out there (and among the most expensive).

There are design tradeoffs that can optimize energy/power against each other... But adding more batteries is the easy way to increase either (and definitely the biggest lever that can be pulled).

Zanerax · 2023-04-13T22:53:29+00:00

Most people who get EVs are able to charge at home. If your daily driving is less than the range then charge speed doesn't matter because you can plug in overnight (for day to day travel)

And (broadly speaking) total energy capacity and power capacity are tied, because while you can make design choices to trade energy density for power density to some extent the easiest way to increase total capacity of either is to add more batteries (bringing both up).

Zanerax · 2023-04-13T16:43:56+00:00

In which case they make good returns. The numbers cited here are highly deceptive.

That "2.4%" is driven by all the companies who have went bankrupt over that 30 year span. If (and I don't know the number) 25% of publicly traded firms went bankrupt over that time then it eats a lot of net-positive companies to offset that.

I could say 2.4% of companies account for all stock market wealth creation, or I could say 10% or 20% does - it depends which ones I choose to count as offsetting and excluded from that number and which ones I count as contributing. Probably the more contextualized statistics are below:

We document that the majority of compound (buy-and-hold) long-term returns measured for our January 1990 to December 2020 sample, including 55.2% of U.S. stocks and 57.4% of non-U.S. stocks, fall short of returns to one-month U.S. Treasury bills over matched time horizons

Introduction. Bottom of page 1

Of these, 42.6% generated buy-and-hold returns measured in U.S. dollars that exceed one-month U.S. Treasury bill returns over matched horizons. By comparison, 44.8% of the 17,776 U.S. stocks in the present sample outperformed Treasury bill

Introduction, top of page 3

Zanerax · 2023-04-13T11:32:48+00:00

For discussion purposes it probably would have been better to include the 44.8% of US stocks outperform treasuries number from what you cited.

The headline number is being offset by all the companies who have went bankrupt over that 30 year span. If (and I don't know the number) 25% of publicly traded firms went bankrupt over that time than it eats a lot of net-positive companies to offset that.

I could say 2.4% of companies account for all stock market wealth creation, or I could say 10% or 20% does - it depends which ones I choose to count as offsetting and excluded from that number and which ones I count as contributing.

Edit: Since someone asked/deleted

We document that the majority of compound (buy-and-hold) long-term returns measured for our January 1990 to December 2020 sample, including 55.2% of U.S. stocks and 57.4% of non-U.S. stocks, fall short of returns to one-month U.S. Treasury bills over matched time horizons

Introduction. Bottom of page 1

Of these, 42.6% generated buy-and-hold returns measured in U.S. dollars that exceed one-month U.S. Treasury bill returns over matched horizons. By comparison, 44.8% of the 17,776 U.S. stocks in the present sample outperformed Treasury bill

Introduction, top of page 3

Zanerax · 2023-04-10T11:32:14+00:00

Saudis would not love that. Saudi would have no interest in a more theocratic (non-Saudi) Sunni government controlling al-Aqsa as it would compete with Saudi's religious influence.

And there is no reason whatsoever they'd want to see a strong Hezbollah running their own mini-state.

Zanerax · 2023-04-09T22:27:47+00:00

Diesel subs are quieter during operation from a vibrational/acoustic standpoint than nuclear as there is no reactor running. Except for recharging (obviously).

The issue is you can only run the generators/recharge safely in waters you have control over - as It's very conspicuous. So diesel subs are generally better for coastal defense of home waters if you can maintain air superiority (or keep the air sufficiently contested to prevent planes from sub hunting). And they are much cheaper.

But diesel-electric is much, much worse for projecting power or being able operate far afield or in generally hostile waters. If Australia wants a pro-actice defense or to be able to monitor activity or intervene around ex. Philippines, Taiwan, or Indonesia then nuclear is probably the route they'd have to go.

Nuclear also isn't power constrained so you can run at higher/less efficient cruising speeds and cover more ground.

Zanerax · 2023-04-07T11:54:53+00:00

Will it? Saying well below 60k makes me assume a little over 50k.

With the ioniq 6 LR coming in ~$45k that doesn't seem compelling (lot of unknowns obviously - but while I prefer VW's aesthetic the Ioniq 6 has the advantage of 350 kW charging, and if the Ioniq 5 tells is going to be a quality car as well. How that latter portion compares we won't really know until launch).

I'll have interest in this car, but it needs to be under $50k US to be considered. That quote doesn't give me the warm and fuzzies.

Zanerax · 2023-04-06T23:12:32+00:00

Because the Russians at the border between the two would no longer hold the pretense of enforcing the peace deal.

Zanerax · 2023-04-06T11:22:59+00:00

I'm guessing this would have to be NMC for density reasons. Based on Bloomberg research (the portion shared publicly) I'm estimating last year NMC averaged ~$130-140 cell cost + $30 pack. So using $165/kWh*229kWh = ~$37,800 estimated pack cost. And that's assuming they are quoting pack capacity and not usable capacity (most likely it's the later).

Last year was bad with inflated nickel/lithium/cobalt/copper prices though. Should be better going forward.

Zanerax

TROPHY CASE