At 5.68 where we are now we are up 36% since we were in the .16 range.....

Right now it looks like we are getting run over by that train.

National Bank of Abu Dhabi: Even at $10 per barrel, oil can't match solar on cost
http://www.treehugger.com/renewable-energy/national-bank-abu-dhabi-even-10-barrel-oil-couldnt-match-solar-cost.html

Game-over
Some people might think that the recent drop in oil price is bad for the solar industry, that it'll slow down investment and reduce demand for clean energy. There might be some truth to that in the short-term, but the long-term trend is clear: Solar is going to take over the world.
Why? Because of this:

And this:

EIA, CIA, World Bank, Bernstein analysis/Screen capture

[The chart above] shows the price of various energy sources since the late 1940s, and as you can see, at that scale there isn't much variation. Even oil's big moment in the 1970s embargo and in the recent years look like pretty small bumps in the road. And then you have solar power that comes in crashing down toward the end. Before then it wasn't even on the charge because the price was above the shown range. (source)

The price of solar has been falling so far for so long, and nothing is even hinting that it'll stop falling, so over time, it'll come to dominate just on that basis alone (even if we remove incentives).


Public domain/Public Domain

Now a new report from the National Bank of Abu Dhabi, as you can imagine, a big player in oil & gas, says that "fossil fuels can no longer compete with solar technologies on price", and that the majority of the $US48 trillion needed to meet global energy demand over the next 20 years will come from renewables.
“Cost is no longer a reason not to proceed with renewables,” the NBAD report says. In some instances, the price of renewables are remarkably low. “The latest solar PV project tendered in Dubai returned a low bid that set a new global benchmark and is competitive with oil at US$10/barrel and gas at US$5/MMBtu.” This was a 200MW bid by ACWA Power at $US0.0584/kWh (5.84c/kwh), without subsidies. Of course, sunnier countries will have lower costs, but over time even cloudier places will see solar eclipse dirty sources.
The report also addresses intermittency:
As for intermittency, the age-old argument against renewables, the report says intermittency and variability are not an issue. “There has been an historic concern that renewables are an unreliable option, because the wind blows only intermittently and the sun does not shine all the time, but that is proving to be less of an issue,” it says.
In the Gulf region, it says, demand peaks tend to occur in the middle of the day, and grids “can now easily cope” with at least 40 per cent of renewable input before requiring modifications. And gas is an ideal complement to deal with the intermittency where it occurs.
“Furthermore, developments in storage technologies are progressing rapidly, and in the next few years utility-scale solutions will be deployed that further minimise concern around what was until recently seen as a major inhibitor to the uptake of renewable generation
This comparison between solar and oil makes more sense in the Gulf region where a lot of oil is used to generate electricity. But as electric cars also come down in price, solar energy will become a competitor to oil everywhere around the world. Not only is progress in batteries helping EVs, but they're also helping grid-scale storage make solar even better.
Oil's best days are behind it, that's for sure.

Richard Masoner/Cyclelicious/CC BY-SA 2.0

Via National Bank of Abu Dhabi, REneweconomy

5.80

Yeah, lose 30M of market cap waiting to do a Couple mil deal.
For being such a "pro" he is awfully slow.......
Wait much longer and screw the Up Listing...

I did nothing and our shares showed up!
1538 on my wife's account, which works out to 39988 instead of 40000.
But I assume that is fees......
And considering the price rise, we are not whining!
Weeeee!

Maybe an afternoon comeback?
Got rid of the sellers?

Looks like the "boys" want to move it down again......

Talking about successful.
Elon just did it again.
Satellite to be deployed in a few minutes...

Google Finance had us listed as private. I gave them the info about the RS and potential Up Listing and the New Ticker. and they fixed it...
https://www.google.com/finance?q=PINK%3ASLTD&ei=vYlkUZDWJ4nt0gH9KQ

I wonder what will happen if the Coal stocks keep on collapsing.
Will coal be looked on as being unreliable?
Making your own power could be looked on as more reliable source of power......
Especially with WLT on the brink of BK.
ACI being forced to do a 10 to 1 RS to avoid a Delisting.

0.18870629371 per KWH for power.
I kinhardly wait to defect from the grid!

It's a "freeing" feeling.
I sold 25% at .09 range to put me on a free ride. I could say that I hadn't sold I would have more. But the relaxation knowing that I have a guaranteed profit was worth it. I DON'T regret it for a second. All the ups and down's the last 6 months would have been a killer. But I now say "so what". I would love to get my wife's shares on a free ride. She got in later, and she is up 250%....

Because it's Yahoo, not Google... Yahoo is 2nd rate......

Here we go again.....
It is time for real news again, before we go down again. We WERE expecting MD in Feb. 1 more day
The RS has worn out (I think).

Here is a desperation RS.....
Ownership is as of today 2/27/15. This right from the Pre 14A: Authorize the Board of Directors of the Company to effect, in its discretion, a reverse stock split of the outstanding and treasury shares
of common stock of the Company, at a reverse stock split ratio of either 1-for-5 or 1-for-10, as determined by the Board of Directors, and approve a corresponding amendment to the Company's Restated Certificate of Incorporation in the form attached to this Proxy Statement as Appendix A (to be filed if the Board determines a reverse stock split ratio of 1-for-5) or Appendix B (to be filed if the Board determines a reverse stock split ratio of 1-for-10) to effect the reverse stock split, subject to the Board of Directors' authority to abandon such amendment

Yes, it's been cool. March 14th in Miami next.
The low res TV is a pain though....

Get your Solar Ready!
Insane! The Tesla 'D' could have a top speed of 210 mph
Read more: http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1096947_is-tesla-model-s-p85d-the-worlds-fastest-sedan-top-speed-test-needed#ixzz3SzEkrcVl

Even 10 years ago, the idea of a “family sedan” that could accelerate from 0 to 60 mph in less than 4 seconds was something between a rarity and a fantasy.

Even more delusional was the thought of a stock family sedan that could exceed 200 mph.

Those heady performance figures were traditionally the territory of extremely expensive sports cars and exotics--but has Tesla invaded this turf with its highest-performance Model S electric luxury sedan, the P85D.

The challenge of a fast 0-to-60-mph time depends on three factors: the weight of the vehicles, the torque and power of its motor(s) or engine, and traction--or the ability to get that power to the road without spinning the tires uselessly.

Today's horsepower champion among so-called family sedans is the 2015 Dodge Charger Hellcat, with an advertised 707 hp. But only its rear wheels are powered, so it doesn't have the real off-the-line grip to use all that power most efficiently.

It is also weighs at around 4600 pounds; the combination delivers a very loud 0-to-60-mph acceleration time of 3.7 seconds on stock tires, with a listed to speed of 204 mph--despite a drag coefficient of around 0.35.

At full throttle, this raw beast sucks fuel at 1.5 gallons per minute--and will run its tank dry in around 13 minutes. (Range anxiety, anyone?)

Three of the most powerful European luxury vehicles--the Audi RS7, Bentley Continental GT, and Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG--each have all-wheel-drive, to allow their gasoline engines (rated from 550 to 577 hp) to get all their power to the pavement.

Each can deliver a 0-to-60-mph time of less than 4 seconds and a top speed of more than 180 mph when fully at song. The fastest of these monsters, the Bentley Continental GT, claims a top end of 198 mph.

These classic power demons appear to be limited in top speed by a lack of aerodynamic efficiency, since their claimed drag coefficients are in around 0.33 to 0.35 and each has frontal area of around 25 to 28 square feet.

They also weigh more than 4000 pounds, limiting performance.

Enter the P85D

In terms of weight, the Tesla Model S P85D is the heaviest, at just a shade under 5000 pounds, representing a theoretical drawback for its 0-60 performance.

As for traction, it has all wheel drive and near 50-50 weight distribution, both pluses for getting all its power to the road surface.

It also has perhaps the best traction control of any of these vehicles, modulating the power delivered by each of its two motors (front and rear) to ensure it always delivers full power to the pavement.

The P85D also has more power than any of the Europeans, at a combined 691 hp. It may well also have more torque delivered to the wheel, as the slightly more powerful Charger Hellcat has its output measured at the flywheel, not at the wheels.

Lowest drag by far

Because the P85D dispenses entirely with a transmission--against the eight-speed automatic the Hellcat must use to match its peaky engine power to road speed--its powertrain is more direct, and so will have fewer losses between engine or motor output and the ground.

Then there's drag; the Model S P85D has a confirmed drag coefficient of 0.24, a fundamental advantage at higher speeds.

So, which sedan has the fastest 0-to-60-mph time? The answer is abundantly clear: The P85D will smoke any of these other super sedan running on standard street tires.

All the more impressive that it's an electric car, from a maker barely 10 years old.

About top speed...

Both the Dodge Charger Hellcat and the 552-hp Aston Martin Rapide max out at 203 or 204 mph.

My new favorite Race Driver!
http://www.carbonfreegirl.com

705

Sleepy Hour.......

I'm on Scottrade, I have no choice... Ha ha ha! It's much easier when I'm playing with THEIR money!

A Tesla 84 KWH battery provides about 265 miles range
A battery 30% degraded provides 185 miles not very useful.
But that 84KWH battery 30% downgraded provides 59 KWH VERY useful for a home.
So there is a secondary market for car batteries. A WIN-WIN situation.

Cash Poor!

Anybody notice that SLTDDis going down...
Until the stock goes back up this is my vehicle.

NEXT UP!
MANUFACTURING PARTNER
MERGER NEWS?
UPLISTING FINALIZED
PATENT NEWS
http://solar3d.lefora.com
He didn't mention the EOQ/EOY............

I think that I'm going back to bed! Zzzzzzzz!
No shares yet, I have time to get my free flashlight at HFT!
And then more stocking up for the house.... (part time prepper)

Jackpot!

Fine house for $7,500.....
I DO hope that you got the sarcasm!
Rats and cockroaches free!

Google & SolarCity partner on $750M fund for rooftop solar
https://gigaom.com/2015/02/26/google-solarcity-partner-on-750m-fund-for-rooftop-solar/
Solar installer and financier SolarCity announced on Thursday that it plans to raise a $750 million fund to invest in installing solar panels on the rooftops of home owners, and $300 million of that fund will come from tech giant Google. While Google has put over $1 billion into clean energy projects over the years, the commitment to the SolarCity fund is Google’s largest to date, and the entire fund will be the largest one ever created for residential solar projects.

The deal shows the momentum behind the booming solar panel industry in the U.S. Solar energy represented over a third of all new electricity in the U.S. in 2014, and that could grow to 40 percent in 2015, which would be a new record. The solar industry is now a major U.S. employer, employing twice as many workers as the coal industry; SolarCity employs more workers in California than the state’s three large utilities combined, said SolarCity CEO Lyndon Rive at the ARPA-E Summit earlier this month.

This isn’t the first time that Google has put money into a SolarCity fund. In the Summer of 2011, Google committed $280 million into a similar solar installation fund created by SolarCity. That collaboration was one of the first examples of a corporate entity (and not a bank) agreeing to invest in solar projects. Usually SolarCity works with banks like Citi, U.S. Bancorp, or Goldman Sachs to raise these types of funds.
The remaining $450 million of the $750 million fund will come from debt financing, says a SolarCity spokesperson. The entire fund will cover the upfront costs of installing solar panels on the roofs of “thousands” of homes across 15 states.

SolarCity’s business was built around creating solar-as-a-service deals where it can offer a homeowner the installation of solar panels and the accompanying solar energy in exchange for a monthly fee over several years (say, 20 to 25 years). That monthly fee is usually less than the homeowner would pay for their monthly utility bill. Thus the homeowner can buy solar energy without having to pay for the high upfront cost of the installation of the solar panels.
This type of solar-as-service deal has transformed the solar energy industry and opened up solar energy for tens of thousands of people that wouldn’t previously have been able to afford it. By the end of 2014 SolarCity, the largest installer in the U.S., had installed a cumulative 1 GW of solar panels on its customers rooftops, and the company plans to install another 1 GW within 2015. A gigawatt is the size of a large natural gas, coal or nuclear plant.

Google wants to invest money into funds like SolarCity’s because it can provide a return (8 to 12 percent) on the investment. The deals with homeowners tend to generate pretty reliable revenue over time because homeowners — particularly the kind getting solar installed — tend to pay their utilities. But because these financing deals are becoming more mainstream as solar becomes more of a commodity, the returns have been slipping in recent years.

I can buy my house now!

Benjamins as in plural!

I guess not being able to trade is just keeping me from doing anything stupid...
Real news is paying off better than the fluff!
I wasn't whining, just telling the truth....

Market Cap Micro Cap | 100M
Better than 2!

Solar will be more of a commodity, not like gas or oil, but like tires, lightbulbs etc.
Once the house is set up, panels won't be obsolete, even after 5 years.
But uninstalled solar panels are probably obsolete 6 months to a year old.
The big change will be plug and plat solar.
And like peel and stick panels, with racks being unnecessary.
For a home it bought cut down to hour install.....

Stay away from them!

Vivint was on Undercover Boss on Friday
To say I was unimpressed with the CEO/Founder and his business operations is an understatement.

Less than $300,000 in stock traded......
Maybe I'm right, maybe I'm wrong, but that is my impression.....
WLT about the same Market Cap traded over $3,000,000

If relatively few shares kept this up today, what happens if there is a huge demand? The mid day sell off didn't last.....

All this upness on the RS. Imagine what will happen when some big news hits, especially one that shows us making money......

Market Cap $86Mil
Walter energy $68M

Did we wave HI as we went past!