We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Fulmar,
Your assessment is correct. In both the case of a generator and motor, the stator (stationary outside section) has electricity flowing to create a magnetic field. there is indeed copper here that allows the electricity to flow. So yes an exciter based generator and an induced motor has more copper within it than that of a corresponding permanent magnet unit. With copper rising to over USD10,500 per tonne there will be balancing act by operators and manufacturers to optimise the most cost efficient method. The auto manufacturers do not want to held to ransom and will be concerned about the supply chain, if they all move solely to the REE technology, hence why a number are using/planning to use induced motors. They will pay a price in range, efficiency, weight, battery storage... Should the US, EU and RoW create a sizable REE industry then auto manufactures may switch over to the permanent magnet based propulsion motor.
Phantom is also correct and the easiest and most efficient route is the REE pathway.
One also has to consider that if 'all copper' motors are less efficient, there will be an increase in charging required for the same work done. So at the wind turbine end of the chain, we will require more of them, or they will need to be more efficient. So will the REE demand just shift from the vehicle to the wind turbine
Thanks Sussex,so motors without permanent magnet motors use a lot more Cu which is also rocketing in price hence @Dumb Renault saying-"Motors without permanent magnets, such as induction motors, use electric current, often with copper wiring, to create a magnetic field and power the motor. These are cheaper, but less efficient and require a larger battery, reducing the driving range". https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/automakers-cutting-back-rare-earth-magnets-2021-07-19/ All seems to be a technical balancing act,and it looks like REE is the most efficient if not the cheapest option (so far)
first line should be "generators AND motors"
Fulmar,
The alternative for generators are motors is to have an exciter or manufacture an induction motor to replace the permanent magnet. The rotation of the coil through a magnetic field generates power or provides rotation respectively. Installing a permanent magnetic means that you do not need to tap off power and thereby reduce efficiency hence why normally an induction motor is less efficient, uses more energy and reduces range on a vehicle. Don't get me wrong there are some manufacturers of induction motors that are getting their efficiencies closer to the permanent magnetic equivalents but they tend to be much more expensive. So there are alternatives but they come at a cost.
what substitutions are there for our REEs? The "Demand Destruction" argument has also been used re Copper,but the trouble with that is in this market place,all the potential alternatives are also seeing huge price rises.
Yes, true Fulmar, he doesn't simply repeat the script of previous interview a week earlier or so. Looking forward to seeing what he has to say, hopefully few new potential investors will be looking in.
Nd-Pr Alloy up 2% today, things looking good...
Every presentation I have seen George do recently (and there's been a few) he has given a bit more information about Phal-it will be interesting to see if any new info transpires tomorrow-RNS for the PEA in the morning would be fun.
AAZ is one I bought into today.
I've just posted a cheeky plug for tomorrow's webinar on the Predator site as both are ESG greenish types of stocks as PRD use carbon capture and sequestion technology, albeit to extract oil from otherwise depleted wells. CCS Enhanced Oil Recovery means less new wells need drilling in pristine wilderness such as Alaska or the Bahamas...
If anyone can think of a tenuous link as an excuse to post on any of your other boards, could be helpful....
ATYM (Atalaya) is my copper play.
ARCM (exploration)
Given the preponderence of copper required in the building of wind turbines, I wondered if any of you guys had Cu investments? I've got a small amount in Glencore
https://twitter.com/LowellResFM/status/1449510397044658180/photo/1