Tag Archives: Sustainable Investing

Solar Power & Electric Utilities: Is The Paradigm Shifting?

Ground Mounted Array.

The 16-module solar array pictured above was built in 2005.  It probably has 2.5 Kilowatt (KW) to 2.8 KW of nameplate capacity. In New Jersey, residential solar systems range from 3 KW to 30 KW. Most are between 4 and 10 KW. Commercial systems range from 8KW to 200 KW. Utility scale systems are in the 10 Mega Watt (MW) to 550 MW range. In 2005, the costs for small scale residential systems were around $8.50 / watt, exclusive of any incentives. Today it is probably around half that, and cheaper for the larger utility scale systems. 1.0 MW system would require 4,000 modules of 250 watts each. The system pictured above requires about 50 square feet of land.As illustrated by the photo of the Topaz array, below, a 550 MW system, like Topaz, would require 2.2 million modules, and would cover a lot of ground.

First Solar Topaz

First Solar, FSLR, a $2.8 Billion company, and Sunpower, SPWR, an $840 Million company, two of the pillars of what is left of the American solar energy industry, made some interesting statements in their 2011 annual reports: Continue reading

Sustainable Investing, Value Investing & Speculation

Earth from Space

Investing for Sustainable Value – changing the paradigm – is critical – because we only have one earth.

This post suggests that investing in Cree, the Ford Motor Company, GT Advanced Technologies, Lighting Sciences, and Solazyme, are investments in companies that are shifting the paradigm toward sustainability. Investments in Cree, Lighting Sciences and Solazyme appear speculative at this time. Investments in Ford and GT Advanced Technologies appear to be “value” investments with significant margins of safety.

Sustainable development is that which meets the needs of the present generation without compromising the abilities of future generations to meet their needs.” This canonical definition was offered in “Our Common Future,” a report to the United Nations by the Brundland Commission in 1987. Report here, see also wikipedia. “Sustainable Investing,” according to Krosinsky and Robins, is “an approach to investing driven by the long-term economic, environmental and social risks and opportunities facing the global economy.” Continue reading

Is Ford Motor Co Sustainable? And is Ford a Value Investment?

Ford Fusion

Ford Fusion, available as a hybrid

Back in October, 2007, I wrote about the Toyota Prius and the GM Hummer in Prius v Hummer, the Battle for the Streets and the Prius v Hummer, the Battle for the Brains. (Spoiler alert – the Prius won). Now I’m thinking about Ford Motor Company. A few years back their tag line was “Ford Has A Better Idea.” That may not be the current tag line, but I think it is the case. I will go further and say that Ford is on the road to being  Sustainable car company, and is a Value Investment.

While Toyota deserves credit for developing the hybrid- the Prius was introduced in 2000 – Ford has an extensive lineup of hybrids and is putting the EcoDrive – which boosts mileage by 20% – on vehicles, from small cars to the F150 truck. And 40% of the F150′s sold today are sold with the EcoDrive engine. Continue reading

Apple v Microsoft, 2011.

Graph of Apple and Microsoft, stock price, 1980 to 2010At a seminar on June 9, 2011, on securing the mobile worker, Apple‘s representative said  “We truly did not understand what we built.” That’s a direct quote. He went on to say “Here’s how they use it at GE, and Hyatt, and in the pharmaceutical industry.” A few minutes later he said “When users tell us what they can’t do, what they need to do, we listen, so tell us what you need.” At seminars on Microsoft‘s products, their consultants describe their software by saying “This is what we built, this is what it does, and here are our best practices – this is how you should use our software.”

This  is it. Apple’s “We truly did not understand what we built,” versus Microsoft’s “This is what we built, this is what it does, and here are our best practices – this is how you should use our software.” These statements define the corporate cultures.

Apple, at $325 per share, is a $300 billion company. With earnings of 21 per share, it has a price earnings  ratio of 15.8. It has no debt.  It is down slightly from it’s high of around $350 per share, reached a few weeks ago. There are 46,000 employees. Net income of 5.99 Billion on $24.67 Billion.  Microsoft, at $24 per share, is a $200 billion company. With earnings of $2.92 per share it has a P/E of 9.44. There are 89,000 employees, $16.4 billion revenue and $5.2 billion net income.

Microsoft’s income per dollar of revenue is higher – but they don’t make hardware. Revenue per employee at Microsoft is $184,000. Revenue per Employee at Apple is $536,000.  Income per Employee at Microsoft is $58,000. Income per Employee at Apple is $130,000.

These data are summarized below,

Employees Net Income Revenues Inc / Emp Rev / Emp
(Millions) (Millions)
Apple 46,000 $5,990 $24,670 $130,217 $536,304
Microsoft 89,000 $5,200 $16,400 $58,427 $184,270

 

When I last looked at Apple and Microsoft, October 30, 2010, here,  Apple was 305.24 per share, with an EPS, of $15.15 and a P/E of 20.147. It’s market capitalization was $279.59 Billion. Microsoft was $26.28, with an EPS of 2.11, P/E ratio of 12.48 and market capitalization of $227.42 Billion, $52 Billion less than that of Apple.  Today Apple’s market capitalization is up 25% to $300 billion and Microsoft’s market capitalization is down about 12% to $200 billion. Apple’s market capitalization is $100 billion higher than Microsoft’s.  Apple’s all time high stock price was a few weeks ago, and I expect it will bounce back and keep climbing as long as they keep selling hardware and software that shifts the paradigm. Microsoft’s was in 1999.  I don’t expect Microsoft to go out of business, but it’s days of shifting the paradigm and tremendous growth are gone.

The iPad (Apple site, here) is a paradigm shifting device.  It has a dual core A5 processor, 16, 32, or 64 GB of flash memory, and no moving parts (other than electrons, which are hard to keep still).  Treated properly, it should last for 10 or 20 years.  It adds a layer of durability and obsolescence resistance to personal electronics.  It puts us on the road from “disposable” consumer electronics back to durable, sustainable consumer electronics  (click here).

And it’s selling by the millions. Apple has sold 200 million iOS devices – iPhones, iPads, iPods Touch, that’s one for two out of three Americans. It’s sold 25 Million iPads, 14 million in 2010 and 11 million in the first half of 2011. The sales projections from Wall Street are tremendous, (Florin at UnWired, Schonfeld at Tech CrunchElmer-DeWitt at Fortune). People buy multiple devices, e.g., iPhone and iPad or iPod Touch and iPad.  These are driving sales of music, apps – by the billions –  and the Mac. Microsoft is buying SKYPE, which is a great company with a great product but it doesn’t know how to make money. Apple is going up, both in terms of market capitalization and earnings. Microsoft is going nowhere.

Continue reading

Sustainable Investing

To paraphrase Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger, “Buying a good company at a good price is a good idea. Buying a great company at a bargain price is better.” But to note this in light of L’ Affaire Sokol – Lubrizol, “Buying a great company at a good price when a stick-picker on my staff just bought it for his account is a really stupid idea.  And making excuses is even stupider.” (See this article by Joe Nocera at the NYTimes.)

Buffett claims to practice “Value Investing” as defined by Ben Graham, Phil Fisher, Ken Fisher, Joel Greenblatt, Bruce Greenwald, and others. I see “Sustainable investing” as a subset of “Value Investing.” Value Investing seeks to find companies that are currently undervalued by “Mr. and Ms. Market” but that are really effective at delivering Shareholder value. Sustainable Investing would seek to find companies that are currently undervalued but that are really good at delivering Stakeholder value. Continue reading

God, Keynes, and Clean Energy

Columbia University

Columbia University

NY. Jan. 25. Mark Fulton, “Climate Change Strategist” Deutsche BankAsset Management, spoke at Cary Krosinsky’s class in Sustainable Investing at the CERC, the Center for Environmental Research and Conservation, Earth Institute, Columbia University.

Krosinsky, Vice President of Trucost, recently co-edited and wrote the book Sustainable Investing: The Art of Long Term Performance with Nick Robins of HSBC. He is an Advisory Board member of the Association of Climate Change Officers (ACCO) and founder director of InvestorWatch. Trucost has built and maintains the world’s largest database of carbon emissions and other environmental impacts as generated by the world’s largest public and private companies. Their data and expertise is used by leading global fund managers and asset owners to manage carbon risk. Continue reading