we must be learning...

Note

Buzz 🔋 Buzz 🔋... as the capital costs are recouped within single digit years (i.e., 1-5), beyond which two plus more very important things happen:

You save the equivalent (and/or more) of that which once was a cost, as without the 'buzz buzz' your costs were scheduled to rise due to the "vroom-vroom-boom boom-dumb-dumb derivative egoic cycles". Now redefined into savings, and/or additional spending power. This is significant.

Your energy becomes a product of near limitless solar and solar's natural effect on/and around you (i.e., weather). You improve your ability to harness (i.e., transmute) your environment. Nature versus And Nurture. 🫲🏾 You improve your survival capacity locally (individual/s), and globally (civilizations/species), while cutting toxic relations and dependence. You learn to pre-terraform manage the most unique and inherently suitable home you will likely ever have. You learn what it will take to make another, and others (I.e., moon, Venus, Mars, etc). This is important.

Your exposure to the whims of unhealthy systems and minds, not defined by the above two points, is reduced to bare minimums, especially if you maximize appropriately the aforementioned. Your subjective and objective free will scalar improves notably. This is beneficial.

The more individuals realize such methods, the less the initial capital costs to start for all involved as another round of marginal costs is collectively pushed to zero. This thus reduces starting costs, quickening what is an already improving meta cycle. This is to be welcomed.

More innovations attract more innovations when the costs are reduced. Covalent solutions build better outcomes across healthier users now occupying a more suitable environment within which nurture strengthens: natural and artificial survival techniques: humanity 🫲🏾 This is primarily necessary.

The European Union has unveiled the Electrification Action Plan, aiming for electricity to account for 46% of total energy consumption within the bloc by 2040, effectively doubling the current rate.

Spearheaded by the European Commission, the aggressive policy shift is a direct economic and security response to the energy fallout amid the Middle East conflict. Currently, ~23% of the EU's final energy consumption is powered by electricity, a level that has plateaued for a decade.

In effect, Europe now considers electrification no longer purely a climate initiative but rather a matter of state sovereignty and national security.

The region remains highly exposed to global market turbulence, importing over 80% of its natural gas and over 90% of its oil. The EU estimates that reaching the 46% target could slash its fossil fuel import bills by up to €260 billion annually by 2040. However, this aggressive shift in the energy mix also forms a core pillar of the EU's long-term decarbonization strategies. The shift will encompass transitioning sectors such as transportation and domestic heating to renewable-powered electric grids and heat pumps to avoid paying volatile market prices for imported oil and natural gas. Electrification is also expected to yield inherent efficiency gains: to wit, electric motors and heat pumps are fundamentally more efficient than traditional combustion engines and fossil fuel boilers.

However, the electrification drive is expected to come with its own set of challenges.👀🫣 To meet this 46% electrification target, the EU is likely to face several systemic challenges, including high consumer electricity-to-gas price ratios as well as resistance from member states opposing new carbon pricing levies.

The electricity-to-gas price ratio compares the cost of one unit of electricity to one unit of gas per kWh. In the EU, high consumer electricity-to-gas price ratios act as the biggest barrier to electrification. The EU electricity-to-gas price ratio currently exceeds 3.0x, above the bloc’s targets of 2.5 for households and 2.0 for industry largely due to non-energy charges, levies, social tariffs and legacy subsidies.

Note

Electricity to gas price ratio: ~ 3x

compares the cost of one unit of electricity to one unit of gas per kWh

The EU electricity-to-gas price ratio currently exceeds 3.0x, above the bloc’s targets of 2.5 for households and 2.0 for industry largely due to non-energy charges, levies, social tariffs and legacy subsidies.

Zero margin cost ratio: 🫳🏾SINGLE👀 digit years🫲🏾 (beyond which ≈ free energy 🫲🏾 FREE 🫲🏾‼️ free 😈 energy 🫲🏾 😐 THIS IS IMPORTANT 🫲🏾‼️

The Mechanism: Fixed development costs are completely decoupled from production volume.

Examples: Digital storage, processing power (compute), and data transmission. Bandwidth was once a highly metered, expensive commodity; now, it is practically invisible to the end user because the infrastructure can handle immense volume at negligible incremental cost.

RoC ratio: ~+2x

The European Union has unveiled the Electrification Action Plan, aiming for electricity to account for 46% of total energy consumption within the bloc by 2040, effectively doubling the current rate.

Tesla's LFP Batteries Hold Up Best Over Time in New Study - Not a Tesla App https://share.google/pHZF4QlDRXmcPunLT

When you buy an electric vehicle, long-term durability is usually one of the biggest questions on your mind. Buyers frequently worry about how well a battery pack will hold its capacity after driving tens of thousands of miles down the road. Luckily, real-world data is starting to show that modern EV packs are lasting much longer than early skeptics ever expected.

A new study from Swedish online car marketplace and dealership Carla looked directly at this issue. They analyzed 9,954 battery tests from Swedish electric cars conducted between 2022 and 2026 using precise diagnostics. The evaluation examined how battery health evolves for individual electric car models after they have traveled 10,000 Swedish miles, which translates to 100,000 kilometers or roughly 62,000 regular miles.

Kia and Hyundai swept the top spots on the board, with the Kia e-Niro, Hyundai Kona, and Kia EV6 coming in first, second, and third, respectively, with battery health scores well over 95%. Tesla still managed a respectable showing, with four entries in the top 20. Check out the full rankings below:

Interestingly, the findings showed that Tesla’s cheaper Lithium Iron Phosphate (LFP) battery pack variants are actually outpacing their premium nickel-based siblings. The CATL LFP-equipped Model 3 led the charge for the brand in 8th place, retaining 93.34% of its original capacity. The LG Chem version of the Model 3 followed closely behind in 12th place at 92.83%, while the older Model S architecture grabbed 13th place at 92.80%. Further down the list, the Model X secured 16th place at 92.52%, and the LG Chem Model Y rounded out Tesla’s presence in 18th place, holding onto 92.18% health past the 62,000-mile mark.

The Chemistry Breakdown

The data looked at individual versions of the Model 3 to see how different battery cells hold up under identical usage and climate conditions. Model 3s equipped with a 60.5 kWh LFP pack from CATL averaged an impressive 93.34% battery health after crossing the 62,000-mile mark.

When you look at the nickel-based versions of the exact same car, the degradation gap becomes obvious. Model 3 units with an LG Chem Nickel Manganese Cobalt (NMC) pack sat at 92.83% health, while the premium long-range Panasonic packs with Nickel Cobalt Aluminum (NCA) cells dropped lower, landing between 88.2% and 89.8% capacity.

This happens because LFP cells are chemically more stable and tolerate being charged to 100% capacity much better than nickel-based packs. Notably, the top three EVs in this study all use NMC batteries. However, these packs’ cell compositions and battery management systems (BMS) appear to be tuned specifically for longevity rather than performance or charging speed.

Tesla initially integrated LFP cells into its supply chain to cut manufacturing costs, but owners got a major longevity bonus in the bargain. Tesla supplier CATL is moving even faster now, having recently unveiled its third-generation Shenxing LFP battery with crazy fast charging speeds. Tesla is also doubling down on this tech in the U.S., having signed a $4.3 billion deal with LG for an LFP battery factory in Michigan.

What This Means for Used EV Buyers

In the U.S., the average driver only logs about 13,500 to 14,500 miles per year. That means it takes more than four years of driving to even reach the mileage threshold used in this study.

The overall results from the dataset are pretty positive, showing that modern electric cars generally retain a very large part of their battery capacity even at high mileage. While usage is the main factor behind battery degradation, other things also contribute to cell aging. Bad habits like excessive DC fast-charging, letting your car sit near 0% battery or always charging to 100%, and poor conditioning can all speed up capacity loss. To help keep your cells healthy, take a look at our detailed round-up of Tesla’s battery health tips.

Battery degradation is far less of a worry today than it was even at the beginning of the decade. Typical EV range numbers these days easily clear 300 miles, batteries often have a degradation buffer built into them that takes the brunt of the impact, and packs are retaining more than 90% of their capacity even after several years of ownership anyway. Ultimately, the data confirms your battery pack will likely outlive the chassis around it.

Still, checking battery health is a good idea if you’re buying used, especially when looking at models with an older battery chemistry. Sadly, accessing this data on a Tesla’s screen has become a bit harder since the battery health test feature was quietly removed from the in-car Service menu last year.

Note

Coming now, to a Tesla near you:

Note

There are three prime components, to which China is not competing/competitive (😈!):

Adult-use full commercial legalization/descheduling (China self-excluding/non competitive - TAM includes "Western countries": US, CAN, EU, etc.)

Medical grade cGMP rescheduling (China self-excluding/non-competitive - TAM includes "Western countries": US, CAN, EU, etc.)

Clinical trial supported drug therapies (China self-excluding/non-competitive - TAM includes "Western countries": US, CAN, EU, etc.)

The first offers the most broad access to products and markets, but simultaneously and purposefully is the messiest regulatory option.

The second is the more secure, regulatory defined, and clear for development, but is less retail focused.

The third is the highest value-add and moated but is where the first Holy Grail hides — however, it's expensive and slow... and, did I mention it's slow and expensive?

The fourth is defined by a combination of multiple options as defined above, and will likely outline future M&A or other affiliated partnerships, according to strategic company foresight and political machinations. And, un/expected innovations 🤐

For example, the race for clinical trial successes, bolstered by cGMP productions quality capacities, and either complete or partial legalization across Western participating justifications, together will likely lead to companies (vertical or horizontal) that redefine current expectations.

Note

It's a race 😈 both the Democrats and the Republicans (laggards 😅)... and the midterms, and the deficit, and the debt, and the demographics, and the geopolitical? Imagine that 🟢🫲🏾

The recent strategy of the US administration seems to be "the walled Garden". The US purposefully slows and fractures its regulatory proceedings, which frustrates its own citizens and foreign entrants into US markets. At the same time, it buys its way into foreign markets, and does what it does not allow at home; it establishes businesses using its access to capital as its growth medium. The usual American stuff; do as I say, not as I do. They slow their own efforts towards internal clarity as dense defense, reducing access for others, even Americans, while buying their way with borrowed paper into your markets, because they've starved the globe of liquidity. 'Ish 😅🫳🏾 They assume time is on their side (of the wall) 😅 even as said wall is crashing down, and very expensive to repair, due to compound interests and a far less compounding fertility base. 🤐

Still

I'm told not all things unfold as expected, even for the best laid plans, or the worst laid plans. Even as some foreign governments, at the expense of their own interests and citizens, do as told, still others play aligned. As both the Democrats and the other are racing against debt, deficit, demographics, war, midterms, innovations, and more. And it's important to mention, that they race while 'being', and 'being within' the most internationally dependent political structure this planet has ever referred to as superpower. A superpower that is walled and separated by the greatest oceans on planet Earth, from goods and services, and necessary commodities, in order to prolong its own superpower capacity. It's... 😈 well it's a very American way of counting time and metrics (see: Metric system v. Imperial system 🫲🏾 sorta like that 😅). These things offer confounds not foreseen while designing said walled garden.

Note