Analysts have an irrational urge to be “conservative” when forecasting the future, as if you are only wrong if your forecasts are too high.
The future is uncertain, so acknowledge the range of possibilities.
But try to be accurate, don’t try to be conservative.
Technology production volume vs cost curves & adoption speed once economic parity is reached are all well understood.
Forecasting absurdly slow rates of clean tech price declines & deployment growth deters investment in them & prevents policymakers supporting them as the solution
Thread on what drives technology production costs to decline with cumulative production volume:
A reminder on IEA's awful track record on forecasting clean energy adoption speed:

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Reflex Research

Reflex Research Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ReflexResearch

14 Oct
1) It is sad how many people are against investment in space launch technology.
The narrative “Space is just a playground for billionaires” is not helped by those who focussed on sending themselves to orbit as an end goal, but why is space tech important?
2) More broadly, space launch tech is innovating towards a 100x reduction in launch costs and increasing the ease of access to space.

Why does this matter?
A) Disaster preparedness; With cheaper & quicker access to space we have better odds of addressing issues such as approaching asteroids & satellite wipeouts from solar storms. This is the same as investing in pandemic preparedness ahead of an unknown future event.
Read 9 tweets
28 Mar
Some thoughts on Self Driving Cars:

This is unsolved tech & will be a radically new product with very different cost structures vs current options; the future is highly uncertain.
This justifies a huge disparity in opinions but many may have too high certainty in their views.
Key questions:

1) Will self driving cars require 2x or 20x average human safety to achieve regulatory approval in a given jurisdiction?
2) Will it take 1 year or 20 years to get to this level of safety?
3) Is the Tesla-like deep learning heavy, hardware lite, incremental progress on driver assistance, general solution approach best? Or is the Waymo-like deep learning lite, hardware heavy, moonshot leap, geofenced approach better?
Read 7 tweets
25 Oct 20
1) Tesla's Autopilot driver assist product is now largely feature complete, but how much further does it have to progress to achieve reliability 3-5x greater than the average human & allow removal of human supervision?
2) This is the March of 9s.
Tesla’s self driving strategy from the start was chosen & optimised for this moment now; putting a system & infrastructure in place without data or hardware bottlenecks to allow largely automated progress for a feature complete AP on the March of 9s.
3) But how far do they have left to March?
Is Tesla 99.9% there, does it have 9,000x further to go or its it 33% there? It’s all a matter of perspective.
And most importantly does this all mean is Tesla 1 year away or 10 years away from Robotaxi level reliability?
Read 36 tweets
22 Oct 20
According to usually reliable Tesla hacker @greentheonly Tesla looks set to move to a new next generation radar from Arbe.

Tesla at one point reportedly had its own in-house radar under-development but its not clear if this project is still ongoing.
Read 4 tweets
26 Sep 20
1)A big question from Battery Day was how advanced were Tesla’s chemical engineering based innovations?
(Particularly vague references to new sulphate free processes).
Key to many of the advances, yet it wasn’t widely known that Tesla even had Chemical Engineering R&D teams
2) Part of the lack of detail in this section was likely due to protecting IP & partly because it would have gone over the audience’s head even more than the rest of the material. But was it also because these projects were less advanced than the rest? It is hard to know.
3) High level of speculation follows below.

In my view many of the cathode raw material innovations may have spun out of R&D work on Battery recycling, Battery materials & even waste water treatment at Giga Nevada.
Read 18 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!