This intelligent and sober analysis stands out against the intoxication with a narrowing field of momentum stocks that are rising incomprehensibly (mockingly termed "stonks").

The myth that solar panels use more energy than they produce over a lifetime just wont go away. Latest of literally hundreds of LCA's dispelling this myth is from Stanford. See: https://news.stanford.edu/2019/04/09/good-news-rooftop-so...

I'll happily hold onto my CSL shares thank you very much. good luck you waiting for it to fall to $150...

Valuation of $150 per share based on what? Sounds like you are doubling down to justify your decision not to invest in CSL say three years back. You can increase standard "valuations" based on just the low interest rate environment we now live in - which according to the reserve bank will most likely last for decades due to the size of the debt pile (e.g. US government over 20 trillion). My valuation for CSL is above $400 per share based on the size of the company and its expertise. CSL can easily realign itself if current products including IG come off the boil.

I’m with Carlos!!

Ian Ashman’s posting from Stanford fails to account for Australia’s payment of solar power to the grid of 6 or 7 cents per unit compared to approx 30cents per unit charged by the retailer and the capital cost of replacing the inverter. My inverter has now been replaced 4 times in 12 years. The panels now produce less than 70% of their initial capacity. People should be aware that there’s a significant cost to protecting our environment.