1. While RAW may be overkill in terms of resolution (and it is), there are still definite benefits to shooting RAW when it comes to doing any colour correction/WB adjustment before putting the images into the timelapse clip.
Color correcting each frame of a time lapse sequence individually is a pain...plus if you are not accurate, you will see fluctuations (like strobes) in the video. This is especially true of time lapses involving dramatic changes. For lengthy time lapses of more than one day, shooting and post processing in RAW is the worst possible way to shoot. If the details are that important, the highest JPEG setting is good enough.
2. Manual isn't an absolute necessity.
It is -
Manual Focus - You don't want the camera to change focus if a bird or object suddenly got in the way, do you?
Manual Aperture - the depth of field has to be constant, doesn't it?
Fixed ISO - the change in grain structure from frame to frame is unacceptable (to me at least)
Manual Shutter - If everything else is fixed, this is the only variable - but then you are losing 'perspective'. If you leave this part to your camera, you might get really long shutter speeds for night - which when made into video will be real ugly. You cannot really rely on your camera meter to correctly assess all lighting situations.
Manual White Balance - you don't want colors to shift in between frames when there's sunlight or clouds, or when the lights are turned on at night.
Why AEB? Unless you're working with HDR timelapse AEB shouldn't be required.
I shot a two month time lapse of a construction project - you don't know when it is going to rain or shine - you have no control over the elements whatsoever, and shooting AEB with an intervalometer gives you the latitude to 'replace certain frames' (not merge them into HDR). This is especially true if you're working for a client and can't afford to screw up.
But hey, if auto and RAW works for you, then disregard my experience. Whatever works.
