Lithium-ion battery powered plug-in electric cars like the Volt are the next phase in the history of automotive transportation. The cars are not really here yet, but on the very verge of widespread and massive production with the plug-in Saturn VUE and the Chevy Volt leading the way.
The U.S. government supports this transition, and is eager to help the country move away from its oil addiction.
To that end, the U.S. Department of Energy has announced it will award nearly 20 million dollars in funding to five companies capable of making automotive lithium-ion battery systems. Consider these five companies the cream of the crop, in descending order of grant size:
1. A123 (Watertown, MA) – $6.25 million to develop doped iron phosphate chemistry batteries for 10 and 40 mile range PHEVs
2. Compact Power (Troy, MI) – $4.45 million to develop Manganese-spinel batteries for a 10 mile PHEV
3. Johnson Controls/Saft ( Milwaukee, WI) – $4.1 million to develop nickelate/layered chemistry for 10 and 40 mile PHEVs4. EnerDel (Indianapolis, IN) – $1.25 million to develop lithium titanate anode, nickel-manganese cathode cells for 10 and 40 mile PHEVs
4. EnerDel (Indianapolis, IN) – $1.25 million to develop cells for 10- and 40-mile range PHEVs using nano-phase lithium titanate coupled with a high voltage Nickel-Manganese cathode material;
5. 3M (St. Paul, MN) – $1.14 million to screen nickel/manganese/cobalt cathode materials for small plug-in cars
It is important to point out that these funds will be matched by industry funds from of the USABC (U.S. Advanced Battery Consortium) whose constituent members include the big 3: GM, Ford, and Chrysler.
Two million dollars will also go to the University of Michigan to do a study on PHEVs environmental and electric grid impact, preliminay results expectd at the Jan 08 Detroit Auto Show.
As for release dates..”DOE goals include making PHEVs cost-competitive by 2014 and ready for commercialization by 2016.” Yikes.
Anyway I think this shows us how important the PHEV revolution is for the U.S., and it also tells us who the important battery producers are likely to be in this new era. Also note how the top 3 are already working directly with GM.
This entry was posted on Wednesday, September 26th, 2007 at 4:26 pm and is filed under Battery, PHEV, Politics, Research. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Sep 26th, 2007 (8:02 pm)While I applaude any investment in PHEV technology from government, $20 million is a pittance. We need some serious committment from government to allow this technology to take root and thrive. Those amounts should quadrupled atleast.
I mean let’s put this into perspective: $20 million is 1/6 the cost of ONE F-22 raptor aircraft. Only one.
I am very disappointed.
Sep 26th, 2007 (8:40 pm)Right. It’s not a lot of money.
For example, A123 gets $12.5 million (including the match from USABC). A123 has already raised 10 times that amount from private sources.
But at least it’s a start. It means the U.S. government is starting to look at something else besides fuel cells. It also helps send a message that this will really happen in the near future.
Yes, the dates of 2014 and 2016 are too far out, but Congress usually issues conservative dates. Let’s hope the battery companies beat these dates by a wide margin.
Sep 26th, 2007 (9:30 pm)The amounts are at least doubled, since as the article says “these funds will be matched by industry funds from of the USABC (U.S. Advanced Battery Consortium) whose constituent members include the big 3: GM, Ford, and Chrysler.”
We know that companies like A123 have additional sources of income, their deal to develop batteries for the Volt for instance.
A123 is also a commercial company which has been successfully selling li-ion batteries, albeit in a smaller format, for many months now.
The real question in my mind is, “What happened to Altair Nano?” Not very long ago they seemed to be the industry leader. Now they don’t even make the top 5?
Sep 26th, 2007 (9:57 pm)I think you guys are forgetting that we need to spend $10 billion per month on war. Why would we want to spend more than a few million on alternative energies when we can go have fun killing people instead?
Sep 27th, 2007 (8:12 am)The DOE says in part, “DOE funding announced today will help advance President Bush’s Twenty in Ten Plan, which aims to displace twenty percent of gasoline usage by 2017″
20%? Only 20%?!!!
Hello!
500 Billion dollars in Iraq.
20 million dollars to get us off of oil.
And only 20% by the year 2017?!
I think he should have put way more money than $20 million in the bucket. Had this country done this 15 years ago, maybe we could have saved 500 Billion dollars.
We need to be off of oil now.
We need to let the Middle East go back to being the nothing it used to be before oil was discovered. Let them pick camel fleas out of their pubic hair for all I care. Those people are evil (and I am arab).
They treat their people like dirt, especially their women. Every time we buy gasoline and/or oil, we support those tyrants. We fought two wars in the Gulf Area.
Let’s cure our addiction to oil once and for all so no other American needs to die for oil. Buy a Volt and support America.
Sep 27th, 2007 (9:01 am)In reference to your question what happened to Altairnano, keep in mind that they are just starting production so prices are high and production is low. So they are gearing up to start selling to the highest bidders for immediate profit right now; electric grid (AES Corp), buses (ISE Corp), delivery trucks (ALCOA-AFL), and startups (Lighting GT, Phoenix Motorcars, etc…) at about 4 times the price that automakers can offer. They would probably go under if they were fleeced by major auto companies with their high demand and small profit potential. Expect your cheap automakers to be more interested in Altair as production ramps up and prices fall. Also, if automakers hit any problems with the added control systems, active cooling, lack of full discharge, slow recharge times, shorter lifetimes, etc of the “good enough” cheaper batteries they are working with now, expect them to come knock on Altair’s door. I would say Altair is a full Battery Electric Vehicle and Electric Grid technology for now, which doesn’t apply to the automakers unless they try to make a Battery Electric Vehicle again. If Phoenix Motorcars, using Altair’s batteries, can actually get approved as a Type III ZEV for 1/10th the cost of a fuel cell vehicle (and dropping) I would think that will turn some heads.
Sep 27th, 2007 (9:26 am)EnerDel claims to be commercial by 2009
with a very cost efective battery costing less than NiMH. This greatly exceeds the target dates mentioned.
Sep 27th, 2007 (9:28 am)Of course, everyone realizes that all this is contingent upon EEStor NOT working. If EEStor works as advertised, all those battery companies may as well either get a license or pack it in.
Sep 27th, 2007 (9:49 am)Based on the 190 billion number, 20 million is less than what would be spent on the ‘war on terror’ in 1 hour?
Sep 27th, 2007 (11:26 am)Also as far as AltairNano goes …
They are an idea company. They really do not have the manufacturing expertise or the facilities to produce in large volumes or cost-effectively. Right now this a boutique production shop. Look for them to partner up with a Chinese manufacturer to sub out to as they have some volume to fill. (ABAT being the most likely suspect.) But the companies being supported are the ones with ties to the big players or are big players (3M, JCI-Saft)… a better way to have a bigger impact on the mass market than a boutique shop.
Sep 27th, 2007 (12:25 pm)Rashiid you are not alone on feeling that way. The main reason that I am excited for cars like the Volt to get produced is to get off oil. Low operational cost and low pollution is secondary compared to true cost of oil for this country. True freedom will come when we are free of our oil dependence.
Sep 27th, 2007 (12:28 pm)I’d just as soon not get the government involved. Increasing these numbers dramatically will just give the battery companies more incentive to milk the development time for all it’s worth, and make those 2016 dates (or later!) for real. Let them compete and try to get their products to market as quickly as possible!
Sep 27th, 2007 (12:55 pm)The US government (read both parties)have too many vested friends in the oil industry & too many of their own dollars tied up in it to allow any uncontrolled competetion to oil. I worry the governments pitance of contribution shows its true colors. Like saying they are againt terror but fighting tooth & nail every attempt to secure the borders that are wide open allowing terrorists to cross in daily. If there is any way to delay this tech getting to market, the bought & paid for by big oil Congress & Executive will pursue it. I would like to see made public, the details under which these few dollars, from my taxes, are handed out to descern if there is any Government interference as clearly they are not putting their money where their mouth is & are more keen on dragging out the war & filling their friends pockets at our grandchildrens expense than to rid our country of its energy dependance & entrenched in the quagmire called the middle east. The two party system has run its course & now they are running this country into the ground. I would just as well have no government dollars & strings as to have only 20 million towards investment in what appears to be already developed technology. How about 1 billion towards developing cost effective manufacturing processes for mass producing this battery tech to give the US a leading edge for a change and return jobs they have been exporting for 8 years in an attempt to destroy the middle class & break the Unions. How much money has the government poured into “tech” projects to help the oil indistry under Bush & Cheney, I E Catrina bail out et al? That comparison will tell the real story of where the Governments vested interest lies, & it isn’t with the American people or Lithium Ion batteries!
Sep 27th, 2007 (10:00 pm)The US government would rather waste money subsidizing corn-based ethanol than bootstrap advanced batteries.
Sep 28th, 2007 (5:45 am)NiMh traction batteries can easily meet the Volt’s stated energy density, weight, lifecycle and cost requirements. Doug Korthof and hundreds of others of Toyota RAV4 EV drivers are proving it daily. NiMh of yesterday (it has got even better enerfgy density and lower unit cost now)is still working in vehicles that have run 150,000 miles, and which can go 2 to 3 times the volt’s battery range on a charge.
Lyle, as you seem to have a sort of ‘hot-line’ to various members of the Volt project for the purposes of this site, will you put the following questions forward, and PERSIST in doing so until answers are given:
1) Is Chevron/Cobasys not allowing the use of NiMh packs above a certain size? Yes or no answer from GM please
2) Is Chevron/Cobasys charging an artificially high price to prevent use of NiMh above a ceratian size? Yes or no answer from GM please.
3) If the answer to questions 1 and 2 is “no” then show us the precise data is using to support it’s stsament that NiMh is unfit for purpose, when the eveidence we all have before us is completely contrary to that.
We ALL deserve to have these questions fully answered before we applaud either the administration that puts a few pennies into battery research that is not required, or the car company that tells us “tomorrow”. We were here 10 yars ago when GM used government money in its EV research. They had the cars and they had the batteries. Can we buy either today? Were we EVER given the chance to? Fine, let the market drive the NEXT battery technology along, but let the market OPERATE and that means let NiMh be BUILT in ANY size pack.
If the US givernment wants to make itself useful what about a federal class action against Chevron to FORCE (in the national interest) permission for any OEM manufacturer to build NiMh in any size it wants? They can invade a country in the national interest so why can’t they force early expiration of a patent?
Today’s NiMh would give nearly 200 mile pure EVs, so the Volt could be built tomorrow.
Does anybody out there think it is unreasonable to require proper answers to the NiMh questions? If not surely we can collectively bear weight to get them answered?
Then and only then we all return to the really pressing matters such as the noise it’s going to make!
Lyle, will you undertake to help us get those answers?
Sep 29th, 2007 (2:05 pm)Pete
I have posed NiMh questions to the Volt execs early on, in light of Dougs’ comments in those days, and those of others.
Their answer was simply that Li-ion has much higher energy and power density. They show some beautiful powerpoint graphs demonstrating that, email me if you want to see them. Li-ion can power greater acceleration and ranges for less added weight.
At this point I accept GMs decision and that of many engineers in other auto companies, and national laboratories.
If any car company still wants to make a PHEV out of NiMh, all the power to them, but it looks like it wont be GM.
Sep 29th, 2007 (5:27 pm)Hi Lyle,
To start with your last point first(wishing all the power to any other car company making a PHEV out of NiMh) that sums up my point: They won’t HAVE any power because they won’t be allowed to use the NiMh – unless sombody at GM can answer the question asked and tell us that they are allowed to use NiMh of any size they want?
I fully accept that Li-ion has improved energy density over Ni-Mh and while true, it is a separate matter which does not answer Doug’s justified and searching questions – ie the questions actually asked.
GM must think we’re just lazy or stupid when we don’t persist in demanding an answer but instead accept another 5 year wait on the basis of Li-ion’s higher energy density which we knew about in the first place, when there is a very real chance (however small) that it will not be fit for purpose.
In fact it’s pretty insulting that they tried to fob you and Doug off with just that argument. It isn’t even an argument. If we just walk away accepting it then we are lazy and stupid and deserve more of the same nothing we have ultimately had from GM in the past. NiMh exists, works and can obviously meet the needs of PHEV: If you put a 600cc motorbike engine under the RAV4 EV’s hood you would have an NiMh PHEV with over twice the Volt’s range right NOW. People are driving around using less elegant towed versions of just this RIGHT NOW.
So the question again is WHY are all of these engineers pinning their hopes and (without consultation) our hopes on the uncertainty of Li-ion in this application? engineers are a cautious lot. Are you seriusly telling me that nobody out there sees any merit in starting with what works a while developing improved versions for the future in parallel?
Anyway I guess I’m wasting my time – the release year is set, the production line apparently has an address and the battery chemistry has been chosen even though it is completely unproven. Provided the scientists can produce some batteries to put in it, all will be well. I’ll buy first the car if itever arrives, but you won’t catch me buying any shares in the company withthat kind of carefree approach to R&D. I guess I’ll just fall into line with the rest of the lemmings and hope Li-ion works too!
Don’t get me wrong – I am excited by the Volt and I really want it to happen. If I sound confrontational I don’t mean to: I’m just baffled and frustrated that in a world which needs many EVs YESTERDAY (let alone tomorow) we have so few people prepared to question the conventional ‘wisdom’.
Meanwhile I’m off to lick the contacts on my pre-historic 60 mile NiCads!
Keep up the good work – I’m on your side!
Sep 30th, 2007 (11:27 am)From my vantage point:
1) The amount of funding was reasonable for the size of the firms doing the research to improve their concepts. I think 2x the funding would have been welcome, but 10x would have been wasteful or problematic, at this time.
2) The various lithium chemistries (LTO, LMO, NMn, etc..) all have great potential when used on either the anode or the cathode. I think the Gov did a reasonable job spreading the cash among the contenders. Not all the small players and universities got direct funding from this particular source. They still may find R&D dollars.
3) NiCd and NiMH are competant chemistries. But they will not be competitive with Li for PHEV applications. NiMH is quite capable of satisfying charge-sustaining HEV’s for years to come. But for PHEV’s, it’s a matter of volumetric energy density (Wh/Liter) which drives the battery selection. Cost, Lifetime, and Mass come in close after that. Also remember that when a chemistry is tuned for “energy” it trades-off “power” capabilty.. and vice versa. Li-ion has proven to be quite high performance, and very high cycle life.
4) 20% penetration of PHEV’s by 2017 (10 years) is an aggressive goal. We will see the first major PHEV’s appear by 2010 with incentives attached. In the mean time we can choose Plug-In retrofits and EV’s.
5) The true cost of gasoline is >$5.50/gal. If we actually put that on the pumps, things would move along quite a bit quicker.
Respectfully,
Herman Wiegman
Oct 27th, 2007 (10:07 am)[...] One of our regular GM-Volt.com readers Alex S. has done an academic comparison of the 5 battery companies awarded research grants by the US Advanced Battery Consortium (see previous post). [...]