Oct 04
Congressional Hearing on Lithium-Ion Battery: GMs Denise Gray, and Johnsons Mary Ann Wright Testify
Yesterday we discussed that Japan was funding lithium-ion research 10-fold more than what the U.S. government was. Our reader NeutronFlux promptly pointed out that at that very moment, the U.S. House Committee on Science and Technology, Subcommittee on Energy and Environment was holding a hearing about Energy Storage Technology, including vehicular applications.
Unfortunately, folks, we cannot separate a full understanding of Chevy Volt development from the legislative process.
Witnesses giving testimony for this issue included GMs battery czar Denise Gray, as well as Lynda Zeigler of s. California Edison, and Mary Ann Wright of Johnson Controls.
Committee Chairman Bart Gordon (D-TN) stated:
“Energy storage is also critical for the next generation of vehicles, which will help reduce our dependence on foreign oil and lower greenhouse gas emissions,” and “I also think public-private partnerships can improve the production process for advanced vehicle components so that the U.S. becomes a leader in manufacturing these breakthrough technologies. With so many benefits of energy storage technologies, I think additional federal investment to research, test and advance these systems should be a priority.”
He is planning to introduce a bill called the Energy Storage Technology Advancement Act of 2007
One automotive battery witness was Mary Ann Wright of Johnson Controls and Chief of the Saft partnership. She told the committee she is passionate about the importance of electrification of the car. She feels the lack of current hybrid adoption in the U.S is due to the low cost of fuel here and the lack of government pressure to reduce CO2 output. She feels there are not technical hurdles to producing lithium-ion packs, but the real barrier is cost. She explains why li-ion is superior to NiMh because of increased energy density. She believes the government can help by reducing those costs.
She indicates some barriers to this are lack of domestic manufacturing infrastructure and lack of a supply base beyond Asia (she says all the critical components are made there), as well inadequate field experience, and the need for sufficient sales volume for economies of scale to come into place. She feels the government must partner with battery makers to help develop infrastructure and manufacturing processes, recycling, and equipment development, and outlines the steps to do so.
Denise Gray, GMs advanced battery director was also a witness. She tells the committee GMs vision is to displace petroleum use with electricity. She tells them about the plug-in 2 mode VUE and the Chevrolet Volt. She goes on to describe charge sustaining (NiMh) batteries and charge depleting (li-ion) batteries.
She explains GMs battery development process:
“To bring these new energy hybrid batteries to market GM is using a multi-phase process which starts at qualifying Lithium Ion cells, proving out key performance cycle life, power, calendar life, and then developing and testing battery packs to evaluate system performance attributes. Finally we work through important integration issues at the vehicle level such as thermal, interaction with hybrid controls, and durability.”
She tells them this process can take 5 years but they are trying to expedite it by doing things in parallel.
She goes on to explain the advantage of li-ion and tells them the two test batteries for the plug-in VUE will be evaluated “later this year.” She noted it will take the battery makers 2 years to ramp up to mass production once a final design is created (there’s a big delay factor).
She strongly advised that the battery companies need more government funding, and that the recent 20 million was a “good start”. This funding is needed for them to ramp up to mass production. She also advised funding to help manufacturing and facilities development in the U.S.
This entry was posted on Thursday, October 4th, 2007 at 12:00 am and is filed under Battery, PHEV, Politics, Research. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Oct 4th, 2007 (4:20 am)Hello Lyle, thanks for the information.
I have just sent an email to the European Parlement to ask why we do not see such support in public funding for research on energy storage in Western Europe.
I’ll inform you of the answer, if any.
(Quote)
Oct 4th, 2007 (7:35 am)It’ll be interesting to read the legislation. I assume we’re not talking about just simple grants which can be accomplished through whichever federal agency…
One more thought…I wonder if GM is waiting for Uncle Sam to act or if GM has already taken the approach with the Volt that there will be no federal assistance? Let’s hope the latter.
(Quote)
Oct 4th, 2007 (10:05 am)I fail to understand why anyone would think that LG, the world’s largest and most profitbale electronics company, doesn’t have the funds to build a production facility. They already manufacture over a million battery cells a day. Government funding of most technologies is an oxymoron – if the funding were needed, there are tons of idle investment capital sitting on the sidelines just waiting for something that looks promising. Let’s wait to see the rsults of the initial tests before even thinking about throwing money at a losing technology, like the Feds did when they funded the $1 billion development costs of what Time named as one of the 50 worst cars ever built – the crappy EV-1.
If assistence is provided, tax breaks are the most efficient method, since the much more intelligent open market will be judging which technologies are the most promising, not the braindead Feds. And if the Dems are involved, you know its going to depend on whose Congressional district the company is located in and how senior their representatives are. The Dems have already refused to provide details on their tax bill amendments, so they obviously can’t be trusted. Of course, only 11% approve of Congress these days … must make Bush with his 35% approval feel all-powerful.
(Quote)
Oct 4th, 2007 (10:30 am)Kent:
Your opinions regarding federal funding are duly noted.
However…
You make implications about the Dems and pork-barrel spending that simply amuse me. As though the repubs don’t do the same–does “the bridge to nowhere” ring a bell?
And the 11% approval is for the congress at large. Check out the approval numbers for dems and republicans separately. Overall approval of Dems beats Bush 38 to 33. If that’s not enough for you, check out who people blame for the lack of congressional results. More than 60% blame the republican caucus.
(Quote)
Oct 4th, 2007 (11:42 am)Kent, You said,
“And if the Dems are involved, you know its going to depend on whose Congressional district the company is located in and how senior their representatives are. The Dems have already refused to provide details on their tax bill amendments, so they obviously can’t be trusted. Of course, only 11% approve of Congress these days … must make Bush with his 35% approval feel all-powerful.”
You are the one who does not want this forum to discuss politics. Yet you are the first one today to really bring it up. Why? Because it is unavoidable.
Let’s face it. Both the Republicans and Democrats are useless, along with the President. We are on our own, so to speak, when it comes to funding. $20 million shows up how important PHEVs are to congress. None at all. Yet they were prepared to spend $223 million on “the bridge to nowhere”. Despicable.
(Quote)
Oct 4th, 2007 (12:44 pm)Reading both testimonies there are couple of items I noticed and agree on. First, there is a need for U.S manufacturing capabilities and not be depended on Asia for battery manufacturing. If fed can help with cash and incentives for getting that accomplished I am for it. Second, fed can provide very good tax credits for purchase of Plug-in and other EV type vehicles. If GM initially releases the Volt and it is full $30K, it could be hard sell, but if add a 5K to 10K tax credit, then that would greatly help the market.
So yes agree with some of the above comments but still believe the government can make a difference in moving this technology. We will just have to wait and see if the do anything and what.
(Quote)
Oct 5th, 2007 (1:08 pm)The basic points here are as follows
– The US has embarrassingly low mpg standards
– Its in the self-interest of all the automakers to resist tougher mpg standards
– The Volt won’t have any problems with tougher mpg standards
As an aside, any number divided by infinity does not equal infinity. That statement, or sub-statement, is wrong on at least two levels. But the point you were trying to make is valid.
(Quote)
Oct 20th, 2007 (8:44 am)