Feb 26

Lithium-ion Battery Separators

 

lithium_ion_separator.gif

In discussing the Volt, we are often concerned with the working of the lithium-ion battery. Still not-yet-ready for prime-time, these types of batteries a great for cars because they can hold a lot of power and energy in a small size and weight.

The batteries work as electrons (electricity) flow between the anode (usually graphite or carbon) and the cathode. The cathodes vary by manufacturer, but A123 uses iron nanophosphate, and LG Chem a manganese spinel. Current is generated as the lithium ions flow through the solution.

An understated player in this electric orchestra is the separator.

The separator is generally a film-like material, made of electrically insulating polymer polyolefins that prevents electrons from flowing directly from anode to cathode, allowing them instead to flow out to the electric motor (in the case of an EV).

These separators have to be porous as well, to allow lithium ions to pass through. The more porous they are, the more energy can travel. On the other hand, they are also the critical determinant of the batteries safety, ruptured membranes (in the case of laptop-type or lithium cobalt oxide batteries) have been implicated in thermal runaway (explosion) events.

Automotive battery applications require specialized separators to deal with the large-format sizes of the cells as well as the need to allow very high energy and power flow, and have high melt strength.

We have heard ExxonMobil has developed a new improved automotive separator. How it works, per the source article is “ExxonMobil uses a wet process to dissolve polyethylene resin in an organic solvent. Evaporation of the solvent leaves behind a porous film. The company’s breakthrough is to coextrude multiple film layers, each of which imparts different characteristics.”

For safety, certain layers can close the pores if temperatures exceed 140 degrees Celsius, effectively shutting down the current flow.

So clearly the separator may very well be the unsung hero of the Chevy Volt’s battery pack after all.

Source (Chemical and Engineering News)

This entry was posted on Tuesday, February 26th, 2008 at 12:54 am and is filed under Battery, Engineering. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

COMMENTS: 43


  1. 1
    NZDavid

     

    NZDavid
     Says

     

    Feb 26th, 2008 (1:50 am)

    Jon Lauckner, vice president of global program management for GM, told a forum sponsored by the National Chamber of Commerce last month in Washington, D.C., about additional challenges. “Our performance and durability requirements—10 years of life, 150,000 miles in a very rugged and hostile environment—are unique to automotive applications and considerably more stringent than those applied to consumer goods,” he said.

    The 150,000 miles works out to 40 miles per day, so pretty good really, considering the Tesla batteries are only guaranteed for 5 years.

    With the way battery technology is advancing, looks good for the Volt 2. Now about the price . . .


  2. 2
    nasaman

     

    nasaman
     Says

     

    Feb 26th, 2008 (1:51 am)

    Imagine two huge flat plates, each perhaps 10ft x 10ft, separated by only a few thousandths of an inch by a highly-porous polymer film or membrane. That’s roughly what each cell in the Volt battery looks like from a reliability assessment point of view. Separators in a battery are easily its most critical component in terms of long battery lifetime and failure-avoidance. And separator design is almost more of an art than a science —separators both have to assure that no punch-thru or arcing can occur between adjacent tightly-spaced cathode/anode plates AND provide unimpeded passage of the electrolyte’s ions between those same plates. Of course, these essentially conflicting requirements must be rigorously achieved for the entire life of a battery! To a great extent, therefore, the Volt’s long-term success will depend heavily on the integrity of its battery separators.

    I was therefore very glad to read the following in the referenced article…. “Jon Lauckner, vice president of global program management for GM, told a forum sponsored by the National Chamber of Commerce last month in Washington, D.C., about additional challenges…. “Our performance and durability requirements—10 years of life, 150,000 miles in a very rugged and hostile environment—are unique to automotive applications and considerably more stringent than those applied to consumer goods,” Lauckner said.

    So I find it very reassuring to read in Lauckner’s public statement that GM’s “REQUIREMENTS” (not “goals”) for the Volt’s battery are 10 years & 150,000 miles in the harsh automotive application!


  3. 3
    nasaman

     

    nasaman
     Says

     

    Feb 26th, 2008 (1:57 am)

    NZ David…

    Zounds, David, it seems the same statement from Lauckner “jumped off the page” for us both! It’s really the only place –until now– I’ve seen these numbers publically described as **requirements**. Great news, huh?!?


  4. 4
    Mark

     

    Mark
     Says

     

    Feb 26th, 2008 (2:13 am)

    Still not happy about Exxon being involved. Their main revenue stream is oil. Electricity is competition for them. If Exxon is involved, you know they’ll stall, stall, stall, drag it out or under-perform the final product just so that hydrogen-powered cars will become more appealing. I don’t trust any oil company to dip their hands into technologies that can compete with oil unless they themselves control it.


  5. 5
    David L

     

    David L
     Says

     

    Feb 26th, 2008 (3:16 am)

    #4 – Mark wrote: Still not happy about Exxon being involved. Their main revenue stream is oil.

    I’m sure that polyethylene resin is made from some of Exxon’s oil. :-)

    Anyone have insights into how these separators perform under harsh temperature fluctuations and vibration?


  6. 6
    NZDavid

     

    NZDavid
     Says

     

    Feb 26th, 2008 (5:42 am)

    nasaman

    I agree. Check out the following, while we are on battery development.
    http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/02/researchers-exp.html#more

    it would seem separators are pretty important to fuel cells as well. lol.
    http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/02/new-method-to-f.html#more


  7. 7
    omegaman66

     

    omegaman66
     Says

     

    Feb 26th, 2008 (8:25 am)

    Uggghhh more Oil Co. paranoia. Problem with that thinkings is the Big Oil isn’t threatened by these types of advancements and they know it. So no incentive to stall, bury or anything else.

    Even as electric power grows more and more to power cars instead of oil, demand for oil will easily continue to grow for the next couple of decades.

    Oil has no incentive to stop the electric car. If you are looking for a conspiracy theory then look no further than the car manufactures themselves. An electric motor should last much much longer than your current ICE and require far far less maintenance in both fixing things that break and changing oil and filters and such.

    Today most cars are taken out of circulation (barring a big crash) when the engine goes out. In the future the electric engine will probably last longer than much of the body itself.


  8. 8
    AkRich

     

    AkRich
     Says

     

    Feb 26th, 2008 (9:21 am)

    Big oil? How is that different from “little oil”?

    Remember it is better to think of Exxon as big energy because as the world economy changes and demands new sources of energy you will want large companies with deep pockets to invest in the research to provide the energy. I know BP, Chevron, & Exxon have all invested billions in alternative energy sources & technology.

    One could say it is only a drop in the bucket, but it’s a much larger drop then someone who just sits around dreaming up reasons to complain.

    I for one am thrilled when a company does well and I believe they are obligated to provide their shareholders with the maximum return possible.

    End of rant, :-)


  9. 9
    Dean Anderson

     

    Dean Anderson
     Says

     

    Feb 26th, 2008 (10:00 am)

    The key to the EV is battery science and the recent advances are very encourageing. Oil companies have the reserves to reinvest in these technologies and still remain connected to automotive industry. Looks like a free market path from here.


  10. 10
    kent beuchert

     

    kent beuchert
     Says

     

    Feb 26th, 2008 (10:05 am)

    I find it amusing that the company that environmentalists love to hate the most : Exxon-Mobil, is a leader in new electric mode battery technology. Whatever happened to all those conspiracies that had the big oil companies blocking electric propulsion? Sounds like Chris Paine and his friends have conspired to fabricate slanders about big oil in order to make big money at the box office. I would love to hear his contorted explanation for why Exxon should be leading the way in battery technology. Let’s hear it , Chris.


  11. 11
    Neutron Flux

     

    Neutron Flux
     Says

     

    Feb 26th, 2008 (11:16 am)

    Kent, I would hardly call stumbling upon some new way of creating the membranes by someone accidentally leaving some soaking in a vat overnight to find it all evaporated the next day, as leading the way in battery tech. Although it is true most break throughs in tech have been historically by accident, I do not have first hand knowledge that big oil has been pouring billions into battery R&D & think it is well established that the NMH battery tech was blocked from use in autos for some time after the demise of zero emissions mandate by its owners big oil. The old addage if you can’t beat them join them may be in play here. But it is true there is no shortage of customers for oil currently and there are many by products of oil such as plastics that will be in demand regardless. Chris evenly spread the blame around and truth be told there was no mass market for it at the time based on its cost (EV1) and the cost of petro fuel then. Times have changed and are changing.


  12. 12
    Jon P.

     

    Jon P.
     Says

     

    Feb 26th, 2008 (11:57 am)

    #8 AKRich

    “I for one am thrilled when a company does well and I believe they are obligated to provide their shareholders with the maximum return possible. ”

    Here’s another quote that puts your statement into context:

    “Exxon broke the record it previously had set for profits by a U.S. corporation, earning $40.6 billion last year. Exxon’s profit for the year came to $4.6 million an hour. ”

    I’m all for corporations making profits and returning on their shareholders investments, but there’s a difference between that and what their doing. Making more PROFIT in an hour than most will make in a lifetime is not returning on investments. 40 Billion in yearly profits is a corporation that dosen’t care about the economy of its home country. Your telling me supply & demand is what is driving oil prices up while the Biggest oil company is setting record profits year after year.
    40 billion is so much it can barely be comprehended by a normal person.


  13. 13
    Jon P.

     

    Jon P.
     Says

     

    Feb 26th, 2008 (12:14 pm)

    There’s already an entire electric infrastructure in place in america. One that the current Big Oil has nothing to do with. There is not a Hydrogen infrastructure in place, and therefore alot of room for a corporation making 40 bil a year to get into.

    Not to mention any cost effective reliable hydrogen system is 10 years away. It totally serves there purpose, keep gauging us till the end of oil, then switch over to Big Hydrogen

    40 billon in profits last year and i just read an article that said there getting ready to go infront of the supreme court to decide if they have to pay the 2.4 billon (which was cut in half from 4.8 billion by appeals courts) in punitive damages from the exon Valdez spill in what 91′.
    The pilfering continues, I can’t wait to be a part of the new generation of car owners who recognizes who our enemies are and tells Big Oil to go F*ck Themselves!


  14. 14
    Wise Golden

     

    Wise Golden
     Says

     

    Feb 26th, 2008 (12:56 pm)

    #7 — I agree and I disagree and here’s why. I think that you are right about the oil companies feeling fairly secure and that has a lot to do with how they make their profits. Essentially, they make a profit per visit and it doesn’t change much based on the price of oil. If oil is high, they make say, $1.25 per visit. If oil is low they still make a $1 per visit. They really don’t care what the price of oil is.

    But here is where I disagree. Big Oil includes oil producers, oil producing nations, royal families and governments who own state oil assets. While the oil retailers are not going to be harmed too badly by reduced oil consumption, the other parties at play will receive a 1-2 punch. First, they get hit by reduced consumption – fewer barrels being pumped. And that causes a fall in oil prices which is the second hit.

    So, Exxon, Conoco, Chevron – they are most likely innocent and deserve to be cut some slack, but, Russia, Putin, King whatever, Chavez and all of our friends at OPEC are most likely the folks that are trying to kill the electric car and bio-fuels with purposeful, malicious, and false misinformation campaigns.

    I know it sounds conspiratorial, but after all, OPEC is an organization that was founded on principles of collusion and anti-trust. And the nations involved are often openly hostile to the US, but yet entirely dependent on the US through oil consumption that feeds their economies. Why is hard to believe that they want to kill EV’s?


  15. 15
    Rashiid Amul

     

    Rashiid Amul
     Says

     

    Feb 26th, 2008 (1:07 pm)

    Say whatever you want about Big Oil. That is your choice and it’s wonderful to be able to say it in our free country.

    I have not knowingly purchased Exxon gas since the Valdez incident.
    I no longer buy Mobile either.

    Now getting back to free speech. Jon #13 says he would like to offer directions to the Big Oil on where they can go. Jon P, you are 100% correct. I too, would like to say the same thing. Oil contributes to too many bad things. War, repression, terrorism, pollution, etc.
    I would not mind one bit if oil went away. But I would miss my plastic keyboard, mouse, tires, etc.


  16. 16
    Wise Golden

     

    Wise Golden
     Says

     

    Feb 26th, 2008 (1:08 pm)

    #7 says”Today most cars are taken out of circulation (barring a big crash) when the engine goes out. In the future the electric engine will probably last longer than much of the body itself.”

    Wise reply:
    Nah. The batteries last the same length as a good ICE, about 150,000 miles and they cost as much or more. So, in the future, cars will be scraped when the batteries fail, instead of the engin.


  17. 17
    omegaman66

     

    omegaman66
     Says

     

    Feb 26th, 2008 (1:14 pm)

    Yes ExxonMobil and other Oil companies have been kicking butt the last few years. But keep in mind that over the long haul return on investment for ExxonMobil is only like 12%. Compare that to companies like Wal-Mart who have been making more than twice that and then lets talk about who is screwing the public.

    Profits in dollar amounts do not mean anything in terms of screwing over the public. For example a man selling a bag of ice for 3 dollars who makes $2.50 profit is screwing you alot worse than ExxonMobil. ExxonMobil is a freaking huge company and if they only made 1% profit they would still make billions. But if they only made 1% they would quite the Oil business and simply invest in bonds and get a guaranteed 5%.


  18. 18
    Wise Golden

     

    Wise Golden
     Says

     

    Feb 26th, 2008 (1:38 pm)

    I think it is also worth mentioning that Exxon, Conoco and Chevron have been badly treated by the oil producing Mafia, known as OPEC, that they are beholden to. Each of these countries, including Russia and Venezuela have lacked the ability to develop their own oil resources and in each case, they allowed American (and other) oil companies to invest literally hundreds of billions of dollars into reaching these assets. In almost every instance, they then nationalized the industries and kicked out the oil companies. In some cases they paid a small amount for the assets, but in some cases, they just stole it from the oil companies. Russia extorted from Exxon and Chevron for a number of years, and I think they still are. Venezuela is extorting from Conoco and Chevron right now, while Exxon apparently has had enough and is fighting back with some success thanks to a sympathetic US and UK government. But that could all change.

    Maybe Exxon is really truly fed up and wants to see a conversion to electric/ hydrogen. Exxon has the largest domestic supply of oil and certainly has the reserves to build an electrical infrastructure for these cars. They probably make the chemicals used in the batteries. Maybe they feel that they have a higher up-side with electrical because they still retain the ability to own the production of the fuel regardless of what the fuel source will be. Although, if this were the case, you would think that they would be more supportive of alternative energy.


  19. 19
    Jim I

     

    Jim I
     Says

     

    Feb 26th, 2008 (1:44 pm)

    My only problem with the oil companies is that while ONE company made $40+ billion in profits last year, that they still ask for and get subsidies from a government that is $10 TRILLION in debt!!!!!

    That is the lunacy I do not understand.

    Temporary government subsidies to help jump start a new necessary technology, I don’t always agree with, but I can at least understand, but there is no reasonable person that could make a case for the continued subsidy of the worldwide oil companies.

    And by the way, a stack of 40.6 billion dollar bills would be 2,756.725 MILES high. I just thought that putting it into that context might help everyone to realize how much money we are talking about. And again, that is just for Exxon-Mobil!

    Getting into the battery business makes complete sense. The cost is not all that high, and then get to rub some “green” on themselves. And like it has been said above, they are not going to lose business. It will just transfer to other industries, like plastics, agriculture, medicines, and everything else that uses oil.


  20. 20
    nasaman

     

    nasaman
     Says

     

    Feb 26th, 2008 (2:37 pm)

    19 Jim I

    You said, “Getting into the battery business makes complete sense (for an oil company). The cost is not all that high, and they get to rub some “green” on themselves. And like it has been said above, they are not going to lose business. It will just transfer to other industries, like plastics, agriculture, medicines, and everything else that uses oil.” ….I agree completely!

    But hey, folks, we’ve gotten WAY off this thread’s topic –Li Ion battery SEPARATORS, arguably the most critical component of the Volt’s battery in terms of failure avoidance. I know what happened –ExxonMobil was mentioned as one of several separator sources in the referenced article.

    Separator design details, sources, etc tend to be closely guarded secrets, but to my knowledge neither of GM’s battery suppliers are using ExxonMobil’s separators. And I don’t know whose separators are being used (or if A123 or LGM are using separators developed in-house). Does anyone happen to know?


  21. 21
    omegaman66

     

    omegaman66
     Says

     

    Feb 26th, 2008 (2:39 pm)

    “That is the lunacy I do not understand.”

    Let me explain it to the best of my abilities. Without the subsidies the jobs would largely move overseas.

    There has been a big time movement, even with the subsidies, of Big Oil to move facilities overseas remove the susidies and you are talking about a blunder of mega proportions over the next decade.


  22. 22
    noel park

     

    noel park
     Says

     

    Feb 26th, 2008 (3:00 pm)

    #20 nasaman said:

    “But hey, folks, we’ve gotten WAY off this thread’s topic…”

    You think?

    I would just say the the law of supply and demand is alive and well. When the pain level gets high enough, we will lower our demand. Ergo, the Volt.

    I think that GM must have a fair level of confidence that these batteries are going to work, or they never would have let this “transparent” “process” get as far as it has. I remember the early days ot the “P-word”. Battery life was a big issue then. “What if this $3000 ($7000?) battery pack fails, and we get stuck paying for an new one, we were asking ourselves. Toyota took care of it by putting on a 7 year, 100,000 mile guarantee, or whatever it is. End of problem. Has anyone heard of mass failure of “P-word” battery packs? GM must have the confidence to do the same thing, or no Volt. They have to know it.


  23. 23
    Bryan

     

    Bryan
     Says

     

    Feb 26th, 2008 (3:21 pm)

    Leave it to an oil company to use Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) to supply battery separators for a–theoretically–more environmentally friendly vehicle.


  24. 24
    omegaman66

     

    omegaman66
     Says

     

    Feb 26th, 2008 (5:21 pm)

    I guess everyone here can thank ExxonMobil for doing what nobody else could… usher in a new era in motor vehicles by a major automaker.


  25. 25
    Jim I

     

    Jim I
     Says

     

    Feb 26th, 2008 (5:33 pm)

    I know this is off topic, and I do apologize, but omegaman66 in post #21 said “Let me explain it to the best of my abilities. Without the subsidies the jobs would largely move overseas.”

    1. What jobs would move?

    2. By most definitions, that would be called blackmail. And I think that is illegal.

    I just want to understand this. As a small business owner, we work hard to provide a service to our customers. We provide benefits to our employees, pay all the federal, state, county, and local taxes assessed to me, with no assistance of any kind. And if my business would suffer hard times, it would be my problem to deal with. But my tax payments go to companies that already make very large profits and still believe that they can then demand tax breaks, or they will take all their jobs elsewhere. And I am supposed to be happy about it. Is that about it?

    I am sorry, but that is just screwed up thinking….


  26. 26
    Rashiid Amul

     

    Rashiid Amul
     Says

     

    Feb 26th, 2008 (6:12 pm)

    Jim I, # 25,

    I agree. You would be on your own and too bad if you and your company sink. But don’t worry, ExxonMobile will be more than happy to take the tax money you have been paying. It is really despicable. But I good moan and groan about taxes all day.


  27. 27
    Tachy

     

    Tachy
     Says

     

    Feb 26th, 2008 (6:44 pm)

    ceramic separators for temperatures up to 500 °C are ready for production!

    Look at: http://www.li-tec.de !!!


  28. 28
    Crows

     

    Crows
     Says

     

    Feb 26th, 2008 (6:58 pm)

    To Jim #25:

    Your post is accurate and true,

    Thank you!


  29. 29
    nasaman

     

    nasaman
     Says

     

    Feb 26th, 2008 (7:16 pm)

    27 Tachy

    Ceramic separators good for 500°C are a very intriguing subject! Unfortunately, my 2 yrs of German (long ago) wasn’t enough to keep me fluent, so I’m wondering if anyone here can read the following 4-page pdf file from the site you referenced to see whether these separators are self-healing in the event of a punch-thru to prevent cell shorts? Here’s the link to the pdf….

    http://www.li-tec.de/downloads/Pressemitteilung_Artikel_li-tec.pdf


  30. 30
    noel park

     

    noel park
     Says

     

    Feb 26th, 2008 (7:30 pm)

    Jim, #25:

    As a fellow small business owner, I second the motion. You just have to get big enough to hire the right lobbyists and connected DC law firms, not to mention the campaign contributions. Maybe you could loan your executive jet to a few top “electeds”.

    Of course it’s not just oil. How about “defense”, mining, corporate agribusiness and yes, the auto industry. I remember somebody saying at the time of the Chrysler bailout that you have to get big enough that your implosion will create enough of an impact on the economy to cause some political pain. Otherwise,sayonara.


  31. 31
    Tagamet

     

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Feb 26th, 2008 (9:23 pm)

    “I have not knowingly purchased Exxon gas since the Valdez incident.
    I no longer buy Mobile either.”

    Nor has anyone in my family (and we’re not about to start now.
    That being said, I have a hard time wrapping my little mind around the issue of “too much profit”. Envy is a pretty nasty process that can easily distort some normally “rational” folks. Watch the next elections and see if it’s not “We’re gonna get in there and stick it to all those “haves” and give it to all you poor have nots”.
    Wasn’t this about battery seperators? Oops, sorry, my bad. Seriously.


  32. 32
    Adam

     

    Adam
     Says

     

    Feb 26th, 2008 (10:19 pm)

    I understand this post is suppose to be on battery seperators, but we also have money on the mind too.

    It makes me sick, thinking about the national debt. It’s in excess of 10 billion, and what is our government doing about it? Well, being a small business owner, we can get a $200k grant! Or how about we waste a LOT of money of H2 powered cars! Oh, I have a chance to purchase i slightly used ambulance.

    What happened was, the Air Force base here decided they needed 6 of them, but they shut down the base hospitol 10 years ago.. What do they do with them? Gut them, and selling them for $20k each, their gutted, but only have 6k miles on them, and they cost upwards of $65k each. P*ssin’ money away

    Then we go before China to borrow more money for a pointless war.

    Hmmm, I wonder who to vote for president? I can answer that in a single word.. NEITHER!!!! Can somebody give me more choices?

    Getting back to the batteries. Would ceramic really be a good seperator? I know they like the membrane to be coarse, and ceramics can be, but wouldn’t it be too brittle?


  33. 33
    Jeff J

     

    Jeff J
     Says

     

    Feb 27th, 2008 (12:08 am)

    Lord were do I start!!
    #22 noal Hammer nail head . Thanks for cutting thought he BS. You are right, The Battery is a done deal! GM doesn’t spend 1 dollar making a assemble line unless their 100% sure that a real car is goes to roll off that line .
    #20 nasaman, thanks for the tech info, I also am a small business owner with a mechanical, elec. wiring and CPU diagnostic background. But I have to admit this article flew over my head . Its great to read post from very smart guys that know I ton more than I do about Chem. side of the world .
    1.Exxon and Big U.S. oil Co. if you owned a corp. that is going to run out of it main product in a few years what would you do?
    A. Pray that you stumble on more oil fields
    B. throw up your hands, fire everybody and file chp. 9
    C. Invest and develop different ways to make money ie. new energy technology.
    As a small business owner that makes a living on the Gas engine, I am going to be wiped out sooner or later if the Volt makes it to market. If I stick my head in the sand I will go out of business . But if in start looking for ways to profit and change the way I do things my family will still have food on the table as long as I am breathing.
    2. Its really nice that people on this site , Don’t Flame each other . I love reading all your comments . Keep it coming ! Just My opinion .


  34. 34
    Jim I

     

    Jim I
     Says

     

    Feb 27th, 2008 (1:10 am)

    Adam #37: The national debt is 10 Trillion (With a “T”), which is much more scary!

    Tag #31: If I came across as being envious of the profits made by anyone, then I was not clear in my wording. I am a complete believer of free enterprise and capitalism. What I do have a problem with is profitable companies asking for long term government subsidies and changes to the tax code when there is no real justification for it. That is not free enterprise or true capitalism. That is my main point of contention.

    Milton Friedman said it much better. He called it “The Suicidal Impulses of the Business Community”

    “A particular business will push government to act in that business’s interests to restrain its competitors. It may be wrapped in the noble purpose of giving healthcare to workers or saving jobs, but this is a push away from free markets.”

    That sounds about right to me.

    And sorry about hijacking the thread. But some of these things just need to be said.


  35. 35
    Tagamet

     

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Feb 27th, 2008 (1:36 am)

    Jim I said in part:
    …Tag #31: If I came across as being envious of the profits made by anyone, then I was not clear in my wording. I am a complete believer of free enterprise and capitalism. What I do have a problem with is profitable companies asking for long term government subsidies and changes to the tax code when there is no real justification for it. That is not free enterprise or true capitalism. That is my main point of contention.,,,

    It may feel like splitting hairs, but why is a company’s ASKING the gov’t for (unwarranted) perks not part of true capitalism? When I’m doing my shrinkery, I often need info from other agencies about what’s gone on to date with an individual. I know that it’s unethical for the other agencies to answer my questions. BUT there’s notihing unethical about me ASKING for the info. If they tell me something, it usually helps, but even if it didn’t help, the “blame” is on the party that released the info. Similarly, companies are well within their rights to ask the govt for our money. If the govt says “Sure, wait till I get the BIG shovel”, that’s not Exxon’s fault it’s the fault of the goofballs we elected to Congress.


  36. 36
    Storm Connors

     

    Storm Connors
     Says

     

    Feb 27th, 2008 (5:27 am)

    Exxon/Mobil is the reason the NiMH batteries are not available for auto packs. Perhaps Lion will be better, but NiMH would do the job better than the lead acid we are currently stuck with. The NiMH in the RAV4 still going strong after 10 years and 100K+ miles.

    No conspiracy here, just E/M fighting to keep them off the market. They will not license the technology they bought from GM for use in vehicle sized packs. They could be making a profit for their stockholders and allowing better vehicles to be built.

    Those who think E/M will participate in the BEV development had best check the history.


  37. 37
    Mike G.

     

    Mike G.
     Says

     

    Feb 27th, 2008 (7:08 am)

    response to #25

    Chemical companies as a whole are constantly opening up new plants and those new plants are for the most part being openend in places like Saudi Arabia, Africa and the far east. It isn’t just tennis shoes and clothes that are moving to china. Fewer and few things such as plastics are being shipped from the USA to overseas companies. More and more those same grades of plastic are being shipped to the USA. Oil companies provide a huge finacial boost to this country. If they said good-bye and moved totally overseas this countrys way of life would be destroyed as they provide a huge portion of the taxes and support a huge number of families (huge employer).

    It might sound nice to say things like ‘go after big oil’ with taxes and such. But to a large extent this country would be biting the hand that feeds it. It isn’t like ExxonMobil or Chevron NEED the USA… it is the other way around. What are we going to do when they say enough is enough we are moving our head quarters overseas and locking the gate on these plants.


  38. 38
    Adam

     

    Adam
     Says

     

    Feb 27th, 2008 (8:48 am)

    #34, I know, my fingers have a mind of their own, and refuse to listen to my brain..

    How many f you fine gentlemen out there seen the movie “On Deadly Ground” with Steven Segal? When is enough money enough? The same translates here.


  39. 39
    Tagamet

     

    Tagamet
     Says

     

    Feb 27th, 2008 (11:54 am)

  40. 40
    noel park

     

    noel park
     Says

     

    Feb 27th, 2008 (12:39 pm)

    32 Adam:

    Tell it like it is, brother!


  41. 41
    NZDavid

     

    NZDavid
     Says

     

    Feb 27th, 2008 (6:34 pm)

    Tagamet, 2010 increase says a lot. Interesting times we live in.


  42. [...] on?  Want to know more about the internal structure of lithium-ion batteries?  If so, check out GM-VOLT’s excellent article on the [...]


  43. 43
    Mark McVeigh

    +1

     

    Mark McVeigh
     Says

     

    Feb 2nd, 2009 (10:16 pm)

    You’ve got the wrong battery, kids. Even GM knows the Lithium Titinate Oxide battery will out perform the current battery by at least 100% and at far better heat ranges. Who are you trying to put this off on… the general public?

    Good Luck