Grab our RSS Feed

AND

Nissan and NEC to Begin Mass Production of Automotive Lithium-ion Batteries in 2009

May 19th, 2008 | Posted in: Battery, Competitors

As the race to mass produce electric cars heat up, GM competitor Nissan has teamed up with NEC to form a lithium-ion battery company called Automotive Energy Supply Corp.

The company is producing lithium-ion batteries for automotive use which rely on Manganese-spinel for the cathode, the same chemistry that LG Chem is using.

The company announced today they will produce 13,000 units (for forklifts) in 2009 and 65,000 units by 2011.

Besides using these batteries in their own cars (Nissan and Renault), the company hopes to sell them to other carmakers as well.

Source (Wall Street Journal)

Posted by: Lyle

73 Responses to “Nissan and NEC to Begin Mass Production of Automotive Lithium-ion Batteries in 2009”

frankyB Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 1:58 pm

Great, this will help to bring better battery faster… my hope is by the time the Volt goes in production the battery will be better then the one they are using now to either provide longer battery use for commuting and/or better “driving performance” (accelaration and others…)

(Quote)
kent beuchert Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 2:00 pm

I suppose it’s good to have more rather than fewer battery makers, but it’s going to be very interesting whenever the EEStor devices make their public premier, which should be in the form of a component to allow a car to be converted to all-electic by ZENN Motors later this year. If they work, all the battery builders are Chapter 11. Immediately.

(Quote)
AndyChuck Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 3:10 pm

ha ha… same EEStor hyperbole from Kent.

(Quote)
Brian M Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 3:17 pm

Kent, I respect your tenacity, but it ain’t gonna happen.

(Quote)
Talks Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 3:19 pm

It looks like NEC lithium ion batteries are short lived and it no where near the 10 year , 150000 mile battery life required by the VOLT.
I think A123 cells will retain 80% capacity after 15 years. May be this is the reason my Nissan is thinking of using A123 in some markets apart from the safety A123 cells provide.

Link:
“Based on AESC’s testing, the cells will retain more than 80% capacity after 7 years, including 70,000 km (43,496 miles).”

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/05/aesc-lithium-io.html#more

(Quote)
Jason M. Hendler Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 3:33 pm

#2, kent,

Don’t be discouraged by your detractors, an earlier thread already showed GM considering adding super capacitors to their batteries to optimize performance. Super capacitors will be a component of all future BEV’s and PFCV’s.

(Quote)
omegaman66 Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 3:38 pm

More battery makers the better. Competition is good for the consumer.

Just have to inject people here and around the internet a trumpeting this announcement and saying Nissan will be a EV competitor. UMMMM what part of the release am I missing. Sounds to me like they are saying we won’t be a viable competitor for a long long time. Maybe 2015 before they really get going.

(Quote)
Jean-Charles Jacquemin Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 3:39 pm

Jason #6,

Agreed, we must consider EEStor and other manufacturers venturing in ultracapacitors production as pioneers.
Who could we be if there were no pioneers in the previous centuries ?

(Quote)
omegaman66 Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 3:45 pm

Yes supercapacitors will be coupled with batterys in cars or some mechanical form of energy storage eventual that is the logical progression. But EEStore so far has been all talk and no prototype. Capacitors yes…. EEStore we will have to wait and see.

(Quote)
Jim Rowland Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 4:00 pm

Yes, more people going the same direction. Looks like an impending scramble for battery superiority. All good news for us…and investors!

(Quote)
Estero Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 4:09 pm

The possibility of a supercapacitor being coupled with a battery is both exciting and puzzling.

We hear the Volt gas tank was decreased to 6/7 gallons because of space considerations; there was not sufficient space for the larger 12 gallon gas tank. So, where in the world will GM find space for a supercapacitor? Will they decrease the size of the battery to make room for the supercapacitor? Or, what?

(Quote)
Rashiid Amul Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 4:09 pm

This can only help. The next several years are really going to be exciting.

Kent #2. I truly hope you are correct, but I’m not going to hold my breath. EEStor talks a lot but hasn’t produced anything of substance that they are willing to show the world and fellow scientists. This is the only reason why I wouldn’t hold my breath. But once again, I hope you are right.

(Quote)
DaveP Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 4:18 pm

I think EEStor’s capacitors sound great, but even IF they get them out the door, it hardly spells an end for batteries. Feel free to correct me if I don’t recall correctly (I don’t even feel like googling around to verify this , but they’re only projected at about half the density of A123 cells and there’s technologies on the very near horizon that could increase li-ion by 10x. So, yeah, I’m rooting for EEStor and all, but I think they’re no longer the world changer they could have been thanks to all the work that’s been going on in lithium ion batteries in the meantime.
I actually think an EEStor like storage system is going to make a bigger difference for our HOMES than for our CARS.
(My dream scenario is $1/watt nanosolar panels feeding EEStor units at the house with a Volt in the garage and we could each make all the power we could use and it would be way cheaper for each of us than anything we’re using now. THAT would be way cool). Might even happen, too! At least the Volt is looking pretty good. Nanosolar is possibly not far behind, either. EEStor is, well, as unknown as ever.

(Quote)
Tim Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 4:29 pm

DaveP (#13) It’s about cost. EEStor’s capacitors will be a small fraction of the cost of ANY comparable battery technology and it’s the cost that drives the MASS automotive market. Few can afford a Tesla or even a Volt if it’s over $25-$30K.

I say don’t knock EEStor until they prove or disprove their technology.

Anyway, competition is great when it in a FREE market. I just hope those stupid politicians don’s screw things up again by choosing one over the other like they did with corn ethanol. Morons!

(Quote)
Arch Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 4:47 pm

One thing to keep in mind. Capacitors bleed off the charge over time. If you park your car at the airport for a week it will be dead when you get back. Using supercapacitors to absorb the charge for braking and then using it for acceleration is the best use I have seen so far.

Take Care
Arch

(Quote)
Dick G. Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 4:47 pm

The way I see it…..250,000,000 cars in the U.S…..If we change all of them to electric,….. That’s 250,000,000 battery packs. Can we do this in 5 years….7 years ?

(Quote)
Mark Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 4:50 pm

Excellent…more competition is better for the consumer.

More choices = more competition = lower prices.

(Quote)
Exp_EngTech Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 5:12 pm

“You’ll See ! You’ll See !”
“Soon the EEStor FluxCapacitor (Great Pumpkin) will rise up Out Of The Competing Technologies (Pumpkin Patch) and bring Order (Toys) to everyone !”

I just couldn’t resist.

Sorry, but the dominant power source for the coming global transition to E-REV’s is going to be Lithium. A123 Systems technology to be very specific.

Bank on it.

(Quote)
omegaman66 Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 5:24 pm

11 Estero
There was room for the gas tank. But the design want one tank and added un-needed complexity to the gas tank. Two connected tanks possed some incoveninces that the volt simply didn’t need. 6 gallons at 50 mpg (guestimate) + 40plus from the gas tank means you can drive for over five hours before needing to refill. Bigger gas tank simply isn’t needed.

(Quote)
Estero Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 5:40 pm

19 omegaman66

Thanks for the reply. You’re right on the gas tank.

But, what about the space needed to couple a supercapacitor with a battery? How much space will be needed? Or, does anyone know?

Where would GM find that space? Could they reduce the battery size to accomodate the supercapacitor? Or, what?

(Quote)
Joe Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 5:49 pm

How is GM going to get the advantage if another company has a battery equal to theirs? GM is hoping of using the Volt to get the respect they now deserve so they can change their perception.

(Quote)
Talks Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 5:51 pm

Joe,

See my comment on the top.

(Quote)
Joe Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 5:53 pm

#15 Arch hit it right on the nose about super capacitors.

(Quote)
noel park Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 6:08 pm

“Don’t look back, somethin’ might be gainin’ on ya.”

Anyone who underestimates Carlos Ghosn does so at his peril.

(Quote)
bruce g Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 6:27 pm

NEC believe they can produce 13000 batteries next year ramping to 65,000 batteries(presumeably per year) two years later.
I guess those are realistic goals for A123?

GM wouldnt want to loose sight of the LG batteries. They are very real.

(Quote)
Tagamet Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 6:30 pm

I love competition in the market place.

Can anyone point to a single fact that would suggest that EESTOR even HAS a product? I know that they SAY they do, but I could say that I’m handsome, but as long as I keep this bag over my head, nobody can disprove it…..

(Quote)
Guy Incognito Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 6:38 pm

If capacitors do indeed pan out, one would expect plug-in serial hybrids to use some kind of battery-capacitor combination.
The battery being the main power source for the electric drive, with the capacitor being available as a power boost, for those times that we’ve all experienced when we needed to ‘tromp’ the pedal.
Also, i believe the more companies that begin to manufacture Li-Ion batteries for EV’s the better, competition really does bring about better quality products at a lower cost; for both consumer and manufacturer.

(Quote)
Tagamet Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 6:43 pm

Didn’t Toyota go on record as saying that Li-Ion battery technology isn’t ready for cars?

(Quote)
Arch Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 6:56 pm

#28 Tagamet

Yes they did. IMHO that is because they do not have any experience with them. They have had open field running room since they built their hybrid. Now there is a new game in town. To be honest there are several new games in town.

Take Care
Arch

(Quote)
DaveP Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 7:00 pm

#14 Tim
Agreed, cost is probably the main concern at this stage.
But from what I’ve read about, the lithium battery technologies that increase density don’t necessarily increase cost. So, that Stanford research that shows 10x density improvement at the anode would probably cost only a tiny fraction more, if at all.
http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2008/january9/nanowire-010908.html
I’m certainly not trying to knock EEStor, I have been watching them for some time and respect that they’re not trying to hype what they’re doing.
But on the flip side the lack of information means who knows what EEStor’s ultimate costs will be. With the powder purities being so critical to them, they’re likely to be as yield sensitive as semiconductors are. Their costs may be very difficult to control at first but it’s all pure speculation until they have some more data they’re willing to release.
So, yeah, I’m really happy there’s some different technologies battling it out for energy storage. I hope everybody is going to be a winner from this. I certainly wouldn’t write off the battery folks, yet, though, I think they may very well pull an oder of magnitude cost reduction out of their labs quickly if pressed.

In a similar situation, I was thinking that Nanosolar’s roll printing solar cells would wipe all the silicon based cell manufacturers off the map as well. But the folks at MIT have mapped out how to do <$1/watt silicon based cells as well:
http://www.eetimes.com/news/semi/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=207000381
Competition is a wonderful motivator!!

(Quote)
texas Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 7:05 pm

Tagamet #26,

Please don’t take the bag off! Much like the EEstor product it would kill the mystery and probably my appetite.

(Quote)
Arch Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 7:13 pm

#5 Talks

I just went back and reread the link in your post. I can not believe that Nissan is going with a parallel hybrid system. That means the engine will be running all the time. They will get a little bit better mileage but nothing like the Volt will be able to get. Well we shall see how they play it. So far IMHO GM has the best system going.

Take Care
Arch

(Quote)
Brian M Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 8:26 pm

#27 Guy Incognito I think you have it right. Supercaps will probably not have enough energy density to be the only energy storage system on the car.

Also, in addition to providing boost, supercaps can accept regenerative braking energy faster than batteries.

(Quote)
Paul Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 8:41 pm

I can’t wait to buzz down to the market in my Nissan Forklift.
I wonder how well it’s going to handle?

(Quote)
jbfalaska Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 8:50 pm

GM VOLT: American-made, American FUELED. Why care?

I spent 20 years in the US Air Force with every destination aimed at the Middle-East to protect Mid-east oil passage. The real cost to subsidize the world’s oil use, including our trading enemies, $10/Gallon. Americans pay, all the others enjoy the field advantage.

Lets go GM. American made, American FUELED. American.

USAF Retired.

(Quote)
jbfalaska Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 8:51 pm

I’m hoping GM will honor the waiting list. I made it on fairly early – 6,809.

(Quote)
Tagamet Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 8:55 pm

jbfalaska,
Thanks for your service!
How does one determine what # they are on the waiting list?
Thanks again,
God Bless

(Quote)
john1701a Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 9:10 pm

>> I can not believe that Nissan is going with a parallel hybrid
>> system. That means the engine will be running all the time.

The engine does *NOT* run all the time. The production model limitation for Prius is 42 MPH. The plug-in prototype currently being tested is 62.1 MPH (100 km/h). The next production non-plug is expected to be 62.1 MPH as well.

Faster than that speed, the engine doesn’t necessarily run either. When the extra power is not needed, it will just spin without fuel to limit the RPM the PSD components.

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 9:18 pm

#35 jbfalaska

It looks like you might be from Alaska. I don’t think Alaska is one of the initial roll-out states.

(Quote)
Vincent Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 9:20 pm

#34 Jbfalaska, I too to thank you for your service and I am very sure I speak for all of us on this forum in appreciation.
That $10 a gallon real cost is an eye opener for sure.

(Quote)
Arch Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 9:33 pm

#38 John

I still do not like it. Do you really mean they are going to spin the engine when they are running on the battery motor? That has to be
one of the worse plans I have ever heard of? Oh well what ever.

Take Care
Arch

(Quote)
butters Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 9:33 pm

Arch 15, Joe 23:

I think that EEStor’s claim is a cell that has both electrostatic and electrochemical properties due to a unique dielectric/separator material. It should have a lower self-discharge rate and a flatter voltage curve than a capacitor.

(Quote)
aruby Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 9:46 pm

TOYOTA’s BATTERY
UC Davis Institute of of Transportation Studies
published a report on the goals and current state of battery technology.
Its technical, but written for the layperson.
Here’s what they say about Toyota’s battery:

“We must not generalize the attributes of one battery, e.g. Toyota’s concern about safety with its LCO battery to all Li-Ion batteries.”

So basically, Toyota bet on the wrong battery. Lithium Cobalt Oxide has low to moderate safety, short lifespan, and high cost.
So don’t allow Toyota’s misfortune to influence perception of all the other types of Lithium batteries.
link straight to PDF of the report
http://pubs.its.ucdavis.edu/download_pdf.php?id=1169

EESTOR
would be wonderful, but it relies on 99.9994% pure sub-micron Barium titanate. (wikipedia)
That doesn’t strike me as something that sounds very cheap…
IMHO the main advantage of supercaps is their ability to fully discharge without shortening the lifespan.

(Quote)
Arch Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 10:24 pm

# 42 Butters

I hope you are right! They will not make it otherwise.

Take Care
Arch

(Quote)
Grizzly Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 10:26 pm

“MHO the main advantage of supercaps is their ability to fully discharge without shortening the lifespan.”

**** **** ***** *****

They self discharge over time, and accept high recharge rates, so once again they are superb at buffering a battery and efficiently capturing regen braking.

If Barium titanate works this well, why isn’t anyone designing a battery around it? This is from a website I found:

“As a true breakthrough material in the electronic ceramics industry for more than half a century, barium titanate (BaTiO3) has found widespread use in multi-layer ceramic capacitors (MLCCs), piezoelectric & ferroelectric components, embedded decoupling capacitors (EDC), PTC thermistors, ceramic filters”

So it appears that it’s nothing new and has been used for more than 50 years.

Folks I think that Eestor has a lot of demonstrating to do, and right now I’m going to say that I doubt they’ll do it. I’d love for them to prove me wrong, and if they do, so be it we’ll all benefit. The way I see it right now is that they’ve rented a big bus and are advertising free rides. Won’t be the first time this has happened.

(Quote)
Arch Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 10:37 pm

#43 Aruby

I agree. It is easy to say that now. Go back to when they had to make the call. It was not a easy call back then. I do not like their parallel system nor their battery but they had the guts to make a call way back then. My problem now is that they seem to be resisting change. That is what is going to cost them. JMHO

Take Care
Arch

(Quote)
Hous Volt Pharteen Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 10:44 pm

This is very good news for all of us, the consumers and those of us who care about national security, oil independent USA, the environment/planet, and our wallet and packets too. However, for all that I had read about Erev. I do believe that GM has the upper hand with the Volt and out of all the new cars promising all the goodies about E-Rev, I still in love with the Volt and I will marry her once she comes out 2010. Go GM.

jbfalaska…Thanks for your service…Navy here.
Where is Nasaman…Hope everything is well. Miss you comments here. Take care.

(Quote)
Scott Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 10:45 pm

44 posts on EEstor’s vaporware??? *yawn*. Why don’t we talk about purple hippos in Antarctica. It’s just as possible.

(Quote)
omegaman66 Says:
May 19th, 2008 at 11:39 pm

Purple hippos!!! Why would you even bring that up???? Everyone knows those were disproven more than a year ago!!! Check out this link if you don’t believe me: http://www.thejump.net/humor/catch-and-release.htm

(Quote)
Texas Says:
May 20th, 2008 at 12:10 am

Dear EEstor, If you are reading this I would like to ask you a question. Do you realize that due to your secrecy and hype others are delaying the development and implementation of competing technologies? It’s human nature to delay action if a better way is right around the corner. Hype is great and I hope you achieve everything you desire in life and change the world for the better. Please consider your impact as a fuel for vacillation. Thank you.

Sincerely,
Texas

(Quote)
john1701a Says:
May 20th, 2008 at 1:22 am

>> Do you really mean they are going to spin the engine
>> when they are running on the battery motor?

No! How many times must this same information be posted?

Up to 62.1 MPH, there is the opportunity to kill the engine entirely… no motion whatsoever… it just sits there dead.

(Quote)
Jean-Charles Jacquemin Says:
May 20th, 2008 at 1:42 am

Texas #49,

Thanks, JC

(Quote)
noel park Says:
May 20th, 2008 at 10:40 am

Last night as we were watching AC 360, CNN ran this story about Nissan, NEC, and LI batteries on the moving sign, or whatever you call it, below the picture numerous times.

While I would rather it was about GM than Nissan, anything which raises public awareness about this whole plug in issue can only be good for everybody.

Way to go CNN.

(Quote)
Tagamet Says:
May 20th, 2008 at 10:49 am

Dear Texas ,
Thank you for your recent request about EEstor technology. Unfortunately, that information is currently under our recently invented Klingon Cloaking Device. Although we can assure you that our technology exists and has met all of our high technological standards, noone can actually SEE it because this would disrupt the testing of the KCD.
Thank you for your interest in our fine products.
EEstor customer support

(Quote)
N Riley Says:
May 20th, 2008 at 11:12 am

noel park #52

CNN probably ran that information because it was not about a U.S. company. They tend to report much more favorably on non-U.S. business news, especially if the U.S. business in GM. They seem to have a problem with GM. IMHO.

I am not sure we have honest new coverage anymore.

Nissan does plan a plug-in vehicle. I would expect them to compete in every category of vehicles. I will still buy the Volt over nearly anything produced by non-U.S. businesses. I am going to try to buy American where I can.

(Quote)
Glenn Says:
May 20th, 2008 at 2:05 pm

The Klingons don’t have cloaking technology. The Romulans do.

(Quote)
Glenn Says:
May 20th, 2008 at 2:13 pm

All this talk about EEstor and ultracapacitors and no has brought up AFS Trinity??? Maybe it has been talked to death, but that doesn’t seem to have quashed further discussion of EEstor.

AFS Trinity has proven the marriage of batteries and ultracaps with working prototypes.

http://www.afstrinity.com/

(Quote)
Tagamet Says:
May 20th, 2008 at 4:20 pm

Glenn,
The Romulans invented the Cloaking Device, but the Klingons stole it at a later stardate.
Tag

(Quote)
noel park Says:
May 20th, 2008 at 4:28 pm

#56 Glenn & #58 Tagamet:

Well I dunno, but I don’t think that the Klingons and the Romulans have anything on our good old US of A political system when it comes to “cloaking technology”. Only we prefer to call it “spin”, or better yet “public information”.

And what was that you were saying about my meds?

(Quote)
Tagamet Says:
May 20th, 2008 at 5:46 pm

Noel @59
There are clearly limits beyond which medication can prove successful. Your post @59 may well suggest that you’ve drifted beyond an amelieorable level. I’d suggest that you settle in for a few weeks of 24/7 Fox News (wink).

As always, I am:
“Unfair, Unbalanced, Unmedicated”

(Quote)
noel park Says:
May 20th, 2008 at 7:00 pm

#60 Tagamet:

Well I’ve been called a lot of things, but “beyond an amelieorable level” is a new one. I think I like it!

(Quote)
Tagamet Says:
May 20th, 2008 at 7:06 pm

noel,
I’m genuinely glad you like it! It’s not a phrase I get to use very often. I’d tried to achieve it for several years back in the 60’s without ever being able to maintain it for long.

(Quote)
Grizzly Says:
May 20th, 2008 at 8:37 pm

Tag #54

“Klingon Cloaking Device”……Really?

Am I to assume that the Emperor has a new set of clothes?

(Quote)
Tagamet Says:
May 20th, 2008 at 9:35 pm

Grizzly,
If the Emperor’s clothes are powered by EEstor, he’s gonna really mind the drafts…

(Quote)
Grizzly Says:
May 20th, 2008 at 9:59 pm

Tag #64

One would have to believe that if Eestor was in business for money like most companies they’d have approached GM with a viable product. After all IF YOU had a product that could do what Eestor claims their’s can do what better client could you have than the world’s largest automaker who’s in hot pursuit of a revolutionary automobile that could benefit from this technology?

Instead, you align yourself with an almost chaper 7 EV maker who’s vehicle can’t maintain highway speeds, and isn’t allowed on roads in their homeland of Canada, and has the same need for publicity as you do, only for a different reason.

What does this tell us? Do we join Linus in the pumpkin patch every Oct 31st, or do we move on with Li-ion technology? The answer is the same as GM has chosen, we move on with Li-ion technology.

I’ll state this again. PROVE me wrong Eestor and I’ll be happy to admit I was wrong.

(Quote)
Tagamet Says:
May 20th, 2008 at 10:24 pm

Grizzly,
Sounds spot on to me.

(Quote)
William Hughes-Games Says:
May 21st, 2008 at 12:23 am

Hopefully these new batteries will be specifically designed to be completely recyclable. Has any thought been put into this.

(Quote)
Don Says:
May 22nd, 2008 at 8:48 am

Omegaman post #7 – actually the plan for Nissan is to come to market at around the same time.

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/05/nissan-to-intro.html

“Nissan will introduce an all-electric vehicle in the US and Japan in 2010 and then mass-market vehicles to consumers globally in 2012 …. Nissan will support the revenue growth target by a product plan that will launch 60 all-new models in the next five years and more than 15 new technologies every year from 2009. …. The Renault-Nissan alliance is also working with Project Better Place on the mass deployment of electric vehicles to select country markets, such as Israel. (Earlier post.) …. ”

It is of importance that they are partnered with Project Better Place. This not only assures some baseline market, it also gives them opportunity to proof the technology ahead of worldwide roll-out.

Nissan/Renault plans on introducing a wide selection of product over a short period of time. Unlike GM they can succeed with smaller sales on each product. GM needs the Volt to be if not a grand slam then at least a solid triple. Nissan will consider it a success if they hit a few singles.

The more EVs (EREV, BEV all) to choose between the better in my mind.

#67 William – yes, recyclable.

(Quote)
Don Says:
May 22nd, 2008 at 10:45 am

More on their plans: http://www.economist.com/business/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11332425&CFID=6608835&CFTOKEN=26864226

<>

(Quote)
consigli construction Says:
October 28th, 2008 at 8:44 am

zwvo opwgv

(Quote)
lyrics Says:
November 2nd, 2008 at 11:47 pm

qiegdk

(Quote)
shivo terry Says:
November 4th, 2008 at 10:11 am

vmyti

(Quote)
dont fear the reaper guitar tab Says:
November 15th, 2008 at 9:33 pm

noqgj

(Quote)

Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts

Chrysler dismantles electric car plans under Fiat November 7, 2009
DETROIT (Reuters) - Chrysler has disbanded a team of engineers dedicated to rushing a range of electric vehicles to showrooms and dropped ambitious... […]
Texas
First Solar buys 117 MW project from solar startup Ausra November 7, 2009
First Solar buys 117 MW project from solar startup Ausra: _Link_ (http://www.reuters.com/article/mergersNews/idUSN046821420091105) Given that water... […]
Jason M. Hendler
True believers swamp Fisker opening November 7, 2009
True believers swamp Fisker opening _Link_ (http://www.autonews.com/article/20091106/ANA05/911069996/1137) Can you imagine what the roll-out of the... […]
Jason M. Hendler
Zero Motorcycles Announces Consumer Financing November 7, 2009
Zero Motorcycles Announces Consumer Financing: _Link_ (http://www.allcarselectric.com/blog/1037942_zero-motorcycles-announces-consumer-financing) […]
Jason M. Hendler
LeRoy1974 November 6, 2009
Does the Volt have a trunk in which we can put groceries or a couple of golf bags? All the photos and drawings of the Volt look like it was in an... […]
LeRoy1974
Embrace technology to turn nuclear energy into environmental solution November 6, 2009
From the Seattle Times: "STEWART Brand, author of "The Whole Earth Catalog," visited Seattle last week, promoting his latest environmental manifesto... […]
misslexi
Lutz to Head Opel November 6, 2009
Der Spiegel reports that Lutz is going to head up Opel: Spiegel Online(link)... […]
dagwood55

Nissan and NEC to Begin Mass Production of Automotive Lithium-ion Batteries in 2009

73 Responses to “Nissan and NEC to Begin Mass Production of Automotive Lithium-ion Batteries in 2009”

Leave a Reply

Recent Posts

Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts