Plug in, turn on, drive out

With the promise to be greener and cheaper to operate, Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEVs) are creating quite a buzz in the auto world. PHEVs have been converted by installing an additional storage battery that allows the car to operate more in electric mode and less with the gasoline engine.

Full-scale, commercial production could happen as early as next year. And when they do hit the marketplace, you will be able to charge your car at plug-in stations in Raleigh. PHEVs from Toyota and GM are slated to hit the market in 2010. And if all goes according to the Obama administration's plan, there will be 1 million PHEVs in the American fleet by 2015. Part of the reason that PHEVs haven't made it to the showroom is that old electric-car nemesis: expensive batteries.
Another obstacle is the limited mileage availability between chargings. Those mileage numbers have improved: The Chevy Volt reportedly gets 40 mpg on the battery power alone. The cost is coming down, too. If mass produced, batteries would add $2,000-$3,000 to the price of a regular hybrid.

It may be a while before you see a new PHEV on a street near you, unless you live in one of five American cities that have already signed on to install plug-in stations. Think of them as powerful wall sockets in street side and in parking garages. The original three were Raleigh, Indianapolis and Portland, Ore., and were later joined by Denver and Houston in an initiative named Project Get Ready.
Project Get Ready is the brainchild of the Rocky Mountain Institute, an organization focused on sustainability and innovations for energy and resource efficiency. By 2010, when PHEVs are expected to start trolling city streets, Raleigh plans to have six charging stations near downtown and N.C. State. Progress Energy, a partner in Project Get Ready, is paying for the stations. Meanwhile, several converted PHEVs are being driven downtown, including a city-owned Prius.

Source : IndyWeek.com, by Steve Luxton, November 4h, 2009

Wall Street Is Bullish on Electric Cars

The financial establishment is getting bullish about electric cars. I just talked to a Bank of America/Merrill Lynch analyst who told me that EVs will need "sizzle," or maybe the right phrase is sex appeal, to triumph in the marketplace.

"Cost is not the only factor driving the purchasing decision," says analyst Steven Milunovich. "EVs need to appeal to consumers on a psychological level, such as prestige and driving enjoyment." I totally agree. The good thing is that many EVs already have sizzle to burn. Or is sizzle already burning?

The car magazines are stuck in the past with high-performance dinosaurs, but most of the cars that attract buzz in the financial media today are green. The Fisker Karma, for instance, is a visual outrage--it makes Megan Fox look like a nun. And it's bristling with cool eco-features, including interior wood sourced from river bottoms and a rooftop solar panel to run the heating and cooling systems. And it's not surprising that Fisker is working on some kind of proprietary noise--a Formula One car crossed with a spaceship--so that pedestrians will know it's there when in battery mode.

The Tesla Roadster is, of course, off the charts in sizzle factor, and the forthcoming Model S is the Maserati of electric sedans. General Motors would love to pay for the positive publicity Tesla gets for free.

Another reason Wall Street likes EVs is that it can make money on them. When the battery company A123 (a supplier to Chrysler) went public, its stock--one of the few "pure plays" an investor could buy (most battery makers are either not public or part of large conglomerates) doubled in price on the first day.

Other financial analysts like the switch to cleaner cars, too. A very positive report from Citigroup Global Markets says that the automakers should actually applaud the stricter fuel economy/greenhouse gas standards they once fought (but now endorse). Why? Because the 35.5 mpg fuel economy goal (by 2016) will increase their profits. The report says that under the national program announced by President Obama last May, "Detroit's gross profits are likely to increase by roughly $3 billion a year, compared to an $800 million increase for the Japanese Three," the report said. "And sales are likely to increase by the equivalent of two large assembly plants for the Detroit Three."

Further, the report gets into the reason people buy cars. "Complying with the national program renders the vehicles in the majority of segments more cost effective for consumers," it said. And that's because the extra cost will be less than the fuel saved.

Carol Lee Rawn of the Investor Network on climate risk, representing over $8 trillion in combined assets, testified at a recent EPA hearing that the national standards are a key enabling strategy for the U.S. automakers to produce cars that consumers will actually want to buy, and that will be fuel efficient and competitive. "It is critical that American auto companies significantly change their business models to ensure that they are able to compete successfully in the 21st century," she said.

Finally, a University of Michigan survey that just crossed my desk shows strong consumer interest in buying plug-in hybrid electric cars. Some 42% of those surveyed said they might buy one--the acceptance rose as the cost came down, obviously.

A New York Times editor joked to me recently that, given some of the bizarre EVs we've seen recently, it seems anybody can slap up a web page and call themselves an automaker. Yes, it was that way in 1910, too, but the bad ones fell by the wayside and the cream rose to the top. The good thing is that good plug-in cars are already on the horizon, and people will want to buy them.

Source : TheDailyGreen,by Jim Motavali, November 6th, 2009

Nissan's Plug-In Gamble

Like all other auto executives these days, Carlos Ghosn has been pulling in the reins. In February he suspended Nissan Motor's three-year business plan and launched widespread cost cuts, even delaying new products. Even so, Nissan couldn't avoid a $170 million first-quarter net loss, reported in July. But Ghosn, who surprised many with his quick turnaround of the Japanese carmaker a decade ago, has been careful to protect spending for his boldest initiative yet: to lead the world into a new era of mass-market electric vehicles.

With the help of government loans in the U.S. and elsewhere, Nissan Motor plans to invest several billion dollars over the next three years to construct factories for advanced batteries and retool assembly plants that could produce 300,000 to 400,000 electric vehicles a year on three continents. When you think of electric cars you might think of General Motors or perhaps Tesla Motors. But no manufacturer so far matches Nissan's ambition to create a mass market for all-electric vehicles. GM is looking to sell "tens of thousands" of its plug-in Chevy Volt, due in November 2010. Late this year Toyota Motor will start testing a few hundred plug-in versions of its Prius hybrid. But both have backup gasoline engines.

Tesla has a pure-electric sports car, but it costs $101,000. Japan's number four automaker, Mitsubishi, launched its electrici-MiEV in June. At $48,000 it's not likely to sell in huge numbers, either. Subaru and BMW's Mini is testing the market for battery-operated cars but in low volumes. Toyota, Ford Motor and Chrysler say they'll have an electric car in a few years but appear behind Nissan in revving up to high-volume sales. "We are the only one investing for mass marketing of zero-emission vehicles," said Ghosn. This is a big departure for a guy who derided the hybrid craze as a costly fad and whose company was thus eclipsed by Toyota and Honda. Toyota sold 159,000 Prius hybrids in 2008, compared with Nissan's 8,800 Altima hybrids, which use Toyota's technology.

The first of the company's new electric models, the Nissan Leaf, was unveiled in early August in Japan. It's a five-passenger hatchback with a 24-kilowatt-hour battery in the floor that can go 100 miles between charges. Which means that this is no muscle car; that much energy is the equivalent of a 16hp engine running for two hours (although Nissan is quick to note that it can output 107hp in spurts). Production begins late next year in Japan, with a starting volume of 50,000 units a year. It'll be available in a dozen U.S. cities starting in late 2010. It is expected to sell for around $30,000. Buyers can apply for a $7,500 U.S. government alternative energy tax credit.

By 2012 Nissan will have a lithium-ion battery plant and a retooled electric-vehicle assembly line in place in Tennessee, funded in part by a $1.6 billion loan from the U.S. Energy Department. Nissan plans to build 150,000 evs and 200,000 batteries a year in the U.S. and announced similar plans for battery factories in Great Britain and Portugal. The key to electric cars is making a battery that has a sufficient driving range (125 miles or more), will last 10 years and isn't too expensive. Nissan seems to have an advantage here. Unlike many carmakers currently scrambling to find reliable battery partners, Nissan has been developing lithium-ion batteries in-house for 17 years. Last year Nissan locked up its future supply by purchasing a controlling interest in its battery manufacturing joint venture with Japan's NEC. As capacity increases, Nissan plans to sell batteries to other carmakers. Nissan won't disclose the cost of its battery, but ultimately success will depend on how quickly the company can boost sales volumes. The company is counting on government help. It's partnering with about 30 cities and states, and several foreign governments, to supply them with fleets of electric vehicles while simultaneously helping them get plug-in ready.

In some cases that's as simple as streamlining the process of installing a home charging station. "You can't just walk into a dealership and drive home with an electric car," says Brian Carolin, senior vice president for sales and marketing at Nissan North America. Buyers first need a permit for a 220-volt charging box that needs its own circuit. The box will cost $500 to $800, installation from $200 to $1,500, predicts Nissan. A law expiring in December 2010 (but with a good chance at being extended) gives you a $2,000 federal tax credit on the charger, on top of the subsidy for the car. Plus, some federal stimulus money may wind up financing charging stations in cities like Seattle, Portland, San Diego and Phoenix. Ghosn is now a convert, convinced the environmental winds are on his side. Hybrids or range-extended plug-ins like the Chevy Volt, he says, are transitional technology. They help reduce emissions, not eliminate them. "When you have emissions, you have suspicions," he says. Pure electric cars are clean, he says, and government policymakers worldwide are clamoring for them. "I am extremely bullish on zero-emission vehicles," says Ghosn. Within ten years, he predicts, 10% of the world's cars will be electric--and maybe Nissan will be a leader, not a follower.

President Obama wants 1 million plug-in cars on the road by 2015, but some will be cleaner than others. Here's a rundown of various plug-in technologies:

Plug-in Hybrid
Example: Plug-in Toyota Prius, due in 2010
Stronger battery, and rechargeable, but only slightly more efficient than today's Prius. It can go faster and farther on battery power, but the gasoline engine still kicks in after 10 miles or so.
Estimated MPG: 50-plus

Range-Extended Electric Vehicle
Examples: Chevy Volt, Fisker Karma (both in 2010)
Much bigger battery supplies 40-mile range on electricity. Small gasoline engine generates backup juice for longer distances.
Estimated MPG: 100

Pure Electric Vehicle
Examples: Nissan Leaf (2010), Mitsubishi i-MiEV, Tesla Roadster (on sale now)
Runs on electrons only. Range is 100 to 125 miles (depending on battery size). Rechargeable but no gasoline backup if your battery dies.
Estimated MPG Equivalent: 350

Source : Forbes, by Joann Muller, August 24th,2009

The electric-fuel solution

In 1995 Joseph Bower and Clayton Christensen, two researchers at the Harvard Business School, invented a new term: “disruptive technology”. This is an innovation that fulfils the requirements of some, but not most, consumers better than the incumbent does. That gives it a toehold, which allows room for improvement and, eventually, dominance. The risk for incumbent firms is that of the proverbial boiling frog. They may not know when to switch from old to new until it is too late.

The example Dr Bower and Dr Christensen used was a nerdy one: computer hard-drives. But unbeknown to them a more familiar one was in the making. The first digital cameras were coming on sale. These were more expensive than film cameras and had lower resolution. But they brought two advantages. A user could look at a picture immediately after he had taken it. And he could download it onto his computer and send it to his friends.

Fourteen years on, you would struggle to buy a new camera that uses film. Some of the leading camera-makers, such as Panasonic, are firms that had little interest in photography when Dr Bower and Dr Christensen published. And an entire industry, the manufacturing and processing of film, is rapidly disappearing.

Substitute “car” for “camera” and you have a story that should concern thoughtful bosses in the motor and oil industries. Internal-combustion engines have dominated mechanised road transport for a century, but the past year or so has seen the arrival of a dribble of vehicles driven by electric motors. That these are the products of small, new firms, or of established non-carmaking companies, supports the Bower-Christensen thesis. But next year the big boys, encouraged by legislative pressure to produce low-emission vehicles, will leap out of the boiling water and join in. Their progress towards greenery has been an important theme of the latest auto shows in Frankfurt and Tokyo.

Bold claims are being made. Carlos Ghosn, who leads the Renault-Nissan alliance, thinks 10% of new cars bought in 2020 will be pure-battery vehicles. A report by IDTechEx, a research consultancy based in Cambridge, England, reckons a third of the cars made in 2025 will be electrically powered in one way or another. If that trend continues, liquid fuels might become as obsolete as photographic film.

The Li-ion roars

The technological breakthrough that led to digital cameras was the charge-coupled device, or CCD. The equivalent for electric cars is the lithium-ion battery, or Li-ion. Just as CCDs were used first in specialist applications, such as television cameras, so Li-ion batteries have been used in laptop computers and mobile phones. By 2003, however, their price had dropped to a level where Elon Musk, an entrepreneur who had helped launch PayPal, an online payments service, thought that they might be cheap enough to form the basis of an all-electric sports car.

The “killer app” of this car would be its acceleration. Unlike internal-combustion engines, electric motors have full torque, as pulling-power is called, from zero revs. They are thus predisposed to go like a bat out of hell without the aid of a gearbox. Mr Musk’s brainchild is known as the Tesla Roadster. The sports version goes from zero to 100kph (62mph) in 3.7 seconds—not much slower than a top-line Ferrari.

The desire for acceleration at any price ($121,000, 80,700€) is a niche market, but niche markets are the classic way in for a disruptive technology. Tesla’s next vehicle, the Model S, is a more mainstream family car. At about $50,000 (33,300 €) it will still not be cheap, but it should be cheap enough to appeal to those who like to think of themselves as early adopters, but who also have spouses and children to worry about.

Another reason for the high price of Tesla’s cars is their range. According to its maker, the Roadster can travel almost 400km (250 miles) between charges. The Model S should be able to do even better. But cheaper electric cars have to make a trade-off between range, price and convenience. Since batteries can be recharged only slowly (the process takes hours), a car’s effective range is limited by the size of its battery. And batteries are expensive.

A lot of researchers are working on making them cheaper and faster to charge, of course. In the meantime, though, there are three approaches to the trade-off, each of which has its champions. One is to accept the range limit and design small, thrifty vehicles specialised for city use. This has the virtue of simplicity and the vice of inflexibility. The second is to add a petrol-driven generator known as a “range extender”. This complicates the mechanics, but provides the driver with a security blanket, for he knows he will never be stranded if he can find a petrol station. The third answer is to keep the car all-battery, but to introduce a network of battery-exchange stations similar to the existing network of petrol stations, so that someone who is running out of juice can pull in, swap over and pull out.

Celling the future

A leading contender in the first category is Mitsubishi’s i-MiEV, which should go on sale next year. Its initial price will be $49,000 (32,700 €), although that is expected to be cut in half once the car goes on sale outside Japan. That halving (and potential quartering) of price compared with a Tesla Roadster is achievable because the i-MiEV’s battery has only 88 Li-ion cells, rather than the Tesla’s 1,800. It uses its limited resources well, however. Its quoted range is 160km (100 miles). Other electric city cars are expected from firms such as Fiat and Toyota. And in November Daimler (which also owns 6% of Tesla) plans to start producing a Li-ion-powered version of its Smart Fortwo. In Germany, a full charge will cost about €2 ($2.80) and keep the vehicle going for around 115km—although there is room in the car, as the name suggests, for only two people.

City cars are all very well as runabouts, but for electric vehicles to become widely adopted and displace fossil fuels they will have to crack the saloon-car market, too. To do that with an all-battery car will be a tall order, as the price of the Model S suggests. Most carmakers are taking a more conservative approach than Tesla’s, and it is here that the second answer, a battery plus a generator, heaves into view.

In an existing hybrid, such as the Toyota Prius and the Honda Insight, the wheels can be turned directly by both the petrol engine and the electric motor (and all the energy is supplied originally as petrol). Such vehicles are known as “parallel” hybrids as a result. In the new battery-plus-generator designs, also known as “series” hybrids, the wheels are driven only by the electric motor. The petrol engine is there to create more electricity, if it is needed, but the batteries are usually recharged from the mains.

The most talked-about of the battery-plus-generator models is General Motors’ Chevrolet Volt (to be sold in Europe as the Ampera). This car, which should be in the showrooms next year at a price of around $40,000 (26,700 €), has an all-battery range of 65km (35 miles), after which the range-extender will kick in. GM reckons 65km is enough to cover 80% of daily usage in America, and similar figures pertain to other countries. Mitsubishi says 90% of drivers in Japan cover less than 40km on weekdays and 80% cover less than 60km at weekends. Robert Bosch, a German car-parts firm, reckons that in Germany the 90% figure is less than 80km.

Most of the big carmakers have series hybrids under development. In some cases the range-extenders could be offered as an extra on a battery-powered model, leaving it up to the customer to decide what sort of range he wants. Daimler is taking this approach with its BlueZero cars. These five-seater vehicles will be available in three versions. A battery-only model will have a range of 200km (108 miles). Another will offer 100km (54 miles) of battery-powered range, but will also have a petrol generator to extend it. A third will use a hydrogen-powered fuel cell to generate electricity.

The third answer, though, is perhaps the most radical. Instead of a petrol engine, with its widespread infrastructure of filling stations providing the security blanket, why not build new infrastructure to refuel cars with new, fully charged batteries?

The leading proponent of this idea is Better Place. This firm, which is based in California, has been scouring the world for car markets that are, in its terminology, “islands” and offering to fit them with networks of car-charging and battery-swapping stations that will use robots to exchange exhausted batteries for fully charged ones in seconds. Better Place defines an island as a place with an edge that motorists rarely cross, and the first to be picked by Shai Agassi, the firm’s founder, was Israel. Though more of the country’s edge is land than sea, few cars leave by either route. Israel is now being fitted out with the Better Place infrastructure. Meanwhile, Nissan is tooling up to start building cars with batteries of the appropriate dimensions, for sale starting next year, and Tesla plans to offer swappable batteries on the Model S.

Other “islands” that Better Place has signed deals with include Denmark, Hawaii and Australia. The firm also has a partnership with Tokyo’s largest taxi operator, Nihon Kotsu, to provide swappable batteries for a new fleet of electric taxis which will take to the streets of the Japanese capital. With some 60,000 taxis in Tokyo, this could turn into a huge market. Besides providing drivers with secure refuelling, the Better Place approach has a second advantage. Separating ownership of the battery from ownership of the car changes the economics of electric vehicles. If you rent the battery rather than buying it, that becomes a running cost (like petrol) and the sticker price of the car drops accordingly. This might not matter to a sophisticated economist, who would amortise the battery cost over the life of the vehicle. Many people, though, are swayed by the number they write on the cheque that they give to the dealer.

Better Place, indeed, plans to go further. It will charge for its services (battery and electricity) by the kilometre travelled. The cost per kilometre will be lower than for petrol vehicles, and if you sign up for enough kilometres a month, it will throw in the car for nothing.

Watt’s up

That is possible in part because electric cars are efficient. According to Bosch’s calculations, a conventional internal-combustion-engined car can travel 1.5-2.5km (0.8 - 1.35 mile) on a kilowatt-hour (kWh) of energy. A hybrid with a combined electric and diesel engine would go up to 3.2km (1.73 mile). But a battery-powered car can travel 6.5km (3.5 miles).

On top of that, the energy put into them is cheaper. Owners with garages or driveways can top up at night using the domestic supply. The long recharge time will thus not be an issue, and the electricity will be cheap, off-peak power. Even if more expensive daytime power is needed (some office and supermarket car parks are already being fitted with recharging points, in anticipation of mounting demand), the cost of such juice is still favourable compared with petrol.

Only for garageless owners does recharging become complicated. They will need street-based electrical infrastructure, and a lack of this will limit the spread of electric vehicles to start with. That said, the batteries are expected to get better quite fast. No one is talking of Moore’s Law—a doubling of capacity every 18 months or so. But an improvement of about 8% a year into the foreseeable future is on the cards. A doubling in a decade, in other words.

Bosch, for example, calculates that a car fitted with a 40kW motor capable of speeds of up to 120kph (74.5 mph) would need a Li-ion battery with a capacity of 35kWh. Today such a battery might cost around €17,000 (11,300 €). With the technology and economies of scale Bosch expects to be available in 2015, that could drop to €8,000-12,000 (5,300 - 8,000 €). As Ford recently pointed out, if the industry were to move towards a common standard for battery packs, this would help boost production volumes and so bring prices down even more. Bosch reckons that for electric cars to become universally popular, a threefold increase in energy density (available charging stations) and a fall of two-thirds in the price of batteries will be needed. To that end, it has set up a joint venture with Samsung of South Korea to develop and produce Li-ion batteries for automotive use.

Indeed, battery firms, both old and new, are coming up with innovations that add up to the 8% annual gains. These involve changes to the lithium chemistry of batteries, their mechanical properties and the electronics that control them. Among the newcomers are two American firms, A123 Systems and Boston Power, both of which are based in Massachusetts.

A123 was founded in 2001 and is backed by General Electric. It uses nanoscale materials to boost the performance of its batteries (making an electrode out of nanoparticles increases its surface area, which in turn decreases the battery’s internal resistance and improves its ability to store and deliver energy). Its batteries are already used in power tools, and the company has formed alliances to supply Chrysler and SAIC Motor Corporation of Shanghai with car-sized versions. Its batteries were also being considered for the Volt, but GM eventually picked ones made by LG Chem, a South Korean firm.

Boston Power, founded in 2005, makes fast-charging Li-ion cells for consumer products, including some Hewlett-Packard laptops. The company, which has a factory in Taiwan and plans for one in Massachusetts, is developing a Li-ion battery called Swing for automotive use.

Some carmakers are forming partnerships with battery-makers to ensure supplies and gain access to technology. Others are building their own battery factories. And some are doing both: Nissan has formed a joint venture with NEC to produce advanced Li-ion batteries that use a laminated structure to improve cooling.

The firm is planning to put the batteries in a new five-seater family car called the Leaf that it intends to launch late next year in Japan and America as part of its alliance with Renault. The group plans to build 200,000 a year, the most ambitious production target so far for a pure-battery car. The Leaf will be powered by an 80kW electric motor and will have a range of at least 160km (100 miles) on a full charge. It can be charged to 80% capacity in 30 minutes with high-powered quick chargers which Nissan hopes will be installed in petrol stations and other public places.

At least one battery-maker, though, has loftier ambitions than merely supplying carmakers with its wherewithal. BYD, a Chinese firm, seems to have Panasonic’s success in the world of cameras in mind. Earlier this year it launched the first of what it promises will be a range of electric cars that will undercut those made by American and European producers, in part by using a novel material in the batteries’ electrodes. It claims this will make those batteries both cheaper than conventional types, and faster charging. BYD started with fleet sales in China and plans to begin private sales there later this month and launch its first vehicle in America next year. The company is being watched closely, not least by Warren Buffett, a celebrated American investor who has taken a 10% stake in it.

This will be an interesting experiment. There is a lot more to an electric car than its battery, of course. But established car firms that think their know-how in other parts of carmaking will save them may find themselves in the same position as those 19th-century carriage-makers who thought a “horseless carriage” would, literally, be that. For, once the engine block and the gearbox are gone, the game of car design changes. And batterification could bring about other changes, too.

Which frogs will live?

A number of carmakers and component companies are, for example, looking at getting rid of drive trains, and fitting electric motors directly into cars’ wheels. Such systems would be operated electronically, so they would also provide traction control.

Michelin, in particular, is developing what it calls the Active Wheel. This gives the firm the ability to provide a complete power, braking and suspension package for electric cars. One of the set-ups on which Michelin is working has two motors mounted within each wheel. One turns the wheel. The other works an active-suspension system that dampens the usual pitching and rolling of a car as it drives along. Besides traction control, the driver (or the vehicle’s computer) would be able to select different suspension settings to suit motoring conditions.

One of the first cars to use Michelin’s four-wheel-drive ActiveWheel set-up is likely to be the Venturi Volage. A Li-ion battery gives this a range of around 320km and a top speed of 150kph. It is designed to accelerate to 100kph in under five seconds, according to Venturi, a specialist carmaker based in Monaco. Like the Tesla Roadster, it is not expected to be cheap.

With wheel-mounted motors that mix motive power, braking and active suspension, more of the things conventionally fitted to a car become unnecessary. Because a gearbox, clutch, transmission and differential unit are no longer needed, and springs and other suspension items will probably go, too, vehicles could assume all sorts of shapes and sizes.

Without the cost and complexity of many of the parts hitherto required to make a car, the shape of the automotive industry could be transformed as much as cars are. As for the oil companies, if the visionaries are correct, they risk finding themselves in the wrong business. Some researchers already have battery materials they reckon could be recharged in the time it takes to freshen up and have a snack at a service station. If they are right, the need for even a range-extender vanishes.

That is still a biggish “if”, of course. The efficiency of internal-combustion engines is improving, too—and as the advert above shows, electric cars have come and gone in the past. But propelling modern transport by means of serial explosions in an array of tin-cans does seem an incredibly primitive way of doing things. The time is ripe for a change.

Source : TheEconomist,September 3rd, 2009

New Industry emerging around EVs

Much has been written about the planned release by General Motors of the Chevy Volt, a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle. When GM launches the vehicle, now slated for late 2010, it expects to sell tens of thousands of them. As profiled in an article in the August 24 issue of Forbes, the bigger mover in the electric drive vehicles game looks to be Nissan, which is investing several billion dollars to ramp up and produce 300,000-400,000 electric vehicles within a few years.

Its entry model is the Leaf, a five-passenger hatchback that it aims to sell in the U.S. by late 2010, at a price point of about $30,000 (20,000 €).

A key aspect of Nissan’s surge into electric vehicles is its joint venture with NEC related to its lithium-ion (Li-ion) batteries. The NEC battery design employs a laminated structure that improves cooling performance, which has been a major stumbling point for the use of Li-ion batteries. Indeed, Nissan plans to sell these batteries to other automakers. Nissan’s CEO, Carlos Ghosn, is by his own words “extremely bullish on zero-emission vehicles.” He is bold enough to predict that 10% of world auto sales will be all-electric within 10 years. An excellent overview of the electric vehicle realm, entitled "The Electric-Fuel-Trade Acid Test", was published in the September 5 issue of The Economist. In this article, not only were several of the new electric vehicle makers (e.g., Tesla Motors, Venturi, BYD Auto, SAIC Motors) and battery developers (A123 Systems, Boston Power) put into context, but some all-new technologies and business models enabled by vehicle electrification were highlighted.

For instance, consider the case of Better Place. This California-based firm is launching a business to serve local auto markets with a network of stations that will swap out depleted batteries with fully-charged ones within seconds, and charge the spent batteries for reuse in other vehicles, thereby offering customers a quick recharge akin to a refill at a gas station. Pricing will be akin to “rental” on the battery, until it is returned to a station to be replaced by a fresh one, which will also be “rented.” Each stop at a station thus implies a customer outlay on the same order of magnitude as a tank of gasoline or diesel.

Then there is the case of Michelin, which is developing something called the Active Wheel. Beyond just the tire, Michelin is aiming to embed motors, brakes, suspension and associated systems into wheels, thereby distributing physical control to each wheel and allowing heavy items such as springs and transmissions to be entirely eliminated from the vehicle. Not only will this (theoretically, at least) improve auto performance, but it will reduce weight to increase energy efficiency and possibly lower capital and operating costs of vehicles.

The possibilities for an entirely new industry to emerge in providing and supporting electric vehicle markets are becoming clearer. Earlier this year, a study commissioned by the Electric Power Research Institute – funded by The Cleveland Foundation, the Greater Cleveland Partnership and First Energy (FE) – assessed the potential for Northeast Ohio to become a major player in the electric drive vehicle industry. The study indicates that many thousands of jobs are at stake for the Cleveland region – but only if the U.S. takes actions to accelerate the penetration of electric vehicles in the transportation sector, and at least as importantly, Northeast Ohio organizes itself to more earnestly pursue the business and technology opportunities associated with electric drive vehicles.

This economic potential is not just for Northeast Ohio. Clearly in response to the downturn of the American auto industry, the Obama Administration has made the state of Michigan a major recipient of its largesse, allocating half of a recent $2.4 billion in grants to stimulate electric vehicle and battery production. As reported in the Forbes article, Nissan’s U.S. battery manufacturing will occur in Tennessee, supported by a $1.6 billion loan from the U.S. Department of Energy. A123 and Boston Power are both based in Massachusetts, while Tesla and Fisker Automotive – both supported by the Silicon Valley mega venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins – are based in California.

Of course, not everyone is enamored with electric vehicles. In the same issue in which it profiles Nissan’s electric vehicle strategy, Forbes’ editor William Baldwin writes a skeptical opinion about the cost-effectiveness of electric vehicles in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.When considered solely as an approach for reducing emissions, perhaps electric vehicles aren’t the absolute best solution. However, when one also considers the economic revitalization possibilities, as well as the imperative for reducing reliance on oil (from unstable and unfriendly sources around the globe), electric vehicles seem far more worthy of plugging.

Source : SeekingAlpha, by Richard T. Stuebi,November 2nd, 2009

Plug-ins, the Electric Grid and You

With mass-market plug-in electric cars getting closer to going on sale, automakers and utility companies are studying the demands on the electrical system and car buyers' homes with wide-ranging conclusions. At "The Business of Plugging-In" conference in Detroit, some participants estimated that preparing your home to charge your car was like preparing it to plug in a hair dryer. At least one high-profile speaker said it was like preparing to plug in three additional houses. The truth lies between these theories. It depends on what kind of car you're charging, where you live and how long you're willing to wait for a full charge.

Today, we'll look at the electrical infrastructure's ability to handle plug-in cars."The impact from plug-in electric vehicles on the grid could be very substantial," said Peter Darbee, chairman and CEO of Pacific Gas and Electric Corp. Because his utility serves environmentally conscious northern California, Darbee expects a disproportionate adoption of plug-in cars. "There's more likelihood that the actual demand that we see from customers will be substantially higher than estimates," he said.

Currently, average electrical demand varies from one region to the next — as does the infrastructure currently in place to support that demand. "Adding an electric vehicle at 220 [volts] is like adding another home to the network or system — and that would be a home in the San Ramon area where people use a lot of air conditioning," Darbee said. In San Francisco where average electric use is lower, "It would be the equivalent of adding three homes." The worst-case scenario, Darbee said, is a hot day with high electrical usage where residents would return from work, crank up their home air conditioners and plug in their cars. "You'd create a peak on top of the current peak load, the effect of which could be to bring down the electric system if you had a substantial concentration of electric cars," he said.

A proponent of so-called smart-grid technology, Darbee supports the proliferation of meters and charging stations that can ensure charging happens only at off-peak hours — between 11 p.m. and 5 a.m. — when it’s necessary for the local power grid. Not all of the conference panelists were as cautionary as Darbee. Mike Ligett, director of emerging technology for Progress Energy Corp., said, "People who want to build out a smart grid on the backs of electric transportation aren't doing us any favors. We do not need a smart grid to make this work." Ligett said simple timers can be used to delay charging until off-peak hours. "It may be different if you serve San Francisco and your citizens don't have a place to plug in — there's no infrastructure and somebody's got to put it in," he allowed.

Progress Energy's electric utilities serve Florida and the Carolinas. "We have plenty of capacity; we have lots of off-peak energy," Ligett said. "Even we expect if three customers in the same cul de sac buy a battery-electric vehicle, we might have to upgrade a transformer, but we're not talking about anything like bringing down the grid. Did we have to replace some transformers when people put in air conditioners 20-30 years ago?" he said. "Yeah, we did.""The worst thing we can do is confuse our customers and make it too complicated," Ligett said. "There's time for evolution. The market will evolve, the technology will evolve."In some regards, both electrical utility execs are correct. Power requirements — for both the home and the grid — depend both on location and the type of plug-in car.

Source : Cars.com, by Joe Wiesenfelder, November 2nd, 2009

A Glimpse of the Future?

President Obama made an appearance in Florida last week that should have gotten more attention. At a time when many Americans are apprehensive about the state of the economy and uncertain about the nation’s long-term prospects, Mr. Obama delivered an upbeat speech that offered a glimpse of a broader overall vision and a practical way forward on the crucial issues of energy and jobs.

Speaking at the opening of a solar energy center run by the Florida Power & Light Company near Arcadia in rural DeSoto County, the president touted his administration’s $3.4 billion investment in the so-called smart grid, a potentially revolutionary advance in the way electric power is produced and delivered in the U.S.

The president spoke at a scene described by The Times as “futuristic,” a sea of shimmering solar panels tilted toward the sky across the vast acreage of the DeSoto Next Generation Solar Energy Center.

Mr. Obama said that the plant will produce enough power to serve all 6,000 residents of Arcadia. He added: “Its construction was a boost to your local economy, creating nearly 400 jobs in this area. And over the next three decades, the clean energy from this plant will save 575,000 tons of greenhouse gas emissions, which is the equivalent of removing more than 4,500 cars from the road each year for the life of the project.”

The energy center was one of dozens of projects receiving grants from the federal government and private industry for the development of smart-grid technology. These are the kinds of baby steps that, if encouraged, replicated and systematically expanded, can put the country on the road to a saner, more prosperous and more secure future. More significant than the size of the grants being handed out was the thrust of Mr. Obama’s remarks, which sounded like a national call to action. He offered a compelling analogy:“Just imagine,” he said, “what transportation was like in this country back in the 1920s and 1930s, before the Interstate Highway System was built. It was a tangled maze of poorly maintained back roads that were rarely the fastest or the most efficient way to get from point A to point B. Fortunately, President Eisenhower made an investment that revolutionized the way we travel — an investment that made our lives easier and our economy grow.“Now it’s time to make the same kind of investment in the way our energy travels — to build a clean energy superhighway that can take the renewable power generated in places like DeSoto and deliver it directly to the American people in the most affordable and efficient way possible. Such an investment won’t just create new pathways for energy — it’s expected to create tens of thousands of new jobs all across America in areas ranging from manufacturing and construction to I.T. and the installation of new equipment in homes and in businesses.”

The president then made the conceptual leap from an innovative plant in rural Florida to a bold new landscape of energy for all of America. “We can imagine the day,” he said, “when you’ll be able to charge the battery on your plug-in hybrid car at night, because your smart meter reminded you that nighttime electricity is cheapest. In the daytime, when the sun is at its strongest, solar panels like these and electricity stored in car batteries will be able to power the grid with affordable, emission-free energy.“The stronger, more efficient grid would be able to transport power generated at dams and wind turbines from the smallest towns to the biggest cities. And, above all, we can see all this work that would be created for millions of Americans who need it and who want it, here in Florida and all across the country.” They were stirring words. It was a powerful and important call from a sitting president.

On the same day, Vice President Biden announced in Wilmington, Del., that a General Motors plant that had been shut down would be reopened by a company that plans, with the help of loans from the federal government, to manufacture long-range, plug-in, electric hybrid vehicles.

What was missing from these appearances by the president and vice president was the feeling of excitement that should accompany the early stages of an important national mission. Mr. Obama made his appearance in Arcadia, delivered his remarks and quickly moved on to other matters. The nation was not moved. The president’s remarks were not widely heard. The news media, perhaps understandably, took a ho-hum approach to both appearances. The reporters had heard similar rhetoric before. There were no signals from the White House that something big and important was happening.

Mr. Obama’s vision, briefly glimpsed, seemed to vanish in an ocean of other concerns.

Source : TheNewYorkTimes, by Bob Herbert, November 2nd, 2009