Nissin Co. Ltd. (NIS)

All Comments on NIS

  • commenter
    J. S.
    Mawejje
    Sep 08 07:00 PM
    My Website
    The Electric Car Battery Battle [view article]
    Swimjames wrote: to quote: "... anyone, any thoughts on this: ..The point is that if EVs really boom, there will obviously be a tremendous... need for new electric power sources. If this power comes from conventional systems, a lot of new power plants will have to be built, and a massive amount of fossil or nuclear fuel will have to be produced to run them..."

    Allow me first a few points, a slighlty different view:
    1. Why is it being assumed that we have to rely on the (existing) utility power and companies for powering electric vehicles or a grid?
    2. Why is it being assumed the present auto makers (and hence present vehicle design) are ideally the ones/the best to spearhead electric cars development?
    I do differ because of the following reasons (comments much welcome please), respectivley-
    1- The Existing Utililties:
    - Moral sense: the huge utlilites today hold a stranglehold on our lives by controlling our domestic energy supplies, I dread to have my transportatuion as well handed to them on a siover plate this way!
    - Economic/Logistical sense; the present grid system as configured(see below) CANNOT take an additonal load of- for instance- a full city's worth of electric vehicles, unless massively and completely upgraded (and then realistically one would rather build a new system entirely!). Add onto this the organisational requirements and costs in managing these unrelated functions at such a sheer size, the utilities would simply be overwhelmed to full blown chaos on the roads (imagine a power-cut on the road-supply grid) . Also are we sure the present 'mains' grid congifuration (AC, 110-415v, overhead wires, etc) is the best for electric vehicles operations all aspects considered, and that we need the grid to be centralised and so controlled as opposed to a more decentralised/localise... mode of operation? How about independent renewable energies like solar and wind which may not be efficiently adaptable to a pre-existing fixed system, yet are quite important and viable alternative power sources? We are much better off with the utility giants staying off transport then, because it makes the best scenario all around. The alternative/solution? - I believe it's basically a highly decentralised or localised (but standardised, public- owned) grid which can be 'supplied' by several players all preferably under the control of a Public authority (Municipal council/Department of transport, say), a situation which can only be good news for consumers since it will foster healthy competition.
    2- The Automakers:
    -Electric vehicles will need to be radically new - purpose designed from ground up rather than the present ICE vehicle conversion 'hybird' trend - in order to best utilise their inherent and potential advantages and crucially to fit onto a custom grid. A lot of this will involve new, fresh and open ways of thinking: in body design, materials, assembly, etc - akin to a total rethink of autodesign , indeed a 'paradigm shift' as highlighted above by Swimjames. In such an open environment, It may thus not suprise us if some presently insignificant but highly innovative up-starters (see especially MDI, THINK, even kit-car types) do come up with the most effective solutions as applies specifically to electric vehicles. Of course existing manufacturers will have a head start/edge once viable 'best practice' solutions are established, but it may not be so.
    Returning to the question by Swimjames, the gist of the above points is really to highlight the wide range of possiblities that may actually exist towards making electric vehicles viable, without causing anymore than current levels of environmental undesirables. This is because the total energy resource is effectively still there - for instance at the worst, the same oil (fuel) as drives current ICE cars may be used but more efficiently through conversion to electricity at centralised power stations (rather than in each individual car's engine), supplying to a road-side grid. Same thing for all the rest of available energy sources-solar,wind or nuclear. It is only the grid (or whichever system of powering electric vehicles we may eventually adopt) that needs getting right. Certainly without doubt it will be a major headache properly setting up and providing the power to drive such a fully electric transport system - bearing in mind all the challenges of a fully independent mobile car viz a stationary grid- however this to me is the only major problem. Indeed the key atributes (e.g higher overall efficiency,energy interconversion) that come with an electric vehicle system may more than outweigh any undesirable side effects in the long run.     Reply
  • commenter
    DIEGOJAMES
    Sep 06 09:50 PM
    My Website
    The Electric Car Battery Battle [view article]



    On Sep 05 05:23 AM swimjames wrote:What about the Chinese BYD car coming soon for 5-7,000 dollars;it is lithium iron phosphate battery powered???
    diego

    > anyone, any thoughts on this:
    > The point is that if EVs really boom, there will obviously be a tremendous
    > need for new electric power sources. If this power comes from conventional
    > systems, a lot of new power plants will have to be built, and a massive
    > amount of fossil or nuclear fuel will have to be produced to run
    > them. The environmental impacts that could result from building and
    > supplying these power plants are staggering. Therefore, unless clean
    > sources of alternative power can be developed cheaply and rapidly
    > enough to power EVs, the so-called miracle car could be just another
    > overhyped technological fix that failed to live up to our glorious
    > expectations. (Like ethanol, or nuclear power that was going to be
    > “too cheap to meter.”)
    >
    > But even if all these clean-power sources could be developed, we
    > have to seriously consider their possible unintended consequences.
    > How many windmills and in whose backyard? How many thousands of square
    > miles of solar panels and in whose favorite retreats? In our blissful
    > fantasies of technological utopia, we ignore such questions and conveniently
    > forget basic laws of physics and economics.
    >     Reply
  • commenter
    swimjames
    Sep 06 05:34 PM
    The Electric Car Battery Battle [view article]
    Sure, when the air in L.A. became something you could see and touch in the 1980s, fuel prices rose as a result of the

    oil embargo, and California passed an aggressive clean-air mandate, it looked like electric vehicles might get a new lease

    on life. But the air cleared and gas prices fell, the mandate was revoked and electric cars all but disappeared.

    But now that the polar ice caps are melting and gasoline is taking on the aura of a Cheval Blanc ’53, the electric car

    is beginning to look a whole lot more attractive. All of the major domestic and foreign automakers have announced

    plans to begin to market some sort of electric vehicle and the only question is when they’ll actually ramp up production. The implications are enormous for the world’s environment, for the auto and petroleum industries, for consumers and, of course, for the electric utility industry.

    Sooner or later — and with gas prices what they are, probably sooner — we’ll begin to see meaningful penetration of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles and pure electric vehicles, certainly within the next five years. When we do, a key concern is what effect it will have on the grid. Last year, a U.S. Department of Energy study concluded the system has enough excess capacity to recharge 75 percent of the light cars and trucks on the road today if they were electric. EPRI computer models conclude much the same. Based on likely economic and population growth between 2006 and 2030, incremental demand for electricity should grow by a little under 2,000 million megawatt-hours; of that, about 340 million megawatt-hours, or less than one-fifth, would be attributed to PHEVs and EVs. In other words, if capacity must increase approximately 50 percent over the next 25 years, the addition of electric cars won’t matter one way or the other.

    In fact, the introduction of the electric car is not much different from the introduction of any new electric appliance.

    Rick Tempchin, director of retail distribution policy at the Edison Electric Institute, likens it to the introduction

    of plasma televisions. It represents additional demand, but it’s not as though people will rush out to buy them for the

    holiday season one year and plug in 40 million new electric cars to charge on Christmas morning. “Once we launch the

    technology,” says Tempchin, “we’ll know what to expect and we’ll have time to deal with anything we need to do. That’s

    our business. The first vehicle to come to market will be a simple appliance and it will evolve from there.” Nancy Gioia,

    director, sustainable mobility, transportation and hybrid programs at Ford, thinks ramp-up to reasonable commercial

    production will take a minimum of five years and perhaps a little longer, and while some companies are predicting a

    shorter timeline, virtually no realistic scenario presents a threat to the grid.

    While a new appliance presents no serious threat to the grid, neither does it represent a sudden windfall for utilities. The

    greatest immediate benefit to the utility industry will come in the form of increased efficiency, assuming the new generation

    of cars plug in during off-peak hours. And that’s the most likely scenario. Virtually all of the car companies are aiming for an

    all-electric range between 20 and 40 miles, whether from a hybrid or a pure electric. Because the average commute falls within that range, cars could conceivably go back and forth to work without using any gas and without needing to recharge during the day. Although most utilities operate in a regulated environment and don’t necessarily realize increased profit from the sale of additional electrons, more efficient operation of installed capacity will benefit the bottom line, and increased use of off-peak capacity will dramatically increase overall efficiency. Furthermore, increased off-peak usage will facilitate the shift to renewable energy. Energy

    from wind, for instance, tends to peak during the evening hours, so charging electric vehicles at night would be a perfect opportunity to boost the percentage of electricity generated by wind and, in the process, help utilities meet their renewable mandates. A tangential benefit to plug-in vehicles is that they could eventually function as a distributed energy storage facility for the grid. Their high-density batteries could serve as a widely distributed source of emergency power during periods of excessive peak demand. But this vehicle-to-grid function is at least 20 years down the road — pun intended — which raises the issue again of just what obstacles still need to be overcome before we begin to realize the benefits of the electrification of the transportation system.

    The most obvious issue to be addressed is the battery. As of this writing, no battery capable of reliably powering anything larger than a mini-sized Think-type car is in commercial production. Lithium-ion batteries powering test vehicles produced by Ford, GM and Chrysler are built virtually by hand. The lithium-ion battery isn’t the only option. A sodium metal halide battery used in small European electric cars has great promise for certain types of vehicles, such as the hybrid electric locomotive that GE is developing, but for various technical reasons, the consensus is that some form of lithium-ion battery will power cars in this country.

    Nissan insists the battery issue will not prevent ramp up of retail production of the company’s planned all-electric

    car by 2011. Similarly, GM’s Tony Posawatz, line director for the Chevy Volt, is “very confident” that the automaker’s

    partnerships with A123 Systems and Compact Power, a subsidiary of LG Chem of Korea, will yield batteries in

    sufficient numbers to assure the launch of the Chevy Volt within the intended 2011 timeframe. But Nancy Gioia of

    Ford is more cautious. “It’s going to take a little bit of time and a chunk of change to go from the science lab to the pilot

    production phase to mass production of an efficient battery cell line of 10 million units a year.” Among the issues she

    believes must be settled before commercial production of the batteries becomes feasible are battery life, reliability and

    the ability to operate under broad temperature ranges. More significant from the perspective of utility companies,

    plug-in cars will need to communicate intelligently with the grid, and that means smart meters. Plug-in cars can

    be charged from any outlet, whether 110 volts or 220 volts, although the higher voltage cuts recharging time in half.

    Smart meters will allow utilities to control demand and shape the load and charge customers incentive rates for charging

    off-peak. California is ahead of the curve in installing smart meters, according to Efrain Ornelas, environmental technical

    supervisor for Pacific Gas and Electric’s clean air transportation department. With a goal of equipping all 5.4 million

    customers by 2012, Southern California Edison also intends to fully deploy smart meters to its five million customers by

    2012, and utilities across the country are following suit. “We’re working closely with the Society of Automotive Engineers to

    develop codes and standards for how vehicles will communicate with the grid,” says PG&E’s Ornelas. “Customers will

    be able to program when to charge and to look for specific pricing signals with the option of giving us direct control as

    part of a broad demand-response program.” Ultimately, the combination of smart chargers built into the cars and smart meters will permit a roaming capability, which will allow cars to recharge away from their home base, with electricity billed to the car’s owner. But that’s complicated, with transaction costs easily exceeding actual energy costs. With thousands of separate utility entities, it could make the phone industry’s disastrous experience with roaming look mild by comparison. The issue of developing codes and standards that both automakers and utilities can use efficiently points to what is perhaps the most fundamental unresolved issue on which the success of plug-in hybrids and all electric vehicles rests: a shared business model. Ed Kjaer is the

    director of electric transportation at Southern California Edison, and before that he held key positions with major

    auto manufacturers. He calls the electrification of the automobile a fundamental paradigm shift. “This is not

    about the automakers launching the next car model. It’s about how do we integrate transportation into the energy

    system,” says Kjaer. “It’s an absolute win-win for two titan industries. If you think of this as part of an energy

    system, as opposed to a car, you start to explore some of the values on the utility side of the equation than can be

    monetized and returned to the customer in terms of value. For instance, if we connect the wheels to the grid at night,

    we’re spreading fixed costs over more energy use and that potentially puts downward pressure on rates.”

    The new business model will go far toward defining the future of automakers, utilities, and the economy as a whole. But the challenges are significant. “We announced a partnership with Ford a few months ago, and it took us literally the first

    month of talking to each other before we mastered each other’s vernacular,” Kjaer recounts. “The business models

    are completely different. Throw out all the old ones. Start with a blank sheet of paper and a whole lot of imagination, and at the end of the day you come up with a shared vision where transportation connects to the grid. Our industries are being driven by the same forces: energy efficiency and environmental impact.”

    The environmental impact of electrifying transportation through plug-in hybrids and all-electric vehicles is clear and incontrovertible. No matter which of nine models is used, regardless of the generation carbon mix, a major study undertaken by EPRI and the National Resource Defense Council concludes that the environmental impact, both in terms of air quality and greenhouse gas emissions will be dramatic, with greenhouse gas emissions reduced by as much as 10.3 billion metric tons by 2050. With inevitable carbon constraints on both the utility and the auto industries, both stand to benefit enormously from the increased efficiency this new technology represents.

     Reply
  • commenter
    swimjames
    Sep 05 05:23 AM
    The Electric Car Battery Battle [view article]
    anyone, any thoughts on this:
    The point is that if EVs really boom, there will obviously be a tremendous need for new electric power sources. If this power comes from conventional systems, a lot of new power plants will have to be built, and a massive amount of fossil or nuclear fuel will have to be produced to run them. The environmental impacts that could result from building and supplying these power plants are staggering. Therefore, unless clean sources of alternative power can be developed cheaply and rapidly enough to power EVs, the so-called miracle car could be just another overhyped technological fix that failed to live up to our glorious expectations. (Like ethanol, or nuclear power that was going to be “too cheap to meter.”)

    But even if all these clean-power sources could be developed, we have to seriously consider their possible unintended consequences. How many windmills and in whose backyard? How many thousands of square miles of solar panels and in whose favorite retreats? In our blissful fantasies of technological utopia, we ignore such questions and conveniently forget basic laws of physics and economics.

    Reply
  • commenter
    swimjames
    Sep 05 05:15 AM
    The Electric Car Battery Battle [view article]
    For you guys arguing about whether NiMH is better than Lithium or not:
    Hybrids such as the popular Toyota Prius has a nickel metal hydride battery, which is less powerful than lithium-ion. Automakers are competing to develop lithium-ion batteries for green cars.

    Reply
  • commenter
    swimjames
    Sep 04 05:24 PM
    The Electric Car Battery Battle [view article]
    Energy Conversion Devices seems to have all NiMH technology through Cobasys (see below). Can anyone comment on this??
    Gene Marcial's Stock Picks September 3, 2008, 12:01AM EST text size: TT
    Marcial: A New Spark in Energy Conversion Devices
    A restructuring under new CEO Morelli is fueling a turnaround at the alternative energy company, driven by fat profits at its solar products unit

    by Gene Marcial

    The brightening story at Energy Conversion Devices (ENER), an alternative energy enterprise that makes solar products, rechargeable batteries, and digital storage technology, is attracting investors thanks to the restructuring efforts of CEO and President Mark Morelli, who took over a year ago when the company was in the red. Until the two recent fiscal quarters, Energy Conversion had for many years reported losses. The company's stock, which soared to 71.30 on Sept. 2 from a 52-week low of 20.47 on Jan. 22, hit a 52-week high of 83.33 on June 23.

    Some pros see even more spark in Energy Conversion's shares. Brion Tanous, managing director at investment boutique Merriman Curhan Ford, rates the stock a buy and figures it's worth 110 based on projected earnings and the worth of its three major assets, which are all involved in clean energy technology. "The collective value of Energy Conversion's United Solar Ovonics, Cobasys, and Ovonyx businesses is significantly higher than the current stock price," says Tanous.

    Although the alternative energy field is getting crowded, Tanous says Energy Conversion is one of the major "pure plays" in high-growth thin-film solar products. Using a film of silicon on a sheet of stainless steel, these products can be more easily installed on rooftops than conventional solar cells, which are produced on a base of polysilicon crystalline covered in glass.
    Fat Margins on Solar Sales

    The United Solar Ovonics unit, which contributes about 90% of revenues, uses proprietary technology to make thin-film solar photovoltaic modules that convert sunlight into energy. The modules are mainly used for rooftops. Its Cobasys unit, a joint venture with Chevron (CVX), licenses its proprietary nickel-metal hydride (NiMH) battery technology to hybrid vehicle makers and other manufacturers. Energy's third unit is 30%-owned Ovonyx, which has developed a high-speed memory technology for a variety of applications, including cell phones, digital cameras, and PCs. Several tech companies, including Intel (INTC), have entered into licensing pacts with Energy for the technology.

    Tanous figures Energy Conversion's solar business alone is worth 90 a share and Ovonyx about 20. He expects the company to sell its Cobasys operations to a major automaker by yearend, primarily because the unit has been losing money and requires more funding. He values the operations at about $150 million.

    For the fiscal fourth quarter ended June 30, Energy Conversion posted record revenues and higher net income driven by greater-than-expected gross margins of 33.5% on solar polyvoltaic sales, Tanous notes. Based on the company's higher guidance for 2008 and 2009, he raised his earnings-per-share forecast for fiscal 2009 ending June 30 to $1.61 on revenues of $459.7 million, and to $3.28 for fiscal 2010 on $757.3 million in sales. In fiscal 2008, the company earned a meager 9¢ a share on sales of $255.9 million. The analyst attributes the jump in sales and earnings to a turnaround spurred by Morelli, who cut costs, sold some assets, and focused on commercializing products.
    Still a Bargain?

    Deutsche Bank (DB) analyst Steve O'Rourke, who is also bullish on the company, says that with the company's continued improvement in operations and rising demand for solar photovoltaic products, he is maintaining his buy rating on the stock. "We view strong solar PV backlog growth as indicative of a substantial turnaround in Energy Conversion's sales distribution channels," and a sign of its competitiveness, says O'Rourke. (Deutsche Bank has done banking for Energy Conversion and owns shares.)

    Analysts agree there is strong demand for solar products. Energy Conversion's thin-film solar technology is "superior to and differentiated from the more established and commodity-like polysilicon-based solar technology," says Angelo Zino, an analyst at Standard & Poor's Equity Research (S&P, like BusinessWeek, is owned by The McGraw-Hill Companies (MHP). He notes the company has filled its entire fiscal 2009 available capacity and is getting significant purchase orders for its fiscal 2010 planned capacity. However, Zino has a hold opinion on the stock because of its already sharp climb. He's also cautious about the lower barriers to entry into the thin-film solar market.

    Nonetheless, some investors and analysts believe Energy Conversion is well-positioned for strong growth for the long haul. That's because demand for alternatives to fossil-fuel generated power "should only increase, given environmental, cost, and geopolitical concerns," says Nils C. Van Liew of independent research firm Value Line. Energy Conversion, says Van Liew, has a good shot at grabbing a bigger share of the solar PV market because its product is lightweight, flexible, and easily integrated into building materials, making it well suited for rooftop installations.

    Indeed, as it reshapes its corporate structure and sees healthy global demand for its solar products, Energy Conversion has found a profitable green niche.

    Marcial writes the Inside Wall Street column for BusinessWeek. In 2008, FT Press published the book Gene Marcial's 7 Commandments of Stock Investing.
     Reply
  • commenter
    swimjames
    Sep 04 04:57 PM
    The Electric Car Battery Battle [view article]
    israelline.wordpress.c... ? Reply
  • commenter
    swimjames
    Sep 04 04:55 PM
    The Electric Car Battery Battle [view article]
    Ben B - where is your blog? Yael. Reply
  • commenter
    swimjames
    Sep 03 10:59 PM
    The Electric Car Battery Battle [view article]
    Above confirms existence of Nissan hybrid, not electric car. Reply
  • commenter
    swimjames
    Sep 03 10:50 PM
    The Electric Car Battery Battle [view article]
    Doug Korthof-- you may be right --Ghosn is a jokester and a hypester. Look at below article:
    Nissan shows models of electric car, hybrid
    A battery developed that delivers more power than type common today
    The Associated Press
    updated 11:23 a.m. ET, Wed., Aug. 6, 2008
    YOKOSUKA, Japan - Nissan showed on Wednesday a spiffy electric car packed with a battery developed by the Japanese automaker to deliver more power than the type common in today’s hybrids.

    The electric vehicle, set for sale in 2010, carried a 300 kilogram (660 pounds) lithium-ion battery and still zipped around a Nissan Motor Co. test course, accelerating more quickly than comparable gas-engine cars.

    It was extremely quiet, absent of engine noise — a trademark of electric vehicles. Details such as cruising range are yet to be determined, Nissan officials said.

    Having fallen behind Japanese rivals Toyota Motor Corp. and Honda Motor Co. in hybrids, Nissan has made the electric vehicle the pillar of its green strategy.

    Automakers around the world are trying to develop ecological products amid growing concerns about soaring gas prices and global warming. Electric vehicles are zero-emission.

    Last month, Tokyo-based Nissan, with French partner Renault SA, announced a partnership with the Portuguese government to sell electric vehicles there in 2011. Separately, Nissan has announced deals with Project Better Place, based in Palo Alto, California, to mass market electric vehicles in Israel and Denmark in 2011.

    Nissan’s electric vehicle, shown Wednesday, is being promised to go on sale in Japan and the U.S. in 2010 and globally by 2012.

    But Nissan faces competition from other automakers, including General Motors Corp. and Ford Motor Co. of the U.S., which have developed electric vehicles.

    Also Wednesday, Japanese rival Mitsubishi Motors Corp., working with Japanese battery maker GS Yuasa Corp., said it was building a plant in Japan to mass-produce lithium-ion batteries for its electric vehicle, planned for rental next year and sale the following year.

    Nissan also offered test-drives of its hybrid. Hybrids deliver better mileage than comparable gas-engine vehicles by switching between an engine and an electric motor.

    Nissan now purchases its hybrid system from Toyota for the Altima hybrid sold in the U.S. but is promising vehicles with its own system by 2010.

    Nissan’s hybrid system still has some bugs to work out. Shown on an Infiniti luxury model, it seemed to lurch a little when the gas engine kicked in as speed picked up.

    Nissan engineer Mikio Nozaki said the system delivers the mileage of a compact car, although he refused to give numbers.

    The hybrid comes with Nissan’s lithium-ion battery, although they are much smaller than the version in the electric car.


    Hybrids such as the popular Toyota Prius has a nickel metal hydride battery, which is less powerful than lithium-ion. Automakers are competing to develop lithium-ion batteries for green cars.

    Nissan also showed a side-collision prevention feature that uses sensors to recognize approaching vehicles, even in blind spots, and warns drivers when they are switching lanes.

    The warning feels like a tug, delivered through very slight braking, either on the left wheels or the right, Nissan Senior Manager Junichi Kobayashi said. When that will become available on commercial models is still undecided.

    Safety features that maintain a safe distance with the car in front and prevent dangerous lane departures are already available.


    © 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
    URL: www.msnbc.msn.com/id/2.../

     Reply
  • commenter
    swimjames
    Sep 03 10:17 PM
    The Electric Car Battery Battle [view article]
    10words.betterplace.co...

     Reply
  • commenter
    swimjames
    Sep 03 09:27 PM
    The Electric Car Battery Battle [view article]
    Daimler Sues Cobasys; Mercedes ML Hybrid Delayed or Cancelled

    By Edward Niedermeyer
    August 6, 2008 - 1,078 views

    Who wants to do some business?Information Week reports that Cobasys can't make shipments of NiMh batteries to Daimler. The battery firm, a joint venture between Chevron and Energy Conversion Devices (ECD), lost $76m in 2007. The owners mixed like oil and water. Both "partners" are keen to foist the money-loser on someone else. Daimler's filing a lawsuit (or two) against Cobasys accusing Chevron, ECD and Cobasys of conspiring to keep the plan to bail a secret from Mercedes officials– so that the automaker wouldn't pull the battery deal. Daimler also alleges that Cobasys hadn't begun production on its $6m NiMh contract "in case new owners don't want the contract." And so… "Without a reliable source for this critical part, (we) will be unable to produce the hybrid vehicle in accordance with its scheduled launch date, and will likely be forced to either cancel the vehicle entirely, or delay the launch for an extended period in order to identify and develop a substitute battery, and to redesign other portions of the vehicle to accommodate it." Ouch. Meanwhile, we are still anxiously waiting to hear if rumors of a Cobasys sale to GM were correct or not. After this debacle, with GM's cash flow issues, we can only hope the answer is not.
    Information Week »

     Reply
  • commenter
    swimjames
    Sep 03 09:17 PM
    The Electric Car Battery Battle [view article]
    Mitsubishi’s Trial EV Indicates Challenge for the Lithium Ion Solution

    According to the report below from the L.A. Times the electric version of Mitsubishi’s small vehicle, using a lithium-ion battery, apparently costs more than twice its gasoline-powered equivalent, takes up to 7 hours to re-charge and has a range of only 75 miles.

    A hybrid version with an NiMH battery might be $20,000 cheaper based on existing hybrid prices. A lithium-ion hybrid might be $10,000 cheaper since it would use a much smaller battery than the EV, with the battery cost savings being partly offset by its need to have a standard gas engine as well. Of course the hybrids do not have range restrictions or the need for virtually daily recharging.

    So the Mitsubishi indicates the challenge for the li-on battery and demonstrates the essential trade off between an all electric city car and a hybrid. With the EV you get infinite miles per gallon of gas compared with maybe 50 or 70 on a next generation hybrid. But it is only for short trips.

    There seems to be two conclusions to be drawn. First, the lithium ion battery is currently an expensive technology compared with the NiMH. It probably needs to be decosted before it can compete with the NiMH battery as was discussed here.

    Secondly, a city car may not have a vast consumer market until the gasoline savings are in the range of $4,000 a year to justify an additional $20,000 cost. At 15,000 miles/yr and, say, 50 mpg for a hybrid, the cost of gas would need to be north of $13 a gallon. Or else the battery cost needs to come down a lot.
    Mitsubishi electric car to get U.S. market test by PG & E, Edison
    A handful of i-MiEV cars will be sent to the utilities, which will evaluate whether there’s a mass market for them here.

    By Ken Bensinger
    August 8, 2008

    Mitsubishi Motors Corp. will bring electric cars to the U.S. starting this fall in test programs announced today with Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and Southern California Edison.
    The Japanese automaker will deliver fewer than a dozen of its tiny i-MiEV electric cars to the utilities, but the company said it plans to use the programs to determine whether the U.S. is a viable mass market for such vehicles. We want to evaluate if electric cars are feasible as a commercial technology,” said David Patterson, Mitsubishi’s senior manager for regulatory affairs and certification.
    Currently, only one company sells highway-legal electric cars in the U.S., San Carlos, Calif.-based Tesla, which began delivering its $100,000 Roadster in April. Electric cars made by General Motors, Toyota and other major carmakers were available on limited lease terms in California in the late 1990s, but most of those cars were recalled and the lease programs were discontinued.
    Now, with gasoline prices roughly triple their 1990s prices, interest in electric cars has risen significantly and a number of automakers are considering the technology, including Nissan and General Motors, which plans to release its electric Volt in late 2010.

    Mitsubishi will begin selling the i-MiEV in Japan starting in August 2009 for between $45,000 and $50,000, not including government incentives of more than $15,000. A non-electric version of the car retails in Japan for around $20,000.
    The largest component in the price, said Patterson, is the car’s advanced lithium ion battery, produced by Lithium Energy Japan. Battery technology is considered the main obstacle to widespread adoption of electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles.
    The battery, which can be charged in five to seven hours using 220-volt current, gives the i-MiEV a 75-mile range and a top speed of 81 mph. It can hold three passengers and the driver.

    Tags: peak oil energy investments

    This entry was posted on Friday, August 8th, 2008 at 9:43 am and is filed under batteries, electric vehicles, hybrid vehicles. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
    Print This Post Print This Post     Reply
  • commenter
    swimjames
    Sep 03 09:09 PM
    The Electric Car Battery Battle [view article]
    True, Cobasys is in a financial crisis, see below:
    Thursday, July 31, 2008Last Update: 11:26:26 AM

    Mercedes-Benz Sues Hybrid Battery Supplier
    By ANNIE CLEMENS

    TUSCALOOSA, Ala. (CN) - Mercedes-Benz U.S. International paid Cobasys $6 million to develop a battery pack for a hybrid vehicle under production, but claims the supplier ran into a funding crisis and is unable to deliver the product, putting the pressure on Mercedes to meet its June 2009 production deadline, the car company claims in Federal Court.
    Cobasys is one of the few suppliers to produce nickel metal hydride (NiMH) battery packs for use in hybrids. It submitted the winning bid for the Mercedes hybrid project and, in doing so, agreed to develop, produce and deliver the product on time, the lawsuit claims.
    Cobasys allegedly assured the Daimler AG affiliate that had all the requisite staff, funds and equipment to complete the job.
    After Cobasys and Daimler hammered out the production costs and pricing of the battery pack, Mercedes issued a purchase order. It claims Cobasys confirmed that it could meet the expected launch date, but did not sign a confirmation of the purchase order. The plaintiff says it found out later that Cobasys refused to sign the order because its owners, Chevron and Energy Conversion Devices, had cut off funding, leaving the supplier with "no plans or ability to fund its day-to-day operations past that point, much less make the capital investments required to meet its production volume commitments to (Mercedes) and other manufacturers."
    To make matters worse, Mercedes claims Cobasys' owners are actively searching for a buyer. They allegedly hid this information from Daimler and Mercedes, leading them to believe that Cobasys was "ready, willing and able to produce the necessary parts, while knowing this is not the case, and while avoiding signing (the plaintiffs') purchase order."
    Mercedes claims that Cobasys has since found a buyer, and the sale is imminent. But even if the buyer assumes the contract, Mercedes claims it has become "entirely dependent" on Cobasys' delivering the NiMH battery pack in time. "No other supplier can produce a battery meeting the specifications jointly developed by Cobasys and Daimler," the lawsuit claims.
    However, when Mercedes solicited written reassurance from Cobasys, the company allegedly denied having any contract to produce the battery pack. Cobasys told Mercedes that it would continue the development work, but would not be involved with production. The plaintiff also remains suspicious of what will happen to the property rights, as Cobasys "has yet to provide any written concrete assurances that it will not sell or transfer any assets or intellectual property rights required to carry out its obligations."
    The car manufacturer seeks a declaration of Cobasys' obligations under contract. Chevron Technology Ventures and Ovonic Battery Company, primarily owned by Energy Conversion Devices, have also been named as defendants.
    Mercedes' attorneys are Howard Walthall Jr., Joseph Letzer, Ellen Mathews and S. Greg Burge of Burr & Forman.     Reply
  • commenter
    swimjames
    Sep 03 08:48 PM
    The Electric Car Battery Battle [view article]
    Another matter: Chevron could really break out of the pack if it licensed the patents it purchased from GM for GMs plug in electric car the EV1. Chevron owns all of the patents including the NiMH battery technology. Unlike lithium ion batteries, NiMH batteries do not overheat so there is no chance of fire. It's common knowledge that Toyota can't add a plug to their Prius because of Chevron's patents. Once Chevron licenses these patents to the automakers the sky is the limit as far as the share price is concerned, and the energy crisis and global warming would be averted. Chevron would be a corporate hero. As per Nerfer (top commentator): Also Chevron, via their part ownership of Cobasys, has long blocked the use of NiMH for pure electric vehicles, using their NiMH patents they bought up to block the large-format NiMH batteries needed for that type of application, even for companies like Toyota that get their NiMH batteries elsewhere.
    Cobasys is apparently for sale though (and having $ problems), see: courthousenews.com....
    Gee, maybe if they supplied BEVs they would be making more money?? Even a 50-mile range in a reduced-price car would be sufficient for a whole lot of people (I know I'd strongly consider buying such a car), but they think they need the full range of a gas car before anybody will buy it for their commuting needs.
    What else are you thinking Nerfer? Why isn't Nissan or Mitsubishi mentioning any of this patents owned by Chevron to the public?
    recent article (8/25/08 WSJ):
    online.wsj.com/article...
    Mitsubishi Looks to Russia for Growth
    Masuko Also Plans
    Electric Vehicles
    In Japan Next Year
    By JOHN MURPHY
    August 25, 2008; Page B1
    Mitsubishi also wants to be a leader in ecofriendly cars. It is looking to be the first Japanese car maker to mass-produce a pure electric vehicle with the launch of the i-MiEV electric car in Japan in 2009, a year ahead of rival Nissan's own electric vehicle.
    Excerpts from an interview with Mr. Masuko:

    Mitsubishi Motors
    Mitsubishi looks to launch the i-MiEV electric car in Japan in 2009, a year ahead of rival Nissan's electric vehicle.
    WSJ: What are your sales plans for Mitsubishi's electric vehicle, the i-MiEV?
    Mr. Masuko: We are planning to sell them in Japan next summer. This fall, we are going to test-run those electric cars in Europe. In America, we have made agreements with two California-based electric companies to make test runs. As we do test runs in America, we are trying to judge the applicability and also whether the infrastructure is ready.
    WSJ: So how soon might consumers be able to buy one in the U.S.?
    Mr. Masuko: By 2010, we are looking to make the left-hand drive cars but we haven't decided exactly when we are going to sell them in America.
    WSJ: What is the driving range and cost of your electric car?
    Mr. Masuko: On one charge, the range is 160 kilometers (99.2 miles). The cost is hard to tell. With government subsidies we are looking to sell the electric cars for 3 million yen (about $27,600). After mass production, we will reduce costs and sell it for 2 million to 2.5 million yen.
    WSJ: What are your production plans for the electric vehicle?
    Mr. Masuko: In 2009, 2,000 units. In 2010, our plan is to make 4,000 units and in 2011, 8,000 to 10,000.
    WSJ: Does Mitsubishi have plans to make a hybrid car?
    Mr. Masuko: Right now, we are focusing on electric vehicles but not hybrids. We know that the time for electric vehicles will come and in the future we have the plug-in hybrids in our minds.
    WSJ: Given the difficulties in the global auto industry including soaring gasoline prices, rising raw material costs and the economic slowdown in the U.S., do you think you'll be able to meet your new management plan to double profit?
    Mr. Masuko: It is undeniable that the conditions are very difficult. We definitely want to accomplish our business plan and for now we're not thinking about changing the business plan.
    Write to John Murphy at john.murphy@wsj.com




     Reply
Loading...
Symbols:
Authors:
Quick Links: