Douglas Korthof

Lithium-ion Batteries: 9 Years of Price Stagnation

Why not draw the obvious conclusion, that the (assumed) need for Lithium is FALSE?

NiMH and lead have proven successful in Electric cars and hybrids; NiMH is the lowest-cost battery that lasts more than 100,000 miles (perhaps 200,000 miles, we don't know yet).

NiMH batteries have carried EVs over 200 miles in range; 400 lbs. of NiMH, the same weight as would be used in the so-called VOLT, would yield 12 kWh of accessible energy, enough to go 60 miles in an EV or EREV.

The Toyota RAV4-EV has proven over 17,000,000 miles of all-electric travel on NiMH batteries. Why fool with Lithium, when NiMH is recyclable for CASH, long-lasting, and 25% the cost of Lithium? NO cost decrease for Lithium, despite the economies of scale in lap top batteries; and no increase in life (no Lithium EV has so far gone more than 50,000 miles without significant battery degradation).

GM's insistence on using Lithium just shows they don't want to make an EV, and are lying about their intentions.

Lead-acid PSB 1260 batteries carried the EV1 more than100 miles on a charge, more than needed for the so-called VOLT.

Lead-Acid, Lead-Carbon Batteries: The Only Option for Average Consumer

You won't post the truth. In reality, GM's move to NiMH had nothing to do with it's being "robust", GM was forced to do so by Toyota's use of NiMH and CARB's sticking to its requirements.

Li-ion Batteries: A Speculative Field of Dreams

You're right. No Lithium Electric car has, so far, gone more than 50,000 miles without significant battery degradation.
The fact that NO manufacturer is looking at the proven success of Nickel Metal Hydride (NiMH), which are cheaper and longer-lasting than Lithium, shows that they are all shamming. They are just plain lying about their intentions; GM itself admitted that it's all about P.R.

Ironically, the reason no one can use NiMH is that GM bought exclusive worldwide patent licensing rights to NiMH in 1994, and sold the rights, on Oct. 10, 2000, to Texaco; six days later, Texaco announced that it was merging into Chevron, taking control of NiMH with it.

The next year, Chevron funded a lawsuit aginst Toyota, after which Toyota paid $30 million to Chevron and its allies, and production of the NiMH battery and the Toyota RAV4-EV that it powered ceased. No more new EV-95 batteries can be made or sold at any price, even for replacement of the few RAV4-EV that need new batteries (3 so far, out of about 328 that were sold to the public up to Nov., 2002).

Patent right should not be used to suppress technology that works; and an OIL COMPANY SHOULD NOT CONTROL PATENTS TO THE ELECTRIC CAR.

The next time you see Lutz pattering on about batteries, ask why they aren't using NiMH or even PSB 1260 lead-acid, which gave the EV1 over 100 miles range.

Alternative Energy Storage Is an Investment Tsunami

It's incredible, people like this author writing what they think is important stuff, but in ignorance of the facts.

Has this author NEVER HEARD of the EV1, HondaEV, Toyota RAV4-EV, which use NiMH batteries??

Lithium is used by GM to delay the introduction of EVs; no one has ever made a successful Lithium EV that's lasted more than 50,000 miles without significant battery degradation.

Study, and don't speak about stuff before!

Alternative Energy Storage Is an Investment Tsunami

1. You don't consider NiMH, the battery of choice in all plug-in cars and all-electric EVs.

2. The price is whatever we make it; Nickel is recycleable, the cost can be minimial. NiMH lasts longer than the life of the car.

3. There EXISTS an all-electric practical and fun family and work car: the Toyota RAV4-EV, you can see it on SealBeach.org

Doug Korthof
562-430-2495
to visit and drive in the Toyota RAV4-EV, powered by the sun