In the Know

Huge Incentives for Energy Storage in Today's House Bill

JP,

You can tell I don't believe in emerging "bailouts". Should we give the homebuilders money to increase their production capacity? No, no one is buying. Should we give them money to build houses with the same standards, features, and size in the sub $100,000 range? Perhaps. Should we give the homebuilders money to start developing energy efficient appliances? (This analogy is to point out the stupidity of the car companies developing batteries). The point is that I believe the funds should help deliver the solutions and not accelerate bad management and business models at taxpayer cost.

Huge Incentives for Energy Storage in Today's House Bill

This portion of the bill is great for energy storage in general. The distribution of funds is going to be key. Companies that have overstated capabilities in order to get Venture Fund money should be eliminated off the top. Three in particular went through these phases and should continue to fund themselves with public and private funds (non government). That's Altair, Ener1, and A123. These three companies are in existence only because of their pretensive claims on capability. All the money put into these companies needs to be washed out before any federal funds flow in or we the taxpayer will be left holding the bag of past decisions and mistakes.

Li-ion Batteries: A Speculative Field of Dreams

realist2

If the business case is good, the investors should be lining up. Its not our governments responsibility nor the people they represent.

I want this industry to work, I just don't want the game fixed. Also, you better do a little more homework on the non-toxic part before you start eating.

Li-ion Batteries: A Speculative Field of Dreams

It sickens me to hear that our own Government is even considering providing any assistance to these speculative technologies and companies in the kind of money to build plants vs the critical R&D, supply chain development, and manufacturing development needs.

GM getting into batteries is really not too much different than them getting into oil extraction and refining. Their core is ICE and have no more right to this space than Fisker or Tesla. They have a proven track record of failure in this area.

Ener1 is a joke and advertises that they are past the stage that realistically should be funded by such funds. They should be at the stage where enough investors should step up to the plate (if they can't find them, they deserve to fail).

There are going to be product liability issues in which the companies are responsible for solely. Look at all the lithium ion recalls. This is investor risk, not taxpayer risk.

U.S. Battery Consortium Seeks $1B: Is It a Waste?

Lithium Battery production today can only survive where the upstream supply chain in well developed, the materials are abundant, cheap, and of high quality, and the methods for manufacture are a leap frog advance compared to how they are made today. The cost is mostly materials. Whoever has access to this flat out wins.

It doesn't matter if production facilities are built through this consortium, the 14 companies aren't bringing much difference from each other and they would all be forced to use the same process. Some of the companies in the list are only enabled to be on the list because they convinced some venture capitalist that they have a better mouse trap. This path only allows them to have some non-dilutive funding and not have to take risk from a capital standpoint because they can't figure out how to produce.

Political routes are also being sought, Indiana Senators vs Michigan Governors trying to get billions of dollars moving through their states. I say let free capitalism work and if something has to be subsidized, focus on the raw material supply. Also, I have to emphasize again, government should focus on creating a healthy environment for this business to succeed in the US.

Comparing semiconductor technology to battery technology to me is like comparing a statue vs a human being. Both have advanced material engineering but one is static and one is active. This business need to be approached like a NASA or Nuclear Power Plant project vs a project like a Volt.



On Dec 19 12:15 AM jlounsbury59 wrote:

> When I compare (and I have in other comments and will not repeat
> the details here) semiconductor technology to battery technology,
> I see batteries no further developed than electronics were in the
> early 1960's. At best we are in the sorting out process for battery
> technology similar to when we were debating the relative merits of
> vacuum tubes and transistors.
>
> There have been some excellent articles (and associated discussion
> comments) by John Petersen on this subject on Seeking Alpha.

U.S. Battery Consortium Seeks $1B: Is It a Waste?

Right on. This money would be dis appropriated. I agree there needs to be some sort of subsidy but not through some bureaucratic consortium, it will limit progress. Look at USABC. Its been around for decades. Sure, its nice for developing standards but not necessarily letting the free market work. Government's role is to make the conditions friendly for the free markets, not fund entities that have their hands out.