Filed under: Emerging Technologies, Legislation and Policy, USA
Obama joins the anti-McCain battery prize league
John McCain's (R) plan to give the advanced hybrid battery industry a boost sounds promising. I mean, a $300m prize to the company that can deliver a better, cheaper battery? What's not to like? Well, plenty, apparently. After House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D) criticized McCain's idea yesterday, Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama explained his own objections to the prize money. As reported by the Detroit News, Obama and other Dems said the "game show" strategy wouldn't be strong enough to push automakers to produce the really high-mpg vehicles that are needed (although, the News points out, Obama does support cash prizes in the cellulosic ethanol realm). Obama said it was his across-the-board plan that would do the trick.
Other criticisms that have come into the ABG mailbox include the claim that McCain's plan is "poorly thought out." McCain's aides admit that more details need to be worked out. One alternative would be to not hold the money back until a particular battery can be built, but to offer tax rebates on PHEVs and BEVs that are on the road today, or very close to it.
Photo by transplanted mountaineer Licensed under Creative Commons license 2.0.
[Source: The Detroit News via Autoblog]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Dave 8:08AM (6/25/2008)
Obama suggested the fix is in flex fuel vehicles and fuel cells (hydrogen). He offers no palpable suggestions over McCain's battery prize and tax credit for EVs. I don't have the link but I read it over at Fox News yesterday (bash away liberals, but it's a true statement).
Reply
Dave K. 8:30AM (6/25/2008)
Let's see, the Republican want's to give money to some corporation, and the Democrat wants to give money to people(tax rebate).
No one's talking about our 9 trillon national debt though...
Reply
Pete 9:01AM (6/25/2008)
Amazing. People hammer politicians for doing nothing and not focusing on alternative fuels. Then a candidate actually does something and proposes to offer funding/reward for leap in battery technology that coincides with a plan to build greater electrical infrastructure with more nuke plants and global warming fans are complaining?
I guess you can't make anyone happy.
I don't want fuel cells or hydrogen cars... it will take too long to integrate. The electrical infrastructure already exists. Yes, it needs to be beefed up, but if I have to wait for hydrogen stations and solar cell efficiency and cost gain, then my children may get a chance at a clean car.
Upping battery technology and enhancing the grid are much quicker fixes than anything else on the table.
Reply
Doug 9:24AM (6/25/2008)
It's a bit disappointing that Obama doesn't seem to believe or acknowledge that electric is the best path for clean cars. Corn ethanol?? Really??? Maybe he should have a chat with Al Gore.
I also criticized McCain's plan, but I'm disappointed that Obama appears to be criticizing it just for that sake of criticizing it. I know it was naive to expect anything else, but sadly it's politics as usual.
Reply
Paul 9:31AM (6/25/2008)
Shouldn't surprise anyone who looks beyond Obama's dazzling smile. He's bought and paid for by the ethanol lobby and against whatever McCain is for.
Not exactly inspiring, but hey, he gives a good speech!
Reply
Mike Z 9:45AM (6/25/2008)
Because we all know that X-Prize thing was a complete failure.
This has devolved into pure stupidity. McCain could invent cold fusion and Obama would attack him for it. Go figure. After Obama is the candidate that talks about more math and science education while at the same time promising budget cuts to Nasa. I guess that's known as the politics of hope.
Reply
Steve 9:45AM (6/25/2008)
What Pete said. Members of the opposing party are simply hammering it because it's not their idea, and thus feel support of such an idea would hurt their candidate.
Last year I watched a PBS documentary on Iceland's movement toward a hydrogen based economy, and it was noted that such progress was facilitated by the fact that the demographics and politics of that country's citizens are somewhat homogenous. It's impressive what can be done when a society sets aside partisan bickering and pandering, and simply cooperates instead.
Reply
tankd0g 10:07AM (6/25/2008)
Apparently you granola munching hippies are also pro-corporate welfare. The X-Prize was not tax payer dollars. Stop using it to justify this BS.
Reply
tankd0g 10:11AM (6/25/2008)
time to give up the battery pipe dream. Cheap electricity can be used to make Hydrogen on site. The FCX Clarity and BMW Hydrogen 7 exist TODAY in the hands of ACTUAL DRIVERS. Even if a Telsa Roadster had double the claimed range it does now, and was $40,000, two things that will NEVER HAPPEN IN MY LIFE TIME REGARDLESS OF WHAT BRIBE YOU OFFER THEM, it would still be inferior to all fill-up and go fuels.
Reply
ECD4ME 11:34AM (6/25/2008)
there already are tremendous incentives in place to develop better batteries and many companies large and small are working on it. The money is needed for R&D grants or for tax incentives like help promote hybrids. McCain is a champion flip flopper. Everything he is for now, he was against a year ago. He and other Repubs have predictably opposed or minimized money for alternative and renewable energy and pushed coal and nuclear. He is pandering to every special interest and right wing cause, but it wont help him in the fall.
Reply
Paul 11:37AM (6/25/2008)
@tankd0g, you are so out in left field on this. With current technology, the fuel cells themselves are FAR more expensive than even the most expensive batteries. You do realize the severity of the financial loss that Honda is taking with their FCX lease program, right? The use of Hydrogen as an energy storage medium, again at least using current technology, is significantly less efficient than simply storing it in a battery (60% I think but I don't have a source for this). Producing it locally means that you've already encountered the efficiency loss through electricity transmission, so this is no longer a benefit of hydrogen. Batteries that allow 90-100% "fill-ups" in under five minutes already exist, as well. You won't get this kind of fill-up time at home simply because the power lines can't supply that much power, but you also won't be waiting a day for your home hydrogen reservoir to refill if you need to top off both of your family cars. Not to mention the cost of purchasing the home generation system versus that of a simple 220V outlet. Oh, and there's that whole explosive hydrogen thing to think about (both in the car and in your home-based fueling station).
Battery tech is almost there. Ideally something not requiring lithium will come along (like EEStor's supposed solid state devices) so we're not so dependent on yet another limited commodity, but the fact is that the technology needed for these batteries is here already, it just needs to be optimized and brought down in price.
I assume you must be 80 and suffering from terminal cancer because your lifetime will have to be short not to see a $40,000, 400-mile range electric car...
Reply
BlackbirdHighway 11:41AM (6/25/2008)
Thanks for the update, tankdog. After work I'll go over to the Honda dealer and pick up an FCX Clarity of my own.
Reply
meme 11:50AM (6/25/2008)
Once again, I must remind people that McCain *OPPOSED* H.R. 5321/H.R. 6049 when they came to the senate, which gave huge incentives to alternative power sources and EVs, while Obama *SUPPORTED* them. McCain also has a 0% rating from the League of Conservation Voters and a 24% lifetime rating. Incentives for EVs is simply not the sort of thing he has a record of actually doing; just the opposite, really.
If you want to believe election-year public pandering, that's your choice, but a wise voter looks at what they do when in office, not what they say in public speeches to try and win over voters.
And that's all I have to say about that.
Reply
Randy C. 1:02PM (6/25/2008)
McCain is beginning to show how desperate his party is for votes. The gas tax holiday is just a gimmick. I would save about $18-20 for the entire summer. A lot of bookkeeping for such a little bit of money.
I'm glad Obama is smart enough to see right trough the McCain clue less hype. Many battery companies have already raised more than $300 million in venture capital. The big question is "Is Obama smart enough to realize that everything this country needs to say good by to foreign oil already exists.
We had electric cars that got over 100 miles per charge. We had batteries that were cheaper to make than an engine and lasted over 10 years. The republicans (McCain's party) let the auto makers destroy them and in fact helped hasten their elimination. Electric cars are the cheapest and fastest way to get control of the energy situation. The bio fuels can't be made in enough quantity and not sacrifice food production. The pie-in-the-sky hydrogen is going to be even more expensive that gas and we are still being asked to wait 10-20 years for development.
Reply
Bill 1:36PM (6/25/2008)
I can't believe anyone is behind hydrogen.
Because of the low efficiency of room temperature electrolysis, hydrogen from electrolysis ends up costing much more than getting it from natural gas.
The only practical source of hydrogen for the forseeable future remains natural gas - and you throw away a good chunk of usable energy when it is reformed to get that hydrogen.
Reply
Bill 1:37PM (6/25/2008)
I can't believe anyone is behind hydrogen.
Because of the low efficiency of room temperature electrolysis, hydrogen from electrolysis ends up costing much more than getting it from natural gas.
The only practical source of hydrogen for the forseeable future remains natural gas - and you throw away a good chunk of usable energy when it is reformed to get that hydrogen.
Reply
OhmExcited 2:28PM (6/25/2008)
MCCAIN: THE LEXINGTON PROJECT
Wed June 25, 2008 12:50:11 ET
In recent days I have set before the American people an energy plan, the Lexington Project Ð named for the town where Americans asserted their independence once before. And let it begin today with this commitment:Ê In a world of hostile and unstable suppliers of oil, this nation will achieve strategic independence by 2025.
This pledge is addressed to all concerned -- to those abroad whose power flows from an accident of geology, and to you, my fellow Americans, whose strength proceeds from unity of purpose. Together, we will break the power of OPEC over the United States. And never again will we leave our vital interests at the mercy of any foreign power.
Some will say this goal is unattainable within that relatively short span of years -- it's too hard and we need more time. Let me remind them that in the space of half that time -- about eight years -- this nation conceived and carried out a plan to take three Americans to the Moon and bring them safely home. In less than a third of that time, the gathered energies of my father's generation built the industrial might that overcame Nazi Germany and imperial Japan. That is the scale of our achievement when we set our minds to a task. That is what this country can do when we see a danger, and declare a purpose, and find the will to act.
As president, I will turn all the apparatus of government in the direction of energy independence for our country -- authorizing new production, building nuclear plants, perfecting clean coal, improving our electricity grid, and supporting all the new technologies that one day will put the age of fossil fuels behind us. Much will be asked of industry as well, as automakers and others adapt to this great turn toward new sources of power. And a great deal will depend on each one of us, as we learn to make smarter use of energy, and also to draw on the best ideas of both parties, and work together for the common good.
This Project is not a plan calibrated to please every interest group or to meet every objection. That is how we arrived to our present predicament. That is how energy policy in Washington became a long list of subjects avoided, options ruled out, and possibilities foreclosed. Nor can I promise you that the long-term success of this Project will bring instant relief.Ê In the mission of energy security, some tasks are the work of decades and some the work of years. And they will take all the will and resolve of which we are capable. But I can promise you this. Unless we begin this mission now, nothing will change at all, except for the worse. And when we succeed in the hard reform ahead, your children will live in a more prosperous country, in a more peaceful world.
Reply
fnc 2:45PM (6/25/2008)
If McCain really wanted to help us out NOW instead of at some undetermined point in the future when "leapfrog" technology is developed (whatever that is), put some of my money (since that's what he's spending) behind the auto X-Prize.
I've said it before, if he helps to make electric autos mainstream today, the research into his leapfrog tech will easily take care of itself as, oh, EVERYBODY who makes batteries scrambles for a chunk of that very large pie. Guess he has to let the oil companies know he's not backing anything that will threaten their transportation monopoly in the near future. As usual, American drive and ingenuity from average Americans will have to dig us out of the hole.
And Obama hasn't said anything during the campaign that makes me think any higher of his stance on energy. Essentially, he just wants to make gas more expensive for everybody and then give some of my money back to poor folks. Dude, gas is already expensive and there are already government assistance programs for poor people. Just back the tech we need to get out of this, m'kay?
Reply
RG 3:07PM (6/25/2008)
Too bad hydrogen is a horrible fuel for internal combustion engines. Hydrogen quite frankly has no future. It's a fad that will die off when people realize there is a better way. Series hybrids are the immediate future.
Reply
Wildgoosechase73 4:31PM (6/25/2008)
The benefit to McCain's plan is that it will both promote battery powered cars but also benefit hybrids through improved batteries. While on paper in today's environment hydrogen fuel cells may not be viable. But we have to look to tomorrow. Hydrogen is essentially pollution free at point of use, and will meet all future pollution standards. Range is only limited by the number of fuel stations as opposed to an 8 hour charge for battery. Sure most of the time a charge will get a battery powered car back and forth to work. That's most of the time, not everyone only drives to work, some people like to drive to relatives or take vacations or have sales jobs. I don't know about you, but I don't have an extra 220 outlet, the one I have is in the laundry room and don't want to run an extension cord out the window. Forget about it in apartments, condos and other high density housing. Hydrogen is the future.
Reply