Sure, the government has spent a heap of money promoting hybrids and hydrogen fuel cells and other green car technologies. But it shouldn't come as a surprise to many that the federal government has a lot more to give away. One of the sessions at last week's EDTA conference was dedicated to find ways to pork out on these funds. Over 100 people came to listen to Kelly Carnes, of Techvision 21, give the skivvy on these grants, and here's what she had to say.

One of the most important sources of funding for advanced drive vehicles is the Department of Defense, Carnes said, "because the dollar amounts are quite large" (EDTA attendees UQM and Saft America have figured this out).

The next big thing the government is ready to roll out the funding red carpet for is nanotechnology, Carnes said. Nanotechnology is all about understanding and controlling matter at dimensions of roughly 1 to 100 nanometers, where unique phenomena enable novel applications. The funding for nanotechnology has gone from around $174 million to the billions since the Clinton era, and total U.S. government investment since 2001 is over $5 billion. But you can't just tell the government that you're working on nanotechnology and get a pile of money. Nothing is that easy. Carnes made clear that receiving federal grants is a complicated process, and because these funding opportunities are competitive and merit-based, there are a lot rules to follow. The grants need to be publicly advertised, and EV firms should look over broad agency announcements (BAA) and requests for proposals (RFP) for the notices. For example, in November, the Army put out a BAA in the vehicle technology area for the next five years. Alternatively, companies can try to arrange a Cooperative Research and Development Agreements (CRADA) with the government.

The rest of this story follows after the jump.

Screw the Prius. Isn't that what the image above says to you? This is the first slide in the presentation Glen Bowling, general manager of Saft America's Space and Defense Division, gave at the EDTA conference yesterday. The session he was speaking at, "Defending our Future: Preparedness and National Security" was lightly attended, but I can't say if attendees were simply not interested in the topic or if they stayed away because it was the last session of the day. Whatever the case, Bowling's presentation laid out the clear distinctions between combat hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) and "your mother's HEV," like a Prius.

When a military (Saft sells batteries to different militaries, as well as non-military agencies) asks for a battery-powered vehicle, it has specific needs. These combat HEVs are likely to be in unfavorable situations – parked in the sun in the Persian Gulf for six months – and soldiers need them to perform as expected when needed. Combat HEVs often operate in off-road conditions 24/7 and the on-board energy often needs to do more than move the vehicle, like powering field equipment. Users will also want to be able to do field repairs when something goes wrong.

Military planners like HEVs for a few reasons. They're quieter, which is advantageous in combat, and they use less gasoline. The cost of getting a gallon of gasoline to a combat zone sometimes tops $600, Bowling said, so each drop saved is one less expensive drop that needs to be carried in.

Saft has two types of military HEV batteries, both lithium-ion: combined high energy/high power (for PHEVs) and very high energy (for weapons/propulsion). Saft's technology has found its way into the GDLS 8x8 Demonstrator, the BAE System Lancer and the RST-V hybrid, a light Jeep-style vehicle. Bowling said a hybrid tank running on Saft technology (I missed the name, but it's the one in the picture above) is currently "out in the desert, having a good time" and working well. He didn't say whether or not the soldiers were also having a good time in the desert.

Related:

• Big 3 boost JCI's li-ion battery project

(Edit: "gasoling" typo fixed)