A laboratory researcher examines a lithium-ion battery that may be put in a hybrid car in the future (Photo courtesy of the Department of Energy)
The federal government and US carmakers are spending more
money on battery research for plug-in hybrid vehicles. That’s because
existing battery technology is limited. But some of the grant winners
say success won’t come easily. Chuck Quirmbach reports:
Transcript
The federal government and US carmakers are spending more
money on battery research for plug-in hybrid vehicles. That’s because
existing battery technology is limited. But some of the grant winners
say success won’t come easily. Chuck Quirmbach reports:
The US Advanced Battery Consortium is made up of General Motors, Chrysler and Ford.
Together with money from the Department of Energy, the consortium is handing out millions of
dollars to develop batteries for Hybrid vehicles.
Johnson Controls and a partner will develop lithium-ion batteries for plug-in hybrids.
Michael Andrew is a spokesman for Johnson Controls. He says his company has a lot of work to
do to make a battery that will go forty miles between charges.
“You’ve got to hit volume targets, weight targets, power targets, energy targets, cost targets. For
the 40 mile range application, that’s gonna be a tremendous challenge for us.”
The battery and car makers say it might take even more government support to help the US auto
industry shift away from gasoline-powered cars.
Critics say the companies should have focused sooner on fuel efficiency.
There’s a lot of talk these days in Washington about creating new laws
to cut greenhouse gas emissions. One major question right now is how
the government will handle carbon dioxide emissions from vehicles. Any
new regulation is expected to have some financial impact on automakers.
And, as Dustin Dwyer reports, the carmakers are looking to share the
burden:
Transcript
There’s a lot of talk these days in Washington about creating new laws
to cut greenhouse gas emissions. One major question right now is how
the government will handle carbon dioxide emissions from vehicles. Any
new regulation is expected to have some financial impact on automakers.
And, as Dustin Dwyer reports, the carmakers are looking to share the
burden:
Back in March, the House Energy and Commerce Committee held a hearing
on how the auto industry could help fight global warming. All the
bigwigs in the U.S. auto industry were there: the heads of Ford,
General Motors and Chrysler, the North American president of Toyota and
the head of the United Auto Workers.
At the hearing, all of them agreed they would support a cap on CO2
emissions from vehicles, but they had a sort of caveat:
“We believe that there’s a lot of merit to it. And we believe if it’s
upstream…”
“For Cap and Trade, I think the further upstream you go, the more
efficient you’re going to be.”
“I’d just echo the upstream part.”
“The upstream as I stated earlier and the rest is absolutely critical.”
That was Ron Gettlefinger of the UAW, Jim Press of Toyota, Alan Mulally
of Ford, and Tom Lasorda of Chrysler.
So what do they mean by “upstream”? Here’s Ford spokesman Mike Moran:
“Lower carbon fuels, so that it’s just not what comes out of the
tailpipe, but you’re moving upstream and including the fuels that would
be included in the equation in the transportation sector.”
Basically the idea is, if you have less carbon in the fuel, you’ll pump
less carbon dioxide into the air.
But car companies really can’t take the carbon out of fuel. That’s
really more of a job for the oil industry. So are auto executives just
passing the buck?
David Friedman of the Union of Concerned Scientists says yeah, they’re
dodging the issue:
“The auto companies are basically finding more creative ways to say,
‘No,’ they won’t do anything to improve their products.”
Auto executives would say they’re already working to improve their
products, with millions of ethanol-capable vehicles on the road, and a
growing number of gas-electric hybrids. And many in the auto industry feel that they’ve been singled out for
regulation in the past.
The carmakers main lobbying group, the Alliance of Automobile
Manufacturers says that for the past 30 years, the auto industry has
been the only industry subject to carbon dioxide regulations. Though
most people try to avoid saying so in public, there is clearly some
tension between the auto industry and the oil industry.
Louis Burke is with Conoco Phillips. He says his company is willing to
do more to cut greenhouse gas emissions. In fact, the oil company just
came out in favor of setting up mandatory federal rules. Those include a
possible system that caps carbon dioxide emissions, and allows
companies to trade carbon credits as if they were commodities:
“You can cap and trade at some point down within the value chain,
whether it’s all the way upstream, or whether it’s pretty far downstream. You
can also apply a carbon tax throughout the whole value chain. The whole
idea is it’s gotta be transparent, it can’t penalize any one group.”
So upstream, downstream, the point is something needs to be done.
David Friedman of the Union of Concerned Scientists says everyone can
do a little more:
“Everyone has to do their part. That means car companies have to
produce vehicles to get more miles to the gallon. Oil companies need to
have lower carbon fuels and yes, even consumers need to find ways to
drive less.”
It’s still not clear what exactly what approach Congress will take
toward cutting auto emissions, but while leaders in Washington try to
settle on a plan, local and state officials across the country are
coming up with their own plans.
California and 10 other states have their own plans to regulate
tailpipe emissions. Those plans are being challenged in court by the
auto industry. And California has also gone forward with the nation’s first low carbon
standard for fuels.
That “upstream” plan has the support of both auto and oil companies.
This week, the North American International Auto Show in Detroit opens to the public. Every year, the event is a showcase for the newest trends for tomorrow’s cars and trucks, and this year, the big trend is fuel-efficient vehicles. Cleaner cars have been promised before, but Dustin Dwyer reports that this year’s green car concepts could be more than just an attempt to polish up a dirty image for the auto industry:
Transcript
This week, the North American International Auto Show in Detroit opens to the public.
Every year, the event is a showcase for the newest trends for tomorrow’s cars and trucks,
and this year, the big trend is fuel-efficient vehicles. Cleaner cars have been promised
before, but Dustin Dwyer reports that this year’s green car concepts could be more than
just an attempt to polish up a dirty image for the auto industry:
The press previews for this year’s Detroit auto show were made up of three straight days
of back-to-back new product launches. Dozens of new vehicles were unveiled. Hundreds
of glossy brochures were offered to reporters, and nothing generated as much interest as
the new Chevrolet Volt concept vehicle:
(Sound of buzzing)
A packed crowd gathered for the flashy and noisy unveiling. GM executives announced
that the concept car could run up to 40 miles without using a single drop of fuel. It runs
instead on electricity cranked out by its next-generation lithium-ion batteries. When the
liquid fuel system eventually does kick in, it recharges the battery for better fuel
economy, getting up to 150 miles per gallon.
And as GM CEO Rick Wagoner told the audience, the Chevy Volt represents a new way
of thinking for the world’s largest automaker. It comes from a realization that oil alone is
highly unlikely to supply enough energy for all of tomorrow’s vehicles:
“For the global auto industry, this means that we must as a business necessity, develop
alternative sources of propulsion based on alternative sources of energy in order to meet the
world’s growing demand for our products.”
GM wasn’t the only automaker to unveil a fuel conscious vehicle at this year’s auto show.
Ford’s Airstream concept, and Toyota’s FT-HS sports car concept both featured hybrid
style powertrain systems, backed by a lithium-ion battery.
It might not be all that surprising for automakers to release such vehicles after a year in
which gas prices surged beyond three dollars a gallon, but analyst Jim Hall of Auto
Pacific says gas prices aren’t the reason for automakers to get into low or no emission
vehicles.
“You do it for two reasons, one, the potential of getting out of the business of making a
mechanical engine that has to be machined and made of multiple pieces and assembled,
and the other part of it is, you never have to spend another penny on emissions controls,
and emissions research, and emissions development and emissions engineering, which, at
every major car company is billions of dollars.”
So, basically, greener technology will eventually be cheaper technology. That means that
for perhaps the first time in the history of the auto industry, the interests of
environmentalists and the interest of business-minded bean counters are finally in line.
The big question now is how to get to that greener future. The concepts at this year’s
Detroit auto show all point to lithium-ion batteries as the next frontier. These batteries
are more powerful, and potentially cheaper than the batteries in today’s hybrids, but
they’re also less stable, and don’t last as long.
GM executives say they think they can resolve those issues and have a lithium-ion
powered vehicle by the end of the decade, but Jim Hall says no way:
“I worked on an electric vehicle program when I was employed in the auto industry
directly, and I learned that there are three kinds of liars in the world. There are liars,
damn liars and battery engineers.”
Of course, not everyone agrees with Hall’s assessment. Some lithium-ion proponents
even argue that the technology could be ready to go right now. Ford, General Motors and
the Chrysler Group have asked the federal government for more funding to speed-
development of lithium-ion batteries.
They say the Japanese government is giving its car companies several hundred million
dollars for battery development, and they want a comparable effort from the US
government. But even if Detroit automakers don’t get the money, almost everyone agrees
that big changes are coming for the auto industry, and that decades-long battle between
the good of the environment and the good of carmakers could be coming to a close.
Some researchers say that car makers risk future profits if they continue to make fuel-inefficient vehicles. (Photo by Gustavo
Schonarth)
For the last several years, American car makers have seen their profits falling. Now, a new report says the Big Three will take even steeper hits to their bottom lines if the trend in higher gas prices continues. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mark Brush has this report:
Transcript
For the last several years, American car makers have seen their profits
falling. Now, a new report says the Big Three will take even steeper hits
to their bottom line if the trend in higher gas prices continues. The Great
Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mark Brush has this report:
The authors of the report looked at potential impacts to the U.S. car
industry if gas prices go up. They found that if they go up, profits will
fall, and more jobs will be lost.
Walter McManus is with the University of Michigan Transportation Research
Institute. He co-authored the report and says it should serve as a wake up
call to American car makers.
“It shows them that it is costing them a lot more to sell the fuel-inefficient vehicles than fuel-efficient vehicles, that they are putting
jobs at risk and putting their profits at risk because they are unwilling to
accept that the world has changed.”
Representatives from the auto industry say they already offer many fuel-efficient models, but that overall, American consumers rank fuel economy
lower than things such as power, cargo space, and safety ratings.
A laboratory researcher examines a lithium-ion battery that may be put in a hybrid car in the future (Photo courtesy of the Department of Energy)