Automotive industry analyst Jim Motavalli (bnet.com) writes about Tesla’s dilemma in the context of the company’s rumored IPO, first reported by Reuters but denied by Tesla management. Motavalli points to one solution to the charging infrastructure, proposed by The Car Charging Group, Inc. (CCGI):

According to CEO Andy Kinard, Florida-based CCGI will not build its own charging technology, but will distribute chargers built by established player Coulomb. Its business model…is to sign contracts with businesses…that operate parking lots. The contract spells out revenue sharing between the parties, so parking slots will gain free EV infrastructure and lot managers will get cash from charging.

The article also goes on to say that CCGI will standardize on “J1772 charging hardware” and will go from 0 to 1,000 units by the end of 2010. While this would certainly be good news for Tesla, it is not entirely clear just how reliable CCGI’s predictions are.

However, what the article does not mention is that this is not the whole story for electric vehicle infrastructure. Some startups are focusing on an entirely different strategy. One such company is the Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Network (EVIN), and its business model circumvents the “chicken-and-egg” problem altogether.

I briefly mentioned EVIN in my prior post covering the California Cleantech Open awards. The company has a very unique take on how to solve the infrastructure, range, charging time and adoption rate problems all at the same time without huge upfront costs and without a large installed base of consumer-owned EVs already in place.

According to EVIN’s article on “battery myths,” the company’s strategy focuses on mimicking “the overall behavior of the American driving experience, the ability to drive anywhere, anytime, for any distance.” It goes on to say that in order for any vehicle, gas or electric, to achieve this, it needs to be able to re-fuel at a fueling station and “drive in and drive out in 3 minutes or less.”

The obvious way to achieve this is with easily interchangeable battery packs. The main drawback to this approach is the same as with charging stations: the need for a large number of installed locations. However, this approach also has several advantages: if enough “filling stations” are in place, then the batteries do not have to be particularly high-tech or long range, and the charging times become irrelevant, because the batteries are charged independent of the vehicles.

But there are two more equally important advantages of interchangeable batteries that EVIN wants to take advantage of: First of all, when the batteries are not in a vehicle, they can be used for other purposes, such as time-shifting energy usage for commercial and high-density residential buildings. EVIN plans to partner with building owners, who would initially install an array of battery packs allowing them to save money by charging the batteries at night, when electricity is cheap, and then using that electricity during the day, when it is expensive. Once enough of these installations are in place, it becomes very easy to add the battery-swapping service to them, allowing them to be used by EV owners and providing additional revenue for the owner of the apartment complex.

The second important feature of an interchangeable battery infrastructure is that it allows for conversion of existing gas-powered vehicles to EVs, thus providing a solution to the emissions for a huge number of vehicles, in addition to extending the life of those vehicles. As EVIN puts it:

In order to make a serious dent in our consumption of imported oil, we must also initiate and fund programs that utilize the 245 million cars that are already in use across the country.

EVIN is currently focused on developing standardized battery packs and vehicle conversion technologies, in addition to its deployment strategy, and the company is currently focusing on deploying the first generation of its technologies to commercial fleets.

In contrast to Tesla’s dependence on fixed batteries and CCGI’s charging infrastructure, EVIN has recently announced a partnership with SABA Motors to deploy EVIN’s batteries in its vehicles. SABA, a competitor in the Progressive Automotive X-Prize competition, plans on giving Tesla a run for its money, by producing a high-performance electric sports car for under half the price of the Tesla Roadster.

Could charging stations vs. interchangeable battery packs be the EV version of VHS vs. BetaMax?

—-

1.4.09: UPDATE: A very interesting discussion has developed around this article on TriplePundit.

–

This article originally appeared on TriplePundit and is reprinted here thanks to 3P’s Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license. You can find out more about Creative Commons licensing here.on twitter.

We entered the 2000’s with rules in California requiring automakers to offer EVs, but by 2003, state regulators changed the rules and many automakers dropped EV initiativesand focused on gas guzzlers. But here we are nearing the end of 2009, and automakers are now investing heavily in electric vehicles, natural gas cars are gaining traction in high places, and hydrogen cars are about as far off as ever.

The verdict? Despite some movement, Natural Gas Vehicle adoption and High-Speed Rail are still a long way off, while the Hydrogen Economy is nowhere to be seen. Electric Vehicle adoption also has many more obstacles to overcome than originally predicted. Just about the only thing that the pundits got right was that Hybrid Vehicle technology would be a bridge to EV adoption.

Predicting the future of green transportation (or anything, for that matter), is dicey, at best, but that doesn’t stop us from trying. Here are a few attempts from around the web, for you New Year’s viewing pleasure:

• Electric Vehicles: 10 Predictions for 2010 (hybridcars.com): Pike Research releases a 14-page white paper on the EV market.
• Podcast: Cleantech Group Predicts the “End Is Near” in 2010 (energypriorities.com): Predicting that 2010 is a very good year for cleantech in general, their predictions include: “Electric cars take the back seat to smart mobility “
• Earth2Tech Predictions: 5 Biggest Hurdles for 2010
• Warren Buffett: All cars will be electric in 20 years (autonews.gasgoo.com)
• Nine Hopeful Predictions For 2010 (treehugger.com)

While this would be a really bad thing for transportation in general, it may have a silver lining: yet another reason to invest heavily in green transportation and infrastructure. With luck and some foresight, we may see difficult times turned into a major opportunity for real change.

–

This article originally appeared on TriplePundit and is reprinted here thanks to 3P’s Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license. You can find out more about Creative Commons licensing here.

Fueling the Imagination

For example, just hearing the words “X-Prize” is bound to conjure up images of maverick entrepreneurs competing for millions of dollars of prize money to achieve new milestones in air and space flight. That’s exactly what the founders of the X-Prize Foundation want you to think about when you hear about the Progressive Automotive X-Prize, a new competition which focuses on environmentally-friendly automobiles instead of airplanes and rockets. As we reported in a previous article, the competition awards a $10 million dollar prize to the car that, in addition to being the winner in a series of speed and endurance trials, must achieve an effective 100 miles per gallon, have a 200 mile range, and adhere to a large number of very stringent design and safety criteria.

According to the New York Times, the new X-Prize is receiving a boost from the Federal government in the form of $5.5 million of stimulus money from the Department of Energy. This support of competition seems like a good way to promote fairness and innovation, especially since the DOE has been previously accused of stifling innovation in the automotive sector with its Advanced Technology Manufacturing Loan program.

LIthium-Ion Batteries Experiencing Electrifying Growth

Pike Research has released a report which forecasts that the LIthium-Ion battery industry will grow to $8 billion by 2015, fueled by the launch of “dozens of new plug-in hybrid and battery electric vehicles”. The report states that Lithium-Ion will continue to be the battery technology of choice for some time to come, with China, Japan and Korea being the major players. The report cites the high cost of these batteries as the main limiting factor to their acceptance, adding “30 to 50 percent” to the cost of a new vehicle, and likely requiring heavy government subsidies.

Most EV manufacturers currently use Lithium-Ion batteries in their designs, including Fisker Automotive. Although the company recently pushed back the launch of its Karma vehicle to 2010, it will announce a deal with a battery manufacturer later this month, Ener1 being the likely recipient. Seems like others are banking on Ener1 as well,

the company having received an investment of $20 million in new capital from it’s strategic partner, ITOCHU Corporation.

Investors are sure to be giving a much closer look to the EV and battery industries now that Warren Buffet has publicly stated that ALL cars will be electric by 2030. The WIzard of Omaha holds a 10-percent stake in BYD, which manufactures Li-Ion batteries in China. Google is supporting this as well, with its Clean Energy 2030 initiative, although its detractors envision a multi-fuel future.

Have you heard about any interesting news about electric vehicles? Let us know in the comments.

More Resources:

Walking the Floor at the 2009 LA Auto Show (TriplePundit.com)

Design Judging Complete: Over Half of All Entries Eliminated (Xprize.org)

Where’s My Test Drive? (TriplePundit.com)

GM Invests $336M In Detroit-Hamtramck Plant To Build Chevrolet Volt (Green Car Congress)

–

This article originally appeared on TriplePundit and is reprinted here thanks to 3P’s Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license. You can find out more about Creative Commons licensing here.

I had the pleasure to speak with the animated Mr. Saba and his charming wife at the Fast Lane to CleanTech Incubator Mixer, held at Club Autosport in San Jose. Club Autosport is the current home of Saba Motors, and hosts it and a number of other cleantech companies at its “car-condominium” facility, as part of the Electronic Transportation Development Center (ETDC), a San Jose Redevelopment Agency initiative to incubate and support startups dedicated to clean automotive technologies, including battery infrastructure startup EVIN, the very unusual compressed air powered Magnetic Air Cars, and over 30 others.

SABA Motors is a competitor in the Progressive Automotive X-Prize Competition, with a $10 million dollar prize awarded to the car that, in addition to being the winner in a series of speed and endurance trials, must achieve an effective 100 miles per gallon, and adhere to a large number of very stringent design and safety criteria (complete competition details have yet to be finalized). According to Mr. Saba, these rules are so stringent that, “if the Toyota Prius were to be entered in the X-Prize competition, it would fail to meet the design criteria.” SABA’s competition include rival sports car makers Tesla Motors, Zap and Aptera, along with 37 others that have qualified to date.

The company’s strategy to win the X-Prize, and to deliver on its retail-price promise, is to reduce the amount of batteries needed by making the rest of the vehicle as lightweight as possible. Because they are some of the heaviest and most expensive components of the car, reducing the number of batteries allows the company to achieve both goals simultaneously.

Those familiar with Amory Lovins‘ work on the Hypercar concept will see much of that concept embodied in SAAB Motor’s prototype vehicle. The theory goes something like this: the lighter you make the car, as a whole, the smaller you can make the individual components. For example, a car with less mass requires less energy to move it, and the same is true for making it stop, hence smaller engines and brakes can be employed. As each component becomes smaller, it reduces the requirements for all of the other components, and becomes a compounding effect resulting in large gains in efficiency, and should ultimately result in overall cost savings in the production vehicle.

Mr. Saba demonstrated to me just how lightweight the vehicle is, by effortlessly moving it back and forth with two hands. As a matter of fact, one of his biggest obstacles is how to get more traction to the ground in such a lightweight vehicle. He cites the tires breaking free of the pavement has the biggest limiting factor in the amount of speed that the car can currently achieve.

And… just for the record, the prototype is no glorified golf cart or three-wheeled motorcycle disguised as a car. It’s a real looker, and evokes the minimalist spirit of English roadsters like the Jaguar D-Types of the 50s and 60s or even the Mazda Miata of the 90s, with the same driving-first-and-only mentality. (meaning you will probably need some nice, steampunk-y, leather goggles to keep the bugs out of your face.)

But, unlike its cousin, the Tesla Roadster, the SABA is not intended to be an expensive toy that only a few can afford. Rather, Mr. Saba believes that the only way for an electric vehicle to make a real impact in reducing greenhouse gas emissions is to sell a whole lot of them. Mr. Saba plans on achieiving this by building a car that is not only mere transportation, but also captures the imagination. He believes that if he can do all that while making the car emissions free and under $40,000 retail, he will have a winner on his hands. (the Miata is a great example of how successful this strategy can be, and it wasn’t even emissions-free!)

Who wouldn’t want to own a car with Ferrari-like performance for the price of a well-equipped Toyota, that is zero-emissions to boot? Heck, I’ll take two!

Do you think Simon Saba will realize his vision? Tell us about it in the comments.

—-

This article originally appeared on TriplePundit and is reprinted here thanks to 3P’s Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license. You can find out more about Creative Commons licensing here.

Several pieces of this strategy were unveiled in San Francisco last Thursday, at an event entitled Inside Ford’s Electrification Strategy. Ford’s newly-titled Director of Global Electrification, Nancy Gioia, explained how the company is not only planning to build battery-electric (BEV) and plug-in hybrid electric (PHEV) vehicles, but is also working on strategies to build the infrastructure that will support those vehicles. Attendees at the event were also invited to test-drive two news Ford vehicles, the Escape PHEV and the Focus BEV. While my fellow 3P contributor will be posting an in-depth look at Ford’s electrification strategy itself, I would like to discuss some of the other things that make up the company’s overall strategy.

[MORE]

How well Ford Motors’ actions measure up to the statements that the company has made is something that remains to be seen. Some commitments made by the company were only made after pressure was applied by shareholders. As it has been said, the proof of the pudding is in the tasting. However, the company has made some notable past efforts in greening its operations, led by current Chairman of the Board, and former CEO, Bill Ford.

Mr. Ford, Great-Grandson of founder Henry Ford is known to be an environmentalist, and has made several attempts in the past to move the company in a more sustainable direction, some very successful, and some dismal failures. His major success was the transformation of the River Rouge plant from a polluted industrial brownfield site into a model of green design, complete with green roof. Failures include canceling the company’s electric vehicle program, and the inability of the company to keep to its 2000 commitment to increase fleet gas mileage by 25% by 2010.

What is interesting about these failures is that the company cited market conditions as the main cause. As long as the consumers were demanding larger vehicles, the company needed to provide them, in order to remain in business. Ironically, it was rapidly changing consumer demand that almost put the company out of business, as the economy, rising gas prices and concern about climate change caused buyers to flee SUVs in favor of smaller cars and hybrids.

Huge corporations are not known for their ability to turn on a dime, they are more like Titanics on a competitive ocean, their rudder (leadership) too ineffective to avoid the oncoming iceberg. Perhaps this kind of disaster is the only thing that would allow such an entrenched company to make the necessary changes.

So what, exactly, is the company’s strategy? According to Ford’s Director of Sustainability John J. Viera, the company is not banking on any one technology to solve the various challenges of emissions and oil dependency. Instead, it plans to introduce vehicles which run on a number of different fuels, and employ different technologies in different situations, appropriate to the situation. In addition, the company will become more involved in the fuel delivery process, as in the case of electricity and biofuels.

This was very evident while I was riding in the new Ford Focus BEV, accompanied by a Ford engineer and several of my media colleagues. The vehicle, a prototype of one scheduled to be released in the US in 2011, has a current range of approximately 80 miles, with the production model slated to have about a 100 mile range. During our ride, the engineer explained that Ford did not intend for the BEV Focus to be a car that would be driven by everyone, but would mostly be marketed as a second car or commuter car for those with commutes in the appropriate range. For longer trips, a PHEV is more appropriate.

Ford is also putting it’s money on vehicles that can run on several different types of fuels, also known as “Flex-Fuel” vehicles. These cars and trucks can use Ethanol as well as gasoline. (There are even rumors of a flex-fuel hybrid.) Another type of multiple-fuel vehicle being planned is one that has multiple fuel tanks, such as a propane and gasoline combination. In addition, the company is moving into biodiesel, and will be offering a B20 biodiesel-capable engine for its 2011 F-series trucks.

Although Clean Diesel vehicles are already being produced in Europe, the cost to bring this technology to the U.S. is currently prohibitive, but, according to Motor Trend, the company is planning on being able to offer a clean diesel engine for larger vehicles, such as the F-150 and Expedition, by 2020. This could potentially result in clean diesel technology ending up on other Ford vehicles.

By introducing an assortment of vehicles, with different types of engine running on a number of fuels, the company hopes to diversify the current U.S. portfolio of vehicles away from gasoline. By having a large number of technologies at it’s disposal and readying its worldwide operations to switch technologies quickly, “Ford anticipates it will be ready to leverage the right vehicle fuel and energy sources when and where they are needed in the future (EcoTuesday.com)“. Like diversifying a stock portfolio, this strategy would reduce the risks of dependency on oil, in addition to reducing overall greenhouse emissions.

Speaking to the various Ford representatives, and listening to their presentations, you do get the sense that at least some of Ford’s management are very well-versed in the language of sustainability, and the strategies that they are outlining appear to be sound and well thought out. If these could be implemented in toto, it seems likely that they would work.

However, it does appear that a healthy dose of skepticism is still in order. Ford’s short-term strategy for boosting fuel efficiency is something called “EcoBoost”, which essentially uses smaller, turbo-boosted engines to replace larger engines, something that SAAB has been doing for years. I have to admit, when I first heard about this, I had that same icky feeling that I had when SAAB attempted to pass off turbo-boosting their engines as “recycling”. The catchy, too-green, name, and too-good-to-be-true claims have a faint smell of greenwashing about them; this Wall Street Journal article clearly shows that Ford is likely overstating the fuel economy benefits of turbos.

Perhaps the EcoBoost thing is simply a misstep by a company trying to do anything it can to survive. I really do hope that Ford ends up proving me wrong, for everyone’s sake. A company of this size and influence is in a position to make a huge difference in the multiple fights against climate change and oil dependency. All that is needed is for the company to take its sustainability strategy seriously and to empower good people like the ones I met on Thursday.

What do you think, is Ford going to come through on its sustainability promises?

—-

This article originally appeared on TriplePundit and is reprinted here thanks to 3P’s Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license. Find out more about Creative Commons licensing.

The company plans to begin producing the new global Ford Focus at the plant in 2010, and in 2011 the Michigan plant will begin production of a battery-electric Focus, helping Ford meet its promise of delivering four new electric vehicles in the U.S. by 2012.

The zero-emission Focus battery-electric vehicle, which is being developed in partnership with Magna International, features a high-voltage electric motor powered by a high capacity Lithium Ion battery pack and is charged by plugging in to a 110-volt or 220-volt outlet. It is expected to have a range of 100 miles.

Ford president and CEO Alan Mulally had this to say about the company’s plans for the electric vehicle: “We believe that building this vehicle here at the Michigan Assembly plant, is going to be a critical step toward the commercialization and ultimately the acceptance of electric vehicles. And that’s really important to our country, it’s important to our community, and it’s important, frankly for the world.”

In addition to the Focus battery electric vehicle, Ford is collaborating with Smith Electric to sell a Transit Connect battery electric commercial vehicle for North America in 2010. Ford’s product plans also include a next-generation hybrid vehicle in 2012 and a plug-in hybrid vehicle in 2012.

This post originally appeared on TriplePundit, and appears here courtesy of a Creative Commons license.

Question: What has a steering wheel is made from carrots, has a body made from potatoes, is powered by waste chocolate and vegetable oil, and it goes 125 mph around corners?

1. Bugs Bunny’s carrot mobile
2. Mr. Potato Head’s Funny-Face Car
3. GM’s latest prototype
4. A Formula-3 race car

The answer, of course, is #4, and it’s the Environ-MENTAL, the first Formula 3 race car designed and made from sustainable and renewable materials, and, according to its designers, “putting the world first by effectively managing the planet’s resources.”

The Environ-MENTAL is the vehicle of choice for the WorldFirst Racing Team, a project of the University of Warwick’s U.K.-based Warwick Innovative Manufacturing Research Centre (WIMRC). The team’s goal is to prove to the automotive industry that it is possible to build a competitive race car using environmentally sustainable components. Much like electric-car manufacturer Tesla, the team seeks to change the common perception that environmentally-friendly means boring. They want to prove that sustainability can be exciting.

WorldFirst has set out to design not just a racing car, but an entire sustainable racing system: “If you are going to wholeheartedly embrace the ‘green is great’ ethos and do more than merely posture, you have to broaden your vision. This must encompass a strategy that stretches throughout the chain from the raw materials to the final disposal of the car. The project clearly demonstrates that automotive environmentalism can and should be about the whole package.”

The new WorldFirst racecar is a clever piece of lateral thinking. the team have examined all the components of the vehicle and attempted to introduce a green and sustainable element into each aspect of the car.It has the following unique features:

• Composite steering wheel derived from carrots and other root vegetables
• Potato starch wing mirrors
• Wing end plates made from cellulose and flax composite
• Lightweight wiring loom incorporating recycled aluminum and plastic
• 3D woven natural fiber composites in the barge board
• Biodiesel-powered, race-calibrated engine
• Glass fiber and resin from recycled plastic for the side pod
• A groundbreaking oxygen-generating catalyst on the radiators that cleans the air as the car moves
• A seat made from flax fiber shell, soybean oil foam and recycled polyester
• Recycled carbon-fiber for the engine cover and damper hatch
• Pre-impregnated woven flax fiber for the bib
• Plant oil based lubricant
• Non-carbon disks, with low embodied energy for the brakes

Project Manager James Meredith, a researcher at the University of Warwick, said “It’s been very exciting working on the project and important for our team to develop a working example of a truly ‘Green’ motor racing car. The WorldFirst project expels the myth that performance needs to be compromised when developing the sustainable motor vehicles of the future”

—-

This article originally appeared on TriplePundit and is reprinted here thanks to 3P’s Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license. You can find out more about Creative Commons licensing here.

General Motors and Segway have announced a joint venture to produce a small 2-passenger electric vehicle, based on Segway’s balancing technology. The prototype, named the P.U.M.A., (short for Personal Urban Mobility & Accessibility), includes some notable concepts, including networked communications technologies which [could] allow the vehicles to avoid collisions and participate in an on-demand transit network. Jim Norrod, chief executive of Segway, had this to say, “We’re excited about doing more with less, less emissions, less dependability on foreign oil and less space.” This appears to be a move by General Motors to focus on more environmentally-friendly vehicles and could potentially signal a greater change in GM’s strategy.

A few days ago, Joel Makower wrote about the American obsession with automobiles. This obsession has translated into the current rush to produce marketable electric cars. He laments that switching from gasoline to electricity merely clouds the fact that personally-owned vehicles are inherently wasteful and unsustainable. Makower suggests that what is needed is a shift to a greater focus on providing transportation solutions, not just building more cars. If the automakers could reinvent themselves as “transportation providers,” perhaps they could begin to focus on providing the most efficient solutions to transportation problems. This would most likely lead them to the realization that the solution involves doing more with less. The P.U.M.A. vehicle appears to be a step towards this type of better design and whole-systems thinking.

The vehicle is much smaller than a traditional car, even one as small as a SMART car, and this, by itself is a big plus. It also appears to be much easier to use than a motorcycle and wouldn’t require a special license. For a city-dweller, who may only need a car for those mid-length trips that are too long for a bicycle, this vehicle could easily replace a car, or be an alternative for someone who is reluctant to ride a motorcycle.

But the most interesting feature of the P.U.M.A. concept is its proposed ability to communicate within a transportation network. By using GPS and transponder technology, the vehicle would be able to avoid collisions and could even drive itself. This would allow the vehicle to become part of an on-demand mass transit system. (You can get an idea of how this would work by watching the video.) Larry Burns, GM’s vice president of R&D and strategic planning, indicated that all of this could be accomplished with currently-available technology, “At this point, it’s merely a business decision.”

I’ve seen several concepts for this kind of on-demand personal transporter, usually known as Personal Rapid Transit, or PRT, but they usually involve far more infrastructure and dedicated, usually raised, tracks. The P.U.M.A. appears to require little more than a dedicated ground pathway, much like a bike lane. It seems as if this would be relatively easy to implement for a small city. According to Burns, the company is currently seeking a suitable partner to serve as a test case.

Some have criticized the P.U.MA. concept. The cars.com blog noted, “what do you do in cold weather, where do you park it, where do you charge it? …it’s unlikely there is a large market for the PUMA in the U.S.” WallyChamp.com surmized that it might promote laziness, “[yet] Another indication that Americans will become like the ones in Wall-E. ” Many criticisms have centered around the perceived safety of the vehicle. BusinessPundit.com called it “green, but useless” and said it “looks like it would crumple if a Hummer came within ten feet of it.” Money-cake.com had a similar reaction: “I would not feel comfortable driving the PUMA in Manhattan, NYC going 35 miles per hour. When I see such small vehicles on the road, I consider them coffins.” These critics may have overlooked the fact that the vehicle unveiled is just the chassis and that more safety improvements are planned, including coverings (see artist rendering, below).

From an adoption standpoint, the design of the P.U.M.A. does not seem to carry the same baggage as the much-joked-about Segway Transporter: you drive it and sit in it like a car. It even looks familiar. When I first saw it, it took me a while before I realized that it had only 2 wheels.

Best of all: it has a really cool name.

What do you think? Could this finally be the game-changing vehicle that Dr. Kamen promised us a few years ago? Is this something that General Motors could use to remake its image?

—-

Steve Puma is a technologist, sustainability consultant and strategist. He currently writes for bothTriplePundit and his personal blog,ThePumaBlog.com, about the intersection of sustainability, technology, innovation, and the future. Steve recently received his MBA in Sustainable Management from the Presidio School of Management in San Francisco, and holds a B.A. in Computer Science from Rutgers University.

You can contact Steve through email or any of these social networks:

LinkedIn | twitter | del.icio.us | digg

Last week, electric car manufacturer Tesla Motors made headlines with the unveiling of its long-anticipated Model S sedan. The elegantly-styled four-door hatchback has some extremely impressive statistics. As a matter of fact, the stats are so good that it makes me wonder if this could be the beginning of the end for the Big Three. While Ford, GM ,and Chrysler are mired in government bailouts and don’t appear to be offering much in the way of real change, it looks like Tesla is about to prove that it can not only build a niche sports car for an elite few, but can build one that is much more mainstream.

The annoucement of the new Tesla sports sedan had pundits from across the interweb gushing abut its sleek styling, range, charging times, and cargo capacity. The car sports smooth, aerodynamic curves, with a look reminiscent of high-end BMWs or Mercedes.

According to the company’s technical specifications, the Model S boasts the following:

- 300 mile range: This may be the most impressive and important statistic, but it comes with a few caveats. The lowest-cost Model S will only include a 160-mile battery pack, with 230- and 300-mile packs available at higher cost. However, the company is touting the ability to swap battery packs (“5-minute battery swap”), and may be planning on leasing the packs to customers for longer trips, although details are sketchy. Even a 160 or 230 mile range would make the Model S perfect for all but the longest of daily trips, especially since most drivers will start each day with a fully-charged vehicle, and most trips are well below this range.
- 45 minute charging time: According to the press release: “The Model S, which carries its charger onboard, can be recharged from any 120V, 240V or 480V outlet, with the latter taking only 45 minutes. By recharging their car while they stop for a meal, drivers can go from LA to New York in approximately the same time as a gasoline car.” This is not exactly true, at least not in 2009. To achieve the 45-minute charging time, you need a 480V charging station, none of which are publicly available. At the slightly-more-accessible 240V, the charging speed is a more leisurely 4 hours. It seems that Tesla is counting on leasing the swappable battery packs as an interim solution, until public charging stations are as common as gas or diesel.
- Seats 7(!): Once again, not really. It’s more like a “5+2 really small ones”. There is space for 2 rear-facing child seats in the rear hatch. While this sounds a little odd, by todays standards, it reminds me of the jump seats in my parents station wagon, and I’m sure the kiddies will love it.
- 0 to 60 in “under 6 seconds”: While the Model S will probably not be winning any drag races, one still has to remember that electric motors produce all their torque right away, and the power band is continuous. This should make for quite a nice driving experience.
- Storage Space: Locating the drivetrain and battery pack in the floor frees up cargo space where a typical engine would be, and the Model S combines that with a hatchback design and 60/40 split fold down seats. I could not find specific measurements, but the company claims that the Model S can carry a “mountain bike, 50-inch flat-screen TV, full drum set or futon frame”, and has cargo space comparable to an SUV.

The $49,000 (after a $7,500 government rebate) price tag may seem pretty high, but Tesla is highlighting the fact that greatly-reduced fuel costs and reduced maintenance costs bring the Model S more in line with vehicles in the $35,000 range.

Leading the Pack

There was another announcement this week that startup Detroit Electric (an ironic choice of names-the company is based in the U.K.) will be partnering with Malaysia-based Proton to deliver a much more basic all-electric car to the US by the end of 1999 and priced under $33,000. Detroit Electric has an aggressive sales projection of 270,000 cars by 2012, and, if it can meet that goal it would certainly be well ahead of the Tesla’s 2011 delivery date and 20,000 unit per year sales target. It would also be definitive proof that the mass-produced, highway-capable electric car is an accepted, mainstream product.

I think that the announcement by Detroit Electric will only help Tesla, and also helps solidify Tesla’s position as an industry leader. Tesla’s strategy has always been twofold: focus first on building cars for wealthy early-adopters, and build cars that capture the imagination of the public through styling and performance. The former helps pay for technology development, while the later builds Tesla’s brand image and creates a new perception of what an electric car can be. Both pave the way for Tesla, and other manufacturers, to be able to sell progressively lower-priced vehicles to a growing cadre of buyers.

Taking into account the bad news about the US auto industry, along with Tesla’s and Detroit Electric’s announcements, we may look back upon this as the week that the internal combustion engine finally “jumped the shark.“

What do you think? Is this week’s news sounding the death knell of the internal combustion engine and the Big Three?

—-

This article originally appeared on TriplePundt.

You can contact Steve through email or any of these social networks:

LinkedIn | twitter | del.icio.us | digg

According to the article:

“lithium ions can only pass through tunnels to the active electrode material when they’re perfectly positioned. In the absence of a few good traffic cops, it’s pandemonium. The solution, Ceder discovered, is to engineer the material with a so-called beltway system that guides the ions towards the tunnel entrances at an ideal angle.”

The most exciting part of Ceder’s paper is that, “because only slight modifications to li-ion manufacturing process are required, Professor Ceder is confident that the new battery material could be on the market within two or three years.”

This is very exciting stuff, because it will allow companies like Tesla Motors, Toyota and even Ford to build cars with longer range and longer battery life, both limiting factors in competing with traditional gas-powers cars.

Depending how much more efficient this technology allows lithium-ion batteries to be, it may also allow electronics to become smaller and produce less waste. It may also overcome another potential problem with lithium-ion technology, the scarcity of cobalt.

TriplePundit goes on to explain another very important benefit of this technology as applied to automobiles:

“Battery-powered vehicles…can work as mobile energy storage centers that smooth a potentially-bumpy renewable supply. Millions of these cars and trucks will eventually work in tandem with power companies through vehicle-to-grid (V2G) technology, providing energy to the grid when demand is high, and recharging overnight when power generators have excess capacity, but nowhere to put it. Since electricity supply from renewable sources fluctuates by its very nature, PHEVs and EVs will make it easier to plug those power sources into the grid, heralding a era of clean energy.”

This is reiterating one of the central ideas in the Natural Capitalism philosophy. Vehicles become batteries which stabilize and distribute the electric power grid and enable emerging technologies like solar and wind power to become more viable, by allowing them to produce and store power that can not be utilized right away, thus removing one of the major stopping blocks to growth in the renewable energy field.

I view this of one example of how crucial technological innovations are to solving the climate change and other major challenges. By forcing us to innovate or die, past crisises, such as the two world wars. have produced technological breakthroughs that ensured hummanitiy’s survival, and I expect this crisis to be solved in a similar manner.

Thanks to TriplePundit: http://www.triplepundit.com/pages/the-liion-holy-grail.php