Archives

But when asked if Exxon Mobil had contracts with those companies, Harris sidestepped … (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/5334375.html)

http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/501/Cobasys_Battery_Pack.jpgBrett Clanton - Houston Chronicle - Nov. 28, 2007

A thin film does not make a Li-Ion battery. Then we have the possibility of oil company control of a much needed battery technology … again? -- Ed.

Exxon Mobil Corp. believes it has found an answer to a problem that has bedeviled the auto industry in recent years: using rechargeable lithium-ion batteries, like those found in cell phones and laptops, to power cars and trucks.

This weekend, at a conference in Anaheim, Calif., Exxon Mobil will unveil a super-thin plastic sheeting the company says can improve the power, safety and reliability of lithium-ion batteries for use in automobiles.

Exxon Mobil considers the film a breakthrough because it allows battery makers to build smaller and cheaper battery systems — removing key obstacles that have kept automakers from building hybrid and electric vehicles on a wide scale.

"That desire to use batteries that are more powerful and lighter is something that the auto companies have yearned for years," said Jim Harris, senior vice president at Exxon Mobil Chemical Co., a Houston unit of the Irving-based energy giant.

Today, most vehicles have toaster-sized nickel-metal hydride batteries under the hood. But battery makers and auto manufacturers have begun turning their attention to lithium-ion batteries because they are smaller, lighter, able to hold a charge longer and have a higher energy density.

"It's the natural next step for advanced battery technology," said Brian Corbett, a spokesman for General Motors Corp., which is developing models like the Chevrolet Volt that incorporate lithium-ion batteries.

Safety issues

First introduced by Sony in 1991, lithium-ion batteries were designed to help slim down portable electronics devices. But automakers have struggled to adapt them for vehicles because of operational limitations, high costs and safety issues.

Last year, 6 million Sony lithium-ion batteries in Dell and Apple notebook computers were recalled because of overheating that in some instances resulted in fires.

That recall gave a boost to companies working on improving lithium-ion batteries, including Exxon Mobil Chemical, which has 20 years of experience in the field, and Boston-based Optodot Corp., which has also developed a separator film for lithium-ion batteries.

Separator films are membranes that keep the battery's positive and negative fields, which are wrapped in a jelly-roll configuration, from touching… http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/5334375.html

While this is really interesting work (and builds on other such efforts I've seen elsewhere, by the way), I do not think it is really much more than a better method of coping with the limitations of the LiCo composition. The concept may offer some advantages with other chemistries, but I believe the best and most effective solution is the one being pursued by A123. Namely, a more stable and durable chemistry/nano-structure for batteries.

We will soon see for ourselves what works best, and my bet is on A123. :D

Sheesh...

"Today, most vehicles have toaster-sized nickel-metal hydride batteries under the hood." - wrong.

"But hybrids still cost roughly $3,000 more than their gas-powered counterparts, and can weigh up to 900 pounds more, leading to sluggish performance." - see other article? Wrong.

Hi Shifty35:

___It is not so much this news items inaccuracies (most of the hybrid news items have one or two glaring mistakes) but the fact Exxon/Mobil is getting into the game with their own supposedly game changing technology.

___On par with Exxon/Mobil’s take, Cobasys who locked up the NiMH patents when they purchased Ovonics from GM many years ago has all of 200 employees and I believe have only placed a handful of their packs in GM BAS system equipped vehicles over the past year. This company is not going anywhere just as the research arm of Exxon/Mobil is not.

___Did you notice the articles 20-years of experience in the field quote? They have not put out a single item to move battery technology forward but have 20 years in the business. This only means one thing and unfortunately, it is not a good thing.

___Sean is entirely correct. A123Systems appear to be the best available right now with the LG/Continental doing deals with a yet to be announced chemistry and packaging of their own. JCI/SAFT’s Li-Ion products appear to be headed overseas with soon to be announced deals but not much here in the US? I hope they can supply Ford a pack for the upcoming Fusion but who knows at this point.

___Good Luck

___Wayne

RLC, as I'm sure you're aware I agree with you. Still a band-aid on what is a fundamentally unstable chemistry. Other chemistries such as Li-ion Phosphate seem to be the way to go. Looks like within a year Phosphate batteries should be available to the public, and I'm hoping to test them out in my bike-light system next winter.

Wayne, I think you're right that the fact that it's Exxon is an even bigger concern. I've been hopping mad since I learned of the Chevron/Cobasys situation a while back, and I haven't calmed down yet. I think the movie Who Killed The Electric Car? didn't come down anywhere near hard enough on these guys. They are the culprit. If it weren't for Cobasys' effective refusal to license large format NiMH batteries, those of us who want to could all be driving EVs today. The better EVs of the late 90s (RAV4, Impact) used the same NiMH format and it worked great. It was Cobasys yanking the rug out that prevented additional models from hitting the marketplace. With fuel above $3/gal and global Prius sales approaching a million units, I am 100% certain that EVs could be profitable for automakers today if they had access to NiMH for anything larger than the 2-3 kWh sizes used in hybrids.

To me this is an issue of national and global security. A patent is just a piece of property, one that Chevron/Cobasys bought from a willing seller. Since Cobasys is clearly not a willing seller, I think the federal government should simply use its power of Eminent Domain and seize the patent, just as it did to people's homes when we built the Interstate Highway system. We would of course compensate them for fair market value -- which should only be a few billion dollars to cover their expected royalties (at the current, EV-less level) from now until 2014.

We've pledged to spend nearly as much funding on research on biofuels, hydrogen and other boondoggles, so why not do it on something that will get real EVs in consumers' hands within a couple of years? Heck, hobbyists and specialty shops would be churning out conversions within 2-3 months of large format NiMH batteries becoming available, which itself should take a year or less. We could have REAL EVs in the same timeframe that it will take GM to deliver the Volt and Toyota to deliver a Li based Prius.

WriConsult, well said but I have big concerns about having the government "seize" anything. Yes, this company is causing us a lot of pain right now but I've seen enough missteps by the government to seriously doubt that things would go the way I would like them to after that particular Pandora's box was opened.

I could be wrong, but the thought of "Big Brother" seizing technology for "the good" of society really scares me.

Well, remember that patents are not an real, innate property right, but one specifically granted by We The People. They are issued by the federal government, and we retain the right to decide who gets patent rights and when. Of course we shouldn't be capricious about it (lest we discourage invention) but that doesn't mean the patent holder's viewpoint should always prevail. There is always a balance to be struck between the encouragement of invention and the inherent evil of monopoly power that we grant through the issuance patents.

I should also point out that I'm not talking about the government subsequently taking ownership of the patent for its own use. We're talking about putting it into the public domain for all to use. Essentially expiring the patent today instead of waiting until 2014 as currently planned.

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. That ideas should freely spread from one to another over the globe, for the moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature, when she made them, like fire, expansible over all space, without lessening their density in any point, and like the air in which we breathe, move, and have our physical being, incapable of confinement or exclusive appropriation. Inventions then cannot, in nature, be a subject of property. Society may give an exclusive right to the profits arising from them, as an encouragement to men to pursue ideas which may produce utility, but this may or may not be done, according to the will and convenience of the society, without claim or complaint from anybody...

I get the sense that Japanese battery companies will not be as limited as American battery companies are by the oil industry. The Japanese may get a significant jump on affordable Li-Ion technology if the U.S. oil industry continues to meddle with U.S. developed batteries.