http://www.greencarcongress.com/2007/04/zenn_motor_comp.html

ZENN Motor Company Makes Equity Investment in EEStor
30 April 2007

Feel Good Cars Corporation, operating as ZENN Motor Company, has made a
US$2.5 million equity investment in Austin-based energy storage developer,
EEStor. The negotiated investment terms also grant ZENN an additional
investment option of up to US $5 million on the same terms, following EEStor's
successful completion of its next major milestone: permittivity testing.

EEStor is developing a new high-power-density ceramic ultracapacitor (the
Energy Storage Unit-EESU). EEstor has publicly claimed a permittivity
figure-a measurement of the ability of a material to store an electric
charge-of 18,500 or more.  The required permittivity levels are specified in
detail in the existing Technology Agreement between ZENN Motor Company and
EEStor.

We are very pleased to strengthen and deepen our strategic relationship with
EEStor through this investment. Becoming a shareholder in EEStor at this
pivotal point in their development represents an exciting opportunity for
ZENN shareholders to benefit from participation in the broader market
applications that EEStor will potentially develop for its technology, in
addition to our exclusive automotive applications.

-Ian Clifford, CEO of ZENN Motor Company

Following this initial investment of US$2.5 million, ZENN Motor Company will
own approximately 3.8% of the equity of EEStor.

Under its Technology Agreement with EEStor, ZENN holds certain worldwide
exclusive licenses for EEStor's storage units for new small and medium-sized
low-speed and highway-capable vehicles (up to 1,400 kg curb weight). ZENN
also holds worldwide exclusive rights for EEStor units for the conversion of
any used internal combustion passenger vehicle to electric drive.

ZENN Motor Company currently produces and sells the ZENN, a fully-electric
low speed vehicle (LSV). The potential commercialization of EEStor's EESU in
future ZENN vehicles will allow them to go as far and as fast as a
traditional car at a fraction of the cost, according to the company.

Hey Remy,
I know this is not a "new" story, but I wondered if
you knew more about it.
http://mailman.mcmaster.ca/mailman/private/cdn-nucl-l/0509/msg00011.html

A story of lithium polymer thin film battery gone bad.

Peter
--- Remy Chevalier <remyc@...> wrote:

> From:
>
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/04/29/new-nanotechnology-enables-increased-bat\
tery-energy-density
>
> New nanotechnology enables increased battery energy
> density
> Posted Apr 29th 2007 by Sam Abuelsamid
>
> Nano-materials seem to be one of the keys to
> improving the capability of batteries to absorb,
> store and discharge energy. AltairNano and A123
> systems are both using the tiny particles in the
> construction of electrodes for their batteries.
>
> Another newcomer is now following the same path.
> Nanoexa has a subsidiary in South Korea called
> Decktron that is making lithium ion batteries. The
> company is claiming that Nanoexa's new
> nanocrystalline material that is being used to
> construct the positive battery electrodes allows
> them to achieve an energy density of 3kW/kg. If
> Decktron can achieve this level of energy density
> and match some of the longevity claims of AltairNano
> it could be a real breakthrough.
>
> [Source: RF Design]
>
> Corporate Headquarters:
> 863 Mitten Rd.
> Suite 102
> Burlingame, CA 94010
> Tel: 650-204-6000
> Fax: 650-204-6007
> E-mail: info@ nanoexa.com
> Reader Comments
> 1. There is no word about _energy_-density (kWh/kg),
> only about power-density (kW/kg) !
>
> Rising the amount of kWh/kg to increase the range is
> even more important as power, which is high enough
> in todays' batteries.
>
>
> Posted at 3:21PM on Apr 29th 2007 by Tachy
>
> 2. Doesn't make sense. . . 3 kW/kg isn't a measure
> of energy density, it's a measure of power density
> -- impressive, but something that's not a big
> problem for existing li-ion cells. Maybe they meant
> 3 kW-hr/kg? But if that were so, it would be an
> unbelievable figure, which I think is far beyond the
> theoretical limits for li-ion chemistry.
>
>
> Posted at 3:33PM on Apr 29th 2007 by Tony Belding
>
> 3. @tony:
>
> Standard LiIon-cells as in the Tesla Roadster have
> 0,12 kWh/kg, the altairnano/A123Systems-LiIon-Cells
> have 0,10 kWh/kg.
>
>
> Posted at 5:27PM on Apr 29th 2007 by Tachy
>
> 4. Here is some more information I found about
> Nanoexa's batteries.
>
> "Nanoexa projects that its batteries will provide
> 50% more power density (i.e., greater acceleration
> and torque)and 50% higher energy density (i.e.,
> longer time between charges) than existing Li-ion
> cells"
>
http://www.nanoexa.com/pdf/Power_Electronics_Technology.pdf
>
> Posted at 6:30PM on Apr 29th 2007 by Matt
>
> 5. Good find Matt. A 50% increase in energy density
> would be pretty damn impressive. Sounds like an
> electric midsize sedan with a 350 mile range is now
> realistic.
>
> Posted at 7:07PM on Apr 29th 2007 by frank78
>
> 6. Yet another competing company in the battery tech
> field can't possibly hurt. However, the referenced
> materials in the article are a bit long on hype and
> short on usable information.
>
> There was one real concrete item: The proposed
> introduction of a consumer electronics format
> battery in less than two months. Assuming they
> actually deliver something close to the predicted
> time, we'll actually get a chance to see how well it
> does in the Real World. I'll be watching for it. If
> I can get one of their batteries for my laptop, I
> might even buy one myself.
>
> Posted at 2:12PM on Apr 30th 2007 by Howard Lee
> Harkness
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

Hey Peter

I think I commented on the technology that they created several
years ago - the problem was that the battery was well suited for low
power usage but not powerful enough for Electric Vehicle use and I
was surprised that no one in the company had figured that out. Even
conventional 6 watt output Lithium cells from laptops when combined
in parallel with sufficient capacity to power a vehicle a useful
distance will result in plenty of power to make it perform very
well. You just need enough capacity (Amp Hours) and you will end up
with plenty of Amps. By connecting 100 cells in parallel to make a
200amphour (2ah per cell) you can draw 400 amps (4 amps continuous
per cell) from the battery. The use of the new A123 cells is not
really necessary and a lot more expensive than conventional cells
EXCEPT for their greater calendar life and rapid charging if enough
grid power is available to rapid charge.

Jan


--- In BMBB@yahoogroups.com, Peter Oppewall <evtransportal@...>
wrote:
>
> Hey Remy,
> I know this is not a "new" story, but I wondered if
> you knew more about it.
> http://mailman.mcmaster.ca/mailman/private/cdn-nucl-
l/0509/msg00011.html
>
> A story of lithium polymer thin film battery gone bad.
>
> Peter
> --- Remy Chevalier <remyc@...> wrote:
>
> > From:
> >
> http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/04/29/new-nanotechnology-enables-
increased-battery-energy-density
> >
> > New nanotechnology enables increased battery energy
> > density
> > Posted Apr 29th 2007 by Sam Abuelsamid
> >
> > Nano-materials seem to be one of the keys to
> > improving the capability of batteries to absorb,
> > store and discharge energy. AltairNano and A123
> > systems are both using the tiny particles in the
> > construction of electrodes for their batteries.
> >
> > Another newcomer is now following the same path.
> > Nanoexa has a subsidiary in South Korea called
> > Decktron that is making lithium ion batteries. The
> > company is claiming that Nanoexa's new
> > nanocrystalline material that is being used to
> > construct the positive battery electrodes allows
> > them to achieve an energy density of 3kW/kg. If
> > Decktron can achieve this level of energy density
> > and match some of the longevity claims of AltairNano
> > it could be a real breakthrough.
> >
> > [Source: RF Design]
> >
> > Corporate Headquarters:
> > 863 Mitten Rd.
> > Suite 102
> > Burlingame, CA 94010
> > Tel: 650-204-6000
> > Fax: 650-204-6007
> > E-mail: info@ nanoexa.com
> > Reader Comments
> > 1. There is no word about _energy_-density (kWh/kg),
> > only about power-density (kW/kg) !
> >
> > Rising the amount of kWh/kg to increase the range is
> > even more important as power, which is high enough
> > in todays' batteries.
> >
> >
> > Posted at 3:21PM on Apr 29th 2007 by Tachy
> >
> > 2. Doesn't make sense. . . 3 kW/kg isn't a measure
> > of energy density, it's a measure of power density
> > -- impressive, but something that's not a big
> > problem for existing li-ion cells. Maybe they meant
> > 3 kW-hr/kg? But if that were so, it would be an
> > unbelievable figure, which I think is far beyond the
> > theoretical limits for li-ion chemistry.
> >
> >
> > Posted at 3:33PM on Apr 29th 2007 by Tony Belding
> >
> > 3. @tony:
> >
> > Standard LiIon-cells as in the Tesla Roadster have
> > 0,12 kWh/kg, the altairnano/A123Systems-LiIon-Cells
> > have 0,10 kWh/kg.
> >
> >
> > Posted at 5:27PM on Apr 29th 2007 by Tachy
> >
> > 4. Here is some more information I found about
> > Nanoexa's batteries.
> >
> > "Nanoexa projects that its batteries will provide
> > 50% more power density (i.e., greater acceleration
> > and torque)and 50% higher energy density (i.e.,
> > longer time between charges) than existing Li-ion
> > cells"
> >
> http://www.nanoexa.com/pdf/Power_Electronics_Technology.pdf
> >
> > Posted at 6:30PM on Apr 29th 2007 by Matt
> >
> > 5. Good find Matt. A 50% increase in energy density
> > would be pretty damn impressive. Sounds like an
> > electric midsize sedan with a 350 mile range is now
> > realistic.
> >
> > Posted at 7:07PM on Apr 29th 2007 by frank78
> >
> > 6. Yet another competing company in the battery tech
> > field can't possibly hurt. However, the referenced
> > materials in the article are a bit long on hype and
> > short on usable information.
> >
> > There was one real concrete item: The proposed
> > introduction of a consumer electronics format
> > battery in less than two months. Assuming they
> > actually deliver something close to the predicted
> > time, we'll actually get a chance to see how well it
> > does in the Real World. I'll be watching for it. If
> > I can get one of their batteries for my laptop, I
> > might even buy one myself.
> >
> > Posted at 2:12PM on Apr 30th 2007 by Howard Lee
> > Harkness
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>

http://www.techbriefs.com/content/view/1469/34/
Lithium Dinitramide as an Additive in Lithium Power
Cells. The article says dinitramide compounds were
known as rocket fuel oxydizers, that lithium
dinitramide, as an inorganic additive, can improve
performance of primary or secondary batteries with
metallic lithium or lithium alloy anodes.
-brian



________________________________________________________________________________\
____
Finding fabulous fares is fun.
Let Yahoo! FareChase search your favorite travel sites to find flight and hotel
bargains.
http://farechase.yahoo.com/promo-generic-14795097

Peter Oppewall
evtransportal@...> wrote:

> Hey Remy,
> I know this is not a "new" story, but I wondered if
> you knew more about it.
> http://mailman.mcmaster.ca/mailman/private/cdn-nucl-
l/0509/msg00011.html
> A story of lithium polymer thin film battery gone bad.
> Peter

[[ What did not work then, in 2005, such as Voltaflex for example,
is reminescent to me of why the EV1 didn't work either... all too
fishy... Dr. Donald Sadoway's solid-state li-ion chemistry is sound,
has solved most, if not all these problems... now once Electrifying
Times gets its EV pin-up calendar back from the transparent, and
temporary, take-over attempt by Jon Mack and Marco Berrios... we
might actually stand a chance of seeing these new chemistries into
successful mass production. RemyC ]]

http://www.canada.com/montreal/montrealgazette/news/story.html?
id=9d9c33fd-62b6-46d5-8b5f-b6a879261845

Hydro-Quebec's battery goes dead

The provincial utility and international partners put hundreds of
millions of dollars into a lithium power pack for vehicles and
telecommunications systems. Now, the car dream has short-circuited
and 85 are out of work

WILLIAM MARSDEN

The Gazette, Saturday, September 03, 2005


It would be the breakthrough of the new century: a lightweight, long-
lasting, safe battery to power the cars of the future.

It would make the world's 700 million gas-guzzling, ozone-destroying
automobiles obsolete.

And it would propel its designer, Hydro-Quebec - already North
America's largest and most innovative utility - to new heights as a
world leader in electric car technology.

If only it worked.

Hydro-Quebec and a couple of international partners had put 20 years
and hundreds of millions of dollars into researching and developing
its lithium battery with two markets in mind: The battery could
serve as a backup power source to the world's telecommunications
systems and as a power pack for electric vehicles.

As the 1990s drew to a close, Hydro-Quebec felt the project was
ready to take a giant step forward, and it hired a Belgian
automobile specialist named Tadek Borys. Fears of global warming
were creating heightened interest in electric cars, and that market
was looking particularly promising.

So new money was invested. New partners were found. Tests were
conducted, reports were written, projections were made. And a state-
of-the-art plant was built in Boucherville.

Five years later, in late 2004, Hydro-Quebec got the kind of shock
it did not want from this battery: It didn't work in cars. And it
probably never would.

Now, 85 people have lost their jobs and the provincial police have
been called in to sort out allegations of wrongdoing.

Mystery surrounds the entire costly affair. Neither the police nor
Hydro-Quebec will comment on the substance of the allegations.

According to one source in Hydro-Quebec, however, it was more a
matter of incompetence than wrongdoing. Innovation is always a risky
business.

But in this case, the company failed to impose the kind of checks
and balances that would assure no one could run wild in fantasyland
with Quebecers' money.

"They bought into a marketing story and never checked it out," the
source said. "That's not criminal. That's just stupid."

SSS

The story of the vehicle battery that went dead is partly a familiar
tale about starry-eyed top executives buying into a dream world.

But it's also about the tricky job of developing environmentally
friendly technology for the mass market. What works in the lab
doesn't necessarily work on the street. And the mere fact that a new
technology is good for the environment doesn't mean it will sell.

On this project, Hydro-Quebec discovered what its new executive now
in charge of this project, John Haddock, knows as a general
truth: "The average consumer will not pay for environmentally
friendly."

Hydro-Quebec began developing its revolutionary power source in the
1980s with a Japanese company and the newly founded U.S. Automotive
Battery Consortium. They hoped for a breakthrough technology that
would far outperform clunky, often unreliable and oh-so-heavy lead-
acid batteries.

Twenty years of research produced a prototype that appeared to fit
the bill - the Lithium-Metal-Polymer (LMP) battery, made of
lightweight lithium plates sealed together like a wafer. The LMP
battery was safer (no liquid or acid), one-third the size, one-fifth
the weight and had two to four times the life of an equivalent lead-
acid battery.

Field tests showed that it performed well as an auxiliary power
source for telecommunications installations. This means that when
the electrical grid failed, the LMP battery could be relied on in
any weather to keep the telephone alive. Just supplying these
batteries for the North American market is a potential $1.7-billion
business, it was claimed.

Hydro-Quebec had brought in Borys to work with the U.S. consortium
on a variation of the battery. Borys's experience was in the
automotive field, working in Belgium for Canadian auto-parts giant
Magna.

In 1999, Hydro-Quebec's partners - which included the giant 3M
Corp. - pulled out, but Hydro-Quebec decided to go it alone. It
created a startup company called Avestor and made Borys the
president.

Borys arranged to have the battery installed in Ford's
prototype "THINKcity" electric vehicle to see how it worked.

And according to a 2001 report written by five of Avestor's
technicians, the road tests proved that the "Avestor battery is a
fully functional battery technology for electric vehicles."

In other words, the battery worked well. The company said it powered
the car up to 88 kilometres per hour, with a range of 101 kilometres
before it needed recharging.

And this was an off-the-shelf version of the battery. A properly
modified battery with the latest technology would give even better
results, Avestor claimed.

There was one big problem: The battery alone was the price of an
average car.

Still, Avestor believed that this problem could be overcome.

There was a setback when Ford shut down the Think program in 2001 as
the "thinkers started thinking of other things," Ford spokesperson
Debbie Knight said. She said the car was too expensive and needed a
special plug and socket for recharging.

But prospects, so far as Avestor was concerned, continued to look
good. In fact, they looked so good that in 2001 U.S. energy and
chemical giant Kerr-McGee Corp. of Oklahoma bought a 50-per-cent
interest in Avestor and since then has invested an additional $285
million. During the same period, Hydro-Quebec invested another $120
million.

Borys pushed ahead.

He signed a contract with a French electric car consortium called
SVE (Societe de vehicules electriques), whose main shareholders are
the French military aircraft company Dassault and autoparts maker
Groupe Henri Heuliez. In a project sponsored by the French
government, SVE's goal was to produce a fleet of electric vehicles
for the European market. The vehicles would be marketed under the
brand name Cleanova.

In 2002, Avestor opened the world's first LMP battery manufacturing
plant, locating it in Boucherville. Avestor had registered about 70
patents on the battery and was touting it as a "revolutionary"
technology that was "poised to change the marketplace" for
telecommunications and electric vehicles.

To prepare the foundations of this marketplace revolution, in
February 2004 Borys announced Avestor had Hydro-Quebec approval to
invest 240 million euros ($353 million) to build a second battery
plant - this one in Chatellerault, France, near Poitiers - creating
500 to 600 jobs.

"The project will represent the first step in Avestor's
international strategy," the company's confident statement
read. "Avestor's LMP battery represents a major worldwide
breakthrough in the field of batteries for stationary and motorized
applications."

Hydro-Quebec triumphantly declared that "yesterday's dream is
becoming today's reality." Hydro president Andre Caille said the
utility "showed just how creative and daring it is by offering
automobile manufacturers technology adapted to the needs of the
electric vehicle market, and I am very proud of this success."

The French-Quebec consortium predicted that by 2006 it would
manufacture 10,000 electric vehicles in France, rising to 40,000 by
2010. French partners Serge Dassault and Gerard Queveau said in a
joint statement that with Hydro-Quebec's technology, "We are very
confident we will succeed in implementing an electric vehicle in
Europe."

The car would be powered by the Avestor battery and driven by
another product developed by Hydro-Quebec: the TM4 motor-generator
engine, which is an electrical generator with a backup combustion
engine.

Avestor claimed that with its lighter, safer and more efficient
battery and power generator, the new electric car would cost only
about $25,000, about the same as an average family sedan.

The momentum seemed unstoppable. So when the French consortium
suddenly pulled out of the deal in September 2004, claiming the
Avestor battery didn't work, it was a shocking jolt to Hydro-
Quebec's electric dreams.

The French consortium gave no further details on its decision. It
simply stated that it had chosen another battery, produced by the
French company Saft - a traditional lithium ion battery that was
already used in some electric vehicles.

According to a source, it was then that Hydro-Quebec began to wonder
if it had been misled about the promise of the LMP battery for
electric vehicle use. It called in the police.

With the collapse of a European market for this project, Avestor
quietly laid off 85 workers and Borys left the company. Hydro-Quebec
said his contract simply was not renewed. Otherwise, Hydro-Quebec
has clammed up. It's clear that the electric vehicle battery market
is no longer on the company's agenda.

How its dream turned to dust so quickly, however, is still clouded
in mystery. Why as of last year was Hydro-Quebec ready to build a
manufacturing plant in France and the next minute the project was
killed and the police were called in?

Marc-Brian Chamberlain, Hydro-Quebec's communications director, said
Avestor suddenly realized that its battery did not work in electric
vehicles.

"At the beginning of the electric vehicle project, Avestor was the
chosen battery and TM4 was the chosen engine. And Avestor is no
longer the chosen battery, but TM4 is still the chosen engine."

Chamberlain said the battery simply "is not adapted for electric
vehicles."

One justice department source said Avestor suddenly discovered that
the project made no financial sense.

In fact, the source said, several employees had warned Avestor about
the cost problems but nobody wanted to listen, given the prospect of
entering the sexy electric-vehicle market.

Chamberlain said he couldn't comment on what had abruptly changed
Avestor's view on the battery for electric vehicles or why a file
was given to the Surete du Quebec.

"We did an internal audit with Kerr-McGee and we decided to give the
file to the SQ. So since then, there is a new management. I can't
talk about it because now the SQ has the inquiry in hand."

John Christiansen, spokesperson for Kerr-McGee, said the company
advised Avestor to talk to the police.

"We are committed to legal compliance and high ethical standards,
and as a joint venture we encouraged Avestor to turn this matter
over to authorities and offer their full cooperation."

Christiansen refused to comment any further.

While the electric-vehicle dream is dead for Avestor, however, the
LMP battery is not. The company is betting that its original target
market, the telecommunications industry, will be its saviour.

Kerr-McGee continues to participate in that project, and those
batteries are being produced at the Boucherville plant.

"We're taking the technology to the market that demands it the most,
and the one that demands it the most is telecommunications," said
Haddock, who was brought in as Avestor president in June.

Price is still a problem. The LMP battery costs at least $2,000 a
unit. A traditional lead-acid battery costs only $400 to $500. But
because the LMP battery lasts about four times as long, is not
sensitive to extreme temperatures and is maintenance-free, Haddock
prays that the telecom industry will see the wisdom in paying the
high initial price of an LMP battery.

"During the life of that lead-acid battery, you would have to spend
that $400 to $500 two to four times. You would have to have a
maintenance organization to go out and maintain it. ... The
economics are turning more and more to the Lithium Metal Polymer
battery."

Or so he hopes.

Recent signs are good, Haddock said. He wouldn't give figures, but
he said this year the company expects to sell "in the low tens of
thousands" of batteries.

Avestor is a private company and won't reveal the cost structure of
its product. Still, it's clear it would have to sell many millions
of units before Hydro-Quebec and Kerr-McGee can recover their half-
billion-dollar capital investments.

That could take decades. And there's always the danger that the
revolutionary LMP battery could be eclipsed by better technology.

It's both the challenge and the risk of innovation.

wmarsden@ thegazette.canwest.com

Greetings Everybody,

My interests are Do-it-yourself (DIY), Building Projects, and
anything where I'll get my hands dirty but not burned.  Lately, my
attention is being diverted by EVs.  A lot of sites are offering DIY
conversion kits of turning ICEs into EVs.  Very good solutions
indeed for DIYers, but not for people like me who is living in the
fareast third worlds, where Money Transfers and Freightings are
quite difficult.  Therefore, I am forced to think a lot of
alternatives. 'Get inventive and get resourceful.

The soul of EVs is the Electric Motor.  Sites have offered high
powered tiny packaged motors, and guess again... I don't have access
to these cute little toys.  So I am thinking of using Self Starter
Motors of large Diesel Pick-ups for my EV project.  We have all
sorts of vehicle in our country, and definitely these type of motor
is quite available from Automotive Parts stores.  The problem is I
am not an expert on electric motors, so I am not sure about Self
Starter motors for use on EVs.  By the way, I am trying to build an
electric sports bike, similar to Maxdon GPR1.

Is there somebody out there, who could confirm my idea of using Self
Starter motor for my Electric Bike project.  What are the pros and
cons of this?

Many thanks in advance.

Generally the starter motor of any vehicle is intended for short
term use and are usually very inefficient for EV use were variable
power levels and rpm variations are needed. Cooling and bearings are
the first of many problems. The ideal motor that I have used for a
Bike size EV has been the MG13 from eCycle with their mating
controller. That motor controller package is no longer in production
and has/is being replaced with the newer CMG motors which offer much
higher power levels and much neater packaging at a somewhat higher
price. They also have in development limited production a very small
efficient 400-600 amp 36 volt controller with regen which is factory
configurable and eventually user configurable. Although the price of
these components are expensive they are not that high in price for
the efficiency that they provide and that efficiency will pay you
back in cooler, more reliable operation and greater range on your
battery energy.

Check out the photos section for examples of these products and
their web site http:\\www.eCycle.com

Jan
BMBB Moderator

--- In BMBB@yahoogroups.com, "le_chevalier_azul" <jensano@...> wrote:
>
> Greetings Everybody,
>
> My interests are Do-it-yourself (DIY), Building Projects, and
> anything where I'll get my hands dirty but not burned.  Lately, my
> attention is being diverted by EVs.  A lot of sites are offering
DIY
> conversion kits of turning ICEs into EVs.  Very good solutions
> indeed for DIYers, but not for people like me who is living in the
> fareast third worlds, where Money Transfers and Freightings are
> quite difficult.  Therefore, I am forced to think a lot of
> alternatives. 'Get inventive and get resourceful.
>
> The soul of EVs is the Electric Motor.  Sites have offered high
> powered tiny packaged motors, and guess again... I don't have
access
> to these cute little toys.  So I am thinking of using Self Starter
> Motors of large Diesel Pick-ups for my EV project.  We have all
> sorts of vehicle in our country, and definitely these type of
motor
> is quite available from Automotive Parts stores.  The problem is I
> am not an expert on electric motors, so I am not sure about Self
> Starter motors for use on EVs.  By the way, I am trying to build
an
> electric sports bike, similar to Maxdon GPR1.
>
> Is there somebody out there, who could confirm my idea of using
Self
> Starter motor for my Electric Bike project.  What are the pros and
> cons of this?
>
> Many thanks in advance.
>

Many thanks for the info, Sir Jan

Actually, that's a total mystery to me.  It's not really my idea to
use a Car Starter as the main motor for my Electric Bike, I saw a
three wheeler in our city using it.  And that's actually the reason,
why I made this inquiry 'coz I had the same reaction at first: "A Car
Starter... duh??? Is that reliable".  It intrigued me too much that,
I did some research already. But so far all I got are, modern car
self starter motors are DC series-wound or DC Permanent Magnet. I'd
prefer perm. mags, but perms are comall I've seen available so far
are series-wound.  Problems with series wound are in the case of
failure in the drive chain, drive belt, or drive shaft, the series-
wound motor would go suicidal... series wound should always have a
load. you definitely can't run it while on center stand.

Well, like I said I'm not an expert on the subject. I'm still on the
gathering data part, that's why I'm still going around asking for
confirmations from those who got good and solid knowledge about this
type of motor.

--- In BMBB@yahoogroups.com, "Jan" <lookinnwpt@...> wrote:
>
> Generally the starter motor of any vehicle is intended for short
> term use and are usually very inefficient for EV use were variable
> power levels and rpm variations are needed. Cooling and bearings
are
> the first of many problems. The ideal motor that I have used for a
> Bike size EV has been the MG13 from eCycle with their mating
> controller. That motor controller package is no longer in
production
> and has/is being replaced with the newer CMG motors which offer
much
> higher power levels and much neater packaging at a somewhat higher
> price. They also have in development limited production a very
small
> efficient 400-600 amp 36 volt controller with regen which is
factory
> configurable and eventually user configurable. Although the price
of
> these components are expensive they are not that high in price for
> the efficiency that they provide and that efficiency will pay you
> back in cooler, more reliable operation and greater range on your
> battery energy.
>
> Check out the photos section for examples of these products and
> their web site http:\\www.eCycle.com
>
> Jan
> BMBB Moderator
>
> --- In BMBB@yahoogroups.com, "le_chevalier_azul" <jensano@> wrote:
> >
> > Greetings Everybody,
> >
> > My interests are Do-it-yourself (DIY), Building Projects, and
> > anything where I'll get my hands dirty but not burned.  Lately,
my
> > attention is being diverted by EVs.  A lot of sites are offering
> DIY
> > conversion kits of turning ICEs into EVs.  Very good solutions
> > indeed for DIYers, but not for people like me who is living in
the
> > fareast third worlds, where Money Transfers and Freightings are
> > quite difficult.  Therefore, I am forced to think a lot of
> > alternatives. 'Get inventive and get resourceful.
> >
> > The soul of EVs is the Electric Motor.  Sites have offered high
> > powered tiny packaged motors, and guess again... I don't have
> access
> > to these cute little toys.  So I am thinking of using Self
Starter
> > Motors of large Diesel Pick-ups for my EV project.  We have all
> > sorts of vehicle in our country, and definitely these type of
> motor
> > is quite available from Automotive Parts stores.  The problem is
I
> > am not an expert on electric motors, so I am not sure about Self
> > Starter motors for use on EVs.  By the way, I am trying to build
> an
> > electric sports bike, similar to Maxdon GPR1.
> >
> > Is there somebody out there, who could confirm my idea of using
> Self
> > Starter motor for my Electric Bike project.  What are the pros
and
> > cons of this?
> >
> > Many thanks in advance.
> >
>

The other thing you want to avoid are brushes which these motors
have because they do eventually wear out and are a source of energy
loss and heat plus require air cooling which in a moving vehicle can
introduce contamination from the road.

Jan
BMBB Moderator

--- In BMBB@yahoogroups.com, "le_chevalier_azul" <jensano@...> wrote:
>
> Many thanks for the info, Sir Jan
>
> Actually, that's a total mystery to me.  It's not really my idea
to
> use a Car Starter as the main motor for my Electric Bike, I saw a
> three wheeler in our city using it.  And that's actually the
reason,
> why I made this inquiry 'coz I had the same reaction at first: "A
Car
> Starter... duh??? Is that reliable".  It intrigued me too much
that,
> I did some research already. But so far all I got are, modern car
> self starter motors are DC series-wound or DC Permanent Magnet.
I'd
> prefer perm. mags, but perms are comall I've seen available so far
> are series-wound.  Problems with series wound are in the case of
> failure in the drive chain, drive belt, or drive shaft, the series-
> wound motor would go suicidal... series wound should always have a
> load. you definitely can't run it while on center stand.
>
> Well, like I said I'm not an expert on the subject. I'm still on
the
> gathering data part, that's why I'm still going around asking for
> confirmations from those who got good and solid knowledge about
this
> type of motor.
>

http://www.pjstar.com/stories/051907/TRI_BD8N98V1.004.php

City, county look to woo Firefly
Governments may offer millions in aid for expansion to coax battery firm to
stay in area

Saturday, May 19, 2007

By Steve Tarter Of the Journal Star

PEORIA - The city of Peoria and Peoria County are teaming up to open a
charge account.

The two local governments have partnered on a plan to provide support for
Firefly Energy Inc., allowing the high-tech battery firm to expand
operations in Peoria.

State Rep. David Leitch, R-Peoria, equated the aid package with state
support provided for Keystone Consolidated Industries to keep the company's
steel plant operating in Bartonville. Leitch was among a group of civic
leaders to provide details of the plan before the Journal Star editorial
board Friday.

"We weren't about to let Keystone go down on our watch five years ago. So it
is we don't want Firefly to leave town," Leitch said.

Firefly, a startup company launched in 2003 using technology developed by
Caterpillar Inc., seeks to produce a lead-acid battery using graphite foam.
The lighter, more powerful battery has brought multimillion-dollar contracts
from the U.S. Army and Swedish power-product giant Husqvarna.

Under the proposal, National City Bank would provide Firefly with a
five-year loan for $6 million - $4 million for equipment and $2 million for
working capital.

The loan would be first secured by the purchased equipment in the event of
default. The county also has pledged $1 million in a county reserve fund and
$2.3 million in sales tax revenues. The city would guarantee the loan with a
pledge of $3.3 million in utility tax revenues.

The city and county also would receive stock options in Firefly for their
investment. "If we're reasonably successful, those shares could be worth as
much as $5 million," said Firefly's co-founder and CEO, Ed Williams.

The Peoria City Council will vote on the issue Tuesday, said Peoria Mayor
Jim Ardis, who supports the plan. "We're putting action behind words when we
have the opportunity to keep the next level of technology here in town," he
said.

The matter goes before the finance and tax committees of the Peoria County
Board on May 31 with a vote by the full board in June, said County Board
chairman Bill Prather, who called the proposal a good example of how
governments can work together.

If the deal is approved, Firefly would set up offices at 6533 N. Galena
Road, formerly the site of Foster & Gallagher Co., said Williams. Firefly
has been operating at offices in Illinois Central College's North Campus,
5407 N. University St.

"Even though we've raised $20 million in equity, we're not cash-flow
positive. We need a little bit of help," he said.

The loan provides the company with the opportunity to stay - and grow - in
Peoria, said Williams, anticipating that Firefly would grow from 30 to 65
employees over the next two to three years.

Other cities - and countries - have pursued Firefly with "very aggressive"
offers, he said. "They're laying some incredible situations at our feet,"
said Williams.

Also part of the rare public-private partnership is G&D Integrated, a Morton
firm that looks to build the core components for the advanced-technology
batteries that would then be assembled at battery plants in Missouri and
Ohio.

Joseph O'Neill, G&D president, said his firm will make an $8 million
investment because "his company could change the world of fuel cell
technology and (Williams) wasn't getting cooperation from anyone."

Noting that Firefly is no "one-hit wonder," Williams said that the firm also
holds 15 other patent applications relating to battery power that would be
developed over the next seven to eight years.

Calling Firefly "the poster child of Peoria NEXT," National City regional
president Doug Stewart said that technology was not in short supply in
Peoria. "Ideas are not our problem. The issue is management, first, and
capital, second. If we're going to hit our first home run, Firefly is the
closest thing we've got," he said.

Steve Tarter can be reached at 686-3260 or starter@ pjstar.com

Spread invite far and wide...

EnvironmentalMotors dealership
Grand Opening
Tuesday 4 p.m.
134 South Glendale Avenue
Los Angeles

Zap, Zenn, Smart + many more EVs...

rsvp@ environmentalmotors.com

For more details, read here:
http://www.electrifyingtimes.com/environmentalmotors/environmentalmotors.html

Send to all your friends in L.A.

RemyC.

ºººº ºººº ºººº ºººº ºººº
Remy Chevalier
Environmental Library Fund
25 Newtown Turnpike
Weston, CT 06883
203-227-2065
http://www.remyc.com

Spread invite far and wide...

EnvironmentalMotors dealership
Grand Opening
Tuesday 4 p.m.
134 South Glendale Avenue
Los Angeles

Zap, Zenn, Smart + many more EVs...

rsvp@ environmentalmotors.com

For more details, read here:
http://www.electrifyingtimes.com/environmentalmotors/environmentalmotors.html

Send to all your friends in L.A.

RemyC.

ºººº ºººº ºººº ºººº ºººº
Remy Chevalier
Environmental Library Fund
25 Newtown Turnpike
Weston, CT 06883
203-227-2065
http://www.remyc.com

Could that have been a starter-generator, and not a
typical car starter? You might solve the mystery if
you could find out precisely what make & model starter
was used & how it might have been modified.

Google search for solar-generator india:
http://tinyurl.com/2ed2hz
-brian
--- le_chevalier_azul <jensano@...> wrote:

> Many thanks for the info, Sir Jan
>
> Actually, that's a total mystery to me.  It's not
> really my idea to
> use a Car Starter as the main motor for my Electric
> Bike, I saw a
> three wheeler in our city using it.  And that's
> actually the reason,
> why I made this inquiry 'coz I had the same reaction
> at first: "A Car
> Starter... duh??? Is that reliable".
<snip>




________________________________________________________________________________\
____
Looking for earth-friendly autos?
Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center.
http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/

Toaster66

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3577111611517376908

 

I hope you enjoy it...

 

It's not perfect... we're a little discouraged because the digital quality of the tapes totally degraded, so it will never be a film or a dvd... but hopefully the message will get out faster this way.

 

Ken Sasaki and the Tiki Boys gave us the right to use their music, which really gives this project the flavor it needed to make it real... I can't thank Ken enough, so if you do write or blog about this, please mention his band.

 

Thanks!

 

RemyC
ET webed

http://www.electrifyingtimes.com

Tesla Energy Group, a New Division of Tesla Motors, Signs Development and Supply Agreement Worth $43 Million With Think of Norway

SAN CARLOS, CA -- (MARKET WIRE) -- May 22, 2007 -- Tesla Energy Group, a newly formed division of Tesla Motors, recently signed an agreement to supply Think Global with lithium-ion battery packs for their line of "TH!NK city" electric cars. The supply agreement covers the development and delivery of battery packs starting in December 2007 and continuing through 2008. The supply agreement represents up to $43 million in revenues, of which approximately $3 million is expected to be realized in 2007 with the remainder in 2008.

(Click here for details)
Martin Eberhard, Tesla CEO (left) and Jan-Olaf Willums,
Think CEO (right) with Tesla's Energy Storage System (ESS)
and the Tesla Roadster.

Tesla Energy Group was formed in December of 2006 to develop and market custom designed battery packs for customers in a wide range of industries, utilizing Tesla's patent pending technology for the development of high-power, high-capacity battery packs with superior performance and safety characteristics. Tesla Motors created Tesla Energy Group in response to demand from outside companies for advanced lithium-ion battery pack technology for automotive and other industrial use.

"The establishment of the Tesla Energy Group adds a significant new dimension to the business of Tesla Motors," said Martin Eberhard, CEO of Tesla Motors. "Tesla Energy Group will provide additional sources of operating income for Tesla Motors while accelerating our competitive advantage in battery pack design and manufacturing. Both of these support our core business of developing and marketing extraordinary electric cars such as the Tesla Roadster."

"Tesla Energy Group provides Think with an advanced battery pack design with impressive performance," said Jan-Olaf Willums, CEO of Think.

About Think

Think's mission is to create the most environmentally friendly vehicles in the world in a commercially successful way. The second generation TH!NK city vehicle combines award-winning design with comfort and convenience features that make it a pleasure to drive. The new vehicle is expected to be launched in Norway in 2007, and selected international markets in 2008. More information about Think can be found on http://www.think.no.

About Tesla Motors

Tesla Motors develops and manufactures vehicles that exemplify "Design, Performance, and Efficiency" while conforming to all U.S. safety, environmental and durability standards. The company has taken over 400 reservations for its first car, the Tesla Roadster, a stylish, high performance sports car that accelerates to 60 mph in about 4 seconds with extreme energy efficiency. Tesla expects to start shipping Tesla Roadsters to customers in the fall. Tesla Motors was founded in July 2003 by Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpenning to create efficient electric cars for people who love to drive. Tesla Motors currently employs more than 200 people, including teams in California, Michigan, the U.K. and Taiwan. For more information, visit www.teslamotors.com.

(Click here for details) The Think City

Contact:
Darryl Siry
Tesla Motors
(650) 413-6260
Email Contact

Firefly charges up in Peoria
Start-up battery maker tries to jump hurdle; county to decide if it will
co-sign $6 million loan

Sunday, June 10, 2007
By MOLLY PARKER

http://www.pjstar.com/stories/061007/TRI_BDER54VJ.027.php

Of the Journal Star

PEORIA - Firefly Energy Inc. is about to get $12.5 million in public
financial support, even though the 4-year-old high-tech battery company has
yet to mass-produce a single battery component.
Tour the headquarters of the Caterpillar Inc. spinoff, primarily on the
second floor of Illinois Central College's North Campus, and it's clear
Firefly is eager to jump the market hurdle that separates the weak from the
successful.

Wild mathematical markings are scribbled on dry-erase boards in various
rooms. The research labs look more like they belong in a high school, if not
for the complex-looking scientific equipment. But directions are taped to
one, on a white paper napkin.

A computer-generated sign with clip art hangs on a door, noting an
employee's birthday.

Two men wielding a tape measure discuss how to squeeze out more working
space than was ever intended for the old Zeller Mental Health Center.

Much about Firefly looks startup.

It just isn't behaving that way.

"We have a very rapid research and applied engineering timeline compared to
other battery companies," said CEO Edward Williams, forced to move his
interview with

the Journal Star twice as employees returned to their offices, or the
conference room that doubles as a break room, where the door is propped open
by a competitor's battery.

Williams had to give up his own office to support the growing staff, now 35
strong. "We're moving very, very fast," he said.

Firefly has generated worldwide press for its patented technology, which it
boasts will eventually make batteries in Army tanks, cars, golf carts, lawn
mowers, vacuums and other devices run twice as long while taking up less
space.

What Intel is to the computer world, Firefly hopes to become to the world's
$16 billion lead-acid battery industry.

It doesn't want to reinvent the battery, just make it work smarter.

Even in its infancy, Firefly has learned to work the government, acquiring
millions of taxpayer dollars in the form of capital, a pair of defense
contracts, tax breaks and, if all goes as planned, an unprecedented
financial backing from the city and county to secure a private loan.

The Peoria County Board on Thursday will vote whether to join the city in
co-signing a $6 million loan National City Bank is poised to grant but
considers too risky without the government being a guarantor.

"I see it as one of the safest loans that we could make," County Board
Chairman Bill Prather said earlier this month as the board's tax and finance
committees unanimously supported the agreement. "If I had the money, I'd
make it myself."

Even with good odds, the deal is a gamble on the taxpayers' dime. But having
seen other Peoria-born research slip away for development elsewhere,
community leaders are shaking the public's piggy bank, hoping to keep
Firefly in town.

"The one thing no one has asked is, what would be the risk if they left?"
said state Rep. David Leitch, R-Peoria.

Williams acknowledged the company has received a lot of public funds, but he
said Firefly has generated $17.7 million in private equity from just a small
fraction of the government help it's received, much of which is put back
into the local economy.

That's a healthy return on the taxpayers' dollar, Williams said, not to
mention Firefly's success could give wings to dreams of a high-tech business
market in central Illinois.

Though details of the loan agreement are not finalized, Williams said
Firefly would be willing to sign off on a requirement that its headquarters
remain in Peoria for the five-year life of the loan, so long as the company
is not acquired.

"There's a real payback story of consequence," he said.

When Firefly sells a product, it sells Peoria too, said company Senior Vice
President Mil Ovan.

"There's such an appetite for battery technology," Ovan told a County Board
committee, "that companies around the world are beating a path to Peoria."

Federal fund, contracts

Shortly after inception, Firefly pursued the high-tech military market
because the U.S. Army, in particular, has a reputation for investing in
technology businesses in their infancy, Williams said, a gamble other
private companies are less willing to take.

Firefly tapped two retired generals to sit on its advisory board, and with
the weight of several military stars behind it, peddled its invention to
Detroit-based TARDEC, the Army Tank Automotive Research, Development and
Engineering Center.

The Army needs a battery that will allow soldiers in Iraq to shut off their
tank engines once reaching a desired location, reducing noise and heat while
still being able to access their surveillance equipment, Williams said.

Current tank batteries last about an hour; Firefly believes it can more than
double that. But with little experience navigating the federal
appropriations process, Firefly was denied the grant it sought in 2004 to
become part of the Army's "silent watch" program.

The next year, it got smarter. The company continued to massage its
relationship with the Army, hired a lobbying firm, and invited both U.S.
Rep. Ray LaHood, R-Peoria, and Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., for a tour.

That year about $2 million was planted in the defense appropriations budget
for Firefly to develop what it dubbed a 3D battery for the Army.

The idea is to replace the traditional lead-based negative plates found in
batteries with advanced carbon-graphite foam, which is lighter, more durable
and delivers more energy per square inch.

"We put all that together and then we just got very smart, very effective,
and to be fair, we just advanced. . . . The story just got tighter and we
were able to get that award," Williams said.

The next year, Firefly secured another $2.5 million Army contract to develop
what the company calls its 3D2 battery, which takes the technology a step
further, replacing the negative and positive lead plates with foam. The Army
hopes to use the even more powerful battery as it modernizes its fighting
tools, Williams said.

Firefly started seeing money from both contracts this spring. The first
appropriation will be doled out over about 15 months, the second over about
two years.

Lobbying firm hired

Recognizing it needed a boost on Capitol Hill, Firefly first contracted for
lobbying services in February 2005 with American Defense International, led
by Michael Herson, a man with a controversial yet proven track record of
securing military contracts for clients.

USA Today reported in October that the FBI is investigating whether Herson's
wife, Vicki Siegel Herson - a top aide to Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa. - broke
the law by funneling millions in defense contracts to clients of her
husband's firm. An earlier USA Today investigation showed $50 million in
appropriations went to companies Herson represents.

An internal investigation conducted by Specter's office found no wrongdoing,
but the senator did tighten rules in his office, including banning family
members of Specter or staff from lobbying him or his aides, a spokeswoman
for the senator said. The FBI declined to comment on the status of its
investigation.

Firefly has paid Herson about $220,000 in just over two years, according to
the United States Senate Office of Public Records.

Herson sat on LaHood's campaign steering committee for about two years,
until LaHood disbanded it in January of last year as the controversial
relationship between lobbyists, fundraisers and earmarks was pushed to the
forefront by U.S. Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham, who was sent to prison two
months later for accepting bribes in exchange for earmarks for defense
contractors.

"I just decided I didn't want any kind of appearance that these people were
helping me and I was helping their client," LaHood said.

LaHood was a member of the House appropriations defense subcommittee when
Firefly secured its grants and takes credit for steering the money the
company's way. But LaHood said he never spoke with Herson about Firefly, and
he didn't even realize Herson was the company's lobbyist. He denied any
quid-pro-quo relationship.

Firefly is just "very good," LaHood said, and Peoria is likely to see a boon
as a result of public leaders "thinking outside the box" to keep them here.

Firefly, too, said Herson had nothing to do with securing the Army contacts.
For roughly $10,000 a month, Herson keeps the company abreast of important
deadlines and tracks relevant legislation, Ovan said.

"I'm happy to be doing what I can to get them these defense dollars," LaHood
said. "In the end, I want them in Peoria. That's going to be the icing on
the cake for us."

Other public funds

From Congress to the state, city and county, it seems politicians have
eagerly opened the public purses to help Firefly.

The Illinois Finance Authority - a self-financed, state-run organization
that aids businesses - put $1 million in equity into Firefly between 2003
and 2006. In May 2004, Peoria County partnered with the state and Illinois
Ventures for Community Action, a not-for-profit organization, to award
Firefly a $500,000 equipment loan. Less than $300,000 of the debt remains
outstanding, Williams said. Peoria County fronted $150,000 of that loan.

Still, Morton-based G&D Integrated President Joe O'Neill said Williams was
frustrated by limitations he faced - particularly with facilities - trying
to grow an early-stage technology company in central Illinois.

O'Neill is a self-described, behind-the-scenes businessman with a unique
niche: nurturing other area businesses by offering assembling, manufacturing
and transportation services.

O'Neill met Williams a few years ago at a Caterpillar event, where they
discussed Firefly's space needs. The space at ICC - for which Firefly pays
about $8,000 a month - is too cramped, but Williams said he couldn't find
another landlord with a deal he could afford.

Former Mayor Dick Carver, a friend of O'Neill's, suggested he meet with
Leitch and Mayor Jim Ardis to see if the government could help. Carver, now
a resident of Virginia, called a breakfast meeting in February when he was
in Peoria to update the City Council on the status of turning the Kellar
line into a biking/hiking trail.

Three weeks later, the City Council voted 9-2 to expand its Enterprise Zone
to include a building on Galena Road - once the site of Foster & Gallagher
Co. - where Firefly plans to move. That means a sales tax exemption on
building materials, worth an estimated $160,000.

It also provides a five-year property tax abatement, worth about $89,000
annually or $445,000 total, for G&D Integrated, the property owner, though
Firefly will also benefit from that as it will pay property taxes per the
lease agreement.

Besides being the landlord, O'Neill is a small investor in the company and
is angling to secure a contract with Firefly to manufacture the components
that would then be shipped to battery plants elsewhere.

O'Neill said it has been fascinating to watch the deal with local political
leaders unfold, as he's never asked for government help in his decades of
doing business in central Illinois.

"I'm not familiar with the political process," he said. "It's completely
alien to me."

He has made one political contribution, Illinois State Board of Elections
records show. O'Neill wrote a $1,800 check to LaHood's Illinois fund in June
2005 as the congressman considered a run for governor.

The loan guarantee

Two months after expanding the Enterprise Zone, the City Council voted to
back half of a $6 million private loan for Firefly, also the result of
discussions that began over breakfast.

Initially, Leitch suggested loaning Firefly a piece of the $10 million that
Keystone Consolidated Industries owed the county from a zero-interest loan
the state gave the company in 2002 when it was on the verge of bankruptcy.

He called a meeting with Ardis and Prather, who informed Leitch the county
had agreed to let Keystone pay back the loan in installments. As an
alternative, this public/private-loan deal was hatched.

In return, the city and county will be given stock warrants, allowing them
to cash in on fixed-rate company stock equal to 8 percent of the loan
guarantee over a decade if the company goes public or is acquired.

Leitch trumpeted the deal to the City Council as it passed 10-0 on May 22,
saying it was the most exciting thing Peoria had done since building the
Civic Center. "This will be a moment we can all look back on and say, 'Wow,'
" said Leitch.

The state representative is also regional vice president of National City,
but said that had nothing to do with why Firefly chose to do business with
his bank. That was Firefly's bank before he got involved, he said.

"I only learned, much to my surprise, at the end of the process, of that
relationship," Leitch said. "So I was not acting because National City
wanted me to do this. I was acting because Dick Carver called me up to do
this. I didn't care what bank did it."

Still, the bank wasn't willing to give the loan without a guarantor. Doug
Stewart, the bank's regional president, said that's because banks generally
do not take that type of risk on companies still in the early stage of
development.

Therein lies the rub for Firefly, and companies in a similar place on the
business timeline. It couldn't secure a bank loan of the size it needed, but
venture capital funds - like Tri-County Angels, which has contributed to
Firefly - are geared more toward early-stage companies, Williams said.

Caterpillar could have loaned the money to its spinoff as well, but "they
want to see the company survive as much as it can on its own," Williams
said. Already Caterpillar owns 33 percent of the company, and investing more
could give the appearance that Firefly is nothing more than a Big Yellow
shadow.

Seeking alternative private investments seemed another plausible option, as
Firefly is being tabbed a sure bet. But the direction from Firefly's board,
Williams said, was to increase debt first to make the company more
attractive before seeking its third-round of big investors.

Any realized proceeds from the stock warrants granted the city and county
would go to establish a joint governmental fund to aid companies stuck in
this awkward stage where they are nearing production, but still not
cash-flow positive.

"It directly addresses the fact that we've had products developed at the ag
lab that came forward but there wasn't talent or ability to bring it to
market here," said Peoria County Administrator Patrick Urich.

But if Firefly fails, the bank, after reselling any equipment purchased with
the loan, would collect the rest from the city and county. It would first
take the $1 million debt reserve fund established with the first Keystone
loan repayment to the county, and the governmental bodies would split the
remaining difference on a 59-41 percent ratio.

That's a risk that makes County Board member Merle Widmer nervous. "I keep
reminding people: What often times seem greener out there often times is
not," he said.

But everything in life carries some risk, member James Thomas challenged
back, noting that some things are worth it. "No matter how conservative you
play it, you die," he said.


Molly Parker can be reached at 686-3285 or mparker@...

From:
Felix Kramer
fkramer@ calcars.org
To:
calcars-news@ yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 4:39 PM
Subject: [calcars-news] Report Toyota Will Delay
Lithium Battery Intro in Hybrids


Late last year, Toyota announced it would slow
development of some products due to concerns
about maintaining quality levels. We wondered
then if this would apply to the "next-generation"
Prius (since one generation was sold only in
Japan, that would make it Prius version 4),
expected for Model Year 2009 in fall 2008. Even
since then, Toyota has said it would include
lithium batteries, and we all hoped it might
include plug-in capabilities
(see <http://www.calcars.org/carmakers.html>).

A few weeks ago, reports circulated that Toyota
would delay the introduction of lithium batteries
in the Prius. But a June 7 AP story about
Toyota's reaching its milestone of having sold
one million hybrids, said "Mitsuo Kinoshita, a
senior Toyota executive, recently denied Japanese
media reports that Toyota had given up on having
a lithium-ion battery system for the
next-generation Prius.  "We're still working on
it," he told reporters.
<http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/fn/4872579.html>

Today's Wall Street Journal reports that lithium
is out for the 2009 model because of unresolved
issues with thermal management. Its chief
automotive reporter cites sources saying Toyota
President Katsuaki Watanabe made the call. Toyota
will instead use "more advanced" nickel-metal
hydride batteries. (NiMH has lower energy density
than Li-Ion, and the price of the raw materials
has risen sharply in recent years. But they are
fully proven and have minimal safety issues.)

We imagine the company will make a formal
statement. Meanwhile, this means two things:

First, there is clearly plenty of life left in
NiMH -- and if Toyota wanted to, there's no
reason the 2009 Prius or the "Prius derivative"
station wagon described in the WSJ couldn't be a
PHEV with a substantial electric-only low-speed range.

Second, as the WSJ story says, this improves the
chances that GM will be first with a PHEV Volt or
VUE. (And, since all carmakers watch each other
closely, this could prompt some reasoned voices
within GM to take more seriously the suggestions
that Version 1.0 of GM's first PHEVs could get to
market sooner with NiMH than with Li-Ion.)

We include the WSJ story below. It's followed by
a USA Today report on the evolution of Toyota's
goals for introducing hybrid models. The slowdown
described (one-third of 35 vehicles will have a
hybrid option around 2010) doesn't necessarily
conflict with the May statement by Toyota's
Masatami Takimoto  that all its cars will be
hybrids by 2020. The article says Toyota is also
looking at diesel hybrids -- no mention of
flex-fuel hybrids, which have problems meeting
low pollution standards because of evaporative emissions.


Toyota Delays Use Of Lithium-Ion Batteries
In New Prius Hybrids
By Norihiko Shirouzu
norihiko.shirouzu@ wsj.com
Wall Street Journal, June 13, 2007 12:42 a.m.
<http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118170827719833687.html?mod=googlenews_wsj>

TOYOTA CITY, Japan - Toyota Motor Corp., alarmed
by growing concern over the safety of lithium-ion
battery technology, has decided not to use that
technology for the initial versions of the
next-generation Prius gasoline-electric hybrid
car, whose launch was scheduled for the autumn of
next year, according to individuals familiar with
Toyota's product plans.

The move, those individuals said, is aimed
chiefly at dealing with potential problems with
the application of lithium-ion batteries in the
redesigned Prius - a new technology that packs
more electricity in the same space and weight
than the nickel-metal hydride batteries used in
nearly all hybrid vehicles sold today.

Toyota had hoped the new battery technology would
allow its engineers to halve the size of the
current hybrid propulsion system using
nickel-metal hydride batteries, thereby making
the hybrid substantially cheaper and more
fuel-efficient. The kind of lithium-ion battery
technology that was under consideration for use
in the Prius - one based on lithium cobalt oxide
-- has shown a tendency to overheat and catch on
fire -- a problem that has bedeviled computer
makers using lithium-ion batteries made by
Japan's Sony Corp. The delay also comes in
response to the recent rise in product recalls
and other quality gaffes in new Toyota vehicles,
the individuals who spoke on condition of anonymity said.

They said the decision was made ultimately by
Toyota President Katsuaki Watanabe who in the
recent past has voiced concern about Toyota's
vehicle quality - what he has repeated called the
auto maker's "lifeline." In the U.S., the number
of recalls hit 2.38 million vehicles in 2005,
before settling down to 601,894 vehicles last
year, according to Toyota. The company plans to
use a more advanced version of nickel-metal
hydride batteries for the initial launch of the
next-generation Prius, people familiar with the
  company's plans said.

Nickel-metal hydride batteries are a less
sophisticated kind of technology than lithium-ion
batteries but have been used in the Prius since
1997 and proven in real life driving for nearly a
decade. Still, that doesn't mean the company has
given up lithium-ion battery technology
altogether. Toyota already has been testing a
Prius equipped with a still-experimental
lithium-ion battery pack on the company's proving
ground in Toyota City. The car was being
test-driven as recently as last week. The
individuals said Toyota plans to launch the new
battery technology as soon as it believes it is
robust enough for mass production and real-life
driving. That means, they said, the Japanese auto
maker will likely equip a later derivative of the
next-generation Prius with lithium-ion batteries.
It wasn't clear when that Prius derivative,
believed to be a station wagon, is coming out. A
spokesman at Toyota's supplier of those
lithium-ion batteries, Panasonic EV Energy
Co. Ltd., declined to comment.

Toyota's move to postpone an application of
lithium-ion batteries in hybrids will likely
provide a big break for Toyota's rivals, such as
General Motors Corp. which is trying to come out
with hybrid vehicles using lithium-ion batteries
as early as in 2009. People familiar with GM's
product plans said GM had all but given up its
hopes to beat Toyota to market with a
gasoline-electric hybrid with a lithium-ion
battery pack. GM, those people said, has been
aiming at launching a Saturn Vue Green Line
plug-in hybrid by the autumn of 2009. "This is a
big break" for GM, one of those people said.

A Toyota spokesman in Tokyo said: "We always try
to launch a product in a most timely fashion as possible."

The move is part of Toyota President Mr.
Watanabe's effort to slow down the pace of
product development in order to shore up vehicle
quality and reliability following a string of
recalls and other quality gaffes in recent years.

Last year, Mr. Watanabe told The Wall Street
Journal that after a two-month review of its
product-development processes, the company
concluded engineers in some cases might have
rushed out products without conducting enough
quality checks, such as building prototypes. He
said he intended to boost the number of those
quality checks and would hire more engineers to do so.


Toyota scales back hybrid plans
By JAMES R. HEALEY
USA Today, June 11, 2007
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2007-06-11-toyota-usat_N.htm

After taking a decade to sell its first 1 million
gasoline-electric hybrid vehicles worldwide,
Toyota Motor now says it plans to sell
1 million a year within a few years.

At the same time, the big automaker appears to be
backing away from a pledge made a few years ago
that hybrid powertrains would be available as
options on nearly every U.S. vehicle by 2010.

"The right car, at the right place, at the right
time, in accordance with energy trends," said
Mira Sleilati, spokeswoman at Toyota Motor North
America, the automaker's holding company. Her
comment was via e-mail, in response to questions
about Toyota's alternative-power vehicles.

"Hybrid technology is our core technology, and we
will double our hybrid lineup. At the same time,
we are accelerating the pace of our efforts to
achieve annual sales of 1 million units in the
early part of the 2010s," she said in the e-mail.

That would be less ambitious than promised in
October 2003 at the Tarrytown, N.Y., briefing
on the redesigned Prius hybrid.

Doubling the U.S. hybrid line would result in 12
hybrids, just one-third the 35 total models sold
by Toyota's namesake brand, its Lexus luxury
brand and its Scion youth brand - and not until
after the 2010 date promised at the 2003 briefing.

How does that amount to "accelerating the pace"
of hybrid launches? Sleilati wouldn't explain:
"We, on behalf of TMC (Toyota Motor Corp., the
Japanese parent company) are unable to provide
any additional comment beyond this, particularly
in regards to product planning or timing."

Regardless, Toyota would be the most ambitious
hybrid marketer at a time that $3 gasoline has
made fuel-saving hybrids popular in America.

Sales of gasoline-electric hybrids should boom
226 percent to 854,000 in 2011 from 262,000 last
year, according to a forecast by J.D. Power and
Associates. "If gas prices stay high, the sky's
the limit," says J.D. Power spokesman John Tews.

The United States, in fact, is the biggest hybrid
market. It accounted for 163,000 of Toyota's
313,000 total hybrid sales last year, or 52
percent. And the United States accounted for
about 57 percent of the first 1 million worldwide
sales, which Toyota announced last week.

The automaker introduced its Prius
gasoline-electric hybrid in Japan in 1997 and in
the USA in 2000. It now also sells hybrid
versions of the Camry sedan and Highlander SUV
and of the Lexus LS and GS sedans and RX SUV.
Honda, Ford Motor, General Motors and Nissan also
offer hybrids, though sales lag behind Toyota substantially.

Fuel economy is the main selling point. Toyota's
Camry hybrid is rated 34 miles per gallon in
combined city-highway driving under 2008 federal
rules versus 25 mpg for the highest-rated gasoline Camry.

Toyota also says it is mulling diesel-power
passenger vehicles and expects to announce those
plans, if any, next month. Rival Honda plans U.S. diesel cars in 2009.


--  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  -- --
        Felix Kramer  fkramer@...
       Founder  California Cars Initiative
              http://www.calcars.org
        http://www.calcars.org/news-archive.html
--  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  -- --

Yahoo! Groups Links

Bringing Lithium-ion Battery Technology to North America

CPI is a North American subsidiary of LG Chem Ltd., one of the world's
largest producers of lithium-ion batteries for automotive (Hybrid Electric
Vehicles - HEVs) and non-automotive (commercial, military, conversion, and
portable equipment) applications. As such, the company has accumulated
expertise in the development of safe, high-power/high-energy, compact, and
lightweight lithium-ion battery systems.

CPI was formed in 2000 in the United States with a mission to become the
supplier of choice for state-of-the-art lithium-ion battery technology for
automotive and industrial applications. Headquartered in Troy, Michigan, at
the heart of the automotive industry, CPI is an easily accessible local
source for the research, development, engineering, design, and packaging of
lithium-ion batteries.

CPI's uniqueness as a provider of lithium-ion batteries lies in various
areas, including:

Its expertise and experience in engineering, designing, producing and
packaging lithium-ion batteries
Its ability to provide turn-key solutions for vehicular applications
Its ability to provide customized solutions depending on the application
Its experience in and relationships with the North American vehicle industry
Its ability to call on the resources of LG Chem Ltd.

August 2006 - CPI awarded US Advanced Battery Consortium (USABC) lithium-ion
polymer HEV battery technology development program

Q: What is the environmental impact of lithium-ion batteries versus NiMH?
A: Lithium-ion cells use chemistries that are environmentally more benign
than chemistries typically used in NiMH batteries.

Q: Are lithium-ion batteries cost comparable to NiMH?
A: Lithium-ion batteries can be more cost-effective than NiMH and other
battery alternatives when consideration is given to the increased power and
energy density, extended life, and reduced servicing required with
lithium-ion battery packs.

Dick Pacini
Sr. Vice President
The Millerschin Group
Phone: 248/276-1970
248/770-6446 (cell)
Fax: 248/276-2476
Email: dpacini@ millerschingroup.com

Chris Groesbeck
Business and Finance Manager
Phone: 248/291-2376
Fax: 248/291-2376
Email: cgroesbeck@ compactpower.com

Compact Power, Inc. Wins Lithium-Ion Battery Development Program For General
Motors Hybrid Electric Vehicles - June 5th, 2007
http://www.compactpower.com/files/cpi_gm_development_program.pdf

A Subsidiary of LG Chem
1857 Technology Dr., Troy, MI 48083 U.S.A.
Tel.: 248-307-1800 * Fax: 248-597-0900
http://www.compactpower.com

Media Contacts:
Scott Wilder
Compact Power
248/307-1800
swilder@ compactpower.com

Troy, Mich. - June 5, 2007 - Compact Power, Inc. (CPI), a subsidiary of LG
Chem, announced today it has been chosen by General Motors Corp. to develop
a lithium-ion battery system for the carmaker's innovative E-Flex propulsion
system. The E-Flex electric vehicle architecture underpins the Chevy Volt
concept car shown earlier this year and is being developed as part of GM's
strategy to diversify transportation away from petroleum.

The 12-month program involves the development of battery cells and battery
packs using LG Chem's lithium-ion technology designed to meet the stringent
energy and power requirements of these highly fuel efficient vehicles.

The cells will be developed and supplied by LG Chem, CPI's parent company,
while CPI will focus on pack development and assembly including mechanical
integration, thermal and electronic management and vehicle interface.

"This development contract further validates that lithium-ion is the
preferred battery technology for the automotive industry," said Prabhakar
Patil, CEO of CPI. "Our expertise and leadership in lithium-ion batteries
will contribute significantly to this program. We are honored to partner
with GM in bringing a line of vehicles to the marketplace that are
technologically advanced and provide exceptional fuel economy and reduced
greenhouse gas emissions. This award is a significant step in our goal to
become the vehicle OEM's supplier partner of choice for HEV battery
  systems."

"This technology is developing rapidly," said Denise Gray, GM director of
hybrid energy storage devices. "This contract is an opportunity to deeply
understand the differing battery technologies before making a production
decision."
First shown in January 2007 at the North American International Auto Show
(NAIAS) in Detroit, the E-Flex concept was introduced as part of the Chevy
Volt concept car. It is an electric vehicle with a traveling range of up to
40 miles using battery power and a small engine with a generator to extend
its range to 640 miles. A plug-in fuel cell variant of the E-Flex system was
shown at the Shanghai Auto Show in April.

Prabhakar Patil
Chief Executive Officer

Prabhakar Patil is chief executive officer (CEO) of Compact Power, Inc.
(CPI), the North American subsidiary of lithium-ion battery-maker, LG Chem
(LGC), Korea. In this position, he has overall responsibility for the
strategic direction, engineering and business development activities of the
business.

Prior to joining CPI in 2005, Dr. Patil spent his entire professional career
of 27 years at Ford Motor Company in various engineering and management
positions. He served as chief engineer for Ford's Hybrid Technologies during
2003 and was also chief engineer for the Ford Escape Hybrid from 1998 to
2003.

Dr. Patil received his undergraduate degree from IIT, Bombay, and his PhD in
Aerospace Engineering from The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. He has 12
patents, published 22 articles and received the Henry Ford Technology Award
in 1991 for his work in Electric Vehicle Powertrain Development.

Martin Klein
Engineering Director

Martin Klein is engineering director for Compact Power, Inc. (CPI). He has
overall responsibility for the design, development and validation of
lithium-ion polymer-based battery packs and Battery Management Systems
(BMS).

Prior to joining CPI in January 2006, Klein held a number of increasingly
responsible positions at Ford Motor Company and Visteon Electronics
(formerly the Electronics Division of Ford) over 17 years in the areas of
electronics module design, systems integration, and program management both
in the United States and Europe. Prior to this, he gained eight years of
experience with Texas Instruments and Electrospace Systems, Inc. (now part
of Raytheon) in defense systems electromagnetic compatibility (EMC).

Klein received a Bachelors in Electrical Engineering from the University of
Michigan and a Masters in Electronic and Computer Control Systems from Wayne
State University, Detroit, Mich. He has been a member of the Society of
Automotive Engineers (SAE) for four years and serves on the Hybrid Technical
Committee.

Mohamed Alamgir
Research Director

Mohamed Alamgir is research director for Compact Power, Inc. (CPI), a
leading developer of lithium-ion batteries for hybrid electric vehicles
(HEVs). He brings over 25 years of experience to his current position, where
he is primarily responsible for the research, development and engineering of
CPI battery cells. He joined CPI in 2000.

Prior to joining CPI, Alamgir was research manager for High Energy
Technologies (1996 - 2000) and Rechargeable Battery Industries Corp.
(1995-1996), where he worked to improve lithium-ion technology for
commercial use.

He also spent a year (1995) at Lithium Technology Corporation as a research
manager and started his career at EIC Laboratories where he spent 10 years
(1985-95) as a research engineer working on the performance and safety of
lithium-ion batteries.

Alamgir earned a Ph.D. in physical chemistry from Brandeis University,
Waltham, Mass., and a Master of Science in electrochemistry from Technische
Hochschule, Mersburg, Germany.