Do you realize that even if the U.S. auto companies got re-structured and became competitive, and then made quick steps towards the development of hybrid or electric cars, that the U.S. would still be dependent on foreign energy? It would be battery power instead of oil, but we would still be dependent nonetheless.

There are a number of battery makers thruout the world, a few in the U.S. and others in Asia. But other than two companies--Panasonic and Sanyo--all of the others are tiny by comparison and many are nothing more than start-ups. That includes a couple U.S.-based start-ups.

Guess what? Very quietly Panasonic announced that it is acquiring Sanyo before the end of the year. The merger hasn't gotten much attention, other than in Detroit. I guess there have been a few other newsworthy stories that have dominated the news.

The merger represents Panasonic’s bid to corner a technology and product patents essential to the worldwide auto industry's future: batteries for hybrid and electric vehicles. A combined Panasonic-Sanyo would dominate the field not only for nickel-metal hydride batteries but also for next-generation lithium ion batteries. Both companies have been concentrating on battery design and engineering for more than a decade. Both Japanese companies are well ahead of any other company in the field and have carefully protected their product and manufacturing process developments with worldwide patents. Those familiar with the automotive battery industry say that any of the remaining companies would pale in scale, expertise and ambition to a Panasonic-Sanyo juggernaut.

At this point, both the Japanese companies have well-established supply chain relationships with the Japanese car manufacturers. The American hybrids are all using Japanese-made batteries, but they are in short supply with the Japanese car companies having their contractual orders filled before the U.S. car-makers are served.

We don't need much more bad news this morning, but I suppose it is worth noting that America’s reliance on imported oil will be replaced by reliance on imported batteries, even if the U.S. car companies are re-structured and quickly begin making hybrid or electric vehicles.

Will the foreign battery makers be replaced by new U.S. companies or alternative sources of power in time? Sure, but accelerated development of such products will be extraordinarily expensive, certainly not affordable by any individual company. Without significant government funding of research and product development, experts believe it would be decades before the U.S. could reach the stage that the Japanese companies have already achieved. The Panasonic-Sanyo combination has a huge head start in terms of design, engineering and manufacturing capacity. It will be a long time before we become truly energy independent, even if all the cars sold suddenly relied on batteries for power.

I might note that the federal government had voted a $25 billion package to fund alternative automotive fuel research and development by U.S. companies. But $15 billion of that amount has now been re-allocated as the result of demands by President Bush in the bill passed by the House yesterday for use in funding of the re-structuring of the U.S. auto manufacturers. We won't even begin the process of "catching up" our alternative fuel capabilities for a long, long time. I suppose if there's any good news in all of this it might be the opportunity presented by an investment in Panasonic. I bought some earlier this week.

DRILL HERE, DRILL NOW. Global Warming, or is it climate change they are calling it now is a scam and erases more of our liberties.

Wake up America.

AMEN, Taller Trees!!!!

Senor Lopez used to say to his daughter while giving her golf lessons "DIG NANCY DIG " to make her hit down on the ball.......We need to take some advice from him and ...

DRILL BABY DRILL...


more Texas tea ...fumar ..

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

Do you realize that even if the U.S. auto companies got re-structured and became competitive, and then made quick steps towards the development of hybrid or electric cars, that the U.S. would still be dependent on foreign energy? It would be battery power instead of oil, but we would still be dependent nonetheless.

There are a number of battery makers thruout the world, a few in the U.S. and others in Asia. But other than two companies--Panasonic and Sanyo--all of the others are tiny by comparison and many are nothing more than start-ups. That includes a couple U.S.-based start-ups.

Guess what? Very quietly Panasonic announced that it is acquiring Sanyo before the end of the year. The merger hasn't gotten much attention, other than in Detroit. I guess there have been a few other newsworthy stories that have dominated the news.

The merger represents Panasonic’s bid to corner a technology and product patents essential to the worldwide auto industry's future: batteries for hybrid and electric vehicles. A combined Panasonic-Sanyo would dominate the field not only for nickel-metal hydride batteries but also for next-generation lithium ion batteries. Both companies have been concentrating on battery design and engineering for more than a decade. Both Japanese companies are well ahead of any other company in the field and have carefully protected their product and manufacturing process developments with worldwide patents. Those familiar with the automotive battery industry say that any of the remaining companies would pale in scale, expertise and ambition to a Panasonic-Sanyo juggernaut.

At this point, both the Japanese companies have well-established supply chain relationships with the Japanese car manufacturers. The American hybrids are all using Japanese-made batteries, but they are in short supply with the Japanese car companies having their contractual orders filled before the U.S. car-makers are served.

We don't need much more bad news this morning, but I suppose it is worth noting that America’s reliance on imported oil will be replaced by reliance on imported batteries, even if the U.S. car companies are re-structured and quickly begin making hybrid or electric vehicles.

Will the foreign battery makers be replaced by new U.S. companies or alternative sources of power in time? Sure, but accelerated development of such products will be extraordinarily expensive, certainly not affordable by any individual company. Without significant government funding of research and product development, experts believe it would be decades before the U.S. could reach the stage that the Japanese companies have already achieved. The Panasonic-Sanyo combination has a huge head start in terms of design, engineering and manufacturing capacity. It will be a long time before we become truly energy independent, even if all the cars sold suddenly relied on batteries for power.

I might note that the federal government had voted a $25 billion package to fund alternative automotive fuel research and development by U.S. companies. But $15 billion of that amount has now been re-allocated as the result of demands by President Bush in the bill passed by the House yesterday for use in funding of the re-structuring of the U.S. auto manufacturers. We won't even begin the process of "catching up" our alternative fuel capabilities for a long, long time. I suppose if there's any good news in all of this it might be the opportunity presented by an investment in Panasonic. I bought some earlier this week.

Interesting post! But, we can engineer our own "New" batteries, we can't engineer "New Oil". Once the batteries are manufactured we own and reuse them, but with oil, we use it and it's gone. I'll still take batteries.

The Manhattan Project created a nuclear bomb, from theory, in a very short time. How is it that we can't produce hydrogen inexpensively in just as short of time? Clean, renewable and abundant world wide.

I'd sooner do business with Japan than Iran...

Originally Posted by rshoffer

I'd sooner do business with Japan than Iran...

The statistics tell the tale...

• The U.S. has only 1.6% of the proven oil reserves in the world.

• Currently, we are producing 11.8% of the world's total oil production.

• We are consuming 25.2% of all the oil currently being produced in the world.

• Without the discovery of new oil reserves within the U.S., we will pump all currently proven U.S. reserves dry in 8 years.

Are there additional oil reserves in the U.S. that can be "proven" and ultimately tapped and consumed? Yes. The oil underneath the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) is one source that is thought to be significant. However, not even considering the political resistance to drilling in the wildlife refuge, experts agree that there is no realistic way to drill and then transport oil from ANWR to ice-free ports in southern Alaska for further transport to refineries quickly enough to avoid the U.S. running out of domestic oil. The second new pipeline being built in Alaska connecting the Arctic with Valdez on Prince William Sound won't be completed for a number of years. Even when completed, the total capacity of the pipelines from the Arctic down to the port of Valdez will have the capacity of less than 10% of total U.S. consumption. The same is generally true of trying to satisfy our needs with new drilling platforms off the coastal U.S. We simply cannot increase production from those sources at a rate that will even keep up with increased U.S. consumption.

Put simply, we are becoming increasingly dependent on the importation of oil from foreign countries to satisfy our growing consumption and there is no way to reverse that trend, regardless of where and how quickly we expand drilling operations.

In the last 40 years our annual consumption of oil has increased by 48%, our annual production of oil had decreased by almost 50%, and the amount of oil we import per year has increased by 833%. For several decades the U.S. has increased the percentage of total world oil production that it consumes. Most experts say it may even be impossoble for the U.S. to reverse that trend. The U.S. cannot drill our way to energy independence regardless of how quickly and how intensively we initiate exploration and drilling programs.

to improve most problems of magnitude.
For example, what is wrong with only producing engines that deliver 30 or more miles to the gallon?
What is wrong with direct injection 4 cylinder engines? Diesel 4 cylinders for 40 + mpg?
The real creativity will only come to the forefront when a major disruption occurs....and it will occur sooner or later.
Then the newer technologies will come along to do even better.
They are doing it in other countries as in Europe/Japan. Smaller, much more economic vehicles.
Would you rather be stranded at home with a typical US gas hog or able to get about for 60-70% less cost and energy consumption than today.
I say drill here...send the message to the oil producing nations we are serious. Then mandate a change in our transportation philosophy/strategy.
It is simple to solve. Easy to implement....so why do we not DO SOMETHING?
Isn't it amazing how the problem has slid to the back burner now that gas is dropping in price....FOR NOW>
Mandate mass transportation. Other countries do.
No one person per vehicle allowed on the highways.
Want big powerfull engines...fine...pay a horse power tax and drive your brains out.
The problem is just to easy to fix....but we just WON'T.
I would have preferred to see $4-5 per gallon gas continue....it would have kept the priority where it belongs.
Where is the legislation for nuclear plants? Clean coal useage?
High mileage diesels?
Complacent Americans get what they deserve! AGAIN AND YET!
While we are doling out billions to bail out the incompetence of business, how about a few billion to avert the tragedy that is waiting to happen in the energy sector?
Don't hold yer breath!!!! Change? Nope....just lip service....as usual.

BTK

Originally Posted by gnu

Interesting post! But, we can engineer our own "New" batteries, we can't engineer "New Oil". Once the batteries are manufactured we own and reuse them, but with oil, we use it and it's gone. I'll still take batteries.

The Manhattan Project created a nuclear bomb, from theory, in a very short time. How is it that we can't produce hydrogen inexpensively in just as short of time? Clean, renewable and abundant world wide.

There is one major issue to overcome in battery manufacture - current EPA regulations.

Manufacturing which involves any toxic materials - and there's a lot in battery-making - is expensive. That's one of the re3asons why a lot of manufacturing is done elsewhere. The disposal of some kinds of manufacturing waste sometimes just cannot be done!

Hybrid cars will help in working towards energy independence. Electric cars do nothing to help. Despite all the talk about solar, wind power, geo-thermal, etc; we still have three and only three primary sources of electrical power - fossil fuel power plants (coal, oil natural gas, etc), nuclear power plants and hydro-electric power plants. Hydro sources have been fully exploited in this country, we have not built a nuclear plant in decades and coal has been ruled out by the incoming administration. The present grid does not adequately support our needs today and cannot add the load needed to seriously assist in a move away from fossil fuel propelled automobiles.

Increased use of natural gas to replace electricity in applications including the home and transportation does make sense. Approximately five times the natural gas is used to generate electricity and then do the work (propel vehicles, heat homes, dry clothes, etc) as is needed to do the task directly.

Without getting into a discussion about 'climate change', it is apparent we need to choose between energy independence and drastic reduction of CO2 emissions. We cannot have both. Until our leaders are ready to discuss this honestly and stop hiding behind mythical new technologies, we will never deal with the problem.

Originally Posted by BBQMan

Hybrid cars will help in working towards energy independence. Electric cars do nothing to help. Despite all the talk about solar, wind power, geo-thermal, etc; we still have three and only three primary sources of electrical power - fossil fuel power plants (coal, oil natural gas, etc), nuclear power plants and hydro-electric power plants. Hydro sources have been fully exploited in this country, we have not built a nuclear plant in decades and coal has been ruled out by the incoming administration. The present grid does not adequately support our needs today and cannot add the load needed to seriously assist in a move away from fossil fuel propelled automobiles.

Increased use of natural gas to replace electricity in applications including the home and transportation does make sense. Approximately five times the natural gas is used to generate electricity and then do the work (propel vehicles, heat homes, dry clothes, etc) as is needed to do the task directly.

Without getting into a discussion about 'climate change', it is apparent we need to choose between energy independence and drastic reduction of CO2 emissions. We cannot have both. Until our leaders are ready to discuss this honestly and stop hiding behind mythical new technologies, we will never deal with the problem.

Natural gas is a great bridge to the future, but not the answer. In the short term natural gas can fuel our autos, produce electricity and is an independent source of fuel. It is also widely available throughout the country because of existing pipelines. But natural gas will also run out some time in the future (except for the natural gas found on this political thread, that is).

Hydrogen is the only fuel that produces no CO2 emissions and is abundant in our oceans. When burned, it produces water and oxygen. It is not a mythical technology either and is being used in a pilot production plant in Iceland. The Iceland project is using a point of use production plant to provide fuel for vehicles. We MUST invest in this technology if we ever hope to provide fuel well into the future.

76 trillion cu ft of clean burning natural gas in Gulf of Mex...Russia and China will get that. Alaska has 800 years supply of coal at present usage and there is oil in N Dakota that could supply for a lifetime.

While hydrogen may be a great vehicle for the storage of energy generated through another source of power, e.g. solar power, hydrogen generation always uses more energy than can be released from the separated hydrogen and oxygen. There is simply no way around the laws of thermodynamics.

The world is continuing to use more and more carbon fuels and emitting more and more CO2, particularly in Asia and soon in Africa. The Mauna Loa CO2 readings confirm that CO2 in the atmosphere has risen steadily since 1958 when they were first started. Temperature, however, is no longer climbing.

Originally Posted by BBQMan

While hydrogen may be a great vehicle for the storage of energy generated through another source of power, e.g. solar power, hydrogen generation always uses more energy than can be released from the separated hydrogen and oxygen. There is simply no way around the laws of thermodynamics.

The world is continuing to use more and more carbon fuels and emitting more and more CO2, particularly in Asia and soon in Africa. The Mauna Loa CO2 readings confirm that CO2 in the atmosphere has risen steadily since 1958 when they were first started. Temperature, however, is no longer climbing.

Correct, but the problem is a "renewable" power source that will make us energy independent. While solar, wind, or a thermal heat source, such as in Iceland to produce hydrogen consumes more energy than created, it IS a "renewable" source of portable power that doesn't produce CO2.

Solar, as a practical source of power for automobiles, does not work, considering the needs of transportation. Natural gas is already being used buy industry and a limited amount of trial transportation applications and is not "renewable". Batteries, as Stevez has informed me, create a toxic disposal problem. Only hydrogen is clean, renewable and doable using the earths natural energy.

Nuclear, of course, is a good source of energy to produce hydrogen, but selling the usage to the populace may be an insurmountable task.