1

The Role for Electric Vehicles & FFVs:

Key Policy, Technology & Research Drivers

Paul Wuebben

Iceland Federation of Industries - Reykjavik, IcelandAugust 27, 2009

2

Bottom Line:

Significant evolution underway

Major hurdles: 1st cost, durability, abuse tolerance, OEM-scale

manufacturing for batteries and components, high-quality launch, infrastructure

ED era has started

New car penetration > 1.5% by 2020 unlikely

Direct synergies with FFV technology

3

Outline

The need for Electric Drive (ED)

Air Quality, Energy + Climate Change

Vehicle ED market trends

Technology Evolution

Battery Challenges

Role of Renewable Generation

Direct Methanol Fuel Cells

Future Opportunities + Outlook

4

Convergence of Air Quality, Climate & Energy Security

Urban Air Pollution 25% of U.S. ozone exposure in So. CA

50% of U.S. PM-10 exposure in So. CA

> 85% of airborne cancer risk from petroleum fuel use (diesel + gasoline)

Transportation sources: > 40% of CA GHG

Energy security: CA Transportation: > 95% reliance on petroleum

> 70% of U.S. oil supply is imported

5

Lowest Impact Highest Impact

National Diesel Health Risk

Source:

http://www.catf.us/projects/diesel/dieselhealth/national.php?site=0

6

Adults - National

21,000 Premature Deaths

27,000 Non-Fatal Heart Attacks

410,000 Asthma Attacks

12,000 Chronic Bronchitis

2,400,000 Work Loss Days (WLD)

14,000,000 Minor Restricted Activity Days

Children - National

15,000 Asthma ER Visits

29,000 Acute Bronchitis

330,000 Lower Respiratory Symptoms

270,000 Upper Respiratory Symptoms

PM Exposure Impacts - 2010

721 Premature Deaths

922 Non-Fatal Heart Attacks

21,514 Asthma Attacks

569 Chronic Bronchitis

125,383 WLD

719,773 MRAD

Adults - Los Angeles Co.

Source: Clean Air Task Force

7

Petroleum Based Fuels:

A Momentary Phenomenon…

8source: IPCC

9

Current Policy Initiatives

CAFE and California AB1493 vehicle standards

ZEV mandate (2,500 fuel cell vehs. in 2009-11)

Tax credits and HOV lane access for hybrids

California Global Warming Act (AB 32)

AB 118 Program Funding ($1.5 B over 7 years)

Stimulus funding via DOE

10

Low Carbon Fuel Standard

Carbon intensity performance standard gCO2e / MJ

10% reduction in gasoline CI: 95.61 * to 86.27 * 10% reduction in diesel CI: 94.47 * to 85.24 *

Adoption scheduled for April, 2009 Based on Well-to-wheel GHG accounting Significant roles for:

Biofuels (especially non-corn ethanol) Electricity, natural gas, hydrogen all have GHG

reduction potential* CARB ISOR values, March 5, 2009

4

11

ZEV Regulation – 2003Large Manufacturer Obligation in 2009(Percent of Sales)

~33 %

AT PZEVs

Newly producedType III ZEVs

PZEVs

~6 %

~1 %

12

Electric Drive

Market Trends

13

14

The Market Is Evolving

RAPIDLY !

15

Projected CA AFV Registrations

9

16

17

Electric Drive Technology:Ready for Numerous Market Segments

ON-ROAD SEGMENT

LD

Med Duty

Heavy Duty

Buses

Truck Stops

OFF-ROAD SEGMENT

Port-related

On-dock rail (electric)

Ship “cold ironing”

Drayage trucks

Cranes

Rail

Aircraft

Ground Support Equip.

18

GM Volt

230

19

Chrysler GEM

20

21

22Source: Toyota Congressional Briefing, 2009

Toyota:

A Great Beginning

10

23

Some current hybrid options squander inherent benefits of electric drive technologies by increasing hp and torque rather than fuel economy…

A Point of Caution:

11

24

OEM – Battery Manufacturer Synergies…

Chrysler

A123

Fiat

25

Ford Prototype PHEV:

Integrated with FFV Agility

- Ford Motor Co,

13

26Source: DOE H2 Review, 2009

GM PHEV Prototype with FFV Agility

14

27

Hybrids + 2nd Gen Biofuels: A Winning Combination

Source: DOE, March, 2009

16

28

The Vehicle of the Future?

a. Hybrid drive train

b. Idle shut-offc. Regenerative brakingd. E-85 capability with full range of gasoline (i.e., FFV)e. M-85 optimization with full range of gasoline (FFV)f. Designation of the FFV as “A-85 compatible” to reflect

its compatibility with both ethanol and methanolg. Wall plug-in capability to extend electric rangeh. Low-speed all electric range capabilityi. Short-distance all electric range capabilityj. Dashboard selectability of features (h) and (i) abovek. P-ZEV certificationL. Agility to run on $10 gasoline

29

What Would it Offer?

Maximized electric drive train utility for max. low torque efficiency

Maximum potential for substitution of renewable electricityproduction (e.g., wind power, etc) for conventional petroleum

Maximum potential substitution of renewable cellulosic ethanol + methanol

Maximum price competition between two different types of alcohol (to reinforce market price discipline by producers to ensure maximum consumer value)

Minimized petroleum fuel dependency Maximum GHG reduction feasible with liquid fuel utility Maximum GHG reduction potential for private retail (non-

fleet) vehicles (except for H2 vehicles) Long-term relevant technology given that materials science

“miracles” are needed before H2 storage and distribution can be viable for wide-spread non-fleet applications

Economically competitive at oil prices > $70 USD

30

Volvo C30 Plug-in FFV Prototype

31

Saab 9-3 Prototype: P-HEV FFV (E-100)

Gasoline Version P-HEV FFV Comparison

Horsepower 210 260 better

Torque (ft-lbs) 220 276 better

0 to 60 mph, seconds 8.8 7 better

# of electric motors 0 2 better

Electric motor output, kW 0 53 better

Miles of zero emission range 0 12.4 better

Engine type Otto cycleSpark ignited direct

injectionbetter

Fuel Economy, mpg 31 31Better per

Btu

Cellulosic E-100 compatibility

no yes better

Hybrid ? no yes better

Fuel Flexibility / agility ? no yes better

Plug In ? no yes better

Toxics baseline lower better

Volatile HC's baseline lower better

Petroleum dependency baseline lower better

32

35 to 45 B Gals of CellulosicEthanol or Renewable Methanol

Breakthroughs

30%

33

2 x Fuel EconomyIncrease with

Aggressive Hybrid Drivetrains

40 – 50 mpg CAFE

35 to 45 B Gals of CellulosicEthanol or Biomass Methanol

Breakthrouoghs

30%

30%

34

Diversion to

Renewable

Electricity

with Plug-in

Technology

Σ=90%

2 x Fuel EconomyIncrease with

Aggressive Hybrid Drivetrains

40 – 50 mpg CAFE

35 to 45 B Gals of CellulosicEthanol or Biomass Methanol

Breakthrouoghs

30%

30%

30%

35

Technology

Evolution

20

36Source: Mark Duvall, EPRI, PHEV Technology Forum, 7-12-06

Electric Drive Technology Continuum

or H2FCV

21

37

Source: Nissan, 2009

22

38Source: Mike Andrew, SAFT, PHEV Technology Forum, 7-12-06

Development Risk & Cost : Not Linear…

23

39

Co

mm

erci

aliz

atio

n R

isk

and

Tec

hn

olo

gic

al M

atu

rity

Commercialization Threshold

Proof of Concept

Lab Prototype

Development Prototype

Demonstration Prototype

Commercial Scale Demonstration

Pilot Production Demonstration

Pilot Production Development

Mass MarketCommercialization

Large Volume Production & Demonstration

Full-Scale Production Verification

Time

CNG

H2 FCV’s

Gasoline

P-ZEV’s

+ FFVsHybrid

P-ZEV’s

Viable H2 storage,

PEM membranes & efficient electrolysis

CO2 → Meoh

Limited range EV’s

P-HEVs

40

METI Battery Innovation Projections:

No sooner than 2030

41

Role of

Renewable

Generation

42

“I‟d put my money on the sun and solar energy. What a source of power! I hope we don‟t have to wait until oil and coal run out before we tackle that.

Thomas Edison, 1931

43

Generation Mix Matters…

44

Energy StorageTechnology Challenges

45

EnergyRecaptured

Kinetic Losses

The Grand Challenge:

46

47

Remember:

Energy storage gets optimized for

consumer electronics first…

48

49

50

There are Significant Synergies between

Electric Drive Architectures…

Source: MIT, Heywood, July, 2008

51

P-HEV Design Alternatives

52

53

DOE PHEV

Battery Requirements

54

DOE Ultracapacitor

Requirements

55

56

To Compete with the Prius…

An Improved Polarization Curve is needed

57

Battery Targets Are Demanding

58

59

Ford Motor Co. Assessment

Source: DOE H2 Program Review, 2009

80% of goal

< 60%

of goal

25

60

Ford Motor Co. Assessment

60% of goal

30% of goal

60% of goal

80% of goal

26

61

Long Term Penetration of EDVs:Dependent on Battery Cost Reductions

Source: Grahn, Azar, Williandar & Anderson, Volvo, Ford +

Chalmers University, Sweden, EST, 2009 27

62

Underlying Technology Issues

ED technology and architectures are diverse

Advanced PHEV prototypes are accelerating

Battery options are increasing

Key challenges appear evolutionary, not revolutionary: Volumetric and gravimetric energy and power density

Volume production a critical step

2nd and 3rd generation anodes 29

63

HEV Battery Challenges

High Cost

Durability

Abuse Tolerance

Operating Temperature Range

-30 to +50 C 28

64

Li I Battery Performance Tradoffs

81

81.5

82

82.5

83

83.5

84

84.5

U1 U24

Valence 18650 Cell Options

Sp

ecif

ic E

nerg

y

- W

h /

kg

100

105

110

115

120

125

130

En

erg

y D

en

sit

y -

Wh /

liter

Specific

Energy

(Wh /

kg)Energy

Density

(Wh /

liter)

Source: A. Perasan, NREL, 2006

65

Li Ion Battery Power & Energy Tradeoffs

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

VL41M VL30P

Saft Li Ion Battery Types

En

erg

y D

en

sit

y

(Wh

/ k

g)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Po

we

r D

en

sit

y

W

/ k

g

Energy

Density

(Wh /

kg)

Power

Density

(W / kg)

P/E = 6 P/E = 11.4

P / E ratio = W / Wh

66

67

68

69

Choosing the Right Lithium Ion Chemistry

R & D Focus is Very Hard…

70

Li Ion Battery with 0% SOC…?

71

Battery Exchange Logistics

Engineering Is Not Simple

30

72

Hitachi Assessment

So where do you want to be?

Here?

Or up here?

73

Hitachi DMFC Assessment

74

75

Energy Density Comparison:

• Polyfuel’s DMFC: 70 mW / cm2

• Lithium ion batteries: 3,000 W / kg (A123) 3,500 W / kg (Sanyo)

@ 160 mW / cm2 not specified / cm2

• NTT’s fuel cell: 200 mW / cm2

*

* Brian Wells, Polyfuel, 5-25-05

Samsung: 650 Wh/liter, 2008Samsung: 650 Wh / liter, 2008

76

Suzuki Motors Wheelchair “MIO”25 miles on 4 liters of methanol + large Li Ion secondary battery

77

78

Future

Opportunities

79

Electric Drive Outlook:

Gasoline Price Outlook Likely to Change

$5.25 / gallon just past July, „08

PHEV 30 – not only benchmark

Diminishing CAFÉ benefit easily misinterpreted

But there are diminishing returns for each ∆ of mpg

Link to renewable generation is key

History of “Favorites” has evolved:

“There is no single silver bullet”…

80

HEV Outlook

Battery developer synergies: Toyota / Panasonic

GM / LG Chem

VW / Sanyo

Chrysler / A123

Hyundia‟s lithium polymer could be the next 10 year benchmark battery, similar to NiMH

Battery progress is continuing for many OEMs: Saft, Continental AG, EDS, Johnson Controls, Valence, UltraNano

Honda H2FC assumes vast materials breakthroughs on bulk transport, bulk storage and on-board storage

81

PHEV Outlook

Recent $1 B PHEV tax credits are important:

$4,168 for 4 kWh

$7,500 for 16 kWh

PHEV architecture is evolving rapidly

82

Some Lessons Learned from R D & D

There are always more stages of testing needed to compete with fully mature conventional technology

The competitive benchmarks keep getting tougher

Simultaneous achievement of several challenging benchmarks (such as recharge time, first cost, energy density, power density and battery cycle life) can plague a technology’s development for decades.

Technology push ≠ demand pull

The most important synergies are often unplanned and unexpected

83

Technology Synergies:

Batteries for BEV’s & Hybrids

Electric Motors / Controllers for FC’s

Fuel Reforming / Catalyst Formulations

42 Volt Electronics for Gasoline

Zero Emission Evaporative Systems

Enhanced Fuel Economy

Production Engineering Cost Reductions

84

My “Electric Drive” Crystal Ball:

The decline in oil prices will encourage renewed consumer SUV preferences.

Economic recovery is likely to trigger renewed higher oil prices A fuel‟s carbon footprint will be its principal market value by 2020 The success of auto OEM EVs will depend on successful launch of

major US battery industrial policy coupled with “post-lithium” battery chemistries

The greatest expansion in alternative fuels in U.S. history is about to occur despite the recent largest market failure in 70 years.

The notion of risk sharing has been overshadowed by nationalizing firms “too big to fail”.

Global dominance will be achieved by agility and vision, not capital strength alone or at any one moment

85

And When All Else Fails…..

86

Conclusions I Collision between climate change, resource depletion and

air quality is intensifying

Technology Push and Demand Pull Now Occurring Simultaneously

Significant Opportunities Exist for Govt / Industry collaboration

Optimizing ED architecture requires tremendous creativity

We are at an international crossroad of key enabling technologies, analytical methods and “Best in Class” electric utility stakeholders and regulatory agencies.

87

Conclusions II We‟ve just started the Hybrid Century

There is no reason to “pick winners”

Battery cost maturity dependent on building an “industry” not just pilot plants

Diversity of architectures will reward OEM dexterity

Chemistry 101 News Flash:

Renewable Fuels + electricity do mix36

88

Sage Wisdom: Mildred Dresselhaus, Emeritus Professor, MIT

“Electricity was not discovered via incremental improvements to the candle!”

Studs Terkel:

“Hope has never trickled down. It has always sprung up.”

89

Supplemental

Slides

90

- CA Grid

Plus added upstream

benefits of biofuels

Charge Depleting Systems →Lower GHG Emissions

19

91

P-HEV Battery Design Targets:

92

Typical Li-I for P-HEV:

Specific Power, kW / kg 60 to 80

Specific Power, 10 sec., kW / kg @ 23 C 3,000

Specific Power, 10 sec., kW / kg @ - 23 C 400

2010 Projected Cost, @ 100,000 units $ / kWh 1,100

Cost for 5 kWh capacity $5,500

source: NREL

93

Incremental Cost $5,500

Base hybrid mpg 45

P-HEV mpg, projected 80

Differential mpg 35

annual mileage 12,000

Base hybrid fuel consumption 267

P-HEV fuel consumption 150

Gallons saved annually 117

Fuel cost / gallon $3.00 $4.00 $5.00

Annual cost recovery 350 466 583

Payback, years 15.7 11.7 9

↑ A 10 kWh Battery doubles this payback period

94

Litium Battery Chemistry Options

Anodes Electrolytes Cathodes

Carbon / Graphite Li PF6 Cobalt Oxide

Titanate (Li4 Ti5 O12) Li BF4 Manganese Oxide

Titanium Oxide various solidsMixed Oxides with Nickel

Thin Oxidevarious polymers

Iron Phosphate

Tungsten Oxide Vanadium Oxide based

95LiFePO4 – Lithium Iron Phosphate

96

Commercial Valuation and Risk:10 Meaningful RD & D Investments:

1) Gain non-OEM user experience to identify durability and reliability issues

2) Obtain up-to-date benchmarking data to better understand the status of a particular technology in a specific duty cycle or use environment.

3) Incentive for OEM’s to take a small step toward commercialization

4) Help concentrate engineering resources on key component development and testing

5) Provide user feedback unattainable in OEM test track environments

97

Meaningful R D & D Investments (cont.)

6) Identify “soft” barriers like consumer understanding and anxiety

7) Reinforce non-petroleum fuel technology development at a time of very low conventional fuel prices.

8) Foster technology “fluency” or “literacy” by keeping key researchers active in the field (like Richard Pefley, Tom Gage, Alan Cocconi, et. al.)

9) Spin-off of technology components for future generation technology.

10) Keep competitive pressure on other technologies.

98

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

2012 2015 2017 2020 2022 2024

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Ele

ctr

ic M

oto

rkW

sta

nd

ard

En

erg

y k

Wh

sta

nd

ard

Why Not a Fleet Average Zero Emission

Electric Drive Mandate ?