DOE expands partnership with industry to advance next-generation automotive technologies, adds Tesla and EPRI as members: US DRIVE
19 May 2011
|
|
The US Department of Energy (DOE) has launched US DRIVE, a cooperative partnership with industry to accelerate the development of clean, advanced, energy-efficient technologies for cars and light trucks and the infrastructure needed to support their widespread use. The announcement of US DRIVE marks the addition of two new members that bring additional focus on electric-drive vehicle technologies to the partnership: the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) and Tesla Motors.
Formerly known as the FreedomCAR and Fuel Partnership in the 2000s, US DRIVE—Driving Research and Innovation for Vehicle efficiency and Energy sustainability—is a non-binding and voluntary government-industry partnership that serves as a forum for pre-competitive technical information exchange among partners to discuss R&D needs, develop joint goals and technology roadmaps, and evaluate R&D progress for a broad range of technical areas.
By providing a framework for frequent and regular interaction among technical experts in a common area of expertise, the Partnership intends to:
Accelerate technical progress; peers in the technical community discuss pre-competitive, technology-specific R&D needs and challenges, identify possible solutions, and evaluate progress toward jointly-developed technical goals.
Help to avoid duplication of efforts and ensure that publicly-funded research delivers high-value results and overcomes high-risk barriers to technology commercialization.
The full list of US DRIVE partners includes:
Auto industry: United States Council for Automotive Research LLC (the collaborative research company for Chrysler Group LLC, Ford Motor Company, and General Motors) and Tesla Motors
Energy industry: BP America, Chevron Corporation, ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil Corporation, and Shell Oil Products US
Electric utility industry: DTE Energy, Southern California Edison, and the Electric Power Research Institute
US DRIVE partners will on the following technical areas:
- Advanced combustion and emission control
- Batteries/electrochemical energy storage
- Electric propulsion systems (e.g., power electronics, electric motors)
- Fuel cell power systems
- Lightweight materials
- Vehicle systems and analysis
- Vehicle-to-electricity grid interaction
- Fuel pathway integration
- On-board hydrogen storage
- Hydrogen production
- Hydrogen delivery
- Hydrogen codes and standards
FreedomCAR was a cute label, but let's get beyond the hype and actually DO something to reduce imported oil. I have had it with all the papers and studies that last 10 years...make it actually happen!
Posted by: SJC | 19 May 2011 at 10:51 AM
It seems that we progressively prefer doing studies/paper works, create financial bubbles etc and let other countries like China, India, Japan etc to the manufacturing.
By the way, the next local speculators made bubble may very be with Social Networks stocks.
Posted by: HarveyD | 19 May 2011 at 10:58 AM
non-binding and voluntary government-industry partnership that serves as a forum for pre-competitive technical information exchange
Japan has MITI, Korea and China have their organizations that actually DO something and we wonder why we lose ground to them.
Posted by: SJC | 19 May 2011 at 12:38 PM
When an empire starts to loose its economic and political supremacy, it starts to put more money in military spending in the hope to maintain its grip or revert its decline, not only history has proven that it doesn't work but it tends to accelerate the downfall for obvious financial reasons. Citizen of the empire also feel neglected on the process as they see their well being shrinking...
Posted by: Treehugger | 19 May 2011 at 09:29 PM
We were suppose to have a "peace dividend" according to Bush Sr. after the fall of the wall in 1991. We spend more than ever 20 years after the collapse of the Soviet Union. We were warned about the Military Industrial Complex.
Posted by: SJC | 20 May 2011 at 09:32 AM
Looks like a lot of guys without technical skill trying to figure out how they can make money off of the scientists and engineers. We call them managers, and they manage to take credit for the ideas and labor of others. Which is why a technical career is such a dead end these days. Look also at the participants in that list. They look like companies who are really happy with the way things are going already (with a couple of odd exceptions). Why would the oil companies want anything to change? I guess when your the real boss you can get yourselves onto the consortiums that are intended to provide the technology of the future, and then make sure the future is exactly the same as the present.
Posted by: ChrisJ | 20 May 2011 at 11:47 AM
This is a way you can do anti trust collusion through the government and get away with it. They are not going to share, competitors do NOT cooperate for obvious reasons.
Posted by: SJC | 20 May 2011 at 11:51 AM
Fuels industry: BP America, Chevron Corporation, ConocoPhillips Company, ExxonMobil Corporation, Shell Oil Products US
Fuel pathway integration
On-board hydrogen storage
Hydrogen production
Hydrogen delivery
Hydrogen codes and standards
I guess if you want big oil to be your transport energy companies for another 100 years, this is one way to do that.
Posted by: SJC | 20 May 2011 at 12:05 PM
There is nothing basically wrong with governments participating in initial financing required for technical evolution but a fair return should be imposed in all cases. Give aways or limitless subsidies and tax credits are ways to transfer huge assets from the poor/middle class to the richest (5%) groups.
Posted by: HarveyD | 21 May 2011 at 11:16 AM
If something would actually COME of it, then fine. But I have not seen a score sheet that shows how much comes out of how much goes in. I think the tax payers would like to see that.
Posted by: SJC | 21 May 2011 at 11:20 AM
Well what came out of freedom car was alot of basic work on getting the electronics cheaper and smaller and getting a very compact battery for micro and normal hybrid uses.
They also worked alot of lightweighting and work on carbon fiber .
Only a TINY portion of freedomcar was actualy about fuel cells. Alot of it was about far more short term goals.
Posted by: wintermane2000 | 21 May 2011 at 11:34 AM
FreedomCAR was mainly hydrogen decades away. Bush would make a photo op at a battery plant and then go back to MMS looking the other way in the Gulf and saying Iraqi oil would pay for the war.
Posted by: SJC | 21 May 2011 at 12:50 PM
Not if you looked at the money.. most of it wasnt actualy going to fuel cells.. yes h2 was being spent on.. they have to anyway as we depend alot on h2 anyway and dont realy know or didnt know back then if we could depend on nat gas supplies for much longer then oil;/
Posted by: wintermane2000 | 21 May 2011 at 04:04 PM
"With the hydrogen-focused FCVT, whose goal is decades away, the Bush Administration was criticized for ignoring any intermediate-term solutions, while funding it largely with monies redirected from other renewable-energy and energy-efficiency programs."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FreedomCAR#Criticisms
Posted by: SJC | 21 May 2011 at 04:38 PM
"Under the President's Freedom Fuel initiative, the first car driven by a child born today could be powered by fuel cells. Freedom Fuel complements the President's existing FreedomCAR initiative, which is developing technologies needed for mass production of safe and affordable hydrogen-powered fuel cell vehicles."
http://scienceblog.com/887/white-house-explains-bushs-hydrogen-car-plan/
"the first car driven by a child born today could be powered by fuel cells"
THAT means that it is at LEAST 16 years away. Just the amount of time his friends running the oil companies need to make hundreds of billion of more dollars in profits.
Posted by: SJC | 21 May 2011 at 04:48 PM
I remember reading the list of projects the freedom car thingy was working on and the cost of each and the fuel cell part was rather small.
But that was a long time ago and its not as if I was paying all that mucvh attension as it was after all the freaking freedom car. Now if it had been the deathcar 2020 THAT i would have cared about...
Posted by: wintermane2000 | 21 May 2011 at 10:41 PM
"According to the White House, only $720 million of the $1.2 billion Bush pledged for his hydrogen plan over the next five years is new money. The rest -- roughly 40 percent -- is comprised of funds redirected from the renewable-energy and energy-efficiency programs."
http://www.grist.org/article/tough
He cut the NREL budget SO many times over those years, there was no one left to do a photo op with in 2005, so they hired a few back temporarily.
Posted by: SJC | 22 May 2011 at 12:01 AM
If we will just raise taxes, the government would be able to spend money on so many more fun things that we would soon become accustomed to rat hole spending.
Umm, make that MORE accustomed
Private enterprise CANNOT accomplish such carefree uncontrolled spending – as soon as they start, the greedy stockholders start whining and if they persist, the company goes bankrupt.
They even try to control R & D! They have to; they cannot just print more money.
Since we are at about the tipping point where only 50% or less of the population pays taxes, we just need to be patient.
As the greedy taxpayers become a minority, (and those who pay no taxes, still vote) the government can begin to spend freely – truly freely.
Actually, I think the present progressive administration started this some time ago.
Posted by: ToppaTom | 06 June 2011 at 05:05 AM