Enova to Build Hybrid Service Vans for Fleet Operator
National Program for Scrap Cars to Reduce Mercury Emissions

AES Corporation Joins Plug-In Hybrid Development Consortium

AES Corporation, one of the world’s largest global power companies, has joined the Plug-In Hybrid Development Consortium (earlier post) in support of the development of Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEVs).

The Consortium is made up of a growing number of automotive suppliers, manufacturers and other organizations working together to accelerate the commercial production of Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

We see PHEVs as a practical and economical way to help meet our nation's transportation, environmental and energy goals in a sustainable way, and we look forward to continuing to play a leadership role in alternative energy through our membership in the Plug-In Hybrid Development Consortium.

—Robert Hemphill, AES Executive Vice President

Current members of the Consortium include:

  • A123 Systems (Lithium-ion batteries)
  • AES Corporation (Power company)
  • Brusa (Power electronics)
  • Daiken (Lithium-ion batteries)
  • Delta-Q Technologies (Power electronics)
  • Electrovaya (Lithium-ion batteries)
  • ENAX (Lithium-ion batteries)
  • International Battery (Lithium-ion batteries)
  • Maxwell Technologies (Ultracapacitors and energy storage)
  • NexxtDrive Ltd (Transmissions)
  • PG&E (Utility)
  • Raser Technologies (Electric motors)
  • Solomon Technologies (Electric Drive Systems)
  • Southern California Edison (Utility)
  • Hydrogenics (Hydrogen generation and fuel cells)

The Consortium is targeting the development of “dual-mode plug-in hybrids”—hybrids that operate in the first 20 to 50 miles in all-electric mode, and automatically switch to the internal combustion engine-hybrid mode for longer distances.

AES is an $11-billion company with operations in 26 countries. Its 122 power generation facilities have the capacity to generate approximately 44,000 megawatts.


Harvey D.

Good news. For an obvious reason, all power companies should be interested in PHEVs and EVs. Where are the car manufacturers?

Bud Johns

Harvey D, I for one hope the '08 3rd gen Prius is a plug in...........



I surmise that the managers of the new Chinese plant are awaiting a nod from on high who is awaiting a nod from Toyota and Fuji Heavy engineers testing the manganese-lithium batteries.

The problem is credibility. Dr. Alfonzo Andrew Frank may recall the last time that he paid seventy-seven cents a gallon for fuel, because he is an old geezer. Most other car drivers have never known such a time and thus have difficulty envisioning the equivalent.

We are creatures of habit. That will be $24.38, please.


I'm 36 and I remember burning around in a 455 C.I. Pontiac getting 7-10 mpg and paying about 70 cents a gallon. The stupidity of youth! Years later i was filling out my will with the Mass. Air Nat'l Gaurd, just incase. That was in 1991. Cars have come a long way since then. If you use www.archive.org and check out www.futuretruck.org we can see that the dream of better CLEANER transportation is ongoing and hopes from a few years ago are becoming real.

allen Z

It may just be me, but the link you provided appears to be dead.
___If they are not carefull, they might be sued by the Feds for antitrust violations. Plugins may take off, and while they are reaping the rewards, they might exhibit business practices that may be tantamount to collusion or other illegal practices.
___If managed properly and legally, this consortium may provide the necessary environment and support to help these companies to get hybrids from the 1-10% into the 25-75% of market range.


It's too bad that clean energy companies are not explicitly listed as a member of the Consortium. We currently use 200 billion gallons of fuel per year for transportation. Every watt continuously produced for a year is equivalent to about one gallon of fuel:

1 Watt * (1 Joule/(watt*sec))*(86400 secons/day)*(365 days/yr)= 31.54 Mega Joule

at 1 mile/Mega Joule, a national average mpg, and inefficiencies present to charge a PHEV, that's about 1 gallon per continuous watt. Which means we need to add 200 Giga Watts of continuous electrical power to theoretically replace every gallon of fuel. In wind power terms, that means we need to install 667 Giga Watts. At one dollar per watt, that is $667 billion. In reality, wind power prices will significantly drop due to the astronomical business volume, so we can probably get all the infrastructure for less than $400 billion. If we don't change course, we will continue to burn 14 million barrels of oil every day:
14 million barrels/day * ($70/barrel)*(365 days/yr)
= 357.7 billion dollars.
In the mean time, Iran revenues are so high, they can more than afford to give rockets to terrorist so they can attack Israel (with our own money!).

fyi CO2

Nicely stated, Freddy


Freddy, I don't have the desire/patience to check your numbers...
but I do believe we have spent roughly $400 billion on the war in Iraq so far since 2003.

Once we replace all of our transportation & power needs provided by oil, what oil we do have would be more than enough for other petroleum products (plastics, etc, of course recycling should reduce this as well).

allen Z

A big chunk of that $400 billion is spent on, drum roll... fuel and oil products to run all those armored vehicles, trucks, rotary wing and fixed wing aircraft. A smaller chunk is used up in logistics and electricity generation. This is why the military is looking more and more towards hybrid systems and more efficient engines/powerplants.
While it is true Iran is reaping the rewards of high oil prices, they are suffering from acute lackof refining capacity. They must import gasoline and other refined petroleum products to keep up with surging demand from cars/trucks. They have spent much of their money from oil revenues to keep domestic prices of refined products at artificially low levels. This has led to a woefully inadequate domestic refinery production, soaring domestic fuel consumption, and thus ever increasing imports of refined products from foreign countries.
_What they do not spend on fuel subsidies, they spend on populist projects, the military, their Nuke program, and foreign ventures ie. Hezboallah. They are skimping on economic development and are not using it sensibly like Norway, or UAE (Dubai, Abu Dhabi).
___One side note, Equitorial Guinea has found alot of oil for such a small country. If properly managed, the country could use the revenues, over 20-40 years, to make themselves the Singapore of Africa. They will have to sustain buffeting of lower and higher oil prices due to economic and technological shifts.
___The consortium will have to include other companies that are concentrating on different technologies to diversify the connections. Currently they are concentrated on electrics. Thus they should include solar and other renewable energy system makers. _Hydraulic hybrid systems and ICE developers could form their own partnerships too.


Freddy, I got lost somewhere in your numbers but I think you ended up with too much wind capacity. Well sited wind turbines can produce 3000 hours/year. That's 3 kWh per year for each installed watt, enough to push a PHEV about 12 miles. 200 GW of installed wind power would thus provide roughly all of our 2.4 trillion vehcile miles. That's $200 billion at current turbine prices and perhaps only $125b with economies of scale.

The engineering problem of matching wind's intermittent supply to PHEV demand is left as an exercise for the student.


Allen Z if you use www.archive.org it is a web archive, by berkley I believe, you can view the internet of the past. Future Truck was a program by the Feds and the top 11 engineering universities in the U.S. It was similar to the SAE Clean Snowmobile program. If you use the Archive.org to read the pages of the different years you will see diesel/hybrids giving Ford Explorers an average of 26mpg. The last year of the program 3 schools used fuelcells to modify the Explorer and averaged just over 40mpg equivelant.

In the clean Snow mobile contest the 2 stroke snow mobiles modified with Orbital Corp. technology got better gas milage and lower emissions than the best 4 stroke cats. Orbital was/is a company from Austalia that had some interesting port,breathing work to clean up the 2 stroke. The SAE website used to post that contest.

It seems we need more of these contests as industry follows the students as they move on and uses their learned skills in these areas.

Just a proud not my father is a retired diesl engineer. He designed and had running a diesel with no camshafts in 1995. It used fast electronic swithes and hydrolic tappits for infinately variable lift, duration and velocity to maximixe efficiency for every RPM, Throttle setting, Load, Boost And Temp range. Cool pops well done.

P.S. that was done at Jacobs Vehicle systems for locomotives but wasn't bought by their clients.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)