DS -

not so fast. PNGV was set up to deliver a car with 80mpg fuel economy. At the time (mid-90s) the only technology that had any chance of getting close was diesel engines, which is what the project focussed on. Unfortunately, emissions standards were raised in the interim, to the point that the project had to be abandoned. The Bush administration folded its remnants into the Freedom Car project, which is supposed to deliver hydrogen fuel cell vehicles.

If a greater fraction of those funds were redirected toward Li-ion research, the chances of getting high-MPG personal mobility anytime soon would be that much higher. Moreover, FCVs - if they ever make sense - would also benefit from hybridization, because it reduces the size of the required stack.

Moreover, note that Li-ion already dominates the consumer electronics and other mobile appliance markets (e.g. cordless power tools). Large Li-ion cells and/or packs can help load level solar and wind power as well as electricity distribution grids, including those used for light and heavy rail. There are probably plenty of other applications for large Li-ion beyond cars that haven't even been invented yet.

There is a reasonable argument that given such market potential, private investors will step up to the plate anyhow, so there is no need for government spending. In the present political climate (Pres. Bush calling for 20 in 10, Rep. Dingell D-Mich running the House Energy Subcommittee, the 2008 election cycle already in progess etc.) it is highly unlikely that any politician will show any fiscal restrain on any apparently green technology effort. So if public money is going to be used, better that it be used for something feasible.

The DOE matched Detroit funding for the U.S. Advanced Battery Consortium. About $300 million was spent over a decade. Nothing seems to have been produced although the Consortium is highly satisfied with itself and will argue otherwise.

The offical Tesla motors web site scoffs at the USABC. But then the Tesla people seem to want to get something done, don't they.

Since 1992 there has been an Advanced Lead Acid Battery Consortium composed mostly of battery producers and the Detroit automakers. Despite the name it is not limited to lead-acid development and can try anything likely to improve electrical vehicles. As far as I know it had no government funding.

I have no objection to public funding for battery research. But exactly what will Detroit bring to the team? Would you hire them with your money?

The other big advantage for FCVs of hybridization is that not only would the stack be smaller, but its lifespan would be significantly improved by being used at a steady optimal state which reduces wear and tear on the membrane. Plug in Ultracap-battery-FC range extender hybrid anyone? As I see it the most useful thing the government can do is to make sure that research efforts are not hogged and definitely not suppressed. Even if that means buying out the patents with chunks of cash if need be.

Honda has the right idea. Encourage performance based achievements, not specific technologies.

"How about a 30 mpg car?"

My 1996 Ford Escort got 31 mpg in all city driving faithfully. Sadly my Ford Focus falls short of that. Nicer more comfortable car but the gas mileage sucks. I guess they felt that since the SUV's suck in gas mileage the cars should too.

My 1996 Ford Escort got 31 mpg in all city driving faithfully

So why hasn't CAFE been raised pass 27.5 mpg, the level it's been since 1985? The answer is Detroit gets whatever it wants from Washington.

The direct end result of PNGV is the Prius and the upcoming version is rumored to deliver over 90mpg.
The results of Freedom Car is H2 carbon-fiber storage technology and ever-improving FC technology and perhaps also high-temp electrolysis of water with double the electrical efficiency.
If we now combine the fruits of these two programs together, we will have a 100-mpkg Prius, with a Quantum 4kg hydrogen tank costing under $2000 USD, capable of 400-mi range. The Prius engine can also benefit from Sandia lab's direct hydrogen injection research with multi-mode diesel-like operation that promises 45% thermal efficiency or higher.

I've discussed in previous postings that an integrated H2 gasification and high-temp electrolysis center coupled with a dispensing station all in one location can reduce any inefficiency involved with H2 transportation and distribution, such that 1kg of H2 can be produced from wind electricity at ~$2.50-$3.00 USD, or even less, from waste cellulosic biomass, at $2.00 USD! The neat thing is that the O2 released from the high-temp electrolysis can be fed directly into the gasifier in the biomass or coal gasification process, thus eliminating any cost associated with the acquisition and transporting of O2 from external sources! An urban center with population of 1 million having 10mi x 10mi areas (100 square miles) will only need one H2 station in the center, resulting in on average only a ~4-5 mile trip to the H2 filling station.

DOE data reveals that the total US yearly consumption of gasoline is 140 billion gallons, whereas waste biomass can be gasified to produce 66 billions of kg (gal. of gasoline equivalent) of H2. This means that the typical H2-HEV or H2-PHEV vehicles having over twice the energy efficiency as comparable gasoline cars will be able to meet all driving needs with waste biomass alone. H2 can also substitute for diesel fuel in diesel engines with some modification. Liquid H2 can also power future jetliners.

The fruit of the PNGV and Freedom Car programs in combination can result in petroleum independence and GHG-neutral transportation in the very near future if my above vision will be adopted.

Who can now dare say that Government research funding is a waste of money? Sure, the direct beneficiaries of gov. grants do not always produce the desirable results, but maybe their competitors will, and eventually, our knowledge base will increase, and many more future innovations can come out of the knowledge thus gained.

One reason why the earlier effort failed is that fuel prices were very low then and it was more of an acedemic exercise. Also, customers were not very interested in MPG then.

The situation is different today with fuel prices high and no real prospect of falling due to the emergence of China and India.

Hence, now might be a good time to put some federal money into batteries (and Eu Money while you'r at it).

Different gasoline, different gallons, different test cycles.

In GB 2 liter Focus gets 28/50 mpg, EEC test cycle:

http://www.directford.co.uk/newcars.php?range=8

In US same 2 liter Focus (with lower compression ratio due to lower octane gasoline) gets 26/34 mpg, EPA test cycle.

And by the way, Focus and Fusion are different cars.

Just rented "Who killed the electric car".
I don't think I will ever consider buying a GM car now.

If Detroit got everything they wanted from the feds then there would be a $30,000 tarriff on each imported car. Since Detroit doesn't get what it wants it has had to become an importer of both foreign cars and parts.
As for the PNGV they produced a car that was bigger than the Prius and got 50% better mileage. But this was when gas was $1 gal so there was no incentive to pay the extra cost.

Wintermane:
In 1875 people drove low power cars because President Grant insisted. He stuck to horses and carriages and still got a speeding ticket :)

Tom:
'As for the PNGV they produced a car that was bigger than the Prius and got 50% better mileage.'

If the PNGV was so great then where is it? Is it built in Europe where people buy small cars because of high gasoline costs? (actually, thanks. I am now curious enough to research the PNGV but don't have time this morning)