Senators Urge $250M in Funding for PHEVs and Batteries in 2009 Budget
06 January 2008
Twenty US Senators recently sent a letter to Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman and Office of Management and Budget Director Jim Nussle asking that the President’s 2009 budget request include funding for electric vehicle technology initiatives that Congress has authorized. The letter specifically calls for funding for the development and promotion of Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEVs) and advanced mobile and stationary batteries.
Specifically, we hope the President will request at least $250 million in funding for PHEVs and related electrification measures, including $150 million for advanced mobile and stationary batteries, $40 million for light- and heavy-duty electric vehicle demonstrations, $20 million in PHEV analysis, system modeling, and grid analysis, $5 million for PHEV testing and certification, and $35 million for education, research, development, and deployment efforts. These levels are currently allowable under existing authorizations.
As you may know, 97 percent of our nation’s transportation sector is dependent on oil. The electrification of our transportation sector through PHEVs and other measures holds the promise of significantly reducing our nation’s dependence on oil, while saving consumers hundreds of dollars at the pump and reducing vehicular pollution and greenhouse gases. A financial commitment from the federal government is vital if we are to see PHEVs on the road over the next few years.
Several provisions for the electrification of the nation’s transportation sector were signed into law as part of the Energy Bill (H.R.6), including:
Incentives for domestic manufacturers to refurbish their facilities to produce advanced technology vehicles, such as PHEVs and advanced diesel vehicles;
A requirement for federal fleets to reduce their petroleum use by 20 percent by 2015;
Provisions that allow federal agencies to purchase electric-drive vehicles; and,
The creation of a Department of Energy research and development program to improve vehicle fuel efficiency through the use of lightweight materials like high-strength steel alloys and advanced carbon composites.
The letter to Bodman and Nussle was signed by Senators Evan Bayh (D-IN), Joseph Biden (D-DE), Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Sam Brownback (R-KS), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Robert Casey (D-PA), Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY), Norm Coleman (R-MN), Christopher Dodd (D-CT), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Orrin Hatch (R-UT), John F. Kerry (D-MA), Herb Kohl (D-WI), Carl Levin (D-MI), Joe Lieberman (I-CT), Dick Lugar (R-IN), Barack Obama (D-IL), Ken Salazar (D-CO), Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Debbie Stabenow (D-MI).
And, in case you didn't notice, the oil subsidies are in the bill to make sure we stay addicted to oil; This is a White House that says one thing and does another; a White House addicted to oil money!
Posted by: Lad | 06 January 2008 at 10:03 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but how does this $ 1/4 billion compares with the $13 billion given to Oil producers? I see about 52:1 in favour of Oil?
Shouldn't it be the other way around, if so, it should have been 52 x $13 billions = $676 billions instead of $ 1/4 billion.
This is not very serious.
Posted by: Harvey D | 06 January 2008 at 10:15 AM
As observed above, this is yet another waste of dollars, 13 billion to add to the oil supply and 1/4 billion to reduce oil demand. Naturally this mindless waste is advocated by both parties, but primarily Democrats.
How about an incentive of $5,000 off the price of electric or hybrids with an AER greater than 10 miles? And $10,000 off the price of hybrids or electrics with an AER of greater than 25 miles? What would it cost? Lets say 200,000 vehicles with a 10 mile range are sold each year, and 100,000 with a 25 mile range are sold each year. And the funding was for 4 years, 2009 to 2013. But do the Democrats push something bold? Nope.
Posted by: Van | 06 January 2008 at 01:28 PM
I'm glad to see some action on PHEV's for this bill, but it seems the ship has sailed... the bill's been signed, it's done. Good luck, but they dropped the ball when they had the chance to get it right.
One thing I don't understand is why they don't mandate that all diesel vehicles be capable of running biodiesel or veggie oil without modification. That'd be cheap at a production position, just like flexfuel, but actually useful because there's biodiesel to buy or make.
Posted by: Elliot | 06 January 2008 at 04:50 PM
Gee Whiz. Another Democrat giveaway for more government spending. Everyone of the 20, a Democrat, except Lugar, a retiring liberal RINO.
Where were all these estimable notables, back when the real needs were being faced; to create and to fund battery research? Back then it took government funded basic research spending, to move the Li-Ion chemistry from lab curiosity to product; and to make real the newly formed US government-industry team at the US Automotive Battery Consortium, back in 2001. Necessary research spending, but it bought very few votes, so they weren't interested.
No where to be found, is where they were; since it was a Republican program and denounced as subsidies for the "rich" automakers. Now it's no longer needed, as Li-Ion technology is well established and happening with private industrial research money.
But subsidies to auto buyers will buy lots of Votes; so these gentle-persons are all for it.
Joint government/industry co-operation is GENERAL anathema to Democrats. Such activities are subsidies to the "rich" and not needed according to them. Back then they were preaching about doing without; and belt tightening for everyone else, but peerless leaders, like themselves. We were/are told, we must modify and downsize our lifestyles.
The same members of the Jackass Party fought the "subsidies" to the nuclear plant builders in designing an advanced generation of much safer nuclear plants. Now these new designs will provide the "clean" electrons for all the PHEVs that they want to subsidize, in their quest to buy votes.
Same as the BS today.
Posted by: Stan Peterson | 06 January 2008 at 05:08 PM
Hmm, although the intention is good I think there are already sufficient fundings in Department of Energy, or DARPA that can be redirected to Plug-in or battery research.
The cold reality is that the next generation of Lithium batteries will be coming out of Japan, Korea, or China. The manufacturing cost advantage, and their existing expertise should prove decisive over any of the US start-ups.
Posted by: Lulu | 06 January 2008 at 05:19 PM
Stan, this letter was signed by three other republican senators and two independents. The real jackasses are those in Washington from both parties who continue to bow to the oil lobby.
Posted by: Baydog | 06 January 2008 at 06:47 PM
@Baydog,
Idiocy is where you find it.
I don't know how much of the "subsidies" are pure graft and how much is valid basic research. I object to graft, along wiht you, and second valid basic research.
I certainly don't begrudge any monies spent on developing IGCC "clean coal plants"; or "Sequestration" research & development; or money spent of Photovoltaics or Wind Turbines; as the Oil companies are in all four areas. Even as I think sequestration is pure idiocy based on demented hysteria.
BTW, my Senator McCain her in Arizona is as loopy on AGW as Algore and knows about as much Science too, None. Amazing what the presidential grub does to a mind.
The only reason another two "independents" signed it, is that one is an admitted "Socialist" who has discarded the cover of calling himself a Democrat; and the other is a liberal who was dounble-crossed by the Jackass Party for being a Democrat in the mold of Wilson, FDR, Truman, JFK, and LBJ. You know the kind of Democrat I used to be, ones who represent Americans and America.
Posted by: Stan Peterson | 06 January 2008 at 09:03 PM
Gentelmen:
Without large support funds to finance R & D + start-up cost + transistion cost; batteries + BEVs (and even PHEVs) manufacturing will NOT stay in USA for very long. Do the Big Three have much of a future with 3-tonnes ICE gas guzzlers?
UAW members should know that they are walking a fine line and that their jobs are extremely exportable unless they become more productive.
A country the size of USA cannot survive on R & D alone for a very long time. Copy cats will use the benefits without paying their fair share.
A strong manufacturing base is a must. Unions, politicians and Americans should know that and do whatever is required to ensure its survival.
Posted by: Harvey D | 07 January 2008 at 06:17 AM
Have to agree that $250m is a small number at a very late stage of development. The technology is essentially simpler than ICE and the batteries are well under way in various stages around the world.
What we don't see and is VERY necessary for success is a significant incentive program for BEV PHEV purchases. Probably some combination of mileage, emissions and AER is best. I would rather see tax credits for these new vehicle purchases than more government "programs."
And to continue to subsidize oil companies for exploration at this late date is bewildering. Anyone ever heard of something called "windfall profits?"
Posted by: gr | 07 January 2008 at 12:22 PM
Hey fellas...Battery tech developments are far from over. Companies say they are working & have Lithium tech. That means there is lots of room for decreased charge times, & increased energy density & reliability. Can't declare the war over when its just beginning.
Demeaning comments about one party or the other about a bill constructed by both parties increases the commentor's ego but does not save our Earth.
Posted by: litesong | 07 January 2008 at 02:42 PM
litesong:
Well said.
Transportation vehicles electrification has a very very long way to go. We are at the pre-first generation level.
$$$ billions (not $$$ millions) are required to get mass production going and before we see PHEVs and BEVs at an affordable price.
Posted by: Harvey D | 09 January 2008 at 12:00 PM