GM Volt Forum banner

Bye Bye 10X nanowire lithium-ion battery?

15871 Views 23 Replies 7 Participants Last post by  Jason M. Hendler
I don’t know what to make of this. Any suggestions?

Let me summarize. The man that is responsible for inventing a battery technology that has the potential to globally replace petroleum as an energy source as been given a grant by Saudi Arabia, the biggest producer of petroleum in the world. Things that make you go hummm. Yi Cui, an assistant professor of materials science and engineering at Stanford who specializes in nanotechnology will get 2 million dollars a year for 5 years and is required to spend from 3 weeks to 3 months a year in Saudi Arabia doing research. Here are a few motivations I see:

1) Saudi Arabia knows that it’s oil reserves are far smaller than they claim and know they must switch to alternative energy technologies as soon as possible. Why not get the most promising researcher on earth? Hey, energy was good for them in the past, why not in the future. If the US let’s this guy go because we did not give him enough funding then it will be one of the dumbest things we have ever done (or not done). Kind of like letting Manning (either of them!) go in a trade.

2) By lavishly funding him it will effectively keep Yi out of the commercial market for at least the next 5 years. Hey, research is a heck of a lot more fun than getting a product out the door and making deadlines. Yi was talking about starting up a company or licensing out his technology but now he doesn’t have to. Hummm.

3) Saudi Arabia knows this guy is going to be an important patent generating machine. Grab this IP and continue to rule the energy world.

4) Obtain exclusive rights to Yi’s IP and slow down or halt the technologies ability to displace petroleum. It would be bad for Saudi Arabia if petroleum was displaced, don’t you think?

5) Yi knows that his technology is worthless and getting 10 million from Saudi Arabia will keep him in the lab and also buy him some new toys to play with for another 5 years. This would be a shame but if true it would make Yi even smarter than I thought! lol.

Anyway, I’ve been holding my breath over this silicon nanowire battery technology and what Yi is going to do with it. My hope was for him to unconditionally license the IP to several large companies so that they can get this to market as fast as possible with the least possibility of the technology being bought out and covered up. Looks like my concerns were valid. Oh well, we always have algae I guess. Algae will be much more difficult to cover up. Oh, EEstor is also a possibility. However, I think they would be bought out even easier. Perhaps by the government planning to keep their technology secret in order to maintain a military advantage. I’m starting to sound like a conspiracy theorist. You know what they say, even though someone is paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not being watched. ;)

Come on Yi, license your technology out and let the big boys bring it to market as fast as possible. A quick-charge battery with 10X the performance of current lithium-ion (heck, 2X would do it) is the game changer all of us are looking for. At lest give us an update once in a while. :)
See less See more
21 - 24 of 24 Posts
More conspiracy theorys

Technology is advancing and SA investing in other technology will of course be viewed with a defensive/curious eye. But this is nothing new and nothing to be alarmed about. Here is why!

1. Demand for oil has outstriped the supply that is being produced.
2. All the experts (right or wrong doesn't matter) predict this trend to continue and demand to increase.
3. SA will continue to invest in all kinds of tech just as exxonmobil does and they are one of the most oil positive and alt energy negative companies of all the big oil companies.

Remember it was exxonmobil that developed the technology to make the li-ion batteries safe for car use. Up until that point they were considered too dangerous.

Innovation moves forward and Exxon and SA can't stop it and don't try. They move forward strictly in what makes the most business sense.

This is nothing more than a business putting its PR money to science every year. This year some of that money happens to go to battery technology. Nothing more.

This of course is my opinion and you are free to agree or disagree.

Have a nice day!

If price is similiar or a little higher (for the same weight) then the higher cost could be offset by having less battery (weight wise) and doing away with the range extender all together.
See less See more
I personally think it is either a payoff gesture, or a move to increase their PR and nothing more.

Until I see an actual plug-in car FOR SALE, I'll think any gesture/grant by oil companies or oil nations are to pay off people to suppress their technological developments that could replace oil if mass produced.
Some people are crying conspiracy theories over oil companies and battery technology and others are trying to discredit those that even bring up the thought that a company would even dare to cover up technology for their own benefit. I offer you this simple post from another person. Just the chronology of the events is worth a thousand words. Might not prove anything but maybe, just maybe a small amount of caution might be observed as we move forward. Is that too much to ask? Please read and make up your own minds:

"20. Chris M:

That web page at Cobasys does state that they make "advanced NiMH energy storage systems for hybrid electric vehicles (HEV), electric vehicles (EV), 42-Volt and plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) transportation applications." What it fails to mention is the name of any EV manufacturer to whom it actually supplies the batteries.

Do you know of one? Perhaps Zenn or ZAP or Th!nk or Miles or Aptera? Claiming that they COULD be used for that purpose, but actually providing them... are two different things.

Also, perhaps you should write to Wikipedia to correct their assessment of the Toyota/Panasonic issues. For example, you say that "Toyota stopped making the RAV4EV as sales were poor." Yet Wikipedia claims that "there were more RAV4-EV's sold than there were cars available."

Moreover, on the subject of the NiMH batteries, according to Wikipedia:

"Whether or not Toyota wanted to continue production, it was unlikely to be able to do so, because the EV-95 battery was no longer available. Chevron had inherited control of the worldwide patent rights for the NiMH EV-95 battery when it merged with Texaco, which had purchased them from General Motors. Chevron's unit won a $30,000,000 settlement from Toyota and Panasonic, and the production line for the large NiMH batteries was closed down and dismantled. Only smaller NiMH batteries, incapable of powering an electric vehicle or plugging in, are currently allowed by Chevron-Texaco."

Finally, I think your timeline might be off --and the subsequent consequences and conclusions. According to the documents and news releases I can find, this is the chronology:

1994 - General Motors buys controlling interest in Ovonics's NiMH batteries.

1997 - Toyota makes the RAV4-EV available in the U.S.

Oct. 10, 2000 - Texaco purchases GM's controlling interest in Ovonic.

Oct. 16, 2000 - Chevron acquires Texaco.

2001 - CARB repeals the ZEV mandate and GM axes the EV1 program.

2001 - Texaco/Chevron Ovonic sues Toyota/Panasonic for patent infringement.

November, 2002 - Toyota axes the RAV4-EV.

2003 - Texaco/Chevron Ovonic becomes Cobasys.

July 7, 2004 - Toyota/Panasonic settle with Cobasys for $30,000,000.
See less See more
Who cares about NiMH batteries - that is old tech that no automaker wants anymore. Li Ion batteries are available off-the-shelf from companies supporting laptops, so the world is flush with the only battery tech people want or need.
21 - 24 of 24 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.