DOCSLIB.ORG

Battery Powered Vehicles: Don't Rule Them

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Battery Powered Vehicles: Don't Rule Them BATTERY POWERED VEHICLES: DON’T RULE THEM OUT Jerry Mader, Deputy Director1 Transportation Energy Center (TEC) University of Michigan November 16, 2006 ELECTRIC VEHICLE HISTORY: A TALE OF FALSE STARTS Electric vehicles (EV) are powered exclusively by a battery that is recharged from the electric utility grid. In every decade or so, like in today’s energy climate where gasoline prices have risen dramatically, policymakers and the public become aroused by the prospect of battery-powered vehicles. Although EVs sound like an unusual concept in today’s internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicle world, EVs have been around for about 170 years. The first EV was invented way back in the 1830s and, when battery storage improved later in the 19th Century, EVs began to flourish. In fact, in the early part of the 20th Century, EVs outsold ICE vehicles because they were easier to start, quieter and not as smelly as gasoline cars. But, as roads improved and, with the discovery of crude oil in Texas, the gasoline cars took over. Later in the last century, the U.S. petroleum crisis of the 1970s was an event that spurred interest in the development of EVs. In 1976, Congress passed Public Law 94-413 that mandated the introduction of 10,000 EVs on U.S. roads in five years. However, U.S. policymakers’ enthusiasm for EVs soon dissipated and petroleum substitution strategies were supplanted by policies to support OPEC2 countries that would keep oil flow to the United States. The 1990s brought yet another policy initiative that focused considerable attention on market introduction of EVs. In September 1990, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) enacted the Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) Mandate that required manufacturers to sell 2% EVs in 1998, ramping up to 10% in 2003. The ZEV Mandate was very unpopular with automotive manufacturers, especially General Motors, Ford and Chrysler. These companies complained that a government should not mandate a vehicle technology, but that its acceptance should be based on market forces. Eventually, General Motors sued the state of California over this issue and, as a result, the ZEV Mandate was modified to incorporate other vehicle technologies that could reduce emissions, such as hybrid electrics and hydrogen-powered cars. Although the California ZEV Mandate failed to create a sustainable EV market, it did have a dramatic impact on accelerating the development of battery and fuel cell technology. Today, as we are entering the 21st Century, the battery-powered vehicle still holds the promise for future widespread use. And, our battery-powered future should be driven more on the technical progress in battery storage and less on the wishful thinking of government policymakers. IT’S THE BATTERY STUPID In our current world where laptop computers and cell phones are commonplace, several articles found on Google use the title, Electric Auto Association “It’s the battery stupid” However, this phrase was first used a http://www.eaaev.org/History/index.html decade ago when referring to difficulties in introducing EVs 1 This paper is the third in a series of white papers written by Mr. Mader for policymakers and media representatives who are interested in energy related topics. His other papers are: “Michigan’s Energy Future: It’s too soon to panic,” December 2005, and The U.S. Petroleum Addiction: Is it Hopeless?,” May 2006. This paper, as well as the two others are available electronically at: www.engin.umich.edu/research/tec 2 Currently, OPEC is comprised of Algeria, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Libya, Nigeria, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates and Venezuela 1 Is the Electric Car Dead? into the marketplace. Although a somewhat crass way of putting it, the key problem in EV development has On June 28, 2006, a documentary film directed always been the performance, life and cost of available by Chris Paine was battery technology. Way back in the late 1970s, the released entitled, “Who U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) funded programs Killed the Electric Car?” that explored a variety of battery options, including lead-acid (Pb-acid), nickle-Iron (NiFe), sodium-sulfur This film is in the genre of a murder mystery where the “bad (NaS), silver-zinc (AgZn), Nickel zinc (NiZn), zinc guys” are the automotive industry (especially General Motors), the oil industry, weak consumers and, of course, the federal bromide (ZnBr), nickel-cadmium (NiCd), and zinc-air government. The story is told around an electric car, the EV1, th (ZnAir). But, as the 20 Century came to a close, only which was introduced in California by General Motors in 1996 to the Pb-acid battery had survived as a bonafide cost- fulfill the CARB ZEV Mandate. Some prominent members of the competitive option for EV propulsion. Nevertheless, entertainment industry, such as Phyllis Diller, Tom Hanks and during the 1990s, nickel metal hydride (NiMH) and Martin Sheen, as well as a number of California’s most vocal lithium-ion (Li-Ion) batteries began to receive advocates for EVs have cameo appearances in the movie. One quote from the movie pretty much sums up its major theme, considerable attention from battery developers that “The murder was committed by the General Motors Company,” viewed the EV market in California as a viable entry S. David Freeman, former energy advisor to Jimmy Carter. In point. fact, Mr. Freeman has held several executive positions in California’s government agencies over the past 20 years. Criteria for Battery Development Success Battery Life This author has also had over 20 years experience in California, directly involved in the development and commercialization of Batteries are a very challenging technology to EV technologies. I have had personal experiences working with perfect. During the charging phase, they store many California agencies and I have come in contact with many electrons and, during the discharge phase, they of the technical experts shown in this film. In my opinion, the release electrons. This charge/discharge cycle must obvious purpose of this film was to embarrass the automotive be repeated many hundreds of times during the life of industry and to castigate General Motors. Unfortunately, this is a battery without any appreciable loss in battery quite a common motive of California policymakers and politicians. But, the true underlying causes for this unsuccessful function or capacity. In fact, batteries must last up to venture can be summarized as follows: 1,000 cycles to be effective for powering vehicles. In addition to cycle life, a battery must be durable . The EV1s two-passenger sports car design could only enough to last the life of the vehicle, which is usually satisfy a very small market segment. estimated to be about 15 years. Battery life is a very . Small volume production is a very costly proposition for a important success criterion because it has a large automotive company(a total of 1,100 were manufactured over four years). significant impact on vehicle economics. EV1s were leased at a loss to General Motors of about 100% of the lease cost. Battery Energy . CARB rescinded the ZEV Mandate in 2003, which Another important attribute is energy or specific canceled the regulatory benefits to the manufacturer. energy measured in watt hours per kilogram (Wh/kg). During the late 1990s, when EV1s were manufactured, The specific energy of a battery translates into the battery technology was too immature. The EV1s reliable range was less than 100 miles. range or miles that a given vehicle can travel. The . The actual battery cost was over $8,000 per car. higher the specific energy of the battery, the greater the range of the vehicle. Although the film, “Who Killed the Electrical Car?” attempts to make a dramatic statement about the failure of the EV1, Battery Power electrics are certainly not dead. As battery technology improves, Battery power, or specific power, measured in watts as manufacturers better understand the unique attributes of EVs and as EV attributes are more closely aligned with market per kilograms (W/kg) is another battery needs, the EV will take it proper place as an important characteristic. Specific power is a measure of the contributor to energy efficiency and pollution reduction. acceleration performance that the battery will deliver. 2 Obviously, good acceleration is an important attribute General Motors EV1, requires about 30 kWh of for vehicle driveability. Electrics exhibit excellent capacity to provide a range of 150 to 250 miles. acceleration because electric motors deliver high Therefore, the battery cost is over $8,200 (30 x torque in an instant. $275), which is impossible to recoup at even $3 per gallon gasoline prices. Electric cars have limited Battery Cost range and higher cost than gasoline cars and are Batteries are made from various metals, such as expected to have these disadvantages for the lithium, nickel, lead, zinc, et al., and manufacturing foreseeable future. complexity varies depending upon the particular battery type. Consequently, the cost of a system can A SCENARIO FOR BATTERY POWER be quite variable. For comparison purposes, battery SUCCESS cost is measured in terms of dollars per kilowatt hour A battery is inherently a range limited power source. ($/kWh). A battery’s cost and its life will determine For example, a gallon of gas has about 65 times the its economic feasibility. energy as an equivalent volume NiMH battery. Another way of viewing this is that a typical battery Battery Comparison pack is equal to one gallon of gasoline on an energy content basis. This is a key reason why consumers Battery Comparison Chart3 will have a difficult time accepting the all-battery- Pb-acid NIMH Li-Ion powered electric car. The range limitation stifles the Specific energy 30-35 70 150 flexibility to which car drivers are accustomed.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • System Dynamics Simulation of Income Distribution and Electric Vehicle Diffusion for Electricity Planning in South Africa by Nalini Sooknanan Pillay
    System Dynamics Simulation of Income Distribution and Electric Vehicle Diffusion for 25 JulyElectricity 2016 Planning in South Africa By Nalini Sooknanan Pillay Dissertation presented for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Industrial Engineering at Stellenbosch University Supervisor: Prof AC Brent Co-supervisor: Prof JK Musango Co-supervisor: Prof SS Grobbelaar December 2018 Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za Declaration By submitting this dissertation electronically, I declare that the entirety of the work contained therein is my own, original work, that I am the sole author thereof (save to the extent explicitly otherwise stated); that reproduction and publication thereof by Stellenbosch University will not infringe any third party rights; and that I have not previously, in its entirety or in part, submitted it for obtaining any qualification. Date: December 2018 Copyright © 2018 Stellenbosch University All rights reserved 2 Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za Abstract The electricity generation industry has developed a symbiotic interdependence with the social, environmental, economic and political ecologies in the country, resulting in divergent complexities, which require non-linear model-based planning methodologies. Some of the determinants influencing the power industry include technologies, such as battery electric vehicles (BEVs), which have gained prominence as a possible option to support South Africa’s climate change commitments. This study used an adapted system dynamics modelling process to determine the provincial affordability of BEVs in South Africa so that amended regional forecasts of BEVs could be established to plan for charging infrastructure, environmental impacts in the energy and transport sectors, as well as changes in electricity consumption.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Electromobility and What Is It?
    2 WHY ELECTROMOBILITY AND WHAT IS IT? Anders Grauers Department of Signals and Systems, Chalmers University of Technology* Steven Sarasini Department of Energy and Environment, Chalmers University of Technology** Magnus Karlström Chalmers Industriteknik * Automatic control research group ** Division of Environmental Systems Analysis Chapter reviewer: Björn Sandén, Environmental Systems Analysis, Energy and Environment, Chalmers In this chapter we examine the notion of electromobility and aim to provide a working definition of the term that underpins the analyses presented in the rest of this e-book. We also describe electromobility in technological terms by presenting various technological configurations of electric vehicles, charging infrastructure and energy supply. We then proceed to examine why electromobility is currently supported as a favourable means to transform road transport by discussing drivers and barriers of change in the automotive industry. Whilst electromobility repre- sents a significant technical challenge, it also requires complex social changes. By arguing from different perspectives we hope to illustrate that electromobility is best understood by considering a range of systemic perspectives found in this and later chapters of this e-book. WHAT IS ELECTROMOBILITY? In this e-book we define electromobility as a road transport system based on vehicles that are propelled by electricity. Some road vehicles are equipped with technologies that make them capable of producing their own electricity (e.g. hybrid electric vehicles). Others utilise energy supplied by a source of electricity outside the vehicle – usually the electric grid. This definition works well for battery electric vehicles as well as for vehicles that do not store electrical energy such as trolley busses.
    [Show full text]
  • The California Greenhouse Gas Initiative and Its Implications to the Automotive Industry
    The California Greenhouse Gas Initiative and Its Implications to the Automotive Industry June, 2005 Prepared for The Center for Transportation Research Argonne National Laboratory and the United States Department of Energy by the Center for Automotive Research Ann Arbor, MI 1 Acknowledgements As with any project, this report is the result of many people contributing in many ways. The authors of this report would like to thank Karen Esper and Diana Douglass, who contributed greatly by creating and formatting the document. Their expertise and patience were critical to the project’s success. Chris Gulis and Emilio Brahmst spent many long hours researching, documenting and detailing powertrain technologies and manufacturing processes. Dr. Richard Gerth created, applied, and wrote analysis for the single and multiple Logit statistical models used for forecasting. Dr. Gerth also served as an advisor for the regression modeling, and overall statistical analysis. Jillian Lindsay Gauthier contributed by assisting with the statistical modeling and overall document review. Chris Powers also added document review support. Finally, we would like to thank those in the automotive industry that took time to guide the authors. This topic presents many challenges, not the least of which being the political risks involved in participating in any discussion. The arena of advanced powertrain technology—is a highly controversial and emotional issue. Several industry experts were willing to rise above the fray and offer their time and highly knowledgeable insight into the many challenges of advanced powertrain technology. For this, CAR is greatly appreciative. Brett C. Smith, Assistant Director, Manufacturing Engineering and Technology Raymond T. Miller, Research Assistant 2 Executive Summary Introduction CAR undertook this investigation to better understand the costs and challenges of a local (state) regulation necessitating the implementation of alternative or advanced powertrain technology.
    [Show full text]
  • Electric Drive by '25
    ELECTRIC DRIVE BY ‘25: How California Can Catalyze Mass Adoption of Electric Vehicles by 2025 September 2012 About this Report This policy paper is the tenth in a series of reports on how climate change will create opportunities for specific sectors of the business community and how policy-makers can facilitate those opportunities. Each paper results from one-day workshop discussions that include representatives from key business, academic, and policy sectors of the targeted industries. The workshops and resulting policy papers are sponsored by Bank of America and produced by a partnership of the UCLA School of Law’s Environmental Law Center & Emmett Center on Climate Change and the Environment and UC Berkeley School of Law’s Center for Law, Energy & the Environment. Authorship The author of this policy paper is Ethan N. Elkind, Bank of America Climate Policy Associate for UCLA School of Law’s Environmental Law Center & Emmett Center on Climate Change and the Environment and UC Berkeley School of Law’s Center for Law, Energy & the Environment (CLEE). Additional contributions to the report were made by Sean Hecht and Cara Horowitz of the UCLA School of Law and Steven Weissman of the UC Berkeley School of Law. Acknowledgments The author and organizers are grateful to Bank of America for its generous sponsorship of the workshop series and input into the formulation of both the workshops and the policy paper. We would specifically like to thank Anne Finucane, Global Chief Strategy and Marketing Officer, and Chair of the Bank of America Environmental Council, for her commitment to this work.
    [Show full text]
  • Who Killed the Electric Car?
    Who Killed the Electric Car? On Sunday, October 29, The Salt Spring Island Energy Strategy Task Force sponsored a special showing of the documentary film "Who Killed the Electric Car?," followed by a panel discussion. The film was a rivitting case study of why solutions to the energy crisis are so hard to implement. Electric cars seemed a logical part of the energy equation, with lower comsumption than interal combustion engines and no tailpipe emmissions in the bargain. They were made available on a limited basis by the auto industry - primarily in response to a California "Clean Air" regulation, but the industry claimed there was no market for the cars. The car manufacturers pulled them off the roads and ceased production when the regulations were recinded by the California Air Resources Board. The owners of the electric cars fought to keep them, having been sold on their advantages, but in the end the cars were scrapped, "the body was disposed of." In looking at this "Environmental Crime," the film fingers severl suspects: the consumer, the auto industry, the oil industry, the government, the California Air Resources Board, and even the hydrogen fuel cell, touted by the industry as a better alternative. Of these, only the Battery is absolved. Stan and Iris Ovshansky, inventors of the battery technology used in the General Motors EV1 car, had their company bought out by oil company interests. Frustrated in their goal of large scale production for the transportation industry, they now focus on photovoltaic technology. Even though battery technology has improved, electric cars are a rarity.
    [Show full text]
  • Zero Emission Design Paper (PDF)
    Design and Construction of a High-Efficiency Electric Drivetrain for a Zero-Emissions Snowmobile Nick J. Rakovec, Adam R. Schumacher, Kevin R. King Daniel Bocci, Ethan K. Brodsky, Glenn R. Bower University of Wisconsin–Madison Copyright © 2008 SAE International ABSTRACT The University of Wisconsin - Madison Clean INTRODUCTION Snowmobile team has designed and constructed an electric snowmobile with 32 km (20 mi) range and In 2004, the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), in acceleration comparable to a 75+ kW (100+ hp) internal- partnership with the National Science Foundation (NSF), combustion-powered snowmobile. Starting with an created an additional event in the Clean Snowmobile Polaris IQ Fusion chassis, a direct-drive chaincase was Competition (CSC) with the goal of encouraging the engineered to couple a General Motors EV1 copper-bar development of zero-emissions utility snowmobiles to rotor AC Induction electric motor to the stock track drive support scientific research. A number of environmental paddle. Eighty-four 28 V, 2.8 A-hr Lithium-Ion battery research projects taking place at locations such as modules supplied by Milwaukee Tool compose a battery Summit Station (Greenland) and South Pole Station pack that stores 6.2 kW-hours of energy at a nominal (Antarctica) involve sampling air and snow for global voltage of 336 V. Power is transmitted to the electric atmospheric pollutants which occur in levels of parts per motor via an Azure Dynamics DMOC445LLC motor billion. Visiting or even approaching these sites with controller. All of the components fit within the original conventional snowmobiles or more generally any sled envelope, leading to a vehicle with conventional internal-combustion powered vehicle can significantly appearance and a total mass of 326 kg (717 lb).
    [Show full text]
  • PHEV-EV Charger Technology Assessment with an Emphasis on V2G Operation
    ORNL/TM-2010/221 PHEV-EV Charger Technology Assessment with an Emphasis on V2G Operation March 2012 Prepared by Mithat C. Kisacikoglu Abdulkadir Bedir Burak Ozpineci Leon M. Tolbert DOCUMENT AVAILABILITY Reports produced after January 1, 1996, are generally available free via the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Information Bridge. Web site: http://www.osti.gov/bridge Reports produced before January 1, 1996, may be purchased by members of the public from the following source. National Technical Information Service 5285 Port Royal Road Springfield, VA 22161 Telephone: 703-605-6000 (1-800-553-6847) TDD: 703-487-4639 Fax: 703-605-6900 E-mail: [email protected] Web site: http://www.ntis.gov/support/ordernowabout.htm Reports are available to DOE employees, DOE contractors, Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDE) representatives, and International Nuclear Information System (INIS) representatives from the following source. Office of Scientific and Technical Information P.O. Box 62 Oak Ridge, TN 37831 Telephone: 865-576-8401 Fax: 865-576-5728 E-mail: [email protected] Web site: http://www.osti.gov/contact.html This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof.
    [Show full text]
  • Alternative Energy Carriers and Powertrains to Reduce GHG from Transport
    Alternative Energy Carriers and Powertrains to Reduce GHG from Transport Nikolas Hill (Lead Author, AEA) 25 June 2009 - DRAFT Tom Hazeldine (AEA) Johannes von Einem (AEA) Alison Pridmore (AEA) David Wynn (AEA) Alternative Energy Carriers and Powertrains to ReduceAlternative GHG energy carriersfrom and Transport powertrains EU Transport GHG: Routes to 2050? AEA/ED45405/Paper 2 Contract ENV.C.3/SER/2008/0053 Nikolas Hill (Lead Author, AEA) 25 June 2009 - DRAFT Tom Hazeldine (AEA) Alison Pridmore (AEA) Johannes von Einem (AEA) David Wynn (AEA) Suggested citation: Hill, Hazeldine, Pridmore, von Einem and Wynn (2009) Alternative Energy Carriers and Powertrains to Reduce GHG from Transport. Paper produced as part of contract ENV.C.3/SER/2008/0053 between European Commission Directorate-General Environment and AEA Technology plc; see website www.eutransportghg2050.eu ii EU Transport GHG: Routes to 2050? Alternative energy carriers and powertrains Contract ENV.C.3/SER/2008/0053 AEA/ED45405/Paper 2 Table of contents Executive Summary v 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Topic of this paper 1 1.2 Background to project and its objectives 1 1.3 Background and purpose of the paper 1 1.4 Structure of the paper 2 2 General Background for Different Transport Modes 3 2.1 Road Transport 3 2.2 Aviation 3 2.3 Shipping 3 2.4 Rail 4 2.5 References 5 3 Liquid Biofuels and Biogas 6 3.1 Introduction 6 3.2 Overview of options 6 3.3 General 7 3.4 Road transport 8 3.5 Aviation 9 3.6 Shipping 10 3.7 Rail 11 3.8 Gaps in Identified Information 12 3.9 References 13 4 CNG, LNG and
    [Show full text]
  • Electric and Hybrid Cars SECOND EDITION This Page Intentionally Left Blank Electric and Hybrid Cars a History
    Electric and Hybrid Cars SECOND EDITION This page intentionally left blank Electric and Hybrid Cars A History Second Edition CURTIS D. ANDERSON and JUDY ANDERSON McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers Jefferson, North Carolina, and London LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOGUING-IN-PUBLICATION DATA Anderson, Curtis D. (Curtis Darrel), 1947– Electric and hybrid cars : a history / Curtis D. Anderson and Judy Anderson.—2nd ed. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-7864-3301-8 softcover : 50# alkaline paper 1. Electric automobiles. 2. Hybrid electric cars. I. Anderson, Judy, 1946– II. Title. TL220.A53 2010 629.22'93—dc22 2010004216 British Library cataloguing data are available ©2010 Curtis D. Anderson. All rights reserved No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying or recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. On the cover: (clockwise from top left) Cutaway of hybrid vehicle (©20¡0 Scott Maxwell/LuMaxArt); ¡892 William Morrison Electric Wagon; 20¡0 Honda Insight; diagram of controller circuits of a recharging motor, ¡900 Manufactured in the United States of America McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers Box 611, Je›erson, North Carolina 28640 www.mcfarlandpub.com To my family, in gratitude for making car trips such a happy time. (J.A.A.) This page intentionally left blank TABLE OF CONTENTS Acronyms and Initialisms ix Preface 1 Introduction: The Birth of the Automobile Industry 3 1. The Evolution of the Electric Vehicle 21 2. Politics 60 3. Environment 106 4. Technology 138 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Aerovironment's EVS26 Booth to Feature Historic GM EV1
    May 4, 2012 AeroVironment's EVS26 Booth to Feature Historic GM EV1 AeroVironment exhibiting and participating in Ride, Drive & Charge at the largest conference and exhibit for the electric vehicles industry AeroVironment: EV1 - Courtesy of the Nethercutt Collection WHAT: Visit AeroVironment's booth during EVS26 and learn about the company's rich history and its decades of electric vehicle innovation. Experts, chargers and the groundbreaking General Motors EV1 car will be present to illustrate AeroVironment's historical and current innovations. WHO: AeroVironment is a technology solutions provider that designs, develops, produces, operates and supports an advanced portfolio of electric transportation solutions. AeroVironment's comprehensive EV charging solutions include EV home charging, public charging, fast charging, data collection, grid- integrated communications and complete installation, training and support services for consumers, automakers, utilities, government agencies and businesses. WHEN: Sunday, May 6 — Wednesday, May 9, 2012 Sunday — Exposition and Ride, Drive & Charge: 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday — Exposition and Ride, Drive & Charge: 11 a.m. to 6 p.m. Tuesday — Exposition and Ride, Drive & Charge: 9:30 a.m. to 6 p.m. Wednesday — Conference: 8 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. WHERE: Booth #1515 Los Angeles Convention Center 1201 South Figueroa Street Los Angeles, CA 90015 OPPORTUNITIES: AeroVironment special guest at the booth: the General Motors EV1, the first commercially available electric car that resulted from the company's co-development of the GM Impact with General Motors in 1989. Additionally, AeroVironment is supporting the Ride, Drive & Charge by providing a Level-3 DC fast charger, which can fully charge an EV in as little as 20 minutes, as well as six Level-2 chargers.
    [Show full text]
  • Go Green in the Automotive Industry - Open and Networked Innovation Applied by Tesla Motors and Renault
    Go Green in the Automotive Industry - Open and Networked Innovation applied by Tesla Motors and Renault Authors: Emil Adén Aline Barray Tutor: Dr Sigvald J. Harryson Program: Growth Through Innovation and International Marketing Subject: Business Economics 60 Level and semester : Masterlevel , Spring 200 8 Baltic Business School - ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS - Acknowledgements We would like to start our acknowledgment with expressing our special gratitude towards Dr. Sigvald Harryson, Assistant Professor and Dr. Hans Jansson, Professor at Baltic Business School, for their supervision and advises regarding our thesis. We would also like to thank Sandra Kliknaité that together with Sigvald Harryson conducted the interview for us at Tesla Motors headquarters in Silicon Valley, USA. It gave us valuable and useful information. Furthermore, we would like to express our appreciation to Julie Dumez and Rochelle Chimene at Renault that gave us the opportunity to conduct an interview with them at their office in Paris. We would also like to send a special thank you to Rochelle Chimene for her help after the interview with answering additional questions. We also thank Carina Bärtfors for helping us to get information and literature that we needed during the work with this thesis. Last but not least, we would like to thank you for your interest in our thesis and we also want to thank the persons that we may have forgotten in this acknowledge. Emil Adén Aline Barray II - ABSTRACT - ABSTRACT In today’s economical world, companies realize the importance to build corporate strategies on innovation to sustain a continuous profitability. Innovation is a crucial issue to develop a competitive advantage.
    [Show full text]
  • Energy Exchange Speaker Biographies
    Speaker Biographies U.S. Department of Energy Energy Exchange, August 2015 Chris Abbuehl (Constellation Energy) Christopher Abbuehl is responsible for leading the development of energy efficiency and renewable energy projects at Constellation Energy with a primary focus on the federal market sector. At Constellation, he has been involved with projects involving solar, wind, geothermal, and biomass resources. Previously, he worked in the Federal Energy Management Program as an alternative financing specialist supporting public–private partnerships involving clean energy projects. Prior to that, he worked in the private sector on energy efficiency and renewable energy projects in Central and Eastern Europe as well as Asia. Christopher holds a business degree from the University of Kansas and a law degree from American University. Navid Ahdieh (National Renewable Energy Laboratory) Navid Ahdieh joined National Renewable Energy Laboratory in 2010 as a project leader and is based in Washington, DC. He supports the Federal Energy Management Program’s Federal Fleets task, for which he works with U.S. government agencies on petroleum use and greenhouse gas emissions reduction strategies and the deployment of alternative fuels and advanced vehicle technologies through analysis of regulatory compliance and development of analytical tools and training. Navid earned a master’s degree in global environmental policy from American University in Washington, DC, and a bachelor’s degree in geography and international politics from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Kathleen Ahsing (U.S. Army) Kathleen Ahsing serves as the director for the U.S. Army’s renewable energy programs and business operations. She is responsible for development and execution of the Army’s privately financed, large-scale renewable energy portfolio and for development of policies supporting the renewable energy programs.
    [Show full text]