Featured GM could have led the electric revolution with the EV1

The Impact was actually the prototype for the EV1 and was fully electric. What GM did in 1998, was make four prototypes out of the EV1. One was a CNG powered model with a 3-cyl, turbocharged engine, one was a series hybrid with a gas turbine, one was a parallel hybrid with a 3-cyl diesel and one with a fuel cell.

 

@hill, if you were thinking of the PNGV car, that was the General Motors Precept - Wikipedia.

There were technology advances that came out of PNGV, but the car companies never intended to sell anything based on the concepts. Ford came closest with the Escape hybrid, which they started working on at the time.
Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles - Wikipedia

 

What do we really know about NiMH licensing issues?
Obviously patent holders like to make a profit off of selling their technology.
Sometimes they (especially big companies) set an extreme high profit margin as their licensing program goal, which is one approach, but that means you REALLY have to want it bad to pay the price.

 

Here is a decent overview of the NiMH/Cheron patent thing:
Patent encumbrance of large automotive NiMH batteries - Wikipedia

OK, I did not work for Chevron but I know the possible logic.
US Corporation bean counters/cut-throat business guys, view any new technology as possible competition for their business, This "fear" of new technology even applies to in-house stuff developed by their own R&D departments. Quoting the bean counters, why should we be making new technology freely available to competitors who may use the technology to take our own business away? However, the bean counters are OK with that, if they can swing a huge profit margin, so that becomes the licensing strategy. Yes the upshot is many new corporate technologies/inventions are hindered from growth, never see the light of day. This is also argument for getting rid of the research department, like I used to be in.

 

oh! i'd forgotten all about THAT one. style wise - that one never seemed to have much wow factor. But yes - i was thinking of gm's precept .... tho i'd forgotten about all the variants.
thx @el drobro for the memory jog

CHAdeMO comes to mind. Tepco Japan tried to charge (no pun intended) an arm & a leg to get production rights/membership for their EV charging infrastructure plug. Enter the SAE, with the combo plug - hastening CHAdeMO demise hopefully.
As for NiMH - newer chemistry's are quickly bringing a demise too many of its applications as well.

 

The strange thing is if the terminals can be made gas tight, I can't find any degradation of NiMH chemistry. In contrast, today's LiON has unavoidable, non-reversible chemistry changes that isolate the lithium ions at a very low but measurable rate.

Bob Wilson

 

In the case of Chevron, they wanted to prohibit the use of high efficiency batteries in cars.

Here part of the press release regarding the arbitration agreement that prohibited Toyota (majority owner of Panasonic's battery unit) from making large batteries for transportation. At the time that this was filed with the SEC, Ovinics was owned jointly by Chevron and another company. Note that it prohibits sale of the improved batteries manufactured by Panasonic to the transportation industry. Note also that the first plug in Prius were introduced in 2012, just about the same amount of time needed to get to production after the agreement expired in 2010.

( from https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/32878/0000032878-04-000068.txt )

The Settlement
- --------------

Under the terms of the settlement, ECD, Ovonic Battery, Cobasys and MEI,
PEVE, Toyota have entered into an agreement pursuant to which the parties have
cross-licensed current and future patents related to NiMH batteries filed
through December 31, 2014, effective upon the date of settlement. The licenses
granted by ECD, Ovonic Battery and Cobasys do not grant rights to MEI, PEVE or
Toyota to use the licensed patents to (i) offer for sale certain NiMH batteries
for certain transportation applications in North America until after June 30,
2007 or (ii) sell commercial quantities of certain transportation and certain
stationary power NiMH batteries in North America until after June 30, 2010.

Further, under the terms of the settlement, Cobasys and PEVE have agreed
to a technical cooperation arrangement, including access to suppliers, to
advance the state-of-the-art of NiMH batteries, which are widely used in hybrid
electric vehicles (HEVs). Cobasys and PEVE have also agreed to collaborate on
the development of next-generation high-performance NiMH batteries for HEVs. In
addition to manufacturing their own line of NiMH batteries, Cobasys will be the
distributor of PEVE's NiMH batteries to certain markets in North America
through June 30, 2010.

 

The irony is patent limiting NiMH batteries all but forced development of LiON batteries.

Bob Wilson

 

It's amazing how greed drives innovation, isn't it? Guy A wants to get paid a lot for his invention and Guy B wants to avoid paying him, so he makes his own invention. Now Guy B is Guy A. The cycle continues until the cost of innovation exceeds the potential for profit. Then everyone loses interest and moves on to something else.

 

I don't see it that way. The availability of NiMH batteries, even in small quantities, was enough to spur the development of more advanced electronic controls, chargers and drives for cars. That made hybrids and other EVs more practical, but it also highlighted the drawbacks of the battery designs. Batteries needed to charge faster in order to capture regenerated energy from braking. They needed to be lighter so that you did not need an SUV to provide enough battery capacity for longer range drives. LiON was lighter but NiMH lasted much longer.

I'd say that the biggest force behind developing lithium ION batteries was advances in battery management that allowed relatively safe high speed charging and discharging without significant damage to the battery.

 

The other interesting part of the story is that it was Texaco not Chevron that bought NiMH, so we do not really know what Texaco would have done with the NiMH technology. And then Chevron bought Texaco. But Chevron perhaps made a decent profit on that NiMH technology, and that's was all they wanted. Gravy.

In news today, Biden is considering cancelling the corporate ownership of the COVID vaccine intellectual property, so it can be spread more freely and cheaply. This is what I am trying to say, when a corporation owns technology, their goal is to make a profit from it, and not solve "world hunger" by letting go freely to anyone.. But the frustrating thing is, maybe we could solve world hunger.

 

It's easy, but no one wants to do it. The solution also works for reducing pollution, unsustainable fishing, unsustainable harvesting of forests, etc. The solution is to figure out how to halt population growth. It's basic math that nobody wants to confront. Humans reaction to the idea of population management is like the meth addict's reaction to the suggestion that they quit.

It should also be pointed out that if it weren't for profits it's unlikely that we'd have NiMH, Prius Primes, or many vaccines. You can't share what you don't have.

 

( EMPHASIS MINE)

Yeah, that was an interesting twist. We don't know what Texaco planned. We also don't know exactly how Chevron profited from prohibiting the manufacture of NiMH batteries for use in BEVs. According to the government's NREL, "HEVs have saved nearly 385 million gallons, or over 9 million barrels" from 2000 to 2009. A little math assuming average price of $2.50 per gallon gives us 962 million dollars in gas sales that were lost due to the hybrids of the time. Imagine how much more sales would have dropped if the "big 4" were free to design their own hybrids or BEVs at the time? There might even have been a California ban on gas powered cars in 2010 instead of 2035.

 

Youtube - EV1 - Driving it the final week before the crusher

 

An earlier discussion of this general topic can be found in the 1951 B&W movie "The Man in the White Suit" starring a young OBI Wan.

JeffD

 

Mythbusting: The truth about the GM EV1 | Hagerty Media

 

Meh, take two people working in the EV1 program at GM and you will get two different answers.

EV1 was a expensive hand built car using billet and other money wasters not found on production cars, they rejected most lease applications and further required extensive questioning and interviews after you were brought in the second time.

From folks I talked to it could take 6 months before you were allowed to sign the lease.


GM did not want to waste money on an unprofitable car, if they would have taken fuel economy mandates seriously they certainly could have made the chassis production intent removing most cost there then ensure that you can use whatever drivetrain you want.

EV1 would make an excellent chassis for any drivetrain even if you don’t want to make a BEV, GM missed its chance to lead the hybrid market with the next geo metro.

Very unfortunate waste of resources

 

It led to Tesla so not such a waste.

Bob Wilson