As we shift to hybrid technology vehicles, once again the USA lacks the natural resources to create jobs in America. Specifically the raw materials for nickel metal hydride (NiMH) and lithium-ion batteries used in the new hybrid automobiles.
Stratfor reports that “lithium-ion batteries will become the standard in the near future. Underpinning this shift is the simple fact that NiMH batteries are heavy and their energy per unit of mass is approximately half that of a lithium-ion battery.”
They go on to say that “Currently, most companies that can supply lithium-ion batteries for vehicles are joint ventures between auto manufacturers and technology firms. Of these, seven are based in Japan, two are in the United States, two are in Korea and one is in China. These few producers rely on even fewer suppliers for the components — primarily the anodes, cathodes, separator and electrolytic salt — of lithium-ion batteries. The most specialized step in the process is the production of the electrolytic salt used in lithium-ion batteries. That salt (lithium hexafluorophosphate) is produced only in Japan at two complexes, one in Okayama prefecture and the other in Osaka prefecture.”
Stratfor estimates that “70 percent of the world’s lithium chloride (LiCl) deposits are found in South America. Chile is the world’s largest producer of LiCl — not only because Chile already has highly developed mining, transport and processing infrastructure, but because its climate and geography are favorable for the evaporation that is central to producing lithium. ”
Gilbert note: While this post is not to serve as a science class or investment inducement, it does confirm that while going to hybrid battery technology is a step forward in reducing our insatiable demand for imported crude and reduction in carbon emissions, this new technology will not have a sizable impact on job creation in the USA.
It has been reported that worldwide production of automobiles in 2009 will approach 52 million. If 10% of the cars produced in 2010 or 2011 are hybrids that’s a sizable number of batteries and new jobs for someone.
What’s your point, Larry? Crowley would say the push for electric cars is a fool’s errand; we’ll have gasoline to burn for a hundred years, and global warming is a hoax. Mine would be that having other nations do the manufacturing essential to the U.S. makes our economy too dependent on the stability of others, and places us at risk. What point are you trying to make here, Larry?
Well, we have had 8 years of an anti-science government. This comes back to bite us now.
If the previous government had done its job, this would have created new jobs in the US.
Sounds like opportunity knocking..
California use to lead the way in innovations, why isn’t the reusable rechargeable batteries being made in mass in California today? Who is stopping progress?
SAHS.
You miss the point. I will never stand in the way of progress. How quickly you forget the campaign rhetoric when out of work Americans in the heartland were told that we will bring back their jobs if elected. Paraphrased of course.
America must rely on other nations for the raw materials that keep our machine humming. It is not solely black gold as confirmed by this story.
Andat the other end of road , as I have stated before, is the loss of heavy industry.
Joe. President Bush’s opposition to embryonic stem cell research was ethical, not anti science.
Cook
As stated in the article, and as confirmed just now with a friend in the automotive industry, we lack the raw materials.
Has any member of Congress discussed your idea with any firm engaged in related battery technology R & D?
If it can be done we should encourage it by offering Investment Tax Credits to anyone making that costly and lengthy investment of talent and time.
Larry, I am not talking about stem-cell research.
There are lots of other scientific issues that the Bush administration tried to bend or suppress, either because of ignorance or ideological reasons.
One example is hindering research into alternative energy. Another one is about transportation. That’s why other countries have the technology and the know-how of high-speed trains, whereas we here know how to build gas-guzzling cars. That’s why the Chevy Volt was developed in Germany, at the Opel Research facility, and not in the US.
Larry, and Bush’s opposition to stem-cell research had nothing to do with ethics. Stem-cell researchers are of course ethical as well.
Bush’s prohibition to stem-cell research was indeed an example of misguided religious nutty-ness, of an unholy influence of religion on politics (pun intended.)
Joe.
High speed trains? Amazing. With full knowledge that CA was in a deep hole the majority of voters approved spending $9.999 billion dollars for the first leg of a high speed train that eventually will travel from SAC to SD at a cost of around $50 billion depending on when it is built.
Quesion. I have made a few trips to SAC as well as SD. How many of us will actually utilize this system more than a single vacation?
And when you add ALL of the proposed stops the 200 mph train will be crawling down the coast.
Having traveled on high speed trains in Europe and Asia, as well as traditional trains on the east coast of this country, You need to distinguish between long distance and local transportation systems that can be justified by resident or employment densities.
The subway sysyem in NYC was constructed around 100 years ago when land was plentiful. At one time I worked in NYC where virtually everyone used their subway system. However we are talking about millions of daily riders. Parking a car in NYC today is probably around $50-$100 per day.
Need to head out for a Dr. appointment. More to follow.
Because demand is in Asia, the top producers would be in Asia too.
There is nothing stopping companies in the USA from mass producing batteries and battery powered transportation devices.
Except the government, local, state and national, that toss road blocks to restrict such competition from interfering with the profits and political campaign funding.
#7 Joe.
Just returning form my eye doctor my eyes are still dilated and everything looks wavy but let me try to stay on point.
You mention transportation and president Bush.
Are you referring to land, sea or air?
Are you saying that it’s the government’s job to tell the US auto industry what products they should produce?
In fact the Cutting Edge-a talk show interviewed Parnelli Jones a few months ago. The main purpose of that interview was not to focus on his many auto races. We were after his driving a revolutionary turbine powered machine at Indy that even ran on Tequila.
“In 1967, he drove in the Indianapolis 500 for owner Andy Granatelli in the revolutionary Pratt & Whitney Turbine. Jones dominated the race but dropped out with three laps to go when a small, inexpensive transmission bearing broke. After 1968, turbine-powered cars were legislated out of competitiveness.”
Perhaps you can tell Juice readers why the US government cancelled funding to Chrysler Corp for that R&D?
PS: Was George Bush 41 or 43 president in 1963? Don’t think so!
“The fourth-generation Chrysler turbine engine ran at up to 60,000 rpm and could use diesel fuel, unleaded gasoline, kerosene, JP-4 jet fuel, and even vegetable oil. The engine would run on virtually anything and the president of Mexico tested this theory by running one of the first cars — successfully — on tequila.”
It’s called politics. We had the technology to cut down on our consumption of gasoline over 45 years ago.
And the Chevy Volt getting 230 MPG is very deceptive. Check it out before jumping on the bandwagon.
Larry,
As usually, you fail to understand what I said or you are misrepresenting it.
I have NOT talked about the proposition approved recently here. It is known that CA voters have approved stupid propositions, like Prop. 13… How does it feel to constantly defend one of the most stupid propositions in California history???
And FYI, high-speed trains in Europe are long-distance trains. And people use them. A lot. Instead of flying. And yes, I have used them. Instead of flying.
Joe.
In post #7 you raised the issue of president Bush’s failure to address transportation.
Perhaps you can tell us what role, if any, our federal government should take in this private sector arena? Or is this but another illustration of a socialist state. The government now owns, or should I say controls, GM.
Ike did give us the Interstate system of roads to enable people to drive, not fly or take trains across this great land. Was that action a mistake?