[House Hearing, 110 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
ENERGY STORAGE TECHNOLOGIES:
STATE OF DEVELOPMENT FOR
STATIONARY AND VEHICULAR
APPLICATIONS
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND
ENVIRONMENT
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
OCTOBER 3, 2007
__________
Serial No. 110-61
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Science and Technology
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.science.house.gov
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
37-987 PDF WASHINGTON DC: 2008
---------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866)512-1800
DC area (202)512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail Stop SSOP,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
HON. BART GORDON, Tennessee, Chairman
JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois RALPH M. HALL, Texas
EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER JR.,
LYNN C. WOOLSEY, California Wisconsin
MARK UDALL, Colorado LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas
DAVID WU, Oregon DANA ROHRABACHER, California
BRIAN BAIRD, Washington ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland
BRAD MILLER, North Carolina VERNON J. EHLERS, Michigan
DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma
NICK LAMPSON, Texas JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois
GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, Arizona W. TODD AKIN, Missouri
JERRY MCNERNEY, California JO BONNER, Alabama
LAURA RICHARDSON, California TOM FEENEY, Florida
PAUL KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas
DARLENE HOOLEY, Oregon BOB INGLIS, South Carolina
STEVEN R. ROTHMAN, New Jersey DAVID G. REICHERT, Washington
JIM MATHESON, Utah MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas
MIKE ROSS, Arkansas MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida
BEN CHANDLER, Kentucky PHIL GINGREY, Georgia
RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri BRIAN P. BILBRAY, California
CHARLIE MELANCON, Louisiana ADRIAN SMITH, Nebraska
BARON P. HILL, Indiana PAUL C. BROUN, Georgia
HARRY E. MITCHELL, Arizona
CHARLES A. WILSON, Ohio
------
Subcommittee on Energy and Environment
HON. NICK LAMPSON, Texas, Chairman
JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois BOB INGLIS, South Carolina
LYNN C. WOOLSEY, California ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland
DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois
GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, Arizona W. TODD AKIN, Missouri
JERRY MCNERNEY, California RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas
MARK UDALL, Colorado MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas
BRIAN BAIRD, Washington MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida
PAUL KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania
BART GORDON, Tennessee RALPH M. HALL, Texas
JEAN FRUCI Democratic Staff Director
CHRIS KING Democratic Professional Staff Member
MICHELLE DALLAFIOR Democratic Professional Staff Member
SHIMERE WILLIAMS Democratic Professional Staff Member
ELAINE PAULIONIS Democratic Professional Staff Member
ADAM ROSENBERG Democratic Professional Staff Member
ELIZABETH STACK Republican Professional Staff Member
STACEY STEEP Research Assistant
C O N T E N T S
October 3, 2007
Page
Witness List..................................................... 2
Hearing Charter.................................................. 3
Opening Statements
Statement by Representative Bart Gordon, Chairman, Committee on
Science and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives.......... 8
Written Statement............................................ 9
Statement by Representative Nick Lampson, Chairman, Subcommittee
on Energy and Environment, Committee on Science and Technology,
U.S. House of Representatives.................................. 6
Written Statement............................................ 7
Statement by Representative Bob Inglis, Ranking Minority Member,
Subcommittee on Energy and Environment, Committee on Science
and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives.................. 7
Written Statement............................................ 8
Statement by Representative Jerry F. Costello, Member,
Subcommittee on Energy and Environment, Committee on Science
and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives.................. 10
Panel I:
Ms. Patricia A. Hoffman, Deputy Director R&D, Office of
Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, Department of
Energy
Oral Statement............................................... 10
Written Statement............................................ 12
Biography.................................................... 16
Mr. Bradford P. Roberts, Chairman, Electricity Storage
Association
Oral Statement............................................... 16
Written Statement............................................ 18
Biography.................................................... 20
Mr. Larry Dickerman, Director, Distribution Engineering Services,
American Electric Power
Oral Statement............................................... 20
Written Statement............................................ 21
Biography.................................................... 29
Mr. Thomas S. Key, Technical Leader, Renewables and Distributed
Generation, Electrical Power Research Institute
Oral Statement............................................... 29
Written Statement............................................ 31
Biography.................................................... 33
Discussion
Energy Storage to Reduce Electricity Congestion................ 34
Government Role in Energy Storage Deployment................... 35
Grid Modernization............................................. 35
Ancillary Power Services....................................... 35
State Energy Storage Policies.................................. 36
Fuel Cells for Energy Storage.................................. 36
Ultracapacitors and Fuel Cells................................. 37
Rating Storage Technology...................................... 39
Foreign Energy Storage......................................... 40
NAS Battery Technology......................................... 41
Preventing Others From Capitalizing on U.S. Inventions......... 41
Deploying Technology in the U.S................................ 42
Alternative Energies........................................... 42
Thermal Storage Technologies................................... 42
Recycling Battery Technologies and Environmental Issues........ 44
Twenty in Ten Plan............................................. 45
Solar Technology and Energy Trading............................ 46
Hybrid Electric Development Time............................... 47
The Proposed Legislation....................................... 47
Status of Battery Technology................................... 48
Panel II:
Ms. Lynda L. Ziegler, Senior Vice President, Customer Service,
Southern California Edison
Oral Statement............................................... 49
Written Statement............................................ 51
Biography.................................................... 52
Ms. Denise Gray, Director, Hybrid Energy Storage Systems, General
Motors Corporation
Oral Statement............................................... 53
Written Statement............................................ 54
Biography.................................................... 57
Ms. Mary Ann Wright, Vice President and General Manager, Hybrid
Systems for Johnson Controls; Leader, Johnson Controls-Saft
Advanced Power Solutions Joint Venture
Oral Statement............................................... 58
Written Statement............................................ 59
Biography.................................................... 65
Discussion
Government Accelerating Industrialization...................... 65
Government and Battery Manufacturer Partnerships............... 66
Participants in Vehicle-related R&D............................ 66
Chevy Volt..................................................... 67
GM Allocation of Resources..................................... 68
Energy Storage Devices......................................... 68
Simplifying Hybrid Systems..................................... 69
Southern California Edison Partnerships........................ 70
Domestic Manufacturing of Batteries............................ 70
Purchasing Plug-in Hybrids..................................... 73
Plug-in Hybrids for Consumers.................................. 74
Hybrid Emissions............................................... 74
Raw Material Supplies for Batteries............................ 75
Appendix: Additional Material for the Record
Discussion Draft, October 1, 2007................................ 78
ENERGY STORAGE TECHNOLOGIES: STATE OF DEVELOPMENT FOR STATIONARY AND
VEHICULAR APPLICATIONS
----------
WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 3, 2007
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Energy and Environment,
Committee on Science and Technology,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:10 a.m., in
Room 2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Nick
Lampson [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
hearing charter
SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Energy Storage Technologies:
State of Development for
Stationary and Vehicular
Applications
wednesday, october 3, 2007
10:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m.
2318 rayburn house office building
PURPOSE
On Wednesday, October 3, 2007 the Subcommittee on Energy and
Environment of the Committee on Science and Technology will hold a
hearing to receive testimony on the state of developing competitive
energy storage systems for both stationary and vehicular applications
and the role for the Department of Energy's (DOE) research and
development programs in supporting the development of these systems.
There are significant economic and environmental benefits for
improving the Nation's energy storage capability. Broad deployment of
energy storage technologies can help to improve the operational
efficiency and reliability of our electricity delivery system, and
allow for more diversified electricity sources and vehicle models that
utilize less conventional liquid fuel, have lower emissions, and
address concerns about global climate change. However, there is concern
that the U.S. is falling behind in the race to develop and manufacture
a wide range of energy storage technologies, and a significant effort
is underway to build up a domestic energy storage industry for both
stationary and vehicular applications.
The Subcommittee will hear testimony from two panels of witnesses.
The first panel will focus primarily on stationary energy storage
technologies, and the second panel will emphasize the state of storage
technologies for applications in vehicles. The first panel will be
comprised of representatives from the Department of Energy, the
Electricity Storage Association, an electric utility, and the Electric
Power Research Institute. The second panel will consist of
representatives from the automobile and battery manufacturing
industries, as well as a second electric utility witness who can speak
to the potential for integrating the electricity and vehicles sectors.
WITNESSES
Panel One:
Ms. Patricia Hoffman, Deputy Director Research and Development, U.S.
Department of Energy Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy
Reliability. She will discuss the Department's programs to advance
stationary electricity storage and how it relates to the electric grid.
She will also provide information regarding the Department's activities
on storage technologies for automobiles.
Mr. Brad Roberts, Chairman, Electricity Storage Association. He will
discuss the state of stationary storage technologies and the various
benefits of developing and commercializing storage technologies on a
wider scale.
Mr. Larry Dickerman, Director Distribution Engineering Services for
American Electric Power. He will speak to AEP's announcement to expand
use of stationary electricity storage and the main benefits realized by
storage investment.
Mr. Tom Key, Technical Leader, Renewable and Distributed Generations,
Electric Power Research Institute. He will discuss the role that
electric energy storage plays in the power delivery system today and in
the future.
Panel Two:
Ms. Lynda Ziegler, Sr. Vice President for Customer Services, Southern
California Edison. She will discuss the company's initiatives to
advance electric vehicles in the marketplace.
Ms. Denise Gray, Director Hybrid Energy Storage Systems, General
Motors. She will speak to the state of battery technology development
for vehicles, as well as General Motors views as to how vehicle
electrification fits into a portfolio of advanced vehicle technologies
Ms. Mary Ann Wright, Vice President and General Manager Hybrid Systems
for Johnson Controls, Director of Advanced Power Solutions, a Johnson
Controls and Saft joint venture. She will discuss the electrification
of vehicles through advanced battery systems, and reducing their costs
through advances in manufacturing technology, enhancing our domestic
supply base, and establishing demonstration fleets.
BACKGROUND
Stationary Storage Technologies
Today, electricity is generated as it is used, with very little
electricity being stored for later use. While this system has worked
for decades, it is not very efficient. Demand for power varies greatly
throughout the day and throughout the year as demands for lighting,
heating and cooling fluctuate through the seasons. Because the capacity
for generation of power matches the consumption of power, the
electricity supply system must be sized to generate enough electricity
to meet the maximum anticipated demand, or peak demand. This
inefficiency becomes more evident when considering that it is possible
that the peak electricity demand for any given year could be for a very
short period--a few days or even hours. Rather than maintain massive
generation systems that are designed around a short-lived peak demand,
energy storage technologies would provide a means to stockpile energy
for later use and essentially reduce the need to generate more power
during times of peak electricity demand. Generally, energy storage
systems could be charged at night during off-peak consumption hours and
then discharge the energy during peak demand. Using our generation
capacity at night time to store energy for use during the day is more
efficient, cheaper, and helps to equalize the demand load.
The expanded use of energy storage would also help to avoid the
need to upgrade transmission and distribution facilities as well as
reduce the need to run certain generation plants that may have higher
operating costs and/or have a poor emissions profile. Energy storage
also can improve reliability by providing an alternate source of power
during an outage of the primary power source.
Advances in energy storage technologies are often regarded as key
to increasing the reliability and widespread use of many renewable
energy technologies. Renewables such as wind and solar produce
electricity only when wind speeds are high enough and sunlight is
bright enough to generate power. Strategically distributed storage
would permit electricity from these renewable sources to be stored and
used during times of high demand or low resource availability.
Together, all of these potential benefits from broad deployment of
energy storage technologies would help to improve our energy security.
Because our economy relies heavily on an affordable and reliable
electricity delivery system, the energy security benefits achieved from
greater use of energy storage systems could be significant.
There are a number of promising energy storage technologies being
developed, but they are not all at the same stage of development and
certain storage systems are better suited for specific purposes.
Described below are some of the more promising technologies:
Pumped Hydropower--water is pumped into a storage reservoir at high
elevation during times when electricity is in low demand and relatively
inexpensive. When demand is high, the water is released and used to
power hydroelectric turbines. It is well-suited for applications
requiring large power levels and long discharge times.
Compressed Air Energy Storage--this technology uses high efficiency
compressors to force air into underground reservoirs, such as mined
caverns. When demand for energy is high, the stored air is allowed to
expand to atmospheric pressure through turbines connected to electric
generators that provide power to the grid. In Alabama and Germany,
compressed air energy storage has dispatched power to meet load demands
and keep frequency and voltage stable.
Batteries--there are different types of battery systems for energy
storage. With conventional batteries, chemical reactions within the
battery generate electrons that travel from the negative terminal
through a wire to an application, thus providing electric power, and
then return to its positive terminal. A different battery system such
as flow batteries store electrolytes outside the battery and circulate
them through the battery cells as needed. Batteries have great
potential for use in a range of energy storage applications.
Flywheels--these energy storage systems consist of a rotating cylinder
on a metal shaft which stores rotational kinetic energy. Flywheels are
suitable for stabilizing voltage and frequency.
Electrochemical Capacitors--electrochemical capacitors store energy in
the form of two oppositely charged electrodes separated by an ionic
solution. They are suitable for fast-response, short-duration
applications such as backup power during brief outages.
Power Electronics--power conversion systems are not explicitly a
storage device, but are a critical component of any electricity storage
system as they serve as the communication device between the storage
system and the electric grid.
Smaller energy storage systems may also be deployed in stationary
applications, such as a residence or in a neighborhood, in order to
supply back-up energy and level the load on the electric grid. Advances
in smaller energy storage systems, specifically batteries, may also
allow for entirely new vehicles such as plug-in hybrid vehicle
technologies to enter the mass market.
Energy Storage Technologies for Vehicles
Concerns about energy independence and climate change have caused a
renewed interest in enhancing the role of electricity in the
transportation sector. The benefits of this have been seen to some
degree in the rise in popularity of Hybrid Electric Vehicles (HEV)
because of their high fuel efficiency and lower emissions. Switching
vehicles' primary energy source from petroleum-based fuels to electric
batteries reduces overall consumption of conventional liquid fuels.
Additionally, several recent studies\1\ have shown that, regardless of
its source, electricity used as a vehicle fuel reduces greenhouse gas
emissions. However, greater electrification of the vehicles sector is
constrained by the technological limits of energy storage technologies
used in conventional hybrids, specifically the Nickel Metal Hydride
(NiMH) batteries.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Pacific Northwest National Lab--Impacts Assessment of Plug-in
Hybrid Vehicles on Electric Utilities and Regional U.S. Power Grids,
http://www.pnl.gov/energy/eed/etd/pdfs/
phev-feasibility-analysis-combined.pdf
Electric Power Research Institute and Natural Resources Defense
Council--Environmental Assessment of Plug-in Hybrid Vehicles, http://
www.epri-reports.org
Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEV's) are seen by some as the
next logical step towards greater electrification of the transportation
sector, and the eventual move towards market acceptance of all-electric
drive vehicles. PHEV's allow for electricity to be used as an
additional or even primary source of power for a vehicle, with a
secondary role for the gasoline engine as a back-up power system.
Advocates claim that 100 miles per gallon would be reasonable for
PHEV's, approximately twice the gasoline mileage of today's hybrids.
However, current NiMH batteries for conventional hybrids are not
optimal for this application.
While significant technological advances are still likely in NiMH,
and even the ubiquitous Lead Acid batteries, many in the industry
believe the future of PHEV's depends on breakthroughs in new battery
technologies, such as the lithium ion (Li-Ion) batteries. To expand the
use of electricity in the vehicles sector batteries must be smaller,
lighter, more powerful, higher energy and cheaper--all of which require
considerable research and development. Achieving these needed
breakthroughs will require meaningful federal support and public-
private partnerships with a range of stakeholders.
Chairman Lampson. This hearing will now come to order, and
I want to wish you a good morning, and welcome to our
subcommittee's hearing on one of the oldest and most important
energy technologies available, advanced batteries and other
storage devices.
As long as people have been gathering energy or generating
energy, we have had an interest in storing it, because so often
the rate at which we produce energy doesn't match the rate at
which we use it. Also, there are times when we need portable
power. We would not be able to converse on cellular telephones,
work remotely on laptop computers or shine a flashlight where
we needed it without batteries.
As our distinguished panel of witnesses will discuss today,
batteries are not only the technology for energy storage. There
are others that are not as commonplace, but have the potential
to help us achieve a better match between energy production and
energy consumption.
Why is this important? Because renewable energy, like wind
and solar, do not produce energy on a continuous basis. These
sources will become more viable if we can store the excess
energy produced during times of peak wind and sun and release
it as needed.
Better energy storage technologies will also enable us to
operate electric utilities in a more flexible and efficient
manner. Energy storage can also help us respond to power
outages more efficiently, providing greater electricity
reliability. This could be vital for maintaining operations at
critical facilities, such as hospitals, during a natural
disaster.
We are all aware of the high costs and delicate
negotiations involved when building new electric generating
capacity or transmission lines, especially when plants must be
built to meet the power requirements of peak demand. With
better energy storage options, we can expand our options for
new electricity generation and transmission.
Energy efficiency is the key to progress on three important
goals: economic growth, energy independence, and a cleaner,
healthier environment. New hybrid engines for vehicles have
demonstrated how greater use of battery power can reduce fuel
consumption and emissions.
We can gain further fuel efficiencies and emission
reductions, but this requires advances in better technology and
manufacturing far beyond what we see today, even in
conventional hybrids. This would also allow for more advanced
vehicles, such as Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles to enter the
market and finally bridge the gap between the electricity and
transportation sector.
With both stationary and mobile energy storage, we cannot
let an opportunity to establish a domestic manufacturing base
for these technologies pass us by. And unfortunately, we may
already be losing that race. New R&D activities with the
Department of Energy are critical to advancing energy storage
technologies, and we should pursue this aggressively to ensure
U.S. participation in this field.
Chairman Gordon is working on legislation to support these
programs at DOE, and the witnesses have been provided a copy of
the discussion draft of that legislation. I look forward to
their comments and suggestions to strengthen this bill and to
accelerate our progress in energy storage technology.
[The prepared statement of Chairman Lampson follows:]
Prepared Statement of Chairman Nick Lampson
Good afternoon and welcome to our subcommittee's hearing on one of
the oldest and most important energy technologies available--advanced
batteries and other storage devices. As long as people have been
generating energy we have had an interest in storing it because so
often, the rate at which we produce energy doesn't match the rate at
which we use it. Also, there are times when we need portable power. We
would not be able to converse on cellular telephones, work remotely on
laptop computers, or shine a flashlight where we needed it without
batteries.
As our distinguished panel of witnesses will discuss today,
batteries are not the only technology for energy storage. There are
others that are not as commonplace, but have the potential to help us
achieve a better match between energy production and consumption.
Why is this important? Because renewable energy sources--wind and
solar--do not produce energy on a continuous basis. These sources will
become more viable if we can store the excess energy produced during
times of peak wind and sun and release it as needed.
Better energy storage technologies will also enable us to operate
electric utilities in a more flexible and efficient manner. Energy
storage can also help us respond to power outages more efficiently,
providing greater electricity reliability. This could be vital for
maintaining operations at critical facilities such as hospitals during
a natural disaster.
We are all aware of the high costs and delicate negotiations
involved when building new electric generating capacity or transmission
lines, especially when plants must be built to meet the power
requirements of peak demand. With better energy storage options, we can
expand our options for new electricity generation and transmission.
Energy efficiency is the key to progress on three important goals--
economic growth, energy independence, and a cleaner, healthier
environment. New hybrid engines for vehicles have demonstrated how
greater use of battery power can reduce fuel consumption and emissions.
We can gain further fuel efficiencies and emission reductions, but
this requires advances in battery technology and manufacturing far
beyond what we see today even in conventional hybrids. This would also
allow for more advanced vehicles such as Plug-In Hybrid Electric
Vehicles to enter the market, and finally bridge the gap between the
electricity and transportation sectors.
With both stationary and mobile energy storage, we cannot let an
opportunity to establish a domestic manufacturing base for these
technologies pass us by. And unfortunately, we may already be losing
this race. New R&D activities with the Department of Energy are
critical to advancing energy storage technologies, and we should pursue
this aggressively to ensure U.S. participation in this field.
Chairman Gordon and Ranking Member Hall are working on legislation
to support these programs at DOE, and the witnesses have been provided
a copy of the discussion draft. I look forward to their comments and
suggestions to strengthen this bill and accelerate our progress in
energy storage technology.
Chairman Lampson. At this time, I would like to recognize
our distinguished Ranking Member, Mr. Inglis, of South
Carolina, for his opening statement.
Mr. Inglis. Thank you Mr. Chairman, and thank you for
holding this hearing on the status of technologies that can
accelerate the arrival of clean, renewable energy.
General Electric manufactures wind turbines in South
Carolina's Fourth District. Inside that facility, as soon as
one of the nacelles is finished, it is put on a truck and
shipped out. GE tells me that the production line isn't slowing
down. In fact, they are trying to add production capacity to
meet increased demand, which is a very good thing for
Greenville, South Carolina.
These wind turbines and other technologies, such as solar
panels and vehicle batteries, can speed the growth of our
renewable energy sector, but the energy storage question is a
significant hurdle that stands in the way. There is no doubt
that we can cross that hurdle, and there is no question that it
will just--that it will be worth it. Getting over the hurdle
means not just clean exhaust from our cars, but consistent and
stable energy supply to the grid, even when the sun isn't
shining and the wind isn't blowing. That kind of reliability is
what is necessary before these sources become commercially
viable as alternatives to oil and gas, both at our power plants
and in our cars and trucks.
I am looking forward to learning from these two expert
panels about how the Federal Government can help clear that
energy storage hurdle. In addition, I am also interested in
fuel cells as batteries, and I shall return to that in question
time.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this hearing, and I look
forward to hearing from our witnesses.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Inglis follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Bob Inglis
Good morning. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing on
the status of technologies that can accelerate the arrival of clean,
renewable energy.
General Electric manufactures wind turbines in South Carolina's
Fourth District. Inside the facility, as soon as one of these nacelles
is finished, it's put on a truck and shipped out. GE tells me that that
production line isn't slowing down. In fact, they're trying to add
production capacity to meet increased demand.
These wind turbines, and other technologies, such as solar panels
and vehicle batteries, can speed the growth of our renewable energy
sector. But the energy storage question is a significant hurdle that
stands in the way. There's no doubt that we can cross that hurdle, and
there's no question that it will be worth it. Getting over that hurdle
means not just clean exhaust from our cars, but consistent and stable
energy supply to the grid, even when the sun isn't shining and the wind
isn't blowing. That kind of reliability is what is necessary before
these sources become a commercially viable alternative to oil and gas,
both at our power plants, and in our cars and trucks.
I'm looking forward to learning from these two expert panels how
the Federal Government can help clear the energy storage hurdle.
In addition, I'm also interested in fuel cells as ``batteries.''
I'll return to that in my questions.
Thank you again, Mr. Chairman and I look forward to hearing from
our witnesses.
Chairman Lampson. Thank you, Mr. Inglis. And now, I am
honored to recognize the author of this legislation, Chairman
Bart Gordon, for his opening statement.
Mr. Gordon.
Chairman Gordon. Thank you, Chairman Lampson. I want to
really congratulate you and Ranking Member Inglis. We have had
almost a forced march the first part of this year. Our Ranking,
as well as Majority, staff have done an excellent job. You have
turned out good legislation, and I hope that this could maybe
be one more element that we can put on the menu for an energy
bill for the future. And so again, I thank you for your past
work, and I thank you for holding this hearing, ensuring that
the United States is competitive in energy storage
technologies.
And I understand the witnesses have seen a discussion draft
of the legislation I am working on to accelerate the Department
of Energy's energy storage programs, and I look forward to your
comments.
Many of us here agree that energy storage technologies
offer significant economic, environmental, and security
benefits.
A recent study from Lawrence Berkley National Laboratory
determined that the short-term power interruptions cost the
United States economy over $50 billion annually.
Strategic deployment of energy storage systems could
increase reliability of the grid and reduce the impact of these
outages. Energy storage systems can also enhance the use of
renewable energy sources, diversify our energy mix, and lower
emissions.
Broad deployment of energy storage technologies also can
improve overall efficiency of the energy grid--or the electric
grid. Storing low cost energy generated at nighttime for houses
during high demand in the daytime makes sense.
Energy storage is also critical for the next generation of
vehicles, which will help reduce our dependency on foreign oil
and lower greenhouse gas emissions.
There is more work to be done to ensure batteries for
electric cars are lighter, more powerful, and less costly.
I also think that public-private partnerships can improve
the production process for advanced vehicle components so the
U.S. becomes a leader in manufacturing these breakthrough
technologies.
With so many benefits of energy storage technologies, I
think additional federal investment to research, test, and
advance these systems should be a priority, and I am very
pleased that Ranking Member Hall has also been interested in
these issues, and we look forward to working with him to
accommodate his interests in getting a good bill together.
And again, I thank the witnesses for joining us today.
[The prepared statement of Chairman Gordon follows:]
Prepared Statement of Chairman Bart Gordon
Thank you Chairman Lampson. I am very pleased that the Energy and
Environment Subcommittee is holding this hearing today to receive
testimony on what I view to be a critical objective--ensuring the
United States is competitive in energy storage technologies.
I understand the witnesses have seen a discussion draft of
legislation I am working on to accelerate the Department of Energy's
energy storage programs, and I look forward to your comments.
Many of us here agree that energy storage technologies offer
significant economic, environmental and security benefits.
A recent study from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
determined that short term power interruptions cost the U.S. economy
over 50 billion dollars annually.
Strategic deployment of energy storage systems could increase the
reliability of the grid and reduce the impact of these outages. Energy
storage systems also can enhance the use of renewable energy sources,
diversifying our energy mix and lowering emissions.
Broad deployment of energy storage technologies also can improve
overall efficiency of the electric grid. Storing low cost energy
generated at nighttime for use during high demand in the daytime makes
sense.
Energy storage is also critical for the next generation of
vehicles, which will help reduce our dependence on foreign oil and
lower greenhouse gas emissions.
There is more work to be done to ensure batteries for electric cars
are lighter, more powerful and less costly.
I also think public-private partnerships can improve the production
process for advanced vehicle components so that the U.S. becomes a
leader in manufacturing these breakthrough technologies.
With so many benefits of energy storage technologies, I think
additional federal investment to research, test and advance these
systems should be a priority.
I thank the witnesses for testifying today and I look forward to
your comments on the draft legislation.
Chairman Lampson. Thank you, Chairman Gordon. I acknowledge
the presence of a number of other Members of the Committee, and
I ask unanimous consent that all additional opening statements
submitted by Subcommittee Members be included in the record.
Without object, so ordered.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Costello follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Jerry F. Costello
Good morning. Mr. Chairman, thank you for calling this important
hearing to examine the benefits and challenges of energy storage
systems and to identify necessary research to overcome the challenges
of commercialization and deployment of such systems.
The potential impacts of insufficient power storage range from
simply inconvenience to life-threatening, and affect individuals,
businesses, and industries. Today's electricity generation system has
little ability to store electricity on the grid. Because of this, the
electric power system must constantly be adjusted to ensure that the
generation of power matches the consumption of power. I believe it is
vital for the Congress, the Department of Energy, utilities and the
private sector to work on a comprehensive solution to upgrade the
electricity grid that will meet the electricity needs of today as well
as the future to reduce our dependence on foreign resources and
maintain our environment and economy.
When looking at potential options for energy storage, we must
realize that no option will replace fuel generated electricity, which
is primarily produced from coal. In fact, nine out of every ten tons of
coal mined in the United States today is used to generate electricity,
and about 56 percent of the electricity used in this country is coal-
generated electricity. Therefore, I firmly believe it is imperative to
continue our efforts to develop clean coal technologies as part of the
solution to achieving U.S. energy dependence, continued economic
prosperity and improved environmental stewardship. We must also
continue to work on a diverse energy portfolio and recognize the
technology that exists today so that we can utilize this technology
while developing energy solutions for the future.
Again, I look forward to hearing from our witnesses on these
issues.
Chairman Lampson. Now, it is my pleasure to introduce our
first panel of witnesses we have here with us. First is Ms.
Patricia Hoffman, who is the Deputy Director for Research and
Development and the Acting Chief Operating Officer at the
Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability at the
U.S. Department of Energy--long title. Mr. Brad Roberts is the
Chairman of the Electricity Storage Association. Mr. Larry
Dickerman is the Director of Distribution Engineering Services
at American Electric Power, and Mr. Thomas Key is the technical
leader for the Renewables and Distributed Generation at the
Electric Power Research Institute. Welcome each and every one
of you.
Now, you will each have five minutes for your spoken
testimony. Your written testimony will be included in the
record for the hearing. When all four of you have completed
your testimony, we will then begin questioning. Each Member
will have five minutes to question the panel.
Ms. Hoffman, we will begin with you.
Panel I:
STATEMENT OF MS. PATRICIA A. HOFFMAN, DEPUTY DIRECTOR R&D,
OFFICE OF ELECTRICITY DELIVERY AND ENERGY RELIABILITY,
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Ms. Hoffman. Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee,
thank you for this opportunity to testify on behalf of the
Department of Energy on energy storage technologies.
The Department of Energy places great emphasis on the
promise of energy storage and is researching a variety of
storage technologies. Within DOE, applied research into energy
storage technology primary occurs within two offices, the
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), and
the Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability (OE).
The Department is committed to developing technologies that can
help advance President Bush's Twenty in Ten Plan, a legislative
proposal to displace 20 percent of expected gasoline usage in
2017 through the greater use of clean, renewable fuels and
increased vehicle efficiency. The development and use of Plug-
in Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEVs) will help us work toward
the goal of this Plan. PHEVs present a unique opportunity for
the Nation to transition from using exclusively oil, much of
which comes from foreign sources, to fueling our vehicles, in
part, with domestically produced electricity from the grid.
High energy density batteries are key to the successful
commercial deployment and development of these vehicles. Thus,
EERE is researching lithium ion batteries, which have two to
three times the energy density compared to the nickel-metal
hydride batteries currently in use for todays hybrid electric
vehicles.
It is clear that Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles will have
impacts far beyond the transportation sector and become an
integral, although not always connected, element of our
``stationary'' electric system. When considering the potential
impact of widespread use of PHEVs on our nation's energy
demand, it is essential to understand and address broader
electric system impacts. For example, although ample generation
capacity may exist on an aggregate scale to meet charging
needs, how would PHEVs impact voltage-regulation requirements?
Or, how would that generation capacity vary by region?
Preparing answers today to questions such as these will allow
PHEVs to successfully evolve from functioning solely as
``people-movers'' to becoming ``stationary power'' sources for
residential customers to level the load and ultimately be a
resource for the local utility.
Stationary storage systems provide energy management,
complement renewable resources, and can improve power quality
and reliability. This includes ``ride-through'' of power
quality events such as voltage sags that range in length from
cycles to seconds, often seen as the dimming or flickering of
lights. Additionally, energy storage can be an uninterrupted
power source, providing minutes to hours of electricity, and as
such, can be viewed as ``insurance coverage,'' mitigating risk.
Whether an energy storage device is paired with a renewable
technology or simply installed alone at a residential,
commercial, or industrial site, it can serve a number of
valuable functions: acting as a balancing technology to solve
intermittence issues, serving as an uninterruptible power
supply, or leveling consumers' demand. Energy storage and
photovoltaic (PV) hybrid systems, for example, would provide
customers the flexibility to charge their storage device and
charge their stored power in combination with the PV system to
satisfy their peak demand requirement.
To date, large-scale utilitarian applications of energy
storage in the electric system have not been extensive. Roughly
2.5 percent of the total electric power currently delivered in
the United States passes through energy storage devices, and is
primarily limited to pumped hydroelectric storage. The
percentages are somewhat greater in Europe and Japan, at 10 and
15 percent respectively. The strategic placement of energy
storage systems could provide load leveling within a regional
control area, reduced transmission congestion, and provide
ancillary services such as spinning reserve, voltage, and
frequency regulation.
Energy storage is just one way to increase the reliability
and resiliency of the electric grid. When storage devices are
paired with so-called ``intelligent'' smart grid technologies,
the grid could fully take advantage of renewable technologies,
allow for an increased number of PHEVs, and enable demand
response. Like storage, smart grid technologies could have a
revolutionary impact on our electric system. Smart grid
technologies include smart appliance chips, advanced meters,
and energy management systems located at the customer's site.
Intelligent agents and controls on the distribution system and
wide-area system monitoring on the transmission system are also
considered smart grid technologies.
The Department also recognizes that fundamental, basic
research into the future of energy storage materials and
systems is still required and can be a critical asset that
accelerates our progress. One key opportunity the Department is
pursuing is a new approach combining theory and synthesis of
nanostructured materials, which have been identified as a key
to enabling the design of radically improved electrode
architecture for superior power and energy densities and
increased lifetimes of energy storage systems.
Portable electronic devices, which are enabled by
batteries, are a form of energy storage now ubiquitous
throughout society. When considering how widely accepted these
devices have become in a relatively short period of time, one
can only imagine the potential for storing energy at a much
larger scale. Energy storage has the capability to reshape the
way we fuel our cars, power our homes, and impact our nation's
economic future. Federal investment and research in the
development and deployment of energy storage technologies in
combination with innovative policies and infrastructure
investment, has the potential to improve grid performance,
reduce our dependence on oil, and promote our energy security,
economic competitiveness, and environmental well-being.
I am privileged to contribute to these research efforts,
and thank you for the opportunity to testify today. This
concludes my statement, Mr. Chairman, and I look forward to
answering any questions you and your colleagues may have.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Hoffman follows:]
Prepared Statement of Patricia A. Hoffman
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee thank you for this
opportunity to testify on behalf of the Department of Energy (DOE) on
``Energy Storage Technologies: State of Development for Stationary and
Vehicular Applications.''
The Department of Energy places great emphasis on the promise of
energy storage and is researching a variety of storage technologies.
Within DOE, applied research into energy storage technologies primarily
occurs within two offices: the Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy (EERE) and the Office of Electricity Delivery and
Energy Reliability (OE). EERE supports the Advanced Energy Initiative
by advancing technologies such as biomass and biofuels, solar power,
wind power, advanced vehicles, and hydrogen fuel cells. Moreover, OE
performs research and development, and conducts demonstrations on
stationary storage applications related to the electric system. OE
leads national efforts to modernize the electricity delivery system;
enhance the security and reliability of America's energy
infrastructure; and facilitate recovery from disruptions to energy
supply. Additionally, basic research supported by the Office of Science
can lead to solutions to technology challenges and enhance the energy,
power, shelf life, cycle life, cost, and reliability of energy storage
systems. These functions can help DOE achieve its strategic goal of
promoting a diverse supply and delivery of reliable, affordable, and
environmentally responsible energy.
Vehicular Storage
The Department is committed to developing technologies that can
help advance President Bush's Twenty in Ten Plan, a legislative
proposal to displace twenty percent of expected gasoline usage in 2017
through greater use of clean, renewable fuels and increased vehicle
efficiency. The development and use of Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles
(PHEVs) will help us work toward the goal of this Plan. PHEVs present a
unique opportunity for the Nation to transition from using exclusively
oil, much of which comes from foreign sources, to fueling our vehicles,
in part, with domestically-produced electricity from the grid. High
energy-density batteries are key to the successful commercial
development and deployment of these vehicles. PHEVs have the potential
to displace a large amount of gasoline if they deliver up to 40 miles
of electric range without recharging--a distance that would include
most daily round-trip commutes, since more than 70 percent of Americans
drive less than 40 miles per day. That is why EERE is increasing its
investment in this technology. Propulsion over a 40, or even a 20-mile
range, will require storage technologies with high specific power and
energy, deep discharge, and long cycle life. Thus, EERE is researching
lithium ion batteries, which have two to three times the energy density
(300-400 kWh/L) compared to the nickel-metal hydride batteries
currently in use for today's hybrid electric vehicles.
The Department has also made progress on the issue of safety in
lithium ion batteries for automobiles; however, other interrelated
factors such as durability, power density, and cost must also be
addressed before the technology can become commercially viable.
Currently, the program is focusing on researching materials and non-
flammable electrolytes so future lithium ion technologies will become
more tolerant to abuse. The FY 2008 Congressional Budget includes $42
million to support advanced battery R&D, compared to $41 million in the
FY07 operating plan.
Over the next three years, pending appropriations from Congress,
DOE plans to invest $17.2 million in PHEV battery development projects
that aim to address critical barriers to the commercialization of
PHEVs, specifically battery cost and battery life. Five projects were
recently selected for negotiation of awards under DOE's collaboration
with the United States Advanced Battery Consortium. DOE will also spend
nearly $2 million on a study exploring the future of PHEVs. The study
will: evaluate how PHEVs would share the power grid with our nation's
other energy needs; monitor the American public's evolving view of
PHEVs; and provide the first national-level empirical data on how
driving behavior differs with these vehicles compared to conventional
gasoline, diesel, and hybrid vehicles. It will also assess a possible
reduction of greenhouse gas emissions with the increased use of PHEVs
and identify how automakers could optimize PHEV design to increase
performance while also reducing cost. As part of the study, researchers
and auto industry partners will build a simulation model to test
different PHEV design concepts.
The possibility of increasingly providing fuel for the Nation's
cars and light trucks with domestically-produced electricity and
reducing the use of oil, much of which is imported, is very exciting. A
previous study from DOE's Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
suggests that up to 84 percent of U.S. cars, pickup trucks, and sport
utility trucks could be powered by plugging into the existing
electricity infrastructure and by utilizing this battery capacity to
level loads.
It is clear that PHEVs will have impacts far beyond the
transportation sector and become an integral, although not always
connected, element of our ``stationary'' electric system.
When considering the potential impact of widespread use of PHEVs on
our Nation's energy demand, it is essential to understand and address
broader electric system impacts. For example, although ample generation
capacity may exist on an aggregate scale to meet charging needs, how
would PHEVs impact voltage regulation requirements? Or, how would that
generation capacity vary by region? Preparing answers today to
questions such as these will allow PHEVs to successfully evolve from
functioning solely as ``people movers'' to becoming ``stationary''
power sources for residential consumers that can also support
utilities.
Further studies will be conducted in partnership with the
automotive manufacturers, national laboratories, utilities, and
universities to define PHEV battery requirements; consumer behavior for
charging vehicles and managing residential loads; grid interface and
interconnection requirements; and the effects PHEVs would have on the
grid. The Department is expecting preliminary results from these
studies in the summer of 2008.
Finally, through Executive Order 13423 Strengthening Federal
Environmental and Energy Management, the President has committed the
Federal Government to add PHEVs to its own fleet as the vehicles become
commercially available at a cost reasonably comparable, on the basis of
life cycle cost, to non-PHEVs.
Stationary Storage
Stationary storage systems provide energy management, complement
renewable resources, and can improve power quality and reliability.
This includes ``ride-through'' of power quality events such as voltage
sags that range in length from cycles to seconds to providing minutes
to hours of electricity as an uninterruptible power source. A study by
the Electric Power Research Institute found that 98 percent of power
quality events last less than 15 seconds. Power quality problems are
defined as subtle deviations in the quality of delivered electricity
(sometimes lasting only tens of milliseconds in length), often seen as
the dimming or flickering of lights. Short-term events lasting up to
five minutes can cause hours of downtime in operations. A detailed
survey of cost and outage data throughout the U.S. conducted by
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory estimates the cost of such
outages to be some $53 billion annually (LBNL 55718). Energy storage
can be drawn upon to mitigate power quality problems and prevent
momentary outages, and as such, can be viewed as ``insurance
coverage,'' mitigating risk. Stationary storage systems that are
currently being used include conventional batteries (Ni-Cd, lead acid),
compressed air, pumped hydro, flow batteries, sodium sulfur and metal-
air batteries, fly wheels, and capacitors. These systems are critical
bridging technologies whose applications including load balancing and
improving overall system performance.
Stationary Storage--Residential, Commercial or Industrial Applications
Varying storage technologies can be used in residential,
commercial, or industrial applications. Whether an energy storage
device is paired with a renewable technology or simply installed alone
at a customer's site, it can serve a number of valuable functions:
acting as a balancing technology to solve intermittence issues, serving
as an uninterruptible power supply (UPS), or leveling consumer's
demand. Energy storage and photovoltaic (PV) hybrid systems, for
example, would provide customers the flexibility to charge their
storage device and discharge their stored power in combination with the
PV system to satisfy their peak demand requirement. This system can
begin to address power quality issues.
Many demonstrations are ongoing. The Department, in partnership
with New York State Energy Research and Development Agency (NYSERDA),
has funded a residential energy storage and propane fuel cell
demonstration project that uses an 11kW, 20 kWh Gaia Power Technologies
``PowerTower'' energy storage system in conjunction with a Plug Power
``GenSys'' propane fuel cell. The demonstration illustrated demand
reduction 1) when the ``PowerTower'' provides an energy boost if the
user load exceeds a preset threshold and 2) when the PlugPower propane
fuel cell becomes a primary electricity source in conjunction with the
PowerTower. This system was in operation from January 2006 to July
2006. The partners include the Delaware County Electric Cooperative,
Gaia Power Technologies and EnerNex Corporation.
Another project being funded by DOE and NYSERDA is the ongoing
Flywheel-Based Frequency Regulation Demonstration project (FESS),
located at an industrial site in Amsterdam, New York. It regulates grid
frequency by utilizing a high-energy flywheel storage system consisting
of seven Beacon Power flywheels that have been adapted to operate on
the National Grid (formerly Niagara Mohawk) distribution system. This
system will be capable of providing 100 kW of power for frequency
regulation, about one-tenth the scale of the needed final product.
Frequency regulation can serve to balance the ever-changing differences
between electricity generation and load. Using flywheels to provide
frequency regulation will allow demand to be met quickly and will allow
generators to operate at higher output for optimum efficiency and lower
emissions.
Stationary Storage--Utility Applications
As it exists today, the U.S. electric utility infrastructure
consists of a vast network of power plants and transmission and
distribution lines that span the entire continent. This system requires
that the generation and consumption of electric energy be
instantaneously balanced. As the load changes, generators must ramp up
or down to meet demand for electricity. Yet an equipment failure can
cause an instantaneous imbalance between generation and load, which
could potentially lead to other system damage or a power outage. Using
advanced storage technologies to compensate for changes in demand for
electricity could improve grid reliability and stability.
To date, large-scale applications of energy storage to the electric
system have not been extensive. Roughly 2.5 percent of the total
electric power currently delivered in the United States passes through
energy storage devices, and it is primarily limited to pumped
hydroelectric storage. The percentages are somewhat greater in Europe
and Japan, at 10 percent and 15 percent, respectively. The strategic
placement of electricity storage systems could provide: 1) load
leveling (within a regional control area), allowing generators to
operate closer to their optimum economical and environmental set
points; 2) reduce electric transmission congestion; 3) provide
stabilizing energy to minimize disturbances on the transmission and
distribution system; and 4) provide ancillary services such as spinning
reserve, voltage, and frequency regulation.
The Department has also invested in several storage demonstrations
for utility applications. For example, in partnership with the
California Energy Commission and ZBB Energy Corporation (Menomonee
Falls, Wisconsin), DOE is planning to demonstrate a 2MW, 2MWh zinc-
bromine battery at a Pacific Gas & Electric substation that reduces
distribution system congestion. The battery installation operates in
stand-by mode to supply extra power when the substation reaches
overload conditions. The installation will be mobile so that it can be
deployed to wherever the most serious peaking loads occur.
In partnership with Palmdale Water District (Palmdale, California),
the Department is demonstrating a 450 kW supercapacitor device that
will minimize the impact of variable winds on a 950 MW wind turbine
attached to the microgrid for the Palmdale, California, Water
District's treatment plant. During power outages, this energy storage
will also provide ride-through for critical loads until emergency
generation can be brought online. In addition to providing reliable
energy for the microgrid, the project will also help reduce
transmission and distribution congestion in the area.
Energy storage is just one way to increase the reliability and
resiliency of the electric grid. When storage devices are paired with
so-called ``intelligent'' smart grid technologies, the grid could fully
take advantage of renewable technologies, allow for increased numbers
of PHEVs, and enable demand response. Like storage, smart grid
technologies could have a revolutionary impact on our electric system.
The result will be new innovative tools and techniques, better sensors,
improved diagnostics, and enhanced equipment design and operation that
will increase energy efficiency, system utilization, reliability, and
security. Smart grid technologies such as smart appliance chips,
advanced meters, and energy management systems would be located at the
customer level. The distribution system would have to include smart
grid technology through intelligent agents and controls and the
transmission system would have to incorporate wide area system
monitoring.
Collaboration with the Office of Science
The Department recognizes that fundamental, basic research into the
future of energy storage materials and systems is still required and
can be a critical asset that accelerates our progress. We still seek: a
greater understanding of storage device performance degradation and
failure mechanisms; the achievement of higher power density and longer
life; enhanced energy density; new electrolytes for high-efficiency and
high-current operation; and safety and abuse tolerance. Developing
solutions to these technology challenges could enhance the energy,
power, shelf life, cycle life, cost, and reliability of energy storage
systems.
Thus, the OE and EERE continue to coordinate with the Office of
Science in several research areas, including storage, to ensure the
transfer of basic research to applied R&D. OE would like to expand this
coordination in target materials research for electrical energy storage
(EES). This R&D focus area was the subject of an Office of Basic Energy
Sciences workshop held by EERE, OE, and the Office of Science during
April 2-4, 2007, to explore research needs and opportunities. The
findings, which noted that revolutionary breakthroughs in EES have been
singled out as perhaps the most crucial need for the Nation's secure
energy future, can be found in the workshop report, Basic Research
Energy Needs for Electrical Energy Storage.
The proposed coordinated basic-applied EES research effort aims to
underpin the applied technology research with transformational basic
sciences, while at the same time energizing the basic research with
insights and opportunities that come from advances in applied research
programs. This process will be initiated in FY 2008 and result in
designated research projects in FY 2009. The goal is to facilitate the
successful translation of breakthrough knowledge gained in basic
research to applied technologies, and to cultivate the U.S.
capabilities to maintain a global leadership in energy storage systems
for transportation and electricity transmission and distribution.
One key opportunity DOE's Office of Science is pursuing is a new
approach combining theory and synthesis of nanostructured materials,
which have been identified as key to enabling the design of radically
improved electrode architectures for superior power and energy
densities and increased lifetimes of energy storage systems.
An essential part of this integrated research activity is the
development of methods of analysis that will help elucidate structure
activity relationships that serve as the underpinning for predictive
model development and validation. Basic research will provide proof of
novel concepts, which will lead to module level applied research for
successful approaches. Introduction of promising concepts to industry
will enable advances in manufacturing, cost and commercial perspective
to continued development of commercially viable EES technologies.
CONCLUSION
Portable electronic devices, which are enabled by batteries, a form
of energy storage, are now ubiquitous throughout society. When
considering how widely accepted these devices have become in a
relatively short period of time, one can imagine the potential inherent
in storing energy at a much larger scale. Energy storage has the
capability to reshape the way we fuel our cars, power our homes, and
impact our Nation's economic future. Federal investment in the
research, development, and deployment of energy storage technologies in
combination with innovative policies and infrastructure investment, has
the potential to improve grid performance, reduce our dependence on
oil, and promote our energy security, economic competitiveness, and
environmental well-being. I am privileged to contribute to these
research efforts and thank you for the opportunity to testify today.
This concludes my statement, Mr. Chairman. I look forward to
answering any questions you and your colleagues may have.
Biography for Patricia A. Hoffman
Patricia Hoffman is the Deputy Director for R&D and the acting
Chief Operating Officer for the Office of Electricity Delivery and
Energy Reliability at the U.S. Department of Energy. The Office of
Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability leads the Department of
Energy's (DOE) efforts to modernize the electric grid through the
development and implementation of national policy pertaining to
electric grid reliability and the management of research, development,
and demonstration activities for ``next generation'' electric grid
infrastructure technologies.
As Deputy Director for R&D, Patricia Hoffman responsible for
developing and implementing a long-term research strategy for
modernizing and improving the resiliency of the electric grid. Patricia
directs research on visualization and controls, energy storage and
power electronics, high temperature superconductivity and renewable/
distributed systems integration.
As the acting Chief Operating Officer, Patricia Hoffman is
responsible for the business management of the office including human
resources, budget development, financial execution, and performance
management.
Before joining the Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy
Reliability, Patricia Hoffman was the Program Director for the Federal
Energy Management Program which implements efficiency measures in the
federal sector and the Program Manager for the Distributed Energy
Program that developed advanced natural gas power generation and
combined heat and power systems.
Before this, Patricia managed the Advanced Turbine System program
resulting in Solar Turbine Incorporated's Mercury 50 industrial gas
turbine product.
Patricia holds a Bachelor of Science and a Master of Science in
Ceramic Science and Engineering from Penn State University.
Chairman Lampson. Thank you, Ms. Hoffman.
Mr. Roberts.
STATEMENT OF MR. BRADFORD P. ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN, ELECTRICITY
STORAGE ASSOCIATION
Mr. Roberts. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Members of this
subcommittee. It is a privilege to be invited here today and be
given the opportunity to offer views and perspectives of the
Electricity Storage Association on the value of deploying
energy storage in the electrical grid of the United States.
My name is Bradford Roberts, and I am the current Chairman
of the Board of the Electricity Storage Association. The ESA
was founded from the Utility Battery Group, a utility group
focusing on the benefits of using large-scale storage in their
systems. ESA memberships currently number approximately 100
member organizations, which includes most of the major utility
companies in the U.S., leading manufacturers of energy storage
systems around the world, technologies from academia, at
engineering firms, plus potential investors in energy storage.
Over this period, ESA has worked very closely with DOE's
Energy Storage Program, Sandia National Labs, and various state
agencies, such as the California Energy Commission, the New
State Energy research and development authority, and the
Electric Power Research Institute that is here today. ESA
members have contributed key advancement to electricity storage
technology using the very limited funds that have been
available from DOE in the past. These activities have helped
build a strong foundation for meeting the needs of a growing
electric grid that must now capitalize on the use of renewable
sources and become more reliable, take advantage of smart-grid
technology and be more resilient to threats of any kind.
This brochure that was in the package that was given to you
shows examples of storage projects done around the world by ESA
members. Studies and projects funded by DOE and state agencies
have helped define the most significant use of energy storage.
The most compelling are: help control power cost volatility,
make more efficient use of fossil fuels like natural gas and
oil to reduce dependency on foreign sources; benefit the
performance of the transmission and distribution system,
nationwide; enhance the use of renewable energy sources and
make them more dispatchable; help improve the overall
performance of combined heat and power systems; improve the
grid's stability, reliability, and security.
Very large-scale systems like pumped hydro have been
successful in providing bulk storage for the overall grid for
some time. But only recently, in the last few years, have
practical and affordable distributed energy systems begun to
appear. Storage systems can capture low-cost energy at night
and discharge it during peak daytime periods to help control
price volatility. Storage systems can peak shave at the
substation level and defer system upgrades. Small fast-acting
dynamic energy storage systems such as flywheels can provide
vital ancillary services to the grid such as spinning reserve
and frequency control. Wind energy generation at night can be
transported on lightly loaded transmission systems to load
centers and discharged at peak times the next day.
Other great amounts of electrical storage in the grid can
provide protective power to vital assets in the community, such
as hospitals, airports, critical industries, such as data
centers, communications facilities and so on. As the amount of
storage grows and these resources become more widely
distributed, the entire grid will become more secure and less
vulnerable to manmade or natural disasters. Storage has been
identified as a critical component for the future of smart
grids and will play a vital role in demand side management
programs and make them work more effectively.
The groundwork developed by ESA members working with DOE
and Sandia has identified what we can realize with an expanded
incentive program at this time. Many technologies have the
proof-of-concept stage and are ready for commercial application
and will provide real benefits to the grid.
Some of the recommendations we make are: expand the scope
and size of government funding for storage programs that
interact with the grid; provide incentives to national
producers of storage systems and key sub-entities of those
systems; provide funding to demonstrate the benefit of both
large-scale and short-term balancing effect on wind power;
provide funds to demonstrate the advanced storage to provide
reliability enhancement for the grid; develop legislation to
treat energy storage as a necessary component of renewable
sources and provide federal financial support to incent end-
users to develop and deploy storage systems; also ask FERC to
require independent system operators to allow new energy-store
technologies to compete in the commercial markets and take
advantage of their faster response.
Thank you for this opportunity to be here, and I look
forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Roberts follows:]
Prepared Statement of Bradford P. Roberts
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and distinguished Members of the
Subcommittee on Energy and Environment. It is a privilege to be invited
here today and be given the opportunity to offer views and perspectives
of the Electricity Storage Association (ESA) on the value of deploying
energy storage in the electrical grid of the United States.
My name is Bradford Roberts, and I am the current Chairman of the
Board of the Electricity Storage Association (ESA). The ESA is a trade
organization founded 17 years ago to promote the value of electrical
energy storage in our nation's grid and other electrical systems around
the world. The ESA was founded from the Utility Battery Group (UBG), a
utility group focusing on the benefits of using large-scale storage in
their systems. ESA membership currently numbers approximately 100
member organizations encompassing most of the major utility companies
in the U.S., leading manufacturers of energy storage systems around the
world and leading technologists from academic and engineering firms
with interest in designing storage applications.
Over the last 17 years the ESA has worked closely with the
Department of Energy's Energy Storage Program, Sandia National
Laboratories and various State agencies such as the California Energy
Commission (CEC), the New York State Energy Research and Development
Authority (NYSERDA) and the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI).
ESA members have contributed key advancements to electricity
storage technologies using the very limited funds in the DOE Energy
Storage program. These activities have helped build a strong foundation
for meeting the needs for the growing electricity grid that must now
capitalize on the use of renewable energy sources, become more
reliable, take advantage of smart grid technology and be resilient to
threats of any kind. Storage of electricity is able to address these
needs by reducing the need for fossil fuels, reducing cost of
electricity and at the same time increase the reliability and
robustness of the electric power system.
Primary Benefits of Storage in the Grid
Studies and projects funded by the DOE Energy Storage Program have
helped define the most significant uses of electric energy storage. The
most compelling of these uses are:
Control power cost volatility
Make more efficient use of fossil fuels like natural
gas and oil to reduce dependency on foreign sources
Benefit the transmission and distribution systems
Enhance the use of renewable energy sources
Improve the overall performance of combined heat and
power systems
Improve the grid's stability, reliability and
security.
Very large-scale systems like pumped hydro plants have been
successful in providing bulk storage for the overall grid's use but
only in the last few years have practical and affordable distributed
storage systems begun to appear. Other smaller electricity storage
technologies, many of them marketed and deployed by our members, offer
more flexibility in deployment on a distributed basis throughout the
grid. These technologies offer a variety of benefits to the key items
mentioned above.
Storage systems can capture low-cost energy at night and discharge
it during peak daytime periods to control price volatility. Some
storage systems can peak shave at the substation level and defer system
upgrades. These large systems and smaller fast-acting dynamic energy
systems such as flywheels can provide vital ancillary services to the
grid such as spinning reserve and frequency regulation. Wind energy
generated at night can be transported on a lightly loaded transmission
system to load centers and discharged at peak times. Excess electricity
from combined heat and power (CHP) systems can be used to charge local
storage systems and further improve total grid efficiency. Further,
greater amounts of stored electrical energy in the grid can provide
protected power to vital assets in the community such as hospitals,
airports and critical industries such as data centers and
communications facilities. As the amount of storage grows and these
resources become more widely distributed, the entire grid will become
more secure and less vulnerable to man-made or natural disasters.
Storage has been identified as a critical component in all projected
and studied future power systems including smart grids and will also
play a vital role in enabling demand-side management schemes without
compromising end-users' interest.
ESA Recommendations for an Expanded Electricity Storage Program
The groundwork developed by ESA member companies working with the
DOE and Sandia National Labs energy storage program has identified the
value that can be realized with an expanded incentive program at this
time. Many technologies have passed the ``proof-of-concept'' stage and
are ready for commercial applications that will provide real benefit to
the grid. At a time of growing concern for the environment, expanded
storage applications can begin to pay dividends. The following
recommendations are made:
1. Expand the scope and size of government funding of storage
programs that will interact with the grid at all levels from
residential to substation sizes.
2. Provide incentives for national producers of storage
systems and key subcomponents.
3. Provide funding to demonstrate the benefits of both large-
scale storage and short-term balancing of wind energy to
improve overall system performance.
4. Provide funding to demonstrate the use of advanced storage
to provide reliability enhancement of grid power to critical
load customers (hospitals, data centers, critical process
manufacturers).
5. Develop legislation to treat energy storage as a necessary
component of renewable generation source and provide federal
financial support to incent end-users and utilities to develop
and deploy electricity storage systems. This should be a tax
credit on a significant portion of total storage system
investment to help deploy more installations nationwide.
6. Ask FERC to require Independent System Operators (ISOs) to
update Market Rules to allow newer energy storage technologies
to compete in commercial energy markets and take advantage of
the faster response these systems can offer.
Summary
The Electricity Storage Association appreciates the efforts of the
Energy Storage Programs at DOE and Sandia Labs. Our members remain
committed to accelerating the application of storage at all levels to
benefit the environment and improve our lives as we learn to use
electricity more efficiently and responsibly in the 21st century.
Bradford P. Roberts
Brad Roberts is employed as the Power Quality Systems Director for
the Power Quality Products Division of S&C Electric Company which
specializes in low and medium voltage power protection systems.
Brad has over 35 years experience in the design and operation of
critical power systems, ranging from single phase UPS systems to medium
voltage applications. He began his engineering work as a systems
reliability engineer in the Apollo Lunar Module Program at Cape
Kennedy. He held senior management positions in two of the major UPS
manufacturers during his career. Brad is a senior member of IEEE and
has published over 40 technical papers and journal articles on critical
power system design and energy storage technology.
Brad is a registered professional engineer and has a BSEE (Bachelor
of Science in Electrical Engineering) degree from the University of
Florida. He is Past-Chairman of the IEEE Power Engineering Society's
Emerging Technologies Committee and Chairman of the Board of Directors
for the Electricity Storage Association. He has been a member of the
ESA Board for 10 years.
Brad is the 2004 recipient of the John Mungenast International
Power Quality Award.
Chairman Lampson. Thank you, Mr. Roberts. Mr. Dickerman,
you may proceed.
STATEMENT OF MR. LARRY DICKERMAN, DIRECTOR, DISTRIBUTION
ENGINEERING SERVICES, AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER
Mr. Dickerman. Good morning Mr. Chairman and distinguished
Members of this subcommittee. Thank you for inviting me here
today. And also, I thank you for the opportunity to provide the
views of American Electric Power (AEP) on the significance of
deploying energy storage to improve security, reliability and
performance of America's electricity infrastructure.
My name is Larry Dickerman. I am the director of
distribution engineering services for American Electric Power.
American Electric Power is a 5,000,000-customer utility in 11
states. We are one of the largest generators in the country,
having 38,000 megawatts of capacity. We are the largest
transmission utility in the country with 39,000 miles of
transmission line. We are the largest distribution company in
the country with 207,000 miles of distribution.
But of particular importance for the Committee Members here
today, AEP is leading the utility in U.S. deployment of large-
scale energy storage. Of particular note is a success: AEP
installed the first-ever megawatt-sized scale NAS battery,
sodium sulfide battery, in the Western Hemisphere in 2006.
Based on our experience, AEP believes that storage has an
important role in the grid of the future in that it can defer
capital projects by improving the utilization of existing
assets. It can improve security and reliability. It can be
deployed quickly, and it can work well with renewable resources
such as wind.
As we believe storage should be incented through mechanisms
such as a federal tax credit in the range of 30 percent, to
accelerate widespread deployment. Over the last 100 years, AEP
has been an industry leader in development, advancing and
deploying new technology, and has always recognized the value
of storage, as is evidenced by our Smith Mountain Pump-Hydro
Facility. Over the last decade, AEP tested and evaluated the
feasibility of new battery and super-capacitor technologies in
our engineering laboratories. Based on those tests, AEP decided
to move it from the laboratory and into further prototype
testing with the sodium sulfide batteries for distributed
energy storage system to support our grid.
The major actors in selecting the NAS technologies over
alternative technologies were its safe and reliable commercial
operation experience in Japan, compact footprint, about the
size of a double-decker bus, high efficiency and zero
emissions, and you can relocate it if you need to.
Based on successful laboratory and demonstration
projections, AEP worked with NGK and with S&C Electric Company
to deploy AEP's first commercial one-megawatt NAS battery in
2006 on a 12-kv distribution feeder in Charleston, West
Virginia. This battery can provide enough energy for about 600
homes for seven hours.
As a next step, AEP also recently announced a new
initiative to deploy more energy storage on its system, and
this initiative includes six megawatts of additional NAS-based
energy storage by the end of next year, at least 25 megawatts
of NAS-battery capacity by the end of the decade, and adding
another 10,000 megawatts of advanced storage technology in the
decade after that.
The aim of these initiatives is to achieve many benefits,
including reducing peak load on lines and equipment, providing
backup energy to improve security and reliability, offering
shorter deployment time versus traditional solutions,
complimenting the modern grid concept, and enhancing the use of
wind generation at peak demand.
Although this technology, in most cases, rests on the
distribution side--that is physically where it is at on a
distribution system--other benefits of energy storage extend to
all parts of the electricity infrastructure, including helping
to optimize generation.
The Department of Energy played a critical role in helping
to deploy AEP's project in West Virginia, by covering the one-
time engineering costs that were needed for this first-of-a-
kind installation in the Western Hemisphere. The partnership of
DOE and AEP to deploy the first ever megawatt sized battery
facility in the United States was an ideal way of taking a new
technology from research and development to real-world
operation to accomplish something for a utility like AEP.
Given the benefits of storage, AEP supports the continuous
development of storage technology and the adoption of
incentives such as a 30 percent federal tax credit for
deployment of distributed energy storage to accelerate the
widespread use of storage to improve security, reliability, and
performance of the United States' electric grid infrastructure.
Again, thank you for inviting me here today.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Dickerman follows:]
Prepared Statement of Larry Dickerman
Summary
American Electric Power is one of the largest electric utilities in
the United States, delivering electricity to more than five million
customers in 11 states. AEP ranks among the Nation's largest generators
of electricity, owning more than 38,000 megawatts of generating
capacity in the U.S. AEP also owns the Nation's largest electricity
transmission system, a nearly 39,000-mile network that includes more
765 kilovolt extra-high voltage transmission lines than all other U.S.
transmission systems combined. AEP's utility units operate as AEP Ohio,
AEP Texas, Appalachian Power (Virginia, West Virginia), AEP Appalachian
Power (Tennessee), Indiana Michigan Power, Kentucky Power, Public
Service Company of Oklahoma and Southwestern Electric Power Company
(Arkansas, Louisiana and east Texas). Combined, these utility units
operate and maintain over 207,000 miles of distribution lines in
service territory covering approximately 197,500 square miles.
AEP is the leader among U.S. utilities for deployment of large-
scale battery-based energy storage. Over the last 100 years, AEP has
been an industry leader in developing, advancing and deploying new
technologies and has always recognized the value of energy storage. In
1965, AEP's Smith Mountain, a 600MW pumped hydro energy storage
facility in Virginia, came on line with the ability to provide peaking
power within minutes and thereby better utilize the company's existing
generation and transmission assets.
Over the last decade, AEP tested and evaluated the feasibility of
new battery and supercapacitor technologies in its engineering
laboratories. Based on those tests, AEP decided to use sodium sulfide
(NAS) batteries for a distributed energy storage system to support its
distribution grid. The major factors in selecting the NAS technology
over the alternative storage technologies were its commercial operation
experience, compact footprint, high efficiency, zero emissions and
relocation ability.
Based on successful laboratory and demonstration projects, AEP
worked with NGK Insulators and S&C Electric Company to deploy AEP's
first commercial 1MW NAS battery in 2006 on a 12kV distribution feeder
in Charleston, WV, and recently announced a new initiative to deploy
more energy storage on its system including 6MW of additional NAS-based
energy storage by the end of 2008; at least 25MW of NAS battery
capacity in place by the end of this decade and adding another 1,000MW
of advanced storage technology in the next decade.
Energy storage technologies, such as the NAS battery, offer many
benefits to improve the reliability and performance of the distribution
system. These benefits include reducing peak load, providing backup
energy and offering shorter deployment. In addition, energy storage
also complements the ``modern grid'' concept. Although this technology
in most cases rests on the distribution side, other benefits of energy
storage extend to all parts of the electric utility infrastructure,
including helping to optimize generation.
The Department of Energy (DOE) played a critical role in helping
deploy AEP's project in West Virginia by covering the non-repeat
engineering costs that were needed for this first-of-a-kind
installation in North America.
AEP supports the adoption of incentives for deployment of
distributed stationary energy to improve security, reliability and
performance of the United States electric grid infrastructure.
Good morning Mr. Chairman and distinguished Members of the House
Committee on Science and Technology. Thank you for inviting me here
today. Also, thank you for this opportunity to offer the views of
American Electric Power (AEP) and for soliciting the views of our
industry and others on the significance of deploying energy storage for
improvement in security, reliability and performance of America's
electricity infrastructure.
My name is Larry Dickerman, and I am the Director of Distribution
Engineering Services of American Electric Power (AEP). Headquartered in
Columbus, Ohio, we are one of the Nation's largest electricity
generators--with over 38,000 megawatts of generating capacity--and
serve more than five million retail consumers in 11 states in the
Midwest and south central regions of our nation. In addition, AEP also
owns the Nation's largest electricity transmission system, a nearly
39,000-mile network that includes more 765 kilovolt extra-high voltage
transmission lines than all other U.S. transmission systems combined.
We also operate and maintain over 207,000 miles of distribution lines
in a service territory covering approximately 197,500 square miles. But
of particular importance for the Committee Members here today, AEP is
the leading utility in the U.S. for deployment of large-scale energy
storage, which improves the security, reliability and performance of
our distribution grid. Of particular note, AEP installed the first-
ever, megawatt (MW)-scale NAS battery in the Western hemisphere in
2006.
Over the last 100 years, AEP has been an industry leader in
developing, advancing and deploying new technologies and has always
recognized the value of energy storage. In 1965, for example, AEP's
Smith Mountain, a 600MW pumped hydro energy storage facility in
Virginia, came on line with the ability to provide peaking power within
minutes, thereby reducing peak demand and better utilizing the
company's generation and transmission assets.
Grid Modernization and Energy Storage
In many respects, the distribution grid of 2007 is not much
different than the grid of 1965. Consequently, many associated with the
electric utility industry are talking about developing a ``smart
grid,'' ``modern grid'' or ``the grid of the future.'' I first want to
address what is meant by these terms and how energy storage fits into
the concept of a ``modern grid.'' One clear analogy is the progress
that has been made with automobiles since 1965. In 1965, automobile
builders compromised on components so cars could meet a variety of
demands such as acceleration and steady state driving. In addition, the
components could not communicate and had limited adaptability to meet
different demands. An automobile built in 2007 is far different in that
a communication system provides information to on-board computers and
components have the ability to adapt how they operate based on input
about varying conditions. Consequently, a modern car performs better,
stops better, pollutes far less and gets better gas mileage. More
recently, this dynamic optimization has been taken a step further with
on board batteries in Hybrid Electric Vehicles. The on-board batteries
provide further opportunities to size the engine for steady state
conditions, while the battery provides power for acceleration and other
peak demands.
The utility grid in the United States is an enormously complex
system that like automobiles can benefit from a modern communication
infrastructure, interconnected computers, devices that can dynamically
change and store energy. To achieve dynamic optimization similar to
what has been achieved in the automotive industry, the ``modern grid''
will require:
Inexpensive communication systems that work over
large areas;
Computer protocols determining how each connects/
communicates with various pieces of equipment;
Equipment from suppliers that can receive
communication and dynamically adapt; and
Electricity storage devices to optimize use of assets
and improve reliability.
A ``modern grid'' using this technology would improve reliability,
improve the utilization of existing assets, move demand off peak, help
customers reduce usage, and help with the integration of distributed
resources.
AEP Efforts to Deploy Energy Storage
A key component of the ``modern grid'' and of particular interest
today is energy storage. Over the last decade, AEP tested and evaluated
the feasibility of new battery and supercapacitor technologies in its
engineering laboratories. Based on those tests, AEP decided to use
sodium sulfide (NAS) batteries for a distributed energy storage system
to support its distribution grid. The major factors in selecting the
NAS technology over the alternative storage technologies were:
15 years of commercial operational experience in
Japan at sizes over 1MW (1MW produces enough energy to power
600 homes).
The ability to have high energy and power density in
a compact footprint the size of a double-decker bus.
High efficiency through the charge/discharge cycle.
No emissions, vibrations or noise concerns.
Ability to economically relocate and recycle.
AEP first tested a small 12.5kW module (enough power to feed seven
homes) in our laboratories and installed a 100kW demonstration unit
(enough power to feed 60 homes) for peak shaving and backup power to
one of our office buildings in 2002. As a next step, AEP worked with
NGK Insulators (manufacturer of NAS batteries) and S&C Electric Company
(manufacturer of the system to connect DC battery to an AC power grid)
to deploy its first commercial 1MW, 7.2MWh\1\ NAS battery in 2006 on a
12kV distribution feeder in Charleston, WV. This site was chosen to
alleviate overloading of an existing distribution transformer. By
installing the battery, AEP was able to reduce its daily peak load and,
therefore, defer substantial capital investment on a new distribution
substation. Department of Energy (DOE) played a critical role in this
project by covering the non-repeat engineering costs that were needed
for this first-of-a-kind deployment in North America and we deeply
appreciate their assistance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 7.2MWh can feed 1MW of electricity for 7.2 hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Following the successful operation of the NAS battery in West
Virginia, AEP recently announced a new initiative to deploy more energy
storage on its system including (see the attached press release):
An additional 6MW added of NAS-based energy storage
by the end of 2008.
At least 25MW of NAS battery capacity in place by the
end of this decade.
Adding another 1,000MW of advanced storage technology
in the next decade.
AEP, NGK and S&C are now in the process of further developing NAS
battery technology by implementing an ``islanding'' feature to improve
distribution reliability. With ``islanding,'' the battery can be
deployed at the end of a long remote distribution line and provide
power even when the normal feed is interrupted. AEP will demonstrate
the ``islanding'' technology with four megawatts of the six megawatts
planned for 2008. The islanding feature will also demonstrate the use
of communication and control systems necessary for the deployment of a
``modern grid.''
The other two megawatts scheduled for 2008 will be deployed at a
site near wind generation that will help AEP understand how electrical
storage can enhance wind generation. NAS batteries can help by storing
energy whenever the wind does blow and giving the energy back when
needed most during times of peak demand. NAS batteries can be utilized
with wind and all forms of generation today, but likely will become
even more attractive as the price for NAS batteries decreases through
greater volumes and the need increases due to a greater number of wind
generators.
Electricity Storage Benefits
Energy storage technologies, such as the NAS battery, offer many
benefits to improve the reliability and performance of the distribution
system. Although this technology in most cases rests on the
distribution side, other benefits of energy storage extend to all parts
of the electric utility infrastructure, including helping to optimize
generation. A list of benefits of energy storage includes but is not
limited to the following:.
Improving service reliability and power quality by
being a backup energy source (``islanding'') during outages.
Reducing peak load (or lead leveling) and hence
reducing the need for other local capacity upgrades in
distribution.
Complementing ``smart grid'' or ``modern grid''
benefits by taking advantage of the distribution grid's
communication and control features.
Much shorter deployment time than most conventional
solutions to address many immediate grid problems.
Enhancing the use of wind generation during periods
of peak demand.
Most importantly, in a given application, many of these benefits
can be achieved at the same time.
AEP Perspective on a Federal Energy Storage Research, Development and
Deployment Program
In the past, the United States led the world in pure research on
energy storage. For example, the concept of the NAS battery was
pioneered in the United States in 1965 for electric vehicle
applications. Others in the U.S. and Europe continued to advance the
technology. However, in the mid 1980s, the Tokyo Electric Power Company
and NGK, with support from the Japanese government, launched a
development and demonstration program that successfully commercialized
the technology for utility-scale applications. Because of this, AEP
would suggest and strongly support a federal energy storage research,
development and deployment program that would join technology experts
with end-users of energy storage to actively develop, guide, and
implement a government-supported storage program. To do this, federal
funding needs to be balanced between research and ``real world''
applications to advance the technology. A few sample projects could
include:
Implementing large scale battery ``islanding''
capability to improve reliability in rural areas.
Developing a ``smart'' or ``modern grid''
installation and integrate energy storage.
Using energy storage to improve security to critical
infrastructure that includes police, fire stations, water pumps
and hospitals.
Exploring greater benefits of the technology on the
entire energy infrastructure, including distribution,
transmission and generation.
Legislation to establish federal financial support is needed to
encourage end-users to overcome their respective entry costs to deploy
large-scale energy storage systems. For example, an investment tax
credit in the range of 30 percent of the initial investment in an
energy storage facility would help accelerate deployment across the
industry. (Note that in Japan, the government has subsidized early end-
users of energy storage for grid support and currently covers one third
of the cost of energy storage facilities that support the deployment of
wind power systems.)
AEP Perspective on Renewable Resources
AEP strongly supports the increased use of renewable energy sources
and believes that further technological advances and commercial
deployment of energy storage technologies will significantly increase
the use of renewable energy sources. Today, we have 467MW of wind
generation under purchased power agreements, but we intend and fully
expect to increase our renewable portfolio into the future. That said,
we oppose the federal Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) recently
adopted by the House (and similar measures) as a costly and unnecessary
government mandate.
The RPS adopted by the House, for example, will likely cost
electricity consumers billions of dollars in higher electricity cost
without the development of significant additional renewable generation
or, more importantly, without any technological advances. Simply put,
many retail electric suppliers will be unable to meet the RPS through
their own generation and will purchase renewable energy credits. As a
result, AEP anticipates a wealth transfer from electric consumers in
states with little or no renewable resources to those states with
abundant renewable resources (which would likely be developed without a
federal mandate) and/or the Federal Government. In fact, we calculate
that this proposal, if implemented, would cost our customers
approximately between $6-$8 billion dollars (with some purchases of
credits) in total cumulative costs by 2020.
Rather than focusing on an RPS, the Congress should promote
technologies to the degree where economic and environmental benefits
are optimized. For example, combining energy storage and wind
generation will in the long run increase the availability of this
resource and may meet the definition of economic and environmental
optimization. Unfortunately, this combination would not help AEP meet
the RPS mandate adopted by the House beyond the original addition of
the wind generation. In short, mandates may be well intentioned, but
are not always the most effective way to proceed from both an economic
and environmental perspective.
Conclusion
In conclusion, energy storage is an important technology for the
transformation of the existing electricity grid in the United States. A
strong and cooperative partnership of industry and government can and
will promote research and development and, ultimately, commercial
deployment. AEP is committed to being a part of this important process,
and helping you achieve the best outcome at the most reasonable cost as
quickly as practicable. Thank you again for this opportunity to share
these views with you.
Biography for Larry Dickerman
Larry Dickerman is the Director of Distribution Engineering
Services. Prior to his present position, Larry led various
organizations for AEP including Distribution Dispatch & Emergency
Restoration Planning, Distribution Asset Management and Operations
Improvement. Larry is a 32-year employee with AEP.
Larry graduated from N.C. State University in 1974 with a BSEE and
is a registered professional engineer in Virginia. Larry now resides in
the Columbus, Ohio area.
Chairman Lampson. Thank you very much. Mr. Key.
STATEMENT OF MR. THOMAS S. KEY, TECHNICAL LEADER, RENEWABLES
AND DISTRIBUTED GENERATION, ELECTRICAL POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Mr. Key. Thank you, and good morning, Mr. Chairman and
distinguished Members. I am representing the Electric Power
Research Institute. I shall focus on the role energy storage
plays in the electric grid, both today and in the future.
As a starting point, I want to recognize that electric
energy storage is both valuable and expensive. Consider your
retail electric rates at home that are around $.10 per kilowatt
hour, yet most of us will gladly pay dollars when we replace a
battery in a flashlight or cars or a portable appliance. We
think it is worth it, and it is much the same way in the
electric power grid. We are generally willing to pay more to
store kilowatt hours of electricity than it costs us to make
them by conventional means. The key is to have the energy in
the right place at the right time, and this is an investment
that we are willing to make.
Today, our electric energy system delivers about 4,000
terawatt hours, and it runs with very little storage. I would
like to explain this. We are getting by without much storage
because of the ingenious system of interconnecting many
generators and consumers, by forecasting demand, scheduling
supply, and maintaining reserve generation as backup. If the
electric load turns off in one place, another one turns on
somewhere else. In effect, we are running a massive just-in-
time delivery system, and as we have seen, it can be tricky to
keep this system balanced.
We depend heavily on natural gas, to both regulate up and
down and to cover peak period. Gas currently accounts for 47
percent of our supply capacity. Pump storage, our only
significant method for electric storage, accounts for a little
over two percent. In the future, we expect this situation to
change. It will be increasingly difficult to operate this grid
without additional energy storage. This change is our response
to reducing carbon emissions, higher fossil fuel prices and to
enable more diversified ways of generating and using
electricity.
We need more energy storage to support the new mix of
lower-emitting and less-controllable electric supply, including
solar and wind, but also nuclear and clean coal. We shall need
energy storage to enable a more effective participation by
customers in managing their own use of electricity. One way
storage can benefit the grid is to improve our use of the
generators, the transformers, and the power lines. Currently,
our utilization of these assets is below 50 percent. This is
because of large variations in the electricity demand, day to
night and seasonally, and because of our practice of just-in-
time delivery.
To find large-scale storage options, EPRI is looking at new
ideas in compressed air systems to supplement existing hydro.
This will allow us to use existing transmission lines much more
effectively. On a smaller scale, distributed storage, using
batteries, pumped water, or compressed air can improve grid
asset utilization closer to the point of use. This is at a
substation or feeder level. EPRI is working on a future, smart
distribution grid using distributed resources, including
storage, to help manage electricity use. With more cost-
effective storage technologies, we can increase efficiency and
interact better with other new technologies such as rooftop
photovoltaic and plug-in hybrid vehicles. These new storage
technologies will be needed to enable future solar and wind, by
giving our operators more options in balancing renewable supply
and demand.
Cases are already documented where wind has challenged
operators in New Mexico, California, and Hawaii. In all of
these cases, storage is considered as part of the solution.
I would like to point out some challenges for electric
storage, related to economics and risk. Costs are very high and
siting and permitting can be difficult for large-scale storage.
This is illustrated by the very modest amount of pumped hydro
in the U.S. today. Energy storage by its nature, creates value
streams for several different stakeholders. With the
regulation, it is difficult to aggregate the value and secure
financing. This was illustrated by a compressed air plant that
was not built to support West Texas Wind in 2002.
Distributed energy storage will require significant
investment for development and demonstration. The utility
industry is usually in a position to make this investment. We
believe that the DOE programs are on the right track to address
the utilities interest, but there are many more opportunities
in the future to partner on first-of-a-kind applications in
different regions and under different grid-operating condition.
In the future, EPRI shall continue to work with its members
and the Department of Energy to help realize the untapped
benefit of new energy storage technologies in the electric
grid.
We believe that the expanded use of energy storage is
important to improving the efficiency, reliability, and
security of the electric power network. Energy storage
application in both the transmission and distribution grid will
be essential to meet the growing demand for electricity using
low emitting technologies and gaining the full value of end-use
energy management. Thank you, sir.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Key follows:]
Prepared Statement of Thomas S. Key
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee. I am
Thomas Key, Technical Leader, Renewable and Hydropower Generation for
the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), a non-profit,
collaborative organization conducting electricity related R&D in the
public interest. EPRI has been supported voluntarily by the electric
industry since our founding in 1973. Our members, public and private,
account for more than 90 percent of the kilowatt hours sold in the
U.S., and we now serve more than 1,000 energy and governmental
organizations in more that 40 countries.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide testimony on ``Energy
Storage Technologies: State of Development for Stationary and Vehicular
Applications.'' My testimony today comes from the viewpoint of the
electric power system and focuses on the role that electric energy
storage plays in the power delivery system of today and in the future.
Today the power delivery system is a complex network of over
450,000 miles of transmission, five million miles of distribution, and
22,000 substations that tie together electricity supply and demand. At
EPRI we partner with our members to ensure that this existing grid
infrastructure is working reliably and safely, and that new
technologies are available to meet future requirements. The power
delivery system of the future, in a carbon constrained world, will be
required to support both a new generation mix, with lower emissions,
and a more effective participation by consumers in managing their
efficient use of electricity. We believe that the ability to cost-
effectively store electric energy will be an important part of this
delivery system of the future.
Before I discuss the benefits of energy storage, I feel it would be
worthwhile to explain how we operate the electric power system with
only a small amount of electric energy storage today, and why this will
change in the future.
The existing grid has operated for nearly a century as a massive
just-in-time delivery system, providing electricity to meet demand
practically as soon as it is generated and without storing in
inventory. This is made possible by the size and diversity of the power
grid, which allows system operators to ignore the small fluctuations
associated with individual electrical load changes. When an electrical
load turns on in one place, the effect is reduced by another turning
off somewhere else. This characteristic allows system operators to
follow load changes by throttling only a few generators. Large shifts
in load occur daily over a period of hours and can generally be
forecast, giving system operators the chance to schedule, dispatch and
gradually ramp generation up and down according to the demand for
electricity. Natural gas fueled turbines are the primary generation
resources used to meet peak demands. Reserve generation, some actually
spinning, is required to maintain reliability and to meet system
contingencies.
This just-in-time electric delivery system requires that
generation, transmission and distribution capacity are large enough to
serve the maximum load that can occur at any point in time. The maximum
load, for example on the hottest days in summer, can be significantly
larger than the average load on the system, but may occur only once or
twice a year. One consequence of the large variation in electricity
demand and just-in-time delivery is that the power system assets are
often under underutilized, such as at night and during temperate
seasons. The overall utilization of electric generation in 2006,
according to EIA data, was 48 percent. Utilization of the power
delivery system in this traditional power system model is less than
generation. Natural gas fueled turbines are the primary generation
sources used to meet peak demands, and these plants remain idol most of
the time. In effect natural gas also allows us to operate with only
about two percent pumped hydro storage, a significantly lower supply
than in Europe and Japan.
We believe that this traditional model will not work as well in the
future as it has in the past. Our growing economy and rising standard
of living continue to push the demand for electrical power upwards, but
social, economic, and environmental reasons have made the construction
of new generation, transmission, and distribution assets unattractive,
particularly when those assets are underutilized. Even so new electric
generation and related transmission resources will be needed. The
changing nature of these resources will increase the need for energy
storage on both the supply and demand sides. New electric energy
storage technologies coupled with energy efficiency measures are keys
to a better utilization of existing and future power system assets.
The large scale adoption of renewable energy technologies, with
today's wind at the transmission level and future roof top solar at the
distribution level, change the way utilities and grid operators will
manage power delivery. Unlike conventional generation systems, which
can be controlled by adjusting the fuel input, renewable energy
technologies generate only when the wind is blowing or when the sun is
shining. They cannot be controlled to meet demand and may provide
insufficient energy to the grid when it is needed or too much energy to
the grid when it is not needed. Specific cases are already documented
where wind has challenged system operators in New Mexico, California
and the Big Island of Hawaii. In all of these cases energy storage is
being considered as a solution.
Another important factor related to the need for storage is the
increasing cost of fossil fuels that has made their efficient use more
vital than ever before. This is particularly true with the use of oil
in the transportation industry. One important method of actualizing
this improved efficiency is electrification with technologies such as
the plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV). Energy storage technologies
developed for PHEV applications, and made available via the smart
electric distribution grid of the future, can provide grid support in
the electric distribution system. In this application energy storage
directly improves energy efficiency and reduces our dependence on
foreign oil, with related advantages to security and society.
In the future cost effective energy storage will be needed to
increase utility system asset utilization, support energy efficiency
measures and allow the increased use of renewable energy sources,
reducing the carbon intensity of the American economy. EPRI has
identified several specific benefits to the expanded use of energy
storage technologies in the electric grid, including the following:
Enable integration of renewable energy such as wind
and solar with the existing electric power delivery system;
Improve reliability and security of the electric
power delivery system by proving grid support both at
transmission level and close to the point of use;
Increase asset utilization of existing power delivery
infrastructure, as well as potential deferment of the
construction of new assets, by shaving peaks;
Improve utilization of primary fuels and reduce
domestic consumption of petroleum through the electrification
of transportation; and
Provide needed load following and regulation services
to electricity markets.
A number of different energy storage technologies are being
considered to bring these benefits to fruition. Each technology has
advantages and disadvantages, which make it suitable for certain
applications. For instance, sodium-sulfur batteries have made strong
inroads in distribution level peak shaving applications, and lithium
ion batteries are considered the energy storage technology of choice
for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. For utility-scale load leveling
and storage of wind energy, pumped hydro has been the workhorse for the
industry. However, suitable locations for new pumped hydro are
considered to be limited, suggesting a promising opportunity for large-
scale compressed air energy storage (CAES) that can be sited in many
areas.
In a CAES system, electrical energy is used to compress air, which
is then stored in a pressurized reservoir. The compressed air can later
be used to generate electricity by passing it through an expansion
turbine with heat input. The heat input is often delivered through the
combustion of natural gas. Although natural gas is burned in these
systems, the stored heat energy allows efficiencies that are more than
double those of conventional gas turbines, with correspondingly low
carbon intensity. CAES systems are usually designed on large scales,
with power ratings in the hundreds of megawatts, and the capability to
deliver that power for hours. Large underground caverns, salt domes or
aquifers are used to store the compressed air. Two such systems have
been built, one in Germany and the other in the U.S., with at least
three others proposed in the U.S. to date.
The hurdles in bringing needed energy storage technologies on line
are related primarily to economics and risk. Specific challenges are
different for large scale central systems and for smaller, more
distributed, energy storage technology options:
Hurdles to deployment of large-scale, transmission-connected energy
storage:
Construction of proven large scale technologies, such as pumped
hydro and CAES, would immediately assist operators in the integration
of wind and nuclear energy. However, the costs of implementing these
technologies can be unreasonably large. For example a 200MW compressed
air energy storage plant capable of storing 800MWh of energy can be
expected to cost $200 to $250 million, not including the cost of siting
and permitting.
The very modest amount of pumped hydro built in the U.S.
illustrates this issue. Today there are 38 pumped hydro plants with a
summer peaking generating capacity of 21GW. Fifteen years ago FERC had
license applications for 18GW of new pumped storage (42 plants total,
with 31 in the west). However, deregulation, relatively cheap natural
gas, and risk adverse private investors led nearly all developers to
back out of construction. Only one large plant was build, the 800MW
Rocky Mountain facility commissioned in 1995 in Northern Georgia.
Another hurdle is the aggregation of energy storage benefits, which
are spread across a number of stakeholders. While there is little doubt
that the net social benefits of these large storage plants are
positive, the benefits are distributed among power produces, system
operators, distribution companies, end-users, and society at large. The
decision to build a plant, however, must be made by a single entity,
and it is often unclear how that entity can capture enough benefit to
justify the investment. A specific case in point is a CAES plant
proposed to support wind development in West Texas in 2002. In a study
commissioned by the Lower Colorado River Authority the sum total of all
benefits for this large scale plant were clearly shown to exceed the
cost. However, benefits were shared by wind plant operators, local
power distributors, an independent system operator and rate payers. Not
any single value stream, by itself, could secure financing.
Also impeding investment in large scale energy storage is that
current situation where electric storage is not clearly defined as
either a generation or a T&D asset in most jurisdictions. This presents
a problem for deregulated utilities who would like to invest in
storage. If a transmission utility invests in a system, and a ruling
subsequently classifies that system as generation, the utility will
have made a large investment it cannot recover.
Hurdles to deployment of smaller-scale, distributed electric energy
storage:
Distributed energy storage holds great promise for improving
utilization of distribution assets and enabling a future grid with
PHEV, roof top solar and distributed power system communication and
control (``smart grid''). The actualization of this potential requires
significant investment to develop, demonstrate and deploy new
technologies. The utility industry is generally not in a position to
make this initial investment, although there is high interest for
trying out promising grid-connected technologies. Department of Energy
programs to develop, test, and demonstrate energy storage technologies
are believed to be right on target regarding utility industry interests
in the distributed systems. More opportunities to partner on first-of-
a-kind applications in different regions, and under different grid
operating conditions, will be welcomed.
In the future EPRI will continue to work with its members and the
Department of Energy to help realize the untapped benefit of new energy
storage technologies in the electric power industry. We believe that
the expanded use of energy storage is important to improving the
efficiency, reliability and security of the electric power delivery
network. Energy storage applications in both the transmission and
distribution grid will be essential to meet the growing demand for
electricity, using low emitting generation technologies, and gaining
the full value of end-use energy management.
Biography for Thomas S. Key
Mr. Key directs R&D in the Renewable Program at EPRI.
Experience
A nationally recognized leader in electric power system research,
application of distributed generation and energy storage, and related
testing, Mr. Key is credited as the father of the ``CBEMA'' curve for
compatibility of electronic equipment. He has been a catalyst and major
contributor IEEE standards for compatible interface of end-use
equipment and distributed power systems.
Prior to joining EPRI he was a member of the technical staff at
Sandia National Laboratory in Albuquerque where he pioneered some of
the early work on grid integration of distributed solar electric
systems. This included design and testing of photovoltaic power
systems, development of grid-connected inverters for conditioning and
control of distributed energy sources, and creation of power system
design practices for grounding, and protection.
Since joining EPRI in 1990 he has developed criteria for a utility
grid-compatible interface, characterized high-performance dc/ac
inverters and electronic appliances, analyzed effects of power
disturbances on sensitive electronic equipment, and developed design
criteria and recommended practices for cost-effective application of
power-enhancement equipment.
He is the author of more than 100 professional papers, reports, and
technical articles.
Professional Affiliations and Activities
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
(IEEE)
Proposed and chaired the first IEEE Recommended
Practice for Powering and Grounding of Sensitive Electronic
Equipment
Initiated IEEE Standards Coordinating Committee for
Power Quality
Lecturer for Univ. of Wisc., EPRI, and IEEE Standards
Board Seminars
United States Navy, Civil Engineer Corps (Seabees),
Retired
Achievements
IEEE Fellow for Advancements in the field of Electric
Power Quality
John Mungenast International Power Quality Award
distinguished power quality research.
IEEE Outstanding Engineer Award, Region 3
Originated and directed the EPRI Power System
Compatibility Research Program
Education
Master of Science in Electrical Power Engineering and
Management, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, 1974
Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering,
University of New Mexico, 1970
Discussion
Chairman Lampson. Thank you. I appreciate the testimony,
and we will now enter into periods of questioning by Members. I
shall recognize myself, as Chairman, for the first five
minutes, and I would like to start with Mr. Roberts.
Energy Storage to Reduce Electricity Congestion
The Department of Energy has designated two national-
interest electric-transmission corridors, the Mid-Atlantic Area
and the Southwest Area. They include areas of growing
population and growing electricity congestion. These
designations have not been without controversy.
Do you think that advanced energy storage systems could
help reduce some or much of the need to build more electric
generation and transmission lines?
Mr. Roberts. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I think it is essential that storage be applied in the load
centers in the larger cities in those regions. It will help
relieve that congestion in the peak periods and will be very
essential in making that happen and hopefully delaying those
upgrades for a long period of time, hopefully.
Government Role in Energy Storage Deployment
Chairman Lampson. Mr. Key, in your testimony you state that
another hurdle to energy storage deployment is the fact that
the benefits are spread across a number of stakeholders,
including power producers, system operators, distribution
companies, end-users, and society at large. Is there a role for
the Federal Government to help bring stakeholders together to
encourage investment in energy storage systems so the
investment burden doesn't lie with one entity?
Mr. Key. I think we need help in these areas. I haven't
prepared any recommendation related to how the Federal
Government might help, but it is very difficult to build large
plants, and there are clearly benefits, aggregate benefits to
the public to do this, and we have seen that with our few
existing plants that are still valuable today, and we are going
to need more in the future.
Grid Modernization
Chairman Lampson. Mr. Dickerman, in your testimony, you
discussed what is needed to modernize the grid, including
electricity-storage devices and communication systems. In your
opinion, do we need a new government body dedicated to
facilitating or overseeing the modernization of the electric
grid?
Mr. Dickerman. I think that, clearly, what is needed in
this whole area is some clear thinking about how all of it fits
together. If I might take a minute, I think the kind of
transition we are talking about here is very much like what
happened with vehicles, where a vehicle in 1985 and one today
is very different, and there is a lot of communication
protocol, and there is a lot of computer capability, and there
is a lot of control of various devices that have optimized an
automobile today.
Now, we are talking this afternoon about the importance of
storage and further optimization. It is a very complex thing
that we are talking about doing in an automobile. And electric
utility grid is far more complex in many respects that there is
so much of it, and it all operates together, and it operates in
real time. So we can improve the operation of the electric
utility grid substantially with communication and with control
and with dynamic optimization and storage. But to do all of
that, there are a lot of technologies that have to come
together, and they have to come together in a way that is
common across the entire nation, and so I do think that there
needs to be some kind of group that comes together to really
work through what does this look like and how do the
technologies work together?
Ancillary Power Services
Chairman Lampson. Thank you. And for Mr. Roberts and Ms.
Hoffman, several questions: as you know power generators
provide a number of ancillary services to the grid to help it
meet reliability and operating standards. You both mentioned
spinning reserves and frequency regulations in your testimony.
Ms. Hoffman also describes the Department's frequency
demonstration project in New York. In the future, do either of
you anticipate energy storage systems playing a large role in
providing vital ancillary services to the grid?
Ms. Hoffman. Mr. Chairman, yes, I agree that storage
systems will provide a large source for frequency voltage
regulation and expanding reserves in the future.
Mr. Roberts. Mr. Chairman, I agree. One of the issues at
stake here is, today, the response time for the generating
systems to respond to frequency-regulation signals can be three
or four minutes. Whereas fast-acting storage systems could
respond in cycles, which would be more beneficial. It is
stressful on many large plants to do this up-and-down
regulation, and I think the power electronics that go with
these types of systems adds R-control, which is reactive-power
control as a side benefit of providing real power, so there is
a real opportunity here, I think, to take care of these devices
to do these functions.
State Energy Storage Policies
Chairman Lampson. I shall ask these last two things, and
you can all just comment on them: outside of the Department of
Energy's demonstration projects, are states or regions adopting
policies to encourage the use of energy storage systems to
provide ancillary services to the grid, and are there benefits
to broad adoption of policies that encourage the use of them?
Ms. Hoffman. Both New York and the California Energy
Commission have strong programs looking at energy storage
demonstration projects as well as some of the demonstration
projects that you have heard here from AEP and the Electric
Power Research Institute. I believe those are very strong
programs in looking at the strategy for appropriate placement
of energy storage systems.
Mr. Roberts. I would agree with her comments. Those two
states have taken a leadership role in this. I think other
states are looking at how they might get involved, and I think
the message is starting to spread around that there is real
benefit here at the state level at the operation of the grids
in those regions, and it is going to improve.
Chairman Lampson. Thank you very much. I shall now
recognize Mr. Inglis for five minutes.
Fuel Cells for Energy Storage
Mr. Inglis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am particularly
interested in the storage of energy for transportation
purposes, and in the discussion draft we have before us of the
bill that we may be marking up soon, we talk about research on
ultra-capacitor, flywheels, batteries and battery systems,
including flow batteries, compressed air energy systems, power
conditioning electronics, manufacturing technologies for energy
storage systems and thermal management systems. I wonder if
fuel cells are appropriately in that list. Ms. Hoffman, do you
think so? Is a fuel cell appropriately in a list of batteries?
Is it essentially a battery, you just put something in it and
then it runs through and creates electricity. Should it be on
the list?
Ultracapacitors and Fuel Cells
Ms. Hoffman. A fuel cell is a type of exchange, so for
storing energy, it does use hydrogen as part of the fuel cell
component. I shall have to get back to you on that.
[The information follows:]
Information for the Record
Fuel cells are not really an energy storage system. They can be
considered generators that produce energy similar to solar energy, wind
energy, and other distributed generation. Research on fuel cells is
conducted by other DOE programs.
Mr. Inglis. I just wonder if it might appropriately be in
there. It is--of course, I have talked a lot about hydrogen and
I am very excited about its potential applications to
transportation. It is also true that batteries could be the
competitor that wins the race to the car of the future. You
know, if you have a really good battery, then perhaps you don't
need hydrogen, either burning in an internal combustion engine
like BMW wants to do it, or in a fuel cell, like General Motors
wants to do it. And I was very interested in this story
recently about Lynn Motor Company using an ultra-capacitor. I
think they are based in Austin, Texas, and maybe manufacture in
Canada--I saw the story, but they say that they have an
ultracapacitors kind of concept that will enable a battery to
be recharged in five minutes and to take a car 500 miles on a
charge. Are you familiar with that or--I read the article and I
thought, wow, this could be fabulous, and then I saw some
questions about whether it would really work. Do you have any
thoughts about that?
Ms. Hoffman. I don't have any comments on your specific
example. I shall have to get back to you for the record on that
specific example, but with respect to your comments on the
types of vehicles and what horse is going to win the race, I
think that versatility is an important aspect of having for our
vehicle fleet as well as our stationary sources, and I believe
that in that diversity, there are options for fuel cell cars as
well as plug-in hybrid electric vehicles in providing the
diversity that the country needs.
[The information follows:]
Information for the Record
Zenn Motor Company, a Toronto-based producer of battery powered
cars, has a technology agreement with EEstore, Inc. of Austin, TX and
holds an exclusive license for EEstore batteries. The device, which is
a type of supercapacitor, is not yet in production. EEstore claims that
their batteries, when inserted in the Zenn motor Company's 25mph
vehicle, would allow a range of 500 miles and would recharge in five
minutes. Sandia National Laboratories, acting for DOE's Energy Storage
Program, has requested a sample product and offered to test their
device in order to verify these claims. The company has declined to
provide a sample. The Department is not aware that any authoritative
experts have verified the claims of the device.
Mr. Inglis. And certainly, it really doesn't much matter
who wins the race, does it? I mean as long as we can get away
from what we have got now which is a terrible way to get
around, in terms of the environmental benefits and national
security risk that we are running, and the job creation
opportunity by creating these new technologies. So do you think
that--I don't know if anybody else wants to comment on whether
they have seen that--or looked at the ultracapacitor technology
involving that car. Mr. Roberts, have you seen that?
Mr. Roberts. Congressman, I have done some research, my
company has done some research on that particular thing you
read about in that article, and a lot of money has been
invested in waiting to see when a prototype is finally
delivered to see if these claims can be met, because they are
pretty broad.
Mr. Inglis. Yes.
Mr. Roberts. And so it is kind of stretching the boundaries
right now, but until some demonstration is done to see, we
won't really know.
I have a comment on the fuel-cell usage in stationary
application. Fuel cells are--work very well, but they have no
energy behind them. They have no punch. To make a stationary
fuel cell really work effectively, you need to add some from of
storage to it to give it the immediate energy it needs if there
is a sudden load change or something, if you are applying it in
an office building or something and the air conditioning turns
on, a fuel cell can't deliver that surge of energy, and so
storage actually enables fuel cells to work better.
Mr. Keys. We have tested ultracapacitors and applied them,
and I would just say that to drive a vehicle 500 miles, there
must be some other fuel involved. There is just not energy, I
think, today, although the research is very interesting in this
area--and in fact, we have done a lot of it. Regarding fuel
cells, I don't think they are really treated as a battery or as
a storage system. The storage, of course is the hydrogen--or
the natural gas or the fuel that goes into the hydrogen. So I
think one problem with treating a fuel cell, because it uses
hydrogen as energy storage, it is like we have used hydrogen in
internal-combustion engines from a tank of hydrogen, so there
is a bit of a problem, I think, if you go down that route.
Mr. Dickerman. I might offer a couple of comments as well.
AEP has been involved with supercapacitors, and we have not
seen results anything close to that, but what we have seen is
that they have a real advantage in the fact that they can go
through a lot of charge-discharge cycles, and we don't even
know the limits yet. We have not been able to wear one out, so
it is very positive in that regard.
In terms of fuel cells, I think fuel cells in storage, as
Brad Roberts was alluding to, are a really great marriage,
because we are also working with fuel-cell technology with
Rolls Royce, one-megawatt-sized fuel cells for deployment on a
utility grid. And the thing about the fuel cell is that it
really likes to run flat out. In other words, you turn it on,
and you run it at a megawatt, and it doesn't want to vary. If
you put a storage device with it, then you can take up all of
the variation and load with the storage device, so a two-
megawatt unit--one megawatt, a fuel cell; a megawatt of
storage--and then you have got something that can sort of
follow the load and the efficiency of the fuel cell is very
high. So I think it is an important technology related to this,
and it is a technology that benefits from this.
Mr. Inglis. Thank you.
Chairman Lampson. I would recognize Chairman Gordon at this
time. He has stepped out, but in the interest of time, Mr.
McNerney for five minutes.
Rating Storage Technology
Mr. McNerney. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank the
panel for coming in today with your testimony. Storage is, I
think, critical to global warning issues because storage is
going to allow us to utilize wind energy, solar energy, and
other forms of intermittent renewable energies on a large
scale. Right now, we are not able to do that because of the
intermittency problems. So I want to see what we can do in
terms of the Federal Government encouraging this type of
research.
Mr. Dickerman, you mentioned--well, I would like to know
how you rate storage. Now, there are two ways to rate, by the
installed capacity so to speak, how much power it can generate
and how much energy it can store, and then how would you use
that to--how would you use that, economically, to decide
whether a storage technology is viable for a particular
application?
Mr. Dickerman. That is a great question. I think one of the
issues with a technology like storage is that it is a fairly
complex set of economics, because you are talking about
multiple benefits at the same time, so we can deploy a storage
device to just shave a peak, so essentially what that gives you
is about enough energy to serve 600 homes for seven hours, if
it is a megawatt. We are probably going to tend to be deploying
more in the two megawatt size, so about 12,000 homes for about
seven hours. So that is the basic grading. You can use it for
just peak shaving, and in that case, it might defer capital
like a new station transformer or line upgrades or things of
that nature.
But we are also working now to island the technology, that
is to make it such that if you lose the feed to an area--
imagine a remote rural area with relatively poor reliability,
single-feed. You lose the feed because a tree comes across a
line. Then, the battery can continue to feed that area. So that
has a value as well. And then there is this value that is much
harder for us to get our arms around that we were talking
about. As it sits, there are regulation values for generation
and that type of thing, so there are several things happening
at the same time in terms of building up the value, so each of
the projects we are looking at, we are sort of tailoring the
economics and saying how much do we save in terms of differing
capital because it reduces the load of peak. What is the value
of the reliability that we are gaining? And basically, those
are the two factors. We are not really yet to the point of
trying to decide what is the value of some of those other
aspects that might benefit generation.
Mr. McNerney. Well, that is right. With wind energy, which
I am familiar, you have, say, $1,500 a kilowatt installed, and
then you have $.05 to $.06 per kilowatt hour produced. And I
don't have a clear idea of how storage impacts those economics.
Mr. Dickerman. Specifically on wind generation?
Mr. McNerney. Well, wind, but it would be, you know,
certainly the analysis would be transferable, I am sure.
Mr. Dickerman. Well, in the case of wind, for example, wind
can probably be best thought of as a negative load. So load is
something that you can predict somewhat, and you can follow
load with the generation that you have got. But the generation
that we are used to dispatching, you know what it is. You know
you can dispatch it. If it is 100 megawatts, you know it is
available; you turn it on, and it meets the need. Wind
generation, you don't know if it is going to be there, because
you don't know when the wind is going to blow, so there is an
uncertainty. So it is uncertain in the same way that load is
uncertain, and you have to follow load, and you also have to
follow wind generation because you don't know what is going to
happen. What the battery does is it enables you to store it and
then make it available on peak when it means the most to you.
And obviously, the price--the real price of producing energy
goes up as the demand goes up throughout the day.
Foreign Energy Storage
Mr. McNerney. Ms. Hoffman, you had said something that
peaked my interested, that we have--2.5 percent of our energy
in this country goes through storage, and 10 to 15 percent goes
in Europe. What are the technologies they use in Europe that
allow that high a percent of their electric power to go through
storage? How economic is that?
Ms. Hoffman. I believe I had mentioned Japan. Japan did the
first sodium-sulfur battery, so they do have--it is the same
suite of storage technologies that we are talking about here
for the United States.
And I am sorry. I missed the other part of your question.
Mr. McNerney. Well, what is the economics of that? How much
do they pay, premium, for that storage capacity.
Ms. Hoffman. I shall have to get back to you on that for
the record.
[The information follows:]
Information for the Record
The primary storage technology in Japan, as in the U.S., is pumped
hydro. However, as Japanese government mandates increasingly require
more storage to offset intermittent wind generation, sodium-sulfur
storage systems are being widely deployed there. Due to the success of
this technology in Japan, U.S. companies such as American Electric
Power and the NY Power Authority have chosen to install pioneering
field tests in the U.S. The Department supports these tests through
collaboration on facility design, monitoring, and economic analysis of
the systems.
At approximately $1,500/kWh, the price of NAS batteries is about
three times that of conventional lead acid batteries. However, because
their lifetime is considerably longer, the cost per cycle is only a
third of the cost for lead acid batteries. Maintenance costs are also
considerably lower for NAS batteries.
Mr. McNerney. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Key. Well, the storage in Japan and in Europe is pump
storage, sir. There is very little battery storage, you know,
that would add up to that percentage in the world.
Mr. McNerney. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Lampson. Thank you, Mr. McNerney. Ms. Biggert,
five minutes.
NAS Battery Technology
Ms. Biggert. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Hoffman, what are
the origins of the NAS battery technology? I thought that this
technology was developed in the United States. And did the
government play a role in that development?
Ms. Hoffman. I am going to defer to Mr. Dickerman for that.
Mr. Dickerman. The NAS battery technology was developed in
1965 and Ford Motor Company was involved, and it was a
technology that was, of course, considered at that time as
having possible application in vehicles. It was taken to a
certain extent, and basically the technology, then, was picked
up by the Japanese and a combination of NGK with support of
Tokyo Electric, the Japanese government continued to develop it
and brought it to the kind of maturity to where it could be
used in the Japanese electric-grid infrastructure.
Ms. Biggert. Was it ever used by the government, do you
know, or Department of Energy had any research on that?
Mr. Dickerman. That, I don't know.
Preventing Others From Capitalizing on U.S. Inventions
Ms. Biggert. I guess I am just wondering because it seems
like this is another example where technology was developed in
the U.S., and then commercialized and deployed by foreign
companies and governments. Just like we have developed the
nuclear technologies, particularly the recycling, and then it
has been commercialized by France, and now they are selling
this back to the United States, so--and we are having to buy
from overseas because we have failed to capitalize on the
inventions and the technology here, so do you have--anybody
have any ideas about how to prevent this? How we can make
sure--Mr. Roberts?
Mr. Roberts. I would like to comment on that. That part is
true, but taking that battery energy and delivering it into the
grid requires very sophisticated power electronic equipment,
and we are in a leadership position in that field in the United
States, and we have been very fortunate that we have developed
that marketplace. And we are one of the leaders, my company is
one of the leaders in that arena. And our initial developments
and all of our work are a very good example of DOE programs
that go back about ten years ago, so----
Ms. Biggert. Mr. Dickerman.
Mr. Dickerman. Yes, I think there is really four stages to
development of any technology. There is the basic research, and
quite often that involves academic institutions, pure-research
kind of programs in various places around the country. And then
there is applied research, where you start thinking about what
you can do with it. Then, I think where things tend to break
down is there is a need for demonstration projects, and at that
point, you have to take the technology from something that is
applied research, like we did with this NAS battery, or like we
are doing with the islanding aspect of the NAS battery, and
actually do something that has to work and actually serve a
useful purpose. And at that point, there needs to be a greater
collaboration between industry and between the organizations
that are doing the research and understand the technology to
create the real handoff as to how can you use this technology
in a real way to accomplish a real purpose. And then, once that
happens, I think there has to be incentives for widespread use,
and what happens is, quite often, the technology, initially,
even if it works, is at a price point where it really isn't
competitive yet, and it needs an incubation period through some
type of incentive. So basic research, applied research,
demonstration projects, incentives for widespread use: I think
that is what is needed, and where things break down is in the
demonstration project phase with industry, I think.
Deploying Technology in the U.S.
Ms. Biggert. Well, why did AEP, then, need DOE's help
when--deploying that technology here when it has been in use
for 15 years in Japan.
Mr. Dickerman. Because it had not been employed on a U.S.
infrastructure, and the U.S. infrastructure had some
fundamental differences in the power electronics that Brad
Roberts was talking about, and our vision from the start was to
take it to a different level. So in Japan, the technology just
sits there and peak shaves. And to even do that, we needed to
develop the technology further to apply it on a U.S. system.
The thing that hasn't been done anywhere in the world is to
island this kind of technology so that it can improve
reliability and function with no connection to the electrical
grid. That we are doing for the first time in the United States
anywhere in the world.
Alternative Energies
Ms. Biggert. And Ms. Hoffman, in your testimony, you talked
about replacing imported oil to use domestically produced fuel
electricity to fuel our cars. But if we continue to, in this
country--a trend I am not encouraging--gas or coal or nuclear
for energy and not allowing drilling for natural gas on the
outer continental shelf or in ANWAR, don't we run the risk of
being more dependent on foreign gas? It seems like so much of
this is based on natural gas which is really a commodity that
we will run out of, and I think we need to keep it for, you
know, the things that are really--plastics and fertilizers and
things.
Ms. Hoffman. Thank you, Congresswoman. The Department is
looking at advancing all of the generation types that I think
the United States is going to acquire in the future to meet
that demand for electricity, and we will continue to look at
clean coal concepts, advanced nuclear, and renewable technology
to the maximum extent possible. Thank you.
Ms. Biggert. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Lampson. You are welcome. The Chair now recognizes
Ms. Giffords for five minutes.
Thermal Storage Technologies
Ms. Giffords. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to our
panelists who have come in today to talk about energy storage
technologies. I am exited, Mr. Chairman, about this topic,
because when I think about the challenges that we face as a
nation and that the world faces, I think a lot of the solution
to our energy needs can be talked about here in this room and
hopefully put into action in terms of policy.
This technology is important, not just because of global
warming, but because of our dependency on foreign oil. As you
know, figuring this piece of the puzzle out is going to be
critical. I am also really concerned, and Congresswoman Biggert
talked about it, is this competitiveness issue that we are
facing. We put money into research and development here in the
United States, and then we see that technology furthered in
other places, and that has got to change, and hopefully this
Congress can be part of making that a reality.
A couple of questions: I am from Arizona, and everybody
here on this committee knows because I always talk about
Arizona. I am very proud of my state, and one of the beauties
that we have in this state, of course, is our abundant supply
of sunshine. We have over 350 days of sunshine every year. So
it is really solar energy that has the greatest potential for
renewable energy in Arizona. I noticed, Ms. Hoffman in your
written testimony, and even in the testimony provided by the
other panelists that there was no mention of thermal storage
technologies, and that is obviously going to be critical for
the development of solar power. So I was hoping that you would
talk about this form of technology, what the Department of
Energy is doing, and in each of your individual, respective
area, where you see thermal storage development coming from and
whether or not these applications can be used in other areas
beside the concentration of solar power, which we are seeing
developed out in areas like Arizona.
Ms. Hoffman. Thank you, Congresswoman. Thermal storage is
an opportunity but the Department does not currently have any
research programs in the area of thermal storage that I am
aware of. I shall check on that and get back to you for the
record. But it does have potential for residential usage for
thermal storage, and it can provide a balance with your
photovoltaic system.
Ms. Giffords. Ms. Hoffman, let me clarify, so you are not
aware of DOE having any research or any development into this
area?
Ms. Hoffman. At this time. I shall check for the record,
yes.
[The information follows:]
Information for the Record
The Department of Energy is investing in the use of thermal storage
with solar technology applications through a number of projects. The
storage of solar energy in this manner removes the intermittency of
sunlight, enabling concentrating solar power (CSP) systems to provide
energy to homes and businesses day or night.
In the mid-1990s, the Department retrofitted the 10-megawatt Solar
One Power Tower in Barstow, California with molten salt storage to
demonstrate the functionality of solar power. That project, ``Solar
Two,'' succeeded in proving the viability of molten salt storage, at
one point producing power around the clock for 150 hours in one test.
The Department strongly supports development of technology that
dramatically reduces the cost of CSP power and emphasizes the
development of storage technologies. Toward that end, the Department
recently announced that it had selected twelve projects for further
negotiations to enable DOE to invest up to $5.2 million to energize the
U.S. market for CSP systems with a major focus on thermal storage.
Also, both Sandia National Laboratories and the National Renewable
Energy Laboratory are working to develop more efficient and lower cost
thermal energy storage technologies for parabolic trough and advanced
higher-temperature CSP systems.
Even though solar technologies are largely load following, as peak
power production coincides with peak air conditioning loads in the
southwest, without thermal storage the capacity factor is only about 25
percent. However, with storage, CSP technology can reach capacity
factors exceeding 65 percent, making this a highly attractive power
option for utilities looking for reliable renewable power to meet their
intermediate and even baseload power needs. The Department's goals in
the area of CSP include reducing the cost of solar power to be
regularly available at less than 10 cents per kilowatt-hour by 2015.
Mr. Roberts. A comment on solar energy and storage:
typically, around the county, solar energy peaks two to three
hours before the load peaks, and if you apply storage, you can
extend--capture all of that energy and extend it into the
evening and take advantage of that sunshine that was shining
brightly in the afternoon when everybody was still at work, and
so that is one of the areas storage can level out, solar
energy, and extend that peak period to meet the peak period of
the actual load itself.
Mr. Key. Thermal storage is of great interest to a number
of our Members in the west because of concentrated
photovoltaic. In fact, we expect as much as five gigawats of
that type of generation, and the thermal storage is a very
natural part of a power tower, and it is also being looked at
and tried out for the trough technology. It is limited, pretty
much to the Southwest. It is great, and it will be a big help
with solar, and in fact, with just balancing the Western system
which has such long distances and issues with stability.
Ms. Hoffman. Congresswoman, I shall clarify that there is a
thermal storage program with concentrating solar power in our
Energy Efficiency Office. I shall have to get back to you with
more details on that program.
Ms. Giffords. Please because, you know, here, again, in
Arizona, you have an area with large tracks of lands, terrific
sunlight, and also the scientist at the University of Arizona
and other research institutions as well. The University of
Arizona just announced a specific program that is going to go
for building a center for solar excellence, and I think if we
use that technology and we use the resources we have, we are
able not just to help the fastest growing in the Nation, but
also export that energy as well.
Recycling Battery Technologies and Environmental Issues
Let me just switch to another topic really quickly, which
is the environmental impact of the storage in general and
batteries in particular. You know, as we try to develop more
and more of this technology, and again, in a state like Arizona
where we have a lot of hard rock mining and a lot of the
environmental impacts, I was just hoping that the panel could
address the ability to recycle this technology and also the
increased demand for some of these precious and rare metals
that are going to go into the storage capacity.
Mr. Roberts. I shall start the responses, Congresswoman.
All of the technologies, the battery technologies that are
being used today are based on 100 percent recycling taking
place at end of life in those technologies. That is something
that is very important. The sodium-sulfur battery is a
medically sealed box, so there is no emissions associated with
it, and at the end of its life, it is totally recycled.
Mr. Dickerman. And for the years of operation in Japan,
there haven't been any environmental or safety issues. Most of
what is in that big box the size of a double-decker bus is
sand, and that is most of the weight, but there really aren't
any environmental issues that we have seen, and as I said, at
the end of life, we expect to recycle the components.
Chairman Lampson. I recognize Mr. Bartlett.
Twenty in Ten Plan
Mr. Bartlett. With 10 kids, 16 grandkids, and two great-
grandkids, I ask what I think is a rational question to those
who would like to drill in ANWAR and offshore. If you could
pump ANWAR and the offshore tomorrow, what would you do the day
after tomorrow? And there will be a day after tomorrow.
Wantonly consuming the small additional reserves that we have
is not a prescription of security for tomorrow.
Mr. Key mentioned the challenge we have in getting
batteries for cars that will get us very far, and that, of
course, is because of the incredible energy density in our
fossil fuels. One gallon of gasoline, it is a little, still
cheaper than water in the grocery store, carries my Prius car
50 miles. How long would it take me to pull my Prius car 50
miles? This is incredible energy density. And to provide that--
even anything approaching that energy density in batteries is a
horrendous challenge, and that is why this is such a difficult
challenge.
You know, in our aspiration for the future, we really need
to be rational, and Twenty in Ten is not rational. There isn't
even a prayer unless we have a devastating worldwide depression
with demand destruction that we can even come close to
displacing 20 percent of our gasoline in ten years. That is not
going to happen if all of our corn was used for ethanol and
just countered for fossil fuel input, it would displace 2.4
percent of our gasoline. If all of our soybeans were converted
to diesel fuel, they would displace 2.9 percent of our
gasoline. Those aren't my numbers. Those are National Academy
of Science numbers. And if we use all of our wastelands to
plant a mixture of grasses and use the cellulosic ethanol, that
might produce as much displacement of fossil fuels as all of
our corn. So you add up these three things, and you are way
short of even ten percent.
You know, I am all for doing something rational, but you
know, this is an impossible dream, and I don't want to set us
up for disappointment. We are going to be enormously
disappointed if we think we can even come close to displacing
20 percent of our gasoline in ten years. We can certainly
reduce by far more than 20 percent of consumption of gasoline
in 10 years by conservation. I was in France at the last
election--and by the way, it is interesting that the new French
president is the son of a Hungarian immigrant. He is doing a
pretty good job, isn't he? And I looked there for people riding
in a pickup truck as personal transportation. I saw not one,
and I looked for people riding in an SUV. The only SUV I saw in
Paris was parked behind a church. I did not see one on the
street. If we really want to reduce our consumption of
gasoline, we need to approach it rationally, not with some
impossible dream, and continue to drive these huge SUVs and
pickup trucks, one person in them, for personal transportation
and displace 20 percent of our gasoline in ten years. Am I
wrong?
Mr. Roberts. I would like to, Congressman, make one
comment. I think everybody agrees that conservation and
changing our ways has to take place. Along that way to that
process, we need to use the energy resources we have much more
efficiently--we are adding a lot of wind into the system--and
to try to utilize it more effectively as quickly as we can.
These programs that are listed in this bill, I think, would go
a long way to helping that, but the real problem is, I think,
as you suggested, that things have to change and attitudes have
to change.
Mr. Bartlett. I am a huge fan of wind and solar. I have an
off-grid home. All of my electricity is produced by wind and
solar, and I have a big bank of batteries to supply. But you
must be very frugal in the way you use electricity if you are
providing for yourself. There is nothing that will make you a
better convert to conservation than producing your own
electricity with wind machines and solar panels and watching
how quickly that disappears if you are at all proliferate.
Thank you all very much for your testimony and your helping
to move us forward. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Chairman Lampson. Thank you, Mr. Bartlett. The Chair now
recognizes Mr. McCaul for five minutes.
Solar Technology and Energy Trading
Mr. McCaul. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Roscoe, I want to
congratulate you on ten children. I have five children, but you
manage to double the amount that I have. That is an incredible
accomplishment.
I want to pick on an issue that was discussed earlier, and
that is solar. My home state of Texas also has a lot of
sunshine. Applied Materials in my district is working on solar
panels, making great progress with those, and the real issue is
storage, as you know. They tell me that the power grid can be
used to--or their theory where they are going with all of this
is to store the solar energy from the panels into the power
grid, and then be able to draw upon the power grid, in other
words, sort of getting credits for that. Is that a realistic
technology? Anybody can answer.
Mr. Dickerman. Well, I think that is. What we were saying
to complement storage and wind is that you simply are taking it
from something where you can't be sure when it is available,
and you are storing it an making it available on peak, which
clearly has a value. It sounds like that is exactly what they
are talking about doing with the solar, and so it is the same
value proportions. Simply making sure that it is available and
dispatchable resource on peak when needed most.
Mr. McCaul. Mr. Key.
Mr. Key. The point that we will use the electric grid to
buy and sell and trade solar and wind energy is critical. As I
described in my testimony, we are limited, I think, in doing
that, especially as we take our regulation-type generation,
natural gas, and we try to move toward more nuclear and clean
coal, and we add wind, and then it is going to be more
difficult to do this trading and keep this system in balance.
So I think it is a correct statement, but it is a matter of how
long we can continue to do that as these renewable resources
come into play.
Mr. McCaul. And Ms. Hoffman, as I recall, in your
testimony, you are not aware of any thermal storage research
and development programs at the Department of Energy.
Ms. Hoffman. Congressman, I was actually thinking of ice
storage and some of those technologies when we were talking
about thermal storage. We do have a concentrating solar power
program that is tied with thermal storage, but I shall have to
get back, for the record, on details of that program.
Hybrid Electric Development Time
Mr. McCaul. One more, I have limited time. The hybrid plug-
ins, you know, we have hybrid vehicles, we have batteries,
why--just explain to me--I am not a scientist--why it takes so
long to get a hybrid plug-in vehicle that could be available to
the average consumer, if anybody knows the answer to that one.
Ms. Hoffman. The next panel may be able to address that
with----
Mr. McCaul. Ms. Hoffman, you would probably be the best
person to try to venture at that. I won't be around for the
next panel.
Ms. Hoffman. From the Department's perspective, in
developing a vehicle, there is a development cycle that the
manufacturers have to put plans for future vehicles, and I
understand that cycle is somewhere around eight years to ten
years, and so they are looking now for technologies that they
will introduce in the marketplace at a later time. For the
record, I can find more on the cycle development for
introducing new technologies into vehicle application.
Mr. McCaul. I know we sponsored legislations for tax
credits for that. It just seems to me that should be more in
the short-term than in the long-term.
The Proposed Legislation
And finally, Ms. Hoffman, have you had a chance to look at
the proposed legislation here before us? There are two
sections, section 6 and 7, that deal with demonstration
projects at the Department of Energy. Can you comment on these
two sections and also whether there is any duplication between
these two programs?
Ms. Hoffman. From a technical perspective on the content of
that, I think it is very synergistic to where the Department is
heading, where the states are heading, and where other research
programs are going for this type of demonstration project. So
for an area of completeness, I think the bill does capture both
of those aspects.
Mr. McCaul. So you see them as complementing and not
duplicating. Is that fair?
Ms. Hoffman. Yes, sir.
Mr. McCaul. And then, finally, intellectual property is
going to be a real issue if advanced technologies are
discovered through these joint activities. Do you have anything
in place to protect intellectual property?
Ms. Hoffman. The Department does, and I would have to get
back to you for the record on that one.
[The information follows:]
Information for the Record
Protecting intellectual property rights (IP) is a matter of high
priority for DOE. The policy and procedures for protecting IP in DOE's
Research, Development and Demonstration Program is well developed and
in accord with applicable statutes and the practices followed by all
government agencies. First, a private partner's preexisting IP is
respected and under the terms of any award, the preexisting private
partner's IP remains owned by the private partner. Next, while the
government retains some rights to new inventions that are created
through DOE awards, such as a government use license, the Bayh-Dole Act
(35 U.S.C. 200 et seq.) permits small business and nonprofit
organizations to retain ownership of their new inventions. Pursuant to
a statutory procedure, other organizations can petition DOE to retain
ownership of their new inventions and such petitions are usually
granted subject to the government obtaining some rights. Finally, while
technical data first produced under an award is normally required to be
publicly disseminated, in appropriate circumstances DOE may grant up to
five years of protection from public release of some data from a
research award at the discretion of the DOE program office.
Mr. McCaul. Okay, that will be fine. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
Chairman Lampson. Mr. Akin, I recognize you for five
minutes.
Status of Battery Technology
Mr. Akin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just--I didn't know of
the different witnesses, do we have anybody that is on top of
where we are in terms of battery technology and that
developmental process? My background is in engineering. My
sense is that maybe one of the shortest paths to solving some
of the dependence on foreign oil is using the off-peak power
from the--whether it is coal or nuclear generation, and being
able to put that right into a car. It also has the added
benefit of not paying any fuel tax, which I like. But anyway,
what is the status of battery technology? I understand,
basically, the answer to my friend's question is that it is too
expensive. The batteries are too expensive. They don't last too
long, and just, economically, it is cheaper to burn gas. But
the question is where is that technology, because certainly, it
has come a long way in ten years. I mean I remember when they
came out with that first electric-powered, you know, screw gun
or drill, and the thing was not much power. Now, they have got,
you know, these big hammer-drills are running on batteries. Is
that continuing to move or not?
Mr. Roberts. Congressman, unfortunately, in the afternoon
session, there is a battery manufacturer that is here that
could address that probably a little better, but there is a lot
of activity and research and development of advanced batteries,
particularly for vehicle application, going on in this country
right now, and----
Mr. Akin. But that is not your expertise, particularly.
Mr. Roberts. No.
Mr. Akin. Well, that is all I had for questions. Thank you,
Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Lampson. You are welcome. I think everyone has had
an opportunity to ask questions, and we do have a second panel.
We want to thank you very much for coming. I shall, in closing,
ask are any of you aware of anything that has to do with
wireless transmission of energy, and if so, I would like to
talk with you. And again, I thank you all for coming. We will
take a short break. We shall be in recess before our next panel
comes up.
[Recess].
Chairman Lampson. Come back to order, and we will now hear
from our second panel. That includes Ms. Lynda Ziegler who is
the senior vice president for customer services at Southern
California Edison; Ms. Denise Gray, who is the director for
hybrid energy storage systems at General Motors; Mary Ann
Wright is the vice president and general manager for Hybrid
Systems Power Solutions at Johnson Controls. You will each have
five minutes for your spoken testimony. Your written testimony
will be included in the record for the hearing, and when all
three of you have completed your testimony, we will begin with
questions. Each Member will have five minutes to question the
panel.
Ms. Zeigler, we will begin with you.
Panel II:
STATEMENT OF MS. LYNDA L. ZIEGLER, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT,
CUSTOMER SERVICE, SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
Ms. Zeigler. At Southern California Edison, we are the
largest purchaser of wind. We purchase over 2,700 megawatts,
and we also purchase 90 percent of the solar generation in the
country. My company has been committed to the electrification
of transportation for 20 years. We operate the Nation's largest
and most successful fleet of electric vehicles, a fleet that
has traveled nearly 15 million miles on electric power. Our
Electrical Vehicle Technical Center, unique in the utility
industry is one of only several facilities recognized by the
Department of Energy to evaluate all form of electro-drive
technology. We have ongoing research collaborations with major
automakers, battery suppliers and both the Federal and State
governments. We believe that with continued engineering
advances and appropriate public-policy support, the widespread
use of advanced batteries in plug-in vehicles and in stationary
storage will become one of the Nation's most effective
strategies in the broader effort to address energy security,
reduce greenhouse gas emission, and reduce air pollutant.
In fact, the Electric Power Research Institute, which we
heard form earlier, and the Natural Resources Defense Council
recently partnered to publish one of the most comprehensive
studies to date on Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles. One key
finding was that widespread adoption of plug-in hybrids could
reduce annual emissions of greenhouse gases by more than 450
million metric tons by 2050, or the equivalent of removing 82
million passenger cars form the road. That kind of reduction is
obviously a long way off, but it provides all the more
incentive for us to begin today.
Electricity is virtually petroleum free, is about 25 to 50
percent of the cost of a gasoline equivalent and is the only
alternative transportation fuel today with a national
infrastructure already in place. A recent study by the U.S.
Department of Energy estimates that a little over 70 percent of
the light-duty cars and trucks on the road today could be
fueled by the excess off-peak capacity that exists in the
electricity system, without building a single new power plant.
For utilities such as Southern California Edison, the
challenge and the opportunity is to integrate electric
transportation and their advanced batteries into a total energy
system.
In the near-term, the advanced high-energy battery in a
plug-in vehicle could serve as a source of temporary energy
power for the home, or to occasionally help customers avoid
high electricity costs during peak pricing time. We call this
vehicle-to-home. These same advanced high-energy batteries
could also be used in stationary applications. Home owners
could fill a home energy battery at night using lower cost
electricity and then draw from it during the high-cost part of
the day to help lower the monthly utility bill.
In the mid-term, as plug-in vehicles increase in volume,
using the grid's off-peak capacity at night to charge these
vehicles may actually help lower customer's rates by increasing
the utilization of our generating plants. In effect, utilities
would spread their fixed costs over more kilowatt-hour sales.
We evaluate new business models on these and other
applications. Edison recently launched a partnership with Ford
Motor Company to demonstrate and evaluate purpose built plug-in
hybrid Ford Escapes. Our goal is to explore the future customer
values believed through plug-in vehicles and stationary energy
storage.
At the same time as the emergence of plug-in vehicles and
home energy storage is the advance of advanced utility meters.
Over the next five years, Southern California Edison will
install five million next-generation advanced meters called
Edison SmartConnect in the home of every customer in our
service territory. These meters will offer our customers better
information and enhanced control over their electricity usage.
Our Electric Vehicle Technical Center is working with industry
stakeholders to integrate the vehicles and the home and the
advanced meter.
Finally, in the long-term, we can imagine the potential of
so-called vehicle-to-grid systems, or the ability to move
stored energy from many plug-in vehicles back to the grid. The
potential, however, for vehicle-to-grid is many years away and
will depend on the development of all new control technologies
as par of the smart grid of the future.
Is that anything I should worry about?
Now, let me conclude with our view on the important role
the Federal Government can play to bring the promise of
electric transportation closer to reality. In our opinion,
large-scale domestic manufacturing capacity for high energy
advanced batteries is crucial to the expansion of plug-in
hybrid vehicle application and complementary stationary energy
storage uses. There currently exists no such capacity on a
significant scale in the United States today. The Federal
Government should provide near-term incentives to help nurture
U.S. production of this critical technology.
And earlier this year, H.R. 670, the DRIVE Act, included
important measures to support research, development, and
demonstration of advanced batteries in plug-in hybrids, battery
EVs and stationary applications, as well as R&D for other
aspects of electric drive technology. This language was then
improved this summer by battery makers, automakers and other
stakeholders and now passed the Senate as H.R. 6, and part of
the DRIVE Act have passed the House as H.R. 3221.
We support this language and look forward to working with
your committee to explore other effective national
manufacturing and consumer incentives to set the stage for the
breakthrough of plug-in vehicles and energy storage in the U.S.
marketplace.
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, we stand
committed to partnering with all automakers, battery suppliers,
stakeholders and government to help realize the vision I have
laid out for you today. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Ziegler follows:]
Prepared Statement of Lynda L. Ziegler
Thank you Mr. Chairman (Lampson) and Ranking Member Inglis.
My name is Lynda Ziegler and I am Senior Vice President of Customer
Service at Southern California Edison. Thank you for the opportunity to
lend our support today to your important efforts to promote advanced
battery technology.
My company has been committed to the electrification of
transportation for twenty years. We operate the Nation's largest and
most successful fleet of electric vehicles, a fleet that has traveled
nearly 15 million miles on electric power. Our Electric Vehicle
Technical Center, unique in the utility industry, is one of only
several facilities recognized by the Department of Energy to evaluate
all forms of electro-drive technology. We have ongoing research
collaborations with major auto makers, battery suppliers, and both the
Federal and State governments.
We believe that with continued engineering advances and appropriate
public policy support, the widespread use of advanced batteries in
plug-in vehicles and in stationary storage applications will become one
of the Nation's most effective strategies in the broader effort to
address energy security, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and reduce air
pollutants.
In fact, the Electric Power Research Institute and the Natural
Resources Defense Council recently partnered to publish one of the most
comprehensive studies to date on plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. One
key finding was that widespread adoption of plug-in hybrids could
reduce annual emissions of greenhouse gases by more than 450 million
metric tons by 2050, or the equivalent of removing 82 million passenger
cars from the road. That kind of reduction is obviously a long way off,
but it provides all the more incentive for us to begin today.
Electricity is virtually petroleum free, is about 25-50 percent the
cost of a gallon of gasoline equivalent and is the only alternative
transportation fuel today with a national infrastructure already in
place. A recent study by the U.S. Department of Energy estimated that a
little over 70 percent of the light duty cars and trucks on the road
today could be fueled by the excess off-peak capacity that exists in
the electricity system--without building a single new power plant.
For utilities such as Southern California Edison, the challenge and
the opportunity is to integrate electric transportation and their
advanced batteries into a total energy system.
Near-term
In the near-term, the advanced high-energy battery in a plug-in
vehicle could serve as a source of temporary emergency power for the
home, or to occasionally help customers avoid high electricity costs
during peak pricing times. We call this ``vehicle-to-home.''
These same advanced high-energy batteries could also be used in
stationary applications. Home owners could fill a home energy battery
at night using low-cost electricity and then draw from it during the
high-cost part of the day to help lower their monthly utility bill.
Mid-term
In the mid-term as plug-in vehicles increase in volume, using the
grid's off-peak capacity at night to charge these vehicles may actually
help lower customer rates by increasing the utilization of our
generating plants--in effect utilities would spread their fixed costs
over more kilowatt hour sales.
To evaluate new business models on these and other applications,
Edison recently launched a partnership with Ford Motor Company to
demonstrate and evaluate ``purpose built'' plug-in-hybrid Ford Escapes.
Our goal is to explore the future customer values delivered through
plug-in vehicles and stationary energy storage.
At the same time as the emergence of plug-in vehicles and home
energy storage is the advent of advanced utility meters. Over the next
five years SCE will install five million ``next generation'' advanced
meters called Edison SmartConnect in the home of every customer in our
service territory. These meters will offer our customers better
information and enhanced control over their electricity usage. Our
Electric Vehicle Technical Center is working with industry stakeholders
to integrate the vehicle and the home and the advanced meter.
Long-term
Finally, in the long-term we can imagine the potential of so-called
``vehicle-to-grid'' systems or the ability to move stored energy from
many plug-in vehicles back up to the grid. The potential however of
vehicle-to-grid is many years away and will depend on the development
of all-new control technologies as part of the ``smart grid'' of the
future.
The Role of the Federal Government
Now let me conclude with our view on the important role the Federal
Government can play to bring the promise of electric transportation
closer to reality.
In our opinion, large-scale domestic manufacturing capacity for
high-energy advanced batteries is critical to the expansion of plug-in
hybrid vehicle applications and complementary stationary energy storage
uses. There currently exists no such capacity on a significant scale in
the United States today. The Federal Government should provide near-
term incentives to help nurture U.S. production of this critical
technology.
And earlier this year H.R. 670, the DRIVE Act, included important
measures to support research, development and demonstration of advanced
batteries in plug-in hybrids, battery EVs and stationary applications,
as well as R&D for other aspects of electric drive technology. This
language was then improved this summer by battery makers, automakers
and other stakeholders, and has now passed the Senate as H.R. 6, and
parts of the DRIVE Act have passed the House as H.R. 3221.
We support this language and look forward to working with your
committee to explore other effective national manufacturing and
consumer incentives to set the stage for the breakthrough of plug-in
vehicles and energy storage in the U.S. marketplace.
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, we stand committed to
partnering with all automakers, battery suppliers, stakeholders and
government to help realize the vision I have laid out before you today.
Thank You.
Biography for Lynda L. Ziegler
Lynda Ziegler is Senior Vice President of the Customer Service
business unit of Southern California Edison (SCE), one of the Nation's
largest investor-owned electric utilities. She is responsible for
customer services to SCE's 4.7 million customers, including customer
experience, industry-leading demand-side management programs and
advanced metering, as well as customer-facing operations, phone center
activities, field services, account management, and local public
affairs. She was elected to the position on March 1, 2006.
Ziegler began her career at SCE in 1981 as a conservation-planning
consultant. She held a variety of positions including service planner
and manager of energy efficiency, customer service and major accounts.
She was most recently the Director of the Customer Programs and
Services Division until she was elected as Vice President of Customer
Service on May 1, 2005.
Ziegler is a member of the EEI Customer and Energy Services
Executives Advisory Committee, and is a member of the Marketing
Executives Conference. Ziegler also serves on the board of directors of
Leadership California, an organization dedicated to educating high-
level women on the issues in California and encouraging women's
leadership in policy and public office. She also serves as Secretary on
the board of Partners in Care Foundation, an organization dedicated to
improving health care policy through demonstrating success.
She received her M.B.A. at California State University, Fullerton,
and her Bachelor of Science degree in marketing from California State
University, Long Beach. In addition, she has participated in two
special management development programs at Southern California Edison.
Chairman Lampson. You are welcome and thank you. For those
of you who don't know, those were our equivalent in the Science
Committee for bells for votes, so we will have votes in just a
few minutes. We shall proceed on until we have to leave, and we
will be watching the number of people for those votes.
So at this time, we will call on Ms. Gray for five minutes.
STATEMENT OF MS. DENISE GRAY, DIRECTOR, HYBRID ENERGY STORAGE
SYSTEMS, GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION
Ms. Gray. Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, thank
you for the opportunity to testify today on behalf of General
Motors. I am Denise Gray, director of the Hybrid Energy Storage
Systems Department. I direct the development and the production
of energy storage systems for GM, with a focus on developing
and qualifying new battery-technology solutions.
For 100 years, the global automotive industry has run
almost exclusively on oil. Tomorrow's industry will not. The
solution: alternative sources of energy, along with new
technology to allow automobiles to run on tomorrow's fuels. But
what fuels? And what technology?
At GM, we believe that no one solution is right for part of
the world, or even every consumer in any given market, so our
approach is simple: offer as many choices to as many consumers
as possible everywhere we do business, while offering the best
possible fuel economy for whatever type of vehicles our
customers choose.
Our vision moving forward is to reduce petroleum dependency
and greenhouse gas emissions by displacing oil with biofuels
and electricity as well as enhancing vehicle efficiencies. And
we have developed a comprehensive advance-prolusion strategy to
meet these challenges. We are continuing to make incremental
improvements in the efficiency of conventional vehicles. We are
continuing to expand the portfolio of flex-fuel vehicles,
ramping up to 50 percent by 2012, provided the fuel
infrastructure and supplies are available.
We are continuing to expand the portfolio of hybrids we
offer with five hybrid offers available this year, and more
coming next year.
Most relevant to this hearing, we have started a plug-in
program for our Saturn VUE Greenline two-mode hybrid, followed
by the introduction of our Chevrolet Volt concept vehicle.
And finally, we are continuing to develop hydrogen-powered
fuel-cell vehicles and the infrastructure needed to support
such vehicles with the largest market test of fuel-cell
vehicles today, beginning later this month.
As I mentioned earlier, this year brought the announcement
of a game-changing Chevy Volt, our first demonstration of an
innovative new GM propulsion system called E-Flex. The ``E''
stands for electric because all of the E-Flex vehicles will run
on electricity. The ``Flex'' in E-Flex is flexible because the
electricity can come from many different sources. GM E-Flex
system is simpler than hybrids, because it is purely
electrically driven. Electricity is stored in the battery pack,
and used with electric motors to drive the car, with the
electricity from the battery obtained in two different ways.
First, you can plug in your vehicle in your common electrical
outlet to recharge the battery. This allows the vehicle to
operate as a battery-electric vehicle. Second, once the battery
charge from the electric utility grid is depleted, the battery
can also be recharged by a simple engine generator set or fuel
cells. This allows you to extend your vehicle's electric
driving range to several hundred miles.
Let me turn to our battery technologies. There are really
two types of batteries that we require. The one most people are
familiar with is charge depletion. Think of this as a
flashlight that depletes its energy when used. And then you can
either dispose of it, or you can recharge it. It is the
rechargeable version of this battery that we are most
interested in for plug-in hybrids. This is a new area of focus
for the U.S. Advanced Battery Consortia (USABC).
The other type of battery is known as charge sustaining.
These batteries are designed to accept and deliver power while
maintaining a constant state of charge. They never deplete.
Charge sustaining batteries are used in hybrids on the roads
today, such as our Saturn Aura hybrid. They store up energy
captured during breaking and reapply it to help the vehicle
accelerate. Charge sustaining batteries have progressed to the
point where many OEMs are able to offer these hybrid vehicles.
We owe much of this success to the work of DOE and USABC with
the supplier community.
For plug-in vehicles, what we really need are high-energy
charge-depletion batteries that also have power, so we are
looking for both of those attributes. To bring these new hybrid
batteries to market, GM is using a multi-phase process that
starts with qualifying these lithium ion cells. Then we develop
these, and we go through a number of different tests as a
battery pack, with performance attributes such as life,
durability, reliability, and finally we work through our
vehicle integration process to make sure that these batteries
can live in our vehicles.
Again, I must make sure that with these points in mind, we
have to follow the various concepts, if you will, that are
outlined in our various plans. Again, with this, I stop and
look forward to your questions. Thank you so very much.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Gray follows:]
Prepared Statement of Denise Gray
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, thank you for the
opportunity to testify today on behalf of General Motors. I am Denise
Gray, director of Hybrid Energy Storage Systems. I direct Development
of Hybrid Energy Storage Systems for GM with a focus on developing and
qualifying new battery technology solutions. It's a daunting task for
our team (and all of us as an industry) to develop and produce vehicles
with these advanced battery systems in a robust and timely manner.
For 100 years, the global auto industry has run almost exclusively
on oil. Tomorrow's industry will not. The solution: alternative sources
of energy, along with new technology to allow automobiles to run on
tomorrow's fuels. But what fuels? And what technology?
At GM, we believe that no one solution is right for every part of
the world, or even every consumer in any given market. So our approach
is simple: offer as many choices as possible, to as many consumers as
possible, everywhere we do business. And regardless of the fuel,
regardless of the technology, our goal remains the same--the best
possible fuel economy for whatever type of vehicle our customers
choose. That's why we offer more cars that get 30 mpg highway than any
other automaker.
Our vision moving forward is to reduce petroleum dependency and
greenhouse gas emissions by displacing oil with biofuels and
electricity, as well as enhancing vehicle efficiencies. Over time, the
goal is to reduce vehicle emissions to zero and make personal mobility
truly sustainable, but it will take a variety of powertrain and fuel
technologies to get there. And we have developed a comprehensive
advanced propulsion strategy to meet these challenges.
First, we're continuing to make incremental improvements in the
conventional vehicles that we produce (e.g., six-speed transmissions,
active fuel management). Currently, we have over two and one-half
million flex fuel vehicles ``FFVs'' on the road today with 16 FFV
offerings in the 2007 model year. We're continuing to expand the
portfolio of FFVs, ramping up to over two million vehicles a year by
2012--provided the fuel infrastructure and supplies are available.
Second, we're continuing to expand the portfolio of hybrid vehicles
that we offer. For 2007, GM hybrids include: the Saturn VUE Green Line,
and Saturn Aura Green Line and beginning next month, the Chevy Malibu,
the Chevrolet Tahoe and GMC Yukon will offer hybrid models using our
advanced two-mode system. For 2008, the two-mode hybrid system will be
added to the Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra pickup trucks and to
the Cadillac Escalade. The Saturn Vue Green Line will also get the
advanced two-mode hybrid system.
And third, beginning with the Los Angeles and Detroit auto shows,
we created quite a stir with the announcement that we have started a
plug-in program for the Saturn VUE Green Line two-mode Hybrid, followed
by the introduction of the Chevrolet Volt concept car.
We're also continuing to develop the fuel cell capabilities needed
to produce hydrogen powered fuel cell vehicles and the infrastructure
needed to support such vehicles. Later this month, we will roll out the
first of a fleet of 100 Chevy Equinoxes for Project Driveway, the
largest market test of fuel cell vehicles to date.
The E-Flex Architecture
The Volt is our first demonstration of an innovative new GM
propulsion system called ``E-Flex.'' The ``E'' stands for ``electric,''
because all E-Flex vehicles will run on electricity. And E-Flex is
``flexible'' because the electricity can come from many different
sources. The Volt is designed as a flex fuel vehicle capable of running
on gasoline or E-85 ethanol. In Shanghai, we showed the fuel cell
variant of E-Flex in a fuel cell Volt. And most recently, in Frankfurt,
we showed the bio-diesel variant of E-Flex in the new ``Flextreme''
concept car. By offering a system that drives vehicles with any of
these fuels, E-Flex will provide our customers around the globe with a
single elegant solution to tomorrow's energy future.
E-Flex consists of a common drivetrain that uses electricity
created and stored on board the vehicle in a variety of ways. This
includes creating electricity with a simple engine and generator,
creating electricity from a hydrogen fuel cell, and storing electricity
in an advanced battery by plugging the car into the electric utility
grid. E-Flex enables energy diversity because electricity and hydrogen
can be generated from a wide range of energy sources.
GM's E-Flex system is simpler than a hybrid because it is purely
electrically driven. Electricity is stored in a battery pack and used
with electric motors to drive the car, with the electricity for the
battery obtained in two ways. First, you can plug the car into a common
electrical outlet to recharge the battery. This allows the vehicle to
operate as a battery-electric vehicle. Second, once the battery charge
from the electric utility grid is depleted, the battery can also be
recharged by a simple engine/generator set. This allows you to extend
your vehicle's electric driving range to several hundred miles.
Battery Technology
There are really two types of batteries that we require. The one
most people are familiar with is called ``charge depletion.'' Think of
this as a flashlight battery that depletes it energy with use, and then
is either disposed of or recharged. It is the rechargeable version of
this battery that we are interested in for plug-in hybrids. This is a
new area of focus for USABC.
In addition to charge depletion, there is another type of battery
known as ``charge sustaining.'' These batteries are designed to accept
and delivery power while maintaining a constant state of charge--they
never deplete. These charge sustaining batteries are in use in hybrid
vehicles on the road today, such as our Chevy Malibu and Saturn Aura
hybrids. They store up the high power energy captured during braking
and reapply that energy to help the vehicle accelerate. Although charge
sustaining batteries have not yet met their cost and durability targets
as defined by USABC, they have progressed to the point where many OEMs
are able to offer a limited number of hybrid vehicles. We owe much of
this success to the work of DOE and USABC with the supplier community.
For the future, what we really need are high energy ``charge
depletion'' batteries necessary for plug-ins that also have the
``power'' of charge sustaining batteries to handle the re-generative
braking and other high power situations of conventional hybrid
vehicles.
To bring these new energy hybrid batteries to market GM is using a
multi-phase process which starts at qualifying Lithium Ion cells,
proving out key performance cycle life, power, calendar life, and then
developing and testing battery packs to evaluate system performance
attributes. Finally we work through important integration issues at the
vehicle level such as thermal, interaction with hybrid controls, and
durability.
All this work is necessary as a precursor to declaring a solution
``implementation ready'' and planning it into a production program.
While this is a sequential process with some overlap it can take up to
five years. Currently, our challenge is to parallel path key work
streams to develop the battery solutions and vehicle in a faster
timeframe.
In a traditional hybrid, the battery provides electric vehicle
operation at low speeds, recharges only while driving, and is designed
for very limited electric only drive. A plug in version of a
traditional hybrid, such as our design for the Saturn VUE two-mode
hybrid would need to provide over 10 miles all electric drive, charges
while driving and when plugged in. In our design for the Volt Range
Extended Electric Vehicle, the battery would provide at least 40 miles
in city driving. It would be charged through and on-board generator,
regenerative braking and when plugged in. Each of these carries a very
challenging goal of being ``life of vehicle'' solutions.
For example, the discharge power for two-mode plug in hybrid is
marginally higher than for a traditional hybrid. However, the Volt
would require roughly three times more than traditional hybrids. In
terms of energy, the difference is even more drastic. Range Extended
Electric Vehicles like the Volt require significantly more energy than
traditional hybrids.
Currently, NiMH batteries typically provide about 70 whrs/kg.
Lithium-ion batteries represent a significant improvement over NiMH in
terms of both power and energy. Energy formulations of Lith-Ion can
provide higher specific energy, but lower power. Range Extended EVs,
like the Volt, would need a more optimized balance of power and energy.
Big challenges also remain in terms of thermal management & life.
GM has awarded advanced battery development contracts to two
suppliers to design and test lithium-ion batteries for use in the VUE
plug-in hybrid: the first to Johnson Controls and Saft Advanced Power
Solutions, and a second to Cobasys and A123Systems. Both teams are
being challenged to prove the durability, reliability and potential
cost at mass volumes of their technology. The two test batteries will
be evaluated in the prototype VUE plug-in hybrid beginning later this
year.
In developing advanced batteries, OEMs and component suppliers have
many similar objectives and needs. Auto OEMs need to determine which
technologies and pack solutions are most promising. We need to develop
strategies that maximize bill of materials reuse and move toward more
plug and play solutions. As technology evolves, suppliers are looking
for revenue stream quickly, reducing the amount of OEM specific work
and not have to burden the entire risk of introducing new battery
technology in the market. Both OEMs and suppliers should focus on the
things they are good at and leverage others for things they are not.
Qualification of design solutions is the first big hurdle to enable
both charge sustaining and charge depleting hybrids with Lithium Ion
batteries. Once these solutions have met ``design readiness'' we need
to quickly and in parallel, move toward high reliability and high
volume battery ``manufacturing readiness'' as a parallel path that
needs significant focus and funding support. Many of the leading
battery suppliers have shared that it takes up to two years to ramp up
high volume production once the high volume manufacturing process and
equipment have been developed.
As an automotive industry, we are reliant on these rapid
advancements in order to consider scaling to high volume the vehicle
solutions that will use these batteries.
Legislation
As we assess pending legislation, we believe that as a general
matter Congress should support initiatives that will accelerate the
process and industrialization needed to ramp to high volume Lithium Ion
battery manufacturing and subsequent access to these developed products
that will help us together bring to life the sustainable mobility
vision for our industry and for our nation. The additional funding for
energy battery development that Congress has provided DOE and USABC is
a good start. It will help our suppliers develop near-term battery
chemistries required if we are going to be commercially successful in
the next few years. However, as an industry, we also recommend last
November in response to a White House request that Congress provide
funding support for manufacturing and facilities development for
potential U.S. suppliers. This will be essential if these new battery
chemistries are to be manufactured in the U.S. at a cost and
reliability level that will enable more than just niche market success
sooner than would others be possible.
We also recommended that more funding be provide for long-term
research into new, novel approaches to batteries. The potential of
lithium-ion appears to be limited to plug-ins and other short all-
battery operation mode vehicles. We will need all new batteries
approaches if we want to extend the range of vehicles to the point
where an internal combustion engine or fuel cell generator would not be
required.
With these points in mind, we have the following comments on the
Discussion Draft you provided us for review. First, we support the
overall authorization levels for both basis and applied research into
energy storage. If fully funded at these levels, the proposed research
program could materially speed up the development of advanced
batteries. Second, the direction to conduct demonstrations of advanced
energy storage systems could make a valuable addition to the
development of plug in vehicles, although funding is not specified in
the bill.
One issue that is not clear from the draft is the relationship
between this research program and ongoing DOE battery research
programs, and the roles of USCAR and USABC in the new program. In
general, we believe new legislation should build on the existing DOE
structure and not seek to create a parallel research program.
Another issue is the scale of any demonstration programs. We
believe that in the 2009-2014 timeframe, demonstration programs should
be of limited size. As with fuel cells, we learn most of what we need
to know with relatively few vehicles involved--placing thousands of
vehicles in a demonstration program yields limited marginal returns.
Within this time window, we look beyond demonstration programs to early
purchase programs where federal procurement of early vehicles--
realizing that they will be more expensive than today's vehicle
technology.
We suggest that the Committee consider transitioning from
demonstration programs to buy-down programs to reduce the cost of
cutting edge technologies to federal and State agencies. Sections 782
and 783 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, dealing with early federal
and state purchases of fuel cells, may offer a model for plug-in
vehicles.
Thank you.
Biography for Denise Gray
Employed by General Motors since September 1980.
Current assignment is Director Hybrid Energy Storage Systems.
Position responsibility consists of advance development, design,
release, validation of battery system solutions for GM Hybrid and Range
Extender vehicles.
Previous assignments include the following.
Director of Transmission Controls. Responsible for design and
release of Transmission Algorithms and Calibrations, Electromechanical
devices, and Torque Converters for four-speed, five-speed, and six-
speed transmissions. These transmissions are integrated into GM
conventional powertrains as well as hybrid powertrains.
Director of Engine and Transmission Controller Systems Integration
and Director of Engine and Transmission Software Engineering. Both
positions engineered controller hardware and algorithm/software
solutions into GM vehicles worldwide. The job elements contained
design, development, and verification of complex engine and
transmission controls systems to meet worldwide emissions and safety
standards while meeting customer driveability requirements.
GM Vehicle Engineering experiences include electrical systems
development and validation. Some of the electrical systems include
instrument clusters, entertainment systems, lighting systems, and anti-
lock braking systems. Assignment locations also included GM's
manufacturing and assembly facilities.
Educational accomplishments include BS Electrical Engineering from
Kettering University (formally GMI) in 1986 and MS Engineering
Science--Management of Technology from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
in 2000.
Proud wife and mother of two sons.
Chairman Lampson. Thank you, Ms. Gray. Ms. Wright, you are
recognized for five minutes, and at the conclusion of that, we
do have three votes, and we will be in recess long enough for
us to make those votes, probably half an hour.
STATEMENT OF MS. MARY ANN WRIGHT, VICE PRESIDENT AND GENERAL
MANAGER, HYBRID SYSTEMS FOR JOHNSON CONTROLS; LEADER, JOHNSON
CONTROLS-SAFT ADVANCED POWER SOLUTIONS JOINT VENTURE
Ms. Wright. Very good. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Members
of the Subcommittee. It is a pleasure to be here. And my hope
is when we all walk out of this room for you to go vote that
you will have a better understanding of what the state of play
is for battery technology and how we are applying that battery
technology into the various hybrid applications.
Before joining Johnson Controls, I was with Ford most of my
career, where I was the chief engineer of the Escape Hybrid.
And Mr. Inglis, I was also the chief engineer for the fuel cell
program and the hydrogen internal combustion program. So I am
going to do two things today. One is what is the state of play
of hybrid battery technology, and what is going on relative to
putting that technology into the vehicle.
As Denise said, on the road today, we have a lot of
hybrids. They are powered by nickel-metal hydride batteries.
And I have to tell you that in the industry we have done a
really good job of creating acceptance and confidence in the
technology. They are reliable. They perform well. They are
safe, and they deliver really good fuel economy and lower
emissions. But like anybody's technology, your iPod or anything
else, technology continues to move forward.
Now, what we are doing is you are seeing this journey go on
from nickel-metal hydride to lithium ion. And it is the right
step: they are smaller; they are more powerful; they are
lighter; they are equally safe. And the exception, obviously,
is the economic benefits are going to come along with them as
well, and along with those benefits, you get better fuel
economy, better emissions performance because they are lighter.
Weight is the evil in a vehicle for fuel economy.
Now, not all hybrids are alike. At the break, we had an
interesting discussion, and one of the things I want everybody
to understand is there are several different types of hybrids.
We have hybrids that are on the road today, readily available
for all of us to purchase and drive. Mr. Bartlett drives his
Prius. I have an Escape. Starting with the stuff that is here
today, we have micro-hybrids. Those are basic start-stop
function hybrids. They are widely available in Europe. In fact,
Johnson control will put over 400,000 of these batteries in
vehicles this year over in Europe. And they have a pretty good
efficiency rating of about 10 percent fuel economy and CO2
reduction benefits.
Moving up the spectrum, we have mild hybrids. That you
would probably think of as a Honda Accord. It delivers about 30
percent improved fuel economy and emissions and provides a bit
more functionality, as Denise said, regenerative capability.
And then, finally, we have the full hybrid, and an Escape
hybrid and a Toyota Prius are a full hybrid. You can power the
vehicle on electric power alone, which clearly would provide
increased economy relative to fuel consumption, as well as
reducing CO2 emissions.
All of these are on the road and available today. In fact,
Johnson Controls, next year, will be putting our first lithium
ion batteries in the Mercedes S-Class, which will go on sale in
the United States in 2009. And they are also ready to go into
the full hybrid.
If you take the journey a bit further, now we are talking
about plug-ins and pure EVs and there is an awful lot of,
deservedly so, excitement about the opportunity with plug-ins.
They are very promising, significant improved fuel economy and
emissions. I mean literally, you can have zero emissions and a
very, very high fuel economy rating. Lithium ion, clearly, is
the enabler, just because of the physics of the battery--they
are smaller and lighter--because of all of the energy that is
going to be required to be able to propel these vehicles.
Just as the lithium ion is the enabler, it is also the
biggest technical challenge that we have on the table, and it
is working with my customers, such as Denise, to try and
overcome these challenges as an industry. Now, in Johnson
Controls, we have a lot of partnerships in play right now, with
GM on the Saturn VUE, with Southern Cal, with Ford Motor
Company on a plug-in fleet, and clearly all of the great work
that is going on with USABC as well as the Chrysler Sprinter
Vans that are going on sale next year.
We are going to solve these technical problems. I am
absolutely convinced of that because I sat in this seat about
four years ago, talking about hybrids and just getting them on
the road. But then, what you are faced with is what are you
going to do about the cost and the economics? We have got to
get this scale up. We have to get standard. We have to put a
recycling infrastructure in place. We need domestic
manufacturing capability. We have to establish a diverse supply
base outside of Asia.
So in conclusion, we are confident we are going to be able
to get to commercialization by solving the technology and
working towards these cost drives. But it is going to take
Federal Government assistance. We are going to need to continue
to fund research, and not for just the stuff we are doing
today. Clearly, we need that, and we need demonstration fleets.
We also need to fund the next great breakthrough, because just
like lithium ion was a breakthrough, next is going to be
something else. The consumer and manufacturing incentives are
sure enablers to help us with this. Funding manufacturing
investment and infrastructure and supply-base development, we
have to facilitate collaboration between the industry, our
government labs, the automakers and the utilities to see this
all come to fruition in a way that we can see mass
commercialization.
So in summary, recognizing that you all need to go and
vote, thank you very much, and I look forward to answering your
questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Wright follows:]
Prepared Statement of Mary Ann Wright
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, my name is Mary Ann
Wright. I am the Vice President and General Manager of the Hybrid
Battery Systems business at Johnson Controls, headquartered in
Milwaukee, WI. I also serve as the Chief Executive Officer of the
Johnson-Controls Saft Advanced Power Solutions (JCS) joint venture. JCS
was formed in January of 2006 specifically to address our customers'
needs for advanced battery systems for hybrid vehicles, plug-in hybrid
vehicles, and electric vehicles. In addition, I serve on the Board of
Directors of the Electric Drive Transportation Association (EDTA).
I greatly appreciate the opportunity to discuss with you today the
options and challenges that America faces as it moves down the road
towards the goal of a sustainable transportation future. I am honored
that you have asked me to speak before you today on a topic so critical
to the security, economic vitality, and environmental stability of our
country and planet.
Electrification of Vehicles
Clearly, the United States is at a crossroads. We face a double-
edge sword: the world's supply of crude oil is approaching maximum
output while the specter of an environmental future compromised by
green house gas-induced global warming continues to grow. As President
Bush stated in his 2006 State of the Union speech we must change the
way we power our buildings, homes, and vehicles. Today, I would like to
discuss specifically what can be done on the vehicle side of the
ledger.
The focus of my discussion will be vehicles with electrified
drivetrains, powered by advanced battery systems. A key to this
discussion will be differentiating hybrid battery applications in the
range of micro to full hybrids, that have been proven using NiMH
chemistry and are in the final validation phase using Li-Ion, from
battery applications which have not yet been fully validated for
functional performance and life; plug-in hybrids and pure electric
vehicles. However, first I would like to comment on other credible
powertrain technologies that can help us transform the way we power our
automobiles, trucks, and buses. Given the continuing upward trend in
vehicle miles driven annually in the United States, incremental
increases in spark (gasoline/ethanol) and compression (diesel) ignition
engine efficiency, while desirable and attainable, will not be
sufficient to substantially reduce America's dependence on crude oil.
Increased production and use of biomass derived motor fuels (e.g.,
ethanol) are important from an energy security standpoint, and have the
potential to significantly advance progress towards the President's 20
in 10 goal. Affordable Fuel Cell (H2) vehicles and an
infrastructure to produce and distribute hydrogen are many years away
from commercial viability.
I passionately believe that electrification of the vehicle
powertrain in part or in whole can make a dominant contribution to
America's energy security and transportation sustainability. Electric
powertrains by nature are incredibly more efficient than their internal
combustions counterparts. This efficiency prowess is the foundation of
the hybrid advantage. The additional benefit of electrified powertrains
is that they can be used as complementary technology to internal
combustion engine drivetrains or as stand-alone technology, e.g., pure
electric vehicles. Despite the proven benefits in terms of fuel economy
and emissions, we face substantial challenges to widespread adoption of
hybrid vehicles in the United States. Currently, neither the domestic
market-pull nor the domestic manufacturing technology-push is
sufficient to drive a sustainable electrified powertrain vehicle
industry. Contrary to a popular notion, battery performance is NOT the
barrier to widespread adoption of standard hybrid vehicles. In fact,
Johnson Controls is the leading supplier of advanced lead-acid battery
technology, called AGM, for use in micro hybrid automobiles as well as
hybrid transit buses. Next year Johnson Controls will launch its first
production Li-Ion battery system for the Mercedes-Benz S-Class mild
hybrid. You may be familiar with Nickel-metal hydride (NiMH) batteries.
NiMH battery technology is a proven, mature technology that to date has
captured nearly 100 percent of the HEV battery market. Yet Li-Ion, due
to its lower mass, reduced volume, higher power and energy, faster
recharging, and lower cost potential is expected to overtake NiMH as
the battery technology of choice by 2012. From 1988 to 2005, I worked
for Ford Motor Company. I was the Chief Engineer for the Escape Hybrid
SUV, the first domestic hybrid which was successfully launched in 2004.
Since then total global sales for the hybrid Escape and it sister
vehicle, the Mercury Mariner hybrid, have exceeded 59,000 units. The
Escape hybrid utilizes NiMH battery technology. I also led the team
that launched the first hydrogen fuel cell demonstration fleet. These
vehicles also use the same NiMH battery technology as in the Ford
Escape. Please see Figure 1 on page four for a comparison of the NiMH
and Li-Ion technologies.
Rather than battery technology, the major issues impeding broader
acceptance of HEVs in the United States are:
1) Relative insensitivity to motor fuel prices on the part of
the American consumer, thus inhibiting the desire to purchase a
hybrid vehicle at a cost premium.
2) An underdeveloped domestic industry for manufacturing raw
materials and key components necessary to produce hybrid
powertrains.
To better understand the domestic factors currently suppressing
hybrid vehicle sales, it is helpful to look at the hybrid advantage
from a global perspective. In Europe, the vehicle manufacturers are
aggressively pursuing the spectrum of near-term hybrid technologies--
micro, mild, and full, while continuing to improve the diesel engine
technology that has traditionally enjoyed tremendous popularity.
Because of the high fuel prices and CO2 reduction targets
self-imposed by European OEMs, the incremental costs of hybrid
technology is less daunting to would-be purchasers. In Asia, and
particularly China, there is a tremendous amount of activity focused on
the rapid development of hybrid and fuel cell vehicles. In the People's
Republic of China, the government has set very aggressive goals for the
introduction and proliferation of ultra-efficient and clean vehicle
technologies.
The United States is somewhat unique in that our relatively low
motor fuel prices and current lack of CO2 emissions
reduction mandates also contribute to stunted demand for high
efficiency vehicles such as hybrids. Fortunately, there is a remedy,
but it will require a phased-technology plan and government assistance
at the federal and perhaps State and local levels as well.
Phased Technology--A Journey
I see the development of a strong hybrid vehicle industry and
market in the U.S. as a journey, not just a destination. As is the case
with most journeys there are key achievements points or milestones
along the way. Figure 2 illustrates the Hybrid Journey--a technology
evolution that builds on hybrid technologies available today--yes,
today. I urge the Congress to implement policies that accelerate the
commercialization of micro, mild and full hybrid vehicles in the United
States.
The plug-in hybrid concept has garnered substantial attention over
the last 18 months and deservedly so. Congress has heard testimony
extolling the virtues of plug-ins and their promise to eradicate our
energy and environmental problems. Without question, plug-in hybrids
are a promising technology. The plug-in approach has the potential to
double vehicle fuel economy while displacing imported oil with
domestically produced electricity. The environmental benefits could be
massive, particularly if recharging is done using predominantly
renewable energy sources for electricity generation. Demonstration
vehicles, like those being operated by Sacramento Municipal Utility
District are registering fuel economy over 90 mpg. The key tasks needed
to make PHEVs a reality are: 1) accelerated technology, particularly
the Li-Ion battery development; and 2) further assessment of the
commercial opportunities and issues by the public and private sectors.
The assessment phase should include a plan for the development of a
recharging infrastructure throughout the country to ensure that the
benefits of PHEVs could be maximized. Also, because PHEVs by definition
will at times be ``on the grid,'' it is imperative that all
stakeholders, but in particular, the vehicle OEMs, the supply base and
the utility industry, engage in frank discussions about the cost/
benefits that will be encountered. Unlike the case for micro, mild, and
full hybrids, there are significant battery technology barriers to the
commercialization of PHEVs. A strong partnership between the public and
private sectors will be needed to tear down these barriers. A
successful outcome from this endeavor would serve as a giant step
forward in achieving the ultimate embodiment of highly efficient and
environmentally responsible transportation--the pure electric vehicle.
Johnson Controls has a development contract with General Motors to
furnish PHEV battery systems technology for the Saturn Vue Green Line
vehicle. We are also partners with Southern California Edison and Ford
to deliver PHEV demonstration fleets. Earlier this year, Johnson
Controls announced a partnership with Daimler and Chrysler to provide
Li-Ion batteries for Sprinter van demonstration fleets. In addition,
the Department of Energy announced on September 25th that Johnson
Controls will be awarded a PHEV battery development contract for 10
mile and 40 mile electric range vehicles. We are proud to continue our
mutually beneficial relationship with DOE and the United States
Advanced Battery Consortium, and look forward to accelerating the
development of commercially feasible technologies for PHEV battery
systems. Next, I'd like to concentrate on two words from the previous
sentence--commercially feasible.
Reducing the Cost of Battery Systems
During my stint as Chief Engineer for the Escape hybrid SUV my team
had to focus on the same acceptance criteria demanded by purchasers of
conventional automobiles: style, performance, comfort, convenience,
reliability, quality, serviceability, safety, and last but not least,
cost. There is certainly a place early in the product development cycle
for demonstration vehicles produced with recognition that costs will be
high, but the bottom line is this: A successful HEV (all types of HEVs)
vehicle industry and market in the United States must be based on
satisfying these required criteria. These requirements are demanded by
our customers and/or mandated by the government and they must be
delivered at an affordable cost and acceptable market price.
So, although the battery technology is in the final validation
phase to drive forward the market for micro, mild, and full hybrid,
other elements needed for marketplace success, notably cost, are in a
very early stage of development. The resolution path to ensure a long-
term economically successful HEV industry in the United States must
elevate cost reduction to the highest priority. Johnson Controls is
confident that there are no insurmountable technical issues prohibiting
the eventual widespread use of Li-Ion battery technology as the heart
of standard hybrid vehicle drivetrains. Other issues separating it from
commercial viability are:
insufficient field experience,
lack of domestic manufacturing infrastructure
adequate sales volume to achieve economies of scale
supply base diversity beyond Asia
technical standards to drive common architectures
These challenges can be overcome in a compressed timeframe with
sufficient federal assistance. Specifically, we propose a partnership
between the appropriate Federal Government agencies, the battery
manufacturers, and the lower Tier supply chain companies to drive down
costs by focusing on the three following elements: 1) Material and
component manufacturing and supply base development, 2) Process
development and recycling, and 3) Equipment development.
1. Material and Component Manufacturing and Supply Base
Currently, we obtain almost all of our critical battery materials
and system components from Asia. We need to develop a North American
supply base for:
Cell materials
Oxides
Carbonaceous and graphitic additives
Separators
Electrolyte
Roll stock aluminum and copper
Although the battery system is central to this discussion, other
HEV system components are of similar concern from the standpoint of an
insufficient domestic manufacturing base including:
Power electronics
Drivetrain electromechanical devices
A secure supply of strategic materials, e.g., lithium
ore
2. Process Development and Recycling
Another cost reduction opportunity is in the processes used to
convert the basic battery materials and components into finished
products. For example, today the electrode manufacturing process is
time intensive, energy intensive, and environmentally challenging. A
new electrode manufacturing process can be developed that would be a
lower cost process, which is more environmentally friendly, saves
energy and could potentially enhance battery life. Also, significant
economic and environmental advantages can be realized through recycling
spent battery systems. This can involve both re-use of certain
components and re-processing of components containing strategic
materials; e.g., nickel and lithium. Currently, over 97 percent of all
lead-acid automotive batteries are recovered for recycling. Although
recycling processes exist today for NiMH and Li-Ion batteries,
technology development programs aimed at cost-reductions goals should
include recycling.
3. Manufacturing Equipment Development
To achieve an optimal balance between product cost and creation of
a sustainable domestic manufacturing base we must also focus on the
equipment needed to execute the advanced processes discussed above. We
need to work with domestic equipment manufacturers to develop large,
production-scale equipment with a high degree of automation capable of
obtaining higher speeds compared to the smaller prototyping and
development-scale equipment currently in use.
There is also a large cost savings potential in improving the
design of the cell for manufacturing. Identifying a design change might
save several steps in the manufacturing process, thereby saving time
and cost. In addition to the electrochemical cells, the battery system
requires additional components and subsystems to provide critical
functions, such as thermal management. Domestic manufacturing of non-
cell componentry should also be factored into policy-enabled mechanisms
to advance the commercial viability of hybrid vehicle technologies. A
high level listing of the barriers to sustainable commercialization of
hybrids in the United States and proposed enabling countermeasures are
shown below in Figure 3.
We would urge Congress to consider legislation to stimulate
advanced battery development, including the following detailed
provisions:
Research and development programs to maintain our
nation's competitive advantage in the basic and applied areas
of energy storage R&D
Demonstration programs to accelerate the development
of batteries and battery systems
Demonstration programs to accelerate the development
of advanced manufacturing technologies to reduce production
costs
Loan guarantees for capital investment
Battery industry and supply chain programs to secure
a low cost economically competitive industrial base in the
United States
Strategies to secure long-term critical material
supplies
Fleet programs to prove-out advanced technologies
Tax incentives for micro, mild, and full hybrids
Automotive manufacturer incentives to drive domestic
production and supply of hybrid systems
Consumer purchase incentives
Carbon-based fuel efficiency regulations (miles per
carbon content rather than liquid volume)
Increased role of the battery manufacturers in
determining the goals and technical direction for development
programs including more direct interaction with national
laboratories and institutions of higher learning
Integrated activities involving all stakeholders:
OEMs
Battery manufacturers
Federal Government agencies
Consumers
Electric Power industry
Fuels industry
Labs
Academia
In closing, I would like express my gratitude to this committee for
taking the time to hear my testimony. I hope that you consider my
comments in the spirit of cooperation guided by the goal to secure the
economic and environmental future of the United States.
Johnson Controls looks forward to taking the hybrid journey with
Congress. We are energized and ready to go.
Thank you for your time and attention.
Biography for Mary Ann Wright
Mary Ann Wright is the Vice President and General Manager, Hybrid
Systems for Johnson Controls, and also leads the Johnson Controls-Saft
Advanced Power Solutions joint venture. Wright joined the company in
March 2007.
Wright is responsible for accelerating the growth and executing the
launch of hybrid, plug-in hybrid and electric vehicle battery programs
with emphasis on state of the art technology, manufacturing and
electronics integration.
Prior to joining the company, Wright most recently served as
Executive Vice President Engineering, Product Development, Commercial
and Program Management for Collins & Aikman Corporation since February
2006. Prior to joining Collins & Aikman, she served as Director,
Sustainable Mobility Technologies and Hybrid Vehicle Programs at Ford
Motor Company. In this capacity she was responsible for all hybrid,
fuel cell and alternative fuel technology development. Wright also
served as Chief Engineer of the 2005 Ford Escape Hybrid, the industry's
first full hybrid SUV. She began her career at Ford in 1988, holding a
variety of positions in finance, product and business planning, and
engineering. She also played a major role in the launch of multiple
vehicles at Ford including the initial Mercury Villager and Nissan
Quest, and successive versions of the Ford Taurus and Mercury Sable.
Wright has been recognized by Automotive News as one of the
``Leading 100 Women in the Automotive Industry.''
She earned a Bachelor's degree in Economics and International
Business from the University of Michigan, a Master of Science degree in
Engineering from the University of Michigan and a Master of Business
Administration degree from Wayne State University.
Chairman Lampson. Thank you very much. We shall stand in
recess for our votes. See you shortly.
[Recess].
Discussion
Government Accelerating Industrialization
Chairman Lampson. The automobile industry practically
invented high-volume manufacturing. Why is the Federal
Government needed to accelerate industrialization in this area,
and what can DOE do that the industry cannot do? Either of you?
Ms. Wright. Well, actually, I came with a whole list of
specific projects that I would go and talk to my friends at DOE
about relative to high volume manufacturing. We are presently
completing the construction of our first lithium ion facility
in Nersac, France. I wish I could say it was Nersac, Maryland
or something. And one of the things that we are learning is
that we have good capability to produce good quality hybrid
cells, but it is not at the level that we need to be producing
them in the qualities and at the cost levels that you do for
cell phones and for laptop computers. We know very well the
kind of help that we need, that we need help from the
government labs, DOE and other federal resources, and I would
be delighted to share those specific projects with you that
would, indeed, enable us, here in the United States, to be able
to get a leg up on the high-volume manufacturing at affordable
costs.
Government and Battery Manufacturer Partnerships
Chairman Lampson. To drive down costs and to spur
development of advanced batteries in the U.S., you propose a
partnership, Ms. Wright, between federal agencies and the
battery manufacturer's lower tier suppliers. Let me ask you
three questions. Do these partnerships not already exist in the
forms like the U.S. Advanced Battery Coalition? Does the DOE
partner directly with the battery manufacturers and lower-tier
suppliers in R&D projects, or is it mostly conducted through
partnerships with automobile manufacturers? Or is there a need
for diversifying the pool of participants in federal vehicle-
related R&D?
Ms. Wright. You know, clearly we do have partnerships that
are established, and they are good partnerships. Through DOE
funding, USABC freedom card--those are all great forums. But I
would suggest to you that what we need now is to really look at
it in two pieces in terms of improving our partnership.
One is being able to take the technology that is ready to
go forward and be commercialized in high volumes at affordable
costs and support that as an industry with the automotive
manufacturers, the battery suppliers, and the Federal
Government, including the labs, who can help us with the
intellectual-property generation, and get those into
demonstration fleets to absolutely build the confidence and the
capability to do it on a high volume.
The second piece--and this is where I don't think that we
have the emphasis that we need--that is the what comes next. We
tend to focus too much on getting through a specific project
rather than we will solve this, but what is going to come after
that? Because I assure you everybody else in the world is
already thinking about that. And I think, in terms of--the
partnerships really are through the USABC in terms of our day-
to-day interaction, so the direct work really comes through the
USABC at the direction of DOE. I would encourage more direct
interaction between DOE, the automotive manufacturer, the
industry, as well as the suppliers.
And then, finally, I think you had a question on
diversification of who should be involved?
Participants in Vehicle-related R&D
Chairman Lampson. Who are the participants in vehicle-
related R&D?
Ms. Wright. I think, you know, we are actually in fairly
good shape relative to who is participating, you know, in these
established forums, and I think, clearly, if you take a look at
how the automotive manufacturers are partnering up, they are
taking advantage of everything that is available to them.
Unfortunately, there are only a few of us that are based, here,
in the United States.
Ms. Gray. If I could add in that area as well, I think
USABC and DOE have done an excellent job, thus far, to getting
us to where we are. But our product is still high cost. Our
product still doesn't have a quality it needs to go. We need to
take a step change in allowing us to understand more,
apparently, how these applications are going to work, learning
cycles. We can stay in the research, we can stay in the what-if
kind of mode for awhile, but in order to really get to a
commercialization of where this has to go, you have got to have
demonstrations. You have got to manufacture the production, and
you have got to have exercising activities from a learning
perspective. And the cost of these energy storage systems,
these batteries, are high in the beginning, and you have got to
have means by which you get some quick learning cycles, and
then you have go to have a means for the customer to be able to
buy these kinds of things. So they've got to have some
incentives to bring it down so the customers don't assume all
of the cost, but then, rapidly, at the same very time, you have
got to build up your manufacturing capacity in the States in
order to continue and sustain that cost curve, because if you
don't do that, you will end up having one system that works,
and all of a sudden, it is gone away, and technology has passed
you up.
Chairman Lampson. I shall call on Mr. Inglis, and then I
shall come back and ask a second.
Chevy Volt
Mr. Inglis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We are here at the
Science Committee, and you know, we are very excited about
science. It is also true it can be a science project until the
market sort of drives things along. And so the goal being to
break our dependence on foreign oil, the goal being to create
jobs by inventing new technologies, and the goal being to clean
up the air, I think it is very helpful testimony you are giving
because it is about the market. And so, Ms. Gray, maybe you
could talk a little bit about General Motors hope of either--is
it hydrogen or is it volt? Or is it, it doesn't matter, either
one works for General Motors? As a manufacturer here, what do
you see as the market's acceptance of those? And help us move
from a science project into something that is really going to
transform the fleet.
Ms. Gray. You know, when we put out the Chevy Volt earlier
this year, I think that was a means to bring these kinds of
things together, because number one, we have got a battery, a
high-voltage storage device, that allows you to mate that up
with an internal-combustion engine so that when the battery
gets depleted, you can use the internal-combustion engine in
order to replenish the battery, but you can also use a fuel
cell in that same configuration, if you will, in order to
provide power, if you will, energy for that battery to store
and to use appropriately.
It really was a way that we pulled all of these
technologies together, so it is not an either-or, but an and,
in order to allow us to have diversification, if you will, from
petroleum. So really there is a place for both us them,
depending upon the needs and the use and the accessibility of
the various energy devices.
GM Allocation of Resources
Mr. Inglis. That said, capital is generally limited. In
other words, you have got to allocate resources within a
company, so you think you will be allocating them--where do you
think you will be allocating them? Don't tell me anything you
have got to shoot me after you tell me or anything or call the
SCU lawyers if you have got to before you answer, but I guess
it is a public forum so you can probably tell me.
Ms. Gray. Allocation of resources have been applied for
both areas, quite frankly, and for all of the areas. I was
telling one of the constituents a little while ago, back in the
early '90s, I worked on ethanol. Currently, I am working on
energy storage devices in fuel cells, and I am coming up with
requirements for fuel cell vehicles with an energy storage
device, and I am also coming up with requirements for an
internal-combustion engine, again, to replenish the battery
when needed, so we have resources allocated in all of those
areas. I was also trying to advertise that we are still hiring,
because for some reason, people think that we are not adding
resources in these particular areas, but that is so, so
incorrect. We have been hiring over the last ten years in areas
that allow us to increase our fuel economy through regular,
conventional vehicle efficiencies as well as diversification.
If you looked at where GM has been hiring, if you will,
over the last ten years, it has been in those areas so that we
can meet the need of where we have to go, so the answer is all
of the above.
Energy Storage Devices
Mr. Inglis. Ms. Wright, do you got a prediction about which
one is going to win?
Ms. Wright. Well, I was going to ask you if I could make a
comment if you didn't invite me. I think it is really important
for everybody to understand that one is a journey so you are
going to learn and we are going to increase hybridization,
increase electrification, and there is going to come a point
where it is not going to matter what is actually providing the
fuel. You will always, always, always have an energy storage
device. So I am employable for a long time, because you are
always going to need an energy storage device.
Now, what shape and form it takes, what the chemistry is,
who knows? What is really exciting about that, though, is we've
done--and it used to be called a science project at Ford with
the hybrids and with the fuel cells. We are now seeing the
convergence, and exactly what GM is doing, and that is
regardless of what the power plant that Denise is told to
provide an energy storage for, she doesn't care. She is going
to be able to provide an energy storage device that will fuel
anything. And so as we get better and smarter with ethanol and
internal combustion engines and diesels and fuel cells and pure
electrification, it is all a journey that we are going to drive
standards, drive the cost down, and eventually, we will have a
whole portfolio of stuff that we will be able to.
So I didn't answer your question. I would be a good
politician, wouldn't I? I don't think there is winner. I think
the winner is the battery, clearly.
Simplifying Hybrid Systems
Mr. Inglis. That is helpful. Now, I have heard from some
people that hydrogen is the future--or a pure electric would be
far more simple to manufacture than a hybrid. I have heard the
objection to hybrids that they are actually very complicated
systems. In fact, I have seen it laid out how many pieces are
in a hybrid as opposed to how many pieces would be in a fuel
cell vehicle, and it is really an interesting layout. And the
idea being, you know, you put all of that complexity into a
vehicle, and you drive it a couple of hundred thousand miles, a
lot of those things are going to break, and so the simpler, the
better, right?
So I agree, you have got to have a storage mechanism, but
you want to get it as simple as possible, right, and cut out
that--some part of that so you can get the simplicity?
Ms. Wright. Well, I do agree with you, and if you take a
look at the complexity of a hybrid system, you have essentially
nine intelligence systems that are trying to play nicely in the
sandbox, right, and operate as a cohesive system. But what you
have to take--and this is where we get into Lynda's expertise--
is you are right. Denise said EVs are inherently more simple,
but then you have to take a look at the total picture, and that
is how clean is the energy source from which you are driving
that electric vehicle. So I mean we get outside of the
fundamental technology of the vehicle, and then you have to
start looking at it more globally, so I would suggest to you,
yeah, we want to drive to electrification of vehicles and with
or without a fuel cell. You know, we can debate that. But I do
think, then, we have to examine and say how are we doing, to
ensure that the energy sources aren't worse than the cure of
those vehicles of which we are propelling them.
Mr. Inglis. Ms. Ziegler.
Mr. Ziegler. Yes, I just did want to add the study that was
done by EPRI and NRDC, when they look specifically at plug-in
hybrids, in all scenarios, even with the current mix of
generation, which doesn't include any, you know, coal
gasification or anything like that, there was greenhouse gas
benefits in all cases. And then if you look at, as the
electricity industry moves to, you know, lower carbon
generation, you get much more greenhouse gas savings. So even
with--and this was studied on the plug-in hybrids, not pure
electric vehicles. But in all cases, with the current mix of
generation, there was benefits for greenhouse gas.
Ms. Gray. The only comment that I would like to make, if I
may, as we talked about simplicity, I agree that as we move
towards our Chevy Volt for example, or E-Flex system, it does
get more simple when it comes to the control system. But we
need the technology breakthroughs in order to realize that
simplicity, and that is why we have to keep focusing on
ensuring that we have got that technology breakthrough in our
advanced battery technology area. So I like the end-game, but
we have got to make sure that we take the appropriate steps as
we move forward, and providing some additional support in the
advancement of batteries will allow us to get to that very more
simplistic end-game.
Southern California Edison Partnerships
Chairman Lampson. Ms. Ziegler, Southern California Edison
is leading the charge to develop plug-in hybrid vehicles, and
you signed some employment partnerships in this area with
companies like Ford and Johnson Controls. What are the next
steps in using these partnerships to advanced technologies?
Ms. Ziegler. I think what we will get out of these
partnerships is exactly what my two colleagues were talking
about, which is getting vehicles tested with real people, out
in real circumstances, so when we get the Ford vehicles
delivered to us, we will put them in our fleet, we will put
them out with some customers, and we will test them in real
circumstances, looking at the recharging cycles and the
discharge.
So the benefit of that is getting cars in the fleet,
getting them tested. The other things that we are working on,
and you have heard talk to day of this smart grid of the
future--it is looking at what are the kind of standards and
controls that you are going to want to have. When we talk about
that the electricity grid can charge most of these vehicles,
you need to charge them off peak. We have excess capacity on
the grid for California that is typically at night. So what you
want to have is the intelligence, either in the car, in the
smart meter, or in the grid, that can tell the car that you
only want it to charge at night. So another benefit of these
partnerships is really looking at what are the kinds of
standards and controls that we need to develop between all of
the industries to make that happen and use the electric grid to
the benefit, as opposed more on big load by charging the
vehicles.
Chairman Lampson. What is the timeline to do so?
Ms. Ziegler. The timeline for the first, which is the
demonstration, we will get some vehicles next year and begin
demonstrating those. I hesitate to speculate on the timeline
for the smart grid. I think we are experimenting now with one
circuit, which we call our Avante circuit, which is a test of a
smart grid, and so we need to test that and see the results,
and then you are looking at a huge infrastructure across the
United States. So to replace that infrastructure with a smart
grid technology is at least a couple of decades, I would think,
if not more, to really replace all of the electric grid with
the smart-grid capability.
Domestic Manufacturing of Batteries
Chairman Lampson. All of you to comment on, we talked about
the importance of building up a domestic manufacturing base for
an advanced-battery industry, but what does this really mean
for your respective sectors and the United States as a whole?
Why should domestic auto-manufacturers not outsource part of
the industry to Asia and buy cheap components from an
established battery sector?
Ms. Gray. If I could start?
Chairman Lampson. Please.
Ms. Gray. Every single program that we have, we made up
with a supplier, and there is learning that happened. And that
learning on how does the customer use their vehicle--and as
every one of us is in here, there are those many different
means by which a person drives a vehicle. And that learning
loop is so important, and how we characterize it, how we
standardize those driving operations, and then give that to a
supplier to make your system, they are learning from you. And
every time they do that, they are getting better and better at
doing that. If we do that with all of our non-domestic
companies, they become smart. They will stay smart, and we will
continue to send information that way.
I think it is very important that we establish within our
own country that learning opportunity, the learning opportunity
to make energy storage devices, the technology to build the
manufacturing tools. There are toolmakers out there that are
all outside of the United States. There are chemists. There are
companies that make all kinds of powers and things like that
for energy storage devices. And they are all outside of the
United States. If we don't retain that knowledge here, every
single vehicle that we build, all of the knowledge on how we
operate and how we advanced that technology goes away and does
not stay here in the United States. So I think it is extremely
important that we establish that capability, that competence,
here in the States, so that we can retain that knowledge, so
that we can have jobs here for our folks, instead of sending
information or sending parts the other way.
So it is extremely important that we, as OEMs, partner up
with companies and have the ability to have that knowledge
here, and we can only get it by increasing our focus on
manufacturing of energy storage devices, high-tech systems here
in the States, because it is an art, and it is also a science.
Ms. Wright. In terms of--and let us talk about hybrids
first. The market is and is going to continue to stay here in
the United States. We are the largest consumers of hybrid
vehicles in the world, and it is projected that we are going to
continue to be doing that. So if you start with that premise,
it seems to make sense that you want to make the jobs here,
where you are going to be assembling them. We can assemble them
here; we can manufacture them here; and we can sell them here.
I would also let you know that hybrid vehicle technology
originated here in the United States, and if you take look at
what happened, we are absolutely getting decimated in the
marketplace with technology that we invented here. And I am not
going to repeat what Denise said, but I think she summed it up
exactly right. We have an opportunity here to take advantage of
a market that wants hybrids and will accept them, with some
help from the government, of course. We can create jobs. We can
create the infrastructure. We can pull, through our
universities, and through our schools, a desire and a sexiness
for kids to embrace science and technology instead of becoming
day traders. We can then become exactly what we are seeing
happen everywhere else in the world where we have to go and
export. And from a purely practical standpoint, every time we
do a hybrid vehicle right now, we have to go to Japan, China,
or Europe to get all of our components. It takes a lot longer
for us to get a vehicle on the road if we are traveling all
over the world to get these components, you know, engineered
and manufacture----
Chairman Lampson. Well, what is the state of the
development of a domestic supply chain for the battery----
Ms. Wright. We don't have one.
Chairman Lampson. Period?
Ms. Wright. We don't have one, and I would--I don't think
you know this, but this facility that I have in Milwaukee, the
Johnson Control facility, is the only facility outside of Japan
that has complete capability to do cell research, cell
prototype manufacturing and systems engineering. It is the only
one outside of Asia. That is a real commentary on what has
happened to our ability to not only have the basic science, but
the capability to produce. We do not have a single supplier
here in the United States.
Chairman Lampson. Ms. Ziegler, would you like to comment?
Ms. Ziegler. I would just add one thing. I think, as we
talked about earlier, we are looking at plug-in hybrids and
this technology to really get ourselves off of imported oil, so
doesn't it make sense to try to use United States manufactures
to make the replacement for imported oil. And I would really
preach, as well, we as the United States really need to have
good jobs for our people that provide good wages, and I think
being able to manufacture technology in the United States is
critically important.
Chairman Lampson. What are other countries doing to
increase their own capabilities that as we, perhaps, develop
that, they will stay competitive. What kind of comment would
you have on that?
Ms. Wright. Well, I think it starts first in the structure
of the society. If you take a look anywhere but in the United
States, they encourage science and technology in the school
systems. They are supportive from a government level, the
industries as well as the universities, to advance their
technology. So I think there is just a fundamental
infrastructure inside of these countries that we just don't
have here to encourage the building up that capability.
And if you take a look at what is happening--let us just
use Europe as an example. They have a plethora of activity
going on, not only in diesels, but in hybrids, because they
know for the 2012 Kyoto protocol, diesels, alone, are not going
to get them to the levels they need to be at. So what they are
going to do--and we will produce the batteries--sell the
vehicles over here. We shall make sure that it is accepted, and
we will get the technology, and they are going to take it back
over there. And that is what is happening in the world right
now.
Ms. Gray. Just to add another comment, I think we need a
more focused effort between government and industry here in the
United States in order to advance that technology. You are
absolutely right. We have efforts in place, DOE, USABC. We have
been doing some thing thus far, but if we are going to stay in
this league, we are going to have to make a step change in our
efforts, in our funding efforts, in our focus efforts.
As we, industry, come together--and it's amazing how GM has
a collaboration with Ford and Chrysler. We also have
collaborations with BMW as well as DCX because the answer is
everybody sees this is what we have to do. We have to advance
the technology in this area, and collaborations are occurring.
I think, from a government perspective, we need to step up our
game in that area as well. Japan has a huge step up in this
where they have combined, very effectively, their government,
their industry, as well as their universities in development,
not just nickel-metal hydride, but also lithium and the next
generation lithium, because the answer isn't just with one. You
have got to have that business plan to allow you to continue to
sustain that to understand what the next one is and the next
one is in order to bring the cost down, because if you stay in
the startup mode, which I feel we are in at this point. We are
still at that infancy of being able to bring advanced-battery
technology to fruition. If we just stay there, the cost will
never be there, and we will be left behind.
And then, again, the cost is going to be high in the
beginning, and collectively, with government, we are going to
have to lower that so that we can get more product out there in
the real consumers' hands so that we can learn more and then
bring those costs down.
Chairman Lampson. Mr. Inglis, I have well overstayed my
welcome.
Purchasing Plug-in Hybrids
Mr. Inglis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I don't know that I
shall use all of the five minutes, but here is the--if I wanted
to go from here to buy a plug-in hybrid, can I get one? Who
would I call?
Ms. Gray. You can't get one from an OEM today that has been
completely integrated, that has been completely tested, that
will last the expectation, ten years, you won't have to service
it. We are not ready yet. There is still a lot of work to get
done.
You can buy demonstration kinds of things where it is in
there; it won't last forever; but yet it allows you to have
some demonstration opportunity.
Ms. Inglis. So I could get a kit, right, for a Prius? I
guess I could buy that? I could go online and find a kit----
Ms. Gray. Well, I am not advertising----
Ms. Wright. I shall take care of that one Denise. Yes,
there are what we call garage-conversions. I would just caution
you, however, if you are personally thinking about that, one,
you invalidate your automotive warranty, and number two, Denise
is absolutely right, the standard and the validation that we
have to undergo as an industry are beyond anything anybody,
except for if you are in that industry, understands. And so
these conversions do not or are not intended to meet those
validations, useful life, reliability, and potentially
unintended consequences. So I would just encourage you to wait
because she is going to be out very soon with one.
Mr. Inglis. So it will be soon?
Ms. Gray. Yeah, we are currently working on a plug-in
hybrid, right now, for Saturn VUE. Johnson Controls staff is
one of the advanced technology suppliers that we are working
collectively on, but we have got to make sure that under all
kinds of conditions, this vehicle is safe, in a crash
condition, that the occupant is not hurt.
We have got to make sure that it lives and lasts. You don't
want to go and replace your battery every 600 miles because we
have failed. So we are working towards coming up a with a real,
certified plug-in vehicle that will allow us to, again, sell it
to the customer, and it meets your needs.
Mr. Inglis. And when is the projected delivery?
Mr. Gray. We haven't put a production date on that we can
announce to the public, although internally, I got a production
date that I have to make sure that I line everything up and
work as hard as I possibly can to uncover and to deal with all
of those engineering issues in order to make this program
feasible.
Plug-in Hybrids for Consumers
Mr. Inglis. You encourage me that it is that, it is
engineering of standards. It is not the price of gasoline. Is
that right? Or is it also some concern about whether the price
of gasoline goes down, and then when it goes down, do I really
want to buy one, or do I just decide I shall keep on driving
what I got?
Ms. Gray. As an OEM, I wish I could predict which vehicles
you will buy and at what price you will buy them. I can't do
that, but my obligation is to get the technology out there,
certified, so that you can have the opportunity in order to
accomplish that.
Ms. Wright. And you know what we have to do is, in absence
of mandates, we have to drive the market pull. And I think
Denise said it very well that it is going to be a
collaboration. We have to have continued and continued improved
collaboration with government. The vision is, at some point,
hopefully in the next couple of years, you are going to go to
the dealership, and when you choose whether you want leather or
your recyclable seats, you can then check off a plug-in option
or another hybrid option, and it will be some reasonable
incremental cost, that you see the value being there and that
Denise's and my industry can have a profitable growth plan.
That is what we are working towards, but we can't do it at
the volumes that we are at now, the lack of standards, and the
lack of real collaboration in terms of driving scale and
infrastructure here in the United States.
Mr. Inglis. So if we really wanted to drive this, mandates
may be a good idea? In other words, fuel efficiency standards
might be a good idea?
Ms. Wright. You can address it in a number of ways. It
could be fuel efficiency, or I would--certainly the shift in
discussion to carbon mandates.
Hybrid Emissions
Mr. Inglis. Which is helpful in your chart that you had
both of those, either carbon kind of systems or a fuel
efficiency standard. I mean it is a good argument that perhaps
that might really get us going?
Ms. Wright. Without a doubt, and what you saw in that chart
represented CO2. When you add in all of the other
forms of greenhouse gasses, it only gets better as you increase
your level of hybridization. So just to refresh your memory, I
would very much encourage that we continue to exploit the
technology that we have available today that we can put on the
road today, but we are not in the volumes, as well as continue
to invest in what is hopefully going to be near-term plug-in
capability and eventually EV.
Raw Material Supplies for Batteries
Mr. Inglis. And one last question: the--I have used all of
the time, Mr. Chairman. We have got enough raw materials to do
these batteries, right? It is not like there are made out of
platinum, and there is only so much in the world, and that
means that we really can't use these or--it is not a resource
problem, right?
Ms. Wright. That is correct.
Mr. Inglis. There is enough Lithium there is enough----
Ms. Wright. We can't divulge the recipes because that is
our intellectual property, but clearly the materials are always
a concern, but as Denise said, when you look at nickel-metal
hydride versus a lithium ion, first because it is 50 percent
lighter, you are using--consuming less materials. And one of
the areas that I would encourage additional research beyond
where we are today is alternate materials that take all of the
variability in terms of market spikes as well as availability.
And they are there. They are on the horizon, and we are working
with them. So we are going to continue to experiment with our
recipes to ensure that we meet all of the requirements from our
automotive manufactures, but I think there are a lot of
opportunities for us to continue to take that volatility out
and still deliver all of the performance.
Mr. Inglis. All right, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Lampson. You are welcome. I would like to go
another 20 minutes. It is fascinating, and you all have been
great. Thank you very, very much. We appreciate you appearing
before our subcommittee, and under the rules of this committee,
the record will be held open for two weeks for Members to
submit additional statements and any additional question that
they might have for the witnesses. We shall send them to you.
This hearing is now adjourned. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 1:20 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
Appendix:
----------
Additional Material for the Record