Two Hundred And Twenty Billion New Reasons To Be A Plug-in Vehicle Skeptic
John Petersen
On April 8th the Electrification
Coalition, a recently formed industrial lobby comprised of
top-level executives from Cisco Systems (
Aerovironment (AVAV),
NRG Energy (NRG),
Rockwood Holdings (ROC),
Nissan Motors (NSANY.PK),
FedEx (FDX), A123
Systems (AONE)
and a gaggle of private companies released a slick but wholly
unenlightening white paper titled, “
Impact of the Electrification Roadmap.”
I haven’t seen so many finely sculpted curves and unspoken assumptions
since the tax shelter forecasts of the early-80s. The only clear
message is that electric drive will be little more than a footnote in
automotive history unless the powers that be agree to provide $121.1
billion in direct subsidies and incur another $100 billion in
unspecified budget deficits over the next decade. Then, if everything
goes according to plan and nobody develops a better personal
transportation alternative, we can start thinking in terms of cost
recovery and potential benefit to society.
I’d love to be able to provide an in-depth analysis of the assumptions,
but they’re conspicuously absent. For me, that fact alone makes the
analysis about as worthwhile as a call to the psychic hotline. While I
hate to be a stick in the mud about history, I think it’s always
worthwhile to remember other transportation technology schemes
conceived in the halls of government and sold to investment markets as
the next big thing, including:
| 25 years ago | Methanol |
| 15 years ago | Electric Vehicles |
| 10 years ago | HEVs and Electric Vehicles |
| 5 years ago | Hydrogen Fuel Cells |
| 3 years ago | Ethanol and Biofuels |
| Today | Grid Enabled Vehicles |
| 2012 | ??? |
Given the sweeping technological change I’ve witnessed over the last
thirty years, I have to chuckle when anybody is naïve enough to
suggest that any technology can ascend to dominance and hold that
position for the next thirty years. On balance, I see the forecast
decade of sunk-costs as realistically achievable but view the forecast
cost recovery and long-term benefit decades as highly suspect.
To their credit the Electrification Coalition has always been upfront
about the enormous challenges that electrification of personal
transportation entails, including:
- The current high cost of batteries;
- The current lack of reliable access to refueling infrastructure
for GEVs; - Regulatory and coordination problems that will complicate
interface with the electric power sector; and - Consumer acceptance issues.
To overcome these seemingly insurmountable problems the coalition
members propose several policy initiatives that will use your tax money
to underwrite their business goals and pay for somebody else’s
consumption. The principal policy initiatives are summarized below,
along with my personal observations.
One – $13.75 billion
installing automotive grade batteries in stationary applications to
help drive scale
using uneconomic automotive batteries in uneconomic grid applications
is like buying eggs for a dime, selling them for a nickel and trying to
make up the difference on volume.
Two – $10.00 billion
retooling automotive assembly lines and manufacturers of GEV components.
in loan guarantee costs can add up to $50 to $100 billion in government
liabilities if the borrowers default.
Three – $9.70 billion
value for used large-format automotive batteries.
happy talk about the future resale value of used EV batteries?
Four – $74.10 billion
credits to make them variable such that the upfront cost of a new PHEV
or EV is equal to a comparably sized conventional vehicle.
up around the block to pay a premium price for less utility,
performance and flexibility.
Five – $12.60 billion
equal to 75 percent of the cost to construct public charging
infrastructure.
chicken or egg situation.
Six – $0.80 billion
home charging equipment.
of the car cost.
Seven – $0.18 billion
for up to 50 percent of the costs of the necessary IT upgrades to sell
power to electric vehicle consumers.
even an issue?
Hole Policy Costs
between the $121.1 billion in line item costs and the $220 billion
cumulative increase in the Federal deficit by 2019.
friends?
When I consider the electrification coalition policy initiatives, it’s
easy to see why the members are eager supporters of a proposal to
convert huge piles of taxpayer money into operating revenue. I have a
harder time, however, with the tacit admission that electric drive has
no real future without government intervention to force the issue. The
wheels really come off the bus when I consider the duplicity of
suggesting that we can expect quantum leaps in battery powered electric
drive technology, but must ignore the likelihood that some other
nascent technology will gain enough ground over the next decade to give
battery powered personal transportation a run for the money.
At its core, cleantech is an ethical system based on the responsible
application of technology to optimize the use of natural resources,
moderate global warming, secure energy independence, offset rising
energy costs and increase the well-being of the six billion people that
live on this planet. There has never been an industrial revolution led
by a technology that promised to deliver less economic benefit at a
higher economic cost. Shifting the burden from consumers to taxpayers
is like re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, a hollow
subterfuge that does nothing to eliminate the burden of
waste masquerading as conservation.
Were I made of sterner stuff I’d short them all. Fortunately,
experience has taught me that the market can remain irrational longer
than I can remain solvent. So I’ll just watch the predictable train
wreck from the sidelines.
Disclosure: None.
-- AltEnergyStocks.com
