Shai Agassi = Steve Jobs (good news / bad news)

Excellent..

Main thing I want to add is a reference to this video of a presentation he made at MIT last winter.

http://visforvoltage.org/forum/6344-questions-about-project-better-place039s-battery-swap-business-model

In the video me makes a claim that China isn't about to sell batteries (??in significant quantities??) to anybody outside China but instead that the plan is that they will sell complete vehicles. What is your take on that?

e.g. there are several LiFePO4 makers in China but it seems difficult to get their batteries here. The size of some of the factories indicates large production potential and how could they afford large factories if they're not making sales.

they may very well end up with a well designed and workable CLOSED system.

Apple makes very pretty walled gardens.

I saw a presentation about the better place system and read a few things.

It appears to me that it has many characteristics of a cult.

Their guru is portrayed as the savior with the enlightened ideas, and it all rides on his charisma.

That does not have to be all bad, of course:

Even if you don't want to bounce around wearing orange, chanting the Hare Krishna Maha Mantra continuously for the rest of your life, you might acknowledge great value in the results:

Food for Life
Main article: Food for Life

ISKCON has inspired, and sometimes sponsored, a project called Food for Life. The goal of the project is to "liberally distribute pure vegetarian meals (prasadam) throughout the world", as inspired by Prabhupada's instruction, given to his disciples in 1974, "No one within ten miles of a temple should go hungry . . . I want you to immediately begin serving food".[30] A global charity, directed by Paul Turner and Mukunda Goswami,[31] coordinates the project. Food for Life is currently active in over sixty countries and serves over 700,000 meals every day.[31] Its welfare achievements have been noted by a number of journals worldwide.[32][33][34][35]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Society_for_Krishna_Consciousness

There's a point which may be obvious.. but.. here goes anyway.

A hundred years or so ago there was a Taxi company in NYC whose taxi's were electric vehicles. They had quick change battery stations all over NYC so that the taxi could just pull in, and after a couple minute the battery would be swapped and away the taxi would go. This is one model where a quick change battery system makes a lot of sense. General form is some kind of work vehicle, e.g. delivery van, taxicab, etc. The ROI for a work vehicle is keeping it on the road full time, and a quick change battery pack would do so.

A consumer car spends 80-90% of its time parked. Hence if the pack is big enough to handle normal around town driving with one recharge per day then it probably does not need quick change battery packs. In fact Shai said so in the video I linked in the other posting. He described needing the battery exchange stations at strategic places to support long range trips. e.g. the SF Bay Area is a transportation island due to the mountains and the limited highways in-/out- of the area. Hence a battery exchange station in South San Jose, another in Los Gatos, another in Pleasanton, another in Martinez, and another in Marin County, those would cover travelers taking long trips outside the bay area.

Maybe a flaw in his plan is focusing on consumer cars when it's the various work vehicles (around town delivery trucks etc) who might gain the most benefit from battery exchange.

FWIW the Zero Motorcycles system proves quick battery exchange doesn't require a complex roboticized system.

Honestly, I think trying to build long-range all-electric vehicles is premature right now.

I see two simple choices that will serve our needs for another 10 years:

1) Two vehicles. I have a diesel car for long trips, and an all electric scooter for local/daily travel. Most households only need some sort of short range electric, and could easily just rent a liquid-fuel vehicle for long distance travel. The long-range vehicle should be as efficient as possible, but optimized towards long trips, which means it doesn't require a large all-electric range. An electric scooter is a good choice for a second vehicle, since it's significantly less expensive than a car, and is much more efficient for most needs than a larger and heavier car.

2) Range-extended electric. This is an electric vehicle that carries an onboard liquid-fueled generator, like the Chevy Volt. You get a reasonable plug-in electric range for daily driving, but the vehicle has a conventional liquid-fuel engine that provides power on long trips. If you have to have a single vehicle that does it all, this is probably the design to target for the next few years.

This is what I see being needed for the next 10-15 years. After that, battery and/or ultracapacitor technology may produce all-electric vehicles that can do both local and distance travel without long recharging delays.

Another possibility is that liquid fuels will never disappear entirely, since they allow the transfer of a huge amount of energy in a very short time. However, they liquid fuels will be synthesized via chemical processes using renewable energy, rather than being pumped out of the ground. Ethanol and Biodiesel are the very beginnings of this trend, but there is room for improvement on both the production and consumption sides.

Hmmmm. is Shah Agassi and his Better Place just a well conceived confidence trick, or are they caught up in a self deluded cult of personality(some pretty impressive personalities I'll grant you!).

In my humble opinion, it's a bit of both. Sooner or later in any major emerging industry or advance in the way the technology of mass production changes to the way we live there are always the Utopian's. These seer's and their followers can be found during any major advance. Distinguished by smug self-righteous conviction and impractical science, they evangelize a vision with very much the same methods as the quasi-science based creeds of the 19th century. the descendant's can be found in every science, out on the fringes, emerging during times,of economic upheaval, only to retreat into obscurity again. Like their Hippy ancestors, the fringe dwellers are convinced of apocalyptic dreams where they will emerge as the righteous heroes!

I'm afraid Shah Agassi falls into the same category as other men who having been luckily successful in one field are now convinced they can solve any problem in the world. King Gillette, Preston Tucker, Delorean,etc,etc... the list goes on and on. On thing they all had in common was they were convinced that the vison was correct if only they could ignore or brush away, those irritating flaws in the grand plan! Along the way they convinced well meaning politicians, ardent supporters and very charismatic people to sell a concept flawed from the beginning. In fact the more flawed, why the more faith that is required from the faithful!
A Better Place, isn't a business, it's a cult! Sadly, Better Place will achieve nothing more practical, than the ardent supporters of "miracle fuel additives" and the con men who prey on them! The only thing that will happen is a huge amount of investment will be wasted and diverted from worthwhile EV development.
In my own experience with Better Place, it would appear that any serious forensic questioning is met with, half truths, evasive explanations, or "the software will deal with that" ! (wow, some software!)

An example of this is the claim, now so widely accepted that, Better place has signed up several countries. But has anyone actually examined this claim and what it really means? It is now so widely accepted, that it is virtually impossible to explain how silly this statement is, and people simply don't want to listen to a factual, rational, explanation debunking this blatant lie, instead preferring to accept the , 30 second, headline grab, skillfully orchestrated PR engineered propaganda from Better Place media machine.

If this sort of nonsense was advanced by an oil company,or auto-manufacturer, it would be exposed for the useless propaganda that it is, but because Shah Agassi and his followers say the tings we want to hear, we suspend our normal analytical cynicism. The kindest prognosis for A Better place will to be consigned to the scrap heap of redundant technology, along with John Logie Baird's Mechanical TV, Eight Track stereo, hydrogen fuel cells,etc..Oh, and a marvelous project in blind determination over commonsense, that MIK should know from his Australian homeland, "Big Lizzie".

Please excuse the above rant, but any serious organization that defends a deeplyflawed business plan with the nonsense that China will not mass manufacture lithium based batteries for export, for some mysterious reason, thereby denying the world cheap and improved batteries, is just plain silly! Do better place imagine that they are addressing ignorant sheep? I'll bet the Taiwanese would be delighted to leap at the opportunity to supply the market, or any one of 50 other aspiring nations.

for those of you who have not had the privilige of visisting Australia

....
Oh, and a marvelous project in blind determination over commonsense, that MIK should know from his Australian homeland, "Big Lizzie".

Here is a link to Big Lizzie: http://home.vicnet.net.au/~rcdhsoc/lizzy.html

http://www.ebroadcast.com.au/ecars/ClassicTrucks/PiCs37/BigLizzie.jpg

Thank you Mik for the link,

A really amazing piece of engineering! Just imagine those guy's building that enormous behemoth and trundling for two whole years across the wilderness, completely ignoring the two developments that would ensure that the whole effort was completely futile. The first was that no bridge existed across the Murry river that would carry Big Lizzie's weight, and secondly,even before They started the epic journey the Railroad was being built along side their route! Great stuff! I just love it !! Sort of a real life, Pythonesque, "Ripping Yarn"!

However, one thing Agassi is doing is giving the public what they want - "unlimited range". For all our stats and studies that say unlimited range isn't necessary there's still an apparently impassable hurdle for the consumer to get past to agree and buy a limited range EV. One of the reasons I believe scooters make the best market sense for EV's is because we can compete head to head on everything and range doesn't matter nearly as much (although it still pays to have "good range" - whatever that is!)

The technical name for this is Habituation. The habit-habituation in everybody's mind is decades of cultural experience with vehicles that have effectively unlimited range.

My background is principally in investment banking, venture capital risk, feasibility studies , due diligence, market positioning etc.., but my professional qualifications are Law/Behavioural Science.

What does Shah Aggasi do right? Well he is very professional about marketing his ideas to the general public and politicians. As long as you don't examine or test the beginning of his assumptions the rest of his sales pitch seems plausible and well intentioned. It is his treatment of dissenting views that gives the whole hoopla away, basically he is very driven to be another Steve Jobs. The main difference between him and his idol, is Jobs really does develop feasible products.

The problems facing mass/volume consumer acceptance of EV's are, speed, range and price. Realise that it may seem ridiculous that in countries where speed limits are rigorously enforced at around 70MPH or 130 Klm.s, consumers still can purchase ICE vehicles capable of travelling 3 times that speed. But hey, lets be honest, which of us would reuse delivery of the latest Ferrari? Well yeah, I know there are those 'save the earth, sandal wearing, puritans who ride bicycles and dream of every one being forced to use public transport and knit their own yogurt, but they really don't spend enough to sustain a consumer society capable of mass manufacture. I recently attended a conference where a large part of those worthies attended as well as a mixture of engineers and EV supporters. When a consensus had been reached that the "authorities' should be admonished for not doing enough to encourage EV development, I asked if any of those assembled actually owned an EV or at least travelled to the conference in one. Yeah, NOT one of the 180 attendees actually owned an EV let alone a Vectrix, which for all its faults is the closest you can get to a mass-production, freeway legal EV. The problem is, outside of the specialist commercial area, EV's are not supported by even their own fan base. (well not in sufficient numbers).

Now don't get me wrong, I believe that the EV will eventually prove to be the only viable successor to the ICE, but only when it can approximate the same market appeal. Shah Agassi is right on the money in his marketing pitch when he exclaims that no one is going to radically change their entire life-style when purchasing a new car/vehicle. Yes,i know what the advertising brochure says, and really do hope that your new "freedom machine' will change you from being a middle aged accountant,still living with your mum, into the next James Bond, But it might be cheaper just to get rid of the comb-over and cardigan!

Shah Aggasi appeals to a future we all would love to see. Me? I'd just love to have been a passenger on one of the great airships in the 30's. The sad reality is that only practical and convenient appliances survive in the market place.

The answer to EV development is better battery technology or ultra-capacitor/whatever development. This is the holy grail of EV acceptance.

basically he is very driven to be another Steve Jobs.

Interesting take. That may be endemic of Silicon Valley (where I live) in that Steve Jobs is a bit of a rock star. My former employer, Sun, has it's own S.J. wannabe in Jonathan Schwartz, and you can see where that got Sun.

sustain a consumer society capable of mass manufacture.

Hurm,... I don't wear sandals but I really think a huge part of the problem in our society is the "modern consumer society" (as you put it). Go watch The Story of Stuff for a brilliantly put description of how I feel about this. Consumption for consumption's sake is unsustainable and contributory to global warming etc.

It does appall me the number of people anxious about these issues but who can't be bothered to do much about it on their own.

but only when it can approximate the same market appeal.

As a practical matter I agree with you, but it makes me sad.

I'd just love to have been a passenger on one of the great airships in the 30's.

In Silicon Valley we have some kinda tourist oriented company that's flying those very sort of Great Airships on trips around the area. They take off from Moffett Field where there are still dirigible hangers left over from the 30's and the Navy had dirigibles they used for coastal defense work. The things fly over my house regularly. Way cool but expensive.

Well now, perhaps the sandals were a bit over the top! I wanted to highlight the impotence of well meaning philosophy against practical reality when it comes to mass marketing any product.

I wholeheartedly agree with the problems of consumerism for consumerisms sake! Aye, but therein lyes the rub! We are venturing into the realm of opinion and like art, one mans treasure is another rubbish! You and I may say the the late night, TV home shopping special product, a Dial-a-tic, handy-dandy, sponge sharpener, (now available in 14 different colours!) is an absolutely disgraceful waste of the planets dwindling resources, but the inventor, manufacturer, those who depend on the success of the product to sustain employment, families and incomes, may recent the sanctimony of those who profess adherence to democratic choice but actually practise sanctimonious hypocrisy.

The solution is not to pass more self-righteous laws, but to encourage investment for awareness within our existing capitalist system. For Despite its shortcomings, it is the only real system available. Waiting smugly around dreaming of a new utopia will only make EV adherents irrelevant. EV development needs capital from investors who expect a return on profit in the form of dividends and capital growth. It will be the Toyota's and Ford's who will eventually manufacture and market successful EV's. This is evidenced by the success of the Ford backed Smith-Newton EV truck range.

You are indeed fortunate to live near the Dirigible bases in California. I am only really familiar with Blimps, (Goodyear style)but Wow, imagine travelling from Berlin to Rio in the Graff Zeppelin! Of course had the USA allowed the export of helium, the journey would have proved less dangerous!

Who knows, the age of the airship may return, harnessing atmospheric energy to power electric engines !!

Ah well, unfortunately, the outcome of all quests, mythical or otherwise, are always dubious and unexpected!! (Just ask poor old King Pryrrus)

However, in most part I agree with your analysis. However, my remarks were intended to reflect not my personal philosophy, but a pragmatic, real world, approach to develop, build, market and service an EV product with sufficient appeal to compete with ICE as a FIRST and ONLY car. In common with Better Place I recognize the difficulties experienced by the general public in accepting the replacement of ICE with acceptance transport. I have problems with the solutions offered by Better Place. It is not hard to identify the basic flaws in the Better Place business model. No matter how good the presentation (or passionately sincere the belief) snake oil remains snake oil!!

To answer your Question I am UK based, but spend a lot of time in Australia, NZ, South Pacific and Asia.

I wouldn't place your faith in Detroit Electric, if Toyota can't build a successful EV, sure as hell some hopeful con not. Yes, I know all those hopefuls are crying "you’re killing our initiative" but car manufacture is a huge and complex sophisticated industry, with a great many stakeholders. We don't live in Henry Ford’s day, and we can't turn back time. People want and expect an EV to deliver the same performance, convenience, safety and luxury as an ICE. Morally right or wrong that is the reality! It really bugs me watching all those SUV's picking up children from school in one of the most congested city on the planet, I know it is a silly fashion statement, but no one ever went broke underestimating the publics’ good taste!

I do envisage real scope for the future in EV'S rental’s. The light commercial, agricultural, specialist vehicle and Bus markets are also markets where EV's should do very well . I know my Lexus GS 450H is only a token gesture, but it does deliver me what I want, not need, but want. Note the difference? No amount of huff and puffing about the environment will persuade me to adopt a pedal car or some other totally impractical means of transport. Now that's where good ole, Shah Agassi and his guy's excel! With a ‘hey, let all get rich by supplying an EV that can do all that, by just setting up mysteriously organized battery swapping stations. In response to the feasibility of the such logistics are question, just chant the magic word, Software!

I think you should have more faith and sympathy for the US ailing giant GM. To me GM is very much a mirror of US society, deep flaws and immense greatness often go hand in hand.

if Toyota can't build a successful EV

They did. It was called the RAV4-EV and it had a 100 mile range and an 80mph top speed (I think). Can't remember the price - but it was "too expensive". They stopped production after they lost a lawsuit and were fined $30M for using NiMH batteries. Sigh.

We seem to be having this discussion spread across this blog entry,the "who killed" forum post and the "small vs. large manufacturing" forum post. 'tis all very disconnected - but it is a great conversation.

Marco - are you aware of the RAV4-EV and it's history? Any comment on that?

The question is whether Toyota was successful with the RAV4-EV?

I've ridden in two RAV4-EV's - there are still some in operation that avoided being crushed - the dontcrush.com campaign worked with Toyota and not GM. Anyway my impression as a passenger was it felt like a typical SUV, not terribly exciting in that regard, a very normal SUV experience. It was cool going 70 miles/hr down the highway knowing the driver was going to have done 60+ miles in his total trip that night. It was easy to forget with the normalcy of it that we were in an EV.

I'd say in terms of it being a well built machine it successfully performed it's designed function. Curious thing is both of these RAV4-EV had a palm pilot taped to the dashboard giving more data to the driver. Indicates that Toyota had some failure with the design that the software in the palm pilot fixed.

But was it a business success? A commercial success? There are different definitions of 'success'. John, you and I are engineers and we might have a different idea of success than a business guy.

I have been in meetings with Toyota and listened to the enthusiasm from the engineers who created the program to build the RAV4-EV.

The difficulty for Toyota was that the amount of resources devoted to the project would be better invested in Hybrid manufacture due to market acceptance on a wide scale. the other two factors were 1) the RAV4-EV could not guarantee Toyota's required standard of reliability. 2) A lack of certainty of continued and expanding support from the US and Californian governments to continue to support EV's development, subsidies, tax breaks, compulsory charging posts, the list went on and on..

I think a lot of internal politics went on within the corporation between the hybrid exponents, and Plug-in guys also, although its hard to tell. But I believe a big factor was the difficulty for the pro-plug in lobby to deliver a certain success against the confidence of the hybrid faction from an economic point of view.

Anyway, that was just my reading of the situation, how accurate it is, I really don't know.

But was it a business success? A commercial success? There are different definitions of 'success'. John, you and I are engineers and we might have a different idea of success than a business guy.

Or in other words: "Operation successful. Patient dead."

Er....yes! Pretty much! Although it's not easy working within a giant corporation, and Toyota is better than most. It's sort of like trying to direct an obstinate elephant, and becomes very bureaucratic. But if can can move it in the right direction it has the resources and capacity to accomplish developments responsibly and very professionally.