Electrification Coalition sees plug-ins making up 25 percent of market by 2020
by Sebastian Blanco on Nov 16th 2009 at 1:05PM 
A new Electrification Coalition was announced today with the backing of the CEOs from twelve companies. What's interesting about this group is that, among the leaders from electric vehicles companies and related start-ups – Coda Automotive, Coulomb Technolgies, A123 Systems, etc. – we find Nissan's Carlos Ghosn. Nissan is the only major OEM to participate in this coalition, which will promote "policies and actions that will facilitate the deployment of electric vehicles on a mass scale in order to combat the economic, environmental, and national security vulnerabilities caused by our nation's dependence on petroleum."
Step one is the Electrification Roadmap (36MB PDF), which calls for ambitious plug-in sales goals: by 2020, BEVs and PHEVs should make up a full 25 percent of new vehicle sales in the U.S. This is a huge step beyond what Ghosn said was possible on Friday. By 2030, the target jumps to 90 percent, and, by 2040, 75 percent of all vehicle miles traveled in the U.S. should be done in a plug-in vehicle. The way the Coalition believes this can happen is by targeting markets where plug-in vehicles will be accepted early, and moving from there to the broader public. More details, including a list of all 12 companies involved, are available after the jump.
[Source: PRTM]
Photo by phos365. Licensed under Creative Commons license 2.0.
PRESS RELEASE:
Top CEOs Launch Electrification Coalition
Nissan's Carlos Ghosn, NRG's David Crane, FedEx's Fred Smith, Top CEOs Come Together to Endorse Electrification and Release Roadmap
WASHINGTON – More than a dozen business leaders-including Carlos Ghosn, President & CEO of Nissan Motor Company; David W. Crane, President & CEO of NRG Energy; and Frederick W. Smith, Chairman, President & CEO of FedEx Corporation-came together today to form the Electrification Coalition. The Coalition is a nonpartisan, not-for-profit organization committed to promoting policies and actions that will facilitate the deployment of electric vehicles on a mass scale in order to combat the economic, environmental, and national security vulnerabilities caused by our nation's dependence on petroleum.
As its first official act, the Coalition today released the Electrification Roadmap¸ a sweeping report detailing the dangers of oil dependence, explaining the benefits of electrification, describing the challenges facing electric cars, and providing specific policy proposals to overcome those challenges. PRTM, a global management consulting firm, provided market analysis and technical input for the Roadmap, including detailed modeling on vehicle costs.
"It is time for business leaders and policymakers alike to step up," Smith said. "Our unrelenting dependence on oil has threatened our nation for too long. Up to now, electrification seemed like a pipe dream. But we are offering a realistic, practical, achievable plan to build a transportation system that will enhance our national security, propel economic growth, and reduce carbon dioxide emissions."
The Electrification Roadmap presents a bold and specific vision: By 2040, 75 percent of light-duty vehicle miles traveled in the United States should be electric miles. As a result, oil consumption in the light-duty fleet would be reduced by more than 75 percent, and U.S. crude oil imports could effectively be reduced to zero.
"The first electric vehicles will be delivered in 12 months," Ghosn said. "The widespread acceptance of zero emission cars will require more than the efforts automakers can provide on their own. Public and private collaboration will be the key to mainstream acceptance."
Among its many policy recommendations, the Roadmap proposes the creation of electrification 'ecosystems,' geographic areas in which all of the elements of an electrified transportation system are deployed, thus providing a crucial first step toward moving electrification beyond a niche product into a dominant, compelling, and ubiquitous concept.
"It is absolutely crucial that all of the key elements of an electrified transportation system are introduced in a highly coordinated fashion and in a way that is effective, affordable, and appealing to actual American consumers," Crane said. "Introducing all of the separate elements, from cars to infrastructure, simultaneously in select communities across the country will move electrification beyond the early adopters; policymakers will witness the national benefit derived from a new kind of transportation system while consumers will benefit firsthand from a new kind of driving experience."
In addition to electrification ecosystems, the Roadmap proposes specific policies in the following areas:
* Batteries and Vehicles
* Charging Infrastructure
* Electric Power Sector Interface
* Consumer Acceptance
###
Members of the Electrification Coalition
Timothy E. Conver, Chairman, President & CEO, AeroVironment, Inc.
Peter L. Corsell, CEO, GridPoint, Inc.
David W. Crane, President & CEO, NRG Energy, Inc.
Kevin Czinger, President & CEO, Coda Automotive
Peter A. Darbee, Chairman, CEO & President, PG&E Corporation
Seifi Ghasemi, Chairman & CEO, Rockwood Holdings, Inc.
Carlos Ghosn, President & CEO, Nissan Motor Company, Ltd.
Ray Lane, Managing Partner, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers
Richard Lowenthal, Founder & CEO, Coulomb Technologies, Inc.
Alex A. Molinaroli, Chairman, Johnson Controls-Saft and President, Johnson Controls Power Solutions
Reuben Munger, Chairman, Bright Automotive, Inc.
Frederick W. Smith, Chairman, President & CEO, FedEx Corporation
David P. Vieau, President & CEO, A123 Systems, Inc.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
FrankBank 1:18PM (11/16/2009)
two actual car legitimate carmakers and/or suppliers on this list. the rest are wannabes.
Reply
falstaff 1:50PM (11/16/2009)
Add two actual energy companies.
Add one actual huge vehicle fleet buyer
Add one actual battery designer and manufacturer
nrb 4:17PM (11/16/2009)
"Add one actual battery designer and manufacturer"
I count two.
Some of these companies are real players. At the same time, the prediction happens to be pushing their own agenda.
Boyprodigy1 5:27PM (11/16/2009)
Anyone else find it interesting that Nissan is in a group that has a policy of addressing "our national security"? Good for them of course but where are the american car companies?
BlackbirdHighway 3:41PM (11/16/2009)
If gasoline is $10 a gallon by 2020 then their goal is achievable.
Reply
Joeviocoe 4:18PM (11/16/2009)
Only at current battery costs will gasoline need to be $10 per gallon.
If production of batteries ramps up, some small technological improvements, cost of EVs will go down. Then gasoline would only need to be about $6 per gallon to achieve this goal. And by 2020, gasoline could easily be that price.
Geoff de Ruiter 4:18PM (11/16/2009)
I fully agree with this estimate. Things will happen fast once fuel really starts to show that is it running out reflecting in increased petroleum prices, and how and EV is cheaper and simpler to operate in the long run. I have agreed with this and if not higher adoption in past posts on ABG. They will need to be higher if we want to have a chance at not completely imploding.
However I feel we need to rethink what a car is and it's purpose in society and thus the number of cars actually produced will have to be lower. But whatever someone is going to blast me for thinking too far ahead.
Reply
skierpage 5:50PM (11/16/2009)
@netcarmarket, Since production of a car only represents a small fraction of its lifetime energy use (10% - 25% in all legitimate analyses I've seen), making a few more parts of a car out of green materials doesn't deliver nearly as much environmental benefit as increasing its operating efficiency.
Regarding this announcement, I worry about the secret ANTI-coalition that wants to see plug-in fail, fueled by a $700+ billion fossil fuel industry. Astroturfing (as we see on this site), greenwashing using the H2 fantasy and tiny meaningless pilot projects, working city-by-city to frustrate public recharging, making sure nothing actually takes place to reduce CO2 immediately (all the "30% reduction by 2020" commitments mean another 10 years of profits)... it's all in the fossil fuel companies' interest.
Reply
EVdriver 7:45PM (11/16/2009)
This is all wrong, because everybody knows 2015 is the year of hydrogen economy with shockingly low pices. LOL! ;)
Reply
jtak 8:10PM (11/16/2009)
EVdriver, thanks for bringing up hydrogen. 2015 is the date by which several of the major automakers have said they'll have a fuel cell electric vehicle (FCEV) that is cost competitive with other green vehicle models. It was Toyota that said people will be surprised at how much cost will be reduced from current levels.
The hydrogen fueling infrastructure is a separate issue. Both battery electric vehicles (BEVs) and fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs) face charging or fueling infrastructure challenges and both are asking government to step in and level the playing field. BEVs are great for urban driving in small vehicles and FCEVs are great for those that need more than a 100 mile driving range and want a vehicle with larger seating and storage capacity.
DasBoese 9:45PM (11/16/2009)
"2015 is the date by which several of the major automakers have said they'll have a fuel cell electric vehicle"
One of them said it, and they were kinda sketchy on the details. Screw it, they didn't provide anything of substance at all.
"The hydrogen fueling infrastructure is a separate issue."
It's the very core issue that the success of HFCVs depends on. People aren't likely to buy a car that they can't refuel, have to drive a sgnificant distance to do so, or can't take on a longer trip because wherever they're going doesn't have a hydrogen station within a reasonable distance.
"Both battery electric vehicles (BEVs) and fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs) face charging or fueling infrastructure challenges"
No, only one of them. For BEVs, a public charging infrastructure is a convenience, for HFCVs it is a necessity.
"both are asking government to step in and level the playing field."
One asks for a level playing field, the other wants a multibillion dollar free ride.
"BEVs are great for urban driving in small vehicles"
They're great for many purposes, vehicle size has nothing to do with it.
Well actually that's not true, larger vehicles can be proportionally more efficient because the weight fraction of the electric drivetrain decreases, and they suffer less from aerodynamic drag at any given speed because of a higher momentum, thus improving energy recapture through regenerative braking.
"FCEVs are great for those that need more than a 100 mile driving range and want a vehicle with larger seating and storage capacity."
As are PHEVs like the Volt, at a fraction of the cost and capable of using the existing petroleum and E85 infrastructure.
GreenGuy 1:26PM (11/17/2009)
Smoke and Mirrors! If they don't address other processes in manufacturing that don't pollute or have huge carbon footprints what does it matter?
Reply
Joeviocoe 5:02PM (11/17/2009)
Define "huge".... no, better yet, quantify "huge".
Even regular IC engine automobiles would have a huge carbon footprint if they were made in such low volume.
When EVs become more mainstream and in higher volume, you will see that EVs can be made with less of a carbon footprint. Far fewer moving parts, the absence of cast iron or, in modern engines, aluminium and magnesium. Filters, oil, catalytic converters.
The process to manufacture these IC engine item is only this "clean" because it has been incrementally improved over 100 years. With high volume comes reduced cost and lower production energy.
GreenGuy 9:11AM (11/18/2009)
Well Joe let’s start with the skin of the vehicles, shall we. I take it from your in-depth knowledge of automotive manufacturing the pre-treatment processes of caustic cleaners and Electro-coat treatments to metals including aluminum have somehow been illuminated by these so called green cars? The ovens that are used to bake these pre-treatments into the surface are now solar? The solvent based products used to add color and shine are made from recyclable materials that require no baking? My point being if you are going to call something green it shouldn’t be partially green! If all of these “green cars” were manufactured in California where there are huge restrictions and penalties for VOC’s I would think they had created a truly green car.
Reply
Joeviocoe 4:51PM (11/18/2009)
I don't know much about paint or metal finishing... or even how to say it right.
Anyhow. Do ALL car makers utilize renewable energy in ALL manufacturing processes? No! So why single out EV manufacturing?
Until you quantify energy and GHG emissions of the "FULL PRODUCTION" manufacturing process, and compare it to ICE vehicle, then you cannot say whether it is better or worse.
The problem is that nobody is manufacturing EVs on that scale yet. But as production ramps up on many different models, it seems clear that both energy consumption and GHG emissions of EV production will be no worse that that of ICE vehicle.
But we are allowed to call it green because, like most "colors", it is subject to gradation. Being "green" is not an absolute. You can never be completely environmentally friendly. Even if I crushed my car and walked everywhere, you could just call me out for spewing CO2 with every breath I took. This argument is called Reductio ad Absurdum.
"Perfect is the Enemy of Good"
GreenGuy 4:24PM (11/20/2009)
Let’s go at this from a different approach. My original observation was “smoke and mirrors” and I understand one step at a time. However what happens when they actually get their collective acts together, will they be calling them GREENER CARS or from your analogy DARK GREEN? Start to use reclaimable, recyclable powders to coat the exteriors, technologies that are currently farther along then the battery technology.
Standardize on batteries which can be properly recycled? Right now my pickup should be considered Green compared to my Hummer. The only real Green is being wasted, without establishing standards they are throwing nice Green money away. How efficiently and effectively do you think they will be able to recycle battery packs with thousands of little batteries? Easier to bury it somewhere! Full Production means a lot more batteries to deal with.
How about saying right now all batteries will be located under the car. You’re traveling across the country. You pull into an EV station, while you sit there the battery is replaced you pay for the charged battery like a propane tank, they get yours and you get a freshly charged one. Pull away the station is responsible for recharging and when the batteries are too old to hold a charge they have a procedure for recycling. There may be 4 or 5 standard sizes depending on your vehicle. There is now a much better chance of recycling 4 or 5 styles of batteries compared to 50 or 60.
Reply