There are some cars on the road in Japan, but you're right, I think
the timetable for release in limited numbers to fleet customers starts
in a month or two. My focus is not in the US. In fact, I would
prefer it if vehicles are released, for sale, to willing buyers,
outside the US. Those of us in the US have earned no special
treatment. If anything we are the land of EV-crushing corporations.
An EV-producing corporation might want to take heed.

I like the fact that BYD (in which I have a tiny indirect interest)
has actually produced and sold a few dozen PHEVs, in China, but
apparently they are limiting sales to fleet customers and had only
sold 80 through April-ish, for roughly about 3-4 months that the
vehicle had been for sale to fleet customers in China.

http://www.zoomilife.com/2009/04/15/chinese-byd-f3dm-not-selling-well-in-china/

To give more idea, there is "test leasing" of about 1400 MiEVs to
fleet customers starting in July, according to this claim:

http://www.riverwired.com/blog/i-miev-sales-start-april-2010

So, if we don't see them on this side of the Pacific, in one sense
that's fine by me. As long as they're on the road, that is one good
thing.

This article says differently. It says in theory the vehicles are for
sale (not just for lease) in Japan:

http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2009/06/mitsubishi-imiev-goes-on-sale-in-japa\
n-in-july.html

This piece claims that the Stella EV by Subaru, apparently to go on
sale in August, in Japan, will be the world's first EV from a
Production manufacturer:

http://www.allcarselectric.com/blog/1021631_review-2009-subaru-stella-plug-in-ev\
-worlds-first-production-ev-for-sale-by-major-automaker

Sure, the specs and prices and durability expectations are lame
compared to what we could be driving from a Toyota RAV4 EV, but in the
meantime, it looks to me like Subaru (and Mitsubishi, BYD, et. al.)
are going through with this whether we like it or not, whether we
criticize it or not. I am glad they are doing so. With all of the
faults we are likely to see of Lithium Ion batteries, I think we need
to see the issue(s) forced, and for the vehicles to see some mileage
on the road, in the hands of owners.

I don't deny that it's disappointing when I look at some of these
vehicles and numbers, but to say that we see nothing is quite an
exaggeration. Rather I see one competing technology (Lithium) going
to market without its most worthy competitor being given any chance
and with autommotive companies in some cases still playing dangerous
games (BMW) and in other cases simply going forward with some level of
determination (BYD) for right or wrong.

On Wed, 01 Jul 2009 03:32:11 -0000, "doug korthof"
<live_oil_free@...> wrote:

>Hi Murdoch,
>Thanks for the optimism.
>
>But I note,
>
>"...there are no less than three or four established Japanese automakers...with
highway...capable LiOn cars on the road..."
>
>golly, are you going the way of CARB, which points to 100 fuel cell cars and
claims that's all we can do??
>
>So far, no car.
>
>Doug
>
>
>
>--- In electric_vehicles_for_sale@yahoogroups.com, murdoch <murdoch@...> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Well, if the extent to which Lithium Vehicles stays only in the
>> limited niche of overly-expensive vehicles requiring expensive battery
>> exchange every few dozens of thousands of miles, then so be it. What
>> some major companies seem to be making clear is that this will be what
>> they're going forward with whether we think it's smart or not. So, if
>> it ends up being stalled only in numbers of a few thousand per year,
>> in total, around the world, while this would contradict what they are
>> saying, it is something that is going to play out.
>>
>> I am not as certain as you that things will certainly play out with
>> the "stalled" scenario. I do not have certainty that lithium
>> batteries will be a bust. I simply don't know how things will play
>> out.
>>
>> If I have to guess, then I have to factor into my thinking that I am
>> having a hard time believing that several large automakers not in the
>> US and not as "on-board" with the agenda of the American Petroleum
>> Institute are simply going to deliberately wreck portions of their
>> companies on a non-viable EV scenario. Even if I ignore the Chinese
>> companies which are a bit less transparent to me, and count the
>> Koreans as a completitive wildcard, there are no less than three or
>> four established Japanese automakers, (not even counting Honda or
>> Toyota), allied with established Japanese lithium battery makers and
>> already with highway-or-city-capable LiOn cars on the road. It's a
>> bit hard for me to discount their claimed corporate goals.
>>
>> So, I think it's fine for you to point out the question marks that
>> still hang over Lithium, but I'm pointing out that from a corporate
>> behavioral analysis point of view, there are some limited signs that
>> "this time is different", just as there are signs that "this time is
>> no different". Certainly, as always, I could be wrong.
>>
>> What I want to emphasize is that *regardless* of whether Lithium
>> batteries turn out better than you seem to expect or worse than I have
>> allowed myself to hope, NiMh is relevant since no economic system
>> should be going to market with only one speculative technology
>> competing against a proven technology that is not allowed into the
>> marketplace. Just about everyone is worse off in that non-competitive
>> scenario.
>>
>>
>> On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 22:54:13 -0000, "doug korthof"
>> <live_oil_free@...> wrote:
>>
>> >Murdoch,
>> >
>> >Your faith is charming.
>> >What makes you think the "three miracles" of Lithium will occur:
>> >
>> >1. A Lithium EV travels more than 50K miles on a standard Lithium pack;
>> >2. The price of Lithium falls by 80%;
>> >3. Lithium magically becomes possible to recycle economically, cheaper than
mining new Lithium.
>> >
>> >You have no evidence of this, nor any reason to believe that it's going to
happen other than the promises of those very folks who killed the EV and lied
about fuel cells.
>> >
>> >Doug
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >--- In electric_vehicles_for_sale@yahoogroups.com, murdoch <murdoch@> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Looking to 2010-2015-2020, I see Lithium Ion Batteries playing a role
>> >> in our driving lives. As with all technologies (no exceptions) that
>> >> role will be somewhat limited by price, materials scarcity, technology
>> >> limitations (will it perform in Minnesota in January?) and so-on. I'm
>> >> educated-guessing that Lithium Ion Batteries are (in my very fallible
>> >> view0 very likely a significant and good player in the near-term
>> >> future for EVs.
>> >>
>> >> However, I think that Lithium battery technology makers will struggle
>> >> to fill all our needs, and without full motivated healthy competition
>> >> from NiMH and other batteries, consumers lose.
>> >>
>> >> I think the future would have been better off if competition had
>> >> existed, or could somehow be resuscitated.
>> >>
>> >> To be honest, it may be that to some extent the NiMH story is now
>> >> mooted. Maybe Lithium Ion and other battery technologies are really
>> >> poised to fill all of our needs nicely. Since this is not certain, I
>> >> think this makes it important to bring out the NiMH story.
>> >>
>> >> Reasons that I think it is productive to continue to bring out the
>> >> NiMH story include:
>> >>
>> >> - I don't think it is healthy for marketplace competition if one of
>> >> the top two or three competitors has been stifled, and continues to be
>> >> stifled. What if this had happened (for example) in batteries for
>> >> laptop computers or digital cameras? What if we had been told to wait
>> >> for laptops and cameras until Lithium Ion was ready? And to this day
>> >> do we not see some competition at some levels in those areas? NiMH
>> >> batteries, and other batteries, continue to compete.
>> >>
>> >> If a basic issue inherent to battery competition is limitations on
>> >> material abundance, then I think this issue is exacerbated by the
>> >> artificial limitations on competition that Chevron and others have
>> >> brought.
>> >>
>> >> - Inventive people, such as those who brought us the NiMh batteries,
>> >> will be less inclined to reveal their inventions and participate in
>> >> our society if they see that nobody is willing to protect their patent
>> >> rights. Clearly, the patent rights to NiMH have in some way been
>> >> protected, but in a perverse mis-application of enforcement. The
>> >> result has not been that the inventor and business people and
>> >> customers have been able to produce the invention and make money and
>> >> get good product into the hands of customers, but that the invention
>> >> has been only partially produced, with the key crowning part of it
>> >> (energy and power-dense batteries suitable for propulsion of
>> >> highway-capable 4-wheel vehicles) not produced as they could have been
>> >> and customers left hanging. The inventor in this case has kept his
>> >> focus on invention, but has not lived to see his extremely timely
>> >> potentially-world-altering invention come to market.
>> >>
>> >> - I guess another reason I talk about these things is that no
>> >> policy-maker has done so. I have never heard a policy-maker take up
>> >> the cause of (or mention) NiMh battery technology suppression. I have
>> >> never heard a policy-maker take up the cause of (or mention) the need
>> >> to protect inventors' rights or even on some occasions to act in the
>> >> opposite direction and prevent the mis-use of laws intended to protect
>> >> the rights of inventors to do business and see their invention through
>> >> to production.
>> >>
>> >> - In the end, yes, I think a reason that will never go away for
>> >> discussing the NiMH battery story is simply to bring out the truth and
>> >> make sure that it is not lost. Even to this day, to look at a related
>> >> counter-example, observe the extent to which the history of the
>> >> successful partial scuttling (partial marketplace natural death?) of
>> >> trolley technology continues to be a history that is twisted and
>> >> turned to the advantage of sophists-arguing-for-strawman-capitalism.
>> >>
>> >> I think it would be great if somehow we could prevent this from
>> >> happening with NiMH, but to be honest, I won't shut up even if it's
>> >> futile. I don't like being lied-to, and if something needs (in my own
>> >> view) to be set straight, then I see no reason to not do so, if time
>> >> permits.
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >------------------------------------
>> >
>> >Yahoo! Groups Links
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------------
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>