BatteryTech

Texaco has patents for NiMH
http://seekingalpha.com/article/116718-li-ion-batteries-a-speculative-field-of-dreams?source=yahoo

http://www.ev1.org/chevron.htm

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

http://peakoildebunked.blogspot.com/

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

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6969567.PN.&OS=PN/6969567&RS=PN/6969567

You're right. No Lithium Electric car has, so far, gone more than 50,000 miles without significant battery degradation. The fact that NO manufacturer is looking at the proven success of Nickel Metal Hydride (NiMH), which are cheaper and longer-lasting than Lithium, shows that they are all shamming. They are just plain lying about their intentions; GM itself admitted that it's all about P.R.

Ironically, the reason no one can use NiMH is that GM bought exclusive worldwide patent licensing rights to NiMH in 1994, and sold the rights, on Oct. 10, 2000, to Texaco; six days later, Texaco announced that it was merging into Chevron, taking control of NiMH with it.

The next year, Chevron funded a lawsuit aginst Toyota, after which Toyota paid $30 million to Chevron and its allies, and production of the NiMH battery and the Toyota RAV4-EV that it powered ceased. No more new EV-95 batteries can be made or sold at any price, even for replacement of the few RAV4-EV that need new batteries (3 so far, out of about 328 that were sold to the public up to Nov., 2002).

Patent right should not be used to suppress technology that works; and an OIL COMPANY SHOULD NOT CONTROL PATENTS TO THE ELECTRIC CAR.

The next time you see Lutz pattering on about batteries, ask why they aren't using NiMH or even PSB 1260 lead-acid, which gave the EV1 over 100 miles range.

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

evworld
http://evworld.com/blogs.cfm?blogID=729

However, unfortunately it took a turn for the worse when the petroleum company Chevron bought the Ovonics patent on NiMH traction batteries. Once they had acquired the Ovonics patent in 2003, Chevron filed suit against Toyota to prevent further manufacture of the Panasonic EV-95 NiMH battery that powers the RAV4 EV. Chevron continues to deny licenses to any automobile manufacturers to manufacture NiMH traction batteries. The only battery companies manufacturing NiMH traction batteries are those who were “grandfathered in” at the time of the Chevron-Toyota legal settlement, and none of these have the capacity or performance of the Panasonic EV-95. Of course, there are huge numbers of licenses to manufacture NiMH http://www.ovonic.com/al_alliances_licensees_battery.cfm, however, these are companies that deal in smaller batteries such as AA, AAA, C, and D cells.

Never fear though, because there is a new NiMH battery technology. As reported in EV World Nilar http://www.nilar.com has produced a new way of packaging the old technology so that it will not encroach on the ECD/Cobasys patent. Nilar’s NiMH battery utilizes a unique architecture that provides high performance and a simplified manufacturing process. So maybe, just maybe, we can have a battery system that can do 375 miles on a single charge.

Emminent domain

 * http://www.dcmonitor.com/ Us President must force licensing of NiMH battery
 * http://www.twocentspermile.com/

Toyota
http://pppad.blogspot.com/2007/05/nimh-held-hostage-by-chevron-texaco.html


 * Long lifetime, longer than the life of the car -- even a Toyota car. Toyota's EV-95 batteries are still running Toyota RAV4-EV cars more than 20,000 miles per year, and for over 100,000 miles so far.

But no more EV-95 batteries can be made, after Chevron sued Toyota. In 1994, Stan Ovshinsky, the inventor of the NiMH battery and principal of Energy Conversion Devices with the late Dr. Iris Ovshinsky, sold control of the NiMH batteries to a jont venture, GM Ovonic, between GM and his company, with the goal of manufacturing patented NiMH batteries for EVs.

Ostensibly, GM was supposed to go into production, and thus, it seemed, perhaps, natural to allow them control of the battery they would, supposedly, be using. In the event, Honda and Toyota used NiMH 4 years prior to GM's final release of a NiMH version of the EV1. But passing control of the batteries to GM proved a fatal mistake for the future of EVs. GM announced on Oct. 10, 2000 the sale of the worldwide patent rights for the NiMH batteries to Texaco. Six days later, on Oct. 16, 2000, even before the sale was consumated, Texaco then merged with Chevron. The sale of the batteries was finally concluded on July 17, 2001, long after Texaco had become one with Chevron.

Chevron/Texaco received "...GM's 60 percent stake in [NiMH] batteries, and a 20 percent stake in ECD itself...", giving Chevron effective control of NiMH. On Mar. 6, 2002, just months after inheriting control of NiMH batteries, Chevron's subsidiary filed suit against Toyota, Panasonic, their PEVE joint venture, Sanyo et al. On December 12, 2001, Chevron's affiliates filed an arbitration demand...with the International Chamber of Commerce...In December 2002, an arbitration agreement...on Nov. 4-19, 2003, the hearing was held, and concluded on Jan. 21, 2004. On July 7, 2004, the settlement agreement ended in complete defeat for Toyota, Matsushita and their joint venture, PEVE. NiMH was only mentioned for "hybrids", those which cannot plug in, and Cobasys, Chevron's unit, became distributor of PEVE batteries, received $20 million licensing fee, in addition to $10 million paid to Energy Conversion Devices. "Cobasys will also receive royalties through December 31, 2013 on certain NiMH batteries sold by [Toyota] in North America."

Chevron oil, the successor to Standard Oil of California, thus worked with GM to eliminate the batteries needed for plug-in EVs, similar to how America's small urban commuter railroads were bought up by the same surprising buyers.

The railroads were dismantled, the right-of-way lost to the public domain, just as the NiMH batteries are now unavailable to run EVs or plug-in hybrids that can replace our oil addiction and address global warming concerns.

Until we move to plug-in cars and electric trains, any talk of dealing with climate change, decreasing oil use, or getting free of our oil addiction anemia, is a sham. Chevron's subsidiary sued Toyota, Panasonic and all other battery makers, forcing a settlement agreement and $30,000,000 payment from Toyota to Chevron's subsidiary.


 * Most importantly, Toyota's NiMh EV-95 production line was closed down, and


 * No more EV-95 batteries are available for any purchaser at any price. Toyota closed down their production line, and the batteries which power the RAV4-EV or the 1999 EV1 are no longer available. Chevron's patent rights don't expire until 2014. [link]

Lead acid battery

 * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7gp3XjsH64 Diy production

http://batteryuniversity.com/learn/article/absorbent_glass_mat_agm

http://batteryuniversity.com/learn/article/sulfation_and_how_to_prevent_it "....In a sulfated battery, which is so heavily sulfated, beyond desulfation, is it possible to drain the electrolyte and using a rotary tool, cut the battery top off and lift the battery out of the housing and clean the plates, reinstall the battery, replace the electrolyte, reseal and charge it? Is this possible? I have one that was used in my PV system in which I was forced to replaced......" This is possible by making our own batteries as is done in Napal https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOTFBDLziHI. The process isn't complex and CncControllers could automate much of it.

Lithium battery
http://www.batteryrecycling.com/Battery+Recycling+Process

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmwxk5boIrw lithium bat production. Li carbonate is turned into a metal linthium ingot and sliced thinly.