Greentech Media recently reported that Southern California electric vehicle startup Coda Automotive (Coda) launched a battery business called Coda Energy, which will enter the grid-scale energy storage market.

Coda’s patent portfolio offers a window into the battery technology that might be part of the new business.

Coda owns at least half a dozen U.S. patent applications relating to energy storage technologies, including U.S. Patent Application Publications Nos. 2011/0256431 (’631 Application), 2011/0256432 (’632 Application), 2011/0281145 (’145 Application), 2011/0304202 (’202 Application), 2011/0304298 (’298 Application, and 2012/0015242 (’242 Application).

A search in Cleantech PatentEdge™ yields an additional international application, Publication No. WO 2011/060074 (’074 Application), entitled “Battery thermal management systems and methods,” which is the international, or PCT, filing of the ’145 Application.

The ’431 and ’432 Applications were filed based upon the same provisional patent application and are entitled, respectively, ”Battery temperature control” and “Battery humidity control.”

The ’431 Application is directed to systems for controlling temperature in a battery pack including temperature control gas transported through a distribution and heat transfer system. The ’432 Application is directed to systems for inhibiting condensation in a battery pack which include a humidity sensor and control system.

Also pertaining to temperature control are the ’145 Application and its international counterpart, the ’074 Application. Entitled “Battery thermal management systems and methods,” the ’145 Application is directed to systems for thermal management of a battery pack in which the battery pack (102) has a thermally conductive interstitial member (108) disposed between the battery cells (104a-d).

The interstitial member (108) is coupled to a plate (110) along a bottom surface of the battery cells and fills at least a portion of the insterstitial space (106). A first plate (110a) may be located along the bottom of the battery pack (102), a second plate (110b) located along a first side of the pack, and a third plate (110c) located along a second side of the pack.

A cooling fluid (112) flows along the bottom surface of the battery cells (104a-d). The cooling fluid (112) draws heat generated by the battery pack and may flow in different directions to disperse the heat.

The ’298 Application is entitled “Battery charging using multiple charges” and relates to distributing charging load among multiple chargers. Less relevant is the ’202 Application, which is electric vehicle technology for disconnecting a battery during a crash.

The most recent application, filed in June of last year and just published January 19th, is the ’242 Application, entitled “Battery with improved terminals.” The ’242 Application is directed to a battery cell (10) comprising a casing (12), a cell core (14) housed within the casing, and a sealing lid (16).

A pair of terminals (18, 20) are supported on the lid. Fasteners (33) are spaced apart and offset relative to the terminals (18, 20). According to the ’242 Application, this arrangement provides a relatively large surface portion for connection to the terminals.

Eric Lane is a patent attorney at Luce, Forward, Hamilton & Scripps in San Diego and the author of Green Patent Blog. Mr. Lane can be reached at elane@luce.com.

Related posts:

• CODA Promises That Their Sedan is the First Electric Vehicle You Can Trust
• XP’s Equalized Cells to Provide Xtremely Large Scale Energy Storage
• Valence Victorious in Canadian Advanced Battery Patent Suit
• Primus Energy Storage Tech Goes With the Flow
• Argonne Battery Tech is a Governmental Green Patent Licensing Success Story

It’s December again (how did that happen!?) and our annual time for reflection here at Kachan & Co. So as we close out 2011, let’s look towards what the new year may have in store for cleantech.

There are eggshells across the sector for 2012. Global economic uncertainty in particular is leaving some skeptical about the chances for emerging clean technologies. And those who watch quarterly investment data, or who look only in a single geography (e.g. North America) may have seen troubling trends brewing this past year. But the true story, and the global outlook for the year ahead, is—as it always is—more complicated.

As you’ll read below, we predict a decline in worldwide cleantech venture capital investing in 2012. But as you’ll also read below, we believe the gap will be more than made up by infusions of corporate capital. And the exit environment, depending on who you are and where you list, still looks robust in 2012 for cleantech (it may not have felt so, but it was actually surprisingly robust in 2011, according to the data. See below.) All in all, if you’re a cleantech entrepreneur seeking capital, our advice is brush up that PowerPoint and work the system now… while there’s still a system to work.

Because, as we detail below, the largest risk, to cleantech and every sector in 2012 we believe, is the specter of precipitous global economic decline and the systemic changes it might bring. Details below.

Here are our predictions for cleantech in 2012:

Cleantech venture investment to decline
In the face of naysayers then forecasting a cleantech collapse, in our predictions this time last year, we called an increase in global cleantech venture investment in 2011. We were right. At this writing, total investment for the first three quarters of 2011 is already $6.876 billion, with the fourth quarter to report early in 2012. Given historical patterns (fourth quarters are almost always down from third quarters), we expect 2011 to close out at a total of ~$8.8 billion in venture capital invested into cleantech globally. That’d be the highest total in three years, and second only to the highest year on record: 2008.

Total 2011 investment is expected to show growth from 2009’s figures once the fourth quarter (dashed lines, estimated) is added. However Kachan predicts total venture investment in 2012 to decline from 2011’s total. Data: Cleantech Group

Yet in 2012, we expect global venture and investment into cleantech to fall. Not dramatically. But we expect cleantech venture in 2012 as measured by the data providers (i.e. companies like Dow Jones VentureSource, Bloomberg New Energy Finance, PwC/NVCA MoneyTree, and Cleantech Group) to show its first decline in 2012 following the recovery from the financial crash of 2008. Our reasoning? There are factors we expect will continue to contribute to the health of the cleantech sector, but they feel outweighed by factors that concern us. Both sets below:

On one hand: What we expect to contribute to growth in cleantech investment in 2012

* China gets a hold on its economic turbulence – For five years now in our annual predictions, both here at Kachan and when I was a managing director of the Cleantech Group, we foretold the rise of China as cleantech juggernaut. Yet, now with China having become the largest market for and leading vendor of cleantech products and services by all metrics that matter, and now receiving a larger percentage of global cleantech venture capital than at any point in history, there have been recent warning signs. New data just in (for instance, falling Chinese property prices and sluggish export growth because of faltering first world economies, not to mention the first decline in clean energy project financing in China since 2010 as wind project financing declined 14% in the third quarter of 2011 on fears of over-expansion) suggests the Chinese economic engine is slowing. On the face of it, that might look bad for cleantech. But we put a lot of faith in China’s central government and the seriousness with which it views this sector as strategic. Even now, the country has just gone on the record forecasting creating 9 million new green jobs in the next 5 years. Nine million! And China has a good track record in executing its 5-year plans.
* Rise in oil prices – Cleantech is a much wider category than energy. But for many, renewable energy is its cornerstone. And while there’s no question about the long-term markets for renewables, the biggest factor affecting their short-term commercial viability is the price of fossil-based energy. The good news: indications are that oil prices are headed upwards in 2012, which should be expected to help make renewables more economic. Naysayers maintain that a poor global economy will destroy demand for energy, keeping the price of oil artificially low. For much of 2011, the price of oil was relatively low. But we argue the price per barrel will continue its inexorable rise in 2012 given continued growth in the size of the global market for oil, driven by market expansion in the developing world. Further adding to the expected oil price increase is a little-known fact: there’s been a decline in the quality of oil the world is seeing on average. And the poorer the quality of the oil, the more it costs to refine it into the products we require. Oil prices are headed up.
* Corporations’ even stronger leadership role – Corporate venturing was up in 2011, possibly setting new record highs, according to the data providers (4Q data not in yet.) Cleantech corporate mergers and acquisitions globally were up in 2011, again possibly setting new record highs, according to the data. The world’s largest companies assumed the leadership we and others predicted they would last year at this time—and indications are they will continue to do so in 2012, with balance sheets still strong.
* Solar innovation as a perennial driver – Investment into good old solar innovation and projects is still strong, and has remained so for years, while other clean technologies have risen and fallen in and out of investment fashion. And that’s despite most solar companies being in the red and having billions of dollars in market capitalization disappear over the last year. As some solar companies will continue to close up shop in 2012, look for investment into solar innovation to remain strong in 2012 as the quest for lower costs and higher efficiencies continues.
* Persistence of the fundamental drivers of cleantech – The sheer sizes of the addressable markets many cleantech companies target, and the possibilities for massive associated returns, will continue to draw investors to the sector. Why? The world is still running out of the raw materials it needs. Some countries value their energy independence. More than ever, economies need to do more with less. Oh, and there’s that climate thing.

On the other hand: What worries us about the prospects for growth in cleantech investment in 2012

* Investor fundraising climate tightening – Today, limited partners (i.e. “LPs” – the organizations and/or wealthy individuals that fund venture capital companies) are still bankrolling cleantech worldwide; in its 3Q 2011 Investment Monitor for clients, the Cleantech Group details 34 dedicated cleantech and sustainability-focused funds receiving billions in capital commitments internationally in the third quarter of 2011 alone. But we expect a slowdown in venture fundraising in 2012. Blame Solyndra for negative American LP sentiment. Or blame the lack of rock star returns in cleantech of late. But there are more indications than ever that some LPs are becoming increasingly reluctant to fund cleantech. They’ve been grousing about cleantech for years. But the politicizing of the Solyndra bankruptcy has amped the rhetoric higher than ever, and will foster a self-fulfilling prophesy in 2012, particularly in America, we believe.
* Waning policy support in the developed world – Expected conflicting government policy signals to continue in 2012. Don’t expect cleantech-friendly U.S. policy leadership in 2012, an election year. We wouldn’t be surprised if the ghost of Solyndra and other U.S. Department of Energy stimulus grants and loan guarantees continued to haunt American cleantech through the whole of 2012, making any overt U.S. government support of clean or green industry unlikely. While cleantech is far from solely an American phenomenon, there’s no mistaking that the (now expired) American national loan guarantee program helped loosen private cleantech capital in an immediately post-2008 shell-shocked economy. However, continued uncertainty over the future of the U.S. Treasury grants program and production tax credits is holding the U.S. back. Policy support suffers elsewhere in the developed world. For instance, in the UK, investor confidence was recently dealt a blow by a dramatic drop in solar feed-in-tariff (FIT) rates, and the erosion of renewable policy support in Germany and Spain is well known.
* Lag time of negative sentiment – Even if the sky indeed started falling in cleantech (and we don’t believe it yet has), it would take a few quarters to show in venture or project investment numbers. Remember, deals can take quarters to consummate. Transactions being counted now may have been initiated a year ago. Fear takes several quarters to manifest. Which is why we believe today’s uncertainty will start to show in 2012’s performance.
* VCs still circling their wagons – In 2007, before the financial crash, the percentage of early stage venture investments into new cleantech companies was roughly the same as later-stage venture investments into established companies. Since the crash of 2008, deals have remained skewed—both by number and size of deals—towards later stage companies, illustrating investors’ preference to keep existing investments alive than take risks on new companies. While the exact ratio varies quarter to quarter, and from data provider to data provider, there have been generally fewer early stage companies getting funded. That’s hampering cleantech innovation. We expect the trend to continue into 2012.
* Perennial concern about exits and IRR – Despite the size of its massive addressable markets and near-record amounts of capital entering the space today, on the whole, cleantech investors are still seeking the returns that many of their web and social media tech brethren enjoy. Even now, 10 years into this theme that we started calling cleantech in 2002. That’s not for lack of exits; 2010 saw the largest number of cleantech IPOs on record (93 companies raised a combined $16.3 billion) and 2011 has already had 35 without the last quarter reporting. And cleantech M&A activity in 2011 was strong and significantly higher than last year. No, the concern is for lack of multiples. For instance, 8 of the 14 IPOs of the third quarter of 2011 were trading below their offering price as of the publication of the Cleantech Group’s 3Q 2011 Investment Monitor. Don’t let anyone tell you exits aren’t happening in cleantech. They’re just underwhelming. And/or they’re happening in China.
* Macro-economic turbulence, collapse, or at least, reform – They’re the elephants in the room: The Occupy movement. Arab Spring. Peak Oil. The continued and growing mismatch between overall global energy supply and demand and food supply and demand. Ever-increasing debt and trade deficits. Currency revaluation or political/military developments. Any or all of these could spur another massive global economic “stair-step” downwards of the scale we saw in 2008, or worse. Concern about all of these points and the impact they’d have on the cleantech sector weighs heavy on us here.

Venture dip made up for by rise in corporate involvement
The world’s largest corporations woke up to opportunities in cleantech in 2011, making for record levels of M&A, corporate venturing and strategic investments. General Electric bought lighting and smart grid companies. Schneider Electric bought some 10 companies across the cleantech spectrum. Corporate venturing activity was high, as were minority-stake investments. In just the third quarter alone, ZF Friedrichshafen invested $187 million in wind turbine gearbox and component maker Hansen Transmissions of Belgium, Stemcor invested $137 million into waste company CMA in Australia, and BP invested $71 million into biofuel company Tropical BioEnergia in Brazil. And there were dozens more minority stake transactions like these throughout the year.

Look for even more cash-laden companies to continue to buy their way into clean technology markets in 2012, supplementing the role of traditional private equity and evidencing a maturation of the cleantech sector.

Storage investment to retreat
Significant capital has gone into energy storage in recent quarters. In 3Q11, storage received $514 million in 19 venture deals worldwide, more than any other cleantech category. Will storage remain a leading cleantech investment theme in 2012? We’re betting no. Here’s why.

Storage recently made headlines as the subsector that received the most global cleantech venture investment in the third quarter of 2011, the last quarter for which numbers are available. An analysis of the numbers, however, shows the quarter was artificially inflated by large investments into stationary fuel cell makers Bloom Energy and ClearEdge Power. Do we at Kachan expect more investments of that magnitude into competing companies? No. Why? Even if you believe analysts that assert that stationary fuel cells for combined heat and power are actually ramping up to serious volumes (old timers have seen this market perpetually five years away for 15 years, now), just look how crowded the space currently is. Bloom and ClearEdge are competing with UTC Power, FuelCell Energy, Altergy, Relion, Idatech, Panasonic, Ceramic Fuel Cells and Ceres Power … just some of the better-known 60 or so companies vying for this tiny market today. And many are still selling at zero or negative gross margins.

But the main reason we’re not bullish on storage: Smoothing the intermittency of renewable solar and wind power might turn out to be less important soon. Sure, nary a week goes by without announcements of promising new storage tech breakthroughs or new public support for grid storage (e.g. see these three latest grid storage projects just announced in the U.S., detailed halfway down the page.) But we believe that utility-scale renewable power storage might be obviated if utilities embrace other ways to generate clean baseload power.

In 2012 or soon thereafter, we expect those clean baseload options will start to include new safer forms of nuclear power (don’t believe us? Read Kachan’s report Emerging Nuclear Innovations—U.S. readers, don’t worry: nuclear innovation won’t apply to you.) Or NCSS/IGCC turbines powered by renewable natural gas delivered through today’s gas distribution pipelines (see The Bio Natural Gas Opportunity). Or even geothermal (gasp!) or marine power (see below). All of these promise to be less expensive than solar and wind when you factor in the expense of storage systems required—incl. electrochemical, compressed air, hydrogen, flywheel, pumped water, thermal, vehicle-to-grid or other—if solar and wind are to be relied on 24/7.

Marine energy to begin coming of age
I’m a closet fan of marine energy, despite today’s extraordinarily high cost per kilowatt hour. We started covering wave, tidal and ocean thermal energy conversion equipment makers in 2006. Anyone who’s heard me talk publicly on the subject has had to suffer through hearing how I’d much prefer invisible kit beneath the waves than have to gaze upon solar and wind farms taking land out of commission.

In 2006, the lifetime of equipment from then-noteworthy companies like Verdant Power and Finavera (which since exited marine power after a failed test with California’s PG&E) in the harsh marine environment could sometimes be measured in days. The designs just didn’t hold up. Even Ocean Power Delivery, now Pelamis Wave Power, with its huge, snakelike Pelamis device, had hiccups in early onshore grid testing. Back then, the industry clearly had a long way to go.

Today, six years later, we think it’s time to start taking marine energy seriously. A high profile tidal project is now underway in Eastern Canada’s Bay of Fundy. Several weeks ago, Siemens raised its stake in UK-based tidal energy developer Marine Current Turbines from less than 10% to 45%, because it liked the predictability of ocean energy, and Voith Hydro Wavegen handed over its first commercial wave project to Spain. And last week, Dutch company Bluewater Energy became the latest vendor to secure a demo berth at the European Marine Energy Centre at Orkney, Scotland—the most important global R&D center for marine energy. Things are going on in marine power. Still, its major hurdle is the large variation in designs and absence of consensus on what prevailing technologies will look like.

2012 won’t be the year marine power becomes cost-competitive with coal, or even nearly. But you’ll hear more about marine power in 2012, and see more private and corporate funding, we predict.

Increased water and agricultural sector activity
Look for increased venture investment, M&A and public exits in water and agriculture in 2012.

At one point, only cleantech industry insiders championed water tech as an investment category (and, frankly, at only a few hundred million dollars per year on average, it still remains only a small percentage of the overall average $7B annual cleantech venture investment.) Industrial wastewater is driving growth in today’s water investment, with two of the top three VC deals of the last quarter for which data is available promoting solutions for produced water from the oil and gas industry, and the largest M&A deal also focused on an oil and gas water solution. Regulations aimed at making hydraulic fracturing less environmentally disruptive to will spur continued innovation and related water investments in 2012.

Where water was a few years ago, agriculture investment appears to be today. There was more chatter on agricultural investment than ever before at cleantech conferences I attended around the world this past year. Expect it to reach a higher pitch in 2012, because of:

* Growing awareness of the complex interrelationship between water, energy and food
* Increased awareness of the math underlying the planet’s current population growth rate and how that’s going to impact our ability to feed the world, and
* Our reliance on inexpensive oil and gas, petroleum-based fertilizers and hybrid seeds for today’s crop yields

Investing in farmland is even resurfacing, in these uncertain times, as a private equity theme.

Remember the food crisis three years ago, when sharply rising food prices in 2006 and 2007, because of rising oil prices, led to panics and stockpiling in early 2008? Brazil and India stopped exporting rice. Riots broke out from Burkina Faso to Somalia. U.S. President George W. Bush asked the American Congress to approve $770 million for international food aid. Those days could return, and they represent opportunity for micro-irrigation, sustainable fertilizer and other water and agriculture innovation.

And so concludes our predictions for 2012. What do you agree with? What do you disagree with? Leave a comment below.

Article by Dallas Kachan, appearing courtesy Kachan & Co.

A former managing director of the Cleantech Group, Dallas Kachan is now managing partner of Kachan & Co., a cleantech research and advisory firm that does business worldwide from San Francisco, Toronto and Vancouver. Kachan & Co. staff have been covering, publishing about and helping propel clean technology since 2006. Kachan & Co. offers cleantech research reports, consulting and other services that help accelerate its clients’ success in clean technology. Details at www.kachan.com.

Related posts:

• Top Clean Tech Trends for 2010
• What Outsourcing Trends Might Mean to Sustainable Supply Chain Management
• Israel NewTech Forecasts Cleantech for 2012
• Obama’s win: Bright future for CleanTech?
• Ormat and NV Energy Sign 30MW Geothermal Power Contract

Electric cars may present different hazards than conventional design. Recent crash tests as well as one report of a battery fire suggest that the present car design may have to be improved. Crash tests have been carried out in the well known Euro NCAP testing center on the Volt and the Renault Fluence EV that gives tested cars crash resistance ratings scores ranging from 1 to 5 points. Overall crash test results of both of cars resulted in the Fluence EZ having an over crash test rating of 4 points, as compared to the Volt receiving a higher score of 5 points, highest in the auto safety rating program. One Chevy Volt battery pack that was being closely monitored following a government crash test caught fire. Another recently crash-tested battery emitted smoke and sparks.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has issued a statement on its investigation into a Chevrolet Volt fire that occurred at the organization’s facilities. NHTSA had done a side-impact test on a Volt then parked it outside, and three weeks later Chevy’s plug-in hybrid caught fire. The battery was determined to be the cause, after its coolant line was ruptured during the side-impact test. That led the NHTSA to consider a ruling forcing hybrid and electric-car batteries to be drained after a wreck.

So far, no fires have been reported in Volts involved in roadway crashes, NHTSA said. More than 5,000 of the vehicles have been sold.

Both the crash tests on the Volt and the Fluence appear to show a vulnerability to their lithium battery packs, especially when hit in the side.

Whether or not the GM Volt and Renault Fluence manufacturers can strengthen their cars more in respect to damage from crashes remains to be seen. This appears to be especially critical in regards to the danger of the cars’ battery packs catching fire or even exploding in a serious car crash.

Recent NHTSA tests of three battery packs were designed to replicate the earlier tests. In that test, the Volt was subjected to a simulated side-impact collision into a narrow object like a tree or pole followed by a rollover.

The first battery tested. But a battery test on Nov. 17 initially experienced a temporary temperature increase, and on Thursday caught fire. Another battery tested on Nov. 18 began to smoke and emit sparks shortly after the rotation.

Article by Andy Soos, appearing courtesy Environmental News Network.

Related posts:

• Keeping Batteries Cooled and Heated: The Key to Alternative Transportation Longevity
• Analysts Say Battery Prices Are Key to Lower Electric Vehicle Prices
• New MIT Battery Design Could Double Range of Electric Cars
• New Battery Uses Seawater and Freshwater to Produce Electricity
• Electric Vehicles (EV): Latest News

Renewable energy such as solar has a basic problem: No sun , no power. In order to make it more usable the Power must be stored for off peak use when the sun does not shine. Batteries though die when repeatedly recharged. Stanford researchers have developed part of better battery, a new electrode that employs crystalline nanoparticles of a copper compound. In laboratory tests, the electrode survived 40,000 cycles of charging and discharging, after which it could still be charged to more than 80 percent of its original charge capacity. For comparison, the average lithium ion battery can handle about 400 charge/discharge cycles before it deteriorates too much to be of practical use.

Rechargeable batteries have their energy content restored by charging, some deterioration occurs on each charge—discharge cycle. Low-capacity NiMH batteries (1700—2000 mA·h) can be charged for about 1000 cycles, whereas high-capacity NiMH batteries (above 2500 mA·h) can be charged for about 500 cycles.

Short-term transients, including those related to wind and solar sources, present challenges to the electrical grid. Stationary energy storage systems that can operate for many cycles, at high power, with high round-trip energy efficiency, and at low cost are required. Existing energy storage technologies cannot satisfy these requirements.

The new electrode was made using crystalline nanoparticles of a copper compound called copper hexacyanoferrate. Most batteries fail because of accumulated damage to an electrode’s crystal structure caused as ions – the electrically charged particles whose movements either charge or discharge a battery – move in and out of the electrode. In comparison, the atomic structure of the crystals found in the new electrode have an open framework that allows ions to easily move in and out without damaging the electrode.

Laboratory tests saw the electrode survive 40,000 charging/discharging cycles, after which it could still be charged to 80 percent of its original capacity. This is a huge improvement over an average lithium-ion battery, which can handle around 400 charge/discharge cycles before it deteriorates too much for practical use. And because the ions can move so freely, the charging and discharging cycles of the new electrode are extremely fast.

There are a few issues still, these batteries are very large so they will not be practical for anything other than a power grid. Also, its chemical properties make it only usable as a high voltage electrode and every battery needs two electrodes – a high voltage electrode for the cathode and a low voltage electrode for the anode – in order to create the voltage difference that produces electricity. This means the researchers will have to find another material to use for the anode before they can build an actual battery.

Article by Andy Soos, appearing courtesy Environmental News Network.

Related posts:

• New Battery Uses Seawater and Freshwater to Produce Electricity
• A Solar Panel That Washes Itself
• Nano Scale Energy
• Economic Stimulus Plan doesn’t quite stimulate battery research
• New MIT Battery Design Could Double Range of Electric Cars

Ioxus is a manufacturer of premium performance ultracapacitor technology for transportation, alternative energy, medical, industrial and consumer markets. Ioxus has focused on improving capacitor technology, specializing in electric double layer capacitors (EDLC).

The Oneonta, New York, company recently announced the release of its 16V/58F iMOD Ultracapacitor Module Series for alternative energy markets (pictured above).

The iMOD is an ultracapacitor comprising a plurality of in-line high voltage capacitors which provide power for such green technologies as wind turbine pitch control systems, start and drive systems on hybrid vehicles, and power conditioning for renewable energy systems. The iMOD allows for in-line high voltage capacitors sized to parallel or replace common battery sizes.

According to Cleantech PatentEdge™, Ioxus currently owns one U.S. utility patent and has at least four pending U.S. patent applications, all relating to ultracapacitor technology.

U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0053844 (’844 Application) is entitled “High voltage EDLC cell and method for the manufacture thereof” and directed to an EDLC having a unit cell structure with alternately interleaved electrodes formed lithographically and a separator between the electrodes and impregnating an electrolyte therein. The ’844 Application also describes a manufacturing process for the EDLC cells.

U.S. Patent No. 7,830,646, is entitled “Multi electrode series connected arrangement supercapacitor” and directed to an EDLC series stack formed into a single electrolyte cell structure. The figure below shows a complete 12-volt EDLC in a poly bag package.

An EDLC device (10) includes five concatenated electrode assemblies (34-38). Voltage monitor/control tabs (39-42) extend external to poly bag (31), which provides a lightweight, puncture resistant, air-tight seal for the cell stack. The power tabs (32, 33) and voltage monitor/control tabs (39-42) provide the complete electrical interface.

Ioxus ultracapacitors have many applications in green technology. For example, they have previously been used on wind turbines to control the pitch of rotor blades relative to wind speed in order to maximize efficiency. Rotor blade pitch control is also used as a safety feature to slow or stop the turbine when wind speeds are too high or in the event the turbine loses connection to the grid.

Compared to batteries, ultracapacitors are preferred for use in wind turbines due to their light weight, solid state design, and ability to operate in cold conditions. Ultracapacitors also require very little maintenance and have an approximate ten-year life span – twice as long as most batteries.

According to Ioxus’ press release, the iMOD modules deliver easy to install, ready to use, and durable ultracapacitor modules at a lower price and with improved cell balancing.

According to Chad Hall, Ioxus Founder and Vice-President of Sales, “This is a complete, ready to install package. You can go up to 750V without any external management, you can run parallel to a 12V battery or replace a 12V battery. It’s ruggedized to handle insustrial environments.”

While ultracapacitors charge quickly, they are limited in application as they also discharge quickly. They are ideal when relatively short bursts of electricity are needed. As this technology improves, its application will undoubtedly increase.

Are ultracapacitors the new battery? Due to their lack of long term power delivery, ultracapacitors are not ready to replace batteries yet, however, they are certainly preferred in some situations.

Article by David Gibbs, a contributor to Green Patent Blog. David is currently in his third and final year at Thomas Jefferson School of Law in San Diego. He received his undergraduate degree in Geology from the University of California, Berkeley.

Related posts:

• With Hybrid Capacitors, LEDs Have a Bright Future
• China Introduces a Unified Grid Feed-in Tariff for Solar Power
• New Lithium-Ion Battery Offers Quicker Charging Times, Researchers Say
• Automotive Battery Makers to Benefit From Smart Grid
• New Nissan System Charges Electric Cars with Solar Power

Previous posts (here and here) discussed the patent litigation involving A123 Systems Inc. (A123), a Boston area lithium-ion battery maker, Canadian utility Hydro-Quebec (H-Q), the exclusive licensee of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,910,382, 6,514,640, 7,955,733, 7,960,058 and 7,964,308 (collectively “Cathode Materials Patents”),and the Board of Regents of the University of Texas (UT), the owner of the patents, as well as H-Q’s recent complaint adding Valence Technology and Segway to the dispute.

The parties recently announced they had settled their disputes and entered into a settlement agreement and patent sublicense deal (see the A123 press release here).

Some details of the Patent Sublicense Agreement have been made public. Actually a cross-licensing deal, A123 has taken, or will take, a license to lithium metal phosphate patents developed at UT, a family of electrode metal carbon-coating patents, and several lithium metal phosphate patents licensed to H-Q by Nippon Telephone and Telegraph.

A Swiss-based alliance called LiFePO4+C Licensing AG, formed by H-Q, Sud-Chemie, Universite de Montreal and Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, has taken, or will take, a license to two recently-issued battery patents owned by A123. A123′s original Nanophosphate patents, developed at MIT, are not part of the settlement.

The Cathode Materials Patents are entitled “Cathode materials for secondary (rechargeable) lithium batteries” and relate to host materials for use as electrodes in lithium ion batteries. The patented materials provide a larger free volume for lithium ion motion that allows higher conductivity and therefore greater power densities.

Both sides called the resolution a victory for the advanced battery market. Elie Saheb, Executive Vice President, Technology, for H-Q said the agreement “will help accelerate broad-based market penetration of lithium metal phosphate products.”

A123′s CEO, Dave Vieau, called the agreement “a win-win for the entire industry by paving the way for faster adoption” of phosphate-based lithium ion technology.

I’m sure we’re going to see much more cross-licensing activity in clean tech as green patent infringement suits continue to proliferate, move forward and reach resolution. The LED lighting sector, in particular, with companies patenting different features and components and litigation on the rise, is a likely candidate for cross licensing arrangements.

Eric Lane is a patent attorney at Luce, Forward, Hamilton & Scripps in San Diego and the author of Green Patent Blog. Mr. Lane can be reached at elane@luce.com.

Related posts:

• Valence Victorious in Canadian Advanced Battery Patent Suit
• Solannex Strikes Again, Accuses Nanosolar of Patent Infringement
• Court Orders Former GE Employee to Cease Wind Patent Licensing Activity
• Argonne Battery Tech is a Governmental Green Patent Licensing Success Story
• DOE Offers Deep Discount on Patent Licenses to Speed Tech Transfer

Normally Oxygen is fairly tight bound to the hydrogen in water. If it can be easily removed, it has potential benefits for certain energy and fuel systems. A team of researchers at MIT has found one of the most effective catalysts ever discovered for splitting oxygen atoms from water molecules — a key reaction for advanced energy storage systems, including electrolyzers, to produce hydrogen fuel and rechargeable batteries. This new catalyst liberates oxygen at more than 10 times the rate of the best previously known catalyst of its type.

The new compound, composed of cobalt, iron and oxygen with other metals, splits oxygen from water (called the Oxygen Evolution Reaction, or OER) at a rate at least an order of magnitude higher than the compound currently considered the gold standard for such reactions, the team says. The compound’s high level of activity was predicted from a systematic experimental study that looked at the catalytic activity of 10 known compounds.

The team, which includes materials science and engineering graduate student Jin Suntivich, mechanical engineering graduate student Kevin J. May and professor Yang Shao-Horn, published their results in Science on Oct. 28.

The scientists found that reactivity depended on a specific characteristic: the configuration of the outermost electron of transition metal ions. They were able to use this information to predict the high reactivity of the new compound — which they then confirmed in lab tests.

“We not only identified a fundamental principle that governs the OER activity of different compounds, but also we actually found this new compound” based on that principle, says Shao-Horn.

Many other groups have been searching for more efficient catalysts to speed the splitting of water into hydrogen and oxygen. This reaction is key to the production of hydrogen as a fuel to be used in cars; the operation of some rechargeable batteries, including zinc-air batteries; and to generate electricity in devices called fuel cells. Two catalysts are needed for such a reaction — one that liberates the hydrogen atoms, and another for the oxygen atoms — but the oxygen reaction has been the limiting factor in such systems.

Fuel cells come in many varieties; however, they all work in the same general manner. They are made up of three segments which are sandwiched together: the anode, the electrolyte, and the cathode. Two chemical reactions occur at the interfaces of the three different segments. The net result of the two reactions is that fuel is consumed, water or carbon dioxide is created, and an electric current is created, which can be used to power electrical devices, normally referred to as the load.

At the anode a catalyst oxidizes the fuel, usually hydrogen, turning the fuel into a positively charged ion and a negatively charged electron. The electrolyte is a substance specifically designed so ions can pass through it, but the electrons cannot. The freed electrons travel through a wire creating the electric current. The ions travel through the electrolyte to the cathode. Once reaching the cathode, the ions are reunited with the electrons and the two react with a third chemical, usually oxygen, to create water or carbon dioxide.

In addition, even though they have already found the highest rate of activity yet seen, they plan to continue searching for even more efficient catalyst materials. “It’s our belief that there may be others with even higher activity,” Shao-Horn says.

Jens Norskov, a professor of chemical engineering at Stanford University and director of the Suncat Center for Interface Science and Catalysis there, who was not involved in this work, says, “I find this an extremely interesting rational design approach to finding new catalysts for a very important and demanding problem.”

Article by Andy Soos, appearing courtesy Environmental News Network.

Related posts:

• Solar Artificial Leaf is Unveiled by MIT Researchers
• Recycled Newspapers Could Fuel Tomorrow’s Cars
• Researchers Develop Machine To Recycle Carbon Dioxide Into Fuel
• Swiss Zinc-Air Batteries Store Three Times the Energy of Lithium Ions
• Bubbling New Technologies for Cost Effective Wastewater Purification: Mapal and Diffusaire

The Global Cleantech Cluster Association, known as the global voice of cleantech, announced its Global Top 30 Semi-Finalists for its 2011 Later Stage Award at the 11th European Forum on Eco-Innovation in Lahti, Finland today. The finalist companies span North America, Europe and Asia, representing the most innovative and quickly growing green technology companies in the world. The finalists will now be judged by 28 cleantech venture capitalists, investors and serial entrepreneurs who collectively manage $3.5 billion in clean technology investment. Winners in the 10 Later Stage Award categories will be receive international investment exposure.

Ten Later Stage Awards awards will be announced on November 14th in Dublin, Ireland at the Dublin Cleantech Forum and GCCA Later Stage Awards Dinner. Co-hosted by An iSli Ghlas – The Green Way, Ireland’s cleantech cluster, the full day executive event features CEO presentations and high-level discussions on the most critical topics for emerging clean technology companies and investment opportunities.

“Narrowing down 185 nominations from cleantech clusters all over the world down to 30 was a very competitive process,” says Ben Taube, Chairman of the GCCA. “These Top 30 Finalists are the rising stars of the world’s clean technology sector.”

“These companies, with their customers and revenue, are building significant green collar economies in the regions where they operate,” said Shawn Lesser Co-Founder of the GCCA. “For the health of the planet, both economically and environmentally, we are committed to spotlighting these game-changing companies on the world stage.”

The GCCA Later Stage Award Global Top 30 Finalists were selected out of the 4000 companies represented by the GCCA’s 30 member clusters. Each cluster conducted internal evaluations to nominate up to 10 companies in 10 categories, including solar, wind, energy storage, green buildings, and water. In total, these member clusters nominated 185 companies for the 2011 Later Stage Award.

The Top 30 finalists were selected through a rigorous Keystone Method™, developed at the University of Michigan by GCCA Head Judge Dr. Peter Adriaens and CleanTech Acceleration Partners. This business and venture development tool has been reliability used since 2006 to rigorously evaluate and scrutinize over 400 early and later stage companies for investment or strategic repositioning.

“The Top 30 Finalists have demonstrated strong product differentiation, viable business models and have secured solid market traction, in their various clean technology sectors,” said Dr. Adriaens. “Narrowing down the nominations from 185 to 30 was a detailed and arduous process. The 2011 Global Top 30 truly are the world’s best in class cleantech companies.”

About the Global Cleantech Cluster Association
Global Cleantech is a non-profit association, headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia, U.S. that creates conduits for companies to harness the tremendous benefits of international cleantech cluster collaboration in an efficient, affordable, and structured way. Global Cleantech provides a gateway for established and emerging cleantech companies to gain exposure to potential investors, new markets, influential networks, innovative technologies and best practices. GCCA was founded by swisscleantech, the Finnish Cleantech Cluster, and Watershed Capital Group For more information about Global Cleantech, please visit www.globalcleantech.org.

Related posts:

• European ‘Green Challenge’ Grant Open to US Cleantech Startups
• Global Cleantech Cluster Association Announces Winners
• Top Ten Highlights of Colorado Cleantech Industry Association
• 10 Reasons Why San Diego is a Cleantech Leader
• Automotive X Prize Selects 9 High-Efficiency Finalists

Liquid Metal Battery Corporation (LMBC) is a Boston-area startup pursuing an liquid metal battery technology.

According to this Greentech Media piece, Don Sadoway of MIT is the inventor of LMBC’s core technology.

Sadoway is a named co-inventor on two related patent applications, U.S. Application Publication Nos. 2011/0014503 (’503 Application) and 2011/0014505 (’505 Application) describing and claiming batteries having liquid metal electrodes.

The ’503 Application is entitled “Alkaline earth metal ion battery” and is directed to an alkaline earth metal ion energy storage cell (10) which contains three liquid constituents: two liquid electrodes and a liquid electrolyte.

More particularly, the cell (10) houses a molten metal body (14) that serves as a negative electrode, an electronically conductive liquid alloy body (16) that serves as a positive electrode, and an intervening ionically conductive electrolyte (20).

According to the ’503 Application, calcium or magnesium is used in the liquid electrodes (14, 16) because these elements generate relatively high voltage, are safe to handle and are relatively inexpensive.

An electronically conductive container (22) houses the liquid constituents, including an electronically conductive lid (26). An insulating inner sheath (24) prevents shorting between the negative and positive electrode (14, 16), and an insulative seal (29) confines molten constituents and vapors to the container (22).

A portion of the lid (26) in contact with the negative electrode (14) acts as a negative current collector (27) such that electrons pass between the negative electrode (14) and an external source or sink by way of a negative terminal.

Similarly, a portion of the container (22) is in contact with the positive electrode (16) and functions as a positive current collector (23), through which electrons pass between the positive electrode (16) and the external source or sink by way of a positive terminal (30).

The ’505 Application, entitled “Liquid electrode battery,” is a continuation-in-part of the ’503 Application, which means it claims priority to the ’503 Application and has some common disclosure as well as some new material.

The ’505 Application adds certain improvements to the liquid metal battery, such as a circulation producer including thermal management devices to provide a heat transfer path so heat can be conducted away from the liquid constituents (14, 16, 20) of the battery.

According to the ’503 and ’505 Applications, the use of liquid electrodes provides the advantage of higher current density:

The use of electronically conductive liquids for electrodes 14 and 16 with a liquid electrolyte 20 facilitates facile oxidation and reduction of the active alkaline metal and its cation at the electrodes 14 and 16. The electronic conductivity of the liquid electrodes promotes high current density during operation of the cell 10 by enabling electron-transfer reactions to occur at sites over entire liquid electrode-electrolyte interfaces rather than being limited to triple-phase intersections. Furthermore, because reactions at both electrodes occur entirely in the liquid state, the reaction kinetics are not throttled by the nucleation of distinct product phases. Thus, the cell constituents are consistent with extremely high current densities…

Sadoway told GTM that the all-liquid configuration is self-assembling and should be scalable for large-scale electrical grid applications at relatively low cost.

Eric Lane is a patent attorney at Luce, Forward, Hamilton & Scripps in San Diego and the author of Green Patent Blog. Mr. Lane can be reached at elane@luce.com.

Related posts:

• Can Insurers Help Climate Change Adaptation?
• iPhone App Simulates Electric Car Experience
• Startup America Policy Challenge: Clean Energy
• New Battery Uses Seawater and Freshwater to Produce Electricity
• Battery Patent Apps Could Support Coda Automotive’s New Energy Storage Biz

The idea that electric vehicles could be used as power storage for the home is not new, but in current blackout-prone Japan, the country needs to find ways to secure some level of energy security.

Enter the Nissan LEAF. Recently, in Japan, Nissan unveiled a system for using its LEAF electric vehicle model to feed power back to a house at moments of power outage or shortage.

The two-way system made of lithium-ion batteries can help ease load on the grid during peak hours and allows EV owners to buy their power during the cheaper night hours. The system operated from a 200V single-phase three wire AC input. A switch on the display panel gives users the option to either charge the battery or supply power to the home. A display shows battery power level and information about current.

The Nissan Leaf batteries can store up to 24kWh of electricity, which is enough for an average Japanese home for two days. But, as BNet notes, this level of capacity wouldn’t work in the U.S.

In Japan, however, it does and it’s necessary. The country has been plagued with blackouts since the earthquake and tsunami in March. With the government’s decision to phase out nuclear, it needs to make the most of its power capacity while authorities think up and implements viable alternative energy systems.

Article by Antonio Pasolini, a Brazilian writer and video art curator based in London, UK. He holds a BA in journalism and an MA in film and television.

Related posts:

• New Electric Car in Israel Includes Battery Swap Subscriptions
• Analysts Say Battery Prices Are Key to Lower Electric Vehicle Prices
• Anxiety Over The Range of Electric Vehicles
• New MIT Battery Design Could Double Range of Electric Cars
• New Battery Uses Seawater and Freshwater to Produce Electricity