The Benefits of Long-Term Batteries Are Clear, but Their Feasibility Is Uncertain

EVs with long-term batteries are expected to be competitive with gasoline-powered vehicles in terms of performance and cost. The Benefits of Mid-Term Batteries Are Unclear, but Feasibility Has Largely Been Demonstrated

According to USABC officials, batteries that achieve the mid-term goals are likely to be feasible but vehicles with them will have a much shorter driving range than gasoline-powered vehicles and are likely to cost more. The consortium’s original budget was $262 million for 1991 through 1995. USABC officials hope to extend the cooperative agreement beyond 1995 to complete the development effort. In addition, the contracting officer said that the consortium is required by the regulations governing the cooperative agreement to conduct close-out audits of battery developers’ costs and, if necessary, to request DOE’s assistance in conducting such audits. Provisions for repayment were negotiated between DOE and USABC in the cooperative agreement and subsequently between USABC and the battery development contractors. USABC’s Contracts and CRADAs

	Overview

USABC has entered into eight contracts for the development of advanced battery technologies. As table VI.1 shows, as of fiscal year 1995, DOE had received appropriations of nearly $96 million for USABC. Comments From the Department of Energy

Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

The objectives of the review were to determine (1) the progress that the United States Advanced Battery Consortium has made toward reaching its long-term and mid-term goals; (2) the funding that has been spent thus far and the additional amounts, if any, that will be needed; and (3) DOE’s role in managing the USABC. Electric Power Research Institute

An official of the Electric Power Research Institute who represents the electric utilities on the USABC Management Committee. In addition, Saft is developing a long-term battery.
Why GAO Did This Study

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed the development of advanced batteries for electric vehicles, focusing on the: (1) progress that the United States Advanced Battery Consortium (USABC) has made in reaching its long-term and mid-term research goals; (2) funding that has been spent as of fiscal year 1995 and the additional amounts, if any, that will be needed; and (3) Department of Energy's (DOE) role in managing the consortium.

What GAO Found

GAO found that: (1) the consortium's long-term goal is to develop a battery that allows electric vehicles to compete fully with gasoline-powered vehicles in terms of performance and cost, but the feasibility of such a battery has not been demonstrated; (2) USABC is developing a mid-term battery that allows an electric vehicle to travel at least 100 miles under real world conditions; (3) electric vehicles using the mid-term battery would not likely achieve much commercial success, due to the battery's high costs and low driving range; (4) the consortium's budget for 1991 through 1995 was $262 million, but USABC spent only $123 million through March 1995, because of technical problems and delays in negotiating agreements; (5) the original USABC budget should sustain USABC initial research efforts through 1997, after which USABC will seek $38 million from DOE to complete the development of batteries meeting its long-term goals; (6) DOE reviews and approves USABC contracts and agreements with battery developers and national laboratories and participates in USABC management and technical committees; and (7) DOE plans an audit of USABC and will require USABC to conduct close-out audits of the individual battery developers.