Why Ener1 Went Bankrupt

Ener1's bankruptcy casts a cloud over the future of Li-ion batteries for EVs

2 min read
Why Ener1 Went Bankrupt

It’s hard to deny that when Ener1 announced that it had built “a pilot nanotechnology-based manufacturing facility to fabricate electrodes for high discharge rate, lithium-ion batteries” that it sounded like we were about to witness a new successful nanotechnology company.

The fate of the company might have been foreseen, however, if one examined the use of this technology for this particular application area—namely Li-ion batteries for electric vehicles (EVs).

What was likely whispered among some battery experts became a bit more public when the US Secretary of Energy, Stephen Chu, implied over a year ago that the Li-ion battery might not be the best solution for powering EVs.

Just to be clear, I would like to see some technology replace the internal combustion engine for powering automobiles. I just don’t think it’s clear that the Li-ion battery is the best alternative.

It would seem that the marketplace agreed. In announcing its Chapter 11 bankruptcy yesterday, Ener1’s CEO, Alex Sorkin, acknowledged, “Our business plan was impacted when demand for lithium-ion batteries slowed due to lower-than-expected adoption for electric passenger vehicles."

If I may turn Mr. Sorkin’s assessment around somewhat, it might be that there are customers for electric passenger vehicles but those vehicles need to have the same level of functionality as the fossil-fuel-powered variety and come in at the same, or at least competitive, price. So, come up with a power source that does that and the demand for electric vehicles is there, especially at the current price for gasoline. It may be that the demand for EVs exists, just not for Li-ion-battery-powered EVs.

The Chapter 11 debt restructuring will allow the company to recapitalize itself to the tune of $81 million, but one has to wonder what $81 million will accomplish that a matching grant of $118 million from the US government couldn’t.

It seems accepted wisdom that technologies currently exist for eliminating a fossil-fuel economy and that just acts of will—including capital investment—will simply make this happen. But perhaps we’re not as far along as we imagine in the technological struggle or in the strategic application of capital to bring those technologies to market.

The Conversation (0)

3D-Stacked CMOS Takes Moore’s Law to New Heights

When transistors can’t get any smaller, the only direction is up

10 min read
An image of stacked squares with yellow flat bars through them.
Emily Cooper
Green

Perhaps the most far-reaching technological achievement over the last 50 years has been the steady march toward ever smaller transistors, fitting them more tightly together, and reducing their power consumption. And yet, ever since the two of us started our careers at Intel more than 20 years ago, we’ve been hearing the alarms that the descent into the infinitesimal was about to end. Yet year after year, brilliant new innovations continue to propel the semiconductor industry further.

Along this journey, we engineers had to change the transistor’s architecture as we continued to scale down area and power consumption while boosting performance. The “planar” transistor designs that took us through the last half of the 20th century gave way to 3D fin-shaped devices by the first half of the 2010s. Now, these too have an end date in sight, with a new gate-all-around (GAA) structure rolling into production soon. But we have to look even further ahead because our ability to scale down even this new transistor architecture, which we call RibbonFET, has its limits.

Keep Reading ↓Show less
{"imageShortcodeIds":[]}