The US Department of Energy (DOE) has released a list of 38 new projects that will receive a share of $45 million to accelerate research and development of clean vehicle technologies. While John DeCicco, a prominent skeptic of federal funding for green cars, would likely give thumbs down to the DOE grants, a long list of private enterprises, universities and national labs were likely thrilled to hear about it.

While similar to the massive Advanced Vehicle Technology Manufacturing program, this new DOE project fund is a separate project tied into President Obama's recently announced Climate Action Plan. That plan is based on building a 21st century transportation sector that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The administration's overall campaign is tied into saving consumers $1.7 trillion at the pump and eliminating six billion metric tons of carbon pollution. The DOE's announcement of the 38 new projects also cites an alliance between the energy agency and the Department of Army. The Army is contributing $3 million in co-funding to support projects aimed at lightweighting and propulsion materials, batteries, fuels and lubricants.

The funded projects fall into a list of five categories: advanced lightweighting and propulsion materials will receive $10.2 million; advanced batteries $22.5 million; power electronics $8 million; advanced heating, ventilation and air conditioning systems $4 million; and fuels and lubricants $2.5 million. They're all based on making the technology more efficient, durable, lightweight, temperature resilient and cost effective. Recipients include Ford, General Motors and Chrysler. Here's a complete list (PDF) of all the 38 projects.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 15 Comments
      ffforte
      • 1 Year Ago
      A good start, but a drop in the bucket. Pocket change compared to much other, often worthless spending. Should be 10x that. Technology is where the USA supposedly has a competitive edge in the global economy, and facilitating that is a good thing.
      lad
      • 1 Year Ago
      Ever hear of The Battery Consortium? A Government Program funding the Big Three Auto Companies to develop traction batteries...that was funded on an on-going basis about 10--15 years ago...nothing was ever developed. I hope Obama's people do a better job of making sure there is progress on the projects and there are clear goals that the researchers must meet along the way. I hope this doesn't turn into another Cancer Research Boondoggle...we have been waiting for decades for Cancer cures and all we have so far is remission therapies...the research doctors have been well-financed over the years and given billions to find answers...where are the answers? God knows we've spent plenty of money to pay salaries. Time we started asking the tough questions about Government funding of research!
        Letstakeawalk
        • 1 Year Ago
        @lad
        The Volt battery was a result of that program.
          EVnerdGene
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Letstakeawalk
          ABC - Advanced Battery Consortium - I remember arguments that only the US auto makers should be eligible for the billions. Toyota and Honda were snubbed even though they were also major US automakers and taxpayers. The VOLT battery is made by LG Chem, a Korean company. I wonder how the billions of gov-dollars from the ABC helped LG Chem ? btw: LG Chem has more recently gotten hundreds of millions in gov-dollars to build their plant in Michigan, while most of the batteries so far (for the VOLT), are imported from Korea. no, you can't make this stuff up
      2 wheeled menace
      • 1 Year Ago
      Taxation is theft, but this isn't a bad use of stolen monies. :P
        Joeviocoe
        • 1 Year Ago
        @2 wheeled menace
        Congress shall have the power to Levy Taxes. The constitution mandates theft? Well, I never seen a Libertarian have such a problem with the Constitution before. Oh, wait, yes I have.
          2 wheeled menace
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Joeviocoe
          I'm not a libertarian.
          2 wheeled menace
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Joeviocoe
          And the constitution does not mandate theft, merely legitimizes it. I never insinuated that it mandates it.
          EVnerdGene
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Joeviocoe
          When referring to the US Constitution, the word constitution should be capitalized. $45M is indeed chump change. Just enough for the administration to trade brown noses; little else. btw: Someone mentioned the billions in funding for the Advanced Battery Consortium, with claims that without it the Volt would not be possible. hummmm - then GM buys batteries from LG Chem, a Korean company. blow
          EZEE
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Joeviocoe
          The power to levy taxes was one of the items cited on how the government could implement Obamacare, The question is, is there any power, any program, any thing that the government cannot do, as long d it associated with a tax? We already have eminent domain being used to take land from private individuals to give to corporations, like Walmart, opposed to the original 'public' definition, which meant schools, roads, hospitals, etc. we have interstate commerce clause saying the government can regulate what you grow in your garden, because you might eat your own food opposed to buying food tht would have been shipped via interstate commerce (do I need to cite a court case?). So what can the government not do? We interpreted in a right to privacy, the interpreted it right out again for the NSA. Why not take a pile of land and hand it to the oil companies? We can tax those we re taking it from, ship the oil across state lines, and use the extra taxes for the greater good! I have three things here tht say tht wold be constitutional! Yay!
      bluepongo1
      • 1 Year Ago
      I have no problem with research in schools, but these "too big to fail" 100 year old companies are getting "corporate welfare" for R&D on the taxpayer dime.
        Ryan
        • 1 Year Ago
        @bluepongo1
        Oh no, a whole 20 cents a year per American... out of the thousands I pay in Federal taxes, I'm not complaining about this expense. And if individuals were allowed to direct where their tax money went, I bet this would get more than $45 million.
          bluepongo1
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Ryan
          I guess you don't see how the system is propping up the status quo and slowing progress.
        mikeybyte1
        • 1 Year Ago
        @bluepongo1
        It is way less than what we throw at military companies to build and design new weapons. At least this spending is aimed at having a good return on investment. Compare that to building more tanks that we don't need so we can park them in a desert.
      EVnerdGene
      • 1 Year Ago
      And $6,000,000 per year for the girly-boys at the DOE to manage the program (like the ATVM program) ? Corporate welfare recipients GM and Ford posting significant profits - and we give them even more. Fund your own damn R&D This is chump change to them anyway - just nother wink-wink program while the US prints $1T per year ? ( $1T per year - QE3 )
    • Load More Comments
    Share This Photo X