When we last brought you news about Firefly nearly two years ago, it was of a more hopeful nature: I had a chance to sit down with the company’s then-Senior Vice President, Mil Ovan, and discuss Firefly’s future.
At the time, Firefly seemed like it was set to take off. With lucrative military and private contracts to change out those institutions’ old hat lead-acid batteries with new ones that were supposed to provide much higher durability, longer charge capacity, and less sensitivity to temperature changes in a lighter and more compact package.
Well, that future is no more. Firefly has officially closed up shop and filed for bankruptcy. Chapter 7 to be exact. The one where all that’s left of the company is liquidated in a fire sale.
Firefly’s claim to fame came in the form of a lead-acid battery that, instead of having heavy, corrodable lead plates, had graphite foam impregnated with lead. That seemingly simple innovation accomplished many key things, including using up to 70% less lead, up to 50% reduction in weight and size, much faster recharge and discharge capabilities, much better cold weather performance, and greatly increased lifetime and durability.
Plus, because it was made with lead, the battery could be manufactured using domestic mineral supplies instead of relying on foreign countries for lithium. To top it off, lead already has a robust recycling program in the US where almost 98% of it gets recycled.
Firefly seemed to have everything going for it. So what happened? According to many reports, Firefly, founded by Mil Ovan and CEO Ed Williams 7 years ago after it was spun off from Caterpillar, couldn’t find the investors needed to get their product to market. You could blame all sorts of issues for this.
Perhaps, in the end, the product was really a non-starter and they couldn’t figure out a way to make it a reality at a price people would swallow? But based on large initial investments from private firms and backing from the US military, I don’t think the actual feasibility of their product was a problem. Lead is cheap, and scaling their already existing manufacturing techniques up to the commercial level likely wasn’t the culprit.
Certainly the financial meltdown and the drying up pool of investors had something to do with it. Let’s face it, lead really isn’t all that sexy. Even the phrase “lead-acid” doesn’t shine a candle to the sexiness of “lithium-ion.” But other next generation battery companies were able to make it through the financial meltdown, so why couldn’t Firefly?
The answer comes from Ovan himself. As quoted over at Green Car Congress, Ovan, who actually left the company last month, said that their military contracts worth more than $5 million weren’t enough to keep the company running. But he also added that the company was disappointed when Firefly failed to get a share of the $2 billion stimulus money distributed by the federal government for advanced battery research. Those funds were almost exclusively distributed to lithium-ion companies.
Truly, the feds seemed to have picked their own favorite sweetheart battery technology as the winner in the next generation battery race. Certainly lithium-ion is a great technology, and it seems that with research we might even be able to increase its capacity by 10 times within the next decade. But that doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t also be pursuing other types of advanced batteries too. For instance, Firefly’s lead-acid technology could have been exactly what the trucking industry needed to be able to stop idling all night.
If we want our various industries to continue to innovate in an environment that brings the greatest amount of solutions to our problems in the shortest period of time, the government can’t pick the winners and losers. Having a large variety of solutions available to consumers means that we can solve our problems quicker. Creating an environment that encourages innovation means supporting all promising companies equally. By killing off Firefly, we may have lost an important solution.
Source: Earth2Tech
PDF 
This is 38-50 WH/Kilo technology where Li-ion is already way past 100WH/Kilo. Why would the feds support this?
That’s a good question Chris, but like I said, lithium-ion technology provides solutions to different problems than lead-acid. For one, the Firefly battery would have been much cheaper than an equivalent sized lithium-ion battery. For trucking applications, lithium-ion is overkill and far too expensive. The FF lead-acid battery would have been perfect for that. Also, for military applications, lithium-ion is too finicky and not robust enough. The FF lead-acid battery would have been able to withstand the intense military use. But, you’re right, when you just look at the numbers on paper and compare the two technologies without thinking of them in different applications, FFs battery tech was a non-starter. I can see how Federal bean counters wouldn’t have been able to see past that.
That’s a good question Chris, but like I said, lithium-ion technology provides solutions to different problems than lead-acid. For one, the Firefly battery would have been much cheaper than an equivalent sized lithium-ion battery. For trucking applications, lithium-ion is overkill and far too expensive. The FF lead-acid battery would have been perfect for that. Also, for military applications, lithium-ion is too finicky and not robust enough. The FF lead-acid battery would have been able to withstand the intense military use. But, you’re right, when you just look at the numbers on paper and compare the two technologies without thinking of them in different applications, FFs battery tech was a non-starter. I can see how Federal bean counters wouldn’t have been able to see past that.
This is 38-50 WH/Kilo technology where Li-ion is already way past 100WH/Kilo. Why would the feds support this?
That’s a good question Chris, but like I said, lithium-ion technology provides solutions to different problems than lead-acid. For one, the Firefly battery would have been much cheaper than an equivalent sized lithium-ion battery. For trucking applications, lithium-ion is overkill and far too expensive. The FF lead-acid battery would have been perfect for that. Also, for military applications, lithium-ion is too finicky and not robust enough. The FF lead-acid battery would have been able to withstand the intense military use. But, you’re right, when you just look at the numbers on paper and compare the two technologies without thinking of them in different applications, FFs battery tech was a non-starter. I can see how Federal bean counters wouldn’t have been able to see past that.
Its simple, goverment money was needed for more “Fool Cell” pork projects, instead of creating jobs. Where are the Federal bean counters when the Hydrogen Fuel cell pork projects are on the table. At least Firefly had a product in production that worked and fit a real need. If Hydrogen fuel cell cars had to pay their actual start-up and production costs they would be dead too, another “non-starter”. The bonus money spent on a couple of wall street CEO’s or a few Fuel cell cars should have been able to keep the company going.
Its simple, goverment money was needed for more “Fool Cell” pork projects, instead of creating jobs. Where are the Federal bean counters when the Hydrogen Fuel cell pork projects are on the table. At least Firefly had a product in production that worked and fit a real need. If Hydrogen fuel cell cars had to pay their actual start-up and production costs they would be dead too, another “non-starter”. The bonus money spent on a couple of wall street CEO’s or a few Fuel cell cars should have been able to keep the company going.
Its simple, goverment money was needed for more “Fool Cell” pork projects, instead of creating jobs. Where are the Federal bean counters when the Hydrogen Fuel cell pork projects are on the table. At least Firefly had a product in production that worked and fit a real need. If Hydrogen fuel cell cars had to pay their actual start-up and production costs they would be dead too, another “non-starter”. The bonus money spent on a couple of wall street CEO’s or a few Fuel cell cars should have been able to keep the company going.
This is an excellent example of what is wrong with the Federal Government making Grants to certain technologies for subsidies, rather than using an exemption from taxes as the only subsidy.
The Government chooses the winner, even when they are wrong, while preventing the better technology from developing and growing to supply an economically viable product to the market.
In case you may have forgotten the Food and Drug Administration has approved all of the drugs that are now being sued for causing health damage. What makes you believe that they can do any better outside the drug industry?
The only regularly successful government agency, based on success of their programs is the military. They won WW1, WW11, settled Korea in a satisfactory manner, and were on the way to a win in Viet Nam when Lyndon Johnson conceded to the NORTH. Theyu won Desert Storm, and the second Iraqi conflict and are in the process of turning the country back to the citizens of Iraq.
Contrast this with the success rate of the congress with their programs. Social Security is near bankruptcy, and only near because of continual tax increases. The same can truthfully be said of Medicare and Medicaid. National unemployment insurance run by congress is continually running out of funds.
The Federal Government should NEVER be allowed to choose the winner arbitrarily. Their record is horribly and completely unacceptable.
This is an excellent example of what is wrong with the Federal Government making Grants to certain technologies for subsidies, rather than using an exemption from taxes as the only subsidy.
The Government chooses the winner, even when they are wrong, while preventing the better technology from developing and growing to supply an economically viable product to the market.
In case you may have forgotten the Food and Drug Administration has approved all of the drugs that are now being sued for causing health damage. What makes you believe that they can do any better outside the drug industry?
The only regularly successful government agency, based on success of their programs is the military. They won WW1, WW11, settled Korea in a satisfactory manner, and were on the way to a win in Viet Nam when Lyndon Johnson conceded to the NORTH. Theyu won Desert Storm, and the second Iraqi conflict and are in the process of turning the country back to the citizens of Iraq.
Contrast this with the success rate of the congress with their programs. Social Security is near bankruptcy, and only near because of continual tax increases. The same can truthfully be said of Medicare and Medicaid. National unemployment insurance run by congress is continually running out of funds.
The Federal Government should NEVER be allowed to choose the winner arbitrarily. Their record is horribly and completely unacceptable.
The government has proven wholly inept at business, because it was never formed as a business entity, and has no incentive to profit the taxpayers who are stockholders of the nation.
Political campaigns cost money, and money spent on politics comes back as favorable legislation and pork. On the beltway, it is axiomatic that you have to spend money to get money. Therefore, even the best business operators will find themselves at a disadvantage compared to the business with political friends.
In addition, when the government is not packing the pork barrel, they tend to favor whichever technology offers the most “Gee Whiz”. This is both an effort to provide our nation with the best technology, and a Public Relations campaign.
The best examples of this “Gee Whiz” are the Apollo missions. The moon landings provided only a trickle of profitable technology for the money poured into the project.
The causes and effects of this story of batteries are nothing new, only a reminder that we do not really have a free market. Governments all over the world meddle, to give their own industries an advantage in the world market, ours doesn’t do the job as well as some others.
Because of our false free market, we have money shamelessly lavished on some sectors of our economy, while our technology and manufacturing sectors are outsourced, and companies that might have bridged a gap between current technology and the next level are cheated.
It is hard to get to the next level of technology without that bridge, so now we have to import that, too.
The government has proven wholly inept at business, because it was never formed as a business entity, and has no incentive to profit the taxpayers who are stockholders of the nation.
Political campaigns cost money, and money spent on politics comes back as favorable legislation and pork. On the beltway, it is axiomatic that you have to spend money to get money. Therefore, even the best business operators will find themselves at a disadvantage compared to the business with political friends.
In addition, when the government is not packing the pork barrel, they tend to favor whichever technology offers the most “Gee Whiz”. This is both an effort to provide our nation with the best technology, and a Public Relations campaign.
The best examples of this “Gee Whiz” are the Apollo missions. The moon landings provided only a trickle of profitable technology for the money poured into the project.
The causes and effects of this story of batteries are nothing new, only a reminder that we do not really have a free market. Governments all over the world meddle, to give their own industries an advantage in the world market, ours doesn’t do the job as well as some others.
Because of our false free market, we have money shamelessly lavished on some sectors of our economy, while our technology and manufacturing sectors are outsourced, and companies that might have bridged a gap between current technology and the next level are cheated.
It is hard to get to the next level of technology without that bridge, so now we have to import that, too.
The government has proven wholly inept at business, because it was never formed as a business entity, and has no incentive to profit the taxpayers who are stockholders of the nation.
Political campaigns cost money, and money spent on politics comes back as favorable legislation and pork. On the beltway, it is axiomatic that you have to spend money to get money. Therefore, even the best business operators will find themselves at a disadvantage compared to the business with political friends.
In addition, when the government is not packing the pork barrel, they tend to favor whichever technology offers the most “Gee Whiz”. This is both an effort to provide our nation with the best technology, and a Public Relations campaign.
The best examples of this “Gee Whiz” are the Apollo missions. The moon landings provided only a trickle of profitable technology for the money poured into the project.
The causes and effects of this story of batteries are nothing new, only a reminder that we do not really have a free market. Governments all over the world meddle, to give their own industries an advantage in the world market, ours doesn’t do the job as well as some others.
Because of our false free market, we have money shamelessly lavished on some sectors of our economy, while our technology and manufacturing sectors are outsourced, and companies that might have bridged a gap between current technology and the next level are cheated.
It is hard to get to the next level of technology without that bridge, so now we have to import that, too.
I have been tracking progress made by Firefly and had great hopes from this battry technology!I tend to agree with you Nick that funding is available to things in “Fashion”,Lion Batteries being the in thing!I wud like to to some how continue to support Firefly!It will be possible if it is made available to user at say about 200 USD/kwh!I think,it is possible to acheive this if made in larger quantity!Can i get in touch with Firefly Scientists? Gudluk to Firefly!
I have been tracking progress made by Firefly and had great hopes from this battry technology!I tend to agree with you Nick that funding is available to things in “Fashion”,Lion Batteries being the in thing!I wud like to to some how continue to support Firefly!It will be possible if it is made available to user at say about 200 USD/kwh!I think,it is possible to acheive this if made in larger quantity!Can i get in touch with Firefly Scientists? Gudluk to Firefly!
I have been tracking progress made by Firefly and had great hopes from this battry technology!I tend to agree with you Nick that funding is available to things in “Fashion”,Lion Batteries being the in thing!I wud like to to some how continue to support Firefly!It will be possible if it is made available to user at say about 200 USD/kwh!I think,it is possible to acheive this if made in larger quantity!Can i get in touch with Firefly Scientists? Gudluk to Firefly!
A long winded article never touching on the obvious. FireFly energy never made its technological paradigm available to the commons, the public. The financers at FireFly know every shade tree mechanic or small garage would start converting to electric cars. FireFly is going out of business to protect the status quo and not the common American.
A long winded article never touching on the obvious. FireFly energy never made its technological paradigm available to the commons, the public. The financers at FireFly know every shade tree mechanic or small garage would start converting to electric cars. FireFly is going out of business to protect the status quo and not the common American.
A long winded article never touching on the obvious. FireFly energy never made its technological paradigm available to the commons, the public. The financers at FireFly know every shade tree mechanic or small garage would start converting to electric cars. FireFly is going out of business to protect the status quo and not the common American.
It is easy to blame government for everything. We forget that WE are government and we have to make ourselves acountable and demand it in government. If your party is the borrow and spend party or the party of no YOU are acountable by your support. If your party is tax and spend YOU are acountable by your support if these policies are irresponsible.Write congress or get involved in a different party but dont blame government if it is not working, start working yourself
It is easy to blame government for everything. We forget that WE are government and we have to make ourselves acountable and demand it in government. If your party is the borrow and spend party or the party of no YOU are acountable by your support. If your party is tax and spend YOU are acountable by your support if these policies are irresponsible.Write congress or get involved in a different party but dont blame government if it is not working, start working yourself
If you believe that investors act rationally and in their self-interest, then the logical conclusion is that Firefly couldn’t produce a competitive product. If they could have, they would have been able to attract customers and investors. It’s easy to say the government shouldn’t pick winners and losers, but people would be screaming just as loudly if the government had chosen to award funding to companies that have no chance of commercial success, even if this might promote “diversity.” The government is not picking winners and losers, as much as it is giving additional support to the companies that the free market has already chosen, as reflected by private investment or stock valuation.
If you believe that investors act rationally and in their self-interest, then the logical conclusion is that Firefly couldn’t produce a competitive product. If they could have, they would have been able to attract customers and investors. It’s easy to say the government shouldn’t pick winners and losers, but people would be screaming just as loudly if the government had chosen to award funding to companies that have no chance of commercial success, even if this might promote “diversity.” The government is not picking winners and losers, as much as it is giving additional support to the companies that the free market has already chosen, as reflected by private investment or stock valuation.