Project Better Place is tackling small markets (Denmark, Israel) with eyes on a larger prize (the World).

With significant private backing, and a very high level audience. I’ll be honest though, the website is a bit short on meaty details… I can do with a bit less of Mr. Agassi’s speeches and statements of how much funding they have and name-dropping the who’s-who of infleuntials… and more on the details of the practical solutions of how they supply power to their “virtual oilfield” and certainly a lot more about the products themselves. So, where’s the beef! Ah…. that’s just me, I’m less a vision guy, and more a product guy.

I’m wondering what to make of the fact they model their business model on the mobile phone service model. It may make sense in the early days… as the cost of electric vehicle hardware is still lofty. However, private subsidies create so much consumer FUD and ultimately detach innovations from consumer needs as well as stifle direct competition among the subsidized goods makers.

Long term, I’d like to see a migration path to the vehicle lease/ownership model, with a gas station fill-up business model… something the mass consumer understands. This is what a free market will sustain with as little regulation as possible.

Some of my thoughts on how the service model could work are here. I’ll be keeping my eyes on PBP. So should other folks who want to see how these pilot programs to stimulate market growth succeed. They will determine to a large degree how the broader market takes shape.

I’d tell the Gasoline marketing companies (you know, the guys who own service stations) to develop a supply chain and service model to enable the following, and start rolling it out by 2011.

I’d tell automakers that 10% of their models sold in 2012 should utilize this infrastructure…

I call it Voltaire, for fun. Think replaceable power-cells (e.g. batteries).

Feel free to click on the above picture to get a closer look. The idea is simple. Take what we’re used to and instead of selling gasoline, sell batteries.

I’ve seen this concept before bandied about… I like it, the more I think about it.

Here’s why:

• Drivers will never have to worry about vehicle “down-time” associated with plug-in scenarios.
• Drivers retain user experience model of service stations which they know. Less re-training of mass behavior.
• Infrastructure model is the same as today. Gas stations can slowly roll out battery swap service… similar footprint to car washes. Relative low cost capital equipment. Initial costs are low, and scale. The amount of batteries required in charger-WIP (and thus charging equipment, obsolescence, hazard, etc) scales with the amount of demand at a given station.
• Economics of service stations remains. Snacks still sell. That’s where all the margin is in running service stations.
• Battery recharge/refurb. processes and equipment can be decoupled from consumer. Continuous improvement and innovations in processing/handling can differentiate service providers and justify a market for service providers
• Car always has fresh, quality-assured battery.
• Automobile drive-trains can be battery independent. Can still be Hybrid, battery only, multi-chemistry, etc. Carmakers can still differentiate drive-trains while relying on a industry standardized battery market.
• Battery chemistries can be decoupled from automobile platform life-cycle. Drivers can experience the benefits from improvements in battery technology throughout the lifetime of vehicle ownership.
• Better yet, call it a power-cell instead of a battery, and when fuel cells catch up in volumetric power density, they can play too.
• What else…

And here’s maybe why not:

• Defining standard battery package requires centralized body to expedite.  The more governmental this agency is, the less efficient it will be.  The more private, the less cohesive.  We need an intelligent benefactor with deep pockets.  Accepting term sheets now…
• Defining battery integration into vehicle platform may be difficult. The more rigid the standard, the less design freedom automakers.  Power systems interfacing is no laugh either.  It’s a serious and challenging engineering problem to solve.
• Engineering swapping mechanism may prove costly. Manual labor intensive operation is an option, but human error factors in.  Coming from a background on semi-automated manual processes, I am sure there is an economical way to simplify this operation.  And I’m all for stimulating technician-level, green-tech, jobs.
• Automotive industry would need to adopt and adjust to a new swappable battery subsystem. May result in core-battery + supplemental architecture… adding cost to platform.
• What else…

Stupid? Tell us why.

Naive? Tell us why.

Impossible? Tell us why.

You got something better? Tell us why.

There is either too much inaction, or too much secrecy in charting out where we are headed. How does the market organize quick enough to rescue us from rising gas prices? The auto industry has had far too many false starts… (yes GM, I’m talking to you) it’s time to plot a course and get this ball rolling. That we’ve been selling hybrids in this country for almost 12 years now… is a farse. They still run on gas, get less than 70 mpg, and are expensive… and Joe Jones on main street didn’t even know what a hybrid was 2 years ago. Hybrids are such a half measure compared to all-electric products that have been forced to go it alone in a risky premium niche (Yes, Tesla, I’m talking to and rooting for you).