There was a time when some people thought foam carbon composites technology would give lead-acid chemistry a new lease on life in a world of hybrid and hybrid-electric vehicles. The great hope was the carbon foam batteries could deliver enough energy density to make the transition, and Firefly Energy was going to lead the way.

Not anymore. Various newspaper reports indicate that the Peoria-based Firefly went out of business last week, a death that appears to be more or less caused by the company’s inability to impress the DOE that its battery design would be a game-changer or that its business plan would be successful. In other words, Firefly is a casualty of the (defensible) decision by DOE to select strategic “winners” - and by omission, “losers” – in next-generation energy storage systems.

I’m sure there are those around Firefly that feel they got shafted, and it is unfortunate that money was lost and jobs eliminated, but it seems they got their chance. The company received several rounds of development funding from the DOD and was backed by several venture capitalist firms. Prototypes of Firefly’s 3D² batteries were submitted to the DOE and some batteries were tested in buses in Peoria, but the DOE apparently felt that the densities and benefits were exaggerated and lacked verification, and development of improvements was going too slow.

Firefly, not unexpectedly, disagreed with the DOE’s assessment, but alas, the battery business is very competitive in the U.S., but the stakes and competition are even more cutthroat on the world scale.

Have an interest in nuclear-related studies and research? The DOE wants you! The agency has just announced that it is seeking applicants for $5 million worth of scholarships and fellowships as part of its efforts to recruit and train the next generation of nuclear scientists and engineers.

This opportunity is open to any student enrolled in two-year, four-year and graduate engineering and science programs related to nuclear energy at accredited U.S. universities and colleges.

Besides some obvious studies categories such as nuclear physics, materials and engineering, DOE says it is also willing to consider applicants from mechanical and electrical engineering programs as well as chemistry, radiochemistry, health physics and even nuclear policy tracks. The door is also open to students in two-year programs certificate programs or minors in nuclear power, maintenance, radiation protection and engineering technologies.

DOE says the undergrad scholarships will average $5,000 per year, but it says that it also has budgeted for three $25,000 scholarships for distinguished undergraduate students. The maximum award for fellowships will be $50,000 per year over three years. Winners will be notified by June 2010; the actual awards will be distributed in July 2010.

The application deadline is April 26, 2010. There are links to the scholarship and fellowship applications through DOE’s Nuclear Energy University Program website.

The fierce urgency of now tomorrow at the DOE:

FYI, the average for all federal agencies is 30%.

Still glue in the gears at the NSF, too:

(Either JavaScript is not active or you are using an old version of Adobe Flash Player. Please install the newest Flash Player.)

John Marra spoke at the MCARE conference in February 2010 on new and emerging approaches to the thorny issue of managing nuclear wastes, and the fundamental changes that need to be made. Concerns about nuclear wastes have plagued nuclear power operators for decades and the Obama administration’s call for building a new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants and commitments for over $8 billion in loan guarantees for the construction of two new nuclear reactors in the United States gives these concerns new meaning.

Although Marra takes some time to explain the political and technical context of a “nuclear renaissance,” his main points have to do with a roadmap for applying new techniques for converting spent fuel into safer and reusable assets, and moving to a fuel-recycle model rather than the existing “once-through” model. He also discusses the coming Gen III and IV reactors, and opportunities for the most significant R&D gains.

Marra is an associate laboratory director at the Savannah River National Lab where he works on Strategic Initiative Development. He has worked for over two decades in the management and treatment of high-level radioactive waste, development and application of advanced materials and advanced chemical process applications. He has coauthored numerous publications on the application of ceramic materials in the nuclear industry. Marra is also a past-president of ACerS, an Fellow of the Society and a past chair and past trustee/director of the organization’s Nuclear & Environmental Technology Division.

37 minutes.

Like shootin’ fish in a barrel. Me, six days ago:

Prediction: Tom will state that Bloom Energy changes everything!

Today from Friedman:

Several months ago, though, Sridhar took me into the parking lot behind Google’s Silicon Valley headquarters and showed me the inside of one of his Bloom Boxes, the size of a small shipping container. Inside were stacks of solid oxide fuel cells, stored in cylinders, and all kinds of whiz-bang parts that I did not understand.

[ . . . ]

Our politics has gotten so impossible lately, too many Americans have stopped dreaming.

Here’s my latest scorecard on Tommy’s ideas:

• Free trade!
• Invade the oil cartels! (aka, Suck On This)
  
• Free trade, except for Silicon Valley!
• Ambien!

Actually, he writes something even stupider today:

All I know is this: If we put a simple price on carbon, these new technologies would have a chance to blossom

There is already a simple price on carbon and TF knows it. Unfortunately, it is mispriced and artificial because of various policies, taxes and subsidies that will continue because there is an army of lobbyists screaming ZOMG! REAL CARBON PRICING IS THE END OF CIVILIZATION, and they know they have pet-dog pundits like Friedman who will provide the cover they need.