New Energy Technologies: Where Should America Place Its Investment Bets?

The new U.S. Administration appears poised to stimulate investment in domestic energy efforts in the form of rebates, loans, grants, and tax credits for renewable energy producers, advanced battery research, smart electricity grid, and clean technologies.

Most forecasters see a necessary mix of technologies and they will satisfy just some of the U.S. demand. Some new technologies will fail if not adequately subsidized in their development (short-term politics) or if they create low demand (long-term economics). Those that survive may take decades to mature or to contribute significantly.

Here are several recent viewpoints regarding technologies that are said to merit stimulation:

BIOFUELS:
President Obama says he will require 60 billion gallons annually of advanced biofuels by 2030. This is double the current 30 billion gallons by 2020 mandated by Congress.

Biorefinery capacity for biofuels is about 11 billion gallons, mostly corn ethanol and soybean biodiesel, equivalent to about 7% of US annual gasoline consumption. Current venture capital investment in biofuels is only one fourth the investment for solar technology.

BATTERIES:
John Peterson, energy stock blogger from Seeking Alpha, is a big advocate for alternate energy storage at the infrastructure (electricity grid) or consumer (car) level and believes it is worthy of more investment.
(http://seekingalpha.com/article/117782-lead-acid-lead-carbon-batteries-the-only-option-for-average-consumer)

He claims that lithium-ion batteries, now at a manufacturing cost of $1500 per kWh are not recyclable, take too long to recharge, are far too high performance and long-lived for most consumer needs, and can never be economical for most storage applications.

Despite being heavier and bulkier, new lead acid battery technologies have the promise of earlier advances in cost, ability to be recycled, reasonable lifetimes (recharge cycles), and application to automobiles.

ELECTRIC VEHICLES:
Shai Agassi is former SAP president and now at BetterPlace, http://www.betterplace.com/, "a venture-backed company that aims to reduce global dependency on oil through the creation of a market-based transportation infrastructure."

He plans to implement a business model whereby consumers who buy electric cars have plenty of recharge spots. Consumers would drive on contracts that account for electricity consumed, access to network software, battery switching service every 100 miles, and the battery (which the car owner does not own). He says a lead acid battery may weigh 550 pounds, but it takes you 155 miles without air conditioning. He claims batteries beat fuel on efficiency, affordability, and convenience;what was missing was the business model to be competitive with $25 barrel oil.

In addition, at night batteries become distributed storage for electrical sources producing at off demand peak time. For example, see http://www.ferc.gov/news/media-alerts/2007/2007-3/10-22-07-v2g.pdf).

The first prototype systems for a plug in electric vehicle grid are in Israel and Denmark; the intent is to create enterprises whose adoption have have been accelerated by government tax policy.

FUELS FROM COAL:
It appears that, as the largest nonrenewable energy resource in the US, coal continues to be overlooked for major new investment. Coal's main use in the US is for generating half of the US electricity requirements.


With 27% of world's proven recoverable reserves, US coal could be used more widely or exported. Critics point out how "unclean" coal is, causing CO2 and methane (greenhouse gases), SO2 (acid rain), NOx (smog) and mercury contamination.


The coal industry and its users have come a long way developing "clean coal technologies" to reduce these pollutants. Other countries are meeting fuel demands or industrial needs by utilizing improvements on old technologies that gasify or liquefy coal, creating basic organic chemicals and diesel fuel.

Which New Energy Technologies do you think deserve investment?

Dr. Barry E. Bowen, the author of this blog spot, is a Vice President of The CECON Group, Inc. and a member of CECON's technical staff. Dr. Bowen received his Ph.D in Analytical Chemistry from the University of Florida and has more than 35 years of experience in business leadership, human resources, technical project management, classified projects, government funding and contracting, and high performance materials.

How to Be an Effective Expert Witness in Science & Technology Law Cases

By far the most important requirement for an expert witness is that you know the par­ticular subject matter in which you are testifying. Then, you must be able to document your expertise through academic credentials, peer reviewed publications, and in-depth actual experience. Finally, you must look and sound as if you know your stuff – you must be convincing, presentable, credible and unshakable. A tall order.

Prevailing in technical law cases often depends almost as much on the quality of experts as on the skill of attorneys. By quality I mean not only technical knowledge and credibility, but also such factors as stage presence, articulation, self-control, creativity, and confidence. These characteristics are especially important in court appearances.

The opposing counsel can challenge your qualifications as an expert witness in order to reduce the impact of your report, deposition and testimony. This challenge can range from probing questions intended discredit your technical option and skills, or to embarrass you or throw you off your stride. Frequently opposing attorneys will ask challenging questions about your university grades and degrees, your professional licenses, your prior employment credibility or your past expert witness work. There is no end to the list of tactics the opposing council will employ to discredit your impact. You can't get impatient, you always must remain calm and courteous and sometimes you just have to have a thick skin.

Recently I sat through a five-hour deposition while five attorneys were trying to discredit my credibility and testimony. The first 90 minutes was a tedious review of my back­ground, as well as irrelevant personal questions. This inquisition was clearly an attempt to show that I was a "hired gun" who could not be trusted. Later, they asked many questions related to the substance of the case in many different ways with the objective of finding contradictions.

You should testify only those cases in which, in good conscience, you can testify honestly and objectively. You should think of yourself as a teacher instead of an advocate for the party that retained you. You must always be honest and represent correctly the technical and circumstantial facts as you know them.

You must prepare yourself for writing a technical report, deposition, and trial. You should read everything thing your client attorney can provide about the case and ask any questions that may occur to you. Then, you should review everything you can find about the subject area involved in the case in order to be knowledgeable about recent developments or relevant reports. With your attorney, you should agree on key issues and the strategy of the case so you can support his/her arguments.

I can think of two cases in which extensive research and preparation made a big difference in the outcome of a case. While looking at the patented technology for a clothes deodorizer in a patent infringement suit, we found prior art in an out­ of-print book that was not picked up in the patent, academic, or trade literature. This facilitated a satisfactory settlement for the defense. Likewise, in a personal injury case, we unexpectedly found in the literature the probable presence of trace quantities of phosgene, a toxic chemical, when a commercial cleaner passed through an arcing electric appliance.

In a deposition, witnesses are questioned under oath by opposing counsel and their testimony is recorded and becomes part of the record of the case. In a trial, witnesses are questioned both by the opposing counsel and the counsel for whom they are appearing. It is most important that your trial testimony is consistent with your deposition testimony. At a trial you are usually appearing before a jury, so you must not only be careful of your spoken words but also your stage presence and believability. Jurors tend to base their opinions on which expert witness makes a better presentation and appearance, especially when the technology involved is complicat­ed.

It is important to tell the truth. Answer questions concisely with a "yes" or "no" when called for unless the question is unclear, in which case you should ask for a clarification. Don't answer until the attorney has completed asking the question. Never appear hostile, arrogant, or unresponsive.

You should dress conservatively. You should stay calm. You should look the cross-examiner in the eye and sit upright with good posture.

By participating in the legal process as a technical expert witness, you are serving a client and a legal system which needs your expertise. The experience can be productive, individually stimulating and professionally satisfying. I recommend it.

What do you think?

• Have I emphasized the most important points for being a good technical expert witness?
• What other points would you emphasize?
• Do you think it is worth the effort to subject yourself to tough attorneys and the legal process to serve as an expert witness?

Dr. Stanley Tocker, the author of this blog spot, is the Executive Vice President of The CECON Group Inc. and a member of CECON's technical staff. Dr. Tocker is a highly qualified and experienced expert witness and was named to the Delaware Environmental Appeals Board by the Governor of Delaware. A graduate of Johns Hopkins, he received his Ph.D. in Organic Chemistry from Florida State University. His specialties are organic syn­thesis, polymers, pesticides, formulations, and patent strategy.

The CECON Group Blog Guidelines

PURPOSE

The purpose of the CECON BLOG is to stimulate and expand constructive discussion and social networking among scientists, engineers, and technical business specialists that engage in professional consulting.

GUIDELINES

1. Blog posters are personally responsible for the content they publish on this blog site.

2. Remember your postings are open to all: avoid private information, be courteous, constructive, and add to the social dialog. Protect your privacy and the privacy of others.

3. Respect your audience. Don't use ethnic slurs, personal insults, obscenity, or engage in unacceptable conduct. Avoid topics of politics and religion.

4. Write in the first person and make it clear that you are speaking for yourself and not in behalf of another.

5. Do not disclose proprietary or confidential information of your own, other individuals, companies, or institutions.

6. Respect copyright, fair use, and financial disclosure laws.

7. When possible and appropriate, link back to the source of your information.

8. Use citations as necessary to give credit to others for their ideas and insights.

9. Try to add value by providing worthwhile information and perspective.