

Shaky Battery Maker Claims a Breakthrough - rmah
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/12/business/energy-environment/a123-us-backed-battery-maker-claims-breakthrough.html?pagewanted=all

======
seanc
I think the criticism misses the point.

The reason why governments make very risky bets in new technology companies
(and pure research) is that unlike private investors, the government's upside
is spread across the whole industry. They tax them all, no matter which
company wins.

So even if A123 fails as a business, if the industry grows then the government
wins. No matter who buys A123's technology, the government will still get the
tax revenue. Even if A123's specific tech is no good, the employees will still
go on to other battery companies and help the industry grow that way. The only
way the government loses is if the whole idea of improved batteries turns out
to be a dud.

To put it another way, imagine if the government invested in an early solid
state laser company. Even if that one went belly up, the laser industry paid
out so many tax dollars there is no way the government suffered a net loss.

Some industries will grow no matter what the government does. However others
can stand to use the boost of government investment, and I think green energy
technologies like solar and batteries qualify.

------
colanderman
This article is from yesterday, the actual announcement is here:
[http://www.a123systems.com/lithium-ion-battery-
technology.ht...](http://www.a123systems.com/lithium-ion-battery-
technology.htm)

------
planetguy
_The success or failure of the new technology may well determine the fate of
A123. It will also render an early verdict on Mr. Obama’s broader push to
promote electric cars and build a domestic industry to develop and manufacture
advanced batteries to run them_

This sounds like a pretty good reason not to believe anything you hear, one
way or the other, about this new "breakthrough" battery technology until
either (a) you see it parked in your driveway or (b) it's 2022 and you don't.

