Let me ask you a question in a different field. In the field of space, for example, we have a lot of research being financed primarily by the Government, either directly or indirectly. Is there any part of this space research which has been helpful in any of these fields that you know of?

Mr. BOGAN. The only one I can recall at the moment, the relation that I can see, is these battery companies. One of them testified the other day, and is our sole source, and has done, and probably the others have done, work in that field to supply those energy cells, batteries, whatever they term them. They keep us advised of, and informed on, those developments.

At the moment, that type of merchandise, if you want to call it that, is far out of the realm of commercial marketable equipment. But the technology is passed on and is available to us.

Senator HARTKE. Specifically, as far as you know, have there been no concrete results to this field which would have come from the research being done by NASA?

Mr. BOGAN. I wouldn't want to say "No" to that without searching the subject a little within our own organization. I can't put my finger on anything specific.

Senator HARTKE. I would hope that any subsequent witnesses which have help in this field will volunteer that information, in case I am not here.

Let me come back to the question which the Senator from Maine was talking about, and that is this question of smaller operations producing the type of vehicle which would have sufficient value to be utilized. Technically speaking, I mean, as far as mass production is concerned, are we not faced here in this country at the present time with this type of situation: whether the Government or some small independent enterprise develops a vehicle of the type which these two bills envision, they would still have to come to one of the four major automobile manufacturers in order to provide for the mass production of such a vehicle before it could be available to the public? Isn't that true?

Mr. BOGAN. I don't know whether I am qualified to answer that. The thought occurs to me that you have golf carts manufactured by the dozen right now that haven't come to us. And we are not in that business, and don't at the present time foresee being in it. An extension of that particular thing is this small car type of thing. If it gets into any volume where there is a market for enough of them, I think, then, the larger companies come into the picture.

But I don't believe we tend to stifle the operation there, unless they just haven't got the money or resources themselves to promote a good idea. And I keep stressing the good idea. There are a lot of ideas that aren't any good that some of these people would like us to take on and pay them for and promote. And we aren't about to do that.

Senator HARTKE. Is there at the present time any production in any foreign country of a vehicle of this type that you are acquainted with, or one which is developing?

Mr. BOGAN. I would have to say I heard that English presentation the other morning. Yesterday, I think, to be exact.

To my knowledge, no, there isn't anything of any significance. I think that we said in our testimony, to our knowledge, we don't see it

as practical. We don't say there aren't vehicles. We say "practical," taking all things into consideration, and also that business which I think the English witness got in a little bit of a difficulty with when he said he just accepted the lower performance. I don't know how much lower performance you or your family is going to accept. We would like to know more about that before we lay it down in the marketplace.

Senator HARTKE. Where, basically, do you do your research at the present time?

Mr. BOGAN. Right where Senator Muskie was the other day—at Highland Park, in Detroit.

Senator HARTKE. In Detroit?

Mr. BOGAN. Yes, sir.

Senator HARTKE. All of it is done in the United States?

Mr. BOGAN. Yes. Our engineering and research, which is it is hard to draw a line there. We are not quite as affluent as some of our friends, and we, therefore, have it combined, but I think we can show a reasonable set of facilities right there it is centralized. And the engineering and research development is all in the Highland Park complex,which I believe you have seen at one time or another.

Senator HARTKE. I want to take you down that track for the very obvious reason that I hope that you will convey to all the principal automobile manufacturers in the United States that Canada wants to share in the production of our automobiles, but they are not willing to go ahead and pay for the research and development facilities up there. This wonderful agreement which was made for the benefit of Canada, the so-called "free trade arrangement" between Canada and the United States, is nothing but a giveaway to the Canadian workers, where they are receiving 40 cents an hour less than our production workers, and they are not willing to go ahead and take anything except the cream of the crop. I hope you carry that back to your superiors so that they don't get trapped into the experience along that line. Mr. BOGAN. I have had a little experience there.

Senator GRIFFIN. Am I correct in concluding that you believe, if the Government is going to spend money for research, one of the places we need to spend money is in research concerning the kinds of standards for pollution that should be developed?

Mr. BOGAN. I understand that. Yes.

Senator GRIFFIN. I am speaking particularly of the oxides of nitrogen. The fact that we apparently don't know too much about it, the interaction of that-we have no standard for it, to what extent it is a serious matter. Is that an area where there should be research done by the Government?

Mr. BOGAN. We would be in support of it, yes, sir.

Senator GRIFFIN. Insofar as setting standards, they have served a good purpose. It seems quite obvious that the automobile industry would not have achieved such a remarkable degree of improvement if no standards had been set, either by the State of California or by HEW. Isn't that a fair statement?

Mr. BOGAN. May I disagree? [Laughter.]

Senator GRIFFIN. Yes, you may.

Mr. BOGAN. OK. We were working with California, as you knowbefore I got back into engineering I was in several places in the corporation and picked up engineering in the last several years,

having been an engineer all my life but back in 1953, if I recall, 1955 and I believe some of our testimony to you is along the lines of 13 years and we gave the same thing in the air pollution control in December-for some 13 years or so we have been working on this, the industry has.

California had the problem and was leading the way. No question about that, because the squeaking wheel gets the grease. They were in need of something, and we were working very definitely with them. And I believe that regardless of legislation we would have put some kind of a retardant on the emission systems.

I cannot disagree that the California State and even the Federal now does spur us on more, and all we have been trying to do, and I think Mr. Barr has tried to give you that idea this morning, we are not against performance standards on anything. Performance let us do it anyway-let any company do it anyway they want to. But we can't have this stuff thrust on us because in spite of what some publicity has come out with, that we can change overnight and we can do a lot of things in less time than we actually can do them, all we need is time, and an agreement with the technical areas, of which HEW has been the kind of channel, to get an agreement on what is a reasonable standard, give us a reasonable date, and we work toward it and will produce according to this kind of arrange

ment.

I don't see anything wrong with that. And I think it is a good system.

We get into disagreements about certain details, which we always will. But that doesn't, in my opinion, say that we are not for what you gentlemen are doing, and we need support like that at times, and an understanding is what we have been after. We have worked at it pretty hard, and we are going to continue to work at it pretty hard, and be as cooperative and helpful as we know how to be.

Senator GRIFFIN. Mr. Bogan, your testimony has been very helpful. If there are no further questions, we will move on to the next witness. Mr. BOGAN. Thank you.

Senator GRIFFIN. Dr. Frederick de Hoffman, vice president, General Dynamics, and president, General Atomic Division.

Cochairman MUSKIE. Mr. Chairman, before I forget, since we are short of time, it might be well if it would be agreed that members of the committee could submit questions in writing to these witnesses, to Chrysler and to General Motors as well.

Senator GRIFFIN. Without objection, the witnesses who have appeared this morning may expect to receive questions in writing, to which the committee would appreciate answers in writing. This procedure being necessary in view of the fact that we have so many witnesses and such a limited amount of time.

STATEMENT OF DR. FREDERICK DE HOFFMANN, VICE PRESIDENT, GENERAL DYNAMICS, AND PRESIDENT, GENERAL ATOMIC DIVISION, SAN DIEGO, CALIF.

Dr. DE HOFFMANN. Chairman Griffin, Senator Muskie: My name is Frederick de Hoffmann. I am vice president of General Dynamics and president of General Atomic Division at San Diego, Calif.

I have on numerous occasions had the pleasure of testifying before your colleague, Senator Pastore, in his capacity on another committee

of Congress; namely the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy. Actually the connection between atomic energy and batteries is a close one. In the fifties it was generally recognized that large nuclear power stations, because of the low fueling cost, lead to best economics when they are producing electric power over the maximum of the day and it was natural then that the General Atomic Division would search for and try to bring about major new uses for electrical power.

Clearly, the electrically powered vehicle is such a major use, and one which would have important public benefits as you are bringing out in these hearings.

In air contamination, of course, it parallels the benefits of nuclear power in decreasing air pollution. Thus by early 1960 a battery program was underway at General Atomic, and I would like to emphasize that one of the earlier witnesses today tried to dismiss batteries somewhat shortly by saying that, after all, their performance was not up to the gasoline engine, and since "cars" had to have this kind of performance, that probably we had a long way to go for batteries. I will try to describe a program to you which had addressed itself to short-range benefits from electric propulsion; namely, things like lift trucks, delivery vehicles, buses, and I believe that as one of your gentlemen said, after all, there are large areas we can attack today, and I believe we should attack them today.

From the beginning, clearly, the interest of the electric power companies was largely very high, and we are in close contact with a large number of them. By the end of 1963, the agreement had been formalized so that the Edison Electric Institute, the largest association of utility companies in the States, joined General Atomic in sponsoring the program. You will hear from them tomorrow. I will not take time about that arrangement.

We believe that a practical battery in the sense I am using the word, needs to have an energy density larger than about 50 watt hours per pound. Let me translate this into the numbers that Ford gave you today. They showed you that lead-acid cannot do the job at the moment for the types of things we would like to do. We are talking about energy density about at least five times as great, and I am happy to report to you that the model sitting in front of me, which I will describe to you, has now very good promise of giving us as a practical means six to seven times the energy densities, and I think with this we are moving in a range that is very useful and very important.

The written testimony which you have does describe the technical parts of the battery. I will not take your time with this but I would like to show you one or two quick charts. The first chart, which is in front of you, actually shows the zinc-air battery system. And this is a model of the heart of the system.1

The system has air introduced into it and uses air as one of the reactants. Air of course being freely carried around as far as the weight is concerned, is a great advantage.

The zinc in it is a cheap and common material which means we hope to produce these cheaply.

1 The charts referred to appear in Mr. de Hoffmann's prepared statement, beginning on p. 280.

The air is eventually again discharged as nitrogen and oxygen to the air and there is no contamination whatever to the air which has been redischarged.

I think if you look at the next chart you will see that a very important feature of the system is that the electrolyte, in other words the substance that moves the ions from one side to the other, is circulated. Normally you are thinking of battery systems where the electrolyte just sits there and is not moving around. The feature of circulation actually is an important one. It allows constantly clean electrode surfaces and thereby allows us to have better performance from the batteries.

The battery system is divided into two parts: the heart of the battery, where the zinc-air reaction takes place, and the accessories such as the pump, air compressor, and so forth. This is an important point because actually a given size of accessories can service a large number of cells. Consequently as the systems get larger you have improved energy-density. This means for example that by the time you get to sizes of a delivery truck you are able to provide ranges of 80 to 120 miles for such a delivery vehicle, and I submit that that is a very useful range and and a very well matching range to today's requirements. And I believe that the powers achieved will be reasonable so we believe for these uses we have a viable system in the near future.

You might be interested in the magnitude of the moneys which have been invested in order to bring the zinc-air battery development to this successful stage. The joint funding between the Edison Electric Institute and our own company through 1968 will amount to approximately $3 million, of which about half has already been spent to date. I am pleased to report we have achieved and are continuing to achieve substantial technical results from this program. If I may have the next chart.

I think you can see (as the next chart shows) that this is not a new program. It goes back to 1960. We recognized the need for batteries early.

The important thing on this chart I believe is to recognize that as early as 1962-63 we had small scale cells. And I think the bigger step here is that we are not dealing with laboratory test type batteries any more today. We already in 1963 to 1964 began to have full-scale cells, in other words cells of the size that one of these represents. And in 1965-66, quite recently, we actually had a 14 kilowatt hour prototype actually operating. I think if you will look at the next chart you actually see a developed 14 kilowatt hour prototype toward the end of last year operating in the laboratory at General Atomic.

If I had a film here you would actually see that the axle on the left is turning, and that you have a dummy load on it. You come as close as you can in the laboratory to actually testing the batteries.

In 1966 our work here in the United States attracted indeed worldwide attention and the result was that one of the largest British companies in the field, in the battery and automotive accessory field, Lucas Industries, joined us in our research program.

Since some of you were asking questions about efforts here and abroad I thought you might be interested in this fact. Lucas has already started technical work in the field and will devote substantial