This group brings together the best thinkers on energy and climate. Join us for smart, insightful posts and conversations about where the energy industry is and where it is going.


Ener1 Is No Solyndra

James Greenberger's picture
Executive Director, NAATBatt International

James Greenberger is the Executive Director of NAATBatt International, which he co-founded in 2007.  NAATBatt International is a trade association with more than 130 corporate and institutional...

  • Member since 2011
  • 157 items added with 88,525 views
  • Jan 28, 2012

This past Thursday the bad news coming out of Ener1 seemed to culminate in the filing of a Chapter 11 bankruptcy petition in the United States Bankruptcy Court in the Southern District of New York.  The news about Ener1 has been bad for a while:  The insolvency of a major customer, restated earnings, loss of senior management, delisting from the NASDAQ, and bridge loans bridging to who knows what have been weighing heavily on the industry for months.  Many had been expecting the worst.

What was announced on Thursday was, however, not the worst (unless you happened to be a common stockholder of Ener1) and may even be grounds for some optimism.  The filing on Thursday was a “prepack”, indicating that the major creditors of Ener1 have gotten together and agreed on a plan for Ener1 going forward.  Those creditors, including Liberty Harbor Special Investments of New York, Itochu Corp. of Tokyo and Goldman Sach’s Palmetto State Credit Union of Florida, will exchange their debt for all of the stock of Ener1.  Trade creditors and employees will be paid in full.  Operations at EnerDel in Indianapolis will continue.  And most important, and most intriguingly, $81 million of new money will be invested in Ener1, according to the company’s press release.

The future, or at least the near future, of Ener1, therefore, looks far different than that of Solyndra following its bankruptcy.  Operations at EnerDel will continue.  The technology and know-how that the $110 million DOE stimulus grants funded appears to remain intact.   The market has not rejected that technology.  In fact, once Ener1’s balance sheet is cleaned up, it appears that the market will be willing to invest another $81 million in it.

As I wrote at the time of the Solyndra bankruptcy, the failure of a company is not the same thing as the failure of a technology-based business.  The losers in the Ener1 bankruptcy are those who invested in the common stock of Ener1.  Their loss is unfortunate, but hardly novel among investors who buy high risk-high reward technology stocks.  Their loss is of no consequence to U.S. taxpayers, whose $110 million grant was never intended to benefit the stockholders of Ener1, but rather was intended to support the development of technology and of a base of knowledge and experience in advanced batteries in the United States.  By all accounts that technology and knowledge base appears secure and about to be doubled-down upon by $81 million of new investment.  This is no failure.


No discussions yet. Start a discussion below.

James Greenberger's picture
Thank James for the Post!
Energy Central contributors share their experience and insights for the benefit of other Members (like you). Please show them your appreciation by leaving a comment, 'liking' this post, or following this Member.
More posts from this member

Get Published - Build a Following

The Energy Central Power Industry Network® is based on one core idea - power industry professionals helping each other and advancing the industry by sharing and learning from each other.

If you have an experience or insight to share or have learned something from a conference or seminar, your peers and colleagues on Energy Central want to hear about it. It's also easy to share a link to an article you've liked or an industry resource that you think would be helpful.

                 Learn more about posting on Energy Central »