“Aptera’s production and delivery will be tied directly to funding,” said Aptera Motors CEO Paul Wilbur in a release from the ultra high-efficiency vehicle startup late yesterday. That very mild assessment belies the reality that Aptera is peering across the Valley of Death, where many ventures die for lack of funding at the critical commercial development phase. According to the release, dwindling cash reserves are forcing the company to delay production of its inaugural vehicle, the three-wheeled electric 2e, until 2010 rather than the end of this year as previously announced.

Hitting the new 2010 target (or any future production goal for that matter), will require Aptera to bring in fresh capital, and it’s banking on either a federal loan or private investment to come through. At this point, the company is shifting its focus away from development, which “has been outpacing the rate of fundraising.” The company has laid off an undisclosed number of employees, co-founder Steve Fambro is taking an extended vacation (he’ll return in the new year), and Chris Anthony, the other co-founder, is “stepping aside from day-to-day activities” — all in an effort, Aptera says, to slow the burn rate and free up resources for top priorities: raising cash and starting volume production of the 2e.

After all, nearly 4,000 customers are waiting. That’s how many deposits (fully refundable) Aptera says it has received for the 2e. And then there are the heavyweight investors — including Google.org, Idealab, The Beall Family Trust and others — who Aptera says it hopes to provide with “strong returns.”

This week’s sober announcement from Aptera is in some ways reminiscent of the straits startup Tesla Motors found itself in late last year, when plans to set up manufacturing for the delayed Model S sedan were put on hold pending approval of a loan guarantee or low-interest loans from the Department of Energy. Tesla CEO Elon Musk described the loan guarantee back then as a “when, not an if,” adding, “We’ll do what we need to get approval.”

Tesla ended up winning $465 million in DOE loans this summer (though according to a report this week from former Tesla marketing chief Darryl Siry, the company hasn’t “seen a dime” of the award yet). If private investors fail to come through for Aptera this time — it has already raised more than $24 million — the company hopes to secure a loan under the same program that has approved loans for not only Tesla, but also another startup, Fisker Automotive.

Aptera’s odds in the program are better now than ever before, given that federal rules were recently revised (after a significant lobbying effort by Aptera’s backers) to allow high-efficiency, three-wheeled vehicles like the 2e to at least qualify for funds. But Aptera is smart to rein in spending, because having an open door at the DOE and a team of deep pocketed investors in your corner won’t necessarily deliver you across the Valley of Death.

Updated with additional info from ActaCell: Lithium-ion battery startup ActaCell has just added the state of Texas to its corral of high-profile backers. The state is providing a “pre-seed award” of $250,000 to ActaCell, according to a release from the Austin-based company this morning, and putting another $750,000 on “reserve” for the startup, which nabbed $5.8 million in first-round financing last year from investors including Google.org’s RechargeIT program, DFJ Mercury, Applied Ventures (the VC arm of Applied Materials (s AMAT) and Good Energies.

Founded in 2007, ActaCell is working to commercialize lithium-ion battery cells and packs based on technology developed in the Material Science and Engineering labs of professor Arumugam Manthiram at the University of Texas at Austin. DFJ Mercury managing director Ned Hill said back in 2008 that the batteries — meant to have longer life cycles at lower cost than currently available options –  would be particularly valuable for the plug-in hybrid vehicle market. But ActaCell (one of our 13 lithium-ion battery startups to watch) has let few details slip since it spun off from the university.

The funding announced this morning comes from the Texas Emerging Technology Fund, a program designed to support commercialization and manufacturing of emerging technologies in the state. (Award winners have to commit to locating a “substantial percentage” of the work resulting from the funds in Texas.)

The $1 million from the fund is more than pocket change for ActaCell at this stage. However, it’s small game, compared with the $600 million project that the company had planned to participate in as one of the 50 members of the National Alliance for Advanced Transportation Batteries (NAATBatt) — if stimulus funds had come through for the consortium’s planned li-ion battery plant earlier this year.

At this point, the state funding, combined with the “final tranche milestone” of the Series A financing round, will allow the company to expand the “technical and managerial ranks of the company” and complete development of an R&D facility, ActaCell President and CEO Bill Ott says. Previously the company said that it will bring a product to market in 2010. We’ve asked for an update on that time line — more when we know more.

Update: ActaCell CEO Bill Ott tells us this morning that the startup plans to develop a beta product during 2010. The main use of the $250,000 from the Texas fund, and the additional $750,000 that ActaCell can request if it hits two technical milestones, will be expanding the company’s ranks of technical and management staff. According to Ott, “specifically focusing on senior talent from the Li-Ion battery industry is a key effort for ActaCell in the near term.”

Graphic credit Manthiram Laboratory

Electric car maker Aptera Motors has deep-pocketed friends — it’s raised more than $24 million from investors including Google.org, Idealab, The Beall Family Trust, The Simons Family, Esenjay Investments and David Gelbaum’s Quercus Trust. But Uncle Sam has so far declined to pony up the $75 million in loans Aptera requested for its futuristic electric three-wheeler because the feds define an automobile as “any 4-wheeled vehicle.”

Now the Wall Street Journal reports that major lobbying dollars are being spent as some of Aptera’s backers kick up dirt over the issue in Congress. The House gave the green light for a provision in a spending bill before the August break that would change the highly competitive $25 billion Department of Energy Loan program to “include any fully enclosed vehicle designed to carry two adults and that averages at least 75 miles a gallon,” and require the agency to reconsider applications (like Aptera’s) that were rejected on the basis of the four-wheel rule.

That would give Aptera’s 2e, which the company says gets 100 miles on an electric charge with extreme aerodynamics made possible by the three-wheel design, a chance for the funding under the program. Aptera CEO Paul Wilbur says the company doesn’t need federal aid to kickstart its already-delayed production later this year, but the loans would help accelerate its expansion.

It’s hard not to root for the startup’s outsider market position, but it strikes me as an unduly risky bet with public dollars to back this first-gen model, given that so many companies are seeking funds for green vehicles with a better shot at mass market adoption than the 2e. However, Aptera founder and former CEO Steve Fambro described a plan back in 2007 to use the three-wheeler to help establish the Aptera brand and generate revenues while it works on other “more mainstream” products. When it comes time to seek funds for that more mainstream effort, then more power to ‘em.

While “the boring stuff,” — permitting and siting solar plants and transmission lines — might cause the biggest hurdles for Oakland, Calif.-based solar thermal startup BrightSource, the company doesn’t seem to have any trouble bringing in big backers. According to the New York Times, BrightSource will announce on Wednesday that the finance arm of construction giant Bechtel has taken an equity stake in the company’s first group of solar thermal plants called the Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System. Bechtel will provide the construction and engineering for the solar projects, which will sell solar power to California utilities Pacific Gas & Electric (s PCG) and Southern California Edison.

The Ivanpah solar farms, which will be built near the Nevada border to the west of Ivanpah Dry Lake, are some of the first in the queue of projects being reviewed by the California Energy Commission and the Bureau of Land Management. The long approval process from the state and federal regulators are holding up the projects more than anything else. “We’re in year two of [what was anticipated would be] a one year project,” said BrightSource CEO John Woolard at the National Clean Energy Summit in Las Vegas earlier this year.

Financing doesn’t seem to be a problem, however. The size of Bechtel’s investment was undisclosed, but BrightSource has already raised $160 million total from a long list of investors including Google.org, BP Alternative Energy, StatoilHydro Venture, VantagePoint Venture Partners, Morgan Stanley, Draper Fisher Jurvetson and Chevron Technology Ventures.

BrightSource has the right partner if it wants to get the plants built as soon as the projects are approved — Bechtel’s massive construction and engineering forces have over 44,000 employees, in over 25 countries, and the company delivered revenues of $31.4 billion in 2008. BrightSource hopes that its Ivanpah solar projects will be approved by early 2010.

A growing number of automakers are readying plug-in vehicles for mass market rollouts within the next 3-5 years. Racing against the clock, some of the first major deployments of smart charging technology — software, networks and devices that can manage vehicle recharging to minimize strain on the grid and maximize use of clean power sources like solar and wind — are starting to roll out. Utilities, automakers, government labs and startups have roles to play, but exactly how the technology evolves remains to be seen. Here’s 10 proposals — from high-profile companies like Better Place and Nissan, as well as under-the-radar national lab researchers and startups like Juice Technologies — that offer a glimpse of how the competition is shaping up.

With billions of dollars in government funds coming down the pipeline for advanced batteries courtesy of the stimulus package, and the auto industry gearing up to make its first real go at marketing plug-in vehicles for the masses, the race to build lithium-ion batteries for vehicles has never been hotter.

Massive international battery makers may dominate the mobile device and laptop markets for lithium-ion batteries, but a growing number of companies — some founded just in the last year, others that have been around for over a decade — are hoping to carve out a piece of the battery vehicle market. They have their work cut out for them, however, as more established companies such as Sanyo, Hitachi (s hit) and NEC are eying the same prize.

As the money rolls out and competition heats up, here are 13 battery startups you should know about:

A123Systems: Massachusetts-based A123Systems, working with nanoscale materials licensed from MIT, has attracted big-name backers including General Electric (s ge), Motorola (s mot) and Qualcomm (s qcom). The startup had raised $132 million by late 2007, and last year filed for an IPO. But A123 has since revised its registration with the SEC several times (taking into account tumult on Wall Street and in the auto industry, and most recently the introduction of new government incentives) and has yet to go public.

Runner-up to supply cells for General Motors’ (s GM) Chevy Volt and winner of a deal with Chrysler to make modules and battery packs for the struggling automaker’s planned plug-in vehicles, A123 is also working on energy storage systems for electric utilities and got its start with batteries for power tools. The company has its eye on at least two DOE programs, and has won state-level support as part of Michigan’s efforts to lure battery manufacturing jobs.

ActaCell: Having raised $5.8 million in a Series A round led by DFJ Mercury and joined by Google.org (s goog) last summer, ActaCell has been working toward a 2010 commercial launch. ActaCell’s devices, which it expects to have a longer cycle life at lower costs than the competition, are based on technology developed at the University of Texas at Austin. The company has joined the National Alliance for Advanced Transportation Battery Cell Manufacture, a group of 50 U.S. companies that plan to invest more than $600 million in a battery R&D center in Kentucky, if DOE funds come through.

Boston-Power: Massachusetts-based laptop battery maker Boston-Power unveiled a new battery for plug-in vehicles in May 2009. The 4-year-old company hasn’t released many details about this “Swing” model, other than to say that it will deliver “industry-leading capabilities” in areas such as energy density, lifespan, safety, cost savings and environmental sustainability.

While Boston-Power says it has enough manufacturing capacity to produce millions of cells per month in Asia, it aims to build a new lithium-ion battery factory within three years in Auburn, Mass., for both laptop and vehicle battery cells — if it wins approval from the DOE for about $100 million in grants. Otherwise Boston-Power plans to continue to grow and open more factories to meet demand, but probably not stateside.

CFX Battery: Co-founded less than a year ago by Rachid Yazami, research director of France’s National Center for Scientific Research, Caltech professor Robert H. Grubbs and French chemist Andrew Hamwi, CFX Battery is working with technology developed at Caltech to produce prismatic (flat), cylindrical, thin-film and coin lithium-ion cells.

The Azusa, Calif.-based startup has reportedly raised $15 million and now says it is growing its team and seeking alliances with major equipment manufacturers as it develops batteries for not only electric cars but also medical devices, mobile phones, laptops, and military and industrial applications. Anticipating a lithium squeeze down the road and eying lower-cost alternatives, Yazami tells the New York Times that he is also “trying to develop a battery powered by nano particles of sodium and water.”

Electrovaya: Mississauga, Ontario-based Electrovaya makes battery systems (cells, modules and interfaces) for hybrid and electric vehicles — including some of its own, such as the low-speed electric Maya 300 that rolled last month in a small ExxonMobil-backed (s xom) car-sharing program. Working with nanostructured lithium-ion polymer technology, Electrovaya snagged three deals with Chinese manufacturers late last year, and also has agreements with India’s Tata Motors and Norway’s Miljø Innovasjon for highway-speed electric cars. The company was founded in 1996 and began trading on the Toronto Stock Exchange four years later.

Enax: Founded 13 years ago as a battery consulting service in Tokyo, Enax is now working on “lithium-ion cells especially for future hybrid and electric drives in automobiles” with battery giant Continental, which bought a 16 percent stake in the company last year. Enax claims the new batteries will be safer and have a longer service life than today’s offerings, as AutoblogGreen reports. The company, which aims to provide batteries for “electric vehicles, submarines, fuel cell system, etc.,” also supplies electrodes to other companies.

Envia Systems: Based in Hayward, Calif., early-stage Envia Systems raised a $3.2 million first round of financing late last year from Bay Partners and Redpoint Ventures to help with development of “high performance, low cost energy storage solutions using lithium ion batteries” for plug-in vehicles.

Imara: Founded in 2006, Menlo Park, Calif.-based Imara is working on small-format batteries for power tools and outdoor equipment, with the goal of eventually producing vehicle batteries after it builds “a solid economic base,” VP Neil Maguire tells Triple Pundit. Still, the company has requested stimulus funds from the DOE to build a plant in Portland, Ore., to produce cells for plug-in hybrid vehicle batteries.

Imara has raised $20 million in venture capital (investors include Battery Ventures and Nth Power) and licenses its technology from SRI International. The company told us late last year that it aimed to use the funds to ramp up annual production capacity to at least 8 million cells by the end of 2009, with electrode manufacturing facilities in Menlo Park, Calif., and assembly for small-format batteries contracted out in Asia.

Mobius Power: Based in Fremont, Calif., Mobius Power aims to produce lithium-ion batteries with high energy density for mobile phones, notebook computers, backup power for the grid, and hybrid vehicles. Founded in 2007 with a reported $4.5 million investment from Walden International, Lightspeed Venture Partners and Sigma Partners, the company is not revealing many details, but says its “technology is based on innovative and patented developments in the research laboratories at a major U.S. corporation.”

Sakti3: Sakti3 has been amassing funds and partnerships since we first wrote about its $2 million investment from Khosla Ventures last year. It remains tight-lipped about its technology, however, which stems from research led by CEO Ann Marie Sastry, who heads up University of Michigan’s energy systems engineering program.

Sakti3 has won significant support from the state of Michigan and partnered with General Motors, a move designed to strengthen both companies’ requests for government aid and a vote of confidence in the startup’s cell tech. In a separate deal, Sastry is already helping to retrain 50 GM engineers at the University of Michigan. To reach commercial-scale manufacturing within three years, Sakti3 hopes to get a $15 million grant from the Department of Energy.

Seeo: Seeo has developed a nano-structured solid-state battery based on a solid polymer electrolyte that founder and technology director Mohit Singh says is more stable, safer, and has a higher energy density than lithium-ion batteries now on the market. For comparison, MIT’s Technology Review explains, “[T]oday’s lithium-ion batteries use lithium cobalt oxide electrodes and a liquid electrolyte…the electrode material can release oxygen when overcharged or punctured, causing the flammable solvent to catch fire and the battery to explode.”

Singh developed the nanostructured polymer electrolyte as a post-doctoral fellow at Lawrence Berkeley National Labs, and says the batteries can deliver 300 watt-hours per kilogram (compared with less than 200 watt-hours per kilogram for a traditional lithium-ion battery) and can operate at a much higher temperature than the competition. The company has reportedly raised around $2 million in funding from investors including Khosla Ventures.

Planar Energy Devices: Founded in 2007 as a spin-out from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Planar is working on solid-state, high-capacity batteries. If $56 million in DOE funds come through, the startup plans to start production at a shuttered lithium-ion battery factory built over a decade ago in Gainesville, Fl.

When we wrote about Planar last fall it had one technology that it wanted to use for micro, mid-sized and large batteries — starting with military applications and smart cards. The company’s thin-film batteries, designed with a “laminated safety separator” that Planar says protects cells from thermal and overcharge abuse, are supposed to charge in seconds, have a high energy density, last 400-500 life cycles and be safer than traditional lithium-ion batteries. These days Planar’s focus seems to have shifted more to vehicle batteries, at least for the purpose of securing stimulus funds.

Quallion: Although Quallion has been around since 1998, making lithium-ion cells and batteries at high volume for medical and military applications, and in custom designs for aerospace and other applications, the company is a relative newcomer to the plug-in vehicle battery market. It has requested $220 million in stimulus funds from the DOE to build a factory in Palmdale, Calif., with capacity to produce 20,000 lithium-ion batteries a year for hybrid cars and trucks by 2012, according to the Los Angeles Times.

Co-founded by billionaire Alfred Mann, Quallion has won support for its aid request from a delegation of 17 California representatives in Congress, and the state Energy Commission, which has pledged to provide up to $9 million if the DOE gives the green light. As Automotive World reports, Quallion aims to produce lithium-ion batteries for cars as well as “batteries that replace engine idling as a stationary power source for heavy duty trucks” at the proposed Palmdale facility.

An issue near and dear to Silicon Valley — financing for high-risk clean energy projects in the midst of a recession — took center stage on Capitol Hill this morning, as the Senate Committee on Natural Resources delved into the nitty gritty of proposed changes to the Department of Energy loan guarantee program. The short version of what went down in the Committee’s hearing this morning goes like this: Venture capitalists are gladly funding clean energy technologies to pilot stage but not to commercial production, so hundreds of billions of government dollars would be a good thing to bridge that gap, often called the “valley of death.” But as always, the devil’s in the details — two of them in particular: What should the government get in return for taking these risks? And how much cash should be set aside as a buffer against potential losses?

This morning’s hearing focused on a new entity called the Clean Energy Deployment Administration, or CEDA, which would provide loans, loan guarantees and other “credit enhancements” to help lure private capital “off the sidelines,” as the DOE’s Matt Rogers put it, when it comes to scaling up clean energy technology from the pilot stage to deployment at commercial scale. CEDA is proposed in the 21st Century Clean Energy Technology Deployment Act — a piece of legislation Committee Chairman Ed Markey said he hopes to introduce later this week.

Appropriately, the tech and startup community had some representatives there including Dan Reicher, director of Climate Change & Energy Initiatives for Google.org, and Kleiner Perkins partner John Denniston (“regular testifiers,” as Markey noted). The two joined the panel of witnesses and praised the Committee’s efforts to help bring to fruition the breakthrough, high-risk clean energy technologies that banks and venture capitalists are unwilling or unable to finance — with some caveats. Reicher said he wanted to see CEDA involve private financiers more directly than the current discussion draft proposes — possibly by running an annual finance conference to solicit feedback from the private sector, or by pre-arranging financing for the third or fourth clean energy plants, for example, based on government-funded preliminary plants meeting set performance criteria.

Reicher also suggested that CEDA be allowed to take equity positions in funded companies, and to acquire rights to invest in future projects on favorable terms. This could make the program start to look a lot like a government-backed green VC — probably not the smartest use of government funds, as we’ve explained before. Not surprisingly, Denniston would rather see incentives put in place to encourage the private market — e.g., his firm — to “come forward with that equity capital.”

Reicher and Denniston disagreed about what percentage of capital the agency should keep as a buffer against potential losses, or the “loan loss reserve.” It might seem like an obscure bit of policy, but depending on where Congress sets that buffer, it could mean the difference of tens of billions of dollars available for clean energy projects. “This is important,” Reicher said in his prepared testimony, “because the lower the loan loss reserve the more loans CEDA can make for the same amount of appropriation.” For example, if Congress gives the program $10 billion and requires a 10 percent reserve, as proposed in the current draft, that would provide about $100 billion in loans ($10 billion is 10 percent of $100 billion). With a 5 percent reserve, Reicher said, the same $10 billion appropriation would allow about $200 billion in loans.

So where do Reicher, the Googler and former DOE adminstrator, and Denniston, the venture capitalist, disagree? Reicher is OK with the 10 percent reserve, for now, but he wants the CEDA administrator to have the authority and flexibility to change it later on. Denniston wants a higher reserve. As you increase the loan loss reserve (the government’s taking greater risk) you increase the incentive/participation for private investors. He said, “I’d rather see a 25 percent loan loss reserve,” which would let the government take on more risk, thereby boosting the incentive for private investors to join in.

Denniston also urged the senators to add more financial and business experts, in addition to scientists on the CEDA advisory team, and to let startups volunteer for a “quadruple-Z” credit rating, avoiding the credit rating agency review process that costs hundreds of thousands of dollars and inevitably finds that the fledgling company has not established good credit.

Denniston and Reicher agreed, emphatically, on at least one thing: “Overall,” Reicher said, “the bill takes the absolutely right approach to taking critical technology across the valley of death” — a place that the financial crisis, Denniston said, “has made even drier.”

Death Valley photo courtesy Flickr user mandj98

Lately, when Google.org has gotten involved with the workings of Capitol Hill, it has called for transparency and open standards, and promoted its PowerMeter tool. Today Dan Reicher, Google.org’s director of climate and energy initiatives, put another Google (s GOOG) initiative — that of enhanced geothermal systems — in the Congressional spotlight. Speaking before the House Energy and Commerce Committee in a hearing on the climate and energy bill now being debated in Congress, Reicher called for lawmakers to help clean energy projects through the so-called Valley of Death (something he also wants Google.org to do with its cleantech fund) and to “provide money for EGS technology beyond the stimulus.”

When Google.org invested $10.25 million in EGS technology last summer, Reicher said in an announcement that the technology “could be the ‘killer app’ of the energy world. It has the potential to deliver vast quantities of power 24/7 and be captured nearly anywhere on the planet.” As we noted at the time, Google also said it would use the funds to push forward a policy agenda for geothermal energy. Reicher did that today, prodding the committee to keep the U.S. from slipping behind Australia and the EU in developing the technology.

Of course, it wouldn’t be a Google testimony without a shoutout for empowering consumers with energy data (and thus creating an opportunity for Google to manage and monetize it). Reicher called for the Committee to “push the DOE to make large investments in smart meter deployment,” and to back technology and devices that give electricity users a more accurate picture of their electricity usage “in as near real time as possible.” Like, say, devices that use PowerMeter, which Google aims to make available to consumers by year’s end.

I guess I’m on the Google beat for SAPP.  Just so you’re up-to-date . . .

The Skoll Foundation has announced that its founder and chairman, Jeff Skoll, has given $100 million to launch an organization that will work to address urgent threats confronting humanity and the planet. The new organization will be led by Larry Brilliant, the founding executive director of Google.org.   More here.   I must say I’m a bit surprised by this choice.  Google.org has floundered without direction for quite some time.  I hope Mr. Brilliant executes more successfully with the Skoll Foundation’s effort.

Now that President has been elected and the the controversy surrounding Sonal Shah has died down,  she has finally landed in the Obama administration as the head of the White House Office of Social Innovation. 

The office will be involved in the Social Innovation Funds pilot program that was just created by the Serve America Act, a national-service bill that will be signed by the president next week. The funds, which will be administered by the Corporation for National and Community Service, will provide money for groups that are “developing innovative and effective solutions to national and local challenges.”  

Ms. Shah was a member of the Obama transition project’s advisory board and co-chair of a transition group that made recommendations about technology and innovation, including “innovation and civil society.” She is co-founder of Indicorps, a nonprofit group that offers fellowships to Indian-Americans working on development projects in India.

Ms. Shah has also held positions at Goldman, Sachs & Company, the Treasury Department, the Center for Global Development, and the Center for American Progress.  Jane Wales, director of the Program on Philanthropy and Social Innovation at the Aspen Institute, praised the new White House office today in a Chronicle online discussion.

In an article yesterday, The Chronicle of Philanthropy confirmed the rumor that Sonal Shah has been named the head of the new White House Office of Social Innovation. The office was created to “promote government efforts to help innovative nonprofit groups and social entrepreneurs expand successful approaches to tackling pressing social problems.” Our CEO & President Jane Wales is quoted in the article on the potential of the new office: “…it has the opportunity to encourage public-private partnerships aimed at addressing some of the toughest problems we face at home and abroad,” and in addition, “the office can take a careful look at U.S. government policies, including tax and regulatory policies, and determine which policies spur innovation, and whether others might needlessly impede innovation.”

Previously the head of global development at Google.org, Sonal is an excellent choice for the position, and we’re looking forward to seeing where she takes it.

“The dog finally caught the car” is how Dan Reicher, Google.org’s director of climate and energy initiatives put it today — with the dog being clean energy advocates, and the car being government funding for renewables. Now, according to Reicher, who spoke on a Ceres conference panel today about innovative business models, the money has to move so fast it can’t possibly be spent with total transparency (an issue dear to Google (s GOOG)) or wisdom.

“We’ve been asking for this for 30 years, getting a billion here, a billion there [for clean energy],” said Reicher, who served in the Clinton administration Energy Department and helped develop portions of the stimulus legislation as a member of President Barack Obama’s transition team. “Now we have $80 billion.” Anyone in the audience at Ceres, he said, “could write the New York Times or Washington Post story a year from now about how we didn’t spend the money well.”

Reicher thinks the stimulus funds will be most effective if there’s more transparency and a greater effort to get the word out about how to apply. Evidently he’s unimpressed with Recovery.gov, the Obama administration’s attempt to provide easy access to information about applying for stimulus funds and how they’re being spent. The Google.org approach? Cast a wide net for pitches. Over a year ago, when Google.org was just getting started doling out its own pile of clean energy cash, Reicher told a group of entrepreneurs and investors to “send us your business plans.” Have you sent yours to the feds?

Dr. Larry Brilliant, head of Google’s philanthropic division, Google.org, will be stepping down as general manager, and will adopt the new quintessentially Googlian title of “Chief Philanthropy Evangelist”.

Taking his place will be Google’s vice president of new business development, Megan Smith, who will be taking on the additional role of general manager of Google.org.

Google.org’s innovations since its inception in 2004 have included technological breakthroughs such as Flu Trends, RechargeIT, Clean Energy 2030, and PowerMeter.

Brilliant has said that they still intend to stand behind their commitment made in 2004 to devote 1% of Google’s equity and profits to philanthropy.

The news of Google’s change in philanthropic direction has inspired a lot of commentary in the blogosphere.   The opinions have ranged from “Google is doing to the right thing” to “Is this change in direction a cutback in disguise.  The Chronicle of Philanthropy’s Give & Take section does nice job of summarizing the spectrum of viewpoints.  In my (admittedly cynical) opinion, I think Google’s new “strategic corporate philanthropy” really is a cutback, but let’s see.

In the midst of the debate, Google’s new direction has had some positive implications for India.  On Feb. 3, Google India took the company’s mission to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful to the streets, when it unveiled The Internet Bus project, in Chennai.   With the  aim of increasing exposure to the knowledge and resources available on the Web, the bus will travel throughout Tamil Nadu over a period of a month and a half, led by a team of Googlers.  The contention is that many people in the villages and towns where the bus will stop will be exposed to the Internet for the first time in their lives.  Read more here.  (Hat tip to the SAJAforum).

U.S. to Set Single MPG Standard for Cars, Trucks? Carol Browner, assistant to the president for energy and climate, says she and others in the White House back the idea of a universal fuel-efficiency standard aimed at curbing greenhouse gas emissions. — Washington Post

Growing the Google.org Team: Larry Brilliant says Google’s (s GOOG) philanthropic arm, Google.org, is getting more engineers and technical staff, a stronger focus on IT-based projects like RechargeIT, Clean Energy 2030, and PowerMeter — plus a new manager. — Official Google.org Blog

Bush Enviro Adviser Jumps Into Energy: James Connaughton, former chairman of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, joined Constellation Energy Group (s CEG) today as executive V-P of corporate affairs, public and environmental policy. He’ll guide development of the company’s renewable energy and nuclear portfolios. — Press Release

Midwest Governors Push for Ethanol, Wind: Governors from four Midwestern states pressed the EPA yesterday to increase the percentage of ethanol allowed in gasoline blends beyond the 10 percent that automakers say can corrode fuel lines, and to issue mandates and tax credits for wind energy. — BusinessWeek

Green Desert Metropolis: Oil-rich Abu Dhabi is trying to build a zero-emission, car-free and zero-waste city. Should the rest of the world care? — MIT Technology Review

Late last night, Google.org’s Executive Director Larry Brilliant announced that he would step down from leading Google’s philanthropic wing, known as “DotOrg” to Googlers. A NY Times article notes that Megan Smith, a long time Google exec, is stepping in to align the focus of Google.org more with with Google as a whole.

“During our review it became clear that while we have been able to support some remarkable nonprofit organizations over the past three years, our greatest impact has come when we’ve attacked problems in ways that make the most of Google’s strengths in technology and information,” Dr. Brilliant wrote.

“By aligning Google.org more closely with Google as a whole, Megan will ensure that we’re better able to build innovative, scalable technology and information solutions,” he wrote.

Larry Brilliant is a member of our Advisory Council at GPF and has participated as a speaker in our past two conference. Watch him here with Fazle Abed of BRAC discussing how to create an economic space for the poor.

The online community is aflutter with news of the change in leadership at Google.org, the philanthropic arm of Internet giant Google.  Dr. Larry Brilliant, the first Executive Director, is moving away from a day to day oversight role to become ”Chief Philanthropy Evangelist,” in charge of developing big ideas and identifying partners in the philanthropy work.  In his place, Google’s Vice President of New Business Development, Megan Smith, is taking over.  

What is Google.org?

Despite the “.org” right there in the name, Google.org is not a foundation or a nonprofit organization.  It’s more like an umbrella organization.  Google.org is a pool of resources: financial, human and intellectual capital.  I frequently cite Google.org in speeches as an example where all the tools of the new approach to philanthropy are in play: grants, investments, advocacy efforts, human skills, corporate reputation and significant business networks, just to name a few.  Google.org tries to bring the right resources to the problem at hand.

Why the Shake-up?

According to Dr. Brilliant, Google.org reviewed its progress after three years: “During our review it became clear that while we have been able to support some remarkable non-profit organizations over the past three years, our greatest impact has come when we’ve attacked problems in ways that make the most of Google’s strengths in technology and information.”  

So take for example the FluTrends Project.  According to the site, “We’ve found that certain search terms are good indicators of flu activity. Google Flu Trends uses aggregated Google search data to estimate flu activity in your state up to two weeks faster than traditional systems.”  Could  anyone but Google have found such a brilliant early warning system for public health officials?  It’s doubtful.

In essence, Dr. Brilliant is saying that Google.org is going to focus on projects where it’s unique strengths put Google.org in a position to bring value and add insight to solving social problems.  And if you think about it, the lesson there is both obvious and yet profound.  

Lots of philanthropists have money to spend on solving social problems–that certainly isn’t a unique strength.  And lots of philanthropists big, tiny and everywhere in between have spent that money, many of them always feeling like they weren’t being as effective as they would like to be, but unsure of what to do differently.  Google.org has come up with an answer: it’s not our money that makes us effective, it’s our know-how.  They plan to focus on problems where information aggregation and innovative technology can bring key insights and move us toward new solutions.

And for those of us without a billion dollars to spend on our philanthropy, the same lesson holds true: It’s not the amount of our money that makes us effective philanthropists, it’s the strength of our other resources that help us decide where to donate that money.

Have you thought about what your expertise is and how you can bring it to bear on your philanthropic donations?  If, as some pundits predict, the current recession is going to result in over 500,000 nonprofits going out of business, don’t you want to make sure the most effective ones stay in business?  If so, then you need to direct your charitable giving to organizations that you are able to evaluate based on the skills and community knowledge that you already have.  

If you’re an educator who works with small children, you may always wonder if you’re doing the right thing by donating to a national emergency relief organization after a natural disaster: Would a local church be more effective at finding and helping people in need?  How do you know if you don’t understand the logistics and complications of emergency relief programs? But if you look at two education organizations working with kids in trouble, you’re probably going to feel more confident in the work of one or the other, based on your own experience and knowledge of the people, the approach and the leadership of the organization.  

One last note: 

Some will argue that the focus on technology solutions is self-serving and takes Google’s philanthropy more in line with traditional corporate philanthropy–usually perceived as self-serving, thinly disguised marketing programs that serve the corporate interests more than society’s interests.  It’s something for us all to keep an eye on, but this is where we can hope that the old mantra of “Don’t Be Evil” will play out for all of our benefit.

Several weeks ago, I posted about changes in direction announced at Google.org (Google’s philanthropic arm) by Sonal Shah.  Google.org was set up not as a traditional philanthropy, but rather as a Google unit that could profit from its investments. Yesterday, the organization announced further changes. 

Larry Brilliant, the executive director of Google.org, said late Monday that he would step down from managing Google’s philanthropic unit and signaled that Google.org might curtail its financing of nonprofit groups unless they are closely aligned with Google projects.  Instead, Dr. Brilliant said he would become chief philanthropy evangelist for Google, seeking partnerships and collaborators for Google’s efforts.  Megan Smith, a longtime Google executive with experience in engineering and business development, will manage Google.org, while retaining her job as vice president for new business development at Google.   According to an article in the New York Times, Brilliant reiterated that  “[Google] stand[s] behind the commitment made in 2004 to devote 1 percent of Google’s equity and profits to philanthropy, and we will continue to iterate on our philanthropic model to make sure our resources have the greatest possible impact for good.”

Additional articles about this change can be found here and here.

As of yet, there is no mention of the role that Sonal Shah might play in the new structure.  What are your thoughts about Google.org’s new directions?

It is not surprising that today many charities are adopting innovative business techniques to thrive and succeed in their philanthropic endeavors. Many traditional charities, provide help and alleviate short run problems; whereas, market-based charities are built to thrive and have the potential to grow on their own.

Charitable institutions often use business principles and innovative involvement techniques to deliver services and provide aid more effectively to impoverished communities. These institutions involve their stake holders (government, local communities, and business corporations) in all realms of their endeavors.

Involvement in the organization and knowledge of where the donation is being used makes the giving party more responsible, interested and, committed to the charitable organization. It also ensures an efficient channeling of resources (monetary funds, human, technical skills) by the organization to the needed areas.

Naandi, a non-profit charitable institution in India that works to promote a) child’s rights, b) safe drinking water, and c) sustainable livelihoods is a classic example of the way organizations are changing the way they function. Some of their projects comprise supplying food in government schools, providing job training skills to youth, educating the poor with sustainable livelihood techniques (for example farming), and educating the poor on the benefits from drinking safe water and immunizations. Their projects aim to provide poverty stricken communities with the ammunition they need to survive in the long run.

Some organizations like the Soros Economic Development Fund aim to help the impoverished with making investments and providing access to financial capital (through loans and equity) in projects that prevent deterioration of communities. Other organizations such as Google.org use technology and information to help. Unitus, invests in agencies and works with them to provide microfinance services to the poor. This type of charity aims to help the poor by providing critical services like health care, housing, and low interest loans that are affordable and within the reach of the poor.

Endeavor’s business model for philanthropy invests in human capital and targets the high-impact entrepreneurs in emerging economies. It provides financial help, advice and guidance until they are able to sustain and fend for themselves. These successful entrepreneurs serve as role models and encourage others organizations to follow similar paths. Investments of this kind are expected to change communities and produce permanent gains which are manifested in financial, cultural, human, intellectual and social capital.

Economies continue to grow in this era of increasing globalization, improved technology, and growing markets. The gap between the rich and poor is steadily increasing. In an attempt to help the poor, charitable institutions today are channelizing their resources in areas which attack the root cause of poverty. They assist the poor to develop the skills they need and provide an infrastructure which will help them cross poverty lines.

(PND: Business-Minded Charities Work to Tackle Poverty, Hunger in India)

- P

Well, it’s business as usual for the Aperion/Maniatis team. We’re headed off to Washington to attend the Google Community Conference headed up by Google.org’s Dan Reicher. We’re pretty excited about getting there and checking out what the Google team is up to in the world of efficient home and community building.
This is the future for truly green homebuilding and creating sustainable living.
Maybe we’ll see you there!