All "Future" battery technology thread

[SanDust]

This one joins the list with the new A123 battery, but I'm willing to bet this one will beat the A123 to market. EOS said that they will use them for electric storage first, then EVs.

Shorthand way of saying "our energy density leaves much to be desired".

... I also predict that 90% of these "miracle breakthroughs" will never be commercialized...

You are an optimist

+1 :lol: And you may be optimistic.

 

[SanDust]

Looks like Envia has something. Maybe not 400 wh/kg but something close. http://bottomline.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/08/09/13204747-gm-exec-100-200-miles-on-a-charge-may-be-coming?lite" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

Looks like Envia has something. Maybe not 400 wh/kg but something close. http://bottomline.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/08/09/13204747-gm-exec-100-200-miles-on-a-charge-may-be-coming?lite" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ya, saw that. i personally think the price of current technology will be halved just by the increase in demand and larger production volumes.

they would do duty in a car, be swapped out in 4-5 years for stationary UPS or other storage use.

 

[LTLFTcomposite]

Looks like Envia has something. Maybe not 400 wh/kg but something close. http://bottomline.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/08/09/13204747-gm-exec-100-200-miles-on-a-charge-may-be-coming?lite" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Double the range, half the price... if that can be accomplished with the requisite reliability and durability, "game changer" is probably an understatement.

 

[SanDust]

If you could get it to $150/kWh, which I doubt, the Volt battery pack would cost under $2500 for the cells. With double the energy density you'd have half the number of cells to monitor. That would be more important the the range I'd think because matching and monitoring all the cells is expensive. You'd probably also get a fifth seat.

The structure should be more stable than what Nissan and LG Chem are using now, giving the battery a longer cycle life.

 

[GRA]

If you could get it to $150/kWh, which I doubt, the Volt battery pack would cost under $2500 for the cells. With double the energy density you'd have half the number of cells to monitor. That would be more important the the range I'd think because matching and monitoring all the cells is expensive. You'd probably also get a fifth seat.

The structure should be more stable than what Nissan and LG Chem are using now, giving the battery a longer cycle life.

I do note that they've backed off from triple density/one third of the cost to double density/one half, which was what I expected during commercialization. We'll have to see if they need to back off further, or if they can actually produce that. I disagree with Dave that they'll get to 1/2 cost just by higher volume and the learning curve anytime soon. Every analysis I've seen indicates that is unlikely to take place within the same timeframe as GM is talking about. I'll be happy to be proven wrong.

 

[GaslessInSeattle]

I do note that they've backed off from triple density/one third of the cost to double density/one half, which was what I expected during commercialization...

perhaps that's because they are realizing they can't get away with using nearly 100% of capacity like Nissan does. Ideally, about 1/3 capacity should be out of bounds. From what I've read and been told, to maximize battery life, hybrids including the Volt access about the inner 65% of their pack, the rest is buffer. Such a cushion would allow for more dependable GOM predictions in a BEV, as the cut off could go more by actual miles than a precise floating voltage since there would be more wiggle room (which is what I suspect the Volt does to improve "accuracy"). I would think more of the pack could be accessible in cold weather to make up for range loss due to cold. Also, that extra cushion would allow a more stable pack life, allowing access to more of the overall pack as it ages and degrades, keeping more consistent range available to the user... mainstream consumers don't like fluctuation! All in all, I don't expect a big jump in range at first with the next jump in technology, but rather a more realistic and user friendly system for range management.

 

[GRA]

I do note that they've backed off from triple density/one third of the cost to double density/one half, which was what I expected during commercialization...

perhaps that's because they are realizing they can't get away with using nearly 100% of capacity like Nissan does. Ideally, about 1/3 capacity should be out of bounds. From what I've read and been told, to maximize battery life, hybrids including the Volt access about the inner 65% of their pack, the rest is buffer. Such a cushion would allow for more dependable GOM predictions in a BEV, as the cut off could go more by actual miles than a precise floating voltage since there would be more wiggle room (which is what I suspect the Volt does to improve "accuracy"). I would think more of the pack could be accessible in cold weather to make up for range loss due to cold. Also, that extra cushion would allow a more stable pack life, allowing access to more of the overall pack as it ages and degrades, keeping more consistent range available to the user... mainstream consumers don't like fluctuation! All in all, I don't expect a big jump in range at first with the next jump in technology, but rather a more realistic and user friendly system for range management.

Agreed. BTW, Thursday's WSJ has a front page article which says that a Chinese company is buying A123 (essentially throwing them a lifeline):

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443991704577576881949308486.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

If you could get it to $150/kWh, which I doubt, the Volt battery pack would cost under $2500 for the cells. With double the energy density you'd have half the number of cells to monitor. That would be more important the the range I'd think because matching and monitoring all the cells is expensive. You'd probably also get a fifth seat.

The structure should be more stable than what Nissan and LG Chem are using now, giving the battery a longer cycle life.

I do note that they've backed off from triple density/one third of the cost to double density/one half, which was what I expected during commercialization. We'll have to see if they need to back off further, or if they can actually produce that. I disagree with Dave that they'll get to 1/2 cost just by higher volume and the learning curve anytime soon. Every analysis I've seen indicates that is unlikely to take place within the same timeframe as GM is talking about. I'll be happy to be proven wrong.

i think before we can agree to disagree we need to determine what the baseline price of batteries are now. i personally think all reported figures are grossly inflated due to far off manufacturing, limited supply and demand and uncertainty with EVs in general and an volatile political climate.

it is THAT price i am referring to.

 

[Herm]

How much is a quality 2.5Ah laptop cell selling for now?.. in large quantities..

 

[ERG4ALL]

Regarding A123s possibility of coming to market. I'd say the odds are pretty good. After using $295 million of taxpayers money for R&D, Solyndra pretty well turned off our politicians to see the A123 project through. Apparently China thinks that whatever A123 has developed must be pretty good because they just bought 80% of the company for $450 million. So another bunch of intellectual property goes to China along with the jobs and profits. Thus, to get longer range American Technology we'll have to by a chinese BYD or a Coda. Yessiree, we have some real intellectual giants in Washington, as Will Rogers said, "the best politicians that money can buy".

 

[Stoaty]

Interesting ranking of Lithium ion battery makers and future possibilities:

http://www.luxresearchinc.com/blog/2011/09/ranking-li-ion-battery-developers-on-the-lux-innovation-grid/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[marccbr]

Looks like we may be replacing the batteries in our vehicles with these cheaper and longer range ones when it comes time.
http://theenergycollective.com/cliftonyin/102906/one-step-closer-game-changing-electric-vehicle-batteries" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[LEAFfan]

Actually, there isn't anything new in this Envia article from what had been posted many months ago.

 

[mkjayakumar]

With no news or updates after February, I think perhaps Envia has stalled

 

[marccbr]

It dosen't seem like they stalled since as of last week the GM CEO thinks that it will be ready in 2 - 4 years and they have completed some testing. Hopefully it comes true but we shall see.

 

[cwerdna]

With no news or updates after February, I think perhaps Envia has stalled

On this note, http://www.torquenews.com/1075/gms-akerson-promises-200-mile-range-electric-car-few-years" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; was posted in a LinkedIn group I'm on. I haven't followed Envia (and still don't) but one person posted this comment (Akerson being GM's current CEO, who is not a car guy):

What Akerson knows about automobiles, you could put on the top of a pin and still have room! Envia is a start-up looking for lots of capital and as a result, tells a lot of half truths. Go to their website and look at the data. The 45Ah cell drops to 35Ah on the second cycle and by 450 cycles is about 25Ah and still declining. The 400Wh/kg is correct for first cycle only! They have probably 5-10 years to take this to production plus need 100's of millions of dollars to produce cells for automotive. If they tell the truth no investor would touch them, so they distort reality. GM Ventures probably knows only slightly more than Akerson. They put $5M into Bright Automotive who went out of business this year.
Breakthough? Not even close. The media seems also about a bright as Akerson.

The author of the Torque News article responded:

Yes, I saw those things while reviewing the data. 300 charge cycles, and 10% loss of capacity on a C/3 discharge test. Not good. However elsewhere on the site they talked about 1000 cycles at 100% DOD with 100% capacity remaining. In other words, it's 99% likely that the data presented on the website is only part of the story, and that there's a bunch of data they're not publishing. I wrote the article trusting that there's more to this than what they're disclosing publicly.

I think they're referring to http://enviasystems.com/announcement/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

 

[mkjayakumar]

I don't see half truths or lying. They have simply posted the results of their tests. Even with 10% degradation after 300 cycles, the energy density is atleast twice as any other cells that are in production today. Agreed that making a battery pack out of these cells could still be tricky, and we don't know the effects of heat and fast charging yet. All said I haven't seen where the fudging is. 400 Wh/Kg might be over promising and headline catching, but their test results are just black and white for everyone to see and not so disappointing either.

My main concern is lack of any additional information over the last 6 months, which could very well mean they have hit a brick wall.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

My main concern is lack of any additional information over the last 6 months, which could very well mean they have hit a brick wall.

that brick wall could be anything. marketing, production facilities, patent delays. in the grand scheme of things; a revolutionary product launch is a slow process and most of it is aggravated by money grubbing corporate raiders

 

[evnow]

The 45Ah cell drops to 35Ah on the second cycle and by 450 cycles is about 25Ah and still declining.

Not quite correct.

That chart is kind of weird, but the CEO confirmed that the cycle shown is for a 80% charge.

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2012/02/envia-20120227.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;