Argonne: EVs will have gas-like energy density by 2045

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

GRA

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 19, 2011
Messages
14,018
Location
East side of San Francisco Bay
Via ABG: http://www.autoblog.com/2016/05/12/argonne-ev-gas-energy-density-2045/

Fact #1: the energy and power density of automotive batteries are constantly increasing. Fact #2: they still have a long, long way to go to match the energy density of gasoline. Fact #3: according to Argonne National Lab, once you correct for the efficiency of the powertrain, we're only 40 years away from a time when gas and electric powertrains will offer the same energy density. . . .
Someone at ABG needs to work on their math skills. At least, I get 30 years when I subtract 2015 from 2045.
 
GRA said:
Via ABG: http://www.autoblog.com/2016/05/12/argonne-ev-gas-energy-density-2045/

Fact #1: the energy and power density of automotive batteries are constantly increasing. Fact #2: they still have a long, long way to go to match the energy density of gasoline. Fact #3: according to Argonne National Lab, once you correct for the efficiency of the powertrain, we're only 40 years away from a time when gas and electric powertrains will offer the same energy density. . . .
Someone at ABG needs to work on their math skills. At least, I get 30 years when I subtract 2015 from 2045.

Yeah, tons of errors in that article. Here's another one:

And so, given that 100x factor mentioned above, you'd need 100 pounds of battery to go as far as those 10 pounds of gasoline would take you, if all other factors were the same.

Last I checked, 100x10 = 1,000, not 100.

The other issue I have with this article is that it is focused on weight only, as if that is the reason BEVs are being held back. While weight matters, Tesla has proven that a heavy weight vehicle can still be highly successful. IMHO, the two biggest roadblocks for EVs today are 1) battery COST and 2) rapid refueling on the go (both speed and availability of chargers).
 
GetOffYourGas said:
GRA said:
Via ABG: http://www.autoblog.com/2016/05/12/argonne-ev-gas-energy-density-2045/

Fact #1: the energy and power density of automotive batteries are constantly increasing. Fact #2: they still have a long, long way to go to match the energy density of gasoline. Fact #3: according to Argonne National Lab, once you correct for the efficiency of the powertrain, we're only 40 years away from a time when gas and electric powertrains will offer the same energy density. . . .
Someone at ABG needs to work on their math skills. At least, I get 30 years when I subtract 2015 from 2045.

Yeah, tons of errors in that article. Here's another one:

And so, given that 100x factor mentioned above, you'd need 100 pounds of battery to go as far as those 10 pounds of gasoline would take you, if all other factors were the same.

Last I checked, 100x10 = 1,000, not 100.

The other issue I have with this article is that it is focused on weight only, as if that is the reason BEVs are being held back. While weight matters, Tesla has proven that a heavy weight vehicle can still be highly successful. IMHO, the two biggest roadblocks for EVs today are 1) battery COST and 2) rapid refueling on the go (both speed and availability of chargers).
No arguments from me. To be successful, any AFV will need to reduce costs of both itself and its fuel/charging infrastructure until it's competitive with gas ICEs.

One thing's for sure, even with the 3 to 5 times greater efficiency of electric motors, gasoline has an specific energy of around 12,400Wh/kg. Battery _packs_ are currently in the 100-200 Wh/kg. range, with theoretical limits for Li-ion around 400Wh/kg at the _cell level_ IIRR; practical maximums are less. Li-Si would be a bit better, Li-S better than that, but only something like Li-air will get into the range that, with the above efficiency advantages, will give BEVs comparable range/weight. So far, none of these have been commercialized, and no one yet knows if they can be, as aside from cost they all suffer from longevity or other problems at the moment. I'm currently reading "Advances in Battery Technologies for Electric Vehicles," (2015): http://store.elsevier.com/Advances-in-Battery-Technologies-for-Electric-Vehicles/isbn-9781782423980/

which lays out the issues facing "Post-lithium-ion battery chemistries for hybrid electric vehicles and battery electric vehicles" in great detail
(see Chapter 7 in the ToC). Actually, far too much detail unless you've got a degree in electrochemistry and love looking at SEM photographs of cell lithiation etc. plus chemical equations :lol: However, many of the other chapters provide a lot of useful info about the various choices in designing and building packs, different types of BMS, cell balancing and state estimation, thermal management methodologies, aging mechanisms etc. in much greater detail than we usually have access to (again, see the ToC). The book's in English but most of the contributors aren't from the U.S./UK so the syntax is sometimes awkward. On a quick scan, the majority of them are German, but there are also Italians, Koreans, Singaporese, as well as a few from the U.S. (from Ovonics and PNNL). A lot of the EV market chapters will seem a bit old hat or out of date to long-time MNL readers, but there's still a lot of useful technical stuff here.
 
GetOffYourGas said:
GRA said:
Via ABG: http://www.autoblog.com/2016/05/12/argonne-ev-gas-energy-density-2045/

Fact #1: the energy and power density of automotive batteries are constantly increasing. Fact #2: they still have a long, long way to go to match the energy density of gasoline. Fact #3: according to Argonne National Lab, once you correct for the efficiency of the powertrain, we're only 40 years away from a time when gas and electric powertrains will offer the same energy density. . . .
Someone at ABG needs to work on their math skills. At least, I get 30 years when I subtract 2015 from 2045.

Yeah, tons of errors in that article. Here's another one:

And so, given that 100x factor mentioned above, you'd need 100 pounds of battery to go as far as those 10 pounds of gasoline would take you, if all other factors were the same.

Last I checked, 100x10 = 1,000, not 100.

The other issue I have with this article is that it is focused on weight only, as if that is the reason BEVs are being held back. While weight matters, Tesla has proven that a heavy weight vehicle can still be highly successful. IMHO, the two biggest roadblocks for EVs today are 1) battery COST and 2) rapid refueling on the go (both speed and availability of chargers).

I also agree with your points. We don't need BEV batteries to have the energy density of gasoline because BEVs are so much more efficient then ICEVs. I personally think 300 - 350 mile range is plenty for the average driver switching over from an ICEV. Definitely won't be 30 years to get that kind of range, Tesla is almost there now!
 
That's an awfully long prediction timeline for technology that's under heavy research and development. I wonder how much of the prediction is based on actual technology in the pipeline, and how much is simply assumptions about rate of advancement. By 2045 we may not even be talking about Lithium batteries at all.
 
Back
Top