All "Future" battery technology thread

[planet4ever]

I do not see your problem. Using Leaf numbers, a half hour quick charge gives 80% of battery capacity, about a 50 mile range.

BUZZZ! Half an hour is not from empty to 80%, but from LBW to 80%, which is really 60-65% of usable battery capacity. But it is possible to stretch that to 50 miles if you keep your speed down.

I think lpickup has the answer to Dave's pessimistic assumption, except that he didn't carry it through to its logical conclusion. Dave, lpickup, and I would probably do the planning to keep the battery in the middle of its range, but I'm willing to bet that most Joe Publics will have their battery at 100% nearly every morning. If the car sits at home for 10 hours and has a 6.6kW charger, that gives -duh- 66kW to use every day. Even if they hotrod it and get only 2 m/kWh they'd have to go 130 miles every day to keep the battery at a constant level. So every night, except for those occasional long trips, the charge level will go higher and higher until it hits the max, where it will stay.

Ray

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

Tesla 3 00 mile sales will be no more than a few hundred a month ever.
Put a 100-150 mile EV out there for $22-24,000 and you will sell 5000-10,000 a month if gas staysabove 4

 

[Ingineer]

The CHAdeMO specs goes to 100kW (200A 500V). The charger may limit at less. Most of todays chargers are limited to something between 49kW and 62.5kW.

The protocol supports more, but the current top end limit is 150A @ 500v. The US-Spec connectors are only certified by UL for 120A, so that limits QC's on Leafs in the US to about 47kW max. (The Leaf's top end voltage is ~390v on QC). In Japan/Europe, the connectors are certified to 150A, which would give you about 59kW tops.

-Phil

 

[Desertstraw]

I do not see your problem. Using Leaf numbers, a half hour quick charge gives 80% of battery capacity, about a 50 mile range.

BUZZZ! Half an hour is not from empty to 80%, but from LBW to 80%, which is really 60-65% of usable battery capacity. But it is possible to stretch that to 50 miles if you keep your speed down.
Ray

You have changed the numbers a little but not my point. If you want to drive 500 miles in a day, you would have to allow 3 hours for charging along the way. With meals and rest stops this is not much.

 

[bill]

I don't think this has been posted yet. The Envia battery has been discussed many times and this main article is of little value but read the multiple comments from the Envia rep. Lots of details I haven't sen on other sites.

http://engineergreen.blogspot.com/2012/03/envia-battery-technology-aargon_04.html

Argonne National lab did not play any role in our 400 Wh/kg battery program. Envia holds Dr Michael Thakeray in the highest regard in cathode battery chemistry. He is the best thinker, bar none in this field and an icon. We licensed his patents from Argonne four years ago. We developed our own cathode and cathode compositions to solve automotive cathode specs. This was really really difficult - we went from a few grams of cathode material to hundreds of kilograms of cathode material. To get to compositions that solves automotive specs took 2-3 years and over 25M test hours. And I still think we have solved 70-80% of the market problem. To scale-up took another 2 years of hard work. But all that work got us nowhere close to 400 Wh/kg. It took a 4M grant from ARPA-E and another 2 years of work to develop the Si-C anode and cycle it 300 times or so to get to a 400 Wh/kg 45-Ah cell. Argonne was not a party to any of this work. In addition to keep the cathode as abode at higher voltages, we developed our own electrolyte.

Dear Cory: Cathode structural patents were Mike Thackeray's (as i pointed out). With cathode, you cannot get to 400 Wh/kg (technology has been licensed to several companies and only one announcement so far on 400 Wh/kg). Si-C anode is all Envia's work. Cathode development based on Mike's patents was all Envia's work. Electrolyte development was all Envia's work. Cell design and development was all Envia's work. BTW on the business model, Envia's mission is to bring the prices down for these packs asap. We could go down the A123 way and raised 100's of millions of dollars - but it does not seem like the best business outcome. We have to come up with the model where all parties in the value chain (including ANL) get rewarded but the pack prices do go down.

@Cory - We have not outsourced any technology to the Chinese. We have a fully owned Envia-only Chinese subsidiary that makes prototype cells in China. We never make any anode, cathode or electrolyte in China (whether inside Envia China or outside). We don't have any collaboration or have not accepted any form of investment from a Chinese company or Chinese Government to date.

As for rewards, the license agreement with ANL is confidential.

@Jack - I don't know the answer yet. Market forces will dictate this.

-Bill

 

[Desertstraw]

now this is good for a one stop charge on a 500 mile trip. ok , ya i can see that and that should cover about ½ of 1% of the trips made.

I really do not understand you. With a 300 mile range, almost all trips are covered by the overnight charge, e.g. I could do a round trip between Phoenix and Tucson in one day. What is left is long trips, e.g. cross country trips, something I have done a number of times. It is my experience that anything over 500 miles in one day is next to impossible without several drivers. Yes there are always exceptions, I once did 800 miles. The essential point is that if the Envia claim holds up, for all real purposes an electric car will do anything that an ICE car can do, and better.

 

[evnow]

I don't think this has been posted yet. The Envia battery has been discussed many times and this main article is of little value but read the multiple comments from the Envia rep. Lots of details I haven't sen on other sites.

Thanks for the link.

I think there are a lot of sceptics, and rightly so, who dismiss envia as just "NMC" or just a copy of ANL. If this was so, there should have been many companies who could claim the same 400 kWh/kg or $125/kWh cells.

Also, I see most of the people with such claims do not speak using personal expertise in the battery field (like that Cory guy). I'm also a little sceptical when people bash companies based on jingoism.

 

[surfingslovak]

The essential point is that if the Envia claim holds up, for all real purposes an electric car will do anything that an ICE car can do, and better.

Well put! The Deloitte study published last year indicated that 200-miles range will cover the needs and expectations of most prospective buyers. What we have today in the Leaf can be considered the minimum requirement for mass adoption. Things will get very interesting once EVs can drive 200-300 miles on a charge, there are quick chargers available, and the sticker price is competitive with conventional vehicles.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

now this is good for a one stop charge on a 500 mile trip. ok , ya i can see that and that should cover about ½ of 1% of the trips made.

I really do not understand you. With a 300 mile range, almost all trips are covered by the overnight charge, e.g. I could do a round trip between Phoenix and Tucson in one day. What is left is long trips, e.g. cross country trips, something I have done a number of times. It is my experience that anything over 500 miles in one day is next to impossible without several drivers. Yes there are always exceptions, I once did 800 miles. The essential point is that if the Envia claim holds up, for all real purposes an electric car will do anything that an ICE car can do, and better.

ya, i see that.

lets take a poll. how many 300+ mile trips has anyone taken in the past 30 days?

or past 3 months?

my point is need verses what we willing to pay for. you might be in the position where you can sell all your cars, pay a big time premium and be a 100% electric household.

i am not nor is most of the world and this is not beyond the manufacturers of these electric cars either. it is quite frankly cheaper to build a charging network.

i know that does not sound valid but it is. for 230 million, we are getting 15,000 L2 and 310 L3 (at least that is the rumor) think of what half the annual oil subsidy would get us?

you want technology that we quite frankly do not have. charging technology is already here now (well, not nearby since closest QC for me is 119.3 miles ...ya, i have thought about it...)

so, ok. talk about what can be done TOMORROW...but i am driving a Leaf TODAY. i want something done today. not 5 years from now.

**edit** and another thing.

right now there are most of 310 L3 stations up for grabs right now for any business willing to donate 2 fricking parking spaces. the project will pay for installation, electricity used, and 100% of all expenses for the first 3 years.

so why is the rollout so slow. it is because of negativity, uncertainity and the lack of synergy between Nissan, PUD's, dealerships AND Owners

even we cannot agree on charging. do you not think others read this forum and sense a lot of apprehension between owners??

how many interested people are being turned away from our comments that to be honest with ya, do not seem very positive?

 

[LEAFfan]

BUZZZ! Half an hour is not from empty to 80%, but from LBW to 80%, which is really 60-65% of usable battery capacity. But it is possible to stretch that to 50 miles if you keep your speed down.
Ray

YES, it is, at least on the Blink I've been using. I've been to Turtle (empty) and it QCd to 80% in 30 minutes. At LBW, it was LESS than 30 minutes. All of my QCs to 80% have been less than 30 minutes, except the Turtle one.
I will have no trouble going well over 50 miles on the freeway at 55-60mph.

 

[TonyWilliams]

At 60mph (hit 4.2m/kW h for 30 mile trip yesterday), I can get over 4m/kW h (I always exceed the 'chart') which would take me 75-80 miles. QCing will definitely work for me.

Are you factoring in all the variables? For instance, PHX does have elevation of over 1000 feet MSL. That means the air, at the same temperature, is less dense than the chart data at sea level. There is a correction for that of +1.5% per 1000 feet density altitude.

 

[LEAFfan]

At 60mph (hit 4.2m/kW h for 30 mile trip yesterday), I can get over 4m/kW h (I always exceed the 'chart') which would take me 75-80 miles. QCing will definitely work for me.

Are you factoring in all the variables? For instance, PHX does have elevation of over 1000 feet MSL. That means the air, at the same temperature, is less dense than the chart data at sea level. There is a correction for that of +1.5% per 1000 feet density altitude.

Actually, it is relatively flat here...under 1000 ft. elevation. If I were to use QCing, it would mostly be from here to San Diego or L.A. Those routes are still under 1000 ft, and relatively flat. I've been driving for the past 9 months in exactly the same conditions, so I know what I can obtain.

 

[TonyWilliams]

So, what I'm trying to determine is "what's different". I don't think your LEAF is any different than the other 23,000, and there's not much driver technique in cruising down a flat road at 60mph. I find what most people will start with a reset the economy meter, then drive numerous miles at a relatively high surface street mile/kWh, say 5.0, of then hit the highway at 60mph. The meter never gets reset, which means the data for 60mph is corrupted, and will average several decimals higher than a straight run at 60mph, where the economy meter was reset once reaching 60mph.

The next issue is which meter are you using? The dash one, or the console one which reads 0.1 higher?

Being flat has nothing to do with elevation:

Phoenix:
PHX
Lat/Long:  33-26-03.4000N / 112-00-41.7000W
Elevation:  1135 ft. / 345.9 m (surveyed)

Chandler:
CHD
Lat/Long:  33-16-08.8000N / 111-48-40.0000W
Elevation:  1243 ft. / 378.9 m (surveyed)

Former Williams AFB:
Lat/Long:  33-18-28.1619N / 111-39-19.6581W
Elevation:  1384 ft. / 421.8 m (surveyed)

 

[lectricgenius]

@BILL That was not just a company official but their CEO who posted on my blog. In case no one is aware who Atul Kapadia is, he is a venture capitalist; sold one of his companies to Cisco (for 150 million) and the other one to Sun Microsystems for an undisclosed amount (undisclosed 2 me anyway). I was glad to have that exchange with him, but I'm sorry he didnt keep commenting to me .

 

[Luft]

I don't think this has been posted yet. The Envia battery has been discussed many times and this main article is of little value but read the multiple comments from the Envia rep. Lots of details I haven't sen on other sites.

Thanks for the link.

I think there are a lot of sceptics, and rightly so, who dismiss envia as just "NMC" or just a copy of ANL. If this was so, there should have been many companies who could claim the same 400 kWh/kg or $125/kWh cells.

Also, I see most of the people with such claims do not speak using personal expertise in the battery field (like that Cory guy). I'm also a little sceptical when people bash companies based on jingoism.

I think that this is the company that the guys on EVTV.com were talking about. They have no battery and do not make batteries. They own the intellectual property rights and are looking for people that will pay for licenses to make their batteries.

 

[brucedp]

Envia announced they have a breakthrough
http://enviasystems.com/announcement/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
400 Wh/kg is here!


I posted more on the evdl.org that some might find interesting
http://electric-vehicle-discussion-list.413529.n4.nabble.com/EVLN-400-Wh-kg-is-here-Envia-announces-big-breakthrough-td4508459.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The highest energy density known to be recorded


{brucedp.150m.com}

 

[Ingineer]

Awesome TED presentation on MIT's Liquid Metal battery. (for extremely low-cost grid bulk-storage.)

Note that this battery tech cannot be used in EV's, unless for very definite high-usage scenarios. For example, delivery trucks for fleet use. Ir maybe even a "long trip" battery for Project Better Place's battery swap.

Regardless the argument for/against battery swapping, I think Nissan should have incorporated this technology into the Leaf. It would probably add only a few hundred dollars to the cost.

Imagine that you keep your 22kWh battery for normal commuter driving, but when you want to take a trip, you stop in at a battery station, pick up the 200kWh battery and hit the road. When you arrive at your destination city, you visit the station again to swap back, each time with a full charge. It would be possible to use a Liquid Metal battery in this scenario because they are under constant use. (required to keep the battery at a high-temperature molten state)

-Phil

 

[Ingineer]

FYI: Note that it's still possible to swap the battery in a leaf, but it would probably take about 10 minutes at a minimum to do it on a current Leaf.

-Phil

 

[davewill]

FYI: Note that it's still possible to swap the battery in a leaf, but it would probably take about 10 minutes at a minimum to do it on a current Leaf.

I would think that Better Place could develop a quick change kit for the LEAF if they got serious about offering battery swap here.

 

[Luft]

Is anyone else uneasy that GM is investing in Envia?

GM has a record of gaining the rights to battery technology only to sell those rights to the petroleum industry.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobasys