Page 3 of 5

Re: GCR: GM battery chief: 600 mile EVs viable, million-mile battery in sight

Posted: Tue May 26, 2020 7:37 am
by danrjones
Oilpan4 wrote:
Sat May 23, 2020 9:21 pm
I thought tesla claimed they had a 1 million mile battery last year.
The problem is do people want to pay for 600 miles of range?
...

I do, if the price is reasonable. Even if the battery is still $100 per kWh, that could be 200 kWh of battery for 20 thousand -> plus the car around it.
So maybe 45k? 45k with incentives available to me right now would be worth it if I liked the car. 600 miles is even more important if it was a TRUCK
People easily pay 60 grand for F150s. .

The reason I want more miles is because where I live, EPA range is fictional. My 2018 Leaf averages 3.3 Kwh on the open road. Meaning since I don't push the lower limit of the battery I get maybe 100 miles. Add in terrain and it can drop a lot further. One of the drives I like to do to go hiking takes me from 2200 feet to 10,000 feet. Even a Leaf plus looks iffy given the lack of charging where I live.

I think having 600 miles or more really just depends on where you live. In some areas it is probably way overkill, in others, its what's needed to replace and kill the ICE. That and charging options... So the question really just depends on where you live, your lifestyle and what your goal is. For a in town or commute only car, it is probably not needed. Heck my 2018 Leaf is overkill for an in town and commute car.

But I can see myself having an EV truck in the future and wanting to tow. Or an EV Class C motor home? What range will that need? Probably a hell of a lot.

Re: GCR: GM battery chief: 600 mile EVs viable, million-mile battery in sight

Posted: Tue May 26, 2020 9:13 am
by WetEV
GRA wrote:
Mon May 25, 2020 9:58 pm
Yeah, really - you just made our point.
Your point was Moore's law is the fastest exponential growth known to date, or that other technologies never have exponential growth?

The first point is boring. Doesn't show the second point.

Re: GCR: GM battery chief: 600 mile EVs viable, million-mile battery in sight

Posted: Tue May 26, 2020 11:11 am
by goldbrick
My memory of Moore's law was something like the number of circuits on a certain area of silicon would double every 18 months. That's just a swag and there are many differing versions of what Moore originally posited, but that's the gist of it. There are obvious cost and performance ramifications that occur when the size of each integrated circuit shrinks but the original thought was all about circuit density. This started in the early 1960's IIRC, and it has been eerily accurate since the days of $500 hand-held calculators that could only do the basic 4 math functions.

Batteries haven't followed nearly such a trend. Li batteries were a huge jump in tech and capacity but what about Pb-acid? It hasn't changed much since the days of Volta's piles. Li tech has certainly improved and shows signs of further improvements but the gains are uneven and hard to predict.

Re: GCR: GM battery chief: 600 mile EVs viable, million-mile battery in sight

Posted: Tue May 26, 2020 11:34 am
by WetEV
goldbrick wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 11:11 am
My memory of Moore's law was something like the number of circuits on a certain area of silicon would double every 18 months. That's just a swag and there are many differing versions of what Moore originally posited, but that's the gist of it. There are obvious cost and performance ramifications that occur when the size of each integrated circuit shrinks but the original thought was all about circuit density. This started in the early 1960's IIRC, and it has been eerily accurate since the days of $500 hand-held calculators that could only do the basic 4 math functions.

Batteries haven't followed nearly such a trend. Li batteries were a huge jump in tech and capacity but what about Pb-acid? It hasn't changed much since the days of Volta's piles. Li tech has certainly improved and shows signs of further improvements but the gains are uneven and hard to predict.
What about vacuum tubes?

Li ion batteries have improved in cost, energy per kg and service lifetime since their invention in the 1970's. While the future of both transistors and batteries is uncertain, both have fairly straight lines on a log graph. The path for double capacity in the same mass and for half the cost per kWh is fairly clear, but beyond that isn't clear. The path for a few more generations of transistors is fairly clear, but beyond that isn't. Which was true in 1980 as well as today.

Physics provides the limits of technology. Once you can count the atoms in a transistor on your fingers, it's not going to get much smaller. Ten atoms of gate oxide are an insulator, so the transistor works. Two atoms are not.

Once batteries get close to the energy density of fuels like gasoline (if you include the necessary oxygen), then little improvement is possible. That's about fifty times the present energy density. So batteries might, just might, improve for a long time.

Re: GCR: GM battery chief: 600 mile EVs viable, million-mile battery in sight

Posted: Tue May 26, 2020 4:46 pm
by GRA
WetEV wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 9:13 am
GRA wrote:
Mon May 25, 2020 9:58 pm
Yeah, really - you just made our point.
Your point was Moore's law is the fastest exponential growth known to date, or that other technologies never have exponential growth?

The first point is boring. Doesn't show the second point.

No, the point is that no other tech development has ever shown the prolonged constant rate of doubling as the semi-conductors that Moore's Law applies to, and which has only applied to them. Citing Moore's Law as an example of what can be expected from any other tech development is unsupported by the entire history of technical development, including energy. Semi- conductors are unique.

And of course, Moore had to modify the original version of the law, as he originally said the doubling rate was every 18 months. That rate didn't last.

Re: GCR: GM battery chief: 600 mile EVs viable, million-mile battery in sight

Posted: Tue May 26, 2020 7:05 pm
by WetEV
GRA wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 4:46 pm
No, the point is that no other tech development has ever shown the prolonged constant rate of doubling as the semi-conductors that Moore's Law applies to, and which has only applied to them.
To date.

So Li-ion batteries have only halved the cost five or six times. Only a decade's worth of Moore's law, and at less than a third the rate of improvement of Moore's law. Once again, so what?
GRA wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 4:46 pm
Citing Moore's Law as an example of what can be expected from any other tech development is unsupported by the entire history of technical development, including energy. Semi- conductors are unique.
In the number of generations the improvement has gone on, yes. At the rate of improvement, yes.

Strawman of batteries are just like semiconductors is your loser. Take it away.

Moore's law is another example of improvement through experience. Goes all the way back to at least Adam Smith, in 1776, "Wealth of Nations". A stunning one, yes, but still just one of many.

Re: GCR: GM battery chief: 600 mile EVs viable, million-mile battery in sight

Posted: Tue May 26, 2020 8:49 pm
by GRA
WetEV wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 7:05 pm
GRA wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 4:46 pm
No, the point is that no other tech development has ever shown the prolonged constant rate of doubling as the semi-conductors that Moore's Law applies to, and which has only applied to them.
To date.

So Li-ion batteries have only halved the cost five or six times. Only a decade's worth of Moore's law, and at less than a third the rate of improvement of Moore's law. Once again, so what?
GRA wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 4:46 pm
Citing Moore's Law as an example of what can be expected from any other tech development is unsupported by the entire history of technical development, including energy. Semi- conductors are unique.
In the number of generations the improvement has gone on, yes. At the rate of improvement, yes.

Strawman of batteries are just like semiconductors is your loser. Take it away.
No, citing Moore's Law as an example in reference to any other technology's likely future development isn't a straw man, it's what you did. Our point is that Moore's Law has no relevance to any other tech development, and has no business being cited other than as a unique case (so far, measured over a hundred thousand years or so of human invention) of R&D timescale.

Moore's law is another example of improvement through experience. Goes all the way back to at least Adam Smith, in 1776, "Wealth of Nations". A stunning one, yes, but still just one of many.
If you want to use it so, fine, but identify it as such. Don't try to use it as if it's typical of tech development.

I think this horse is thoroughly dead,so you get the last word, if you wish.

Re: GCR: GM battery chief: 600 mile EVs viable, million-mile battery in sight

Posted: Tue May 26, 2020 8:53 pm
by GRA
WetEV wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 7:05 pm
GRA wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 4:46 pm
No, the point is that no other tech development has ever shown the prolonged constant rate of doubling as the semi-conductors that Moore's Law applies to, and which has only applied to them.
To date.

So Li-ion batteries have only halved the cost five or six times. Only a decade's worth of Moore's law, and at less than a third the rate of improvement of Moore's law. Once again, so what?
GRA wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 4:46 pm
Citing Moore's Law as an example of what can be expected from any other tech development is unsupported by the entire history of technical development, including energy. Semi- conductors are unique.
In the number of generations the improvement has gone on, yes. At the rate of improvement, yes.

Strawman of batteries are just like semiconductors is your loser. Take it away.

No, citing Moore's Law as an example in reference to any other technology's likely future development isn't a straw man, it's what you did. Our point is that Moore's Law has no relevance to any other tech development, and has no business being cited other than as a unique case (so far, measured over a hundred thousand years or so of human invention) of likely tech improvement timescale.

Moore's law is another example of improvement through experience. Goes all the way back to at least Adam Smith, in 1776, "Wealth of Nations". A stunning one, yes, but still just one of many.

If you want to use it so, fine, but identify it as such. Don't try to use it as if it's typical of tech development.

I think this horse is now thoroughly dead, so you get the last word if you wish.

Re: GCR: GM battery chief: 600 mile EVs viable, million-mile battery in sight

Posted: Wed May 27, 2020 3:04 am
by coleafrado
WetEV wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 11:34 am
Physics provides the limits of technology. Once you can count the atoms in a transistor on your fingers, it's not going to get much smaller. Ten atoms of gate oxide are an insulator, so the transistor works. Two atoms are not.

Once batteries get close to the energy density of fuels like gasoline (if you include the necessary oxygen), then little improvement is possible. That's about fifty times the present energy density. So batteries might, just might, improve for a long time.
pingswept wrote:Battery scientists have a metric called maximum theoretical specific energy; you can read about the definition in Advanced Batteries by Robert Huggins. Right now, the most energy dense batteries you can buy are lithium ion, which are in the 100-200 Wh/kg range. I don't know what the best battery is, but later in the book, Huggins shows calculations that indicate that Li/CuCl2 cells have an MTSE of 1166.4 Wh/kg. (5x the capacity of current batteries!)

We know that the highest MTSE is at least 1166.4 Wh/kg; you could use his method to calculate the same value for other chemistries, but the search space is pretty large.

I've also seen references on the internet to Li/O2 and Al/O2 batteries with MTSE of 2815 and 5200 Wh/kg, respectively. Not sure how credible those references are. Later references, like this 2008 article in the Journal of the Electrochemical Society, suggest that the MTSE for a Li/O2 cell is around 1400 Wh/kg.

The energy density of gasoline is about 13000 Wh/kg when air mass is ignored.
https://electronics.stackexchange.com/a/4329

Re: GCR: GM battery chief: 600 mile EVs viable, million-mile battery in sight

Posted: Wed May 27, 2020 6:56 am
by WetEV
coleafrado wrote:
Wed May 27, 2020 3:04 am
WetEV wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 11:34 am
Physics provides the limits of technology. Once you can count the atoms in a transistor on your fingers, it's not going to get much smaller. Ten atoms of gate oxide are an insulator, so the transistor works. Two atoms are not.

Once batteries get close to the energy density of fuels like gasoline (if you include the necessary oxygen), then little improvement is possible. That's about fifty times the present energy density. So batteries might, just might, improve for a long time.
pingswept wrote:Battery scientists have a metric called maximum theoretical specific energy; you can read about the definition in Advanced Batteries by Robert Huggins. Right now, the most energy dense batteries you can buy are lithium ion, which are in the 100-200 Wh/kg range. I don't know what the best battery is, but later in the book, Huggins shows calculations that indicate that Li/CuCl2 cells have an MTSE of 1166.4 Wh/kg. (5x the capacity of current batteries!)

We know that the highest MTSE is at least 1166.4 Wh/kg; you could use his method to calculate the same value for other chemistries, but the search space is pretty large.

I've also seen references on the internet to Li/O2 and Al/O2 batteries with MTSE of 2815 and 5200 Wh/kg, respectively. Not sure how credible those references are. Later references, like this 2008 article in the Journal of the Electrochemical Society, suggest that the MTSE for a Li/O2 cell is around 1400 Wh/kg.

The energy density of gasoline is about 13000 Wh/kg when air mass is ignored.
https://electronics.stackexchange.com/a/4329
Looks like I was incorrect, thanks for checking. There is less potential for improvement that I suggested.
Adding in the air mass is fairly easy. And I didn't do it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoichiom ... mmon_fuels

13000Wh/kg/14.7 = 880 Wh/kg (gasoline air) or about 5x times for gasoline-oxygen or 4200Wh/kg as air is 21% oxygen.

So 16x today's batteries is about the limit. Not 50x. Practical limit is less, perhaps 4x. So a range of 1200 miles is about the best we could hope for. 12 hours at 100 miles per hour. Can anyone's brain, butt or bladder last that long?