GM Volt Forum banner

Esstor Ultra capacitors

33K views 51 replies 12 participants last post by  Cybereye 
#1 ·
The little Zenn city car is to be sold in fall of 09 here in USA. It runs on supercaps that recharge in 5 minutes and suppose to have a range of 250 miles. If this is true, I hope GM takes notice and uses this technology in the Volt. GO Volt Go!
 
#11 ·
Suppose it takes four hours to do the 250 miles using a 20kW motor. To provide this amount of energy in a five minute charge would require almost a 1MW charger! And we are supposed to plug these in where?
Remember, crusing uses much less than 20kW. I looked at these numbers last year - I came up with 125MJ (35kW*hr) for a 200mi range. I would guess 28F charged to 3000V based on the EEstor patents. 5 minute charge from 500V to 3000V is then 230A continuous. This is managable in terms of the cable size.

I also think this is managable in terms of the "pump" hardware, since you are not constrained by weight & volume in a fixed installation. Presumably, the "pump" would contain the same caps as the car it is charging, reducing the peak load on the AC service. But yes, a public charging station would need to be located near an electrical substation. So I say, locate the charging station near an electrical substation.

Batteries have chemical changes happening inside them. Ceramic capacitors however tend to be very stable, since the whole structure is fired in place at high temperature. EEstor has gone one step further by encapsulating small particles of the dielectric with glass. Potentially, such a capacitor could have no wear-out mechanism, just as the power electronics has no wear-out mechanism, and the motor has one set of bearings.

I just hope that the rest of the car is made to last, to match the potential reliability of the electrical components.
 
#4 ·
Yep. When you consider energy recharge time for vehicles, liquid and gas powered vehicles come out way ahead of battery (or even potentially capacitors someday) power for convenience and flexibility.
 
#5 ·
Relax people! There are at least two good solutions in-the-pipe for the fast charging of automotive batteries:

1) High power, no contact (inductive) charging from the bottom of the car. The supply system will be another storage system like a super-cap or advanced battery. These batteries are charged all day and night and in-between customer recharges. Thus, the charging stations will not need to extract that high of a flow from the grid all at once. If the station has super high energy requirements then it will make sense to give it a dedicated high power line. Most stations do not run anywhere near the continuous power required for a 5 minute recharge. Also, most of the charging will be done in the garage and in parking lots and will not require the super fast recharge. You will basically be doing charging at every stop, not filling up once a week like you do with liquid fuels. Slight culture change, what's the big deal?

2) Swap-out stations. Just read the solution proposed by Project Better Place. Simple and uses technology of today. Might not work too well for the US because of it's size and difficulty of providing the critical mass of charging and swap-out stations but that's why we have the hybrids, right? After the infrastructure is in place (as long as gas remains viable) then we can conveniently switch to an all EV fleet.

Yes, gas and diesel were great! However, I don't feel they will be needed in the future and the benefits to switching are hard to calculate. Agreed?
 
#6 ·
Relax people! There are at least two good solutions in-the-pipe for the fast charging of automotive batteries:

1) High power, no contact (inductive) charging from the bottom of the car. The supply system will be another storage system like a super-cap or advanced battery. These batteries are charged all day and night and in-between customer recharges. Thus, the charging stations will not need to extract that high of a flow from the grid all at once. If the station has super high energy requirements then it will make sense to give it a dedicated high power line. Most stations do not run anywhere near the continuous power required for a 5 minute recharge. Also, most of the charging will be done in the garage and in parking lots and will not require the super fast recharge. You will basically be doing charging at every stop, not filling up once a week like you do with liquid fuels. Slight culture change, what's the big deal?
This approach faces the same problem as the hydrogen approach - who is going to build these massive power stations in the densities required to have people feel confident that they can take long trips?

2) Swap-out stations. Just read the solution proposed by Project Better Place. Simple and uses technology of today. Might not work too well for the US because of it's size and difficulty of providing the critical mass of charging and swap-out stations but that's why we have the hybrids, right? After the infrastructure is in place (as long as gas remains viable) then we can conveniently switch to an all EV fleet.
Yes, after paying for your automobile, you get to lease a battery pack, so the car will be cheap but the long term lease is going to hit you hard month after month, and when you can't pay it, they repossess your battery pack, leaving you with a vehicle shell that you can't use.

Yes, gas and diesel were great! However, I don't feel they will be needed in the future and the benefits to switching are hard to calculate. Agreed?
Gasoline, diesel and alcohol are going to hang around until they add enough hydrogen tanks at their filling stations to eventually replace them.
 
#9 ·
Whats the big deal?

If you're going to take a road trip, you have to be able to quick charge or swap batteries eventually. The E-REV is going to give us the time we need to implement a charging infrastructure. Battery swapping will never work in the USA.

I don't understand why the concept of quick charging is so difficult for everyone to deal with. Yeah, the braided wire charging cable will be a little bigger than a gasoline pump hose, big deal. And we're going to need battery storage the size of a shipping container that cost $1 million, so what. A Three phase 600 amp service to each station, piece of cake.

We'll have less than half as many charging stations as we have gas stations today, because the only time people will need them is on long trips. We certainly wont have three at one intersection like we do now.

This is the future...
Electric cars, charge at home, or the office, quick charge at a premium when you must.
 
#10 ·
Quick charging can be of value as a convenience item at supermarkets, convenience stores, malls, etc. It could also work at highay service plazas, highwayside restaurants, rest stops, etc. I don't see it being a primary revenue source or being 600V/200A anytime soon. 240V at max A for Volt capability (hopefully 100A) will most likely be available in near term. After that, I see battery capability going beyond 300 miles and extended battery capacity rentals coming on. Buy the capacity that you need on a regular basis and rent the rest for the occasion trip. Swap the rental battery for "quick charge".

For quick charging only to supplant the genset for most people, the battery must be capable of 250 miles or more. It will be a while before batteries are cheap enough and light enough for this. Until they get below $100/KWh, I don't think it will make sense to offer more than 80-100 AER.
 
#12 ·
I just hope EEstor is not full of it. It would be very disappointing for a lot of people. Well, if they can't get it to work we still have the silicon nanowire lithium-ion battery to dream about.

Now that very inexpensive-to-manufacture solar panels are rolling of the lines (www.nanosolar.com) that only leaves the battery to complete the puzzle. Once we have that safe, long lasting, high capacity, light, fast charging, inexpensive and environmentally friendly beast in our hot little hands it's "Game on"! Until then... <twiddling thumbs>
 
#18 · (Edited)
Eric, I not only agree with you but you also brought up an excellent point. The charging station batteries (or caps or whatever electrical storage device) would also act as storage capability for the new smart grid. It will allow a higher percentage of alternative forms of energy to be connected to the grid. It will help reduce the amount of pumped storage hydro capacity needed as well as act as a form of emergency backup for critical services should the grid experience problems.

In my vision of our future smart grid the quick-charging stations will play a big role in emergency backup, stabilization and base load operation. I'm not sure as to what percent it would be but it would be significantly more than zero. This is an important advantage for having an EV transportation fleet supplied by quick-charging stations. All other methods require an additional device to provide emergency or backup capability. For air car charging station infrastructure you would need a large air motor attached to a generator. A hydrogen car infrastructure would require a large fuel cell. A biodiesel car infrastructure would require a large diesel generator. While the fuel cell could be brought on-line quickly (assuming it's not out of service) none would be even near as fast or as ready as a bank of batteries that are being used everyday. The charging station batteries could be an integral part of the operation of the smart grid, not just a backup feature. I feel this is a compelling argument towards the decision to go with an EV infrastructure. It provides maximum utilization of infrastructure resources.

The following is the proposed structure of the future US smart grid:


Future Smart Grid Inputs:

Solar farms - (PV and thermal) standard profiles during daylight.
Private solar - (mostly PV) standard profiles during daylight.
Wind farms - mostly at night but intermittent.
Private wind farms - mostly at night but intermittent.
Hydroelectric - standard hydro.
Geothermal - standard geothermal.
Storage systems - listed below.
Private storage systems - listed below.
Others - other non-renewable, other renewable.


Future Smart Grid Outputs:

Public users.
Private users.
Storage systems - listed below.
Private storage systems - listed below.
Others.


Connecting infrastructure:

High voltage AC.
High voltage DC.
Standard AC.
Standard DC.


Storage systems:

Pumped storage hydro.
Compressed air storage.
Diesel generator - both petroleum and bio based.
Battery banks.
Capacitor banks.
Other electrical systems - including fuel cell.
Other mechanical systems - including flywheel.


Private storage systems:

Quick-charge station storage.
Home battery systems.
Automobile battery systems.
Other.
 
#19 ·
The Tesla Roadster is rated for 220 miles for 53KWh. This works out to about 48KWh for 200 miles. The Volt will be a little better but the average vehicle will be a little worse. And this is rated mileage not real driving. To figure on 50KWh/200miles for the average vehicle would optimistic. I thought 480V was a standard commercial voltage, but don't recall 415V. At 480V, it would take about 500A and maybe more to charge an average car's battery in 15 minutes (accounting for charging losses and non-constant draw of battery charging). This is a LOT of power for a consumer application. It also requires on site generation and/or large capacity as others have described. The market can be expected to be a declining one from the start. Only along highways and waning as batteries improve. By the time BEV's will be widely practical, battery energy densities will result in about .75 - 1 mile/ 1 pound.

Of course an EESTOR type of breakthrough could change this dynamic considerably, but even then it would be more efficient to swap srorage media than to charge-discharge-charge. Texas' vision of charging stations doubling as grid augmenting and balancing sites is excellent. The value in this is huge, especially for intermittent renewables such as solar and wind. On other blogs, I have also suggested solar canopies for these sites. They all seem to naturally fit so well together. All of this holds true whether the stations do quick charging or storage media swapping.
 
#20 · (Edited)
Oh yeah...I meant 440v

Koz-

The problem with storage media swapping is the necessity for a standard. I don't believe this is possible for several reasons. For the sake of brevity lets call the storage media "batteries". The battery configuration that will work in a compact hatchback is quite different from the one that will work in a mini van or a pickup truck, or a fast sporty coupe, and even more different are the power requirements, voltages etc. A standardized battery dimension/design will limit the storage capacity, vehicle design, and the creativity and innovation that makes great cars great. It also limits future technological advancements. For example, the NiMh batteries in the Ford Escape are 330volts, but the ones in the new Malibu are 36volts. The Volt will be close to 400 volts but the EEStor capacitors operate at something like 3000 volts. I just don't see storage media swapping as a viable option.

Quick charging however is an easy solution. I think where we disagree is the total amount of power available to the charging station. Lets stop talking about voltage and amperage for a moment and simply look at total current. If we use your figure of 50kwh, then a post substation feeder line capable of a ten minute charge can be found literally everywhere you see a power line. Those lines carry 6600+ volts each. The higher the voltage, the smaller the cables will need to be. By stepping the voltage down to a more manageable 440 volts at the charging point does NOT also limit the total available current, it just means we need bigger wires to transfer it.

Here is a video of a ten minute 14kw charge. Enough to drive this EV 120 miles.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rcbx57Azisw&feature=related

Really people...This is not a big deal.;) But we do need some advanced load management to prevent too much local draw at any one time.

BTW...Texas, I am totally 100% on board with your smart grid concept. I think the big difference we're going to see between the hippy greenies of the 70s and the modern green movement is power sharing. Previously, "green" people wanted to be energy independent and off of the grid entirely. Although I applaud there attempts, its actually quite wasteful because when the batteries are full, no more energy is harvested.
The Global Green concept is where we all stay on the grid and do our part to suppliment it with clean energy eventually displacing coal altogether. This actually assures that all of the energy we can harvest from wind, solar, or whatever is put to use. We get even more benefit by selling it during peak ours when we're not home. (Ironic how peak solar hours correspond with peak electrical loads) This way we have all the power we need to run our homes like civilized people but still contribute to a cleaner world.
As you pointed out, quick charging stations will simply augment the future, smarter, power grid.
 
#21 ·
Eric E,

I agree with nearly everything you are saying regarding battery swapping considerations, but disagree with the conclusions. Standards will be needed and that's a good thing. Just think of the hassle and expense it would be to replace a conventional car's battery if there weren't accepted standards. I realize an EV traction battery needs are greatly different from a starter battery, the benefits of standardization are similar. Actually, the EV would see greater benefits in resale values. The main concept I think you aren't considering that may change your opinion is that of battery modules or "blades" if you will. Most thinking is on cell and pack levels, but think of the whole pack as a system or battery bank. With today's power electronics and computing power, why can't we use intelligent blades. The biggest issues I see are cooling and weight distribution. The blades would have to standardize on a voltage and the cars battery bank would require a base group of blades to generate the designed voltage, and subsequent blades would be added in groups based on this voltage. With advanced power electronics, there are also other ways around the Voltage concerns. It would require some standardization of the blades, but this is a good thing (oops, said this already). There are a lot of benefits to the swapping approach if the battery banks can be designed effectively:
-quick "fillups"
-significantly reduced vehicle cost since you can buy only what you need regularly and rent what you need occasionally.
-More efficient than stored fast charge and carrying extra battery weight all of the time
-Upgradability when better batteries become available
-Expandability since you can buy more capacity if your driving patterns change
-Replacability. Without a system designed this way you may have to replace the entire pack when a cell goes bad

Sure there are single, tandem seating, and Aptera-like vehicles but you would have plan a charging station on regular shaped vehicles. Aerodynamics will improve some but the functionality still has to be there and there will still be trucks too. A realistic load to design around would be 85KWh/200 miles for a pickup truck. So, for 4 charging ports at a station it would require 1.7MW (80% utilization) service for 200 mile, 15 minute charging. This seems like a lot. How many could added with existing grid capacity and what infrastructure changes would be needed. I think slow charging onsite storage is more practical, but this is less efficient and much more expensive to implement.

This is all mid term to long term conjecture, but I do like the idea of any away from home charging and will be happy with fast charging too. Even so, I would like to be able to only purchase the battery I need regularly but have access to extended range occasionaly. I would hate to have to pay $10+K for a 250+mile battery that I would seldom use and use lose much of its life to the calendar.
 
#22 · (Edited)
Eric and Koz, I think you guys have hit on the absolute cusp of the energy problem and are now deciding on the fine details of implementation.

I too am going back and forth over quick-charge and swap-out. Both of you make great points for the advantages and disadvantages of each. I'm now looking at short, medium and long term implications for each option. Here are my thoughts (very close to both of you):


*** Battery charging station analysis - Version 1.0 ***


Short-term facts and assumptions:

Batteries are expensive and heavy.
Batteries have unknown cycle and shelf life.
Charging speeds are getting very good (15 minutes is realistic).
No standards exist.
No infrastructure exists.


Short-term swap-out proposal:

1) Define standard blade size (Koz - I like this analogy and term).

2) Design EV chassis to accept different number of blades from underside. The order of insertion is important for weight distribution.

3) Design swap-out station mechanics - Robotic functions.

4) Define station power usage - using bulk storage so substation level power delivery is not required. I agree that several municipal size (2MW) solar farms would be a perfect fit for this application. See Nanosolar's blog (www.nanosolar.com) for their ideas on this.


Short-term quick-charge proposal:

1) Design high power induction charging port to charge the car's battery pack from the underside. Delco has many patents from their work on the EV1. They have a patent for an oil cooled, minimum 130 kW coupler. It's oil cooled because there is heat generated and due to the fact that if a person handles the coupler it must be at a safe touch temperature. However, if the charging is a hands-free and automatic process from beneath the car the port can remain hotter and also have a much larger surface area (induction area). The technology for this device is proven but will take time to design an optimized solution that is safe, high power, robust in all weather, cost effective, etc.

2) Design matching charging port on EV. This would become a high power induction charging standard.

3) Define station power usage. This is similar to the swap-out station but is greatly simplified because there's no movement of batteries. The only part that moves is the automatic, high power induction charging port.


Medium term (5-10 years) assumptions:

Several fast charge battery technologies start to arrive.
5X Lithium-ion hits production but cost are high in order to recover R&D expenses and because it has such value.
EEstor like technology hits production but the units prove to not be a silver bullet.
There are many models of hybrids and pure EV on the market but penetration has been low for EVs due to lack of infrastructure. Hybrids are selling very well.
Life, weight, cost, capacity, etc. of batteries have all improved significantly.


Medium-term swap-out station proposal (assume first generation stations were built in the short term timeframe):

1) Design new blades with improved battery technology. Perhaps there are a few standards (high power, high capacity, low weight, etc.). Customer can decide based on their needs and vehicle capabilities. Think AA, AAA, C, D, like designations. Probably retain the same standard physical characteristics to make the swap easier. However, a smaller blade would allow better vehicle design flexibility.

2) More EV cars arriving at each station require increased storage and solar acreage. Since initial stations were planned for this expansion the process is relatively easy and results in further increases in grid capacity and stability.


Medium term quick-charge station:

1) The old style charging port has been significantly improved in terms of efficiency and power delivery and a full conversion of all stations is implemented. The design is backward compatible but due to a radical change in shape the port interface has to be redesigned to allow ports to be automatically selected based on the vehicle. There are slight problems with having multiple ports but the new design was so superior that it was decided to go forward.

2) Station capacity is expanded in the same way as the swap-out station. Same benefits are seen.


Long term (over 10 years) assumptions:

Full 10X battery technology is in full production. It's light, inexpensive, extremely safe. It has caused a mass movement toward the EV. Because of the grid-battery-motor system's inherent efficiencies and reliability older technologies like hydrogen, hybrids, air cars, pure ICEs, even diesels have been rendered obsolete.
Trucks are now running on the new battery technology.
Charging stations are now considered a main component of the National Smart Power Grid (NSPG).
The national transportation fleet is 95 percent electrified.
The power grid has reached 90 percent renewable by the year 2040.
The last remaining peak-oil holdouts admitted that the world reached peak oil production in 2012.
Global electrification is an on-going project not expected to be completed until after 2100.


Long term swap-out Proposal:

1) Convert swap-out stations to dual use. Must be able to swap-out legacy vehicles while quick-charging new vehicles. This should not be difficult because there already exists the robotic swap-out structures.


Long term quick-charge proposal:

1) Upgrade to 3rd major quick-charge technology. Safer, quicker, more efficient.


Summary:

Based on my assumptions I'm now leaning towards swap-out stations. However, I think both paths are viable. This is good and bad because having a choice leads to standards selection delay (BDVD - HDDVD only multiplied many times). In previous threads I was considering a duel format that had both an integrated, owner purchased battery as well as having swap-out areas. Maybe having both systems in one car is a bit too much. Perhaps one or more of the "server" bays could be filled with purchased blades (again, love the server-blade analogy). You buy the vehicle and purchase just the amount of battery capacity you need for around 80 percent of your daily driving. You then have the remaining bays available for long trip swap-out charging. The batteries could be rented, leased, purchased, etc. Here are the many reasons for choosing the swap-out station over the quick-charge station for initial infrastructure build out:

1) Current batteries are heavy. With the swap-out bay system you can carry around just what you need. Very efficient!

2) Battery upgrades would be very easy to implement. They just use the same physical blade box and insert the upgraded technology and electronics. Since it looks like a lot of changes are on the horizon I now think this is a must have feature. Do you really want to be the guy with the Playstation 2 battery technology when your buddy just got the Playstation 3 battery technology? I know I don't.

3) Current battery cycle life is in question. Automobile companies must overcharge for the frame integrated battery in order to cover long-term risks.

4) Current batteries are expensive. I would rather pay $10,000 for my first 10 kWhs and $3000 for my next 10 kWh in 3 years then pay $20,000 today for the same capacity. You can add more capacity in following years and it just gets cheaper and lighter. It's like the price for a gallon of gas gets cheaper and cheaper! Much better than the post peak-oil increases that we will have to endure.

What do you guys think? Please share your proposals or tear mine apart. In the end we might just have something. :)
 
#23 ·
Perhaps it's both or neither. Nothing like a definitive answer.

I say perhaps both, because they both have their benefits and some important ones are exclusive. Configurability, upgradability, and more importantly price savings of practicality of smaller packs with swapping are exclusive to swapping. Ability to meet the needs of those unable to plugin at home is unique to fast charging. So, both together fills the entirety of market needs.

I say neither, because the E-EREV concept requires neither if charging ports become ubiquitous at workplaces, parking stalls, malls, etc. With topographic maps, GPS, and some intelligent software controls a 75+mile AER E-REV can step down to a 2-cylinder ICE and not be in danger of performance limitation. Once the AER reaches 100+ miles, the gas utilization becomes pretty minor. At 150+ miles AER then the ICE can be tossed for many people if the car, especially if made generator freindly (charge port and tow hitch). These users could rent an ICE car for rare long range trips, rent a generator trailer, or buy a generator trailer (building contractors would love this option). At 300+ miles AER, most driving needs are met and few would need the integrated genset.

Some conclusions:
1.) Charging ports at work and other away from home locations is as important as improving battery technology. The government, EV companies, and major automotive should form an organization to select standards (240V/30A & 120V/20A I think) for public charging. This should have been done yesterday and incentives to encourage build out of this infrastructure should be done today. Without this plug-ins are not practical for a large segment of the population.
2.) These are complex problems that will probably be solved by a solution that we aren't even considering. Perhaps something like Zinc Air (I think that's the name) battery that can store a significant amount of energy densely but can provide it at low rates. So, something of a non-ICE hybrid storage system. One storage media for daily use and high power, while another one for high energy and low power.
3.) Either way, I would like a design that readily upgradeable and expandable. This will let people configure the car for their needs and maximize the battery use while minimizing the cost. Perhaps battery and power electronics people can chime in on the feasibility of this approach.
4.) Quick charge would be great too, but there will be other options and with the issues I don't know if it will catch on.
 
#24 ·
Hmmm...this is good thread.

Ok. I would agree that the battery swap has some merit, particularly as it pertains to battery ownership versus "renting" a full battery with the option for easy upgrades as technology advances.

However, even though the "energy blades" would theoretically be modular enough to work in multiple different body styles, we still have other limitations to consider. The battery in a Kyocera phone won't work in a Motorola...why? They could have all just used AA, AAA, C, D, or some other standard right? so why do they all use proprietary batteries? I believe there are two major reasons:

1) Design. Using standard batteries meant significant design limitations. The new cellular technology required a new threshold of power density and mobility. We needed a 24 hour phone that would fit in a shirt pocket. This meant that cell phone manufacturers had to engineer custom batteries to give their phones an advantage. They surely didn't want their phone to look and perform like everyone elses. This is the capitalist way that pushes technology forward.

2) Money. Incidentally, the charger for that phone is also proprietary. Funny how the charger (a cheap simple transformer) has a HUGE mark-up, and so do all the accessories.

One other interesting note; I strongly dislike having contracts for my TV programming provider, my cell phone provider, etc. Whenever possible I prefer to pay outright for my cell phone, or satellite TV receiver etc. to prevent getting locked into those contracts. The battery swap concept could evolve into that scenario quickly and irreversibly.

Although the auto industry does not compare well to the cell phone revolution, there are a few commonalities that cant go unoticed.
1) Standardization. It would be a huge undertaking to get ALL of the automakers to conform to a standard battery configuration. Particularly when the technology is actually in it's infancy. By contrast, a simple adapter on the end of a cord can make an American electric shaver work just fine in China.
2) Design. No matter how hard we try, the battery compartment on a Mercedes Smart car and a Kenworth heavy truck simply cannot be similar in any way. Even with the use of power blades. However, the quick charging infrastructure can be virtually identical with the only difference being the time it takes to recharge.
3) Innovation. By using the battery swap concept you penalize GM, Ford, Toyota, Chrysler, etc for leading the way in developement of new technologies by forcing them to share or license their knowledge with the likes of Hyundai, Daihatsu, Tata, etc. And although the licensing can be profitable, it is contrary to innovation and competition. The Volt will be a success because of innovation...nothing else. But if they had to build a battery compartment similar to the Prius's, we would have no Volt.
4) The New Global Economy. Whether we like it or not, the world is becoming smaller every day. McDonalds in China, and BYD Auto in the USA. Tata just bought out Jaguar for cryin out loud! The coming electrification of the automobile simply cannot be limited to the physical constraints of a one world "power blade". The robotic swapping may be feasible in LA, but likely not in Rome where gas stations are a couple of pumps on the corner of a 1500 year old street with real estate measured in square centimeters. But...they have the power to quick charge right over their heads.
5) Cost of Infrastructure. I can tell you that the one pump gas station in Two Dot Montana cant afford a robotic battery swapping facilty and $100,000 worth of batteries sitting there just incase someone needs one. But the may be able to swing $20-30k for a transformer and some wires. If we want a REAL EV infrastructure we need charging stations everywhere...especially in the middle of nowhere.
 
#25 ·
For all the reasons Eric has just stated and more (how many automated car washes do you see "out of order" on a regular basis) charging stations are the way to go. AES is already working with Altairnanoon large-scale storage set-ups. Robert Hemphill, Executive Vice President of AES also sits on the board at Altairnano. I think the fast charge station is coming, it's just a matter of a little bit of time.
 
#26 ·
Great points! I have some more thinking to do. First I would like to address each of your conclusions so maybe we can whittle down to a workable plan. What if we had to make a decision next week? What would you do? Someone hands you a huge check and says spend it. Anyway, on to your conclusions:


Koz's comments:

"I say neither, because the E-EREV concept requires neither if charging ports become ubiquitous at workplaces..."

I also like the E-REV concept and agree that most offices, homes, parking lots will eventually have regular charging ports (think standard plug) with smart interfaces for billing purposes (think non contact swipe cards that are so common around the world). The good thing is that this normal charging infrastructure can be built out as needed.


"At 150+ miles AER then the ICE can be tossed for many people if the car, especially if made generator friendly (charge port and tow hitch)."

I'm not sure about this. Let's say Joe would like to go from SF to LA for the weekend for his work. He makes this trip often but does not have a garage. He keeps his car at his Apartment's parking lot (it has a charging port). I'm thinking that a genset trailer would be very impractical and shows a glaring deficiency when compared to 'old technology' cars. Perhaps he would have to have a biodiesel or ethanol powered engine but I feel if there was no practical way for an EV to travel long distances that the EV would never make it out of the niche market. To be the primary mode of transportation in the US long distance capability is a must for most people. Maybe you are right that the EV is not ready to fill this role.

I was just sketching out an idea about building quick-charge (with or without swap out - not sure) stations every 200 miles along our Interstate system. It would require around 600 stations but would allow a person with a EV to travel anywhere in the country. I'm thinking that the built-out could be done in stages the first of which would be one bay with a quick-charge or swap-out port (or both from what you guys are saying) connected to one storage battery that is connected to the grid. Very simple and would use the existing gasoline station infrastructure. The final conversion (long-term - using highly advanced batteries) would have the quick-charge port connected to the required bank of batteries and a large solar farm (or wind or both) near by. This is the the concept of the batteries being used not only for the cars but to store the power from local alternative energy sources. A car-battery bank-solar farm-smart grid connected system. All working together. I remember reading about the first crossing of the America by train (the final stake) or the first interstate road crossing and thought how significant it would be for the first practical (using quick charge or swap-out charging) crossing of America in a BEV. It would be like a parade of all different types of BEVs. I would really like to see that.


"Charging ports at work and other away from home locations is as important as improving battery technology. The government, EV companies, and major automotive should form an organization to select standards (240V/30A & 120V/20A I think) for public charging."

Agreed. I think PG&E are hard at work with Ford on this.


"Perhaps something like Zinc Air (I think that's the name) battery that can store a significant amount of energy densely but can provide it at low rates. So, something of a non-ICE hybrid storage system. One storage media for daily use and high power, while another one for high energy and low power."

If I understand correctly are you talking about something like a couple of suitcases worth of batteries to take the place of the Volt's ICE, for example? Where would this be installed? Like swap-out or in the trunk for long trips? That is an interesting idea.


"I would like a design that readily upgradeable and expandable."

I agree. I was thinking that it would be hard to do with an integrated approach like the Volt, hence my leaning toward the swap-out concept. Perhaps a more permanent upgrade like going to the shop to have the upgrade performed. Kind of like swapping out your video card and CPU. I'm also guessing that specialized conversion shops will fill this need.


"Quick charge would be great too, but there will be other options and with the issues I don't know if it will catch on."

I'm still not convinced the EV could make it without quick charging (either by using quick-charge ports, swap-out, or other way of quickly getting energy to the car on long trips). City cars of course but not the main mode of transportation. Hummm.


End of Part 1 - I can't believe it... I exceeded the max length. :)
 
#27 ·
Part II


Eric's comments:


"Design. Using standard batteries meant significant design limitations."

Agreed. However, at our current state of technology do we have the option for free forms, like current cell phones? We have serious weight and cost considerations. What do you think? I think in the long-term that we can have all kinds of crazy shapes and that is also why I'm so excited about the electrification of the automobile. New and wild designs unhampered by current power train limitations. However, if I had to work around a standard "battery box" in order to make a practical car in the next few years or not do it at all because it would be too costly and heavy then I would choose the battery box.


"Money. Incidentally, the charger for that phone is also proprietary. Funny how the charger (a cheap simple transformer) has a HUGE mark-up, and so do all the accessories."

With a standard blade wouldn't the charging also be standardized? I was also thinking if the blade (the shape of which would probably have to be more like a cylinder or a honey comb than a box - due to insertion and contact pressure considerations) would have integrated charging electronics or would the charging electronics be on the car or located at the station. Not sure. Having the high-power charging electronics at the station makes the most sense (big and hot). For the slow charging electronics I'm not sure. Thoughts?


"One other interesting note; I strongly dislike having contracts for my TV programming provider..."

Yeah, I don't know how this will fly either. I'm very interested to see how the first pilot projects work out for Project Better Place. This could answer many questions, especially when the drivers are interviewed. I guess personally I will go with the easiest, cheapest, most upgradable, and lowest risk (stuck with dead battery 5 years down the road). What would sway you if there were many options?


"Standardization. It would be a huge undertaking to get ALL of the automakers to conform to a standard battery configuration. Particularly when the technology is actually in it's infancy. By contrast, a simple adapter on the end of a cord can make an American electric shaver work just fine in China."

Agreed. The thing that helped me lean towards the swap-out method in the short-term was the fact that no standards exist. No EVs are on the road (OK, Tesla). I look at how Toyota and GM worked together to define the induction paddle. The first one out defines the standard. Just a thought. Even the quick-charge port will have to be standardized. This is no small hand-held device. For the power needed (maybe 225 kW) this device would have to be automated. No grandmother or non-technical person should be around this kind of energy. That's another reason why I'm leaning towards the swap-out station - very safe and also the quickest.


"Design. No matter how hard we try, the battery compartment on a Mercedes Smart car and a Kenworth heavy truck simply cannot be similar in any way. Even with the use of power blades. However, the quick charging infrastructure can be virtually identical with the only difference being the time it takes to recharge."

Noted and it makes good sense. I did however see semi-trucks being handled at a different station (biodiesel, huge quick-charge port, liquid hydrogen, who knows). I actually think a large enough volume inside of a vehicle can be set aside to handle this requirement. Afterall, the ICE is a huge massive object that all cars have in common (the swap-out station could handle front, back or even multiple location swap-outs with no problem). I will again wait to see what the Project Better Place people come up with. They are quite convinced and these people are very sharp. What do they know that we don't know? :)


"Innovation. By using the battery swap concept you penalize GM, Ford, Toyota, Chrysler, etc for leading the way in development of new technologies by forcing them to share or license their knowledge with the likes of Hyundai, Daihatsu, Tata, etc. And although the licensing can be profitable, it is contrary to innovation and competition."

Eric, I don't understand what you mean here. I think of the blade as a simple standard like an AA battery. Sony doesn't need to talk to GE when they design a radio. Can you please expand on this?


"The New Global Economy. Whether we like it or not, the world is becoming smaller every day. McDonalds in China, and BYD Auto in the USA. Tata just bought out Jaguar for cryin out loud! The coming electrification of the automobile simply cannot be limited to the physical constraints of a one world "power blade"."

Yes, this is a good point. I was thinking that in the cities the normal charging methods would be used but it's a good idea to think of all the major markets before proceeding. Don't forget that you will always need the station batteries unless you have a substation feeding the quick-charge station. You do make a good point that the high power charging port could be less invasive. Can you give me some examples where there's absolutely no room for a high power station on long routes? I can't think of any. Perhaps making sure the car had at least the high-power charging port located at the bottom of the care would be best (like you guys have mentioned before). That way the high-power charging station could have the the ability to swap-out or at least quick-charge or both. I'm thinking it would not be that hard to add the quick-charge port to the swap-out station. Same robotic mechanisms. Again, I hope people fully appreciate how much power we are talking about. No cable and paddle will be practical to be handled by normal drivers.


"Cost of Infrastructure. I can tell you that the one pump gas station in Two Dot Montana cant afford a robotic battery swapping facility and $100,000 worth of batteries sitting there just incase someone needs one. But the may be able to swing $20-30k for a transformer and some wires. If we want a REAL EV infrastructure we need charging stations everywhere...especially in the middle of nowhere."

You are right, infrastructure considerations are extremely important. That's why I'm going with electricity rather than hydrogen. That's also why I think it's important to integrate this infrastructure as a way to get solar and wind technology onto our grid acting as base load. It's almost like a two-for-one sale. I think this is one of the biggest considerations and why it makes so much more sense when compared with hydrogen or liquid fuel.

It requires a change in thinking because Interstate gas stations were not connect to the grid before and neither were gasoline powered cars. EVs and plug-ins are a new paradigm shift where they are all connected, why not the charging stations as well? This was a eureka moment for me. Additionally, I don't feel we will be "filling up" the same way in the future. The "fill up" will happen every time you you get out of the vehicle. Stop - plug in - swipe card - go about your business. Thus, you will only need to quick charge during your normal daily driving if you forgot to plug in or are in an area that has no infrastructure, etc. A change in thinking from once-a-week "fill-up" to always plugging in. I think this will be accepted very easily within a short period of time. How many people actually enjoy going to a crowded, dirty, smelly gas station once a week? Anyway, you are right... Infrastructure baby, infrastructure! :)


Well, Thanks for the great input. I still have got a lot more thinking to do. I also need to check in to see how Project Better Place is doing. I hope they are open with their progress. This is important information! I hope you keep the comments coming.
 
#28 ·
Swapping will never work here. Man power and storage for all the batteries/ultracaps would be huge. Man power and liability alone aren't going to allow this to happen. And cars would have to be built with the quick swap in mind and cars being built now would be able to recharge as fast or faster than swapping out. Swapping out would lead to wear and tear on the connection components and that would not be a good thing as far as dependability would go. Does anyone really think that you can pull into a gas station and have a mechanic ready within seconds to swap out a battery and have you back on the road in a matter of minutes?

There are so many hurdles to over come it isn't even funny.
 
#29 ·
I agree and disagree with you. Will swap-out stations be built. Yes. They will. Project Better Place is run by a guy that will make this happen. I have no doubt in my mind. Not only that he has two countries signed up and all the money needed. Massive development is underway.

That said... I think I agree that it will not work here in America. Back and forth I go over this issue (swap-out, quick-charge) and as I work on the finer details of what is required and listening to everyone's great comments I think I have acquiesced to just having automated quick charging ports. Since I don't feel battery technology is ready for the quick charge model I have decided that it’s probably the right thing to do to just convert over to plug-in hybrids running flex fuel and biodiesel engines for the short-term and then add in BEVs to the mix when the technology catches up. Sure BEV's can handle the city work and play the second car role but for the main mode of transportation? Considering America’s massive road infrastructure? Maybe not yet.

That still means we can move aggressively on the regular charging lots. Just like Project better Place's parking lot charging infrastructure. Hold off on the swap-out stations for now. If Project Better Place shows that it works and makes sense then great. I'm looking forward to seeing the first tests of their car and infrastructure. I also don't agree with their ridged leasing plans for use here in America. Americans are kind of crazy when it comes to ownership. But if gas keeps doing what it’s doing we may just beg to be on a waiting list for a Project Better Place car. ;)
 
#30 ·
Couple of points to consider.

1. you mention if gas prices go up quickly it will help project better place.

I disagree. The quicker we move to electric the more likely people are to have an electric powered car that doesn't have quick change capability. Point is arguable... just my thoughts on it.

2. I would be willing to bet a ton of money that any quick change place that are built eventually go out of business within 5 years of opening due to lack of business as rev, longer range bev's make them less and less in demand. Think about this. It is imho a given that the USA will never come close to adopting the quick change idea. Therefore people elsewhere are likely to have a choice on quick swap or non-quick swap. Since non-quick swap will prove to be more convienent via quick charge or rev the use of quick swap in Israel and Denmark will deminish and the use will be abandoned.

Just my opinion.
 
#32 ·
Yes, Jashua, EESTOR is where this thread started but the discussion has evolved into the practicality of quick charging versus other methods. Nanosafe already makes a battery that can be quick charged and A123's chemistry capability is not far behind. EESTOR's most salient aspects are the projected cost and the potential lifetime (i.e. a human's lifetime and more) cycles.

Texas,
I have been absent for a couple of days from this issue but have been meaning to address yours and Eric E's responses. It sounds like you have come around to my "neither" option. I did think that was dismissed a little too quickly. Allow me to elaborate:
-Sometimes we get too caught up in the excitement of new technologies and theoretical, elegant solutions; but we forget about the actual problems we are trying to solve. In my mind the single biggest objective for automobile development is to significantly reduce gasoline consumption with cleaner techonologies. Get off foreign oil and significantly reduce polution. I believe reducing gasoline usage to less than 15% of our currents rates by utilizing grid energy is good enough to be considered successful in these goals. In considering the technology and infrastuctures we have at hand, I came to the conclusion that neither quick recharge nor battery swapping are necessary to achieve these goals. While they definitely present advantages and could drive down gas usage for affected vehicles to 0% or close to it, at what expense and more importantly at what time expense.
-I believe E-REV's with 100+ mile range will achieve this goal. Every single driver may not see the 15% or less, but the average of this E-REV fleet would.
-With some minor improvements in drag, power electronics, and the next generation battery technology we will be there. Looking back at LI development, I am very confident that in the 2012-2014 timeframe a battery pack capable of 100+ mile range with similar weight and price to the first generation Volt pack will be available.
-A trailering genset was only seen as an option for those with a very occasional need. I would expect the person in your example to use an extended E-REV with integral genset as well a significant but dwindling number of buyers as the range increases.
-Since the E-REV puts on what appears to be a very viable and visible path to our objective, I would like us to get on this path and down it as quickly as possible. Another major impedement to overcome is price. If we all have to wait for a full E-REV with 100+ mile range to meet our price requirements, it could take a long time. The BEV option with the same range would significantly cheaper than the E-REV. The potential to be able to have the extended range of the E-REV by renting a genset if needed may sway some buyers that couldn't afford the E-REV but aren't comfortable enough with a BEV without this option. People tote trailers around for long distance trips all of the time. I don't see a big deal for a lot of people.
-I do think that the E-REV's will need to have an planned for expandable and upgradable battery system as well. For many people, this is another opportunity to lower the price while still meeting the objective. If a driver only needs a certain AER to travel 70% of his miles then this is all he needs to meet the objective. He should be able to purchase an E-REV with this AER, but if his needs change then add to his battery. There are also a host of other advantages to desgining the battery system in this way.

...more to come
 
#33 · (Edited)
Koz, I have to agree with you on just about everything you said. Well, except for the trailer idea but that will be worked out by the market place. Regardless, I do feel the plug-in hybrid (including E-REV) with flex fuel or biodiesel capability will get us at least 80% of the way. This actually makes me feel much better because the path America is on seems correct but at the moment we are taking too casual of a stroll. However, once people get use to the cultural change of plugging in at every stop rather than filling up every week I think the paradigm will catch on like wild fire. If gas keeps going up it will only accelerate that transition.

There are also some issues about how to integrate the battery packs (easy to upgrade, not meant to upgrade, lease, rent, etc.) but again US companies will dish out all kinds of options and the market will decide.

That being said, "good enough" is not in my personality. Of course I have to accept it in many areas of life and I do understand that most of the time it’s the practical and prudent thing to do but I still have a dream. That dream is to be standing in the middle of a crowded downtown street in NY city on a beautiful day around afternoon rush hour. As the sun is setting I hear the crying of a child maybe 100 yards away. It catches my attention and at that instant I realize I'm able to so clearly hear the sound from that child because the road noise is almost nonexistent. I look around and every vehicle is at complete rest, not one engine is running nor can the putrid smell of gas or diesel fumes be detected. There is absolutely no interruption in the calm serenity of the moment. At that very point in time I could be run over and killed and I would die with a smile on my face and a tear of joy in my eye.

Thus, I leave the hybrid mission to others as I pursue my dream of a practical BEV and associated infrastructure being powered 100 percent from renewable resources.
 
#34 · (Edited)
Nap over...Did someone say "good enough"!

I was getting board with this thread and wanted to move on to other topics...

BUT...

Texas, you just made the very point that perks up my ears and gets me back in the game.

I agree with you that most peoples "good enough" just simply isn't good enough! It will never be good enough until the sound of the ICE in every application (not just cars) is only a memory. There is simply no credible excuse to continue using a technology and an infrastructure which is pathetically inefficient. (I do include hydrogen in that comment) I mean honestly, we use inefficient gas powered machines to extricate and transport the gas for our inefficient machines. This must cease, for hundreds of reasons including; it's just plain stupid.

The electric grid is absolutely the most efficient means of transporting energy. Period. If we can produce that energy cleanly (which we can), and if we can take that energy and put it directly into our cars efficiently (which we can), and then store and use that energy efficiently (which we just now can), then basic logic tells us no other known solution can ultimately compete in the long run. The ONLY reason we haven't seen this happen already is do to the poor energy density of batteries. (which has increased five fold in 10 years)

Therefore, I know for certain that the E-REV is an interum solution. And again I would include hydrogen in that assessment. I believe we have a long way to go before battery electric storage densities reach critical mass. We are going to see clean, quiet, high power battery electric lawn mowers, snow blowers, skidsters, snowmobiles, you name it. The energy density of LiFePO4 is already enough for lawn mowers...but the price isn't there yet. I hate waking up at 8:00am on Saturday morning to the humm of lawn mowers being pushed by morning poeple. (Just a personal note)

Anyway, Texas, I have seen your dream and I am with you 100%. I really think I'll see it 80% there in my life, but we've got to keep pushing on the "good enoughs".

Now, back to "smooth quick charging" vs "clumsy battery swapping":

...well, I've decided that I really have nothing more to say on the topic except this; I'm going to design, price out, construct, and test a quick charging station at my buddy's car lot.
Here are the goals:
1) Charge one 10kw LiFePO4 battery (or equivelent) in <15 minutes.
2) Total project cost to be <$5000.00 (not including batts or real estate)
3) Use existing feeder powerlines currently at the location.
3) Document and record video of entire project and results.
4) Complete project in less than 12months (only because I can't afford to do it faster and I'll only be doing it on weekends) and file any required patents.
5) Publish findings, results, and videos.

I have two partners who are going to help me on weekends with this fun little project. I'll keep you all posted...
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top