I own an electric car (on my second one now) that I use for around town. It’s fine for short jaunts, which is the majority of driving. However the limiting factor is of course the battery and the range associated with it. While I can get about 40 miles of city driving, I could probably double that with a lighter, more efficient battery. While I know some people pooh-pooh electric cars, I think mine is rather fun. With gas prices headed toward $5 a gallon, I’ll have even more fun.
My electric car, shown above – a bit like a “smart car”, but slightly larger. My first was little more than a glorified golf cart. This one is full featured.
From the American Chemical Society
New high-performance lithium-ion battery ‘top candidate’ for electric cars
Scientists are reporting development of an advanced lithium-ion battery that is ideal for powering the electric vehicles now making their way into dealer showrooms. The new battery can store large amounts of energy in a small space and has a high rate capacity, meaning it can provide current even in extreme temperatures. A report on this innovation appears in ACS’ Journal of the American Chemical Society.
Bruno Scrosati, Yang-Kook Sun, and colleagues point out that consumers have a great desire for electric vehicles, given the shortage and expense of petroleum. But a typical hybrid car can only go short distances on electricity alone, and they hold less charge in very hot or very cold temperatures. With the government push to have one million electric cars on U.S. roads by 2015, the pressure to solve these problems is high. To make electric vehicles a more realistic alternative to gas-powered automobiles, the researchers realized that an improved battery was needed.
The scientists developed a high-capacity, nanostructured, tin-carbon anode, or positive electrode, and a high-voltage, lithium-ion cathode, the negative electrode. When the two parts are put together, the result is a high-performance battery with a high energy density and rate capacity. “On the basis of the performance demonstrated here, this battery is a top candidate for powering sustainable vehicles,” the researchers say.
The authors acknowledge funding from WCU (World Class University) program through the Korea Science and Engineering Foundation.
ARTICLE FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE “An Advanced Lithium Ion Battery Based on High Performance Electrode Materials”
DOWNLOAD FULL TEXT ARTICLE http://pubs.acs.org/stoken/presspac/presspac/full/10.1021/ja110522x
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Why does it have a filler cap Anthony? (see the picture!)
😉
Marek256 says:
February 24, 2011 at 1:06 am
‘it’s all about the battery’ ultracapacitors will solve the problem soon or later.
In Shanghai they are running buses using “Super Capacitors” with good results until the hot months of July and August. They then have to load the bus with dry ice to keep them efficient!
Cute car! It would be great if the discussion here could go to figuring out how the carbon footprint of your vehicle would compare to say the 2010 Ford Focus Econetic (European Diesel Model) if you had to use coal powered electricity for charging. I’m not very good at calculating energy densities, kWh to miles etc., so maybe someone here could chime in.
The Ford uses no electricity (external), has 109bhp and will take you 74.2 miles on a gallon of diesel. It is a regular compact car with four doors. So, with 24-mile per day commuting specs (5-days a week) the Ford would burn around 84 gallons of diesel in a year, a bit less than two drums of the stuff…..
Best,
Jose
“Jose Suro says:
February 24, 2011 at 5:13 am”
Top Gear (UK) sort of covered that. But yes, the diesel was the better option. Yay go green, consume more!
EV or hybrid is not solving the problem, it is just another form of moving a mass from A to B. You need the same energy for that.
Reducing the size, weight and maximum speed of the vehicle and the maximum load that can be added, then the reduction of engery/cost can be achieved no matter what source of energy is used.
Also consider that the transformation of energy from one form to another form has a loss as well the transportation of that energy from the source of creation to the destination of usage.
You can’t avoid the law of physics.
I haqve just worked out what we pay in the UK for diesel, per UK gallon which is 25% larger than yours, and it is equivalent to $9, or about $7 per US gallon, so you are much better off in the USA than us here in the UK. Can I live with you?
Rik Gheysens says:
February 23, 2011 at 3:17 pm
To be complete, the source of my comment came to a large extent from Koen Van de Moortel, who wrote in the readers’ letters column in the Flemish magazine Humo (23 February 2010 – Belgium).
Who makes the car?
Where can I get one?
Lovely car, Anthony!
Personally, I’m still in favor of the “battery exchange” option. Better Place (http://www.betterplace.com/) looks to be moving ahead on plans for multiple countries, including Australia, putting out car-wash size stations that drop an empty battery pack out of the belly of the car and snap in a fully charged one. 5 minutes and you’re back in business!
The drawback, of course, is that you need a standardized battery pack with under-car access.
Battery charging rates are getting better, but they’re not going to match gas fill rates until we get hypercapcitors instead of batteries.
IF these electric vehicles became prevalent, which they won’t due to the fact that they are only expensive toys for those with high incomes, there would have to be a mileage tax, and a high per mile tax to have funds to keep the roads in a good state of repair. The fact is that all electric vehicles are being subsidized by the fuel-tax-paying gasoline and diesel powered vehicle owners.
Of course, I am old enough to have lived through the late 1970s fuel shortage days. All of the above schemes were tried, CNG powered vehicles (severe lack of fueling stations, so the vehicles had to have dual fuel capability. Tanks holding the CNG weighed several hundred pounds, and when driven with CNG, performance was dreadfully poor. With all of that additional mass, handling characteristics were also terrible.
In the end, when gasoline became once again available, it was the end of the line for these alternative fuel use vehicles.
I saw the other day a new concept in diesel engine design (Japanese), and that a huge diesel engine has been constructed which halves the fuel usage for the same power output. http://www.vincelewis.net/bigengine.html
It has some features which greatly extend the life of the engine. Brilliant new design.
All of the electric vehicles are no more than death/maiming traps. Last I looked, half of all fatal vehicle accidents were at speeds of 25 mph or less. Drive exceedingly careful, Anthony.
Anthony:
I have just acquired an EVA electric car (1978 AMC Pacer) which is in process of being restored. When ready I will install new lead-acid batteries, obtain performance data, then install a li-ion battery of equivalent or larger capacity. I will be very surprised if the range can be doubled. In the era of 1960 to 1995 electric cars generally achieved 4 miles per KWH at 50 mph. The published info on the Chevy volt suggests that it delivers about 3.4 miles/KWH (some guesses are required).
I, too, can only give two cheers for electric cars at present; but think them a worthy area for research. At present they’re far from carbon-neutral due to manufacturing processes, including manufacturing replacement batteries at fairly frequent intervals, even if nuclear provides re-charging current. I’d like to see a rigorous carbon cost / benefit analysis in parallel with any financial cost/ benefit analysis. But in addition I’m concerned about environmentally disastrous mining techniques for materials such as lithium, cadmium, rare earths used for modern magnetic materials and so on.
People who want electric cars should be able to buy them but people should not be forced into them because those in government want it and because that same government intentionally taxes, restricts oil exploration, drilling and refining to make conventional transportation too expensive. Forcing such a technology on the people is a fast track to poverty and limitation of easy affordable transportation.
The technology is not in place to replace conventional transportation in the free market. And the justification for imposing the technology is based on a fraud.
Someone commented the automobile at the start of its development was not that efficient and that is true but as it improved and the cost went down the public in the free market saw the benefit of the car, truck and tractor and the horse and buggy business went out of business.
Bottom line let the free market determine the availability and purchase of vehicles.
This thread would demonstrate – if needed – how much we’re proud of our cars !
Now about batteries, definitely the key component, success factor of any electric only car : this paper shows how the now traditional lithium-ion batteries may be improved.
Would you have heard that here in France, an independent group (Bolloré) is developing his won electric car with an internally developped battery proprietary technology : lithium-metal-polymer.
If my understanding is correct – a dare assumption – this techno would offer a key advantage : as a ‘dry’ battery, this would stabilize the device, avoid excess of heat, and minimize any risk of explosion.
If some around @ur momisugly WUWT has any clue…
Laurence (8:28 am 2/24/11):
“In the end, when gasoline became once again available, it was the end of the line for these alternative fuel use vehicles.
I saw the other day a new concept in diesel engine design (Japanese), and that a huge diesel engine has been constructed which halves the fuel usage for the same power output. http://www.vincelewis.net/bigengine.html
It has some features which greatly extend the life of the engine. Brilliant new design.
All of the electric vehicles are no more than death/maiming traps. Last I looked, half of all fatal vehicle accidents were at speeds of 25 mph or less. Drive exceedingly careful, Anthony.”
Laurence,
Your right that diesel engine is HUGE! I hope they will be able to scale down the technology so that the efficiency gains (i.e. “half fuel usage for same power output”) can show up in a standard automotive and commercial truck diesel engine space. If I happened to live in the LADWP (say Hollywood) service area, was concerned about the smog in the city (ozone levels) and I was in the market for a new transportation vehicle I would more then consider a Chevy Volt or Nissan Leaf. I don’t happen to live in the LADWP service area (which has the following residential electrical rates-
2. Monthly Rates
High
Season
June – Sep. Low
Season
Oct. – May
a. Rate A – Standard Service
(1) Energy Charge –
per kWh
Tier 1 –
per Zone Allocation $ 0.07020 $ 0.07020
Tier 2 –
per Zone Allocation $ 0.08520 $ 0.07020
Tier 3 –
per Zone Allocation $ 0.12000 $ 0.07020
(2) ECA – per kWh See General Provisions
//www.ladwp.com/ladwp/cms/ladwp000536.jsp )
If I was concerned about CO2 levels I might be a bit concerned about the source of power (and the location it was in generated in if was worried about smog in the LA Basin) for my home charging station. For LADWP it looks like this-
2009 Power Content Label
Energy Resources
LADWP Power*
(Actual Mix) LADWP Green Power** (Actual Mix) 2008 CA Power Mix***
(for comparison)
Eligible Renewable**** 14% 100% 2%
-Biomass & waste 2% 32% <1%
-Geothermal 1% <1% 1%
-Small hydroelectric 6% <1% 0%
-Solar <1% <1% <1%
-Wind 5% 68% 1%
Coal 41% <1% 33%
Large Hydroelectric 4% <1% 18%
Natural Gas 30% <1% 42%
Nuclear 11% <1% 5%
Other <1% <1% 0%
TOTAL 100% 100% 100%
* 93% of LADWP Power is specifically purchased from individual suppliers.
** 100% of LADWP Green Power is specifically purchased from individual suppliers.
*** Percentages are estimated annually by the California Energy Commission based on the electricity sold to California consumers during the previous year.
**** In accordance with Los Angeles City Council’s action on 10-5-04 for File No. 03-2688 (RPS).
I live in Northern CA- PG&E's service area. PG&E's power content doesn't have much coal (lots of hydro, natural gas and now some wind, solar and geothermal) anymore. Unfortunately, for most residential customers in PG&E's territory their AVERAGE price for a kw/hr of electricity is currently $.182 per kwh. Lots of folks- like my neighbor- pay a lot more then this average price. Their marginal cost is $.39 kwh for most of summer as they are in Tier 4 usage with their e-1 meter schedule- http://www.pge.com/nots/rates/tariffs/electric.shtml#RESELEC
Tier 1 $.122
Tier 2 $.139
Tier 3 $.280
Tier4/5 $.389
PG&E Power content- 2010 ENERGY
RESOURCES PG&E POWER MIX*
(Projected) 2008 CA POWER MIX**1
(For Comparison)
Eligible Renewable 15% 2%
• Biomass and waste 4% 0%
• Geothermal 4% <1%
• Small hydroelectric 4% <1%
• Solar <1% 0%
• Wind 3% <1%
Coal 2% 34%
Large Hydroelectric2 16% 18%
Natural Gas 47% 42%
Nuclear 20% 5%
Other 1% 0%
TOTAL 100% 100%
I would likely feel a bit guilty about not paying any sales tax for the electricity I use to charge a Leaf…. In the best of all worlds if I happened to work at a green company in the LA Basin they would likely have a free (to me) charging station that I could use to charge my Leaf. Being green is good (and it looks like it might be cost effective for an EV owner in LA too) as I might not have to pay anything for my transportation fuel.
Mark
PS How about a carbon fiber LNG tank to keep the weight down……………..
Ah the sight of cognitive dissonance hitting a blog…
I quite like some of the newer electric motorcycles, unfortunately they don’t sound right!
http://www.zeromotorcycles.com/zero-s/
Like virtually all discussions that I have seen on electric vehicles, almost everyone is ignoring the real problem with electric vehicles, and it aint the batteries. No even if we had super hyper batteries beyond anything we can think of now, with huge energy densities and charging rates measured in 100s of amps, electric vehicles will remain a niche product.
The more fundamental problem is how you get the electricity from power station into the battery. Copper wire has fairly restrictive limts on how much power you can put down it (at the sort of max voltages that are workable).
Think of it like this; imagine that all filling (gas) stations pumps had a maximum hose diameter of 1/32 inch, and that all deliveries to said station had to be by 2″ pipe line.
Ah, but we will charge up at home you say, well in that case the charging rates are even smaller due to the maximum power ratings of domestic wiring (usually around 6kw per circuit).
If you want to charge up a reasonable sized vehicle( there is a reason why EVs tend to be on the small side) and drive it, partially loaded, a reasonable distance – say couple of hundred miles – then you are still looking at recharge times measured in many hours even if you do have “hyper capacitors”.
Sadly electric vehicles are a technological dead end. However for some people they do presently offer some reasonable cost savings, however this is almost entirely due to the excessive level of tax/duty on motor fuels.
BTW a standard US gas pump delivers energy at the rate of about 20 megawatts.
I recently watched a very interesting Japanese program, about a new electric car they were developing. The company already had a successful small electric vehicle, and they were four wheel drive, motor in wheel designs. The existing car had a problem in that the electric motor rpms were far too high so they needed an epicyclic gear box on each motor to reduce the wheel rpms (about 1000 rpm was needed at full road speed.
So their new design, used external rotor electric motors, so their was a large radius multipole wound thator, and a permanent manet outer rotor, made up from rare earth laminated magnets. Since the motor circumference was no large, they could put in multiple poles, and cut the motor RPM and eliminate the gear box.
So each wheel had one of these large diameter low RPM multipole motors; so no gear boxes and the like. Of course they put a lot of design effort into lowering the total weight of the vehicle to improve the battery charge mileage.
It struck me; and they made no mention of the problem; but if you build a car, designed to have a very low total weight, and you use a low rpm motor in each wheel, you have a very lightweight car, with a very high (relative) unsprung weight. The brakes such as they would need would also be in each wheel and part of the unsprung weight as they are on most modern vehicles.
Although the low RPM multipole motor is a great idea in my book, to eliminate any need for a gear box, I think they need to get both the motors and the brakes out of the wheels to lower the unsprung weight; otherwise they are going to have a car that drives like a prairie schooner, and shakes itself and its occupants to bits.
Much better to have both inboard motors, and inboard brakes, and have light weight constant velocity universal joints to drive the wheels.
Just my observation. Obviously these dudes imagined their car was going to drive around on billiard table surfaces; rather than on actual roads with bumps.
re AndyW35 – ”I think people forget that electric cars are only now coming into play and that cars driven by petroleum products neither had the range or performance when they first started.”
Well, actually, they have been around as long as internal combustion vehicles: we HAVE given them time and they are still no more than toy runarounds…
Anthony-
While I would like to see electric cars become practical, they can’t meet my needs yet.
You are right about it being all about the batteries. The first electric vehicle I had anything to do with at the research institute where I worked, was in 1975. Of course it had lead-acid batteries – lots of them. But the conviction then was: “with 10 years of research we’ll have the battery problem solved. “ Ten years later, in 1985, that was still the mantra. Ditto 1995. Don’t know about 2005, because I had retired by then. But for at least 35 years the battery solution has been just around the corner.
Whether from Tesla or the new Nissan Leaf, or any other electric, I put the range estimates in the sales pitches in the same category and computer projections of future global temperature. Show me some real world data!
For example from the official Nissan Leaf website:
http://www.nissanusa.com/leaf-electric-car/index?dcp=ppn.39666654.&dcc=0.216878497#/leaf-electric-car/range-disclaimer/index
“your Nissan LEAF™ is built to go 100 miles on a single charge*
how far you’ll go will depend on a number of variables
DISCLAIMER *Based upon EPA LA4 test cycle conducted in laboratory tests. See http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/fe_test_schedules.shtml . Gradual loss of capacity in battery will result with time and use. Actual range will vary depending upon driving/charging habits, speed, conditions, weather, temperature, and battery age”
The EPA LA4 test cycle (officially known as the Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule) is an approximately 20 minute long laboratory test cycle that simulates city driving. It has a max speed of 56.7 mph and an average speed of 19.59 mph. About 20 percent of the time is the vehicle is stopped. The accelerations are a leisurely 3 mph per sec. (that’s 0 to 60 mph in 20 seconds). The horsepower requirements are for level ground, and while the official ambient temperature specs are 68 to 86 degrees F, most labs run the test at between 70 and 75 degrees F. Also the A/C and heater are off.
So if that describes your driving you may get 100 mile per charge when the car is new.
Let’s wait a while an see what the auto magazines have to say about the leaf”s range in the real world.
Or, you can do what I do which is run a 10 year old skoda diesel on home made Bio made from recycled chip fat. Costs around 20p/litre with a fuel consumption equivalent to derv of around 46-48 mpg (UK gallons) Car was cheap and the only up-front cost was the purchase of the oil converter kit. No alteration to the car was necessary so if I run out away from home I can fill up with ordinary diesel to get me home. A local restaurant supplies all the oil I need and the rest (methanol and reagent) I get delivered.
Electric vehicles are great in principle but until they sort the batteries, Ill stick with the oily stuff
@ur momisugly George E. Smith from February 24, 2011 at 3:09 pm:
The issue of “unsprung mass” was attacked before when wheel motors were discussed, see near the end:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/09/23/bad-news-for-green-technology/
It may have some relevance on some applications, like with buses retrofitted with wheel motors (see link). These utilize the proven generator set (gen-set) concept, engine drives generator, electricity powers motors through electronic controls (includes regenerative braking), with a battery between gen-set and the usage. In this case, fuel use is cut by half. There were questions about the suspension but it doesn’t appear to be a problem.
http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/22328/
Complete wheel motor units can be designed with the suspension built in, to be bolted to a frame. The following isn’t my idea of an ideal car, for sure, but it has a pic showing the concept:
http://www.technologyreview.com/computing/19651/
As for ride quality and the rest that gets dredged up for “unsprung mass” complaints against wheel motors, we’ve come a long way in suspension technology since the days of leaf springs and nothing else. Also mass at the wheels may go up, but you can get rid of axles, driveshafts, and other components that contribute to unsprung mass, thus it might not be that much of a difference.
I laid out here what I’d like to see in an electric vehicle, there was subsequent hashing out of “unsprung mass” and other issues. I’m no fan of plug-in electric vehicles, due to batteries and other issues. But I do favor wheel motors and an electricity-based propulsion system, using a gen-set, due to system simplification, reduction of inefficiencies, and other benefits. The major thing to note is the technology has long been used in industry, what’s needed is repackaging not groundbreaking innovation. This is happening, has already happened elsewhere, and it does work, and works well.
From manstoke on February 25, 2011 at 11:34 am:
I’ve researched bio-diesel before. I noted the problems with corrosiveness, actually more of a solvent-type issue, how older diesel engines may have to have the fuel system seals and hoses updated to Viton or similar to withstand the use of bio-diesel. Also diesel at the pump has many additives for engine life etc, and specified characteristics that the engine controls are expecting for maximum performance and efficiency.
I concluded bio-diesel would be great for home heating, as diesel and #2 heating oil are basically the same and interchangeable for heating, and oil burners are universally designed to handle either #2 or #1 heating oil, with #1 being kerosene, a known solvent. But for vehicles, it’s better to stick with standard at-the-pump diesel.
KD Knoebel,
Please try to waste some time reading up on the theory of automotive suspension.
Not only are your assumptions that support the “viability” of hub motors for general automotive use demonstrably false (e.g. brake temperatures), you, like so many others assume that roads are smooth and that cars are always driven on clean, dry billiard tables. The vertical displacement of a wheel suspension has to be of a higher magnitude than what can be accommodated in the hub of a wheel.
Suspension travel on modern cars isn’t there for “fun” and to frustrate those trying to change a wheel quickly. The travel is required to smooth pertubations; reducing stresses on all the sprung elements of the vehicle as well as its occupants, and to maintain contact with the road’s surface as much as possible for safety. A suspension whose wheels can’t closely follow the contours of the road results in poor braking, road-holding and handling. i.e. it compromises safety.
Further, regenerative braking is highly unlikely to replace mechanical braking. Least of all because mechanical brakes are safe. The work even without the engine running or the availability of electrical power in the vehicle. The second reason is that the battery and electronics cannot handle the braking power; the vehicle’s kinetic energy that needs to something else in a very short time in an emergency. Typically less than 4 seconds from 100 km/h.
Do the arithmetic. That’s of the order of 100 kW for 4 seconds. And longer from real motorway speeds… Where are the batteries that’ll accept that sort of charge? At 50 to 60°C on-road.
From Bernd Felsche on February 26, 2011 at 8:02 am:
I already did that, darling, back at the other WUWT article I linked to.
No, darling, I live in central Pennsylvania, where we have potholes and other road imperfections, road debris like assorted tree pieces and rocks, snow, ice, rain, hills, and even curbs. I especially dislike the current usage of low-profile tires as they are unrealistic, especially the combining of them with aluminum alloy wheels instead of traditional steel, and have noted the anecdotal reports of increased tire and wheel damage.
Regenerative braking, where the motor is used as a generator to drain off kinetic energy, has a long history in industry in many applications where it must be reliable. It is often combined with dynamic braking, where a motor is briefly fed current that otherwise would make it reverse direction except with the goal of stopping the rotation suddenly, also an AC motor can be fed small amounts of DC to lock the rotor in place. Mechanical brakes are not needed.
I specifically mentioned still having mechanical brakes as an emergency backup in the other article, darling.
As mentioned at the other article, darling, as is found in industry, resistor banks are used. Current generated during regenerative braking that cannot be sent back to the current source, be it AC mains or batteries, gets dumped to one or more resistor banks, where it is transformed to heat. Thus while with mechanical braking the heat generated is at the wheel, which leads to considerable stresses, with regenerative braking nearly all the heat can be safely dumped to the atmosphere at a location other than the wheel, and can even be utilized for other purposes such as warming the engine air intake or heating the cabin.
And yes, there are electronic systems found in industry capable of the equivalent of stopping a car or truck traveling at 62 mph in 4 seconds or less. As stated that’ll be for emergency use, not routine, thus the required system can be smaller than otherwise. If manufacturers wish to balk at the size and/or cost, they might try to blend in a touch of mechanical braking in emergencies so they can use an even smaller system. But if the current generated is merely dumped to resistor banks with no attempt to make it suitable for returning to the source, little more is needed than suitable mechanical relays costing not that much money and occupying not that much space. It can be done, and has been done in industry.