Better Batteries A123 makes a new type of lithium-ion battery. Lithium-ion batteries, which are now used widely in laptops and cell phones, pack a lot of energy into a small space. They take up just one-sixth the space of the lead-acid batteries used in previous types of electric vehicles, and they weigh one-sixth as much. They also take up less than half the space of nickel-metal hydride batteries, the kind used in today's conventional hybrids, while weighing just a third as much. But the type of lithium-ion battery that's used in laptops and cell phones has problems, including the occasional tendency to overheat and, in rare cases, burst into flame. Troubling as this instability is in personal electronics, it could be even worse in a car, which uses a module that consists of hundreds of times the number of batteries found in an electronic device. On top of that, although prices have been coming down gradually, lithium-ion batteries are still expensive. All that could change as a result of A123's batteries, in which electrodes based on cobalt oxide have been replaced with iron phosphate electrodes. At relatively low temperatures, oxides release oxygen, which can drive reactions that might heat up a battery and cause it to explode. But phosphates continue clinging to oxygen at much higher temperatures. What's more, iron is far cheaper than cobalt. Volt or Bolt? Will automakers follow through on their highly publicized announcements about plug-ins? GM, for one, has a reputation for quitting on innovative engineering; the company's executives scrapped an earlier all-electric vehicle. And even though GM had an early lead in conventional hybrid technology, it failed to bring hybrids to market until after the success of Toyota's Prius. What will happen to plug-in plans if gas prices drop, or if interest in reducing greenhouse gases wanes? No one can predict the results of the carmakers' fickle decision-making process. But a few things are clear. Plug-ins are the most practical and enticing alternative to the internal-combustion engine that has been developed in years. And their fate will depend on whether automakers learn from the success of conventional hybrids and fully embrace the new technology. I did at last drive a working plug‑in. The converted car glided noiselessly along the streets of Boston as I eyed a gauge that estimated my mileage at more than 150 miles per gallon. But on the day that I saw the Volt on display at A123's offices, GM wasn't giving rides; the car was just a mock-up, without the new batteries. As I sat in the driver's seat and grasped the steering wheel, sunlight streaming through the clear roof, it was easy to believe that plug-ins are on the way. But the mock-up was also a harsh reminder that when it comes to green innovation, U.S. automakers have long been more eager to show off flashy concept cars than to manufacture vehicles that work. Kevin Bullis is the nanotechnology and materials science editor at Technology Review. |
Audio »
Share »
Digg this
Add to del.icio.us
Add to Reddit
Add to Facebook
Slashdot It!
Stumble It!
Add to Newsvine
Add to Connotea
Add to CiteUlike
Add to Furl
Googlize this
Add to Rojo
Add to MyWeb
Favorite
Print
E-mail
Is GM's Volt Ready to Roll?
09/18/2008
Comments
thmlco on 08/15/2007 at 2:08 AM
4
Well, they changed before, under nearly the same exact circumstances when Japan was eating their lunch with better, smaller, more efficient vehicles. The the real questions, as the article indicates, is can they do it again?
asdar on 08/15/2007 at 12:09 PM
64
I think that GM has gotten a bad rep for the EV-1, partly because of that very biased movie "Who killed the electric car"
If you look into the real story, which is out there, you'll see that GM has done more than any other car company toward the development of electric cars. They spent millions on research, more than any other car company. The Tesla owes much to GM both for their controls system, and AC Motor configuration.
AC Propulsions founder got his start in the EV-1 program developing the electric systems.
The EV-1, at it's best and latest stage would not sell today. It had a horrible range of less than a 100 miles, and a long recharge time. It cost nearly as much as the Tesla, and the battery life wasn't long enough that it ever paid for itself.
If you blame GM, and spread anti-GM propaganda, then I think you're betraying the cause of the EV.
By unfairly bashing them, and spreading bad publicity about the Volt, you're halting the advance of an important technological step toward electric vehicles.
See what's really there, judge the Volt, on the Volt's qualities, and not on what you think you know about the EV-1.
Tysto on 08/15/2007 at 7:56 PM
16
asdar on 08/16/2007 at 9:29 AM
64
GM developed an AC motor that changed EV's from unresponsive to quicker than ICE efficiently. They developed control systems that are critical in the current EV situation in maximizing battery performance.
The EV-1 was a decent car held back from being a great car by the batteries.
The Prius is a near waste of expensive battery material that barely cuts fuel usage. It's real value is only in changing people's perception from thinking that EV's are impossible to possible.
Toyota gets great credit for knowing the market was there, and GM gets some deserved criticism for not seeing that it was there.
Just the same, when we're driving EV's I think the technology will be a decendent of GM more than Toyota.
mstalanon on 08/16/2007 at 10:06 AM
1
If the EV-1 was so horrible, why didn't they allow people to buy them? Granted, when they first came out, they had a super limited range, but after they converted to the NiMH batteries, it all worked out. a 100 mile range is QUITE doable for a commuter. Only long range communtes would be a problem.
And this was in the 1990s! If Chevron wasn't in control of the patent, those larger NiMH batteries would be making QUITE the noise on the open market.
I'd rather go with the proven technologies than holding my breath on the LiON awaiting in the wings.
asdar on 08/16/2007 at 3:09 PM
64
They didn't sell those cars because the cars were a huge liability. One single car accident with a law suit would have cost them a fortune, even if they won, and it would have been bad publicity. All for letting a couple hundred people drive around in an electric.
It was a good business decision at the time to crush those cars. They're not responsible for the Rav.
If you took the EV-1 today it wouldn't sell for a profit. No way no how, It would still cost $60k and you'd need to pay to have the battery recycled every 5 years or so even in San Diego where the temperature is steady. It was a toy car for rich people that could afford two.
I'm an environmentalist too, but think of it from the business side. The car could never make a profit, at the time there was nothing developing in the battery department that showed any signs of making it work, and even if you could make it work decently it would cost the company offset profit from their ICE market.
Nobody that was thinking business first would have made a different decision.
The Volt on the other hand is a car that can succeed if people don't take an attitude toward GM because of a movie that showed one side of the argument.
The Volt is the right way to go. Flexible, because electricity is the ultimate energy, convenient because of the range of the generator and the decreased maintenance, fun because of the performance GM can put into the engine without cost to efficiency.
zerogas on 09/04/2007 at 2:12 AM
1
My EV1 with NiMH batteries got up to 120 miles per charge and always got more than 100. The long recharge time was meaningless because it always charged while I was sleeping. The right comparison is between the 10 seconds to plug it in at night and the time spent at gas stations and repair shops for gasoline cars. I have had no battery or motor problems in 8 years of commuting in electric cars.
There are millions of households with multiple cars and they are certainly not all rich. The market for second cars is plenty big enough to make an impact on emissions and to jump start an electric industry.
The EV1 was costly, but it should have been the first of a series of cars. GM blew the chance to be viewed as the leader and anyone who watched them lobby against emissions standards and fuel economy standards is naturally suspicious of their new found religion with the Volt. I hope they prove us wrong and follow through with high volume production, not just more concept cars.
asdar on 09/04/2007 at 8:47 AM
64
Just under or just over a 100 mile range is still too short to sell to the masses. The reason they stopped making them wasn't to kill the environment. That's my point, they made a business decision that was smart in business.
The car wouldn't sell at the $60-80k, at the time there was no technology that would make it enough better that would have shown any potential to ever sell at that price point.
The decision to crush those cars was what anyone with a half a brain would do. No smart person would want that liability with no return.
The big point I'd like to leave people with is that GM didn't do anything morally wrong. They're not rapists or anything. Look at the Volt with open eyes, or you're the one hurting the environmental movement and you don't have the excuse of trying to make wise business decisions.
Gurthang on 09/04/2007 at 12:49 PM
13
asdar on 09/06/2007 at 9:07 AM
64
GM has done great things for the electric car field, and they still have their technology lead because of it.
If people open their eyes and see that GM did more good than harm in the electric field, or just give them a fair chance then the Volt is the car that will change everything.
The Prius is a joke. Without plug in it's a waste of valuable material that just barely offsets it's own energy usage.
smith90201 on 11/19/2008 at 5:10 PM
6
Electricity is now 60-70 cents per gallon equivalent of gas. Don't want to pay 1/6 of the recent cost of gas? Feel free to send your money to the Oil cos, Saudis, etc. Just don't expect the rest of us to do the same.
See EVs - WHO TO TRUST via profile, or http://www.technologyreview.com/discussions/energy/61076/page3/#comment-205913
brucebudd on 10/20/2007 at 9:07 PM
1
smith90201 on 11/19/2008 at 5:32 PM
6
peasler on 08/15/2007 at 1:11 PM
1
Phil
kentt on 09/21/2007 at 6:40 PM
1
My electricity cost ~ 17 cents/kWh
(state of MD, no overnight discount)
Gasoline at $3 a gallon and 36.6 kWh per gallon = 8 cents/kWh
Am I missing something? Are electric cars somehow much more efficient? (however note that the above does not include any charging/battery efficiency
losses.) Perhaps the issue here is comparing a wholesale, discounted electricity price to the retail gasoline price.
JackSlims on 01/10/2008 at 6:12 PM
1
What you should compare is gallons of gas per mile and kWh per mile, converted by $ by retail price.
Solar John on 10/24/2008 at 9:57 AM
13
chuckpiot on 08/31/2007 at 11:17 AM
1
JeffD on 09/04/2007 at 9:34 AM
1
vitotao on 06/10/2008 at 1:25 AM
1
Secondly - imho hybrid's revolution won't succeed until one barrel of oil cost around 200$.
Today there is a lot of mess (in media) with developing new technology and people still more eagerly buy old-school-gasoline cars, becouse of... some kind of fear to the unknown?
The matter of enviroment is so delicate and ambigous that sometimes I feel like being cheated just for companies good.
smith90201 on 11/19/2008 at 4:27 PM
6
Electricity is now 60-70 cents per gallon equivalent of gas. Gas is $2.40 /g and $60 /barrel (today, CA) ... So $15 to $17.50 a barrel and that is just break-even, Ignoring national security, pollution and global warming and more.
BUT there is another HUGE incentive. Doug Korthof points out that you can buy a PV solar system to generate ALL your domestic electricity with the gas saved ... The payback time can be as short as three years. Thereafter free electricity and gas-equivalent for transport. Useful man, Mr. Korthof. liveoilfree http://www.youtube.com/liveoilfree
See EVs - WHO TO TRUST? via profile, or
http://www.technologyreview.com/discussions/energy/61076/page3/#comment-205913
Qtip on 07/18/2008 at 9:11 PM
1
smith90201 on 11/19/2008 at 5:06 PM
6
See EVs - WHO TO TRUST via profile, or http://www.technologyreview.com/discussions/energy/61076/page3/#comment-205913
MickeyFouse on 12/09/2008 at 12:42 AM
19