# Any Change in the State of the Art?



## MJ Monterey (Aug 20, 2009)

Ah the frustration of waiting for technology to come to market. I cut up and tossed out my first EV project 3 years ago because of the lack of decent batteries on the market.

I have also been keeping an eye on the horizon and the present. You are correct a crystal ball would be nice.

I tend to be a bit pessimistic so I do not see the new technologies becoming available over the counter any time soon. I am confident patent squatters will hold them until they can cash in with big orders from major corporations or sell themselves to major corps. And even then no small scale sales chanels will be set up.

It was good to see Cobasys was purchased by a Bosch-Samsung joint venture. So that technology may actually make it to the light of day.

Now what I have seen that is positive:
ThunderSky has made process refinements so that their new format 200ah battery is in the same basic container as the old 160ah units. So I guess to me the silver lining will be manufacturing advancements of what is currently available.

BMI/LiFeTech (screen name for a member here) represents a line of batteries that is suited to our uses and he seems willing to sell them to us. The New battery has incorporated an advancement for one of the chemicals inside. Once I figure out what I need I'll check with him on pricing and availability to ship to the US. Or have them drop shipped to a friend in Australia and have him forward to me.

MJ


----------



## pgrovetom (Oct 6, 2009)

I believe this is optimistic in timing but its a great review of my question plus more. 

The only component that is out of reach is the battery. I concluded I would need over 1000lbs of even the Thundersky LiPO4 batteries which would cost $20K. Based on volume and the technology claims by so many, a 2:1 improvement in weight and performance seems realistic at half the price = 4:1 but it probably will be 2015. 

http://www.4efv.in/EFV/Session 5_Future of Electric Vehilces/4 Mr Hariprakash.pdf


----------



## MJ Monterey (Aug 20, 2009)

I missed saying it before so.... Welcome back.

Interesting slide presentation.

If we start the clock at mid 2009: My gut feel is that 2:1 on density may not be achievable without a change in electrode. However 3:2 through manufacturing driven improvements does not feel out of line with existing chemistry.

Cost per WHr may come down slowly as Manufacturers compete more or a new more automated operation comes up. Again, for us, it will depend on if a major player opens their sales to individuals or smaller resale outfits like Ev Components. No insult to James and the crew they are doing good pioneering work!

In fact you may want to P.M. him and see if he has input.....


----------



## Voltswagen (Nov 13, 2008)

All new TS Lithiums ( LiFeYPO) added Yittrium to the cathode. Their spec sheet has increased life cycles to 5000 @ 70% DOD.
I ordered 40 - 160ah.......I expect them to last me 20 years .


----------



## BMI/LiFeTech (Aug 12, 2009)

Voltswagen said:


> All new TS Lithiums ( LiFeYPO) added Yittrium to the cathode. Their spec sheet has increased life cycles to 5000 @ 70% DOD.
> I ordered 40 - 160ah.......I expect them to last me 20 years .


....sure the cycle life has increased to 5000 @ 70%...... and I could send you a spec sheet saying our new cells have increased to 10,000 @ 80%..... just depends on how gullible you are (then again I would never make such claims since I am an extremely honest person).

The fact remains if TS really believed this they would provide a decent warranty to back up their claims. It is easy to say anything and not give some re-assurance for the hard earned dollars you have spent on batteries.


----------



## Voltswagen (Nov 13, 2008)

BMI
Hence the wink .


----------



## BMI/LiFeTech (Aug 12, 2009)

Voltswagen said:


> BMI
> Hence the wink .


Sorry my friend Voltswagen. I missed your wink!
......by the way have you heard about the new cell which TS will be releasing soon which has twice the life of its current cells? Apparently it not only has Yittrium but Kryptonite as well.


----------



## IamIan (Mar 29, 2009)

I recommend you define what you want / need... don't get caught in the perpetual waiting game... or you will never do anything... Battery progress never really stops.

Like waiting for the next Computer improvement ... you could have been waiting sense Windows 95 as things keep going and going.

---------------

I expect economies of scale to continue to be rampping up for at least the next 20 years or so... if not longer.

Mobile devices like cell phones , game boys , PDAs , Laptops, I-Pods, etc... all will continue to drive battery price and performance... but over the next couple decades we will continue to see more and more influence from HEV productions , PHEV productions, and EV productions.

As the total annual market for batteries grows additional funding for research happens ... so more developments might yet be on the way... but there is almost always 5+ years lag between the lab and the shelf to buy... even after they discover it.

Separate from research and new battery science ... just the raw economies of scale even if there is no new research ... and even if nothing new is developed... just as the battery market continues to grow over the next 20+ years the prices and such will continue to come down just from economies of scale.

-----------------

Don't expect the miracle battery ... those are always ... just a few years away ... and they never come ... Battery progress is like Computer progress ... improvements are made every year but I seriously doubt there will ever be a sudden massive jump ... it just doesn't happen ... and even after we see something proven in the lab... it will always still be several years more before we start to see it able to be bought.


----------



## TomA (Mar 26, 2009)

I have to agree with Ian:

The state of the art is rapid development. 

If you are waiting for some defined moment of battery capacity or motor efficiency per pound, per dollar or whatever before you mobilize an effort to do something at that specific point, the moment will come and go and the effort will miss the moving target, fall behind, and be quickly eclipsed and obviated by those who are living and working with the systems as they are rapidly developing. Its a frothy river of change, and those who aren't in it now aren't going to be ready when it suddenly opens up to smooth water you can really swim across. But that's a narrow and naive view of how EVs are going to catch on in the culture- that start-ups are going to have game-changing products that redefine the mix of the passenger vehicle install base. It isn't going to happen that way.

I also disagree with the premise that OEMs are locking into technologies- batteries or otherwise. Watch the Charlie Rose interview of Carlos Ghosn from last month. This is not a man or a company wedded to any battery technology, nor is Renault/Nissan apparently banking on a drive technology. They appear to be committing to substantial EV production over the long term- maybe growing to 20% of their output- with no illusions about the technology, total market size or the difficulties ahead. GM and Chrysler may not be pursuing sound EV ideas, but this guy Ghosn seems to have it about right. 

Moreover, here's the really interesting part- they intend to sell these cars _at no premium_ over an ICE vehicle for the EV. Take that, Chevy Volt. It makes sense, since most of the parts are actually simpler and cheaper in huge quantities, but there he is saying it out loud. Whether you believe it or not is a different matter, but the difference between this guy's understanding and the way he talks and someone like, say, Rick Wagoner is pretty astonishing.

Anyway, my simple point is that the State of the Art is actually more than sufficient to make OEM EVs practical right now, and again I disagree that these vehicles need to be made with aerospace materials and yet-to-be-produced batteries. The Leaf and the Volt are good enough right now, as is the RAV4EV for that matter. Its only a question of OEM commitment, and customer acceptance.

So, in my opinion, questions about the State of the Art are far less important than questions about the state of the _market_, and the willingness of manufacturers to address and develop it. Tesla has done a great job serving the supercar/toy end of the market, Corbin failed to catch on at the commuter end, and Aptera and a few others are struggling getting to market at all. Ultimately, they are all marginal players with almost no chance of breaking into the OEM auto business in any significant way. It is going to come down to the established players, and which of them has the right blend of product, marketing and determination. Everyone else is either a hobbyist or some flavor of Bucky Fuller/Preston Tucker/Wacky Arnolt/Malcom Bricklin/Peter Monteverdi/Steve Moal who isn't going to change the _market_ other than to prove it up in some way.

I predict Renault/Nissan will have a major impact in the adoption of passenger EVs by the mainstream automotive buying public. Maybe GM will be there, too, before the public catches on and demands these vehicles from the industry generally. That will happen one day in any event. 

Beyond that, people around the periphery are just "slapping the water," fun and rewarding though it may be...

TomA


----------



## Wiredsim (Jul 4, 2008)

I agree that the evolution of technology is ofter as effective as supposed revolutions. I think often times there are significant advances, but by the time they are in the supply chain the "old" technology has been improved to the point that the new stuff doesn't look nearly as impressive.

I know it is extremely hard for EV advocates to believe any miracle battery claims after all of the false starts in the past. However I would argue that there has been a significant change in recent years. Most of those previous miracle technologies were the result of a single inventor or company "announcing" their technology with no real hard details. These were shot in the dark attempts without sufficient financing and I would hazard a guess that most of these were trumpeted far too early in their design life. Not only was there no industry support, but there was what some would describe as an actively hostile business environment. 

Compare that to the existing field where you now have MAJOR players investing in and supporting the EV infrastructure. Not to mention a sympathetic administration. On the vehicle side of things, nearly all of the major automakers have plans for electric vehicles. Some may be more serious then others, but the point is these aren't secret plans, the pressure has been building on them to move in this direction.

On a personal note regarding the battery side of the equation, here in my home town of Holland, MI, Johnson Controls-Saft is currently developing a battery plant for EV batteries and there is a good possibility LG may invest $300 million in another Battery plant in the area this year.

So above I'm talking about industry support, the other side of things is the battery technology itself. Even a casual perusal of science / technology aggregate sites gives a good image of significant numbers of research teams and serious advances of existing chemistries and significant investments in new chemistries and battery technologies. A good one is MIT's Technology Review site.

Just look where we are now with the LiFeP04 cells, the default choice for new conversion seems to be the TS cells. I'm not exactly a longtime member but just over the last year or two I've seen that significant switch.

So here are my predictions, FWIW: We will see continued refinements of the current products available to DIY'ers from China, I am guessing we will see an increase in cycle life and also increased density(1.3-1.5x). But within the next 2-3 years we will start to see some additional domestic products available to DIY'ers, it always seems American companies aren't as open to small order sizes, but the existing distribution channels that have developed in the last year or so will help open this. Then within 4-6 years I think we will see some of the more advance technologies leading to 2-4x increases in energy density and specific power over where we are now.

The one area I haven't touched on is price. This is an area I think we will really see the effect of government support and increased competition. I would expect to continue to see the prices drop to half what they are now per kw/hr by the end of next year(2011).

Crazy? No I really don't think so! Optimistic maybe..


----------



## IamIan (Mar 29, 2009)

Wiredsim said:


> I am guessing we will see an increase in cycle life and also increased density(1.3-1.5x). But within the next 2-3 years we will start to see some additional domestic products available to DIY'ers,
> 
> Then within 4-6 years I think we will see some of the more advance technologies leading to 2-4x increases in energy density and specific power over where we are now.
> 
> Crazy? No I really don't think so! Optimistic maybe..


optimistic ... definitely... 

What specific energy density numbers are you thinking will relate to the 1.3-1.5x and the 2-4x you listed above?

Li-Ion is already at ~200 wh / kg to purchase today... Are you expecting up to ~300 wh / kg in 2 to 3 years? ... up to ~800 Wh / kg in 4 to 6 years?

Or were you thinking of different numbers for your 1.5x and 4x?


----------



## MJ Monterey (Aug 20, 2009)

Wiredsim said:


> Johnson Controls-Saft is currently developing a battery plant for EV batteries


I wish I shared your optimism about SAFT. I have been rebuffed by SAFT since before their marriage with Johnson controls 4 years ago. From the tone of previous comunications they have zero interest in supplying to end users/DIYs.

Unfortunately I believe the ThunderSky has developed the better business plan for our needs. Get the basic product ready for market. Get feedback from customers and be open to customer driven refinements. Build a diversified customer base (including small ones, they may be your next big customer) by adjusting products to customer needs and product evolution.....

Soapbox/rant on:

This is called entrepreneurship, a lost art in the corporate driven U.S. and western Europe. I see the U.S. as marketing driving the consumer, not the consumer driving the market. I believe this is fundamentally a wrong approach for a society that wants to progress froward.

Soapbox/rant off:

MJ


----------



## dtbaker (Jan 5, 2008)

BMI/LiFeTech said:


> The fact remains if TS really believed this they would provide a decent warranty to back up their claims.


in defense of TS.... ANY battery can be killed quick if over/under charged. How could they warranty with no control over the charge/BMS used?!


----------



## IamIan (Mar 29, 2009)

dtbaker said:


> in defense of TS.... ANY battery can be killed quick if over/under charged. How could they warranty with no control over the charge/BMS used?!


easy ... every warranty includes plenty of fine printed conditions... all they would have to do is say the warranty only applies if treated according to manufacture specs... which they kind of already do anyway.

'These cells are warrantied to last for ___ years when treated as outlined in section 2a bellow. These cells are warrantied to last for __ cycles when treated as outlined in section 2b bellow.'

you list the storage conditions ... the charge conditions ... the discharge conditions etc... list any conditions you want... and they pretty much already do this anyway... and when you treat them as they tell you to they still only give you ___ warranty.


----------



## icec0o1 (Sep 3, 2009)

How would TS prove that a battery died of natural causes/manifactured fault instead of being drained too low?


----------



## TomA (Mar 26, 2009)

Actually, the warranty on these Chinese batteries is mostly a set of problems related to the worldwide distribution of goods and resulting supply chain responsibilities. It also has a cultural component.

TK and SE, and whomever else is manufacturing batteries in China, isn't really set up to support individual overseas customers at any level- ordering, tech support, warranty etc. Now that EVComponents and others are importing the batteries, they can support the individual customers and work out their warranty returns with the manufacturers as all distributors do. It is happening, it works this way with most other consumer products, and there doesn't seem to be a problem with the development of that distribution scheme.

The cultural component is that Chinese manufacturers aren't used to dealing directly with American _consumers. _They expect distributors and retailers who buy regularly and in quantity, and can bargain their defect detection and replacement terms as they go. This is a big source of frustration and trouble among the early adopters here who dealt directly with the manufacturers.

I really don't get why people are expecting these companies to support retail customers with onesey-twosey problems in a foreign language from 10,000 miles away. There really isn't any reason at this point to buy directly from them now, either, where US retailers are offering the batteries at about the same price with apparently very favorable support and warranty terms.

This whole discussion seems like yesterday's news. On the other hand, I'm pretty sure the easy availability of these batteries from US distributors who stand behind them is in fact the biggest change in the "State of the Art" in LiFePO4 batteries since this time last year. Nice work, Mr. Morrison, et al.

TomA


----------



## IamIan (Mar 29, 2009)

icec0o1 said:


> How would TS prove that a battery died of natural causes/manifactured fault instead of being drained too low?


My first thought is that ... the assumption that the burden of proof on TS might not be correct... I suspect that it is the other way around.

TS claims anything they like ... then use that claim to void any warranty you have ... if you don't like it ... go to court ... you present your evidence they present theirs ... and the judge decides... thus the default / initial condition is that TS or any manufacture gets to make any claim they want using any method they like ... if you don't like that decision ... the burden of proof is on you to explain it to a judge who only knows the law and might know absolutely nothing about science at all.

This happened when Honda tried to void the First Gen Insight owners IMA warranties because of the hot southern US climates in which they lived could cause additional wear and shortened service life ... Honda did it ... people disagreed took them to court ... The judge sided with the consumers and against Honda ... so by court order Honda was forced not only to honor the IMA warranty but to extend it ... then because there was a legal precedent Honda choose to just extend it for all Honda Gen-I Insights in the U.S. ... but other places like in the UK where US legal precedent doesn't carry as much weight , Honda did not extend the IMA warranty at all.

----------------

My second thought is that ... I would suspect if interested enough to through enough resources at it ... one way or another they could determine what happened to a reasonably good accuracy... the only question is weather it would be more cost effective to use that many resources or to go the legal route... or some combination of both.


----------



## Wiredsim (Jul 4, 2008)

IamIan said:


> optimistic ... definitely...
> 
> What specific energy density numbers are you thinking will relate to the 1.3-1.5x and the 2-4x you listed above?
> 
> ...



No, that _is _exactly what I was thinking.. 

Actually I should qualify that somewhat, with the 1.3-1.5x I was speaking _specifically _about existing manufacturers improving the energy density of their _specific _existing products, such as the TS cells which are at a lower power density then 200wh/kg.

But in general the efforts to get us a 1.5x-2.0x increase over that of existing products are quite far along in their development. Nissan for example is betting on NMC to give them an 2x boost in density over their existing cells. You will be seeing more information from them based on this within 12-18 months after Leaf hard launches.

For another example lets look at good old Panasonic, remember that recent announcement with Telsa? Thats because by 2012 they have already committed to releasing a 18650 cell with 3.4AH and by 2013 a 4.0AH cell (LiNiO2). The 3.4AH cells alone would increase the Model S range to over 400 miles.

Within this timeframe A123 should have their second generation nano-material which should replace all or a significant portion of the iron with manganese. We will see how much of a gain they see though as they haven't posted specific number. I'm sure they wouldn't be making the switch unless there was something to gain from it though.

So just these alone gives us a bit of that 1.5-2x increase in power density within the next 2-4 years. I actually think I am being very conservative with that estimate. There are efforts at every major battery maker to hit that 250-350kw as that is somewhat of a magic number, allowing for mainstream pure electric cars with a 200 to 300 mile range (300 being the magic number supposedly with consumers).

Further out for the 4x+ increases its really like the wild west out there. I'm not going to put a bet on any specific technology, but you can follow the money our there and look at where the big players are investing (Lithium Sulfur with BASF or Lithium Air with IBM for example). Some of these have the theoretical potential for densities for up to or over 1000wh/kg.

I'm not even going to mention the other possibilities from University teams and small start-ups. The announcements of potential breakthroughs are a nearly daily occurrence. 15 minutes of googling will give you more information then you could ask for.


----------



## IamIan (Mar 29, 2009)

Wiredsim said:


> No, that _is _exactly what I was thinking..


Thanks for the clarification... I was not sure at first.

I am well aware as anyone who follows batteries is ... that there is allot of nice stuff happening.

Personally I would still suspect you are being overly optimistic ... but time will tell.

Historically battery technology averages about ~5% increase in energy density per year... with occasional variation up or down from time to time.

I expect we will see a significant number of those higher spike increase years in the near future ... maybe as high as ~10% or so ... But higher than that I think is a bit overly optimistic.

I guess we will find out in the next ~5 years or so.


----------

