# Nissan Leaf at 150,000 miles and climbing



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

Link?

I think the Leaf is a great car, but it's commute range is just too short for me.

Once they have a Leaf-priced EV with 250 mile range (advertised range, which should guarantee me the ability to make the 70 mile run to the airport in cold weather and the heater running; leave it for a week; and still know I have enough juice to drive back home without damaging the battery) I'm switching. Then my DIY project will be building a tow-behind range extender for long trips.

I've been holding off trading my 17 year old SUV; fortunately it is one of the best vehicles ever made (1999 Toyota Forerunner) and seems to be holding up well. Apparently people know that that year was a great one - I routinely get offers to buy it from complete strangers...


----------



## dedlast (Aug 17, 2013)

https://www.yahoo.com/news/owner-100-000-mile-nissan-leaf-electric-car-120012108.html


There ya go...

B


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

While it is commendable that someone has explored the limits of what we CAN do, it is still a bit sad that in order to accomplish this the employer essentially had to subsidize his adventure by installing a charger at their expense and providing him the electricity (the latter admittedly a small expense).

I am convinced that at least one of the recent technology breakthroughs will put an end to those driving limitations for most people. 24M's re-thinking of the battery building process; Sakti3's solid state battery; Nanoparticle applications; improved cathodes for conventional batteries; etc. Sakti3 has just received funding for their first battery plant; 24M is a bit ahead; others offer drop-in component improvements to existing battery plants. These are no longer science fiction, they are in the pipeline.

The Leaf is a fine car. It will be even better when the batteries double or triple in capacity for less cost.


----------



## ken will (Dec 19, 2009)

PhantomPholly said:


> it is still a bit sad that in order to accomplish this the employer essentially had to subsidize his adventure by installing a charger at their expense and providing him the electricity


You really are a "Negative Nelly"!
The article said "The owners of the firm were happy to oblige"!


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

There is nothing negative about what I said. I am not saying that the business didn't feel they'd get enough positive press out of the deal to offset the cost. What I am saying is that it would not have worked without the company's willingness to shell out hard cash. 

And the reality is that most companies may do that for the first or second employee for the same reason, but if suddenly everyone wanted their own charger there would be a very different answer forthcoming...


----------



## dedlast (Aug 17, 2013)

One of my co-workers has a Leaf. When she asked to charge at work so she could safely make her commute during the winter, the building owner (not our employer) told her no. She ended up driving her minivan through the winter.

B


----------



## ken will (Dec 19, 2009)

PhantomPholly said:


> I am not saying that the business didn't feel they'd get enough positive press out of the deal to offset the cost.


You just do not get life...

The owners did not do it for the positive press...

They did it to be nice!!!

They did it to make the world a better place!!!

You,apparently, have not learned that the opportunity to help someone else, can be a gift that can make you feel wonderful for days!!!

A sad selfish person would have done it only for the positive press.


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

ken will said:


> You just do not get life...
> 
> The owners did not do it for the positive press...
> 
> They did it to be nice!!!


That's so sweet. Keep thinking that.



> You,apparently, have not learned that the opportunity to help someone else, can be a gift that can make you feel wonderful for days!!!


And you apparently are both ignorant and arrogant to suppose you know what others think or believe. I help people every day and enjoy doing so. The difference between us is that I'm realistic enough to recognize that most people aren't like me. I'm also brutally honest with myself - I recognize that when I do help people it is because I like doing so - which is a totally selfish attitude.

Somewhere along the line, perhaps because of child abuse or guilt or because someone dropped you on your head, you came to the incorrect conclusion that selfishness is "evil." That is a nonsense notion; selfishness is our primary survival tool and it is what motivates great people to make the world a better place.



> A sad selfish person would have done it only for the positive press.


You are a selfish person, does that make you sad? Strangely enough, many people do not do things based entirely on their feelings as I am coming to suspect you do. There are business decisions to be made which spell life-or-death for the business without which MANY people would suffer. Those decisions must be made by dispassionate people who are able to put aside their feelings and act on facts and reality, not ideological fantasies. 

There is no such thing as a selfless person - they are all dead from suicide.


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

dedlast said:


> One of my co-workers has a Leaf. When she asked to charge at work so she could safely make her commute during the winter, the building owner (not our employer) told her no. She ended up driving her minivan through the winter.


Yep. The subject of the article was probably a highly valued employee, or the business would not even have considered the expense of the charger installation. Once considered, they probably put together a business plan to determine if they could break even with publicity, or if not whether that person was valuable enough to them to do something "special" to make them feel good.

Take an example of a "highly valuable" IT person with many years of deep company understanding. Salaries plus benefits in a good company for a senior person are about $150,000 per year. That is neither good nor bad, simply the cost of retaining a valuable person. However, LOSING such a person has costs far above the salary - typically at least half a year's salary in lost productivity, and perhaps more if they were popular and other good people follow them to another company. A perk like a charger may cost $60k installed, but they generally can charge 4 vehicles at a time and make MANY people "feel good." It's a good investment for some companies, not so much for others.


----------



## Moltenmetal (Mar 20, 2014)

My employer allows me to use a landscape outlet for recharging, which is all I need. And they don't just get me to pay the incremental cost of the electricity I use, they take the number of dollars they spend on electricity per year and divide by the number of kWh they use, and charge me that. Fair enough.

We have two Volt drivers at work, both electricians. They installed, at their own cost and on their own time, a level 2 EVSE that one of them got thrown in as a 2nd unit when he bought his Volt. Easy enough to do in an industrial building with metal siding.

Our new building will have three level 2 EVSEs installed from day one, at our employer's cost, plus a few regular outlets on separate circuits. Same deal- EV owners will keep track of charges and pay for the power they use.


----------



## hmincr (Jan 20, 2012)

All the comments on this thread are fine, however, I posted this to show how the battery life drama is possibly underestimating actual battery lifespan. If one person can achieve 150,000 miles plus, where does the 80,000 miles necessary battery change come from ? That guaranteed 80% capacity in 8 years, I believe, is to cover the manufacturers from more severe treatment from abusive driving habits. 

I believe how hard you discharge the battery is relevant to battery life. The article, (I forgot to post that link by the way), states he uses various charge rates both longer term and fast charging. This seems to indicate that charging is no where near as critical to battery life as discharging, no ?

I see no reason that batteries should not outlive cars if decent driving habits are used and also, there should be many more years of use as solar and wind storage capacity for so called depleted batteries. 

Anyone converting or buying a used E-car should be able to change out their depleted battery with a salvage yard unit and still get excellent benefits from not using petroleum fuels.


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

hmincr said:


> I believe how hard you discharge the battery is relevant to battery life. The article, (I forgot to post that link by the way), states he uses various charge rates both longer term and fast charging. This seems to indicate that charging is no where near as critical to battery life as discharging, no ?


I would not conclude that. All of the articles I've read indicate that depth of discharge as well as maximum C rate have drastic impacts on battery life. Exceeding either or both on a regular basis will doubtless reduce total life.

C rate is somewhat "protected" in a leaf because maximum draw from the motor is not truly excessive. I suspect that the article's subject is careful not to over-discharge the pack, thus protecting life.



> I see no reason that batteries should not outlive cars if decent driving habits are used and also, there should be many more years of use as solar and wind storage capacity for so called depleted batteries.


That is true; yet we can and will do better. Batteries already moving from the lab to the factory promise to allow many times the charge cycles of batteries already in vehicles, while better energy density combined with lower price virtually ensures manufacturers will install packs large enough that people will not generally go even below 50%, let alone 80%, in daily use.


----------



## Karter2 (Nov 17, 2011)

Most every thing seems to influence pack life.
Charge rate, discharge rate , minimum cell voltage, max cell voltage, time held at max voltage, ambient temperature, constant or pulse loads, etc etc etc
Some tests on Tesla cells have even shown that not using the pack for a period can noticeable restore some lost capacity and hence useful cell life.
Whilst there has been a lot of data generated from various sources , its very hard to set definitive rules.
One of the biggest problems with analysing this data is that it is all from different cell chemistries and test protocols


----------



## Moltenmetal (Mar 20, 2014)

We know some things that kill cells or reduce capacity, and for some we know why.

Time at high voltage, particularly while hot, further thickens the solid electrolyte interface with electrolyte oxidation products- irrespective of chemistry if I recall what I read correctly. What constitutes high voltage obviously varies with chemistry. Eventually the thickened SEI can block pores or occlude whole areas in the cathode material, effectively blocking them off. There are electrolyte additives which reduce this tendency but once they're used up, they are no longer effective. The thick SEI also increases mass transfer resistance which shows up as internal resistance and increases self heating during both charge and discharge. It also results in tying up some lithium.

As to damage from high charge or discharge rates, there are mechanisms which vary by chemistry and probably by construction too.

The great thing Li-ion batteries have going for them is how little volumetric change occurs to either electrode each charge-discharge cycle. When volume changes are large, mechanical damage from the volume changes can be a real problem.


----------



## Bugrug (Jun 7, 2016)

When they make one with a charge life of 500+ miles, I'll buy one. But only a 2nd or 3rd generation. They will be much cheaper at that point.


----------



## Duncan (Dec 8, 2008)

Bugrug said:


> When they make one with a charge life of 500+ miles, I'll buy one. But only a 2nd or 3rd generation. They will be much cheaper at that point.



That is an interesting point maybe we should deliberately limit the range so that we don't get people driving for 500 miles at one hit and putting the rest of the road users at risk


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

Bugrug said:


> When they make one with a charge life of 500+ miles, I'll buy one. But only a 2nd or 3rd generation. They will be much cheaper at that point.


They will get there.

24M is building their first factory. Same basic chemistry as current LiIon batteries, but by reducing much of the unnecessary "filler" materials will get about 20% more power and, more importantly, project manufacturing costs will eventually be as low as 20% of current LiIon batteries. I'll settle for half for now.

Current LiIon batteries are limited by their cathodes, which can only store about 20% of the energy that the corresponding anode is capable of. There are multiple labs which have announced solutions to this weakness using various materials and treatments. One of those will probably make it to market in about 5 years. Since the part will be a line-replaceable swap for the current cathode, battery factories will not need to change to get an immediate boost in power for about the same cost. Again let's settle for half price.

That will put battery manufacture costs around $35/Kwh, with batteries about 40% current weight and size for the same capacity (.8 weight for 24M's manufacturing process * .5 for the new cathodes = .4, or 40%). That is a conservative estimate, the actual will probably be better than that in both weight and cost.


----------

