RANGE CHECK: Carmakers worry Americans will hesitate to buy an electric car that can only go a few dozen miles.
Image: US DEPARTMENT OF STATE
ARGONNE, Ill.—Twenty miles southwest of Chicago, government researchers are pursuing the automotive version of Mr. Right.
He's powerful. He has endurance. He isn't too expensive to have around. And he never, ever explodes.
That's one way to think of the perfect car battery, which will have to balance many different factors to lure the American masses to the electric car.
For the moment, though, Mr. Right is just a set of equations in a notebook.
"Theoretically, it works on paper," said Don Hillebrand, who directs the Center for Transportation Research at Argonne National Laboratory.
At Argonne National Laboratory and elsewhere, researchers are just beginning to crack the basic science behind a promising technology: lithium-air batteries. If their theories are right, these batteries will have five to 10 times the energy of lithium-ion batteries, the big battery pack that's powering the first wave of electric-drive cars.
"Lithium-air is where we're going," Hillebrand said. "You can't foresee the future, but right now, that's the place where I think we see the endpoint, the end solution for ... the battery. The battery everybody's looking for."
But as engineers get closer to perfecting the lithium-ion variety, lithium-air has a long journey to replace the batteries of yesteryear.
A good idea that's still en route
"Nickel-metal hydride's an adult. Lithium-ion is a developing adolescent. And lithium-air, we're just looking at the ultrasounds," Hillebrand said.
Some say lithium-air will only carry triple the energy of lithium-ion; others project a hundredfold increase. Regardless of the estimates, all agree that lithium-ion could use a tuneup.
The reason has to do with "battery chemistry," a term that describes what makes the device go.
Batteries have an anode and a cathode, two materials that exchange ions -- in this case, lithium ions. When the ions go one way, the battery charges up; when they go the other way, the battery releases its charge.
Different materials for the anode and cathode, of course, affect this back-and-forth movement. For example, they can speed it up, move a larger number of ions, or reduce the number of times the battery can repeat the exchange -- that is, shorten the battery's life.
Lithium-ion chemistry is considered an improvement over past efforts to power electric cars. Previous options were so large and heavy that they were just barely economical to lug around. Lithium-ion packed so much more energy into less space and weight that major automakers christened it for their latest lineup of electric and hybrid cars, including Toyota's Prius, General Motors' Volt, and Nissan's Leaf.
The change came at a price, though. Today, lithium-ion batteries are commonplace and commercialized for laptops and cell phones. But the larger batteries needed for cars remain their most expensive component -- and the one deemed most essential to helping millions reach the road.
In the coming years, many expect these costs to decline. Even so, plenty in the battery field foresee the day that lithium-ion, so essential to the present day, will face retirement.
A battery that could challenge petroleum
"Let's say we want to electrify the entire fleet of vehicles in the world," said Jeffrey Chamberlain, head of Argonne's Energy Storage Major Initiative and one of the lab's leading battery chemists. "Lithium-ion batteries will get us partway there. But in reality, they're not quite high enough in energy density or quite low enough in cost."
See what we're tweeting about
15 Comments
Add CommentThese all seem like inspired developments, and I hope at least one of these processes leads to a widely acceptable battery.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHaving seen "Who Killed the Electric Car?", I take just about anything that a car maker says, especially GM, with a fistful of salt. I know there are myriad technical issues to overcome, but I suspect there will be foot-dragging from those with a financial stake and little backbone.
Between car makers' short-term profit decisions and tremendous pressure on both automakers and the regulatory process by the petroleum industry , any forward progress in this area is a miracle.
I wouldn't worry about GM anymore. They've lost their relevancy a long time ago. It's the new upstart auto makers like Tesla and Fisker that have a vested interest in better batteries that will accelerate these technologies.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYeah, I guess that's true. Judging from how happy the EV1 drivers were, I think the next generation of electric cars will have even more devoted fans.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBattery capacity and electric vehicle range are not the issues that will get people to buy electric cars. My motorcycle only gets about 140 miles on a tank, but I can confidently plan a trip across America and not worry about being able to get gas along the way no matter what route I choose; freeway or rural road. Even if I ran out of gas I could get road service to come and give me enough gas to get to a refueling station. To have the same confidence an electric vehicle would require an infrastructure for quickly recharging or replacing the battery. That is a long way off if ever.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisInternal combustion engines will be built way in to the distant future. Electric vehicle technology will not replace the diesel truck fleets or piston engine airplanes or stationary power units. To reduce the need for petroleum current internal combustion engines can be modified to operate with fuels other than gasoline or petroleum derived diesel. For example, cars can run on CNG with little modification and the infrastructure for that now is almost as good as for gasoline.
There are also unanswered questions about the manufacturing and disposal of lithium batteries.
In summary I will not be alive when or if all the issues with electric vehicles are resolved to where they will replace even a small portion of the current vehicle fleet.
The technology should not take more than 10 hears its the foot dragging and machinations of the oil giants that makes any alternative to oil out of reach of the consumer...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI can't see the all-electric car as a substitute for the petrol/oil driven car, unless battery technology and speed charging of batteries (max 5 minutes) take tremendous leaps.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisRather, I see the hybrid-car as a short/midterm solution, you can drive 30-50 miles on batteries, and have an engine running at optimum efficiency and lowest possible emission for longer drives and quick refuelling.
But the long-term solution could be a modernized version of the tram/streetcar, i.e. some kind of constant supply of electricity while driving on major roads, and batteries for short distances on minor roads. One model would be some kind of induction device (like in an induction cooker) in the tarmac, which is picked up by coils in the car.
I believe DeanB understands the idea. I would only believe about 5% of what the fossil fuel auto makers say. They have a financial interest in making sure electric cars never come to market, and if they do make it to market, they will be so expensive no one but the people with more money than brains can afford them.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTo listen to the fossil fuel auto makers, you'd think American scientists are so stupid that they can't even make a battery that can last over 40 miles of use. In Iran, they found a 25,000 year-old battery that ran off lemon juice that could get a hundred times that 40 mile distance and to recharge it...just add more lemon juice. Inside the battery they had a scroll; I believe it was made of zinc and copper. If they could build a battery to run their light bulbs or airplanes 3,000 years ago, why can't we build a battery today that can drive our cars further than the neighbor's drive-way?
I'm not sure if or when all vehicles will be battery powered, but since typical consumer driving is something like under 70 miles per day, electrics are good solution for that segment if they are accessible (affordable) and convenient (plug-in, safe chemical top-off, etc). A low cost lease would be OK with me. Maybe ownership plus a guaranteed discount on an internal combustion vehicle from the dealer, if you need to go on a long trip or something. Someone will come up with a way to make driving these cars an attractive choice instead of a scary or unreachable choice.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI know you all love to bash GM - but - a Volt like car IS the answer. Put Lithium-air batteries in a Volt with it's little 3 cylinder gas motor which charges the batteries - Bob's your Uncle, Fanny's your Aunt - viola - a seriously versatile, BASICALLY electric vehicle that can also go cross country in a pinch.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWell done GM!
quincykim...so agree...to see them buy the nickel-metal hydride battery plant and then what...close it down...what a bunch of idiots...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiswhat they need to replace at least 50 percent of the vehicles is something that gets at least 150 to 200 miles on a charge...tesla does it....just need it a lot cheaper...
long distance trips are going to require something completely different...ie swap batteries...etc...
i'm glad to see them developing new battery tech...but its not going to help in the near term....
stew6302...what an idiotic comment...please have something to say if you going to post....
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI think it is so funny that people see cars companies as trying to "thwart" electric cars. Car companies want to sell cars that they can make a profit from...period. There is a great deal of competition in the automotive marketplace. The real breakthrough is that Nissian will be fielding the Leaf next year. Before long we will have electric cars that will also be fun to drive with higher horsepower motors at each wheel.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAt present, the prime contender for the Electric Car of the Future is the Tesla Motors entries, which all run on cell phone batteries. The MOST promising power source for an all electric vehicle is the Motionless Electromagnetic Generator (MEG), which was patented 26 March 2002, and is only about $12 million and 1.5 years of scaling research away from production. See www.cheniere.org, which is the website of Doctor Thomas Bearden, one of the 5 co-patent holders.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe MEG transducer taps COPIOUS amounts of pure, clean, electrical energy DIRECTLY out of the Quantum Vacuum, and it "keeps on keepin' on" until the electrical parts wear out: at least 20 years! It COULD replace any stationary power plant, any "roadable" power plant (electrical, gasoline, diesel, etc.) any marine power plant (INCLUDING nuclear!) or any propellor driven aviation power plant. It also could also become a source of trusters for high speed airborne or even space propulsion use, provided it is pulling NEGATIVE ENERGY (that is negative ENERGY, and NOT negative CHARGE!) from the quantum vacuum. BTW, the author of the article upon which I am commenting could use a spell checker: it's "gauntlet", NOT "gantlet"...:S
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis is amazing great news. This country needs a new industry not money give-aways and this will be the one. A battery car that goes 500 miles a charge will be good for most people. A two car family can have one electric car for day use and a gasoline one for trips. Perhaps even just rent the gasoline one when you need it.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this