What a bullshit article. While better anode materials are always nice, these claims about charging speed are just dumb. That's only so much power you can push into a battery and today's 350 KW chargers are probably already the practical limit. And if you can't take a 20 minute break every 400 km or so, you should go home and rethink your life.
That's a weak ass road trip. My car gets 400 miles per tank and we don't stop until it needs gas again. 400km is chump change on American roads.
That's very reckless of you. Regular breaks are required to be able to drive safely. If you don't take breaks you are being irresponsible and endangering your own life and those of others.
My car drives itself chill bro
I was thinking that this is one of those thousands of battery technologies we will never hear about again.
I'm sick of reading phones and cars charging in a matter of minutes for the past decade.
Don't worry about it too much. These sorts of articles focus on battery tech, but the ultimate limiting factor is the ability of the plug to supply power.
A Tesla Model 3 has a 75kwh battery. Let's say it's at 20% charge. That's 60kwh to get it full (assuming 100% charge efficiency). It would take 600kw to charge that in 6 minutes.
The SAE J1772 plug is only rated to go up to 400kw on DC level 2, and you'd be hard pressed to find a charger that does it. I couldn't find info on Tesla's plug, but since it's about the same size, it's likely around the same. Tesla's superchargers are themselves only going up to 250kw.
It would take yet another plug standard, and chargers that can actually handle such a load. Oh, and upgrading the electrical network to handle such a beast in widespread use.
Most of which is pointless, anyway. EVs are best handled by giving them a little charge wherever they're parked. For road trips, unless you're the type to pee in a bottle and eat sandwiches you prepared ahead of time, about 300mi range with existing charge rates is sufficient.
It's a matter of power delivery at the moment. A modern rapid charger you can add about 10 miles a minute so 10 minutes is normally fine.. barely enough time to have a cup of tea.
Getting power to a battery faster starts to become impractical simply because of the thickness of cable you'd need to do it, and the internal heat the battery would generate if you threw power at it that fast.
Think of it like a swimming pool. You can fill it with a small hose, might take an hour or two.. bigger hose, maybe down to 30 minutes.. you want it to be done in seconds? Sure.. let me just turn up with this dump truck full of water...
Most of the things you read are about as useful as potato batteries. 'We've come up with this new compound that can take charge really fast'. Sure. Now make millions of them, the size of a car, for a price people will pay. Oh you can't... there's the rub.
Turns out there are a near infinite ways of combining materials that make a battery, and only a handful that scale to industrial production.
Oh look. Another "could revolutionize" article.
Alright, so let's assume a 100kWh battery like some tesla models. Now, someone made such a battery that can be charged in 6 minutes... how much power does it need?
100 kW•h / 6minutes = 100kW•h / 0.1h = 1000kW = 1MW
So, we need 1 MEGAWATT car chargers ... that's some power required there.
Possibly even more significant, those are some large cables and even larger contacts required. There's no way a 1MW disconnect is just a little plug you stick into your car.
In fact as an electrician I can't think of anything even near megawatt class that would be connected with a portable cord, or at a voltage that would be safe for consumers to handle.
Maybe someone in the mining industry or similar can chime in, but I currently run a pumping station that includes 3000HP motors (2.2MW). These are 4kV 3 phase units where each phase cable is as thick as your arm. All connections are bolted and taped to avoid corona discharge. Just dragging the cable to the car would be more than the average driver could handle.
I don't see a way to get these power levels into a car short of a standardized and semi-automated docking system. Or maybe go back to the idea of standard swappable batteries where the battery then is charged rapidly for the next customer.
The power lines in the cable are disconnected inside the charger by a contactor until communication with the car is confirmed established with a handshake, and then it connects power to the cable. If the communication with the car drops at any point, the contactor disconnects the power to the cable. It requires both effort and knowledge to bypass this design, it basically can't happen accidentally.
Also, the cables you mention are that large, because they're passively cooled, DC car chargers have watercooled cables so they can be much thinner without overheating. And at 4kV you're looking at significantly different insulation thickness as well, compared to the 400-800V that electric cars use.
Electric busses already have automated docking systems, the only problem I see is cost
https://assets.foleon.com/eu-central-1/de-uploads-7e3kk3/39195/17_syb21_content1.79205c469709.jpg
That's 4,350 amps @230vac. The service fuse for my entire home is 80 or 100amp (single phase domestic dwelling Australia). The main breaker is 63amp.
DC fast charging typically runs at 400 volts, with some cars doing 800. They also do it with highly specialized equipment and service lines you'd never see in a residential setting.
When charging at home, you have all night. A 50A circuit will go 0-100 on most cars in that time, and if you look at what most people actually drive you can generally get by on much less.
Fast charging uses up to 1000 V DC, and the current limits of conductors are typically set by the temperature it reaches when conduction losses heat them up. This can be (and is) offset by liquid cooling, allowing current installations to deliver up to 650 A (Tesla supercharger v3).
With improvements, it's not far off 1 MW.
thats assuming 100% efficiency. which is impossible
True, so I guess 1MW won't even be enough
Tesla semi is meant to be able to charge at 1mw, which makes sense considering the size of the battery, bigger battery means more cells and more space for cooling. The truck is also meant to support 1mw with the new v4 chargers. So if you believe Tesla (which is hard because of Musk), it is coming.
Charging that rapidly is only possible for some but not all 100% of the battery as you have to slow down as you approach 100%. 350kw chargers slow down around 80% (I've gone as high as 85% before I've seen the slow down). This happens at all charging speeds to protect the battery, even 7kw chargers slow down for the last couple of percent.
However charging to 100% of the time on ultra rapid chargers is monumentally dumb as it's considerably more expensive per kWh than slow chargers, slower for that last 20%, blocks chargers for longer, and isn't good for the long term health of the battery. It is as quick to charge twice to 80% than it is once to 100% on the same charger for 60 to 70% more range from charging twice. This is true because you avoid slowing down at the end of the charge.
could
k
And like all battery advancements we will maybe get this in the next ten years.
If at all. A lot of published science turns out not to be usable in real products, if not completely wrong. For starters, someone else should replicate the findings independently, to confirm them, then the manufacturing process needs to be scaled and the cost reduced, then ... someone will need to figure out how many MW this thing needs to charge in 6 minutes ...
All of these speedy innovations are great and everything, but they are impractical for most people. They will be useful for emergency situations and for long trips, but for the large majority of people driving electric vehicles their slow chargers in their houses will work just fine.
I love hearing about new ideas, but it's annoying hearing them phrased like it'll change the entire charging game. It doesn't matter if they invent things that charge cars in 30 minutes. Most people will still be slow charging their car while they sleep.
The barrier to adoption is so often outlier scenarios though.
A vehicle is a huge purchase. For many it's the largest purchase they will make. For everyone else it's the second largest, behind their home. They want to make sure it does everything they do normally, and everything they might do once in a while.
As a small example, my family travels to a specific lake about once per year, for around a week. We switched cell phone providers to one that worked better at that lake. It costs a bit more, but even though on an average week it doesn't matter at all if our phones work at that lake because on average we aren't there, it was important to have our carrier work there. The outlier scenario actually made the decision for us with all other factors equal.
It doesn't matter if the average buyer isn't likely to take longer trips frequently. What does matter is that those outlier scenarios can be conceivably accomplished without significant hassle. And before you say that's not reasonable, consider that it doesn't matter that it isn't reasonable.
People base their purchase decisions on unreasonable factors all the time. How else do we explain how many trucks are on the road?
It does not matter that current charging methods cover 99% of scenarios for 99% of people. The glare of that 1% will shine a light brighter than the positives from the standpoint of widespread adoption. And from that perspective, news of a solution to slower charging is a very good thing.
Also slow chargers in houses will not work for many people. The majority of ICE drivers that won't even consider an EV as an option yet live in apartment buildings which currently don't have electric charging and likely won't install them anytime soon, or live in areas without access to a driveway/garage (i.e. basement suites)
The more arguments that you can take away from ICE owners the better it will be for widespread EV adoption.
Time to recharge is ICE owners biggest complaints, next to single charge range.
I asked gpt4 to explain this abstract in terms a high schooler would understand.
Sure, this text is talking about making better batteries. Right now, a type of material called “mixed transition metal oxides” has potential to be a really good component in batteries. But there are problems like they don’t hold as much energy as we’d like, they’re hard to make, and they don’t conduct electricity well.
So, the researchers made a new version of these materials, tweaking them with manganese and iron. They used a new, easier method to make super-thin sheets of this stuff. This new material can hold a lot of energy, way more than the old versions.
The thin sheets also let electric charges move more easily, which is good for battery performance. Plus, they made sure that the material doesn’t expand too much, which helps keep the battery stable over time.
So basically, they made a high-performance battery material that can be charged quickly, holds a lot of energy, and lasts a long time. It’s like creating a new recipe for a better, longer-lasting smartphone battery.
Eh, 15 minutes of charge every 3 hours of driving is fine for me. Long distance is not a problem with the Tesla network. And it's opening up for everyone else too soon. Hopefully it will cause competition for the other networks and force them to improve.
Imo the way things stand things are already good enough as they are.
we don't need to double battery capacity/distance or even charging speeds, it's a massive waste of resources that won't benefit the vast majority of people.
from quick google
Every day, there are some 70 Million (M) worldwide driving trips. The average trip duration globally is 15 minutes long. The average trip distance globally is 15 Kilometers / 9.3 miles. The average speed globally is 30 km/h (or) 18.6 mph
so even if you have a 200km worst case scenario range on your EV, unless you are one of those people that are on the road a lot, it literally covers like 99% of your car usage.
Hyundai EVs charge with 350Kw, to 80% in like 15m which is perfectly fine for a longer roadtrip imo. I used to travel 200kms every two weeks and in most cases I took a rest half way through the 2 hour trip anyway to stretch.
if you are one of those guys that will come on and say you drive 500+kms every day and BEV is just unacceptable for you, well guess what, just get a fucking Hydrogen EV, pretty sure those can get up to 1000km ranges already which is more than my Diesel Hyundai.
Faster charging means a lower chance of all the chargers are in use at the service stations en-route. Currently if you're in need of a charge you'll have to wait for the others cars to get charged and then you still have the 20+ minute wait for your own car. That's going to put a lot of folks off owning an EV. Coupled with the fact the EV uptake is growing a lot faster than the charging infrastructure to support it. Faster charging has a lot of benefits.
except, the vast majority of your trips are from your home to some place and back, you charge at home and the range is more than enough to cover 90+% of your trips.
rather than focusing on super chargers (which we also need along high ways) we need to focus on smaller lvl 2 chargers at places where they make sense, apartment complexes, offices, to enable BEV use for people who don't own a home with their own garage.
you also completely ignore load balancing of the infrastructure, for one 350KW charger you can create 7 50KW chargers, that means 7 cars being charged while parked at places you spend lots of time at instead of 1 charger charging 1 car.
so like I said, fast chargers make sense next to main roads and highways during long trips and they don't make much sense at all in cities.
Average trip duration is not a great metric because they measure a trip as going from point A to point B. That's great, but then I do six trips a day in errands.
Total miles per day is the metric to use. On average, in America, it's 37 miles.
That is to say, EV cars would work for many people. But to reach the majority we need these advancements.
why? you literally say 37 miles, that means it's already good enough for the majority.
Averages are useless. It does not matter if my car is fine most of the time, I'm not going to have a second car for when it is difficult or impossible.
Hydrogen is the other tech which makes quick refuelling possible, but there are not yet enough hydrogen refuelling stations to make them feasible for most drivers. And we don't yet know if leaks can be controlled enough to make hydrogen a net positive for consumer applications.
Averages are useless. It does not matter if my car is fine most of the time
so what, you would want to triple your battery capacity because once a year you might need it?
why not just a rent car for that one occasion?
Where did once a year come from? I can't reach any of my family without stopping to charge most (currently affordable) EVs. We only bought a car because it was getting more expensive to rent them when needed (and train prices have doubled), we're not going to pay twice over.
so that's what 150+ 200+ km? (and that's being generously low given something like Hyundai Ioniq 5s range)
is it unfathomable for you to take a 15 minute break during a trip like that?
Where are you getting 15 minutes from? Why do you keep inventing scenarios to make your point?
Why do you keep inventing scenarios to make your point?
bruh
At an ultra-fast 350 kW charger, IONIQ 6 can add up to 351 km of range in just 15 minutes – or charge from 10 to 80% in just 18 minutes! Hyundai's world's-first technology in IONIQ 5 & 6 supports both 400V and 800V charging infrastructure.
Now you want everyone to drop £50k on a car?
Come on. Be serious.
you know BEV cars will get cheaper with time, right?
you also do know about used car market right?
be serious...
This guy: "You're expecting people to drop 50k on a car."
me: screaming in the land of 80k V12 F-150s driven by city commuters
(I seriously live in a dense neighborhood in the city in CA aka US liberal HQ and people here regularly buy high five to low six figure trucks they can't fit in their condo garage...)
Have you rented a car for a week? It's prohibitedly expensive for most people, especially if it needs to be big enough for the family and a week vacation. I'm considering getting an EV, but it's only because we'll have my wife's gas powered SUV to use for our longer trips, which are 1-4 times a year. That not an unusual need, and one that make exclusive EVs a no-go for a lot of people. Hybrids are an option of course.
I still don't understand why people need ultra distance in EVs. If I drove as much as often as the "I need a million mile range" crew I'd take a good, long look at my life and what was wrong with it.
I mean, it could be part of the job they do, whatever, but people vastly overestimate what they actually need from a vehicle.
If my commute distance was as long as some of these people claim, I'd do any number of things to change that.
there is stuff other than commute, for example a friend of mine works as a mechanic for agricultural machinery.
so there are days where he goes 400km one way to go do repairs on a piece of equipment.
Of course he is an exception to the rule just wanted to point out that there are jobs where you actually have to drive more than a BEVs range in a day.
Sure, it's the long tail, but everyone pretends they're in the tip of it.
I think there's something else behind it honestly. People have grown used to not planning and making long drives randomly and don't want to have to plan before making a Lewis and Clark length voyage now even if it's pivotal because of impending climate collapse.
I don't think the average American has moved very far from being aghast at Jimmy Carter's suggestion that they wear a sweater when heating prices were high.
We're spoiled babies and we don't intend to change, even if it means the end of all things.
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
