# The end of petroleum dominance



## Dune (Aug 18, 2012)

A group of Korean scientists, working at the Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology (UNIST), have developed a fast-charge lithium-ion battery that can be recharged 30 to 120 times faster than conventional li-ion batteries. The team believes it can build a battery pack for electric vehicles that can be fully charged in _less than a minute_.
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/...ery-that-charges-120-times-faster-than-normal

With 300 mile range and almost instant recharging, petroleum powered cars will cease to make sense.


----------



## BoilerMan (Aug 18, 2012)

Agreed, however how do we generate electricity in _this country?_  They are taking most of the hydro off-line in my part of the country and now _import_ electricity from Canada, which is hydro produced.  Don't get me wrong though, the electric car will benifit from seriously fast charging long lasting batteries.

TS


----------



## begreen (Aug 18, 2012)

I like the final question, "To charge a 56KW battery in less than a minute would take an awful lot of power and some really thick cables, right?" Ah, yeah.


----------



## Frozen Canuck (Aug 18, 2012)

Yes I think we are going to have be satisfied with slower charge times.
Unles of course you are satisfied with line voltage like I have seen some welders use in Mexico.
Not sure how one contols or meters that though!


----------



## Frozen Canuck (Aug 18, 2012)

On the upside every improvement in battery technology does bring us closer.


----------



## Dune (Aug 19, 2012)

begreen said:


> I like the final question, "To charge a 56KW battery in less than a minute would take an awful lot of power and some really thick cables, right?" Ah, yeah.


 
Right, one minute is clearly not practical, but how about 7-10 minutes?


----------



## begreen (Aug 19, 2012)

It's certainly possible, though not for the current charger infrastructure that is going in on our highways. I think the best they can do is 32 amps. But 10 minutes would be enough for a good partial charge to get one another 50 miles down the road. Both the vehicle and the charging station would need to be set up for higher voltage and amperage charging. These are often 460VAC 3 phase setups not seen in homes. Alternatively in areas that have adopted A Better Place's standard, the battery pack would be swapped out for a freshly charged one. That takes a bit over a minute and the process is similar to a drive-thru car wash.


----------



## Dune (Aug 19, 2012)

begreen said:


> It's certainly possible, though not for the current charger infrastructure that is going in on our highways. I think the best they can do is 32 amps. But 10 minutes would be enough for a good partial charge to get one another 50 miles down the road. Both the vehicle and the charging station would need to be set up for higher voltage and amperage charging. These are often 460VAC 3 phase setups not seen in homes. Alternatively in areas that have adopted A Better Place's standard, the battery pack would be swapped out for a freshly charged one. That takes a bit over a minute and the process is similar to a drive-thru car wash.


 
Admittedly the infrastructure for fast charging is not in place everywhere, however, I think it would be relatively simple and quick to install if the demand appeared, certainly more so than a hydrogen infrastructure for example. The beauty with high voltage 3-phase of course being that the wires are small (cheaper) even for higher amps than lower voltage single phase.

The better place system requires that all the cars have the same battery pack, I presume. How much is that being utilized now, other than in Israel?


----------



## begreen (Aug 20, 2012)

In urban areas it should be fairly straight forward. In interstate rest areas, not so easy, but again one doesn't always need a full charge instantly.

The better place project is moving along. It takes time to set up standards and then have vehicles manufactured to that standard. The battery pack doesn't have to be identical. It just needs to meet the standard for size, attachment, connectors, etc.. That way technology can progress without obsoleting the vehicle. Israel is fully committed, but the project is being adopted in Denmark, Japan, Australia and Hawaii too. It makes good sense to adopt it for fleet vehicles and taxis to start with.


----------



## btuser (Aug 20, 2012)

I think we're (the proverbial) 20 years away from the common nano-battery.  Until then people could simply change their attitudes/habits to get around what it takes to charge their batteries. Right now a battery will give you 100 miles (give or take, heat and defroster and AC running) and that's fine for the vast majority of people.  If you're a OTR trucker, you won't be able to make it 14hrs, fake your log book and turn around for the return trip, but a few stops every 4-6 hours will save you A LOT of money vs pouring diesel into your tank while you keep everyone else safe.  If you're outside sales you may have to take a 2 hr lunch at the charging station while you make some calls and catch up on email.  Gas stations converted to charging stations with wifi would be more than enough for me to waste an hour, or leave an hour early from work and finish up.  

I can see us switching to the siesta time schedule quite easily.


----------



## Jags (Aug 20, 2012)

I am not sure why mega amp charging stations appear so daunting.  A bank of large capacitors located in the brick building next to the station could be at a constant charge and when a car pulls up, dumps.  So it takes 7 minutes of line power to charge the caps back up - so what - it takes 10 minutes for the driver in front of you to fuel and get out of the way, now.


----------



## btuser (Aug 20, 2012)

Jags said:


> I am not sure why mega amp charging stations appear so daunting. A bank of large capacitors located in the brick building next to the station could be at a constant charge and when a car pulls up, dumps. So it takes 7 minutes of line power to charge the caps back up - so what - it takes 10 minutes for the driver in front of you to fuel and get out of the way, now.


And you wouldn't have to fill the tanks every few days.  Mega-giantic solar setups and push the sunshine North.


----------



## Jags (Aug 20, 2012)

btuser said:


> And you wouldn't have to fill the tanks every few days. Mega-giantic solar setups and push the sunshine North.


 
I think you WILL see a solar revolution if (when) electric cars go mainstream.  I have an acre or two I am willing to donate to the cause.


----------



## Flatbedford (Aug 20, 2012)

This stuff is pretty cool. It's looking like it will happen.


----------



## begreen (Aug 20, 2012)

Jags said:


> I am not sure why mega amp charging stations appear so daunting. A bank of large capacitors located in the brick building next to the station could be at a constant charge and when a car pulls up, dumps. So it takes 7 minutes of line power to charge the caps back up - so what - it takes 10 minutes for the driver in front of you to fuel and get out of the way, now.


 
Look at an average filling station in the city. There can be 4-6 vehicles filling up every 5 minutes in a busy station. That's a lot of amps.


----------



## Flatbedford (Aug 20, 2012)

Somebody (actually a bunch of people) figured out how to get large quantities of gasoline to station all over and built the infrastructure to do so. I imagine that once the demand is there the infrastructure will come without much trouble. There _will_ be money to be made in it.


----------



## begreen (Aug 20, 2012)

Actually it will take a whole lot of infrastructure to make it work. Local power companies are pretty concerned about a mass migration. The grid and generating capacity is pretty close to max in many regions. Distributing the load via overnight charging is preferable right now. It may be slower, but what else is the car going to do while you sleep? And how much do you invest if hydrogen is the next solution?


----------



## Seasoned Oak (Aug 20, 2012)

I see these type stories every month or so ,seems you never hear about the same concept again.


----------



## begreen (Aug 20, 2012)

There's a big jump from the lab to scaled up production. That takes research, testing and time. A big company like Ford or Toyota is going to be very conservative about the battery they supply with the car. It has to last a long time and be very safe. But I do see incremental changes starting to show up in motors and batteries. Nissan is claiming to have improved range by 25% in the 2013 Leaf via motor and battery improvements. That's a respectable increase.


----------



## BoilerMan (Aug 20, 2012)

It is the heat and A/C that is currently (no pun intended) killing the electric/hybrid concept in my neck of the woods.  Much better suited for city stop/go traffic, but A/C again.........  The grid is pretty much at max capacity now, as we all know brown-outs are are a sign of overloading with mass air conditioning.  The idea sounds good, but there are still many hurdles to overcome, just as there were with the "horseless carrage".  Our world is built around oil, and a switch will be difficult to say the least, anyone remember when we tried to go metric in the 70s?  LOL

TS


----------



## begreen (Aug 21, 2012)

It's ironic that this is an issue in your neck of the woods. I would think that is only a problem for a few weeks. It seems that the  bigger problem would be battery capacity in the deep cold of winter.


----------



## Dune (Aug 21, 2012)

begreen said:


> Actually it will take a whole lot of infrastructure to make it work. Local power companies are pretty concerned about a mass migration. The grid and generating capacity is pretty close to max in many regions. Distributing the load via overnight charging is preferable right now. It may be slower, but what else is the car going to do while you sleep? And how much do you invest if hydrogen is the next solution?


 
I think overnight charging will always be preferable. The vast majority of cars are parked at home overnight, and charging at night helps the electric companies by balancing their loads better.
Of course, many could be encouraged to continue charging at night with off peak metering.
The need for fast charging will not even be an issue for most drivers anyway, since they drive less per day than even
present day batteries are capable of.


----------



## Seasoned Oak (Aug 21, 2012)

One train of thought is to allow (for a price ) power companies to tap into unused battery capacity, as per the days your electric car sets in your garage unused, to satisfy peak loads during the day. Not sure if its a good idea cuz it will cost you 1 charge cycle. Wear and tear.


----------



## Jags (Aug 21, 2012)

Seasoned Oak said:


> One train of thought is to allow (for a price ) power companies to tap into unused battery capacity, as per the days your electric car sets in your garage unused, to satisfy peak loads during the day. Not sure if its a good idea cuz it will cost you 1 charge cycle. Wear and tear.


 
The one problem that I have with this is wanting to jump in and go and not knowing if it is fully charged or not.  I don't want somebody draining that sucker when they don't know my schedule.


----------



## Seasoned Oak (Aug 21, 2012)

The cars owner, not the electric company would make the decision to make the cars capacity available to the grid. Might work better with old end of life volt/leaf batteries that are not actually in a car.


----------



## velvetfoot (Aug 21, 2012)

Anybody hear anything good/bad about the Prius plug-in.  Price is not low...


----------



## Seasoned Oak (Aug 21, 2012)

Its not catching fire with its 11 Mile range and relatively high price tag. The GM volt seems to have nailed it on quality and usability. Although many may not like the price ,i saw a $268.00 month lease the other day.Id go for that.
In 24 months theres likely to be many more choices.


----------



## velvetfoot (Aug 21, 2012)

Are you serious about 11 miles?  They're going for $ mid-thirties as well, no?


----------



## btuser (Aug 21, 2012)

Seasoned Oak said:


> The cars owner, not the electric company would make the decision to make the cars capacity available to the grid. Might work better with old end of life volt/leaf batteries that are not actually in a car.


We could charge up off-peak and sell it back at peak demand prices.  I could put in a stop at say 50 miles ( or 100 depending on how far I want to go) or even a price I'm willing to sell.   

Figure you could take your whole office off the grid if people plugged in their cars, or if you charge at work you could take advantage of cheap solar during the day.


----------



## Seasoned Oak (Aug 21, 2012)

velvetfoot said:


> Are you serious about 11 miles? They're going for $ mid-thirties as well, no?


Thats what the toyota website claims


----------



## velvetfoot (Aug 21, 2012)

11 miles is pretty lame.


----------



## Seasoned Oak (Aug 21, 2012)

Im NOT a toyota fan after owning a poorly desgned 1999 tacoma truck
But I always liked their electric RAV4, came out in 2000. Got 120 MPC with NIMH Batt & was $30000 new. Now they just reintroduced it ,its $50000 and get 100 MPC with LI-ion Batt.
Going backward?


----------



## Dune (Aug 21, 2012)

Seasoned Oak said:


> Im NOT a toyota fan after owning a poorly desgned 1999 tacoma truck
> But I always liked their electric RAV4, came out in 2000. Got 120 MPC with NIMH Batt & was $30000 new. Now they just reintroduced it ,its $50000 and get 100 MPC with LI-ion Batt.
> Going backward?


 
Not on purpose.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel–metal_hydride_battery


----------



## Seasoned Oak (Aug 21, 2012)

Dune i believe that patent(chevron) has expired recently.


----------



## begreen (Aug 22, 2012)

The Ford C-Max is looking interesting. The Energi model will do 27 miles on pure electric and has great combined mileage of 47mpg city and hwy plus 550mile range.


----------



## btuser (Aug 22, 2012)

Don't you people get it?  If we stop using oil we're not the bell of the ball any longer.  Then people won't want our toilet dollars and we'll have to go back to work.  How are we supposed to fund the Military Industrial Congressional Complex without it? 

Every gallon of gas we waste is a victory against the terrorists.  Burn baby burn!


----------



## Seasoned Oak (Aug 23, 2012)

begreen said:


> The Ford C-Max is looking interesting. The Energi model will do 27 miles on pure electric and has great combined mileage of 47mpg city and hwy plus 550mile range.


Nice to see one of the home team hit a winner.


----------



## velvetfoot (Aug 23, 2012)

I just found out a Prius can be rented near me, so I might give that a whirl for the weekend.
It doesn't look as much fun as my MINI Cooper, which got 46 mpg on the last tank (although I was driving carefully).
The thought of regularly exceeding 50 mpg is exciting to me, but I'm strange that way.


----------



## Flatbedford (Aug 23, 2012)

I think that 46 from the Mini is great. With all it's high tech, I think the Prius _should _twice get like 75.


----------



## velvetfoot (Aug 23, 2012)

I usually get 42 or so on the MINI.  That's by doing the math, not the mileage display on the car.


----------



## Flatbedford (Aug 23, 2012)

Even 42 is pretty good. My little Ford Focus only gets about 32. That's my math too, no display, cheap car.


----------



## velvetfoot (Aug 23, 2012)

I drove a diesel Focus in Ireland.  I'm partial to diesel, and liked the way the car drove.


----------



## jharkin (Aug 23, 2012)

Its a great innovation and I knew it would be along eventually... Not quite as revolutionary as they claim thought-  The LiFePO4 chemistry batteries made by A123 systems have been around for years and can already safely charge at 4C (15min) to 5C (12min).   We use the small capacity batteries extensively in radio control models and I have stacks of  6.6volt/1100mAh (~ 7Wh) packs that I use to power model plane electronics.  We charge them at 4 Amps and a top off partial charge is sometimes under 5 minutes.

Unlike the fragile lithium Ion and lithium polymer batters in consumer electronics the A123 cells will take years of this kind of abuse and can recover from an accidental deep discharge that would kill traditional LiIon.

The key to the problem of thick charging cables is to run very high voltage series battery packs, as the guage of the wiring needed is  proportional to the amperage.  Which is why hybrids already run 200-400+ volts.  These technologies might see kilovolt+ systems start showing up if we can make it safe.


----------



## BoilerMan (Aug 23, 2012)

It's interesting to think that back in the early 80s VW and others made gasoline powered cars that regularly saw 40+ MPG and that was 30 years ago.  I know I still own one, and it got 42+ curising at 70, BEFORE we has ethinol in the fuel.  No power by todays standards, 3,800 pounds and 74HP doesn't = passing anyone uphill, or on the flat for that matter.  Mechanical fuel injection technology from WWII aircraft..........  Now we have computers that see the movement of pistons like the elderly climbing stairs and all we can do is match what we got 30 years ago with square cars............  Don't say there isn't something wrong with this picture.  Like, well I won't go into my mechanics certification, but there are some pretty obvious not so "green" things one can do to get 20% better fuel mileage out of todays cars, but it's illlegal to so it's not marketed or allowed. 

TS


----------



## Jags (Aug 23, 2012)

Taylor - I have made the same comparison in the past.  It is a two sided sword.  Think of where MPG could be without choking the crap out of the engine with smog control stuff.  Think of where our smog levels could/would be without them.

Now - if you really want to sprain your brain - think about the reduced levels of smog in unsmogged cars because of the reduction in fuel use and compare that to the reduced level of smog in smogged cars - but higher fuel consumption.

I just had a discussion over lunch where I was cussing the way that the states regulate pollution on our vehicles and how that is compared to the European model.  I was making a case for small diesel engines that were not approved for the US market.  I should have been a trial lawyer.


----------



## Flatbedford (Aug 23, 2012)

It does seem that one very effective way to reduce emissions would be to reduce consumption. My '94 Nissan Sentra got better mileage than my '06 Focus does. The cars are about the same size, but the Nissan had a smaller and less powerful engine. The Focus will pull most hills in 5th gear, but Id rather shift a little more and get the extra 6 mpg.


----------



## macmaine (Aug 23, 2012)

Seasoned Oak said:


> Its not catching fire with its 11 Mile range and relatively high price tag. The GM volt seems to have nailed it on quality and usability. Although many may not like the price ,i saw a $268.00 month lease the other day.Id go for that.
> In 24 months theres likely to be many more choices.[/quote
> 
> Wish I had that Lease price it is getting very cheap!!
> ...


----------



## BoilerMan (Aug 23, 2012)

Jags said:


> Taylor - I have made the same comparison in the past. It is a two sided sword. Think of where MPG could be without choking the crap out of the engine with smog control stuff. Think of where our smog levels could/would be without them.
> 
> Now - if you really want to sprain your brain - think about the reduced levels of smog in unsmogged cars because of the reduction in fuel use and compare that to the reduced level of smog in smogged cars - but higher fuel consumption.


 
This is only partially true, get your brain splints out........  If we run a gasoline engine at stoichrometric air/fuel ratio at sea level it's 14.7/1   Ok, well this is considered the best for all-round running, but we make much more power with a richer mixture, say 8/1, but our HC, or unburnt fuel, levels are higher.  Now on the lean side of things we can safely run at around 21/1 and have less "power" but our mileage is obviously higher due to higher cumbustion temps, which also promote the production of NO2, another "regulated greenhouse gas".  Also at this lean mixture our exhaust temps will melt the platnum out of a catalytic converter, so we "must" stay below this threshold.  Now in moderm closed loop fuel injected cars the air/fuel ratio changes based on air temp, engine coolant temp, barometric pressure, and the driver's right foot, amoung other things.  However there are ranges outside of this range which and engine can make more power......... and be more efficient, but the exhaust gasses produced at the two extremes are "dirty". 

All I'm saying is that with some software changes and proper exhaust modifications one can get much more out of a gallon, and make much more out of the tailpipe....  This seems counter-productive but the science supposts it, and I've proven it in the field. 

Bottom line:  More fuel consumed = cleaner exhaust, trust me on this one 

If anyone is old enough to remember the demise of the VW type1 (origional beetle) in '76  VW introduced an electronic fuel injected version to pass emissions, it got WORSE fuel economy then the identical engined Solex-carbed version sold in the 48 states, but it met emissions standards, where the carbed one did not.  The dirty......or clean truth.

TS


----------



## jharkin (Aug 24, 2012)

Flatbedford said:


> It does seem that one very effective way to reduce emissions would be to reduce consumption. My '94 Nissan Sentra got better mileage than my '06 Focus does. The cars are about the same size, but the Nissan had a smaller and less powerful engine. The Focus will pull most hills in 5th gear, but Id rather shift a little more and get the extra 6 mpg.


 
But I bet your 94 Sentra weighed a LOT less.   The 1982 Accord I drove in college could get in the high 30s easily. But it only weighed maybe 2200 lb and had 72 hp with a 5speed.   The small Acura hatchback I drive today struggles to see 30+ highway and weighs 2800 lb with 200hp, and is still lighter and more efficient than most cars on the road.

For an even more interesting comparison look at a Model T - they were getting 25MPG in the 1920s!

The problem is not that we are not making progress in the efficiency of the engines.  We are making tremendous progress.  The engine in my little hatchback is 2/3 the displacement of that T, a fraction the weight and makes 10x the power burning less fuel with far fewer emissions. The problem is that we more than offset those gains with bigger heavier more complex cars.


----------



## jharkin (Aug 24, 2012)

Taylor Sutherland said:


> Bottom line: More fuel consumed = cleaner exhaust, trust me on this one


 
I guess that depends on how you define clean. Sure NOx etc are reduced when we burn richer but every single article I've ever read states that at  for CO2, the emissions are directly related to the volume of fuel consumed and for practical purposes can only be reduced via mpg increases.  If you have material that says otherwise I'd like to see links to read it.


----------



## velvetfoot (Aug 24, 2012)

Yeah, cars nowadays are way heavier than they used to be for safety.


----------



## Jags (Aug 24, 2012)

Taylor - that is somewhat the discussion I was pointing to.  It can be a brain teaser.

1956 Packard Caribbean Convertible = 6000 pounds.  Huge V8 getting 18+ MPG.


----------



## BoilerMan (Aug 24, 2012)

jharkin said:


> I guess that depends on how you define clean. Sure NOx etc are reduced when we burn richer but every single article I've ever read states that at for CO2, the emissions are directly related to the volume of fuel consumed and for practical purposes can only be reduced via mpg increases. If you have material that says otherwise I'd like to see links to read it.


 
This is true, I did not mention CO2, we can emit more NOx but have _less_ CO2. Back in the 80s CO2 was considered harmless, we had two and three way converters that made it, but now it's the evil buzz word. I'm just saying that we (not suggesting we do) can make "dirty" cars that have incredible mileage with current tech.

Just food for thought...... I do enjoy these types of discussions
TS


----------



## woodgeek (Aug 25, 2012)

The catalytic converters still make CO2 out of VOC and CO.  Hard to believe the amounts are that big, and it helps keep the ground level ozone down.


----------

