Many people feel a need for long-range batteries when they buy electric vehicles, and that actually goes for new buyers as well as repeat buyers. I have to admit that I have a hard time understanding it unless you’re an encyclopedia salesman (not sure if those still exist) or go … [continued]
The post I’m Using Just 20% of My Tesla Model 3 SR+ Battery appeared first on CleanTechnica.
Source: CleanTechnica Car Reviews RSS Feed
UK automotive testing technology company AB Dynamics has announced its acquisition of US dynamometer-based testing services provider Venshure Test Services (VTS).
The maximum consideration payable for VTS, which is being acquired from its two shareholders, is $30 million. The initial cash consideration is $15 million.
VTS is focused on developing and deploying EVs for US automotive OEMs. It comprises facilities that offer such testing services as mileage accumulation and assessment of EV powertrain and battery performance in extreme climatic conditions. Its standardized procedures are used to validate EV battery energy consumption and range testing by producing SAE J1634 quality data.
The acquisition is intended to enable AB Dynamics to expand its testing capabilities, and to complement its California-based track testing services business with laboratory-based testing.
“The acquisition expands both our capability and geographic coverage in the important and growing field of EV battery and powertrain performance evaluation,” said AB Dynamics CEO Dr. James Routh.
Source: AB Dynamics
Source: Electric Vehicles Magazine
The poor reliability of public EV chargers is an industry-wide scandal. A year ago, when legacy automakers started adopting Tesla’s NACS charging system, many seemed to assume that this would soon solve all the problems. More sober observers told us that one of the main reasons Tesla’s Superchargers have been so reliable is that vehicles, chargers and network were all controlled by a single company—and that advantage was always going to disappear as soon as other brands’ EVs started using the Superchargers.
Here at Charged, we were also skeptical about the wisdom of granting so much power over the charging scene to any one company (especially one with a loose cannon at the helm). Those concerns were arguably validated this week when Tesla reportedly laid off its entire Supercharger team and threw the industry into turmoil.
It remains to be seen how the surprise move will affect Tesla and other industry players, but whatever ends up happening, Tesla’s NACS has morphed into SAE J3400, and it isn’t going away. Interoperability testing has been going on for months, and will continue. One of the companies at the center of this is EcoG, which provides an operating system that powers EV chargers from many different brands.
“Tesla might test its EVs with 5 to 10 charger types, but the broader challenge is much more complex.”
“Tesla is doing better because there you have this single entity controlling both the charger and the vehicle,” EcoG CEO Joerg Heuer told Charged in a recent interview (which took place before the latest Tesla news). “Most people look to the charger, but we also look to the vehicle. We provide a Reliability Index for vehicles, and we plan to publish the second edition sometime later this year.”
“Right now, we’re looking at a landscape with about 100 charging station manufacturers and a growing number of EV manufacturers,” said Heuer. “Tesla might test its EVs with 5 to 10 charger types, but the broader challenge is much more complex. To achieve a truly seamless charging experience for any EV driver, we’re tasked with ensuring that every electric car can use any charging station. Achieving this interoperability means testing over 500 different combinations of cars and chargers.”
“Achieving…interoperability means testing over 500 different combinations of cars and chargers.””
One thing that will hopefully facilitate interoperability over the coming years is the fact that NACS/J3400 is not radically different from CCS. “The plug is quite different, but all the processing behind it is quite similar,” Heuer explains. “That’s also the reason why in Europe they can easily use a CCS plug, and in US they have these adapters. Of course, in the foreground, it looks very different because the plug looks different. But in the background, the automation, the really complex stuff, that’s quite similar.”
“About two weeks after the announcement that Ford would adopt NACS, a customer of ours just added a Tesla cable to their CCS station, and the thing worked with a Tesla vehicle,” Heuer told us. “That’s the nice thing. It’s no longer this competition between CHAdeMO and CCS, which were really totally different systems. Compared to CHAdeMO, I would say 90% or 95% is really the same between CCS and NACS.”
Some find it ironic that in Europe, Tesla adopted the CCS plug, whereas in the US, vehicle OEMs and EVSE manufacturers are adopting the Tesla plug. Heuer explains that there are several reasons for that. “One reason is that in Europe, we have a three-phase AC system, so this would be a shortcoming of the Tesla plug because then they would only be able to charge one phase. In Europe, we would then be limited to three kilowatts in most countries, maybe maximum seven. That’s one physical aspect.”
A second difference between the North American and European markets is that the latter has developed in a less vertically-integrated way. “The networks started quite early with roaming and so on—it was not so dependent on what network or mobility service provider you contracted with. So the advantage Tesla had compared to the rest of the networks was not so significant.”
Source: EcoG
Source: Electric Vehicles Magazine
US battery materials producer 6K has confirmed that its cathode active material (CAM) will meet US government mandates for compliance with the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) for both lithium iron phosphate (LFP) and nickel manganese cobalt (NMC) materials for EV batteries.
The company’s 6K Energy subsidiary is delivering large quantities of critical materials from its Battery Center of Excellence facility to customers for qualification. 6K’s UniMelt production system is capable of producing multiple lithium-ion battery materials, including NMC, LFP, lithium salts and alkaline battery CAM. It aims to deliver IRA-compliant CAM at a lower cost than materials exported from China.
The IRA offers additional tax credits for battery production in the US—as much as $35/kWh for the production of battery cells and an additional $10/kWh for battery module assembly. The Advanced Manufacturing Production Credit also offers a $7,500 tax incentive for EV battery production in the US—including 10% of the cost of critical mineral production and 10% of the cost of electrode active material production.
6K is currently building its flagship PlusCAM plant in Jackson, Tennessee, which is expected to start production in 2025. The plant will have the capacity to produce 13,000 tons annually, of single-crystal NMC811 and two LFP variants: a direct replacement for LFP made in China and a new spherical option for electrode construction, which the company says is effective for delivery of powder when using a dry coating process.
“During the past year, we’ve witnessed a transformation in the battery industry like never before. Targets for domestic production of batteries and battery material were once just aspirational goals and are now being mandated by the government with the introduction of the Inflation Reduction Act,” said Sam Trinch, President of 6K Energy.
Source: 6K Energy
Source: Electric Vehicles Magazine
Pacific Power Source, a global provider of AC and DC power testing solutions, has announced a new Regenerative product line of bidirectional sources and loads.
The new products, including the All-in-1 AGX Regenerative AC/DC Source, 2-in-1 RGS Regenerative Grid Simulator and RLS Regenerative Load Simulator, emulate real-world power flows, and are designed for testing EV chargers, V2X hardware, Solar PV inverters, home energy storage systems and more.
Pacific says the new SmartRegen products offer greater than 90% energy efficiency and a high power density, with up to 21 kVA in a single 4U chassis. Modular by design, these rack-mountable components can scale up to 168 kVA of power in a single 19-inch cabinet, and can be paralleled up to 252 kvA to meet future requirements. The voltage ranges cover 350 VLN/606 VLL in AC mode or ±500 VDC in DC mode with exceptionally high AC current capability.
“Our new line of Regenerative test solutions offers the highest level of flexibility, performance and intelligence,” says Herman Vaneijkelenburg, Director of Marketing. “These test systems integrate a high-tech 4-quadrant design in silicon carbide (SiC) technology to support superior voltage range, current and power specifications. They are compact, powerful, versatile and easy to use. Our mission is to innovate how you test with smart power to make it simpler, safer, more productive, and sustainable.”
Source: Pacific Power Source
Source: Electric Vehicles Magazine
The holy grail for many EV owners is to obtain all of the energy needed for recharging from renewable energy sources, and while that’s difficult to justify on a purely economic basis if grid power is available, for those living off-grid it will be all but necessary to rely on renewable energy sources, as in this case running a fossil-fuel powered generator is the economically non-viable option (except on an occasional basis, as is its intended purpose).
An off-grid energy system basically consists of just four key components: 1) a battery to store energy; 2) one or more renewable energy sources (e.g. solar panels, wind turbines, hydroelectric turbines); 3) an appropriate DC-input charger for said source; and 4) a DC-to-AC inverter to power the house, EV charger, well pump, etc. from the battery. Since no renewable energy resource is available 100% of the time, you will probably need to incorporate a backup generator to supply an AC-input charger, but the good news is that this generator can be a lot smaller than if it were sized to power the house directly, because the inverter and storage battery will handle the peak power demands.
To properly size an off-grid energy system you need to know two key parameters: the peak power demanded by all of the loads that are likely to run concurrently; and the average daily energy consumption.
To properly size an off-grid energy system you need to know two key parameters: the peak power demanded by all of the loads that are likely to run concurrently; and the average daily energy consumption. The peak power demand sets the minimum size of the inverter, obviously, but it also influences the size of the battery (bigger batteries can supply more current, all else being equal), the size of the wiring, fuses/breakers, etc. The average energy consumption dictates pretty much everything else, from the number of solar panels or the swept area of the wind turbine to the storage battery capacity, and the power rating vs runtime of the backup generator, its attendant AC charger, etc.
A good way to get accurate values for these two parameters is with a whole-house energy monitor that uses current clamps on each incoming phase leg in the main breaker panel. If that isn’t an option (perhaps because the off-grid location isn’t yet up and running) then you can estimate the power demand with rules of thumb (e.g. assume that major appliances draw 80% of their breakers’ amperage ratings), appliance data labels, and even anecdotal evidence (e.g. the neighbor’s well draws 9 A at 240 VAC). As for estimating the average daily energy consumption, a typical value for us spoiled Americans is going to be in the range of 10-25 kWh per day for the first person in the house, and around another 2-5 kWh per day for each additional person.
Given that the size of the storage battery scales directly with this figure, it pays to determine it as precisely as possible rather than just relying on a thumb rule in an article you read in a magazine…ahem. Lastly, factor in the power rating of the EV charger, and if said EV will be charged when the renewable energy source isn’t producing—say, at night with a photovoltaic system—then you’ll also have to add the typical daily consumption of its battery capacity to that of the storage battery rating (in kWh, not Ah, since the two batteries will not be the same voltage unless the EV is a golf cart).
For estimating the average daily energy consumption, a typical value for us spoiled Americans is going to be in the range of 10-25 kWh per day for the first person in the house, and around another 2-5 kWh per day for each additional person.
The storage battery is what makes an off-grid energy system possible, so it is arguably the most important component, but it is also one with a fair amount of flexibility. The three key parameters to consider here—assuming a nominal 48 V rating—are the energy capacity in kWh, the current rating vs time (that is, how much current is allowed over timescales of seconds, minutes and hours and/or continuously, often given in C rather than amps) and the cycle life vs Depth of Discharge.
When it comes to the size of the storage battery, bigger is better, budget (and space) permitting, but a practical minimum is enough energy capacity to run everything as per usual for at least a full 24 hours, so that if the renewable source isn’t producing you don’t have to immediately fire up the generator (or, worse, go rushing off to get fuel for said generator…at night…in the rain). For those wanting more concrete numbers, I feel that 200 Ah (again, at 48 V nominal) is the bare minimum for a single person (speaking from experience here), while 400 Ah would allow for an almost carefree lifestyle (assuming there is sufficient renewable energy available to feed said battery).
The most common choices of battery type are lithium iron phosphate (aka LFP or LiFePO4), all of the other lithium-ion chemistries (including recycled batteries from junked EVs), and, finally, lead-acid. To reach the de facto standard of 48 V nominal (the actual voltage can go up to near 58 V, depending on battery chemistry) you can either wire four 12 V batteries in series, or the appropriate number of bare cells (typically 16 for LFP). There are also ready-made “whole-house” batteries available, such as Tesla’s Powerwall, but these are often aimed at grid-tied solar systems to be installed by licensed contractors, rather than DIYers, and they carry a correspondingly hefty price tag.
LFP is arguably the best all-around choice for off-grid systems, as it has a very high cycle life (in the range of 2,000 cycles at 100% DoD to 10,000 cycles or more if operated over the range of 80% State of Charge down to 20%), and it can tolerate high peak and continuous current draws of up to 4 C and 1 C, respectively, with negligible impact on longevity or energy capacity. There are two main choices of LFP batteries: those intended as drop-in replacements for lead-acid batteries; and bespoke 48 V batteries—often in convenient 10-inch rackmount cabinets—that are specifically designed for off-grid use. The former come in a wide range of Ah ratings (from 7-10 Ah for a computer UPS to 200+ Ah for off-grid systems) and have an internal BMS that protects against overcharge, overdischarge and overcurrent.
Lithium iron phosphate is arguably the best all-around battery type for off-grid systems, as it has a very high cycle life, and it can tolerate high peak and continuous current draws of up to 4 C and 1 C, respectively.
These typically lack the ability to communicate with other batteries in a series string (or other devices), nor do they come with any means of monitoring total charge in and out of the battery. The former shortcoming can be addressed with an external active balancer (aka charge equalizer) that automatically shuttles charge from the highest-voltage battery in the series string to the lowest until all are at the same voltage. The latter shortcoming is easily handled by an external battery monitor/coulomb counter (ideally with the ability to report such data to a remote display or smartphone via Ethernet, Bluetooth or WiFi). Note, however, that charge equalizers typically have modest current ratings in the range of 1 A to 10 A, so they can’t correct a grossly out-of-balance pack, nor one with a battery that has significantly less Ah than the rest.
The higher price of the rackmount 48 V batteries will be offset somewhat by not needing an external balancer, of course, as well as being easier to wire up. They will also likely be able to communicate with other batteries (wired in parallel) and/or devices (e.g. to notify the inverter to shut down at the minimum DoD, rather than a minimum voltage) and include some form of monitoring and/or coulomb counting, along with a local display of such information. That said, an external battery monitor will still be more versatile and convenient, especially if the batteries are located in a different building.
The more adventurous (and technically capable) can drop the $/kWh metric even lower by repurposing old EV traction batteries for off-grid storage use, but this is not for the faint of heart (or short of time). Unless the EV was a golf cart, you’ll have to reconfigure the cells to deliver 48 V nominal, so don’t count on using the original BMS (which probably won’t work, anyway, without a lot of code-hacking) and you’ll still be taking the risk that the battery was abused so much that it has no real usable capacity left.
The last option is venerable old lead-acid, though perhaps it’s best to relegate it to the proverbial dustbin of history. Sure, the prohibitive weight of lead-acid batteries is less of an issue in off-grid systems than it is in EVs (until you need to build the racking to hold 10 kWh or more of capacity with them, anyway) and they are notorious for not liking to be discharged below 50% of their rated capacity, though even then you shouldn’t count on more than a few hundred cycles of life. Furthermore, continuous current draw needs to be limited to a fraction of a C (typically C/4) to avoid loss of capacity from the infamous Peukert effect. This basically means that a lead-acid storage battery will have to be 2x to 5x larger in energy capacity relative to LFP, which effectively eliminates all the cost differential between these two chemistries.
Eliminate the cheaper “modified sine wave” type of inverter from consideration, as its output is really just a 50/60 Hz square wave of less than 50% duty cycle that a lot of devices won’t like.
The next key component in an off-grid system is an inverter, which converts the nominal 48 VDC from the storage battery into the 120/240 VAC required by the house, EV charger, etc. Eliminate the cheaper “modified sine wave” type from consideration, as its output is really just a 50/60 Hz square wave of less than 50% duty cycle that a lot of devices won’t like (standard dimmers and induction motors being two notable examples). The other type creates a pure sine wave by sinusoidally modulating the duty cycle of a much higher-frequency square wave, then filtering out the high-frequency components with an LC network. If this sine wave is available directly, it’s called a “high-frequency” type, and if it feeds an internal 50/60 Hz transformer it’s called—somewhat misleadingly—a “low-frequency” type.
The LF type is supposed to be better at starting heavy loads like AC compressors by virtue of the energy stored in its transformer’s inductance, but better HF inverters will cope with such loads by going into current limiting mode, rather than outright faulting off (this should be explained in the user manual [you did Read The Fine Manual, didn’t you?]), so this might be a distinction without a difference. Furthermore, the LF type draws more no-load power (1-2% of rated power is typical) to maintain the magnetizing flux in that LF transformer, and this can add up to a lot of energy over the course of a 24-hour period.
The last major choice to consider is whether to go with a standalone inverter with separate DC- and AC-input chargers, or a unit that combines one or both charging functions (the latter is often called a “hybrid solar inverter” or AIO, for All In One). Note, however, that you do not want a “grid-tie” inverter in an off-grid system, as such will not function without the presence of AC from the mains. The AIO type can be a little less expensive, because it combines all three devices into one box, but its main advantage is the ability to prioritize whether energy for the AC loads comes from the solar panels (or, very rarely, a wind turbine), the AC mains or generator, or the battery. This is an excellent solution for partial off-grid operation—e.g. running off solar during the day and the grid at night—but if you’re going purely off-grid, there is more flexibility in using separate devices, as the intelligent prioritizing won’t be nearly as useful.
And speaking of solar and wind (and hydro, for those lucky enough to have it), we’ll cover that—and the appropriate DC-input chargers for each—next time in Part Two.
This article first appeared in Issue 67: January-March 2024 – Subscribe now.
Source: Electric Vehicles Magazine
It’s widely believed that shipping will be one of the hardest transportation segments to electrify. However, as usual, the Chinese are on the case.
The state-owned China Ocean Shipping Group (Cosco) has developed and manufactured an all-electric container ship, the Greenwater 01, which is now operating a regular service route between Shanghai and Nanjing.
As reported by the South China Morning Post, the Greenwater 01’s propulsion system is powered solely by batteries, and saves 3,900 kg (8,600 lb) of fuel for every 100 nautical miles sailed.
The ship’s main battery pack features LFP cells, and has a capacity of over 50,000 kWh. The vessel can accommodate additional battery boxes for longer voyages. Each battery box stores 1,600 kWh of electricity, and is similar in size to a standard 20-foot container. With 24 battery boxes onboard, the Greenwater 01 can complete a journey requiring 80,000 kWh—equivalent to saving 15 tons of fuel compared to a standard container ship.
According to Cosco, the ship can reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 2,918 tons per year, equivalent to taking 2,035 cars off the road.
Safety is a top priority aboard. Crew members undergo specialized fire training to handle emergencies related to the Li-ion batteries, and the ship has a fire detection and alarm system designed for the battery compartment.
In addition to the Greenwater 01, Cosco has launched two 700TEU electric container ships, prosaically called N997 and N998.
The company said Greenwater 01’s inaugural voyage with “zero emissions, pollution and noise has set a new benchmark for transforming the shipping industry towards the goals of low carbon and environmentally friendliness.”
Source: South China Morning Post via Tech Times
Images: COSCO
Source: Electric Vehicles Magazine
Ride1Up has been disrupting the world of electric bikes with edgy designs that take some of the same affordable components found on other e-bikes and bundes them together in extremely affordable packages. The Ride1Up Prodigy was one of the best values in the mid-drive electric bike game for years. So … [continued]
The post The Ride1Up Prodigy v2 Review — CleanTechnica Tested appeared first on CleanTechnica.
Source: CleanTechnica Car Reviews RSS Feed
Airbus has publicly unveiled its electric CityAirbus NextGen prototype in conjunction with the opening of its new center in Donauwörth, Germany. The center is dedicated to testing eVTOL systems including flight controls, avionics, and electric motors with eight rotors.
The two-tonne-class CityAirbus is slated for its maiden flight later this year. It has a wing span of approximately 12 meters. It is being developed with an 80 km range and a cruise speed of 120 km/h for operation in urban areas.
Airbus is also workingwith Dublin-based aviation company LCI to develop partnerships and business models in the areas of strategy, commercialization and financing.
“Rolling out CityAirbus NextGen for the first time is an important and real step that we are taking towards advanced air mobility and our future product and market,” said Balkiz Sarihan, Head of Urban Air Mobility at Airbus.
Source: Airbus
Source: Electric Vehicles Magazine
Japanese chemical company Asahi Kasei will construct an integrated plant in Ontario, Canada for the base film manufacturing and coating of its Hipore wet-process lithium-ion battery separator.
Asahi Kasei will invest approximately ¥180 billion ($1.14 billion) in the facility, which will have a production capacity of around 700 million square meters per year as coated film, and is planned to start commercial operation in 2027. The company will establish a subsidiary called Asahi Kasei Battery Separator in October 2024, which will issue preferred shares to the Development Bank of Japan to receive funding of ¥28 billion.
Canadian separator business company ES Materials Canada and E-Materials Canada, its local manufacturing company responsible for plant construction and manufacturing, will provide financing. Asahi Kasei also expects to receive financial support for the plant from the federal government of Canada and the provincial government of Ontario, in addition to support under a 2023 agreement between Canada and Japan concerning battery supply chains.
The company has concluded a basic agreement with Honda, and the two companies are exploring the possibility of establishing a joint venture to manufacture Hipore separators for batteries installed in EVs manufactured by Honda and other vehicle manufacturers for the North American market.
“The separator is an extremely important component that contributes to higher performance and durability of batteries that are essential to EVs,” said Manabu Ozawa, Managing Executive Officer of Honda.
Source: Asahi Kasei
Source: Electric Vehicles Magazine
