It's the Batteries, Stupid!

[TEG]

Even if the Volt/Ampera get some mockery for still having a gas/petrol engine, they do show that GM still can build production quality EV drive-trains. If the Envia cells are working out, then it seems they could just make the Volt what it was meant to be, and replace the ICE components with a large pack of these new cost effective cells. A 300 mile range BEV would be preferable to a 30 mile range plug-in hybrid.

The old "EV1" name implied that there could be an "EV2" someday.

 

[EVNow]

Looks very promising. Maybe a 300 mile bluestar for 2015 is a goer afterall. If GM don't have an exclusive on it.

Given that they are using government funds too, I don't know whether exclusivity would be permitted. I hope not.

http://www.anl.gov/Media_Center/News/2011/photo/110126-envia.pdf

“HCMR is the first next-generation solution to leverage Argonne National Laboratory’s composite cathode material, licensed by Envia.”
...
Concurrently, GM announced that they led a $17 million equity investment round in Envia Systems and secured rights to use Envia’s HCMR cathode material.
...
Envia recently secured development grants from USABC totaling $3.65 million, adding to grants of $4 million from the U.S. Department of Energy’s ARPA-E program and $1 million from the California Energy Commission secured in 2009. Envia has raised equity financing from GM Ventures, Asahi Kasei, Asahi Glass, Bay Partners, Redpoint Ventures and Pangaea Ventures.

 

[stopcrazypp]

"400 watt-hours per kilogram at a cost of $150 per kilowatt-hour". That's a major breakthrough if true.

Compare that to 245Wh/kg for the NCR18650A and probably higher than $200/kWh (from Elon's recent comments).

The way Envia achieved their density is by making changes to three areas:
- cathode (NCR18650A made changes to this)
- anode (the planned 4000mah cells made changes to this in addition to the cathode)
- electrolyte for higher voltage (probably the next step for Panasonic)
-the fact they are pouch cells also helps cell density (although it does mean the modules will need more re-enforcement).

- their lower cost, I suspect, is likely from the manganese (much cheaper than cobalt in the Panasonic cells)
http://green.autoblog.com/2012/02/2...dvance-in-cheaper-better-batteries/#continued

 

[stopcrazypp]

Envia Systems | Powering the next generation of electric vehicles

The above page has a graph with "capacity" over "cycles".

I'd like to contrast this with the approach of the DBM Energy/Kolibri team. The DBM Energy team did a publicity stunt, but never released any concrete cells specs, testing data, or cost estimates.

Envia actually released concrete cell specs, testing data, and cost estimates. It makes them a LOT more believable and you can see their claims directly.

As for the cycle testing, even 400 cycles is pretty good given the density.

 

[Robert.Boston]

Given that they are using government funds too, I don't know whether exclusivity would be permitted. I hope not.

http://www.anl.gov/Media_Center/News/2011/photo/110126-envia.pdf

ARPA-E grants allow the awardee to retain commercial development rights to the IP. The DOE has rights for government usage, only. (My group has an ARPA-E grant, so I'm speaking from experience.)

 

[dpeilow]

I'd take 400 cycles x 250 miles, especially if they buy the old cells back for reuse.

 

[EVNow]

ARPA-E grants allow the awardee to retain commercial development rights to the IP. The DOE has rights for government usage, only. (My group has an ARPA-E grant, so I'm speaking from experience.)

Rereading the document - it sounds like GM only got rights to use the cathod material, about a year ago. They probably also got batteries for testing. GM will probably get the first vehicle with their batteries out - I doubt it would be exclusive.

 

[dpeilow]

If this is so close to being productised, why did GM go with A123 for the 2013 Spark?

 

[TEG]

I was wondering about that myself...

 

[EVNow]

If this is so close to being productised, why did GM go with A123 for the 2013 Spark?

I think it would take about 3 years for an OEM to comeout with their EV using these batteries, from the time they get samples. Assuming GM got their samples now, it will be atleast 2015 before we see a production vehicle. GM must have been working on Spark EV using A123 batteries for a couple of years now.

 

[Fr23shjive]

So this Envia battery technology is legitimate? I always take these claims with a grain of salt but if that is true that is some exciting news.

Also, what does that mean for Tesla?

 

[stopcrazypp]

So this Envia battery technology is legitimate? I always take these claims with a grain of salt but if that is true that is some exciting news.

Also, what does that mean for Tesla?

It's certainly way more legit than EEStor, or the DBM claims. At the very least we know some concrete preliminary cells specs and price targets. The biggest question spec-wise that remains is max discharge/charge speed and capacity under load (they only discharged it so far at 1/3 and 1/10 of what typical battery tests would do).

The other question is how they intend to do licensing and production. That will affect who gets to use the cells or if they even make it to production.

For Tesla, it may mean more competitors that can match or exceed their range.

 

[Larry Chanin]

The way Envia achieved their density is by making changes to three areas:
- cathode (NCR18650A made changes to this)
- anode (the planned 4000mah cells made changes to this in addition to the cathode)
- electrolyte for higher voltage (probably the next step for Panasonic)
-the fact they are pouch cells also helps cell density (although it does mean the modules will need more re-enforcement).

- their lower cost, I suspect, is likely from the manganese (much cheaper than cobalt in the Panasonic cells)
http://green.autoblog.com/2012/02/2...dvance-in-cheaper-better-batteries/#continued

I don't know what pouch cells are, but I assume that they are different from the laptop style batteries that Tesla uses. Do you know whether there is any reason why this technology can't be adapted to the 18650 form factor?

Thanks.

Larry

 

[JRP3]

A big reason to use the laptop form factor is the mass production capability to keep costs down. If these new cells are so much cheaper to make anyway it's easier, and cheaper, to use fewer larger pouch cells compared to thousands of small laptop cells.
Pouch cell:

 

[EVNow]

I don't know what pouch cells are, but I assume that they are different from the laptop style batteries that Tesla uses. Do you know whether there is any reason why this technology can't be adapted to the 18650 form factor?

There shouldn't be any reason to make cells in other formats, like 18950. They show some results in some coin cells, for eg. Pouch cells are rectangular thin cells.

Note that below the big "drop" in capacity is apparently because they are 80% DOD rather than 100%. Bad graph.

 

[JRP3]

Initial cycling of most cells show a large drop in capacity, which is done at the factory. Usually we only see charts for a broken in cell.

 

[EVNow]

Some more info from their website.

Envia Systems | Powering the next generation of electric vehicles

 

[dpeilow]

Says they can do 18650 Envia Systems | Powering the next generation of electric vehicles

 

[JRP3]

I wasn't even thinking about the potential laptop market for this chemistry. Too EV focused :redface:

 

[Robert.Boston]

Further to the point of how new battery tech finds its way into Tesla vehicles, here's a snippet from yesterday's Tesla 10-K:

We maintain an internal battery cell testing lab and an extensive performance database of the many available lithium-ion cell vendors and chemistry types. We intend to incorporate the battery cells that provide the best value and performance possible into our battery packs, and we expect this to continue over time as battery cells continue to improve in energy storage capacity, longevity, power delivery and cost. We believe this flexibility will enable us to continue to evaluate new battery cells as they become commercially viable, and thereby optimize battery pack system performance and cost for our current and future vehicles. We believe our ability to change battery cell chemistries and vendors while retaining our existing investments in software, electronics, testing and vehicle packaging, will enable us to quickly deploy various battery cells into our products and leverage the latest advancements in battery cell technology.

Another interesting bit:

To date, we have tested hundreds of battery cells of different chemistries, form factors and designs. Based on this evaluation, we are presently using lithium-ion battery cells based on the 18650 form factor in all of our battery packs. These battery cells are commercially available in large quantities. We currently intend to use the same battery cell form factor in Model S and Model X. We recently entered into a supply agreement with Panasonic Corporation (Panasonic) for the use of Panasonic’s battery cells in Model S.

Note that the Panasonic deal is for the Model S, but not (apparently) for the Model X.