Penn State Engineers Are Developing An Inexpensive, Thermally-Modulated Battery For Electric Cars (psu.edu)
- Reference: 0141277244
- News link: https://tech.slashdot.org/story/21/01/19/236250/penn-state-engineers-are-developing-an-inexpensive-thermally-modulated-battery-for-electric-cars
- Source link: https://news.psu.edu/story/643897/2021/01/18/research/inexpensive-battery-charges-rapidly-electric-vehicles-reduces-range
> Range anxiety, the fear of running out of power before being able to recharge an electric vehicle, may be a thing of the past, according to a team of Penn State engineers who are looking at lithium iron phosphate batteries that [2]have a range of 250 miles with the ability to charge in 10 minutes . "We developed a pretty clever battery for mass-market electric vehicles with cost parity with combustion engine vehicles," said Chao-Yang Wang, William E. Diefenderfer Chair of mechanical engineering, professor of chemical engineering and professor of materials science and engineering, and director of the Electrochemical Engine Center at Penn State. "There is no more range anxiety and this battery is affordable." The researchers also say that the battery should be good for 2 million miles in its lifetime.
>
> They [3]report today (Jan. 18) in Nature Energy that the key to long-life and rapid recharging is the battery's ability to quickly heat up to 140 degrees Fahrenheit, for charge and discharge, and then cool down when the battery is not working. The battery uses a self-heating approach previously developed in Wang's center. The self-heating battery uses a thin nickel foil with one end attached to the negative terminal and the other extending outside the cell to create a third terminal. Once electrons flow it rapidly heats up the nickel foil through resistance heating and warm the inside of the battery. Once the battery's internal temperature is 140 degrees F, the switch opens and the battery is ready for rapid charge or discharge. [...] Because of the self-heating, the researchers said they do not have to worry about uneven deposition of lithium on the anode, which can cause lithium spikes that are dangerous.
[1] https://slashdot.org/~schwit1
[2] https://news.psu.edu/story/643897/2021/01/18/research/inexpensive-battery-charges-rapidly-electric-vehicles-reduces-range
[3] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41560-020-00757-7
Time to market? (Score:3)
I suppose someday in the far future, we'll look back and say, "yeah, I remember when this new technology was announced..."
Re: (Score:2)
> I suppose someday in the far future, we'll look back and say, "yeah, I remember when this new technology was announced..."
I still remember when I read about SSD and OLED technology on slashdot when they were in their infancy, not unlike this article.
SSD is here, OLED not so much (Score:2)
The performance and cost of SSDs are really impressive and I think they've achieved their promise. OLEDs? If they had improved at the same pace as SSDs, there wouldn't be any more LCDs (just as LCDs have replaced CRTs) and overall costs would be a quarter or less of what an LCD costs now. I should say that I'm bullish on OLEDs - I've been really impressed with the current state of the art, but I'm expecting to start seeing costs drop much more significantly any time now. I know there are issues with LED
It will be a while. (Score:2)
If it's current formulation and manufacturing costs are lower than existing battery technology and perform better then it would be out as soon as possible. However, considering they are still just being worked on in the lab, there is still a lot of work to be done. Additionally, there is a good chance that developing this chemistry will require several revisions (similar to lithium–sulfur batteries) before being mature enough to bring to market.
TL;DR: New high density battery chemistries have thus f
Re: (Score:2)
The idea of heating it to 140F or charging and discharging is so alien to me, it has always(?) been the case that heat killed batteries.
We are... (Score:3)
Penn State!
Re: (Score:2)
> Penn State!
I have a daughter in her senior year and a daughters boyfriend that has already been hired at Lockheed Martin.
Stop polishing a turd. (Score:1)
There are chemistries in production right now that last longer (calendar aging), cycle an order of magnitude more times and can also be fast charged. LTO batteries already do all that and literally can't catch fire.
The problem with LTO is it is more expensive up front (cheaper over lifetime) and a lower energy density. As soon as people stop being so precious about having the best car in the world and use it for its intended purpose, the answer will come to them.
250 freedom units in range? So what? Learn to
A bonus on already-existing advantages (Score:2)
I think that people underestimate the already-existing advantages of electric cars. This claim to cost-parity with combustion engines sounds great, but even prior to that:
* The drive-train of electric cars features far fewer moving parts, and are proving quite durable. There are Teslas with mileage nearing 500,000, still going strong. In terms of cost of ownership, electric cars are already quite affordable just in terms of life-cycle and maintenance, particularly if you go for liquid-cooled batteries, l
Re: A bonus on already-existing advantages (Score:2)
With the Volt, are there any adverse effects to not burning the gasoline in the tank? If a cares it's too long, it often can have issues when you do finally crank it back up. Wondering if there are any downsides to a full tank of gas sitting there for a year?
Re: (Score:2)
My friend had one and the car is smart enough to burn off the gas if for no other reason than it's getting old.
Here you go, a whole article about it:
[1]https://www.wsj.com/articles/B... [wsj.com]
(Wow, over 10 years old!)
[1] https://www.wsj.com/articles/BL-DSB-3535
Re: (Score:2)
The Volt's management software will inform the owner when the gasoline is getting stale and require them to burn it down if it gets old enough. [1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRhvsWK5Hyk
Re: (Score:2)
Do you use a fuel stabilizer? Leaving fuel in the tank for 4 months at a time is likely to be very detrimental to the engine.
250 miles with the ability to charge in 10 minutes (Score:2)
vs my 480mi range on my ICE vehicle that 'charges' in about 1 minute
Re: (Score:2)
I would much rather have the 250/10 as long as it's at the right price point. There are other advantages to electric, and I'm not just talking about environmental ones.
It's not like I would ever need to charge it away from home unless I was driving cross-country, and even then I wouldn't mind having to stop once every 3-4 hours to stretch my legs while it recharges. Having to stop once every 1-2 hours would be painful on a long trip, but not once every 3-4.
For Australians this could be the tipping point (Score:2)
Young Aussie folk think nothing of driving 1000km for a week away. They need a battery that can power a car for the time it takes a bladder to fill and can charge in the time it takes a bladder to empty.
It looks like a car based on these batteries could just about do it. Many people who own such an electric would no longer feel the need to have a second car or to hire a car for the occasional long trip.
Bring 'em on. If the price was right Australia's woeful uptake in electric cars would then improve.
old tech (Score:2)
> "according to a team of Penn State engineers who are looking at lithium iron phosphate batteries that have a range of 250 miles with the ability to charge in 10 minutes. "We developed a pretty clever battery for mass-market electric vehicles"
Note- lithium iron phosphate batteries are nothing new. We have been using them in large devices at work for 6+ years now and they have been around a lot longer than that. They are more safe than regular lithium batteries, and they have a better number of cycles f
No Thanks (Score:2)
I'll take a regular battery, 250 miles still won't get you far.
Re:No Thanks (Score:4, Interesting)
> I'll take a regular battery, 250 miles still won't get you far.
Seems like a good trade off if it can be recharged in 10 minutes vs. all night for a regular battery. That's a quick pee and snack break (hopefully, one then the other) at a charging station. And maybe they can two batteries in the car...
Re: (Score:2)
Gas cars empty their tanks and refill them to full because they can buy gasoline only at the gas station
We battery car owners top up the tank every night. Takes typically a couple of hours most days. But, even after driving home after a long drive of with nearly empty battery, the battery is full next day morning.
Re: (Score:2)
>> I'll take a regular battery, 250 miles still won't get you far.
I hardly ever drive 250 miles in a single day. Most days (even before the pandemic) rarely more than 50 miles. 250 mile range sounds like plenty to me.
And if it recharges in 10 minutes (!!).
Re: (Score:2)
You realize that 250 is an arbitrary number that is entirely dependent on how big a battery pack you decide to buy. It's not a theoretical limitation or anything, just I suppose that 10 minutes of recharging is a nice round number and evidently 60/10*250 = 1500 mph charging rate is what they have been able to achieve.