EnerDel has recently been making the news, appearing on the shortlist of U.S. battery makers awarded U.S. government research grants. I had the opportunity to interview the companies Vice-Chairman to get us some more details (previous post).
Now they have publicly unveiled a fully-functional working lithium-ion battery pack, to be used in hybrid (not plug-in) electric vehicles.
The event occured yesterday in their home state of Indiana, and was attended by congressman Dan Burton.
The pack is noted to cost $1500.
You can view a video of the event here: (VIDEO LINK)
There have also been some recent rumors suggesting that EnerDel has signed a deal with Th!nk to be the supplier of packs for their plug-in electric car (link).
I asked whether that was true of Ener1 Vice-Chairman Charles Gassenheimer, and this was his response:
“As you know, we can’t comment on speculation or rumors, so therefore, we can’t confirm or deny the rumors of a contract with Th!nk at this time. As soon as we are able, we will let our investors, media and other interested parties know of any definitive agreements.”
This entry was posted on Wednesday, October 10th, 2007 at 9:12 am and is filed under Battery, Hybrid. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Oct 10th, 2007 (9:31 am)“to be used in hybrid (not plug-in) electric vehicles”
Ok. I’ll go first. Why not plug-ins?
Oct 10th, 2007 (9:54 am)They haven’t developed for PHEVs or RxEVs. The question should be “how long until they have a pack for plug-ins?” I just want to say that this is awesome!
Oct 10th, 2007 (10:08 am)I understand that they will have packs for the Volt mules by the end of the year and that they chose the HEV pack first because those are simpler to produce and the vehicles are already on the market. This is just the first baby step in pack production.
Oct 10th, 2007 (11:34 am)What is different about the EnerDel batteries than conventional lithium-ion? I believe they are not nano-based, like A123. How do they achieve high cycle life and low probability of runaway thermal events, which are requirements for plug-in series hybrids?
Oct 10th, 2007 (11:44 am)The magic lies in the chemistry. It is a lithium-titanate material. The physical characteristics are different than lithium-phosphate and lithium-manganese. Each chemical setup just has different properties. They’ve developed one using titanium that meets market expectations.
Oct 10th, 2007 (12:05 pm)The EnerDel technology is similar to Altair’s except that the cost is WAY less and I think they aren’t as hefty as the Altairs. Think has had a very spotty history – into and out of bankruptcy, ownerd and then discarded by Ford, etc.
Notice that many of the previously all-electrics are now realizing that all-electric is not feasible, even for tiny,
incapable cars. They are all following VOLT’s lead.
Oct 10th, 2007 (12:10 pm)They haven’t released full technical specs on the battery pack, so this is almost a non-story.
Oct 10th, 2007 (2:06 pm)Ken, I think GM realized through the EV-1 project that the leap to BEVs just takes too much faith for most people. This paradigm/technology shift must be accomplished in steps.
1) Mild Hybrids with BAS, and piston shut-down
2) ICE Hybrids with little electric helper motors like the Prius.
3) Plug in Hybrids like the View.
4) BEVs with “range extenders” like the Volt E-Flex
5) BEVs with larger batteries and no range extender BEV E-Flex.
All of these vehicles have their place depending on use, power requirements (towing, range etc.). Once people realize through personal experience that they hardly ever use their Volt’s range extender for their daily commute, they will buy less expensive all electrics for commuting and rent the others for specific tasks. Of course, the rich will own multiple vehicles and companies will buy for specific tasks.
Oct 10th, 2007 (2:24 pm)Kent left out that it’s also not zero strain like Altair’s, so it’s not as safe, long lasting, cool running, fast charging or power dense all at the same time.
Oct 10th, 2007 (2:25 pm)Tim– that actually nicely summarizes where we think the market is heading. Toyota believes #3 is the future, while GM is trying to jump to #4 with the Volt. Tesla and others are trying to leapfrog them all straight to #5. I think over the next 20 years we will see a mix of all 6 options (option 0 being the existing ICE). It is an exciting time to follow the auto industry. Innovate or go out of business!
Oct 10th, 2007 (3:34 pm)Pesonally, I think that the RxEV (design #4) is the best design. I integrate my perspective with the benefits for V2G uses. If nothing else, in the future V2G will allow people to use their cars for backup power for the occasional blackout. That’s a benefit that fully disregards outside market opportunities involved in providing V2G services to utilities, etc. Everyone (almost) has a car. And if your car is a RxEV, then when you or someone your visiting experiences a blackout, you can use your car as a generator. Designs 0, 1, and 2 don’t allow that in anyway, and with option 5 you can use it for a while, but then you’ll be in a bigger problem if the battery is depleted because you’ll also be stranded. Maybe the future will be as much as a mix as you say, but I think people will almost all gravitate towards design #4. It’s my opinion, mind you, but I think it’s just the best!
Oct 10th, 2007 (4:03 pm)#4 will dominate ground transportation for the foreseeable future with the others filling defined roles. V2G combined with the new low cost home solar PV would make that scenario ALMOST perfect. Perfection of course would be to invent a Zero Point Electron Pump for an unlimited energy supply. Some say that it’s almost ready, but we’ll see. I believe that we’ll have to wait until all the money and power is sucked out of the ground first.
Oct 10th, 2007 (5:40 pm)Tim –
What is this Zero Point Electron Pump you speak of? Sounds like perpetual motion, but I’d like to read more if you have a link.
Thanks
Oct 10th, 2007 (6:19 pm)Pure electrics will cost more, because of the battery requirements, and likely weigh more for the same class of vehicle with the same range — at least in the somewhat near and foreseeable future. I doubt we will see any pure electrics driving down I-5 in the desert, or from Los Angeles to Phoenix anytime soon.
When pure electrics can go more than 500 miles and are priced in the same range as an ordinary car, then you will see them gain in popularity. However, it’s very unlikely this performance could soon be extended to all class of vehicles, especially larger ones. As such, the generalized e-Flex architecture has the potential to strike a nerve in the next 10 years.
Oct 10th, 2007 (8:00 pm)I agree with Steve B. The RxEV is the best design, at least from my perspective. I also believe the market will demand the cars be utilitarian; family cars.
Yes, there will be many who will use their cars for commuting to/from work, neighborhood shopping, etc. This is good! But, those same people will demand their RxEv be a family car.
Sorry, but I cannot buy into the idea that people will purchase a PHEV for commuting and rent otherwise. That’s not likely to happen. Let’s not forget that those rental cars are also likely to be a RxEV design.
Oct 11th, 2007 (12:19 pm)#13 Brian, this is for you.
http://pesn.com/2007/08/27/9500495_Advanced_Energy_Technology_Colloquium/
Enjoy!
Oct 11th, 2007 (12:23 pm)What the heck, here’s more interesting info:
http://www.freeenergynews.com/Directory/ZPE/index.html
Crazy, maybe. Interesting, OH YEA!
Jun 25th, 2008 (7:31 am)The Only Solution to the pandemic ENERGY CRISIS is EASY and SIMPLE.
STOP the ENERGY WASTE !
Our energy waste is horrendous and tragic, thou easily FIXABLE !
America wastes over 60% of the energy it consumes. The Energy Waste is
Everywhere !
(1) We over heat and over cool our homes, businesses, offices,
schools, churches, etc…
(2) 10′s of millions of outdoor lights burn during the day.
(3) Over packaging is the norm. Recycling is inadequate . Our
landfills are busier than ever.
(4) Most Americans do not minimize their driving. Congestion is horrendous.
(5) Road construction in America is the ultimate contradiction.
The Only way to eliminate energy waste and over demand is by using the
economic impact of taxing energy, in lieu of Federal Income Tax. Until
the price of gas is $6 to $8 per gallon, hedonist America will not
significantly reduce its over consumption and energy waste. Federal
Gas Tax should be $4 to $6 per gallon and ‘offset’ by making Federal
Income Tax begin at $60k.
Only with a tangible/dollar reward will America care to conserve. High
energy costs are the only incentive by which renewable alternative
energy supply will be developed.
In the mean time, the USA continues to give away its economic and
political wealth to the Islamic Middle East via OPEC, just so we can
continue our energy waste. Know that the Islamic dominated OPEC cartel
is glad to allow supply and demand market forces to drive energy
prices to $8/gallon. The Islamics, who want to annihilate us, may
succeed; using our American ‘gas money’ to buy the weapons needed to
do so.
China, India, and other ‘developing countries’ have just begun to
compete for the world’s remaining energy supply. Geopolitical unrest
is directly related to global competition for energy and natural
resources. If global demand for energy is not dramatically reduced,
World war is inevitable.
Ford and General Motors are headed for bankruptcy, which will leave
100,000,000 Americans unemployed, ruin our economy, and lead to
anarchy. America can no longer continue to ‘do business as usual’.
Ford and GM must quickly transition to the lucrative business of
building solar and wind ‘energy producers’ for the world’s 6.7 BILLION
people reason$. The world cannot continue to support all the
automakers. We are running out of petroleum. Wake up !
Mass transit must reward those who reduce their driving and thereby
become FREE, SAFE, CLEAN, and CONVENIENT. Only then, will significant
numbers of people use it.
The incentive necessary to create a renewable and sustainable energy
supply can only occur when we implement the economics of TAXING ENERGY
- NOT INCOME!