Grab our RSS Feed
USABC Battery Contractor Comparison
One of our regular GM-Volt.com readers Alex S. has done an academic comparison of the 5 battery companies awarded research grants by the US Advanced Battery Consortium (see previous post).
Alex was able to derive estimates of what each of the battery makers lithium-ion cells attributes may be. This is not verified but an interesting starting point for discussion.
More details on his analysis may be found on his site: Futuredrive
Popularity: 3%
(No Ratings Yet) 
Loading ...
Posted by: Lyle
27 Responses to “USABC Battery Contractor Comparison”
Leave a Reply
Recent Posts
- EPA Closer to Giving the Chevy Volt at Least a 100 mpg Rating
- GM, Natural Gas, and the Volt
- GM and Chrysler in Merger Talks
- More Details About Chrylser’s Electric Car Plans
- As GM Goes So Goes the Nation
- Lutz Provides More Volt Details: Photovoltaic Roof to be Unveiled in January, and Volt Development Ahead of Schedule
- GM’s Electric History
- Project Better Place CEO Calls the Volt a Niche Product
- The Production Chevy Volt Has One Charging Port, and Unnamed Object Identified
- Video: 60 Minutes - Race For the Electric Car
Designed and Developed by Twenty Six Media
October 27th, 2007 at 11:36 am
Can we get some explanation on the capacity? like, what is 1C, 25degC, 100%DOD mean verses 5C, 55degC, 100%DOD?
October 27th, 2007 at 11:47 am
These figures are almost useless without a cost comparison. If we can’t afford it… who cares!
October 27th, 2007 at 12:30 pm
I’m hoping those figures are accurate, and if they are, you’ve got to love the potency of those A123 cells. I’m wondering if that’s an inherent advantage of cylindrical over stack?
MB
October 27th, 2007 at 12:32 pm
Thank you Alex S. for doing up this chart.
I read your page and found it very interesting.
Showing my ignorance: The cycles seem low to me. I was thinking the Volt would go about 7000 cycles with the A123 battery. It says 95%@1000 cycles. Does that in anyway mean it is starting to degrade at that point?
October 27th, 2007 at 1:31 pm
The capacitance figures (1C, 5C, etc) are related to how fast a battery can be charged or discharged. The figures on this chart appear to be charge rates. 1C is common for a lot of lithium polymers. Simply stated, it means the batteries can be charged at a rate 1x their capacitance. So if you have a 1Ah battery you will be able to charge it in 1 hour. A 5Ah battery can be charged in 12 minutes.
October 27th, 2007 at 1:33 pm
Oops. Edit that last sentence to say: A 1Ah battery with a 5C rating can be charged in 12 minutes.
October 27th, 2007 at 1:59 pm
[quote comment="12369"]The cycles seem low to me. I was thinking the Volt would go about 7000 cycles with the A123 battery. It says 95%@1000 cycles. Does that in anyway mean it is starting to degrade at that point?[/quote]
Note that that’s at 100% depth of discharge, and the Volt will only be discharging 70% of its battery pack capacity. Full discharges are much more brutal than partial discharges, so they’re commonly used as a convenient benchmark.
I don’t know if there’s necessarily a linear relationship between capacity loss and cycles (e.g. 5% lost every 1000 cycles).
October 27th, 2007 at 2:02 pm
[quote comment="12364"]Can we get some explanation on the capacity? like, what is 1C, 25degC, 100%DOD mean verses 5C, 55degC, 100%DOD?[/quote]
1C, 5C, etc = how quickly the cell is discharged. The more quicky you discharge, the harsher it is on the cell.
25deg C = temperature in degrees celsius. The hotter the battery, the worse it is for the cycle life.
DOD=depth of discharge. 100% is the harshest on the cells. I used 1000 cycles cyles at 100% DOD whenever I could to keep it consistent.
October 27th, 2007 at 2:40 pm
Someone asked on the site about EnerDel’s values for energy and power density. EnerDel has been somewhat less than forthcoming about its attributes, but HAS stated they meet the minimum USABC requirements. Thus, all I could assume was 80 and 150 as the MINIMUM, and indicate that they are probably greater than this using “≥”.
October 27th, 2007 at 2:54 pm
I seem to remember A123 Systems claiming
5000 discharge lifespan (over 13 years) and also LG Chem claiming a lifespan of potentially 40 years(!). Obviously, looking at these tables isn’t providing the data we care about.
Nor do I believe it makes any sense to talk of future goals of the Battery Consortium. With the BYD obviously capable of putting a $19,000 60 mile range plug-in that contains a cheap iron battery pack sporting a claimed 2000 charge capacity looks to achieve 120,000 miles plus (just on electricity !), plus looks better than Toyota’s Lexus on the road, and will travel the highways 2 years before the first significant Western plug-in, the race for a practical electically driven vehicle looks very close to being won before it even starts by, naturally, the Chinese. I’m still committed to the VOLT, simply on the basis of anticipated higher quality and much better looks,and I don’t believe the
two list prices will be all that different, but it would be a lot easier if I could hear the magic words “60 mile driving range.” I will be interested to hear what Lutz and company are going to announce/show during the Detroit Auto show, which will, as I recall, also feature their main competitor from China.
October 27th, 2007 at 3:20 pm
Long term will favor all-electrics should
the price of batteries get low enough, but
that also would provide for longer range plug-ins to the extent that the any differences between the two types would mostly be relegated to fairly lengthy trips. Imagine a 350 mile all-electric VOLT, which would require at least a 70 kWhr capacity battery pack. Even at $200 per kWhr for the batteries, that would yield a $14,000 battery pack. Unless some radical new battery technology shows up, I don’t see practical all-electrics for a very long time, unless you assume drivers will be willing to stop for recharges every 150 miles or so. I don’t assume that and see no big advantage, either economically or emission-wise, or crude avoidance-wise
for moving away from range extender electrics into all-electrics. I think those who are pushing all-electrics simply don’t realize that they really don’t add much of anything to the equation. Especially when biofuels can probably take care of a very large percentage of the range extender’s meager fuel needs.
October 27th, 2007 at 3:22 pm
Just because you read something on the internet doesn’t mean it’s true. I’ve heard a bunch of crazy stuff from China over the years that never panned out. We have the same nonsense here–who was that nut a while ago posting about a perpetual motion company in all the forums here? I’ll believe China has a miracle electric car when I see somebody driving it on YouTube.
October 27th, 2007 at 3:32 pm
[quote comment="12390"]I seem to remember A123 Systems claiming 5000 discharge lifespan (over 13 years) and also LG Chem claiming a lifespan of potentially 40 years(!). Obviously, looking at these tables isn’t providing the data we care about.[/quote]
In that interview, LGChem never specified between calendar and cycle life. Also, see my previous comments about cycle life being enhanced by partial discharge.
October 27th, 2007 at 3:44 pm
According to a GCC article,
“A123Systems designed the 32157 PHEV cells to deliver the lowest cost per watt hour ($/Wh). The 32157 offers a volumetric density of 260 Wh/L, can deliver very high power at a lower state of charge with a 10+ year projected service life, and has a projected cycle life of more than 7,000 cycles at 100% DOD, according to the company.”
I was not able to read the model designation for the A123 battery cell, but it might be the power tool cell, not the 32 series M1 HD PHEV cell.
As I understand it, the 32 series cells are to be packaged and used in the Volt, with a 10 year calendar life design goal, and a 150,000 mile cycle life design goal.
October 27th, 2007 at 3:53 pm
Kent-
I’m mystified by your dogged advocacy for the BYD project on every one of your posts.
First off, by “iron battery”, are you referring to ferrate salt-based batteries, which are still in the research stage?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_iron_battery
More than likely, “iron battery” is probably just a silly mistranslation of lithium IRON phosphate, the same lithium ion technology as A123, Valence, Phostech et al. If they try to market a car in the US using this chemistry, they’re jumping into a legal meat grinder.
If they actually try to sell the car for 20grand, I suspect that all of that cost is the battery. Slave labor is cheap, you know.
October 27th, 2007 at 4:30 pm
I have read that the quality of cars made in China is awful. You get what you pay for. GM is not going to produce the Volt until they have a quality product.
October 27th, 2007 at 8:01 pm
So, what is the cost per kWh that will allow the Volt to be sold?
The current $1,000/kWh is too expensive to put into a $30,000 Volt.
$300/kWh? (i.e. $5,000 battery pack)
or less?
shoot, if they can get it down to $200/kWh put me down for a 10 kWh pack as my “whole-house UPS”
And I haven’t yet seen a made in China car that can pass any U.S. crash test.
October 27th, 2007 at 9:12 pm
The current OEM price for the A123 cells is probably around 1600/kWh.
Killacycle pack is $12,000 for 7.5kWh.
Source
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/03/30/edmunds-editor-karl-brauer-offers-a-brief-opinion-on-batteries-f/
October 27th, 2007 at 11:49 pm
re: Kent and the BYD vaporware:
If not LiFePO4, then the batteries BYD is referring to are likely Nickel-Iron.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel-iron_battery
Only manufactured in China at the moment, and yes, quite cheap. But they’re also horribly inefficient to charge and discharge (65%, vs 99% for Li-ion), and have the absolute worst energy density. They’re also horribly low on power, and have horrible self-discharge (i.e. they “leak” energy).
Knowing that, I think it’s safe to say from a scientific perspective that BYD’s project is dead on arrival.
October 28th, 2007 at 3:31 am
Cycle life is a very tricky issue. first of all, only projections can be made, because of course nobody has never tested LifePO4 technology over a span of ten years!
It depends on temperature, rates used, depth of discharge…
if less than 5% loss is achieved after 1000cycles, it’s already a good figure.
juste think about your cell phone battery that is dead after a few years.
From the start, a battery is loosing capacity.When graphite anodes are used (the vast majority of Li-ion, including A123) the capacity decreases as soon as the battery is made, because of passivation reactions taking place on the anode and increasing slowly the impedance, even if the battery is not used.
October 28th, 2007 at 7:45 am
Lets see, if the cost per KWH is $1600 and the Volt has 16, then the battery cost is $25,600. That is going to be a hard fit into a car that sells nicely under $30,000.
So either the bulk price will come down or the Volt we not be competitive with the Prius. I expect the actual price to be about $750 per KWH, or $12,000 for the battery. Toss it into a $14,000 car and voila, a $26,000 car that sells nicely under $30,000. Time will tell
October 28th, 2007 at 8:31 am
As I recall from previous interviews with A123 and maybe others, the battery cells that will be delivered for the Volt is not available on any of the public web sites. Until they start delivering the Volt or go public with specifics on each cell then it is all guess work.
October 28th, 2007 at 1:25 pm
Guesswork sounds dismissive, how about feasibility estimate.
October 28th, 2007 at 4:53 pm
[quote comment="12482"]Until they start delivering the Volt or go public with specifics on each cell then it is all guess work.[/quote]
Yes but given that the automotive A123 cells are made with the same fundamental chemistry, you can at least do some EDUCATED guesswork.
For example, part of the power density of the power tool (M1) cells is that there is a short path length from the electrode to the current collector. If you were to thicken the electrodes, the path from electrode to current collector is longer, and there is more electrical resistance in the way. This reduces the power, but would also increase the amount of energy storage.
Given the premium put on weight reduction and energy storage, the Volt will probably make this compromise.
In other words, expect a specific power lower than 3,000W (~4 horsepower) per kilogram of batteries, but do expect specific energy closer to LiFePO4’s theoretical max energy storage of ~130Wh/kg.
October 28th, 2007 at 8:51 pm
Having specific power less than 3000W/kg doesn’t seem like a problem. The energy density is much more limiting, but still very good. Assuming 100wh/kg, you would need 160kg battery for the 16kwh pack. The motor is 120KW; to generate that power with a 160kg pack you would only need a power density of 750w/kg.
October 29th, 2007 at 2:50 am
[quote comment="12537"]The motor is 120KW; to generate that power with a 160kg pack you would only need a power density of 750w/kg.[/quote]
Very true. However, the more powerful the cells are, the lower the discharge rate needs to be to achieve 120kW. The lower the discharge rate, the less strain it is on the battery, and the longer the lifespan.
December 5th, 2007 at 9:51 am
[...] For more on how some battery companies lithium-ion cells compare with one another, see this post: (LINK) [...]