World’s first ‘superfast’ battery offers 400km range from 10 mins charge::Tesla, Toyota and VW supplier CATL says production will begin in 2023
Not once in the entire article do they measure energy in a unit suitable for measuring energy.
Measuring batteries in km is misleading and nonsensical. Batteries do not have a distance range. Cars have a distance range, based on many factors, only one of which is battery capacity.
Similarly, please stop measuring light output in watts that an imaginary incandescent bulb from 30 years ago might theoretically have used to produce that amount of light.
I remember having the light-measured-in-watts discussion years ago when LED lights were still considered a novelty. Of course, this was with a videographer who actually understood the issue. He complained that it wasn’t a good idea to limit car headlights based on their wattage, which is how all the laws at the time were written. 5 years later, suddenly there were LED headlights blinding everyone.
I actually like the compatible watts for light bulbs. They should absolutely also prominently list a correct measurement (I assume linens?), but I only know how bright it is based on the old watt comparison.
Just like crop frame cameras list lens lengths in full frame equivalent because that is what people understand. But they also need to lose the actual mm.
You’re thinking lumens
deleted by creator
Stopped reading after: “increase in battery capacity and charge time was achieved through a “brand-new superconducting electrolyte formula” that results in improved conductivity.”
I guess the source, author or both don’t really care about technically accurate terminology. If it’s good enough for Star Trek, it’s good enough for us.
But it’s got electrolytes. It’s what batteries crave!
But what are electrolytes?
Not only that, it’s superconductive too! Totally not a recipe for short-circuiting the battery or anything like that.
So should we use Foot candles or Lux?
Lumens are the way. Lux being Lumen by square centimeters.
But for something that diffuse light all around it, Lux has no meaning.
Nah we need radiation intensity by frequency graphs, anything else is just a magic number
Show me an article promising substantially better battery tech in less than 5years and I will show you a steaming hot pile of crap.
honestly though batteries have improved a lot
But the manufacturing engineering is harder than anyone thinks.
always. but saying “oh there’s all these developments and they’re all vapor” - i get sick of armchair experts telling everyone they know better every time on-the-horizon announcements come out. I get not all of them ever get produced, but by current phone has 10 times the battery capacity of my first one, and the quick charge really does give me something like an 80% charge in 15 minutes or so.
some of these claims are pretty out there but development keeps going and by the time something with high levels of performance is in your car these guys will be smugly crapping on something else to assert nerd authority. i guess it’s just a social niche thing and nothing about batteries 🤷♂️
There is a whole lot full with these things.
We’re past that point. Every claim you heard in the last 10 years has been researched to its end. Some worked out, some didn’t, but we didn’t need all of them. Just one or two breakthroughs are enough.
These are going into production this year They’re not lab experiments anymore.
Want to join me on an online betting platform and wager against my statement that you will not be able to purchase what is described here in 2years? We’ve seen these kinds of promises over and over again with battery tech. Slow incremental changes yes. These types of breakthrough reports are consistently garbage regardless of how close to market they claim they are. I presume they put these out to stir up investment.
I don’t bet, but CATL is a company that already manufactures tons of batteries for EVs. It’s not some fly by night operation hoping to live off venture capital. If it’s not in actual BEVs within 2 years, it’ll be because car manufacturers themselves take longer than that to integrate it into existing designs.
I agree that some of it is marketing, some of it is tech bloggers trying to get clicks, but some of it is also real science that does have an effect. You probably won’t notice when it goes into effect, just that battery technology will slowly get better. It doesn’t really matter how fast this can charge until it’s supported in the infrastructure (and most people will charge at home overnight anyway), so you’ll only hear that charging is slowly getting faster over time, not sudden leaps. It doesn’t mean it’s all smoke and mirrors though.
How quickly will capacity degrade charging at that speed?
Other challenges include access to battery materials and battery degradation, though CATL claims this second pain point is not an issue with its latest battery.
If true then that’s the real innovation for me. I don’t want a car that I basically need to replace 70% the cost of every 4-5 years.
That’s already not the case. Not only do you not need to replace the battery (the range is just slightly reduced over time), the degredation is a lot slower than that.
Yes reduced range is very important- especially when you live in a cold climate where range is already significantly reduced from that. The cold climate also speeds up the degradation of the battery.
Do you have experience? Adoption of EV vehicles in Norway is really high without much issue, and it’s likely colder than wherever you live. Plus, 400km is a lot. The average commute in America is 66km. 400km might be used on a fairly long road trip, but if you can charge in 10m it’s not really an issue. The everyday experience is just plug it in at home and it’s done by morning. No gas station visits or anything else.
Sure range is important, but I just think it’s misleading to consider a battery that has lost less than 10% maximum capacity as something to be replaced immediately. It’s still definitely more than usable for the majority of people
Current batteries can do 1000- 3000 cycles before the capacity drops below 80%.
With ranges of several hundred km this gives us hundreds of thousands km of lifetime mileage, if not a million.
Most ICE cars don’t get that far either.
Most 4 cylinder ice cars will go 300,000 miles on the motor before the motor would need replaced if you take good care of them, and at that point you could drop a new motor in for $5,000 with labor.
These large batteries on the other hand are looking to cost triple that.
Also, there plenty of ice vehicles with original motors on the road that are well over 15+ years old and still run great (I own 3) but even with a new tech lithium battery that can stay good for 2,000 charge cycles, there is NO lithium battery getting cycles put on it or not that doesn’t go bad after about 15 years. You’re currently guaranteed to need a new battery after that long and since most vehicles are worth $10k or less after they’re 15+ years old that leaves the vehicles worth a bit more than scrap.
This is probably the biggest reason why I won’t buy a battery powered vehicle right now, and when I try explaining that to people they’re like “well then just lease or sell it and buy a new one lol”.
That’s not really an honest comparison though, and also kind of simply doesn’t matter.
Most vehicles will have some expensive component fail well before the engine, and after ~10 years almost any major replacement will cost $5k or more. My suspension gave out at year 8 and it would have cost me $5k to repair my Ford valued at $5k. Who’s going to want to spend that - on an engine or otherwise - on a 15+ year old car unless it’s a particularly well regarded model by enthusiasts? The average consumer doesn’t care.
The average consumer wants a new car after a decade simply for new features (like sensors or safety), change of lifestyle (like going from a sedan to a van for kids or an SUV to a sports car), or even simply styling and aesthetic. If the battery lasts 5+ years than the average consumer wants the car in the first place, it won’t matter.
Not to mention that in the coming years, the price of replacing battery packs will likely drop, while the price of replacing engines may likely increase, as OEMs ramp down engine production and ramp up battery production.
The average shade tree mechanic (like myself) or a “friend” can replace that truck suspension in less than a day and do it with good aftermarket stuff for $800, or cheap stuff that will last a few years for $400 and get it done in an afternoon. That is absolutely not possible with the larger EV batteries, and the battery pack itself is $10,000, not including labor.
Your comparison to a truck suspension (which you laughably overpriced, even with taking it to a shop) is worlds different from dealing with an EV battery.
Your engine pricing ramp up also isn’t going to happen in the next decade, and generally if it’s an old vehicle you won’t put a new motor in them anyhow. You need a motor for a car from 2005 you’re much more likely to buy a used one, or a used rebuilt one.
This is coming from someone who’s done automotive work for the past 20 years and own, repairs, and quite enjoys a prius, so it’s not like I’m against evs for no reason. I just know right now it’s tossing money down a sinkhole. EV isn’t there yet for the US. Smaller countries where evs that only need 150km range and batts are cheaper it would be fine in, but in the US it won’t work yet. Not for the power grid or economically.
It may have changed in recent years but several years ago when I was more into EVs it was a reasonable concern. But I do somewhat question the legitimacy of this seeing as how quickly small electronics Lithium batteries degrade.
There are now soooo many studies out showing that capacity in EVs drops significantly slower than ever expected. An EV that is used “normal” is basically best-case for Li-Ion batteries. You are charging the car once to twice a week and then you are charging it slowly over night or at your office, only using fast-charging when you are on roadtrips. You rarely drop your battery percentage below 30% and a lot of cars also dont go higher than 90% capacity without you explicitly activating it
Can you please send a source for the studies?
Do you mean phone batteries? Cause they are often cycled at least once a day. If you drive your ev for 500km a day, yes, don’t expect it to last five years. But I would think an ICE car would handle that either.
Electronics batteries degrade within a couple years even with very few cycles in my experience.
Which is great. No need to poo poo it.
However. Fast charge isn’t really necessary unless you are on a long journey over 400 km and need to charge on route or you drive a lot. Eg taxi Uber etc.
Best thing ever industry can do for planet would be a 350km car that’s cheap. That’s really what most car users require. They drive to and from work and most drive less than 100km a day.
Just like a phone you charge over night and don’t need oooodles of range.
Anyone going on long trips really should be using a train with another vehicle if required at the destination.
Truckers are a different story and should be separated from the day to days if average car users
However. Fast charge isn’t really necessary unless you are on a long journey over 400 km and need to charge on route or you drive a lot. Eg taxi Uber etc.
There is a large amount of apartment renters that don’t have access to the preferable overnight slow charging. Fast charging like this article is talking about could be a game changer for that segment of buyers.
Huge issue I know. One of the largest barriers to owning Evs. On street charging needs an overhaul and this is where you’d run into a lot of problems.
Given enough time and demand there’s no reason apartment complexes can’t outfit their parking spots with slow chargers. Slow charging a car is much less demanding (and efficient) than trying to fast charge.
Our appartement block just voted down getting an engineer in to see what would be required to have car charging infrastructure installed. To be honest I get it, owners don’t want to pay for that for the hypothetical electric car owner in the future.
Given enough time and demand
You’re talking decades away. Until then better fast charging offers options for apartment/rental dwellers.
I mean we could just require apartment owners to install them
It would be easier to invent a better battery than to get landlords to do anything that wouldn’t maximize their profit.
It’s not that simple. In many countries the current electricity infrastructure can’t handle everyone charging their EVs. It’ll fry the wires. Countries like Finland have unusual advantage in this due to our grid being designed for electric heating, electric saunas and people using block heaters on their cars in the winter. This is not the case in most of the world.
But that 350km should not be best case summer. It should be worst case -10°C at ~250-300km
Absolutely. Has to be actually real life range. Not best case in a lab with nobody in it with everything turned off.
350km up and down hills in hot/ cold weather with 2 adults and a child in back. Charging phones playing music acceleration and braking.
Fast charge isn’t really necessary
Totally disagree. I think fast charging is the biggest roadblock we have in making electric cars more popular. Just think how much time filling cars with petrol takes, charging should also take similar time. 10-15 mins would be ok if you also can have breakfast in that time.
But you don’t need it. You need a vehicle that gets you a to b. You can charge when you aren’t driving.
Electric cars will be common once they reach price parity with ice. Why buy an ice that helps prop up the profits of oil cartels.
If price can get close to ice with good enough range. Cuts out every going to a petrol station again and solar panels will reduce your transport costs. Plus added bonus of less moving parts and no oil changes ever again.
Plus less noise.
It doesn’t matter if 95% of the time you don’t need fast charging. When making a major purchase like a car, most people will consider their extreme use cases. Whether that’s logical or not doesn’t factor in
And where would the vehicle sit and charge while I’m not driving it?
Is this a stupid question or ?
I totally agree - kinda, the truth is there are various common use cases for cars. A cheap little run around that slow charges over night would be great for a lot of people but it wouldn’t suit everyone, having a wide range of options is a great thing.
Imagine I’m a car salesman who doesn’t give a shit about EVs. I just want to sell a car.
“This car right here, you can fill 'er up in 1 hour! Oh but this feller, well she only takes 60 seconds, and has twice the range to boot!”
The average person isn’t going to care that the first car is an EV and the second car is gas-powered.
Most people can’t afford to get charging set up at home for overnight charging, either. You’re also not considering emergency scenarios where people won’t have time to wait an hour for their vehicles to charge.
The scenario you’re imagining is an ideal scenario, not working with the current reality we have right now. The industry is working on making EVs charge extremely quickly because they believe it is a major selling point for their vehicles. Which, for the average person, it absolutely is. If EVs want to outsell gas-powered vehicles consistently, they need to meet the basics of being able to fill up quickly and having identical range.
Isn’t. Just like phone makers are pushing fast charging. Nice to have but not required.
You and everyone else on this car forum forget. Cars are luxury products that have only been around 100 years.
We managed before cars. Since the beginning of humans we’ve managed without electricity cars and most other things. We can change the use
I own exactly one car. If it can’t do everything I need a car to do, it isn’t the right car for me. Me, like many others, don’t buy a car for the 98% of drives, we buy it for the 2% of drives that need to happen.
Edit: Given there isn’t a train that goes the 2% of places, should I buy one car for 98% of drives and a completely different car for 2% of drives? That hardly seems like a good solution.
I’m with you 100%. The people downvoting you must live in some idealized fantasy land where public transit is effective and rental cars are easily available and affordable.
Like you, I live in the real world, where public transit is a mess, the rental market is completely overwhelmed, and charging infrastructure is spotty at best. So I went with a plug-in hybrid vehicle when I needed something new after my 11 year old Lancer got rear ended and written off by the insurance company. Enough electric range for all of my daily driving, but also a gas tank for when I need to exercise that 2% of my driving routine and go farther afield.
It’s been over 500km since I last filled the tank and so far it’s still full.
Let me get this out of the way - this is my experience, other people may have very different needs and uses. I’m not saying my needs are your needs, or that your needs are invalid. I have a driveway and we were able to install a charger at our house. I don’t tow trailers full of lumber uphill all day. YMMV.
Getting an EV really opened my eyes to how many wrong assumptions I had about how much I drive and what the pain points would be. I worried a lot that range would be an issue - we got a Bolt, which has a nominal 259 mile range (on the low side these days), it’s fast charging isn’t super fast, and we live in New England, and park outside, so the battery was cold for the first several months we had the car, but we figured we’d adapt. As it turns out, so far there really haven’t been any pain points, and adaptation has been minimal.
In the winter on very cold days, when we’re running the heater, our realistic range is about 160 miles on a charge. But it turns out, I don’t drive anywhere near that far on a typical day. It’s more like 30-40 miles a day, sometimes a hundred, which is fine. The charger tops up the car in an hour or two, and could charge it all the way from empty overnight easily. Range is a funny thing - the thought of going to a gas station every 150 miles is offputting, but in reality, it’s the opposite - every morning I have maximum range, and NEVER have to go to the gas station, or a fast charger, which is a benefit I hadn’t considered. Now in the summer the range is substantially over 300 miles, and AC uses WAY less power than the heater, so it’s even less of an issue. In fact, I only charge the car to 80% every day to maximize battery life now because it’s fine (I do charge all the way prior to long trips).
It also turns out we take fewer long trips than I thought (4 in the 7 months we’ve had the car, 2 in the dead of winter). There was a train that went somewhere near one of the 4 locations, at exorbitant cost. The first, 2 weeks after we got the car, was a little stressful as I learned how to find and use fast chargers, but it really wasn’t a big deal. Especially when I figured out how to warm up the battery first, and not to bother filling up, just charging in the fast part of the curve, and parking at level 2 chargers when possible. On our overnight trips, to place with no level 2 chargers, even the super slow 110v charging was enough to keep us from having to worry about charge.
So the downsides turned out to not really matter (to me), and the plus sides (full range every morning, essentially silent, no smell, and by far the best performance of any car I’ve ever had) are pretty sweet.
That said, if I got second car, I’d consider a plugin hybrid - that does seem to take care of most of the 2% cases. The knock on them is that they have pretty low electric range (like 30 miles or so) but it turns out that would be fine the vast majority of the time. I’d just have to remember to get the engine to start once in a while.
I’d just have to remember to get the engine to start once in a while.
I can’t speak authoritatively about every PHEV, but the one I have at least takes care of that for you and will run the engine at least once every three months or so if your regular driving habits are such that you manage to stay all electric all the time.
That said, if your driving patterns are such that you can go 3+ months on the 40 mile EV range without ever dipping into the gas tank maybe you don’t need a PHEV.
The people downvoting you must live in some idealized fantasy land where
I’d guess it’s probably because of the “Me, like many others, don’t buy a car for the 98% of drives, we buy it for the 2%” part which just makes no sense. Now, not being able to handle the 2% might justify the car not being the correct car for that person but realistically, people primarily buy a car for what they’re going to use it for the majority of the time.
Presumably you would rent a special vehicle for the 2% of drives. Of course that’s still inconvenient, and I don’t know where the crossover for others is.
For an individual there are a lot of factors, and I don’t know all of them because I have never owned an EV or even a Hybrid.
That said, if I could get rid of stopping at gas stations and oil changes, and have it cost less per mile, those are all plusses for me. But I still weigh it against the still much higher purchase price, and need for electrical work that would probably cost a lot, or 110v charging which would be slower than I’d like.
I also don’t really want to have a “worse fit to me” next car just to get an EV. I think EVs keep getting closer, but I am still 50/50 if they’ll be there when I’ll need a new car in 5 years.
I hear ya. I’m leaning toward a plug-in hybrid for the car in a few years. Lets me get cheap fillups 98% of the time and still covers the 2%. The gas engine shouldn’t need too much maintenance if it isn’t getting used much. Though, I suppose in a few years when that time comes, I’ll have to see if anything changed.
deleted by creator
Same. I don’t even want to think about the difficulties in transporting 5 mountain bikes without a car, and then hiring a car at the destination that also has a big enough bike rack.
Truckers are a different story and should be separated from the day to days if average car users
Why not also move freight by train and use smaller delivery vehicles at the destination?
Exactly. Why not.
Charging at work via solar would be even better. If there was some way for businesses to be incentivised for it.
I’d be curious just how much energy you’d get from this. I couldn’t imagine it would be very much. If the solar panels are on the roof and the roof is at least translucent then the efficiency would go way down. Not that i think an opaque roof would do a whole lot better though.
…why would the roof be translucent? I can’t speak for anyone else, but exactly zero of the places I’ve worked have had naturally lit ceilings.
Because i didn’t think about the work building having solar at the time… Lol
I don’t think he means on the car roof but rather over the parking lot/work building
Oh, my. Lol. I really misunderstood
Why would you need that ? That makes no sense. Unless you drive 350km a day for work. If that’s the case. Stop.
You aren’t doing any favours for your job your health the planet.
Get a train or public transportation. Shouldn’t be commuting hours to work. That’s just nonsense
There are heaps of people who do just that without the privilege nor opportunity to stop or do otherwise
Do what ?
Drive long for work.
The issue with this mentality is that lots of people (or even most) can’t charge at home or at work. If you have fast charging cars and enough stations then you don’t need to address this issue and you now have a drop in fossil fuel replacement rather than something that needs lots of new local infrastructure.
Lots of people, yes but far from most. If you live in a house you can at the very least do level 1 charging which will meet you 30-50 miles of range per day.
Literally anybody who lives in an apartment block. Or anyone who’s front door is too far to run a charging cable. Then charging at work is even fewer people. In my country most people can’t park directly outside their house to begin with even if they own a house. This is very naïve.
Know what’s better than a battery that charges fast? A train with a catenary that never has to charge at all
It’s not remotely realistic to expect a sudden drastic change in infrastructure like that. While we should work toward such goals, statements like this are ignorant of the time and efforts necessary to affect such change.
I’m getting so sick of the anti-car crowd commenting this stuff on anything related to cars. Like yes, we know, public transportation is good and a great goal. But they’re just so out of touch with reality most of the time.
Seriously. In fact we’re doing both things in a lot of places.
For most people, it doesn’t matter unless it’s happening near them. Source: Texan.
Kinda telling on yourself by calling it “drastic”. What exactly is “severe” or “rapid” about supporting alternative methods of transportation?
Then build me a railroad track fucker.
Sure is. You should build out the infrastructure since no one else seems to want to.
I’d love to see you take a trash lumber pile or fence clippings to the landfill with a train. If I didn’t own a truck I would have already needed to rent one twice this week
Damn, you really incensed a whole bunch of people who seem to like living in soulless, identical car-centric hells. What normal person thinks you expect “a sudden drastic change” from a silly comment like this?
Thing about reactionaries, they tend to react
How does that get me from my house to somewhere near my house? Or is this something I’m supposed to pay higher taxes for that won’t service anything near me?
It doesn’t. Public transportation only really works in dense environments. The rub is that the default mode of development across the US has been suburban sprawl, which basically makes the “last mile” - from the bus/train route to your house / business / shops - impractical.
Best we can do given this state of affairs is build good transit and densify around the stops with infill development. Continuing the pattern of sprawl just makes every problem related to transportation harder - longer commutes, more traffic, higher amount of energy consumed to get from point A to point B.
Anyway, hope this battery tech works out because a lot of us are stuck with expensive personal vehicles as our only viable option given the way our cities are laid out.
Ugh, me? Living in a SOCIETY where I have to PAY for things I don’t USE?! What’s next, paying for SCHOOLS when I don’t have KIDS?!
ride a bike
Removed by mod
deleted by creator
What an explosive revelation!
