Boost for Charging Speed

But how much would the charger and electrical service that could handle that cost? Faster charging is great, but the batteries aren't the only hurdle.

 

great news, i hope it comes soon!

 

So instead of pulling 13 watts, the next PiP will pull 3,900 watts?

I'm gonna' need a bigger extension cord...

 

Charge speed Schmarge speed. For home recharging, faster charging means bigger and more costly home electric service, and more stress on the electric grid when commuters get home and plug in en masse, then get filled up long before the utily's overnight lull arrives.

I would put battery cost and energy density as the biggest drawbacks today. Taking all night to recharge will actually be a benefit for the electric grid.

 

This would violate the laws of energy conservation.

 

A supercharger can give a Model S 170 miles in 30 minutes. Perhaps this new chemistry will allow a faster charge time with existing equipment. that is the current battery is the limit at this time. Without an upgrade for the equipment and likely electrical supply, I don't it being a major leap in improvement. With those upgrades, this chemistry could make BEVs really long trip capable. The cost is going to be more than just the batteries, keep that in mind.

In the immediate time frame, these batteries can make regenerative braking more efficient. Perhaps even take a charge near what a supercap can. They will boost performance, but I don't think we really need a Model S type car that can to 0 to 60 in under 4 seconds.

 

Hopefully the new electrolyte isn't flammable either.

Seriously though with the standard equipment we have, if these new batteries are more efficient with accepting charge, they should run a lot cooler. And being cooler makes them more stable in the long run which means they'll last longer.

This will lead to more efficient onboard charger designs. And then more efficient support electronics.

 

There probably are advantages none here have considered yet. It is just that a charge up of 170 miles in 10 minutes is very unlikely outside the lab due to variables outside the battery.

 

it would be one less reason for people not to buy ev's.

 

One word of caution about new battery chemistry . . . some may generate inert by-products over a charge-discharge cycle. It is my understanding that some LiON chemistry have this characteristic. They eventually convert their reactants to stable but inert compounds.

Bob Wilson

 

I agree that those are the real drawbacks. But charging time is generally believed by the average person to be high on the list as well.

I don't know why cars couldn't be equipped, essentially, with 2 or more chargers, connected in parallel and the battery partitioned such that you can charge multiple packs at once. Just design the cable and connector so it has duplicate circuits. The car or the charging station could dynamically choose one or more circuits to be active based on user input, power available, time-of-day, other cars charging or whatever. Maybe some stations have only 2 circuits, some have 1, some have 4, etc.

Mike

 

The Tesla S can be equipped with two chargers.
The cables and connectors are already on the beefy side. Putting more circuits into them is going to increase their thickness. The wall unit for the S with 2 chargers is rated for 80amps. This requires at least three(+, -, & ground) 4 gauge wires. Each is 0.2043 in. diameter without insulation. That is for a solid wire. These are likely stranded for flexibility, which will make them thicker. Then there are the cables for communication between the wall and onboard charger(s), and they are all wrapped together into a cable.

To get power to more onboard chargers, you will end with a cable as thick as the ones going into a 200amp service panel.

 

Hey, speak for yourself!

 

3,900 watts?? We're already charging some plug in's at 50,000 watts, and higher ... so the bigger cords are already out there. Yea, the OP doesn't really apply to the PiP ... and most likely not even to Toyota - because Toyota would rather sink its high hopes on its hydrogen vehicle IMO. The OP is really just about hopeful / future battery tech.

It seems to have been a while since we had a nice lengthy dialogue over what is no more or less likely to be vaporware - than any of the prior/many chemistries constantly being worked on. Funding ... I get it ... they gotta toot their horn to keep research $$$ flowing. That's fine. Still - and before the thread becomes 16 pages deep with 'how it's gona be' ... maybe consider waiting 'till they get it out of the test tube. Just sayin' ... the forum is already thick with prior 'miracle battery chemistry' vaporware threads. Still, I wish them, and all the other battery formula tester teams a hearty 'good luck'.
.

 

The real head turners that will shift more people to full electric/battery vehicles; making it just as inconvenient to charge up as it is going to the gas station to fill-up an ICE vehicle, and standardize charging that any electric vehicle can use. Each new breakthrough takes us a step closer to transitioning away from ICE vehicles. Before it becomes mainstream, costs have to come down, and of course the road tax dilemma needs to be figured out - another topic already discussed at length.

 

We'll just bury the huge banks of capacitors like we do with the fuel tanks at gas stations to left everybody feel easier and not think about how much caged energy they are standing next too.