Li-ion Batteries: A Speculative Field of Dreams 112 comments
an article to
-
Font Size:
-
Print
- TweetThis
My capacity to overlook the obvious never ceases to amaze me. Last weekend Jack Lifton sent me a link to an article he recently published in The Resource Investor that discussed the development and commercialization history of NiMH and Li-ion batteries and focused principally on the availability of critical rare earth metals. While the Lifton article goes a long way toward alleviating my concerns over the availability of lithium metal, at least for the short term, other aspects are far more troubling. In particular, I was horrified by Mr. Lifton’s assertions that:
No attempts were made in the twentieth century to substitute lithium-ion battery technology for either lead-acid or nickel metal hydride uses by any OEM automotive mass marketer.
And,
Toyota’s (TM) management has concluded that lithium battery technology is not mature enough now for a full-scale commitment by Toyota to move from nickel-metal hydride battery technology to lithium battery technology in the near future. Toyota has announced that it will construct a few lithium batteries for some short runs of commuter cars to begin testing the concepts, and the markets for short-range battery operated or extended range vehicles.
Honda (HMC) and Ford (F) seem also to be following the Toyota model.
The main reason that GM has suddenly discovered lithium batteries is that there is no other technology available to them!
It’s taken a couple days for the message to sink in and work its way through my aging neural synapses, but I think Mr. Lifton may be right. I’ve done some searching and I can’t find a single report on how GM, Ford or Chrysler (or anybody else for that matter) has built a fleet of several hundred or several thousand Li-ion powered cars and put them through their paces in rigorous road tests. A number of fleet tests have been announced or started, but none of the pending or proposed tests has come anywhere near completion. In other words,
THE RUSH TO SPEND BILLIONS BUILDING LI-ION BATTERY PLANTS FOR PHEV AND EV POWER TRAINS IS BASED ON SPECULATION – NOT SUCCESSFUL ROAD TESTS.
The guys in the white lab coats believe that Li-ion technology will work and the battery companies are using that opinion and an intense PR campaign to bypass the pesky formality of diligent road testing and jump directly into building factories that will be financed by billions of taxpayer dollars. What if they’re wrong?
Most hype-based scams are discovered after the fact. The Li-ion battery promotion is being perpetrated today and nobody but Jack Lifton (and now me) has had the temerity to ask, “WHERE THE HELL IS YOUR PROOF?”
Li-ion batteries may well offer the performance advantages that their advocates claim; but shouldn’t we at least complete the road tests before spending billions of Federal dollars building plants to manufacture something that may prove to be a colossal technical or economic failure?
I for one am tired of "if you build it they will come" speculation based on laboratory research. If Li-ion technology is so wondrous, let’s build a fleet of test cars, prove both the principle and the economics on America’s roads and then decide whether the technology is worth the billions of dollars that undercapitalized development stage companies like Ener1 (HEV), Altair Nanotechnologies (ALTI) and others are demanding from Congress.
Disclosure: Author holds a large long position in Axion Power International (AXPW.OB), a leading U.S. developer of lead-carbon batteries, and small long positions in Exide (XIDE), Enersys (ENS) and ZBB Energy (ZBB).
Related Articles
|
-
The Seeking Alpha 100
See allThe top 100 stock
market authors
selected for publication
Seeking Alpha 100 » -
Fastest Climbers
Authors with the largestSee all
increase in followers
in the last 7 days
Fastest Climbers » -
Top Commenters
Top commenters,See all
as ranked by their peers
Top Commenters » -
Top Instabloggers
The 100 most activeSee all
Instabloggers.
Top Instabloggers » -
Top StockTalkers
TopSee all
StockTalkers.
Top StockTalkers »
I didn't mention brand name, because 1) there are many commercial electric motorcycles (and cars) currently in the market and I don't intend to play favorites, although I know which one I like the best for now (the one I own) and 2) I want people to do their own basic reserach and find our for themselves that there are quite a few choices, already on the markets and on the roads. You can easily ifgure out which one I own from the specification hints I've given and by doing a few seconds of on-line research.
@ Paul
Please see above. Despite your claims, there are in fact already many commercially produced electric vehicles on the road, many using lithium, and more every day. Please get up to speed with reality before you make sweeping pronouncements. Electric drive is obviously the end game, with unusually rapid adoption rates already occuring - the consumer doesn't and won't care what the fuel sources (such as LNG) for electricity (100% wind power in my case, thanks to a subscription plan through my regional power utility company) any range extender or energy carriers (such a lithium on high energy density or lead on low cost) are, so long as it works with electric drive.
I have been for developing Methane Hydrates for many years. The Russians actually got lucky and found a way to separate Methane gas from MH under ground and have been doing this for decades in ONE of their fields. The USA does have HUGE deposits of MH all around the cost and in Alaskan permafrost.
However that does not change the fact that electric motors are 3 or 4 times more energy efficient than ICE engines. And the Volt gets the equivalent of around 95 MPG for the first 40 miles using battery power alone. After 40 miles it get about 50 MPG because it uses an ICE to run a generator to keep the battery charged. No transmission is necessary and the Volt ICE could run on NG. Since the HUGE MAJORITY of drivers commute less than 40 miles each way daily that is how perhaps 80% of the 140+ billion gallons of gasoline is burned yearly in the USA.
Long haul trucking and other freight carriers use about 60 billion gallons of diesel fuel yearly and they could have all these diesel ICE engines modified to use a blend of about 85% NG and 15% diesel. That makes sense because they travel perhaps 400 miles daily. The US military has been using a Diesel Electric system similar to the Volt's and Diesel Electric Locomotives for about 5 years. It gets between 20 and 40% better MPG than diesel alone and can be used to generate electric power for airfields and combat outposts.
Therefore batteries make sense to replace gasoline usage and NG could replace most of our Diesel fuel use!
I would have no problem with using LARGE Lithium batteries either, if they did not have heating and safety problems and if the advanced lead acid with ultra-capacitor technologies did not appear to be a much better safe cost effective solution. I am all for the latest and greatest but sometimes they are not the best solutions. Li batteries may be replaced by methanol fuel cells by SERIOUS lap top computer users, news.cnet.com/8301-111... .
The following statement from Jack Lifton is totally unfair. “No attempts were made in the twentieth century to substitute lithium-ion battery technology for either lead-acid or nickel metal hydride uses by any OEM automotive mass marketer.” In the twentieth century, there was no viable, proven li-ion battery technology suited to automotive applications, whether SLI or EV and Jack Lifton knows it.
Li-ion batteries, using LiCoO2 cathode chemistry, were only commercialized in the 1990’s. These batteries targeted the replacement of the incumbent NiMH technology in the fast growing laptop and cell phone market. The major advantages these li-ions batteries had over NiMH was less weight and size and a lower rate of self-discharge – very important attributes for portable devices. LiCoO2 batteries are somewhat prone to overheating, have low power capability and suffer from calendar life degradation but these were not issues for small battery packs and products subject to obsolescence in 2 or 3 years. As for cost and cycle life, NiMH and LiCoO2-based batteries were similar. Both also use several pounds of expensive cobalt per kWh.
In the twentieth century, LiCoO2 was the only proven li-ion chemistry and it was less suited to large-format battery applications than NiMH technology in products with a lifetime beyond several years.
LiFePO4 was patented by Goodenough in 1996. This chemistry was recognized for its potential – power capability, cycle life (deep discharge cycles no less), stability and use of inexpensive materials – but it was not a proven entity in the twentieth century. In fact, it was ten years later (ca. 2006) that a LiFePO4-based battery was introduced by A123 for use in DeWalt power tools.
As for Tesla’s use of LiCoO2 cells in its Roadster battery pack, they have done a masterful job of compensating for the shortcomings of these laptop battery cells – proclivity towards thermal “incidences” and low power capability by clever packaging and using lots of cells (6831 to be exact), respectively. As for the shortcomings of low cycle life (~ 500 cycles) and low calendar life, they will manifest themselves in battery performance that will start to roll off noticeably as early as the third year unless one carefully controls the battery state of charge and temperature as well as the frequency of severe acceleration events. The good news for Tesla owners is that the replacement batteries should more suitable for a BEV application and cheaper.
Please make special note of my use of the word "could." I don't know anywhere near enough to predict whether the current generation of Li-ion will offer the performance and life cycles people anticipate. But it really bothers me that if the advocates are honest, they have to say the same thing.
The product already works - that's not in question. The only question is how fast the adoption and broad market penetration will occur and when/how substitution to other energy carriers and changing carrier mixes will occur. Keep in mind that autos took over 100 years for first tier market saturation and that we still have about 9 million horses in the US. 3% total market adoption for plug in electric vehicles (including hybrids) within the first ten years with a classic growth curve seems reasonable to me, with or without the government, probably with mostly lithium and with other energy carriers. Lithuim is not perfect and will not be the best choice forever, but for now it certainly is good enough for the widespread, increasing use that it enjoys.
If you think that 3% is not enough to count as a reasonable fleet, than by your argument, there are no hybrid cars on the road at all, which is a ridiculous conclusion.
I know all about the performance of your 362 pound (with rider) EV and I'm delighted that you are pleased with the way it works in the southwest. I would respectfully submit, that your experience with a lithium crotch rocket that you admittedly purchased as a toy has absolutely no relevance to a family of four or somebody who is planning to purchase a product from a major manufacturer instead of a mail order outfit.
I firmly believe that civility is of utmost importance in this kind of venue and you have without a doubt been the most un-civil commenter I have ever encountered. I've tried to treat you with respect and gotten nothing but disdain in return. This will be my last response to one of your posts until you learn to act like an adult. If you continue with the insulting rants I'll have no choice but to ask Seeking Alpha to evaluate your posts and their terms of service.
I hope to be able to respond to questions or comments from you in the future.
But I personally think that most of your other points are deeply wrong: if US companies are not able to deliver proper and reliable batteries, it doesn't mean that competitive li-ion bateries are not possible.
I don't think you know so much about the battery companies of Korea and - guess? - China.
I have been personally there, evaluating the technologies and the companies, been interviewing potential customers who actually road-tested the batteries, and I can tell you one thing: out there there are a bunch skilled chinese and korean companies that today can produce reliable and competitive batteries. they have the technology, and they're scaling up.
and lots of pe's and vc's are there to invest.
the world is much bigger than us (and japan)
Here is a good presentation from November 2008 on the status on the HEV/PHEV/BEV battery industry by the Rocky Mountain Institute. Its main focus is the eight flavors of Li-ion battery technology although it does compare them to lead-acid, NiCad, NiMH, Zinc-Air and Zebra (NaNiCl), with merely a mention of ultra caps.
The presentation includes a technological ranking (1-to-5 scoring) of EV battery technology based in five categories – energy, power, cost, lifetime (cycle life & calendar life) and safety. It also has a table that notes the development stage. For example, the table designates LiFePO4 as “Pilot”, and LiMn2O4, GM’s choice for the Volt, as “Developmental”.
www.its.berkeley.edu/s...
We need to support research and we need to conduct organized and detailed performance tests in real world conditions. Until a technology has proven itself safe, powerful and durable in a broad based test, it's an unknown and you don't spend government money to manufacture a pig in a poke.
NorthernPiker, thanks for the link.
Yes, there is problem with the governmental funding of manufacturing facilities for any nascent technology because, in essence, the government is now picking winners, a skill governments generally have yet to demonstrate. Furthermore, a fully paid for battery factory in the US would also need ongoing support since its prices, FOB Detroit, would still not be competitive with batteries from China at current exchange rates.
However, I have a more fundamental problem with the rationale for such funding for battery independence. It is probably not necessary, if reliable, diverse sources of batteries were available. Yes, national security may dictate some US battery manufacturing capability (with a Stategic Battery Reserve?)
The government funding for batteries and other technologies should focus on R&D incentives.
Build a thousand cars with each of the competing technologies and then put them on the road. Let performance data from detailed testing tell us which technologies are cost effective and which ones aren't. Then start talking about subsidizing manufacturing if necessary.
Command economies make technology decisions and force them down. Free economies hold a horse race before crowning a winner.
On Jan 27 12:59 PM realist2 wrote:
> It's a safe bet that Toyata can milk the Prius parallel and nickel
> technolgy for many years and that lithium will be a major, though
> certainly not the only, player in many applications, vehicle energy
> carriers among them, for decades.
seekingalpha.com/artic...
Li-ion works great for scooter and light vehicle applications where the vehicle weight to driver weight ratio is low. But none of the EV solutions are very attractive from a cost-benefit standpoint when you wrap 3,000 pounds of steel around a couple hundred pounds of passengers.
On Jan 28 11:13 AM timbball wrote:
> I'm surprised no one has talked about BYD Auto (1211-HK) yet, the
> company Buffett took a 10% stake in. BYD uses lithium iron phosphate
> battery to power its vehicles.
I am building a three wheeler trike and should be out working on it now instead of writing this. It's all up weight will be around 300 to 400 pounds, it will haul three people, but my needs are very small concerning speed and distance. I am using wood techniques which I learned from building a number of boats. Light and very strong.
What I am looking at is more in line with golf carts and such. I got quotes for lithium cells from China and the cost (FOB) was about $1500 U.S. compared to the $480 for the gel cells I will be using, and mine aren't that heavy. By the time I received them and paid duty, the Li cells would be about six times as expensive - beyond my reach and needs.
Keeping the weight down, I figure the max speed with me alone will be over 40 mph and distance about 30 to 50 miles, fine for my needs.
When we think of cost/benefit analyzes, what I see is that electric, especially when I get solar panels installed, will give me a degree of independence that I don't have now. So even if I'm never able to amortize out the cost versus say gasoline, it will be worth it to me to be free of the gas stations, government dictated gas prices, and some of the maintenance.
But that is just me...
I have read through all the posts and the gentleman from China makes good sense in that, as in many things, the U.S. is again lagging behind. When the new technologies come in, much of the manufacturing is bound to be done in Asia.
Also, I found Realist2's input enthusiastic, but not in any way obnoxious, so would suggest you take time out to review your prescriptions on this. He makes very good points, which maybe oppose those of the thread's founder, but are never-the-less very valid. I think you are off-base on this.
Don't think the U.S. government has any business in direct investment here, only facilitation though other means.
We are in an odd time right now. The bulk of the EVs that exist are motorcycles like Realist's and DIY vehicles like yours. But the headline news in the industry focuses on things like the Tesla and Phoenix roadsters which travel at highway speeds, have long driving ranges and are beyond the means of normal men. The next level of news comes from announcements by auto makers about their plans to make commuter and family cars using electric technology. This has led many people to a point where there is a disconnect between what can be done technically and what can be done at a reasonable cost. My goal is to bring the two points closer together.
I would see EVs as limited to local transport which is what most non-commercial transport is. Here there are big advantages in fuel cost savings(even with gel cells) and maintenance (fewer parts, less to go wrong). In the fifties my grandfather drove around it what must have been a very primitive early version of the golf cart. Old technology and served him admirably with no problems at all. He used it to go to the markets and to church. My current need is for little more than what he had back then. Town is three miles away and thus speed in unimportant.
With regard to auto makers and their fancier contributions - all the luxuries they will introduce and charge for just aren't needed. We don't need sports cars or 400 mile ranges for such vehicular types. They are obviously boosting up what they can make off of each EV. Maybe people will be fooled into thinking they need all these things, but then again maybe they will realize that simple, local transport is all that is really needed.
Much of the real development will be by people like myself - giving creative and fresh ideas into the mix from time to time.
I should say that I live on a small island in the South Pacific where gas prices are out of sight and distances needed to be traveled small, so alternative technologies here make particular sense.