Big 'Green'? IBM works on 500 miles-per-charge battery

[IDemo]

An electric car that can go from Boston to Detroit on a single charge could hit showroom floors sometime in the next decade, if all continues to go smoothly for IBM.

Yes, IBM. The company, best known these days for its trivia-champ computer Watson, is making a risky bet on the development of lithium-air battery technology in a bid to accelerate adoption of electric vehicles.

"Certainly, if it is successful, we stand to make some money," Winfried Wilcke, the principal investigator of IBM’s Battery 500 Project, told me on Thursday. What’s more, he added, such a battery could expedite the transition away from reliance on oil. "That was really the trigger for me to start this project."

Several electric vehicles are on the road today, but most of them have a range of 150 miles or less. The fear of running out of juice while driving around – known as range anxiety – is considered a major barrier to adoption of the technology.

http://www.futureoftech.msnbc.msn.com/technology/futureoftech/big-green-ibm-works-500-miles-charge-battery-725115

[longship]

1. Go IBM! (more)

AFAIK the limits to battery technology are threefold, the storage capacity, the ability to move charge efficiently, and recharge cycles. Advantages in capacity are not worthwhile if the battery degrades before its capacity can be utilized. Anode and cathode design determine efficiency in delivering power. Recharging without degradation of the other things is the primary problem these days.

I may have this wrong, as I don't subscribe to the latest, but that is the way I read what the science press has been writing about advances.

A further problem is that a 500 mile battery is no good if it doubles the price of the car. Only economics of scale is likely to cure that.

Still hopeful about this. But it really looks like advances in battery tech are incremental, not revolutionary.

[KurtNYC]

2. Electric cars are BS

Less efficient than gasoline powered AND you have manufacture and disposal of the batteries. Nothing green about them.

[kristopher]

3. ROFLMAO

Thanks for sharing.

[KurtNYC]

16. Unlimited amounts of lithium charged with 33% efficient coal fired grid power,

expensive as hell and the batteries don't last, ...let's see how many batteries and kWh to move an 18-wheeler from Chicago to New Orleans?...



Myself, I'll wait for the solar-powered flying unicorns that poop cancer vaccine -- they're coming. I read it in a press release.

[NickB79]

32. I've never seen any serious proposals to move 18-wheelers with batteries

All EV advocates I've heard agree that large vehicles like that would still require some sort of combustible fuel, but argue that we could supply this small segment of the vehicle fleet with carbon neutral materials like biodiesel.

EV's are pretty much about small, personal vehicles for commuting.

[DCKit]

4. Only if you're using the Republican dictionary to define "efficient" and "green".

But thanks for the laugh.

[KurtNYC]

17. Republican dictionary ? You're the one blindly and poorly defending an IBM press release.

Name calling and mockery are not a counter argument.

[DCKit]

20. $0.04/mile running costs not low enough? Not efficient? Not green?

And that's with electricity generated from any source. That said, any car that doesn't run while stopped at a traffic light or in stalled traffic is always going to be more efficient. That's why the Prius-C is rated at 53mpg city.

Even I don't think it's (as yet) worth the extra cost, though I think they finally got it right with the Chevy Volt. However, even at $8/gallon, the price difference between that and any of a multitude of high mileage, sub-$20K cars (the Prius-C base model is in that class) would pay for the gas for the life of the vehicle.

Unless prices on lithium ion batteries drop drastically in the near future, my next vehicle is likely going to be non-electric - at least not fully electric.

I'm a little bit sorry, but your statement deserved to be corrected. You were wrong on the Internet, and I couldn't help myself. Your position is indefensible without a redefinition of the words "efficient" and "green", no matter which corporate monster put out the press release.

[txlibdem]

26. Generally where electric rates are higher then so are gas prices

While the 4 cents a mile may not be true for every part of the country, the savings in energy costs to run your vehicle are great compared to any internal combustion engine vehicle. And since the days of "cheap oil" are past gasoline is only going to get more expensive (on average) as the years go by.

I pay extra to get wind power from my electric utility, 12 cents a kilowatt hour (kWh) so my cost to drive an all-electric car would be between 2.4 cents per mile and 4.2 cents per mile.

Best case:
200 watt hours per mile / 1000 to get kWh per mile, multiplied by 12 cents in my case
or, with the heater, stereo, lights, etc., turned on:
350 watt hours per mile/ 1000 to get kWh per mile, multiplied by 12 cents

You can make an easy comparison with a gasoline burner car by dividing the price per gallon by the Miles Per Gallon

@$2.50 per gallon
40 mpg = 6.25 cents per mile
50 mpg = 5 cents per mile
60 mpg = 4.1667 cents per mile

1. It's unlikely that you pay $2.50 per gallon and your car gets 40+ MPG.
2. No matter how you slice it the electric car is cheaper to drive
3. Corporate monsters in electric vehicles -vs- corporate monsters in fossil fuels = a tie.
4. Electric vehicles are the only vehicle that will get CLEANER the longer you own it as more renewable energy is added to the grid (or solar panels get cheap enough for you to put them on your roof).

[txlibdem]

27. PS, in Albany, New York gas is over $4 a gallon.

That makes running your gasoline burner vehicle (aka fossil burner) significantly more expensive than an electric vehicle.

http://www.newyorkgasprices.com/GasPriceSearch.aspx

Dallas, TX: $3.73 is the cheapest according to that site
Portland, OR: $3.96
Miami, FL: $3.90

The electric vehicle has already won. The contest will only get more one-sided as gas prices climb and more electric vehicles get onto the road (efficiencies of scale during manufacture, etc).

[DCKit]

29. Preaching to the choir. I just can't afford the premium for an electric.

Add to that, I'm going to be moving to a very rural area soon - 35 miles to shopping, in a very red area of VA. I would seriously consider the Prius-C, but there are (finally) a lot of cars that get really good mileage.

No matter, I'm ecstatic that so many people here "get it". I've never seen a poster try so hard, against such odds - not since the pro-Fukushima radiation posters.

[txlibdem]

30. The Leaf goes 100 miles

Unless you use the heater; then it goes 60 miles. So right now an electric car is probably not a good fit for you.

But over the next few years (5 years max) you will be able to afford an electric car that goes 150 miles on a charge... and that would be plenty of extra battery for you.

Two things will make this happen:
1. Gas is going to continue to rise; we've past peak oil, it's inevitable.
2. Batteries will continue to get less pricey.

You'll meet somewhere in the middle of the collision between #1 and #2.

PS, if you have excellent credit then you can lease a Volt. Half your drive would be on electrons and not gas. If you can get a lease at all they go for about $350/month.

[caraher]

6. less efficient?

Care to back that up with some numbers? Battery manufacture and disposal do pose genuine environmental challenges, but I've yet to see a reasonable non-economic definition of efficiency under which electric vehicles do worse than gasoline powered cars.

[KurtNYC]

15. Let's start with charging the batteries

Most people will use power from the grid which has to be converted to DC and then pushed into the battery -- there are 2 inefficiencies. In use the battery won't return 100% of the energy which was put in, more inefficiency.

So electric cars effectively burn coal (grid) and then squander much of that dirty energy converting it, storing it in batteries and reconverting it to energy.

[IDemo]

18. The difference in efficiencies between the electric motor (90%) and ICE (25-30%) is what counts

If you want to argue that electric power is less efficient well-to-tank(battery), you might actually have a case. But internal combustion engines pour the vast majority of their energy out the tailpipe in the form of heat, while electric motors return 90% or better efficiency.

The numbers have all been run by outfits such as Argonne National Lab. See "well to wheels".

[dmallind]

21. How much of electricity do you think is coal generated?

How much do you think that is where EVs are most popular?

Heat is a great measure of inefficiency. If we run an ICE car for 30 minutes flat out and an EV likewise which would you prefer to put your hand on?

How much energy do you think it takes to extract, transport, refine, transport and supply fossil fuel to a car?

[joshcryer]

25. Electric engines are about 90% efficient. Combustion barely breaks 30%.

Yes there are combustion engines that can be 50% or so but they can't fit in a vehicle, they are used in power plants.

More electricity is made to produce gasoline than it takes to charge a car.

[Vogon_Glory]

8. Unh Hunh And Internal-Combustion Is So Environmentally-Friendly

"Electric cars are less-efficient than gasoline-powered". Actually, that's a crock, even with today's batteries. Admittedly, current electric vehicles do need to be recharged more frequently than internal combustion cars need to be fueled, but the tech can be improved on.

As for "nothing green about them"? Do you enjoy breathing the fumes from i/c cars wafting from the streets and roadways? Do you think that drilling for oil and the pipelines that carry the product are environmentally benign? Do you think that oil refineries are clean and non-toxic?

Yeah, the batteries are going to have to be recycled. But that's a trade-off and at worst it's comparable to the messes made in the production, transport, and distribution of gasoline and diesel fuel currently propelling most of the world's transportation network.

The idea of battery-powered vehicles and clean air in major cities appeals to me. So does the notion of getting away from the pollution caused by the petroleum economy and the whims of the nasty little crooks profiteering from it.

[usrname]

9. i/c engines

get about 15 to 20% efficiency, with a theoretical max of about 30% (depending on the engine type and fuel). Electric cars are 90% efficient on the energy in the battery. Recharging the battery depends on the energy source. The most environmentally unfriendly energy source is coal and that's running about 33% efficiency (which includes the loss through transmission). Overall, electricity as the energy source for cars, through recharging, is more efficient than gasoline powered internal combustion engines.

Disposal of the battery will be done efficiently and cleanly as there's a market for reclaiming the battery.

[jeff47]

10. It's about decoupling the energy generation from the energy storage

With an ICE, the energy is generated on-board in the car. While we've vastly reduced pollution from ICEs in the last few decades, we've reached the practical end of what we can do.

On the other hand, there's lots of headroom in making electricity generation more efficient and/or less polluting. Heck, it's already ahead of ICEs in energy efficiency if we ignore pollution and greenhouse gasses. Electric cars let us use those optimizations.

[tinrobot]

22. My electric car costs less than $30/month to run.

My hybrid costs about $200/month when gas is $4/gal.

That savings is not BS to me.

The batteries have an 8-10 year life and are fully recyclable.

Get your facts straight.

[PoliticAverse]

5. Looks like the IBM PR department is earning their salaries. n/t

[n2doc]

7. Great. Hope it doesn't take 10 years for it to happen

and just perhaps, can we get an electric car that doesn't cost twice as much as the gas version?

[jeff47]

11. Their forcast is for 2020-2030.

As for price, hybrids like the Volt cost so much because they have two powerplants. All-electric are already comparable to ICE-only.

[n2doc]

12. No they aren't.

Leaf is 30K, New ford ed focus is 30K+, after tax breaks. Comparable ICE 15-18K. I am unaware of any electric cars (not glorified golf carts) that cost less.

[jeff47]

13. The Leaf is a 4-door family car. You can't pretend it's "comparable" to tiny 2-door.

The Leaf also comes with a crapload of features that are options on the base ICE models you're trying to compare. Power windows, power locks, Remote keyless entry, Nav system, and so on.

In size and features, it's much closer to the Maxima, which is also about $30k.

[n2doc]

14. You may think so

I don't. And what about the Ford- it is the EXACT same vehicle except for the battery propulsion.

I'm still waiting for someone to produce a useable full EV under 30K. Would think someone would have done so by now if all it was were a matter of removing the navigation and leather. After all, Toyota makes a Prius for 20K.

[jeff47]

19. They won't, because of how they're marketed

Now, the following is from the perspective of the people marketing these cars, not necessarily true:

All electric works great...as the 2nd vehicle. Virtually everyone is going to occasionally make a long drive. With no fast charging infrastructure comparable to a gas station, all electrics can't really do this.

Since we market small ICE cars at singles, they won't have a second car. So they won't want all-electric. So fancy it up for the middle-aged and married as their 2nd car, thus driving the price up.

Back in reality, Avis, Herz and Enterprise exist. And if you do 1 long drive a year, you can rent a car for it pretty cheaply. Or you could happen to not do long road trips. Or your car could charge at the airport while you fly there. But the car makers are assuming the people who would be willing to do such work-arounds are a small market. So they market all-electric to higher-income.

Hopefully they'll pull their heads out of their asses sometime soon.

[tinrobot]

23. Compare cost of ownership, not purchase price.

Here's the Nissan lease calculator:

http://www.nissanusa.com/apps/paymentestimator

A Leaf costs $369/month, the comparable Versa costs $269/month

At 30mpg and $4/gal gas with 12k miles/year, you're looking at about $130/month for gasoline, plus oil changes for the Versa, bringing the cost up to little over $400/month.

The Leaf will cost around $30-40/month in electricity, making the cost of ownership to a little over $400/month as well. The two cars cost pretty much the same per month, even though the Leaf has a sticker price almost twice that of the Versa.

[DCKit]

24. And there you go for those of us living in the real world.

You just went up ten notches tinrobot.

Still can't/won't pay the initial price, but to say it's not attainable, green or sustainable is bullshit.

[tinrobot]

33. Oh, and insurance is less for the Leaf

Most companies give you a discount for eco-friendly cars.

And once gas hits $5/gal, the Leaf becomes a lot more cost effective.

[txlibdem]

31. +1

[Dead_Parrot]

28. As an aside...

...it's nice to see IBM branching out again, rather than flogging off subsidiaries for a quick buck.