While everyone and their mother (this author's parents included) have bought one of those hot new environmentally-conscious cars like a
Prius, there's an old-new game in town: the
purely electric car. This isn't the defunct EV1 we're talking about here, nor some of those
other models we've heard about before, this is the Phoenix Motorcars electric SUV, which can be plugged into a wall socket and recharged with the same plug that powers your garden party boombox. Just grab an extension cord,
plug in your truck for six to seven hours, and bam, it's good to roll. Simple concept, right? Worried about power under the hood? It'll do 0 to 60 in under 10 seconds, and can sustain a top speed of 110 miles per hour. What about the range? It'll stayed juiced for up to 250 miles, which is a little more than half the distance between Los Angeles and San Francisco. Wanna take one for a spin? You'll have to throw down $45,000 for the pleasure -- the first 500 are due out in 2007, and the next 6,000 will be out the following year. One problem though, it's powered by lithium ion batteries, which have a potential to, erm,
explode (if built by Sony, anyway). Still, Altair Nanotechnologies and Phoenix Motorcars say that they've fixed it with an inert anode made of "lithium titanate spinels," whatever that is. (Say, can't we get some of that action in our laptop batteries?)
Update: We neglected to mention that while a normal charge takes six to seven hours,
CNET also reports that you can juice it up via a "special charger in about 10 to 15 minutes." [Thanks, Andrew]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Joel miller @ Dec 1st 2006 9:13AM
Follow link to AutoBolgGreen for more on the Altair batteries.
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2006/11/29/edta-conference-altair-nanotechnologies-nanosafe-batteries-in-p/
Looks either like reason to celebrate or reason to buy life insurance if you work for Altair. In times past, Big Oil would have killed to keep this kind of technology off the market. Or at least bought the company out, and distroyed it by now.
Lappies could sure use a squirt 'O' this juice too, might keep the lights on for twice as long for the same battery weight and output. Plug in for 8-12 minutes to fully recharge.
Adam @ Dec 1st 2006 9:14AM
The truck has a range of 100 miles (page 2 of article), the 250 mile figure is for an upcoming SUV.
Eddie @ Dec 1st 2006 9:58AM
@ Adam:
"this is the Phoenix Motorcars electric SUV"
The article is about the SUV, therefor, 250 miles is the correct range.
fraggle_rocker @ Dec 1st 2006 9:44AM
6 hours is too long, i dont even sleep that long, until they can get it to 15 mins i wont get one. That said i walk everywhere anyway.
Matt @ Dec 1st 2006 9:50AM
Bravo, phoenix motors! I applaud plug-in cars. It's no Tesla roadster, and it's too bad it's an sport ute, but it's definitely the right idea. Imagine having a solar panel or two on top of your garage providing juice to this... how sweet would that be?
asher @ Dec 1st 2006 10:08AM
1. why can't the car assist in it's own charging with a solar roof and inductive brakes (like Ford's do)?
2. How is this actually good for the environment? So the power plant now produces pollution for that car instead of the car doing it directly. But nothing is actually gained is it?
Chocolate Starfish @ Dec 1st 2006 10:13AM
Because the engine that creates energy at the power plant is typically much more efficient than the one in a car, with better emissions control, and wider array of fuel options usually chosen for total cost rather than ease of shipping.
asher @ Dec 1st 2006 11:13AM
So there's an offset difference in environmental impact between a powerplant producing energy for the car vs. the car's engine doing it.
Do the huge Li batteries make up that difference?
JC @ Dec 1st 2006 10:49AM
asher, ever heard of emissions? Isn't a zero emissions car better for the environment than one that does produce emissions?
Also, as technologies get better, we are better able to harness renewable resources to produce power (wind, water, geothermal).
Electric cars are not for everyone, nor are they built for long distance travel, but for the LARGE majority of people who commute to and from work everyday, and sleep more than six hours, unlike fraggle_rocker (although I suspect he's exaggerating), electric cars are a perfectly practical means of transportation.
Bravo to Phoenix for taking steps to end the addiction to oil.
asher @ Dec 1st 2006 11:15AM
right now, a coal/oil/nuke powerplant does produce emissions. Yes I've heard of them and still don't see how a car producing them is any different than a powerplant producing them.
fraggle_rocker @ Dec 1st 2006 1:20PM
surprisingly i aint.
If places would let you charge your car in the office car park, that would be awesome. My gf who does drive could charge it as she works.
ash @ Dec 1st 2006 11:02AM
i want a nuclear car that runs off bananas, like the one in back to the future!
Karl @ Dec 1st 2006 1:29PM
Actually, nuclear power produces no emissions. It doesn't contribute to global warming at all. Also, depending on where you are, you could have a large dependence on hydroelectric dams, which are also relatively clean.
So it is a good way to go.
Kent Beuchert @ Dec 1st 2006 11:24AM
As usual, the media reporter screwed up on the details. First off, the Altair battery is not chemically very similar to those explding li ion batteries tht the writer seems to think he has
knowledge of - the electrode is NOT carbon but
nanotitanate, and these bateries exhibit no thermal events during charging or recharging. Second, and most important , the writer completely missed the two characteristics of this battery that make it revolutionary - 1) it can be recharged in 8 MINUTES with sufficent feed, which a public station would have, even if you don't have such a feed at home, which (need I spell it out for you all?) means that the driving range becomes UNLIMITED. 2) the batteries can be recharged and discharged completely once a day for over 40 YEARS (if their material bodies hold up that long, unlike li ion batteries that can do this for less than two years). That makes the cost of batteries per year (which is the cost metric that should be used) less than 25 % of li ion batteries. The Altairs weigh almost twice that of li ion, but only half as much as those used in the EV1. They flow power well at low temps and flow at high volumes, both superior to li ion batteries.
SuperQ @ Dec 1st 2006 12:46PM
Altair seems interesting, they have about the same power density as NiMH, but 20x the number of charge cycles. This might be a more robust replacement for the NiMH used in the Prius.. or a add a few more and do a plug-in diesel hybrid.
90Wh/kg is still only a tiny fraction of the ~13000Wh/kg that gas has.. even when you factor in the much higher energy->motion efficiency of an electric motor, there is still a long way to go for batteries.
Tesla solved the battery problem a couple ways: They have an active liquid cooling system in the battery pack. (uses a small ammount of A/C capacity to cool the pack if necessary) They also use a slightly less dense, more robust cell than laptops use. This also gives them more charge cycles.
Cameron Campbell @ Dec 1st 2006 11:28AM
Umm.. isn't the power plant going to be producing the emissions whether there are cars powered by electricity or not?
Doesn't this mean that now instead of boththe car and the power plant producing emissions that only the power plant is? Wouldn't this mean a net reduction in emissions?
SoreThumb @ Dec 1st 2006 12:16PM
I want to certify the following:
http://ffden-2.phys.uaf.edu/102spring2002_Web_projects/Z.Yates/Zach's%20Web%20Project%20Folder/EICE%20-%20Main.htm
Internal combustion engines are only about 33% efficient.. meaning that they waste 66% of the energy that goes into it.
Technically, power plants can be and are much more efficient in almost all cases (I don't mean the old coal burning ones, but the new coal burning ones.. probably would be cool.)
In essence, if we can take our pollution off a wide network on the roads and condense it to a few zones, we can control the problem better.
That is to say, "why not litter everywhere? We don't NEED landfills, cause it is the same trash"... though the impact is smaller because it is contained and controlled.
Man, if they could market these cars for $20,000, I might even consider a loan for a completely electric car with one of those new batteries.
rgully @ Dec 1st 2006 12:33PM
As far as pollution from the electricity goes, electric vehicles get cleaner every year as the grid gets cleaner. No gasoline vehicle does that. Electric vehicles have the potential to be completely clean when renewable energy is used. It is an indisputable fact the electric cars are cleaner than any car that gets under 100 MPG.
Someday I plan on having a solar panel roof and an electric car so I can tell OPEC to keep their dirty oil.
Grey Acumen @ Dec 1st 2006 1:23PM
Okay, before I'm won over by these Oh so amazing battery cars. How about addressng a few more important issues of mine.
1) Sure, it can do 0 - 60 in 10 seconds and 110 mph, but how does that change if it's actually hauling something heavy
2) Are you absolutely SURE that this thing can handle constant IRREGULAR charging and decharging for 40 years without any problems? I don't know about anyone else, but I know that my laptop batteries have a hell of a problem developing memory. I recently had to order a new one, after only a year, because it had developed a memory which took me from 2 hours of power to only 30mins, while it's an inconvenience on my laptop, that could be dangerous on the road. If I have 2 hours of power left, but I might need 4, I don't want to have to drive around for 2 hours to drain it completely just so I can charge it back up again.
3) Okay, maybe these batteries won't just randomly explode, but if I get in an accident, I think I'd prefer to have a car that only needs the fire department to put out, and not an entire hazmat team(not covered by insurance)
Just looking at the basic list of safety instructions for my laptop battery, some really troublesome ones pop up:
Always confirm the temperature is 5c to 35c before charging battery. leakage, excessive heat or deterioration could occur (Dunno about you, but in winter it drops well below freezing where I am)
Never expose battery to liquid(Like... rain?)
Never expose battery to direct sunlight, never store battery in unventilated vehicle(uh... so I have to take the battery out if I parked in the parking lot?)
Never shock the battery by dropping it or throwing it (doesn't sound terribly resilient)
Okay, so if anyone could address these issues, I think I'd be perfectly fine with hybrid cars. I don't really care as long as I can count on it getting me where I need to go.
Grey Acumen @ Dec 1st 2006 1:28PM
Oh, and before anyone mentions it. I realize that I'm working off of the stats and functionality of a laptop lithium-ion battery, which isn't the same thing, but I am NOT about to buy that the chemicals in the newer batteries are any less dangerous if leaked or burned or exposed to similar weather conditions. Especially when given the type of constant irregular use that a typical car is going to have to be able to handle.
Weembles @ Dec 1st 2006 2:42PM
I'm not sure what you're gunning for here...
1) Are there any vehicles in existence that don't accelerate less well when towing something? I can't think of any.
2) Are there any car parts in existence that stand up well to 40 years of doing ANYTHING? Car parts wear out - that's life. As for memory, Lithium Ion batteries don't have memory problems, at least not in the same way older rechargeables did.
3) I don't think it's fair to compare the batteries in a piece of indoor consumer electronics to something that's been engineered from the ground up to be inside a car. I can't leave my desktop computer out in the snow on a freezing day but I don't worry about the control computer in my car.
spil @ Dec 1st 2006 6:42PM
Although your do have valid things to say about the danger of the chemicals in the battery- which, true, they are dangerous- the chemicals aren't the problem e.g.: "Never expose battery to liquid(Like... rain?)". If the battery is on a car, it would be in a more rugged, waterproof in this example.
Chris R @ Dec 1st 2006 2:43PM
Most industrial furnances operate at an overall 95% efficiency. besides all the scrubbers and catalysts, they recycle energy that is completely lost in a car. Think about, 90% of cars do not recycle the energy in their exhaust stream (turbo's do though), and all cars waste energy in the form of a cooling system. In a large plant, the "cooling" system does not radiate heat, it makes high pressure steam to drive more turbines!
Brookie @ Dec 1st 2006 2:51PM
Good job on the electric vehicle.
Thermodynamically, it is more efficient to have a large, centralized power plant producing power than many small power plants (internal combustion engines) producing the same amount of power. This is largely due to the combined inefficiencies of the car engines being more than the inefficiency of the power plant.
Also, with a single point of release for emissions, the pollution and carbon dioxide can be dealt with much more easily (with emissions scrubbers, carbon capture, carbon sequestration, etc.). Also, the release of emissions can be remote from population centres where people are doing the driving, so smog production decreases and air quality increases. There are currently many hospitalizations and even deaths every year associated with respiratory ailments linked with smog and vehicle emissions in cities.
HOWEVER...
Gasoline is still a pretty clean-burning fuel. The workhorse of the power industry is still coal, which is quite polluting and a large releaser of carbon dioxide. The problem is that coal is by far the cheapest fuel source, and probably will be for the forseeable future.
Another big advantage is that the electricity grid gets power from a mix of sources, not just coal. There is currently coal (dirty), gas turbines (cleaner), hydro (cleaner yet), and an array of renewables (cleanest). As fossil plants are life-cycled out, and renewables are adopted, the electric vehicles will get "cleaner" to operate.
I like the idea of Electric Vehicles. The electricity grid is already moving towards renewable power. Electric vehicles would allow a rather painless shift from and Oil-based transportation system to one based on an array of renewables.
Jonathan Loor @ Dec 1st 2006 4:14PM
And for those responsible individuals who have solar/geothermal homes, does that not qualify as clean, reusable energy? Hybrids, Plug-in Hybrids, and Pure EV cars should be seen as part as a global infrastructural upgrade. As a nation and global leader we should be pushing away from petroleum, driving vehicles that use little to no petroleum, building/converting homes to utilize and harness the power of the sun/wind/hydro electricity/nuke power. We should consider plugging in the energy we harness individually through our homes into the power grid to turn back the meter. We also need to check our individual CO2 Carbon footprint and offset it with contributing into clean energy programs in other parts of the country/world. Please watch the "Inconvienent Truth" and "Who Killed the Electric Car?" and educate yourselves with how we are doomed if we do not become environmentally conscious in this world. We need to at least attempt to reverse this disturbing trend and find ways to stop those snow caps from washing New York City away.
spil @ Dec 1st 2006 6:21PM
Thanks, asher, you HAD to start that inevitable debate in any all plugin car post... the power plant is just doing the polluting for you.
I don't understand why a company doesn't make a lightweight, small, aerodynamic, sporty-looking electric, it would be more effecient. Although the Tesla has this down for the most part, they made it sorty, which equals less effecient.
A major problem in the reason I think electric cars haven't gotten popular is those long charge times. Sure, its fine for everyday use to and from work, but inevitably, you will take a long car trip. This has a pretty good range, but the time of the recharge needs to be faster. 15 min. should be about to "fill" the batteries, but there should be a quick charge that's like 5-10 min., perfect for a road trip. Park it (and plug it in), use the restroom, get some snacks, unplug, and "boom" (to say it in Steve's terminology), you're off.
Andir3.0 @ Dec 1st 2006 6:51PM
"lithium ion batteries, which have a potential to, erm, explode (if built by Sony, anyway)."
Did you have to go there? Li-Ion batteries with the appropriate saftey devices are just as safe as any other battery. In fact, I'd go as far to say that they are safer than a full tank of gasoline.
Lonnie McClure @ Dec 2nd 2006 3:19AM
With any post about an electric vehicle come the posts from the "electricity isn't emission free" crowd. These folks always overlook that the complete emission and energy costs for gasoline are not measured at the tail pipe and gas pump, respectively.
Gasoline doesn't magically appear in your local filling station's tank. The greatest energy cost and additional emissions happen at the refinery.
Less significant is the energy use and emissions from the refinery to your local station, typically via a large diesel-fueled tanker. There is also the energy cost and emissions from transporting the crude (typically by huge ocean going vessels), not to mention the energy costs and emissions related to exploration and drilling.
I expect someone will bring up the energy cost and emissions in constructing a power plant, but compare these to those associated with a large oceanic oil platform, and the likely useful lifespan of each construction.
Sim @ Dec 2nd 2006 6:47AM
"Oh, and before anyone mentions it. I realize that I'm working off of the stats and functionality of a laptop lithium-ion battery, which isn't the same thing, but I am NOT about to buy that the chemicals in the newer batteries are any less dangerous if leaked or burned or exposed to similar weather conditions. Especially when given the type of constant irregular use that a typical car is going to have to be able to handle."
The chemicals in normal cars are hardly the best thing to be dealing with. And i would have thought battery acid or whatever these new batts run off is less dangerous in a fire than 50 litres of high octane high volatility petrol (or gas, if thats how you say it).
"Actually, nuclear power produces no emissions. It doesn't contribute to global warming at all. Also, depending on where you are, you could have a large dependence on hydroelectric dams, which are also relatively clean."
Nuclear power is actually rather rubbish,w e dont have that much of the suitible isotopes and its incredibly costly to start up and to decommission.
The benefit of this is just that as a whole power generation for the national grid is a LOT more efficient than the internal combucstion engine (not to mention you can move electricity 1000s of miles with little loss, petrol needs tankers)
Tiffany @ Dec 2nd 2006 4:42PM
Should any of you reporters out there care to take the time to look into who is behind Pheonix Motor Cars you might find something like...they have absolutely no background in the auto industry....they had to put a front man in to hide behind certain felony records that would make your hair stand on end....and their funding may look like a laundry...running ...not walking from this group would potentially be your reaction.. do your own due dilligence is all I can say if you have even the slightest interest...
Tiffany @ Dec 2nd 2006 5:29PM
Should any of you reporters out there care to take the time to look into who is behind Pheonix Motor Cars you might find something like...they have absolutely no background in the auto industry....they had to put a front man in to hide behind certain felony records that would make your hair stand on end....and their funding may look like a laundry...running ...not walking from this
group would potentially be your reaction.. do your own due
dilligenceis all I can say if you have even the slightest interest...
Trevor @ Dec 6th 2006 10:46AM
I have spent over five years promoting electric tractors and some of the above comments are typical. For those who suggest that the emissions are just being transferred to the electricity generation source, you are correct. But, Traditionally those who buy these types of vehicles are progressive enough in their thinking that the next step is to put solar and micro wind on their properties. Thereby making it truly a zero emission vehicle.
I don't know about anybody else, but I would pay big dollars for the opportunity of going to my gas station to ONLY buy milk and bread. That for me would be the single biggest reason for purchasing one of these wonderful vehicles.
robert Tarzwell @ Dec 6th 2006 11:18PM
well many comments are just plane wrong, first the national average efficency on the production of electrical is 43 percent, when you add 12 percent transformer loss and 10 percent charger loss, and 13 percent battery loss during charging , 12 percent controller loss and 10 percent motor loss your electric vehical is only 26 percent efficent from the grid, we would need solar or hydro generation to make any diffrence in efficency or CO2 output. The effiecency of Gas production is only 13 percent to pump, ship and process oil to gas, and many car engines are now over 30 percent as they improve the technology. And as to a 6 min charge at 45 kwh for the battery pack a 220 volt house voltage would need a 2250 amp supply which would cost 30 to 50 grand to put in. so a quick charge is not realy practaical. PS the opec oil guys are down to only 16 percent of your imported oil, canada and mexico are 50 percent, so time to loose the bad east talk. A electric car will be bought when its the same or slightly more cost, when it can get 250 miles of travel regardless of outside temp, and last 150,000 miles , I will be the first in line.
Henry @ Dec 12th 2006 2:12PM
Holy smokes Engadget you really don't do your research before you write a report. The Altairnano batteries which can have a bullet go trhough it without a reaction. It does not explode - it is too stable. It melts unlike a heated gas tank.
It is the same battery going into a electric Silverado for the Army.
People you have to go to CNET to get the real scoop.
http://news.com.com/Revving+up+for+the+all-electric+SUV/2100-11389_3-6139703.html?tag=ne.gall.related
Kent Beuchert @ Dec 29th 2006 12:38PM
For all you electric car neophytes, we talk mileages in terms of kilowatt hours, which cost an average of 8.4 cents, according to the latest U.S. Dept of Energy statistics. They can cost as low as 5 cents at nighttime rates.
A 2500 pound electric car can expect to achieve
milesage of around 5 miles per kWhr. At 3800 pound, the car would get arounf 3.7 miles per KWhr. At 3100 pounds, around 4.5 miles (mileages are not colinear with weight).
Phoenix Motorcars is offering its commercial fleet oriented SUTs and pickups with 35 kilowatthr capacity batery packs, with 60 kilowatt hours battery packs available as extra cost option. Amount unknown, but generally Altair NanoSafes
cost roughly the same as lithion ions - about $400 per kilowatt hour capacity. A kilowatt hour capacity weighs 28 pounds. The NanoSafes have 1.25 kilowatt hour capacity for each battery. UQM electric motors come in 177 foot pound models (weight-89 pounds, includes regenerative capability) and 420 foot pound models (190
pounds). For comparison, a dressed 350 cu in Chevy V8 weighs around 650 pounds. Also absent in an electric is an automatic transmission and torque converter (110 pounds) a gas tank plus 15 gallons of gasoline (120 pounds) , a cooling system, with water and radiator and hoses; an exhaust system, with mufflers and cat converters; a charging system with battery;
Kerry Beauhrt @ Dec 29th 2006 12:39PM
The Tesla battery manager doesn't make li ion batteries practical - they still require 4 hours to recharge and last only a few years. Tesla Motors has
(rather fraudulently) claimed that they last 100,000
miles. No, they last about 4 to 5 years, regardless of how much they're used. To get 100,000 miles out of a Tesla you basically need to spend all your time either driving the car or recharging it. The battery pack costs between $20,000 and $30,000 (Tesla isn't saying, except that they have rather optimistically noted that costs for li ion come down every year. Unfortunately, that was due to gains from increased production runs, which are no longer occurring. Material costs are going up, not down.)
A driver getting 25 MPG average would spend about $1400 a year on gas to travel 12,500 miles.
The Tesla owner will spend between $4,000 and $5,000 for batteries every year, plus electricity
to run the car. The Tesla is NOT a practical electric car. It is for millionaire Hollywood actors who want to improve their image. It serves no other purpose. Tesla has made claims about building an electric econobox "for the little people" - little people here means anyone with $50,000 to spend for an exotic impractical grocery getter that can't get you to any destination and back over 110 miles away. Hollywood types don't think the way you and I do. Actually, they seldom think at all.
James Newport @ Feb 11th 2007 1:21PM
Well, think like an amusement park "bumper cars' or electric trolley system. In high density areas, electric feeder lines are touched by the "pig tail" that sends electricity to the electric cars. That doesn't seem so hard to do.. then after about 20 miles or so out of town.. the grid ends and the cars zip on their batteries to the house.. and get plugged in. Decent modern employers will have a stable for powering the electrics.. or pay meters around town too.
Larry Saum @ Feb 13th 2007 2:45PM
I always thought that the battery problem could be solved by electric car manufacturers agreeing on a standard, exchangeable battery pack. It would be exchanged at a service station for a charged one for a modest fee. It could fit a variety of model cars, with a quick exchange design. The pack could then be recharged, and/or repaired at leisure, by the service station. Lower cost batteries would then be feasable.
Upgrades could be phased in over time in this standard format.
john @ Apr 5th 2007 4:39PM
Need more publicity in newspaper on weekdays were people will read.
The fast charging time is excellent.
If price is $25-30,000, more people won't be hesitant.
BoyInOrbit @ Jul 9th 2007 5:43PM
The selling point for me is that I'll save my gas money and stop supporting foreign oil!! Sure, power plants will continue to burn coal. But what's that got to do w/me saving gas $$? That's a separate problem!
Besides, there's technology in the works to use algae that eats carbon dioxide from the coal plants. They can eat up to 45% of the carbon dioxide and later be used to produce biofuels! Separate solutions for separate problems!
What? Should people do nothing at all??
cogene @ Mar 6th 2008 3:12AM
There sure are a lot of whiners about where the energy will come from. They should think of it as a problem to solve and make some money.