Scientists discover method for rapid charging Li-ion batteries
By Darren Murph 
posted March 13th 2010 3:19AM
posted March 13th 2010 3:19AM
Huzzah! Yet another discovery for us to add to our ever-expanding list of "awesome things that'll never actually happen!" Ibrahim Abou Hamad and colleagues from Mississippi State University have reportedly devised a method of charging batteries that could hasten the process rather significantly, and better still, it could provide "an increase in battery power densities" as well. The only problem? Lithium-ion batteries have been disappointing tech users for years, and so long as Energizer and Duracell are calling the shots, we kind of doubt a lot will be done to improve the longevity of 'em. Skepticism aside, the new method involves some fancy black magic surrounding molecular dynamics simulations, and researchers have found a way to boost charging time by "simulating the intercalation of lithium ions into the battery's graphite anode." We know we just went way over your heads on a Friday afternoon, but if techobabble's your thing, all you can handle is right there in the Source link.
To eliminate the gasoline engine we need a 50 to 100x improvement in battery technology.
@JS
50-100 times improvement? That would give us electric car batteries that could go 5,000 - 10,000 miles to a charge! Remember, the current crop of affordable EVs go 100 miles to the charge. Let's say a typical gas sedan gets 500 miles to the tank. You'd need only a 5x improvement to existing battery packs, and Nissan's generation 2 pack (complete and awaiting the launch of the gen 1 Leaf before they can begin production) will already do 200 miles to a charge for the same price as the gen 1 packs. That's a 2x improvement in the span of a few years, albeit mainly due to economies of scale bringing down the production cost.
I'm not including the Tesla's 250 mile battery pack because it powers a $90,000 car which of course would be meaningless to the average consumer. But the Leaf, Think City, Reva NXR, Coda sedan, and similar models from Miles, Fisker, BYD and the rest get a standard 100 miles to the charge, and 200 miles looks to be the standard in the next round, provided the first batch sells the way they all hope it will. That's 2/5ths the range of a gasoline auto, not 50-100 times less, and the price is coming down rapidly under the brute force pressure of automakers eager to ride the electric car bandwagon and resuscitate their stagnant industry in the process.
An electric car with a 500 mile range will be enough to convince all but the most stubborn gas-guzzlers to make the switch. 100 miles to the charge at the same price as a Prius is enough to convince most buyers who had any interest in efficient, clean motoring in the first place. In the interium, swappable battery packs and rapid charging will make the comparatively low energy density of batteries a practical non-issue for EV owners.
@JS
Nah, we just need to combine battery recharge facilities with Petco stores. Get some of those lazy hamsters to work for us for a change.
@Zamboro
1. The leaf is really small. How long would those last powering a pickup.
2. 500 miles + at least 3 hours of charge time. For batteries to really replace gasoline, they need to be able to do a full 14-15 hours of driving. That's 1000 miles. + 100 to be on the safe side. . . . Or charge time have to be reduced to 10 minutes or less which is a 20x increase in the best battery tech we have.
@69camaroSS How many people drive for more than 500 miles without taking a 3 hour break during/after. I think it will be the charging facilities that will have to improve. If you could plug in your car at a Supermarket while you go shopping or in your work's car park then the distance "limitation" of 500 miles wouldn't be an issue. I talking with respects to the consumer market, not long distance haulage.
@d0mth0ma5
We weren't talking about acceptable; we were talking about the demise of gas power. Refer to original post. And I've never taken a 3 hour break on a road trip unless it was a scenic lookout.
@d0mth0ma5
300 mile range with a 1 hour charge time should be the goal in my opinion. That would certainly cover the majority of drivers.
@Zamboro This comparison is null and void if the charge time on a car is more than the time it take to fill up a car with gas.
@Zamboro 500 miles to the tank? more like 350 unless you are running diesel.
@Zamboro
If you want to match the performance of gasoline in a larger vehicle he's probably not too far off. The extra weight added by the batteries is undesirable and the better battery technology gets the less they have to weigh down the vehicle.
@Zamboro Yeah, but with gas you can also fill up near-instantaneously. Battery swap stations might make electric a little more comparable to gas.
My car only gets 200 miles per tank! I can refuel quickly though!
And honestly, I do agree with the OP - for electric to *completely* kill gas, it needs to be good on road trips. My roommate drives a few hundred miles to tahoe every weekend or so for skiing, and addind 3 hours in the middle of a 4 hour trip is just not okay.
2nd gen electric cars will be good enough for most people, but they'll probably also have to own a gas car in the household.
Also, unrelated, this discussion reminds me, I did some calculations and found that I could build an iron man style flying suit with electric ducted fans, if batteries were about 10-50x more dense. Though even then you could maybe only fly for an hour, not as long as he does!
-Taylor
@JS
How about we not eliminate the gas engine. Keep it around for range extending for people who HAVE to have a vehicle that goes 500 miles with quick refueling in between (although in practical driving, I really don't think this is a requirement; you have to sleep sometime right? That's a couple of hours of charging right there). It is not safe to travel more than 500 miles alone anyways without rest (1000 miles with another driver).
But if things go well for EVs it might eliminate the gas station. People still have the station based mindset for fueling, but people might adapt and like being able to charge at home or work, and rarely having to visit a station. Then the rare (for most people) occasion of roadtrips probably is an acceptable trade off.
@Taylor Yes Taylor
Charging time is proportional to miles. So if a 500 mile pack can charge in 3 hours. The charging time for a 4 hour trip will be roughly 1.5 hours. Plus you friend can have it fully charged leaving his home. Thus he only needs to top off when he gets to Lake Tahoe (where the car will likely be parked anyways).
@d0mth0ma5
Obviously you aren't from Canada.
I in the past regularly drove for 12-20 hours straight up and down I-75. I need an electric car that can drive for 800 miles, or recharge for a 500 mi range over a 30 minute lunch in order to replace the versatility of a gasoline powered vehicle.
@KirinIchiban Haha no, little cramped England. The concept of me doing the driving more than 200 miles at a time is beyond me. But yeah I concede that those of you with more "spacious" countries might need more range.
@lokiracer
No problems. Swap out the drained battery for a charged one. That'll be faster than pumping gas, but will probably require some sort of standardized batteries. Or you can charge it every night from the grid in your garage? Hopefully it won't add more the electricity bill than gasoline does.
So ETA 2020 then?
Hell, it's about time
What is this, the 4th time scientists have said this in the past few years? Bring it to the market people!
@Thomsonbear If it is a radical (say 5 or 10 times) improvement in battery life then the companies won't want to sell it without adjusting the price accordingly and consumers won't pay that increase in price despite the added benefits. This is only the case for AA/AAA batteries and the like though, commercially there might/should be demand.
Did he just run these test in a computer or did he also do real electro chemical tests?
Patented by Apple is 3.. 2.. 1..
@pika2000 Nicely said. And the University either a). ripped off CrApple's patent or b). someone had an apple (either the fruit or an iPod) so the whole idea belongs to Jobs -NOT.
@rederikus
Dude, apple is patented by Newton. Didn't he discover the apple when it struck him on the head? Wait... it was something else...
nothing of value to add, but this is TOTALLY my school. woot.
@radiochu ME TOO!
@radiochu
W00t... I have to say, I had more than a little bit of trouble understanding that this was the school I go to...
How has no one else commented on the use of a hamster in the picture? Seriously?
IDK. I thought it was funny.
@J1024 I really wanted us to be using hamsters in this tech in some way. Something like: realizing that hamsters are the most efficient animal at turning calories into energy (far-fetched, maybe replace that with easily and cost-effectively disposable) the scientist started a team of hamsters on an endurance mission to power...
@juanvaldez
An a short life span. . .
@69camaroSS Litter sizes can be up to 24 though...
Since when is engadget beholden to corporate conspiracy theories? Battery tech, and really any physical tech, takes YEARS to go from proof of concept to production and release. This does not include "manufacturers" who simply slap parts together. They can easily bring a "new product" to market by simply rehashing materials and parts. But genuinely new technology requires years of research, testing, marketing plans, manufacturing upgrades, etc. What seems like a simple upgrade can become exceedingly complicated due to unforeseen complications.
@bradsh and yet we have had li-ion batts for how long?
@bradsh
Yet Oil companies kept killling electric cars since 1840.
@KGB
Dude, wake up! No one wanted the electric car when it only went 100 miles, took 8 hours to recharge, and had a 10000 battery that had to be replace every 2 years. The tech wasn't there.
'New technology which harness the enormous potential of hamster farming.'
err?
Just FYI, there are 6C batteries out there now. This means I can charge a lipo completely in less then 20 minutes.
"awesome things that'll never actually happen"
I find your cynicism... refreshing.
Too bad that Lithium is the best reductor on the planet. Simply put, Lithium sucks electrons like crazy making it the most useful atom for batteries. There is no other molecule or atom that is so much capable of taking up electrons than Lithium. Therefore, Li-ion batteries won't disappear for a long time, I'm afraid.
Why so down on lithium ion??? Do you realize how long we have come since I was a kid? I had a laptop that would last 30 minutes. The batteries had to be replace every 200 charges. I love lithium ion! The biggest problem with battery technology is the Hybrid philosophy, which still requires gas or requires a completely new distribution network for hydrogen. If car makers would just abandon that idea, we would already have cars like the Tesla Model S today.
There are two main problems with recharging EVs quickly.
One is battery life. You can charge most Li-Ion batteries quickly, but its at the expense of cycle life. The faster your charge or discharge a Li-Ion cell, the less cycles they'll last.
Second is safety. To recharge a 400-mile battery (120kWh for a mid-sized car) in the same amount of time you fill up your gas tank now would need 1.5MW of electricity. Thats a lot, the conductor needed to transfer 1.5MW of DC energy into your car is about 12" in diameter (very rough estimate). Plus all the necessary equipment to make it safe (short circuit protection, etc).
I go to Mississippi State! Glad to see somebody finally did something useful!
@ Murph, don't be condescending. Over your head maybe, but not everyone's.
For christ sakes, bring out the fuel-cell batteries already!
I wonder how many hamsters it takes to power a computer...
THAT will be freakin' awesome... you'll essentially be powering your computer with pet food.
just read the link. it's not all that great. 25Ghz increases the heat of the battery which in turn lowers the impedance - but heat has a negative impact on battery life - you can read it in the comments.
aah well :)
Where's the typical promise: "You'll see this technology commercially available 2 years from now"