jb_hybrid_ford wrote:

> OK, so NiMHs are not the best choice.  <snip>

The NiMH chemistry has lower specific energy than li-ion, but auto
manufacturers are already using them in mass-produced vehicles.  With
the Electro Energy batteries, we will be showing that NiMH batteries can
successfully power a PHEV.  Some, if not all, mass-produced PHEVs may
well use NiMH batteries for the first few years until li-ion (or yet
another chemistry) takes over.

>
>
> As I recall Lithium Polymers had some good characterics (including
> weight) but had problems with adequate power.  I haven't heard much
> talke about them.

I have been considering lithium polymer cells to be a type of li-ion.
In general, they have excellent high power handling capabilities but
equally high prices.  They may or may not have safety advantages; each
product needs to be tested and evaluated separately.  For example, 18650
cells can have built-in pressure cutout as well as temperature cutout
switches built in to help avoid fires, but the packaging of lithium
polymer cells may just bulge instead of activating such a built-in switch.

>
> Ron said:  "-- and that still wouldn't affect similar peak hill-
> climbing and descent currents, which can last for minutes."

This remark applied to the use of supercapacitor banks to handle peak
currents.  The point was that there can be real value to be gained by
having the battery pack able to handle full regenerative braking, if not
acceleration, currents, rather than depending on supercaps to do so.

>
> I think that the most economical PHEV would simply lose some charge
> from an extreme downhill and require some I.C. motorized assist on
> an extreme uphill.  I don't know exactly what the extremes would be,
> but I could see that at some point, the cost for a given performance
> would rise dramatically.  Sometimes I think there is a desire to
> have full E.V. behavior for the first 20 miles or so, but clearly
> that's probably not the least-cost option, especially under these
> extreme conditions.  <snip>

I have previously talked about there being a range of EV vs. ICE
capabilities possible for PHEVs (just as for HEVs).  Near one end is the
PRIUS+, which is capable of only limited EV operation in terms of both
speed and acceleration; and is capable of no more than doubling gasoline
mileage until the battery is depleted.  At the other end is a serial
hybrid with a small ICE disconnected from the drivetrain and running a
generator as necessary to maintain the battery's state of charge above a
minimum.  Lots of things between these extremes are possible AND WILL BE
TRIED, because no one yet knows what is optimum in the real world, and,
in fact, the optimum may vary for different costumers' driving regimes
-- just as the mildly hybridized Insight gets better highway mileage
than a Prius, but the Prius does its best in city driving.

For now, CalCars is focussing on what can be done with merely electrical
modifications to existing full hybrid vehicles, because this is where
the short-term leverage exists for quickly getting mass-produced PHEVs
into the marketplace.  And even such vehicles, not originally optimized
as PHEVs, can be remarkably good!  Later there will be plenty of time to
debate the fine points of PHEV optimization.

> "We model our effort on "Open Source" software development projects:
> We draw on the expertise and solutions of a broad group of experts
> and no individual owns any resulting intellectual property."
>
> "Since we don't keep our discussions secret, our MESSAGE ARCHIVES
> ARE OPEN to the public. We remain highly focused, relatively low-
> traffic and spam-free. In this working group, members post messages
> based on their specialties."
>
> And from the last post:
> > CalCars is pursuing Li-ion options that we can't yet talk about
> > publicly.

Well, we are trying to balance on a razor edge here.  To pursue specific
batteries, Felix and I (CalCars' two full-time volunteers) have found
that we must respect various manufacturers' needs for confidentiality.
This means that there are certain specifics and deals that we cannot
discuss in our public forum until they have reached a point where we are
able to make a public announcement, as has now occurred with Electro
Energy Inc.  This is one of the limits we have found to how thoroughly a
project can be run as a public forum.

>
> I apologize for posting items off-topic.  Apparently, batteries for
> others to use fall in that category as well.

On-topic for this list are discussions of things directly related to
CalCars' current conversion projects, the PRIUS+ and the ESCAPE+.  I
apologize that though I try to avoid it, I, too, sometimes allow myself
to be led off into more general PHEV discussions.

> <snip>
>
> -Jim

--
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
     Ron Gremban, rgremban@...
     California Cars Initiative, a nonprofit organization: 
http://www.CalCars.org
     Moderator & Technical Lead
     http://www.priusplus.org
     PRIUS+ PHEV Conversion Group:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/priusplus
     Newsletter:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/calcars-news
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Jim all your concerns have been addressed by our designs for years and that
is one of the reasons we are promoting the plug-in hybrid because all those
points you bring up disappear due to the large available battery capacity!!


Also the days of passive batteries are long gone!!  Every battery for an
electric or hybrid electric is an intelligent battery system that knows the
condition of every module and perhaps every cell from birth to death!! Life
should be 15 years and 150,000 miles of use.

Prof Frank

At 08:52 AM 10/31/2005, you wrote:
>There is some aspect of "here and now" that needs to be considered for
>batteries.  People have been talking about wonderful batteries just
>around the corner for 30 years. (To be fair, 30 years ago gas was
>$0.30 per gallon). I think we are close to something reasonable,
>however, I will believe the high production price when I see it.
>[When I quoted the one penny per Farad (2.7V) price for the Maxwell
>Caps, that was based on what they would sell them at in high volume,
>not an estimate.]
>
>Thanks for correcting me on Lithium Polymers.  The discharge rate is
>actually better, but everything else (price, "bulk", cycles) are a
>little worse.  I don't know if Lithium Polymers are considered the
>same as Lithium Ion for the purposes of future batteries.
>
>I could see how automakers would prefer Lithium Polymers.  The
>conformal shape quality is extremely valuable to them -- far more than
>the bulk problems Li polys have or even the cost.  There are lots of
>nooks and crannies on cars that is dead space with a battery pack of
>fixed cells. [As I understand it Lithium Polymers are somewhat
>favorable to Lithium Ion w.r.t. Energy/kg, but less favorable w.r.t.
>energy/volume.]
>
>Also, the improved safety characteristics of Lithium polymers is
>extremely valuable.  A huge, huge advantage.  You have to think how
>they do.  If just one Lithium cell heats up and burns, then they've
>got massive recalls and Billion dollar lawsuits.
>
>I'm not sure the Engine size issue is on-topic (getting more skittish
>about that....:) ) because it can't directly apply the to Prius+.
>Maybe take it offline or if you mention it again, I will comment.
>
>I keep running into this new parameter that seems germane to PHEVs and
>BEVs as well.  That is some kind of burst power rating for a
>period of time.  So if nominal operation requires 15kw, the vehicle
>could also be powered to 25 kw for 60 seconds (for example).  This
>parameter would be a function of one or more of:
>
>IC engine size
>supercap/high discharge battery specs.
>electric motor size
>
>If it was a pure, ideal electrical system, then the rating would be in
>power-seconds, like 1500 kw-seconds. (That would include 1500 kw for
>one second or 50 kw for 30 seconds, etc.)  But a real system would
>have some kind of maximum power output, constrained by some physical
>parameter. So this maximum power rating (e.g. 30 kw) such specify the
>system pretty well.
>
>Note that this is unlike an ordinary vehicle, which just has a maximum
>power rating, and no limit to how long it can be employed.  Existing
>hybrids also have no such rating because they can just cite the IC
>enegine power output.  If an ordinary car has a power rating, then
>perhaps a PHEV/BEV has a Power rating and a "surge" rating, or some
>such thing.
>
>After "surging", the vehicle would need some extra energy from the
>system to restore the surge capacity.  So the closer a vehicles
>nominal power output is to it's nominal power usage, the longer it
>will take (in seconds) for the surge capacity to be restored.
>
>So this engine issue is really what are acceptable values for these
>numbers to the consumer and what is the most economical way to reach
>them?  Since it is employed during non-nominal operation, the
>efficiency of how one achieves this is of secondary consideration.
>
>-Jim
>
>
>--- In priusplus@yahoogroups.com, "d0li0" <priusplus@d...> wrote:
> >
> > --- In priusplus@yahoogroups.com, "jb_hybrid_ford" wrote:
> > > So I guess it's Lithium Ions for now.  But $3 per unit might be a
> > > bit optimistic at this point.  So your battery prices really aren't
> > > completely realistic.  Maybe within a factor of 2 though for Li.
> >
> > Actually $3 IS the *high volume* going price for 18650 cells...
> > I think these are up to 2.4 Ah at this point, but these are all
> > "Standard" cells limited to 4C max discharge or about 9.6Amps.
> >
> > Cells for Hybrids or EV's would quickly dawrf that of Laptop
> > production lines.  At 12cells per laptop and 6800 per BEV each
> > 300 mile EV represents well more than 500 Laptops worth of battery.
> >
> > Of course we wouldn't be using small cells at that point but the
> > materials and manufacturing quantities should scale up similarly.
> >
> > Actually we'd be going with more advanced Li-ion tech which is
> > approaching 20C and even 50C discharge/charge rates.  The price
> > shouldn't change much as the materials and processes are very
> > similar, but till we can actually purchase and test a few I'll
> > stop here at just the mention, Li is still a young technology.
> >
> > > As I recall Lithium Polymers had some good characterics
> > > (including weight) but had problems with adequate power.
> > > I haven't heard much talk about them.
> >
> > Actually Polymers are similar in weight and energy density,
> > it's their power density which is/was superiour to Li-ion.
> > Many RC park flyers use Polymer cells since they can reach
> > nearly 20C discharge rates, 5 times that of comperable Li-ion.
> >
> > > Ron said:  "-- and that still wouldn't affect similar peak hill-
> > > climbing and descent currents, which can last for minutes."
> > >
> > > I think that the most economical PHEV would simply lose some charge
> > > from an extreme downhill and require some I.C. motorized assist on
> > > an extreme uphill.  I don't know exactly what the extremes would be,
> > > but I could see that at some point, the cost for a given performance
> > > would rise dramatically.  Sometimes I think there is a desire to
> > > have full E.V. behavior for the first 20 miles or so, but clearly
> > > that's probably not the least-cost option, especially under these
> > > extreme conditions.
> >
> > I couldn't disagree more, it's true that the Prius PHEV will
> > function in this manner because it is primarily an ICE vehicle
> > with BEV features which we are enhancing with larger batteries.
> > ( And perhaps even more importantly, or primarily, grid charging )
> >
> > > There's nothing wrong with letting the engine go on once in
> > > a while in the first 20 miles. In fact, if it doesn't then
> > > you have probably not balanced the system well enough.
> >
> > Now, to the point of my disagreement.  A Purpose Built PHEV would
> > be primarily a BEV with additional range via gas and an ICE.  The
> > ICE could be further downsized to meet the average power demands
> > at crusing speeds, I figure that about 1/3 an Insight ICE would do.
> > Such a 0.3 Liter engine could produce 15-20kW continuousely which
> > is enough for a passanger car, larger vehicles would need more.
> >
> > L8r
> >  Ryan
> >
> > Think about it this way, what are the precieved disadvantages of
> > BEV's?  Range and charge rate, a BEV/PHEV would eliminate those.
> > BEV's are not slow/weak and are capable in all other respects.
> > .oO ( Sorry if my true colors shine through sometimes... )
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

There is some aspect of "here and now" that needs to be considered for
batteries.  People have been talking about wonderful batteries just
around the corner for 30 years. (To be fair, 30 years ago gas was
$0.30 per gallon). I think we are close to something reasonable,
however, I will believe the high production price when I see it.
[When I quoted the one penny per Farad (2.7V) price for the Maxwell
Caps, that was based on what they would sell them at in high volume,
not an estimate.]

Thanks for correcting me on Lithium Polymers.  The discharge rate is
actually better, but everything else (price, "bulk", cycles) are a
little worse.  I don't know if Lithium Polymers are considered the
same as Lithium Ion for the purposes of future batteries.

I could see how automakers would prefer Lithium Polymers.  The
conformal shape quality is extremely valuable to them -- far more than
the bulk problems Li polys have or even the cost.  There are lots of
nooks and crannies on cars that is dead space with a battery pack of
fixed cells. [As I understand it Lithium Polymers are somewhat
favorable to Lithium Ion w.r.t. Energy/kg, but less favorable w.r.t.
energy/volume.]

Also, the improved safety characteristics of Lithium polymers is
extremely valuable.  A huge, huge advantage.  You have to think how
they do.  If just one Lithium cell heats up and burns, then they've
got massive recalls and Billion dollar lawsuits.

I'm not sure the Engine size issue is on-topic (getting more skittish
about that....:) ) because it can't directly apply the to Prius+.
Maybe take it offline or if you mention it again, I will comment.

I keep running into this new parameter that seems germane to PHEVs and
BEVs as well.  That is some kind of burst power rating for a
period of time.  So if nominal operation requires 15kw, the vehicle
could also be powered to 25 kw for 60 seconds (for example).  This
parameter would be a function of one or more of:

IC engine size
supercap/high discharge battery specs.
electric motor size

If it was a pure, ideal electrical system, then the rating would be in
power-seconds, like 1500 kw-seconds. (That would include 1500 kw for
one second or 50 kw for 30 seconds, etc.)  But a real system would
have some kind of maximum power output, constrained by some physical
parameter. So this maximum power rating (e.g. 30 kw) such specify the
system pretty well.

Note that this is unlike an ordinary vehicle, which just has a maximum
power rating, and no limit to how long it can be employed.  Existing
hybrids also have no such rating because they can just cite the IC
enegine power output.  If an ordinary car has a power rating, then
perhaps a PHEV/BEV has a Power rating and a "surge" rating, or some
such thing.

After "surging", the vehicle would need some extra energy from the
system to restore the surge capacity.  So the closer a vehicles
nominal power output is to it's nominal power usage, the longer it
will take (in seconds) for the surge capacity to be restored.

So this engine issue is really what are acceptable values for these
numbers to the consumer and what is the most economical way to reach
them?  Since it is employed during non-nominal operation, the
efficiency of how one achieves this is of secondary consideration.

-Jim


--- In priusplus@yahoogroups.com, "d0li0" <priusplus@d...> wrote:
>
> --- In priusplus@yahoogroups.com, "jb_hybrid_ford" wrote:
> > So I guess it's Lithium Ions for now.  But $3 per unit might be a
> > bit optimistic at this point.  So your battery prices really aren't
> > completely realistic.  Maybe within a factor of 2 though for Li.
>
> Actually $3 IS the *high volume* going price for 18650 cells...
> I think these are up to 2.4 Ah at this point, but these are all
> "Standard" cells limited to 4C max discharge or about 9.6Amps.
>
> Cells for Hybrids or EV's would quickly dawrf that of Laptop
> production lines.  At 12cells per laptop and 6800 per BEV each
> 300 mile EV represents well more than 500 Laptops worth of battery.
>
> Of course we wouldn't be using small cells at that point but the
> materials and manufacturing quantities should scale up similarly.
>
> Actually we'd be going with more advanced Li-ion tech which is
> approaching 20C and even 50C discharge/charge rates.  The price
> shouldn't change much as the materials and processes are very
> similar, but till we can actually purchase and test a few I'll
> stop here at just the mention, Li is still a young technology.
>
> > As I recall Lithium Polymers had some good characterics
> > (including weight) but had problems with adequate power.
> > I haven't heard much talk about them.
>
> Actually Polymers are similar in weight and energy density,
> it's their power density which is/was superiour to Li-ion.
> Many RC park flyers use Polymer cells since they can reach
> nearly 20C discharge rates, 5 times that of comperable Li-ion.
>
> > Ron said:  "-- and that still wouldn't affect similar peak hill-
> > climbing and descent currents, which can last for minutes."
> >
> > I think that the most economical PHEV would simply lose some charge
> > from an extreme downhill and require some I.C. motorized assist on
> > an extreme uphill.  I don't know exactly what the extremes would be,
> > but I could see that at some point, the cost for a given performance
> > would rise dramatically.  Sometimes I think there is a desire to
> > have full E.V. behavior for the first 20 miles or so, but clearly
> > that's probably not the least-cost option, especially under these
> > extreme conditions.
>
> I couldn't disagree more, it's true that the Prius PHEV will
> function in this manner because it is primarily an ICE vehicle
> with BEV features which we are enhancing with larger batteries.
> ( And perhaps even more importantly, or primarily, grid charging )
>
> > There's nothing wrong with letting the engine go on once in
> > a while in the first 20 miles. In fact, if it doesn't then
> > you have probably not balanced the system well enough.
>
> Now, to the point of my disagreement.  A Purpose Built PHEV would
> be primarily a BEV with additional range via gas and an ICE.  The
> ICE could be further downsized to meet the average power demands
> at crusing speeds, I figure that about 1/3 an Insight ICE would do.
> Such a 0.3 Liter engine could produce 15-20kW continuousely which
> is enough for a passanger car, larger vehicles would need more.
>
> L8r
>  Ryan
>
> Think about it this way, what are the precieved disadvantages of
> BEV's?  Range and charge rate, a BEV/PHEV would eliminate those.
> BEV's are not slow/weak and are capable in all other respects.
> .oO ( Sorry if my true colors shine through sometimes... )
>

--- In priusplus@yahoogroups.com, "jb_hybrid_ford" wrote:
> So I guess it's Lithium Ions for now.  But $3 per unit might be a
> bit optimistic at this point.  So your battery prices really aren't
> completely realistic.  Maybe within a factor of 2 though for Li.

Actually $3 IS the *high volume* going price for 18650 cells...
I think these are up to 2.4 Ah at this point, but these are all
"Standard" cells limited to 4C max discharge or about 9.6Amps.

Cells for Hybrids or EV's would quickly dawrf that of Laptop
production lines.  At 12cells per laptop and 6800 per BEV each
300 mile EV represents well more than 500 Laptops worth of battery.

Of course we wouldn't be using small cells at that point but the
materials and manufacturing quantities should scale up similarly.

Actually we'd be going with more advanced Li-ion tech which is
approaching 20C and even 50C discharge/charge rates.  The price
shouldn't change much as the materials and processes are very
similar, but till we can actually purchase and test a few I'll
stop here at just the mention, Li is still a young technology.

> As I recall Lithium Polymers had some good characterics
> (including weight) but had problems with adequate power.
> I haven't heard much talk about them.

Actually Polymers are similar in weight and energy density,
it's their power density which is/was superiour to Li-ion.
Many RC park flyers use Polymer cells since they can reach
nearly 20C discharge rates, 5 times that of comperable Li-ion.

> Ron said:  "-- and that still wouldn't affect similar peak hill-
> climbing and descent currents, which can last for minutes."
>
> I think that the most economical PHEV would simply lose some charge
> from an extreme downhill and require some I.C. motorized assist on
> an extreme uphill.  I don't know exactly what the extremes would be,
> but I could see that at some point, the cost for a given performance
> would rise dramatically.  Sometimes I think there is a desire to
> have full E.V. behavior for the first 20 miles or so, but clearly
> that's probably not the least-cost option, especially under these
> extreme conditions.

I couldn't disagree more, it's true that the Prius PHEV will
function in this manner because it is primarily an ICE vehicle
with BEV features which we are enhancing with larger batteries.
( And perhaps even more importantly, or primarily, grid charging )

> There's nothing wrong with letting the engine go on once in
> a while in the first 20 miles. In fact, if it doesn't then
> you have probably not balanced the system well enough.

Now, to the point of my disagreement.  A Purpose Built PHEV would
be primarily a BEV with additional range via gas and an ICE.  The
ICE could be further downsized to meet the average power demands
at crusing speeds, I figure that about 1/3 an Insight ICE would do.
Such a 0.3 Liter engine could produce 15-20kW continuousely which
is enough for a passanger car, larger vehicles would need more.

L8r
  Ryan

Think about it this way, what are the precieved disadvantages of
BEV's?  Range and charge rate, a BEV/PHEV would eliminate those.
BEV's are not slow/weak and are capable in all other respects.
.oO ( Sorry if my true colors shine through sometimes... )

A printable 4-page version of this document is available at
http://www.calcars.org/priusplusfactsheet-v1.11.pdf

FACT SHEET: CalCars PRIUS+ Conversions
version 1.11 October 27, 2005
Photos of some of the people involved in the formation of CalCars (2002),
creation of the first PRIUS+ (2004)
and the EnergyCS and EDrive Systems prototypes (2005). For more
identifications and details see http://www.priusplus.org

1. Specifications
2. Performance data of current prototype
3. Future prototypes and consumer conversions
4. Preliminary performance data of EnergyCS Li-Ion Conversion
5. How and when can I get a Plug-In Hybrid?
6. About The California Cars Initiative (sponsor of PRIUS+ Project)

This summary of three conversions completed since fall 2004 brings you up
to speed on what we've done -- and where we're heading. This Fact Sheet is
a work in progress (check at http://www.priusplus.org to make sure you're
reading the latest version, and, if you're reading the email version, pick
up a neatly formatted (currently 4-page version). For the latest technical
discussions, see the Conversion Group URL below. Subscribe to the
Newsletter to keep up with the latest news coverage and milestones.

Note that all our mpg reports also include electricity use -- no free lunch!

Contact us if you're interested in becoming involved!
-Felix Kramer fkramer@...  Founder, California Cars Initiative
-Ron Gremban rgremban@... -- Technical Lead, PRIUS+ Project

http://www.calcars.org and http://www.priusplus.org Info
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/calcars-news CalCars-PHEV Newsletter
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/priusplus/ PRIUS+ PHEV Conversion Group

1. SPECIFICATIONS

* Conversion platform is Ron Gremban's stock 2004 Prius hybrid (HEV).
* Stock Prius hybrid battery pack (Panasonic nickel-metal hydride (NiMH)
6.5 Ah, 201.6 Volt, 99 lb/45kg.) remains unused during PHEV operation and
can be used in normal hybrid mode as needed, e.g., for comparison (in
future conversions, this battery will probably be removed).
* CalCars' initial battery pack, completely replacing Prius pack (for our
first prototype, we used low-performance, short-life but resilient lead
acid (PbA) for testing purposes and to obtain design criteria for
higher-performance packs): 18 electric bicycle B&B 20Ah 12Volt SLA
batteries from ElectricRider.com. (nominal 12 Ah, 2.4 kWh total at the
car's high discharge rates, 216 Volt, 260 lb without associated hardware
and components). (Pack replaced with new PbA batteries Oct 2005, after 11
months and approx. 200 charging cycles, pack unable tohandle 120A peak
discharges beyond 70% of its capacity.)
* Batteries positioned in empty well below hatchback deck, with independent
manually switchable air cooling system.
* Batteries recharged via standard 120-volt outlet in 3 hours with Brusa
NLG5 charger from MetricMind.com. (cheaper charger, longer time for larger
packs).
* Battery Management System and Controller/Display Unit (CDU) by Energy
Control Systems Engineering (EnergyCS.com) of Monrovia, CA, replaced
Toyota's Battery ECU. No change to the rest of Toyota's Hybrid Synergy
Drive (HSD) -- what used to be called Toyota Hybrid System (THS).
* Data from battery and CAN (Controller Area Network) bus interface.
Dashboard analog meters display battery voltage and current. EnergyCS
in-dash digital display includes battery voltage and current, Amp-hours
used from the battery, vehicle power requested (e.g. via throttle
position), battery state-of-charge (SOC) reported to THS, and gas used/trip
(thousandths of gallons).
* Simulated State of Charge information sent to THS is set
semi-automatically to force energy use and regenerative braking regimen
(automation has been fine-tuned in later iterations of the EnergyCS
controller).
* Configuration permits rapid reversion to standard hybrid operation using
the Prius's Battery Management System and the retained original battery.
* Operation permits electric-only mode at up to 34 mph (using
reverse-engineered "EV" button available on European and Asian Priuses;
above 34 mph, battery energy continues to assist the engine, contributing
to lower gasoline consumption. The PbA battery is good for 10 all-electric
miles, 20 miles of doubled gasolinemileage, or mixes of the two. Then
operation reverts to normal HEV mode, still using the new battery pack.

2. PHEV PERFORMANCE DATA WITH LEAD-ACID BATTERIES

* Heavy lead-acid batteries add approx. 300 lb (10%) total, reducing
mileage by approx. 5 mpg (10%) in standard HEV operation on city streets
(because of acceleration losses), but by little or nothing at highway
speeds (where wind resistance is the main factor). Lower weight from
removing the unused original pack and lower internal resistance of future
battery packs is expected to increase the efficiency of standard HEV
operation sufficiently to restore original standard HEV city mileage even
when grid-charging energy is not involved.

Equivalent mpg numbers and operation costs depend on patterns of use (total
miles driven/day, speeds driven, etc.).

The following examples show improved performance (expected to be better
with lighter, more efficient batteries. IMPORTANT: low PHEV and HEV mileage
is due to short runs, hilly Marin County terrain, and other local factors.

* Under 10-mile all-electric propulsion (at under 34 mph), infinite mpg
(i.e., no gasoline use) plus 262 grid Watt-hours/mile vs. 40-45 mpg as a
normal HEV.
* 14 mile round trips, including approx. 10 miles on hilly freeways: 80 mpg
+ 200 grid Wh/mi, compared to 36 actual HEV mpg on the same course, driving
with the extra battery weight -- otherwise maybe 40 mpg.
* 26-28 mile trips with many surface streets: 60 mpg +144 grid Wh/mi.
* Beyond 20 miles/day (40 miles/day with NiMH or 60 miles/day with Li-Ion
batteries), normal HEV mileage -- except better mileage on long descents
due to ability to store more recovered energy -- and no further electricity
use.

All-electric miles: power cost, approx. 1.5 cents/mile (assumption of 310
grid Wh/mi and 5 cents/kWh on California off-peak EV "E-9" (PG&E) rate, and
not amortizing battery cost), vs. approx. 5.6 cents/gasoline mile
($2.50/gallon, 45 mpg). (2.5 cents for 10 cents/kWh rate.)


3. ADDITIONAL PROTOTYPES, CONVERSIONS FOR CONSUMERS

* Nickel-metal hydride (Ni-MH) (30 Ah, 6.5 kWh, 190 lb extra after removal
of existing battery); up to 20-25 mile all-electric range or 40-50 mile
assisted range. In Oct 2005, CalCars announced a development program with
Electro Energy Inc. (NASDAQ EEEI) to test their bi-polar Ni-MH batteries.
* Lithium-ion (Li-Ion) (35-40 Ah, 9 kWh, 160-190 lb extra after removal of
existing hybrid battery) for the EnergyCS Prototype/EDrive cars (see next
section); up to 30 mile all-electric range or 60 mile assisted range.
Improved performance as well as additional electric range can be expected
from the above batteries, due to significantly lower internal resistance
losses.
* "Installed kits" for purchase from third-party partners (see below)
* "Do-It Yourself" project for advanced experimenters with experience in
high-voltage projects initiated by Electric Auto Association in October 2005.
* New efforts by CalCars on other platforms, including Ford Escape Hybrid.
* It's important to say that we estimate automakers could provide small
30-mile range PHEVs for $3,000 more than a hybrid, $5,000 more than a
non-hybrid.
* For the latest details (between updates of this Fact Sheet) see the
CalCars Vehicles page and subscribe to our CalCars News (see section 5 below).

4. VERY PRELIMINARY ENERGYCS LI-ION PERFORMANCE DATA

EnergyCS's version of PRIUS+, completed Feb. 2005, uses off-the-shelf
Valence Technology Saphion U Li-Ion batteries (for pack spec see Section 3
above), plus specialized monitoring and control circuits. These
automatically select EV operation at low speeds during low power usage, and
provide electric motor benefits at all speeds. This vehicle will be the
starting point for retrofits to be available in 2006 from EDrive Systems.
(CalCars and EDrive have no contractual or relationship; we support their
efforts.)

Equivalent mpg numbers and operation costs depend on patterns of use (total
miles driven/day, speeds driven). EnergyCS will document performance under
third-party testing auspices. Following are examples reported by EnergyCS:

* Under 35-mile trip all-electric propulsion (at under 34 mph), infinite
mpg (i.e., no gasoline) plus 200 Watt-hours/mile.
* 70 mile trip, 80% 55 mph freeway, 20% city: 120-180 mpg + 115-150 grid
Wh/mi, compared to est. 55 mpg as a normal HEV.
* Beyond 50-60 miles/day, normal HEV mileage -- except better mileage on
long descents due to ability to store more recovered energy -- and no
further electricity use.

All-electric miles: power cost approx. 1.0 cents/mile (assumption of 200
Wh/mi and 5 cents/kWh on California off-peak EV "E-9" (PG&E) rate, or 2
cents/mile at 10 cents/kWh electricity, not amortizing battery cost), vs.
approx. 5.6 cents/gasoline mile ($2.50/gallon, 45 mpg).

5. HOW AND WHEN CAN I GET A PLUG-IN HYBRID?

Thanks for asking. Quick answer: most people will have to wait for
automakers to build them. To keep people up-to-date on the progress of
CalCars, plug-in hybrids (PHEVs) in general, and conversions, please join
our CalCars-News list. At http://groups.yahoo.com/group/calcars-news, you
can subscribe to our low-traffic newsletter -- or watch the News Archive
for our progress.

Prius conversions will operate like any other Prius, with no necessity to
drive slower or differently. They will re-charge overnight from
conventional 120-volt outlets (no need to hunt for a place to plug in
during the day).

The initial EDrive Prius systems are proof of concept prototypes. EDrive
Systems, LLC is working with technology partners EnergyCS, Clean-Tech and
Valence Technology to reduce component, manufacturing and installation
costs. EDrive's goal is to have a commercial retrofit option available in
early 2006 with an installed cost of $10-$12,000. Initial systems will be
installed in Southern California. Additional licensed installers may make
EDrive systems available elsewhere later in 2006. To find out more, see he
EDrive Frequently Asked Questions at
http://www.edrivesystems.com/Edrive-FAQ.html

EDrive's first conversions will be for 2004-2006 Prius (not 1997-2003
"Classic"). Later, conversions from EDrive, CalCars or others, including
the EAA project described in Section 3 may be possible for other Toyota and
Ford hybrids. Because of Honda's different architecture for Insight, Civic,
Accord (in Integrated Motor Assist cars, the engine always runs when the
electric motor is in use), and we'll wait for Honda to make PHEVs .

Toyota could decide that the conversion voids some or part of your car or
hybrid system warranty (unless the company worries that will tarnish its
green image). We won't know how dealers will respond to service requests
for this car until we start driving them. Read the Specialty Equipment
Marketing Association perspective on warranties and aftermarket conversions.

To learn more about PHEVs, hybrids and alternative fuel vehicles:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/priusplus/ - PRIUS+ PHEV Conversion Group
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gridable-hybrids -- PHEV general discussions
http://www.seattleeva.org/wiki/EAA-PHEV -- Electric Auto Assn. conversions
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Prius-2G -- 2004 Prius issues
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Prius_Technical_Stuff -- Prius nuts and bolts
http://www.priuschat.com -- general Prius info and talk
http://www.hybridcars.com -- all about hybrids
http://www.evworld.com/electrichybrid.dfm -- focus on PHEVs at site for
general coverage of alternative fuel and advanced technology vehicles

Meanwhile, we thank you in advance for your encouragement, and hope you'll
spread the word about our efforts. If you know of any individuals in a
position to discuss fleet purchases, provide us with substantial support or
celebrity endorsements, please send them our way. If you want to contact
automakers to tell them you'd like PHEVs, we suggest you contact your local
dealer, and feel free to send a copy of any email you write to
info@....

6. INTRODUCING CALCARS, SPONSOR OF THE PRIUS+ PROJECT

Here's a quick background summary on CalCars, Plug-In Hybrids, PRIUS+ and
Felix Kramer.

The California Cars Initiative <http://www.calcars.org> is a Palo
Alto-based nonprofit startup. We're a group of entrepreneurs, engineers and
environmentalists promoting high-efficiency, low-emission cars and
harnessing buyer demand to help commercialize advanced technologies.
Somewhat uniquely, we focus both on public policy and technology
development. Formed in 2002, our efforts for "100+MPG hybrids" began to be
noticed in early 2005 when we were covered in The New York Times, Business
Week, TIME, Newsweek, National Public Radio, and local and national TV.
(See <http://www.calcars.org/kudos.html> for print, audio and video clips.)

We're demonstrating the immediate opportunity and benefits of "plug-in"
hybrids (PHEVs). The next generation of hybrid cars can be based entirely
on existing components. They're basically like some current hybrids but
with larger batteries and the ability to re-charge conveniently, so local
travel is electric, yet the vehicle has unlimited range. We see it as the
future pathway to multi-fuel and biofuel/cellulosic ethanol PHEVs -- the
cars that get 500 MPG of gasoline that people are talking about. Here's how
we describe PHEVs:

It's like having a second small fuel tank that you always use first. You
get to fill this one at home with electricity at an equivalent cost of
under $1/gallon. How much under depends on your car and your electric rate.
You refill from an ordinary 120-volt socket, with energy that's much
cleaner, cheaper and not imported. Or another way of thinking about this:
at $3 for a gallon of gas, driving a non-hybrid car costs 8-20 cents/mile
(depending on its MPG). With a PHEV, all-electric local travel and
commuting can drop to 2-4 cents/mile.

We began with a prototype conversion we call "PRIUS+" to bring attention to
plug-in hybrids and encourage car makers to build them. We "green-tuned" a
stock 2004 Prius by adding batteries and grid-charging. (We replaced the
battery control system but didn't modify the hybrid controls.) Our
proof-of-concept used lead-acid batteries. We document our effort at our
open-source-style technology discussion group at
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/priusplus> (see chronology from June '04-May
'05 at http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/priusplus/message/421). We're
working with Electro Energy Inc. (NASDAQ: EEEI) to demonstrate the
viability for PHEvs of nickel-metal hydride (Ni-MH) batteries used in
current hybrids: see
<http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/calcars-news/message/175>.

EDrive Systems LLC, a for-profit integration company in Southern California
<http://www.edrivesystems.com>, installed even better lithium-ion (Li-Ion)
packs to get 100+MPG (plus costs of electric power). EDrive intends to
begin selling PRIUS+-style retrofits in early 2006, with a goal of pricing
conversions at $10-$12,000. At
<http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/calcars-news/message/37> on May 2 we
explained how our efforts intersect. View their Frequently Asked Questions
at <http://www.edrivesystems.com/Edrive-FAQ.html>. A separate group of
engineers experienced with high voltage has started a "do-it-yourself"
conversion project we are advising: <http://www.seattleeva.org/wiki/EAA-PHEV>.

We're also involved in advocacy and public policy, bringing together the
growing attention given to this "up-and-coming" technology. New
organizations that have in part been catalyzed by our efforts include
SetAmericaFree, Plug-In Austin, PlugInAmerica, and a trade association, the
Advanced Hybrid Vehicle Development Consortium. We're educating the large
market of car buyers who will pay extra for all the benefits to them and
society of better cars. We're presenting PHEVs, along with wind and solar
power, as a coordinated response to two of today's greatest challenges:
global warming and energy security. We've spoken at high-visibility venues
including the Palo Alto Research Center (former Xerox PARC) Forum. We've
recently engaged with noted designer/architect William McDonough,
responsible for the new Ford River Rouge plant, to incorporate Cradle to
Cradle approaches to our future strategies.

Our goal is to motivate automakers to build PHEVs for a market we expect to
expand as the Kyoto Protocols and parallel state and international
greenhouse gas initiatives are phased in. We're exploring with public
officials ways to provide incentives to auto makers to build PHEVs.

Working with other PHEV advocates, we're developing innovative ways to meet
expected demand from utility, government and corporate fleets, and early
adopters for 10,000-100,000 vehicles before a car company delivers
production PHEVs. To take advantage of that who-knows-how-long window of
opportunity, we're exploring ways for a California company to partner as a
Qualified Vehicle Modifier (QVM) with an auto maker to design, assemble and
sell PHEVs -- at a price several thousand dollars higher than conventional
hybrids, which would provide a lower lifetime cost of ownership than any
other vehicle type. For info on our plans see
<http://www.calcars.org/sjmercury-vcinsider+calcars-opportunity.pdf>.
Conversion possibilities include the Ford Escape hybrid, forthcoming
hybrids from Hyundai and others, and all cars that use Toí“×'s "Hybrid
Synergy Drive" (Prius, Lexus, Highlander, Nissan).

We're a mostly-volunteer effort. We've gotten contributions from, among
others, a well-known entrepreneur and the Energy Foundation, with others to
come. We accept tax-deductible donations and offer a unique bumper sticker
to Charter Sponsors.

Founder Felix Kramer says, "I'm a startup person and environmentalist going
way back <http://www.nlightning.com/resume.html>. In 2001, I sold
eConstructors.com (marketplace for web development) and began advising
Rocky Mountain Institute/Amory Lovins' Hypercar Inc. My change in focus
from that futuristic simulation to immediate solutions led to the launch of
CalCars in 2002. My personal motivation evolved from general environmental
goals to seeing PHEVs as a keystone component of a strategy to address
global warming both nationally and internationally. See
<http://www.calcars.org/globalwarming.html>. I envision millions of PHEVs,
charged from off-peak electricity from a modernized grid and from
distributed photovoltaic and wind power, with the range extension engine
powered by zero-carbon cellulose ethanol, as a way to significantly reduce
the more than 30% of greenhouse gases that come from transportation. See my
blog, Power, Plugs and People at <http://www.hybridcars.com/blogs/power>."


--  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  -- --
        Felix Kramer  fkramer@...
       Founder  California Cars Initiative
              http://www.calcars.org
                CalCars-PHEV Newsletter
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/calcars-news
              Power, Plugs and People Blog
     http://www.hybridcars.com/blogs/power/
       PRIUS+ PHEV Conversion Group
     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/priusplus/
        PO Box 61045 Palo Alto, CA 94306
--  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  -- --

OK, so NiMHs are not the best choice.  But if the batteries for the
prices cited won't work, then it isn't really a fair price, is it?

So I guess it's Lithium Ions for now.  But $3 per unit might be a
bit optimistic at this point.  So your battery prices really aren't
completely realistic.  Maybe within a factor of 2 though for Li Ions.

As I recall Lithium Polymers had some good characterics (including
weight) but had problems with adequate power.  I haven't heard much
talke about them.

Ron said:  "-- and that still wouldn't affect similar peak hill-
climbing and descent currents, which can last for minutes."

I think that the most economical PHEV would simply lose some charge
from an extreme downhill and require some I.C. motorized assist on
an extreme uphill.  I don't know exactly what the extremes would be,
but I could see that at some point, the cost for a given performance
would rise dramatically.  Sometimes I think there is a desire to
have full E.V. behavior for the first 20 miles or so, but clearly
that's probably not the least-cost option, especially under these
extreme conditions.

There's nothing wrong with letting the engine go on once in a while
in the first 20 miles. In fact, if it doesn't then you have probably
not balanced the system well enough.

Quoting from the top:

"We model our effort on "Open Source" software development projects:
We draw on the expertise and solutions of a broad group of experts
and no individual owns any resulting intellectual property."

"Since we don't keep our discussions secret, our MESSAGE ARCHIVES
ARE OPEN to the public. We remain highly focused, relatively low-
traffic and spam-free. In this working group, members post messages
based on their specialties."

And from the last post:
> CalCars is pursuing Li-ion options that we can't yet talk about
> publicly.

I apologize for posting items off-topic.  Apparently, batteries for
others to use fall in that category as well.

As do efforts to try to keep the rhetoric tight and accurate.
(After which, Joe Lieberman's office issues a poorly worded press
release saying PHEV's can get "500 miles per gallon".)

Well then, respecfully, what is on-topic for this group at this
time?  If we are to aid you in the Prius+, but then you are taking
it in a direction "we can't talk about", then how are the rest of us
supposed to contribute?  Maybe just hold tight for now?  I could
understand that...

-Jim

Thanks for posting the results of your research.

My testing pretty much eliminated NiMH "D" cells as a viable PHEV
battery option, as the power handling of even the best is about half
that necessary.  Also, handling the charge balancing issues in the
necessary multiple strings of cells gets overly complex.  In my recent
messages, I merely used "D" cell prices to begin getting a handle on
NiMH volume pricing.

Normal 18650s have the same power handling limitations, though there are
some "high power" 18650s and 26700s out there.  The tradeoff is lower
capacity (e.g. 2 vs. 2.4 Ah).  Paralleling cells is not an issue, and
charge balancing is not more complex than for any Li-ion pack.  The
adressable challenges are then making reliable, high-power connections,
cooling, temperature balancing, safety, and cycle life.

Though I think supercaps will have a role in future HEVs, if not PHEVs
and EVs, I have tested a supercap string and done calculations against
the most cost-effective supercaps available.  I found them not yet
either cost-effective or weight-effective.  My results have been posted
here.  It would, for example, take a string of Maxwell's MC2600 caps,
weighing 180 lb and costing as much as the battery, to effectively
buffer a PRIUS+'s acceleration and deceleration surges -- and that still
wouldn't affect similar peak hill-climbing and descent currents, which
can last for minutes.

As with the Electro Energy NiMH project that has now been announced,
CalCars is pursuing Li-ion options that we can't yet talk about
publicly.  Cycle (and calendar) life and safety are known issues that
are included in the discussions.  Often cycle life can be greatly
extended by reducing depth-of-discharge (DOD) and maximum temperatures,
as well as via very careful charge balancing.  In addition, normal life
is considered at an end when a pack's capacity is reduced to 80%,
whereas a PHEV can work well down to e.g. 60%.  In fact, if DOD is
restricted to 60-70% anyway, FULL EV range could be preserved until
beyond the 20% loss of capacity mark.

Batteries for do-it-yourself conversions should be addressed at
http://www.seattleeva.org/wiki/EAA-PHEV rather than here.

/ron

jb_hybrid_ford wrote:

> --- In priusplus@yahoogroups.com, Ron Gremban <rgremban@c...> wrote:
> >
> > Though I won't answer all questions raised recently, I do think battery
> > costs and their effect on PHEV cost-of-ownership are relevant.
> >
> > As clearly stated in my "Battery evaluation and production cost
> summary"....
>
> I was able to find lots of references to NiMH D cells, some with
> storage of up to 10000mAh.  The prices are in line with what you had
> stated as well ($4.50).
>
> With the Lithium Ion I wasn't quite as fortunate, but I think I saw
> some 3.7V 2000mAh versions for about $5.00.  I've no doubt about Ron's
> claims of $3 per unit however.
>
> So the top choices seem to be:
>
>
> Model        Voltage  Current   Power   Nom. Cycles Cost  Cost/kWhr
> NiMH D-Cell  1.2      8-10KmaH  low???  1000        $4.50 $375
> Li Ion 18650 3.7      2-2.5KmaH better  2000-3000   $3.00 $324
>
> There are other choices, obviously, including batteries made
> especially for vehicle use, but they are not as easily accessible to
> the hybrid tinkerer.
>
> I am assuming that Ron has the belief that the batteries can last
> longer than their nominal cycles, as indicated by the EPRI and the
> experiences with the RAV-4 EVs.
>
> Since assembling Li Ions "has already been done" by A/C propulsion
> (Jerry Pohorsky, July 1,2005)  does it make sense to look into NiMHs?
>
> It seems to me the # Cycles is a contention that greatly affect the
> NiMH option and which is probably a hard sell to skeptics. Li Ions
> also seem to have a safety concern that may require engineering best
> left to professionals (I'm not saying some of you can't do it -- just
> that some of "them" might not believe you did it.)  On the other hand,
> if we can cycle some batteries a lot, they would probably find that
> believable.  This goes back to the cycling and lifetime studies that
> other have indicated are really lacking.
>
> Of course, I'd be interesting in topping them with Supercaps to limit
> power requirements.
>
> If we could build a module (such as a replacement for one of the Pb
> batteries) that might be something that other tinkerers could look to
> as a model or standard.
>
> I dunno.  What say you?
>
>
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS
> 2004 prius
>
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=2004+prius&w1=2004+prius&w2=Alternative+fue\
ls&c=2&s=39&.sig=mohBv-03-sKEkaIzpq3MTw>
>  Alternative fuels
>
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Alternative+fuels&w1=2004+prius&w2=Alternat\
ive+fuels&c=2&s=39&.sig=z8qzhV0gJuqBX1ktqlG06Q>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>     *  Visit your group "priusplus
>       <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/priusplus>" on the web.
>
>     *  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>        priusplus-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>       <mailto:priusplus-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>
>     *  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
>       Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>

--
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
     Ron Gremban, rgremban@...
     California Cars Initiative, a nonprofit organization: 
http://www.CalCars.org
     Moderator & Technical Lead
     http://www.priusplus.org
     PRIUS+ PHEV Conversion Group:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/priusplus
     Newsletter:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/calcars-news
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

--- In priusplus@yahoogroups.com, Ron Gremban <rgremban@c...> wrote:
>
> Though I won't answer all questions raised recently, I do think battery
> costs and their effect on PHEV cost-of-ownership are relevant.
>
> As clearly stated in my "Battery evaluation and production cost
summary"....

I was able to find lots of references to NiMH D cells, some with
storage of up to 10000mAh.  The prices are in line with what you had
stated as well ($4.50).

With the Lithium Ion I wasn't quite as fortunate, but I think I saw
some 3.7V 2000mAh versions for about $5.00.  I've no doubt about Ron's
claims of $3 per unit however.

So the top choices seem to be:


Model        Voltage  Current   Power   Nom. Cycles Cost  Cost/kWhr
NiMH D-Cell  1.2      8-10KmaH  low???  1000        $4.50 $375
Li Ion 18650 3.7      2-2.5KmaH better  2000-3000   $3.00 $324

There are other choices, obviously, including batteries made
especially for vehicle use, but they are not as easily accessible to
the hybrid tinkerer.

I am assuming that Ron has the belief that the batteries can last
longer than their nominal cycles, as indicated by the EPRI and the
experiences with the RAV-4 EVs.

Since assembling Li Ions "has already been done" by A/C propulsion
(Jerry Pohorsky, July 1,2005)  does it make sense to look into NiMHs?

It seems to me the # Cycles is a contention that greatly affect the
NiMH option and which is probably a hard sell to skeptics. Li Ions
also seem to have a safety concern that may require engineering best
left to professionals (I'm not saying some of you can't do it -- just
that some of "them" might not believe you did it.)  On the other hand,
if we can cycle some batteries a lot, they would probably find that
believable.  This goes back to the cycling and lifetime studies that
other have indicated are really lacking.

Of course, I'd be interesting in topping them with Supercaps to limit
power requirements.

If we could build a module (such as a replacement for one of the Pb
batteries) that might be something that other tinkerers could look to
as a model or standard.

I dunno.  What say you?

Though I won't answer all questions raised recently, I do think battery
costs and their effect on PHEV cost-of-ownership are relevant.

However, as technical lead for a small nonprofit organization (us) I
have had very limited and unreliable access to volume pricing
information.  Also, what I do have is not for public disclosure.
Therefore, I have had to get as much mileage as possible from the
snippets of information I have acquired, as well as refrain from giving
many specifics.

As clearly stated in my "Battery evaluation and production cost summary"
of July 21, the $600/kWh NiMH price is a projection based on 150% of the
wholesale price I was quoted for Chinese NiMH "D" cells.  I just now
remembered and looked up an approximate volume quote of $735/kWh for a
more appropriate NiMH module from a major manufacturer.  It's a little
higher than my guess, but not out of the ballpark.  Electro Energy has
not quoted any specific prices, but they have assured us that their
pricing will be "competitive".  They are also working on a future Li-ion
product using their unique packaging.

For Li-ion, I projected $400/kWh from an approximate real wholesale
price of $3 each for 18650 cells.  Again, it was a tenuous strategy, but
appears to have made sense, as a manufacturer of large-scale Li-ion
batteries has recently estimated a high volume price of . . . $400/kWh!

I think Li-ion batteries are potentially cheaper in high volume than
NiMH because the raw materials are cheaper.  As volume increases and
time moves on, manufacturing costs decrease while raw material costs
remain even or increase.

In my "Re: Price on NiMH packs++" posting of Oct 24, I showed that a
$400/kWh pack that lasts the expected 10 year (or 150,000 mile) life of
a PRIUS+ while using 70% depth-of-discharge (DOD) would cost only 3.57
cents/EV-mile (2800 kWh throughput from 4000 cycles at 70% DOD).  BUT I
WAS WRONG.  Actually, I was comparing against a Prius, with an OEM
battery that would be removed, costing $1100/kWh (says Toyota), $1430,
or 0.95 cents/mi over 150,000 miles (a non-hybrid car would have much
higher fuel costs).  The $400/kWh PHEV battery would therefore cost only
an additional 2.62 cents/EV-mile.

With 2.64 cents/mile for electricity at 8.8 cents/kWh, that is 5.26
cents/EV-mile vs. 5.6 cents per gasoline mile at $2.50/gallon!  This is
economically viable even without governmental or social incentives (or
even reductions of corporate welfare to oil producers or exchange rate
corrections to be expected due to our huge and increasing worldwide
trade imbalance).

More figures, corrected for replacing the cost of a hybrid battery with
that of a PHEV battery (rather than adding to it), and assuming NO
social/governmental incentives for PHEVs:

$400    $600    $800    Cost of PHEV battery capable of 4000 cycles at
70% DOD, $/kWh
3.57    5.37    7.16    Cost of PHEV battery, cents/EV-mile @ 250 Whr/mi
2.62    4.42    6.21    Cost of PHEV battery less 0.95 cents/mi of OEM
hybrid battery, cents/EV-mile
5.26    7.06    8.85    Cents/EV-mile, including 2.64 cents/mi
electricity at 8.8 cents/kWh and 300 grid kWh/mi
$2.37   $3.18   $3.98   Cost/gallon of gasoline at 45 mpg to match EV
fuel and battery amortization costs vs. Prius

7.26    9.06   10.85    Cost/EV-mile plus cost of hybridization @ $3000
or 2.0 cents/mi (without subtracting existing tax incentives)
$2.18   $2.72   $3.26   Cost/gallon of gasoline at 30 mpg to match EV
fuel, hybrid, and PHEV amortization costs vs. non-hybrid

If the hybridization cost for a Prius is $3000, that amounts to 2.0
cents/mile for 150,000 miles.  If a similar non-hybrid got 30 mpg vs. 45
for the Prius, the gasoline usage over 150,000 miles would be 5000 vs.
3333 gallons, a 1667 gallon difference.  At that rate, the hybrid would
have a cheaper total cost of ownership as long as the price of gasoline
remains over $1.80/gallon.

Note:  None of these figures counts the expected reductions in
maintenance costs of a PHEV, or, on the other hand, the interest on the
battery cost or the effects of gasoline taxes.  It may be politically
feasible, as PHEVs catch on, to raise gasoline taxes (and maybe just the
gasoline portion of E85) -- rather than further taxing electricity -- to
keep highway tax receipts up in spite of reduced usage.  This would keep
increasing the incentives over time to use gasoline frugally.

/ron

Murdoch wrote:

<snip>

>I did try to go back and read your July exposition that you
>referred to, but I wasn't quite clear how, in the end, we arrived at a
>different desireable pricing for NiMH than for Lithium ($600 kWh vs.
>$400 kWh I think it was).   Was some of this to building different
>factors into the pricing... such as the fact that Lithium is more
>untested and so manufacturers may understandably want to pay a lower
>price for a less certain item?  I think we can see that at present
>Lithium will cost more, not less.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
     Ron Gremban, rgremban@...
     California Cars Initiative, a nonprofit organization: 
http://www.CalCars.org
     Moderator & Technical Lead
     http://www.priusplus.org
     PRIUS+ PHEV Conversion Group:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/priusplus
     Newsletter:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/calcars-news
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Jim and all:

I'll answer on your email so that the answers don't get too mixed up.  At
09:04 AM 10/26/2005, you wrote:
>Prof Frank (and Ron),
>
>Thanks for making these important points.  I know from talking to them
>that the automakers are aware of how much consumers hate going to the
>gas station, so if a PHEV reduces the number of trip to the gas
>station, that's a big plus (as long as the plugging in isn't a big
>hassle either...)  At some point this can be automated, especially if it
>is only 1.8 to 2 kw.
>
>Given the reality of tentative automakers, isn't some kind of
>augmented Hybrid ("Heavy Hybrid") the most likely path to getting a
>commercialized PHEV? Yes, maybe this is a way to do it.
>
>Assuming that's true, what's the biggest change that's needed to
>produce a true PHEV versus, say, the powertrain of the Prius/Escape? a
>place to hold the batteries, a larger electric motor and smaller gesoline
>engine, and a better lower cost transmission using a mechanical CVT.
>
>It also seems that even given that, one still needs batteries, more or
>less.More!!  And in cranking the numbers, I couldn't get to anywhere near
>$400 or $600 per kWhr for either Li-ion or NimH (I thought we were
>abandoning them?  No?  Are we back to NimH at this point?).  I think I
>got something like $800-$900 per kWhr for Li-Ion, but 4000 cycles is
>slightly optimistic for them at this point.Battery technogy marches on !!!
>lower costs are inevitable.  But where do you get your information?? And
>by the way, by the time the PHEV is developed for high volume production,
>(at least 2 to 3 years) the price of batteries will fall further. Also how
>have you put volume into your cost projections?? Remember that if you put
>it on a cell level, that the 300 volt system has a lot more cells!
>
>So,can you flesh the basis for the $400 and $600/kWhr numbers a bit
>
>Thanks,
>
>Jim
>
>
>--- In priusplus@yahoogroups.com, Andy Frank <aafrank@u...> wrote:
> >
> > In answer to Jim's comments on the cost of batteries and cost parity
>with
> > conventional cars.  I'd like to point out a few important points.
> >
> > 1. PHEV's are not hybrids and are not conventional cars. because
>they have
> > many more desirable features.
> > 2. the cost of batteries are not the same $/kwhr of the present
>Prius or
> > other currently manufactured batteries, since they do not have to
>have the
> > same power density. for the same power.
> > 3. The Prius Plus should not be considered as the cost increment of
>a PHEV
> > because it is a retrofit and and not a complete system design where
>as the
> > batteries are increased and the motor is correspondingly up sized the
> > engine can be down-sized and the transmission can be simpler using
>other
> > simpler more efficient CVT the cost of the power train can be much less
> > than current Toyota and GM/Chrysler/BMW systems.  The money saved
>can be
> > put into the higher kwhr batteries.
> > 4. New technology is being developed and now available for mass
>production.
> > 5. We have not integrated the system with affordable renewable electric
> > generation systems.
> >
> > There are many more advantages and value added features of PHEV's that
> > people are willing to pay for.
> >
> > Prof Andy Frank
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Jim (and others on the group)

I've tried to moderate this group with a lighter hand recently. But the
further this discussion (and the previouis thread, "PHEVs are starting to
get overhyped") gets form actual vehicles and CalCars projects, the more
inclined I am to request that this discussion continue off the group or at
other venues like:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gridable-hybrids/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/evworld/

where there are many people who are not members of this group but are very
well qualified to talk about these issues.

Thanks, Felix

--  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  -- --
        Felix Kramer  fkramer@...
       Founder  California Cars Initiative
              http://www.calcars.org
     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/calcars-news
     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/priusplus
      http://www.hybridcars.com/blogs/power
--  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  -- --

Prof Frank (and Ron),

Thanks for making these important points.  I know from talking to them
that the automakers are aware of how much consumers hate going to the
gas station, so if a PHEV reduces the number of trip to the gas
station, that's a big plus (as long as the plugging in isn't a big
hassle either...)

Given the reality of tentative automakers, isn't some kind of
augmented Hybrid ("Heavy Hybrid") the most likely path to getting a
commercialized PHEV?

Assuming that's true, what's the biggest change that's needed to
produce a true PHEV versus, say, the powertrain of the Prius/Escape?

It also seems that even given that, one still needs batteries, more or
less.  And in cranking the numbers, I couldn't get to anywhere near
$400 or $600 per kWhr for either Li-ion or NimH (I thought we were
abandoning them?  No?  Are we back to NimH at this point?).  I think I
got something like $800-$900 per kWhr for Li-Ion, but 4000 cycles is
slightly optimistic for them at this point.

So,can you flesh the basis for the $400 and $600/kWhr numbers a bit?

Thanks,

Jim


--- In priusplus@yahoogroups.com, Andy Frank <aafrank@u...> wrote:
>
> In answer to Jim's comments on the cost of batteries and cost parity
with
> conventional cars.  I'd like to point out a few important points.
>
> 1. PHEV's are not hybrids and are not conventional cars. because
they have
> many more desirable features.
> 2. the cost of batteries are not the same $/kwhr of the present
Prius or
> other currently manufactured batteries, since they do not have to
have the
> same power density. for the same power.
> 3. The Prius Plus should not be considered as the cost increment of
a PHEV
> because it is a retrofit and and not a complete system design where
as the
> batteries are increased and the motor is correspondingly up sized the
> engine can be down-sized and the transmission can be simpler using
other
> simpler more efficient CVT the cost of the power train can be much less
> than current Toyota and GM/Chrysler/BMW systems.  The money saved
can be
> put into the higher kwhr batteries.
> 4. New technology is being developed and now available for mass
production.
> 5. We have not integrated the system with affordable renewable electric
> generation systems.
>
> There are many more advantages and value added features of PHEV's that
> people are willing to pay for.
>
> Prof Andy Frank
>
>

Thanks to all at the EAA for their help and enthusiasm.
This approach is the hands-on equivalent to the work being done by EV
enthusiasts at http://www.pluginamerica.com

To get the word out further, at the CalCars-News group, under the subject,
"Do-It--Yourself Conversions: By Popular Demand"
http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/calcars-news/message/179

I've reposted Jerry's notice plus CalCars Tech Lead Ron Gremban's
informative and cautionary comments to this list from Oct 3:
<http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/priusplus/message/504>http://autos.groups.y\
ahoo.com/group/priusplus/message/504

and we will shortly update the CalCars website and PRIUS+ Fact Sheet to
reflect the existence of this new effort.

This group will remain focused on CalCars' ongoing conversions and related
discussions -- stay tuned!
As non-members will see from the note on the home page, this group is not
currently accepting new members -- the practical reason is that we don't
have the time to screen all the requests. But the discussions are viewable
to members and non-members alike. And Ron will shortly be posting an update
to the battery options spreadsheet, available to members in the files area,
and reflected for non-members at http://wwww.calcars/org/priusplus.html

Thanks for all your help!
Felix

At 12:29 AM 10/25/2005, Jerry Pohorsky wrote:
>The EAA (Electric Auto Association) approved the formation of a Special
>Interest Group (SIG) for Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEV) at their
>October 15th 2005 Board of directors meeting.   The intent is to make the
>information needed to convert a Hybrid Electric Vehicle such as the 2004 or
>2005 Toyota Prius into a PHEV (with substantial EV-only range) available to
>our members and others.  Some of the information is based on a working
>prototype PHEV Prius that has demonstrated the proof of concept.  Several
>hybrid related email groups already exist, however the information related
>to this EAA-PHEV project will be stored at the following website thanks to
>the efforts of EAA member Ryan Fulcher who is affiliated with the Seattle WA
>chapter.
>
>http://www.seattleeva.org/wiki/EAA-PHEV

--  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  -- --
        Felix Kramer  fkramer@...
       Founder  California Cars Initiative
              http://www.calcars.org
     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/calcars-news
     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/priusplus
      http://www.hybridcars.com/blogs/power
--  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  -- --

The EAA (Electric Auto Association) approved the formation of a Special
Interest Group (SIG) for Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEV) at their
October 15th 2005 Board of directors meeting.   The intent is to make the
information needed to convert a Hybrid Electric Vehicle such as the 2004 or
2005 Toyota Prius into a PHEV (with substantial EV-only range) available to
our members and others.  Some of the information is based on a working
prototype PHEV Prius that has demonstrated the proof of concept.  Several
hybrid related email groups already exist, however the information related
to this EAA-PHEV project will be stored at the following website thanks to
the efforts of EAA member Ryan Fulcher who is affiliated with the Seattle WA
chapter.

http://www.seattleeva.org/wiki/EAA-PHEV

At this website is an email list archive and instructions for subscribing to
the EAA-PHEV email list .

There are also links to relevant information and photos of work that has
been done by some of the more advanced Prius experimenters and developers of
hardware and software tools that enable PHEV technology.

Additional information about batteries, chargers and related items will be
added as time permits and progress is made.  Once the information about the
Prius has reached a certain level of maturity, other hybrids (such as the
Ford Escape) that are capable of EV only operation may be added depending on
member submissions.  Eventually there may be step by step plans although
this information may take quite a while to develop and refine.  Initially
much of the information will be contained within the text of various email
messages and through links to other websites.

Those who join the group are reminded to observe standard email etiquette
and be respectful of each other.  The information is provided as a public
service and the EAA assumes no liability for its use.   Anyone modifying a
Prius or other vehicle does so at their own risk and may void their
manufacturer's warranty.

Adios,

Jerry Pohorsky
EAA Silicon Valley Chapter President and EAA board member
Pohorsky at comcast dot net

In answer to Jim's comments on the cost of batteries and cost parity with
conventional cars.  I'd like to point out a few important points.

1. PHEV's are not hybrids and are not conventional cars. because they have
many more desirable features.
2. the cost of batteries are not the same $/kwhr of the present Prius or
other currently manufactured batteries, since they do not have to have the
same power density. for the same power.
3. The Prius Plud should not be considered as the cost increment of a PHEV
because it is a retrofit and and not a complete system design where as the
batteries are increased and the motor is correspondingly up sized the
engine can be down-sized and the transmission can be simpler using other
simpler more efficient CVT the cost of the power train can be much less
than current Toyota and GM/Chrysler/BMW systems.  The money saved can be
put into the higher kwhr batteries.
4. New technology is being developed and now available for mass production.
5. We have not integrated the system with affordable renewable electric
generation systems.

There are many more advantages and value added features of PHEV's that
people are willing to pay for.

Prof Andy Frank


At 09:17 AM 10/24/2005, you wrote:
>In lieu of a response from Ron, I'd say that it's very much in doubt.
>There's been talk about how the cost of battery packs will go down in
>price with quantity, but how much will this discount really be?  It
>would hard to believe that this discount would exceed 10-20% unless
>extremely large quantities are produced.  This could impact on ability
>of automakers to field PHEVs (initially in small quantities) at
>anything approaching cost parity.  [Even now, many question whether
>Toyota is actually making any money on their hybrids.  Ford is losing
>money on their Escapes.]
>
>One could argue that even higher gasoline prices will lower the tip
>point for battery technology, but over time, these higher energy costs
>will eventually impact on the battery costs as well, to some extent.
>
>This is a huge problem for the adoption of PHEVS that all the
>automakers know and express, but for which the boosters just seem to
>want to ignore.  The PHEVs being built now, ($12,000 conversions by
>E-drive systems) are far too expensive to be viable to the general
>public.  The is the elephant in the PHEV room that no-one wants to
>talk about.  PHEVs are advantageous over EVs because they solve the
>range and infrastructure issues.  The cost issue remains, however.
>
>I was just at an alternative energy conference, and I saw another
>instance of "Whistling past the graveyard"  (not acknowledging core
>concerns or problems).  It was the case of wind energy.  To reduce
>mean cost per kwhr produced, wind projects need to be large, but the
>NIMBY (not in my backyard) factor is immense.  Much larger than people
>want to admit.  Even Ted Kennedy objects to them.
>
>I think this issue (and the battery cost issue) can be addressed, and
>I am optimistic about PHEVs.  But I don't think brushing problems
>under the rug is the best way of handling them.  Politicians
>ill-equipped to handle this complexity will say silly things that will
>provide good talking points to critics.  That's why letting the
>politics get ahead of the technology may not minimize the time to
>adoption.
>
>The current bottom line is that the GGE cost due to the battery pack
>far exceeds the cost of the electricity itself.  By a factor of 10 at
>least.  Yet the electricity cost is the one most-often cited, and the
>battery cost is less-often cited and not even clearly understood.
>
>While I understand the technology is in flux, this could be construed
>as almost a deception.
>
>Many, many things in our socieity w.r.t. energy use would greatly
>improve if cheap, efficient batteries can be developed. Not just
>PHEVs.  Well, they haven't been at this time, despite lots of effort.
>I know that kinda sucks, but that's the way it is right now.
>
>-Jim
>
>
>--- In priusplus@yahoogroups.com, "Ken@J..." <ym1784@d...> wrote:
> >
> > --- In priusplus@yahoogroups.com, Ron Gremban <rgremban@c...> wrote:
> > [snip]
> > > This is an opportunity to announce what has already just happened:
> > > after just 200 cycles, the PbA pack wore out.
> >
> > I believe you paid $3,000 for the PbA system.
> > So, the cost about a single cycle was $15.
> > We can get 5 gallons of gas for $15, then Prius runs 200 miles at 40MPG.
> > Your PbA Prius runs about 20 miles per charge, right?
> >
> > Are you confident the EEI's NiMH will be worth for money?
> >
> > Ken@Japan
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

--- In priusplus@yahoogroups.com, Ron Gremban <rgremban@c...> wrote:
>

>
> First, let me address Ken's comments before moving on to Jim's.  Ken,
>
> Jim brings up the overall PHEV battery cost/value proposition.

Using Ron's numbers:

> At $600/kWh capacity, this amounts to $0.21 per kWh
> throughput; at $400/kWh, $0.14.
> IS higher than the cost of electricity (e.g. 8.8 cents/kWh or 2.6
> cents/mi),

Let's just stick with the kWhs for a moment, as "miles" is way too
dependent on speed, etc. and other factors.

So with battery+elec.  we have $0.298 or $0.228 per kWh.

For gasoline, can we estimate how much kWh the Prius engine produces?
Assuming 30% efficiency, we have 1 gallon of gasoline (36 kWh) netting
out  10.8 kWh.  At 33%, we have 11.88 kWh.  At $3.00 per gallon, that
is  $0.28 to $0.25 per kWh.

Well, that's pretty close.  Gasoline has a gas tax on it, so at
(untaxed) prices, we'd have something more like $2.25 per gallon.
That would give us $0.208 to $0.189 per kWh. If gas was taxed higher,
($4.00 per gallon) then we be up to $0.37 to $0.337 per kWh.

>
> Remember all the significant social advantages of EV vs. gasoline
> propulsion.  Even small incentives acknowledging these advantages >
> could make up for any small temporary (until production quantities >
> begin to approach those of ICE vehicles) life cycle cost differences
> that my figures above imply.

Nah.  Not enough people think that way when it comes to their wallets.

What I'm getting out of this:

1.  PHEVs not THAT far off economically.  I think adding ONLY the cost
of the battery pack for the PHEV is kind of a simplification and
retail green electricity is a bit higher, but no horribly unrealistic
assumptions are being made.

2.  Gas tax is really important.  At this price point, oil
fluctuations bring the PHEV in and out of economic viability.  A
higher gas tax could really solidify the baseline so that alternative
strategies could be pursued in this country.

3.  PHEVs are competing not only against gasoline, but other
alternative fuels such as cellulosic ethanol or Fischer-Tropsch fuels
derived from coal.

This reminds me an observation I made not that long ago.  It's very
hard to beat gasoline at even $3.00 per gallon.  But as the price
rises to $4.00 or $5.00, then almost anything can compete with it.

PHEVs will continue to walk this tightrope between gasoline and other
alternatives until either batteries get better or (more likely) green
electricity drops some more.

If I were an automaker, I'd build a hybrid car (with some fuel
flexibility) that could accommodate 0-20 miles or so of battery
capability.  And I'd lobby for a higher gas tax, as it would make my
life a lot more predictable.

Oh, and I'd send money to calcars by the bucketful....  :)

-Jim

> > after just 200 cycles, the PbA pack wore out.  -  Ron
_________________________________________________________
> ....you paid $3,000 for the PbA system.
> So, the cost about a single cycle was $15.
> We can get 5 gallons of gas for $15, then Prius runs 200 miles at 40MPG.
> Your PbA Prius runs about 20 miles per charge, right?

... Ken@Japan
__________________________________________________________

As Jim said: "in lieu of Ron":

You change the battery pack: the rest stays.

ICE vs. BEV operating cost is effectively "gas replacement" vs.
"battery replacement".

The pack is 18 $38 (retail) batteries = $700
200 cycles of 20 miles each = 4000 miles

This gives battery cost of 17 cents a mile, equivalent to about 18 mpg
at $3/gallon.

That's in the ballpark. Not over the fence, but not in the graveyard
by a long shot.

Rich

--- In priusplus@yahoogroups.com, "Ken@J..." <ym1784@d...> wrote:
  >
  > --- In priusplus@yahoogroups.com, Ron Gremban <rgremban@c...> wrote:
  > [snip]
  > > This is an opportunity to announce what has already just happened:
  > > after just 200 cycles, the PbA pack wore out.
  >
  > I believe you paid $3,000 for the PbA system.
  > So, the cost about a single cycle was $15.
  > We can get 5 gallons of gas for $15, then Prius runs 200 miles at 40MPG.
  > Your PbA Prius runs about 20 miles per charge, right?
  >
  > Are you confident the EEI's NiMH will be worth for money?
  >
  > Ken@Japan

First, let me address Ken's comments before moving on to Jim's.  Ken,
you are right about the PbA cycle costs being high, though the correct
figures are below:
     PbA battery pack cost:   $700
     Approx. lifetime cycles:   200
     Approx. pure EV miles/cycle:   10
     Approx. $/EV-mile:   $0.35/mile

This cost, more than 10x the cost of electricity, is obviously way too
high to be a value proposition.

Jim brings up the overall PHEV battery cost/value proposition.  For it
to be effective, a battery pack must last the lifetime of the vehicle.
California's emissions control laws define this as 10 years or 150,000
miles.  10 years of every day charging is 3650 cycles, so 4000 cycles is
a good goal.  Various NiMH and Li-ion batteries, when operated within
careful limits (as modern electronics can easily ensure), are capable of
this level of longevity.  Below, I'll go into costs in detail.

However, as only a few PHEVs -- and only a limited number of pure EVs
with advanced batteries -- have ever been built, there is a dearth of
real-world experience to back up battery longevity claims in the field.
Even laboratory data, whose applicability to real-world driving is
uncertain, can require a year or more of testing for each new battery
design -- and new designs and improvements are coming at a pace that is
far faster than the cycle life testing is keeping up with.

This uncertainty, I believe, is the real challenge for the rapid
deployment of PHEVs:  short of years of deployment and careful
monitoring of small fleets of PHEVs, the only option is for someone to
take the risk to guarantee battery life in PHEVs despite insufficient
data to know that there will not be problems as the vehicles age.
Actually, if one assumes that PHEVs WILL ramp up in quantities sold over
time, the risk need not be excessive, for three reasons.  First, if the
first batteries do turn out to have too limited a lifetime, it will be
years before the problem shows up.  By then, battery prices will have
presumably gone down significantly, and replacement batteries will cost
much less than the original.  Second, if the number of PHEVs built each
year increases dramatically, the costs associated with fixing the
earliest few before battery longevity problems were found and addressed
will be a small percentage of current sales.  And third:  the upside of
the bet is a HUGE battery market.

Now, for some cost/benefit figures.  In my "Battery evaluation and
production cost summary" message of July 21, I stated that I believe an
auto manufacturer would currently pay $600/kWh or less for a NiMH
battery pack capable of 150,000 miles, or $400/kWh for a Li-ion pack.
These costs should decrease as PHEVs become dominant.  Let's say that
either pack is capable of 4000 cycles at 70% depth-of-discharge (DOD).
That works out to 2800 kWh lifetime throughput per kWh of battery
capacity.  At $600/kWh capacity, this amounts to $0.21 per kWh
throughput; at $400/kWh, $0.14.  At 4 Prius EV miles per kWh throughput,
this amounts to 5.4 or 3.6 cents per mile respectively.  For now, this
IS higher than the cost of electricity (e.g. 8.8 cents/kWh or 2.6
cents/mi), but not prohibitive.  Adding battery and electricity, one
gets 8 or 6.2 cents/mile.   For comparison, gasoline for a Prius, at
$3.00/gallon and 45 mpg, currently comes to 6.7 cents per mile.  Then
there is oil, spark plugs, and other ICE maintenance that is reduced as
the EV portion of a vehicle's mileage is increased.

Remember all the significant social advantages of EV vs. gasoline
propulsion.  Even small incentives acknowledging these advantages could
make up for any small temporary (until production quantities begin to
approach those of ICE vehicles) life cycle cost differences that my
figures above imply.

jb_hybrid_ford wrote:

> In lieu of a response from Ron, I'd say that it's very much in doubt.

<snip>

> This is a huge problem for the adoption of PHEVS that all the
> automakers know and express, but for which the boosters just seem to
> want to ignore.  The PHEVs being built now, ($12,000 conversions by
> E-drive systems) are far too expensive to be viable to the general
> public.  The is the elephant in the PHEV room that no-one wants to
> talk about.  PHEVs are advantageous over EVs because they solve the
> range and infrastructure issues.  The cost issue remains, however.
>
> <snip>
> -Jim

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
     Ron Gremban, rgremban@...
     California Cars Initiative, a nonprofit organization: 
http://www.CalCars.org
     Moderator & Technical Lead
     http://www.priusplus.org
     PRIUS+ PHEV Conversion Group:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/priusplus
     Newsletter:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/calcars-news
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

In lieu of a response from Ron, I'd say that it's very much in doubt.
There's been talk about how the cost of battery packs will go down in
price with quantity, but how much will this discount really be?  It
would hard to believe that this discount would exceed 10-20% unless
extremely large quantities are produced.  This could impact on ability
of automakers to field PHEVs (initially in small quantities) at
anything approaching cost parity.  [Even now, many question whether
Toyota is actually making any money on their hybrids.  Ford is losing
money on their Escapes.]

One could argue that even higher gasoline prices will lower the tip
point for battery technology, but over time, these higher energy costs
will eventually impact on the battery costs as well, to some extent.

This is a huge problem for the adoption of PHEVS that all the
automakers know and express, but for which the boosters just seem to
want to ignore.  The PHEVs being built now, ($12,000 conversions by
E-drive systems) are far too expensive to be viable to the general
public.  The is the elephant in the PHEV room that no-one wants to
talk about.  PHEVs are advantageous over EVs because they solve the
range and infrastructure issues.  The cost issue remains, however.

I was just at an alternative energy conference, and I saw another
instance of "Whistling past the graveyard"  (not acknowledging core
concerns or problems).  It was the case of wind energy.  To reduce
mean cost per kwhr produced, wind projects need to be large, but the
NIMBY (not in my backyard) factor is immense.  Much larger than people
want to admit.  Even Ted Kennedy objects to them.

I think this issue (and the battery cost issue) can be addressed, and
I am optimistic about PHEVs.  But I don't think brushing problems
under the rug is the best way of handling them.  Politicians
ill-equipped to handle this complexity will say silly things that will
provide good talking points to critics.  That's why letting the
politics get ahead of the technology may not minimize the time to
adoption.

The current bottom line is that the GGE cost due to the battery pack
far exceeds the cost of the electricity itself.  By a factor of 10 at
least.  Yet the electricity cost is the one most-often cited, and the
battery cost is less-often cited and not even clearly understood.

While I understand the technology is in flux, this could be construed
as almost a deception.

Many, many things in our socieity w.r.t. energy use would greatly
improve if cheap, efficient batteries can be developed. Not just
PHEVs.  Well, they haven't been at this time, despite lots of effort.
I know that kinda sucks, but that's the way it is right now.

-Jim


--- In priusplus@yahoogroups.com, "Ken@J..." <ym1784@d...> wrote:
>
> --- In priusplus@yahoogroups.com, Ron Gremban <rgremban@c...> wrote:
> [snip]
> > This is an opportunity to announce what has already just happened:
> > after just 200 cycles, the PbA pack wore out.
>
> I believe you paid $3,000 for the PbA system.
> So, the cost about a single cycle was $15.
> We can get 5 gallons of gas for $15, then Prius runs 200 miles at 40MPG.
> Your PbA Prius runs about 20 miles per charge, right?
>
> Are you confident the EEI's NiMH will be worth for money?
>
> Ken@Japan
>

--- In priusplus@yahoogroups.com, Ron Gremban <rgremban@c...> wrote:
[snip]
> This is an opportunity to announce what has already just happened:
> after just 200 cycles, the PbA pack wore out.

I believe you paid $3,000 for the PbA system.
So, the cost about a single cycle was $15.
We can get 5 gallons of gas for $15, then Prius runs 200 miles at 40MPG.
Your PbA Prius runs about 20 miles per charge, right?

Are you confident the EEI's NiMH will be worth for money?

Ken@Japan

jukai27278 wrote:

> Has anyone seen a suggested retail price on these yet, as citied in
> the press release? I'd like to try a set in my electric scooter
> conversion, and am wondering if the lightened version could give me
> the weight-to-charge density ratio I need to run it (finally) at
> higher voltages than 48v...thanks for any info.

No, as far as I know, Electro Energy (EEI) has not yet set a retail
price on any of their battery packs.  They expect to be "competitive",
but, in the short run at least, I would expect them to be more likely to
design modules, packs, and controls for custom OEM applications than
come up with an array of retail products.  However, I do not know their
plans.

>
> What will folks do with the battery packs of the Prius after the point
> that these Nimh's become a total replacement option? Sell on ebay?

This is an opportunity to announce what has already just happened:
after just 200 cycles, the PbA pack wore out.  Internal resistance
increased to where regenerative braking was causing overvoltage at any
state-of-charge (SOC), and I could get only about 2/3 of the original
capacity (8 vs. 12 Ah) before the voltage kept going below the minimum
180V needed to sustain EV-only mode.  I replaced three of the worst
battery modules, but it helped only slightly.

Therefore, since the NiMH aren't quite here yet and we have a full
demonstration schedule, we bought a new set of PbA modules and replaced
the whole pack.  It has made a large difference in performance.  By the
way, I'll put in a pitch here:  we have been getting our PbA batteries
from http://www.ElectricRider.com.  They have treated us very well, are
good people to get EV parts from, and their BB Battery PbA modules are
very effective for the price and weight.

The old batteries are probably good for applications that don't require
current peaks of 180A and charging current peaks of 120A -- even brand
new PbA batteries are quite marginal for this application, and I am
actually quite impressed at the job they have done.  Someone can have
them for the price of shipping, especially if you can use all of them.

We may have another vehicle to transfer our new PbA battery pack to once
the NiMH pack arrives.

/ron

>
> Thanks,
>
> Peter
>
>
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS
> 2004 prius
>
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=2004+prius&w1=2004+prius&w2=Alternative+fue\
ls&c=2&s=39&.sig=mohBv-03-sKEkaIzpq3MTw>
>  Alternative fuels
>
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Alternative+fuels&w1=2004+prius&w2=Alternat\
ive+fuels&c=2&s=39&.sig=z8qzhV0gJuqBX1ktqlG06Q>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>     *  Visit your group "priusplus
>       <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/priusplus>" on the web.
>
>     *  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>        priusplus-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>       <mailto:priusplus-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>
>     *  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
>       Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>

--
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
     Ron Gremban, rgremban@...
     California Cars Initiative, a nonprofit organization: 
http://www.CalCars.org
     Moderator & Technical Lead
     http://www.priusplus.org
     PRIUS+ PHEV Conversion Group:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/priusplus
     Newsletter:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/calcars-news
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Has anyone seen a suggested retail price on these yet, as citied in
the press release? I'd like to try a set in my electric scooter
conversion, and am wondering if the lightened version could give me
the weight-to-charge density ratio I need to run it (finally) at
higher voltages than 48v...thanks for any info.

What will folks do with the battery packs of the Prius after the point
that these Nimh's become a total replacement option? Sell on ebay?

Thanks,

Peter

http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/calcars-news/message/175

And see Ron's Oct 6 posting about the technology
http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/priusplus/message/513

We'll have additional reports as the project develops. But since we're
working with a public company, the information we can make available may at
times be more limited.

--  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  -- --
        Felix Kramer  fkramer@...
       Founder  California Cars Initiative
              http://www.calcars.org
     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/calcars-news
     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/priusplus
      http://www.hybridcars.com/blogs/power
--  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  -- --

Electro Energy <http://www.electroenergyinc.com> (Nasdaq: EEEI), a
company with an upcoming line of very innovative "bi-polar" nickel-
metal hydride batteries, is currently completing custom design of a
prototype battery pack for CalCars' PRIUS+.  CalCars hopes to use
these batteries to demonstrate that NiMH, already in use in hundreds
of thousands of hybrid cars, are capable of powering effective
production-vehicle-based PHEVs.  And in the future, we hope to
demonstrate EEEI's batteries on other vehicle platforms.

I am now at Electro Energy's facilities in Danbury, CT to complete
and verify operation in their Prius, after which the pack will be
shipped to CalCars.  Though engineering has been in progress for
some time, I had not yet reported it here because we were still in
negotiations.

Electro Energy's bipolar design based on flat wafer NiMH cells, in a
sealed package, are stacked together under pressure in sealed
modules.  This patented technique has resulted in higher power and
energy densities for the nickel-metal hydride chemistry, and results
in reduced weight, volume and costs, with increased performance.
Also, overcharging and overdischarging of any cell pack can be
detected non-electrically, eliminating the need to monitor tapped
voltages.  Since we will be using two parallel strings of modules,
it is also worth noting that this system also provides a way to
disconnect the first-fully-charged of two parallel strings of
modules during charging, to ensure that both strings get fully
charged.

Our first prototype battery will be heavier than those that Electro
Energy is gearing up to produce in a few months.  Here are the
specs, which I will soon put into my battery spreadsheet:

Prototype:
60 cells/module, 72V nominal, 17 Ah, 70 lb, approx. 0.2 ohm internal
resistance
      6 modules => two strings of 180 cells in parallel, 216V
nominal, 34 Ah, 420 lb, approx. 0.3 ohm internal resistance (vs.
0.35 for the OEM pack)

Eventual:  90 cells/module, 108V nominal, 17 Ah, 73 lb, approx. 0.2
ohm internal resistance
      4 modules => two strings of 180 cells in parallel, 216V
nominal, 34 Ah, 292 lb approx. 0.2 ohm internal resistance (vs. 0.35
for the OEM pack)

The eventual weight is similar to that of our current PbA battery
pack.  Once we remove the OEM battery, added weight is expected to
be around 200 lb.  However, with the prototype pack, unless we
immediately remove the OEM batteries, added weight will be over 400
lb!  We are therefore looking for air shocks or other effective,
reversible means of raising the rear Prius suspension while it is
carrying double the eventual extra weight.  I will post a request
for a solution, but if you are reading this and have one, please
chime in.

The expected PRIUS+ performance with the Electro Energy pack is as
follows:
      EV-only range:   20-25 miles
      Average mixed-driving mpg and range: 90 mpg for 40-50 miles
      Charge time (Brusa charger, 120V, 15A outlet):   6 hours

Note also that the prototype pack should have lower internal
resistance  than the OEM hybrid battery, and the eventual pack
should have much lower internal resistance.  Though I haven't made
the internal resistance measurements myself, these are not, as with
the "D" cells I tested, gleaned from ideal 'typical' curves, but
specific measurements made by engineers with whom I have been
working closely.  Given what we have learned from others that have
decreased a Prius battery's internal resistance, the eventual pack
should increase the hybrid system's efficiency enough to more than
make up for any mileage losses due to its additional 200 lb --
meaning that even non-plug-in city mileage should be increased at
least slightly (and non-plug-in highway mileage should continue to
be unaffected).

Since Toyota's existing fleet of RAV4EVs has already proven
that deep-cycled NiMH battery packs can have long lifetimes in
electric vehicles, Electro Energy and CalCars will thereby prove
that NiMH batteries are capable of powering effective production-
vehicle-based PHEVs.

At that point, having used our Prius conversion as a test-bed, we
hope to put EEI's batteries to use on other vehicle platforms.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
      Ron Gremban, rgremban@...
      California Cars Initiative, a nonprofit
organization:  http://www.CalCars.org
      Moderator & Technical Lead
      http://www.priusplus.org
      PRIUS+ PHEV Conversion Group:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/priusplus
      Newsletter:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/calcars-news

Well, then perhaps this is close enough to be on topic as well.  It
may impact powertrain design.

I was thinking how PHEVs might interact with an electric overhead wire
system, similar to what is already used by electric buses or trolleys.

Obviously, it's an infrastructure cost, but it could be concentrated
in areas of high use, and would be optional for use of the vehicle.

The PHEV would pass through one of these areas and quickly "sip" a bit
of energy to take it further.  RFID tags or similar technology could
monitor use, though the electricity could probably just be given away
freely.

Lanes of connection could exist on highways, to recharge PHEVs and
trucks, perhaps even long enough to take them to the next charging
site.

Has this been seriously considered?  It would be cheaper than the
"Hydrogen Highway", I'd think.  I'm not sure how fast a charge could
be delivered (It could be fast for UCAPS) and how much would be
useful.  Overall, it would reduce the needed battery size for the car,
which is a good thing.  It also fits well with the philosphy of "store
electrical energy as short a time as possible" to save expense.

-Jim

--- In priusplus@yahoogroups.com, murdoch <murdoch@h...> wrote:
> >The other areas (aerodynamics, lightweight materials, etc.) are not
> >related to powertrain so I really think they are off topic.
>
> They may be somewhat offtopic for supercaps and batteries, but they
> are not offtopic for MPG improvements and exploring better ways of
> building HEVs and PHEVs.
>
> We have been discussing some of this in the EVWorld.com yahoo group,
> including with a person who has a background as an aerodynamicist
and
> who recently won an aware for driving his aerodynamically-modified
VW
> in a way that got him superb mileage.
>
> I speculated to him, and will repeat here, that if we build vehicles
> where the engine is turned off much of the time, then during those
> times the aerodynamic requirements of the vehicle are altered away
> from conventional ICE-engine-breathing and perhaps it will be
possible
> to squeeze some added mpg improvements from this fact.
Pure-BEV-mode
> operation does not necessarily have the same aerodynamic
configuration
> optimization requirements as ICE-Hybrid-mode operation.

On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 23:02:57 -0700, you wrote:

>Was:  Re: [priusplus] Re: speculation as to how supercaps can play a
>role in a good PHEV
>
>jb_hybrid_ford wrote:
>
>> I think this is a very important area to explore.  As Ron can attest,
>> there are some tantalizing hints that a great deal of efficiency
>> improvement can be obtained.  The overall system may even be lower
>> cost, because of the increased battery life.
>
>1.  The available efficiency improvements with supercaps are limited to
>elimination of hybrid battery losses.   In a Prius, the hybrid battery's
>cycle efficiency at its average working current is around 70%.  Another
>way of looking at it is that average dissipation in the battery is no
>more than 1 kW or so -- little enough for effective forced air cooling.
>If this loss were *completely* eliminated, it would mean a gain of 1 kWh
>per hour.  Since the Prius can travel just under 5 miles on 1 kWh, it
>would mean an improved mileage of up to 5 miles each hour.  At 70 mph,
>this is a 7% improvement; in 35 mph city driving, a 14% improvement.  It
>would be unreasonable to expect any more improvement than this in hybrid
>fuel economy via any use of supercapacitors -- either along with or in
>place of batteries!
>
>2.  Supercapacitors, used with batteries, may indeed improve battery
>life.  However, once again I believe the gains will be smaller than
>often anticipated.  The reason is this:  the three commonly encountered
>effects that are the largest factors in shortening a battery's life are
>depth of discharge, high temperatures, and overcharging.  Let's look at
>each.

Your calculations are interesting. However, they are calculations and
need some verification.  I absolutely do not claim CalCars should
necessarily to be the ones to go to that trouble and expense, but I
point it out because I think it needs to be said, and because we can
accomplish a lot I think by continuing to discuss, flesh out ideas,
and be aware where others do in fact go to the time and expense.

Again, I take to heart also your comment about a lingering need to get
real-world experience with battery longevity.  I think it's hard for
us to put a price on accumulating good real-world experience with a
lot of these new ideas.

Also, I think the use of the idea of "batteries" is too general.
Supercaps might have markedly different battery lifetime extension
effects, depending on the battery and the setup.

1. I did a lot of homework on Maxwell about 4 years ago, in
preparation for interviewing them.  One of the things that came up was
that mention they made somewhere on their site of having combined
supercaps with conventional lead-acid (SLI?) in a primitive BEV, and
the had dramatically improved battery lifetimes (by 2 or 3 times?)  I
will see if I can find the link.....

I can no longer readily find the link on their site.  However, here is
the interview I did carry out, and apparently I mentioned this issue
in one of my questions to them (I quote the relevant portion, but keep
in mind that the question and answers are four years old... I had
forgotten that Solectria at some point was mentioned in terms of
trying ultracaps?):

http://maxwell.com/ultracapacitors/news/inthenews/interview.html


>JL: In the fairly well-publicized debates with the California Air Resources
Board, a really big factor has been cost... the cost of the proposed electric
cars, the cost of proposed hybrid cars, and anything that could bring the cost
down has to be regarded as super-important, especially if you're slightly
replacing some of an advanced battery pack that's extremely expensive, and I
note a lot of your literature emphasizes that it saves on battery life. [Do you]
extend battery life?
>
>RS: Yes, if you're in a cycling application, most batteries have a limited
life, depends on the depth of discharge, and a lot of the advanced technology
batteries, they're very expensive and they don't last very long in heavy
cycling. So, what you'd like to do is to say, "What is the economic solution?",
the heart of the question, what is the economic solution. It's strongly our
belief that the economic solution is to take the simplest battery that is very
acceptable today, [..] the standard lead-acid battery, which is very low on
cost, and use it for the energy drain portion of either a hybrid or an electric
vehicle, but to pair it up like the Solectria experiment with capacitors. And
then the capacitors do all the power function.
>
>It turns out in another research project that was done in University of Hawaii
under DARPA funding, we basically took a starting battery, a standard lead-acid
battery, put it with capacitors and then cycled it many, many times and we found
that we not only got the extended range, a fact that Solectria also
demonstrated, but we got about two and a half times battery life. In other
words, the batteries lasted.... If they would have lasted 2000 cycles they
lasted 5000 cycles....
>
>JL: ...Wow...
>
>RS: ...So it's a significant impact on the cost. And also you're replacing a
very low cost battery instead of a very high cost battery. And you get all the
benefit of some of the exotic chemistry batteries. And actually you get more
benefit because we'll work at a broader temperature range and we'll be more
efficient at very low temperatures than the batteries will.

Since it's been four years, I wonder what new data has turned up, and
there is still the open question as to whether Cobasys technology (or
some of the other respected advanced battery technologies) would
benefit, and by how much, with use of supercaps.

2.  This ISE Thundervolt link also turns up, in terms of getting us a
bit further feedback on someone's more recent experience with trying
to use ultracaps in a significant HEV prototyping effort.

They've used used Maxwell product and built large scale HEVs (busses).
I think some of their products are PHEV, but I'm not sure. [Note a bit
of politics... possibly not important,.... they are geographically in
the same city as Maxwell.]

http://www.isecorp.com/hybrid_information_center/documents/technical_paper_ultra\
caps.pdf

Starting around pages 7 or 8 there is some discussion of the exact
topic here... some experiments that Maxwell did to try to evaluate
effect of supercaps on battery life, but unfortunately they are
talking about AA batteries.  The effects were most dramatic (about 80%
improvement in life?) for the worst batteries, with somewhat less
dramatic improvements for better batteries.

At the least, based on some of how you seem to approach things, I
think you'll find the conclusions starting on page 10 to be somewhat
interesting reading, keeping in mind that the tests are meant to be
"indicative" not "conclusive" and that the author is in searcing for
information relevant to battery packs for busses.... packs even far
larger than we are seeking, so he is just trying to develop some ideas
as well, from the limited initial-returns on the topic.... not
pretending to himself (I don't think) that a few tests with AAs will
prove out everything we need to know.

He goes on to discuss not one but two busses where batteries and
Maxwell Ultracaps have been combined.  One project was terminated
prematurely due to some leak in seals with the Maxwell project
(important note: if they were to catch fire, this would be a
life-and-death poisonous-emissions issue, I think.... check with
them).  The other project is in transition of some sort as of the
writing.





>
>   a.  Depth of discharge.  What a supercap stack can do working in
>conjunction with a battery, is to soften current spikes the battery
>would otherwise see.  A hybrid battery will probably have 10 times the
>energy storage capacity of the supercap stack (20-100 times for a PHEV
>battery), but the supercaps will have lower internal resistance, thereby
>smoothing out short-duration current spikes.  However, existing hybrid
>batteries are already capable of handling hundreds of thousands of tiny
>discharge-and-charge cycles, and in California are by law guaranteed for
>10 years or 150,000 miles -- the expected life of the vehicle.
>Supercaps will last longer, but will it matter?
>
>   b.  High temperatures.  A supercap stack working with a hybrid or
>PHEV battery would reduce cycle losses by smoothing current peaks,
>thereby reducing the heat the battery must dissipate.  This could lower
>temperatures and improve battery lifetime.  However, a well-designed
>battery pack will already have sufficient cooling to avoid the
>life-sapping high temperatures anyway.
>
>   c.  Overcharging.  This is a result of the battery control
>electronics.  Often a degree of overcharge is intentionally used to
>provide charge balancing services.  Otherwise, good battery management
>electronics, not supercaps, is what is needed to remove this battery
>ageing process.
>
>The '04 Prius is a hybrid where all the really major effeciency-gaining
>steps have already been taken, along with many, many minor ones.  For
>example, the engine's crankshaft has been offset from directly under the
>pistons, so that the power stroke is more direct, removing a small
>amount of bearing friction.  Here are some guesses on the maximum that
>might be gained from some of the most important areas yet to be tuned in
>hybrids like the Prius:
>
>1.  More efficient battery (larger, better, or improved with or replaced
>by supercaps:  10% city, 5% highway
>
>2.  Exhaust turbine driving a generator:  15% city or highway (Andy
>Frank hopes to use this technique to improve the peak efficiency of a
>Prius engine from 38% (already impressive) to 45%)
>
>3.  Better aerodynamics:  5% city (little low-speed drag is
>aerodynamic), 15% highway (Prius) or 33% highway (SUV)
>
>4.  Lightweight materials:   30% city, 5% highway (most highway drag is
>aerodynamic)
>
>5.  Total, assuming 1/2 of each maximum is actually likely:  25% city,
>17% highway (Prius) or 25% highway (SUV)
>
>6.  Effective real mileage from total maximized future efficiency
>improvements:
>   Prius (45 mpg actual existing city & highway):  city, 60 mpg;
>highway, 54 mpg
>   Escape (30 mpg actual existing city & highway):  city, 46 mpg;
>highway, 46 mpg
>
>Of these opportunities for efficiency improvement, only the exhaust
>turbine -- with a modest 15% possible improvement -- would improve
>gasoline (or other liquid fuel) efficiency without simultaneously
>improving a PHEV's electric fuel efficiency.  Therefore, none would
>significantly reduce the relative value of PHEVs vs. pure hybrids.
>
>>
>> That all is fairly apparent to those looking into this issue.  What is
>> less apparent is the impact of this work on PHEVs.  It could be
>> dramatic.  It could be so dramatic that PHEVs might not be needed at
>> all (or more likely, it could delay their logical (i.e. economic)
>> introduction by several years).  In a lot of these energy studies, I
>> am reminded of the great line that Bill Murray had in "Tootsie":  "I'm
>> going to rewrite the necktie scene without the necktie".
>
>See above.  Also, I believe we will discover that the peak oil and
>global warming problems are so intractable, yet vital to quickly
>address, that we will need to throw everything we have at them,
>including hybrids, PHEVs, lightweight materials, efficiency
>improvements, biofuels from farm waste, wind and solar electric
>generation, carbon sequestration, and anything else we can come up with
>that actually helps.
>
>Personally, I can even see a role for enough nuclear generation to burn
>up the stockpiles of fissile uranium and plotonium left over from the
>cold war, thereby hopefully reducing, though not eliminating, yet
>another horrible and intractable problem.
>
>In fact, given that it has recently been discovered that global warming
>was masked (reduced) for years by the industrialized world's high but
>now dimishing output of particulate air pollution, we may need to
>temporarily reduce the effects of global warming (at the cost of mucking
>with weather patterns) by adding something to jet fuel -- which, by the
>way, is going to have to change from petroleum to biofuel, too -- to
>reflect some sunlight before it reaches the earth.
>
><snip>
>
>/ron
>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>    Ron Gremban, rgremban@...
>    California Cars Initiative, a nonprofit organization: 
http://www.CalCars.org
>    Moderator & Technical Lead
>    http://www.priusplus.org
>    PRIUS+ PHEV Conversion Group:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/priusplus
>    Newsletter:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/calcars-news
>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>

>The other areas (aerodynamics, lightweight materials, etc.) are not
>related to powertrain so I really think they are off topic.

They may be somewhat offtopic for supercaps and batteries, but they
are not offtopic for MPG improvements and exploring better ways of
building HEVs and PHEVs.

We have been discussing some of this in the EVWorld.com yahoo group,
including with a person who has a background as an aerodynamicist and
who recently won an aware for driving his aerodynamically-modified VW
in a way that got him superb mileage.

I speculated to him, and will repeat here, that if we build vehicles
where the engine is turned off much of the time, then during those
times the aerodynamic requirements of the vehicle are altered away
from conventional ICE-engine-breathing and perhaps it will be possible
to squeeze some added mpg improvements from this fact.  Pure-BEV-mode
operation does not necessarily have the same aerodynamic configuration
optimization requirements as ICE-Hybrid-mode operation.

I apologize (again) for getting this conversation off track.  I didn't
mean to imply a false dichotomy for PHEVs vs. SuperCaps.  But since
they are related to the powertrain, somewhat closely, then it seemed
to me they shouldn't be examined in isolation to each other.

I think the Supercap issue is a bit confusing:

Ron Gremban 6/17/05:

"However, I would not be surprised if overall mileage could be
increased 10-20% merely via the addition of a Maxwell supercap string
in parallel with the Prius' OEM hybrid battery. And, if it had any
effect on battery life, it would improve it. At 12,000 miles/year, 50
mpg, and $2.50/gal, one would save 24-48 gallons and thereby
$60-120/year. At $400-500, this could be a reasonable investment,
though at current low volume prices of $2400-4000 it would never pay
for itself."

Ron Gremban 8/29/05:

"My guess today would be 0-5% improvement of ordinary Prius hybrid
mileage by a 20 lb string of 18 BPAK0350-15EAs; though the larger and
heavier DMOD2600-16s might provide the 10-20% I mentioned.  And I just
had someone else provide a tip about 3-10kF supercaps at $0.01 or less
per Farad, with the 3000F ones less than 1/2 the weight of the Maxwell
2600F ones (87 lb vs. 200 lb per string).  I have asked for but don't
yet have details about these other supercaps.  Any of the three could
be worth trying out in parallel with the Prius OEM hybrid battery,
though such experiments would be off-purpose for CalCars."

Ron Gremban 9/07/05:

"What he is doing is very similar in effect but much heavier than
putting supercaps in parallel with or as a replacement to the Prius'
hybrid battery.  If he is accurate about the 75 mpg, and most of that
isn't due to extra-fuel-efficient driving, it means that
supercapacitors may be able to increase hybrid efficiency more than
the 5-15% I see as likely.  Eventually, we need to stop quessing and
get someone to do the experiment -- in a scientific way and with (for
a Prius) at least a 25 Farad capacitor stack (e.g. 108 Maxwell MC2600
2600F, 2.7V supercaps)."

I am not qualified to challenge Ron' points:

1. Efficiency improvements limited to hybrid battery losses (7-14%)
2. Supercaps improve battery performance (but not that much)

It was unclear in the discussion of #1, but wouldn't Supercaps also
improve regenerative braking quantity (as well as efficiency)?  I
couldn't tell if this was covered under #1.

As for #2, I couldn't help but notice as an apparent technical
reason:

"...and in California are by law guaranteed for 10 years or 150,000
miles -- the expected life of the vehicle."

A legal mandate is not a technical solution.  If a solution is not
available, then it is a cost that has to be borne elsewhere.  Don't
get me started with CARB and their technical expertise in developing
legislation....  (grrr.....)  :)

The other areas (aerodynamics, lightweight materials, etc.) are not
related to powertrain so I really think they are off topic.

A higher overall efficiency would reduce the battery pack needed to
go the required 20 miles.  This lowers the cost of the most
problematic cost element which is the main problem with the acceptance
of PHEVs (and BEVs) by the automakers.  In that case a 10-15%
improvement is a big help.

* * * * *

As to the general nature of our energy problems, I feel the need to
remind the California folks that global warming and oil depletion are
largely orthogonal problems.  (The Swedish have studied this...)

In addition to general efficiency and conservation improvements, the
lowest hanging fruit for global warming is displacing coal-fired
electricity (with nuclear or wind farms).

The lowest hanging fruit for oil depletion is improving vehicle MPG.
That is most cheaply done by introducing more hybrids.  As mentioned
earlier, getting a 20 MPG SUV up to 30 MPG does more than taking a
Prius from 40 MPG to 60 MPG.  Adding more ethanol and bio-derived
methanol to the fuel mixes will help some too.  PHEVs should follow
naturally from hybrids, if the batteries can be made cheap enough.


-Jim

So is a Supercap test in the works or not?   Barring that, maybe a
'How-To' Book as was requested?

Was:  Re: [priusplus] Re: speculation as to how supercaps can play a
role in a good PHEV

jb_hybrid_ford wrote:

> I think this is a very important area to explore.  As Ron can attest,
> there are some tantalizing hints that a great deal of efficiency
> improvement can be obtained.  The overall system may even be lower
> cost, because of the increased battery life.

1.  The available efficiency improvements with supercaps are limited to
elimination of hybrid battery losses.   In a Prius, the hybrid battery's
cycle efficiency at its average working current is around 70%.  Another
way of looking at it is that average dissipation in the battery is no
more than 1 kW or so -- little enough for effective forced air cooling.
If this loss were *completely* eliminated, it would mean a gain of 1 kWh
per hour.  Since the Prius can travel just under 5 miles on 1 kWh, it
would mean an improved mileage of up to 5 miles each hour.  At 70 mph,
this is a 7% improvement; in 35 mph city driving, a 14% improvement.  It
would be unreasonable to expect any more improvement than this in hybrid
fuel economy via any use of supercapacitors -- either along with or in
place of batteries!

2.  Supercapacitors, used with batteries, may indeed improve battery
life.  However, once again I believe the gains will be smaller than
often anticipated.  The reason is this:  the three commonly encountered
effects that are the largest factors in shortening a battery's life are
depth of discharge, high temperatures, and overcharging.  Let's look at
each.

    a.  Depth of discharge.  What a supercap stack can do working in
conjunction with a battery, is to soften current spikes the battery
would otherwise see.  A hybrid battery will probably have 10 times the
energy storage capacity of the supercap stack (20-100 times for a PHEV
battery), but the supercaps will have lower internal resistance, thereby
smoothing out short-duration current spikes.  However, existing hybrid
batteries are already capable of handling hundreds of thousands of tiny
discharge-and-charge cycles, and in California are by law guaranteed for
10 years or 150,000 miles -- the expected life of the vehicle.
Supercaps will last longer, but will it matter?

    b.  High temperatures.  A supercap stack working with a hybrid or
PHEV battery would reduce cycle losses by smoothing current peaks,
thereby reducing the heat the battery must dissipate.  This could lower
temperatures and improve battery lifetime.  However, a well-designed
battery pack will already have sufficient cooling to avoid the
life-sapping high temperatures anyway.

    c.  Overcharging.  This is a result of the battery control
electronics.  Often a degree of overcharge is intentionally used to
provide charge balancing services.  Otherwise, good battery management
electronics, not supercaps, is what is needed to remove this battery
ageing process.

The '04 Prius is a hybrid where all the really major effeciency-gaining
steps have already been taken, along with many, many minor ones.  For
example, the engine's crankshaft has been offset from directly under the
pistons, so that the power stroke is more direct, removing a small
amount of bearing friction.  Here are some guesses on the maximum that
might be gained from some of the most important areas yet to be tuned in
hybrids like the Prius:

1.  More efficient battery (larger, better, or improved with or replaced
by supercaps:  10% city, 5% highway

2.  Exhaust turbine driving a generator:  15% city or highway (Andy
Frank hopes to use this technique to improve the peak efficiency of a
Prius engine from 38% (already impressive) to 45%)

3.  Better aerodynamics:  5% city (little low-speed drag is
aerodynamic), 15% highway (Prius) or 33% highway (SUV)

4.  Lightweight materials:   30% city, 5% highway (most highway drag is
aerodynamic)

5.  Total, assuming 1/2 of each maximum is actually likely:  25% city,
17% highway (Prius) or 25% highway (SUV)

6.  Effective real mileage from total maximized future efficiency
improvements:
    Prius (45 mpg actual existing city & highway):  city, 60 mpg;
highway, 54 mpg
    Escape (30 mpg actual existing city & highway):  city, 46 mpg;
highway, 46 mpg

Of these opportunities for efficiency improvement, only the exhaust
turbine -- with a modest 15% possible improvement -- would improve
gasoline (or other liquid fuel) efficiency without simultaneously
improving a PHEV's electric fuel efficiency.  Therefore, none would
significantly reduce the relative value of PHEVs vs. pure hybrids.

>
> That all is fairly apparent to those looking into this issue.  What is
> less apparent is the impact of this work on PHEVs.  It could be
> dramatic.  It could be so dramatic that PHEVs might not be needed at
> all (or more likely, it could delay their logical (i.e. economic)
> introduction by several years).  In a lot of these energy studies, I
> am reminded of the great line that Bill Murray had in "Tootsie":  "I'm
> going to rewrite the necktie scene without the necktie".

See above.  Also, I believe we will discover that the peak oil and
global warming problems are so intractable, yet vital to quickly
address, that we will need to throw everything we have at them,
including hybrids, PHEVs, lightweight materials, efficiency
improvements, biofuels from farm waste, wind and solar electric
generation, carbon sequestration, and anything else we can come up with
that actually helps.

Personally, I can even see a role for enough nuclear generation to burn
up the stockpiles of fissile uranium and plotonium left over from the
cold war, thereby hopefully reducing, though not eliminating, yet
another horrible and intractable problem.

In fact, given that it has recently been discovered that global warming
was masked (reduced) for years by the industrialized world's high but
now dimishing output of particulate air pollution, we may need to
temporarily reduce the effects of global warming (at the cost of mucking
with weather patterns) by adding something to jet fuel -- which, by the
way, is going to have to change from petroleum to biofuel, too -- to
reflect some sunlight before it reaches the earth.

<snip>

/ron
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
     Ron Gremban, rgremban@...
     California Cars Initiative, a nonprofit organization: 
http://www.CalCars.org
     Moderator & Technical Lead
     http://www.priusplus.org
     PRIUS+ PHEV Conversion Group:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/priusplus
     Newsletter:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/calcars-news
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

>What needs to be understood is to what extent the effort in these
>areas would reduce the oil use by the vehicle (via efficiency or
>alternate energy source) in proportion to the effort expended.  This
>is hard to assess, of course, but my impression is that the
>supercap/battery investigation is more fruitful than plugging in,
>which is more fruitful than some generic aerodynamic improvement
>(because it is dependent on styling tastes, etc.)

I'm not sure I'm entirely understanding what you're trying to say, but
as best I can tell, my response is that you're setting up a false
dichotomy.  It is not "either focus on supercaps+batts vs. plugging
in".  They're not mutually exclusive, in any way (that I'm aware), and
the quotation was from a consortium that is including both plugging in
and supercaps (both) as important aspects of the project, without
really questioning the inclusion of either.

The play will, I think, include a necktie and a turbocharger for it,
both.

I do agree and see that efficiency improvements in can't-be-plugged-in
HEVs and other high-mpg non-pluggable vehicles may lead to a delay in
demand for PHEVs, but I don't think it will be that big of a deal as
far as deciding on whether to use supercaps in a PHEV project,
particularly if they can be shown to have a dramatic improvement not
so much on efficiency but on Battery Life (both advanced batts and
non-advanced batts).

If supercaps can be shown to have a dramatic effect on battery life,
then this would dramatically affect a lot of the economic equations,
both for OEMs and Do-It-Yourselfers.  This can be seen somewhat in
Ron's post today where he discusses some of the response that has been
formulated to requests for how-to instructions, and the economic
considerations that DIY people will face with batteries.  Clearly
battery cost is a critical issue, and related to this is
battery-preservation-behaviour for the owner and battery lifetime and
how it affects battery cost.

Ron talks about the difficulties of getting good experience and data
for battery longevity in actual PHEV field use, but in addition to
this, to this day, I'm not sure if there's any good data out there on
how supercaps affect battery longevity.

I know that Maxwell hinted at very dramatic improvements in
non-advanced lead-acid battery lifetime that were possible by mating
the batteries to supercaps, but I have not seen much (if any) further
mention or data on this issue, or with the related question of whether
supercaps can affect (dramatically or mildly)
advanced-battery-lifetime.

Maybe the consortium can start to publish some results in some way.





>I think we are duty-bound to investigate what we perceive is the more
>fruitful areas first.  If we don't someone else eventually will, and
>we will have to rework our assumptions on PHEV viability in this new
>domain.  Overall, that will result in wasted time and effort.
>
>-Jim
>
>P.S. If we can work together to write a wildly successful play, we
>shouldn't be too concerned if the necktie scene doesn't have a necktie
>in it.
>
>
>
>--- In priusplus@yahoogroups.com, murdoch <murdoch@h...> wrote:
>> At the conclusion of Bill Moore's interview with the PHEV consortium
>> people (no Electrovaya person was present) they discuss the issue of
>> how the capacitors play a role in possibly bringing out the best in
>> the batteries and vice-versa.  I tried to articulate some of this
>last
>> year, such as the issue of whether or not costs could be driven down
>> (not up) if caps could increase battery life.
>>
>> While I do understand that our project differs from others' in terms
>> of its cost calculations, and in other respects such as differing
>> goals, and that we might not use caps, I still thought these points
>> were interesting:
>>
>> http://www.evworld.com/view.cfm?section=article&storyid=895
>>
>> A key element in accomplishing that objective is the melding of
>> Electrovaya's Superpolymer lithium ion batteries and Maxwell's
>> ultracapacitors into a energy storage package that takes advantage
>of
>> the strengths of each. West sees this as extremely important to the
>> success of their initiative. Ultracapacitors have extraordinary
>power
>> density and durability to the tune of hundreds of thousands of
>cycles.
>> Lithium has high energy density but like any battery, overtime it
>> weakens if cycled too frequently and too deeply. The ideal solution
>> for any electric-drive vehicle, be it pure electric, hybrid or
>> hydrogen fuel cell would be the mating of these two chemistries.
>>
>> Maxwell's Tressler put it this way, "It's pretty obvious that most
>of
>> the people that have an appreciation both for batteries, as well as
>> ultracapacitors, see that there's a sweet marriage that can exist.
>> Obviously, batteries provide great energy over continuous demand for
>> that energy, whereas ultracapacitors can provide the power
>> requirements for those short bursts or for the opportunity for regen
>> braking. Because of their efficiency, normally anywhere between 95
>and
>> 97 percent of what you put in you`re going to get back out
>again".
>>
>> He noted that this offers the opportunity to develop entirely new
>> energy storage architectures, especially for advanced energy
>batteries
>> that can now be optimized for energy density, instead of trying to
>> engineer their chemistry for both energy and power density.
>>
>> "That presents some interesting combinations that currently don't
>> exist in the marketplace", he stated. "There will be some innovation
>> and some technological advances that I think the consortium will
>> provide, not just in theory, but in practicality in being able to
>put
>> it on the road and in the street and that' where everyone will get
>the
>> bang for the buck".
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>