DOE Embraces “Beyond Lithium-Ion” Strategy for Advanced Battery Development
The Obama Administration generated considerable interest with its May 15, 2013 announcement that the U.S. Advanced Battery Consortium (USABC) has been selected to run a $12.5 million program to accelerate development of advanced batteries for electric vehicles.
“By investing in these cutting-edge battery technologies, the Energy Department is helping to cut America's oil imports and provide American families and businesses with more transportation options,” according to a Department of Energy (DOE) news release.
This certainly was good news for efforts by the U.S. battery industry to meet the challenges of bringing affordable batteries to the electric vehicle market. However, it wasn’t until the third paragraph of the news release that DOE made clear the USABC program is “subject to congressional appropriations.” In other words, Congress needs to approve funding for USABC to run the program.
DOE’s advanced battery research and development program does enjoy strong support in Congress, but with a twist. For the past several years, Congressional committees have become somewhat impatient with progress in developing affordable lithium-ion batteries for hybrid and electric vehicles. DOE estimates the current price to be about $485/kWh. While that is lower than the $1,200/kWh estimated cost in 2008, it is still above the target price of $150/kWh.
So, DOE has embarked on a two-pronged strategy. First, DOE intends to continue its work to make lithium-ion batteries more affordable for consumers. Second, however, DOE also wants to adopt a “beyond lithium-ion” strategy to look at a broader range of chemistries.
This broader range includes lithium-metal, lithium-sulfur and lithium-air. But it also includes non-lithium chemistries as well. This will involve a collaboration between the DOE Vehicle Technologies office and the DOE Office of Science, which runs the department’s basic research program. A diagram showing how such a program can work was displayed May 14, 2013 at the Vehicle Technologies Annual Merit Review meeting in Virginia.
|
|
Target |
|
End of Life Characteristics |
Units |
Under hood |
Not under hood |
Discharge Pulse, Is |
kW |
6 |
|
Max current, 0.5s |
A |
900 |
|
Engine-off accessory load |
W |
750 |
|
Cold cranking power at -30°C (three 4-5-s pulses, 10s rests between pulses at lower SOC) |
kW |
6kW for 0.5s followed by 4kW for 4s |
|
Extended Stand Test (30 days at 30°C followed by cold crank test) |
kW |
6kW for 0.5s followed by 4kW for 4s |
|
Min voltage under cold crank |
Vdc |
8.0 |
|
Available energy (750W) |
Wh |
360 |
|
Peak Recharge Rate, 10s |
kW |
2.2 |
|
Sustained Recharge Rate |
W |
750 |
|
Cycle life, every 10% life RPT with cold crank at min SOC |
Engine starts/miles |
450k/150k |
|
Calendar Life at 30°C, 45°C if under hood |
Years |
15 at 45°C |
15 at 30°C |
Minimum rund trip energy efficiency |
% |
95 |
|
Maximum allowable self-discharge rate |
Wh/day |
10 |
|
Peak Operating Voltage, 10s |
Vdc |
15.0 |
|
Sustained Max. Operating Voltage |
Vdc |
14.6 |
|
Minimum Operating Voltage under load |
Vdc |
10.5 |
|
Operating Temperature Range (available energy to allow 6 kW (1s) pulse) |
°C |
-30 to +75 |
-30 to +52 |
30°C - 52°C |
% |
100 (to 75°C) |
100 |
0°C |
% |
50 |
|
-10°C |
% |
30 |
|
-20°C |
% |
15 |
|
-30°C |
% |
10 |
|
Survival Temperature Range (24 hours) |
°C |
-46 to +100 |
-46 to +66 |
Maximum System Weight |
kg |
10 |
|
Maximum System Volume |
L |
7 |
|
Maximum System Selling Price (@100k units/year) |
$ |
$220 |
$180 |