220 kW/800v 250 mile range in 20 minutes
 

Porsche Mission E developed around a new 220 kW/800v electrical system will have capabilities to charge them with 250 miles in 20 minutes. Uwe Michaels, the head of Porsche's electrics and electronics development division details about the company's thinking and the future car's features; Level 5 autonomy features, become 800-volt international standard, fast 'Turbo Charging' system, high-voltage charging stations with built-in battery storage, intelligent routing with the network's charging stations, and partnerships with battery-cell suppliers LG Chem and Panasonic to develop customized cells and battery packs.

https://images.hgmsites.net/lrg/tota...00579151_l.jpg

Porsche targeting sub-20 minute 249 mile recharge time for all-electric Mission E | Auto Express

The problem is that isn't very fast, despite the insane specs. It still needs to be 2-4x faster. Current CCS chargers are typically 500v/100A, or 500v/125A, which is a fraction of what they are talking about here (800v/275A) to achieve the 220 kW output target.

Current chargers aren't even capable of charging a Bolt at maximum rated speed. Then around the 50% SOC mark the charge rate tapers off.

Who is going to build this monster charging infrastructure? Even if you can find enough sites to locate these chargers, how much will it cost per kWh? Commercial rate schedules have a demand charge, which is expensive and is based on the maximum output capacity. Put a few of these chargers in 1 location, and you're paying a demand charge for over 1 megawatt of output.

Consider me a skeptic of EVs being great for long distance travel anytime within the next decade. Battery chemistry just isn't at a point where it can be recharged quickly enough, while retaining longevity and high storage density. Even if that hurdle is overcome and costs come down, the infrastructure isn't designed for these monster chargers. Even if that hurdle is overcome, it will cost too much to charge compared to buying a few gallons of petrol.

Natural Gas generators? Just an idea, or large capacitor/battery banks that would transfer the power and charge over time.

Maybe the high cost would just incentivise people to "slow" charge when the vehicle is sitting idle at home and only pay the higher cost when they need to travel long distances.

You're right though, dedicated EV for normal long distance travel or OTR trucking is still quite a ways off without a breakthrough battery technology, which then these systems could be in place in anticipation.

All of those solutions underscore the difficulty of this problem. EVs are wonderful for local trips; even long local trips now that the Bolt has 250 miles of range. Slow charging at home is cheap and convenient in this case.

The problem is people want the vehicle to be convenient on long distance trips, and charging while traveling sucks. A gas generator defeats the purpose of an EV as you might as well have just brought along a gas powered car. Converting fuel into electricity by burning it has conversion losses. The only solution I can envision is a massive battery that is used to then charge the EV batteries, but that's expensive and wasteful, and may not even alleviate the problem of supplying such a large amount of power in a short amount of time if many people use the chargers and over-run the capacity. It would need to be used frequently to offset the cost, too.

That's the other problem; that chargers need to be used frequently to cover the cost of building them, but people don't use them often because most trips are local. If demand for the chargers is too high, people are waiting around for a charger to become available. If demand isn't high enough, it isn't profitable to install in the first place.

We're back to where I started, that charging either takes too long, or costs too much, and usually both.

Really going to need natural gas turbine peaker plants.

I'm a skeptic too but personally I see no reason for fast charging. EVs are fantastic for driving around town. For trips we take the wife's car. A large portion of the population could do the same which means EV's don't need to be good at road tripping to gain market share.

It is about using the right tool for the job.

That's what I've been saying, but consumers are not willing to own a vehicle that only is suitable for 97% of their trips, despite the fact that it's easy to find a gasser for longer trips.

For some reason consumers think that if it's technically possible to drive an EV across the country, they must do that instead of drive something else.

I believe if/when gas is roughly the same cost as it is and has been in the rest of the world, opinions will change. I have a hard time believing that will happen, but we are seeing hybrid pickup trucks, which in my mind is a huge indicator.

I believe things will change as more people get to ride in or drive an EV. EVs just have a better driving experience. Combined with greatly reduced operations expenses more people will be willing to purchase one for a least a second car.

I see 48v system are being driven by a few things.

1. It is a cheap way to meet increasing fuel economy standards
2. They make packaging easier. (You don’t need belt driven accessories hanging off the front of the engine.
3. The extra power is needed for the safety systems that are rapidly becoming standard. For example, it is much easier to do lane assist with electric power steering.

Electric power steering isn't unique to BEVs, neither is electric water pumps, electric heat pumps, or electric brake boosters. The Gen III Prius is entirely beltless.

EVs have a lot going for them:

Performance
Convenience of "refueling" at home
Generally lower "fuel" cost
Lower maintenance costs
Lower pollution
*Eventually cost of purchase

These advantages will need to outweigh the drawback of limited range and slow charging for consumers to be interested in them. Once the purchase price can beat ICE purchase prices, people will adopt them more. They will still suck at longer trips though. I'd be willing to plan an EV trip and wait at chargers though if gasoline were crazy expensive and DCFC electricity was cheap, but as it is, just the opposite is true.

You can't go beltless on a 12 volt battery. That is why OEMs are stepping up to 48v (My comment was directed at ksa8907's mention of the 48V system in the new Ram 1500)


Range ceases to be an issue at the 200 to 250 miles seen in current EVs. At that point you are covering 98-99% of trips.

Current EVs are already cost competitive with ICE vehicles. The savings in operating cost more than make up for the increased purchase price.

There is absolutely no reason to drive an EV on a long trip. There are plenty of other options.

You can go beltless if the vehicle is a hybrid with a traction battery, and a MG instead of an alternator. The Prius uses a DC/DC converter to charge the 12v battery from the high voltage battery.

EV range isn't much of an issue to me, or most other rational people, but the typical consumer still has anxiety about the 2% of times they would drive beyond the EV 1-charge range. Range anxiety is real regardless of the extent of the problem.

I just ran some numbers through my spreadsheet comparing a $20k Honda Fit to a $30k Chevy Bolt. The 5 year cost for the Fit was $22,500 compared to the Bolt at 27,300. EVs are cost competitive if you buy them used and keep them a while, but they aren't cost competitive for the typical new car buyer who keeps a vehicle for 5 years.

Click my signature and look at the figures I used and criticize my methods.

[QUOTE=redpoint5;560069]
Consider me a skeptic of EVs being great for long distance travel anytime within the next decade. /QUOTE]

You'll have to add an "Other than Tesla" qualifier if you want to continue saying such things. Cross-continent by Tesla is already superior to any gasser experience.

Sure, Chevy has screwed the Bolt by refusing to deploy any charging infrastructure, and I agree that 50 kW DCFC is insufficient for road trips, as it essentially doubles the trip duration after your first-charge range.

People here often seem to overlook that DCFC is perfect for turning a local car into a regional car. Sure, it might not work cross-continent, but a single fast charge near your destination to take care of the return trip is no big deal.

Yes you can. Again, I was talking about conventional ICE cars going from 12V to 48V and how 48V is soon be the new standard.

Range anxiety is real. The best way to kill it is for people to experience EVs first hand. My EV has opened up the eyes of quite a few people. There is nothing better than hearing first hand from someone that you know and trust.

I estimate about 1/3 of cars could be EVs even if we were only talking couples, with multiple cars, that live in major cities, in single family homes, with a garage. It is much easy to buy an EV as a second car than a first car.

You are comparing the wrong cars. The Fit is an economy car. The Bolt is a hot hatch that runs the 1/4 mile 0.3 seconds slower than a Golf GTI even handicapped with crappy LLR economy tires. That is the beauty of EVs, you can have great performance and still get 100 MPGe. If we compare hot hatch's the cars start out costing the same.


If we are talking about economy hatchbacks then we can compare the 2018 Fit to a 2018 Leaf ($30K - $10K tax credits) The EV starts out cheaper than gas car and is still quicker.

Some nitpicks.

• EVs are exempt from DEQ
• Your gas car maintenance is low. (I averaged $160 a year for my Prius and did all the work myself. If a shop does the work you can double it at least)
• Your EV maintenance is high. My Spark (and the Bolt) only require the coolant to be changed at 120K miles and a cabin air filter every 30K. In 5 years we are looking at 1 set of tires and a cabin filter or about $80 a year.

Either way, the EV purchase price is the same as a comparable gas car and the running costs much lower.

I don't feel screwed by Chevy at all. It isn’t an automaker’s job to install a network of charging stations. In fact what Tesla is doing is counterproductive as they insist on using a proprietary plug so that other EVs cannot charge at their stations. At least Chevy uses the standard plug adopted in the USA and used by all US and European automakers.

This may be a place where the Feds need to step in a enforce a standard. Having 3 competing plug standards does nothing but hurt the adoption of EVs.

I don't know what cars Bolt owners cross-shop. My awareness of new cars is pretty limited. Just thought they were similar size or have similar utility and features.

Gas maintenance likely is low. I do all my own maintenance, so that skews things. My Prius has only cost about $20/year in maintenance so far, but the category also includes tire replacement cost, which can be expensive for the Bolt. To some degree, delayed maintenance can be reflected in depreciation, since many buyers would want a discount if the timing belt had not been changed, for instance.

My overall point is that EVs have a higher rate of depreciation, and that hits new car buyers hard. Depreciation is the single largest cost of ownership for most people, especially for newer vehicles.

We can find examples of ways that an EV or gasser is cheapest to own, but in general I still consider new EV prices to be a bit off putting for most consumers.

Chevy is selling a long range CCS-equipped car into a national market with nearly zero CCS stations. TESLA saw this CCS vs CHAdeMO standards war coming, and also that neither standard was adequate for highway trips, so they built one better. American and German automakers are selling hobbled products until they either negotiate a license from TESLA, or at least kick-start the CCS infrastructure, as Nissan did for CHAdeMO after the Blink bankruptcy.

Stepping back from an obvious need and saying "not my job" is neither a way to get promoted nor grow your market share... :eek:

CCS can do 350 kW. CHAdeMO 65 kW. Tesla 120 kW. Tesla is being different just to be different.

That's OK though. Telsa is about to be crushed under a wave of new EVs from automakers that actually know how to make cars. We will see in 10 years who comes out on top.

I purposely purchased by Spark EV without DC charging and don't feel that the car is "hobbled" in any way. I've charged my car at a public station twice in 18 months and that was just to get the parking spot.

A huge portion of that depreciation is the $7500 to $10,000 tax credit that goes right into the buyer's pocket. The real selling price of a LEAF in Oregon is $20K not the $30K MSRP. In 5 years it should be worth about $10K

I agree many are. However, that is because most people only consider the purchase price not the total cost of ownership.

Prices are dropping. The 2018 Nissan Leaf goes 40% farther on a charge, is 2.5 seconds faster 0-60, and costs less than the old model.

I'm right on the fence on if I want a used leaf or Spark for my first EV (maybe Focus or i3). Leaf wins the parts availability category as they begin to hit the junk yards, but I suspect the Spark battery will far outlast the Leaf, which is the single biggest concern with EV ownership. There is a bit of a price premium on the Spark, perhaps due to better thermal management, or perhaps from looking a little better than the Leaf, or maybe better performance?

The general public is financially illiterate. They would rather pay less up front, but spend more over time than to spend more up front and pay less over time. Secondly, the average household doesn't have the requisite $7,500 tax liability to fully benefit from the federal credit. It's essentially a subsidy for the wealthy. I don't even pay my fair share with my $66k salary, or have $7,500 in tax liability, which is a very comfortable living.

The EV price tipping point is very near, as you point out with the gen II Leaf. Within the next couple years, the typical consumer will be more inclined to purchase a lower priced EV that has the performance of higher priced gassers.

The Leaf is the sensible family hatch. Midsize car / 0-60 in 10 seconds. The Spark is the hooligan. Subcompact car / 400 lb-ft of torque at 0 rpm / 0-60 in 7.5 seconds (traction limited). The Spark will spin it's wheels at will and finding traction is a problem even with performance A/S tires.

However, if I was to buy a 1st generation EV the only option for me would be the LEAF. Nissan made 300K LEAFS while Chevy made 7371 Spark EVs. An improved battery pack for the LEAF is $5500 and comes with another 8 year / 100K mile warranty. A replacement battery for the Spark is $19,540 and comes with a 12 month warranty. 10 years from now the Spark EVs will be in the scrapyard and the aftermarket will still be refurbishing battery packs for the LEAF. (The Spark motor in a Toyota MR2 Spyder sounds like a fun project!)

I also wouldn't buy any of the other "compliance" EVs made by automakers just to satisfy CARBs EV mandate. (Fiat 500e, Honda Fit EV, Smart ED, Mercedes B, Kia Soul EV, etc.) I doubt any of them will get support in the future.

I know most people don't pay enough federal taxes to get the full $7500 tax credit. However, they can lease the car, the leasing company claims the full tax credit, and then rolls it into the lease deal. Yes, if you want to buy the car it is more expensive that way but still cheaper than not getting the credit. My lease on the Spark EV is $0 down / $100 a month and anyone could have got that deal.

I also disagree with tax credits in general. If the Feds want you to do something and are willing to help pay for it then they should just do a point-of-sale rebate is applied at time of sale. Paying full prices then filing for a credit at tax time is just a stupid system and, as you say, favors wealthy people with high tax bills.

I agree and I also think the depreciation of EVs will be closer to gas cars. Cars like a 1st generation LEAF have such low residual value in part because the technology has advanced so much. Why buy a 60-80 mile LEAF when the new one goes 150 miles.

A car like a Bolt is a different beast. Someone might be perfect happy in 5 years to buy a 200 mile used Bolt even if the new one goes 250 miles. Personally I think 150 to 200 miles range is the sweet spot and I wish GM offered a cheaper (quicker) version of the Bolt with a shorter range.

Exactly that. The Bolt forum members talk about how disappointing the new Leaf is with only 150 miles of range, but I think Nissan has that worked out just about right. What I'd really like to see is a modular battery design, where capacity can be added and removed with relative ease. Would be even better if it was user replaceable, although designing thermal management would be tricky. Make a modular design, and you take both cost and range off the table of complaints, as the car can be cheap if needed, or go long distance if someone is willing to pay.

I expect most EVs will come with multiple options of battery packs just like gas cars come with different engines. Tesla area does it and the Leaf will come with the option of a 40 kWh or 60 kWh pack next year. If I remember correctly Volvo was going to offer 3 different battery packs for there upcoming EV.

What I don't expect is for those to be added or taken out after the car is sold. I don't think most OEMs want customers dealing with orange high voltage cables.

(That said Honda has a modular system for their electric PCX scooter

http://www.visordown.com/sites/defau...?itok=zvma_b7r

Double Post

When you look at how passive / inert chevy got the volt battery pack when it's disconnected, I believe multiple changeout packs ought to be a slam dunk even for clueless users. When was the last time a laptop caught fire changing the battery. Oops, wrong illustration.

Laptop batteries don’t weight hundreds of pounds.

The pack in my Spark is 475 lbs split into 5 modules. To make the modules swappable the power, battery management, and cooling would need to be plug and play. Then the owner has to crawl under the car and drop a 100 lb module.

Without having given much thought to the engineering challenge; in principle it should be possible to design the vehicle in a modular way where certain battery bays in the floor or trunk would be accessible to the owner to drop in an extra battery or 3. Perhaps there would be a certain minimum capacity which is somewhat more permanently installed on the vehicle in a less accessible area, with some accessible battery bays available to the owner. Since the battery is the single largest cost of the vehicle, it makes sense to let people decide just how much range they wish to purchase.

Dreaming even bigger here, I'd like to see these modular batteries used in other applications such as lawn mowers, air compressors, and many other applications that typically have proprietary battery designs.

All that said, the fact that companies will be offering 2 or 3 battery sizes in their vehicles, and there are multiple EVs to choose from, there is a good selection for consumers to choose from.

Ever rebuild an aircooled VW bug motor? Or how about dealing with a Volt pack? Everything is quick disconnect and easy just using a floor jack. Not something a rocket surgeon needs to do, but average Joe can.

I've done all sorts of engine rebuilds, mechanical swaps. I've never had to deal with battery packs as my Prii have been too reliable. :thumbup:

The average joe never pulls an engine for any reason. The average joe doesn't even change their own oil. For module battery packs to be commercially viable they need to be truly plug and play and go in and out without needing any tools. 50 lbs each would be about the max weight.

Redpoint5's idea for module in the trunk could work but I just don't see OEMs doing it. I also don't see most people wanting to store extra battery modules for the rare cases they need extra range. Technically possible and commercially viable are two very different things.

Not really modular for the purpose of taking unused capacity out, but rather having the ability to add range if the need arises in the future. If battery renting/swapping service were ever viable, it would be in modules that could easily be exchanged.

Agreed that the modular idea isn't likely. Manufacturers offering EVs in multiple range capacities will fulfill the consumer need to purchase only the range each customer needs.