# Forums

JOIGNEZ-VOUS À LA COMMUNAUTÉ

Ultracapacitor EV

I am trying to crunch the numbers needed to make a super(ultra) capacitor based EV commercially feasible.
Take for example the Model S:
1. For a battery with 85 kWh capacity, it can run a 2.1 ton car for 300 miles.
2. Assuming the specific energy of the Panasonic cells as around 240-260 Wh/kg, the battery weighs approx 700 lb (320 kg) excluding the battery management.
3. The best UCs (Graphene-based) achieved around 85 Wh/kg under laboratory conditions. At this rate, a 85 kWh source for Model-S weighs about 2100 lb (950kg) i.e. making the car 30 % heavier and affecting the range by say 80 miles.
4. As the UCs have high power density, the power electronics can be adjusted to maintain the same performance.
5. The UCs charge extremely fast. Hence, a nationwide network of superchargers can gain further momentum as charging can be dropped to a fraction of the current time. You need not have lunch everytime you charge, listening to a song would suffice :)

Question:
As specific energy doesn't seem to be much of a problem, benchmark for UCs must be based on volumetric energy density (Wh/L). What should be the vol. energy density for UCs to get adapted in EVs?

Notes:
The above analysis has been simplified just to get an idea of the order of magnitude and not the exact values of such technologies. There has been significant improvements in mass production of Graphene and if it can replace silicon in semiconductors, the price would drop even further.

Start with a truck. Capacitors are BIG. They are lightweight, and take up a lot of volume. Try energy density per cubic meter and see how far you get.

Ok people, here goes my 2 c. Maybe I'm stupid, maybe I don't know anything at all but this is what may train of thoughts is... so bear with me and correct me if and where I'm wrong... No problems if people points out dumb thinking processess to me but please refrain from chewing me out or shoot me to pieces etc. I don't like to fight...

Why do we need 85kWh worth of battery power? for the distance correct? The one limitation of quick charging is what the battery can handle. According to what I've picked up on the web this is a total different ball game with supercaps or ultracaps. They can handle massive volumes of charges within seconds but they also due to leakage looses quite a bit of it over a period of time.

This means that while we put back energy into the system by charging with regenerative breaks, the batteries can not handle al the current delivered to it. On the other hand, caps can handle much more than batteries. This results in a battery normally charged for 10 secs allows for more or less 10 secs worth of usage, while a ultra cap after 10 secs of charge allows for about 2 mins worth of usage of the same apparatus.
So by replacing more than 50% of the battery storage with about 20% , ultracaps.40 kWh of battery power combined with about 20kWH supercaps will result in a car with more or less the same weight but do tue bigger current handelig abilities, will allow this car to go maybe as far previously or even further.
With the correct electronics between cap and battery all the energy of regen breaking is caught up in the caps and then eficient been charged into the baterries

A small buffer would serve to smooth out the spikes, but the 40kWh of supercaps would take as much volume as the whole 85kWh of battery does now, or more. Caps are big and light by comparison to batteries.

I am a software engineer and love cars. I have so many ideas and hopes for the future but understand the engineering limitations that currently exist and the struggle to get new ideas onto the market.
That said if the car is designed to have a shelf under the entire center of the car from front to back you can store quite a few super capacitors in there. This would mean a slighty different look and you would take on more wind drag but after seeing the volts roller skate body I think just raising the passenger compartment up and storing the capacitors underneath it can give you all the storage you need for the caps.

BUT the COST thing comes into play.

Everytime I see an EV and its limited range and expense I shrug my shoulders and move on to see if there is something I can afford.

That is why I hope this post finds someone at Tesla, who seems to have some brass, to do a 4 or 2 cylinder gas electric car using supercaps for accelerations and the engine to maintain current velocity. Using current software tracking of each wheel I think the engine can be used as an efficent generator running at its optimum level, making it more efficent than throttling. Using electric motors in each wheel and some feedback software when the driver wants to accelerate they can call on the stored power from a much smaller and light weight supercapactitor bank.
In my imagination if you used a 2 cylynder light weight low HP (under 50) engine and were constantly throttling it should make it quite a gas saver and much cheaper than a straight up EV. Cheap enough so a regular middle class person can afford it.
As far as batteries have come they are still not an optimum auto
energy source.
They are heavy and not perfect for instant energy discharge or quick charge.
They are not meant to be constantly charged and discharged while caps are perfect for this.
Caps also excell at delivering instant power and quick to charge with regenerative breaking.
I would love to hear from a mechanical engineer or someone at Tesla to tell me why this should be be done. Seems like a no brainer to me but takes someone with resources to create.

Slight correction this should have read..
In my imagination if you used a 2 cylynder light weight low HP (under 50) engine and were NOT constantly throttling it should make it quite a gas saver and much cheaper than a straight up EV.

You've added at least 3 layers of complexity, and are still burning gas.

Elon's already said that while he's CEO no Tesla will burn gas, which is how it should be IMHO.

Throw this GM or Fisker's way, it seems to run on the road they've picked.

The only way I could see UCs work is if there was a nationwide Ultracharger (UC for ultra cap cars) network of > 1000kw chargers, as in one at every gas station in the country, and cars had say 40 kw Ultracaps and you could charge them in about 3 1/2 minutes.

That said as far as complaints about battery and breaking regen in this thread, you obviously need to go test drive a Model S. My P85 will regen 60kW when off the throttle at highway speeds, and put out 310kW at full throttle, charging at a supercharger at close to 200kW. 60kW is more than enough breaking for anything but emergency stops and for those you want to use the real breaks anyway.

MrB;
brakes.

1 MW chargers require serious hardware. Not human-operable.

Let's wait and see what kind of technology we have at our disposal in 2020. This is just future talk.

The fact that we have the 85 kWh battery, that allows us to have a range of 480 km sounds already very exciting to me. Because it's the reality of today. And add the technology of the Superchargers (solar powered) to that. Then it becomes even better.

I think that some people within the oil and car industry are slowly starting to get nervous. Regarding as to what extent this Tesla technology can lead to.

In the October 1, 2012 Popular Mechanics Breakthru Awards interview with Elon Musk, Mr. Musk mentioned super capacitors, and stated he was aware of a company in Silicon Valley that is working towards a solid state super capacitor, that the company is not EEStor, a stealth capacitor start up in Cedar Park Texas.

That was about 4 months ago. Last Month, on January 28, 2013, EEStor issued a press release that claims heretofore unheard of energy density in a capacitor from a pilot production line, not a lab sample.

Here is a link to the press release.
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/eestor-inc-shows-preliminary-res...

Super capacitor technology is not ready for prime time as the primary energy storage device, but are certainly ready to capture regenerative braking energy and act as a buffer between regenerative capture and lithium ion batteries. Moreover, they can be used for high energy bursts for quick acceleration rather than stressing the battery pack. Seems likely that battery pack cooling systems would need to be less robust with a few supercaps, and perhaps they are only a few years away now.

Would be nice to have confirmation that Tesla Motors is aware of the EEStor press release.

If I click on the link then I see
"Sorry the page you are looking for cannot be found".

EESTOR is not new. Been following them for a while now (since the initial announcements and the incubation phase in Texas). Their primary investor has been Zenn Motors (http://www.zenncars.com). There has been a LOT of promises about this technology. If they are able to work out the many technical hurdles, it would be a significant breakthrough (think about charging your EV for 10 minutes and getting a 200 mile range). There are a LOT of hurdles to overcome.

Is this possible in the near future (before 2020)? Or is 2040 more likely?

Try this link for the January 28, 2013, EEStor PR:

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/eestor-inc-shows-preliminary-res...

I have been following this story for six years, now. It has been a long slog, but I can say with some confidence that it is most assuredly not a scam.

It is hard to predict if or when the technology will be available for the automotive market. Tyler Hamilton is a technology writer and has a weekly column in the Toronto Star. He has been been following the story since 2006 and posted a column on Feb 1st.

You can visit (http://www.prnewswire.com/) and search for "eestor" to find the press release. Likewise, visit (http://www.thestar.com) and search for "tyler hamilton eestor" and choose the link written on February 1, 2013, or maybe this link will work for you.

If the links don't work, copy and paste into your browser. :)

Mr. Musk is very interested and also uniquely qualified to assess the technology. In fact, he attended Stanford and was part of a team working towards high energy density solid state capacitors in the mid 1990's.

High energy and power density solid state capacitors with low leakage are the holy grail for energy storage. If EEStor delivers, it is a game changer. I sure hope they succeed. If they do, Tesla Motors will be beating a path to Zenn Motors, as Zenn holds exclusive rights to the technology for automobiles.

Well, the secret of running a good scam is to convince lots of people you're not running a scam.

Brian H +1

EEStor has been promising this "coming soon" for about decade now, seemingly being on verge of breakthrough all of time. That raises whole lot of red flags in my mind.

I was at a financial conference and heard the CEO of Maxwell Technology (a San Diego based ultra capacitor company) speak. Some thoughts from my notes:

(1) think of batteries as a Teapot, and UltraCaps as a Tea Cup. You can only fill/empty the teapot at the rate possible by its spout. The Tea Cup however can be emptied/filled very fast.

(2) UltraCaps are unaffected by charge/discharge cycles and have a much greater operating temperature range. Thats because they store energy in electrostatic rather than electrochemical form.

(3) UltraCaps hold up to 50% of their energy for 30 days, and a single 3000 farad 2.7V UltraCap is about the size of a Coke can. As BrianH noted the weight is much less hence the energy density is low.

(4) ideal application is to pair UltraCaps with Batteries. Lets the UltraCaps absorb/provide the big currents need for acceleration and regeneration and the battery supply the steady state 'cruising' load. Maxwell has shown a DOUBLE of service lifetime in a combined battery/UltraCap solution.

(5) the UltraCap 'protects' the expensive battery from high charge/discharge rates ("power") but the battery provides the kWh need for range ("energy").

They have over 500k units installed in the field with varying applications such as wind turbines, busses and truck batteries. Very interesting technology that I imagine Tesla could include in the future.

Motor connected to
Ultra Caps <--> Li-Ion battery <--> Li-Air battery
<--- high discharge . . . . . . . high storage --->

When physical volume and economics allow, probably sealed in the same pack. Advanced management needed.... or maybe never, keeping the KISS principle...

You mean Keep It Sophisticated, Sylvester? ;) :D

pilot Steve-
+1 nice analysis for us non-engineers. Looks like a combination strategy might work in the near future but I would not want to be in charge of developing the management system.

Take a look at this technology.

http://vorbeck.com/energy.html

@ polotSteve

That sounds great to me, but wouldn't it be very complicated to build/manufacture/engineer something like that?

Maxwell current sells a battery (lead acid I believe) co-developed with Exide with internal UltraCaps for commercial trucks that does exactly this. They have hundreds of thousands of units installed and have documented 2x life improvement in fleet battery life.

I think Tesla did it exactly right for the Model-S with their temperature managed pack, but I think its likely future batteries will include UltraCaps in some quantity because the life improvements make such compelling economics.

All this is part of the 8%/year compound improvement in battery cost/life/weight/capacity and everybody is factoring in for future pricing and product specs.

Its going to be exciting!

@ pilotSteve

"I think its likely future batteries will include UltraCaps in some quantity"

Do you think that will be before 2020, or after 2020?

As a buffer, you don't need much.

Hi all,

I work in the supercap development field and would like to wade in.

1 - In order to swell their group's chances of getting funding a lot of papers quote the carbon-loading performance, not the gravimetric (i.e. cell) performance. Given carbon's quite light you can usually divide cell-loading performance by 5-10 to get actual cell performance. Best I've seen is 12Wh/kg ~ 10KW/kg.

2 - The group that got 80 ish wh/kg used horrifically expensive ionic liquids as electrolyte and low graphene density, all this makes for good papers, but lousy products.

3 - EESTOR = full of ****.

4 - Yes supercaps can handle simple epic amounts of current, we run 60C - 100C charging as part of our standard analytical step. Whilst supercaps might fall down on storage they more then make up for the ability to regen brake charge (pretty much any scenario you can think of).

5 - Unless someone comes up with a cost effective, high ESW low viscosity electrolyte then I'm afraid it's progressive improvement rather then giant leaps for now!

Pete

I thought I would chime in on this as I've not only been following the story of super caps closely for many years but have had discussions with officials at the DOE and senior DC politicians on both side of the aisle about the the issue of solid state versus chemical energy storage.

Suffice to say that a fully scalable high voltage, high capacity solid state electrical storage device with rapid recharging, low energy dissipation (leakage) and energy density equal to that of petroleum would be a total game changer. This would be similar to the quantum jump from vacuum tubes to transistors. This is the type of breakthrough that's desperately needed but hard to predict in terms of timelines.

Such a development would mark the end of the Carbon Age and make all forms of terrestrial propulsion electric based in short order. It would also lead to the development of a truly smart grid characterized by a decentralized storage infrastructure with electrical dispatching. Coupled with high efficiency solar generation it would make RE far more cost effective than any fossil fuel.

So lets hope the bright sparks out there who are working on this technology nail it and soon. Cheers