Green Car Congress  
Home Topics Archives About Contact  RSS Headlines

« VTT-led project to develop enzymes found in India’s wildfire-prone areas for biorefineries; IndZyme | Main | Fully autonomous vehicle developer Optimus Ride raises $18M in Series A »

Print this post

Enevate introduces its silicon-dominant Li-ion technology for EVs; extreme fast charging and high capacity

2 November 2017

Enevate Corporation, developer of a silicon-dominant composite anode material and high energy density batteries (earlier post), has introduced HD-Energy Technology for Electric Vehicles (EVs); the high energy-density cells support extreme fast-charging. Enevate’s silicon Li-ion battery technology in EV cells (NCM-based) can be charged in 5 minutes at up to a tested 10C charging rate to 75% capacity with energy densities of more than 750 Wh/L. Conventional graphite cells with lower capacities suffer significant degradation with extreme fast charging.

Enevate first introduced its HD-Energy Technology—a self-standing, silicon-dominant composite film anode with more than 70% silicon—in 2014, with an initial focus on smartphones, tablets, ultra-thin/hybrid notebook PCs, and wearable devices. (Earlier post.) Enevate licenses its silicon-dominant HD-Energy Technology to battery and EV automotive manufacturers and suppliers worldwide.

Volumetric-Gravimetric-chart-1
The silicon-dominant monolithic composite anode combined with the overall battery cell architecture enables ultrafast charging, high volumetric and gravimetric energy density, structural integrity, and electrical conductivity. Source: Enevate. Click to enlarge.

The anode material film features a gravimetric energy density of 1500 mAh g-1 in cell design, with volumetric and energy densities of ~750 Wh/L and ~300 Wh/kg, respectively. The anode is high-density (1-15 g/cc) with a silicon surface area of <10 m2/g. The film is compatible with existing high volume manufacturing processes—unlike nanowire or silicon wafer approaches.

Five-minute charging would allow flow-through charging stations where EV drivers wait just a few minutes to “fill up” just as they would with regular gas stations. In addition, with such short charging times, smaller batteries can be used in some EVs making them much more affordable.

Enevate says that its HD-Energy battery technology can safely charge and discharge down to -40°C and capture more energy during regenerative braking, extending range in cold climates. A key safety benefit is that Enevate’s HD-Energy Technology is inherently resistant to lithium-plating during fast charge and also during charging in low temperatures, which is a major challenge for conventional graphite Li-ion cells.

DSC05757-300dpi
Enevate says that its silicon-dominant EV battery technology features up to 10C charging rates with more than 750 Wh/L energy density. Click to enlarge.

Enevate’s film-based silicon-dominant anode and cell is a truly novel approach and great practical fit for use in EVs addressing the major barriers to EV adoption.

—Dr. John Goodenough, University of Texas at Austin

Investors in Enevate include Mission Ventures, Draper Fisher Jurvetson, Tsing Capital, Infinite Potential Technologies, Presidio Ventures – a Sumitomo Corporation company, and CEC Capital.

November 2, 2017 in Batteries, Electric (Battery) | Permalink | Comments (25)

Comments

Me alegra de sobremanera la noticia pero tengo serias dudas ¿Son las mismas celdas que se presentaron en 2016 donde en un grafico a 4C de carga y 0,5C de descarga estas se quedaban al 65% de la capacidad inicial?. He visitado la pagina de Enevate nada mas leer este post y los graficos del 2016 siguen en el mismo lugar sin cambio alguno......Se me hace dificil tomar como aceptables estas cifras para ser comercializado a nivel masivo, no lo veo sinceramente.

That looks like the perfect battery for the EV of tomorrow with >350KW Ultra-Chargers, allowing 200KWH packs in less space than 100KWH today and almost the same weight...where is the trick ? Is the price prohibitive ? Why Tesla did not pick them if that perfect for EVs ?

This may be the improved battery that Toyota has been waiting for mass production of extended range quick charge BEVs?

Yes, 200 kWh packs would be enough for cold (all) weather extended range light vehicles. Buses and heavy trucks will need 3 or 4 packs.

Ultra quick charge 800+ Volts, 450+ KW charging facilities may become the norm?

Sounds promising...maybe....I think. LOL If it can routinely handle 10C charging with that kind of energy density, that's good. But is that really new/different from what they've had for a couple of years?

I'm wondering if Centurion is right and this is really just marketing spin on the same battery they've had for a couple of years....much like the Toshiba SCIB announcements last week. I think everyone is just realizing that fast charging batteries with a good super charger network opens up new possibilities.

These specs seem slightly different from what's on their website. For Example "down to -40 degrees" here compared to "even below -20 degrees" on their old specs.

Did they just decide to make a stronger marketing statement or is it really closer to 20 degrees better in the operating range?

I'll wait for full specs including $/kWh and life cycles, etc. before I get too excited.

HarveyD, I do not have to contend with the cold weather you do. 30KwH in a Leaf with this type of charge would overcome any range anxiety I have for my driving.

300 Wh/kg and 10C charging is an exciting breakthrough. Bravo, Enevate!

300Wh/Kg is double the density of my 2011 Leaf battery and if true is a great promise for the future, especially since it has been endorsed by Prof. Goodenough. But, I always wonder what are the down sides and why Tesla, the battery giant, doesn't have it?

300 Wh/Kg and 5 minutes ultra quick recharges are minimum performances for all weather extended range BEVs together with 150 to 200 kWh packs.

Many near future batteries will offer more than 300 Wh/Kg with similar and/or with very different technologies.

Alternative technologies like FCEVs will have difficulties to compete with ultra quick charge 400+ Wh/Kg batteries.

300 Wh/Kg at the cell level would not quite be double the gravimetric energy density of the Tesla battery, but in round numbers, not too far off. A 1,300 lb Tesla battery (current spec) could be nearly 180kW, which would yield a range of 588 EPA miles.

I'm pretty sure we don't have to wait for 400+ Wh/Kg batteries for BEVs to compete effectively with FCEVs.

Alternately, we could see a smaller, lighter, cheaper battery as Musk has indicated is more likely.

300+ miles of EV range means you stop worrying about range entirely, in my experience.

Even in cold weather, batteries and cabins can be pre-heated and range loss kept to less than 20%

Let's wait and see what fine tuning can do with this technology in the next 3+ years.

Sometime in the 2020s, 4X (400+ Wh/Kg) batteries will probably hit the market place. If so, that could be the begining of the end for ICEVs and FCEVs.

Tesla built their original roadsters using 18650 (18 mm x 65 mm long) lithium-ion cells. I believe that these cells were used as they were available from the portable tool market. Anyway, they have continued to used cylindrical cells but the Tesla 3 will use larger 21700 (21 mm OD x 70 mm long) cells. Almost everyone else in the EV market uses larger prismatic cells which have a better form factor for packaging and require fewer cells.

Cylindrical cells have thermal management advantages. Larger prismatic cells develop hot spots.

No doubt we will see a trend toward optimal form factor. Too many smart people and massive computing being applied for this problem to stand.

400Wh/kg does seem within reach. When it does, cars may be the least interesting transportation technology enabled by the breakthrough.

eci said:

'300 Wh/Kg at the cell level would not quite be double the gravimetric energy density of the Tesla battery, but in round numbers, not too far off.'

It really helps to properly source figures, as I have no idea where you get your claim from, which AFAIK is more appropriate to the pack level of the present Tesla batteries than the cell level.

'In comparison, the Panasonic 18650 cells that Tesla uses have an energy density of just 254 Wh/kg.'
http://theconversation.com/teslas-batteries-have-reached-their-limit-heres-how-they-could-go-further-64765

And:
https://www.orbtronic.com/batteries-chargers/panasonic-3100mah-ncr18650a-li-ion-rechargeable-18650-battery-cell-made-in-japan

What are you talking about?

I should add that the M3 uses 21700 cells, but there is no evidence that they have significantly different energy density to the 18650's, and fans of Tesla have consistently been trying to claim that their energy density is higher, which would make the discrepancy with eci's claims worse, not better.

Call me skeptical but where is the catch?
Cost?
Production?
Availability?

If this is true it just jumped over a HUGE hurdle for electric long distance driving. It also reduces weight substantially for daily commuter vehicles.
WHEN?

Tesla batteries have increased in energy density over the course of the product life cycle. Other improvements have also increased range. The Model S 85 had an EPA rated range of 265 miles, and the current Model S 100 has a range of 335 miles.

Whichever of these batteries you choose to compare, 300Wh/kg is an impressive increase and probably puts the same vehicle at or above 400 miles of range.

Whether it’s 400, 500 or close to 600 is less relevant than the fact that over a given threshold, you simply stop worrying about range. Driving in town, you’ll never exceed 300 miles before you have to sleep again. For most people, the number of times that they take a trip out of town exceeding double that number (requiring a full charge) is so seldom that is not a great concern.

Which is why Elon Musk is on record as saying you probably won’t see a Tesla with a battery bigger than 100kWh.

He may be wrong, and he may not have been thinking about light duty trucks with tow bar when he made that statement, but in my experience over the course of 70,000 all-electric miles, over 300 miles capacity you just stop worrying about range. That includes dozens of trips over 1,000 miles and several over 2,000 miles round-trip.

The rate of charging is key here. It alleviates the dependency on a large capacity battery. Like a 10 gallon tank vs 15, You just have to fill up more frequently (assuming there are charging stations at that point). Definitely echo the concerns on cost and cycle frequency though.

According to this, a virtual train in China can recharge fully in 10 minutes for. While it has only 15 kilometer range, it carries 300 passengers. So how does that translate to distance for a car? And more to the point, what kind of batteries are they using?

eci:

Nowhere in that verbiage is their any substantiation for your claim that:

'300 Wh/Kg at the cell level would not quite be double the gravimetric energy density of the Tesla battery, but in round numbers, not too far off.'

I repeat, what is your source and what are the figures you are using for the specific energy of the present Tesla packs at the cell level?

I have provided sourced figures showing that 300Wh/Kg is nothing remotely like double the energy density.

And if that information is old, and as you claim the energy density of the current Tesla cells has improved, that makes your claim worse, not better.

Have you simply invented your figures?

Please either substantiate them or withdraw them,

You’d like to quibble over my rough approximations, Davemart? Have at it. I’d be surprised if anyone else missed the larger point. We’re entering an era where 200-300 mile all electric range will be routine. With continued innovation as Enevate presents here, longer distances reaching past 400 miles will be possible, but generally not very useful. Smaller and cheaper packs will be the goal.


eci:

You claimed:

'300 Wh/Kg at the cell level would not quite be double the gravimetric energy density of the Tesla battery, but in round numbers, not too far off.'

Without the courtesy of quoting your sources, and when corrected of the region of an upping from 254 Wh ie an increase of only perhaps 18% you not only waffled on interminably to evade the point but now have the brass neck to whine that you were 'approximately right'

You were not approximately right, you were grossly in error, and making grossly misleading claims.

Those who do not know you may falsely assume since you have not got the guts to post under your own name here but pass yourself off as the site name that you know something about battery electric cars or are speaking from some position of knowledge.

In fact you are trading on the undoubted expertise and credibility of some of those who write articles on Inside EVs such as George Bower, without apparently knowing anything at all yourself.

I was just dealing with your post on its own merits, as you continually complain I do not do when you are simply trolling hydrogen threads.

But you are as ill informed in those things you support as those you oppose, and content to drastically mislead, as well as basking in the reflected and quite unearnt reputation of those on Inside EVs who know what they are talking about.

You have no clue, and are posting as a fake authority.

Will Davemart continue to be an ever lasting pessimist?

Other keys to improved battery capacity are the 5 minutes ultra quick charging and smaller volume.

Fine tuning could increase energy density to 400 Wh/Kg by..?

Quick charging, smaller volume and higher energy density batteries will lead to potential extended range all weather BEVs for everybody, including users without home charging facilities.

Of course, ultra quick 400+ KW (5 minutes) charging stations will have to be developed and installed. It is doable.

Davemart, it’s comical to see you repeatedly try to conflate InsideEVs and Electric Car Insider, as if the people who read your posts also cannot make the distinction because the two businesses share a six character string.

You’ve been told no less than four times here on GCC that there’s no relationship, yet you persist. Whatever you think you gain by the falsehood, carry on, it just makes you look more daft each time your repeat it.

The real kicker here is the 5-minute charging time.

The thing people are missing here isn't that this makes the 500-mile EV possible or the 150-mile EV affordable, it almost makes the 50-mile EV practical.  The necessary element is charging in motion; you don't stop for 5 minutes to charge, you don't stop at all.  Siemens has already tested conductive power via overhead wires.  If you have a 4-mile charging lane every 50 miles, your vehicle just slows down to 45 MPH and tops off the battery before going off to the next one.  100 miles of range is about the upper limit of what you'd need.

You can make 5x the number of 100-mile batteries vs. 500-mile batteries.  This turns the EV into the petroleum-killer that much sooner.  Cities will start banning IC engines and drivers will quickly appreciate the quiet and convenience of electric propulsion, driving a preference cascade to eliminate liquid fuels.

And you can still fill up in the time it takes you to get in and out of the C-store.  So little will change.

Doing the math, 750 Wh/l means my Fusion Energi's battery could be cut to half the volume while doubling the capacity to 15 kWh.  This battery is a huge game-changer.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Green Car Congress © 2017 BioAge Group, LLC. All Rights Reserved. | Home | BioAge Group