USABC Finalizes $12.5M PHEV Battery Development Contract With A123Systems
06 May 2008
The United States Advanced Battery Consortium (USABC), an organization whose members are Chrysler LLC, Ford Motor Company and General Motors Corporation, has finalized a $12.5 million plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) battery technology development contract with A123Systems for 10- and 40-mile electric range PHEVs.
USABC awarded the 36-month contract in collaboration with the US Department of Energy (DOE), which previously announced the award (earlier post), pending agreement on all terms and conditions.
A123Systems’ key program objectives for its lithium-ion battery technology will be to improve cell energy density to meet charge depleting requirements; reduce cell cost; test abuse tolerance for automotive applications; and demonstrate performance, cycle and calendar life.
The new A123Systems contract follows research previously conducted with USABC to develop next-generation lithium-ion battery technology for hybrid-electric vehicle (HEV) applications. (Earlier post.)
The goals for the new three-year program include significant increases in power, reduction in system cost, improvements in abuse-tolerance and extended battery life. Since its initiation in December 2006, the program has seen progress in all of these areas.
| USABC Goals for Advanced Batteries for PHEVs Requirements at End of Life (EOL) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Characteristics at EOL | High Power/Energy Ratio Battery | High Energy/Power Ratio Battery | |
| Reference Equivalent Range | miles | 10 | 40 |
| Peak Pulse Discharge Power - 2s / 10s | kW | 50 / 45 | 46 / 38 |
| Peak Regen Pulse Power (10 sec) | kW | 30 | 25 |
| Available Energy for CD (charge depleting) mode, 10 kW rate |
kWh | 3.4 | 11.6 |
| Available Energy for CS (charge sustaining) mode |
kWh | 0.5 | 0.3 |
| Minimum Round-trip Energy Efficiency (USABC HEV cycle) | % | 90 | 90 |
| Cold cranking power at -30°C, 2s - 3 Pulses | kW | 7 | 7 |
| CD Life /Discharge Throughput | Cycles/MWh | 5,000 / 17 | 5,000 / 58 |
| CS HEV Cycle Life, 50 Wh Profile | Cycles | 300,000 | 300,000 |
| Calendar Life, 35°C | year | 15 | 15 |
| Maximum System Weight | kg | 60 | 120 |
| Maximum System Volume | Liter | 40 | 80 |
| Maximum Operating Voltage | Vdc | 400 | 400 |
| Minimum Operating Voltage | Vdc | >0.55 x Vmax | >0.55 x Vmax |
| Maximum Self-discharge | Wh/day | 50 | 50 |
| System Recharge Rate at 30°C | kW | 1.4 (120V/15A) | 1.4 (120V/15A) |
| Unassisted Operating & Charging Temperature Range | °C | -30 to +52 | -30 to +52 |
| Survival Temperature Range | °C | -46 to +66 | -46 to +66 |
| Maximum System Production Price @ 100k units/yr |
$ | $1,700 | $3,400 |
USABC is a division of the United States Council for Automotive Research LLC (USCAR). Founded in 1992, the USCAR is the umbrella organization for collaborative research among Chrysler, Ford and GM. Enabled by a cooperative agreement with the DOE, USABC’s mission is to develop electrochemical energy storage technologies that support commercialization of fuel cell, hybrid and electric vehicles.
I was hoping to see how A123 compares to these goals...
Posted by: Patrick | 06 May 2008 at 10:48 AM
Those are some pretty detailed goals. The spec for regenerative braking seems high, but what the heck do I know. It must be interesting for battery companies to be courted by everyone like this. They are walking through a legal mine field with lawyers in tow to make sure that they do not sign anything that restricts their options in the future.
Posted by: SJC | 06 May 2008 at 11:37 AM
The USABC is an alliance for the big three to use taxpayer funding to offset the costs of developing batteries. It's been around since the development of the GM EV1 and has cost us masses of tax money for the little bit of battery development that has come from it. It is a convolution of study after study and review after review all funded by you and I. I believe it's just another way for Congress and the President to pick and select the winners in the energy field by letting the big three indirectly control the funding.
Posted by: Lad | 06 May 2008 at 12:53 PM
Hi Lad...Your hammer hit the nail square on the head!
Posted by: litesong | 06 May 2008 at 01:00 PM
Well aren’t A123 already capable of satisfying that list apart from the price level and probably the 15 years calendar life? I hope they concentrate on price. This is what will change the world now that the other criteria have been accomplished.
Posted by: Henrik | 06 May 2008 at 01:07 PM
Henrick is correct. Most of these goals are met or exceeded by the Volt battery. A $300/kWh cost would be a significant BEV incentive. At 100k units/year that might be ambitious.
Posted by: gr | 06 May 2008 at 07:57 PM
Besides, in the energy game this is chicken feed $$ (which is of course, corn.)
Posted by: gr | 06 May 2008 at 08:37 PM
I don't think A123 meets the 40 mile weight and volume specs, in addition to the cost specs.
Posted by: doggydogworld | 07 May 2008 at 09:38 AM
Bring down cost indeed. They need to meet the greater population of consumers.
What would be the quickest way to reign in cost? Why 15 years, not 10 for initial rollout? And what would another 20-40Kg matter for fuel usage? Or is this strict space requirements? These seem like long term goals that prohibit immediate market infusion.
Why not a tax rebate for a 5-10 year inversion period that lowers as cost lowers? Until they meet the cost line, 15 year cycle and size?
This would enable more people, more demand and ramp up productions numbers.
Posted by: Michael | 08 May 2008 at 10:21 PM
To be clear. The goals are good, but there must be some flexibility to gain market share early.
I do not understand the design specs that require 15yr lifespan. The size I'll leave to those more informed. Is it a strict requirement?
Posted by: Michael | 08 May 2008 at 10:25 PM