OCT 04

In the last few years, electric vehicles have gone from a dream to the next logical step for vehicles. Of course, the future of EVs is still being debated, but IBM is using its cash and influence to push for an electric vehicle battery that can carry a car 500 miles without recharging.

500 miles is a long way, longer than most gasoline engines. And while the batteries might still require a long charge at the end of those 500 miles (longer than a five-minute gasoline fill up) it would still be a tremendous advantage over the 100 mile range of today's EVs.

There are a few paths to getting around this range problem. One is GM's "extended range electric vehicle" idea, which puts a gasoline generator in the car to recharge the batteries when they run low. Another is Shai Agassi's "Better Place" model, which has battery swapping stations scattered around the country for when you need a quick re-charge.

The third and most obvious option is to wait for battery technology to get good enough to satisfy the demands of drivers. IBM, sick of waiting, is pushing this direction hard. The project is called the "Battery 500 Project" and it focuses on advanced battery chemistries that will increase the "power density" of batteries. IBM's "Big Green" project last year asked for submissions for big green ideas, and the winning submission was the "Lithium Air Battery" which is what the Battery 500 Project will be focusing on.

Conceptually, lithium air batteries use lithium as the anode and oxygen as the cathode. Because oxygen would be fed into the battery from the surrounding air, the cathode would, in effect, be weightless. And because oxygen is available on demand, the only limiting factor is how much contact the battery can make with their air. That's where IBM's expertise comes in, they want to take their high-tech, nano-scale semiconductor manufacturing experience and use it to dramatically increase the surface area of the anode.

IBM is estimating that it will take two years to determine whether this technology is feasible. But even if that means it'll be five years before they hit the market, this will still be a huge breathrough for power storage technology.

Via Engadget

Comments (9)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Power isn't equivalent to Energy
written by Dan Homerick, October 05, 2009

The project is called the "Battery 500 Project" and it focuses on advanced battery chemistries that will increase the "power density" of batteries

The smartertechnology.com article you linked got it right, that the project is focused on increasing energy density. You'd want to increase the batteries power (energy/time) if you wanted a faster car, not one with a longer range.

• 
• +1
• 
• 

...
written by Chris, October 05, 2009

Longer range is nice, but the current ranges are good enough if you focus on using electric cars just on a limited local basis. For longer distances, we would be better off using electrified rail. More info here:

http://selfdestructivebastards.blogspot.com/2009/10/electric-cars-in-small-doses.html

• 
• -1
• 
• 

Reality Check
written by Mark, October 08, 2009

500 mile range would be great - heck, 300 miles would be pretty good. However, if a 100 mile range was enough for most people, millions of electric cars with that range would already have been sold. Reality is that most people want to do more than just commute to work in any car they own, even if they have 2 or more cars. Besides commuting to work, add in the trips across the local area to shop, visit friends, go to the beach, take kids to their athletic events, etc. Then you're way over 100 miles. Then there are the drives outside the local area such as my drives to my ski club and the ski resorts (about 8 times per winter, 3 hours each way).

Electricified rail for longer trips? I can't see it. Too many different destinations, too few travelers per destination. Note that even with big numbers of riders, commuter rail in metro areas has to be subsidized with tax money.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

EV's and Battery charges
written by EcoGreen, October 08, 2009

I don't see why you would try to put a gasoline backup to charge the E-batteries. It defeats the whole purpose of having a 100% Electric vehicle. Keep in the realm of renewables. I would suggest a Solar or Wind or both incorporated into the cars design so that when it it moving, the wind produced from the car's motion would trigger the wind power charge to the batteries. And of course same with the Solar panels, some how incorporate it into the car's body or skin so that it picks up the sun's rays while driving which powers the Batteries. This might be an expensive solution so maybe even create solar and wind Modifications that EV owners can purchase and easily install on their vehicles.

• 
• -3
• 
• 

...
written by WinterRain, October 08, 2009

Over the course of my lifetime I've had time to observe a lot of unsavory stuff; Here's one thing I've figured out: The Good Ole' Boys Club is going to wring the most money out any technology, new and not so new. Gasoline engines will be put into cars until petroleum cannot be had for any price anymore, then electricity, solar and hydrogen technology, and any other phony bologna nonsense used to make us still fatter and lazier will shoot through the roof. If everyone gets a mule and a saddle, mules and saddles (and hay)will suddenly cost an arm and a leg. If we walk, they'll put in toll booths every 500 feet along the side of the road. They will get their loot one way or another!

• 
• -1
• 
• 

EVs
written by Mary Genoud, October 08, 2009

Global reserves of lithium are finite and small. EVs although practical for local commutes, are not the answer alone. We need, especially in the US, gas stations for both route security and motorists convenience. 2nd generation biofuels are the better solution. Batteries increase energy efficiency, but biofuels provide the pump sales to preserve filling stations. Electric motor hybrids make more sense.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

EVs
written by Dave Wilson, October 10, 2009

The obvious solution: a biodiesel backup generator.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

500 mile battery
written by Richard Fletcher, October 10, 2009

I believe that Mark is correct, 300 miles at a minimum would probably be good enough for most people. There is so much more than normal commuting that is required for most families, that range would be necessary.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

EV-1
written by rayk, October 11, 2009

The first model GM's EV-1 (that was eventually killed)that was introduced back in 1996 used the current lead-acid battery used by every oil based engine vehicle in the world. It proved successful and gave a decent mileage. We have already problems recycling lead and acid from these batteries. At point of sale, recycling fee of up to as much as $12/battery is tacked to the cost to compel motorist to return their old batteries. The tons of cadmium, nickel and other disposable batteries from every electronics is already creating environmental problems. What more when majority of cars will be running on lithium-ion batteries? Where do we expect to dispose of them? I think hydrogen powered vehicles is more practical rather than battery powered ones as water will be the only by product.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Name

Email

Website

Title

Comment

smaller | bigger

Subscribe via email (registered users only)

Write the displayed characters

Add Comment