Tesla passes U.N. battery tests

[WoodPeckr]

Tesla passes U.N. battery tests

August 7, 2007 9:01 PM PDT
Posted by Michael Kanellos
http://news.com.com/8301-10784_3-9756535-7.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-5

The lithium ion car battery created by Tesla Motors has passed a battery of certification tests that effectively remove another hurdle in the path toward selling products.

The Tesla Roadster is a fully electric sports car, and is the first car to be produced by electric car firm Tesla Motors. Tesla claims prototypes have been able to accelerate from 0-60 mph (100 km/h) in about 4 seconds, and reach a top speed of over 130 mph (210 km/h). Additionally, the car will be able to travel more than 200 miles (322 km) on a single charge of its lithium-ion battery system. The Roadster's efficiency is reported as 133 Wh/km[2] or equivalent to 135 mpg (1.74 l/100 km).[3][4][5] For details, see the Fuel efficiency section.

Pricing

Final pricing for the 2008 Tesla Roadster base model is US$92,000 (an increase to US$98,000 on June 15, 2007 has been announced). The majority of the first 200 Roadsters ordered by October 2006 came fully loaded with all Tesla Roadster optional equipment taking the cost up to just under US$100,000.

 

[shakenbake]

Tesla passes U.N. battery tests

August 7, 2007 9:01 PM PDT
Posted by Michael Kanellos
http://news.com.com/8301-10784_3-9756535-7.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-5

The lithium ion car battery created by Tesla Motors has passed a battery of certification tests that effectively remove another hurdle in the path toward selling products.

The Tesla Roadster is a fully electric sports car, and is the first car to be produced by electric car firm Tesla Motors. Tesla claims prototypes have been able to accelerate from 0-60 mph (100 km/h) in about 4 seconds, and reach a top speed of over 130 mph (210 km/h). Additionally, the car will be able to travel more than 200 miles (322 km) on a single charge of its lithium-ion battery system. The Roadster's efficiency is reported as 133 Wh/km[2] or equivalent to 135 mpg (1.74 l/100 km).[3][4][5] For details, see the Fuel efficiency section.

Pricing

Final pricing for the 2008 Tesla Roadster base model is US$92,000 (an increase to US$98,000 on June 15, 2007 has been announced). The majority of the first 200 Roadsters ordered by October 2006 came fully loaded with all Tesla Roadster optional equipment taking the cost up to just under US$100,000.

I am certain that, with economies of scale, the prices will come down.

Now, where to get the electricity to charge these babies with!

 

[Mao Tse Tongue]

Is Tesla slated for Canada?

 

[DATYdude]

I'll take 2 please...

 

[xarir]

Interesting that Tesla is starting at the high end with a sports car. Hopefully the experience they gain in that niche will translate neatly to normal cars for the rest of us.

On a practical note, it would be difficult for condo dwellers like myself to purchase one - nowhere to recharge it! People with homes have easy access to electrical outlets but not us condo types. That's unfortunate because an electric car would suit my lifestyle quite well. (Occasional driver only, mostly in town.)

 

[KBear]

Seeing so many of these cheap solar powered lights now. Wonder how long it will be before they can make the car body panels with solar cells integrated into the finish. Would work well for the occasional driver who parks outdoors.

 

[Papi Chulo]

I wonder how stable the lithium batteries will be... look at the fires / explodeing batteries from laptop & cell phone batteries!

 

[Tech72]

What about the roar?

Interesting sports car with a bright future no doubt. But this and furture electric sports cars will all be missing one very important and sought after thing; the roar of the engine. Who wants to accelerate from 0-60mph in 4seconds flat to the sound of a sewing machine?

 

[Mack Bolan]

I have no doubt that if the demand was there, condo dweller would be able to have power plugs for each parking space. They will just have to come up with a billing method for the charge up and lets not forget a way to make sure that you don't get charged for services not used.

 

[WoodPeckr]

I have no doubt that if the demand was there, condo dweller would be able to have power plugs for each parking space.

Charging appears to be no problem:

How do you recharge it?

Unlike EVs of the past, the Tesla Roadster has a built-in battery charging system that can basically plug into any outlet. The car ships with a particularly easy-to-use Home Charging Station that is installed in your garage by a qualified electrician. There is also an optional mobile charging kit that allows you to charge from any available electrical outlet (110V or 220V) wherever you happen to be.

 

[l69norm]

I wonder how stable the lithium batteries will be.....

Whatever happened to fuel cells? They have been talking for years about fuel cell powered laptops running from 5-40 hours on a single charge of methanol. Seems like an ideal thing for a car (then again why not a gasoline powered fuel cell?)
http://www.pcworld.com/video/id,461-page,11-bid,0/video.html

 

[Keebler Elf]

The problem with electric cars is that no one seems to be taking into account the surge in electricity prices that will occur when/if our economy takes a major shift towards electric cars.

Our electricity production is already at peak capacity.

But on the bright side, there really would be justification for price increases during long weekends when everyone goes driving.

 

[WoodPeckr]

Whatever happened to fuel cells?

Powerfull special interests (Oil, Natural Gas, Coal, the Utilities) are against them because fuel cells have the potential to drive them all out of business.

In spite of this some advances are being made.....by Japan of course.

Hydrogen fuel cells power Fujitsu data center
By Michael Kanellos
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: August 17, 2007, 2:54 PM PDT

SUNNYVALE, Calif.--Hydrogen is a better source of energy than you think, according to Fujitsu.

The Japanese electronics giant inaugurated a 200-kilowatt hydrogen fuel cell from UTC on Friday that will provide electricity as well as heat to the buildings on its campus here.

The fuel cell--which sits in the parking lot and looks like a pair of giant green dumpsters--provides two types of energy to the facility. First, a unit heats methane with steam to create hydrogen. The hydrogen is passed through a proton exchange membrane (PEM). The electricity produced by the reaction with the PEM runs lights, computers and other equipment.

Additionally, the hot water from the methane-hydrogen reaction is cycled through the building to create heat. More waste heat could be recaptured from the PEM unit, but the water is too hot for Fujitsu's internal systems, so it is just vented off. Someday, however, it may be piped into the building.

Although carbon dioxide is expelled when producing hydrogen, the fuel cell will result in about 35 percent less greenhouse gas emissions overall, according to Homer Purcell, UTC vice president of sales. That's about 500 tons of carbon dioxide not emitted a year. It will also save about 800,000 gallons of water a year, he added. Conventional power plants require more water.

Industrial-size fuel cells won't work well in a lot of circumstances. "If you have an office building that's open five days a week from 9 to 5, it may not be a good application," Purcell said. "You need to be running 24-7."

Customers also have to exploit the heat that comes off the reaction, he added. Fujitsu's fuel cell is about 50 percent efficient when the recaptured heat is added. At that level, the fuel cell is roughly on par with many gas-powered power plants. Potentially, fuel cells can be made 85 percent efficient by capturing more of the waste heat.

But if those requirements can be met, a fuel cell can make economic sense, Purcell said. UTC, in fact, has already installed 280 fuel cells, according to a company spokesman. Customers include data centers, hospitals and hotels.

Utility credits also help. Pacific Gas & Electric gave Fujitsu $500,000 in rebates for installing the system. That works out to $2.50 a watt, or the same amount that homeowners get for installing solar panels. With the subsidy, the fuel cell will pay itself off in around 3.5 years and will last around 15 years, according to Fujitsu.

Like many Japanese companies, Fujitsu has set goals for greenhouse gas reductions. (Pollution problems and skyrocketing costs of imported energy in the 1970s kicked off a conservation movement in the country that has remained somewhat strong.)

The company's goal is to reduce carbon dioxide emissions to below 1990 levels by 2010. In 2006, it reduced overall waste in its factories 41 percent from 2003 levels, according to Hideru Yamaguchi, president of the corporate environmental affairs unit at Fujitsu.

The company also has tried to integrate more green ideas into its products. In 2005, for instance, it released a laptop in Japan with a biodegradable chassis made of corn starch-based plastic.

More:
http://news.com.com/2300-11392_3-6203260-1.html?part=rss&tag=6203260&subj=news

 

[RTRD]

Uh huh...

...I'll believe it when I see a test by a LEGITIMATE automotive journal.

Bricklin.

DeLorean

And don't forget the Vector, which appeared TWICE on the cover of Car and Driver, but not one was every actually sold.

Everybody CLAIMS they can mass production build a car better than the big...umm...12?LOL!!

No one...NOT ONE SINGLE COMPANY...has done it yet.

These guys will NEVER sell any significant number of vehicles at this price. Will...not...happen.

 

[WoodPeckr]

These guys will NEVER sell any significant number of vehicles at this price. Will...not...happen.

Vested powerfull interests are counting on that sentiment and support........

 

[RTRD]

Yeah, I know...

Vested powerfull interests are counting on that sentiment and support........

...the grassy knoll and all that.

DeLorean had the full on support of the British (Irish?) Government...but failed due to the reality that he simply did not have the resources to compete. Ultimately, his vehicle proved to be over priced and under performing...once the "gee, look at me" buyers had made their purchases...no more were sold in significant numbers.

First step - like I said, I SEE lots of claims by these Tesla guys...but I haven't SEEN an independent test by an independent authority. I highly doubt the UN did any of the performance testing claimed in this article...(and...ummm...when did the UN start testing cars anyway? Testing a battery and testing a car are two different things...). Once someone NOT associated with Tesla proves this car does indeed exist and does what is claimed, then...

Second step - I want to see them actually manufacture them in profitable volumes. The 100K price point is pretty good for that type of performance...you can pay less (Corvette), but you can also pay more (Porsche, Audi R8, and of course the Italians), and none will have quite the cache. There is a market, no question....IF they can actually produce the cars. Ask John DeLorean about how hard it is to actually mass produce cars...and you will need to mass produce them in order to make a profit at that price point.

3rd - And this is the thing that ultimately kills them all (remember the Yugo? Fiat in North America? Daewoo?) - support. People want their cars serviced after you sell them. That means dealers, warranty support, trained mechanics, etc. People who buy a low volume kit car don't expect it to run 24 / 7 / 365, and don't expect to be able to get it repaired with ease. Hence, no shortage of kit car and specialty car manufactures. Plenty. And those people do indeed make vehicles that are very good at what they do while compromising other things (because it is pretty damn hard to out engineer people who had 1 billion dollars worth of development money at their disposal...yeah you can make they car they designed go faster...but reliably? And pass emission regs?)- they appeal to a niche market.

But people who buy what is supposed to be a mass produced car expect the fucker to run, and when it doesn't, they expect it to be able to be repaired reliably.

Contrary to all the conspiracy theorist belief's, both GM and Honda spent MILLIONS trying to engineer, design and mass produce electric cars. Guess what? PEOPLE DIDN'T BUY THEM. Do you REALLY think those companies didn't want to sell and make a profit on those cars, after spend MILLIONS bring them to market? Ultimately the GM EV1 and the Honda Insight were done in by the fact that they represented engineering compromises that the average person was not prepared to accept...and hence they were never mass produced or sold in significant quantity.

Technology...specifically battery technology...has advanced tremendously in the last 15 years. No question. But don't you think there is a reason why the automobile manufactures...with all of their financial and technical might...have not brought such a car to market, even though there is OBVIOUSLY a large segment of the population prepared to buy them (which is why hybrid sells are like nuts)?

It is because that car DOES NOT EXIST...even with today's technology...at a price point that can be mass produced and mass marketed. At least not at a profit.

But...the grassy knoll guys think it is because "the man" wants to keep the electric car down. "The man" apparently doesn't want to stop hybrid sales...nooooo....but an electric car? No way. Not going to let it happen.

0 to 60 in 4.0 seconds....and 135 mpg. From a company that has never even produced a vehicle before... Ya.

Tell you what...you hold your breath...and bookmark this post. I will eat my words the first time one gets tested by a legitimate automotive magazine or authority...and swear on everything short of my kids life I will BUY ONE once they pass 10,000 in sales (assuming 0 to 60 in 4.0 seconds / 135 mpg / $100,000 holds true). Fuck...I'll but you one as well.

 

[WoodPeckr]

...the grassy knoll and all that.

Well Pres. Carter, a nuclear engineer btw, backed by many, many scientists were ready and said it was very viable to make the change 30 yrs ago.......what happened?.......

 

[RTRD]

What happened...

Well Pres. Carter, a nuclear engineer btw, backed by many, many scientists were ready and said it was very viable to make the change 30 yrs ago.......what happened?.......

...is EXACTLY what I said.

BTW...were any of those scientist AUTOMOTIVE ENGINEERS?

Again...let me be clear - no one is saying such a car cannot be built. What I (and everybody else who isn't a "scientist") is saying is that you can't build 10,000 of said cars PROFITABLY. Not TODAY. Ten years from now, when the cost of batteries comes down further, and you have ten more years of electric motor efficiency progress...maybe. Hell...probably.

You do understand the difference between a scientist and an engineer, right?


My bet still stands...

 

[21pro]

these were the same guys that were able to get over 240 hp out of a small lightweight toyota corolla engine and still remain within legal emissions and fuel restrictions.

i think they used a slightly toned down version (189hp) in the newer model lotus elise. toyota uses an adaption of that same concept in the XRS models.

 

[RTRD]

Here is an interesting peice of info...

...to add to the debate...

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/tec...em&ex=1189656000&en=f2cc5af180e1cb07&ei=5087


AUSTIN, Texas (AP) -- Millions of inventions pass quietly through the U.S. patent office each year. Patent No. 7,033,406 did, too, until energy insiders spotted six words in the filing that sounded like a death knell for the internal combustion engine.

An Austin-based startup called EEStor promised ''technologies for replacement of electrochemical batteries,'' meaning a motorist could plug in a car for five minutes and drive 500 miles roundtrip between Dallas and Houston without gasoline.

By contrast, some plug-in hybrids on the horizon would require motorists to charge their cars in a wall outlet overnight and promise only 50 miles of gasoline-free commute. And the popular hybrids on the road today still depend heavily on fossil fuels.

''It's a paradigm shift,'' said Ian Clifford, chief executive of Toronto-based ZENN Motor Co., which has licensed EEStor's invention. ''The Achilles' heel to the electric car industry has been energy storage. By all rights, this would make internal combustion engines unnecessary.''

Clifford's company bought rights to EEStor's technology in August 2005 and expects EEStor to start shipping the battery replacement later this year for use in ZENN Motor's short-range, low-speed vehicles.

The technology also could help invigorate the renewable-energy sector by providing efficient, lightning-fast storage for solar power, or, on a small scale, a flash-charge for cell phones and laptops.

Skeptics, though, fear the claims stretch the bounds of existing technology to the point of alchemy.

''We've been trying to make this type of thing for 20 years and no one has been able to do it,'' said Robert Hebner, director of the University of Texas Center for Electromechanics. ''Depending on who you believe, they're at or beyond the limit of what is possible.''

EEStor's secret ingredient is a material sandwiched between thousands of wafer-thin metal sheets, like a series of foil-and-paper gum wrappers stacked on top of each other. Charged particles stick to the metal sheets and move quickly across EEStor's proprietary material.

The result is an ultracapacitor, a battery-like device that stores and releases energy quickly.

Batteries rely on chemical reactions to store energy but can take hours to charge and release energy. The simplest capacitors found in computers and radios hold less energy but can charge or discharge instantly. Ultracapacitors take the best of both, stacking capacitors to increase capacity while maintaining the speed of simple capacitors.

Hebner said vehicles require bursts of energy to accelerate, a task better suited for capacitors than batteries.

''The idea of getting rid of the batteries and putting in capacitors is to get more power back and get it back faster,'' Hebner said.

But he said nothing close to EEStor's claim exists today.

For years, EEStor has tried to fly beneath the radar in the competitive industry for alternative energy, content with a phone-book listing and a handful of cryptic press releases.

Yet the speculation and skepticism have continued, fueled by the company's original assertion of making batteries obsolete -- a claim that still resonates loudly for a company that rarely speaks, including declining an interview with The Associated Press.

The deal with ZENN Motor and a $3 million investment by the venture capital group Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, which made big-payoff early bets on companies like Google Inc. and Amazon.com Inc., hint that EEStor may be on the edge of a breakthrough technology, a ''game changer'' as Clifford put it.

ZENN Motor's public reports show that it so far has invested $3.8 million in and has promised another $1.2 million if the ultracapacitor company meets a third-party testing standard and then delivers a product.

Clifford said his company consulted experts and did a ''tremendous amount of due diligence'' on EEStor's innovation.

EEStor's founders have a track record. Richard D. Weir and Carl Nelson worked on disk-storage technology at IBM Corp. in the 1990s before forming EEStor in 2001. The two have acquired dozens of patents over two decades.

Neil Dikeman of Jane Capital Partners, an investor in clean technologies, said the nearly $7 million investment in EEStor pales compared with other energy storage endeavors, where investment has averaged $50 million to $100 million.

Yet curiosity is unusually high, Dikeman said, thanks to the investment by a prominent venture capital group and EEStor's secretive nature.

''The EEStor claims are around a process that would be quite revolutionary if they can make it work,'' Dikeman said.

Previous attempts to improve ultracapacitors have focused on improving the metal sheets by increasing the surface area where charges can attach.

EEStor is instead creating better nonconductive material for use between the metal sheets, using a chemical compound called barium titanate. The question is whether the company can mass-produce it.

ZENN Motor pays EEStor for passing milestones in the production process, and chemical researchers say the strength and functionality of this material is the only thing standing between EEStor and the holy grail of energy-storage technology.

Joseph Perry and the other researchers he oversees at Georgia Tech have used the same material to double the amount of energy a capacitor can hold. Perry says EEstor seems to be claiming an improvement of more than 400-fold, yet increasing a capacitor's retention ability often results in decreased strength of the materials.

''They're not saying a lot about how they're making these things,'' Perry said. ''With these materials (described in the patent), that is a challenging process to carry out in a defect-free fashion.''

Perry is not alone in his doubts. An ultracapacitor industry leader, Maxwell Technologies Inc., has kept a wary eye on EEStor's claims and offers a laundry list of things that could go wrong.

Among other things, the ultracapacitors described in EEStor's patent operate at extremely high voltage, 10 times greater than those Maxwell manufactures, and won't work with regular wall outlets, said Maxwell spokesman Mike Sund. He said capacitors could crack while bouncing down the road, or slowly discharge after a dayslong stint in the airport parking lot, leaving the driver stranded.

Until EEStor produces a final product, Perry said he joins energy professionals and enthusiasts alike in waiting to see if the company can own up to its six-word promise and banish the battery to recycling bins around the world.

''I am skeptical but I'd be very happy to be proved wrong,'' Perry said.