New Battery Technology From Korea Might Increase EV Charging by 30-120 Times Faster Than Current Batteries

5 years ago by Mike Buchanan 17

New technology from Korea might have your EV getting a range of 600+ miles per charge!

According to an article from Torque News, a university in Korea has recently released information about a new type of lithium-ion battery that has the fastest recharge properties currently found in EV batteries.

 

Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology (UNIST) says that university scientists recently found a major breakthrough with lithium-ion batteries. Based on information from the school, UNIST newest technology enables lithium-ion batteries to recharge at 30 to 120 times faster than any other lithium-ion battery found in an EV, according to Torque News. Although this latest technology has not been stress tested , if this technology does work and charging stations are built that support such a rapid charge rate, this would be a major advancement to issues surround electric cars.

 

According to the article, UNIST’s battery technology uses cathode material along with standard lithium manganese oxide. These materials are then soaked in a solution containing graphite which forms an extremely conductive network that runs throughout the cathode to allow for more of the battery to recharge at any given time. For example, regular lithium-ion batteries recharge starts at the surface of the cathode and then distributes through the battery where as the UNIST has energy-processing particiles that charge throughout the battery automatically.

 

The large battery pack from Tesla allows a 90 kilowatt charge to allow for a range around 300 miles.

One of the the biggest issues concerning current EV technology is recharge time. According to a scientist at the Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology in Korea said, “The development of such a battery could significantly raise the popularity of electric vehicles whose lithium-ion batteries currently take hours to recharge.” But, since this technology requires a massive amount of power, will this technology actually be usable.

 

Based on information released from the university in Korea, depending on the battery size and desired distance wanted, charging rates would be between 198 to 792 kilowatt range, up from the current 3.3 kilowatt or 6.6 kilowatt charge rate found in personal and commercial charges on the market today.

 

Although Tesla has a SuperCharger system that supports up to a 90 kilowatt charge rate that relates to around a 300 mile range, consider what a 198+ kilowatt charging rate for an EV would net? You could fully charge a Nissan LEAF or Chevrolet Volt in about 5 minutes!

 

To learn more about this technology, take a look at the article from Torque News, who admits that “this is early stage research and it is unclear when automotive quality batteries built with technology would exist.”

17 responses to "New Battery Technology From Korea Might Increase EV Charging by 30-120 Times Faster Than Current Batteries"

  1. vdiv says:

    Hmm 200 kW / 240 V = 833 A… That would be one thick and heavy cable.

    NP, you say, we’ll just raise the voltage to 10 kV. That would still be one thick and heavy cable insulation. Not to mention the size of the power electronics.

  2. Shawn Marshall says:

    If fast charging ever proves out ( even though it was prohibited by certain omniscient seers at the GM-Volt site years ago) the power transfer problem could be treated 2 ways to lower amperage requiremnets and heavy demand on the power system( especially in the evening when everybody gets home and plugs into the chargers).
    1)Charge at battery voltage to or higher to lower current (400 – 500 VDC)
    2) Charge from home battery banks which could be charged slowly and intermittently off the grid or even from solar cells or windmills
    3) Commercial sources could likewise supply energy from battery banks that are charged more graduallythe
    It is silly to pretend it cannot be done.
    Tha cable could be silver plated plastic tubing, possibly even cooled, and the insulation for 1000 VDC is not a problem. Can be EPR and very flexible – not a big deal.
    If the technology works, it makes BEVs much more attractive. I’ve got my fingers crossed that we’ll all get a charge out of it.

    1. Brian says:

      A minor correction – nobody will be charging at these rates at home. This will solely be used while on a road trip. 6.6 kW charging will work for more than 99% of users if charging overnight. I do agree though that the solution is to have a stationary battery bank that is slowly charging at all times. Think of it as a water tower for EVs 🙂

      1. vdiv says:

        Well, sodium batteries could be used for storing power from solar panels as well. Dealing with such power levels is dangerous especially for people without proper training and experience. I don’t think we will see this at home anytime soon either.

  3. Bonaire says:

    Recharge time today is 5C using A123 cells. It’s not the battery. It’s the recharging system, wiring to the charger, etc. 5C charging is simply 6-minute recharging and A123 20Ah cells can do that today. A 20kWh battery system would require 100KW over 6 minutes to fully recharge. That is a ton of power in a short time. sometimes, these stories don’t pull the real issue into the picture – very high voltage and amperage needed to “fast charge”. Very dangerous if abused.

    1. Bonaire says:

      Correction: 5C charging is 12-minute recharging (60/5). sorry about that. However, a full charge in 12 minutes would work out for anyone.

  4. Bill Howland says:

    1500 volt cable @ 100 amps would yield 150 kwh. This would be a very small cable.
    Say, 2 – #4 AWG, and 2 #18 control, and 1 #8 ground (earth).

    As far as coming up with the 150 kw, there are already products on the market that take juice at a level 1 rate (12 amps at 120volts), and slowly charge an internal battery all day, and then provide level 2 rate of 30 amps at 240 volts.

    Doesn’t take a genius to figure out a Level II to Level III unit could be build also, if we can get the batteries cheap enough.

    Example: The Level III charger gets itself ready at home by running a day at 30 amps. Then the futuristic car with 150 kwh battery pack (60 % more than even tesla’s biggest), will take charge at 1500 volts and 100 amps or 150 kwh. In 65-70 minutes, the car will be full, ready for another 400 mile trip. And no strain on the house electrics since you’ve used electricity just slightly great rate than a typical electric clothes dryer.

  5. Bill Howland says:

    er: correction. When I use the power rates, i mean 150 kw not kwh, which is energy storage.

  6. Bill Howland says:

    I think in the future the scenerio I just mentioned is what will transpire since the cost is so low, and no infrastructure needs to be changed at all.

    The previous posters pooh poohed the idea saying it can’t be done. 2 – #4 AWG in a flexible cable is a very low cost proposition.

    Beware of naysayers. I read an article in Scientific American 25 years ago saying electric cars are impossible since we’d need 1000 amp connectors at 12 volts to get a mere 18 horsepower. And this guy supposedly had a PhD.

    Just because cars had never more than 12 volts does not mean nothing can change in the future ever.. Its not true anyway, the Tucker had a 24 volt system, at least for starting.

    The charging process does not need to be INSTANT anyways. An hour’s time for charging is acceptible if getting dinner at a roadside restaurant. You need to eat every 400 miles anyways.

  7. vdiv says:

    Bill, consider a voltage divider with input voltage of 1500 V. The first resistor is an x length, #4 AWG wire (0.2485 Ohm/kft Cu), and the second resistor is also x length, but #8 AWG wire (0.6282 Ohm/kft Cu). Ignoring the current for a moment, what is the output voltage of this divider?

    Do you see why the grounding cable cannot be thinner than the supply ones? In fact when dealing with such high voltages the grounding conductor may have to be multiple times the thickness (conductivity) of the supply cables in order for it to properly ground anything.

    Now let’s consider that length x and the weight of the resulting cable. How many people will be able to comfortably lift it and plug it properly in a receptacle? I am already having a hard time with the 16ft 3x#14AWG and 2x#18AWG cable on the portable Level 1 EVSE of my car, I seriously doubt that my 72 year old father or my 110 lbs sister can handle it.

    By the way, 100 A, assuming copper cable, would require a minimum of #3 AWG wire. At this point you may have to use silver. Good luck keeping thieves from taking an interest in such a cable.

  8. Bill Howland says:

    @Vdiv.
    Way ahead of you man. National Electrical Code (NFPA 70 in the USA) requires #8AWG safety ground for 100 amps. Lets say including connector resistance .7 ohms / kft, or .014 ohms for a 20 ft cord including contact resistance at the jack. That’s a whole voltage drop of a whopping 1.4 volts at 100 amps. Since this 100 amps is being derived from an inverter the fault current wouldn’t be much more than the operating current. And only for a split second until the unit’s ground fault tripped.
    The tables you doubt are reading from are 75 degree centigrade rating. If you examine most EV cords they are 105 degree centigrade rating. And the rating is for 3 current carrying conductors in normal operation. The example I gave assumed 2 current carrying conductors.
    As far as saying #3 is required, not much difference between #3 and #4 anyway, but silver is not required. The Tesla 70 amp cord is 2- #6 AWG. It works because they are not working with your 75 degree rating. The cord is allowed to get hotter.
    The chevy Volt “Commits the horrible crime” of putting 12 amps on a #16 AWG 18 foot cord, with all the recalls only making the plugin stub bigger, the main 18′ cord is still #16AWG.

    You’re voltage divider analogy works this way. on a hard fault inside the car, and assuming a fault current regulated to 100 amps, there would be .6 volts drop across the #4 AWG, and 1.4 volts drop across the #8AWG. So we’re talking trivial amounts, and that’s making the very big assumption that any current of any significance would go through the ground anyway. If the 1500 volt inverter supply output that I mentioned was floating, then there wouldn’t be any drop across the #8 AWG anyway. Sorry man.

    1. vdiv says:

      Good discussion. Actually, my simple divider example works this way. The output voltage on the car would be

      1500 * 0.6282 / (0.6282 + 0.2485) = 1075 V

      That is dangerous. Are you assuming that the GFCI would work, that the source cannot supply the current, and that the connectors, cables, or fuses would break the circuit before this voltage can harm anyone? Is the supply floating after all? Making assumptions to assure safety? The reason why the grounding conductor should be thick is so that most of the current will in fact go through it rather than someone’s body.

      As far as running the cable at 105 degrees Celsius, this can burn someone handling it or melt things around it. Even at 60 deg C it is a bad choice because that assumes 25 deg C ambient temperature. This is outside, the temperature in the shade can reach 40+ degrees.

      Such cable also wastes energy by heating up the environment rather than delivering it to the load. From your example

      0.7 Ohms/kft * 0.02 kft * 2 * (100 A) ^ 2 = 280 W dissipated by the cable.

      My whole point is that high-current charging is not as practical or as trivial as articles like this one would lead the reader to believe.

      1. Bill Howland says:

        @vdiv
        Oh C’mon, I was just commenting on your own voluntary personal experience and drawing the reasonable conclusion. I thought a bit of levity would be easier to accept than the cold hard truth.

        Anyway on that point, your own numbers are wrong, and, excuse me, you apparently aren’t familiar with the way electricity works from a constant current source. The voltage output would not remain 1500 volts under fault conditions. It would drop to 2 volts under the scenerio I gave, but, point is, the cable sizes I mentioned satisfy legal requirements. Even a very high 1000 amp fault current would only cause 20 volts overall on your entire ‘voltage divider’. An inverter that has a running current of 100 amps really cannot supply 1000 amps for very long, or at 1500 kw for very long, like microseconds. A person can withstand 13 volts for 1 microsecond.

        Wrong point #2). The resistance you gave was .2485 ohms/kft. I think that’s a bit low, but since you mentioned it, lets use it (its not far off anyway).

        Pwr dissipated is 100 * 100 * .00994 = 99.4 watts for a 20 foot cable or 5 watts per foot. On a reasonably stout cable thats not a big deal.

        Reiterating: I’m not assuming anything. A level 2 to level 3 converter would have transformer isolation in it at some point, there’s no problem in either making the output float, or putting it through a high resistance ground.

        More to the point, I don’t know what your discussion is trying to accomplish but both the volt cord and the tesla cord violate your standards. No offense, but so what? Those companies will keep making those cords, and my proposed cord heats similarly to the tesla (actually, my current density is a bit lower than tesla’s current cord, but i’ll leave that as a homework assignment for you).

  9. Bill Howland says:

    @vdiv
    The Tesla Roadster connector can be a bit of a pain when its cold outside, but a properly working j1772 style connector (currently being built in upmto 80 amp models) is easily negotiated.

    You are having trouble with a 12 amp cable? Man I’d start eating some Wheaties for breakfast fast.

    I know several women who use a Chevy Voltec 110 charger with 3-#16AWG, and 2 -#18AWG, plus a quite heavy SAE J1772 plugend/flash light. They have expressed no difficulty HOISTING the cable that you imply would give you problems, into the 3 foot high car port.

    If what you say in your post is true, then obviously your sister and father call for assistance lifting that really heavy gasoline hose at the filling station.

    1. vdiv says:

      No need to get personal. Where they live there are mostly full-service gas stations, and they only fill up once a month or so. Unwinding, plugging, unplugging and winding the charging cord every day/multiple times a day is a hassle. You can see it in the public charging stations where most cords are a mess laying on the ground than properly stowed. It gets worse with the portable Voltec charger when you have to wind the cord around it neatly without banging your knee or the door panel of your shiny Volt with the plug leaving a ding so the charge cord fits in the trunk.

      1. Mark H says:

        Owned my Volt for nine months and never removed my portable charging chord from the wall. I have a nice hanger parallel to the port that you simply plug into. This is the point of a PHEV, you don’t have to worry.

        1. vdiv says:

          Not everyone can have a permanently mounted charging cord at home especially if they live in a multi dwelling community or rent. Also if driving places, visiting friends or relatives that do not have an EVSE, staying overnight, etc, often the only option to charge is the portable cord.