DoE Announces Funding Opportunity For Extreme Fast Charging

1 week ago by Mark Kane 27

Porsche Mission E prototype out testing (Automedia)

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) intends to jump start the development of “extreme fast charging” (XFC) by awarding $15 million to various projects.

Phoenix Contact – High Power Charging (HPC) – 500 A, 1000 V CCS Combo plugs (U.S. Type 1 and Europe Type 2)

The funding opportunity splits into two areas of interest: charging systems/vehicles, and batteries capable of fast charging.

The baseline requirements for funding include a 3C charging ability over a broad state-of-charge window (state of charge need to increase by at least 50% at 3C). Translated to the real world, it would mean an approximate increase in the state of charge from 30% to 80% in 15 minutes.

One of the first models that is intended to be capable of charging in 15 minutes is the Porsche Mission E, which will accept up to ~350 kW of power.

Baseline requirements:

  • Identify a current baseline plug-in electric vehicle, and describe how the proposed project will incorporate XFC technology and lead to a value added for the demonstration vehicle in terms of reduced charging time.
  • Identify specific vehicle types(s) (including light, medium, or heavy duty vehicles) and electric drive systems that will be developed and demonstrated.
  • Demonstrate the ability of the proposed technology to decrease charging times relative to currently available technologies while maintaining currents to less than 400A.
  • Assure that the battery state of charge increases by at least 50% with a 3C or greater rate of charging.
  • Describe planned charger location(s), including infrastructure requirements and impacts at these sites.
  • Include and describe partnerships with state governments, local governments, metropolitan transportation authorities, air pollution control districts, private or nonprofit entities, and component and/or subcomponent suppliers or combinations of these entities integrated within the project team to support the overall system design and demonstration effort.
  • Include partnerships for the supply or co-development of components and/or subcomponents such as, but not limited to: battery packs, power electronics, controllers, chargers, sensors, cabling, and connectors.

In case of XFC, the requirements envisions “battery cells capable of achieving 500 cycles (with less than 20% fade in specific energy) consisting of a 10-minute fast charge protocol, while achieving or improving state-of-the-art cell specific energy and cost“.

The point of reference for state-of-the-art, high-energy battery cell technology is >200 Wh/kg, <$150/kWh and 2C (30 minutes) charging capability.

Specific technical interests for achieving the objectives include, but are not limited to the following:

  • Novel electrode and cell architectures
  • Novel electrolytes
  • Active material modifications
  • Improved additives

source: Green Car Congress

Tags: , , ,

27 responses to "DoE Announces Funding Opportunity For Extreme Fast Charging"

  1. SparkEV says:

    SparkEV is 2.6C to 80%, so 3C doesn’t seem all that far. After about 300 DCFC cycles, it’s lost 1 kWh (5%). Come on Chevy, you just need to take the lead on chargers, and you’re probably there already.

    1. Bonaire says:

      SparkEV early models used the LiFEPO4 chemistry from A123. That cell can do a 6C charge in RC-pack form.

      1. (⌐■_■) Trollnonymous says:

        Those cells were pretty Sick.

        High discharge rate and charge rate with high cycle count to 100% DOD.

        I was tempted to buy a couple modules of those on ebay from wrecked EV’s.

        1. SJC says:

          A 40 kWh pack charging at 120 kW is 3C. It depends on cell chemistry, pack cooling, BMS and other factors to be able to do this without cell degradation.

  2. Jay Cole says:

    There was a post (and subsequent extended conversation) between unlucky and InsideEVs that really didn’t have anything to do with this thread, but became fairly distracting.

    Therefore, to restore balance to the article and its proper discussion, it isn’t here now.

    1. Mark C says:

      Isn’t that interesting….

      Happy to see the DoE, with a Pres Trump appointee promoting electric infrastructure.

  3. Bonaire says:

    “Translated to the real world, it would mean an approximate increase in the state of charge from 30% to 80% in 15 minutes.”

    3C is 1 full charge from empty to full SOC in 1/3 hour. At 3C, a real full charge takes 20 minutes. 50% of a battery charge would then mean 10 minutes. But perhaps 5 extra minutes for plug-in, ramp-up, ramp-down, finish, driveoff. But “how big is the battery?”

    3C is a misnomer. Does not indicate capacity. 3C of 100kWh is far more AMPs than 3C of a 20kWh pack. It also means 100kWh pack chrged at 6.6kWh per minute (26 mile of range per minute). For 20kWh, 3C means adding 5 miles per minute.

    This article/DoE item also seems to lean toward BEVs all being something like 100kWh in capacity, if not bigger. This is a big part of the problem. We don’t need this size of a battery per-car. Make “more cars with smaller batteries” so that the precious ingredient can be spread further.

    3C of 100kWh is 300KW charging for a Tesla model S.
    3C for a Chevy Bolt is about 165KW
    3C for a Gen-1 Volt would be about 36KW.

    The EVSE is not rated on the C speeds but rather the input line speeds. An EVSE utilizing 300KW throughput is far different than one doing 50KW.

    1KW charging rate is adding between 3 and 5 miles of range for a car. The goal should be to add approximately 90-120 mile of range per minute. That is 30KW to 40KW for shared resources. Still is 166A for 240V at 40KW.

    Today’s tech isn’t capable of this – hence the study. But this is akin to trying to replace gas pumps with electric pumps. We don’t have gas pumps at home. We do have electric pumps at home – wall sockets and L2 EVSE. Shouldn’t the drive be to get at-home DCSC (DC Slow Charging) put into place, if possible, even integrate it into Solar PV and battery subsystems?

    Lots of battery products are out there now including LTO cells which can do 3C charging. LiFEPO4 does 3C to 6C charging now. This is not new tech, but the problem is those are not dense enough for lighter-weight car solutions. Good for buses and grid-storage where high cycle count and fast charging is important.

    I see why they want to do ultra-fast charging. For the convenience factors. But forcing chemistry through its limits may be troublesome especially for grid and power resources that must keep up with “convenience” over sound thinking. This solution certainly should be a value-added feature – such as you pay extra for this convenience, perhaps .40/kWh, for an ultra fast charge versus typical overnight and regular DCFC.

    Now, solve the chemistry problem – and if batteries all act as super-capacitors which can take “lightning” charge rates, maybe this would work in terms of flash-charging cars. But we’re not there yet with today’s battery tech.

    If people really really need this speed of a refresh/refueling – why wouldn’t properly-done battery swap be the way to go? Especially if this “shared economy” happens and cars must be in use 24×7? Even the time to get back to a charging station and charge will take time away from the car’s shared use.

    When 300KW is not enough, what’s next? 5C charging of 120kWh packs? That’s still slower than filling a gasoline tank right now.

    1. R.S says:

      Besides battery swapping, which only really works if all cars are shared, what is the other option? More and more chargers? Now it’s 40, next is 80 and then 160?

      And what about people with no reliable source of slow charging? People that don’t own homes? Do they have to wait for that shared economy?

      Building five 500 kW chargers is cheaper than building fifty 50 kW chargers, especially if ground is expensive. In some major cities parking spaces cost a fortune, so having less for the shared cars will bring cost down immensely.

      So yes the only thing better than 120 kWh charging at 5C would be even quicker charging. At some point of course there are obvious reasons why it cannot be done. Weight of the car, price of the pack, degradation through high charging, but IMO more is better. Especially now when it takes the most popular affordable EV 30 minutes to charge 90 miles.

      Because while it might work for many, it won’t work for all and EVs for all is what we need.

      1. Nix says:

        ground is certainly expensive in big cities. But that ground is already being used to park cars.

        When there are parking spaces that are 6 digits in price, adding overnight charging is actually cheap.

      2. Brandon says:

        Yeah, and really what we need is for most EVs coming out in the next 1-2 years to be able to charge at Tesla speeds, which is typically a bit upwards of 100 kW when starting out fast charging. Get these multi stall 150 kW ChargePoint Express Plus fast charger style setups in the ground, and in a few years from now when 300 to 350 kW charging speeds are relatively common in EVs, these fast chargers can be upgraded too.

      3. Bojan says:

        “Besides battery swapping, which only really works if all cars are shared, what is the other option?”
        If all cars are shared, why swap the battery? Just swap the car.

        This whole push to achieve refueling time parity with ICEs is nonsense. It’s like trying to get gasmobiles to achieve morning tank fullness parity with EVs. Or tailpipe emissions parity, for that matter.

        The current recharging technology is good enough, we just need more of it.

  4. Warren says:

    We would be fine with 70 kW chargers at every gas station. Bigger batteries,and bigger chargers just promotes bigger cars. They are already too big. This isn’t about keeping up our decadent lifestyles. It is about staying alive.

    1. DJ says:

      With that mindset ICE’s will never go away. Fact is people in part don’t buy EVs because they don’t want to be stuck somewhere for 30 mins just to get 200 miles worth of juice.

      Significantly reduce the charge time w/o increasing cost dramatically and I suspect we’ll see more and more people getting EVs.

      1. Warren says:

        ICE will be going away, about the same time we do.

        1. Warren says:

          We need to do all of this, and more, within 20 years.

          https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/nov/08/seven-megatrends-that-could-beat-global-warming-climate-change

          Where are the leaders who will challenge us to try?

    2. pjwood1 says:

      Decadent is what people buy. So, EVs are fine as is, and those who still criticize their weight are actually flattering them. Just put a “Sports” emblem, on it. It isn’t as if bigger batteries aren’t quicker, too.

      This thread is about 15 million. VW has to spend 2,000 million, on promotion/infrastructure. 15mn wouldn’t buy 10 hydrogen pumps. Great, if it reinvents charging, but how much is that necessary when home penetration of EVs (where people have outlets) is still relatively untapped.

      There’s a social need to bring fast-charging to the masses, of renters, etc., but leaving “1% of sales” is the lower hanging fruit. Why be tied to gas stations, when you can go straight home?

      1. Null says:

        People apply what know about current tech to future tech.

        Currently, most GO to a stinky gas station. Hopefully this is on their way. They then wait for it. I did this 2-3 times a week, figure 5-10 minutes each.

        So going to a charger and standing there waiting for 1-3 hours is laughable.

        Well, the laugh is on them.

        Electric car use patterns. Unplug car and drive to work. Drive home and plug in. Total time 10 seconds/day at the most pessimistic. So a minute a week.

        Long distance travel is relatively rare. Most Americans if they get a vacation rarely take it. Yet it is held up as proof EV’s can’t work. Same way they hold up the off road rugged travel as why you should buy all wheel drive SUV’s and trucks. Yet few trucks ever go as off road as driving on a lawn.

  5. Doggydogworld says:

    Toshiba SCiB crush the charging speed and cycle life requirements. They aren’t 200 Wh/kg, though. Not sure if they could hit $150/kWh in high volumes or not.

    Still, this charging speed goal is pretty tame.

  6. scott franco says:

    Porsche has already done it.

    The next goal should be 7 minutes/650 kW.

    The final destination is 5 minutes.

    Why? Because Americans understand bigger, better and faster. They don’t understand compromise very well. We are not French.

  7. me says:

    15 minutes isn’t “extreme fast charging”. For folks who haven’t adopted EVs yet, 15 minutes is slow charging because the baseline of comparison is how long it takes to fill up at a gas station (and anybody who lives in an apartment, a big city, etc is not going to be able to charge every night at home).

    1. M Hovis says:

      Until autonomous drive arrives in conjunction with wireless charging, and then your EV will leave the apartment at night, charge itself, and return when summoned.

      1. ga2500ev says:

        Wouldn’t it be easier to simply make an EVSE charge port available where the car is currently parked? I could see autonomous vehicles and remote charging if the plan is to eliminate the parking spaces. But if the space is already there, why not just electrify it?

  8. Nix says:

    “extreme fast charging” sounds funny. Maybe they could have called it 5G charging? Or 4G LTE charging?

    *laugh*

    Seriously though, we need some naming standards for charging rates that are more informative than just using “fast”. Fast is relative. It has no quantitative value, and no intrinsic meaning.

    And kW ratings won’t cut it, because those are all max values and people will just get angry when they find out for the first time about charging rates tapering off.

    Heck, we still get people years after the release of Autopilot, who go nuts about “Autopilot” when they learn for the first time that autopilot (in both cars AND in planes) still requires you to be in charge of the operation of the vehicle at ALL times.

    Some people would go crazy if they found out that a kW rating only lasted to 50% charge or less. Especially since many would still be asking what the heck a kW was…

  9. bro1999 says:

    I took an interesting survey pushed out to Bolt owners. Asked my rating for a couple dozen fictional BEVs. Here was one such example:

    http://ibb.co/fwkS0m

    Note the 50 miles in 3 min/200 miles in 15 min. That is over 4x faster than the Bolt’s 90 miles in 30 min 50 kW charging speed. So we’re talking charge rates of 200 kW+ for this vehicle.

    Interesting to see what GM comes out with the next 5 years…

  10. ga2500ev says:

    Ultra fast charging is going to be like greyhounds at a race at the dogpark: Expending a lot of exertion chasing a rabbit that cannot be caught.

    The next charging infrastructure should play to electricity/battery strengths instead of their weaknesses. The first strength is ubiquitous distribution. Electricity is virtually everywhere. Every building and most parking lots. Widespread distribution of charging where cars are going to be anyway will remove much of the anxiety about charging access. The second strength is the opportunity to charge while moving. No easy way to do that with gas. Be is dynamic wireless charging like Qualcomm is demonstrating ot contact based moving charging that Honda is proposing, charging while moving could be an EV killer app that finally boosts adoption to the mainstream.

    The infrastructure should have an “all of the above approach”. Fast charging, slow charging, everywhere charging, moving charging. Once charging is truly universal, then virtually all the problems disappear because of the universal access. Charging no longer is a specific place/time activity. It’s just something incidental to the normal usage of the vehicle.

    It’s time to stop chasing the rabbit and putting in the infrastructure that makes charging just as invisible as home/business power that we all enjoy today.

    ga2500ev

  11. Bill Howland says:

    Let’s see – 3C charging for a 100 kwh battery would be around 300 kw. That’s fine for a BUS where there are plenty of people around to amortize the cost, but it seems only People who can afford a Porsche Mission-e will be able to afford to charge at this rate.

    Of course, gov’t ‘directives’ can skew who actually pays for things, and if they ‘give away’ or highly subsidize the electricity, THEN such rates are conceivable.

    I thought this was the big achiles’ heel of Hydrogen Stations…. Who in their right mind would pay to build, maintain, and pay the electric bill? Especially when it is competing with relatively cheap gasoline (in the states at least).

    So I’m still curious to see who is going to pay for this party – or it will be forced upon the general public quietly, since the cost in absolute numbers admittedly isn’t that great.

    Seems it would be far more economical to have apartment dwellers charge up slowly overnight where they park their cars. I don’t care if they have a garage or don’t or have a parking spot or not – the car has to exist SOMEWHERE when the EV driver is sleeping.

    1. Jason says:

      It really is that simple, isn’t it?

      Still need destination charging for long distance travel. So far I haven’t met a Tesla driver who wasn’t happy with the SC network. Tesla really has this right and everyone else just doesn’t seem to understand it at all.

      Give away J1772 chargers for free to anyone who wants to install a slower charger. Build 125kW chargers along travel routes. 200mi in 30min should be the goal, with every parking space powered to allow this. 200mi is a lot of driving in one sitting without any break. Governments all advocate taking a break after 2hrs driving, EV’s should be governments wet dream come true, they should be falling all over themselves to make this a reality.

Leave a Reply