UPDATE: GBatteries Claims Amazingly Fast Charging Times For Electric Cars


This startup says their technology can charge an EV as fast as gassing up.

*GBatteries reached out to us with a correction. The Autoblog article has a typo saying 15 minutes, rather than five minutes. Since we used that article for the information, we also stated 15 minutes, which seemed long to us. The charging time as advertised and demonstrated by GBatteries is actually five minutes, and the original source article from TechCrunch has been updated to reflect that. This makes much more sense since the company claims its tech can make charging as fast as gassing up.

Startup GBatteries surfaced as a Y Combinator seed. The company claims incredibly fast electric car charging speeds are on the horizon. According to a report on Autoblog (via TechCrunch), GBatteries employs Artificial Intelligence (AI) tech to optimize its EV battery charging system.

The new tech was developed by aerospace engineer Kostya Khomutov, with the assistance of two electrical engineers: Alex Tkachenko and Nick Sherstyuk. In addition, CCO Tim Sherstyuk had his hands in the effort. The publication also notes that funding has already come in by way of Plug and Play, Airbus Ventures, SV Angel, and Initialized Capital. Khomutov shared:

Most companies are focused on developing new chemistries or materials (ex. Enevate, Storedot) to improve charging speed of batteries. Developing new materials is difficult, and scaling up production to the needs of automotive companies requires billions of $,” said Khomutov. “Our technology is a combination of software algorithms (AI) and electronics, that works with off-the-shelf Li-ion batteries that have already been validated, tested, and produced by battery manufacturers. Nothing else needs to change.

GBatteries says its tech can charge a 60-kWh battery pack with ~120 miles of range in about five minutes. It also claims that the system will work with current lithium-ion battery packs. You’ll have to utilize this new fast-charging system and a special adaptor to make it all work. Still, the company was able to prove such claims in live demonstrations at 2019 CES in Las Vegas, Nevada.

The technology works by slowing down and speeding up vehicle charging over time, based on certain algorithms and conditions set by AI. This is much different from the current situation, in which safely and efficiently topping up an electric vehicle battery may be impacted differently based on a multitude of factors that may be out of the user’s control. Sherstyuk voiced his concerns with current systems and stated:

We’ve always tinkered with stuff together since before I was even a teenager, and over time had created a burgeoning hardware lab in our basement. While I was studying Chemistry at Carleton University in Ottawa, we’d often debate and discuss why batteries in our phones got so bad so rapidly – you’d buy a phone, and a year later it would almost be unusable because the battery degraded so badly.

This sparked us to see if we can solve the problem by somehow extending the cycle life of batteries and achieve better performance, so that we’d have something that lasts. We spent a few weeks in our basement lab wiring together a simple control system along with an algorithm to charge a few battery cells, and after 6 months of testing and iterations we started seeing a noticeable difference between batteries charged conventionally, and ones using our algorithm. A year and a half later of constant iterations and development, we applied and were accepted in 2014 into YC.

Sadly, due to its startup nature, we have no clue when this tech might come to the forefront. However, the reality of this charging breakthrough seems more viable than anything else we’ve shared in the past.

What are your thoughts? Please let us know in the comment section below.

Source: Autoblog via TechCrunch

Categories: Battery Tech, Charging

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

101 Comments on "UPDATE: GBatteries Claims Amazingly Fast Charging Times For Electric Cars"

newest oldest most voted

Not sure I would trust details given out by scientists with obvious Russian names.

Funny, I thought the total opposite. The Russian folks I worked with in engineering grad school had a fantastic theoretical background, quite a bit better than the majority of us who did our undergrad work in the US. I wouldn’t discount the research just because the authors may be Russian…

Okay, I’ll discount the claims because with only one single exception (LG Chem’s lower cost EV batteries, circa 2015), all the claims about breakthrough battery tech over the past 10+ years have lead nowhere.

delete post and pushy while you’re at it. 😉

Yes they are smart with few hundred thousands dollars, and computers knowledge they took over America and the Republican Party. That’s smart!

Go work for Robert Mueller. They need bias people like you. After 2 and half years, they’re still trying to find proof.

You know, much of his campaign have been convicted.

His argument was weak (ad hominem, in fact, which is not an argument at all, merely a rethorical technique) but disbelief is appropriate. Not because the people who say it are Russian, but because of ohm’s law. The resistance of the battery pack cannot be affected by varying the charging rate (even if AI is used to decide how to vary it). To achieve 20 C on average with variation the peak must be over 20 C; that’s just simple math and not shaken by use of AI. Since P = UI² (U being the voltage drop over the resistor and I the current through it) varying the rate a lot just creates more heat (because power increases exponentially with current; if it were a linear relationship varying the current would make no difference, but power is proportional to the square of the current). To my mind this claim makes no sense at all. Yet IEVs claim the company has proved that it really works. Amazingly, not one of the hundreds or thousands of YouTubers who covered CES considered it worth posting a video of this profound event, or at least not one that YouTube’s search presents to me when… Read more »

What you say is true, but the one factor you forgot is that batteries’ internal resistance isn’t caused by simple resistors to which Ohm’s law applies. The law is used as a gross approximation.

One example I’ve worked with recently is Li-ion primary cells. On discharge, if you pulse current, it has lower internal resistance than continuous flow, and this doesnt match resistive behavior or even frequency dependant impedance.

So we can’t dismiss this technology so easily, but it certainly is difficult to believe. No doubt many people have tried tinkering with battery charging strategies, and we’ve seen no significant improvement on simple CCCV in the 20+ years since they were commercialized.

Actually they seem to be claiming ~10 C… Other than that, I agree though that their claims sound like a big heap of BS.

You know, I’m the same way with Korean names. You never know whether they are from the North or South. It’s better to be safe than sorry. And don’t get me started on those Arab names…. /s

Check almost any research facility in the U.S. You will find it hard to not see Russians, Chinese and other Asians.

he bing sacastik.

-10 down votes so far for a joke! You gotta love people’s zero sense of humor these days!

And he even added the explicit sarcasm sign, if it wasn’t obvious enough…




Russian paranoia hitting a high in US?

It’s not paranoia when they really are conspiring against you.

Not that this has anything to do with battery tech.

You must be young. It’s still far off the peaks of old.

Americans survived the Cold War, but can’t handle the Russians under Putin. LOL!

Either people are greatly underestimating American’s resolve, or it’s just convenient to fit one’s political bias, simply because they lost the election.

The Dems lost because of Hillary! I hope she runs again, like she wants to, and the Russians can donate more money to the Clinton foundation, like they did in the past, along with Sweden, and Morocco. Yeah, but that outside influence and interference is OK.

It is not just a bunch of Russians. Their Chairman and Technical director is Dr. Bart Riley, founder and former CTO at A123 Systems.


Andrej KarpathyПодлинная учетная запись
Director of AI at Tesla. Previously a Research Scientist at OpenAI, and CS PhD student at Stanford. I like to train Deep Neural Nets on large datasets.

Sergey Brin says hi!

I think there is real promise here. Another untapped area is with V2H (vehicle to home) applications. For the most part, this has been avoided due to the cycling of the battery thus reducing the battery life. Studies are now showing that mathematical cycling could actually extend the life of the battery through optimization. Such cycling would be aimed at battery health opposed to home usage, still, both technologies will improve EV usage. One, providing longer life and the other faster charging.

The one study I have seen that claimed extended battery life through V2G, was total BS, based on a nonsensical apples-to-lemons comparison.

Yes, you can extend battery life by partially discharging it after a full charge, instead of leaving it sitting fully charged… Except you can extend it much more by not unnecessarily charging to full in the first place.

> GBatteries says its tech can charge a 60-kWh battery pack with ~120 miles of range in about 15 minutes.

Sorry to burst the bubble, but that doesn’t exactly sound ground-breaking in today’s EV landscape. I don’t know that it really justifies the word ‘amazing’ in the headline.

If they’d said five minutes I might have been more excited, but 15 mins for 120 miles…? well, it’s good, but they’re not going to have the major OEMs fighting among themselves to acquire the technology if that’s the best they can do.

Truth be told, they probably have got some useful tech in there, and if it can be combined with some of the other ideas being developed, maybe it will help to get charging times down. But what they’re offering is an incremental change at best, not a revolution.

It has been corrected to 5 min.

The article has been corrected to reflect 5 minute charging, not 15.

If you fully charge a 60kWh battery in 5 minutes, you would need to average 720kW of power. That is impressive if possible.

They are not claiming a full charge in 5 minutes, more like 50% charge in 5 minutes. 120 miles in a 60kwh battery is not full.

Even so, isn’t Taycan supposed to charge ~200 miles in 15 minutes? That makes that 120 miles in 5 minutes not all that impressive, certainly not “amazing”.

My math skills are telling me if you can charge 120 miles in 5 minutes that this is much faster than 200 miles in 15 minutes.

Except your “math skills” don’t factor in the fact that Gbatteries only charge the lower half of the battery where charge rates are still very high while Porsche charges all the way up to 80%. If you compensate for that I doubt Gbatteries numbers are all that much better than Porsche’s.

Or equal to, but still the faster charging certainly takes away one of the obstructions of greater acceptance of EV’s. Notwithstanding the the silly comments about their names, this is good news that batteries currently in use can be charged much faster than previously thought. The hassle of cross country driving could soon be eliminated without the expense of solid state capacitors or new technology batteries.

I would find it quite amazing indeed if they can actually do that on any practical basis, day in and day out, without prematurely aging the pack. That would be a genuine quantum jump improvement, of the sort we haven’t seen in commercial battery tech for decades.

Also, Porsche has yet to demonstrate the Taycan can actually be charged as fast as they claim on a daily basis.

Actually, we have seen a whole bunch of quantum leaps in commercial battery technology over the past decades.

Perhaps not of the “several times better in one step” kind, but certainly of the “double-digit percentage improvement in one step” kind.

When I see the Taycan do it, I’ll believe it.

Same for Gbatteries I’m sure.

Tesla Model 3 Supercharge v2 at low SOC is approximately 120 miles in 15 minutes (~8 miles per minute).

Supercharge v3 at low SOC should deliver between 10-15 miles per minute, at least briefly.

Porsche Taycan has made various claims between 15 to 20 miles per minute.

GBatteries claims of 24 miles per minute is better still, but it’s not clear if they’re using a conventional battery or a cell chemistry better suited for high power charging. Ascribing the charging improvements to “AI” is not a promising sign.

“Ascribing the charging improvements to ‘AI’ is not a promising sign.”

That’s a definite red flag for me, too. But then, I always simply assume all claims regarding breakthru battery tech are B.S. It saves a lot of time. And if one of the claims ever turns out to not be B.S. …well then, that news will spread quite fast indeed.

A pessimist is never disappointed.

As with all tech, the proof is in the scientific evidence. They have enough promise to convince some Silicon Valley investors, but this was pretty light on evidence so I’ll withhold judgement until we see some actual results. Hopefully it’s true, but I am skeptical that they can get huge charging speed improvements with just software, there’s no free lunch when working with energy and chemistry.

Maybe they should release a phone charger first….
I think there is a huge misuse of the “AI” moniker here – AI isn’t just algorithms.

@John said: “…I think there is a huge misuse of the “AI” moniker here – AI isn’t just algorithms”

Actually AI *is* just algorithms.

Thing is that “AI” is a very broad term with no definitive established threshold what level of machine learning intelligence constitutes AI. It could be easily argued nearly all phone apps today are sufficiently intelligent to be deemed AI.

The above battery company trying to present that “AI” battery management system software algorithms is somehow novel to me that is a big red flag.

I guess it depends on what the context is in which the term “A.I.” is used. When I read a science fiction story, or watch a sci-fi movie, I know what the term A.I. means… and it does not mean mere expert systems software, as used all too often today in marketing software. The term “A.I.”, like “nanotech”, has been overused by marketing so much that it’s practically meaningless in that context.

Fortunately, the term “A.I.” still has meaning in other contexts.

Wonder if this is somehow connected to I think both Airbus and VW buying DWAVE Q computers to try to optimize chemistries. So you’d think there would be no AI in that but Google bought the same machines as it works on its own and its stated approach is to put neural net and AI on the front end as it melds these tech pieces together and makes its own components from scratch. So what I am saying is given how huge the pay off would be for a battery break through where the issue seems to be an optimization problem all these huge firms may be attempting the optimization logic pitched by DWAVE for its more limited type Q machines to this show case problem so it may be that this tiny optimization focused firm is saying that its tech may be benefitting from the moonshot trickle down. The head of Googles Q machine dev said about 5 years ago that in a decade or 5 years hence forth all computing would be done on Q AI neural net type machines presumably in a Google cloud projected domination but also plausibly with more local elements. So its plausible a… Read more »

I would say AI is algorithms + databases.

I’m very doubtful of anything claiming to use “AI”. It isn’t a new chemistry, but a different way of adjusting which cells are being charged at which rates. I’d be curious to know if any existing production packs would support this.

Yeah, that’s another problem. Apparently they are claiming an improvement in BMS (Battery Management System) software. But what EV maker would allow a third party to modify their BMS software, without voiding the warranty for the battery pack?

Now, that’s not to say it’s impossible that this startup really does have a genuine breakthru. It’s at least theoretically possible they could license their improvement to EV makers, and so we’d see improvements in future plug-in EVs. But no way is this going to benefit EVs currently on the roads or currently in production, even if — improbably — the claims turn out to actually be true.

60kWh and 120 miles? That battery must be very heavy, probably Lithium Titanate(LTO), is known for it’s fast charging times, high cycle life, heat tolerance, but high cost and low energy density.

5 minute charging is easy-mode for an LTO. Ford tested them back in 2017, and said they could charge them to 90% in 2 minutes….

Now, if you want to charge this 60kWh battery in just 5 minutes, you need a 720kW charging unit(CCS chargers right now only go to 350kW, and Porsche is working on 450kW ones). In other words, you need impractical power levels.

They claim they can recharge for 120 miles worth of energy in 5 minutes on a 60 kWh battery. As the charging speed depends on the total capacity of the battery.

Oh, so maybe it doesn’t weigh that much and it’s only charging 30kWh in 3 minutes. In that case, only need a 360kW charger to do that, and it’s 0-50% in 5 minutes…

The thing about >350 kW CCS chargers is that even if a charger can *theoretically* achieve a higher rate, by maxing out both voltage and amperage at the same time (AFAIK 920 V x 500 A = 460 kW for CCS 2.0), in practice no battery can actually take that charge, since full voltage is only achieved towards the end of charging, where amperage is already significantly tapered. More than 350 kW or maybe 400 kW simply doesn’t make sense within the confines of the current CCS specification.

Looks promising. But I would remind that, as opposed to taking 5 minutes to 120 miles worth of charge for an EV, it takes me only 5 minutes to re-fuel my ($23,000, six seat) Dodge Journey ICE good for 425 miles.

Yes, but according to pulmonologist and cardiologist, your Dodge is causing asthma and cancer as particulate matter from the exhaust enters everyone’s bloodstream through our lungs so there is that.

Besides the negative near term human health effects from incidendial exposure to petroleum exhaust gasses and particulates, there is the ongoing C02 legacy to the worlds oceans, as the toxic burden of Carbonic Acid begins its biochemical transformation of global ccean ecology.


Do you understand the difference between how the energy is stored in a battery vs. how energy is stored in molecules that are broken apart and oxidized?

Not sure why this is getting downvotes. The article says the technology “can charge an EV as fast as gassing up,” but even if the claims are true, 120miles in 5 minutes is more than 3 times slower than gassing up.

We can describe the benefits of EV transportation (and the downsides of reliance on gasoline) without having to distort facts about how fast refueling is.

Good point. I forgot that silly claim was made, so people shouldn’t be downvoting.

But to me, 120 miles in 5 min is no less convenient than a gas fuel up.

Total BS galore. Anyone with a basic knowlegde of physics understands that the battery need not be the bottleneck and that in all likelyhood the actual charger is the limiting factor. Right now I can jam 285 kWh of fuel under 60 seconds in my car. This would require a charger of about 17 megawatts…. Not gonna happen.

Yeah, but factor in that you can get about 136 MPGe from a BEV vs ~50 MPGe from a hybrid and that cuts the power needs in half. Then compare it against a more typical 25 MPG for a pure ICE and you cut that by a factor of over 5… so it’s more like you need to charge an EV at 3 MW to be comparable to gas.

Really… I think it’s probably easier to build an electric semi. Bigger battery means higher charging rates are possible, and you’re competing against diesel vehicles that take tens of minutes to refuel. Tesla Semi will have a cakewalk once it’s in production.

My Prius (Gen 3) does about 50 MPG. You’ll need a charger of about 5.5-6 MW to compete with my Prius. Very unlikely that this will ever happen. Charging speed is and remains a problem for EVs: it’s either the battery and/or the charger that just isn’t up to the task. You’ll need to charge approx. 95-100 kWh per minute to compete with the latest hybrids out there. I don’t see this happening anytime soon.

Most EV owners who drive under their range limit daily spend seconds plugging in and unplugging at home. I think I would save about 250 minutes a year switching to an EV with 400 km plus range. Only a handful of trips I can think of where we would ever have to visit a Fast Charging station. Sadly, need a different living situation so we could have a L2 charger. Can’t wait until we change from condo to house.

Ah, it’s the tired old “BEVs have to charge as fast as you can fill a gasmobile’s gas tank” myth.

Nope. Most charging will continue to be slow charging at home or at work. Most charging at public EV chargers will be done during long trips, when you likely need a rest room break anyway.

10 minute charging should be quite adequate for most people’s needs, especially since they won’t be using public chargers that often.

The idea that BEVs need to fully charge in 2 minutes or less to be able to compete with gasmobiles, is absurd. It’s as silly as claiming that motorcars need to be able to feed on grass or hay to be able to compete with using horses for transportation.

Strange, I have never ever seen combustion cars rated based on their gassing-up speed…

The idea that BEVs have a problem until they can beat the single fastest-gassing combustion car, is so absurd it’s not even funny.

17 megawatts? That’s easy – just talk to Prius Maniac. His claim has always been that since Spark Plugs run on 30,000 volts that car chargers should also. Forget this wimpy 120 or 240 volts used in the world’s houses. Convert them all to 30,000 volts right now. Of course, that guy never saw the COST of 30,000 volt equipment. But that’s an irrelevancy since we’ll just tax all of our next door neighbors to come up with the money to make it happen.

Now if someone is worried that THAT is alot of HEXFETs to build a charger this size – we could always do it the old fashioned way by simply putting a 25,000 Horsepower Motor Generator set in the backyard (those things really do run on 13.8 kv !!!) hehe.

While we are at it, what would you say is the highest reasonable voltage for DC charging?…

It makes more sense if you think about it as charging the battery at an average rate of 6C. When charging at that rate it takes 10 minutes for a full charge regardless of the battery size. Of course there has to be enough electric power available for the size of the pack you are charging. For a 285 kWh pack you need 1.7 MW, but for a 10 kWh pack (think electric motorcycle) you only need 60 KW.

I suspect the reason you got a lot of downvotes is that it’s not just one or the other. Ultra-fast charging will require both very powerful charging stations and cars with battery packs built to withstand being charged that fast without overheating.

And anyone who thinks that ultra-fast megawatt EV chargers will never be commonplace, or possibly even 2-3 MW chargers — and even more powerful ultra-fast chargers at truck stops — is ignoring the history of technological improvements pretty firmly. The use of energy by the human species has been growing exponentially for centuries, and that trend will continue. What seems difficult or impossible today will be routine in another generation.

We are already working on solid-state transformers that can run directly off of 13.2kV lines, and convert that down to 1000VDC… In the future, a 1MW charging unit might not be any bigger than one of those EVgo 100A 50kW units, and it won’t require an external transformer either, HV to DC conversion can all be done inside the unit itself.

In the meantime, 150, 175, 350kW units, supplied with batteries(for peak shaving, and storing renewable energy) should be the standard. After all, if your car supports it, 350kW charging units could charge 350 miles of range in 25 minutes…

Ha! Tell me when you get the related switchgear smaller. 1 MVA transformers are not significantly larger than their ‘solid-state’ replacement when used in practice, since ABB makes them now, although they do have usefulness onboard ships and other places where extreme compactness is worthwhile.

Utilities must disagree with you since they still purchase the same ‘old-fashioned’ 1 MVA liquid cooled transformers since they are so economical.

If you disagree – convince THEM.

Speaking of switchgear, the ‘demonstration’ Medium volt charger was a 480 volt switchgear panel, a Step-up old fashioned air-cooled transformer, and THEN a smaller charger.

So you guys ‘Demonstrate’ stuff by conveniently ignoring all the stuff you also have to practically have, which takes up a relatively gargantuan amount of space.

“… charge a 60-kWh battery pack with ~120 miles of range in about five minutes.” Nice headline but can be and is very likely misleading. How are they translating the power in the 60kWH battery into 120 miles range?They don’t disclose their assumptions about initial battery temp. & SOC, weight and efficiency of the vehicle, the speed it is traveling at or the ambient temperature. Hyped headline for the EV cultists and uneducated masses. If want people to believe your claim, publish the numbers.

The GBatteries website specifically says:
“Enabling off-the-shelf Li-ion batteries to charge to half in 5 minutes, full charge in 10 minutes.”

So basically charging existing battery packs with ordinary cell chemistries at an average rate of 6C is what they are claiming. This is revolutionary if true. You just replace the external charger with one of theirs and you get 6C charging rate without overheating or excessively degrading the battery pack. Of course that assumes there is enough electric power available for the size of the pack you are charging, and that the current limit protection in the pack’s BMS allows the higher than normal current.


Thank you for clarifying the claim here. I assumed they were using some sort of non-EV battery cells optimized for very fast charging. Well, you know what happens when you assume… 😉

Not that I think this makes the claims here any more believable; in fact, that makes them even less credible. But it’s nice to have more data to argue over. 😉

I think the article was pretty clear about the use of standard batteries rather than optimised cells…

Charging for the most part is dictated by the flow ofelectrons between the electrode and cathode, the composition of these two materials plus the composition of the medium will dictate how effective the change ratio will be. I tried charging with algorithms years ago, (this is not a new trick by any stretch) with multiple battery chemistries with zero success.

AIUI the major limiting factor is more often the flow and oxidation/reduction of ions, rather than flow of electrons?…

5 minutes for 120 miles of a 60 kWh battery? With the same battery.

I’m always suspicious when people claim an out-of-this-world performance gain that nobody else in the industry figured out.
What is it they know that everybody else overlooked?

This is not an entirely new trick: there have been papers on faster charging methods for li-ion batteries before. If you have a charger that can supply the current, you can have very high charge rates at a low state of charge. Let me guess the charge from 10% or maybe even 0%. Assuming 120 miles = 30 kWh for a battery has 60 kW usable. That corresponds to an average charge rate of 5C. With a high enough charge rate in the beginning, it could be possible.

Another week, another wholly unbelievable claim from some high-tech battery startup. In other news, water is wet.

Hopefully someday one of these hundreds of claims will actually lead to a commercial product which can actually be used in real production EVs. But I’m not gonna hold my breath!

“The storage battery is, in my opinion, a catchpenny, a sensation, a mechanism for swindling the public by stock companies. The storage battery is one of those peculiar things which appeals to the imagination, and no more perfect thing could be desired by stock swindlers than that very selfsame thing. … Just as soon as a man gets working on the secondary battery it brings out his latent capacity for lying.” — Thomas Edison, 1883

“My top advice really for anyone who says they’ve got some breakthrough battery technologies, please send us a sample cell, okay, don’t send us PowerPoint. Just send us one cell that works with all appropriate caveats; that would be great. That… sorts out the nonsense and the claims that aren’t actually true. Talk is super cheap; the battery industry has to have more B.S. in it than any industry I’ve ever encountered. It’s insane.” — Elon Musk, Nov. 5, 2014

They aren’t a battery startup, but rather a battery charger startup. The charging algorithm and charger electronics is where their innovation seems to be. They claim their charger works with existing off-the-shelf Li-ion batteries.

The claims here are for a breakthru in battery pack technology, rather than a breakthru in battery cell technology. But just like EEStor with their (thoroughly disproven) claims for a radically improved supercapacitor — technically not a “battery” — it’s aimed at the same market: those suckers investors willing to invest in breakthru battery tech.

Yet again no mention of battery degradation and reduced lifespan resulting from frequent ultra-fast charging.
Why — he asked rhetorically – is this moot but crucial issue NEVER mentioned ?
Paul G

+1 for proper use of the word ‘moot’!

Actually, “moot” has two distinct meanings, the one (open to discussion; debatable) very nearly the exact opposite of the other (unworthy of discussion).

And that’s a moot point. 🙂

For those EV owners who charge nightly at home with a conventional EVSE, there wouldn’t be frequent ultra-fast charging. It might be used only a half dozen times per year (public charging) for the annual long road trip. You know, the trip that convinces some potential EV buyers to choose an ICE or PHEV instead.

They say this about degradation:
“The problem with batteries today is not charging speed; it’s possible to charge any battery quickly, but the faster you charge a battery the faster it will degrade. Our technology is able to decrease the irreversible chemical reactions that happen during charging, so that the same batteries can be charged fast without compromising cycle life.”


The new Theranos. Obvious scam.

The Theranos scam was perpetuated by more than a few complicit individuals, in the ongoing fraudulent narrative that was being falsely demonstrated to investors and associates alike.

The bait and switch with new and improved purported batteries claims, is a little harder to pull off when you have the proof and the pudding right in front of you, to easily verify and assess with known standards and techniques.

If true, this would be the holy grail of charging systems. Many EV buyers would accept a smaller battery, putting more affordable EVs into the mass market.

Yep, it would mean we don’t really need solid state batteries after all.

This has all the hallmarks of snake oil salesmanship, and you should be very careful about what you claim. For instance, you write they were able “to prove” “such claims” at CES 2019, which creates the impression that Steven Loveday and IEVs are claiming GBatteries have proved that they have tech that can charge any ordinary 60 lithium battery pack in just 5 minutes. There are very good reasons to be extremely suspicious of such a claim. And it’s not unheard of for companies to stage demonstrations that supposedly prove something, but use trickery or simply lies to deceive the onlookers. If this claim was true it ought to be the biggest news from this year’s CES by far. Yet when I searched for “GBatteries CES 2019” at YouTube I didn’t get a single relevant search result. It seems to me that there’s only two possible explanations: the demonstration didn’t happen, or not even one YouTuber has as low editorial standards as IEV. Take your pick, or suggest what else can explain it if you can think of something else. I’m not a battery expert, but every single thing I do know about batteries stands in the way of accepting… Read more »

Here is a CES video for you. They are charging a Dewalt tool battery in 10 minutes.

Some more info here:

Interesting tech… Several groups have claimed to speed battery charging with sensors and algorithms. But how do you accommodate the average > 1.5MW current flow to achieve this [125kwh in <6 minutes]. This issue is critical to the fast charging network [from battery designers, to charging equipment, and charging operators]. Tesla solved it for the Semi by using several 100kw charging stations-cables-connectors in parallel [segmented battery or feeds to a common 350v buss?]. But this may not work well for a car. Thoughts?

Most of these people assume 100% charging efficiency – even out of the battery. Charging a 60 kwh battery in 5 minutes in THEORY can be done with only 720 kw, in practice it will take over 1,000 kw.

Of course, then they say someone is sure to invent a MEGA FARAD capacitor battery with ALSO low ESR, so don’t worry about it. Uh huh.

The Total solution is to just hire Priusmaniac, one of the commenters here. He states that since cars work on 30 kv for the spark plugs that 30 kv will be no problem.

I’m sorry I know you are trying to be serious. See the next comment.

This reads like the script for a Hollywood movie… A couple of genius tinkerers in a garage manage to make a breakthrough that evaded everyone in the industry for decades. Next act: they struggle to bring their technology to market as nobody takes them seriously; but finally, after a lot of tears and sweat and character development, the show them all and ride away into the sunset to dramatic music… (Most likely they also find some sweet romance along the Journey. This is Hollywood, after all!)

I’m flabbergasted at the remark that “this charging breakthrough seems more viable than anything else we’ve shared in the past”. Seriously? I think this might actually be the biggest load of BS we have yet to see here.

Well, if this is true, than great! But – it sounds to good to be true.

Charging a battery is changing it’s chemistry – and laws of physics can’t be bent, or avoided.