GM To Provide Vehicle For New Extreme 400-kW Fast Charging Initiative

AUG 31 2018 BY MARK KANE 89

Delta kicks off its 400 kW fast charging project with GM as an automotive partner.

Delta, together with several partners, starts a new $7 million research program with 50% cost-share by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), to develop a solid-state transformer (SST)-based extreme fast EV charger (XFC) for ultra-fast charging at 400 kW.

The list of partners includes GM, which is expected to supply a prototype electric vehicle that will be able to accept 400 kW of power and replenish up to 180 miles (290 km) of range in just 10 minutes:

  • Delta’s automotive division, located in the greater Detroit area (Livonia, MI), and researchers from the Delta Power Electronics Laboratory (DPEL), located in North Carolina’s Research Triangle Park
  • General Motors LLC
  • DTE Energy
  • CPES Virginia Tech
  • NextEnergy
  • the Michigan Agency for Energy’s Energy Office
  • the City of Detroit’s Office of Sustainability

The proposed XFC design is scheduled for 2020 and will bring a whole set of improvements:

  • grid-to-vehicle efficiency up to 96.5% (3.5% more than typical) using silicon carbide (SiC) MOSFET
  • four times less weight and
  • half the size of conventional DC fast EV chargers (DCFC)
  • high voltage direct current (HVDC) port to utilize energy storage and renewable energy systems, minimizing demand on the power grid

Here are more technical details about XFC:

“The novel SST power cell topology directly utilizes medium voltage alternating current (MVAC) at 4.8-kV or 13.2-kV, eliminating conventional line frequency transformer (LFT) technology, which converts low voltage alternating current to a direct current (DC) to charge the high voltage battery in an EV. Combined with a new silicon carbide (SiC) MOSFET device, the proposed SST enables a 3.5 percent improvement in grid-to-vehicle efficiency to industry-leading levels up to 96.5 percent, a 50 percent reduction in equipment footprint, and four times less weight than today’s DCFC EV chargers. Moreover, the 400kW XFC prototype, which is expected to be ready in 2020, will boast a power level enabling ground-breaking 3C charging speed on tomorrow’s long-range EVs. With this technology, EV drivers will need close to 10 minutes to achieve an additional 50 percent of vehicle range on their vehicle. For example, a 360-mile EV could achieve a 180-mile range in approximately 10 minutes of charging.

Early data and results from the program will arm automotive manufacturers, technology providers, cities and utilities with a greater understanding of how fast-charging will impact demand response efforts within specific circuits. The project will also provide insight into how renewable generation can be integrated to avoid infrastructure strain on the power grid associated with the wide deployment of XFCs.”

M.S. Huang, president of Delta Electronics (Americas) said:

“We’re thrilled to lead such an important project and have a stellar team of researchers and partners in place that are more than ready to take on the challenge of setting a new standard for EV fast charging. By utilizing solid-state transformer technology, we have the opportunity to create unprecedented charging speed and convenience that will ultimately help support the DOE’s strategic goal of increasing EV adoption across the nation.”

Categories: Charging, Chevrolet

Tags: , , ,

Leave a Reply

89 Comments on "GM To Provide Vehicle For New Extreme 400-kW Fast Charging Initiative"

newest oldest most voted

One of the concerns will be what will happen to the grid when millions of EV’s are charging on 400KW (or 350KW) during rush-hours or main holiday traffic, you can’t store all that MWh by putting buffer batteries at the charging station.
And the double battery (stationary at station) means beside charging/discharging loss the double LiNiCoMn resource consumption.

“”four times less weight and half the size”” how I wish this for the carried around EV battery rather for the stationary charger hardware…..

Of course you can buffer it with batteries. Tesla already does this for supercharger sites. If a car charges in only 10 minutes, not all cars will be charging at the same time. Long range cars don’t need to change every day. Probably only a few percent of cars will be fast charging simultaneously even during the most busy times.

yup. charge twice as fast for half the time.

Are there millions of ICE cars refueling at the same time right now? NO!

At peak times, there are lines at gas stations. With BEVs taking much longer to charge, it will get worse. You will need to supply 400kW x the number of stalls, more or less continuously for hours on end. It’s a real problem, although we are far from encountering it today.

Sure there are lines at gas stations because 0% of ICE vehicle owners have a gas pump in their garage. The majority of EV owners almost never use a high speed charging station. I think I’ve used a fast charger twice in the past 25k miles of EV driving.

You need to get out of the gas station mindset, EVs are different.

For EVs to gain wide acceptance and replace ICE vehicles we will most definitely need a distributed charging system that will be very similar to the distributed gas/diesel fueling we use today. The reason is the large number of people who live in multi-family dwellings and who don’t have access to overnight charging. New construction which includes charging infrastructure will alleviate this going forward but existing construction that doesn’t have it will be with us for a long time.

In the US the majority of households live in detached single family homes and have more than 1 car. That’s about 60-80 million households that could easily use an EV today with no compromises.

While the majority of US households may live in their own homes with dedicated parking, i suspect a sizeable fraction of them are in (semi-)rural areas, and have different needs and preferences, and may be one of the last to abandon ICE even if EVs can mostly fit into their lifestyle.

However, city dwellers are a bigger potential market for EVs, and cities have higher shares of renters or condo residents who don’t have dedicated parking or a lot of say in what they can do with it. I live in a city where the majority of residents are renters. I suspect the numbers are similar in other large American cities. While ideally city residents wouldn’t need personal cars at all, that is not the case right now. Thus, to give all of us city dwellers a convenient option of an EV, we need to adopt policies that allow renters and condo residents to install and use charging at home.

Adding overnight chargers to existing multi-apartment dwellings is perfectly feasible. Considering that it’s considered among the major advantages of EV ownership, thinking it won’t be happing on a large scale is crazy…

(Of course some would argue that most people in such conditions might abandon private car ownership altogether, in favour of robo-taxis…)

I live in a condo that is installing 12 amp outlets for electric car owners with a $25 per month fee for charging. Simple and super convenient, 99% of the time.
But I wouldn’t dream of abandoning private car ownership.

glad to hear that about the install. granted EVs were not a thing when I lived there so I’m not sure how it would have gone over but in the apartment complex I lived in each apartment had 1 spot under a lighted carport which also happened to have electrical outlets available.

But most of your charging will happen at home or work or at the parking garage downtown. DCFC is only really needed for long distance travel.

If there is infrastructure, there will be those who use it they way it suits them, and not necessarily the way it was intended. As soon as DCFC becomes ubiquitous, there will be people who don’t have home charging who will charge with DCFC exclusively like it was a gas station. There are already people who own EVs who use DCFC as their primary way to charge. Right now, there aren’t many of them, but as the popularity of EVs grows, so will the share of people who will buy them and exclusively fast charge because they have nowhere else to charge, and don’t want to wait around public Level 2s.

The way to reduce those people’s numbers is to enact a robust policy of EV readiness in multi-dwelling units. That way most people who rent or own condos can still charge “at home”, and DCFC can indeed be used primarily for travel.

I live in an apartment house, the owners would never consider putting chargers in, they just built a brand new one ,they didn’t put any chargers in that one either.
Here in Las Vegas,many get free charging at the casinos.

There are millions of cars refueling at once nationwide. However if you limit it to just one highway stop with say two or three stations there are constantly dozens of cars and trucks coming and going with a steady stream. Then if you widen the view out a bit, you find the same thing happening just 10 miles away and then again another 15 miles away and so on. If you actually sit and watch the traffic flow into and out of gas stations you’ll realize that there is going to be a real challenge for the electrical grid. A stack of batteries will help, but it’s not a magic bullet because those batteries have a recharge time too.

It’s a challenge, but not a major one, according to actual studies that have been conducted on this topic.

There probably is. But they are not all pulling from the same pump and reservoir.

I have thought about this too. It’s certainly a problem that needs to be solved. However, it is a long way in the future before it becomes an issue. It’s also only an issue for a few hours during a handful of days of the year. Most of the time, quick chargers will be idle (just like gas pumps). And during mini-peaks, like Friday evenings in the summer, batteries will still probably keep up. The one that keeps me up at night is the evening before Thanksgiving. Being a national (and non-religious) holiday, most Americans try to gather with their families in some respect. That’s a lot of people travelling on the same day. If everyone needs to stop a few hours into their trip to top off their EV, that’s a huge surge in charging. There will be lines, and the grid will be stressed. It is not likely that batteries will be able to buffer that much energy. But then again, maybe they will. It will be decades before EVs make up the majority of the fleet. Even when they do, many 2-car families will still have an ICE or a PHEV. They will likely just take that… Read more »
@rolando, you are correct, but I see this a problem only for certain locations. Since people can charge (slowly) to 100% before a long trip at home, the typical ICE pattern (fill up on the way out of town) will not exist with EVs, since you really should not charge to 100% with high current and who would want to start a trip at 80%. The problem locations will be the ones on highways at 80% range from the big cities. Lots of people pack up and leave after work on Friday for a weekend trip within a small window. Why is the EV pattern different that the ICE pattern? Range – ICE has a lot more range (1200km in my F150) so many vehicles won’t stop at all and others stop at varying distances, whereas the current set of long range EVs fall into a much tighter window. And then EVs are not filling to 100% so their next stop comes much sooner. Time to Fill – 6 mins on average for an ICE. 10 mins EV will help but still longer. Fill rate – all gas pumps pump at the same rate regardless of number in use. So… Read more »

Wow many replies and many downvotes (rivaling David Green) …. Seems to be my mistake when using the term “rush hour” which was not meant for daily commuting.

I was thinking more about central Europe where really millions of cars hit the road when school holiday starts by EU-country or a little separated a week apart by German states. Then freeways are clogged with long distance travelers and gas stations and restaurants on the freeway stations are clogged to the hilt. So imagine this (EU) standard situation at Easter/summer/Christmas holiday and now think about a million EV heading to a fast charger pulling 100 – 400 KW within a few hours during those periods.
That’s one of the main concerns at least in Continental Europe when discussing EV’s and electric grid stability!

Also China has even bigger traffic at the end of their ‘Chinese new-year’, when the entire country enter their cars and hits the freeways to drive home from their parents province to their work place in the Mega-cities at the coast.

Not exactly sure why you were downvoted Rolando, but don’t pay much attention to it, since it only matters if it is a thoughtful downvote – I know I didn’t register a negative vote. But, your over-generalization is incorrect. There will not be ‘Millions’ Charging at Rush-Hour. This situation will be handled by SOME batteries at the fast charger, as well as time-of-day pricing such that when electricity is truly dear it will be expensive. The problem – if ever existing in the first place – will solve itself as consumers search for cheaper electricity just as they search for cheaper gasoline now. Its precisely due to the batteries in the cars that EVs driving DURING Rush Hour don’t HAVE to charge – they’re doing the commute totally on battery power. For the very small percentage that need it, the docking stations are there. Now, my comment applies to Europe as to the States or anywhere else. France, with their huge amount of electric heating, will have a different time of the day during the wintertime where ‘electricity is dear’, than the USA will have. To prove it is so LITTLE a problem – the historical solution to peak loads… Read more »

I wonder, is 8 MW really a major challenge for a typical medium-voltage grid connection?

Yes, neither utility in my area will allow 8000 kw at MV levels. A third utility will kinda allow it in certain areas, but then in those areas they do not offer MV.

The problem is more if in 10 years or so , during this holiday peak travel 100,000 EV’s might hitting the German grid with 100KW Dc chargers = 10 GigaWatt at the same hour (which is 10 Nuclear or large coal power plants) for a grid running at average 50 GW , this is a big whopper ….

So the solution would (1) a giant buffer battery at the charging stations along the freeways (80% efficiency with buffer storing) or (2) resurrect the old battery swapping idea of Shai Agassi and his long gone ‘Better Place’ corp in Israel which could even stabilize the grid by taking in excess RE power whenever available

Not an issue man – read my comment above.

Keep in mind on days were you have holiday rush hours typically correspond to days when the grid has excess capacity. If people are travelling they ain’t working.

Millions of EV’s charging at rush hour? The vast majority of long range EVs charge at home, at night when there’s excess power on the grid. A 400 kW charger is only needed when the long range EV is on a road trip.

-“The vast majority of long range EVs charge at home, at night when there’s excess power on the grid.”-

Until there are millions of BEVs charging at home at night. That’s when the excess evaporates.

Odd, one would assume the challenge is not in developing a charger that can dispense 400KW but in the battery that can accept that sort of output. It’s not like size ,weight and a few percentage point of extra efficiency are all that important for charging station situations. I also wonder why no other carmakers have signed up for this initiative yet.

For GM this would be a paradigm shift indeed from no serious quick charge capabilities at all for Bolt, nor any interest in infrastructure to industry leading charging rates and involvement in development of the chargers. We’ll see.

We don’t know what vehicles GM has designed or planned. They don’t announce vehicles years into the future like others do. We just know they plan on having several EV’s by 2020.

Exactly. There were murmurings in 2015 about a mythical 200-mile BEV that GM was working on. Most people didn’t believe it. They couldn’t accept that GM was anywhere close to this target given that the publicly stated little to nothing about the project. And then suddenly in 2016, a 238-mile $30k Bolt appeared on the market. Not just as a prototype, but as a vehicle one could buy. GM pulled an EV rabbit out of their hat when most people didn’t believe that they even owned a hat. I have a feeling we’ll see a repeat performance of this kind of leap in about 2020 when their next EV platform arrives.

“Murmurings in 2015”?

GM showed the Bolt at NAIAS in January 2015 and one month later announced it was approved for production.

And GM haters still went “it’ll never go to production” only to eat their words a month later. L

Ok, so I was off by a year. I stand corrected. My point is that GM did a lot of development on the Bolt, and very few people believed it was real.

GM was looking at Envia in 2009-2013 to provide new great battery to make 200+ mile EV possible. It wasn’t exactly secret even if not advertised on billboards. And we all know how it ended:

Right. Murmurings they were working towards an EV. Noone believed they were. And we do know how it ended – with the incredible car that is sitting in my driveway.

It is more about cell makers not GM or other automaker. GM can only use whatever commercial product LG/SDI/Panasonic/Amperex/Toshiba… can provide for real. (Don’t even start on battery startup lies here). Cell manufacturers usually promise this or that new product next year or in few years time, but the further into the future, the more into fantasy land dreams we go.

GM designs their own battery cells. They only use others to manufacture them.

Yes, well the chemistry mix in the cell is from GM.

The Bolt cells are not different (except minor packaging details) from what Jag buys from LG or what you can order on Alibaba:

Tesla can only do what Panasonic permits.

Tell Goldstar, or whomever LG is calling themselves lately, to produce a 150 kwh complete battery-electric system (cooling, packaging, wiring, charging, motor, drive inverter, dc/dc converter, etc.) that will ONLY fit in a large vehicle. Let’s see who is the first to implement a car based on the design.

Knowing GM, their next plug in vehicle will be superbly engineered, overpriced and suffering from one or two really irritating flaws that GM could have remedied for a couple hundred dollars, but chose not to.
Happy Volt owner here, but one who is unable to drive around with more than one passenger seated comfortably.

@Chris O said: “Odd, one would assume the challenge is not in developing a charger that can dispense 400KW but in the battery that can accept that sort of output…”

Exactly what I was thinking.

Also, “solid-state transformer (SST)” is already a well known existing technology. So it seems they are not innovating new technology but instead applying a demonstration of existing technology.

Also just so happens…

That Tesla is already big-time involved in SST including but not limited to:

Tesla’s Senior Electronic Design Engineer (Hao Chen) bio:

(January 2013 – October 2016)
*My PhD work focuses on inventing, designing, and developing a first-ever fully soft-switching solid state transformer [SST]

*Design and develop a 480 V/ 50 kVA three-phase solid-state transformer [SST].

* Invent a first-ever fully soft-switching solid-state transformer [SST].

*Design a hybrid high-frequency transformer to reduce the magnetics by 50%.

…So perhaps this GM announcement has a lot to do with Tesla’s competitors working to keep up with Tesla… which is not a bad thing.

Well, Tesla actually suggested recently that it is not really interested in 350KW+ hypercharging as it’s more trouble than it’s worth the way Tesla sees it. Apparently ~200KW is it for Tesla which strikes me as risky since Porsche and apparently GM now intend to take things a lot further than that.

The interesting part of this story is that they are talking about skipping over the low voltage 480VAC and pulling directly from the medium voltage grid at 4.8-kV or 13.2-kV. Which will eliminate a lot of transformer losses and make for a lot smaller power cabinets.

Hehe yeah right. Too bad the trend for the last 100 years has been to implement LV power at levels that were formerly only at MV voltage levels.

Smaller Power cabinets? Have you ever SEEN A SINGLE 13.2 kv anything?

Hint: They don’t sell them for $29.95 at Canadian Tyre.

There are reports that Tesla is short the SiC MOSFETS it uses today, perhaps because of non payment, which is restricting production.

At an energy conference earlier this year Mary Bara discussed the need for GM to invest in or build out charging infrastructure directly. So this seems like a major step toward that goal.

I wish the CAR manufacturers would stick with something they know. Like building more electric cars. And not hiring Ev-Haters like Johann DeNysschen who discontinued the ELR after only 12 months of production, but keep other abortions like that CT6 PHEV that even the Chinese don’t buy. Step One: You’re a CAR manufacturer, Mary – how ’bout making some CARS. Step Two: Don’t discontinue perfected EV’s already in production. They certainly are somewhat challenged regarding the basics of car charging – my experience with the 2011 VOLT for instance. A LEAR charger cord came in the trunk of the car. I installed a dedicated receptacle for it in my garage EXACTLY as it said to do it in the owner’s manual. Since it only had a #16 attachment plug, under some substandard existing installations the plug would overheat, due to no fault of GM since there were sufficient warnings regarding the subject in the owner’s manual. I kept refusing the ‘recall’ to change it out since I was satisfied with the way my original cord was working. I finally got a note from GM saying they wouldn’t take care of any other warranty issues until i had my cord ‘modernized’,… Read more »

I’d say halving the amount of energy that literally gets blown into the air, is quite significant.

Half the waste heat could also ease installation e.g. in parking garages. Lower weight mostly matters for logistic; smaller size might have further advantages in certain locations.

Since this is clearly about the charger side, I don’t see much need for other carmakers to join the trial…

Getting the recharging network situation from where it is (little better than a patchwork of awfulness) to what we want (something that makes long distance travel as hassle free for EV drivers as it is today for ICE drivers), will require two distinct components:

Technical, which is essentially in-car hardware/software. Building a charger that can deliver a ton of amps isn’t that hard, but making a car that can accept said ton o’ amps repeatedly and in wildly varying environments and usage scenarios without degrading is whole different challenge.

Social, which includes things like the number and placement of stations, plug compatibility, a unified payment system, rock-solid reliability (i.e. no stations that show up on an app as available but are in use or out of service), consumer confidence in the whole smash, etc.

Very interesting.

Wow. Someone down voted you that.

To be fair, it’s not a very substantial comment…

The downvote probably comes from the fact though that this particular poster wouldn’t consider it interesting if it didn’t involve GM.

180 miles in 10 minutes is not *quite* gas-refueling speeds. But for all intents and purposes I believe it is close enough. People will want more, of course, but this is more than most really need.

It’s not quite there. A gas pump delivers about 100 miles/minute, which is a far cry from 18 miles/minute.

That said, I think 200 miles in 5 minutes is when we can seriously discuss BEVs replacing ICE across the board.

You do not have to come close to gas refueling speeds, this effort ,is a great improvement but wouldn’t see deployment for years,2020 for a prototype would mean 2023 for a large deployment.
I read something about Ammonia giving H2 which could be as fast as gas.

I hear you, but 150 miles in 15 minutes would satisfy the majority of drivers, I believe. It won’t be enough for the every day long distance road trippers but most people dont road trip that often. Plus, most people stop longer than 10 minutes every time they make a pit stop on a long drive.
Don’t let the tiny minority of “drive all day and wear diapers” types drive the train. Appeal to the normal 80% of the car driving public. 175 kW charge rates are more than fast enough for the decided majority of drivers.
I mean, seriously, what kind of driver drives for 2.75 hours, refuels in just 5 minutes, then drives for 2.5+ hours? Why would you want to do that?

It’s an irrelevant comparison since most charging is done at home, one starts every morning with a full “tank” so it’s not like one will want to stock up for at least a week for convenience reasons.

For people without access to home charging these numbers are probably good enough to make owning an EV practical so there is relevance there.

No, it’s not irrelevant. It matters on road trips that exceed the single-charge range of the car. I take about 10-12 of those per year. So it’s not as often as buying gas, but it certainly is relevant about once a month.

Most people need stops not only for refuelling…

How often do most drivers take a roadtrip where they have to drive more than 2 200 mile legs? How many drivers don’t take 15 minutes or so to stretch their legs and hit the head after driving for 2 or 3 hours? Not many, not often.
So charging faster than 150 miles in 15, or 200 in 20, would be nice, but irrelevant for most car buyers.

I’m so tired of this cop-out. I mean, I get it. It’s less important in an EV than in a gas car. I’ve been living with a BEV since 2012, so I truly get it. But we have to get past that point for two reasons: 1) That’s not how most people perceive things. And we want to see increased sales, so we have to overcome that perception. Telling people they are wrong is not a good way to win them over. 2) There are legitimate times when fast charging matters. It will matter more to some than others. For me, about once a month I have to drive farther than the car’s range. Sometimes much farther (as in 3x the real-world highway range of my Bolt). Most of the time, 55kW is all I need. Sometimes I do need to charge a little faster, and sometimes I simply WANT to charge faster. Like when myself, my wife, and our two kids had to sit at a charger in Albany for an hour late at night just to make it home. We didn’t get home until after midnight. It sure would have been nice to shorten that stop. So I… Read more »

It’s not a cop-out. It’s a simple fact that engineering for the one-percent-case is not reasonable.

You give a valid example why the slow charge rate (and mediocre range) of the Bolt is a meaningful limitation. That doesn’t mean anything slower than a gas pump is a meaningful limitation.

Hi Brian!

Just got back from the Welcome Center they just opened in Grand Island: 3 – 500v@100amp ccs/chademo chargers. Nicer and Larger center than Geneva –

Its your tax dollars at work – they spent a fortune on the place. Huge Emergency Generator out back to keep the fast chargers running – of course in a real power outage, the credit card machine would not reboot properly and you won’t be able to charge anyway, but then they never think that far ahead. And, of course there is no L1 or L2 facility should your car not be able to take L3. I wonder when they upgrade Geneva if they’ll rip out all the level 2 stuff?

My Nephew was complaining about the 20 foot high ceilings, but I explained the State spends absolutely as much money as is humanly possible on things – myself – I thought they did a fairly nice job.

Since Porsche also insisted on developing their own charger claiming higher efficiencies it makes you wonder about how bad the efficiency of the ABB and Tritium chargers is.
Anyways, the prices for those high power chargers need to come down so more players is better.

ABB says 95% for their charger. But that excludes batteries, of course. Maybe cabling and connector losses too?

All well and good but few people will want to purchase such an ugly car. Why does GM continue to offer unappealing cars. TESLA succeeds not only because of battery innovation but stylized design for their cars. GM needs to step up it’s game in design if it wants to be taken seriously.

It’s funny that you say this. Subjectively speaking, I find the new Volt a better looking car than the Model 3. And I have seen both parked next to each other every day for months, so I’ve studied them from all angles. I agree the Bolt is a bit dorky, but so is the Honda Fit (the look very similar to my eyes), and that has been a successful car.

How can you comment on the looks of a car that has yet to be released?

From a sales perspective, the people who dislike the appearance of a car are irrelevant. All that matters is the people that say “I want that thing”.

Because some people care more about practicality than looks. That shape gives lots of rear head room and more boot space, it’s a pretty common “small family” vehicle shape. It’s ugly, but it works. Sedans don’t have that practicality, they’re designed more for people that do high mileage, largely on their own, with little luggage (“repmobiles” and perfect for transporting the golf clubs).

1.) the Bolt is not ugly
2.) that is not necessarily the car GM is providing.

Plenty of people see everything connected with Tesla to be ugly, from the look of its cars to the tweets of its corporate head, to the comments from its owners. I’m not one,I like the look of its cars.

I can hardly wait.

Gotta think we’re getting closer to a revolution of investment in solar, battery storage, and quick charging at places like truck stops. They’d like nothing more than seeing their restaurants full of EV drivers while charging, and are only waiting for this tech to catch up. Are already starting to see some power companies promoting solar with backup attached to their grid in a symbiotic relationship. Will be the new grid.


This is yuuuge! Im happy with the present charging technology but I cant wait for even better in the next 5 to 10 years as the technlogy sorts out.

Conveniently 2 years from now so that they have time to admit for one reason or another that the cars won’t actually charge at that rate.

When Tesla unveiled the Supercharger system, there were already several sites constructed, and they showed cars charging!!! Admittedly it was only 90kW, but 90kW is still pretty damn fast even today.

Do not criticize GM for being part of an effort to improve EV;s,but it is true that this is years away from deployment. There will be a thousand programs for EVs this size.

Funny how the title focuses on the fact that GM provides the test vehicles, which seems to be pretty much the least important detail of this announcement…

Guess nobody would read the article otherwise? 😛

Good point, they are a small part of a small program, still interesting, faster charging is coming.

I just wish GM would provide electric vehicles period, and they’re doing more than any company except Tesla – who only offers quite high priced solutions.

How about any kind of electric large vehicle?
How about an affordable electric sports car?

There is no great need for recharging at 1080 miles per hour. There is need for a car to be purchased.

And all this nonsense about MV power levels: In case the dude hasn’t noticed, there is more industrial equipment running at LV these days than traditionally at MV since the low voltage stuff uses cheap commodity drives to the point that it doesn’t matter what the transformer costs. Transformer efficiencies have been greatly improved lately as well, so that takes another point away from their drivel.

Cant wait for DC fast chargers on I 80 in PA. I can finally get an Bolt EV . Start traveling in it to see family in Eastern part of Pennsylvania from NE Ohio

400 kw for 10 mins… so lets assume 460 volts that’s around 600 amps. That’s an incredibly large amount of power. The average home has a 240 volt service single phase around 200 amps. On hot humid summer days we sometimes experience power failures and that’s due to 60-80 amp AC loads. These are great challenges for engineers but discussion with power providers and understanding limitations of current infrastructure should be the hot topic. We also need to consider our first responders and training when one of these energy dense batteries are involved in an accident. How to deal with lithium, how these products should be recycled and the list goes on. I am all for new technology but we really need to work out the details.