Samsung SDI Presents Batteries That Enable 370 Miles (600 km) Of Range At 2016 NAIAS

JAN 12 2016 BY MARK KANE 91

Samsung SDI lithium-ion batteries at the 2016 North American International Auto Show in Detroit

Samsung SDI lithium-ion batteries at the 2016 North American International Auto Show in Detroit

At the 2016 NAIAS, Samsung SDI is presenting one of the most beautiful lithium-ion battery cells – but not for the first time really.

There are 26, 28, 37 and 94 Ah cells on the show table, plus two new ones with undisclosed capacity, but according to the Korean manufacturer those are even more energy dense.  (Buy a million of them…they might tell you)

Samsung SDI states that latest prototypes could enable electric cars to drive up to 370 miles (600 km) on a single charge, compared to current generation cells (good for about 500 km/310 miles). That’s 20% more energy  according to our math. Samsung SDI says 20-30%.

Besides BMW and Fiat, Samsung SDI has also secured a deal with Audi to provide batteries for their long-range SUV (rated at 500 km on an unknown test cycle – although we assume it to be NEDC) so for sure Samsung is raising the bar.

Cells for 500 km range cars are delivered in samples currently, and production probably won’t begin for anytime soon (2017-ish, we guess as the first production based EVs using the tech arrive in 2017). The new cells for 600 km are to be produced starting around 2020.

“Samsung SDI began to make its foray into the North American automobile market by introducing a variety of customized battery products at the 2016 North American International Auto Show opened on January 11, 2016, at Cobo Center in Detroit, the United States. New battery products include the prototype of high energy density battery cell for EVs that enables them to drive for up to 600 kilometers by charging once, ‘low height pack’ and ‘low voltage system (LVS)’ for EVs.

The prototype of new high energy density battery cell for EVs is the world’s top EV battery cell that improved energy density and driving distance by 20~30% compared to cells that enable EVs to drive for 500 kilometers, which are currently being provided in samples. The commercial production of this high energy density battery cell is expected to start in 2020.”

The other new products are low voltage systems (LVS), which could be replacements for lead-acid batteries.

Samsung SDI lithium-ion batteries at the 2016 North American International Auto Show in Detroit

Samsung SDI lithium-ion batteries at the 2016 North American International Auto Show in Detroit

At the booth we see a bunch of various kinds of battery packs for all-electric and plug-in hybrids. Samsung SDI says those are low height packs:

“Samsung SDI also unveiled ‘low height packs’ for EVs that significantly reduced the battery size and ‘LVS solutions’ that enable regular vehicles to improve eco-friendliness and fuel efficiency simultaneously.

Being a compact battery whose height is 20~30% lower than existing packs for EVs, the ‘low height pack for EVs’ is reduced in size while enhancing energy density. The reduction in height and improvement in energy density will allow EV designers to install packs more easily and to make commercial production while reducing costs, expediting establishment of platform for EV systems.

And the new ‘LVS solution’ can be installed in regular vehicles as well as EVs. As a low voltage system that can replace a lead-acid battery with a lithium-ion battery or add to it in regular vehicles, the ‘LVS solution’ features economic value by delivering excellent eco-friendliness and fuel efficiency.

While the issue of environment pollution by vehicle emissions is being raised, the ‘LVS solution’ attracts attention as a means of addressing environmental regulations to control carbon dioxide as it can improve fuel efficiency by 3~20%. Thus the ‘LVS solution’ is increasingly drawing keen interest and demand from consumers and automakers particularly in North America.

Samsung SDI aims to further sharpen competitive edge by capitalizing on its plant in Xian, China, which was built last year, and synergy with SDIBS based on its industry-top cell and module technologies. To that end, the company plans to aggressively cope with diverse specifications and needs of global automakers by setting up a full lineup of products, including high voltage systems such as high energy density battery cells and compact battery packs, and LVS packs.”

President Nam Seong Cho of Samsung SDI said:

“We aim to lead the era of popularizing EVs by introducing a variety of solutions and products desired by customers and the market at this auto show. Particularly, we will accelerate to make foray into the global automobile market including North America by providing the new high energy density battery cell based on the world’s top technology leadership as well as the low height packs and LVS solutions.”

Samsung SDI lithium-ion batteries at the 2016 North American International Auto Show in Detroit

Samsung SDI lithium-ion batteries at the 2016 North American International Auto Show in Detroit

Samsung SDI lithium-ion batteries at the 2016 North American International Auto Show in Detroit

Samsung SDI lithium-ion batteries at the 2016 North American International Auto Show in Detroit

Samsung SDI lithium-ion batteries at the 2016 North American International Auto Show in Detroit

Samsung SDI lithium-ion batteries at the 2016 North American International Auto Show in Detroit

Categories: Battery Tech

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

91 Comments on "Samsung SDI Presents Batteries That Enable 370 Miles (600 km) Of Range At 2016 NAIAS"

newest oldest most voted

The top photo the pack to the right looks like a Tesla battery pack.

Yes it does appear that it is an EV pack…..but with prismatic cells.

The new Bolt has prismatic. The Germans also have claimed some pretty high energy densities with prismatic. I wouldn’t be surprised if the Mission-e Porsche has prismatic cells.

Could we be seeing a shift away from cylindrical cells for long range EV’s?

Is it possible to achieve achieve equivalent volumetric energy density with prismatic vs cylindrical?

GeorgeS asked:

“Is it possible to achieve achieve equivalent volumetric energy density with prismatic vs cylindrical?”

In theory, sure. Li-ion batteries are made up of many very thin layers laminated together. Whether those layers are laid flat in a cell, such as in a pouch or prismatic cell, or whether they’re rolled up and stuffed into a “can” in a cylindrical cell, shouldn’t matter.

In practice? Well, better find a battery tech expert to ask.

Keep in mind, though, that Tesla didn’t choose the cylindrical form factor because it gave them higher energy density. They chose it because they got a cheaper per-kWh price that way.

i wonder what Tesla may come up with when the GigaFactory will be ready.

So far, it seems they are sticking pretty much to what they have been doing except that they will use a cylindrical cell that is a little taller and a little bigger diameter.

Don’t fix what ain’t broke.

(Then again, perhaps LG Chem’s low battery price for the Bolt has broke them.)

Yeah, Tesla is closing shop and kow towing to the new LG-GM hegemony.

Not quite broken , but certainly urged them to step up the battery development pace. As time goes by, Tesla will more and more driven by desire to have a small sneak peek at Apple R&D, just in case.

Given the rate at which Tesla and Apple are poaching employees from each other, I doubt either has many corporate secrets left that the other wants to know.

Not only will Tesla make cells that are a bit larger from the GF they will also improve energy density an average of 5% per year.

There may be a year they skip increasing kWh in the pack then increase 10% the following year.

Tesla will increasingly use silicon in the battery cells as each generation gets validated in real world use.

Where is the 5% annual improve at Tesla?

85 kWh pack started mid 2012
+5% would be 89.25 kWh mid 2013
+5% would be 93.7125 kWh mid 2014
+5% would be 98.39 kWh mid 2015
+5% would be 103.318 kWh mid 2016.

I highly doubt Tesla will offer 100 kWh pack by summer, just a few days after all the people got their very expensive brand new 90 kWh Model X.

Musk is prone to hyperbole and wishful thinking. 5% in Tesla land is about 1% in everybody else’s reality.

As far as the pack sizing itself, we would be shocked to not see a 110ish kWh pack from Tesla in the next 12-18 months…especially in relation to the Model X.

Tesla needs product bumps/advancement releases every 6-12 months…and just going by what we have been told to expect, we are ~24 months from any volume deliveries on the Model 3.

I think right now (and for the past 12 months) it has been a case of “we can do it” but “we don’t need to” with the Model X backlog/build-out.

One thing was have learned from Tesla is whatever the top-of-the-line vehicle is from the company, it will soon be decimated/replaced…planned obsolescence is in full effect at the company. In other words? Why put out a Tesla Model X 110D, when you can re-sell everyone who just bought a 90 a year and a half from now?

“we are ~24 months from any volume deliveries on the Model 3”

Are those Tesla months or calendar months? (jk – sort of).

Speculayer, ThreeElectrics, Counter-Strike Cat and DonC, my four favorite Anti-Tesla trolls since SeeThrough test drove a P90DL and saw the light…

Speculawyer is certainly no troll, and doesn’t deserve to be lumped in with those who are.

And you’re in no position to throw stones, RexxSee. You’re not a troll, but the assumptions and premises in your posts are mainly based on conspiracy theory fantasies… not actual facts, actual technology, or actual science.

I disagree with your last part, it’s not planned obsolescence, but frenetic progress!
I can see some of our trolls being in for quite a surprise soon.

Fair enough…or it could be a little of both. All good, (=

Jay Cole said: “One thing was have learned from Tesla is whatever the top-of-the-line vehicle is from the company, it will soon be decimated/ replaced…planned obsolescence is in full effect at the company.” It’s always dangerous to disagree with someone who knows more about a subject than oneself, but I find myself in the rare position of being in sharp disagreement with Jay on this point. One of the reasons I am such a fan of Tesla Motors is that it does not perform the meaningless year-to-year style changes which very nearly every auto maker performs on very nearly every model of passenger vehicle; changes performed for no other reason than planned obsolescence. Jay, you say Tesla isn’t actually pushing the edge of the envelope on increasing energy density of its battery packs every year? Okay, so noted. (And yes, I have noticed that too.) The flip side of that is their battery costs get cheaper every year, increasing their profit margin. Profits: You know, that thing that Tesla bashers keep pretending Tesla isn’t making. And how does Tesla gradually increasing the top-of-the-line battery pack capacity count as “planned obsolescence”? Did the introduction of the 90 kWh Model S cause… Read more »

I wouldn’t view a four year old Tesla as obsolete in that it still has a 200 mile range. Even if Tesla came out with a 500 mile range electric car tomorrow I still wouldn’t view the old Tesla as obsolete. Instead I would view the 500 mile range battery as a future upgrade. In that a 200 mile range Tesla with the Supercharger system would easily meet my electric car needs.

We know you’re just See-Through posting under a new name.

LMAO Anti-three electrics…good one!

Oops, CSM and 3E get spanked again for their fact-free anti-Tesla FUD!

I think you are the ones prone to wishful thinking about Tesla.
You don’t want to believe it, but Tesla just sold the most EVs in the US in 2015.
You might be in denial, but Tesla has installed by far the most kwh of batteries in EVs.
You might choose to ignore it, but Tesla has rapidly accelerated real autopiloting in autos, etc. etc, etc!

I seriously doubt that CSC or 3E are actually clueless enough to believe their own repetitive FUD and lies. Their antisocial behavior is much more likely a symptom of trying to drive down the price of Tesla’s stock to benefit their short-selling.

Of course, it may be that they just enjoy trolling. But that also would be an indicator they don’t really believe the bilgewater they’re spouting.

Just because Tesla didn’t jam that extra 5% into battery packs each year doesn’t mean that packs didn’t use 5% fewer cells per year for the same total size of pack. I’m not sure if they’ve reduced cell numbers or not but your numbers alone don’t prove there hasn’t been an energy density gain.

Battery chemistry improvements are also not likely to be a perfect 5% every year sort of thing. The 5% stated by Musk is no doubt an average and an estimation. Ie if we get Samsung cells with 20% higher energy density four years from now as they claim, that will have been an average of 5% improvement per year, but we won’t be seeing those improvements gradually each year, we’ll be seeing them all at once 4 years from now.

“…20% higher energy”

With compounding it is 21.5%.

Dragon said:

“The 5% stated by Musk is no doubt an average and an estimation.”

Actually, Musk is quoted as claiming an increase in energy density of 8% or 9% per year. Most industry analysts cite 7-8%, but perhaps that has accelerated a bit in the past 2-3 years.

Sure, it’s an average and an estimation, just like Moore’s Law in computers. But it’s a useful rule of thumb, just like Moore’s Law.

Batteries improve about 8% per year. But that doesn’t translate directly to cell capacity increases. There are many aspects that can be improved: Wh/kg (lighter pack), Wh/l (smaller pack), C-rate or colombic efficiency (faster supercharging), cycle life (more miles until the pack gets to 80% original capacity), etc.

I think for a while Tesla cared most about higher C-rates because they wanted the pack to supercharge faster given the same thermal envelope. They didn’t care about much else, they had an 85kWh pack that would take highway drivers over 200 miles, but they wanted to make sure that after 30-40 minutes or so you could unplug and be on your way.

When Musk said “we will increase battery capacity with 5-6% every year”?
2012 or when they released 90kWh battery pack?

In 2010, Elon Musk claimed 8-9% improvement per year. Perhaps he would claim a bit less now?

The most common claim I’ve seen is for 7-8% improvement in energy density per year. Note that is for what’s offered for sale as mass produced, commercial li-ion batteries. Much higher energy densities have been demonstrated, or at least claimed, in laboratory demonstrations. But a lab demo is a long way from commercializing a technology.

“Elon Musk: … lithium-ion batteries continue to improve. Roughly, on average, maybe 8% or 9% per year. Which, when compounded over several years, ends up being a meaningful improvement.”

[Edit: Hmmm, this post keeps disappearing. Let me try a different link to the same website:]

I guess its like with every increasing technology, it just follows the rules if you look at the grand scheme. Why should Tesla have changed something, if it still works for them? It just increases the cost to make Panasonic change every the cell every year. Its far more cost effective if you collect improvements and fit them into a new cell, every 5 years or so. I know they changed the current cell a bit over the years, but I guess those changes were very minor and the only jump in energy density happened because it was easy to do. I guess we will see a bigger jump in the next years, but not just for fun, but because of competition, or when the GF comes online and they have to decide which cell they want to produce over the next years.

You’ve got the tail wagging the dog. It’s not Tesla who has been building battery cells; it’s not Tesla who has been constantly fiddling with the chemistry to be able to make battery cells cheaper.

It’s Panasonic who has been doing that. It’s Panasonic who has the motivation to reduce its manufacturing costs, so it can make battery cells cheaper, and thus either increase their profit margin, or make their batteries more competitive with those from other companies, or both.

Of course, since Tesla is now getting into the business of actually making battery cells in Gigafactory 1, Tesla must start dealing with costs directly, and must also take responsibility for doing its own R&D to improve battery cell characteristics and reduce costs.

No it isn’t PP.
The battery design, formula is Tesla’s and patented in many ways and not like anything else Panasonic makes.
Panasonic is a subcontractor to Tesla to produce them for Tesla.
Tesla at any time can hire another or do it themselves.

You’ve greatly overstated your case. You’ve stated as glittering generalities things which are only true to a certain degree, and in my opinion that degree is significantly less than half the entire picture. (To be fair, we all often state things as glittering generalities, so I don’t mean to single you out for that.) 1. Tesla has patents on the internal physical structure of batteries, but so far as I know, not any on the chemistry. It’s the chemistry and materials where li-ion battery manufacturers, including Panasonic, are constantly fiddling, to reduce costs. 2. No, Tesla can’t just go to any battery maker and order the same thing, or at least not at the same price. If they could have, then Tesla would never have been production constrained. As it is, they very publicly courted Samsung for a supplemental supply of batteries, in what looked to me like an attempt to strongarm Panasonic into ramping up production faster than Panasonic wanted to. If you doubt what I say is true, jerryd, then consider this: How is it that Tesla was able to offer an upgrade from 85 kWh to 90 kWh for the Model S, and fit it into the… Read more »

There will come a point where the increased densities start to hit dimiinishing returns as far as range and sales is concerned and will start to produce smaller lighter battery packs instead for improved cost or performance. The model 3 is the obvious starting point for this.

It will be a long time before cars with 300 mile range are really commonplace, even if the technology is available, it’s simply not a requirement for day to day driving for most of the population.

We’ve seen battery chemistry reach the point of diminishing returns in energy density (ED) before. When that happens, that battery makers shift to a different basic chemistry, so they can continue the progression to smaller, lighter batteries. The progression has been NiCad –> NiMH –> lithium ion –> lithium polymer.

Right now, it looks like they’ll be shifting to lithium-silicon chemistry. Maybe LG Chem has already done that?

Batteries have a very long way to go before they run up against the limits of what is physically possible in increasing ED. In theory, batteries should be able reach the ED of gasoline. In practice, probably somewhat less, but certainly much, much higher ED than EV makers are using today.

This is an older graph, but still useful to illustrate the point:

If you follow battery technology research just remotely, you should understand that this 5% number is just approximation and the reality may be completely different each year. Improvements don’t come at straight line. E.g. NMC has promised breakthrough several years ago, a lot of smart people in national labs were working on it, GM also invested in some overhyped Silicon Valley startup, but they just stalled at unexpected problem. Now it is finally getting better as is shown by LG Chem, but who knows if something else can be improved further in the next few years. Tesla still buys the same old NCA from Panasonic, except for Roadster upgrade. Nevada factory may produce NCM in addition if they will get more mature, but I would not expect significant price advantage over LG Chem. Tesla is production company, not a research lab, they use what they can buy or license.

It is so nice to see so many suppliers working hardcore on vehicle battery packs. This market did not even exist 10 years ago.

With another 5 or 10 years of more refinement, the battery prices, energy densities, and power densities should be real nice.

Is this a move directly at the LG Chem with its Bolt deal with GM?

Is Samsung trying to gain a piece of major EV battery pies?

I’m sure that Samsung would like to compete with LG Chem and its new, significantly lower cost (per kWh) li-ion batteries. It’s very clear that LG is offering a significantly lower price per kWh, since their list of customers is growing so rapidly.

But energy density has, apparently, nothing to do with LG Chem’s lower cost for EV battery cells. All the evidence we’ve seen so far, including the comparatively large size of the Bolt battery pack, indicates it’s just lower cost, period. How did LG Chem achieve this? Obviously they’re not saying.

upvoted ++

Anyone remember how the tesla roadster can go 400 miles on a single charge with LG cells TODAY and is available for purchase?

The 400 miles on the Tesla Roadster is about as accurate as the 80 miles range on the Volt or about as realistic as the 300 miles range on the upcoming Bolt with 60kWh battery.

Tesla has an upgrade not quite ready yet that will increase the Roadster’s range to 400 miles as the cells are so much better now after 6-8 yrs.
It also adds better aero, tires, both which increase range too.

People have gone 100 miles on the Gen 1 Volt. So I suspect someone will go 400+ on the Bolt if they are as determined. 😉

These are all at four volts, I guess? I think we know who is confusing the Germans, now.

Ambulator, just one more guess from you. Where did you get that 4V assumption from ? BTW, did you read my reply to your wrong voltage guesses two days ago in the article concerning the 30% range improvement for the eGolf and eUp! ?

Yes, I saw that. Those weird voltages are what I got from calculating it from the kWh and the Ah. I can only assume that VW was showing the Ah of only 1/3 or 1/2 of their packs, depending on the car.

I only assume four volts here because that is what is typical of lithium ion batteries. Maybe it’s twelve volts, or even something else. How are we suppose to judge them if they only show the Ah?

Amp hours are an absurd way to communicate battery capacity.

Ambulator, once again to VW: look – it’s quite simple: A typical battery package for a bev consists of cells (the basic element of storage), groups (several cells connected together in parallel – in order to stand the high charging / discharging current) and finally modules. Also you have a BMS, (battery managenent system) for load balancing and to prevent short cut and overload. Now we come to the numbers and arithmetic: The current eGolf has 264 cells. If you divide that by 3 cells per group, you will get 88 groups. Since there are 3 cells in parallel in each group, the group has the same voltage as a single cell (3.7V). Now You multiply 3.7V times 88 groups and get 325.6V which is close to the value of 323V given by VW. Now you take the given capacity of 24.2 kWh and divide it by 323V. This yields 75Ah (this value holds for each group and the whole battery pack, since the groups are connected serially). Now remember, here we have 3 cells in each group, so each cell has 25Ah !!! You now should be able to do the math for the eUp! yourself. They say they… Read more »

I’d love to see some of this tech in a lawn mower. Every spring I curse the ice and the mess the starting fluid the noise. Every fall I have to spend another day putting it to bed for the winter. Cub cadet makes an electric, but I’m not paying $4,500 for lead acid.

My $289 36V lawn mower has been working great for over 4 years now…

For a small yard that’d be fine, but I don’t have the time to push mow 2 acres. I long for the day when I can mow with no belts, gas, or ear protection. Is your mower lead acid or lithium?

Dude, get a goat. And I got mine last year, runs great, it is lithium.

Bosch makes 2 models for pros:

Robert Llewellyn from Fully Charged said it runs much longer than you do.

I hope to see a BMW i3 with the new cells in the near future. In theory, I’d rather have an i3 with 150-mile range (or so) than a 200-mile Bolt.

They are supposed to have the i3 2017 LCI later in the year with more range. Question is how much extra range. It would be awesome if they could extract more HP too. 6.4 seconds 0-60mph is already best in its class.

Wow… No real specs. How about specific energy, volumetric energy, charge and discharged c-rate tolerance, flammability, and life cycles?

Without all of that, this really means nothing.

Exactly. Also funny is that GM mentioned only two dimensions of the new LG cells used in Bolt, so we still can not calculate their volumetric density 🙁

So this should have brought some cost reduction as well.

Will this reduction reflect in the cost of EVs.

Goodbye to the much touted alarmist nonsense “We need a battery breakthrough”. Evolutionary progress is doing just fine.

Evolutionary progress in battery tech is “just fine” if we only want to continue to see the plug-in EV market share of new passenger vehicle sales grow at the rate of about 0.2% per year, or even less. At the same time, there is virtually no penetration at all in the market for larger trucks or other vehicles which contribute the most to fuel consumption.

If we want to see the EV revolution go into sustained exponential growth, the kind of growth which is the hallmark of a disruptive tech revolution, then we need one or more actual quantum jump breakthroughs in battery tech.

And I don’t at all see this as being “alarmist”, arne-nl. It’s just being realistic.

I wouldn’t know why current battery technology wouldn’t be enough for trucks.

The big breakthrough will never happen. New technologies will emerge, and compared to today’s tech the might seem like a big leap, but by the time they have moved from the lab to the field, today’s tech will have evolved significantly and the difference will be evolutionary rather than a quantum jump.

I Still think you are being ‘alarmist’ 😉 by stating that we need a battery breakthrough for other stuff than passenger cars to be electrified. It is very realistic to suggest that today’s tech (+evolutionary future improvements and cost reductions) is sufficient.


Sure to accieve a breakthrough of EV sales in 2016 a breaktrough in battery technology is needed yesterday. But i think a exponential increase (!) in sales each year is sufficient. Meaning EV share will be around

2015 – 0.8%
2016 – 1.2%
2017 – 1.8%
2018 – 3.2%
2019 – 5%
2020 – 8%
2021 – 12%
2022 – 17%
2023 – 25%

As long as you make batteries better each year by 5-8%, this means a doubling of range every 9-14 years. Having trucks with a range of 600km ready in 20-25 years seems ok to me. This will mean in ~30 years everything can go electric (if needed). And increase of car sales will come/start with three payable cars reaching 200 miles or more (EPA) in 2017.

arne-nl said: “I wouldn’t know why current battery technology wouldn’t be enough for trucks.” Well, clearly it’s not, or UPS and FedEx would already be using EV delivery trucks. I think the barrier is a direct result of the cube-square law; as you scale up a vehicle, increasing the size by 2x means increasing the weight 8x. That means you’d need 8x the volume, weight, and cost of batteries to produce the same power/mass ratio. “The big breakthrough will never happen.” Hmmm, it’s rather dangerous to predict “never” about tech advances. Remember Lord Kelvin’s infamous 1895 prediction? “Heavier than air flying machines are impossible.” If any company figures out how to make graphene at a commercial scale, then we almost certainly will see batteries with graphene-enhanced electrodes, and that will mean a sudden increase of energy density by somewhere around 500-1000%. That is, of course, just one example. Another example would be an improved flow battery which has sufficient power to run a car. I think it would be a big mistake to bet that a revolutionary advance will never happen, given how many, many companies and university research teams are working hard at trying to find the next battery… Read more »

Does anybody of you guys have an idea, why Samsung coloured only one of the new cells in gold ? Premium, like credit card ?

Let’s put this into perspective: High energy density (ED) for EV batteries is not nearly as important as cost. Look at the specs for the upcoming GM Bolt: Everyone was surprised when a GM presentation slipped up and made public GM’s cost for the battery cells going into a Bolt: $145/kWh. That cost is a lot lower than the industry average. But more recently, many InsideEVs readers expressed surprise that the Bolt’s battery pack will have considerably lower overall ED than a Tesla Model S battery pack. In fact, if I correctly interpret what one LG Chem engineer said, LG’s new lower-per-kWh cost cells don’t represent any greater advance in ED of commercial, mass produced battery cells, than the ongoing average industry advance of about 7-8% per year. Now, that’s not to say that ED doesn’t play a role in EV engineering. For example, Tesla chose battery cells for its Model S which had somewhat higher ED than the average for EV builders, so they could fit 85 kWh into the car without making it as big as a truck. But you can be sure that Tesla chose a type of battery that wasn’t much more expensive, per kWh, than… Read more »

Therefore let me suggest a new density-unit: It specifies how many Watthours we get for a $, let me call it “price density” (until someone has a better name). The higher the number, the better. Example: LG battery was told to cost 145$/kWh, this woud give a price density of 6.9 Wh/$.
(I applied the same principle as with fuel consumption: you can specify it as mpg (like in US) which is distance per fuel quantity, or Liters per 100km (like in Europe) which is fuel quantity per distance.)

The one thing that Tesla (Panasonic) and now GM (LG Chem) are doing periodically is pushing the boundaries of battery technology for EV’s, this was always Elon Musk’s intention IMO.

We should be celebrating all & sundry who get in the game, for it is only a matter of time before commercial production of EV batteries have enough ED to run cars, buses, trucks, trains and yes planes (in part) that don’t cost & weigh anywhere near what they do currently.

Less stick beating, more cheerleading !

Alan said: “We should be celebrating all & sundry who get in the game, for it is only a matter of time before commercial production of EV batteries have enough ED to run cars, buses, trucks, trains and yes planes (in part) that don’t cost & weigh anywhere near what they do currently.” We should be celebrating all companies which actually push forward the tech of what is being offered in commercial batteries suitable for EVs. But regarding claims about battery prototypes, such as the one from Samsung quoted above, it’s best to keep in mind this memorable warning: “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 * * * * * Alan said: “…pushing the boundaries of battery technology for EV’s, this was always Elon Musk’s intention IMO.”… Read more »

I forgive you, because you can’t help yourself, my advice is to see a psychiatrist to deal with anger management & insecurity.

Why on earth should anyone send Elon Musk their battery tech exactly ?

To sell them Alan. Isn’t that obvious?
Musk would love a better, lower cost battery and make the person, company with one rich.

I get your point but if and when the technology exists on a commercial production scale, I don’t think they will have any problem finding bigger customers than Tesla at this stage.

I’m all for more players in the battery tech field, like all technology, someone will come up with a breakthrough which will be the tipping point to end ICE vehicles.

Alan said:

“I forgive you, because you can’t help yourself, my advice is to see a psychiatrist to deal with anger management & insecurity.”

When you don’t understand something, Alan, the proper response isn’t to get defensive. The proper response is to ask questions.

If you learn much about the battery industry, you’ll find that frequent outrageous claims are the norm, not the exception. What Elon Musk said summarizes the level of hype (to put it politely) rather well.

We see breathless claims of battery “breakthroughs” about every two weeks these days. And very close to zero percent of those claims actually lead anywhere.

How many of those claims come from major manufacturers of cells already in use in EVs?

Not a high percentage of wide-eyed, gosh-wow claims come from market leaders, altho the “up to 600 km” claim made in the article under discussion certainly qualifies.

But then, there are less than 10 companies that fit your criteria, whereas there are probably hundreds of small companies, startups, and university/college teams working at producing better batteries. So it’s hardly surprising that most of the hype comes from less well known companies and groups.

A perfect caption for the Samsung photo would be: “Caught you, we pretty much at Samsung have a notebook-size battery with 1,000 km range per charge, as well as you in your secretive labs in the States. Watching you and your next move”. Have to say Samsung is rather close, except for the fact that such labs do not operate in States, but rather on the mainland. Notebook-sized, can you imagine that ?

LOL said:

“…a notebook-size battery with 1,000 km range per charge… can you imagine that ?”

Not if it’s a battery which stores power as chemical energy, no. That would require a much higher energy density than gasoline, and I seriously doubt that is even theoretically possible.

Now, if you’re talking about a nuclear power device; a “Mr. Fusion” power source, then maybe, someday.

Most batteries only have 5% to 10% of the storage capacity of gasoline. At the same time 95% to 90% of gasoline’s power is wasted as heat energy in the gas car’s engine.

It might not be out of the question if 50 years in the future you can have a battery be the size of a standard gas can and give 300 miles on a charge.

current ICE engines are about 30% efficient – wasting 70% of the gas energy, not 90-95%. Big difference. The new Prius engine is approaching 40% efficiency.

Even the older engines were more like 20-25% efficient. None were 5-10% efficient, as implied in your post.

Diesel is one of the highest energy dense products used today and has around 11kWh avialable per liter. The battery you propose is in the best case around 170kWh/liter if you assume a notebook has around one liter of volume and the EV uses 17kWh/100km (NECD figure of the Leaf). That is very unrealistic! In realitiy a notebook is more like half a liter, which makes everything even more unrealistic and the leaf uses more like 18.7 kWh/100km. Making the battery more like 375kWh/liter.

Meaning more than twice the energy of a big tesla in you notbook sized battery??? Never gona happen. Well if we could improve battery energy density every year by 8% forever, we will get there within ~80 years. But i think there are some boundaries to that forumla.

Show me the money.

The idea that any of the car companies is developing cell chemistry, or internal structures, is pure hype. All such development is being done by battery manufacturers. Packaging the cells into packs is an area the car companies participate in.

If you want to know what is happening in battery development you will know more, and sooner, by watching the small electric bicycle pack makers. They are getting the latest products from all the battery makers, and getting them into products on a time scale of months, not years, like the big auto firms.


While getting to market quicker once they have the cells, they don’t get the latest cells to play with, the OEMs do. And the OEMs only get them after the battery companies have vetted them out internally for a few years. USABC is probably the best place to see where the cell technology is at and even that stuff is a bit old.

Research developments are fine, but if you want to know what will be in your EV in two years, look at the e-bike packs.

“start companies based on NIBs, like Jerry Barker at Faradion. He’s targeting e-bikes.”

Just learned that Samsung SDI’s website product page under automotive batteries category is woefully out of date. Watched a video they posted to their YouTube channel which an EV 94Ah battery listed alongside the 2013 released (i3) 60Ah one. But wait, they also have a 40Ah Supercapacitor/Li-On blend. That should be VERY interesting especially for the likes of Tesla being as fond as they are for supercharging.

Supercapacitors are great at charging and discharging at electronic speed, and being able to do so with as much as 99% efficiency… even a bit better than the internal cell efficiency of li-ion battery charging.

But they’re lousy at energy density, and even if someone could figure out how to make them with high volumetric energy density, it’s questionable they would hold most of the charge for long.

Wish I could believe in a breakthru supercapacitor with energy density approaching or even exceeding that of state of the art li-ion batteries. But I participated in the EEStor forum for too many years to think that has much of a chance of happening. It’s not physically impossible, but if someone actually did it, it would be huge news.

My comment to this is get out of my dreams and into my Mitsubishi i-miev.

Granted I don’t own a Mitsubishi i-miev or leaf yet.

Bah. I can make a 600 km Leaf today with current battery cells, just by packing the entire rear half the car with batteries.

What *matters* is how much they *cost* and how *dense* they are.

From where to buy this battery pack