I do so love experiencing a true expert at work. Euan cantering through an idiots guide to all these different options at pace but with the depth of knowledge to bring it to life. Like watching a concert orchestra or consummate actor etc. Brilliant
My thoughts precisely. The way each topic was described should allay the FUDding coming from information with an agenda. There I am thinking about the LiPO cells for my first drone, puffing wildly after 20 cycles. Another great video by Imogen and the Fully Charged team.
I love Euan McTurk, he has a massive understanding of all things battery, but he makes it simple to understand. Someone that knows his subject and can explain it is just amazing. Interesting information and small tweaks to the battery technology is adding miles to our use. Thank you.
What is needed more than a 1,000 mile battery are charging stations with clean, well maintained washrooms. Trying to find a bush to hide behind at a charging station is just not providing the service that is required. Canada, especially western Canada, is extremely remiss in this regard. Even most of the gas stations have poorly maintained washrooms.
You are absolutely correct and it perplexes me it took this long for travel centers and convenience stores to start adopting charges. It's definitely moving in that direction now, but they(charging companies) should have been making deals from the beginning. Maybe it was a chicken and egg thing, but now we have essentially all the major players jumping on board, at least in the States. Canada's a bit trickier because you guys have an awful lot of open land up there and sometimes big gaps in services. Dog River needs a charging station.
With enough CCS rapid charges for the number of cars that need to charge and A PLACE TO BUY A COFFEE! Honestly, put a coffee shop in and it will probably cover the cost of the electricity. Why is this so hard for the UK?!?! Other countries have done it!
@@ellieban I agree and that is exactly how gas stations work today. They typically only make between 2 to 8 cents per gallon of gas profit. The bigger profits are from people buying things in there shops. The margins on those items are usually in the 25 to 50 percent margin, which is were they actually make their profits, not gas.
I think that combining a charging station along common routes like Interstate highways where you can stop for a charge, get lunch or a doughnut and coffee would make sense. But also at common places where you spend time when you stop like grocery stores, libraries, movies and other service areas could be a value-added feature for those places and a little extra income for the business.
Well said Euan and Imogen! Refreshing to hear such clarity spoken about the underlying sciences, engineering, and societal/application challenges. Factual and informative 👏
This video is an excellent overview of battery chemistry and research. Imogen asks the important questions, with no fluff or side trips. Dr McTurk does a fantastic job, with accurate and very clear and understandable answers. Hats off to Dr. McTurk and the Fully Charged Team!
Canadian here. Good point on how much easier it is to install charging infrastructure than develop a 1000 mile battery. That said, a battery that could do 600km in -30 degree weather would be a game changer for remote areas. I’m hoping that ONE’s Gemini will get us there.
Or perhaps only instal half of that 1000 mile battery. If it’s one of the advanced chemistries that battery would make for a lighter and more manoeuvrable car.
Given that the majority of journeys don't need that range, perhaps the answer is to rent an additional battery that goes in the trunk? Or simply just rent a long range vehicle for those occasional trips. Of course there will be a minority of folk who regularly drive 600km, but the market can look to support them.
I think that everyone in the EV industry is missing the point when they say we don't need 1000 mile battery and we can just charge in our breaks. The fact is that here in the UK, it costs typically 10 TIMES more to charge at a public charging point than to charge at home on a cheap overnight tariff. I, and many other EV owners here, would love a 1000 mile range, so if I am away for several days, I can do the whole trip without being ripped off at public charging points, and then charge up again cheaply when I get home. Using public charge points, it is often more expensive that it would be to put fuel in a petrol or diesel car.
Euan's point right towards the end of the video was by far the most important. A charging network is always going to be infinitely more important than range itself - in the same way that it doesn't matter if your car's got a small petrol tank because you just fill up a couple times. Charges at destinations plus solving the mystery of chargers for those without driveways is the biggest hurdle.
In 2023 16.3% of the ~2million new car sales were BEV. If the government wants to achieve its 2035 target of 100% zero emission vehicles then we will have a lot more electric vehicles on the road. Until we get to the point where either range and destination charging undermine the need for mass volume en route charging stations, or charging times are closer in parity to refuelling an ICE vehicle, we would need a completely unsustainable number of en route chargers. This is neither practical nor desirable. The bigger push in my mind needs to be a focus on range, destination charging and fast-charging speeds.
@@lordmord8378 If you can get a full charge in less than 10 minutes, then we can just turn petrol stations into chargers...problem solved as it would be like normal.
Euan talks so much sense, let’s stop seeking the maximum range possible and factor in what endurance the driver has, and then when we have our Wizz break, it’ll have sufficient range when we get back in the driver seat.
no he doesnt, quoted statistics have no references to studies. Comments on 1000 mile battery not needed, for many perhaps not, but some countries yes. Plus the transition to EV would be easier if the need to fill up every 250 - 300 miles wasnt a requirement, this would reduce the need for public charging, which appears to be an issue in many many places.
As a caravan enthusiast, where towing a caravan will typically halve the range of an EV, it is essential to have 5-600 mile ranges (250 - 300 with caravan). Also charging stations which accommodate cars with trailers.
@@0Ausyes, so do i, a diesel with a 650 mile range, either my campervan diesel that can tow 350 miles or so, for a 7.5 metre 4 berth fixed bed, or my Mercedes E Class diesel, that can do the same. Petrol stations are designed properly as well, to re-fuel in through put quickly and efficiently and in the dry. EV's are just an inferior product doomed to the dust bin of history, along with betamax tape recorders, the same as the time wasting, unreliable and poorly designed charging infrastructure.
@@stevezodiac491 my solution is a diesel vehicle. As for range Additional fuel. My current touring vehicle is good for 2600 kilometres. No battery car will carry 5.6t across Australia.
My view is that 1000 mile battery is not needed in any use case. Here in North America, we focus a lot on trucks that travel long distances without stopping, but the reality is that if the fuel, i.e. electricity, is significantly cheaper than diesel, there is a good economic argument that stopping for a recharge is not an issue. I would pay the driver for the 30-60 minutes in exchange for the lower cost. Furthermore, stopping more often would be better for the drivers and for road safety. That is so true that it's the law in many countries.
Anything more than 300 miles is reaching a point of diminishing returns for anything other than over-the-road truckers. In fact, given the choice of over 300 miles, I would rather stop at 300 and trade the extra battery for a roomier, lighter, cheaper vehicle.
@@getoffamylan6844 Depends on what you do. I travel all over England and Wales filming EFL football matches. I have to arrive at a specific time and cannot risk being late so I dare not take the risk that I wouldn't be able to find a vacant charging station that is working then spend God knows how long waiting to charge an EV. I currently drive an estate car that when fully filled up gives me a range of 650 miles. Also not forgetting that a large enough EV car with a long enough range that can take my equipment and passengers would probably cost at least 2 or 3 times what I paid for my current car. And before anyone comes on and says driving long distances I need to stop then I do for short breaks but the driving is done by 2 of us. So at the moment EVs are not a solution for me.
The problem is the EV truck starts out with 300 miles of theoretical range but it is cut in half as soon as you hitch a trailer up to it. That is why people want a 500+ range EV truck as the starting range
@@glorfification What was wrong on this vid? Euan knows his stuff and I didn't see anything incorrect in what he said. Some significant simplifications, but that's fair enough for this audience. People can watch 'The Limiting Factor' if they want more detailed battery info in video form.
Great video. This should be revisited once a year or every other year to see what's new. We may not have anything new to discuss since battery technology seems to stay in the development phase for so long. Hopefully something exciting happens.
Love the term “dwell time”. Those obsessing with long-haul truck range often ignore the fact that mandated rests are required of all truck drivers. In Europe, it is 4.5 hours, in Australia, with much greater distances involved, it is 5.5 hours, and in the U.S., it is 8 hours. The range of the Tesla Semi is 500 miles. It will be no coincidence that this just accommodates 8 hours of driving nicely. The speed of charging is also very relevant. The Australian mandated rest after 5.5 hours is just 15 minutes, so voila, the proposed truck Megachargers can poke in almost 200 miles in the “dwell time”. Incidentally, refuelling a diesel truck is considered to be driving time.
longest range needed: 250 miles (400 kms), on the highway 20-80, so 400 miles 0-100%, 3 to 4 hour drive, with 1 hour pauze to recharge, eat, rest and go to the bathroom for travel. Also makes for one week range in most drivers everyday use. 50 miles per day is more then 80% of the people need. That way, vehicles can stay light and affordable, and a light vehicle will use less energy.
Please provide references for some of the statistics like “EV batteries are 20-60 times less likely to catch fire than ICE”. This must be based on a study. Being able to reference a study really helps when trying to correct people making false statements about EV safety. Thanks again for all the great work.
I am all for EV's, but anecdotal evidence points to that statistic being misleading. I would love to see the percentage data on EV fires to EV's on the road vs ICE Fires to ICE vehicles on the road. not to mentioned EV fires, despite what the interviewee said, are particularly nasty. The current battery technology using liquid electrolyte, is just not up to the task at the scale required for vehicles.
I think it is also just based on statistics. companies that manages big fleets of vehicles, insurance companies - they like to make statistics. And it is not that uncommon for a ICE vehicle to go up in fire, even though we almost never hear about it. And think about it, the motors get a lot hotter, there is actual fire and explosions out there, and besides the gas, there are other flammable things, and maybe the maintenance, isn't always the best. It is impressive it is as uncommon as it is after all. But sources are always good, specially if you have to convince someone that really don't want to listen to reason.
@@KrydolphIf somebody does not want to listen to reason: they will hold their beliefs MORE STRONGLY in response to facts and figures. The human mind is weird. Is suspect the issue is that changing your mind on a subject may require a lot of re-evaluation. It is easier to just double-down.
The Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency (MSB) has a study on this. I'd share a link but it won't let me. Pretty easy to find using a search engine though. Just search for "EV 20 times less likely to catch fire".
Fascinating! Euan is a great communicator and it's so nice to be treated to a video that doesn't patronise. And some nice shots of Oxford into the bargain!
Loving the intro. Having started creating my own content recently I can’t help but notice how a video goes together. How it’s entertaining, while getting the message across. It was nice to summarise the progress we have made so far with battery tech. . . I know there is a lot of work involved in getting these videos out. So thank you
it's not the frequency of fire that matter, but their incredible intensity, the lack of forerunner signals, the difficulty to put out electrical fires and don't forget the far from friendly fumes. A death trap that works less often, but when it works .. oh boy...
Errmmm Luton airport !! As Euan states if you watch the video those infrequent EV fires, if significant are SLOW burns not whooomppff - time to walk away
Yeah, this video avoids discussing how difficult it is to put out an EV fire by talking about the small odds of it occurring. Even low-frequency events DO occur, and I know the Phoenix, AZ Fire Dept. has talked about getting a shipping container half full of sand, dropping the burning EV into it, and then filling it with water and leaving it for a day just to ensure that the fire is really, completely, OUT. Apparently a number of “extinguished” EV fires re-kindled when being towed away from the roadside or sitting in junk yards. This is a legitimate concern that shouldn’t be dismissed with “it hardly ever happens”.
I love hearing Imogen trying to say 'polysulphide', making a hash of it, but keeping going without a pause. What a trooper! Thanks for the excellent and informative interview. 🙂👍
What would be really helpful is a running chart or spreadsheet comparing the different compositions of materials and their relative aspects of size, weight, density, etc.
@@fullychargedshow You think that people who understand every part of a car somehow don't know about batteries? Cars with combustion engines also have batteries. You learned something new today.
Excellent summary of today's battery tech and what we may be seeing tomorrow. Note also that grid/home batteries can benefit from a broader range of technologies, not just chemistries: Redox flow, thermal (water or salt based), etc. The Dutch (Triple Solar, Borg Energy Storage) especially seem to be focusing on cheap and efficient water-based solutions, mostly for heat storage and restitution, not electricity generation, with solar thermal panels, heat pumps, 7-day autonomy 4 m³ tanks, etc. We can also convert heat into electricity in summer, as solar heat production would be much higher than what's needed in winter for central heating. If using hybrid thermal+photovoltaic panels, that would also cool down the panels and make them more efficient.
In my country what I need is guaranteed (cold weather, heater on, lights on) 400 km range and up to 10 fast chargers distributed evenly. And charge points at destination is a must I believe. It would make life so much easier for people who don't have garage.
The elephant in the room though, regarding EV fires that was carefully not mentioned was the fact that yes, batteries don't do the explosive boom of petrol, but once they do catch on fire they're the devils own job to put out.
The most flammable is actually NCA, not NMC. But NMC and NCA aren't too far apart from each other whereas LiFePO4 (LFP) is in the weeds in terms of temperature rise rate during a failure. LFP is easily 100x safer than any other mainstream lithium chemistry.
@@GreenJimll I've got a similar amount sitting in the garage, newly upgraded to 16s, but I have them in two sets of two batteries, each set on an Anderson quick disconnect with a pull rope. So if I need to pull them out of the garage all I have to do is pull hard on the rope and they will disconnect as they get pulled out. No messing with bolts or screw terminals in an emergency 😞 Not sure I would trust any lithium battery chemistry in my attic. On the other-hand, I do have a number of singular batteries sitting in my office for testing purposes. Easily man-handled, and there is a door right there to an outside deck, but no pull ropes or quick disconnects so that could be a bit problematic if something goes wrong. -Matt
As long as the next gen batteries can do 250 miles on the motorway in winter, I do not need any more range. If it takes 30 minutes to charge from 10-80% in 30 minutes that is as fast as I need, that is about the same as loo break and coffee in a motorway service station. If the battery is also lighter and cheaper then that is a double win. As for home battery storage - sodium ion seems the way forward
Aptera will eventually provide the range we all need through enhanced efficiency. The 400 mile version will be the first one produced, most likely in late 2024, then the 250 mile version, then the 600 and 800 mile versions.
The issue is not if they go on fire or not, it's what happens if they get caught up in a fire even if they are not the origin of the fire. Lithium Ion batteries pose a particular problem for fire departments because the battery itself can manufacture oxygen during the fire process ,exothermically. This is why car ferries are banning EVs, when ev's are caught up in a fire like on a car ferry they are impossible to extinguish at sea or almost impossible.
There is a reason of why there are needed vehicles for personal use with long range capabilities and it is that currently existing ICE vehicles have such a long range. People are afraid of changes and specially when changes offer what they consider worse features. Those can be irrational fears, but they exist. However, in some cases, those fears are not that irrational. Meanwhile I totally agree with the conclusions of this video, you are not considering that in many places people have no possibility to have a home charger, just because they do not have a private parking space!!! For example, here in Spain most of the population live in flats, and a huge percentage are on old buildings with limited number of parking places and even without any at all. For those people, that park on the streets, the fact that their car has a long range means they do not have to worry on refueling/charging with high frequency, neither with urgency, and that makes a real difference while the fast charging infrastructure scales up. And even when the infrastructure exists, the fact of finding the charging spot and leaving the car in a place for an hour (or several hours) for a full recharge once a week makes a huge difference vs doing the same process two or three times a week. In my case it’s perfect. We have two EVs, home charger and even solar panels. But for some of my friends an EV, with the existing technology and infrastructure, would just over complicate their lives and I totally understand that.
We don't need 1,000 mile petrol or diesel tanks in our cars, even if we're planning a very long journey, because refuelling is not a problem. So the same would go for electric-powered cars if the infrastructure is there. 500 miles is fine, I think.
Realistically: Most of the drivers will come out of less than 50Km a day for their regular commuting needs. In no way will a 1000Km car be needed other than for Taxis, Uber, or other professional appliances like that. And for the most part, EV's are not set to be charged, they're set to be always charging. There won't be miracles. If you have the ability to charge your EV at home or at work, great. An EV is the best outfit for you. If that's not the case, await till there are those conditions. If you are a top professional with tons of daily distances needed, so await till there are cars that make those distances.
Campervan people can easily use 1000 mile batteries, not because they need to go 1000 miles in one go, but because they also use the battery for cooking, cooling, gadgets, heating, and e-bike charging, especially when staying off-grid. Heating particularly uses a lot of kWh without radical changes in the insulation levels and amount of glass in current vehicles. PV can help with this, but only the equivalent of a few miles/day.
Food truck people too. Food trucks typically (in the US) are surrounded by a fog of exhaust either for the truck or for gas-powered a generator. And they tote around LNP canisters. A battery big enough to just go a few miles then COOK, with no exhaust, would make healthier, more pleasant eating.
@@tomp4944 Good point. I wonder how many kWh/day a food truck uses? Induction cooking uses half the energy of gas cooking, and is typically something like 1kWh per day for camper-grade cooking (one or two rings for maybe 30 mins). A food truck may do 5-10 hours at several kW so could easily use 30kWh/day and maybe more. They probably don't travel very far normally so the current typical 50-60kWh battery should work for many cases.
@@xxwookey WOW, that's good information. I assumed the electrical needs would be higher. That's completely doable. I'm assuming as soon as fully electric food trucks arrive, health departments will suddenly notice the toxic fumes we take for granted today and make it hard for food trucks to not be electric.
0:17 Did y'all forget about the Lucid Air, capable of 520 miles? 1000 mile range batteries will be good for pick-up trucks, as towing cannibalises range. But, as mentioned, charging infrastructure is vital.
Nobody is disputing that EVs are less likely to catch fire, however, when they do they are almost impossible to extinguish unlike ICE cars. I was involved with the fire service this year including a trip to an underground road tunnel to see what happens if there is an accident involving fire. ICE fire they can deal with, EV fires not so! So yes EV unlikely to catch fire, but when they do you have a MASSIVE problem. Another not so green thing is that EVs are written off so easily due to the expensive battery and that it’s usually part of the structure and costs approximately 1/3rd of the price of the car. So if a new car is £60k the battery is £20k. Say 3 years later, car is worth £40k (probably less) and is involved in an accident with battery damage. Battery is still £20k plus labour plus any other parts damaged in the crash so car is highly likely to be written off. Add to this that car body shops are being advised to store damaged EVs with a 15m (sure it is 15m) clear radius many body shops are refusing to take in EVs. EV insurance is escalating due to these issues. I am NOT anti electric vehicles, but they are not the only answer and not suitable for everyone! For myself a self charging hybrid is perfect, better than diesel economy without so many horrible emissions. Plus I bought a 3 year old vehicle that I intend to keep for many many years. I feel that EVs are being rushed through as THE answer. They are only part of the answer. Scrapping ICE cars and replacing with EVs is also not the answer. Any ICE car that currently exists has had a lot of CO2 used to build it. If the ICE Car is not a big gas guzzler but just a normal car then keeping this car on the road is actually better than scrapping it as EVs use more CO2 to build in the first place. Scrapping the ICE car is wasting CO2 already used. Yes, get the dirty cars out of the big cities. But don’t scrap them. I’m not getting into the infrastructure, but it’s been proven that this isn’t ready yet and needs some work. Slow down the EV train, improve the infrastructure, work on methods of extinguishing EV fires & improve the battery technology and efficiency.
Ideally, a 400 mile real world range and a 40 minute charge time is needed. That would give 250 miles from 80 to 20% charge, then a 40 minute charge time back to 80% is ample even in road transport.
Batteries are consumables. There are only about 500 charge cycles in a lithium ion battery. Unless the batteries are standardized and made, readily, available, then battery cars will always be a gamble. The manufacturer needs to be reliable, honest and offer battery packs. Otherwise, these cars are throw away items and should be priced as such.
1000 miles battery - well unless i missed it, the discussion seems all to do with driving 1000 miles in a given journey, and whether that is ever needed. Such a battery could go for a month without charging, for an average person, and that is also an attractive notion.
In my opinion, if you can’t charge your car at home then you shouldn’t get an EV. Batteries use a lot of resources that are damaging to the environment and we should be minimising those resources, not lugging around a huge battery so you don’t have to charge so often.
I used to drive from Scotland to the south of England quite regularly in a long range model 3. It so say had a range of 300 miles, in reality it was less than that but still perfectly adequate. The focus I feel needs to be on reducing the cost of realistic range batteries, we don't all need 300 miles when most of us only drive 30 a day. For the odd day thst we do it's cheaper to just hire a car with more range or take the train.
That is well said. I changed 2 years ago my petrol car to 28kWh Ioniq Electric. Also I had to change my mental position; not to pick car for 1% need, but look that other 99% need - which is less than 50km/day. And classic Ioniq can do it without any problems, even with Finnish winter. And for longer trips, just take a train or just plan a bit more and enjoy the trip, not just the destination. ;)
The perfect solution would be to have modular battery packs that you can add or remove based on the how much range your need. This will help reduce weight for shorter trips, which improves the range for the smaller battery. When you need to go out of town on a longer trip, grab all the batteries you can to have the maximum range available. The next step for this scenario would be to have battery swap stations where you leave your depleted battery modules and take fully charged batteries. This is already a think with electric scooters in Asia, but with some ingenuity, we could find solutions for the bigger, heavier car batteries. Maybe have a permanent battery pack that can handle a day of city driving and the rest are swappable battery modules.
@@kayvak7267 Cars with battery swapping system already exists. At least Norway has already few of those, just look for video from Bjorn Nyland; "Nio ES8 battery swap at Vestby, Norway"
@dingopisscreek You're looking at around an hour charging for a drive that distance. Would take about 10hrs. I would stop twice minimum l, once for breakfast and once for lunch. Half hour each stop would be enough to top up the car to complete the journey. You would only then need further stops for the loo without charging. Most people would do this with an ice car too.
Yes, but is it bs about battery fires? Or bs that battery packs are expensive to repair or replace after a minor collision. You might be wiser to to contact the car insurance companies to see what EVs they will provide cover for and the premium charged. It seems slightly silly to buy a battery EV and then fork out huge premiums on top of. You might review the way "you" evaluate EVs.
@@ElectricCarAustralia Hmm ... you appear to be slightly simple in your outlook. Allow me to enlighten you so you might understand the way things are on the internet. If Robert, say, sets out his stall for us to pick over then the context is open to scrutiny is it not? Nobody is going to simply swallow everything wholesale without question are they. Ditto the comments from other posters ... that content is subject to question too. If, as the case may be, you, say, disagree with counter comments then why not explain why you disagree. To simply declare those who question posters as trolls is a tad silly. It would indicate that you, say, are not really into questioning comments ... which leads me to wonder if you are capable of critical thinking. Whether "you" understand the situation or not is immaterial. Battery EVs are merely a step on the way for personal transport, as in its evolution. Horse, (camels?) horse and cart, steam, electric, petrol and diesel, LPG and back to electric again. We now see hydrogen fuel cells and latterly hydrogen combustion via re-engineered ICE We see ways of manufacturing, storing and transporting hydrogen evolving at ever increasing rates. Why, because the ultimate aim is to reduce the production of exhaust gases from burning fossil fuels so as to arrest the rate of global warming. Global warming is predicted to melt all the planetary ice which will alter the coastlines and oblige billions of people to move to higher land or perhaps live on interconnected rafts in the "new" littoral areas. Google is your friend should you wish to know more. Ergo, question everything you read, see or hear ref battery EVs being the pinnacle of personal transport. Robert knows all this anyway and for the moment appears to have dropped his "seminars" involving three old blokes believing themselves to be "mythbusters". Regrettably for Robert he doesn't appear to have the technical education to avoid such nonsense as storage heating and heaters. Neither does Imogen , say, when it comes to explaining how aforementioned storage heaters are super efficient. Hope that helps.
So basically, by 2025-2030, if manufacturers are clever, use marketing correctly and governments educate the masses properly, we should have EVs with semi-solid state LMFP batteries with the anode spiked with silicon, that will weigh 30%-40% less for a similar or slightly improved energy density. That’s truly just what we need. 😊 As I have said before, most current EVs already have a range and charging power that are largely sufficient for any family or individual. You can already drive for 1.5-2.5 hours at motorway speed without stopping. By rapid charging only the amount of energy required to reach your next destination, the breaks aren’t usually very long. 12 minutes on average for me with an Ioniq 28kWh that would normally require 20 minutes to charge 15-94%. These battery improvements will simply hopefully increase EVs efficiency and reduce the amount of materials needed to build the battery pack and EVs in general, making the whole thing even more sustainable. Which is all that matters really.
As a former firefighter I thought he glossed over the risks of EV fires. An EV fire is hot, can't be extinguished and produces very toxic smoke. An ICE car fire is much cooler, easily extinguished using conventional methods and the smoke is much less toxic. The consequences of an EV fire are much greater even if the frequency is less.
Maybe a car fire involving small fuel tanks, in accessable places is easier to control, but when a gas/petrol tanker ruptures the devastation is enormous, and when a whole train of liquid fuel derails ...
@@DrakeN-ow1im We are talking about car fires. A lithium ion battery fire is 2,000 °C or 3,600 °F where as a gasoline car fire can get to 900 °C or 1,600 °F and gasoline fires can be extinguished using conventional techniques such as foam and water. EV battery fires can't be extinguished, you can try cool them, with enough time and water the fire will be suspended but they can and do reignite. The Finns are developing a brine cooled to -40 that is injected in the battery case for fighting EV fires on ships. We don't have that yet. EV fires are no joke, petroleum based fires are easier to fight.
What was not discussed about sodium ion was charge speed. Charge speed is such and important factor. If it sodium charges faster (It was not discussed) ....energy density is less important, because we really can stop for "gas" occasionally on longer trips. Incremental improvements in these factors add up to huge changes in affordability of real practical EVs
Yes, if you're in the car, you have time to get out, but if the car is in a car park (such as the recent airport fire) or in your garage, the burning battery provides toxic fumes and an intense heat source that may cause nearby vehicles or buildings to ignite. The battery fire is also hard to put out. Lithium battery fires seem to be very frequent because the batteries are so ubiquitous. Airlines have become paranoid about people dropping their phone down the side of the seat (understandably, because a fire in an aircraft is a much bigger problem than in a car). The other consideration with car batteries is that they are being carried around at high speed and may be crushed in an accident. With respect to range, all the examples quoted were northern hemisphere. In Australia, there's a lot of situations where a longer range than current EVs is either desirable or necessary. Having said that, the vast majority of travel is locally within cities where a huge range isn't required. Better public transport would help to reduce the need for long drives. I really think there needs to be more emphasis on public transport. If people can conveniently travel those long distances in efficient and affordable public transport, taking a car makes less sense. At the moment for Australia, a lot of people would prefer a hybrid EV where they can use electricity for the short trips and only use petrol for the occasional weekend trip or holiday. Given the time to charge an EV, I just can't see public charging infrastructure being practical for long distances if 100% of the cars were electric. Maybe the solution for zero carbon emissions for those situations is a battery/hydrogen hybrid? Toyota already has hydrogen ICE test vehicles.
Agree on public transport- when it is good, like it is here in Europe, it often becomes the preferred choice. But regarding the hybrids- those are the most likely to catch fire (per number of vehicles sold), while BEVs very rarely do (you can google the numbers). But for EVs, you can go with LiFePO4 battery which does not even even burn. I believe Sodium Ion does not burn either, and both are just fine for city cars. As for hydrogen cars- those are very energy inefficient, plus hydrogen is difficult to store. We should probably already forget hydrogen for cars, go full BEVs, and only go hydrogen for agricultural use (making ammonia), with secondary use of both hydrogen or ammonia as fuel for things like sea shipping.
@@NeblogaiLT why should a PHEV be more likely to catch fire than a BEV if the battery tech is the same? If the risk is due to the presence of an ICE, it's no less acceptable than an ICE car but with lower emissions. Why shouldn't they be able to take advantage of the same chemistry? I'm not sure of the numbers around inefficiency which you're claiming for hydrogen. The future waste and recycling steam is a massive problem if you want to convert everything to BEV. Hydrogen is simpler and cleaner. You can also fill a hydrogen tank in a reasonable amount of time, while BEVs take too long to charge. You ignored my point that in countries like Australia (and the USA frankly), BEV ranges are much harder to work with except for travel within suburbia. So sure, for suburban use and general use where you have a decent charging infrastructure and decent public transport, it might work. BEV adoption is still relatively low, and competition for working chargers is already problematic. Convert everyone to BEV and it's going to be really hard to make public charging infrastructure work without a major change in battery charge times and range. As I said previously, for countries where long trips are much more common, PHEV provides a better transition than BEV. I just can't see BEV being practical for people living on farms a hundred kilometres from the nearest town and without access to grid power. What about the diesel trucks and trains that move everything around? BEV won't replace them on current technology. It's going to have to be a transition, not a wholesale jump to BEV.
Do you want to see how many fumes and flames you get out of a petrol or diesel fire. And in any case, there are plenty of other things in a standard vehicle that will burn very nicely. It’s not like an aircraft where everything has to be certified nonflammable.
@@ouethojlkjn not the point. The heat and intensity of a lithium battery fire is enough to set off a chain reaction of fires in adjacent cars in a car park. I understand that current advice for an EV fire is just let it burn itself out. Sure there's plenty of fumes from any vehicle fire, but not the quantity and toxicity of a lithium battery fire. Don't get me wrong - I think EVs are the future. I'm just not convinced about the safety of current lithium battery technology.
@@theharper1 Put it another way, I have just invented this amazing contraption that uses gallons and gallons of highly flammable liquid, which is squirted into a chamber and induced to do a controlled explosion. The hope being that it remains controlled. As a bonus, we will put the tank where all this combustible fluid it stored under the rear seat where the kids sit. Genius!!! The real culprit for most vehicle fires are 12v batteries, that have more than enough kick in them to start a very healthy and vigorous fire. Usually in the engine bay where they reside but any part of the circuit will do. Hence all the fuses in the fuse box. Finally, the frequency of Battery Electric vehicle fires is still proportionately many times less than a petrol or diesel vehicle. If you don't want to be barbequed, get an EV.
We do need batteries a moderate amount longer than the distances we plan to travel in one go, because we and the battery get concerned when charges approach both 0 and 100%. So a Model Y with a 325 mile range will seldom go more than 250 miles before the system really wants you to stop and recharge. So a 1000 mile battery might be good for 700 miles in reality, a great thing for a quick trip from the Bay Area to San Diego, with spare charge to hit the restaurant and the sights before the destination charger at the hotel.
The technology behind 1000 mile electric car batteries can be useful in other applications. It can be used for trucks to make their battery packs more light weight meaning more freight capacity. It can also be used for electric planes to finally become available to the masses. High-speed trains are a nice thing to have, but for some reasons things tend to go wrong with the concrete over leading to ridiculously low mandatory speed limits at crucial parts of the track (like 40km/h at Antwerp or 80 km/h south of Amsterdam instead of 300 km/h). Speaking of trains, I won't be surprised over the long term trains will switch from diesel and electric trains with overhead lines to battery swapping with such improvements of battery technology. Overhead lines need quite a lot of maintenance and its maintenance has to be done over long distances while infrastructure for batteries can be more localized. It's less energy efficient though compared to wires, but when this leads to less downtime and more using less rolling resistance rail over roads, then it can be considered an alternative.
Very good presentation. Remember that 300 mile range isn't that when you have wipers, heaters, lights etc running. Quoted ranges are generally based on an unloaded car in good weather conditions, start using it in the real world & watch the range tumble. Buy the EV range you need for your real world not theoretical lab use.
@@DrakeN-ow1im Quite so. It's as if the car manufacturers lobbied their governments so that they could claim any old bollocks with reference to range and not be done under "trade descriptions". Or have to state that batteries don't last forever and can be recharged at millions of amps ... or can be recycled in domestic power walls which will work for all eternity, or at least until Earth ends up in the photosphere. We once were assured we were going to see million mile batteries ... yet they seem to have vanished. It would seem prudent to take the manufacturers' claims of range and then divide the number by two. And then presume that not all chargers work, or are available, the moment the batteries have to be re-charged. And then not accept the battery on every used EV is in tip top condition.
Mr McTurk downplays the risk of battery fires by looking at ideal situations only, when he should be considering some worst cases like (1) Bad battery & battery management system being made, (2) Unintended damage to the battery, through accidents, bad repair work, misuse, etc., (3) An EV fire being much harder to put out compared to a petrol/diesel car fire.
@@retiredbore378 Some on the internet have said that there are clues indicating that it's a diesel-electric hybrid vehicle, which can explain why the fire was that intense and why it could not be put out by a couple who had seen it while it was still a one vehicle fire (though they appeared to be amateurs at using a fire extinguisher). The government may have the intention to not reveal the truth because they don't want to jeopardise their Switch to EV drive.
Even for long road trips, a 500 mile range care would be more than suitable in the North American market. It's funny that he mentioned Canada, because I actually drove to Alaska this summer up the Alcan, and I was very pleasantly surprised by the number of EV chargers in BC and the Yukon. Once I got to Alaska it was another story, but it just goes to show that even in very remote areas, having good chargers every 100 miles or so is more than enough
Hmm ... it depends on the amount of traffic there is and the number of chargers (working) there are. The Chinese would appear to have "solved" the problem of charging up battery EVs by having a "lot" of coal fired generators. Granted that won't always be the case but the downside is coal powered generating stations are busily generating CO2 (plus other gases you can Google up for yourself) at the same time as generating electricity. And the amount of CO2 produced getting the coal out of the ground and into the generating stations' furnaces and then getting rid of the ash ends up in the atmosphere too. And of course we shouldn't ignore the fact that despite being assured there's sufficient electricity "in the wires" society is being "encouraged" to use electricity for everything else too so we shouldn't delude ourselves there's always going to be enough electrical energy around to drive everything once we get rid of fossil fuels. There again if we find we can get nuclear fusion to work in the next few decades then we might get away with it.
@@t1n4444 In British Columbia and the Yukon our grid is powered by hydroelectricity, so no, the only CO2 is coming from your oil & gas generated tropes. Nice try though...
LiFePO4 is crazy popular with people doing auxiliary battery / rear battery / Dual Battery installs in Pickups and SUV's for camping, tradies recharging tools, inverters on worksites where there's no main power available, RV's, Campers, work trailers, food vans,... The Sodium based technology and it's cost savings is going to be a huge factor in the take up of new products and a move away from Li-Ion and Li-Po in those marketplaces. Li-Po / Graphene will remain the choice of Quadcopter RPV pilots, especially for racing.
My VW Jetta Wagon TDI goes between 550 and 650 miles (890 to 1,050) on one tank of diesel. On my many trips across these United States, I take 5 minute bio-breaks every 2 hours with a 15 minute break to grab a meal. I then either refuel when I stop at night or just before I leave in the morning. Having to stop 2 - 3 times enroute at ca. 1 - 2 hours to recharge would add several hours to the driving day and end up making me either drive longer each day or add at least an extra 1 to 2 days to my trip. Remember the entire continent of Europe is 4 million square miles (10.4 square kilometers) compared to the 3.8 million square miles (9.9 square kilometers) of these United States.
On the 1000mi battery there is also the 80/20 rule. If we tackle the 80% (probably more like 90%) of car usage with 300-400mi battery the remaining use cases can quite easily keep on using diesel until the charging infrastructure catches up. Also auto-change or quick switch batteries would do away with a lot more problems that come to infrastructure. Charging batteries at off-peak should be absolutely central to the whole system, but it can only happen if law dictates that an EV must have for example 30% of the battery capacity quickly or automatically changeable. At the moment I think there are a few manufacturers doing their own thing, which is insane. Go to any car factory or any factory and you see robotic arms that can do millimetre level things at 1000kg weights. So have a "universal slot" either on the bottom or back of the vehicle that enable 10-30kWh of battery change in seconds of minutes is, not only possible, but would be the game changer. This would also reduce the worry of buying an EV as "the next battery tech, is just around the corner". We just need a common standard, which is hard to get as companies like Tesla etc. all are doing the Apple model of planned obsolescence, with all sorts of built-in batteries and proprietary charging plug and infrastructures.
Yes, but, have you factored in the number of "spare" batteries required to allow this easily changed battery switcheroo thing? Or the amount of energy required to recharge millions of these spare batteries on a "just in case" basis. We don't hear much about that from the "battery switching" industry.
Hi from rural Canada where it gets to -40c for a few months.... Yes!! We do need 1000 mile batteries. That's like 600 miles for me for 3 months of the year. The nearest city to where I live in 200. Btw... I have an EV for 3 years now. I just have to be patient and plan right. Plus I have a ICE for extreme winter conditions
One thing I've noticed since having my EV in the last 5 few months is a mile is not a mile. A mile on the motorway or in the mountains is not the same as a flat A/b road. So a 500 mile range battery will probably give me the same full petrol tank range that I had in my mini (300 miles). my car has a WLTP range of 220 miles which gives me about 100 ish miles motorway driving and more than covers my daily needs. What concerns me most is battery depletion for a given number of charge cycles. I kept my mini for 8 years and it still had all the range available to me. I hope that replacement battery pack will also come down in price over time or there may be many EV's in good condition being scrapped because of the batter state.
About the long range: I am still a fan of the idea of using small batteries in the daily life and stacking up for the journey to Italy. The gas stations will need a new business model, they could provide fully charged batteries, which I take on on my way to the Autobahn, drive 900 km with only 2 stops, arrived in Italy, I give the big battery to a gas station, and vice versa on the way back. Such a system would save so much battery material and weight and thus, energy. We only () would need the car manufacturers to design their cars around a very small amount of different batteries. Where did we see such a system before? - With lead batteries.
As a Canadian I can tell you that you don't need to drive north to be 1,000 miles without a charge point. Ottawa to Winnipeg is over 2,000 km in hilly terrain, Calgary to Vancouver is 1,000 km through the Rockies. An EV with a 1,000 mile range isn't so crazy here.
EV fire is currently a low-probability, high-consequence scenario. Where the consequences can be extremely large if things go wrong in the first place. As the owner and user of a lovely MG4 Luxury/Trophy, it is sad to see EV evangelists suppressing how dangerous a battery fire can be when the consequences of a battery fire can potentially be enormous. Admittedly, there is currently a low statistical risk of an EV catching fire (statistical material for fires in EVs versus ICEs is too small for us to know what the risk is over time). But keeping quiet about the consequences of an EV fire, and especially in the case of a fire in batteries with extremely toxic cobalt where the fumes only need to come into contact with skin to cause serious poisoning, is reprehensible. Stop minimizing the consequences of a battery fire and let people make their decisions as well informed as possible about the risks and consequences. Not least how to reduce possible consequences if the accident were to occur is important to get out to most people. I am very happy with my EV, but I know what the consequences of a fire can be, when the probability of a fire is greatest, and how I can reduce the risk of major consequential damage in the event of a fire. Why deny ordinary people this knowledge?
An excellent program. When can we expect to see LMFP batteries in cars? Some time ago I read they would be in cars in early 2024 - but I haven't heard any more. Please provide an updated battery development program annually. Thank you.
2:55 “the chance of the gasses reaching the cabin are infinitesimally small”. Meanwhile, there is a Jeep 4xe recall for this exact situation as the rear floor is the top of the battery and it is designed to vent in to the cabin. Designed. They knew
Great episode! Good thing that batteries already are more than good enough for many times more users than global production capacity can supply for. Better batteries are very welcome, but supply is far from catching up with potential demand where battery power already is better than current alternatives. So, what's currently most important is to get cheaper and faster and more battery production. The sooner batteries can start to replace combustion in more applications the better, obviously, but the overall transition isn't kept back by a lack of battery technology that is good enough. The most probable reason to not have an opportunity to charge a road vehicle for a thousand miles just a few years from now is that practically no one else drives that route, that also means that issue will remain relevant only for a ridiculously small minority.
Brilliant video. Our current available Li-Ion battery technologies are perfectly adequate for our driving needs. The problem is with our resistance to change and anti-EV lobby (big-oil). Development is welcome but not absolutely necessary. Adequate Ccharging Infrastructure is vital.
We need different battery chemistries and battery formats for different purposes- small city cars don't need range and fast charging, sports cars need battery thermal stability and so on. So it's nice to see that all companies are not sticking to the same formula of future sustainable transport 😊❤
I couldn’t disagree more that 1000 mile battery is niche market… this technology can drive the biggest switch to ev’s as it would make them more convenient that ICE’s for anyone without a driveway charger and remove the need for chargers on every street corner as the owner would be good for one fast charge per month.
I couldn’t disagree more that 1000 mile battery is needed for the mass market for switching to EVs. Hauling that extra battery weight only hurts energy efficiency, adds extra wear to roads, and costs a lot. What we need is cheap and widely available charging, and cheap city EVs. 150-200km range is sufficient if you can always leave the car to charge at your job parking space, or at a shopping center. Such cars could cost less than €15k, as cost is the main obstacle to the switch, and battery is the main cost. Plus production can be scaled up fast, without putting 10x pressure on the battery supply chain, like 1000-mile batteries would.
I would argue that a "1000 mile battery" isn't necessarily the concept of a battery reaching a prescribed distance, but one that is of limited volume to fit in the dimensions of a car to theoretically hit that distance ie the key to that point in the energy density side. This breaks down to not a 1000 mile battery per se but an energy dense battery that can be shrunk thus taking up much less space and weight within the vehicle addressing the big issue with all EV's currently. A smaller energy dense battery that can reduce weight causes a feedback resulting in increased range due to lugging around less weight. As seen with the Mercedes EQXX, properly designing cars to be more efficient by designing from the ground up rather than retrofitting existing designs can result in range gains on current technology. One standout thing was the removal of rapid charging. Doing so meant the large heatsinks of cooling while charging wasn't required further reducing weight and increasing range. this increase in efficiency meant that a home charger was able to add the same range as a rapid charger per min of charging. I should expand and say Yes, I 100% completely agree that charging network needs expanded and based on current technology that should be the priority over the edge cases of a 1000mile EV. Based on everything I do agree that a car with a 1000 mile range isn't useful, but an energy dense battery that can be shrunk would greatly help on the charging network expansion and potential strain on the grid that rapid charging is going to bring. There is also the notion that cars sitting can supply power to the grid to help balance it (something I'm not sold on for various reasons) and something a "1000 mile battery" would actually be a solution to address some of those concerns I have. Overall fantastic interview, definitely learnt a lot I didn't know about batteries and where everything is going. It's a lot more complicated than x vs y that marketing would have you believe as there appears to be X+Y+Z vs A+B+Y+Z options.
I do so love experiencing a true expert at work. Euan cantering through an idiots guide to all these different options at pace but with the depth of knowledge to bring it to life. Like watching a concert orchestra or consummate actor etc. Brilliant
Well said.😀
Yes, it was really nicely done. Thorough and understandable. Kudos!
Loving the detail. I feel like a video like this should be made every year to keep up with developments.
Says Paul Clarke the Virtue Signaller 🤨
My thoughts precisely. The way each topic was described should allay the FUDding coming from information with an agenda. There I am thinking about the LiPO cells for my first drone, puffing wildly after 20 cycles. Another great video by Imogen and the Fully Charged team.
I love Euan McTurk, he has a massive understanding of all things battery, but he makes it simple to understand. Someone that knows his subject and can explain it is just amazing. Interesting information and small tweaks to the battery technology is adding miles to our use. Thank you.
What is needed more than a 1,000 mile battery are charging stations with clean, well maintained washrooms. Trying to find a bush to hide behind at a charging station is just not providing the service that is required. Canada, especially western Canada, is extremely remiss in this regard. Even most of the gas stations have poorly maintained washrooms.
You are absolutely correct and it perplexes me it took this long for travel centers and convenience stores to start adopting charges. It's definitely moving in that direction now, but they(charging companies) should have been making deals from the beginning. Maybe it was a chicken and egg thing, but now we have essentially all the major players jumping on board, at least in the States. Canada's a bit trickier because you guys have an awful lot of open land up there and sometimes big gaps in services. Dog River needs a charging station.
With enough CCS rapid charges for the number of cars that need to charge and A PLACE TO BUY A COFFEE! Honestly, put a coffee shop in and it will probably cover the cost of the electricity. Why is this so hard for the UK?!?! Other countries have done it!
@@ellieban I agree and that is exactly how gas stations work today. They typically only make between 2 to 8 cents per gallon of gas profit. The bigger profits are from people buying things in there shops. The margins on those items are usually in the 25 to 50 percent margin, which is were they actually make their profits, not gas.
I think that combining a charging station along common routes like Interstate highways where you can stop for a charge, get lunch or a doughnut and coffee would make sense. But also at common places where you spend time when you stop like grocery stores, libraries, movies and other service areas could be a value-added feature for those places and a little extra income for the business.
Not seeing the changes at convenience stores here in Arkansas either.
Well said Euan and Imogen! Refreshing to hear such clarity spoken about the underlying sciences, engineering, and societal/application challenges. Factual and informative 👏
This video is an excellent overview of battery chemistry and research. Imogen asks the important questions, with no fluff or side trips. Dr McTurk does a fantastic job, with accurate and very clear and understandable answers. Hats off to Dr. McTurk and the Fully Charged Team!
Canadian here. Good point on how much easier it is to install charging infrastructure than develop a 1000 mile battery. That said, a battery that could do 600km in -30 degree weather would be a game changer for remote areas. I’m hoping that ONE’s Gemini will get us there.
Or perhaps only instal half of that 1000 mile battery. If it’s one of the advanced chemistries that battery would make for a lighter and more manoeuvrable car.
Given that the majority of journeys don't need that range, perhaps the answer is to rent an additional battery that goes in the trunk? Or simply just rent a long range vehicle for those occasional trips.
Of course there will be a minority of folk who regularly drive 600km, but the market can look to support them.
I think that everyone in the EV industry is missing the point when they say we don't need 1000 mile battery and we can just charge in our breaks. The fact is that here in the UK, it costs typically 10 TIMES more to charge at a public charging point than to charge at home on a cheap overnight tariff. I, and many other EV owners here, would love a 1000 mile range, so if I am away for several days, I can do the whole trip without being ripped off at public charging points, and then charge up again cheaply when I get home. Using public charge points, it is often more expensive that it would be to put fuel in a petrol or diesel car.
We need long range (1000km) batteries here in Australia.
and it would have to fully charge in mins not hours.
Euan's point right towards the end of the video was by far the most important. A charging network is always going to be infinitely more important than range itself - in the same way that it doesn't matter if your car's got a small petrol tank because you just fill up a couple times. Charges at destinations plus solving the mystery of chargers for those without driveways is the biggest hurdle.
In 2023 16.3% of the ~2million new car sales were BEV. If the government wants to achieve its 2035 target of 100% zero emission vehicles then we will have a lot more electric vehicles on the road.
Until we get to the point where either range and destination charging undermine the need for mass volume en route charging stations, or charging times are closer in parity to refuelling an ICE vehicle, we would need a completely unsustainable number of en route chargers.
This is neither practical nor desirable. The bigger push in my mind needs to be a focus on range, destination charging and fast-charging speeds.
@@lordmord8378 If you can get a full charge in less than 10 minutes, then we can just turn petrol stations into chargers...problem solved as it would be like normal.
Euan talks so much sense, let’s stop seeking the maximum range possible and factor in what endurance the driver has, and then when we have our Wizz break, it’ll have sufficient range when we get back in the driver seat.
no he doesnt, quoted statistics have no references to studies. Comments on 1000 mile battery not needed, for many perhaps not, but some countries yes. Plus the transition to EV would be easier if the need to fill up every 250 - 300 miles wasnt a requirement, this would reduce the need for public charging, which appears to be an issue in many many places.
As a caravan enthusiast, where towing a caravan will typically halve the range of an EV, it is essential to have 5-600 mile ranges (250 - 300 with caravan). Also charging stations which accommodate cars with trailers.
@@retiredbore378no stress we already have the appropriate solution.
@@0Ausyes, so do i, a diesel with a 650 mile range, either my campervan diesel that can tow 350 miles or so, for a 7.5 metre 4 berth fixed bed, or my Mercedes E Class diesel, that can do the same. Petrol stations are designed properly as well, to re-fuel in through put quickly and efficiently and in the dry. EV's are just an inferior product doomed to the dust bin of history, along with betamax tape recorders, the same as the time wasting, unreliable and poorly designed charging infrastructure.
@@stevezodiac491 my solution is a diesel vehicle.
As for range
Additional fuel.
My current touring vehicle is good for 2600 kilometres.
No battery car will carry 5.6t across Australia.
@@retiredbore378 you say niche, lol not in Australia.
@@retiredbore378 how's Detroit looking??😀
Can't beat a thorough explanation by the Prof & somehow even numpties like me can more or less understand it😁
Nice job guys 👍
My view is that 1000 mile battery is not needed in any use case. Here in North America, we focus a lot on trucks that travel long distances without stopping, but the reality is that if the fuel, i.e. electricity, is significantly cheaper than diesel, there is a good economic argument that stopping for a recharge is not an issue. I would pay the driver for the 30-60 minutes in exchange for the lower cost. Furthermore, stopping more often would be better for the drivers and for road safety. That is so true that it's the law in many countries.
Anything more than 300 miles is reaching a point of diminishing returns for anything other than over-the-road truckers. In fact, given the choice of over 300 miles, I would rather stop at 300 and trade the extra battery for a roomier, lighter, cheaper vehicle.
@@getoffamylan6844 Depends on what you do. I travel all over England and Wales filming EFL football matches. I have to arrive at a specific time and cannot risk being late so I dare not take the risk that I wouldn't be able to find a vacant charging station that is working then spend God knows how long waiting to charge an EV. I currently drive an estate car that when fully filled up gives me a range of 650 miles.
Also not forgetting that a large enough EV car with a long enough range that can take my equipment and passengers would probably cost at least 2 or 3 times what I paid for my current car. And before anyone comes on and says driving long distances I need to stop then I do for short breaks but the driving is done by 2 of us.
So at the moment EVs are not a solution for me.
The problem is the EV truck starts out with 300 miles of theoretical range but it is cut in half as soon as you hitch a trailer up to it. That is why people want a 500+ range EV truck as the starting range
I now know more about battery chemistry than I could possibly ever need. Great video!
Being misinformed is worse than being uninformed. (The people running this channel are both.)
@@glorfification What was wrong on this vid? Euan knows his stuff and I didn't see anything incorrect in what he said. Some significant simplifications, but that's fair enough for this audience. People can watch 'The Limiting Factor' if they want more detailed battery info in video form.
@@glorfification I am reading your words. You are saying glorification is misinformed and uninformed. I agree.
@@xxwookey glorification is a troll. Just looking to start an argument.
@@glorfification Think your comment missed a few words there. Should be ... "The people running this channel are trying to avoid both situations"
Great video. This should be revisited once a year or every other year to see what's new. We may not have anything new to discuss since battery technology seems to stay in the development phase for so long. Hopefully something exciting happens.
Love it - Euan talking pure facts
Love the term “dwell time”. Those obsessing with long-haul truck range often ignore the fact that mandated rests are required of all truck drivers. In Europe, it is 4.5 hours, in Australia, with much greater distances involved, it is 5.5 hours, and in the U.S., it is 8 hours. The range of the Tesla Semi is 500 miles. It will be no coincidence that this just accommodates 8 hours of driving nicely. The speed of charging is also very relevant. The Australian mandated rest after 5.5 hours is just 15 minutes, so voila, the proposed truck Megachargers can poke in almost 200 miles in the “dwell time”. Incidentally, refuelling a diesel truck is considered to be driving time.
Great video. Nice to hear some clear explanations of the chemistry involved and the benefits of each one.
longest range needed: 250 miles (400 kms), on the highway 20-80, so 400 miles 0-100%, 3 to 4 hour drive, with 1 hour pauze to recharge, eat, rest and go to the bathroom for travel. Also makes for one week range in most drivers everyday use. 50 miles per day is more then 80% of the people need.
That way, vehicles can stay light and affordable, and a light vehicle will use less energy.
I kind of agree. But the ranges should be ACTUAL ranges, and not what they tell you, because that doesn't hold up.
Please provide references for some of the statistics like “EV batteries are 20-60 times less likely to catch fire than ICE”.
This must be based on a study. Being able to reference a study really helps when trying to correct people making false statements about EV safety.
Thanks again for all the great work.
I am all for EV's, but anecdotal evidence points to that statistic being misleading. I would love to see the percentage data on EV fires to EV's on the road vs ICE Fires to ICE vehicles on the road.
not to mentioned EV fires, despite what the interviewee said, are particularly nasty.
The current battery technology using liquid electrolyte, is just not up to the task at the scale required for vehicles.
I think it is also just based on statistics.
companies that manages big fleets of vehicles, insurance companies - they like to make statistics.
And it is not that uncommon for a ICE vehicle to go up in fire, even though we almost never hear about it. And think about it, the motors get a lot hotter, there is actual fire and explosions out there, and besides the gas, there are other flammable things, and maybe the maintenance, isn't always the best. It is impressive it is as uncommon as it is after all.
But sources are always good, specially if you have to convince someone that really don't want to listen to reason.
@@KrydolphIf somebody does not want to listen to reason: they will hold their beliefs MORE STRONGLY in response to facts and figures.
The human mind is weird. Is suspect the issue is that changing your mind on a subject may require a lot of re-evaluation. It is easier to just double-down.
The Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency (MSB) has a study on this. I'd share a link but it won't let me. Pretty easy to find using a search engine though. Just search for "EV 20 times less likely to catch fire".
Fire information is available online for EV, Hybrid , and ICE vehicles for the UK.
I have seen many ICE vehicle fires, but not one EV .
Put this dude in charge of power. He is brilliant and so informative I’ve learnt stuff and I’m in my 50’s.
What a refreshing piece of entertainment. Calm and informative with a wee bit of fun. Thanks.
Fascinating! Euan is a great communicator and it's so nice to be treated to a video that doesn't patronise. And some nice shots of Oxford into the bargain!
Loving the intro. Having started creating my own content recently I can’t help but notice how a video goes together. How it’s entertaining, while getting the message across. It was nice to summarise the progress we have made so far with battery tech. . .
I know there is a lot of work involved in getting these videos out. So thank you
it's not the frequency of fire that matter, but their incredible intensity, the lack of forerunner signals, the difficulty to put out electrical fires and don't forget the far from friendly fumes. A death trap that works less often, but when it works .. oh boy...
Errmmm Luton airport !! As Euan states if you watch the video those infrequent EV fires, if significant are SLOW burns not whooomppff - time to walk away
Yeah, this video avoids discussing how difficult it is to put out an EV fire by talking about the small odds of it occurring.
Even low-frequency events DO occur, and I know the Phoenix, AZ Fire Dept. has talked about getting a shipping container half full of sand, dropping the burning EV into it, and then filling it with water and leaving it for a day just to ensure that the fire is really, completely, OUT. Apparently a number of “extinguished” EV fires re-kindled when being towed away from the roadside or sitting in junk yards. This is a legitimate concern that shouldn’t be dismissed with “it hardly ever happens”.
If EV fires were such an uncommon incidence; why are EVs expensive to insure?
Really good to see Euan on Fully Charged!
Some amazing new battery tech coming.
I love hearing Imogen trying to say 'polysulphide', making a hash of it, but keeping going without a pause. What a trooper! Thanks for the excellent and informative interview. 🙂👍
Great video. Absolutely fascinating.
Amazing episode, very informative, very positive and with nice vision for future. Thanks!
What would be really helpful is a running chart or spreadsheet comparing the different compositions of materials and their relative aspects of size, weight, density, etc.
Love listening to you and Euan. Great video! Super informative and very interesting to see what’s coming next. 👍
The Bane of being an EV enthusiast is having to watch a diagram of how a battery works every time a new development is announced.
maybe we need a standalone "how a battery works" episode to point people towards 🧐
If only someone would invent a skip button.
@@fullychargedshow You think that people who understand every part of a car somehow don't know about batteries? Cars with combustion engines also have batteries. You learned something new today.
@@fullychargedshowworth it, yes.
Yeah, cos we so need a few more seconds of Dr. Wee Jock McSporen and his dodgy background...
Awesome content. I love Imogen's shows. She can always present the most complex topics in a straightforward and understandable way. You rock Imogen!!
Excellent summary of today's battery tech and what we may be seeing tomorrow.
Note also that grid/home batteries can benefit from a broader range of technologies, not just chemistries: Redox flow, thermal (water or salt based), etc. The Dutch (Triple Solar, Borg Energy Storage) especially seem to be focusing on cheap and efficient water-based solutions, mostly for heat storage and restitution, not electricity generation, with solar thermal panels, heat pumps, 7-day autonomy 4 m³ tanks, etc.
We can also convert heat into electricity in summer, as solar heat production would be much higher than what's needed in winter for central heating. If using hybrid thermal+photovoltaic panels, that would also cool down the panels and make them more efficient.
This presentation is best example I have seen on the difference between battery chemistries. Thanks
In my country what I need is guaranteed (cold weather, heater on, lights on) 400 km range and up to 10 fast chargers distributed evenly. And charge points at destination is a must I believe. It would make life so much easier for people who don't have garage.
Sodium for static storage is what we need enmasse
Really interesting informative episode, that guy really knows his stuff! 😎 Thanks for continuing to educate me FC! 🤩
Many thanks - 24 minutes of all you need to know. Withe the physical chemistry nicely explained.
The elephant in the room though, regarding EV fires that was carefully not mentioned was the fact that yes, batteries don't do the explosive boom of petrol, but once they do catch on fire they're the devils own job to put out.
Portable water dams.
The most flammable is actually NCA, not NMC. But NMC and NCA aren't too far apart from each other whereas LiFePO4 (LFP) is in the weeds in terms of temperature rise rate during a failure. LFP is easily 100x safer than any other mainstream lithium chemistry.
So I'm rather thankful that the 10 kWh of battery storage I have up in my attic is LFP based. 🙂
@@GreenJimll I've got a similar amount sitting in the garage, newly upgraded to 16s, but I have them in two sets of two batteries, each set on an Anderson quick disconnect with a pull rope. So if I need to pull them out of the garage all I have to do is pull hard on the rope and they will disconnect as they get pulled out. No messing with bolts or screw terminals in an emergency 😞
Not sure I would trust any lithium battery chemistry in my attic. On the other-hand, I do have a number of singular batteries sitting in my office for testing purposes. Easily man-handled, and there is a door right there to an outside deck, but no pull ropes or quick disconnects so that could be a bit problematic if something goes wrong.
-Matt
Only Tesla use NCA in large quantities and their fire incidence is only .01%.
Good content.
It’s encouraging to hear about new developments with an accessible explanation.
Thank you 😊
A brilliant video! What a clever bloke.
As long as the next gen batteries can do 250 miles on the motorway in winter, I do not need any more range. If it takes 30 minutes to charge from 10-80% in 30 minutes that is as fast as I need, that is about the same as loo break and coffee in a motorway service station. If the battery is also lighter and cheaper then that is a double win.
As for home battery storage - sodium ion seems the way forward
Aptera will eventually provide the range we all need through enhanced efficiency. The 400 mile version will be the first one produced, most likely in late 2024, then the 250 mile version, then the 600 and 800 mile versions.
Impressive analysis of battery chemistry - I’m glad Imogen understands it. 😊👏👏
The issue is not if they go on fire or not, it's what happens if they get caught up in a fire even if they are not the origin of the fire. Lithium Ion batteries pose a particular problem for fire departments because the battery itself can manufacture oxygen during the fire process ,exothermically. This is why car ferries are banning EVs, when ev's are caught up in a fire like on a car ferry they are impossible to extinguish at sea or almost impossible.
Oh yeah? Let's get the crew of the Freemantle Highway on here. See what they have to say.
Battery technology is always improving and will get better
There is a reason of why there are needed vehicles for personal use with long range capabilities and it is that currently existing ICE vehicles have such a long range.
People are afraid of changes and specially when changes offer what they consider worse features. Those can be irrational fears, but they exist.
However, in some cases, those fears are not that irrational. Meanwhile I totally agree with the conclusions of this video, you are not considering that in many places people have no possibility to have a home charger, just because they do not have a private parking space!!!
For example, here in Spain most of the population live in flats, and a huge percentage are on old buildings with limited number of parking places and even without any at all.
For those people, that park on the streets, the fact that their car has a long range means they do not have to worry on refueling/charging with high frequency, neither with urgency, and that makes a real difference while the fast charging infrastructure scales up.
And even when the infrastructure exists, the fact of finding the charging spot and leaving the car in a place for an hour (or several hours) for a full recharge once a week makes a huge difference vs doing the same process two or three times a week.
In my case it’s perfect. We have two EVs, home charger and even solar panels. But for some of my friends an EV, with the existing technology and infrastructure, would just over complicate their lives and I totally understand that.
We don't need 1,000 mile petrol or diesel tanks in our cars, even if we're planning a very long journey, because refuelling is not a problem. So the same would go for electric-powered cars if the infrastructure is there. 500 miles is fine, I think.
Realistically: Most of the drivers will come out of less than 50Km a day for their regular commuting needs. In no way will a 1000Km car be needed other than for Taxis, Uber, or other professional appliances like that. And for the most part, EV's are not set to be charged, they're set to be always charging. There won't be miracles. If you have the ability to charge your EV at home or at work, great. An EV is the best outfit for you. If that's not the case, await till there are those conditions. If you are a top professional with tons of daily distances needed, so await till there are cars that make those distances.
Campervan people can easily use 1000 mile batteries, not because they need to go 1000 miles in one go, but because they also use the battery for cooking, cooling, gadgets, heating, and e-bike charging, especially when staying off-grid. Heating particularly uses a lot of kWh without radical changes in the insulation levels and amount of glass in current vehicles. PV can help with this, but only the equivalent of a few miles/day.
Food truck people too. Food trucks typically (in the US) are surrounded by a fog of exhaust either for the truck or for gas-powered a generator. And they tote around LNP canisters. A battery big enough to just go a few miles then COOK, with no exhaust, would make healthier, more pleasant eating.
@@tomp4944 Good point. I wonder how many kWh/day a food truck uses? Induction cooking uses half the energy of gas cooking, and is typically something like 1kWh per day for camper-grade cooking (one or two rings for maybe 30 mins). A food truck may do 5-10 hours at several kW so could easily use 30kWh/day and maybe more. They probably don't travel very far normally so the current typical 50-60kWh battery should work for many cases.
@@xxwookey WOW, that's good information. I assumed the electrical needs would be higher. That's completely doable. I'm assuming as soon as fully electric food trucks arrive, health departments will suddenly notice the toxic fumes we take for granted today and make it hard for food trucks to not be electric.
0:17 Did y'all forget about the Lucid Air, capable of 520 miles?
1000 mile range batteries will be good for pick-up trucks, as towing cannibalises range. But, as mentioned, charging infrastructure is vital.
RIP John Goodenough; he was my professor at UT Austin.
Nobody is disputing that EVs are less likely to catch fire, however, when they do they are almost impossible to extinguish unlike ICE cars.
I was involved with the fire service this year including a trip to an underground road tunnel to see what happens if there is an accident involving fire. ICE fire they can deal with, EV fires not so! So yes EV unlikely to catch fire, but when they do you have a MASSIVE problem.
Another not so green thing is that EVs are written off so easily due to the expensive battery and that it’s usually part of the structure and costs approximately 1/3rd of the price of the car. So if a new car is £60k the battery is £20k. Say 3 years later, car is worth £40k (probably less) and is involved in an accident with battery damage. Battery is still £20k plus labour plus any other parts damaged in the crash so car is highly likely to be written off. Add to this that car body shops are being advised to store damaged EVs with a 15m (sure it is 15m) clear radius many body shops are refusing to take in EVs. EV insurance is escalating due to these issues.
I am NOT anti electric vehicles, but they are not the only answer and not suitable for everyone! For myself a self charging hybrid is perfect, better than diesel economy without so many horrible emissions. Plus I bought a 3 year old vehicle that I intend to keep for many many years.
I feel that EVs are being rushed through as THE answer. They are only part of the answer. Scrapping ICE cars and replacing with EVs is also not the answer. Any ICE car that currently exists has had a lot of CO2 used to build it. If the ICE Car is not a big gas guzzler but just a normal car then keeping this car on the road is actually better than scrapping it as EVs use more CO2 to build in the first place. Scrapping the ICE car is wasting CO2 already used. Yes, get the dirty cars out of the big cities. But don’t scrap them.
I’m not getting into the infrastructure, but it’s been proven that this isn’t ready yet and needs some work.
Slow down the EV train, improve the infrastructure, work on methods of extinguishing EV fires & improve the battery technology and efficiency.
Great to know that catastrophic thermal runaways are not a concern.
Ideally, a 400 mile real world range and a 40 minute charge time is needed. That would give 250 miles from 80 to 20% charge, then a 40 minute charge time back to 80% is ample even in road transport.
Batteries are consumables. There are only about 500 charge cycles in a lithium ion battery. Unless the batteries are standardized and made, readily, available, then battery cars will always be a gamble. The manufacturer needs to be reliable, honest and offer battery packs. Otherwise, these cars are throw away items and should be priced as such.
Brilliant...thank you for making this one :) Cheers
From my home to my daughter's home is 5000 km so big range is very attractive. On this trip, I travel about 1200 km per day.
1000 miles battery - well unless i missed it, the discussion seems all to do with driving 1000 miles in a given journey, and whether that is ever needed. Such a battery could go for a month without charging, for an average person, and that is also an attractive notion.
That would certainly be attractive those with no ability to home charge.
In my opinion, if you can’t charge your car at home then you shouldn’t get an EV. Batteries use a lot of resources that are damaging to the environment and we should be minimising those resources, not lugging around a huge battery so you don’t have to charge so often.
These battery explanations are fascinating. Thanks
I used to drive from Scotland to the south of England quite regularly in a long range model 3. It so say had a range of 300 miles, in reality it was less than that but still perfectly adequate. The focus I feel needs to be on reducing the cost of realistic range batteries, we don't all need 300 miles when most of us only drive 30 a day. For the odd day thst we do it's cheaper to just hire a car with more range or take the train.
That is well said. I changed 2 years ago my petrol car to 28kWh Ioniq Electric. Also I had to change my mental position; not to pick car for 1% need, but look that other 99% need - which is less than 50km/day. And classic Ioniq can do it without any problems, even with Finnish winter. And for longer trips, just take a train or just plan a bit more and enjoy the trip, not just the destination. ;)
The perfect solution would be to have modular battery packs that you can add or remove based on the how much range your need.
This will help reduce weight for shorter trips, which improves the range for the smaller battery. When you need to go out of town on a longer trip, grab all the batteries you can to have the maximum range available.
The next step for this scenario would be to have battery swap stations where you leave your depleted battery modules and take fully charged batteries. This is already a think with electric scooters in Asia, but with some ingenuity, we could find solutions for the bigger, heavier car batteries. Maybe have a permanent battery pack that can handle a day of city driving and the rest are swappable battery modules.
@@kayvak7267 see Xbus
@@kayvak7267 Cars with battery swapping system already exists. At least Norway has already few of those, just look for video from Bjorn Nyland; "Nio ES8 battery swap at Vestby, Norway"
@dingopisscreek You're looking at around an hour charging for a drive that distance. Would take about 10hrs. I would stop twice minimum l, once for breakfast and once for lunch. Half hour each stop would be enough to top up the car to complete the journey. You would only then need further stops for the loo without charging. Most people would do this with an ice car too.
Hire Euan! top work on not dumbing down the discussion
Good job Euan.
Great summary of batteries and evidence against most of BS on internet about LI battery fires. Keep up the great work. 👍
Yes, but is it bs about battery fires?
Or bs that battery packs are expensive to repair or replace after a minor collision.
You might be wiser to to contact the car insurance companies to see what EVs they will provide cover for and the premium charged.
It seems slightly silly to buy a battery EV and then fork out huge premiums on top of.
You might review the way "you" evaluate EVs.
@@t1n4444 Troll? Or Bot? Either way not wanted here!
@@ElectricCarAustralia
Hmm ... you appear to be slightly simple in your outlook.
Allow me to enlighten you so you might understand the way things are on the internet.
If Robert, say, sets out his stall for us to pick over then the context is open to scrutiny is it not?
Nobody is going to simply swallow everything wholesale without question are they.
Ditto the comments from other posters ... that content is subject to question too.
If, as the case may be, you, say, disagree with counter comments then why not explain why you disagree.
To simply declare those who question posters as trolls is a tad silly.
It would indicate that you, say, are not really into questioning comments ... which leads me to wonder if you are capable of critical thinking.
Whether "you" understand the situation or not is immaterial.
Battery EVs are merely a step on the way for personal transport, as in its evolution.
Horse, (camels?) horse and cart, steam, electric, petrol and diesel, LPG and back to electric again.
We now see hydrogen fuel cells and latterly hydrogen combustion via re-engineered ICE
We see ways of manufacturing, storing and transporting hydrogen evolving at ever increasing rates.
Why, because the ultimate aim is to reduce the production of exhaust gases from burning fossil fuels so as to arrest the rate of global warming.
Global warming is predicted to melt all the planetary ice which will alter the coastlines and oblige billions of people to move to higher land or perhaps live on interconnected rafts in the "new" littoral areas.
Google is your friend should you wish to know more.
Ergo, question everything you read, see or hear ref battery EVs being the pinnacle of personal transport.
Robert knows all this anyway and for the moment appears to have dropped his "seminars" involving three old blokes believing themselves to be "mythbusters".
Regrettably for Robert he doesn't appear to have the technical education to avoid such nonsense as storage heating and heaters.
Neither does Imogen , say, when it comes to explaining how aforementioned storage heaters are super efficient.
Hope that helps.
Having a massive range battery is a game changer for those who can't keep a small battery topped up every night.
So basically, by 2025-2030, if manufacturers are clever, use marketing correctly and governments educate the masses properly, we should have EVs with semi-solid state LMFP batteries with the anode spiked with silicon, that will weigh 30%-40% less for a similar or slightly improved energy density. That’s truly just what we need. 😊 As I have said before, most current EVs already have a range and charging power that are largely sufficient for any family or individual. You can already drive for 1.5-2.5 hours at motorway speed without stopping. By rapid charging only the amount of energy required to reach your next destination, the breaks aren’t usually very long. 12 minutes on average for me with an Ioniq 28kWh that would normally require 20 minutes to charge 15-94%.
These battery improvements will simply hopefully increase EVs efficiency and reduce the amount of materials needed to build the battery pack and EVs in general, making the whole thing even more sustainable. Which is all that matters really.
As a former firefighter I thought he glossed over the risks of EV fires. An EV fire is hot, can't be extinguished and produces very toxic smoke. An ICE car fire is much cooler, easily extinguished using conventional methods and the smoke is much less toxic. The consequences of an EV fire are much greater even if the frequency is less.
Maybe a car fire involving small fuel tanks, in accessable places is easier to control, but when a gas/petrol tanker ruptures the devastation is enormous, and when a whole train of liquid fuel derails ...
@@DrakeN-ow1im We are talking about car fires. A lithium ion battery fire is 2,000 °C or 3,600 °F where as a gasoline car fire can get to 900 °C or 1,600 °F and gasoline fires can be extinguished using conventional techniques such as foam and water. EV battery fires can't be extinguished, you can try cool them, with enough time and water the fire will be suspended but they can and do reignite.
The Finns are developing a brine cooled to -40 that is injected in the battery case for fighting EV fires on ships. We don't have that yet. EV fires are no joke, petroleum based fires are easier to fight.
MLFP sounds great.
Great to see J. Good enough mentioned, what a legend.
Very interesting.
Lightweight, more efficiency has my interest.
What was not discussed about sodium ion was charge speed. Charge speed is such and important factor. If it sodium charges faster (It was not discussed) ....energy density is less important, because we really can stop for "gas" occasionally on longer trips. Incremental improvements in these factors add up to huge changes in affordability of real practical EVs
This was very educational. Please do these regularly.
I would have liked to have seen putting the batteries out once they have caught fire covered too, along with risks following an accident.
Yes, if you're in the car, you have time to get out, but if the car is in a car park (such as the recent airport fire) or in your garage, the burning battery provides toxic fumes and an intense heat source that may cause nearby vehicles or buildings to ignite. The battery fire is also hard to put out. Lithium battery fires seem to be very frequent because the batteries are so ubiquitous. Airlines have become paranoid about people dropping their phone down the side of the seat (understandably, because a fire in an aircraft is a much bigger problem than in a car). The other consideration with car batteries is that they are being carried around at high speed and may be crushed in an accident.
With respect to range, all the examples quoted were northern hemisphere. In Australia, there's a lot of situations where a longer range than current EVs is either desirable or necessary. Having said that, the vast majority of travel is locally within cities where a huge range isn't required. Better public transport would help to reduce the need for long drives. I really think there needs to be more emphasis on public transport. If people can conveniently travel those long distances in efficient and affordable public transport, taking a car makes less sense. At the moment for Australia, a lot of people would prefer a hybrid EV where they can use electricity for the short trips and only use petrol for the occasional weekend trip or holiday. Given the time to charge an EV, I just can't see public charging infrastructure being practical for long distances if 100% of the cars were electric. Maybe the solution for zero carbon emissions for those situations is a battery/hydrogen hybrid? Toyota already has hydrogen ICE test vehicles.
Agree on public transport- when it is good, like it is here in Europe, it often becomes the preferred choice. But regarding the hybrids- those are the most likely to catch fire (per number of vehicles sold), while BEVs very rarely do (you can google the numbers). But for EVs, you can go with LiFePO4 battery which does not even even burn. I believe Sodium Ion does not burn either, and both are just fine for city cars.
As for hydrogen cars- those are very energy inefficient, plus hydrogen is difficult to store. We should probably already forget hydrogen for cars, go full BEVs, and only go hydrogen for agricultural use (making ammonia), with secondary use of both hydrogen or ammonia as fuel for things like sea shipping.
@@NeblogaiLT why should a PHEV be more likely to catch fire than a BEV if the battery tech is the same? If the risk is due to the presence of an ICE, it's no less acceptable than an ICE car but with lower emissions. Why shouldn't they be able to take advantage of the same chemistry? I'm not sure of the numbers around inefficiency which you're claiming for hydrogen. The future waste and recycling steam is a massive problem if you want to convert everything to BEV. Hydrogen is simpler and cleaner. You can also fill a hydrogen tank in a reasonable amount of time, while BEVs take too long to charge. You ignored my point that in countries like Australia (and the USA frankly), BEV ranges are much harder to work with except for travel within suburbia. So sure, for suburban use and general use where you have a decent charging infrastructure and decent public transport, it might work. BEV adoption is still relatively low, and competition for working chargers is already problematic. Convert everyone to BEV and it's going to be really hard to make public charging infrastructure work without a major change in battery charge times and range. As I said previously, for countries where long trips are much more common, PHEV provides a better transition than BEV. I just can't see BEV being practical for people living on farms a hundred kilometres from the nearest town and without access to grid power. What about the diesel trucks and trains that move everything around? BEV won't replace them on current technology. It's going to have to be a transition, not a wholesale jump to BEV.
Do you want to see how many fumes and flames you get out of a petrol or diesel fire. And in any case, there are plenty of other things in a standard vehicle that will burn very nicely. It’s not like an aircraft where everything has to be certified nonflammable.
@@ouethojlkjn not the point. The heat and intensity of a lithium battery fire is enough to set off a chain reaction of fires in adjacent cars in a car park. I understand that current advice for an EV fire is just let it burn itself out. Sure there's plenty of fumes from any vehicle fire, but not the quantity and toxicity of a lithium battery fire. Don't get me wrong - I think EVs are the future. I'm just not convinced about the safety of current lithium battery technology.
@@theharper1 Put it another way, I have just invented this amazing contraption that uses gallons and gallons of highly flammable liquid, which is squirted into a chamber and induced to do a controlled explosion. The hope being that it remains controlled. As a bonus, we will put the tank where all this combustible fluid it stored under the rear seat where the kids sit. Genius!!! The real culprit for most vehicle fires are 12v batteries, that have more than enough kick in them to start a very healthy and vigorous fire. Usually in the engine bay where they reside but any part of the circuit will do. Hence all the fuses in the fuse box. Finally, the frequency of Battery Electric vehicle fires is still proportionately many times less than a petrol or diesel vehicle. If you don't want to be barbequed, get an EV.
We do need batteries a moderate amount longer than the distances we plan to travel in one go, because we and the battery get concerned when charges approach both 0 and 100%. So a Model Y with a 325 mile range will seldom go more than 250 miles before the system really wants you to stop and recharge. So a 1000 mile battery might be good for 700 miles in reality, a great thing for a quick trip from the Bay Area to San Diego, with spare charge to hit the restaurant and the sights before the destination charger at the hotel.
The technology behind 1000 mile electric car batteries can be useful in other applications. It can be used for trucks to make their battery packs more light weight meaning more freight capacity. It can also be used for electric planes to finally become available to the masses. High-speed trains are a nice thing to have, but for some reasons things tend to go wrong with the concrete over leading to ridiculously low mandatory speed limits at crucial parts of the track (like 40km/h at Antwerp or 80 km/h south of Amsterdam instead of 300 km/h). Speaking of trains, I won't be surprised over the long term trains will switch from diesel and electric trains with overhead lines to battery swapping with such improvements of battery technology. Overhead lines need quite a lot of maintenance and its maintenance has to be done over long distances while infrastructure for batteries can be more localized. It's less energy efficient though compared to wires, but when this leads to less downtime and more using less rolling resistance rail over roads, then it can be considered an alternative.
Great video!
This guy is an engaging science communicator, and should be on TFCS more!
Yes. I'll second that motion!
Very good presentation. Remember that 300 mile range isn't that when you have wipers, heaters, lights etc running. Quoted ranges are generally based on an unloaded car in good weather conditions, start using it in the real world & watch the range tumble. Buy the EV range you need for your real world not theoretical lab use.
Thats where actual facts and figures come in useful as opposed to suppositions and acecdotes.
@@DrakeN-ow1im
Quite so.
It's as if the car manufacturers lobbied their governments so that they could claim any old bollocks with reference to range and not be done under "trade descriptions".
Or have to state that batteries don't last forever and can be recharged at millions of amps ... or can be recycled in domestic power walls which will work for all eternity, or at least until Earth ends up in the photosphere.
We once were assured we were going to see million mile batteries ... yet they seem to have vanished.
It would seem prudent to take the manufacturers' claims of range and then divide the number by two.
And then presume that not all chargers work, or are available, the moment the batteries have to be re-charged.
And then not accept the battery on every used EV is in tip top condition.
Mr McTurk downplays the risk of battery fires by looking at ideal situations only, when he should be considering some worst cases like (1) Bad battery & battery management system being made, (2) Unintended damage to the battery, through accidents, bad repair work, misuse, etc., (3) An EV fire being much harder to put out compared to a petrol/diesel car fire.
@@retiredbore378 Some on the internet have said that there are clues indicating that it's a diesel-electric hybrid vehicle, which can explain why the fire was that intense and why it could not be put out by a couple who had seen it while it was still a one vehicle fire (though they appeared to be amateurs at using a fire extinguisher). The government may have the intention to not reveal the truth because they don't want to jeopardise their Switch to EV drive.
Even for long road trips, a 500 mile range care would be more than suitable in the North American market.
It's funny that he mentioned Canada, because I actually drove to Alaska this summer up the Alcan, and I was very pleasantly surprised by the number of EV chargers in BC and the Yukon. Once I got to Alaska it was another story, but it just goes to show that even in very remote areas, having good chargers every 100 miles or so is more than enough
Hmm ... it depends on the amount of traffic there is and the number of chargers (working) there are.
The Chinese would appear to have "solved" the problem of charging up battery EVs by having a "lot" of coal fired generators.
Granted that won't always be the case but the downside is coal powered generating stations are busily generating CO2 (plus other gases you can Google up for yourself) at the same time as generating electricity.
And the amount of CO2 produced getting the coal out of the ground and into the generating stations' furnaces and then getting rid of the ash ends up in the atmosphere too.
And of course we shouldn't ignore the fact that despite being assured there's sufficient electricity "in the wires" society is being "encouraged" to use electricity for everything else too so we shouldn't delude ourselves there's always going to be enough electrical energy around to drive everything once we get rid of fossil fuels.
There again if we find we can get nuclear fusion to work in the next few decades then we might get away with it.
@@t1n4444 In British Columbia and the Yukon our grid is powered by hydroelectricity, so no, the only CO2 is coming from your oil & gas generated tropes. Nice try though...
@@davidcottrell570
Hmm, yes, well jolly good show for you then.
LiFePO4 is crazy popular with people doing auxiliary battery / rear battery / Dual Battery installs in Pickups and SUV's for camping, tradies recharging tools, inverters on worksites where there's no main power available, RV's, Campers, work trailers, food vans,... The Sodium based technology and it's cost savings is going to be a huge factor in the take up of new products and a move away from Li-Ion and Li-Po in those marketplaces.
Li-Po / Graphene will remain the choice of Quadcopter RPV pilots, especially for racing.
My VW Jetta Wagon TDI goes between 550 and 650 miles (890 to 1,050) on one tank of diesel. On my many trips across these United States, I take 5 minute bio-breaks every 2 hours with a 15 minute break to grab a meal. I then either refuel when I stop at night or just before I leave in the morning. Having to stop 2 - 3 times enroute at ca. 1 - 2 hours to recharge would add several hours to the driving day and end up making me either drive longer each day or add at least an extra 1 to 2 days to my trip. Remember the entire continent of Europe is 4 million square miles (10.4 square kilometers) compared to the 3.8 million square miles (9.9 square kilometers) of these United States.
And yes you’re one of the edge cases he mentioned although I suspect your accident risk might be lower with longer breaks.
On the 1000mi battery there is also the 80/20 rule. If we tackle the 80% (probably more like 90%) of car usage with 300-400mi battery the remaining use cases can quite easily keep on using diesel until the charging infrastructure catches up. Also auto-change or quick switch batteries would do away with a lot more problems that come to infrastructure. Charging batteries at off-peak should be absolutely central to the whole system, but it can only happen if law dictates that an EV must have for example 30% of the battery capacity quickly or automatically changeable.
At the moment I think there are a few manufacturers doing their own thing, which is insane. Go to any car factory or any factory and you see robotic arms that can do millimetre level things at 1000kg weights. So have a "universal slot" either on the bottom or back of the vehicle that enable 10-30kWh of battery change in seconds of minutes is, not only possible, but would be the game changer. This would also reduce the worry of buying an EV as "the next battery tech, is just around the corner".
We just need a common standard, which is hard to get as companies like Tesla etc. all are doing the Apple model of planned obsolescence, with all sorts of built-in batteries and proprietary charging plug and infrastructures.
Yes, but, have you factored in the number of "spare" batteries required to allow this easily changed battery switcheroo thing?
Or the amount of energy required to recharge millions of these spare batteries on a "just in case" basis.
We don't hear much about that from the "battery switching" industry.
Hi from rural Canada where it gets to -40c for a few months.... Yes!! We do need 1000 mile batteries. That's like 600 miles for me for 3 months of the year. The nearest city to where I live in 200. Btw... I have an EV for 3 years now. I just have to be patient and plan right. Plus I have a ICE for extreme winter conditions
1000 mile battery may not be needed, but it would demonstrate superiority over gas and diesel vehicles, especially with good charging infrastructure.
really informative ... in the midst of "vague" technology news. Thanks.
He really knows his stuff!
One thing I've noticed since having my EV in the last 5 few months is a mile is not a mile. A mile on the motorway or in the mountains is not the same as a flat A/b road. So a 500 mile range battery will probably give me the same full petrol tank range that I had in my mini (300 miles). my car has a WLTP range of 220 miles which gives me about 100 ish miles motorway driving and more than covers my daily needs. What concerns me most is battery depletion for a given number of charge cycles. I kept my mini for 8 years and it still had all the range available to me. I hope that replacement battery pack will also come down in price over time or there may be many EV's in good condition being scrapped because of the batter state.
About the long range: I am still a fan of the idea of using small batteries in the daily life and stacking up for the journey to Italy. The gas stations will need a new business model, they could provide fully charged batteries, which I take on on my way to the Autobahn, drive 900 km with only 2 stops, arrived in Italy, I give the big battery to a gas station, and vice versa on the way back. Such a system would save so much battery material and weight and thus, energy. We only () would need the car manufacturers to design their cars around a very small amount of different batteries. Where did we see such a system before? - With lead batteries.
As a Canadian I can tell you that you don't need to drive north to be 1,000 miles without a charge point. Ottawa to Winnipeg is over 2,000 km in hilly terrain, Calgary to Vancouver is 1,000 km through the Rockies. An EV with a 1,000 mile range isn't so crazy here.
EV fire is currently a low-probability, high-consequence scenario. Where the consequences can be extremely large if things go wrong in the first place. As the owner and user of a lovely MG4 Luxury/Trophy, it is sad to see EV evangelists suppressing how dangerous a battery fire can be when the consequences of a battery fire can potentially be enormous.
Admittedly, there is currently a low statistical risk of an EV catching fire (statistical material for fires in EVs versus ICEs is too small for us to know what the risk is over time). But keeping quiet about the consequences of an EV fire, and especially in the case of a fire in batteries with extremely toxic cobalt where the fumes only need to come into contact with skin to cause serious poisoning, is reprehensible.
Stop minimizing the consequences of a battery fire and let people make their decisions as well informed as possible about the risks and consequences. Not least how to reduce possible consequences if the accident were to occur is important to get out to most people.
I am very happy with my EV, but I know what the consequences of a fire can be, when the probability of a fire is greatest, and how I can reduce the risk of major consequential damage in the event of a fire. Why deny ordinary people this knowledge?
An excellent program. When can we expect to see LMFP batteries in cars? Some time ago I read they would be in cars in early 2024 - but I haven't heard any more. Please provide an updated battery development program annually. Thank you.
Mis-leading, a tank of diesel will put out a light match, not catch fire.
2:55 “the chance of the gasses reaching the cabin are infinitesimally small”.
Meanwhile, there is a Jeep 4xe recall for this exact situation as the rear floor is the top of the battery and it is designed to vent in to the cabin. Designed. They knew
You mean the 2023 European car of the year? Because I can’t imagine there is any cynical paying for awards going on…
Great episode! Good thing that batteries already are more than good enough for many times more users than global production capacity can supply for. Better batteries are very welcome, but supply is far from catching up with potential demand where battery power already is better than current alternatives. So, what's currently most important is to get cheaper and faster and more battery production. The sooner batteries can start to replace combustion in more applications the better, obviously, but the overall transition isn't kept back by a lack of battery technology that is good enough.
The most probable reason to not have an opportunity to charge a road vehicle for a thousand miles just a few years from now is that practically no one else drives that route, that also means that issue will remain relevant only for a ridiculously small minority.
Brilliant video. Our current available Li-Ion battery technologies are perfectly adequate for our driving needs. The problem is with our resistance to change and anti-EV lobby (big-oil). Development is welcome but not absolutely necessary. Adequate Ccharging Infrastructure is vital.
We need different battery chemistries and battery formats for different purposes- small city cars don't need range and fast charging, sports cars need battery thermal stability and so on. So it's nice to see that all companies are not sticking to the same formula of future sustainable transport 😊❤
Now, I'm no automotive expert, but I'm guessing the Ford Pinto was not battery powered. 😅
That comment alone qualifies you as an engineer! 😊
I couldn’t disagree more that 1000 mile battery is niche market… this technology can drive the biggest switch to ev’s as it would make them more convenient that ICE’s for anyone without a driveway charger and remove the need for chargers on every street corner as the owner would be good for one fast charge per month.
I couldn’t disagree more that 1000 mile battery is needed for the mass market for switching to EVs. Hauling that extra battery weight only hurts energy efficiency, adds extra wear to roads, and costs a lot. What we need is cheap and widely available charging, and cheap city EVs. 150-200km range is sufficient if you can always leave the car to charge at your job parking space, or at a shopping center. Such cars could cost less than €15k, as cost is the main obstacle to the switch, and battery is the main cost. Plus production can be scaled up fast, without putting 10x pressure on the battery supply chain, like 1000-mile batteries would.
I would argue that a "1000 mile battery" isn't necessarily the concept of a battery reaching a prescribed distance, but one that is of limited volume to fit in the dimensions of a car to theoretically hit that distance ie the key to that point in the energy density side. This breaks down to not a 1000 mile battery per se but an energy dense battery that can be shrunk thus taking up much less space and weight within the vehicle addressing the big issue with all EV's currently.
A smaller energy dense battery that can reduce weight causes a feedback resulting in increased range due to lugging around less weight. As seen with the Mercedes EQXX, properly designing cars to be more efficient by designing from the ground up rather than retrofitting existing designs can result in range gains on current technology. One standout thing was the removal of rapid charging. Doing so meant the large heatsinks of cooling while charging wasn't required further reducing weight and increasing range. this increase in efficiency meant that a home charger was able to add the same range as a rapid charger per min of charging.
I should expand and say Yes, I 100% completely agree that charging network needs expanded and based on current technology that should be the priority over the edge cases of a 1000mile EV. Based on everything I do agree that a car with a 1000 mile range isn't useful, but an energy dense battery that can be shrunk would greatly help on the charging network expansion and potential strain on the grid that rapid charging is going to bring.
There is also the notion that cars sitting can supply power to the grid to help balance it (something I'm not sold on for various reasons) and something a "1000 mile battery" would actually be a solution to address some of those concerns I have.
Overall fantastic interview, definitely learnt a lot I didn't know about batteries and where everything is going. It's a lot more complicated than x vs y that marketing would have you believe as there appears to be X+Y+Z vs A+B+Y+Z options.