Battery Electric Vehicle News / Enjoying the Transportation Revolution

Martyn1981

I suspect this news may be irrelevant (for cars), but as it's a quiet day, thought I'd post it before the rumour mill accelerates.

So, it seems there may be a Tesla Model Y testing with much larger range, perhaps 500 miles. But, the story is for now iffy, and most commentators (youtuber sites) suspect it's just a test vehicle running the packs for research. One guess is that it may have a double stacked pack, again for research, as that's what might go in the Cybertruck.

Personally, I'd suggest 500 miles is massive overkill for a car (unless towing regularly), better to just supercharge after 200-300 miles on a long run, rather than pay extra, and carry more weight.

Perhaps more a story for the nerds and geeks (like myself), pondering what planned rollout this relates too.

Tesla employees said to be testing Model Ys with 4680 batteries and 800km range

A rumour that there are Model Ys with 4680 batteries out on the roads in the US  with an ultra-long driving range of 800km has sparked intense debate on social media. But if true, it is more likely to be a fact-finding mission on range, rather than a new offering to customers.

1961Nick

Martyn1981 said:

I suspect this news may be irrelevant (for cars), but as it's a quiet day, thought I'd post it before the rumour mill accelerates.

So, it seems there may be a Tesla Model Y testing with much larger range, perhaps 500 miles. But, the story is for now iffy, and most commentators (youtuber sites) suspect it's just a test vehicle running the packs for research. One guess is that it may have a double stacked pack, again for research, as that's what might go in the Cybertruck.

Personally, I'd suggest 500 miles is massive overkill for a car (unless towing regularly), better to just supercharge after 200-300 miles on a long run, rather than pay extra, and carry more weight.

Perhaps more a story for the nerds and geeks (like myself), pondering what planned rollout this relates too.

Tesla employees said to be testing Model Ys with 4680 batteries and 800km range

A rumour that there are Model Ys with 4680 batteries out on the roads in the US  with an ultra-long driving range of 800km has sparked intense debate on social media. But if true, it is more likely to be a fact-finding mission on range, rather than a new offering to customers.

500 miles might be wishful thinking but 4680 cells should increase the TM3LR to around 435 miles (WLTP) given that it's 16% more energy dense than the 2170 cell. The reduced requirement for cooling could add a few more miles by freeing up space to add additional cells beyond the theoretical 960.

I guess 500 miles might be possible if you're into hypermiling, precondition the pack & don't run the HVAC.

silverwhistle

1961Nick said:

I guess 500 miles might be possible if you're into hypermiling, precondition the pack & don't run the HVAC.

.. and wear a nappy.. So much for decluttering the boot when you're carrying that much battery! I'll be sticking with my 170m range model: I actually spend 70p out and about the other day to ensure I got home safely. Quite a jolt when I've been getting so much free solar recently!

It's an interesting situation for sure. Ken's right to point out how big the Asian market is for cheap Japanese ICEs but even there electric rikshaws and two-wheelers are gaining ground, and in more affluent countries the issue of localised pollution may raise it's head. I can't see the Japanese writing off the better margins of the European market so they may end up having to finance two production streams.

Africa seems to be two different markets, the large polluted cities and the rural areas and in both I can see EVs making an inroad. If I were at the end of a long supply chain for my petrol integrating transport with solar might be an option. Initially by government and foreign investment, but seeing how much of Africa has jumped the grid scenario for more localised generation, a similar scenario might develop for transport, aided by the ability of vehicles to store surplus RE.

orrery

Grumpy_chap said:

Even better would be research and development of energy storage device that doesn't require precious and limited material to be mined.  Finding more of this material probably delays the time that a sustainable energy storage device is reality.

You mean in addition to liquid air batteries and sand batteries, that use, well, er, air and sand. Or for longer term storage create hydrogen and for even longer term storage convert it to methanol.

It isn't R&D we need (we do need more R&D of course), it is simple engineering to build it out in volume.

Grumpy_chap

orrery said:

Grumpy_chap said:

Even better would be research and development of energy storage device that doesn't require precious and limited material to be mined.  Finding more of this material probably delays the time that a sustainable energy storage device is reality.

You mean in addition to liquid air batteries and sand batteries, that use, well, er, air and sand. Or for longer term storage create hydrogen and for even longer term storage convert it to methanol.

It isn't R&D we need (we do need more R&D of course), it is simple engineering to build it out in volume.

Are any of those viable to power an EV?  That was the context of the comment, in line with the subject matter of the thread.

Martyn1981 said:

So, it seems there may be a Tesla Model Y testing with much larger range, perhaps 500 miles. 

Personally, I'd suggest 500 miles is massive overkill for a car (unless towing regularly), better to just supercharge after 200-300 miles on a long run, rather than pay extra, and carry more weight.

You may be correct.

It may also be what is needed to allay fears of range anxiety and facilitate the conversion from ICE to EV, at least in the minds of some.

shinytop

Grumpy_chap said:

orrery said:

Grumpy_chap said:

Even better would be research and development of energy storage device that doesn't require precious and limited material to be mined.  Finding more of this material probably delays the time that a sustainable energy storage device is reality.

You mean in addition to liquid air batteries and sand batteries, that use, well, er, air and sand. Or for longer term storage create hydrogen and for even longer term storage convert it to methanol.

It isn't R&D we need (we do need more R&D of course), it is simple engineering to build it out in volume.

Are any of those viable to power an EV?  That was the context of the comment, in line with the subject matter of the thread.

Martyn1981 said:

So, it seems there may be a Tesla Model Y testing with much larger range, perhaps 500 miles. 

Personally, I'd suggest 500 miles is massive overkill for a car (unless towing regularly), better to just supercharge after 200-300 miles on a long run, rather than pay extra, and carry more weight.

You may be correct.

It may also be what is needed to allay fears of range anxiety and facilitate the conversion from ICE to EV, at least in the minds of some.

Better charging infrastructure is what's needed, not bigger batteries.  That would use less rare minerals too. 

QrizB

Grumpy_chap said:

orrery said:

Grumpy_chap said:

Even better would be research and development of energy storage device that doesn't require precious and limited material to be mined.  Finding more of this material probably delays the time that a sustainable energy storage device is reality.

You mean in addition to liquid air batteries and sand batteries, that use, well, er, air and sand. Or for longer term storage create hydrogen and for even longer term storage convert it to methanol.

It isn't R&D we need (we do need more R&D of course), it is simple engineering to build it out in volume.

Are any of those viable to power an EV? 

It wouldn't be an EV but yes, you could run a vehicle on liquid air. Here's a very similar one from a century ago:
https://www.ageofsteamroundhouse.org/compressed-air-0-4-0-no-1/

More info here, with photos:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fireless_locomotive

Martyn1981

Grumpy_chap said:

orrery said:

Grumpy_chap said:

Even better would be research and development of energy storage device that doesn't require precious and limited material to be mined.  Finding more of this material probably delays the time that a sustainable energy storage device is reality.

You mean in addition to liquid air batteries and sand batteries, that use, well, er, air and sand. Or for longer term storage create hydrogen and for even longer term storage convert it to methanol.

It isn't R&D we need (we do need more R&D of course), it is simple engineering to build it out in volume.

Are any of those viable to power an EV?  That was the context of the comment, in line with the subject matter of the thread.

Martyn1981 said:

So, it seems there may be a Tesla Model Y testing with much larger range, perhaps 500 miles. 

Personally, I'd suggest 500 miles is massive overkill for a car (unless towing regularly), better to just supercharge after 200-300 miles on a long run, rather than pay extra, and carry more weight.

You may be correct.

It may also be what is needed to allay fears of range anxiety and facilitate the conversion from ICE to EV, at least in the minds of some.

Hi. Yes, CAES and LAES (compressed or liquid air energy storage) would power an EV. They use excess generation to storage, then back to leccy when needed. LAES is more efficient, possibly 60%, and higher if there's a source of waste heat or cold, that can be incorporated. CAES has vast potential, 100's of TWH's, even inter seasonal if that's ever needed.

LAES is already starting to roll out, but both technologies are really a next step, for larger / longer term storage, after storage such as batts, mop up the constant fluctuating daily (intraday) work.

Any and all forms of storage, even stationary batteries, that don't rely on automotive battery materials, will help to spread the load on availability, mining, supply etc., which in turn will help with vehicular battery supply and costs. I appreciate this is going off on a bit of a tangent, but on the G&E energy thread, there are often news articles on storage, which would cross reference with BEV's, in a way, if they don't compete for the same materials. So you might find them interesting.

Range anxiety is a strange thing. I think most, perhaps all people have it when thinking about BEV's, but it largely disappears once you own/run one, unless I suppose you get the 'wrong' BEV, not matched to your main needs. More street charging, and reliable fast chargers should help ease fears/concerns.

No silver bullet, but heading in the right direction

Martyn1981

shinytop said:

Grumpy_chap said:

orrery said:

Grumpy_chap said:

Even better would be research and development of energy storage device that doesn't require precious and limited material to be mined.  Finding more of this material probably delays the time that a sustainable energy storage device is reality.

You mean in addition to liquid air batteries and sand batteries, that use, well, er, air and sand. Or for longer term storage create hydrogen and for even longer term storage convert it to methanol.

It isn't R&D we need (we do need more R&D of course), it is simple engineering to build it out in volume.

Are any of those viable to power an EV?  That was the context of the comment, in line with the subject matter of the thread.

Martyn1981 said:

So, it seems there may be a Tesla Model Y testing with much larger range, perhaps 500 miles. 

Personally, I'd suggest 500 miles is massive overkill for a car (unless towing regularly), better to just supercharge after 200-300 miles on a long run, rather than pay extra, and carry more weight.

You may be correct.

It may also be what is needed to allay fears of range anxiety and facilitate the conversion from ICE to EV, at least in the minds of some.

Better charging infrastructure is what's needed, not bigger batteries.  That would use less rare minerals too. 

When you say 'rare minerals', do you mean rare in the sense that demand is growing fast, so supply needs to be scaled up, akin to petrol (crude oil) being rare when cars started to roll out? Or do you mean rare as in rare earth minerals, as this doesn't really apply to BEV's?

Cobalt often gets mentioned now, but (weirdly) not previously, despite the oil refineries using it to produce petrol and diesel. But batts don't have to use Cobalt, LFP's for instance don't use it, and they are the most common battery type now.

Cobalt and Lithium are recyclable. Redwood Materials tends to be the go to for news lately, and yesterday they made the news with VW:

Volkswagen Group taps JB Straubel’s Redwood Materials for battery recycling in US

This morning, Volkswagen Group of America (VWGoA) announced a collaboration with Redwood Materials, Inc. to implement a battery-recycling supply chain in the United States for Volkswagen- and Audi-branded EVs. The collab represents VW’s commitment to sustainability in the United States and beyond while simultaneously expanding Redwood’s closed-loop battery supply chain.

shinytop

Martyn1981 said:

shinytop said:

Grumpy_chap said:

orrery said:

Grumpy_chap said:

Even better would be research and development of energy storage device that doesn't require precious and limited material to be mined.  Finding more of this material probably delays the time that a sustainable energy storage device is reality.

You mean in addition to liquid air batteries and sand batteries, that use, well, er, air and sand. Or for longer term storage create hydrogen and for even longer term storage convert it to methanol.

It isn't R&D we need (we do need more R&D of course), it is simple engineering to build it out in volume.

Are any of those viable to power an EV?  That was the context of the comment, in line with the subject matter of the thread.

Martyn1981 said:

So, it seems there may be a Tesla Model Y testing with much larger range, perhaps 500 miles. 

Personally, I'd suggest 500 miles is massive overkill for a car (unless towing regularly), better to just supercharge after 200-300 miles on a long run, rather than pay extra, and carry more weight.

You may be correct.

It may also be what is needed to allay fears of range anxiety and facilitate the conversion from ICE to EV, at least in the minds of some.

Better charging infrastructure is what's needed, not bigger batteries.  That would use less rare minerals too. 

When you say 'rare minerals', do you mean rare in the sense that demand is growing fast, so supply needs to be scaled up, akin to petrol (crude oil) being rare when cars started to roll out? Or do you mean rare as in rare earth minerals, as this doesn't really apply to BEV's?

Cobalt often gets mentioned now, but (weirdly) not previously, despite the oil refineries using it to produce petrol and diesel. But batts don't have to use Cobalt, LFP's for instance don't use it, and they are the most common battery type now.

Cobalt and Lithium are recyclable. Redwood Materials tends to be the go to for news lately, and yesterday they made the news with VW:

Volkswagen Group taps JB Straubel’s Redwood Materials for battery recycling in US

This morning, Volkswagen Group of America (VWGoA) announced a collaboration with Redwood Materials, Inc. to implement a battery-recycling supply chain in the United States for Volkswagen- and Audi-branded EVs. The collab represents VW’s commitment to sustainability in the United States and beyond while simultaneously expanding Redwood’s closed-loop battery supply chain.

I wasn't really being specific and probably used the term incorrectly. My point is that, assuming resources and manufacturing capacity for batteries are finite, having long range EVs and a poor public charging infrastructure may not the best way of getting to universal BEV adoption.  I may be wrong but perhaps more, smaller, shorter range, EVs along with a better public charging infrastructure will get us there faster and cleaner.  I know that's going to be more difficult in terms of public acceptance but it's going to be a long time before everyone with an ICE car now has a 300 mile plus range EV. 

I've said this several times but as a motorcyclist, I'm happy to travel all over the UK and Europe on a vehicle with a 150 mile range.