Nissan, NASA Teaming Up On Solid-State Batteries (cbsnews.com) 78
Nissan is working with NASA on a new type of battery for electric vehicles that promises to charge more quickly and be lighter yet safe, the Japanese automaker said Friday. CBS News reports: The all-solid-state battery will replace the lithium-ion battery now in use for a 2028 product launch and a pilot plant launch in 2024, according to Nissan. The battery would be stable enough to be used in pacemakers, Nissan said. When finished, it will be about half the size of the current battery and fully charge in 15 minutes instead of a few hours.
The collaboration with the U.S. space program, as well as the University of California San Diego, involves the testing of various materials, Corporate Vice President Kazuhiro Doi told reporters. "Both NASA and Nissan need the same kind of battery," he said. Nissan and NASA are using what's called the "original material informatics platform," a computerized database, to test various combinations to see what works best among hundreds of thousands of materials, Doi said. The goal is to avoid the use of expensive materials like rare metals needed for lithium-ion batteries.
The collaboration with the U.S. space program, as well as the University of California San Diego, involves the testing of various materials, Corporate Vice President Kazuhiro Doi told reporters. "Both NASA and Nissan need the same kind of battery," he said. Nissan and NASA are using what's called the "original material informatics platform," a computerized database, to test various combinations to see what works best among hundreds of thousands of materials, Doi said. The goal is to avoid the use of expensive materials like rare metals needed for lithium-ion batteries.
Nickel-Iron (Score:2, Funny)
You just need lots of.. space
Re: (Score:2)
What!? (Score:1)
How is it that NASA couldnt partner with a domestic automaker on something like this? It actually diminishes my optimism in a project like this that NASA had to go to a foreign, second tier auto maker like Nissan to get it done.
Re: (Score:2)
Most mechanics will tell you that Nissan is the Chrysler of Japan. The GTR is exempt though.
Re: (Score:2)
"Nissan is the Chrysler of Japan"
Was this before or after Carlos Ghosn became CEO?
Re: Because those Japs... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
I dunno I managed to get 80K miles on the transmission that came in my dodge and still going strong ... would have been on my 3rd Nissan cvt by now
Re:What!? (Score:4, Insightful)
Why do you think NASA went to Nissan? Perhaps Nissan went to NASA.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Why do you think NASA went to Nissan?
The reason they did this is deeply embedded in NASA's origins and culture - they went to Nissan not because it was easy but because it was hard,
Re: (Score:2)
Giggity!
Re: (Score:1)
cause NASA couldnt make a paper bag for the last 30 some odd years
Re: (Score:2)
Nissan's USA HQ is in Smyrna, TN. About 100 miles north of the Marshall Space Flight Center in AL. They're nice and close to a big tech center.
Re: (Score:2)
It depends on how you define your tiers.
While being #5 top selling brand is nothing to sneeze at.
In terms of Electric Cars, they were leading, then they rapidly fell behind. Because their battery technology was out of date compared to the competition.
BTW, Tennessee and Alabama are not states that I think of for doing world class research, and hiring and attracting top staff. Now don't get me wrong they are a lot of Smart people, just those locations make it difficult to attract knowledge workers.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, Oak Ridge, TN and Huntsville, Alabama are just filled with hillbillies and rednecks making moonshine. Absolutely zero important research has ever gone on in either place and none is done there now. They can't even hire janitors!
Re: (Score:2)
That is NOT was I was implying.
It is more of a case of particular locations tend to be a hub of different business sectors. R&D based sectors tend to be around areas of Large (often prestigious) Universities, So MA, CT, NY, TX, and CA tend to be bigger Research Areas. Other areas tend to be a Hub, for Mining, Manufacturing, Art, Agriculture, Health Care...
I work in Healthcare in a location that isn't a major Healthcare hub. We do good work, my colleagues (and I like to think myself) do a real good
Re: (Score:2)
I see Nissans on the road very rarely where I live hence me referring to them as second tier. A quick Google search though seems to indicate that I'm wrong though as their US market share isn't so bad.
Re: (Score:1)
yea here in the USA they are like disposable pens, the car people buy when they don't want to bother making a choice, they practically give them away
Re: (Score:2)
Re:What!? (Score:4)
Mod above post up (Score:2)
That makes more sense now. Still would rather see a US automaker though :)
Re: (Score:2)
Reads like a fantasy wish-list (Score:4, Insightful)
This is like Nissan and NASA teaming up to create a warp drive. The lofty starting goals aren't really newsworthy, it's the end product they ultimately come up with. Also, frequently research projects only succeed at turning money into vapor.
The sad reality is that we really don't need faster charging and a physically smaller footprint when it comes to BEV batteries. The main issues hindering the widespread adoption of BEVs is cost and longevity. Cost, because until profit margins for auto manufactures run about the same as for ICE vehicles, they're gonna keep pushing what's most profitable. Longevity, because most Americans actually can't afford a brand new car and have to buy used. The average age of a vehicle in the USA is about 12.1 years, and range degradation is a real concern.
Re: (Score:2)
Longevity, because most Americans actually can't afford a brand new car and have to buy used. The average age of a vehicle in the USA is about 12.1 years, and range degradation is a real concern.
I agree with your overall post. I'm not sure that the reason people buy used cars is because they can't afford new ones, though.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I agree with your overall post. I'm not sure that the reason people buy used cars is because they can't afford new ones, though.
The average median income [census.gov] isn't high enough to afford the average new car price. People who are buying all the new cars are the upper half of the income earners (and the prices paid reflect this [cnet.com]), and then they eventually "trickle down" to everybody else as used vehicles.
This article [motortrader.com] about used car demand was published pre-Covid. The used car market has grown even hotter since, as new cars have become scarce to the continuing chip shortage.
It's worth mentioning for anyone who doesn't feel like clicking li
Re: (Score:2)
That's not to say you're wrong- but $69k a year is more than enough to purchase a new vehicle. Way, way, way more than enough.
Hell, my ex-girlfriend bought a brand new car when she was 18. I bought a used car more expensive than some new cars when I was 20.
These days, I'm making about 3 times the median, and I still haven't bought a new car even once in my life.
I think the person you're replying to is right to be skeptical. I'm not su
Re: (Score:2)
I agree with your overall post. I'm not sure that the reason people buy used cars is because they can't afford new ones, though.
Eh? It's pretty much exactly the reason for most, plus a few who feel it's better value to buy used.
Re: (Score:2)
The #1 selling car is invariably a Toyota in the 20-25k range.
The majority of car purchasers seem to feel there's better value in buying used (which makes sense, since the statistical mode of that cohort probably includes individuals with functioning brains)
When the #1 selling car is a BMW 5 series, then we can discuss how the well-to-do are the only people buying cars.
Re: (Score:3)
we really don't need faster charging and a physically smaller footprint when it comes to BEV batteries.
As an EV owner, I agree that charging time and battery capacity are already good enough. Nonetheless, these are the two biggest issues that stinky-car owners cite to rationalize not switching.
range degradation is a real concern.
I've had an EV since 2015, so 7 years. The max range has gone from 240 to 232, which is negligible.
Degradation is caused more by mistreatment than age: Don't leave an EV either fully drained or fully charged for long periods in high heat.
Re: (Score:2)
So, don't use it, and don't live in Texas, Arizona, or Florida. Got it.
You are being intentionally obtuse.
In the 7 years I have owned my EV, this is how many times I have left it for over 10 minutes while max charged: 0.
I have never fully drained it.
Re: (Score:2)
You are being intentionally obtuse.
No, I'm being realistic. Used cars are going to get used. They'll be owned by people who left 'em plugged in at 100% whenever they're parked at home. They'll have sat in blazing hot office parking lots in the Florida/Texas/Arizona sun for 40 hours every week. They might even have their batteries run completely flat a few times, because humans make mistakes.
Re: (Score:3)
> They'll be owned by people who left 'em plugged in at 100% whenever they're parked at home.
You can actually tell the car to limit SoC; Set the max charge for 80% and the car will not charge above 80% unless you override it or change the setting.
> They might even have their batteries run completely flat a few times, because humans make mistakes.
Can't vouch for all manufacturers but I'm willing to bet the car has safeties that prevent true 100% discharge. Cutoff is probably 3-5% and the actual batter
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
They'll be owned by people who left 'em plugged in at 100% whenever they're parked at home.
You can actually tell the car to limit SoC; Set the max charge for 80% and the car will not charge above 80% unless you override it or change the setting.
Hush, you're harshing his talking points. Who in the hell charges to 100 percent?
They might even have their batteries run completely flat a few times, because humans make mistakes.
Can't vouch for all manufacturers but I'm willing to bet the car has safeties that prevent true 100% discharge. Cutoff is probably 3-5% and the actual battery capacity is usually larger than the advertised, usable capacity for this exact reason.
The only way to discharge to 0 percent is to either do it on purpose, or by leaving the vehicle in an uncharged state for a long, long time. An ICE vehicle doesn't like being ignored very much either.
The arguments about the superiority of ICE to EV's is always ridiculous. The detractors love to point out all of these flaws, sometimes going to extremes that don't exist in real life, while conveniently ignoring the fact that
Re:Reads like a fantasy wish-list (Score:4, Informative)
They'll be owned by people who left 'em plugged in at 100% whenever they're parked at home.
If you leave it plugged in, it charges to 80%, not 100%.
If you want more than 80% charge, you have to intentionally specify that. I only do that immediately before a long trip.
They'll have sat in blazing hot office parking lots in the Florida/Texas/Arizona sun for 40 hours every week.
That's fine. Just don't do it with the battery maxed or drained.
They might even have their batteries run completely flat a few times
My car will warn me when my charge drops below 20% and will track the range to available charging stations. If you drive past a charging station and don't have enough juice to reach the next one, you get a warning to turn around and charge.
There is no way to accidentally drain the battery.
Re: Reads like a fantasy wish-list (Score:2)
Humans who make mistakes like that get poor, real quick. Go figure.
Re: (Score:2)
You know, EV's are a thing that actually exist and have for a while now. You don't have to post made-up numbers. Just google it and see what people are experiencing. EV batteries are not dead in 3-7 years of use after 100k.
Re: (Score:1)
Which numbers are made up? That you need to DoD 40-60% to even reach 1500 cycles at all with decade old NMC technology? Or that most used variants of used EVs are 200 mile range models around 20-60kw/h?
> EV batteries are not dead in 3-7 years of use after 100k.
Below 0.5C Is my threshold for dead. It's true that some have the audacity to sell hard driven car like that, touting such as "ok" because it can drive 50 miles. Again, how much is such a car useable, really?
It's true you can buy unicorn, some city
Re:Reads like a fantasy wish-list (Score:5, Insightful)
Outside of say a 1st generation Leaf I just don't see any cars that match your description in real-world use. Again, the Model 3 came out over 4 years ago. If they were at all likely to go down to 50% capacity after 100K miles in that timeframe, we'd have heard about it.
Re: (Score:2)
If it's a V6 it's not inline, and if it's inline it isn't a V configuration...
Re: (Score:2)
Put a slash between.
Re:Reads like a fantasy wish-list (Score:4, Interesting)
I disagree (also a BEV owner). To keep battery from degrading, you should not charge past 80% and discharge below 20%. Also, during the winter you tend to run heater at full blast and lose at least 20% of range. Plus, if your commute is short, you tend to always drive with battery cold and your range is another 20% or so lower. So the practical range of a BEV under the worst case scenario is about 40% of the rated range (and this is before you factor in the significant decline in range if you drive at 90-100 mph which is illegal but common and even typical on highways). In practice, if you drive like a maniac (BEV have a lot of torque so this is how you are tempted to drive by default), live in a cold climate and try to minimize battery degradation via careful charging profile, you can count on 40% of your advertised range or even less being available. If we start with the idea that 250 miles is what people minimally need, then the advertised range should climb to about 625 miles before BEVs are comfortable for most people.
Charging times... It seems from my usage that 300 kW - 350 kW chargers do charge fast enough but so far they are only advisable to use for long distance runs. If you use them day to day then battery degradation becomes an issue. For example Tesla (which has the best tech in this regard) advises against day to day fast charging. So yes, fast chargers themselves are available and practical and are here. But we need batteries which would not degrade with routine fast charging. We also need electric upgrades at private houses to enable 350 kW chargers at home. Despite efforts to convince people otherwise, it is obvious to any BEV owner that charging overnight is a compromise, not the desirable end goal for usage.
Bottom line is that BEV technology is now good enough to be usable but not good enough to be comfortable to use. In too many cases a BEV owner needs to plan around the car abilities. One can plan this way but this is not good enough for wide usage beyond early adopters. It's like computers. They were able to run Turing-complete software stacks for decades but only got wide-spread adoption one they reached a certain level of performance. Based on my experience owning a BEV, typical range needs to double and prices need to halve before BEVs will be the obvious choice for most people.
Re:Reads like a fantasy wish-list (Score:4, Insightful)
The sad reality is that we really don't need faster charging and a physically smaller footprint when it comes to BEV batteries.
Wrong. Smaller, lighter batteries allow increased range with the same capacity, which allows smaller capacity batteries for today's "good enough" range. Faster charging will be needed for trucks. You may not need it every day, but towing kills range like nothing else. You end up charging about 30% of the time you're on the road. Faster charging makes towing viable in an electric vehicle.
Re: (Score:3)
longevity
Already solved in things like Teslas - the batteries are likely to have greater than 80% capacity longer than the car exists,
Re:Reads like a fantasy wish-list (Score:5, Informative)
range degradation is a real concern.
Ten years ago it was (I know people with EVs older than that). These days 80% capacity can survive what equates to about 1 million miles on the road for the average user in a Tesla, YMMV (pun not intended) for other manufacturers. 1 million miles exceeds the likely lifetime of the car by a significant margin as other pars age. Even then, at 80% capacity, the battery is not useless and can have a secondary application and with changes in the prevalence of renewables that secondary market may expand. Given average mileage of 14,263 a year (U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration data from 2019) then even if the real lifetime is only 500,000 miles, it's 34 years. That should be enough. The issue with resale value may be new tech, or the body not surviving that long.
Re: (Score:2)
Here's a 2011 Nissan Leaf [carfax.com] which has approximately 58% of its original battery capacity, and it has 70k miles on the odometer.
From real-world data [geotab.com] on BEV battery degradation, you could expect a Tesla Model S to have lost about 20% of its original capacity over the same time span. That's at 10 years, not 34.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Reads like a fantasy wish-list (Score:2)
Like the rest of the thread mentioned, 2011 is approaching halfway through a car's life and the point where normal people can afford it.
The Osbourne effect is probably holding back EVs quite a lot, I imagine.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Reads like a fantasy wish-list (Score:4, Informative)
Nissan Leaf is a car notorious for battery degradation because Nissan refuses to provide proper thermal management.
https://cleantechnica.com/2020... [cleantechnica.com]
Nissan Leaf is just one example but it's a general trend.
https://www.torquenews.com/1/i... [torquenews.com]
If you buy a passively cooled BEV like the Leaf then the batteries will degrade very fast and this is not representative of electric cars. It is just representative of bad engineering.
Of course any year before 2018 was a particularly bad year for Nissan Leaf cars. They are just so infamous for battery issues that using an old Leaf as an example of a BEV is borderline slander of the industry lol.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But current Li-on batteries degrade with age even if they're not charged/discharged often. I'd probably be useless long before those 34 years. I'm not saying they aren't good enough right now (I'm not really sure) but that you can't do that math and believe it's realistic
Current Li-On batteries used in EVs are good for typically at least 1500 but more likely 2000 charge cycles before they hit degradation to 80% capacity without advanced battery management. At 350 miles per charge that is up to 700,000 miles. This is why I took the Tesla claim (1 million miles) and halved it before doing my calculation as I am not convinced with its figure. Battery management software should allow the higher figure even if you are not careful with how you use the battery. You can argue that
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The issue with resale value may be new tech, or the body not surviving that long.
By new tech being an issue I mean if you have EV 2.0 to sell and EV 3.0 has also been out a while and the new tech is EV 4.0, you are probably going to take a bit of a bath selling an EV 2.0. 1.0 you might not be able to give away.
Re: (Score:3)
There has been a lot of research into solid state batteries, with multiple companies trying to bring them to market. It's not a fantasy wish list, it's just the culmination of that R&D.
The reason for getting NASA on board is probably to accelerate testing under extreme conditions.
Re: (Score:2)
I can see your point but it's not as incredible as it sounds.
Battery prices are falling at a pace of 6% per year lately. See the link below...
https://about.bnef.com/blog/ba... [bnef.com]
Now let's look at the numbers. At battery level, the cost was about $97/kWh before World War 3 started. Nissan aims for battery price of $75/kWh in 2028. See the link below...
https://electrek.co/2022/04/08... [electrek.co]
That would be a 4% per year cost reduction for the next few years. Is it too good to be true? No, not at all. They are actually p
Adds to the uncertainty (Score:1)
For the world to decarbonize, we need to build a *lot* of batteries, which means mining the raw materials. But it takes 5-odd years to bring a mine online, so what metals will batteries need in 5 years?
Lithium, sure. But cobalt? Nickel? The technology keeps shifting - helped by projects like this - so who knows.
Meanwhile the mining companies are holding off on new mines, not wanting to be left with stranded assets.
Re: (Score:3)
Meanwhile the mining companies are holding off on new mines, not wanting to be left with stranded assets.
The miners can presell their production with futures contracts, so there is no risk of stranded assets.
Current futures prices for cobalt and nickel are very high because of the Russia sanctions.
Re: (Score:1)
I doubt if five-year futures on niche metals are readily available. And the miner would need forward contracts for the lifetime of the mine, which could be decades, and disastrous if they hit low yields or production delays.
2022 is year of the light, cheap, safe EV battery (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Fast charging, cheap, safe, lightweight batteries are ... a pipe dream
Over the past decade, batteries have had phenomenal improvements in all these areas.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
...just like EVs are still a blip on the radar compared to internal combustion engines.
In March this year, fully electric cars represented 16.1% of total sales here in the UK and in many other European countries the percentage is even higher. I wouldn't call that a "blip", particularly when you include plug-in hybrids (6.6%).
I do of course agree that the vehicle population takes about 20 years to turn over, and as a result EVs currently represent only a small percentage of total vehicles (perhaps small enough to be described as a 'blip'). Clearly, even if EVs represented 100% of new ve
Re: (Score:2)
The UK is at #11.
The person you replied to is just being a troll, but 15% sales in the UK over 20 years won't increase the number of extant EVs to more than "blip" status.
You really need to get China, the US, Brazil, and Japan onboard.
Re: (Score:2)
Fast charging, cheap, safe, lightweight batteries are like EVs Year of the Linux Desktop: they're a pipe dream that's always another year around the corner.
Eh? We have fast charging, safe, cheap lightweight batteries. Have you been asleep for the last 20 years? Do you not remember what batteries used to be like?
Re: (Score:2)
Fast charging, cheap, safe, lightweight batteries are like EVs Year of the Linux Desktop: they're a pipe dream that's always another year around the corner.
Eh? We have fast charging, safe, cheap lightweight batteries. Have you been asleep for the last 20 years? Do you not remember what batteries used to be like?
LOL, "cheap". Except prices at my local car dealership say otherwise. But I know, must be some conspiracy or something.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Two steps forward, one step backward. You used to be able to bring batteries on planes. Now, lithium batteries are banned.
Apart from the ones in everyone's phone, laptop, tablet, headphones, etc?
You can also take spare batteries and even pretty huge ones if the airline is happy. Even my large drill batteries are well under the limit. Lithium batteries are everywhere to the point where almost everyone in the country is carrying one at all times, often two or three. Regulations have come in not because they'r
Re: (Score:2)
My last plane flight included ~250Wh of lithium batteries (2 laptops, a portable battery pack, phone, tablet, headphones)
And? Aren't 100 other companies doing this too? (Score:2)
Any and all companies that heavily use or make batteries are probably researching the same thing.
Pilot plant in 2024? (Score:2)
I love the idea of dates when this stuff will be available when they don't even know what it's made from. Will it actually arrive sooner than fusion power?
Re: (Score:2)
I love the idea of dates when this stuff will be available when they don't even know what it's made from. Will it actually arrive sooner than fusion power?
I'm all about EV's and renewable. But here's a red flag. When anything is claimed to be a game changer, I read that as the device is more of a game than a change. https://thedriven.io/2022/04/0... [thedriven.io]