BYD Unveils New Super-Charging EV Tech With Peak Speeds of 1,000 kW (yahoo.com) 215
fahrbot-bot shares a report from Reuters: BYD on Monday unveiled a new platform for electric vehicles (EVs) that it said could charge EVs as quickly as it takes to pump gas and announced for the first time that it would build a charging network across China. The so-called "super e-platform" will be capable of peak charging speeds of 1,000 kilowatts (kW), enabling cars that use it to travel 400 km (249 miles) on a 5-minute charge, founder Wang Chuanfu said at an event livestreamed from the company's Shenzhen headquarters.
Charging speeds of 1,000 kW would be twice as fast as Tesla's superchargers whose latest version offers up to 500 kw charging speeds. The new charging architecture will be initially available in two new EVs -- Han L sedan and Tang L SUV priced from 270,000 yuan ($37,328.91) and BYD said it would build over 4,000 ultra-fast charging piles, or units, across China to match the new platform. "In order to completely solve our user's charging anxiety, we have been pursuing a goal to make the charging time of electric vehicles as short as the refuelling time of petrol vehicles," Wang said.
"This is the first time in the industry that the unit of megawatt (charge) has been achieved on charging power," he said.
Charging speeds of 1,000 kW would be twice as fast as Tesla's superchargers whose latest version offers up to 500 kw charging speeds. The new charging architecture will be initially available in two new EVs -- Han L sedan and Tang L SUV priced from 270,000 yuan ($37,328.91) and BYD said it would build over 4,000 ultra-fast charging piles, or units, across China to match the new platform. "In order to completely solve our user's charging anxiety, we have been pursuing a goal to make the charging time of electric vehicles as short as the refuelling time of petrol vehicles," Wang said.
"This is the first time in the industry that the unit of megawatt (charge) has been achieved on charging power," he said.
Megawatt (Score:4, Informative)
(that is rather impressive, actually)
Re: Megawatt (Score:5, Funny)
Zero-point-zero-zero-one jiggawatts!
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
1,000 kW? That's a megawatt. Use the word. (that is rather impressive, actually)
It is, but you won't just be plunking those down without the participation of your local electric utility.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Sorry, but I'm an American. How many horse powers per hour/second/minutes is that?
Re:Megawatt (Score:4, Funny)
Enough to fling a pound of iron across 2.5 football fields in the time it takes for one Superbowl commercial to play.
Re: (Score:2)
How big is that football field expressed in terms of Rhode Island?
Re: (Score:2)
How big is that football field expressed in terms of Rhode Island?
What's a Rhode Island? I thought we measure in terms of Libraries of Congress, or has Trump/DOGE shut that down too?
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, but I'm an American. How many horse powers per hour/second/minutes is that?
It doesn't matter where you went to school. All of us will need to learn about electrical charging soon.
Using 1 megawatt to charge the battery for five minutes is just how fast the charging is happening. The question you're asking is about as relevant as asking how many gallons per minute is a gas pump filling your car. If the gas pump at the Chevron station can fill my gas tank twice as fast as the pump at Costco, does that make it better?
Actually, for EVs, sometimes the difference between a 5 minute ch
Re:Megawatt (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
>So it's likely 1MW/hour.
Just no.
Energy would be, for example, a megawatt-hour not a megawatt per hour. Anyone that writes “it’s likely 1MW/hour” should not be discussing physical units and dimensional analysis, especially in response to a correction of misuse of units.
The charger delivers one megawatt. That is the reported power. It charges for 5 minutes (300 seconds). That is the reported time. This delivers 300 megajoules. That is the reported energy.
Re:Megawatt (Score:5, Interesting)
A thousand amps at a thousand volts? That's a serious conductor. Are they using solid bus bars instead of cables?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It amazed me how long the general public failed to understand the impact of cooling. Back in the early days of EVs, Slashdot was full of self-assured geniuses with their calculations that EVs could never charge quickly because the cables would be too thick. I used to try to explain that those calculations are for uncooled cables in steady-state, and you can do orders of magnitude higher charge rates from a given cable if you have active cooling, but they adamantly refused to hear it.
Passive air cooling is
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Megawatt (Score:5, Informative)
I would not expect so. For high voltage most of the current will move along the skin of your conductor, so you are much better off increasing the total surface area of the skin by using multiple bundled conductors. You might need to liquid cool the cables to keep them at a manageable temperature. Also, the lithium battery pack will charge with something around 95% efficiency. That other 5% will become heat. Some in the cable, but probably a lot in the battery pack. So that's 50 KW of heat or around 170,000 BTUs/hr, which is about what you would need for a home furnace in a 3000 square foot home in a cold climate, for example. Still a car radiator can handle radiating heat at around 100 KW or more, but that's the radiator for an ICE. The ba ttery could sink that much heat. Estimating around 300 kg for the battery, that would be around 50 kJ per kg of battery. That's very roughly enough to raise the temperature of the battery by 50 degrees C applied instantaneously. Starting at room temperature, that's skin-meltingly hot, but obviously you would have the radiator going during charging and heat would radiate away from the battery, be conducted to the rest of the car, etc. So it would not heat up that much. Still, a design concern for a car meant to charge like this might include a beefier cooling system for the battery itself and a larger, more powerful radiator. Or the charging station itself could have some built in cooling features. A cooling unit that sits under the car, for example, or coolant hoses that are part of the charging connector that snap on and pump heat back to the charger, etc.
Of course, charging efficiency could be up by 98%, but best to design for a worst case scenario and battery heating could be a limiting factor for MegaWatt vehicle chargers. If the goal is to keep charging times consistently fast, it will need to be dealt with.
Re:Megawatt (Score:5, Informative)
For high voltage most of the current will move along the skin of your conductor, so you are much better off increasing the total surface area of the skin by using multiple bundled conductors
You're thinking of the skin effect [wikipedia.org] applies to conductors carrying high-frequency (not high-voltage) electricity.
DC circuits of whatever voltage are unaffected by the skin effect, and EV fast charging is essentially exclusively DC.
Re: (Score:3)
You're right about the skin effect. Should have been more clear about about AC vs. DC. Generally speaking, like you say, current tends to flow through the whole conductor rather than the outer layer with DC, whereas the higher the frequency of AC, the more the electricity travels along the skin. However, I have always understood the issue to be more complex than that. The current flowing through the entire cross section of a wire with DC is the textbook model. In the real world, other forces apply. Specific
Re: (Score:3)
Wrong.
For AC, current tends to move along the outside of the conductor. Skin effect is an AC thing, and skin depth is a function of frequency. It doesn't really effect DC.
Multiple bundles conductors only help with skin effect if they're arranged the right way. The effect is caused by the changing magnetic field generated the changing current flowing in wire. so spreads across adjacent conductors. See Litz wire.
All of this information is on wikipedia.
Re:Megawatt (Score:5, Informative)
so you are much better off increasing the total surface area of the skin by using multiple bundled conductors.
We don't need to guess, these things already exist and the standard for MCS (Megawatt Charging System) is due to be finalised this year after some 5 years of testing. The standard will almost certainly be 2 large single current carrying conductors, hollowed out and liquid cooled. Though it's not clear yet if liquid cooling will be required for 1MW charging, the standard will cover up to 4.5MW. As someone else pointed out you're thinking of skin effect which doesn't come into play here. Single conductors will be used.
There's multiple options being looked at currently and none of them involve simply a radiator. Current testing with MCS include liquid-liquid heat exchangers from the charging station to an external cooling solution. I.e. the batteries are cooled by the same system that cools the cables. Another option that is far more likely is the active heatpump used to maintain cabin temperature being sized to chill coolant for the battery which puts you back in ICE level radiator efficiency. - Remember all vehicles already have a cooling system, it's not like something *new* is being added.
Re: (Score:3)
Beyond everyone correcting you about the skin effect, you don't lose 5% of the power in the battery pack, and EV radiators are sized for their cooling task. At high power chargers, EVs often make noise because they open up any radiator louvres to fully open and turn their cooling fans up to max. When driving, by contrast, any louvres remain mostly closed and fans at low to off. This lets EVs balance drag and noise with cooling power.
Also, it's not just the pack that heats. The pack very quickly loses hea
Re: (Score:2)
1) the skin effect does not exist at low frequencies and also has nothing to do with voltage or power, only frequency, and is completely irrelevant for car charging
2) all DC fast charge cables are already liquid cooled by necessity, even the sub-300kW ones
Roadmaps for megawatt chargers already exist, but even electric semi trucks aren't using them. Electric semi trucks have converged on regular old CCS2 connectors that go up to 350 or
Re: (Score:2)
MWC is going to 1250 V * 3000 A.
Re: (Score:2)
The truck chargers are either water cooled, or split so you use two cables carrying 150-175W each.
Re: (Score:3)
I can recommend @elektrotrucker (@electrictrucker is his English channel) to see the state of the charging infrastruct
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, but if you want a sustained very high charge rate you need to either water cool the cable or have two of them. That's why a lot of things with very large batteries simply have multiple CCS sockets.
Re:Megawatt (Score:4, Funny)
or split so you use two cables carrying 150-175W each.
I knew USB PD would eventually be used to charge cars. :)
Re: (Score:2)
There is no such thing as a "800V battery". All li-ion batteries operate at approximately 4V. You're thinking of 800V charging systems. The batteries never see this voltage; they always see "in the ballpark of 4V". A charging system of a given number of kW can achieve those kW with either high currents, high voltages, or a combination of the two; from the cell perspective, what changes is how many cells are in series vs. parallel. It doesn't affect the cell C rates at all, which you choose. Any of these
Re: Megawatt (Score:4, Informative)
"There is no such thing as a "800V battery". All li-ion batteries operate at approximately 4V."
That is completely factually incorrect
All li-ion CELLS operate at about 4v.
You can absolutely make an 800v nominal battery. It'd have 200 cells in series, and as many parallel strings as needed to get sufficient current for the application.
You seem to have confused yourself about basic terminology here.
Re: (Score:2)
"There is no such thing as a "800V battery". All li-ion batteries operate at approximately 4V."
That is completely factually incorrect. All li-ion CELLS operate at about 4v. You can absolutely make an 800v nominal battery. It'd have 200 cells in series, and as many parallel strings as needed to get sufficient current for the application. You seem to have confused yourself about basic terminology here.
Yeah, the terminology seems to have slid away from us.
Quite right, literally a battery is the word for multiple cells, and a single individual unit of the battery is an electrochemical cell. (In fact, you can have batteries of things other than electrochemical cells: a battery of cannons, for example.)
But, today, everybody seems to use the words interchangeably. You talk about changing the batteries (plural) in your flashlight, even though though you put in C-cells. I work with battery chemists, and even
Re: (Score:2)
Oh yes, there's certainly no turning back the clock on consumer use. And really, there's no reason for most people to know the difference.
Here on Slashdot, where we're talking about technical concepts, on the other hand...
Re: Megawatt (Score:3)
What you said: "All li-ion batteries operate at approximately 4V"
This is horse shit from literally every angle.
Then you doubled down on being wrong.
The technical difference between a "battery" and a "battery pack" is that the "battery" may or may not have an enclosure around multiple cells, while the "battery pack" always does. That's the "pack" part, though.
A single cell is NOT a battery. It is a cell. If it is in a battery, you might call it a "battery cell". The colloquial use of "battery" has come to in
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It may be impressive, but I thought Kempower already had MegaWatt range vehicle chargers.
Re: (Score:3)
But the article is full of the usual hype-and-lack-of-understanding reporting. And I'm not even talking about how we're comparing future numbers (which may change) with present numbers. Take for example:
" enabling cars that use it to travel 400 km (249 miles) on a 5-minute charge, "
China uses the insanely optimistic CLTC drivecycle. You need to cut like 20%-ish off that to get European WLTP drivecycle range figures, and 30-40% to get the EPA drivecycle range figures
Also, high charge rate batteries have b
Re: (Score:2)
BYD (Score:3)
They make great cars too bad we'll never see them here. Not as long as the world is tribalist.
Re: BYD (Score:3)
Try "Opposed to dictatorships".
Re:BYD (Score:5, Interesting)
How are they able to be sold in Europe where they have more stringent requirements?
Re:BYD (Score:5, Interesting)
Bullshit. You can't drive a wank panzer in the UK because it doesn't meet safety requirements. https://www.forbes.com/sites/p... [forbes.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Bullshit. You can't drive a wank panzer in the UK because it doesn't meet safety requirements. https://www.forbes.com/sites/p... [forbes.com]
Cybertrucks get around safety standards for cars because they are trucks.
Also true for SUVs, by the way. Regulation-wise they are in the category of trucks, which have more lenient standards for fuel efficiency and passenger safety.
Re: (Score:3)
Cybertrucks get around safety standards for cars because they are trucks.
In the US, where they pass the relevant safety standards, they are not trucks. They are light trucks. Those are very different things. You can look the definitions up if you want. You will find that the definition is based mostly on GVWR in the USA.
NHTSA has proposed pedestrian crash test safety standards [nhtsa.gov], but they have not been instituted. So no, Cybertrucks get around the safety standards we're talking about in the US because they do not exist.
In the UK, the Cybertruck is considered to be a "truck" becau
Re:BYD (Score:4, Informative)
Has nothing to do with standards, this is all about protectionism. US car manufacturers are behind with EVs, so they had the laws changed to stop China from taking over their markets.
US is all about free markets as long as US companies dominate. Then it's all protectionism.
Even Tesla is lagging. They went on this AI tangent because they can't compete with battery tech.
Re: (Score:2)
China is dumping. Those EVs won't stay $11k forever. Only long enough to destroy the competition.
Re:BYD (Score:4, Informative)
Your very clever argument is only slightly undermined by the fact that Chinese EVs are sold at much higher prices outside China than inside China (and yet are still on average cheaper than Western EVs). It’s really not difficult to understand: fierce competition, economies of scale, vertical integration, lower costs of labour and materials, and accumulation of knowhow, all mean Chinese OEMs can and must produce EVs at lower cost than Western OEMs.
Re: (Score:3)
Tariffs, higher sale taxes, exchange rate buffering, and they are still building out their dealer and servicing networks in Europe too.
And yet they are still half the price and just as good.
Re:BYD (Score:4, Interesting)
Yup. Look at the Xpeng Mona M03: https://wevee.uk/xpeng/mona-m0... [wevee.uk] and https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
I think European OEMs can still compete, if they can get the core right and find a differentiator. For example, the Renault 5 has a reasonable core (although Renault should have been able to improve the range in the five years since the Zoe) and the design is clearly immensely appealing, at least to motoring journos (but I think probably lots of consumers, too). But it's going to be tough, no doubt.
Re: (Score:3)
Holy crap I hadn't seen that. The price is incredible for what it is.
Hopefully they bring some cheap crossover size ones here soon, because that is a bit small for me, but as a Model 3 rival... Well, there's no comparison really.
Re: (Score:2)
Technically the standards discussion does come up again in this case. The cars sold outside of China are not the same as those sold inside China either. But the parent's point is stupid. The tariffs were specifically sized to address dumping, so that is already factored into the cost they see in their western shop.
Re:BYD (Score:4, Informative)
No you're committing the idiocy of listening to a Fox News talking head. Crash standards are not lower in Europe. They are higher general. However there are some key differences which for singular components make those components higher in the USA. For example front facing airbags in American cars are built to higher expected cushioning standards than European ones, but that's because Americans assume drivers are too stupid to use a seatbelt and need to prevent ejecting the driver through the windscreen while European standards say the airbag only needs to prevent the drivers body from hitting the dash and letting the seatbelt do the rest.
But this kind of stuff is simple component level changes. Fundamental car level safety standards are far stricter in Europe, which is why many trucks from America don't meet European requirements (not just for pedestrian safety, but also for passengers safety due to stricter impact absorption requirements, and rollover resistance requirements in Europe). Any car certified for a road in Europe can be certified in the USA if singular components meet the requirements too. The other way round doesn't work.
I guess making the legal drinking age 21 is also technically a safety standard, so you get a point for that one.
Re: BYD (Score:4, Insightful)
He's just out of date. For many years the US had the most stringent crash safety standards, we were first to require partial offset testing for example. We also went back and forth with Japan over the strictest emission test requirements for cars, although our light truck standards were always problematic. We are not leading in either thing now, though, and it is expected to get much worse as well.
Re:BYD (Score:4, Informative)
Technically correct, but they're actually different, not lower.
It's about difference in type of driving done. In most European nations, there's significantly less highway driving and more city driving. Additionally highway speeds outside German Autobahn system in Europe tend to have lower speed limits than US highway driving. That means average driving speeds during impacts are lower, and collision with pedestrians become far more important than high speed highway collisions with other cars in terms of relative mortality rates.
This leads to things like same car in EU spec having a thin aluminum hood/bonnet that will bend easily, vs thicker steel hood/bonnet in US capable of absorbing some of the impact. Former is better for pedestrian survival, latter is better for high speed car occupant survival.
Ultimately this is a function of distances between population centers and average driving distance. For someone driving in US, better high speed collision resistance is more important. For someone driving in EU, less harmful outcomes of low speed collisions with pedestrians is more important.
And no, this is not about propaganda wank on "Europe being nicer to pedestrians" and whatnot, this is about insurance premiums. Lifelong debilitating head injuries are an extreme outlier in payouts.
Re:BYD (Score:5, Informative)
It’s more than that. There *are no* pedestrian safety standards for cars in the US. None, nada. They don’t exist. Only vehicle occupant safety standards.
And you can self-certify for the latter in the US, which you can’t in Europe
Re:BYD (Score:4, Insightful)
They sell well in Europe.
Not to say anything good about Chinese companies, but my biggest three fears about Chinese cars were location tracking, remote disabling without permission, and lack of parts. Well, looks like one doesn't have to go to the Far East for those fears to be realized. So, my hesitation for buying Chinese stuff has dropped.
Plus, the US, cars are way overpriced, and selection is garbage compared to every other world market (especially China, Europe or the UAE). Not everyone wants or can afford a Canyonero. Something like a serial hybrid or PHEV would be perfect for something that is an urban runabout, but when power goes out or one is in a rural area (chargers wind up getting vandalized in some areas), one can just use the range extender.
Re: (Score:2)
Those are three strange fears to have. Location tracking is somewhat irrelevant to me. I really don't give a shit if Xi gets hourly updates where I am, he has no power over me. I'm afraid of my own government, not one of which I'm not a citizen and is located on the other side of the world.
Remote disabling is covered by consumer protection laws. A Chinese company that breaches consumer laws in Europe won't be selling anything in Europe much longer, and if you're talking about war times, well then my EV will
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Including the UK tests (and I presume EU), which evaluate the victims of your traffic collision even if they're un-persons (i.e. not in a car). Something the Cyber truck fails, but BYD cars do not.
If you build the charger, battery tech will come? (Score:2)
My car is rates to 250kw of charging, but it quickly drops off as the batteries heat. I suppose they could put a lot more effort into heating the batteries before arriving at a charger and then a lot more effort into cooling the batteries while charging. That means extra cost, complication, and weight, lowering efficiency. Or they could just kill battery longevity. Or they could just be making ultra fast chargers that will be underutilized while waiting for battery tech to catch up.
Re: (Score:2)
To me it seems most logical to put the cooling functions into the stationary charging station itself rather than into the car. It makes sense if it is only for the purpose of handling battery heating during charging. This could be from a cooling unit that cools from under the car, or potentially by hooking a coolant cable loop from the charger to the car.
Re: (Score:3)
My car charging rate is around 10 to 20MW
I can fill up 600kWh in about 2 minutes
Re: (Score:3)
But you can only use 150kWh of that 600, with the rest being spewed out as heat
Re: If you build the charger, battery tech will co (Score:2)
Still only takes 2 minutes
Re: If you build the charger, battery tech will co (Score:4, Interesting)
Sure, but what matters is how much of your time is being wasted, engaged in the process of fuelling or charging.
I spent less than 2 minutes of my time on my last two charges, with zero inconvenience to me:
1. At the weekend, I drove from London to Durham, stopped at Markham Vale for dinner. I didn’t really need to charge, but thought I might as well. I parked the car in the same car park I’d have used if I wasn’t charging, plugged the car in and tapped my phone to start the charge (30 seconds) and went for dinner. When I finished dinner, I came back to the car, unplugged (15 seconds) and drove off. If I’d been refuelling an ICE vehicle, I would have had to drive from the restaurant car park to the petrol station, stand around for those two minutes you mentioned to pump the fuel, then go inside to pay. It would have been five minutes, which is hardly the end of the world, but would clearly have been *less* convenient
2. Last night, I noticed the car was on 14%. So I plugged in when I got home. When I next need the car I’ll unplug. That’ll have taken 45 seconds total. Again, more convenient than having to use a petrol station
There’s no use case for me where refuelling an ICE car is more convenient and uses less of my time than charging an EV. And I think pretty much any UK driver with the ability to install a home charger (which is about 70% of all drivers) would be in the same position.
Cable Should Be Interesting (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Probably pretty sizeable. CCS allows for up to 1000V in it's current deployed standard, so "only" 1000A (it's specced for 500).
I'd imagine that for these kind of charge rates there'd be some sort of active thermal sensing in the plug and socket housing, along with a current ramp at the beginning.
any tiny resistance in the connector will result in a fire in no time.
It's crazy. With the I^2 term, normal contact resistances are going to dissipate kilowatts. Though as I said they're already specced for 500A, wh
Re: (Score:2)
Erm, this article is about the batteries, not the chargers BYD’s new *cars* will be capable of charging at this speed (470km in five minutes).
Re: (Score:2)
“to *match the new platform*”. The *article* is about the platform. It *mentions* that BYD is also building out chargers, but the *subject* of the article is the platform. And the OP hadn’t spotted that there was anything in the article about the platform because they wanged on about 250kW charging in their car, when the article is about batteries capable of 1MW charging that will be in two models next year.
Battery lifespan (Score:5, Interesting)
You can only push so much current into a battery without destroying it and the higher the current, the faster they degrade.
Not to mention modern fast chargers are 1000v and at the limit of how much current you can push through their wires and connectors. To hit 1 megawatt you either need even higher voltages, or higher current- both of which require stouter cables and connectors. Not to mention the added safety risks that come with such systems.
Is it doable? Sure. Do I think current battery designs can handle those rates without rapid degradation? No.
Re: (Score:2)
American complacency and smugness on full show. BYD have an excellent track record of delivering the tech they’ll say they deliver. And that tech has an excellent track record of reliability.
Stroking your chin and saying “aha, but what about degradation” as though keeping degradation to acceptable levels won’t have been one of the key engineering objectives for BYD, to which they’’ll have devoted really substantial effort, is just absurd.
Re: (Score:2)
> And that tech has an excellent track record of reliability.
I have to say I am absolutely loving the BYD shills that come out in force every time they are mentioned.
BYD has only been making cars for 19 years and EVs for 15 and their early models most certainly were not reliable so I have no clue what this claim is based on.
But hey- there's no reason to argue about this- we'll see if this actually materializes.
> Stroking your chin and saying “aha, but what about degradation” as though keep
Re: (Score:3)
Ahh yes- they've made a battery breakthrough
Breakthrough? It's not a breakthrough to charge li-ion at 5C. It only requires cooling. As you yourself point out, they've had a decade and a half to get that worked out, and only their early models were not reliable.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
EVs for 15 and their early models most certainly were not reliable so I have no clue what this claim is based on.
Their cars 15 years ago were as reliable as the standards at that time demanded.
Idiot very much?
Ahh yes- they've made a battery breakthrough and kept it a complete secret instead of yelling it from the rooftops to prove how awesome Chinese tech is... Would you like to buy a bridge?
Ah, I see you are an idiot. Stupid bridge meme???
What is the leading battery:
- manufacturer/seller
- researcher
- publi
Re: (Score:2)
Higher current requires thicker conductors to limit resistive losses and heat buildup.
Higher voltage requires insulation to prevent sparks or leakage, but that's easy to handle and doesn't require a whole lot. The wiring in your house is usually rated to handle 600v, even though it will never see more than a 240v potential difference.
Re: (Score:3)
Is it doable? Sure.
Not only is it doable, it's been proven years ago to the point where charging systems designed for 4.5MW are expected to be finalised with the update to IEC 61851-23 this year. It's a 1.5kV charging system by the way with actively cooled cables.
Do I think current battery designs can handle those rates without rapid degradation? No.
That kind of fear has been present since day one of EVs, and it has been proven unfounded. Engineers know what they are doing and know the problems batteries face and design around these problems. Part of the higher power MCS test include an active external cooling l
Re: (Score:2)
> Not only is it doable, it's been proven years ago to the point where charging systems designed for 4.5MW are expected to be finalised with the update to IEC 61851-23 this year. It's a 1.5kV charging system by the way with actively cooled cables.
I'm well aware of what the charging standards allow and water cooling is already used in some charging cables- that's nothing new.
> That kind of fear has been present since day one of EVs, and it has been proven unfounded. Engineers know what they are doing a
Re: (Score:2)
Many commercial vehicles accept 1MW or more already, without serious degradation issues. They key is that they have massive batteries, or usually multiple batteries that are charged individually and multiple chargers to do it.
A 200kWh battery at 1MW would only be 5C, well within the safe zone for modern chemistries. BYD has been making batteries much larger than that for years, it's just a question of if they can fit one to a car. My guess would be that they probably can these days.
Re: (Score:2)
> A 200kWh battery
What car is shipping with a 200kWh battery aside from the Hummer EV?
> BYD has been making batteries much larger than that for years, it's just a question of if they can fit one to a car. My guess would be that they probably can these days.
Sure, a Hummer.
> at 1MW would only be 5C, well within the safe zone for modern chemistries.
Even the Ioniq 5 maxes out at 2.9C and averages closer to 2.3C.
You're talking double that and with a massive battery. With a much more realistic 100kWh bat
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, because China never plays fast and loose with safety standards.
Seriously- we're talking about fundamental limits of physics- you need proper insulation and sufficient cable diameter to carry current without overheating.
Meanwhile... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Jokes aside the new Megawatt Charging System standard actually does include a familiar name. "Ethernet" Specifically 10BASE-T1S for the vehicle to charger communication systems.
I plugged my car into ... (Score:2)
I plugged my car into the new megawatt charger and blew the whole power substation.
{^_-} Well, the lights dimmed to be sure.
Psychological vs real barriers (Score:5, Interesting)
Feels to me that this tech is largely useful for addressing consumer perceptions of EV shortcomings. In practice, most EV drivers will rarely feel the need to charge this fast, at least in most of the world. What this battery tech enables is driving 400 miles, stopping for 5 minutes, and then driving another 250 miles. That’s 650 miles of driving — 10 hours — with only a five minute break. The vast majority of people, including in the US, do not drive like that, ever. For Brits, I am 100% confident that what people do on longer trips, is what I did when I drove from London to Durham at the weekend: they drive for 2.5 or 3 hours, stop for a piss and a bite to eat and a stretch and a rest, and then drive another 2 hours to their destination. Plugging in my car while I did this added a max of 1 minute of extra time — the chargers are in the car park, so it was just plug in, tap my phone and head off to the fish and chip shop (Chesters, it was pretty good: http://eatatchesters.com/ [eatatchesters.com]). A five minute charge would have been inconvenient, as I’d have felt obliged to go back to the car and unplug before I’d finished my dinner.
So I think of this kind of charging advance as being a halo product, designed to put people’s minds at ease and increase consumer acceptance.
Re: Psychological vs real barriers (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: Psychological vs real barriers (Score:4, Interesting)
Hi Fluffernutter!
As always, I readily concede that your needs are very different and an EV won’t meet your use case for a long while yet. I don’t see that changing even with this 1MW charging, and even if you had 1MW chargers right across Canada. I mean, tbh, what would, in my view, serve you better, is the ability to drive 8 hours non-stop and then recharge during the 16 hours out of each 24 when you’re not driving, for that giant road trip across the country. Presumably you’re talking about 8 hours at 70mph at -20C, so that’s a range of 600 miles in extremely cold conditions (allowing for 40 miles of safety). There are EVs coming this year or next that’ll do 600 miles in the summer, but I think it’ll be a decade before they’ll do it in -20C. So as I say, I think it’ll be years before an EV comes along that can meet your needs.
But I respectfully submit you are way out there on the unusual end of the use case spectrum, and I’m pretty close to the centre. As with the UK, more than 80% of Canadians live in urban settings, and the vast majority of them would not drive across the country doing 8 hours driving a day in -20C. It’s not that you and your needs aren’t important - they are - but you and they are *infrequent*.
The best data I can quickly find on this is a survey showing that in 2022, 77% of Canadians said they were planning a road trip, and of those, only 9% said that was a trip involving more than 24 hours of driving, ie under 7% of the total population. And this survey was about *summer* road trips. There’s no data for winter road trips, but clearly summer road trips are much more frequent than winter road trips. And clearly, many people *are* willing to put up with crappy food, or want to stop to go to the loo, or to rest longer, and don’t care if their day’s driving is 8.5 hours instead of 8. So as I say, the number of people driving the way you do is going to be tiny. And some of them may well be willing to consider a rental ICE for that long trip, and will happily use an EV for the rest of their driving.
Re: (Score:2)
Vacuum insulation panels don't take a lot of room. By combining that with watercooling and block heater outlets it's technically possible to make cold weather EVs right now, when not driving the battery stays warm and while driving the battery stays warm, but the market isn't large enough to justify.
Re: (Score:2)
Given that:
- Chinese OEMs have developed all sorts of tech for all sorts of weird edge cases, eg premium SUVs that can swim like the Yangwang U8
- winter range anxiety is a highly salient factor cited for consumer purchase reluctance for EVs
- and the market of car buyers who really would experience cold weather range shortening is big (even here in the UK, I see a 25% drop in winter range)
there must be some compelling technical and commercial reasons for the tech you mentioned not to have been deployed. I do
Re: Psychological vs real barriers (Score:2)
Re: Psychological vs real barriers (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Generally I would go grocery shopping and pack a cooler or go to subway when leaving the city I'm in and eat on the road.
So what you're saying is you would drive as long a distance as possible without taking a reasonable break? What else do you do to endanger others? Drink drive?
If you're doing more than 2 hours in a row without a break you're driving impaired. Take a fucking break, it's not a competition.
Re: (Score:2)
Could also be useful for transport trucks.
1,000 kW in a BYD ?!? (Score:2)
Yep, that's a fire (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Kablooey! (Score:4, Informative)
Don’t fool yourself. Just because Americans buy the cheapest shit available doesn’t mean China is not capable of making a quality product. You think the Chinese military is making late USSR quality technology? If manufacturing came back to the USA people would still buy the cheapest low quality shit imaginable.
Rich Rebuilds was able to examine some Chinese EVs while they were in Alaska for testing. These cars are literally half the price of anything made here and nicer fit and finish. https://youtu.be/3QOa__xaCPs?s... [youtu.be]
Re: (Score:2)
> You think the Chinese military is making late USSR quality technology?
Judging by their military aircraft engines- yes.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
You are a few decades out of the loop.
The Chinese stealth fighters beat the F22 and F35 in every thinkable regard. Except for vertical take off an landing, of course.
And regarding the Russians: their jets are not bad. Just expensive and even more expensive in maintenance. Some of them have not even 100 flight hours until the whole engine needs to be replaced. That is basically a knock out criterium.
Re:Kablooey! (Score:5, Funny)
The Chinese stealth fighters beat the F22 and F35 in every thinkable regard.
America: Hogwash, we haven't seen any evidence that these stealth fighters even exist!
China: Precisely!
Re: (Score:2)
Well given what we know of F35s it seems a child with two cardboard wings strapped to his arms can bet that.
Re: Watt per what? (Score:3)
There is. A Watt is 1 Joule per second. Or if you take it all the way to base units, one kilogram-square-metre per second per second per second. That enough time units for you?
Re: Watt per what? (Score:2)
But when are the Yurpeans converting to 100-second minutes and 100-minute hours?
Be consistent!