Lithium News

A leaked timeline from French carmaker Renault shows an upgraded, second-generation all-electric Zoe is planned for production from September 2019, followed by three more hybrid models in 2020.

The leak firms up previous reports of a camouflaged next-gen Renault Zoe that was spotted in France in October 2018, and is rumoured will be built on a bespoke platform with upgraded battery and charging specifications.

The timeline was first published on French news site Largus, shows a continuing electrification strategy for the French carmaker, which announced last October its plan to further its international expansion starting with China, with its expanding range of zero and low emissions vehicles.

This is now confirmed in the timeline below, which shows a Clio V hybrid, Megane plug-in hybrid and Captur II plug-in hybrid planned for 2020.

In addition to the leaked timeline, details of upgraded specs for the Renault Zoe II electric hatchback as reported by Largus promise a big improvement on charging capabilities: 100kW CCS2 fast charging, to be exact (22kW AC charging will remain).

To put that in perspective, the current model available to order through Renault’s Australian dealerships has a 41kWh battery, 300km real-world range and motor with 68kW output and 220Nm torque – and only 22kW AC charging.

It is also expected that the new Zoe II will have a slightly larger battery of 50kWh and with it, an improved range of 400km.

In addition to improved charging and battery specs, the Zoe II will also feature Level 2 autonomy features such as Lane Keeping Assist, Active Cruise Control and a “Traffic Jam” system to allow the vehicle to edge forwards in traffic without the driver’s intervention.

Design-wise, there will be little change from Zoe’s first-gen looks save a refresh to the front end including hood, windscreen, and grille, and the rear lights and window.

Missing from the timeline is the promised all-electric K-ZE, the concept for which debuted at last year’s Paris Motor Show and which is slated first for China.

There are as yet no details on specs for the Clio V hybrid, or PHEV Megane and Captur II.

The New York Public Service Commission on Thursday authorized utilities to spend $31.6 million to build up to 1,075 fast-charging electric vehicle stations and recover costs from ratepayers over seven years (18-E-0138).

The program is intended to help spur sales of EVs by reducing people’s “range anxiety” — the fear of running out of juice on the road — and to achieve Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s Charge NY goal of 10,000 EV charging stations by the end of 2021 and 800,000 zero-emission vehicles by 2025.

The commission’s Feb. 8 order outlines a flow of actions, including annual reviews, that “are smart and timely steps to enable new and needed infrastructure at sensible budgets and at sensible payment structures,” PSC Chairman John B. Rhodes said. “It puts a wide range of partners in a position to invest their money in our agenda for the benefit of all New Yorkers.”

The PSC last April approved a seven-year tariff for Consolidated Edison’s quick-charging station program (17-E-0814)

In a related case (18-E-0206), the PSC in November rejected tariff filings for residential EV charging from all the major utilities in the state and ordered them to file revisions that implement time-of-use rates equal to the traditional residential customer charge.

The new proceeding grew out of a joint petition last April by the New York Power Authority, along with the state’s Department of Environmental Conservation, Department of Transportation and Thruway Authority, seeking rate relief for DC fast-charging (DCFC) facilities for EVs.

The state’s Department of Public Service held a technical conference on the issue last summer, and in November the utilities joined the state agencies in filing a consensus proposal for the program.

Rate Design

Mary Ann Sorrentino, chief of electric rates and tariffs for the DPS, testified that rate design was the PSC’s main concern.

“To capture cost savings from potential technology cost declines, the draft order requires that initial incentive amounts be tied to the year in which the station qualifies for the program,” she said.

Sorrentino said plugs must have a 50-kW minimum charging capability to qualify for the program and that higher incentives will be provided to plugs with a minimum simultaneous charging capability of 75 kW.

Within 90 days of Thursday’s order, the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority must disburse the $31.6 million in unencumbered legacy system benefits charge (SBC) funds to the state’s six regulated utilities in the following amounts: Con Ed ($6.4 million); Orange and Rockland Utilities ($1.66 million); Central Hudson Gas & Electric ($4.4 million); Niagara Mohawk Power ($9 million); New York State Electric and Gas ($5.1 million); and Rochester Gas & Electric ($5 million).

The SBC provides funding for NYSERDA programs targeting energy efficiency, research and development and the low-income sector.

Commissioner Diane Burman brought up the $128 million New York received as its share of Volkswagen’s national settlement for flagrant emissions standards violations, which the state has earmarked for clean transportation measures such as promoting EV use.

“I understand there’s a separate track for that; I’m not looking to get involved in stuff that’s outside our jurisdiction,” Burman said. “To the extent that it complements us … it is extremely important that we are complementing each other in a way that makes sense. Here we’re talking about taking unencumbered legacy funds that seem to never, ever be ending over at NYSERDA, and utilizing them now for part of this.”

The state estimates EV sales were up 50% last year from 2017, with more than 43,000 EVs on the road by October, one-third of them battery electric and the rest plug-in hybrids.

“EVs, as is well known, have a chicken-and-egg problem,” Commissioner Gregg C. Sayre said. “Chargers aren’t being built because there aren’t enough EVs, and EVs aren’t being bought because there aren’t enough chargers. This item helps us get out of that cycle.”

Notable Differences

The PSC decided to minimize some of the “notable differences” contained in the consensus proposal.

“For example, pursuant to the consensus proposal, the Con Ed and Orange and Rockland per-plug incentives were to provide a combined benefit in conjunction with delivery rate discounts offered under the Business Incentive Rate [BIR] and Economic Development Rate, respectively, whereas the other utilities’ per-plug incentives were designed assuming that DCFC stations will not receive other delivery rate discounts,” Sorrentino said.

The Con Ed and O&R proposals were also unique in that they contained a separate load-factor incentive whereby station owners would earn a $500 incentive annually for achieving a 5% load factor, and $1,500 annually for achieving a 10% load factor, she said.

The commission found “the load-factor incentive to be unnecessary at this time, as station owners have a natural incentive to maximize station utilization,” Sorrentino said.

Under Con Ed’s tariff, the BIR was available to owners of EV quick-charging stations with a minimum aggregate charging capacity of 100 kW and a maximum aggregate demand of 2,000 kW in New York City and Westchester County.

“This BIR has been open to electric vehicle quick-charging station developers since April, and that market has not materialized,” testified Bridget Woebbe, assistant counsel for the DPS. “Removing the restrictions really allows site hosts that are providing a direct capital investment by building the critical infrastructure to receive the appropriate incentive to deliver the public good of the DCFC.”

Imagine a world where you never need to worry about finding somewhere to charge your phone’s battery? The utopian dream of a long-lasting and sustainable battery might just be around the corner.

But is it realistic? Whilst we are not there yet, there has been a flurry of work by researchers around the world to make this a distinct possibility.

Researchers and other scientists long-ago realized that if we are serious about moving to a more sustainable future we really need to fix the issue of limited capacity energy storage, like batteries. This has led to global discussions on the issue at hand.

There has even been an explosion in nimble startups dedicating themselves to the job. Their solutions range from incremental improvements on the ancient battery design to more out-of-the-box solutions.

To date, these range from micro-capacitors, miniatured solid oxide fuel cells, graphene polymer, aluminum-graphite, and gold nanowire technology and even sodium. There are batteries that can be charged by water, skin, sound waves, urine and plants and even salt and foam.

Yet, despite this explosion in ideas, none have yet been able to be commercially viable. At least, not yet.

One hurdle could be the lack of funds this area of research has managed to get. Lux Research, a technology research company, has estimated that of the 4 billion dollars spent on energy research, only 1% has been sunk into energy research over the last 10 years.

According to The American Energy Innovation Council, the United States, in particular, spends more on potato chip and tortilla varieties than on sustainable R and D.

Why we need to move away from lithium-ion

But what’s wrong with lithium-ion batteries we hear you cry. This technology is widely available and relatively affordable for most.

But this belies the true cost of these diminutive power stores. Their production is far from sustainable.

Their component parts are often sourced unethically, from enormous mines and tend to be very damaging to the environment when they reach life’s end.

As a matter of fact, Li-on batteries are not a recent innovation, despite what you might think. The technology can trace its origin to around 1912 thanks to the work of an American physical chemist Gilbert Newton.

But, it wouldn’t be until the 1970s that non-chargeable Li-on batteries would hit the market.

Whilst today they come in a wide variety of sizes and shapes, their basic anatomy is virtually identical. Li-on polymer batteries, for example, only really differ from their other Li-on brothers and sisters by the use of dry solid polymer electrolyte.

Early chargeable Li-on batteries used lithium-based electrodes, but this was found to be less than ideal in the 1980s. They could become very hot indeed and could even be a potential fire hazard.

Today’s batteries, on the other hand, replace lithium metal and instead use lithium cobalt for the cathode and graphite for the anode. The battery’s electrolyte is also made of lithium salt.

The demand for lithium-ion batteries has led to a huge thirst for lithium the world over. So much so, that the price of it has doubled between 2016 and 2018.

One of the biggest sources of lithium is the so-called Lithium-Triangle that covers Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile. To extract it, miners drill holes in salt flats and pump salty, mineral-rich brine to the surface.

This is then left to simply evaporate in the sun and the lithium-rich salts scrapped up. But this process uses a lot of water.

So much, in fact, that local farmers really suffer for want of a decent amount of water for their crops. Not only that, but the process of extracting lithium can lead to the potential for toxic chemicals used in the process to leak into the local water cycle.

Disposal of them is also problematic for the environment. Whilst finding methods of recycling them effectively or finding other methods of extracting lithium from seawater could help solve a potential bottleneck in supply, it is only really a plaster on a broken arm.

We do really need to find an alternative to this venerable and ubiquitous battery.

What are some potential alternatives to Li-on?

To date, there are some interesting areas of research that could provide the potential for booting Li-on of its throne. The growth in electronics over the last century shows that the need for a long-lasting and sustainable battery is ever more pressing.

Other industries are also driving the impetus to get this sorted out as soon as possible. Electrical vehicles, in particular, will put even more pressure on dwindling natural resources and compound the already questionable practices employed in producing Lithium-ion batteries today.

Bearing that in mind, the following 4 areas of research could pave the way for a more long-lasting and sustainable battery of the future. There are many more projects out there, but these are some of the more promising.

1. Aluminum batteries would be better for the environment

One potential, from researchers at Victoria University of Wellington, is looking at a new type of electrolyte. They, in collaboration with Ecole Nationale Supérieure de Chimie de Clermont-Ferrand in France, could be the key to practical aluminum batteries.

According to research lead, Professor Thomas Nann, “This electrolyte will make aluminum batteries cheaper and easier to produce. It is more affordable than the ionic liquids currently used in aluminum batteries, and it is also more sustainable, as our electrolyte can be made from plants.”

This could have legs. If achievable aluminum-based batteries would make an excellent alternative. They would be non-toxic, have little to no risk of exploding, be readily recyclable and aluminum happens to be one of the Earth’s most abundant metals!

2. Adding molybdenum and sulfur to the mix could be the answer

Whilst not technically replacing lithium altogether, a research team at the University of Texas, are working on making the use of lithium in batteries more effective and safer for the environment.

According to the team, Lithium-sulfur batteries would be less expensive to produce, be very light and store more than twice the energy as traditional lithium-ion ones. But sulfur is a poor electrical conductor, electrodes of sulfur also tend to break down during charging – less than ideal.

But they managed to find a workaround. By adding molybdenum to sulfur, the electrodes suddenly become conductive and, more importantly, stable. 

“This was what everyone was looking for, for a long time,” research member Dr. Kyeongjae Cho said. “That’s the breakthrough. We are trying to suppress side reactions. It’s a protection technology.

“We are taking this to the next step and will fully stabilize the material and bring it to actual, practical, commercial technology.”

3. Maybe we should re-invent the wheel completely?

Another alternative, by researchers at ETH Zurich and Empa in Switzerland, is looking at changing the materials used in the electrolyte and electrodes completely.

Titanium-nitride could be a good replacement for current lithium-based electrolytes. This is a ceramic-like material that happens to show high electrical conductivity.

Maksym Kovalenko at ETH Zurich said: “This compound is made up of the highly abundant elements titanium and nitrogen, and it’s easy to manufacture.”

It can also readily be formed into thin films. 

Graphite is also readily used as the cathode in sustainable battery solutions like aluminum batteries. The team found they could replace graphite with a chain-like hydrocarbon called polypyrene.

Whilst this might sound like a strange choice, it has some interesting benefits over graphite. One of the most important being the ability to influence its properties. 

The combination of titanium-nitride and polypyrene could open the door for something called ‘pouch cells’ which are batteries enclosed in a flexible film.

4. Sulfide electrodes could extend the life of lithium batteries

Researchers at the University of Central Florida have been working on a sulfide-based sustainable battery. In a recent report published in the Advanced Energy materials journal, they describe how they have designed a new type of electrode.

This electrode, they claim, shows excellent conductivity, is stable at high temperatures and should be relatively cheap to make. Not just that, but using it could make existing lithium batteries last much longer.

They estimate it could mean lithium batteries could retain their high-performance over thousand of recharge cycles without degrading. 

Their solution is to replace the cathode with a thin-film alloy of nickel sulfide and iron sulfide. This combination brings the cathode many interesting advantages over conventional ones at between 300 and 500 times.

The secret is their combination of nickel- and iron-sulfides into a thin film. This film is later etched to make it porous at the nanoscale level.

These nanopores, or holey structures, greatly expand the surface area available for chemical reaction.

“This is really transformative thin-film technology,” Yang said.

Electric vehicles (EVs) are becoming more and more popular in most industrialized countries. Although conventional cars claim 99 percent of the market, the announcement of substantial investments by automakers in EVs signals a new era: Volkswagen is investing $40 billion in EV production, Daimler just announced a $23 billion battery order, and American firms are undergoing massive restructuring to keep up.

Despite the overwhelming abundance of EV news in the mobility sector, producers are not overly optimistic about their finances. General Motors, for example, doesn’t expect its electric vehicles to turn a profit in the coming years. European car makers are selling EVs for near-production value to maintain sales. The Achilles heel of the industry is the high production costs which need to be overcome to achieve the sustainable production and development of new models.

Low profitability in the EV sector

California based auto-maker Tesla had, until recently, been struggling with costs and the development of the production line of its new Model 3. The company reported its 2nd consecutive quarterly profit. Few competitors, however, can claim similar results with their EVs.

According to Carlos Tavares, the CEO of PSA which is the manufacturer of Peugeot, Citroen, and Opel, “everybody needs to realize that clean mobility is like organic food, it’s more expensive”. The problem with EVs is that they still cost €7,800, or approximately $8,800, more on average to produce compared to conventional ones. For plug-in hybrids, the extra costs are still around €5,000.

Despite the high costs, the sale of electric vehicles is set to grow over the coming years. On the short term, EVs will increase in China and Europe primarily due to government-imposed restriction and subsidies.

On the long-term, however, North-America and primarily the U.S. will catch up with Europe to become the second largest EV market in the world.

According to Rebecca Lindland, a senior analyst at Kelley Blue Book, which tracks vehicle pricing: “Demand doesn’t justify the investment, it’s all regulation”. The EU has agreed on plans to cut carbon dioxide car emissions by as much as 45 percent by 2030 from an average of 95 grams per kilometre in 2021. European automakers are already in danger of missing these goals which could lead to hundreds of millions of euros in fines. Customers should either pay more for mobility or put the European car industry at risk.

Most automakers, however, have accepted that they will not make a profit for a while and are pricing their EVs similarly to combustion engine models to maintain market share. BMW, for example, has priced its plug-in models relatively on par with diesel cars. The margins, therefore, on EVs are significantly small. The profitability of the industry is affected, which some automakers compensate by also focusing on conventional cars with large margins such as SUVs.

Competition and EV’s Achilles heel

The majority of the costs in producing EVs goes into batteries which make up 40 percent of the total. Although prices for batteries have dropped significantly over the last couple of years, some analysts think it could have fallen even further if production capacity would have kept up with demand.

Although a combination of developments threatens to increase costs, such as commodity prices for lithium and cobalt and the trade dispute between the U.S. and China, new manufacturing capacity has prevented it. Especially in China, factories are being built frenetically with Beijing assigning the battery industry part of its ‘Built in China 2025’ strategy.

Lowering the costs of batteries is essential for EV producers as automakers are rushing to enter the game. According to consultancy firm Deloitte, supply will outweigh demand by approximately 14 million units over the next decade. It suggests that the number of manufacturers is unsustainable to remain profitable on the long-term.

Reaching equilibrium

The EV market in both Europe and China is receiving a boost from their respective governments in order to tackle air pollution and in China’s case, also kickstart a new industry. European firms have announced significant investments, while Chinese companies receive big subsidies. The development of costs concerning, for example, batteries creates a veil of uncertainty regarding the long-term profitability of EVs.

American automakers, on the other hand, don’t receive the same number of subsidies and regulatory coercion as their Chinese and European peers. Nevertheless, GM and Ford have embarked on the road to electrification. Tesla, however, will remain a prominent producer on the American market and abroad for the foreseeable future.

Tesla and Mercedes-Benz have a history together. In May of 2009, Mercedes bought a 9% stake in the fledgling Tesla Motors for $50 million. Two months later, it transferred 40% of its Tesla shares to the investment arm of the government of Abu Dhabi, according to CCN.com. Tesla provided battery and electric propulsion technology to Mercedes for its early electric Smart as well as electrified versions of its A Class and B Class cars. In 2014, Mercedes severed its relationship with Tesla and sold the remainder of its shares to an undisclosed buyer for $780 million.

No one can ever say definitively whether the investment by Mercedes in 2009 was the difference between Tesla surviving or not, but it certainly came at a crucial time for the Silicon Valley startup. Since then, Tesla has gone on to accomplish things in the world of electric cars that few outside of Elon Musk and his closest associates ever thought possible. Among other things, it has knocked the mighty Mercedes S-Class off its perch as the best selling large luxury car in the US and in Germany, something that must make Dieter Zetsche and the Daimler board of directors wince every month when the sales numbers are released.

As much as Tesla is doing to electrify the private passenger car segment of the transportation sector, medium- and light-duty trucks are responsible for more emissions over the course of a year than passenger cars. Electrifying the Sprinter vans is already underway, but a link up with Tesla could accelerate that process. Zetsche also said Tesla might be interested in using electric Sprinter vans for its on the road service vehicles.

Does a collaboration between Tesla and Mercedes hint at other collaborations down the road? For instance, instead of designing and building its own pickup truck, might Tesla be able to push its goal of getting people out of trucks with gasoline and diesel engines faster by working with an established manufacturer that has factories already configured to build such vehicles in massive quantities?

Volkswagen and Ford are already planning to work together on developing pickup trucks and electric powertrain technology. Waymo is seeking a linkup with the Renault-Nissan-Mitsubishi Alliance for self-driving taxis in Japan (if the Alliance survives). There is a definite movement toward convergence in the world of automobile manufacturing. If Tesla is truly committed to weaning the world off of fossil fuels, it might be able to accomplish that goal more quickly by working with others than by charting its own course for building every type of vehicle under the sun.

On the other hand, Tesla could wind up being the sole surviving global manufacturer once all the consolidations and mergers take place. Time will tell.

After a slight hiatus from covering Pipistrel, we’ve got some news. The company has announced a partnership with heavyweight aviation player Honeywell to design an electric vertical take-off & landing (eVTOL) aircraft — to get us off the congested ground.

Air Taxis Take Off With Pipistrel & Honeywell eVTOL Partnership

According to Honeywell, the memorandum of understanding (MoU) with Pipistrel means the companies will together develop urban air mobility solutions. The aircraft will integrate Honeywell’s avionics, navigation, flight control systems, connectivity, and other products and services in the future autonomous Pipistrel eVTOL.

Pipistrel seems to have developed an electric airplane — or more to the point, converted one of its airplanes to electricity — with much success, as you can see from the video below. It also announced an eVTOL for Uber last year. We don’t have much in terms of the design, but the Uber one can give us an idea of the new Pipistrel & Honeywell eVTOL.

Honeywell defines “urban air mobility” as an aviation industry term for on-demand and automated passenger or cargo-carrying air transportation services. Its aim is to get people to travel safely in and around cities and rural areas while reducing congestion.

According to Ivo Boscarol, founder and president of Pipistrel:

“This is the beginning of a long-term relationship to collectively pursue the future of urban air mobility. Honeywell’s expertise in integrated avionics and flight control systems, systems integration, certification, and manufacturing, combined with our capabilities in designing and developing advanced light aircraft, makes us the perfect pairing to advance the urban air mobility market. Pipistrel was chosen to be one of Uber’s vehicle development partners for its urban mobility solution, and our VTOL air vehicle features next-generation propulsion technology for achieving embedded lift. We have the concept that unlocks a cost-attractive electric VTOL opportunity by addressing efficiency and noise hurdles in vehicle lift, hover and cruise stages of flight.”

Carl Esposito, President of Electronic Solutions at Honeywell Aerospace, added:

“The urban air mobility market is an exciting space requiring innovation, but one that Honeywell is well positioned to support and grow. Companies looking to make breakthroughs in urban air mobility face a wide range of technical, safety, certification and business challenges that come with developing a new mode of travel in an already dense air traffic environment. An understanding of the aerospace complexities and a legacy of innovative technologies can make all the difference in addressing this emerging market. Pipistrel is a well-known leader in the light aircraft space, and this is an excellent opportunity to support its vision of a future VTOL aircraft with our industry-leading avionics, flight control systems, and other potential products and services.”

Pipistrel & Honeywell eVTOL, One Aircraft In the Air Mobility Race

I was able to hear more from Carl Esposito specifically on how the companies are laying the groundwork for flying cars:

“The work being done over the next 12 months will be crucial to making the vision for urban air mobility a reality. We’ve seen a lot of innovative and motivated companies come to the table with concept aircraft and business models that sketch out a future where you and I get to commute from point-to-point with ease and convenience in our ‘flying cars.’ But before we cross that threshold, we need to map out the regulations, infrastructure, and relationships that make the skies above our urban environments as safe and efficient as the routes we travel today. A lot of that foundation will be set in 2019.”

Both companies announced initial demonstration program phases that will start early this year. A schedule announcing the actual flight demonstrations for the aircraft prototypes will follow next year.