Lithium News

The Kitty Hawk Flyer is your own personal electric aircraft

June 11, 2018 By Editor

A year ago, we got our first look at Google founder Larry Page’s secretive “flying car” project, Kitty Hawk: an all-electric hover-bike designed to be flown specifically over water. This week, the company unveiled an updated version of its recreational aircraft, the Flyer. And it’s quite the improvement over the original concept.

The Flyer weighs 250 pounds and sports 10 battery-powered propellors and two joysticks. It looks sort of like bobsled mounted on a couple of pontoons surrounded by a bunch of drone rotors — so, you know, totally safe I’m sure. Its not intended for soaring through the clouds like you’re George Jetson, with a maximum elevation is 10 feet and a top speed (limited by the flight control system) of 20 mph. Kitty Hawk has kept the pontoons for water landings, but gotten rid of the protective netting from the original prototype.

The company won’t say when the Flyer goes on sale, what the final price will be, or whether they’ve received any orders yet. Those who want to join the Founders Series can fill out an online form and join a waiting list. One of the questions is where potential customers intend to fly the aircraft if they get one.

Another sign that Kitty Hawk is in full-on marketing mode: it invited popular YouTuber Casey Neistat to visit its test facility in Nevada. Neistat sat through two hours of training before he was allowed to fly one of the vehicles (which he said he would do in a subsequent video). Two hours seems to conflict with Kitty Hawk’s original promise last year that potential customers could learn to fly “in minutes,” but honestly the more training the better when it comes to defying the laws of gravity.

The Flyer isn’t Kitty Hawk’s only product. It’s also working on the Cora, a two-seater electric aircraft with 13 rotors that can take off and land vertically and is designed for an air taxi service. The company recently struck a deal with the government of New Zealand to test autonomous air taxis for official certification in the country.

At least 19 other companies are developing aerial taxi plans. These include legacy aircraft manufacturers like Boeing and Airbus, and ride-hailing giants like Uber. That company recently held its second annual Elevate conference and has made significant strides in partnering with a handful of aircraft manufacturers, real estate firms, and regulators to better its chances of developing a fully functional, on-demand flying taxi service.

Flying cars still faces significant hurdles. Experts suggest that engineering and regulatory hindrances may prevent electric vertical take-off and landing aircraft from ever taking off in a meaningful way. Simply put, there are no electric-powered aircraft, or even gas-electric hybrid aircraft, in commercial operation today. Flying requires an incredible amount of energy, and present battery technology just doesn’t offer the power-to-weight ratio needed to achieve liftoff. Most experts predict that it will be years, if not decades, before the technology catches up.

An experimental aircraft powered by electric motors crashed in Hungary recently, killing its pilot and passenger. Siemens, the German manufacturer that built the motors, is investigating the cause. The single-engined Magnus eFusion aircraft crashed shortly after take-off at an airfield near Budapest on May 31st.

CSIR lab to give technology for India’s first indigenous Lithium Ion Battery project

June 10, 2018 By Editor

Central Electro Chemical Research Institute (CECRI), Karaikudi, Tamil Nadu under Council of Scientific & Industrial Research (CSIR) and RAASI Solar Power Pvt Ltd have signed a Memorandum of Agreement for transfer of technology for India’s first Lithium Ion (Li-ion) Battery project. The Agreement was signed in Bengaluru on Saturday (June 09, 2018) by Dr Vijayamohan K. Pillai, Director, CECRI and C. Narasimhan, Chairman-cum-Managing Director of RAASI Group in the presence of Union minister for Science & Technology Dr Harsh Vardhan.

A group at CSIR-CECRI headed by Dr Gopu Kumar has developed an indigenous technology of Lithium-ion cells in partnership with CSIR-National Physical Laboratory (CSIR-NPL) New Delhi, CSIR- Central Glass and Ceramic Research Institute (CSIR-CGCRI) Kolkata and Indian Institute of Chemical Technology (CSIR-IICT) Hyderabad. CSIR-CECRI has set up a demo facility in Chennai to manufacture prototype Lithium-Ion cells. It has secured global IPRs with potential to enable cost reduction, coupled with appropriate supply chain and manufacturing technology for mass production.

Currently, Indian manufacturers source Lithium Ion Battery from China, Japan and South Korea among some other countries. India is one of the largest importers and in 2017, it imported nearly 150 Million US Dollar worth Li-Ion batteries.

“Today’s development is a validation of the capabilities of CSIR and its laboratories to meet technology in critical areas to support our industry, besides other sectors,” said Dr Harsh Vardhan after the signing ceremony. “It will give tremendous boost to two flagship programmes of Prime Minister Narendra Modi – increasing the share of Clean Energy in the energy basket by generating 175 Giga Watts by 2022, of which 100 Giga Watts will be Solar and the second, National Electric Mobility Mission, to switch completely to electric vehicles by 2030.”

Dr Harsh Vardhan said, the project is in tune with Prime Minister’s vision of “Make in India”, to turn India into a manufacturing hub and to cut down outflow of foreign exchange.

Raasi Group will set up the manufacturing facility in Krishnagiri district of Tamil Nadu close to Bangalore. “We want to bring down the cost of cell manufacturing below Rs. 15,000/- per KW to replace Lead Acid Battery,” said Narasimhan. “We also have plans to make Lithium Ion battery for solar roof top with life span of 25 years to make it affordable enough to drive the Photo Voltaic segment.”

Li-Ion batteries have applications in Energy Storage System – from hearing aid to container sized batteries to power a cluster of villages, Electric Vehicles (2-wheeler, 3-wheeler, 4-wheeler and Bus), portable electronic sector, Grid Storage, Telecom and Telecommunication Towers, Medical Devices, Household and Office Power Back (UPS), Powering Robots in Processing Industry. Lithium-ion batteries can power any electrical application without the need of physical wires-means wireless.

Road Trippin’ In A Tesla Model 3 vs Other Electric Cars

June 10, 2018 By Editor

Road trips are the final frontier for electric cars to totally outshine combustion-engine vehicles (gas/diesel cars). Already clearly a better technology than combustion vehicles in every other respect, of all the electric cars currently on the market, only Tesla so far provides truly compelling road trip ready offerings. This is an area that other carmakers need to pay much more attention to if they have a hope of ever competing with Tesla’s stratospheric demand and world-leading EV sales volume.

The recently announced version of the Tesla Model 3 with long range and all-wheel drive will be a compelling combination of road trip readiness and affordability, with likely the longest range of any EV, impressive energy efficiency even at highway cruising speeds, and reliable superfast recharging speeds. According to past experience — the dual-motor Model S having a range advantage over the single-motor Model S — common sense suggests that the newcomer will provide a 4–5% range improvement over the single-motor Model 3, which is itself a very compelling road trip vehicle. Official EPA and WLTP vehicle range ratings are only useful for relative comparison (not nearly accurate in absolute terms). More reliable real world range calculations and data (such as those by longtime contributor to the Model 3 Owner’s Club Forums TROY) indicate that cruising range of the dual-motor version at 75 mph [120 km/h] will be around 275 miles [443 km] in optimal conditions. At a more leisurely 70 mph [113 km/h], this increases to 299 miles [481 km] of range. This thing will take road trips in its stride.

Tesla still wants to sell good numbers of its Model S and Model X, so has historically slightly downplayed the Model 3’s official range, and will likely continue to do so for all model 3 variants for a while longer. This will remain the case until the S and X get a refresh to further differentiate their range and features from that of the less expensive Model 3 offerings, perhaps later this year. For now, the Model 3 is significantly more energy efficient than the bigger and heavier S (not to mention the X), with even the official EPA figures giving the 2018 Model S 100D a highway energy consumption of 102 MPGe and the Model 3 LR 123 MPGe. Although EPA and WLTP metrics are notoriously untethered from reality, they can be useful as a basis for comparing energy efficiency of different vehicles. The real-world driving ranges of the longest range versions Model S and Model 3 are similar, though the Model 3’s energy efficiency allows it to achieve this with a significantly smaller battery, which helps in reducing its relative cost and the recharge time needed to regain a given range. We know that Tesla requested that the EPA give the Model 3 Long Range (3 LR) an official range of 310 miles, when it in fact measured 334 miles on the standard test cycle. For the same reasons, Elon has suggested that the Model 3 Long Range all-wheel-drive version (3 LR AWD) will have the same official range as the single-motor Model 3 LR (310 miles), even though sensible estimates suggest a 4–5% boost in range.

Either way, the good news is that for anyone who has wanted to get into a relatively affordable EV and has been concerned about still being able to do comfortable road trips, the newly announced Model 3 LR AWD will have very impressive range capabilities and (along with several other existing Tesla models) will be no less convenient than a gasoline car for road trip purposes (and in fact a much better experience than a gasoline car all round). Whilst the single-motor version is already very capable of making practical road trips, the dual-motor version pushes the bar even higher. With the standard aero wheels and in ideal conditions (more on what this means below), the Model 3 LR AWD’s 100% range when continuously cruising at various speeds (where permitted) should be as follows:

Data based on the work of Troy, as noted in article text above

A Note on Ideal Conditions vs. the Real World

Folks coming from a combustion engine experience may not be accustomed to thinking about how real-world environmental conditions can affect the energy use of the vehicle. But the diesel emissions scandal has clearly shown that combustion vehicles are in reality a lot less energy efficient and a lot more polluting than official ratings and manufacturers’ claims make them out to be. The challenges of real-world conditions apply to all vehicles, whatever the powertrain. “Ideal conditions” means mild weather and mild ambient temperature on a decently paved road without the need for much HVAC and without significant headwinds, amongst other things. These ideal conditions don’t happen too often, so all vehicles use a bit more energy than ideal conditions suggest. When, for example, a 10 mph headwind is present, you should expect closer to 80 mph equivalent range figures when travelling at 70 mph. Crosswinds at these mild levels are less of an energy concern and of course tailwinds will help your energy consumption, if you are lucky enough to get them.

HVAC can use significant energy in extreme temperatures. For gas vehicles with less efficient HVAC, the energy hit can be as large as 20%. EVs are usually designed with much more efficient HVAC systems, with a more typical 5–10% hit on your energy use, depending on circumstances. Another EV advantage is that you can remotely pre-heat or pre-cool the interior (and pre-condition the batteries) when the vehicle is still plugged into a recharging point, without using any battery energy to do so. Mid trip, EVs can do the same whenever they are recharging. A combustion engine vehicle needs to have the driver present and the engine turned on before doing these things, potentially wasting both energy and time to, for example, de-ice the windshield or remove oven-like cabin temperatures before the vehicle is driveable.

Tesla guru Bjorn Nyland recently analysed energy consumption under HVAC use on the road and found that AC cooling the cabin of his Model X from 77–80° Fahrenheit (25–27° Celsius) down to 68° Fahrenheit (20° Celsius) added around 5% to energy use compared to having it switched off (he conducted the test at different speeds with similar % results). In more extreme conditions, your EV’s HVAC could add 10% to energy use, with a corresponding range hit, although this will depend on your driving duration, speed, and other factors. The good news is that EV HVAC systems are becoming more efficient all the time (e.g., using heat pumps rather than resistive heating).

Elevation changes tend to average out over long distances, so shouldn’t be an issue during most road trips. Rain and poor surfaces can have a modest energy hit also. Therefore, in moderately poor conditions (modest headwinds and high/low temperatures), you may use up to 20% extra energy on your journey compared to the above “ideal conditions” figures (EV drivers please join in the comments section to add your own experience on this). As a general rule, if you slow down fractionally in tough conditions (sensible anyway in rain, wind, or extreme cold), you will be able to compensate without much trouble. The range chart figures above demonstrate that a 5 mph [8 km/h] speed trim at highway velocities will save you around 10% energy use, giving you 10% higher range, and often resulting in an overall journey time not much different. The same is true in most vehicles.

EVs & Road Trip Readiness

As I noted in a previous piece, the freedom to hit the open road is something we have long taken for granted with our cars. Despite the fact that for most of us it is something we do just a handful of times a year, the possibility of being able to do so has a strong appeal. Most folks want to buy a car that is capable of doing road trips (especially if it is our only car, as it is for most car-owning families worldwide), however seldom we actually make such trips.

Since total energy storage is a key factor influencing driving range (along with energy efficiency), this is an area where gas vehicles have historically had a residual energy advantage over EVs. However, Tesla’s large battery models, designed both to have world-leading energy efficiency and fast, reliable, and convenient recharging, have long since had sufficient range to enable practical road tripping. Road tripping in a quiet and vibration-free EV is also a lot more pleasant and less tiring experience than in a combustion engine vehicle.

A road trip in an EV typically involves initially driving from fully 100% battery state of charge (SoC) down to no less than 10% SoC, and then recharging. 10% is the recommended minimum because you don’t want to count on finding the right charging spot when you are getting close to empty (just as you wouldn’t in a gas car), and also because it is not great for long-term battery health to habitually drop much below 10% SoC. DC fast recharging back up to 80% SoC happens relatively rapidly in well designed EVs (including all Teslas, though disappointingly few others, as we will see below), but all vehicles typically slow down their rates considerably above 80% SoC — again, to preserve battery health. So recharging much beyond 80% is usually an inefficient use of your time if you are mid trip — though, if you are ready for a longer break, charging to 90% SoC or more may be convenient. Here’s a useful illustration from European charging specialist Fastned, based on recharging data from hundreds of Hyundai Ioniq fast charging sessions:

Image Credit: Fastned

So, on a planned road trip, your first driving stage can make use of up to 90% of your battery’s rated range and subsequent stages will likely be using closer to 70%. In a Model 3 LR AWD, assuming driving at 70–75 mph [113–121 km/h] and experiencing moderately poor environmental conditions, you can still expect to cover at least 200–215 miles [322–346 km] over your initial stage (using 90% of battery charge) and then take a 30–40 minute break before covering at least another 155–168 miles [250–270 km] (using 70% of battery charge). That’s almost 3 hours of initial driving (if you’re up to it — 2.5 hours is the recommended maximum healthy driving duration before taking a break). Thereafter you can drive 2 to 2.5 hour stages at 70–75 mph [113–120 km/h], repeating as often as you need with short breaks in between.

With these capabilities, you can make, for example, a trip from downtown LA to downtown San Francisco (380 miles) without any inconvenience, even in poor environmental conditions. It takes around 5½ hours of driving at highway speeds with a 35 minute break just past the mid point. That’s the typical driving duration and a comfortable choice for a break — whatever your vehicle — on such a long drive. With kids on board, older folks, a dog, you’ll likely want to stop more frequently. Last time I made the LA to SF road trip (with a friend, in his ICE car), we stopped for a 40 minute food break along the I-5 highway and then had to dedicate extra time for gasoline refueling. An EV charge session doesn’t need to be attended (smartphone apps allow you to remotely monitor charging progress), so you can bundle the food break into the recharging period. Any average road trip would follow a similar pattern of driving time and break time, be it from Paris to Frankfurt, Milan to Zagreb, Shenzhen to Xiamen, or what have you. If the trip was longer still, you’d want to stop for further breaks every two to three hours of driving anyway.

We are now at a point where Tesla’s EVs can take such road trips in their stride, with no practical difference in comfortable road-trip-ability compared to any other vehicle. [Editor’s note: I went on a road trip from Poland to Paris and back in a Tesla Model S. While the trip took a bit longer than it would have in a gas car if we had constantly been pushing the limits, I’m sure it was a much more relaxed, comfortable, enjoyable trip in the end due to the break for charging along the way — as well as no need to actually figure out where to stop, since the Tesla navigation system does that for you, and the convenience of Autopilot.]

Where are other manufacturers on the road trip readiness front?
They are still lagging Tesla by a long shot, unfortunately. We all wish they would step up, but they are not making nearly enough effort. So, in this section, let’s review their progress and give them some constructive criticism.

Nissan Leaf 40 kWh

We’ve recently seen that the 2018 Nissan Leaf 40 kWh is inherently incapable of practical road tripping, due to Nissan’s absurd decision to save a couple of hundred bucks by not including even a basic active thermal management system in the vehicle. The management software just resorts to throttling the charging power whenever the battery gets too hot (and it does all the time at normal-speed highway driving). Nissan obscured this limitation in marketing materials, but it has quickly emerged for owners in real-world use, and has become a source of great disappointment for folks attempting longer drives in the Leaf (see #Rapidgate). Now that this problem is known, Nissan will likely lose sales and revenue as a result. The company may even get sued or face “lemon law.” How’s that for shortsighted budgeting decisions?

Only with the battery at an unrealistically ideal temperature, the 40 kWh Leaf will take at least 42 minutes to charge from 10–80%, (at 45 kW initially, then tapering down to 27 kW), which will give you about 90 minutes of driving at 70 mph (covering 105 miles) in perfect conditions. However, with the battery already unavoidably getting hot from driving at these speeds, (as well as heating up significantly during the charging process itself), DC charge rates drop to 22 kWh, thus taking 80–90 minutes of charging to gain 90 minutes of highway driving even in a best case scenario. See EV superfan Bjorn Nyland’s real world experience here. Spending half your journey time charging, and having to limit your speed to 57 mph tops (as Bjorn recommends) makes the 40 kWh Leaf completely impractical for making normal road trips, even in a cool climate (Bjorn’s test was done in the Norwegian winter). In warm or hot climates, it is worse still.

Nissan boss Carlos Ghosn is also under the belief that 186 miles of range (at 100% charge) is sufficient for EV owners (not that the Leaf can achieve even this modest range on a road trip). That would typically mean real-world range figures less than 60% of the Tesla figures above. Apparently, Ghosn either believes road trips are a thing of the past, or that EVs are just city and commuting cars for now. Thanks, Carlos!

Chevy Bolt

The Chevy Bolt is somewhere in between the Leaf and the Model 3 LR, with fairly decent highway range. A Car and Driver test found a 100% range of 190 miles of highway cruising range at 75 mph, with moderate HVAC settings. That’s around 70% of the highway range of the Tesla Model 3LR AWD. So the car has pretty decent range. Using 90% of the battery, the road tripping range in favourable conditions could be 170–180 miles in the initial stage, and thereafter 130–155 miles when using 70% of the battery after a recharge.

On the recharging side, however, while Chevy claims recharging of “90 miles of range in 30 minutes,” in reality, the Bolt will only recharge up to 37% of its energy in that time (even in ideal conditions), which would equate to 70 miles at 75 mph highway speeds (with moderate HVAC use). Perhaps 80 miles at 70 mph. A more significant problem is that the decent charging rates only occur below 52% SoC. Here is real-world DC fast charging data from Fastned:

This tells us that when charging from 10% to 52%, a 45 kW rate is possible in ideal conditions, which equates to adding about 25 kWh, taking about 33 minutes. From 52% to 80% charge occurs at an average 35 kW in ideal conditions, adding around 17 kWh over the next 30 minutes. So, to recharge from 10% to 80%, in ideal conditions, takes 63 minutes. Thus 380 mile “ideal condition” trips in a Bolt at 70–75 mph require an initial stop at 175 miles for 63 minutes, then another stop at the 315 mile mark for perhaps 25 minutes before heading off again to reach the 380 mile mark. Or you could do 3 stops from 10% to 52% SoC at around 33 minutes each and get to your destination that way. Either way, that’s a total of around 90 minutes of charging, in ideal conditions.

In real-world conditions, such a journey seems to require a combination of adventurous spirit and patience (see this forum), traits that, whilst laudable, are not necessary in a Tesla nor in the gas vehicles folks have gotten used to. For highway trips totalling up to 175 miles, then, the Bolt is great, and does have all the other EV benefits. But after the initial 175 miles, drivers have to be willing to take 30–35 minute breaks every 80 miles, or 60+ minute breaks every 130 miles. That’s an hour break for every 1 hour and 45 minutes of driving. Or, better, 33 minute breaks every 1 hour and 5 minutes of driving. Both of those patterns are in “ideal conditions” and neither of them anyway resemble a practical road trip for most folks. Hopefully Chevy will improve the Bolt’s charging capability in future versions.

Soon-to-arrive Jaguar I-PACE

The upcoming Jaguar I-PACE is not an affordable vehicle (compared to the Tesla Model 3 LR or LR AWD) and not an efficient vehicle, and will likely have a real-world range (at 70–75 mph) lower than that of the Bolt (the overall EPA rating gives it around 9% less range than the Bolt). It does promise to have better charging ability (100 kW DC capable in theory, though actual charging speeds remain to be seen). Since it has a 90 kWh battery, filling it from 10–80% (adding 63 kWh) will take at least 45 minutes even at a 100 kW charger, so long as there is no significant throttling.

The real range at highway speeds will likely be about 60% of the Tesla Model 3 LR AWD range figures above, given the relative EPA rating and the fact that SUVs struggle with aero relatively more at higher speeds (speeds that the EPA rating does not account for). That means 70% SoC of the battery will likely give a little over 1.5 hours of real world driving at 70–75 mph between 45+ minute charges.

With slightly lower range but marginally better charging than the Bolt, the road trip readiness will be no better overall — only patient adventurers need apply. It will however be a good vehicle for highway drives of up to 155 miles or so (its 90% range at highway speeds), and great if you only use it for daily commutes and regular driving. Perhaps a future version will be more energy efficient and road trip ready.

Soon-to-arrive Audi Quattro SUV

The Audi Quattro SUV will be expensive (€80,000, or $100,000) and won’t likely be available anywhere for purchase until the end of 2018. It will have a 95 kWh battery, but its energy efficiency relative to the I-Pace’s similarly sized battery is currently unknown. The stablemate low-range VW e-Golf is not an energy efficient EV compared to its peers (e.g., having a 28% larger battery than the Hyundai Ioniq, yet no greater range). Audi will need to do something very different if the Quattro is to be road trip ready, even with its big battery.

Likely it will have a similar highway range to the less expensive I-PACE. However, that’s only 70% that of the Model X 100D’s highway range, which costs a fraction less than the Audi, so it’s hard to imagine who would choose the latter. But unlike the I-PACE, the Quattro should have better 150kW DC fast charging, which in theory will put it close to the Teslas in recharging times.

The lower energy efficiency will mean it will gain less actual mileage than the Tesla for a given charge duration, however. 150kW DC fast charging infrastructure is also very rare compared to Tesla’s Supercharger network. The Quattro may appeal to Audi loyalists, and might appear attractive to well heeled occasional road trippers who don’t need the Model X’s better range, and are happy to stop 2 or 3 times on a 380 mile road trip. Planned production volume is unknown. Again, being an EV, it will be a better vehicle in many respects than its gas counterparts, excepting this limited practicality for road trips.

Soon-to-arrive Hyundai Kona EV

The Hyundai Kona EV should be a relatively energy efficient vehicle, and sources suggest a UK price between £35,000–37,000 ($47,000–50,000, or hopefully a bit less in the US) for the long-range 64 kWh version. This version will likely have similar or perhaps marginally better real-world range than the Bolt (the Kona is aiming to have an EPA rating of 249 miles, vs. the Bolt’s 238). It will certainly beat the Bolt’s recharging with reliable 100kW DC fast charging (its very efficient sedan sibling, the Ioniq, has reliable and fast DC charging — see the top charging graph above — but a very modest range).

Recent reports of 80% charging (from near empty) in 54 minutes should translate into a mid-trip 70% added charge of 47 minutes on 100 kW DC (corresponding to an actual 58 kW charging power, which is still pretty good). It’s also good that Hyundai’s marketing figures on charging appear to be in line with the likely reality, when other manufacturers are happy to bend the truth on charging to hide their inadequacies.

Of the coming crop of EVs other-than-Tesla, the Kona 64 kWh will likely have the best combination of road-trip-readiness and affordability. But with the comparative range being only around 72% of the Model 3 LR’s, and with the compact SUV shape unlikely to maintain its aero efficiency as well as the Model 3 does at fast highway speeds, the Kona will still not be comparable to the Model 3 LR or LR AWD for seamless road trips. It will likely need at least 2 recharge stops to make a 380 mile road trip, the first of 47 minutes and the second of around 25 minutes. That’s still going to be acceptable for occasional road trippers who are happy to take a bit more time, perhaps those with young kids who anyway need more breaks, and certainly a much better vehicle in almost all respects than a gas equivalent.

If it is priced in line with the above rumours, there will be plenty of demand for the Hyundai Kona EV, but unfortunately likely very limited availability. Just like with the Ioniq, which has already closed the order books, it’s expected battery supply won’t be nearly adequate enough. Now, if only Hyundai could someday offer an updated Ioniq with that 64 kWh battery, and make as many as folks want to buy…

Soon-to-arrive Kia Niro EV

The Kona’s platform-sharing cousin, the Kia Niro, will be a bigger vehicle which will likely struggle to get 90% of the Kona’s real-world range, and consequently also 10% lower miles-of-range-added-per-minute-of-charge, so not a challenger unless you need that extra internal space and aren’t concerned about making practical road trips.

If that’s the case, the Niro nevertheless will be a better car than equivalent ICE vehicles.

Soon-to-arrive Tesla Model 3 Standard

Whilst we’re on the subject of EVs arriving in late 2018, the range of the Tesla Model 3 Standard at highway speeds will be similar to the Bolt and Kona. It has a smaller battery than both, but its extremely low aero will give it a significant efficiency advantage at highway speed. It will have faster real-world recharging than the Kona (and much faster recharging than the Bolt).

Again, like the Kona, it will be okay for occasional road trips for those who are not in a rush, but on the other hand, it will likely significantly undercut the Kona on price ($35,000), see much higher production volumes, and is already in very high demand.

The Takeaway

Other EVs intended for worldwide release may exist in press release form (we’re looking at you, Volkswagen and Mercedes), but with little clear commitment about when in the next few years they will actually get made and sold, and in what volume.

Tesla is the only manufacturer selling genuinely practical road trip ready EVs at the current time, perhaps because all the others are not sincere about making EVs and have not invested any genuine effort or resources into EV research and development. They instead appear to be hoping to keep producing existing gas vehicles for as long as they can. Their narrative seems to be that EVs will remain as low-volume city/commuter cars, novelty items, for the foreseeable future.

Hyundai is the only other manufacturer that demonstrates some moderate effort at the moment. Unlike Jaguar, Volkswagen Group, Nissan, and all the rest, they at least seem to have grasped the importance of designing an EV powertrain first and foremost for energy efficiency at realistic cruising speeds, and also provide decent recharging speeds. This approach allows a comparatively smaller battery, thus lower cost and lighter weight, as well as faster recharging to recover a given mileage range. However, as we saw above, Hyundai’s otherwise impressive Ioniq was apparently never intended for reasonable production volumes, suggesting that the company may be more focused on simply selling a low number of compliance cars than actually moving seriously towards EVs. The same can certainly be said for all the others.

Tesla is still a relatively small manufacturer, but the one with the highest EV output. That output is also growing fast, and within a year will likely be double that of any other EV manufacturer. Tesla has huge brand momentum, and a massive lead in EV technology, with little prospect of any others catching up anytime soon (even if they did want to, which they apparently don’t). The Model 3, which is clearly a superior car all-around than its gas vehicle peers, will soon start to erode the sales of regular offerings from BMW, Audi, and Mercedes. Maybe at that point they will wake up and take notice.

The asteroid rush sending 21st-century prospectors into space

June 10, 2018 By Editor

In an industrial park in San Jose, California, Grant Bonin is holding what looks like the end of a metal water bottle. It is the casing, he jokes, of his company’s “flying steam kettle”: a propulsion system for small spacecraft that uses super-hot water vapour, heated to 1,000C (1,832F), to produce thrust. The company has sold about 40 to date. “It comes right out of the hole,” explains Bonin, who is the chief technology officer of Deep Space Industries (DSI).

It is literally rocket science, but the ultimate aim of Bonin’s startup is even more audacious: mining asteroids. No private company has even got close to one. One of the main reasons asteroids will be mined in the future, so the thinking goes, is for the water locked in their clay deposits – and one of the chief uses of that water is likely to be as propellant for spacecraft. Probes and other spacecraft will be able to refuel in space either directly with water, or the hydrogen and oxygen that can be created from it, enabling them to zip around merrily anywhere they want with no end to their useful life. But before the idea of a solar system dotted with gas stations is realised, what is needed are more spacecraft that can actually run on water, which is where selling flying steam kettles comes in.

The idea of mining asteroids is more popular than you might think. The oldest and biggest of the companies on the scene is Seattle-based Planetary Resources, established in 2009 by investors including Google cofounder Larry Page and Richard Branson. DSI was formed in 2013. Other smaller companies include Aten Engineering and the TransAstra Corporation, both also based in the US. In Britain, pursuing the idea is the Asteroid Mining Corporation (AMC). Established in 2016, it’s run by 23-year-old Mitch Hunter-Scullion, who set up the company after his Liverpool Hope University dissertation on the topic.

Sunrun Expands Offerings In Florida With Solar-As-A-Service & Brightbox Home Battery Solutions

June 9, 2018 By Editor

Sunrun, the United States’ largest residential solar, storage, and energy services company, has announced this week it is expanding its offerings to Floridians with its solar-as-a-service and Brightbox home battery solutions, in an attempt to pre-empt hurricane season.

Nearly a year ago we reported that Sunrun, which at the time was only competing to be one of the leading US residential solar suppliers, was expanding into seven new states — New Mexico, Rhode Island, Texas, Vermont, Wisconsin, Washington D.C., and Florida. The move effectively doubled Sunrun’s addressable market and, at the time, brought the company’s total market reach up to 22 states and Washington, D.C (now up to 23 + DC).

Later that year GTM Research predicted that Sunrun would surpass SolarCity (owned by Tesla) as the country’s leading residential solar lease provider — which turned out to be true when Sunrun announced in March of this year it had surpassed its competitors as the leading US residential market installer.

Earlier this year in April, the Florida Public Service Commission opened the way for solar developers like Sunrun to lease solar systems. Previously, it had been illegal for anyone in Florida to sell electricity unless they were a utility, but the ruling opened up the door for customers in Florida to acquire solar systems with up to no upfront payment.

It is unsurprising, therefore, that Sunrun has quickly proceeded to make its solar-as-a-service offerings available to Floridians, giving customers the opportunity to lease solar equipment with no upfront payment, the first company through the proverbial gates. The offering provides customers with all the solar equipment and installation, as well as maintenance and insurance, leased through Sunrun instead of having to shell out money upfront.

In addition, Sunrun is also making available its Brightbox home battery system, which provides backup electricity to households in the event of a power outage. For a state like Florida — which during Hurricane Irma saw more than 15 million Floridians without power — this could prove invaluable.

“Freedom is a value Americans hold dear. In offering Floridians solar-as-a-service, households in the Sunshine State are given the freedom to make, control, and store their own energy,” explained Lynn Jurich, Chief Executive Officer and co-founder of Sunrun. “Unfortunately, too many Floridians have experienced first hand the effects of extreme weather and power outages. Home solar and batteries provide peace of mind and backup power when disaster strikes, keeping food fresh and the lights on.”

“Affordable and resilient, home solar also contributes to a healthier environment for households and communities across the state. Home solar is already playing a major role in America’s future energy system, and Sunrun is thrilled to lead the industry as Florida embraces this technology.”

I also spoke to Jessica Leader, Sunrun’s Corporate Communications Manager, and asked her of the importance, from Sunrun’s point of view, of showing residents in at-risk climate regions like Florida the value of solar and battery storage:

In a nutshell, [it’s] extremely important. The opportunity to access home solar and batteries from zero down is the bedrock of Sunrun’s business model and philosophy, underscoring the belief that solar should be affordable, available, and usable for everyone. Home solar and batteries will play a key role in America’s future energy system. Our recent report (PDF), NREL estimates that home solar alone could meet 40% of total U.S. electricity demand.

“With hurricane season just beginning on June 1, people are looking for resilient and reliable backup power. Home batteries are preferable to generators, which are not only loud and hazardous to local and community health, but only work when you have fuel to keep it going. Solar battery systems, like Brightbox, are recharged daily with the sun, ensuring you won’t have to wait in long lines at the gas station just to make sure that your food doesn’t spoil and your family will get to keep the lights on.”

Sunrun isn’t stopping with Florida, either. “We are expanding to new regions all the time — we launched in Illinois only last month, and began offering Brightbox in Massachusetts in March,” Leader explaiend to me. “Puerto Rico is a great opportunity to rebuild with a more resilient, clean, and reliable energy system. We are actively pursuing opportunities to participate in the reconstruction and development of Puerto Rico with home solar and batteries.”

The news of Sunrun’s expanded offerings was also welcomed by some of Florida’s officials.

Sunrun’s new solar lease will give Central Florida residents greater access clean energy choices, lower energy costs, and continued momentum for local job growth in our state’s renewable energy market,” said State Senator Linda Stewart (D-Orlando). “This is the Sunshine State and Floridians should be able to take full advantage of an abundant, emissions-free energy source that contributes to a healthier community while remaining affordable.”

“As an advocate for consumer choice, I am excited to see new options for Floridians that will make solar more affordable and accessible to residents across the state,” added State Senator Jeff Brandes (R-St. Petersburg). “With our population projected to grow by five million people by 2030, the time for Floridians to invest in energy diversity is now.”

How Batteries Will Change the Power Business

June 9, 2018 By Editor

Until recently, this tidy, quiet town in central Massachusetts was best known to outsiders for its eight-acre corn maze out by Davis Farmland, and for a little statue near the corner of Main and Park immortalizing the lamb that is said to have followed young Mary Sawyer to school one day in 1812, inspiring a well-known poem. Lately, however, Sterling welcomes visitors from far away who don’t come for outdoor fun or nursery rhymes.

“As soon as it came on-line, they started rolling in—Japan, Switzerland, Sweden, Brazil, Colombia—13 different countries so far,” says Darren Borge, operations supervisor at the town’s light department. The visitors come to peek inside a single shipping container placed in late 2016 at the power substation on Chocksett Road. There, twin rows of what look like post office boxes pack lithium-ion batteries that together can hold two megawatts of power. That’s enough to make Sterling, population 8,000, the country’s per capita energy-storage leader—and a glimpse of the future of the electricity business.

High-power batteries have already infiltrated the chain-saw aisle at Home Depot and are poised to disrupt the car industry in the decades ahead. Now, they are quickly multiplying across the U.S. power grid. In Sterling, those two megawatts are enough to provide savings and resiliency—to smooth out power demand and avoid peak charges, and in the event of an outage, run the nearby police department and fire dispatch for more than a week.

Last year, the nation installed half a gigawatt of energy storage—equal to 250 Sterlings. Over the next eight years, the country will add more than 35 gigawatts of storage, or 17,500 Sterlings, predicts the Energy Storage Association, a Washington, D.C., industry group. That’s enough to save $4 billion in yearly operating costs. Stephen Byrd, a utility analyst for Morgan Stanley, calls that storage forecast credible. He reckons the U.S. storage market will eventually be worth at least $20 billion, and $35 billion under more bullish assumptions.

That’s excellent news for many stakeholders. Consumers stand to save on power and see fewer disruptions. Towns can cut pollution and add jobs. Some utilities will enjoy lucrative growth opportunities by, for example, combining renewable power with storage, while others could be left behind, generating costly coal and nuclear power while prices fall around them. Right now, stock valuations across the utility sector aren’t especially differentiated, providing an opportunity for investors.

Sterling is one of a few dozen Massachusetts towns that operate their own power companies rather than rely on investor-owned utilities, and it was an early and eager adopter of solar power through purchase agreements from a nearby provider. But solar power, like wind power, comes with a timing problem. The sun shines brightest at midday, and the wind blows strongest at night, while consumers use the most electricity around dinnertime. With too much solar, surplus electricity can feed back onto the transmission operator—a dangerous condition. If there isn’t enough solar power, customers are forced to pay peak prices to power wholesalers, eclipsing their savings.

Solutions were few as recently as several years ago. But as smartphone sales boomed around the globe, the costs of lithium-ion batteries fell. Companies such as Tesla (ticker: TSLA) and LG Chem (051910.Korea) poured research dollars into batteries large enough to power electric vehicles. Each EV battery can supply roughly three times the power used by a typical household in a day, making automotive battery breakthroughs applicable to utilities, too.

Two years ago, the town of Sterling turned to nearby NEC Energy Solutions for batteries, management software, and know-how. The facility took two months to set up and cost $2.5 million. This past April, the town published a case study estimating that storage cut $400,000 from its power bill in the first year. At that rate, it will pay for itself in less than seven years—2½ years after factoring in state grants.

A few recent developments have made Sterling’s experience suddenly relevant to large-scale power players. The cost of renewable power, especially wind, has fallen low enough to attract the interest of profit-minded businesses rather than just do-gooders (see table on page 21). Last year, in fact, it became profitable for the first time for the owner of a typical coal plant to build a wind farm to replace it, according to a yearly analysis by Lazard, an investment firm. Storage has become a cheap and useful add-on for renewable power projects. Bids for a project in Colorado published late last year showed that developers were willing to build combined wind and storage capacity for $21 per megawatt-hour, compared with just over $18 per MWh for wind alone.

New business models are popping up. Stem, based just outside of San Francisco, provides batteries, software, and artificial intelligence to corporate customers for a fixed subscription price, and says it can cut power bills by 10% to 25%. Software maker Adobe Systems and Amazon.com’s Whole Foods Market unit have signed on, as has a Wet ’n’ Wild water park in Honolulu. AES (AES), a power generator, last year announced that it was shedding 30% of its coal-fired capacity and formed a storage joint venture with Siemens (SIE.Germany), called Fluence. This year, it began marketing a combined solar/storage platform.

“If you have a gas plant that gets fired up only to meet peak demand, you might operate it at less than 10% of capacity,” says AES chief Andrés Gluski. “If you use batteries, they’re online 100% of the time. They stabilize the grid, so you get more advantages than you pay for.”

NEC Energy Solutions, meanwhile, is thinking much bigger than its project in Sterling. “Imagine that platform and 50 just like it were aggregated on our system, and could bid into markets,” says CEO Steve Fludder. He recently built a 48 MW storage facility in Jardelund, Germany, that is Europe’s largest, and will sell capacity to transmission-system operators through weekly auctions.

In Washington, D.C., storage is finding support for more than its environmental or commercial benefits. “I’m fairly immune to politics because we focus on national security, and that cuts across politics,” says Bruce Walker, assistant secretary at the Office of Electricity at the Department of Energy. “Having run grid control centers for most of my life, I’m absolutely convinced there’s a key role for storage to play in security.”

Just across the National Mall from the Department of Energy is the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which in February issued Order 841. Among other things, it paves the way for storage to compete in the wholesale market with gas-fired plants used for peak demand. “This was a watershed moment,” says Kelly Speakes-Backman, the CEO of ESA, the storage industry group.

Wind and solar are still relatively small players, at 6% and 1% of U.S. electricity generation, respectively, versus 32% and 30% for natural gas and coal. The Department of Energy forecasts 139% growth in renewable power generation, mostly wind and solar, through 2050, with healthy growth for natural gas, too, and modest declines for coal. But the department has a record of overestimating the cost of wind and solar and underestimating the pace of technological improvement, says Daniel Cohan, associate professor of environmental engineering at Rice University.

The Department of Energy assumes modest growth for wind after key tax credits expire in 2020. But wind costs are declining due to technology advances as basic as making turbine blades longer, suggesting plenty of room for future declines. “Apples-to-apples, if I’m deciding whether to run an existing gas plant or buy power from someone building a new wind farm, the gas plant still wins on cost,” says Hugh Wynne, a utility analyst at Stamford, Conn., research boutique SSR. He says the combination of renewables and batteries could compete with existing gas plants in six or seven years.

Whether renewable power is the horse and batteries are the cart, or the other way around, is debatable, but both appear poised for rapid growth. For investors looking for exposure, some of the obvious choices come with downsides. Electronics company Panasonic (6752.Japan) is a key supplier of lithium-ion batteries, but collects more of its revenue from appliances. LG Chem, another battery leader, comes with plenty of exposure to petrochemicals. Lithium miners have been hot— Sociedad Química y Minerade Chile (SQM) stock has tripled in price in three years—but as new supply comes on-line to meet demand, returns there could be volatile. Tesla’s battery business comes with a car maker on the side. There’s an exchange-traded fund that lumps together the whole motley bunch and more, Global X Lithium & Battery Tech (LIT). Yearly expenses: 0.75%.

A better bet for conservative investors is to select relative winners, and avoid relative losers, within the utility sector. The entire group has taken a hit this year on concerns that rising bond yields will make stocks with steady dividends less attractive by comparison. The Utilities Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLU) has fallen 8% year to date, while the S&P 500 index has climbed 4%. But growth prospects for many players are picking up.

Even though electricity storage promises to bring customer costs down, especially when combined with renewable power, it can be a moneymaker for regulated utilities that take advantage of it. That’s because these utilities are typically permitted to earn set percentages on the assets they put in place. Naturally, they want to spend money to increase their asset bases, but doing so unwisely would make customer bills go up and prove unpopular.

“What they’re looking for are assets that are so economically efficient that the increased spending brings down customer bills,” says Morgan Stanley’s Byrd. “Look to Midwest players with lots of wind potential, which brings plenty of opportunity for storage.”

Xcel Energy (XEL), based in Minneapolis, is a regulated electric and natural-gas utility that historically relied heavily on coal, and is rapidly shifting to wind, solar, and gas. It plans to retire two coal-fired units a decade early in Colorado. The company’s goal is to increase renewables from 23% of electricity generation today to 45% by 2027. Its shares, down 11% year to date, come with a 3.5% dividend yield and have a record of 6% average payment growth over the past five years. Even after the recent selloff, the stock has outperformed the S&P 500 over the past decade, tripling investors’ money.

American Electric Power (AEP), based in Columbus, Ohio, has more than five million customers in 11 states, including Texas and Michigan. Coal has fallen from 70% of generating capacity back in 2005 to 47% last year. Long term, the company has plans to bring its exposure to coal down more, sharply increase wind and solar, and hold gas steady. One proposed project in Oklahoma, called Wind Catcher, will cost $4.5 billion and be the country’s largest onshore wind farm, using some 800 turbines to supply power to Oklahoma, Louisiana, Arkansas, and Texas. A recent poll shows that 75% of Oklahomans support the project, which will add more than 8,000 jobs during construction. Shares of AEP yield 3.9%. The company’s long-term goal is to provide enough earnings growth and dividends to support low-double digit stock returns, on average.

Beyond utilities, wind developers stand to benefit from storage, too. NextEra Energy (NEE) in Juno Beach, Fla., owns Florida Power & Light and recently announced the acquisition of two more regulated players in the state, Florida City Gas and Gulf Power, but it also develops wind and solar facilities across the country. One recently signed deal will put 100 MW of solar with 30 MW of battery storage just south of Tucson, where it can turn afternoon sunshine into evening power. NextEra has a smaller dividend yield than some pure-play utilities, at 2.8%, but expects to increase its payments faster through 2020, at 10% to 12% a year.

Not all utilities will be winners, of course. Ones to be cautious on are those that sell coal and nuclear power in deregulated markets, says Byrd. Examples include Exelon (EXC) in Chicago and Public Service Enterprise Group (PEG) in Newark, N.J. Such companies don’t get guaranteed rates of return, and they could come under price pressure. That might be less obvious with nuclear plants, which are viewed as expensive to build and cheap to run, but they can carry surprisingly high ongoing costs.

For example, Indian Point, a Westchester County, N.Y. nuclear plant that is owned by Entergy (ETR) in New Orleans and is slated to close by 2021, employs about 1,000 workers earning average salaries of more than $100,000 apiece. Contrast that with AEP’s Wind Catcher in Oklahoma, which will need just 80 to 90 full-time operations workers once construction is complete.

A spokesman for nuclear-heavy Exelon calls the company the “nation’s largest producer of emissions-free energy” and says it’s committed to “the development of new battery storage technology.”

One wild card: A Trump administration memo leaked earlier this month contemplates extending support to coal and nuclear plants at risk of early retirement, citing national security. Depending on what form that support takes, the result could be a quick rise in near-term profits for disadvantaged utilities, including Public Service Enterprise and Exelon.

The Kitty Hawk Flyer is your own personal electric aircraft

CSIR lab to give technology for India’s first indigenous Lithium Ion Battery project

Road Trippin’ In A Tesla Model 3 vs Other Electric Cars

A Note on Ideal Conditions vs. the Real World