- Joined
- 26 March 2014
- Posts
- 20,098
- Reactions
- 12,702
My rant for the year, luckily I don't think I will be here, when the chooks come home to roost.
Booked a cruise for Oct 2023, if we can't go by then, we may as well give it away.Starting up the cruising again ?
Just completely missing the point, but it doesn't really matter.
Whether a battery is fully bolted in and takes several hours to remove, or it is a standard fixing that takes minutes to remove, makes sense to me.
But I can understand the companies wanting to make the profits, because if they were standard, third party manufacturers would get into the action.
The point is cost, environment and future proofing. Battery swapping adds cost across all aspects of EV ownership, and is more harmful for the environment. Read the full article, the link is supplied in my previous post.
Could also add safety to the equation. As new models require crash testing and the battery is an integral part of the vehicle structure, vehicle manufacturers will have their hands tied to a ‘one size fits all’ battery. Who will be responsible for any injury and deaths caused by a structural failure in a crash?
Chinese battery giant and supplier of batteries for EV giant Tesla and China EV maker Nio, CATL, has confirmed rumours and announced that it will be entering the battery swap market.Tesla and Nio supplier CATL confirms battery swap rumours
Chinese battery giant CATL confirms rumours and announces that it will be entering the battery swap market.thedriven.io
According to several local sources quoting the company’s official WeChat account, CATL is set to hold a launch event on Tuesday unveiling its battery swap brand, to be called EVOGO.
Read more: CATL says Evogo battery swap will work with 80% of all pure EVs
Little is known in the way of specifics at this point – unsurprising, considering all we have had so far are rumours and unconfirmed reports, and CATL has only just announced its plans for a launch event.
However, we do know that in December CATL signed a partnership agreement with the Guizhou province in southwestern China which would see them build a battery swap network. The company is a leader in battery manufacture in China, and reportedly commanded 52% of the market there in 2021.
According to Chinese EV media, CATL and the Guizhou provincial government signed an agreement on December 24 which would see the two cooperate on an EV battery swap network across the region and promotion thereof.
But, it is not likely that Tesla (which makes around 50% of its cars at a factory in Shanghai) will join the fray. It is currently making plans to build Model Y and Model 3 with structural battery packs which would presumably require a considerable re-think to make them swappable.
More than that, we don’t know yet, and we await CATL’s official January 18 launch event (at 6:30pm Tuesday evening Australia time) for its EVOGO battery swap plans.
There's a limited number of standard sizes and that has long been the case.The Ford Mondeo battery is different to the Toyota RAV4, which is different to a Mazda CX-5, and that battery is no good for the Mazda3, which won’t fit into the Holden Astra or the Toyota Land Cruiser, and that battery is useless for the Holden Equinox, and so it keeps going.
There's a limited number of standard sizes and that has long been the case.
Take just about any ICE car to an automotive battery shop and they'll sell you the non-OEM branded battery that fits straight in and which is an identical replacement apart from brand. Basically every car over 10 years old, and most over 5 years, will have done just that already.
Same reason the RAA, RACV etc can turn up with a suitable lead acid battery for an ICE already in the van. There's only a limited number of types they need to carry.
Now I'm well aware that manufacturers would like to have their own set of custom parts but that's not to the advantage of anyone, especially not the environment. It makes the car a throwaway item basically if even the simplest part costs a fortune and isn't readily available. They'll do it to the extent they can get away with it however, same as all product manufacturers, but it's not a good thing from any perspective other than profit.
From your article, this sums it up IMO. It would lead to cheaper batteries, but there is no money in that.
Commonized vehicles and battery packs would require every major automaker to tear up existing and future product plans and start from scratch.
And to what gain? Certainly, automakers partner on a limited basis to share technology, such as GM and Honda jointly developing two Honda/Acura models with Ultium batteries. But imagine a Tesla or General Motors agreeing to essentially give away their most-precious intellectual property in today’s industry: The designs, electronic controls and chemistries of batteries, along with the EVs they power. These core competencies include giga-scaled factories for proprietary lithium-ion cells, worth billions in investment. Imagine Elon Musk, and the automotive giants racing to catch up with him, calling a competitive truce, and working hand-in-hand to standardize every battery, brand and model. They’d be doing this not to make a better, safer EV for customers, or in their own self-interest. Instead, they’d be commonizing components so that Agassi-style disruptors—start-ups in the nonexistent “business” of battery swapping—can literally leverage their way into their cars and multi-trillion-dollar industry; with robotic stations to jack up cars, switch out batteries, and take a cut of any profits. Any automaker invested in current EVs and the charging model would be cutting their own throat, and handing potential competitors the knife.
Look we just see things a bit differently, to me batteries will get cheaper and better, as they get developed. I feel open source would develop much faster, than propriety but who knows.No where in that paragraph does it indicate ‘cheaper batteries’. What it says is that for the current industry to open their R&D knowledge to everyone is equivalent to opening your bank account to your neighbours.
Billions of dollars invested in R&D by the likes of Tesla, GM, Toyota, Ford and so on would be turned over to any company that can make a battery. “Any automaker invested in current EVs and the charging model would be cutting their own throat, and handing potential competitors the knife.”
Look we just see things a bit differently, to me batteries will get cheaper and better, as they get developed. I feel open source would develop much faster, than propriety but who knows.
There is a lot of money wasted by every maker going their own way, it IMO, is a bit like most ICE vehicles ended up just using Bosch fuel injection, it saved the manufacturers having to spend money on the fuel system then that money could be utilised to make their product better or cheaper.
Meanwhile Bosch continues to improve and develop the fuel injection product, to suit the various manufacturers and legislative requirements.
But like I say it is only my opinion, maybe it wouldn't work in the case of batteries, but there seems to be a hell of a lot of duplication.
I haven't invested in any car manufacturers, only battery materials. at this point.Yes we see things differently, but I’m using current information.
Bosch is still a big electronics manufacturer but hasn’t been dominant in the fuel injection world since the 90’s.
Opinions are fine for bbq talks and politics, but for technical & investing discussion it’s handy to use actual reference materials.
I looked at the battery swap industry 2 years ago, researched a bit because I thought about investing in it, specifically NIO but it didn’t add up. Instead I I invested in TSLA.
The article I posted is one of many, which offers industry reasons rather than opinions.
Invest in NIO If you believe so strongly in battery swap technology.
I haven't invested in any car manufacturers, only battery materials. at this point.
If you go back to where we started this discussion, it wasn't focused on the swap out industry, it was focused on the standardising of the battery pack to enable it to be used in a wide range of vehicles.I understand what you are saying, but it isn't just a case of a lick of paint, the bottle has to be taken to a facility to be tested to ensure there is not structural issues, if there are it has to be disposed of at another specific facility to ensure that it is done in a safe and correct manner.
The question of how many batteries are required, is somewhat like how many charging stations are required, it will depend on the amount of vehicles the area is servicing.
The issue is how many times will you need to swap your battery, in the case of VC very very seldom, he will charge mainly at home, the same could be for you, so there is two you don't need to carry.
But there may be other people who have an E.V company car and is a travelling salesman that goes all over the city, or a taxi driver in a different make of E.V that runs 24/7, they may swap out every day.
So it would depend on the demographics of the population, but having the same swap out battery and mechanism in your Tesla as a Hyundai or a Polestar or whatever makes sense.
When you and VC in 7 years time find your range isn't what it used to be, you head down the swap shop, drive in and get a new battery in 5 minutes then off you go for the next 7 years hopefully.
I don't think you are looking at it from a holistic point of view, i think you may be thinking you swap the battery every charge, where this for most wouldn't be the case.
If you go back to where we started this discussion, it wasn't focused on the swap out industry, it was focused on the standardising of the battery pack to enable it to be used in a wide range of vehicles.
The swap station issue was a side issue that would be available for people who required it, if you re read above, I actually said you and Value Collector wouldn't ever swap your battery out until it was stuffed as you would just continue to charge at home.
The focus of the discussion now has been lost and the whole discussion is focused on the swap out station model.
Like I said the duplication and wastage in having propriety batteries must be enormous, but as I keep saying, we are looking at it from different perspectives.
So be it, no need to get bent out of shape, neither of us is going to have any effect on the outcome..
How Is This A Good Idea?: EV Battery Swapping
Swap this technological dead-end out for better batteries, improved superchargers and more universal EV charging standards
Battery swapping has become a lot like hydrogen fuel cells for passenger cars: They’re automotive ideas that are never quite born, but just won’t die.
Here in 2021, Battery swapping in EVs has become an especially bad idea. It’s a technical and market dead-end that seems more about separating green investors from their money than providing a solution. That’s despite credulous media reports that coo over the (admittedly cool) spectacle of robots switching car batteries like greasy Rube Goldbergs—but tend to avoid asking tough questions about how it’s supposed to work in the real world.
The technology’s troubled history traces to Better Place, or Exhibit A in the case against battery-swapping’s future. The Israel-based Better Place—founded in 2007 by smooth-talking Silicon Valley entrepreneur Shai Agassi—promised to change the world with robotic service stations that would pluck a battery from a car and pop in a fresh one, extending its driving range in a matter of minutes. In those quaint EV days, with Tesla taking baby steps with the Roadster (built from 2008 to 2011), battery swapping seemed to hold hazy promise. Most newfangled EVs (Tesla excepted) could barely get beyond city limits on a charge, including the 2011 Nissan Leaf and its 73-mile range. Once range was depleted, reliable public charging barely existed, as I recall from my own anxious drives in San Francisco when I tested the original Leaf and BMW i3. When you did find a working plug, batteries took forever to charge.
Better Place’s alternative, through a contract with Renault, was the 2011 Fluence Z.E.: An electric sedan whose upright battery ate into trunk space and provided a piddling 80-mile range. But that battery could drop through the Renault’s floor for swaps at Better Place stations in Israel and Denmark, adding another 80 miles in about 10 minutes, rather than hours of recharging.
But despite raising nearly $900 million from investors, and the media anointing Agassi as an electric savior, Better Place imploded like the Theranos of its day. Robotic swap stations were supposed to cost $500,000 each, but ended up costing $2 million. Critically, Better Place failed to get any other automaker onboard to design and produce standardized vehicles with swappable batteries, with Agassi alienating such potential partners as BMW and GM. Better Place sold fewer than 1,500 electric Renaults before it was liquidated, with Agassi fired in disgrace in 2012. Fast Company magazine called Better Place “the most spectacularly failed technology start-up of the 21st century.”
That debacle didn’t drive the final, automated nail into battery swapping’s coffin. The latest proponents are China’s EV maker Nio, and Ample, a San Francisco-based startup. China’s Nio has taken on the challenge of designing compatible cars, and a few hundred robotic stations that swap out batteries in three to five minutes. Cars roll into a covered bay for a hydraulic lift. Laser-guided wrenches unscrew bolts and lower the battery case from the car. That battery is whisked away on a motorized track, and a fresh one is installed. Despite the whiz-bang tech, Nio’s stations still require a human operator to safely drive the car onto the lift and monitor the process. It’s akin to every public charger coming with its own pump attendant.
Last fall, Nio launched a “Battery as a Service” subscription: Think of it as buying a car with “Batteries Not Included.” Since batteries remain the most expensive EV component, the plan saves owners roughly $10,000 on the car’s price. In return, owners pay about $142 a month to lease a 70 kWh pack with six monthly swaps. In April, Nio claimed it had performed 2 million total exchanges at its Power Swap stations, with users gaining an average of 123 miles of range per swap.
That’s a solid range boost in five minutes. But time, in multiple senses, is still conspiring against battery swapping. Jeremy Michalek, a mechanical engineering professor and director of Carnegie Mellon’s vehicle electrification group, calls battery swapping a relic of a bygone EV age.
Today’s new EVs routinely deliver 200 to 400 miles of range, with a potential 517 miles for the forthcoming Lucid Air. Those EVs charge in 35 minutes or less at Tesla Superchargers and other oases for time-pressed drivers. DC fast charging times have soared by roughly sevenfold, to today’s top 350-kilowatt units. Why do drivers need a contraption to extract the 630-kilogram battery of a Porsche Taycan Turbo, when they can juice that battery in 20 minutes flat? Lucid says its Air will add up to 300 miles of range in the same 20 minutes. That’s enough for nearly five hours of highway driving at 60 mph, before it’s time for a fill-up.
“When you’re looking at 300 miles of range from a fast charge, it changes the game for how convenient EVs are,” Michalek said. “You’re going to spend 20 minutes going to the bathroom and getting coffee anyway.”
In addition, the world has spoken, loudly. Governments around the world are choosing DC charging as the tech winner, including President Joe Biden’s plan to invest $15 billion to install at least 500,000 public chargers. Tesla demonstrated battery-swapping in 2013 on its Model S before abandoning the tech—with reasons including cumbersome stations and tepid consumer interest—in favor of its Supercharger network that now appears a smarter bet.
Since batteries are so expensive, bulky and resource-intensive, Michalek says, creating vast networks of swappable packs—which must be stored, kept charged and maintained—would be a waste of money and resources, while expanding carbon footprints. Many surplus batteries would end up sitting around, waiting for customers. Ultimately, customers would absorb these exorbitant costs. Seeing the conundrum, swap proponents have begun touting the possibility of stored batteries returning power to the grid.
Building and servicing a swapping infrastructure seems another nightmare. Connecting EVs to the existing grid, via a simple plug, is surely smarter than a shell game of batteries and robotic helpers. In the swapping model, polluting trucks would have to haul batteries between stations according to demand. It’s bike rentals writ large, only for 1,500-pound battery packs that cost $10,000 and more. The stations’ complex machinery, especially intermingled with dirty cars and packs, would require far more maintenance than a charger with virtually no moving parts.
If those obstacles seem daunting, we haven’t touched on the worst: Automakers don’t standardize vehicles or batteries, and aren’t looking to start. These are companies that can’t even agree on a charging standard, let alone batteries that could plug-and-play with every car, SUV and pickup. Barring standardization, Michalek says, each automaker would have to develop its own proprietary, balkanized station network, from San Francisco to Shanghai.
Battery-swap proponents want you to see cars as cordless drills, but they’re nothing like that. The design of each automaker’s batteries is deeply entwined with unique vehicle architectures that support vast lineups of car models. Even within a single automaker, batteries are bringing varying module counts and orientations to maximize energy storage, as with GM’s new Ultium packs. Modern packs are designed as integrated, weight-bearing structural elements to pass rigorous crash testing. None are designed for one-size-fits-all or easy removal and reinstallation.
Ultimately, competition and capitalism itself spells doom for battery swaps. Commonized vehicles and battery packs would require every major automaker to tear up existing and future product plans and start from scratch.
And to what gain? Certainly, automakers partner on a limited basis to share technology, such as GM and Honda jointly developing two Honda/Acura models with Ultium batteries. But imagine a Tesla or General Motors agreeing to essentially give away their most-precious intellectual property in today’s industry: The designs, electronic controls and chemistries of batteries, along with the EVs they power. These core competencies include giga-scaled factories for proprietary lithium-ion cells, worth billions in investment. Imagine Elon Musk, and the automotive giants racing to catch up with him, calling a competitive truce, and working hand-in-hand to standardize every battery, brand and model. They’d be doing this not to make a better, safer EV for customers, or in their own self-interest. Instead, they’d be commonizing components so that Agassi-style disruptors—start-ups in the nonexistent “business” of battery swapping—can literally leverage their way into their cars and multi-trillion-dollar industry; with robotic stations to jack up cars, switch out batteries, and take a cut of any profits. Any automaker invested in current EVs and the charging model would be cutting their own throat, and handing potential competitors the knife.
One glance at product plans of global automakers underlines the truth: Aside from Nio—now 25-percent owned by China’s local Hefei government, following a forced $1 billion bailout last year—no automaker seems remotely interested in joining this quixotic scheme.
Ample, the Silicon Valley start-up, seems to anticipate that showroom reality. It has opened five battery-swap stations in the San Francisco area, aimed at beta-testing Nissan Leafs modified to accept Ample’s own modular battery pack. The idea is that battery swapping might serve ride-hailing, delivery or municipal fleets, where even modest downtime for drivers cuts into earnings. Trading a half-hour plug-in charge for a faster battery swap might boost fleet revenue, and avoid overreliance on DC charging that can degrade battery life. Ample’s technical twist is robotics that can remove only the spent modules in a battery, rather than an entire pack.
Yet even the idea of battery-flipping fleets engenders skepticism: Where are the companies raising hands to design these vehicles? Manufacturers large and small—GM, Daimler, Volvo, Tesla, Rivian, Volta, Workhorse—are indeed developing electric ride-share and delivery vehicles, even massive semis. None are publicly discussing battery swaps as part of that toolkit. In an interview with Car and Driver, Ample CEO Khaled Hassounah said the company is working with “five of the 10 largest (automakers) in the world,” but declined to name one.
Experts warn that time is already running short to accelerate the transition to electric transportation, if climate change is to be stopped in its tracks. Fast-tracking a reliable charging infrastructure has become the consensus solution. Even that will require a Marshall Plan-level of political will, private investment and government support. In the face of this dire situation, battery swapping is a distraction and dead-end that the planet can’t afford.
Correction (May 14, 8:40 p.m. EDT): This story was corrected to reflect the fact that other Chinese companies than Nio have introduced EV battery-swap projects.
And you may be correct, but imagine the wastage in the World , because we haven't standardised on either LHD or RHD, because we haven't standardised on what voltage and frequency is the most efficient for consumer mains, so the same appliances have to be made differently and have different components to suit the various countries. When you travel, you have to take adaptors, because we never even standardised plugs.The start for me is my somewhere from divs4ever #5,636, where you quote me and mention gas bottles and swapping.
divs4 comment "well i suspect a well-run organization will first run some checks on the battery ( batteries ) received to be swapped ( and recharged later ) so would think there will be more batteries waiting in the racks than expected customers say 10% to 20% more relying on newly received batteries...."
Which started from me asking a series of questions starting with "How many batteries required to be waiting in storage?" To mullokintyre's posted article Inside China's electric drive for swappable car batteries
This is when you came in, quoting me, and saying "It is an interesting concept and it isn't without precedent, people lease and swap out their their gas bottles. This ensures..."
I still believe that battery swapping is an inefficient way to bring the cost of EVs down. As for battery standardisation? It sounds like a good idea, but also as the article points out, the battery is part of the vehicle structure and strength, making all batteries the same will dampen vehicle and battery development and thus cost reduction.
Standardisation is fine, once the item has reached its near or full development peak, like a gas bottle. However, if standardisation is brought in too early, it will slow development. Because any major update could affect the suitability of installation into older style vehicles. Thus battery development stops.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?