Skip to content

Are EVs Dreamliners or Dream Cars?

January 18, 2013

Safe at any speedWith all the problems with Boeing’s Dreamliner 787 lithium-ion batteries, it’s fair to question the performance and safety of EVs Li-ion batteries.  For the uninformed, regulators around the world joined the United States in grounding Boeing’s 787 Dreamliner passenger jets while battery-related problems are investigated.

Boeing’s technical prowess and FAA’s certification requirements are demonstratively superior and more rigorous than the auto industry, EPA and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. According to Forbes [1], “The auto industry sold around 14.5 million units last year (2012). Meanwhile, according to their research culling through federal notices and manufacturers’ releases, automakers recalled over 14.3 million current and past models during 2012.”

The article points out: “Toyota voluntarily recalled nearly 5 million Toyota, Lexus and Scion models…..” “…..Honda initiated programs for over 3.4 million Honda and Acura vehicles.” “General Motors recalled nearly 1.3 million cars and trucks…..” “Ford recalled over 1.1 million vehicles…..” “…..Ford recalled a brand-new model, the redesigned-for-2013 Escape crossover SUV, three separate times shortly after its release, all for potential engine fires.” “Virtually all automakers–including exotic brands like Rolls-Royce, Lotus and Lamborghini–had at least one recall issued during 2012.

Makes one wonder, if more conventional technologies are plagued with field related problems, what one can expect with a truly cutting-edge technology. Especially with a technology like Li-ion batteries that experienced some catastrophic failures with several consumer electronic products. Take that to the extreme where more power is packed in a smaller package with new chemistry and operated in all sorts of climatic zones by owners who for the most part are relatively inexperienced with suggested EV battery management practices.

There are three major concerns with EV batteries:
1) Will the batteries achieve EPA’s miles per charge rating?
2) Will charge life drop over time?
3) Can the batteries experience catastrophic failure such as catching on fire or exploding?

The first two concerns are inextricably bound together. Owners of Li-ion powered devices such as cell phones and laptops clearly understand these issues. The halls resonate with “where did they get these ratings from, mine don’t even come close,” “where is a socket, my batteries are almost dead,” and “it’s time for a new battery,” or in the case of iPhone users, “time to upgrade.” Pick these apart all you want, but at the end of this is a way of life for owners of Li-ion devices.

To preserve battery life, owners need to adopt good battery management practices. Plugin Cars gave these eight tips to extend electric vehicle battery life [2]:

• Avoid full charging when you can. • For pure electric vehicles, avoid deep discharging your battery pack.

• For plug-in hybrids, consider “mountain-mode” or exiting EV-mode at key times. • Use timers to minimize the time spent at a high state of charge.

• On a hot day, try to park in the shade. During the winter, park in a garage, rather than on the street.

• If your electric vehicle has thermal management and the weather is extreme, plug in whenever you can.

• Plan ahead for periods of extended storage . To maximize battery life, minimize use of DC quick-charge.

Great suggestions but impractical at best! Charging gauges in vehicles need to be relabeled to indicate: JERK at full charge and IDIOT at full discharge. Vehicles need to be programed to beep the horn and flash the lights when parked in the sun or stored for a length of time in a high state of charge (beeping will help to discharge batteries, but hopefully won’t fully dischage). When quick-charging an audible warning signal will speak out: “Danger, Danger! – Mr. / Ms. Smith.”

Autobloggreen recently reported: “Some hot Arizona weather is cooling some Nissan Leaf owners’ enthusiasm for their electric vehicles.   Nissan is addressing complaints from five Arizona owners of Leafs who say the electric vehicles are losing battery capacity at a faster rate than advertised, reported KPHO, CBS’s Phoenix affiliate.   Mark Perry, Nissan’s director of product planning, told KPHO that the automaker is investigating complaints from drivers who say the region’s heat is draining the EVs’ battery capacity. One Arizona driver said his single-charge driving range is down to 44 miles from about 90 miles a year ago, while another says that three of the car’s 12 battery-capacity indicator lights are already out, according to KPHO.”[3]

While a ¬NJ EV owner with 50,000 miles logged dispels myth of cold weather battery woes [4], “the Rocky Mountain Institute reported potential EV buyers should consider range and climate. If the miles you cover each day are predictable and/or less than 60 miles, an EV might work for you. Just like a typical car battery, an EV battery loses effectiveness in cold weather, so they work best in warm climates.”[5]

Concerns about EV battery susceptibility to catching on fire seem legitimate. The media sensitized the public in late 2011 when U.S. regulators investigated the safety of batteries used to power electric vehicles after a Chevrolet Volt caught fire following a routine crash test.

Fisker Automotive’s Karma hybrid EV sedan may be a different. “Last spring a model burnt to near smithereens and damaged its owner’s house, the Karma above caught fire in a Woodside, CA parking lot while powered off.” [6]

The company “analyzed the October 30 fire that destroyed 16 Karmas when Hurricane Sandy flood waters receded. After “a thorough investigation witnessed by NHTSA representatives”–that the cause was residual salt damage inside a Vehicle Control Unit submerged in seawater for several hours. Corrosion from the salt caused a short circuit in the unit, which led to a fire when the Karma’s 12-Volt battery fed power into the circuit.” [7]

The same report noted, “the factory (Fisker) concluded that the fire which badly damaged the 2012 Fisker Karma parked outside a store in Woodside, California, was caused by a short circuit in a cooling fan located in the engine compartment.  No explanation was given for the May 2012 Karma fire, in Sugar Land, Texas, which destroyed the car and damaged the garage and house it was kept in.”

So what are the facts? The American Council On Renewable Energy (ACORE) reported [8]:

• “More than 487,480 electric drive vehicles – hybrids, extended range and battery – were purchased in the U.S. in 2012. (Source: Electric Drive Transportation Association, http://bit.ly/JJXV0w )

• Nissan – world’s largest seller of electric vehicles – is upgrading the Leaf for 2013. All 2013 Leaf models have improved electric range, and recharge time for SV and SL grades falls to four hours from a 220-volt outlet, from about seven hours currently.

• There are eight models of electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles that retail for under $32,000. (Source: Media Matters, http://bit.ly/HN06Vy , http://engt.co/R6dmHv , http://bit.ly/OKTEB4 ). By comparison, the average price of a car purchased in the United States in April 2012 was approximately $30,000. (Source: True Car, http://bit.ly/PLVmzl ).

• Maintenance costs for electric drive vehicles are as much as 50% lower than traditional gasoline vehicles, thanks to fewer fluids to change, significantly reduced brake wear due to regenerative braking, and far fewer moving parts. (Source: Center for Automotive Research, http://bit.ly/L07he8 and U.S. Department of Energy, http://bit.ly/QBLmGY )

• EVs are safe. According to the National Fire Protection Agency, there were an estimated 184,500 conventional highway vehicle fires in 2010, and 31,000 other non-highway vehicle (equipment) fires.  In the extremely rare incidents where a fire has involved an EV, no findings of any relationship to the electric drive components have been found.  The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration thoroughly examined the safety of EVs in accidents and found no real-world electric vehicle crashes that resulted in battery-related fires. (Source: National Fire Protection Agency, http://bit.ly/N3fEBG ; National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, http://1.usa.gov/TJJ5xC )”

In closing, EVs are safe and not prone to fire damage and explosions at any (rated) speed. Facts rather than supposition have to rule. In this regard, when budget and life style allows, EV’s make sense.

PS: I started this piece with the inclination that EV fires are a real and persistent danger. My conclusion speaks for itself. The only lingering concern is industry maturation followed by the introduction of cheap Li-ion replacement batteries. Adherence to standards and strict qualification protocols is a must.

References:
[1] “Biggest Auto Recalls Of 2012 (And Why They Haven’t Affected New-Car Sales),” Forbes, December 29, 2012; http://www.forbes.com/sites/jimgorzelany/2012/12/29/biggest-auto-recalls-of-2012
[2] “Eight tips to extend electric vehicle battery life,” Autobloggreen, October 5, 2011; http://green.autoblog.com/2011/10/05/eight-tips-to-extend-electric-vehicle-battery-life
[3] “Nissan dealing with charges of Leaf battery problems in Arizona [w/video],” Autobloggreen, July 18, 2012: http://green.autoblog.com/2012/07/18/nissan-responds-to-charges-of-leaf-battery-problems-arizona
[4] “NJ EV owner with 50,000 miles logged dispels myth of cold weather battery woes,” engadget, February 2, 2011; http://www.engadget.com/2011/02/02/nj-ev-owner-with-50-000-miles-logged-dispels-myth-of-cold-weathe
[5] “Tips for Switching to an Electric Vehicle,” Earth Share, Kjuly 13, 2012; http://www.earthshare.org/2012/07/ev.html
[6] “Fisker Karma owner returns from grocery run to find hybrid EV on fire,” endgaget, August 12, 2012; http://www.engadget.com/2012/08/12/fisker-karma-hyrbid-ev-second-fire
[7] “Fisker Karma battery not behind post-Sandy fire,” Fox News, November 6, 2012; http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2012/11/06/fisker-karma-battery-not-behind-post-sandy-fire
[8] “Energy Fact Check,’ EnergyFactCheck.org a resource of the American Council On Renewable Energy; http://www.energyfactcheck.org/slideshow/electric-vehicles-evs-are-unpopular-unaffordable-and-unsafe

About these ads
2 Comments leave one →
  1. January 22, 2013 7:58 PM

    See Ultraconductors at http://www.chavaenergy.com for a possible way to store energy that does not involve chemistry. These are polymer equivalents of ambient temperature superconductors. When made into wire and cable they are expected to store energy as does a Superconducting Magnetic Energy Storage system, but without need for cryogenic cooling.

    See Moving Beyond Oil and Cheap Green on the Aesop Institute website for a number of technologies that could change electric vehicles into mobile power plants when parked, able to sell electricity and perhaps even pay for themselves.

    Some of these are Black Swans, highly improbable innovations. Those that prove practical may transform the energy and economic landscape.

  2. April 24, 2014 10:39 PM

    Mark Goldes’ “AESOP Institute” has engaged for many years in the very dishonest and unscrupulous practice of soliciting loans and donations under an endless series of false pretenses, that it is developing and even “prototyping” various “revolutionary breakthroughs,” such as “NO FUEL ENGINES” that run on ambient heat alone – or run on “Virtual Photon Flux” – or on “Collapsing Hydrogen Orbits” – or even on the acoustic energy of sound from a horn.

    AESOP Institute’s make-believe strictly ambient heat engine is ruled out by the Second Law of Thermodynamics. This has been understood by physicists for at least 190 years. There is no “new science” that has ever determined such an engine to be possible.

    AESOP Institute’s make-believe “Virtual Photon Flux” engine is based on the idea that accessible electric power “is everywhere present in unlimited quantities” – which we know to be false.

    AESOP Institute’s make-believe “Collapsing Hydrogen Orbits” engine is based on Randell Mills’ theory of “hydrino” hydrogen, which every scientist knows to be false.

    AESOP Institute’s make-believe horn-powered engine is based on the pretense that a magnetized tuning rod could somehow “multiply energy” – a ludicrous notion, which is obviously ruled out by the law of conservation of energy.

    AESOP Institute’s very latest make-believe engine is a perpetual motion machine in the form of a self-powered air compressor, which proposes to use a turbine to compress air to spin the turbine to compress air to spin the turbine.

    AESOP Institute has never offered the slightest shadow of evidence that it is actually developing or “prototyping” any of these make-believe physics-defying “revolutionary breakthroughs.” All it has ever offered are mere declarations that it is doing so – unsupported by any proof whatever, of any kind whatever.

    There are no “revolutionary breakthroughs” to be found on Goldes’ fraudulent “AESOP Institute” website. There is only pseudoscience, relentless flimflam, and empty claims of engines that are ruled out by the laws of physics.

    http://physicsreviewboard.wordpress.com/2013/12/22/perpetual-flimflam-machine-mark-goldes-fraudulent-aesop-institute/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 192 other followers

%d bloggers like this: