Threat to Charging Infrastructures – Emergence of New Super-Efficient, Conventionally-Powered Compact Models

The global banking crisis of 2008/9 resulted in many governments transferring debt from the banking sector to the private sector. This has resulted in widespread cuts in public spending, including investment plans for charging infrastructures for electric vehicles, especially in Europe.  As a result of the ongoing financial crisis, consumer demand for pure electric vehicles in certain European countries could potentially be dampened by the lack of charging points.

• The Republic of Ireland is one example of a recent slow-down in implementation.  According to the government plan, some 1,500 charging points and 40 fast-chargers were to be in place by the end of 2011 – but by October 2012, some 860 charging points (around 57 percent of the plan) and 30 fast-chargers were installed.  As one of the European governments under pressure to limit public spending, it is unlikely that further funds would be made available to complete the plan, especially when electric vehicle sales have not met expectations – at just 192 units since 2009.  The cost to Electric Ireland in installing the current network has estimated to be around €3.9m (US$5m).
• Better Place has responded to the lack of demand for electric vehicles by curtailing its infrastructure operations in countries such as Australia and the US and concentrate efforts in Denmark and Israel.
• The only recent announcement to build new infrastructure has been from the UK government.  However, such an investment is limited to covering 75 percent of the total cost of construction by private vehicle purchasers at their homes, local governments for use by apartment residents and at railway stations and government facilities. 
• Very few European countries have announced a charging infrastructure plan.  Major public infrastructure investments are limited to just France and Germany.

The resulting recession from the crisis has also made European consumers even more aware of fuel efficiency in vehicle purchases, but it has also lowered tax revenues among European governments.

• As a means of meeting greenhouse gas emission targets, European governments encourage consumers to purchase vehicles that emit less CO2, by way of purchasing subsidies and taxes (called bonus-malus in France for example) or from a varying annual road tax system (as in the UK for example).
• Other incentives, such as free entry to congestion charge zones, are also offered to low CO2 emitting vehicles, to limit congestion and air pollution in city centers.
• As European consumers try to save money by running vehicles that emit less CO2, then the level of purchase subsidies increase and the receipts from annual road taxes decrease.  Fuel sales are also decreasing in some countries, as drivers seek more efficient vehicles.  For example, in the UK, fuel stations sold 37.67 billion liters of fuel in 2007 but only 34.16 billion liters in 2012.
• As European governments try to limit public spending, then the offering of purchase subsidies and annual road tax discounts are changed to models emitting even less CO2.

Consumers’ desires for more efficient vehicles have yet to benefit EV sales in any large-scale way.  A lack of charging infrastructure and relatively higher costs over conventionally-powered models of the same segment has limited the market.  In addition, a new generation of super-efficient compact models are now entering the European market, which offer consumers many of the benefits of an EV without the drawbacks of high purchasing cost, patchy recharge infrastructure and limited range.

• Since August 2012, the French bonus-malus system now offers a €400 bonus (US$516) to vehicles emitting less than 90 g/km.
• The London Congestion Charge Zone offers free entry for vehicles emitting less than 100 g/km.  Future plans to amend the system are being discussed, which include the lowering of the exemption limit to 80 g/km, adding a group of models for congestion charging that are currently entering the Zone for free.
• The current UK annual road tax exempts vehicles emitting less than 100 g/km.  It is also likely that the tax exemption level will also be lowered to 80 g/km, as receipts from the annual road tax decrease further as British consumers turn to more efficient models that are taxed less.
• While plug-in hybrids, such as the Opel Ampera (Chevrolet Volt) and Toyota Prius PHEV emit less CO2 (27 and 49 g/km respectively), they are costly vehicles that essentially use two powertrains.
• Models benefiting from a change in government policy would be those sub-compact or compact hatchbacks that can be modified by adding stop-start systems, adjusting compact diesel engines with reduced torque and variable vane turbochargers, using manual transmissions with longer gearing (but could also use re-programmed automated transmissions, as on the Peugeot 208), modifying the accelerator pedal mapping, reducing weight, use low rolling resistance tires and better aerodynamic features, such as grille shutters, extended tailgate spoilers and wheel deflectors.
• Included amongst these models are the new Toyota mini-hybrids, with the Hybrid Synergy Drive powertrain modified to suit the smaller model.
• But such modifications must not be at the expense of comfort and convenience features, such as power windows and air conditioning, nor mandated safety features, such as airbags.
• Retail prices for these models are still at an affordable level, of between US$15,000 and US$20,000 (with sales taxes), and compare well against used cars that are more costly to run, as fuel economy of the efficient models reaches 60-67 mpg (US).
• Examples include the Toyota Yaris Hybrid (79 g/km, T-Sprint 85 g/km), the Renault Clio dCi 90 Stop & Start ECO (83 g/km), the Hyundai i20 1.1 CRDi Blue (84 g/km), the Kia Rio 1 1.1 CRDi EcoDynamics (85 g/km), the Peugeot 208 Access+ 1.4 e-HDi Stop and Start EGC 70 (87 g/km), the Ford Fiesta Style ECOnetic 1.6 TDCi Start Stop (87 g/km), the Citroen C3 1.4 e-HDi (87 g/km), the Ford Focus ECOnetic 1.6 TDCi (88 g/km), the Opel Corsa 1.3 CDTi ecoFLEX (88 g/km) and the Skoda Fabia 1.2 TDI CR Greenline II (89 g/km).

The Strategy Analytics System Demand Forecast, to be updated later in April already includes this increased demand for stop-start systems and for full hybrid systems among Toyota’s compact segments.  But should the European Sovereign Debt Crisis end, likely to be some time in 2014, this growing demand is unlikely to fall away – it is more likely to accelerate deployment of stop-start and other fuel savings features in other regions and in other model segments in greater volumes.  The OEM Hybrid and Electric Vehicle Strategies Report will be updated in September 2013.

This analysis was conducted following recent updates to the EV/HEV Technologies Supply & Fitment Database and the Hybrid Technologies Legislation/Support Database.

On March 19th, Qualcomm presented its inductive charging technology for electric vehicles.  It had recently acquired the company HaloIPT, an offshoot of the University of Auckland, New Zealand, that had developed the technology.

The induction system involves the fitment of a receiving pad connected to a control unit and the vehicle’s battery pack.  On the infrastructure side, a charging pad is fitted to the road surface, inside a parking bay.  Both pads contain wiring coils, with magnetic fields transferring the electrical energy from the infrastructure to the vehicle.

The charging system is capable of full operation even where there is misalignment between the induction pads.  To park accurately to align with the charging pad is very difficult in practice – so user experience issues have been taken into consideration.  There is even tolerance in the vertical alignment, should the EV be an SUV model, should there be additional occupants in the EV or should the charging pad needs to be hidden from view under the tarmac surface, such as for street cleaning purposes.  This is due to the Double-D and Double-D Quadrature coils designed to enable energy transfer over a wider area.

Foreign Object Detection systems are currently being developed to prevent charging taking place where children or animals are present in the recharging area.  Despite the presence of magnetic fields and radio waves, Qualcomm is convinced that inductive charging is safe – thanks to its earlier experience with RF technologies in the mobile handset area.  It claims it is much safer than the use of conductive charging, with the threat of electric shock, and the presence of cables that people can trip over.

Qualcomm claim high charging efficiencies of 90 percent – another area where detractors claimed inductive charging has a weakness.  It earlier tested its inductive charging system on a Citroen C1 EVIE and the Rolls-Royce 102EX concepts.  Both a 3 kW single-phase and 7 kW three-phase system were developed.  On the Lola Drayson B12/69EV racing car, a fast-charging 20 kW three-phase system has also been developed.  Transport for London and other UK-based partners are evaluating the system from 2012 onwards.

At present, the technology is at the pre-commercial stage and is awaiting interest from OEMs and Qualcomm’s Tier 1 and Tier 2 automotive customers to bring about a platform design, which would generate economies of scale to make the hardware affordable for mass market deployment.  The first deployment of inductive charging technology could come as early as 2015.

So far, business models mooted include the free or subsidized charging: Offered by retail corporations, perhaps time limited; Insurance corporations, to monitor vehicle movements to prevent theft; or Combined with toll road usage.

Dynamic charging is also a long-term possibility, where the vehicle is charged as it is being driven, thanks to the misalignment tolerance developed by Qualcomm – although this will depend on how fast charging takes place in order to replace the energy consumed to drive the vehicle.

Strategy Analytics believes that such a charging system has the potential to become a success in serving the plug-in vehicle market.  However, the technology is still dependant on the ability to persuade supporting infrastructure to be developed alongside Qualcomm’s attempt to have the system deployed by OEMs.  The danger is that as conductive charging systems are now being standardized (e.g. ChaDeMo, SAE J1772), Qualcomm’s inductive charging system could be left behind.  Even if OEMs do adopt the system, they may also have to fit a conductive charging system as a back-up to it – which adds unnecessary cost.

To help advance Qualcomm’s case in the short term would be to promote its charging system as a retro-fitment to the fleet market, whereby volume deployment can be generated quickly.  That way, OEMs would have an earlier indication of how successful such a charging system could be.

Otherwise, history may repeat itself when players having the right technology fail to succeed, by not getting it to market ahead of their rivals – Qualcomm has to work fast to promote its system, get infrastructure players involved  and develop a platform for OEM adoption before conductive technologies shut it out of the automotive market.

As electric vehicles attempt to move into the mainstream, as I identified in my recent Insight (Electric Vehicles: What Is Different This Time?) the one key limitation remaining for EVs is range.  Sixty to a hundred miles may be more than most people need on most days – but it is not enough for everyone, every day.  I wouldn't want to trust most current EVs to get me to Heathrow airport and back, and a weekend trip to visit my parents is well into the realms of the impossible.

IBM's research into lithium-air batteries - with the specific and stated aim of developing a 500 mile (800 km) range battery - is thus of huge potential significance.  

As IBM itself points out, this is "a very high risk/very high reward, long horizon project".  There's little or no chance of seeing a lithium-air powered EV before 2020 at the earliest. Although the technology looks promising, there are still real issues in recharging the batteries.  

I had the opportunity recently to speak with Dr. Winfried Wilcke, Senior Manager, Nanoscale Science & Technology and Program Director, Silicon Valley Projects at IBM's Almaden Research Center in California.  He was clearly enthusiastic about the research - but also realistic about its limitations.  The whole project, he told me, is about reducing oil dependence.  There is, he claims, enough electrical generating capacity in the USA for all light vehicles to be electric - assuming they are charged off-peak at night.  He shares my scepticism that sufficient infrastructure can be put in place to overcome EV range anxiety for the mass-market consumer, and thus the only answer to mass EV adoption is to radically extend the range of EVs.

The key attraction of lithium-air over lithium ion - at least in terms of making a 500 mile battery - is the energy density that the technology offers.  I've seen estimates that it is up to ten times better in terms of mass density (Wh/kg) and twice as good as lithium ion in terms of volume density (Wh/l).  Fitting a 500 mile battery into the 300 litre volume limit the car makers will allow for such a battery is not seen as an insurmountable problem.  The air handling system may need additional packaging space however: a lithium-air battery is as hungry for air as a gasoline engine is for comparable power outputs.

So far, so good.

However - one key limitation of lithium-air is likely to remain.  It is inherently slow to charge and discharge.  Peak energy flows of the order of 30 kW were mentioned. This means that to have competitive acceleration, a smaller lithium ion battery and/or ultra-capacitor will need to be used.  This will enable much higher peak power outputs/inputs for acceleration and regenerative braking, in much the same way as high-speed cache RAM enhances your computer's performance.  It will also, of course, make the final system a bit more expensive.

The relatively low peak power output will also mean that high-speed sustained autobahn-style (> 90 mph / 145 km/h) cruising will not be possible.  Sorry to any Germans reading this!

The limited power output of lithium-air is not to my mind the biggest issue, however. It's the limited charge rates possible.  A 500 mile battery may well prove achievable using lithium-air.  What looks unlikely, however, is a 500 mile battery that you can use to drive 500 miles, recharge easily overnight, and then drive another 500 miles the next morning.  It can do it once, but asking for a repeat performance in short measure is likely to leave you disappointed.  Even with a fast charger, an eight hour full recharge is still a target, not a certainty: it’s not easy to put energy into a lithium-air battery that quickly.  

On a domestic 4kW supply, recovering the full 500 miles of range could take in the region of 30 hours or more.  That’s not a limitation of the lithium air battery – just a simple matter of mathematics and limited domestic supplies.  Electric vehicles face a huge challenge when compared to gasoline vehicles in this regard.  A level III 50kW fast charge may sound impressive – but whenever you fill your gas tank the equivalent energy flow is in the order of 6 MW, more than 100 times greater.  

As Dr. Wilcke admitted, even if the technology works well, the lithium-air powered EV will not be the vehicle for your 2000 mile vacation road trip.

All sorts of questions fire off on this realisation.  Will consumers accept such a limitation?  And, perhaps more fundamentally, will car makers ever manufacture such a vehicle? Given that even the 500 mile EV still cannot match what a conventional gasoline or diesel car can do, is there any point?

Lithium-air appears to offer a bright promise for smaller, lighter batteries that store more energy.  Whether they'll ever be used to make a 500 mile EV is another question altogether.  I can't help wondering if they'll end up powering EVs with, say, a 200 mile range that can be recovered on a domestic outlet in 12 hours or so overnight.  That would make sense to me, and would broaden the EV’s appeal considerably.  

For those who need a family vehicle to do more than 200 miles or so in one go, my crystal ball says that range extenders and hybrids are the future.

There has been some surprise expressed at the news that the Ford Focus EV will likely launch without a DC fast-charge capability.  I’m not surprised.  Although such a capability looks good on the spec sheet – its real world use will be limited.

The development of a widespread public EV recharge infrastructure is problematic in the extreme, and will mean that recharge-at-home will be the default option for most EV owners.

The key issue is business model.  Electricity is – in the scheme of things – cheap.  Putting in the recharge infrastructure is not.  Relying on selling enough electricity to recoup your costs is not viable.  A “full tank” of electrons typically costs less than $3.  In a city, $3 will typically buy you only an hour or so of parking.  The ground under your wheels costs more to rent that than the electricity you are buying.

The only current viable business models for EV infrastructure are thus public finance and private philanthropism, and each of these has its problems:

• Public budgets are facing intense pressure across the globe.  The likelihood is that the governments will invest just enough to be seen to be doing something rather than drive change. 
• Renault understands this limit.  It has repeatedly stated at conferences that it favours AC charging with an on-board AC/DC converter.  Although this adds cost to the car Renault sees OEMs as having to take this cost in order to make the infrastructure cheaper.

Daimler – although developing EVs – is still very keen on hydrogen.  It has pointed out (in a presentation at Ludwigsburg last year) that its calculations show that a hydrogen infrastructure in Germany would be cheaper to implement than an EV charging one.

Even power companies are not keen on widespread fast charging.  At the CESA Automotive Electronics and Systems Congress in Paris last December, EDF clearly stated that “we should prevent pointless technology escalation” and that fast charging should be discouraged by pricing.  Its vision for the French infrastructure in 2020 is that 95% will remain slow charging.

Ford – while perhaps disappointing technophiles – is thus absolutely correct to ignore DC fast charging on the Focus.

The recent news that Toyota is investing $50M in buying a stake in US electric vehicle maker Tesla is arguably Toyota’s most significant activity in the nascent electric vehicle market to date.  Although it owns some 70% of the hybrid vehicle market, its activities in the pure EV market have been modest compared with many of its competitors. It has been matched in its lack of enthusiasm for pure EVs by Honda, which occupies the #2 slot in the hybrid market, with head of research and development at Honda, Tomohiko Kawanabe, recently being quoted as saying: “We are definitely conducting research on electric cars, but I can’t say I can wholeheartedly recommend them… It’s questionable whether consumers will accept the annoyances of limited driving range and having to spend time charging them.”  However – Honda has made significant investments in fuel cell technology, whereas Toyota has shown reluctance to consider anything other than its “Plan A” for vehicle electrification – the hybrid. However – before getting too excited over the relevance of Toyota’s move in investing in Tesla is – it is worth looking at the sums involved.  $50M may initially sound like a lot of money – but it is way less than the current round of re-calls that Toyota is having to initiate.  These have been estimated as potentially exceeding $2 billion – once lost sales and warranty payments are taken into account.  The Tesla deal – which includes Tesla taking over a recently-closed NUMMI and creating 1,000 jobs, will likely play well with the American – and especially Californian  – public.  The deal has already been warmly welcomed by Governor Schwarzenegger.   This deal certainly has damage-limitation and image-boosting aspects, as well as purely technical ones. Toyota thus seems to be thawing in its attitude to EVs – but a large part of this may just be post re-calls signs of a bit less certainty in its own infallibility emanating from Toyota City.