8% battery degredation after 16k miles!!
Discussion
GT9 said:
Why would you dump raw materials that are almost entirely recyclable and therefore continue to have value forever? I would expect it to become illegal to do so anyway.
We currently burn out old Li batteries as it's easier and cheaper than trying to recycle them with tech that doesn't yet exist in a commercial basis. If you consider a defunct battery, it is basically a box of hundreds of individual cells that are all at different proximity to being a very serious problem to get rid of. We have to pay someone to dismantle the battery after shipping it to somewhere that the labour is cheap and we don't care who dies. The individual cells need to them be very gently pulled apart for the chemical extraction. Once you have the raw paste you need to subject it to multiple chemical and highly toxic reactions to reverse the chemistry and get back to say a lithium carbonate. The big problem is that you can't just grind them up, if you tried that you'd have a bit of a mess on your hands.
Recycling Lii batteries is horrible. That's why we currently burn them or more precisely, we almost certainly pay shipping companies who dump them at sea
We absolutely can recycle them but someone has to pick up the tab. What's not yet been decided is whether that is to be the manufacturer, the initial vendor or the last entity to own them.
It is a horrible looming mess and as we can see the best solution the car industry has so far come up with is to sell them on to the energy storage industry before they get landed with the problem.
Notwithstanding newer tech/breakthrough, I think this pretty much answers the question. $/kWh are constantly falling, and will soon be at a point where cost wise it’s not really a massive deal to replace the battery. Certainly not for the likes of the used vehicle trade. Suddenly makes refurbs of older BEV’s and selling them into tertiary markets a lot more attractive. Now that’s recycling!
Regards old battery recycling, there’s just not the volume of dead batteries out there yet for the industry to be properly viable yet. But where’s there’s muck there’s brass, you just need enough muck first.
Edited by dvs_dave on Sunday 28th November 06:56
Yup. We're into the diminishing returns re cost of Li batteries but what will happen over the coming years is that the used EV market will evolve to fit the consumer requirement.
You can already see that cars don't rot for the most part like they used to and most cars end up scrapped due to the cost of repairing drivetrains, suggesting that the car itself had plenty of life left in it. That waste for ICE becomes usable with EVs as the drivetrain is more durable.
I suspect that what you may end up seeing is the manufacturers themselves getting involved in the very used car market as they will be best placed to refurb and update an old EV. A point will be defined by the market where a used EV has more profit by refurbing the battery than selling with it depleted.
Very true about the recycling, there are no economies of scale as of yet. However, even when there are you will always have the issue that recycling to raw will be more expensive than digging up raw. That's a guarantee so it presents the known problem as to who is going to pay for that difference? Am I going to be charged a fee, in which case I'll just dump the battery in the woods along with the old sofa? Is the original cell manufacturer, some state backed entity in Asia going to be sent a bill they won't pay? Is the car vendor going to be forced to pay? Or will they keep doing what they currently do and sell the obligation on to an gent registered offshore who then washes the risk on to another corporate, who in turn obscures their risk by eventually selling to a Panamanian specialist recycling company that mysteriously makes the problem disappear by deep sixing it where no one is looking?
I'm not saying that Li batteries are currently being dumped in the ocean by offshore incorporated 'recycling' firms when they aren't being burnt in the open atmosphere but that is exactly what I'm saying.
We are going to have a nasty problem with expired Li chem because we can't landfill it in Africa, we can't keep burning it or paying elusive firms to make it vanish and someone has to pay to recycle the cells as there is no natural commercial benefit to doing so.
We do have to be honest in this regard and recognise that it is a big elephant in the room. We know it's coming so we ought to be grown up enough to start dealing with the impending problem now rather than adopting the typical strategy of doing nothing until it gets really bad and a load of people have died.
You can already see that cars don't rot for the most part like they used to and most cars end up scrapped due to the cost of repairing drivetrains, suggesting that the car itself had plenty of life left in it. That waste for ICE becomes usable with EVs as the drivetrain is more durable.
I suspect that what you may end up seeing is the manufacturers themselves getting involved in the very used car market as they will be best placed to refurb and update an old EV. A point will be defined by the market where a used EV has more profit by refurbing the battery than selling with it depleted.
Very true about the recycling, there are no economies of scale as of yet. However, even when there are you will always have the issue that recycling to raw will be more expensive than digging up raw. That's a guarantee so it presents the known problem as to who is going to pay for that difference? Am I going to be charged a fee, in which case I'll just dump the battery in the woods along with the old sofa? Is the original cell manufacturer, some state backed entity in Asia going to be sent a bill they won't pay? Is the car vendor going to be forced to pay? Or will they keep doing what they currently do and sell the obligation on to an gent registered offshore who then washes the risk on to another corporate, who in turn obscures their risk by eventually selling to a Panamanian specialist recycling company that mysteriously makes the problem disappear by deep sixing it where no one is looking?
I'm not saying that Li batteries are currently being dumped in the ocean by offshore incorporated 'recycling' firms when they aren't being burnt in the open atmosphere but that is exactly what I'm saying.
We are going to have a nasty problem with expired Li chem because we can't landfill it in Africa, we can't keep burning it or paying elusive firms to make it vanish and someone has to pay to recycle the cells as there is no natural commercial benefit to doing so.
We do have to be honest in this regard and recognise that it is a big elephant in the room. We know it's coming so we ought to be grown up enough to start dealing with the impending problem now rather than adopting the typical strategy of doing nothing until it gets really bad and a load of people have died.
DonkeyApple said:
you will always have the issue that recycling to raw will be more expensive than digging up raw. That's a guarantee
I'm not sure why you say that? These deposits are limited, and many are located in parts of the world which are very susceptible to political instability.We already see from Aluminium, say, that recycling can be cheaper than new, and if the tech evolves at the speed I suspect it will, I wouldn't be so quick to bet that the equation won't swing to parity (at the very least) on these batteries.
Max_Torque said:
I'd suggest understanding the difference between efficiency and consumption before getting too ranty!
You old ICE has in fact reduced both in efficiency and increased in consumption as it wears. Effects like piston ring wear, worn fuel injection components and worn valve gear, and increased parastic losses due to worn oil and water pumps all absolutely have an effect as the engine (and transmission too) wears.
However, because the vehicle was so catastrophically in-efficient even when in perfect working order when new, you mostly don't notice the difference, because day to day differences in environment, driving style and traffic flow make more difference. However it is absolutely measureable when tested under controlled conditions.
With an EV, the battery looses capacity as it ages, but the powertrain does not reduce in efficiency nor increase in consumption. The range simply goes down because you can't "fill up" with as much 'lecy as you could when it was new. This is analogous to the fuel tank of an ICE getting smaller as it ages
The other thing worth noting is that because our electricity grid is greening over time, the effective tailpipe emissions and CO2 of an BEV actually do reduce as it ages. Your ICE's do not, in fact, if we took your 20 year old car and ran it over the certification cycle, you would almost certainly find at it has tailpipe emissons massively higher than when new, precisely because lots of critical engine and aftertreatment parts have worn and reduced in efficiency.
Typical fleet buy-back studies by various OE's show emissions degredations of between 50 and 1000 percent for cars up to 5 years / 60k miles old and CO2 emissions sitting at around 10 to 15% higher than when new
Pumps and other engine components don’t take more parasitic power as they age - quite the opposite. You old ICE has in fact reduced both in efficiency and increased in consumption as it wears. Effects like piston ring wear, worn fuel injection components and worn valve gear, and increased parastic losses due to worn oil and water pumps all absolutely have an effect as the engine (and transmission too) wears.
However, because the vehicle was so catastrophically in-efficient even when in perfect working order when new, you mostly don't notice the difference, because day to day differences in environment, driving style and traffic flow make more difference. However it is absolutely measureable when tested under controlled conditions.
With an EV, the battery looses capacity as it ages, but the powertrain does not reduce in efficiency nor increase in consumption. The range simply goes down because you can't "fill up" with as much 'lecy as you could when it was new. This is analogous to the fuel tank of an ICE getting smaller as it ages
The other thing worth noting is that because our electricity grid is greening over time, the effective tailpipe emissions and CO2 of an BEV actually do reduce as it ages. Your ICE's do not, in fact, if we took your 20 year old car and ran it over the certification cycle, you would almost certainly find at it has tailpipe emissons massively higher than when new, precisely because lots of critical engine and aftertreatment parts have worn and reduced in efficiency.
Typical fleet buy-back studies by various OE's show emissions degredations of between 50 and 1000 percent for cars up to 5 years / 60k miles old and CO2 emissions sitting at around 10 to 15% higher than when new
Near enough every bearing from the engine through to the wheels will be more ‘free’ as time goes on, reducing losses.
This is well proven and common knowledge.
skwdenyer said:
I'm not sure why you say that? These deposits are limited, and many are located in parts of the world which are very susceptible to political instability.
We already see from Aluminium, say, that recycling can be cheaper than new, and if the tech evolves at the speed I suspect it will, I wouldn't be so quick to bet that the equation won't swing to parity (at the very least) on these batteries.
I say that because a commercially viable means to do so doesn't yet exist. We already see from Aluminium, say, that recycling can be cheaper than new, and if the tech evolves at the speed I suspect it will, I wouldn't be so quick to bet that the equation won't swing to parity (at the very least) on these batteries.
But also it's not just a simple job of floating off metals of different masses and then melting like it is with aluminium. In the case of batteries you're dealing with the toxic and rather incendiary oxides of multiple reactive metals that have a desire to do most things other than be converted back to a carbonate. To recycle a Li battery cell require multiple, high cost stages that all must be done in somewhat secure environments. As a source of raw material it will always be more expensive than just digging a hole.
As for Li deposits being located in tin pot nations, these reserves are controlled by the Chinese State. The 'elected' officials aren't going to do anything that they've not been told to do.
The real political risk with EVs is the transition from an oil based economy where the oil market is co trolled by America and where Western nations have an element of control re supply consistency to an energy storage market controlled by China where we have none. Whatever China wishes to do re the price and supply of Li it can do uninhibited by the U.K., EU or US.
It's got nothing to do with the nations where the reserves are being tinpot but the fact that we don't own and control them.
DonkeyApple said:
YYou can already see that cars don't rot for the most part like they used to and most cars end up scrapped due to the cost of repairing drivetrains, suggesting that the car itself had plenty of life left in it. That waste for ICE becomes usable with EVs as the drivetrain is more durable.
Lots of interesting stuff to talk about in the rest of your post but this bit stood out in particular. Have you see any figures on the reasons vehicles are scrapped? I'm interested in understanding what you've based this statement on as I'm not convinced it's the case. I’m assuming that battery price curve above is a couple of years old. My understanding is that batteries are getting more expensive along with everything else. I can’t remember the details but pretty much all raw materials for cars are getting more expensive anyhow. Plus obviously mahoosive R&D costs to shift to new technology.
All this debate about Li-Ion batteries is frankly irrelevant.
Within the next few years you will start to see Solid State battery technology coming through in EVs. Link to an interesting article here:
https://www.carmagazine.co.uk/electric/solid-state...
Li-Ion technology will not be powering new EVs in 2030.
Within the next few years you will start to see Solid State battery technology coming through in EVs. Link to an interesting article here:
https://www.carmagazine.co.uk/electric/solid-state...
Li-Ion technology will not be powering new EVs in 2030.
Superleg48 said:
All this debate about Li-Ion batteries is frankly irrelevant.
Within the next few years you will start to see Solid State battery technology coming through in EVs. Link to an interesting article here:
https://www.carmagazine.co.uk/electric/solid-state...
Li-Ion technology will not be powering new EVs in 2030.
It's definitely coming. There is now several hundred billion £ invested in solid state. The company that makes it work will make trillions - that's not even being slightly dramatic.Within the next few years you will start to see Solid State battery technology coming through in EVs. Link to an interesting article here:
https://www.carmagazine.co.uk/electric/solid-state...
Li-Ion technology will not be powering new EVs in 2030.
But as for timescale... It could be 'tomorrow', it could be 20 years. It's proving a difficult bugger to get the cells to stack let alone make them marketable on a mass scale.
I suspect and hope it will be within the next decade. But we have to be realistic given the billions already spent and progress to date. Although I suppose if one player was on the breach of making it work they would keep very quiet about that fact until it was provable and then it would explode overnight in to the mainstream.
It's a tantalising future but for now, with dates unknown, we can only base decisions as consumers on current li-ion cell tech.
Solid state is like some magic pixie dust cure all fantasy.
At the moment none of it is suitable, it has problems, be it cycles, degradation, scalability , cost , whatever.
I'm sure we'll get it at some point somewhere for something but its not needed to switch to EVs, what we have now is good enough.
At the moment none of it is suitable, it has problems, be it cycles, degradation, scalability , cost , whatever.
I'm sure we'll get it at some point somewhere for something but its not needed to switch to EVs, what we have now is good enough.
RobDickinson said:
Solid state is like some magic pixie dust cure all fantasy.
At the moment none of it is suitable, it has problems, be it cycles, degradation, scalability , cost , whatever.
I'm sure we'll get it at some point somewhere for something but its not needed to switch to EVs, what we have now is good enough.
It's not ideal.. but it works. It just does.At the moment none of it is suitable, it has problems, be it cycles, degradation, scalability , cost , whatever.
I'm sure we'll get it at some point somewhere for something but its not needed to switch to EVs, what we have now is good enough.
Many naysayers on PH for sure but no EV converts that have reported back that they tried and failed.
I actually agree that ICE is good enough and I love ICE. But for most people, whether they realise it or not... EV is also good enough and comes with enough advantages to not be dismissed.
I started from a pessimistic pov but have since lived with EV for a stupidly happy 18 months. What is your view having lived with EV?
TheDeuce said:
What is your view having lived with EV?
Personally I dont see any downsides. Its cheaper, cleaner, better motoring, I dont need to visit a petrol station , occasionally I have to fast charge but thats only after many hours of driving when I need a break anyhow.I'll never own a fossil fuelled car again, and view them like old nokia bricks, past their usefulness to most.
I do admit I am in a good spot for EV use, own drive so I can charge at home, wealthy enough to afford a decent range new car, and most of my driving (like most I think) is well within the range of the car itself.
Saying that battery recycling is all down to cost and not much else is perhaps a little short sighted. At the moment, whilst it’s still an emerging tech, and without true economies of scale, yes, that’s the case. And some unscrupulous activities are consequently being driven by that. But then that comes with the territory, so shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone as literally every established industry has gone through that at some stage. Lots of very bad things have happened that wouldn’t be tolerated, nor are anywhere near legal these days. It was cheap though…
Point is that just because a certain way may be the cheapest, doesn’t mean it’s anywhere near an acceptable long term solution. Sure, using highly unethical means to source virgin elements for battery production, and then burning or dumping expired batteries in landfill/at sea is a very cheap way of going about it. But that doesn’t mean it’s acceptable on a mass long term basis. People for the most part will gladly pay a little more for something that’s been ethically and sustainably sourced vs an equivalent that’s demonstrably not been. And that’s well before any of the inevitable legislation, or geopolitical issues are put into the mix.
Of course this will have an effect on the bottom line. But when considered holistically, it’s extremely unlikely to be a negative one.
Point is that just because a certain way may be the cheapest, doesn’t mean it’s anywhere near an acceptable long term solution. Sure, using highly unethical means to source virgin elements for battery production, and then burning or dumping expired batteries in landfill/at sea is a very cheap way of going about it. But that doesn’t mean it’s acceptable on a mass long term basis. People for the most part will gladly pay a little more for something that’s been ethically and sustainably sourced vs an equivalent that’s demonstrably not been. And that’s well before any of the inevitable legislation, or geopolitical issues are put into the mix.
Of course this will have an effect on the bottom line. But when considered holistically, it’s extremely unlikely to be a negative one.
mattyprice4004 said:
Pumps and other engine components don’t take more parasitic power as they age - quite the opposite.
Near enough every bearing from the engine through to the wheels will be more ‘free’ as time goes on, reducing losses.
This is well proven and common knowledge.
Um, I don't remember that from mech eng lectures. Source?Near enough every bearing from the engine through to the wheels will be more ‘free’ as time goes on, reducing losses.
This is well proven and common knowledge.
Superleg48 said:
All this debate about Li-Ion batteries is frankly irrelevant.
Within the next few years you will start to see Solid State battery technology coming through in EVs. Link to an interesting article here:
https://www.carmagazine.co.uk/electric/solid-state...
Li-Ion technology will not be powering new EVs in 2030.
Unfortunately, that PR release from last year which coincided with the ramping up towards a bond issuance Within the next few years you will start to see Solid State battery technology coming through in EVs. Link to an interesting article here:
https://www.carmagazine.co.uk/electric/solid-state...
Li-Ion technology will not be powering new EVs in 2030.
can be filed alongside all those 70s, 80s and 90s press releases about self driving cars, flying cars and all the other things that are going to be here within the next few hours. Li tech will be surpassed. That's a given. Also, it has to as it just isn't good enough for the modern world and is the Achilles Heel retarding almost every area of human development. Solid State, like grapheme is a primary buzzword and indeed, $trillions are being invested in making the inevitable breakthrough that will rid us of the awfulness of Li tech. But the question is one of timing, that's all.
When will this new tech appear and then how long will it take to trickle down from high end, exclusive tech to cheap, disposable transport boxes for the masses?
Well, firma seeking to raise money to profit from the change will imply that its happening tomorrow and that you just need to give them a little more money because that's what is holding them up. Meanwhile, a firm that is all in to Li or an individual whose career is deeply into Li and their age or industry connection is such that they fear not being able to make a job transition will be inclined to tell you that we are decades away. The date these folk suggest is always suspiciously one after their 65th birthday.
The best way to gauge how close we really are is to ignore all the liars, the ones in lab coats, the ones in turtlenecks and the ones in blue suits and over starched shirts. They will say whatever you pay them to say. Instead look at the overall flow of investment capital.
If the general consensus were that Li tech for automotive and static storage was close to being surpassed then certain money flows would end.
But the levels of investment into Li sources, mining, refining and trading are increasing. Just to bring a new field online and start delivering material to market takes the mining industry a decade. The debt to fund that wouldn't be available at viable levels of funding if the market, as a whole, had any concerns that a replacement tech was imminent. And it's the same story throughout the whole chain, money supply is growing, as he market isn't expecting anything any time soon. You've still got billions pouring in to total alternatives to solid stata.
Of course that doesn't rule out a black swan type event but that wouldn't be announced via a press article using 'coulds' and other classic fantasy wordings when part of a capital raise program.
Of course, the other clue is that were Samsung to discover an actual vaguely competent way to store electricity that was miraculously superior to a 2000 year old water tank then it would manifestly change the company overnight. How many dishwashers and phones it sold would be of no relevance whatsoever as they instantly became the most valuable company on the planet. And yet, for much of 2021 the share price as been in decline on the back of worries that not enough dish washers and other generic and dull household goods will be flogged to punters in the West. There's not a single bit of share premium remotely linked to any near term solution to one of the biggest and most crippling problems facing mankind. A further clue that the general consensus is that we remain some time away from ridding ourselves of Li tech.
DonkeyApple said:
skwdenyer said:
I'm not sure why you say that? These deposits are limited, and many are located in parts of the world which are very susceptible to political instability.
We already see from Aluminium, say, that recycling can be cheaper than new, and if the tech evolves at the speed I suspect it will, I wouldn't be so quick to bet that the equation won't swing to parity (at the very least) on these batteries.
I say that because a commercially viable means to do so doesn't yet exist. We already see from Aluminium, say, that recycling can be cheaper than new, and if the tech evolves at the speed I suspect it will, I wouldn't be so quick to bet that the equation won't swing to parity (at the very least) on these batteries.
But also it's not just a simple job of floating off metals of different masses and then melting like it is with aluminium. In the case of batteries you're dealing with the toxic and rather incendiary oxides of multiple reactive metals that have a desire to do most things other than be converted back to a carbonate. To recycle a Li battery cell require multiple, high cost stages that all must be done in somewhat secure environments.
I said that I thought the tech will catch up pretty quick; you're talking about what's possible now. Those two are not incompatible. Whilst the gestation period for Li batteries was about 30 years, recycling tech tends to operate on shorter cycles.DonkeyApple said:
As a source of raw material it will always be more expensive than just digging a hole.
As for Li deposits being located in tin pot nations, these reserves are controlled by the Chinese State. The 'elected' officials aren't going to do anything that they've not been told to do.
The real political risk with EVs is the transition from an oil based economy where the oil market is co trolled by America and where Western nations have an element of control re supply consistency to an energy storage market controlled by China where we have none. Whatever China wishes to do re the price and supply of Li it can do uninhibited by the U.K., EU or US.
It's got nothing to do with the nations where the reserves are being tinpot but the fact that we don't own and control them.
Again, I didn't say it did. I said they were located in pretty problematic areas. You've just explained why that's a problem - the Chinese will buy off those "problematic" states in the same way we used to in the old days. Because we don't do that any more, but China does, it creates a problem for us. There's a non-zero chance that China will seek to control the market in ways that make it unprofitable to be a non-Chinese manufacturer; IMHO that provides another large strategic impetus to the rapid development of more cost-effective recycling systems.As for Li deposits being located in tin pot nations, these reserves are controlled by the Chinese State. The 'elected' officials aren't going to do anything that they've not been told to do.
The real political risk with EVs is the transition from an oil based economy where the oil market is co trolled by America and where Western nations have an element of control re supply consistency to an energy storage market controlled by China where we have none. Whatever China wishes to do re the price and supply of Li it can do uninhibited by the U.K., EU or US.
It's got nothing to do with the nations where the reserves are being tinpot but the fact that we don't own and control them.
Richard-D said:
DonkeyApple said:
YYou can already see that cars don't rot for the most part like they used to and most cars end up scrapped due to the cost of repairing drivetrains, suggesting that the car itself had plenty of life left in it. That waste for ICE becomes usable with EVs as the drivetrain is more durable.
Lots of interesting stuff to talk about in the rest of your post but this bit stood out in particular. Have you see any figures on the reasons vehicles are scrapped? I'm interested in understanding what you've based this statement on as I'm not convinced it's the case. Richard-D said:
Richard-D said:
DonkeyApple said:
YYou can already see that cars don't rot for the most part like they used to and most cars end up scrapped due to the cost of repairing drivetrains, suggesting that the car itself had plenty of life left in it. That waste for ICE becomes usable with EVs as the drivetrain is more durable.
Lots of interesting stuff to talk about in the rest of your post but this bit stood out in particular. Have you see any figures on the reasons vehicles are scrapped? I'm interested in understanding what you've based this statement on as I'm not convinced it's the case. DonkeyApple said:
Richard-D said:
Richard-D said:
DonkeyApple said:
YYou can already see that cars don't rot for the most part like they used to and most cars end up scrapped due to the cost of repairing drivetrains, suggesting that the car itself had plenty of life left in it. That waste for ICE becomes usable with EVs as the drivetrain is more durable.
Lots of interesting stuff to talk about in the rest of your post but this bit stood out in particular. Have you see any figures on the reasons vehicles are scrapped? I'm interested in understanding what you've based this statement on as I'm not convinced it's the case. Gassing Station | EV and Alternative Fuels | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff