The Battery as the Enabler for Electrifying Mobility
Technological Change and the Automobile
Technologies inevitably evolve over time to meet societies’ changing needs. For example, consider the music industry and its technological evolution from performances to live audiences, the invention of the phonograph, the golden age of radio, tape decks and CDs, the birth of the iPod, and through to today’s live streaming over the Internet on sites such as Pandora and Spotify.1 Apple even continues to expand the breadth of this technologic transformation—today when you plug your iPhone into the USB port of a new model vehicle, Apple CarPlay manages the complete interface between driver and the digital entertainment and communication system.
That same vehicle, however, reveals a stark technological contrast. The history and evolution of personal mobility does not embody such a transformational trajectory. Since Henry Ford’s Model T conquered battery-powered vehicles more than 100 years ago, the internal combustion engine (ICE) has dominated personal transportation. Huge sums of capital were invested in improving the ICE’s efficiency, but the miles per gallon rating has shown only modest improvement.2 While the battery electric vehicle (EV) has attempted comebacks, its history includes several decades of near total stagnation. In fact, some have proclaimed multiple “deaths” for electric vehicle (EV) technology, including the first practical EV introduced in the late 1800s and later the controversial death of the General Motors EV1 at the turn of the 21st century. However, the EV has weathered its rocky past to reemerge with a bright future ahead, a future that can transform how people are transported and one that can provide critical reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.
Traditional ICE vehicles produce a range of emissions—including various local air pollutants that endanger public health—but none have broader impacts than carbon dioxide. The transportation sector accounts for 26 percent of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the United States, ranking second to electricity generation.3 Following the first quarter of 2016, the U.S. Public Interest Research Group (USPIRG) reported that according to year to date federal data, the transportation sector, for the first time in nearly 40 years, is the largest source of GHG emissions in the United States. According to John Olivierie of USPIRG, “it is increasingly clear that there is no path to combating climate change that doesn’t adequately address carbon pollution and other greenhouse gas emissions from transportation.”4
Not only do vehicles in the transportation sector create significant GHG emissions, but since 1990, vehicle miles travelled increased 37 percent5 and the transportation-related GHG emissions in the United States have increased by 17 percent, representing 48 percent of the nation’s increase of GHG emissions.6
Highway vehicles release 1.7 billion tons of GHG emissions into the atmosphere each year, mostly in the form of carbon dioxide.7 Each vehicle is responsible for approximately 7 to 10 tons of GHG emissions. These numbers are not surprising, since each gallon of gasoline burned results in 24 pounds of GHG emissions. Nineteen pounds arise directly from the tailpipe of a vehicle, while the other five pounds are from the extraction, production, and delivery of the fuel.8 While the adoption of fuel economy standards and other measures are expected to continue to reduce total transportation emissions between now and 2040, these modest forecast reductions are nowhere near enough to meet U.S. climate commitments.9
A transportation system powered chiefly by the internal combustion engine is one of the root causes of our climate challenge. Meeting this challenge requires a multipronged approach, including strategies for alternative forms of transportation. But greening our vehicles must also be a key part of our low-carbon transportation strategy. One significant way of doing so is transitioning to EVs. EVs produce fewer emissions and as our nation’s supply of renewable energy grows, the vehicles’ emissions are increasingly cleaner. As the technology continues to improve, public policy advances, and climate change continues to play a pivotal role in society, the adoption rate for electric vehicles will grow dramatically (see Figure 4.1).
Recent studies have shown the potential of vehicle fleets transitioning from gasoline power to EVs. If wholesale replacement of vehicles were to occur with EVs, the estimated emissions from the transportation sector would be reduced by 30 percent, with even greater potential for emissions reduction as we further transition to low-carbon renewable energy.10
Even assuming current EV battery range, EVs can meet 87 percent of Americans’ daily driving needs, and the recent MIT study found that “the adoption potential of EVs is remarkably similar across cities, from dense urban areas like New York, to sprawling cities like Houston,” according to Jessica Trancik, Professor of Energy Studies.11
While EVs can accommodate the daily driving of most Americans, they are also becoming necessary for many manufacturers as emissions standards continue to increase. Carlos Ghosn, CEO of Renault-Nissan, in response to new emissions standards, said, “The only obvious known technology which allows that is massive electrification and electric cars.”12 Another MIT study predicts that EVs will become more economical than the internal combustion engine in most countries sometime in the next decade.13 If this shift happens, global reductions in emissions from transportation could contribute significantly to nations’ collective climate goals.
Figure 4.1 A 2016 Chevrolet Volt at a level 2 charger with SolarWorld solar panels in the background on the campus of Green Mountain College. Adding solar to the grid helps improve the environmental benefits of EVs. (Courtesy of Kevin B. Jones.)
A Long and Winding Road for Electric Car Development
Before we discuss the current EV market and battery technology’s role, we will explore the history of the electric vehicle and the public policies that have led to its resurgence.
In 1835, Thomas Davenport, a native Vermonter, was credited with the first practical electric vehicle—a small locomotive featuring a direct current electric motor.14 However, after this technological breakthrough, decades passed with little to show by way of electric vehicle technological advancement. Some progress was being made, but it remained behind the scenes with no public impact. The first successful electric car was debuted by William Morrison in 1890 and featured a top speed of 14 miles per hour.15 In 1897, the first commercial use of the electric vehicle arrived with a fleet of taxicabs in New York City. The Electric Carriage and Wagon Company of Philadelphia built the fleet for Manhattan’s streets.16 Shortly after, Ferdinand Porsche created the world’s first hybrid electric car that operated on a combination of electricity from a battery and gasoline.17
By 1900, the electric vehicle, largely relying on lead acid batteries, had reached its first peak. One-third of all vehicles on the road in the United States were electric, with the remainder being powered by steam or gasoline.18 According to a New York Times article from 1911 (that seems rather sexist today), the electric vehicle’s popularity grew with women because they were “the only kind of motor car a woman could handle easily, as the early gasoline cars required more strength to crank than most women possess.” The cab was much quieter than other vehicles offered at the time, a fact the Times said resonated with “the fair sex.”19
One major drawback to the vehicles in the early 1900s was their limited range, but this did not stop the elite from purchasing these vehicles. The same New York Times article highlighted this point, explaining that, “They are very handy for use in cities, and numbers of the best known and most prominent makers of gasoline cars in this country use electrics for driving between their homes and their offices.”20 The lack of a charging infrastructure was another early challenge, but as more homes became electrified, this became less of a problem, and for a period of time in the early 1900s, some battery exchange services became available which allowed the car owner to swap out a spent battery for a fully charged one to increase operating range, an option that has regained interest today.
In 1908, the electric vehicle industry was harmed by Henry Ford’s introduction of the Model T. Gas-powered vehicles quickly rose to prominence as they became widely available and increasingly affordable. Gas-powered vehicles averaged $650 while EVs averaged $1,750.21 In addition, the electric starter was invented in 1912, effectively removing the need for a hand crank to start gas-powered vehicles, making them more attractive to all drivers. As the 1920s arrived, gas-powered vehicles gained widespread popularity and the United States also created a better nationwide road infrastructure, favoring automobiles with longer ranges. The era of the electric car was in sharp decline, and by 1935 the EV had effectively disappeared.
First Regulations for Auto Emissions
The EV’s first resurrection began with the growing concern in the 1950s for mobile source air pollution. A groundbreaking study by A. J. Haagen-Smit of the California Institute for Technology identified gasoline-powered vehicles as a primary contributor to smog, which was becoming an increasing concern in Southern California.22 The rebirth resulted from Congress passing legislation that reduced pollution, particularly tailpipe emissions. Senator Edmund “Ed” Muskie from Maine pushed pollution to the forefront of Congressional issues. At this point in history, there was no national environmental policy. Senator Muskie made it his mission, as the chair of the subcommittee on Air and Water pollution, to protect human health by protecting the air, the water, and the land.23 The first installment of the Clean Air Act was introduced in 1963, focusing on the study and cleanup of air pollution. This legislation also served as an important step in the history of EVs because from this point forward emissions reductions were a priority for Congress. Shortly after its passing, the National Emissions Standards Act of 1965 initiated the regulation of automobile pollution but did not set standard requirements.24 Interestingly, the auto industry supported this early federal legislation, hoping that it would limit action in multiple states. The law prohibits states, except California, from setting their own standards. Today, individual states may follow the federal standards or adopt the California standards.
Although Congress’s work brought pollution issues to the surface, no comprehensive plan to reduce air pollution existed until the 1970 Clean Air Act Amendments. These Amendments stated that: “The Administrator shall by regulation prescribe (and from time to time revise) in accordance with the provisions of this section, standards applicable to the emission of any air pollutant from any class or classes of new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines, which in his judgment causes or contributes to, or is likely to cause or contribute to, air pollution which endangers the public health or welfare.”25 These standards called for a 90 percent reduction of carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, and nitrogen oxides from light-duty vehicles and engines manufactured in 1975 onward, comparing emissions to the 1971 models.26
Several key consumer developments fostered continued interest in the EV as well. NASA’s electric lunar rover became the first manned vehicle to drive on the moon in 1971. Victor Wouk, known as the “Godfather of the hybrid,” built the first full-powered, full-sized hybrid vehicle out of the body of a 1972 Buick Skylark.27 In 1975, the United States Postal Service purchased a fleet of 350 electric delivery jeeps, showing a commitment to the environment and pollution reduction.28 However, the combination of these actions plus the advancement in technology did not lead to a rebirth of the EV for nearly another 20 years.
CAFE Standards Set the Stage for an Electric Vehicle Comeback
In 1975, through the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, Congress established Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards to reduce dependence on foreign oil through increased vehicle efficiency. The CAFE standards set mile-per-gallon targets for all automakers’ fleets of new cars and light trucks sold in the United States in a given year. A unique feature of the standard is that it is a fleet average, so automakers only need to meet an average for all of their cars and trucks combined. In effect, selling more high-mileage vehicles also enables an automaker to sell a greater number of less-efficient SUVs and trucks. The first CAFE standards took effect in 1978, beginning at 18 mpg for the fleet, and increased each year until topping off in 1985 at 27.5 mpg, where they remained for two full decades.29
In 2007, the Energy Independence and Security Act further raised CAFE standards to 35 mpg by 2020 and required standards to be set at maximum feasible levels through 2030. Also in 2007, in Massachusetts v. EPA, the Supreme Court ruled that the EPA had the authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector under the Clean Air Act. As a result of these actions and a number of other state and federal developments, the EPA, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) all agreed to support a new national program, with the CAFE standard reaching 34.1 mpg by 2016 and, in 2012, increased the standards again to 54.5 mpg by 2025. In 2009, President Obama signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, which included $2 billion toward developing electric vehicle batteries and related technologies.30 Additionally, another $400 million was allocated to develop the necessary infrastructure to support the expected growth of the industry.31
California’s Zero-Emission Vehicle (ZEV) Regulation
In September 1990, CARB passed low-emission vehicle (LEV) and zero-emission vehicle regulations (ZEV), increasing requirements on gasoline vehicles and requiring the sale of a certain percentage of vehicles sold in a state to be zero-emission vehicles. Zero-emission vehicles include battery electric vehicles, hybrid electric vehicles (although at a discounted value), and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles. Automakers receive ZEV credits, representing the company’s share of ZEV sales. The companies are then required to maintain a certain level of ZEV credits, with a target set at 4.5 percent in 2018 and rising to 22 percent by 2025. An automaker’s credits for selling a ZEV also vary by factors such as battery range. For example, the Tesla Model S (200+ miles range) was eligible for 3.3 credits, and the Nissan Leaf (84 miles) was awarded 1.8 credits. Furthermore, automakers can bank extra credits for use in the following year and trade credits between themselves. Some companies, such as Tesla, have sold significant numbers of ZEV credits to other automakers. Nine other states, including Vermont, Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, and Rhode Island, have adopted California’s ZEV program.32
During the late 20th century, the battery electric EV1 symbolized the rise and subsequent fall of the electric vehicle. General Motors debuted the EV1 in 1988, and it became available for lease several years later. GM produced approximately 1,100 EVs, first featuring lead acid batteries and later nickel metal hydride batteries, promptly leasing them to excited consumers. The early lead acid batteries had approximately 60 miles of range per charge (later increasing to 100 miles), while the NiMH-powered version had a range of 140 miles. Once the lease terms were up, GM decided to “recycle” the vehicles, mandating that customers return the cars. GM then destroyed almost all of the EV1s that had been on the road.33 The recycled vehicles were transported to Arizona for crushing. GM took considerable heat from EV1 fans for crushing the vehicles, although this practice of “recycling” EVs was common practice with other manufacturers, including Toyota and Nissan.
Following the EV1’s demise, there was much finger pointing regarding responsibility for the vehicle’s failure. Some people, including the auto companies, argued the California Air Resources Board (CARB) played an important role in the downfall of the EV1 and similar EV models because it mandated a standard in 1990 when technology was not available to cost effectively meet that standard. The CARB standard forced deployment of EV technology that was both bulky and expensive and that no consumer wanted to purchase at its true value.34 Others placed the blame with the auto companies and claimed that they feared the emergence of electric vehicle technology. While vehicles like the EV1 and Toyota’s RAV4 EV had loyal followings, the auto companies lobbied against the CARB standard, even suing CARB in federal court, and had no interest in pursuing EV technology. CARB delayed and later modified the standard, and the auto companies cancelled their EVs.
In regard to the EV1, 40 vehicles were preserved and given to museums around the country. Today, the only fully intact model is on display at the National Museum of American History.35 The death of the EV1 resulted in a symbolic funeral on July 24, 2003 and inspired the documentary, Who Killed the Electric Car? which premiered in 2006.36 The life cycle of the EV1 only spanned approximately five years, but other developments in the automotive industry allowed EV technology to continue its resurgence, despite the temporary defeat.
Though the auto industry showed little interest in developing EVs, public policy promoting EVs continued in response to growing concerns over mobile source air pollution. The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 established a framework for incorporation of alternative fuel vehicles in fleets. The Energy Policy Act of 1992 created the list of alternative fuel types recognized by the federal government, including electric vehicles.37 Additionally, the Supreme Court’s 2007 decision in Massachusetts v. EPA clarified the EPA’s authority to act on mobile source greenhouse gas emissions.
The Popularity of the Toyota Prius
These ongoing legislative and regulatory changes, paired with the worldwide release of the hybrid electric Toyota Prius in 2000, created another resurgence in interest in the EV. The 1997 Prius was first sold in Japan before its worldwide release. This early Prius version featured a large 274-volt nickel metal hydride battery and averaged 40 miles per gallon.38 Despite some initial concerns, numerous Hollywood celebrities began adopting the Prius, and early positive publicity combined with rising gasoline prices has made the Prius the world’s top-selling hybrid car. In 2015, the Prius made the switch to lithium-ion batteries. The Prius has demonstrated a national staying power far superior to previous EV models. While it began as a hybrid electric vehicle that could not be plugged in, it generated significant public enthusiasm in electric vehicle technology.
A hybrid car utilizes the best of both the traditional gasoline-powered internal combustion engine and the electric drive motor of an EV. Hybrid vehicles create increased fuel efficiency and decreased environmental impact. Rather than charging their batteries while plugged into an electric source, they recharge through the vehicle’s regenerative breaking. The electric motor and batteries can operate the vehicle on its own at slow speeds or assist the gasoline-powered motor when extra torque is needed. In urban start and stop driving, the hybrid is able to shut down the engine when idle, then utilize the electric motor and battery power when moving forward again. The interaction between the gasoline and electric battery engines relies heavily on communication between the two systems to allow them to work together seamlessly.
The Rise of the Modern Electric Vehicle
Favorable public policy and advancing technology spurred the rebirth of the electric vehicle in the 21st century. Somewhat surprisingly, given GM’s history with the EV1, it was Chevrolet that led the resurgence in the United States with the release of the plug-in hybrid electric Volt in 2010. The Volt uniquely had a battery-powered electric motor, which powered the car until discharged, recharging both from plugging in and regenerative breaking, and a gasoline-powered engine which then could drive the electric motor on a tank of gasoline. That same year, Nissan released the Leaf, making it the first contemporary full electric vehicle broadly available. The growth of the EV industry remains modest, but the trajectory is steady. In 2011, the Mitsubishi i-MiEV became the first electric vehicle to exceed 10,000 units sold worldwide, according to the Guinness Book of World Records.39
In 2015, Nissan, GM, and Ford all sold between 17,000 to 19,000 electric vehicles, respectively, while Tesla sold approximately 25,000 vehicles during the year and became the best-selling EV.40 In perspective, the leading conventional vehicle, Ford’s F-Series pickup, sold 780,000 units.41 Importantly, the United States failed to meet the Obama Administration’s incredibly modest goal of one million EVs by 2015, by a “long shot.”42 The 2015 sales numbers declined by 3 percent, likely due to the dramatic drop in gas prices, while global sales increased by almost 80 percent. Sales in China more than tripled, and when combined with Western Europe, the United States, Canada, and Japan accounted for 95 percent of the global EV market.43
While 2015 U.S. sales were down slightly from 2014, the future remains promising. The summer of 2016 demonstrated strong growth (more than 50 percent over 2015) and September set a new all-time monthly sales record (16,794).44 In 2016, there were 25 models of EVs (compared to the seven models in 2011) and, based on manufacturers’ projections, there should be 33 in 2017.45 Manufacturers continue to improve the technology, including increased battery range, and continue to reduce costs. While today EVs make up only about 1.6 percent of light-duty auto sales, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) predicts that this number will grow to 6 percent in 2025.46 A 2016 survey by the Consumer Federation of America (CFA) found that interest in EVs has grown to 36 percent of consumers overall and 55 percent of those very knowledgeable about EVs.47 In addition, 50 percent of young adults (ages 18–34) stated they would consider purchasing an EV.48
Chevy, which released its remodeled Volt in late 2015 with a larger 18.4-kWh battery and an estimated 53 miles of range, rolled out the all-electric Bolt in late 2016, which was awarded an enticing 238-mile EPA range, rivaling the much pricier Tesla models.49 After the $7,500 federal tax credit, the Bolt will cost just under $30,000.50 The extended range, combined with the affordable price and flat battery pack, allowing more passenger and storage space, make the Bolt “a game changer.” According to Kelly Blue Book senior analyst Karl Brauer, “[t]his is the reason people will finally say electric vehicles are ready for prime time.”51 Just in time for delivery at the end of 2016, the Chevy Bolt was awarded perhaps the most important recognition possible when it was named Motor Trend Car of the Year. According to Motor Trend, “[P]erhaps the most impressive thing about the Bolt EV is there are no caveats, no ‘for an electric car’ qualifiers needed in any discussion. It is, simply, a world-class small car, and that’s before you factor in the benefits inherent in the smoothness, silence, and instant-on torque provided by the electric motor.”52 In closing its endorsement, Motor Trend noted what is becoming increasingly apparent when it comes to battery power—the future is today. As Motor Trend noted, the “practical, affordable, fun-to-drive Chevrolet Bolt EV has made electric-powered transport for the masses a reality. The 2017 Motor Trend Car of the Year is the car of tomorrow, today.”53
And following delivery of the Bolt, Tesla is set to release the Model 3 sometime in 2017–2018 at an expected $35,000 price, well below the prices of its luxury vehicles, with an approximate 215-mile range and with an eye-catching 400,000 advance reservations.54
Globally, the Chinese company BYD is the world’s leading EV manufacturer and recently added a U.S. presence to its arsenal. In 2015, BYD jumped from seventh to first in EV sales due to its leading role in China.55 BYD predicts that its 2016 sales will almost triple, reaching 155,000 vehicles compared to the 58,000 produced in 2015. According to BYD Chairman Wang Chuanfu, “the Chinese government has more comprehensive policy support on new-energy cars than other governments, leading to the industry’s explosive development last year … the rapid growth will remain from 2016 to 2018.”56 At the 2015 Shanghai Auto Show, BYD released its world “7 + 4 Strategy.” The strategy is to replace high-utility, fossil-fueled vehicles with clean and efficient alternatives. It focuses on seven industries for on-road vehicles: buses, taxis, logistic vehicles, private vehicles, motor coaches, construction vehicles, and waste management vehicles. In addition, the strategy targets four off-road vehicle types: mining operation vehicles, marine port vehicles, warehouse vehicles, and airport operation vehicles.57 This strategy strives to create electric options in almost every vehicle function, compared to U.S manufacturers’ primary focus on personal vehicles.
Numerous factors play pivotal roles in the continued growth of the EV market. Some factors are directly related to the vehicles themselves, such as battery range and vehicle price, while others depend more on external factors, such as availability of charging infrastructure, continuation of government incentives and mandates, as well as the cost of gasoline. We will discuss the factors related to both the EV battery and charging infrastructure in greater detail.
The EV battery indirectly is the biggest factor in consumer purchasing decisions. Within the battery lies the key to improving the EV’s economic, social, and environmental sustainability in the world marketplace. The battery is the single most expensive component of the vehicle and has the most direct impact on the vehicle’s price. Alternatively, since the battery capacity of an EV is, in a practical sense, comparable to a conventional vehicle’s gas tank, the size of the battery is directly related to the vehicle’s range. Therein lies the conundrum challenging greater consumer acceptance for the EV. The larger the battery capacity and EV range, the greater the price premium compared to the conventional vehicle.
EV range is directly related to battery capacity and, instead of being measured in gallons of fuel in the tank, a battery’s capacity is measured in available kilowatt-hours (kWh), a metric that most people recognize as a tally of their electricity usage on their home utility bill. Complicating this factor is the fact that recharging an electric battery is much more time consuming and at times less convenient than filling up your tank with gas at seemingly ever-present gas stations. Therefore, EV battery capacity is a more critical factor for consumers than gas tank capacity. Further complicating the battery’s calculus is the notion that while a battery has a rated capacity, the full amount of that rated capacity is not available to the driver. In other words, for an EV, some “gas” must always be left in the tank. The battery’s “state of charge” management system that exists in EVs never allows a battery to become 100 percent empty in order for the manufacturer to best manage the useful life of the battery. Instead, batteries for EVs should be measured by their usable capacity, which is usually 60 to 70 percent of the rated capacity, although this number varies.58
Furthermore, how the battery capacity relates to the overall range of the vehicle is complicated. A basic rule of thumb suggests that every kWh of capacity provides roughly three to four miles of range,59 though conscientious drivers can coax five miles from efficient models. However, many factors will influence the range an individual driver will get from the battery, including weather, topography, driving habits, and, of course, the efficiency of the manufacturer’s design. Ultimately at the time of purchase, the consumer must rely on the published EPA range.
While the EV battery capacity is important, so are several other factors. First is the temperature; extreme high or low temperatures affect both the battery performance and the range. Quick acceleration and high speeds also increase the energy drain of the battery. One other factor is aggressive braking. EVs have a regenerative braking system that loses the chance to recapture energy and recharge the battery when the driver of the EV hits the brakes too aggressively.60 Furthermore, driving uphill utilizes more energy, while going downhill will both extend the range from the benefits of both coasting and regenerative breaking. In addition to these external factors, the design decisions of the manufacturer will also impact the vehicle’s range. For example, the different paths chosen by two premium German car companies, BMW and Mercedes, highlight a number of these factors.
The BMW i3 and the Mercedes B250e were these manufacturers’ first all-electric models, with almost identical sticker prices of about $42,000, but they pursued very different design paths. The Mercedes B250e battery capacity is a comparatively large 31.4 kWh, with a Tesla-licensed battery pack retrofitted on an existing hatchback model, giving it a hefty final weight with compromises to both efficiency and vehicle storage.61 The vehicle has a 110-mile range, giving it an average efficiency of 3.5 miles per kWh. While this average is very respectable, the new BMW i3 averages 4.5 miles per kWh. The added efficiency was achieved because the car was designed from the ground up as an EV and was crafted using superior aerodynamics and lightweight carbon fiber materials. With this impressive efficiency, BMW used a smaller battery, minimizing cost; the 18.8-kWh capacity resulted in a range of 85 miles.62 The trade-offs in EV design are highlighted by these strikingly different EVs from leading German performance manufacturers.
Aerodynamics is a particularly important factor for cost effectively improving EV range. Automakers have long focused on aerodynamics, employing wind tunnels for decades and, more recently, using “computational fluid dynamics software to reduce drag, minimize noise and increase stability.”63 For EVs, automakers pay increased attention to reducing drag coefficients, since reductions in drag directly translate into longer driving ranges and reductions in expensive battery requirements.64 During high-speed travel, a large amount of the energy consumed “is used to overcome aerodynamic drag and rolling resistance” and “unlike the energy used to accelerate an EV, which can be partially recaptured through regenerative breaking, the energy used to fight friction is lost to the atmosphere.”65 Aerodynamic drag increases with the square of speed, becoming critically important at higher speeds and with more impact on highway range and less impact on urban range. While this accounts for the sleek look of EVs designed from the ground up, even EVs based on existing models, such as the Kia Soul, the Volkswagen e-Golf, and the Mercedes B250e, push engineers to improve airflow performance.66
Interestingly, two of the most anticipated new EVs—the Chevy Bolt and Tesla Model 3—chose slightly different paths in designing their vehicles for aerodynamic drag. The drag coefficient (cd) for the Chevy Bolt is a respectable, but not industry leading, 0.32, which, combined with its 60-kWh battery pack, still results in an excellent 238-mile range. According to lead designer Stuart Norris, his team relinquished “some aerodynamics for interior room to ensure that the car had enough utility to generate sufficient sales.”67 The Tesla Model 3 has been touted as having a cd of 0.21, which would make it the most aerodynamic mass-produced car ever built and would allow the Model 3 to exceed 200 miles of range, with a smaller battery than the Bolt.68
While lead acid batteries were the battery of choice in the earliest EVs and were even found in the EV1, battery technology has come a long way since those early days. Today, the two dominant battery types in EVs are nickel metal hydride (NiMH) and lithium ion (LIB). NiMH was used for years in the Toyota Prius but currently the LIB is the leading type of battery found in most mass-market electric vehicles. LIBs are viewed positively by manufacturers due to their high cyclability and, for a battery, their relatively high-energy density, making it the best technology for range, power, and recharge time.69
The current market for EV batteries sits at $5 billion at the close of 2015, but one Boston research company forecasts the market to increase drastically, ballooning to $30 billion by 2020.70 Even more surprising is that the market for LIBs for vehicles is expected to grow to $24.1 billion by 2023.71 If these forecasts are correct, lithium-ion batteries will for the foreseeable future consume 80 percent of the EV battery market.
A few companies playing the largest role in EV battery production and improvement are LG Chem, Samsung SDI, and Tesla. LG Chem contracts with Chevy, Audi, Ford, Hyundai, and Volvo for EV batteries.72 Their main project presently is developing the Chevy Bolt battery. LG Chem has had remarkable success, reportedly producing battery cells at $145per kWh, while predictions ranged anywhere from $180 to $300 per kWh.73
Samsung SDI, a branch of Samsung focusing on renewable energy storage, is one of the world’s largest LIB producers. The company has announced their desire to expand beyond small electronics batteries, the first step will be a prototype of their vehicle LIB first introduced at the January 2016 Detroit Auto Show. This prototype’s estimated range is 373 miles when loaded into the proper vehicle.74 Samsung’s version of the LIB is also 20 to 30 percent smaller than the traditional battery. Commercial production is estimated for 2020.
Tesla is also becoming a major player in the EV battery market. The manufacturer has partnered with Panasonic in the Tesla Gigafactory. The Gigafactory is housed in Nevada and features 10 million square feet of dedicated space for research and development of the EV battery.75 The site will create battery cells, modules, and packs for Tesla EVs as well as its PowerPack battery designed for the electric grid market. The factory has a goal of shipping out 35 gigawatt hours (GWh) of cells and 50 GWh of battery packs per year by 2020. Tesla’s investment is striking and the facility is expected to employ 6,500 people.76 Tesla’s Gigafactory is a primary component of the Tesla strategy for building more cost-effective mass-market EVs such as its Model 3.
Future Performance and Research
The battery trajectory follows a very similar path to that of the electric vehicle itself. Technology continues to grow and develop, but advances are incremental.77 Similar to the development of solar photovoltaic (PV), cost reductions through increased economy of scale (e.g., Tesla Gigafactory) and other manufacturing efficiencies seem to offer better short-term hope for the success of the EV than dramatic breakthroughs in battery performance.
With the goal of advancing EV battery technology, the DOE has created a new branch of the Vehicle Technology Office. The branch’s primary focus is on LIB technologies, with the goal of reducing the cost, volume, and weight of batteries while simultaneously improving their performance.78 The branch is split into three distinct divisions: exploratory battery materials research; applied battery research; and advanced battery development, systems analysis, and testing.
While the LIB remains the predominant EV battery technology, research into competing technologies is ongoing. Toyota and Volkswagen are exploring solid-state batteries because they have no electrolyte leaks, longer lifetimes, and a lesser need for cooling mechanisms than LIBs.79 The lithium-air battery, according to IBM, could provide an increased energy density, allowing for a range that could exceed 500 miles on a single charge, operating by oxygen reacting with carbon electrodes.80 British scientists also believe in the technology’s future potential. If perfected, the lithium-air battery could be approximately one-fifth of both the cost and weight of the current LIB.81
Colorado State University is currently researching a copper nanowire cathode lithium battery. This battery technology is a three-dimensional unit featuring microscopically thin copper wires that would allow for storage of ions on the entire surface rather than just the flat surfaces of existing battery technologies.82 The 3D nature would allow for increased storage and release of additional power. The promise of this technology has resulted in the founding of a new company partly funded by the U.S. DOE.
Michigan Technical University is currently developing a carbon foam capacitor hybrid battery. This technology uniquely combines the electrical storage density of a battery with the power delivery efficiency of a solid-state capacitor.83 The technology weighs less than the traditional LIB, yet delivers more charge than a capacitor. Current testing has shown that the hybrid battery can be recharged thousands of times without showing any signs of degradation.84
In addition to these research activities, several other universities are focusing on other battery technologies. Stanford University is working on the development of a lithium-sulfur carbon nanofiber battery. Northwestern University is researching a lithium-silicon battery, while MIT is developing a carbon nanotube electrode lithium battery. Each university’s research and development may help the U.S. DOE meet the Batteries and Energy Storage subprogram’s goals, including halving the size and weight of the EV battery and quartering the production cost of the EV battery.85
End of Battery Life and Recycling
One major concern with EV batteries is what happens after the battery capacity and EV range decrease significantly. Capacity depletion and the associated range reduction have a cost impact on the EV customer and the environment with premature replacement of the EV battery. While currently EVs have extended warranties on EV components, protecting the customer, it is important to examine these impacts. A study by the Berkeley Laboratory in California, which collected the driving itineraries of 160,000 people, provides useful results. According to the study, “the vast majority of people don’t drive more than 40 miles per day on most days, and so they have plenty of reserve available to accommodate their normal daily trips even if they lose substantial amounts of battery capacity due to degradation,” said Samveg Saxena, the head of Berkeley Laboratory’s power train research team.86 The lab pretended that all vehicles in the trial were the Nissan Leaf, with a 24-kWh energy storage capacity. In total, 13 million individual daily state of charge profiles were computed during the trial.87 The results of the trial showed that a 20 percent fade in capacity would allow 85 percent of drivers to still meet their daily driving needs without issue. Even after a 50 percent decrease in capacity, 80 percent of drivers would still be able to complete their daily driving. “We have found that only a small fraction of drivers will no longer be able to meet their daily driving needs after having lost 20% of their battery’s storage capabilities,” said Saxena.88
In addition, the trial showed no significant impact on performance of the vehicles when energy storage capacity decreased. When analyzing battery power capacity fade (the declining ability of the battery to deliver power as it ages), no noticeable loss of performance of the battery was observed. Testing included steep hills and rapid acceleration, and, based on the results of this large sample size research trial, EV battery retirement may be delayed much longer than previously thought.
With an extended life, more people are likely to purchase EVs, but the question remains about what to do with a battery once it has degraded to a point where it is no longer useful for transportation purposes. The lead acid batteries of standard gasoline vehicles present a recycling model that could eventually be used with EV batteries. Stores that take back dead batteries are paid $10 per battery, and the battery is then recycled. “Recyclers shred the hard parts—lead plates, plastic cases—and capture the acid electrolyte. Nearly all of the recovered material goes into new batteries,” said Robert Hohman, vice president at Complete Battery Source.89
A similar model for recycling EV batteries will likely arise, but the materials are significantly different, and with lithium costing only about $2 per pound, the value of recycling the material is not currently cost effective. While the market value of lithium is low, the demand for the material is high and growing. Lithium is used in rechargeable batteries for laptops, mobile phones, and digital cameras. The 2015 demand for lithium was in the range of 138,500 to 265,000 tons, while the 2020 expected demand is set to rise to a range of 175,000 to 500,000 tons.90 Based on this demand, the DOE determined that a recycling facility was worthwhile, despite the low cost of lithium. Toxco was granted funds to build the first recycling facility specifically equipped to recycle lithium-ion EV batteries.91
Several options are already arising for used LIBs. One such process has been created with the E-STOR system, which reuses batteries taken from end-of-life Renault EVs for the electric grid.92 In the future, it may be that using end-of-life EV batteries for grid storage purposes is a cost-effective answer, and this alternative is explored in more detail in Chapter 6. In another exciting development, BMW recently announced “a stationary [home] battery storage system that reuses BMW i3 22-kWh or 33-kWh batteries as they become available to power the home (see Figure 4.2).”93
According to BMW, there should be enough energy in the battery pack to power “a variety of appliances and entertainment devices for up to twenty-four hours.” This use will also allow i3 owners to get more value out of their EV batteries.94 This option is similar to the Tesla PowerWall and other behind-the-meter uses discussed in Chapter 5 in that the battery from the vehicle would be transitioned to home usage after losing too much capacity from use in the vehicle.
Figure 4.2 BMW’s new stationary home storage system gives a second life to BMW i3 batteries. (Courtesy of BMW.)
Another process sees the lithium-ion batteries frozen to -325ºF, ceasing all chemical and electrical battery activity within the battery. A chemical reaction then converts the battery’s lithium to lithium carbonate, which has uses in medicine, industrial chemicals, and pyrotechnics.95 Practices such as these give large auto manufacturers belief that EV battery life, including the use of component materials, will be extended by 5–10 years due to post-auto uses, which also significantly reduces the life-cycle cost of EV batteries.
Battery-Charging Infrastructure
A second major component toward the growth and sustainability of the EV market is charging infrastructure or, as the industry calls it, Electric Vehicle Service Equipment (EVSE). The growth of the EV market has been synonymous with the continued expansion of charging infrastructure. Potential buyers of EVs have range anxiety because of the limited capabilities of early EV battery technology. Because of this anxiety, buyers are concerned about where charging infrastructure exists and if it fits into their commuting routines. Therefore, charging infrastructure has been emerging in all parts of the nation.
As infrastructure continues to grow, a continued problem is software interfacing. Many companies offer charging services but attempt to lock customers into their specific technology, resulting in additional fees for charging at a different company station. For instance, customers can subscribe to the ChargePoint network because it is a dominant player in the EV charging industry, but if a customer then wants or needs to charge at an EVGO station, that customer will need to register separately for the service and pay additional costs. This model is problematic for EV drivers. Tesla offers no additional cost for lifetime charging from its charging network for all of its customers who pay upfront for its supercharging service.
However, new models are arising. Greenlots is attempting to feature its open standards solution. The Greenlots model allows for a network software interface, resulting in consumers being able to charge at nearly any public station.96 With network interfacing and the ability to choose stations, the Greenlots model has the ability to drive competition and remove barriers to cost-effective charging.
The U.S. DOE’s Clean Cities program provides the Alternative Fuels Data Center (AFDC) station locator tool, which shows where charging stations are located nationwide. As of late 2016, the tool shows 12,004 stations with 30,292 chargers available to the public.97 Phone apps, such as PlugShare, access these data sources and assist EV drivers to identify nearby charging stations. PlugShare works internationally with over 100,000 charging stations tracked by its friendly data interface.
EV Charging Levels and Infrastructure
Charging infrastructure comes in three main variations: level 1, level 2, and DC fast charging. Level 1 EVSE is the most cost effective for home charging, since vehicles can plug into a traditional 120-volt outlet. These outlets are typically attached to a 15- or 20-amp circuit breaker and can draw from the grid at about 2 kW per hour. Vehicles can charge overnight and have up to 40 miles of range available in the morning.98 Level 2 chargers, which are the most common in public charging, require a 240-volt outlet, the same outlet that home electric clothes dryers require. Level 2 EVSE typically draws 240 volts at 30 amps (although they can range from 12 to 80 amps) and can provide up to 7.7 kWh of energy in an hour. The cost of installing level 2 EVSE ranges from $500 to $2,500 or more, depending on site conditions.99 The last option is the DC fast-charging station. This version of EVSE draws 200 to 600 volts at varying amperages and typically can provide anywhere from 25 to 60 kW (Tesla’s supercharger network will allow for 120-kW charging). This option is considerably more expensive to install but allows up to an 80 percent charge in one-half hour of charging time for battery EVs equipped to use this technology. Most plug-in hybrid EVs such as the Chevy Volt and Ford C-Max are not equipped to use this technology. Installation cost for this EVSE technology ranges from $22,000 to $60,000.100
Another important consideration in developing charging infrastructure is charging’s impact on the electric grid. As demand for EVs grows, ensuring that high-voltage charging infrastructure does not overwhelm the electric distribution grid is essential. According to analysis from the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, 70 percent of the light-duty vehicle fleet could be electrified without the need to build out additional electric generation or transmission assets if we utilize smart charging, time-of-use rates, and other forms of dynamic pricing.101 Dynamic pricing will encourage EV owners to charge their EVs during lower-cost, off-peak periods, such as the evening period when demand is reduced, or perhaps during the middle of the day when distributed solar generation reduces the net load on the system.102 Dynamic pricing is discussed further in Chapter 5. Since most cars are parked 90 percent of the time at home or at work, access to even Level 1 charging at home and work should be more than sufficient for most consumers, since 68 percent of commuters travel 15 miles or less in one direction.103
Another means for limiting the impact of EV charging on the grid is through forms of direct load control to manage EV charging. Utilities and regional grid operators manage demand response programs which, through smart grid technology, can monitor and curtail EV charging when there are sufficiently high prices or undue local or regional grid impacts from the load being on the system. Revenues from these demand response programs could reduce the cost of charging for the EV owners.104 Software like that from Greenlots or other vendors can help manage the gird service impacts of EV fleets and help consumers otherwise reduce their EV charging costs or perhaps generate some net revenue. Finally, in addition to managing the charging loads from EVs, ongoing research is exploring how EV owners can use the energy stored in their vehicle batteries to sell back energy services to the grid. The services are called Vehicle to Grid (V2G) services, and V2G technology creates a two-way communication stream between the vehicle and the grid, allowing the sale of power from the vehicle to the grid during high price periods, further reducing the operating costs of the EV.105
Regardless of the standard estimates of charging times and the ability to transfer energy, the charging speed of any vehicle is dependent upon the state of charge of the battery within the EV. The traditional lithium-ion battery charge current is determined by the actual cell design of the battery. LIBs feature a thin anode with high porosity and small graphite particles that enable faster charging due to the subsequently large surface area of the battery.106 In addition, LIBs feature high-energy density, higher cell voltages than other batteries, and are available in prismatic forms that result in longer charge retention. No matter the battery type, the key to longevity is the user’s selection of proper charging parameters including current, voltage, and temperature of the charge.107
Battery charging performs best at room temperature using a moderate charge rate. While we live in a society of expediency and instant gratification, the use of fast charging is not the best manner to charge EV LIBs. Fast charges only fill the battery partially, requiring at the end of the charging cycle a slower charge rate that saturates the battery to complete the charging process.
The EV battery could be designed to accept fast charges and must remain in good condition. Good condition requires that all of the cells of the battery are in balance and have low resistance to the charge. Fast charging must take place in moderate temperatures because cooler temperatures slow down the chemical reaction that occurs during charging. The charger must be able to evaluate the condition of the battery in order to make adjustments based on the level of charge and the ability to charge the output it provides to the battery.108 Once the battery receives a 70 percent charge from a fast charge, the rate decreases so that the battery can become fully saturated.
When discussing battery maintenance and charging, it is imperative to discuss the types of chargers that are available to consumers. Currently, two types of chargers exist that are dominant in the EV charging market: constant voltage (CV) and constant current/constant voltage (CV/CC) chargers. CV chargers provide constant voltage to batteries through connections across battery terminals; the current dispensed is limited to less than the battery capacity and its output voltage.109 These chargers are the simplest and most cost efficient, but they require extremely long battery charge times. CV/CC chargers, on the other hand, charge battery cells at high current rates until the battery is 85 percent full; then the charge drops to constant voltage for the remaining of the charge to ensure saturation.110 These types of chargers are the most common because they significantly reduce charge time. This charging technology is actually located on the vehicle, not on the external EVSE. Typical chargers for a vehicle allow charging at 3.3 or 6.6 kW (through the presence of dual chargers on the vehicle).111
As more drivers adopt EVs, however, driving and “refueling” habits will adapt to the practical use of the batteries, and many will realize that slower charging while at work or overnight at home is more than sufficient to power their typical commutes and daily driving demands.
Electric Vehicle Incentives and Programs
One last major factor in determining the growth of the EV market is the incentives that are available to make the upfront costs closer to those costs associated with a traditional gasoline vehicle. Price of vehicle, charging infrastructure, and range anxiety have been the biggest downsides of purchasing an EV. The federal government offers an important $7,500 tax credit for EVs, and a number of states have incentivized EVs to a point where the playing field is level with other vehicles.
In 2015, only five states had two or more EVs per every 1,000 vehicles on the road: California, Hawaii, Washington, Georgia, and Oregon, made possible through different incentives and programs that allowed EVs to be more competitive with their gasoline counterparts.112 California created one of the most supportive platforms to allow electric vehicles to remain competitive and to enhance the air quality of its state. The ZEV mandate requires that by 2025 at least 15 percent of new vehicle sales in the state are zero-emission vehicles, which includes electric vehicles, and the state offers other perks and financial incentives (discussed further in a following section).113 The only state in the east on this list is Georgia, which, until mid-2015, had a generous state incentive of up to $5,000. In 2015, the incentive was ended, and a $200 registration fee was instituted to purportedly make up for the loss of gas taxes. Unsurprisingly, sales of EVs plummeted.114
Not all states have created incentives, and thus electric vehicle sales have not taken off in other parts of the country. Furthermore, recent reductions in the price of gasoline have slowed EV sales. In 2015, there were 17.47 million vehicle sales, which was a record year. The price of gasoline dropped from $4 per gallon in 2011 to a mere $2 per gallon in 2015.115 This price drop significantly lessened the financial advantage of the electric vehicle in regard to monthly operating costs. With this extreme decrease in cost to operate the already lower-priced gasoline-powered vehicle, EV manufacturers felt the impact.
Both federal and state governments clearly play a large role in the continued growth and development of the EV market. Policies and programs have the ability to level the playing field on both vehicles and charging infrastructure. Currently there exist 80 policies and laws nationally that deal directly with EV purchase and usage. Additionally, utility programs such as time-of-use rates and other incentives have the ability to spur EV sales by matching EV charging rates with lower marginal electricity prices during evening (and increasingly midday) off-peak time periods when cars often remain parked and available for low-cost charging.
One EV growth champion is the U.S. DOE Clean Cities program. The program was established to advance the nation’s economic, environmental, and energy security by cutting petroleum usage.116 Since its inception in 1993, the 100 coalitions nationwide have resulted in the displacement of 7.5 billion gallons of petroleum. With 15,000 stakeholders nationwide, Clean Cities builds partnerships to create unbiased and objective information resources about alternative fuels, including electricity. The DOE entity has been able to provide positive results by funding more than 500 projects totaling more than $377 million in project grants. The continued success and growth of battery advancement, the EV market, and consumer awareness depends upon programs such as these.
EV Case Study: California’s EV Leadership
Any discussion of the EV market in the United States must begin in California. While California accounted for only 12 percent of the U.S. auto market in 2015, it was the clear state leader with 54 percent of all EV sales in the United States.117 While only 0.5 percent of total vehicles on the road in California are EVs, 3.1 percent of all vehicles purchased in 2015 were EVs (compared to less than 1 percent in the United States). Only Norway and the Netherlands have a higher rate of EVs sold.118 The most surprising aspect of California’s rise to EV prominence is that the state financial incentives are not nearly as large as in other places. California offers a $2,500 incentive for EVs and $1,500 for PEVs paired with the federal incentive of $7,500.119 The California legislature in 2016 extended funding for the Clean Vehicle Rebate Project (CVRP), and CVRP amounts will be increased by $2,000 per rebate for consumers with household incomes less than or equal to 300 percent of the federal poverty level. California also has an income cap on eligibility for the CVRP.120 The combination of government incentives and mandates has resulted in half of the electric vehicles in the United States being found in California. In addition to the many state-level actions in California, its major cities have local parking, nonfinancial incentives, public charging, and various consumer outreach programs to increase awareness about the technology and its benefits. A recent report by the International Council on Clean Transportation found three reasons for California’s EV sales leadership. First, the policy leadership, including the CVRP incentives and ZEV mandates, has supported the market growth. Second, the local promotion activities, such as parking, permitting, fleets, utilities, education, and workplace charging, have been critical. Finally, the “30 California cities with the highest electric vehicle uptake have, on average, 5 times the public charging infrastructure per capita than the U.S. average” and the electric vehicle market grows with the charging infrastructure.121
While California has been and will continue to be a major player in the growth of the EV market, a new, innovative program in Indianapolis, IN has the potential to have broad future appeal. The 100 percent electric, self-service car share, known as Blue Indy, has revolutionized what the EV market in the United States can look like. A French company, the Bollore Group, which first launched its Blue Car service in France, owns Blue Indy. The 24/7 nonstop self-service program features a 100 percent electric vehicle fleet that customers can subscribe to and drive around the Indianapolis area. Subscribers are given a personal membership card that is scanned to gain entry into the vehicles parked all over the city and constantly charged. Members then unplug the vehicle, retract the cable, close the cover, and hit the road to their destination. The vehicle can then be returned to any Blue Indy spot across the city upon reaching the driver’s destination. Members simply swipe their membership card to end the session and plug the vehicle back into the charger at that spot. For car share services, it appears that plugging into the charging station is much more convenient than having to fill up at a gas station.
Indianapolis drivers have the option to have daily, weekly, monthly, or annual memberships to Blue Indy. After purchasing the membership, each ride costs $4 for the first 20 minutes of use, and 20 cents for each minute thereafter. A monthly membership to Blue Indy runs a mere $9.99 per month. Other EV drivers may charge their personal vehicles by using a charging membership. The concept is very similar to that of Uber because Blue Indy members find vehicle availability and charging spots using an app on their smart phones.
A unique aspect of the program is Blue Indy’s EVs. Blue Indy began with 120 vehicles that feature a 30-kWh lithium metal polymer battery (LMP). These batteries allow the vehicles to travel 150 miles on a single charge at a speed of 65 mph. LMP batteries have been said to be a “battery of the future” because they are 100 percent recyclable. Every single component of the battery is either reused or recycled at the end of its life cycle. When compared to other batteries, the LMP battery is said to store more energy, have a longer life span, provide no threat to the environment, and maintain a high level of safety.122
The program was designed to be simple, convenient, affordable, and environmentally friendly. A major question to be answered was whether midwestern Americans would be receptive to the concept that had already been utilized in Paris, Lyon, and Bordeaux. In the first three months of the program’s existence in Indianapolis, Blue Indy had 1,000 members and over 7,000 rides. A Blue Indy spokesperson said, “This is better than we projected, and it is better than what our programs in France did at the same time.”123 The program plans to balloon from 120 vehicles to 500 vehicles with 200 charging stations.
During the first couple of months of the program, the average trip time was approximately 22 minutes, which would cost the member $4.40 per drive. The program has targeted the popular downtown area, but plans on expanding to the airport and the surrounding universities where travel downtown occurs frequently. While the program is several years and thousands of members away from being profitable, the first returns have shown promise for advancing cleaner, lower-carbon car sharing.124
EV Case Study: Norway’s Global Leadership
Although California has led the way in the United States, Norway has aggressively assumed the role of the world’s leading EV market. Norway’s success can be attributed to a multifaceted approach to EV penetration. Rather than just focusing on the incentives for the vehicles themselves, Norway focused on offering the EV consumer an array of financial incentives and conveniences. The combination of generous incentives and benefits to EV users has resulted in unparalleled public acceptance of EVs. In addition, public charging infrastructure has aided the continued growth with 5,600 public, level 2 charging stations. The Norwegian government funded a nationwide buildout of EV infrastructure via a public agency to ensure that the infrastructure was in place to aid acceptance of EVs.125
EV users receive exemptions from VAT and import taxes at purchase as well as exemptions from road tolls, public parking fees, ferry usage fees, bridge and tunnel tolls, and have access to bus lanes. The financial incentives in place were set to expire either when 50,000 EVs hit the road or in 2018, depending on what came first; however, incentives were extended to 2017 as the 50,000 EV target was reached three years earlier than expected.126 The exemptions in place not only make EVs comparable to their gasoline counterparts but can make them more affordable. Tax exemptions are the most financially motivated reasons for EV purchases, but the country has found that travel times based on the ability to use bus lanes also plays a major factor.127
With such rewards and incentives has come increased demand. In 2015, 30,000 EVs were sold in Norway, equivalent to 22 percent of all vehicle sales in the nation. The Tesla Model S broke a 28-year record for individual model sales for any type of vehicle, with 1,493 sold in March of 2014, breaking the previous record held by the Ford Sierra.128 Breaking the 20 percent market share annually is a major step forward in Norway. It also shows how far ahead of the rest of the world Norway is, since the next highest EV per capita in any country is only half that of Norway. While these numbers are impressive, the country has bigger plans: 70 percent of vehicles on the road by 2025 being zero-emission vehicles and 100 percent of new passenger cars, buses, and light commercial vehicles being zero-emission, with the vehicles being primarily either electric or fuel cell powered.129
Its capital, Oslo, has been coined the EV capital of the world, and almost 100 percent of the nation’s electricity comes from hydropower, meaning the EVs on the street are one of the cleanest fleets in the entire world.130 A survey of EV owners “showed that a high percentage of the EV owners bought their electric car solely for economic reasons, but became conscious about his or her energy use and the environment after buying” an EV.131
Norway extended its electrification investment beyond the light-duty EV market when it began operating the ZeroCat, the 260-foot battery-electric ferry, on one of its busiest ferry routes in the country. The ZeroCat has a capacity of 120 cars and 360 passengers and replaces a 2,000-horsepower diesel engine with an electric version powered by an 800-kW battery that charges in 10 minutes.132 While the battery adds weight to the ferry, it is constructed of an aluminum hull, and the boat weighs only half as much.133 The electric ferry began operating on January 1, 2015. The ferry operates via energy from the traditional power grid and from onboard batteries. This combination effectively removes fossil fuels from its operation. The result has been EV vehicles and traditional vehicles alike traversing Norway on a battery-operated ferry.134
Another important transportation mode for the electric battery is the mass transit sector where Americans in 2013 used mass transit more times than in any other year since 1956.135 Mass transit is appealing for those with big-city commutes, those who appreciate the environmental benefits, those attempting to cut costs, and those who enjoy being able to work while on their daily commute. More than half of humanity lives within major cities that feature options of public transportation, and people are continuing to realize the value of these systems. There were 10.65 billion passenger rides on transit system within the United States in 2013.136 This number represents a 37 percent increase in the use of public transportation since 1995.
As public transportation continues to become more popular, the use of electric batteries in its operations is gradually growing. While examples exist of some systems employing electric battery technology, mass transit alternatives have historically adopted the use of electricity to provide a more efficient form of mass transit.
One area of mass transit that has a significant opportunity for employing electric batteries is the public bus. One feature supporting electrification of buses is that for a public bus, the battery’s cost is more manageable as transit buses travel 3.5 times more miles yearly and transport six times more passengers than the average light-duty vehicle.137 While electric buses have higher initial capital costs, the actual lifetime cost of a bus that runs on electricity via an electric battery is 35 percent less than the traditional diesel bus. The savings occurs through the miles per gallon comparison: a diesel bus gets only 3.1 miles per gallon when conducting its city routes, diesel hybrids get approximately 5 mpg, whereas a comparable battery electric bus achieves a 21.4 miles per gallon equivalent.138 In regard to upfront cost, a diesel bus costs $400,000 to $500,000, a compressed natural gas (CNG) bus costs $500,000 to $600,000, diesel battery hybrids cost $650,000 to $730,000, and an electric battery bus, depending on battery configuration, could cost as little as $550,000 if one buys the vehicle and leases the batteries; an outright purchase with maximum battery configuration may cost $800,000.139
In addition to offering an environmental alternative to traditional diesel-operated buses, electric buses offer similar performance. Public transit buses stop and start frequently, which requires high amounts of torque on the engine. Electric motors offer this very high torque as well as the ability to deliver it at low speeds, which is needed on busy city streets. Lastly, electric buses are better able to conserve energy. Not only do electric buses use only 20 percent of the raw energy that their diesel counterparts use, they are also able to capture energy through regenerative braking.140
One leading company manufacturing battery electric buses is Proterra, which began filling commercial orders in 2001 and has now completed more than 400 orders delivered to a dozen cities.141 Proterra’s buses have logged more than 1 million miles of service and, according to the company’s CEO, they are “in contention for roughly 20 percent of the potential transit vehicle orders in the U.S.” There is a decent percentage of transit managers who realize that “EVs are the long-term future of the market.”142 The buses that Proterra has been most successful with recently are in the $700,000 range. The total lifetime cost of ownership for a Proterra bus as opposed to a diesel vehicle is about $1 million versus $1.4 million when including upfront acquisition cost, midlife maintenance, and fuel consumption.143 Ease of maintenance may move electric buses toward the dominant technology, since keeping vehicles running is a challenge. Diesel and CNG buses are complex, but EVs are “clean, quiet, and simple.”144 The average diesel bus consumes 10,000 gallons of fuel a year and CNG consumption is around 12,000 gallons. Typical maintenance for an electric bus comes at midlife or at around 12 years when the battery pack may require some maintenance to restore its level of charge to 80 percent capacity, in compliance with the Proterra warranty.145
Proterra buses use “the most durable Li-ion chemistry you can get your hands on, in the form of lithium titanate oxide (LTO),” which can cycle 20,000 to 40,000 times while maintaining 80 percent of original capacity.146 In regard to charging, Proterra recommends both overhead fast charging and conventional plug-in overnight chargers. With overhead fast charging, the vehicle drives into the bus stop and enters the charging zone. The charging software then takes over and slows the bus down, controlling how fast it can move through the charging zone, with charging finished in as little as 5 minutes. Some overhead fast chargers can charge as high as 500 kW (see Figure 4.3).147
Figure 4.3 The Proterra all-electric bus can travel 350 miles on a single charge and is rated for 22 MPGe. (Photo courtesy of Proterra, Inc.)
Another option is remanufactured electric buses, which can allow the customer to go electric for the price of a diesel bus. Complete Coach Works (CCW), founded in 1986 in California, remanufactures buses, recycling the old chassis while adding a new electric drive.148 CCW built its first prototype roughly five years ago and now has electric buses in operation in about half a dozen cities, with its largest order of 21 buses from the Indianapolis Public Transit Corporation.149 CCW has favored models, but it will work with “anything in the transit world.”150 The company installed one of the first hybrid systems, although its sales manager describes hybrids as “not a viable option anymore.”151
CCW is remanufacturing buses for about $580,000, with savings on fuel and maintenance expected to total about $440,000 over the life of the bus.152 The onboard charger (100 amp, 50 kW) is meant to “require no special charging infrastructure beyond 480-volt, 3-phase electrical service” typical of an overnight depot.153 Its bus has a 131-kW liquid-cooled electric motor, and it uses Samsung lithium-ion battery cells.154 Its standard configuration has “311 kWh of energy storage (250 usable), which delivers a range of 150 miles,” although it also offers a half-pack option.155 CCW also has an option for wireless charging from “a Utah company called WAVE (Wireless Advanced Vehicle Electrification).” WAVE’s system is fully automated and operates at 50 kW, with an efficiency level greater than 90 percent. The system utilizes a charging pad with another pad mounted on the vehicle’s undercarriage. Once a bus drives over the pad with a layover of 10 to 15 minutes, the bus can be fully charged, effectively doubling its range or alternatively allowing it to operate with half the battery pack.156
Some worldwide locations have already begun using the technology. Copenhagen, for example, operates an electric CityCirkel bus system that runs solely on electric batteries.157 The buses are able to operate fully all day on battery power, and the batteries are recharged overnight. The buses have a range of 155 miles, while featuring an iron phosphate battery.158 The same electric bus technology offered by BYD manufacturing is available and in operation in several cities in China, Europe, and North America.
China has become the world leader in implementation of electric buses in major cities. Over 20 percent of all buses in China run on electricity, making the nation’s fleet of electric buses well over 100,000.159 One exciting development took place in Ningbo, China where the world’s fastest charging electric bus is found. The bus can charge in as little as 10 seconds, while being able to cover half of the 24-stop route.160 The bus uses supercapacitor technology that is able to recharge over 1 million times before having to retire; this is projected to result in a 12-year life cycle for the supercapacitor in the bus.161 This form of electric storage technology is one that will likely see a great increase in research and development in the near future, for all forms of transportation.
South Korea has implemented a trackless train pilot project. The trackless train, which will recharge as it drives, will allow the battery to be only one-fifth the size of batteries currently used in EVs. The smaller, lightweight batteries will reduce the upfront cost of the battery for the train. If the pilot works well, the trackless train could revolutionize mass transit.
Another area where the electric battery has tremendous opportunity and has recently seen its first signs of progress is in the heavy-duty trucking industry. Several challenges exist with the electrification of the heavy-duty truck. Tim Urquhart, from HIS Automotive, explained: “The weight of the battery pack has stymied the creation of a fully electric truck … however, the progress that has been made in cell development towards increasing power storage and lowering cost means that this concept is now a viable one.”162 This sentiment is evidenced by Mercedes releasing the first ever heavy-duty electric truck, the Urban eTruck, which can tow up to 24 tons and has a range of 124 miles.163
Within the heavy-duty truck industry, the garbage truck has taken the baton as the first vehicle type that has undergone electrification. A typical garbage truck averages 3 mpg and costs $42,000 to fuel annually; however, the newly released Chicago electric garbage truck produced by Nikola features a natural gas and electric combination engine with the ability to haul 80,000 pounds while not having to recharge for 1,000 miles.164 Nikola, along with another innovative company called Wrightspeed, are leading the growth of the electric heavy-duty truck. Nikola, in addition to its garbage truck model, has released a hydrogen fuel cell–electric combo truck that features six electric motors providing 2,000 horsepower and 3,700 pounds of torque.165 The majority of the power comes from the hydrogen fuel cells, but the truck also features a 320-kWh lithium-ion battery pack.
It goes without saying that these advances have arisen because of a global need as well as because of government requirements. The EPA and the Department of Transportation in August 2016 released joint greenhouse gas emissions and fuel efficiency standards for big rig trucks, vans, and buses that are forcing manufacturers to green the heavy-duty industry. The standards in the new rule have the ability to create lasting change, since the trucking industry creates 20 percent of the transportation sector-related emissions while only accounting for 5 percent of the total vehicles on the road.166 The rule has “the potential to provide very large reductions in GHG emissions and fuel consumption and advance technology development substantially.”167 The rule features required reductions of emissions as well as credits at varying levels based on the type of truck that is purchased. The credits range from 3.5x traditional credits for diesel and hybrid trucks to 4.5x credits for full battery-operated heavy-duty trucks.
August 4, 2016 saw a great advance in the heavy-duty trucking industry. The State of California awarded a $9 million contract to manufacturer BYD. The contract, not surprisingly, is located in a state that has been on the forefront of electric vehicle development and deployment, but is noteworthy due to its sheer size. BYD has been tasked with creating 27 electric trucks for the state, 23 of which will be class 8 trucks that will be used to move freight in freight yards, while the other 4 will be class 5 medium-duty trucks that will be used on the railroads.168
It is clear that electric batteries are going to play a major role in both electrifying mobility and transitioning to a low-carbon economy in the United States and in the world. In order to continue the growth and development of the EV market, investments must continue to be made in R&D. If resources are invested, we can expect that batteries will become lighter, smaller, more efficient, longer lasting, and feature greater range. In order for greater adoption to continue, EVs and mass transit EVs must become more visible. That burden falls mainly on the government, which has the ability to provide incentives to increase adoption. The success in Norway demonstrates that if governments are creative in the ways that they offer incentives, rebates, and other rewards, then EV adoption can grow dramatically. Current battery improvements have created the opportunity to both increase range and decrease cost. The more cost effective the battery production, the more affordable and appealing the vehicle will become. Our climate goals require broad adoption of zero-emission vehicles. Public policy must reflect this need in order for us to expedite the transition to a low-carbon economy.
