Electric-car buyers expect battery upgrades

Electric-car owners want battery upgrades over their cars' lifespan. Will automakers eventually give the people what they want?

|
George Frey/Reuters/File
A car owner makes a phone call as he charges his 2013 Nissan Leaf electric car at ABB Inc.'s DC fast charging station in Salt Lake City, Utah (April 30, 2014).

With battery-electric cars now on the market for five years, and perhaps 200,000 on U.S. roads, we now know more about how the cars and their drivers behave in the real world than we did when they first arrived.

One learning is that an undercurrent among some electric-car buyers that suggests they fully expect carmakers to offer future battery upgrades that providesignificant range boosts.

This, it seems fair to say, both startles and baffles automakers.

Those buyers, used to upgrades in their mobile phones as often as every 18 months, seem to view their electric cars not as automobiles but as consumer-electronics devices.

And they expect the pace of change in technology to be far more rapid for electric powertrains than for conventional internal-combustion engines.

There's some justification for this view.

While battery technology does not improve at the same rate as that of microelectronics (famously codified in Moore's Law), lithium-ion cells have a historic rate of cost-performance improvement of roughly 7 percent over more than 20 years.

Automakers, however, have spent more than a century designing, testing, building, and selling cars--and then thinking about them as little as possible.

And future upgrades to vehicles simply haven't been a design consideration.

Consider the response by a Ford Motor Company executive when asked about whether its new Sync 3 system could be retrofitted into cars of the last three years equipped with the earlier and much-reviled MyFordTouch system.

"The upgrade path," he said firmly, "is a new vehicle."

Nissan, similarly, offers no provision for fitting its new 30-kilowatt-hour battery pack from the 2016 Nissan Leaf (rated at 107 miles) into earlier Leafs that came with 24-kWh packs, even though the form factor appears to be identical.

Nissan representatives in several countries have said the company has no plans to offer retrofits. It has said it will offer replacement 24-kWh packs using the latest heat-resistant chemistry for $5,500, but they are not upgrades.

The only electric cars for which battery upgrades are available now, in fact, are roughly 2,000 Tesla Roadster 2.0 or 2.5 models. They can be upgraded to a new "Roadster 3.0" pack that fits in the original space that will provide "over 35 percent more range" for $29,000.

In part, this is because all makers design their packs to last the life of the car--at least 10 years, and generally as much as 15 years.

Packs are customarily warranted against failure for at least eight years, but warranties against anticipated capacity loss are rarer and vary by manufacturer.

But what if battery packs were not designed to last for 10- or 15-year vehicle lifespans?

That's the intriguing question raised during a lengthy interview with Denise Gray, the new CEO of LG Chem Power, the U.S. battery arm of Korean conglomerate LG Chem.

That company has provided the cells for both generations of Chevrolet Volt range-extended electric cars, and is widely presumed to be the supplier for the Chevy Bolt EV as well. It also supplies cells for vehicles from Audi, Ford, Hyundai, Renault, Smart, Volkswagen, Volvo, and others.

Among other positions in a career of more than 20 years at General Motors, Gray was director of global battery systems engineering. In that role, she oversaw the laboratory that tested and validated cells from various makers and the designs for the first-generation Volt battery pack.

She left in 2010, just before the Volt went on sale, to join startup battery-pack integrator Atieva, where she gained an understanding of the Chinese plug-in vehicle landscape and its manufacturers' requirements.

Suppose, Gray asked, carmakers only specified battery packs that were only intended to last for half a car's life: five to seven years, say?

That would greatly reduce the cost, redundancy, and perhaps even the size and weight of batteries that would not need to have sufficient capacity to last 10 to 15 years, she suggested.

Design for future upgrades is something that engineers who work with electrified powertrains generally have in mind, she said.

But, historically, it's rarely prioritized over the more traditional view that, "You've got 'em for life"--and the time, effort, and priorities of getting a vehicle with an advanced powertrain out the door on schedule with the necessary high reliability and lowest possible costs.

But the very fact that Gray raised the idea suggests that it's at least being discussed among automakers looking at larger volumes and more diverse plug-in offerings for 2020 and later.

Which poses all sorts of interesting questions, including how on earth the automakers would market a car that needed a $5,000 to $10,000 component replaced after five to seven years.

Stay tuned on that one.

This article first appeared at GreenCarReports.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Electric-car buyers expect battery upgrades
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/Business/In-Gear/2016/0121/Electric-car-buyers-expect-battery-upgrades
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe