Next-Generation Batteries - For An Electric Locomotive!

MitchJi

10 MW
Joined
Jun 2, 2008
Messages
3,246
Location
Marin County California
Hi,

How suitable would these batteries be for an EV or Plug-in Hybrid?
http://cleantechnica.com/2013/10/26/new-life-green-weenie-electric-locomotive/
Railway giant Norfolk Southern launched its ambitious all-electric NS 999 locomotive project in 2007, and since then it has been chugging steadily, if slowly, along. The pace has been picking up of late, though. At a recent trade conference, the company and its partner, Axion Power, documented improvements in the locomotive’s battery management system that leapfrogs the technology into the next generation.

Our sister site, Gas2.org, first began covering the NS 999 prototype when it rolled onto the tracks in 2009. Dubbed the “green weenie” by rail fans, the all-electric locomotive sported 1,080 12-volt lead-acid batteries.

There have been some promising tweaks to lead-acid batteries, but the difference occurred earlier this year, when NS 999 switched over to a new lead-carbon battery developed by Axion Power.

The positive electrode follows standard procedure for a conventional lead-acid battery, being composed of lead dioxide. The negative electrode, however, subs in a supercapacitor made of activated carbon for the sponge lead found in a conventional battery, hence the moniker PbC® battery.

Axion explains how the high surface area of its specially formulated activated carbon gets the job done:
In conventional lead acid batteries the concentration of acid changes from being very concentrated in the charged state to somewhat dilute in the discharged state as the acid is converted to water. In contrast, the PbC® battery stores H+ in the negative electrode in the fully charges state which move to the positive electrode during discharge where they are neutralized to form water. The result is reduced acid concentration swings from the charged to discharged state which reduces grid corrosion on the positive electrode and leads to longer life of the positive electrode.
At the 7th Annual ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineers) Rail Transportation Conference in Pennsylvania earlier this month, Axion and Norfolk Southern provided an update on NS 999, comparing the new battery system to the earlier valve-regulated lead-acid battery system.

The report didn’t pull any punches, critiquing the previous iteration of NS 999 for its unwieldy battery management and battery packaging systems, which piled on maintenance costs.


The new PbC® batteries were tested on the Norfolk Southern Hybrid Locomotive Simulator, and the results look promising. According to the report:

PbC® batteries have a unique charging curve, known as “concave down, increasing,” which allows the batteries to self-equalize in strings. This characteristic of PbC® batteries provides for simpler battery management and reduced maintenance charging, while increasing the usable energy available to the string.

We Built This Zero Emission Locomotive!
Before Axion came on board, in its initial stages NS 999 was developed in partnership with Penn State University with an assist from Department of Energy funding (Norfolk Southern has also received $105 million in Recovery Act funding to improve the critical Crescent Corridor freight network, btw).

The Department of Energy also awarded Axion $150,000 last year, to help the company kickstart a commercialization plan for the PbC® battery.
NS-999-electric-locomotive.jpg

http://www.axionpower.com/PbC_Battery_Overview
PbC® Battery Overview

Technology and Performance & Economics

Conventional lead acid batteries are comprised of two electrodes: a positive electrode made of lead dioxide (PbO2) and a negative electrode made of sponge lead (Pb). Both the lead dioxide and sponge lead materials are pasted onto lead grids that act as the current collector. Two half reactions occur on the electrodes during charge and discharge that are described by the well known double sulphate theory for lead acid batteries...

The PbC® battery is a hybrid device that uses the standard lead acid battery positive electrode and a supercapacitor negative electrode that is made of activated carbon. The specific type of activated carbon we use has an extremely high surface area (1500 m2/g) and has been specifically formulated by Axion for use in electrochemical applications. During charge and discharge, the positive electrode undergoes the same chemical reaction that occurs in a conventional lead acid battery, i.e. lead dioxide reacts with acid and sulphate ions to form lead sulphate and water. The main difference in the PbC® battery is the replacement of the lead negative electrode with an activated carbon electrode that does not undergo a chemical reaction at all. Instead, the very high surface area activated carbon electrode stores the protons (H+) from the acid in a layer on the surface of the electrode. This new negative half reaction can be written as the following:
Negative Electrode in the PbC® battery technology
nC6x-(H+)x D nC6(x-2)-.(H+)x-2 + 2H+ + 2e- (discharged)

In conventional lead acid batteries the concentration of acid changes from being very concentrated in the charged state to somewhat dilute in the discharged state as the acid is converted to water. In contrast, the PbC® battery stores H+ in the negative electrode in the fully charges state which move to the positive electrode during discharge where they are neutralized to form water. The result is reduced acid concentration swings from the charged to discharged state which reduces grid corrosion on the positive electrode and leads to longer life of the positive electrode.
http://www.asmeconferences.org/RTDF2013/ViewAcceptedAbstracts.cfm
"Norfolk Southern Railway Company (NS) is developing an all-electric switching locomotive, the NS 999, to provide a zero point source emission electric locomotive option for switching service. The original NS 999 suffered from poor battery management and challenging battery packaging, making maintenance difficult. The rebuilt NS 999, anticipated in the 3rd quarter 2013, will be powered by Axion Power’s PbC® batteries. The Axion PbC® batteries provide increased charge / discharge cycle life and charge acceptance compared to conventional Valve Regulated Lead Acid (VRLA) batteries, as well as increased usable energy when configured in series as ‘long strings.’ NS and Axion will review the challenges of the initial battery management system, improvements to the battery management system, and test results from the Norfolk Southern Hybrid Locomotive Simulator using Axion’s PbC® lead-carbon hybrid battery / supercapacitor. Axion will present test data showing the low variation in strings of PbC® batteries compared to VRLA while simulating locomotive switching. PbC® batteries have a unique charging curve, known as “concave down, increasing,” which allows the batteries to self-equalize in strings. This characteristic of PbC® batteries provides for simpler battery management and reduced maintenance charging, while increasing the usable energy available to the string. "
 
Let's buy some and find out.. oh wait.

Axion power and it's former employee and full-time shill John Peterson have been promoting this next-gen carbon lead acid for 6 years.. about the same amount of time it took the stock to lose 95% and get delisted.

There may be something to the tech as far as improving lead acid durability and power density (maybe less peukart effect= more capacity?) but the power to weight is still terrible. it was well under 100wh/kg. that's why it's used in locomotives and semis and backup power. The worst part is it removed the major benefit of lead acid.. lower cost.

I haven't followed the tech since A123 folded, so maybe things are better. They have to be or the company won't exist next year. If you have any real data that isn't come from corporate liar - i mean lawyer - JPeterson, I'd be interested to see it.

here's an ancient thread detailing some of the hype:
http://gm-volt.com/forum/showthread.php?3670-CNT-battery-price-29-kwh-cost-9-kwh-ED-440wh-kg.-Who-can-compete
 
RedLine19K said:
I haven't followed the tech since A123 folded, so maybe things are better.
A123 never "folded." They went into bankruptcy which resolved with a purchase by the Wanxiang Group. They've been in continuous operation throughout and are now poised to double production. And their tech was never hype. The problem was the 2007-8 recession and the slowing of the economy which made it difficult for start-ups and electric vehicle sales.
 
Ok. Not "folded". is "lost all their customers, went Ch. 11 bankrupt and sold the scraps to Wx and others after a decade of corporate incompetence and staggering losses" better? Btw, A123 Inc was renamed B456.. then ceased to exist. The new A123 LLC might have the same buildings, customers and a even some of the same employees but is not the same company.

But i actually meant I haven't followed axion's tech since A123 went BK - they were both in teh same sector. AndA123s problem is absolutely the tech, not that is doesn't work, but that it can't be sold for a price that makes it competitive. But let's not get off track, this is about another hyped technology that destroys investors while it's executives get by on the promise of tech breakthoughs and future sales that are almost, but never quite, real.
 
arkmundi said:
...A123 never "folded." .
Well, that depends on your definition of "folded".
In my book, if a company's business plan fails to the point where they can no longer trade and have to file C11 ..
...then they have folded.
The property, buildings, equipment, employees and product my continue under new owners, but the business "folded".

And back on topic, i dont consider an "improved" PbA battery, much of an advancement for the EV world.
What we need is something lighter, cheaper, with a longer cycle life.
 
Locomotives need reliability and weight for tractive effort. What would a lithium pack in that loco look like? I imagine that while it might roll down the rails more efficiently, it will be spinning wheels when it tries to take off up a 1% grade.

Lead acid cells, despite their woes, actually have a place in applications like this where reliability is critical. The start-up current will be big though, and I guess that's why they went looking for high-C innovations.

Battery powered locomotives aren't such a crazy idea for shuntyards and hill assists. Think of the regen potential!
 
If Lithium cells were the same cost (per kWhr) as Pb, which would you choose to power any EV , even a loco ?
You could either use the saved weight to add more capacity, or if you dont need the capacity ( unlikely ) then use the saved space for extra freight as ballast ...or just add ballast as needed.
 
but this is not a lead acid battery. this guy just trashed them because he wanted to rag on someone and arkmundi was convenient.

there is no evidence there was poor management at A123 in any respect. they invested a large amount of capital in building a production line for the Volt EV and then GM double crossed them and bot the pouches from LG.

they struggled through that but they had a manufacturing process control failure that allowed the electrodes and separators to be slightly misaligned during the automated placement process step on one of their production lines, not all of them. it was not discovered until a large number of pouches had been built in order to meet a crisis deadline to Fiskar as i understand it.

from what i read there was no failure of management in this, just the normal sorta thing that happens when you ramp up a new production line, except they needed to meet the Fiskar deadline which pushed the production engineers farther behind in their process monitoring so when the misalignment was discovered they had already produced a large number of pouches which they could not deliver to Fiskar.
 
Frock, can we have a thread about battery powered trains without bringing up A123's financial arrangements please? Sheesh.
 
Jones, sorry. Yeah, these will work in yards where quiet and clean air is more important than cost. NS has been testing them for over 5 years...still deciding on whether this "better in every way" technology is the way to go.

dnmun said:
but this is not a lead acid battery.

WHAT? This IS a lead acid battery. How can you be confused on such a simple fact?

OP asked is this tech was suitable for EVs - it isn't. Start stop/microhybrids were going to be the salvation of A123 and Axion at one point, except people don't want to buy $1000 batteries to save .1mpg. Heavy batteries do have a use in locomotives, forklifts..anywhere 60wh/kg can be described as a "feature" But, for reasons already listed, why not just use more capacity for the same price, or ballast for 1/100 the cost?

As for A123, I was just explaining my research of AXPW was incidental and stopped when A123 was "unable to continue as a going concern", only to get called out on some pointless debate about whether they folded, imploded, or went to Belize.

I wasn't "trashing" Ark, but i disagree with every point and tried to explain why. I've done over 200 hours of research into (the former) A123 and probably about 20 in AXPW. For the record, A123 had no chance at the Volt, because they didn't have a pouch cell and bought Enerland in South Korea to add that capability, but way too late. Good call GM, btw. Livonia was NOT built for the Gen1 Volt.

As for poor mgt, I'm not talking about planning on sales that never came, that was just an honest 750M mistake :) FiskEr had stopped receiving batteries in late 2011, due to nonexistent sales. So A123 was doomed, and the mar26 recall was just fuel on the (battery) fire.The toxic financing deals that accelerated A123s demise fit perfectly with their restructured golden parachute clauses, while simultaneously ensuring there was zero chance A123 could survive. If you have doubts, I'll email you about 800 pages of records that explain it all. Or we can just let it die, like A123 did.

AXPW, is just A123 on 1/100 the scale and a stretched time frame. Startups with aging tech desperately searching for good press and investors while bleeding cash. If you bother to read more than PR, you'll find the "tech breakthroughs" always more significant than real, the costs never disclosed but "cheaper in volume" and next quarter will be the turnaround, even tho the last 12 turned out not to be.
 
Well you did manage one sentence before jumping back on the A123 train. :roll:
 
Tempting to edit more than that one word.

Back to locomotives, a better lead tech would have applications in locomotives. May as well carry lead ballast instead of water or something. Perfect for the intended application, switching engines in rail yards contribute a lot of diesel smoke nobody needs more of in a city. Cost of the battery over it's entire lifespan might be lower, if you don't have to change tons of lead batteries so often.
 
Your desire to capitalise opening words pleases me dogman :)
 
Hi,

Thanks for your information. I should have posted more specific questions. BTW if you find a better solution than lead-acid for "1/100 the cost" please let us know what it is and where to buy it!

RedLine19K said:
OP asked is this tech was suitable for EVs - it isn't. Start stop/microhybrids were going to be the salvation of A123 and Axion at one point, except people don't want to buy $1000 batteries to save .1mpg. Heavy batteries do have a use in locomotives, forklifts..anywhere 60wh/kg can be described as a "feature" But, for reasons already listed, why not just use more capacity for the same price, or ballast for 1/100 the cost?

As for A123, I was just explaining my research of AXPW was incidental and stopped when A123 was "unable to continue as a going concern", only to get called out on some pointless debate about whether they folded, imploded, or went to Belize.

I wasn't "trashing" Ark, but i disagree with every point and tried to explain why. I've done over 200 hours of research into (the former) A123 and probably about 20 in AXPW.

For my purposes (12v batteries for a ZENN or GEM which I should have stated) your information on the business case for AXPW might be irrelevant. I don't need AXPW to be successful. I just need to be able to buy six 100ah (or bigger) 12v batteries that are superior to SLA at an affordable price. The business success or failure of A123 is irrelevant to all the forum members who have used A123 26650's or 20 ah pouches in their builds.

OTOH it might be critical if AXPW never produces and sells 12v batteries. Maybe the fact that this Locomotive is planning to use them is an indication that they might actually produce them.

They could be a great drop-in replacement (much simpler than lithium) in a ZENN or GEM. But I didn't see any specs.

I assume they have as much or more energy per size and weight?
Less peukert effect?
Better C rate (or a lot more energy per size and weight)?
Affordable?

Thanks!
 
Ballast at 1/100 the cost. ballast. Do I have to start diagramming sentences? My point was if this carbon-electrode lead-acid ends up with a lifecycle cost=lithium but 4x energy density isn't needed, then slag can be used for the extra traction weight. (lead would be too expensive and toxic).

Yes, these batteries may have a use in rail, forklifts etc IF they perform as promised and IF the price is less than alternatives ( i challenge you to find a price) Many quotes from 2011 put them at $400-500+, and the NS deal was 1080 batteries for 475K=$440 but the Ah of the batteries is never mentioned. These "test prototype" deals are often structured with other costs or sold at a loss to "keep hope alive"

An 4x improvement in lead acid life and better performance would be a major benefit, and these PbC batteries supposedly have self-balancing characteristics, but may still require BMS (probably not for your 2s3p tho). If they can keep the cost to ~2x the price of a deep-cycle, they may have a chance. But lead acid replacement is a huge market, and LiFePO4 versions are becoming more common.

All of which is moot because, unless you have industry connections, you can't purchase the Axion cells yet.

The financial viability of both companies is absolutely relevant. Nobody is more interested in finding the truth in a fog of PR, vague promises and unproven technological claims than someone who has significant gains/losses at stake. Axion is losing money and has very few retail customers but lots of prototypes. Exactly like A123 a few years ago. And just like A123, they don't sell to end users. A123s popularity on this forum is directly the result of grey-market salvage at $25. I've seen very few people recommending Amp20s at the $70 retail cost (which again, is only possible because the old A123 failed.) When Axion goes BK...some cheap PbCs might show up. Otherwise, it's going to be at least 2+ years before Exide branded PbCs show up on store shelves.

Here's tons of propaganda from JP/Axion:
http://seekingalpha.com/instablog/1631091-axion-power-host/2327572-axion-power-concentrator-277-oct-19-13-axion-norfolk-southern-at-asme-rail-conference-john-petersen-joins-epower

Compare their double speak to published data/financials and decode the spin. I can't short AXPW so it's not worth my time. Have fun.

MitchJi said:
I assume they have as much or more energy per size and weight? same*
Less peukert effect? yes so more usable energy than nominal depending on load
Better C rate (or a lot more energy per size and weight)? 7-10C
Affordable? 2-4x $ for 2000 charges vs 400-500 but you can't actually buy them

I speculated on these answers back in my first post. Good luck finding a PbC datasheet (look for PbC-30HT-12V) their 83ah battery.
Otherwise, you have to decode statements like:
"Earthrise: What is the pricing relative toleadacidbatteries and relative to lithium-ion and nickel metal hydride?
Granville: A top of the line advanced lead acid batterysells for $240-$260 and Axion's battery will command some premium over that. Axion's battery is about one third the price of a lithiumion or a nickelmetal hydride battery solution."

http://www.earthrisecapital.com/images/EarthriseCapitalObservatorySpring2011.pdf

1/3 of which lithium solution, the $300/kwh tesla one, or the $1000/kwh A123 one? You can't figure out the price because they don't want easy comparisons, a moving target is an easier sell. These are 2011 numbers and earthrise is a 26M "investor"

The axion website is also suspect, information from 2008. It's strange they still have bold predictions of future sales already proven false.

More links:
http://www.fleetsandfuels.com/electric-drive/2013/06/axion-and-epower-18-wheel-hybrid/

http://www.altenergystocks.com/archives/2010/12/why_energy_storage_investors_must_understand_newtons_laws.html
 
pdf with lots of graphs related to stop/start applications:

Axion received 1.2M in federal grants, so detailed technical specs are probably buried on a govt website if you can find them. Here's a similar doc about A123
Here is an example of "digging for data" In this Apr2012document

p1: "Energy storage utilizes a string of twenty-four (24) Axion PbC Group 30HT maintenance free batteries, series connected. "

p2:
"The primary Axion PbC battery features include:
i. Longer cycle life—factor of 3-4 X that of advanced Lead acid batteries
ii. 2500 cycles @ 100% depth of discharge
iii. Deep discharge capability without compromising cycle life
iv. Excellent Partial SOC Performance
v. High rate charge acceptance
vi. Environmentally friendly—99% recyclable
vii. Sealed VRLA package"

"d. Each individual battery has a one-hour rated capacity of 0.5 kWh"

p5:
"Nominal 1 hour rating 75 Ah"
"Dimensions (L X W X H) 13.5" X 6.75" X 10.75" = 980 cu. in. = 16L
Weight 75 lbs" = 34kg

12v battery has 75ah at 1C..isn't that .9kWh, not .5kWh?
If the battery is only rated for 55% at 1C.. maybe it does have a high peukart constant

Here's a quick comparison (I didn't include Lipo because it just isn't suitable for industrial scale, low-maintenance apps.)

500wh/34kg= 15wh/kg SLA: 41 A123 20ah:131
500wh/16L= 31wh/L SLA:85 A123 20ah:247
cost@$400= .80/wh SLA:.30 A123: 1.08

Even with PbC at 2500 cycles, SLA at 500 and A123 ~2000 it looks terrible. My math has to be wrong.

Sources:
http://www.verlab.dcc.ufmg.br/_media/projetos/roomba/comparison_table.pdf
http://www.allaboutbatteries.com/Battery-Energy.html
http://ultralifecorporation.com/download/275/
http://www.atbatt.com/product/23922.asp
http://www.batteriesinaflash.com/deep-cycle-battery-faq
http://www.raceyard.de/tl_files/Newsletter/Dateien/A123-AMP20-M1HD-A-1-Data-Sheet.pdf
http://www.altenergystocks.com/archives/2009/05/why_advanced_leadacid_batteries_will_dominate_the_hev_markets_1.html <--JP again. .this guy is slime.

also, i know i seem like an argumentative jerk.. i'm just frustrated by careless or lazy misinformation
 
MitchJi said:
I just need to be able to buy six 100ah (or bigger) 12v batteries that are superior to SLA at an affordable price.
They could be a great drop-in replacement (much simpler than lithium) in a ZENN or GEM. But I didn't see any specs.

I assume they have as much or more energy per size and weight?
Less peukert effect?
Better C rate (or a lot more energy per size and weight)?
Affordable?.

doesnt look like they would meet many of your requirements !
I can see how a simple "drop in" replacment cell has its attractions , but jeez,..i can never see how choosing to be stuck with half a ton of unnecessary weight is not a sufficient incentive to convert to a better chemistry.
 
I can see why the weight could be good in a locomotive, or even a forklift. And of course, a lighter battery in a locomotive can just use other ballast. Like water for example.

But lots of weight, it's got to be a detriment in any personal transportation vehicle.
 
Back
Top