backtop


Print 20 comment(s) - last by FITCamaro.. on Dec 11 at 5:09 PM


GM Spark less likely to burn  (Source: GM)
Lithium Phosphate batteries less prone to fire

GM announced the Spark EV back in October with little fanfare and few hard details. With the recent fires in the testing of the Volt, some car buyers and the government are looking at GM and specifically the batteries used in its vehicles.
 
The Volt is currently under investigation by the NHTSA and GM engineers to determine the cause of the fire and what should be done to prevent the fire from happening again. The battery packs in the Volt are made by LG Chem and use lithium-ion technology. That battery tech is more prone to fire than some other battery technology. 
 
Business Week reports that GM has chosen another company and different battery tech for the Spark. The Spark will use batteries built by A123. The A123 batteries are less fire prone as they use lithium phosphate chemistry. When GM took bids years ago for the battery packs for the Volt, the technology to mass-produce lithium phosphate batteries was not available.
 
James Hall from consulting company 2953 Analytics stated, "Lithium phosphate chemistry looks like it could be more friendly in terms of heat management. But it stores less energy. There is a tremendous amount of new discovery. This is new territory for lithium batteries."
 
Robert Kanode is the CEO of battery maker Valence Technology Inc. in Austin, Texas. Kanode said that if his firm used phosphate batteries to build a pack for the Volt it would be about 10% larger than the existing Volt battery pack. This is another reason phosphate technology isn't common in EVs today. 
 
Fisker will also be using lithium phosphate batteries in Karma EV.

Source: Business Week



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

3249734 Inc.
By Namey on 12/9/2011 1:51:00 PM , Rating: 3
When I start a company, I'll also use a random alphanumeric string as the name.




RE: 3249734 Inc.
By Shadowsite on 12/9/2011 2:49:03 PM , Rating: 3
It isn't random. It is based on the chemistry used to create their modules.


RE: 3249734 Inc.
By corduroygt on 12/9/2011 2:55:49 PM , Rating: 4
I thought it was based on the owner's combination in his luggage.


RE: 3249734 Inc.
By JediJeb on 12/9/2011 3:09:27 PM , Rating: 5
Maybe they wanted to be listed in the Phone Book ahead of AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA Auto Parts.


RE: 3249734 Inc.
By Smartless on 12/9/2011 3:16:41 PM , Rating: 5
Megamaid has gone from suck to blow!

Hey as naming conventions go it could be worse. They could name a non-electric car the Spark hoping to sell it on the great GM name before the EV or even hybrid comes out later.


RE: 3249734 Inc.
By Shadowmaster625 on 12/9/2011 3:17:53 PM , Rating: 2
2953 Analytics? Sounds pretty random...


RE: 3249734 Inc.
By FITCamaro on 12/11/2011 5:09:46 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe the founders birthday is 2-9-1953


"So if you want to save the planet, feel free to drive your Hummer. Just avoid the drive thru line at McDonalds." -- Michael Asher














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki