Interview with electric car entrepreneur Shai Agassi
David Pogue interviewed electric car entrepreneur Shai Agassi about his plans to create electric cars with removal batteries so that drivers can simply drive up to filling stations and get their old battery swapped for a new one in less time than it takes to fill a regular car's tank with gas.
Video above, and Pogue has the full transcript of the interview on his NYT blog.
DP: So what will you guys make? What will you do?(Thanks, Daniel!)SA: We sell miles, the way that AT&T sells you minutes. They buy bandwidth and they translate into minutes. We buy batteries and clean electrons–we only buy electrons that come from renewable sources–and we translate that into miles.
DP: What are we talking about here? What’s the infrastructure you’re building?
SA: We have two pieces of infrastructure. 1) Charge spots. And they will be everywhere, like parking meters, only instead of taking money from you when you park, they give you electrons. And they will be at home, they’ll be at work, they’ll be at downtown and retail centers. As if you have a magic contract with Chevron or Exxon that every time you stop your car and go away, they fill it up.
Now, that gives us the ability to drive most of our drives, sort of a 100-mile radius. And that’s most of the drives we do. But we also take care of the exceptional drive. You want to go from Boston to New York. And so on the way, we have what we call switch stations: lanes inside gas stations. You go into the switch station, your depleted battery comes out, a full battery comes in, and you keep driving. It takes you about two, three minutes–less than filling with gasoline–and you can keep on going.
the latest
latest episodes
Agassi has the business plan I've heard so far to take electric cars mainstream with existing technology.
That's pretty insane.
* There's no standardized battery technology
* Batteries are very expensive
* Batteries are very large
The battery in the Tesla roadster makes up a very large part of the weight and price of the vehicle.
His only customers would be people who bought his cars. And if the batteries are small and cheap enough to make swapping practical, they won't hold much juice, suggesting extremely limited range.
He talks about "building infrastructure first", but this is like if Ford had built gas stations all over the country in 1900 --- that could only fuel Fords.
If he's really in the refueling business, and not the automobile business, he should be talking to all the other electric car manufacturers about standardizing battery technologies.
He'll be blown out of the water by the first guy to come up with a standardized refueling infrastructure that isn't tied to a single manufacturer's cars.
So we'll go to a system where we're dependent on foreign oil from multiple middle eastern countries to a system where we are dependent on the services and intellectual property of one multi-national (....from Israel?) And it will be government enforced. Hmmmm.
#3 also a dependency on Coal in the US since that's the major source of electricity.
@ FreeYourCRT #3:
The company is based in Palo Alto, California. Israel is just one of the first test markets (along with the city of San Francisco and the state of Hawaii). The company chose these markets because they are small and autonomous enough to feasibly create a new infrastructure system before expanding the idea to larger areas.
I don't see adopting a common standard for electric car production as such a problem. At the very least all the companies are going to have to agree on a standard for the plug at some point if they expect charging stations to become ubiquitous.
"They will be everywhere." O RLY?
This guy gets tons of PR and government photo ops, but so far hasn't built jack. We need some electric car entrepreneurs who actually make products before they get in front of the cameras.
Careful - preposting an NYTimes article will net you a take down notice.
A major development in the history of electric motors was the creation of standard frame sizes. Thus there was a high degree of interchange no matter who made the motor. It follows that from the practical matters of inventory and exchange that the auto makers should create a set of standard battery pack mounting dimensions. The recharge stations would probably limit themselves to stocking no more than 5 types. Anyone buying a non-standard pack would be on his own.
I'm also interested in the source of his financing. If it's done on the public's dime they better tax the hell out of his profits.
That'll never happen, this'll be subsidized six ways from Sunday.
I've been thinking about this for a few years, and really it solves one of the major problems: not having to get new batteries. In this fashion, batteries can be tested when they're swapped out. Once they reach some minimum figure, they're taken out of circulation.
In this fashion, there's no huge hit to the pocketbook when a new battery is required; it's simply figured in with the price of the charge. Unfortunately, the system proposed here would be abused by people who recharge more frequently than they swap batteries, as the swapping stations would take the financial hit without the benefits of regular sales.
Wired had a good article about this a while back.
Technology may surpass them sooner than they think. MIT recently came up with a new lithium battery that charges in minutes, not hours. It's not out yet (of course), but they seem pretty happy. Cell phones may change in seconds.
It's not about changing the fuel that drives our cars, it's about reducing the number of cars. If all we do is use a different fuel, we haven't done a thing to reduce all of the other headaches, expenses, and eyesores of operating our unsustainably large number of vehicles.
Thanks for finding that, smadness. I couldn't remember where'd I'd read about this before.
#2 wrote: "He'll be blown out of the water by the first guy to come up with a standardized refueling infrastructure that isn't tied to a single manufacturer's cars"
That would be HIM. Agassi has requested, and so far received (in 5 countries), commitments to build an OPEN, STANDARD network of charging outlets. Competitors are free to use them.
(His rationale is in the interview transcript linked above.)
#4: "#3 also a dependency on Coal in the US since that's the major source of electricity."
Nope. Better Place has committed to use only renewable energy sources. (This, too, is in the interview!)
#6: "This guy gets tons of PR and government photo ops, but so far hasn't built jack."
That's not true. I witnessed construction crews building the charging sockets in San Fran myself, and they're all over Israel at this point. I drove in the first Better Place cars.
This, TOO was in the interview!!
#12 wrote: "Technology may surpass them sooner than they think."
Actually, not--the MIT battery thing plays perfectly into the Better Place scheme. That's why their cars have SWAPPABLE batteries. If a better one comes along, they can use it, without your having to buy a new car.
And yes, this, too was in the interview.
Sheesh.
--Pogue
Swapping out the battery isn't the answer. A battery that charges in the same amount of time it takes to fill your gas tank now is the solution. I've lugged enough batteries around to know that I don't want my wife or mother doing it.
The boys at MIT won't let us down. And a charge will only cost a fraction of what 20 gallons of gas cost. Charging stations will probably be drive-thru service, with contacts made beneath the car. Most charging will be at home, overnight.
@ #13 posted by MollyMaguire:
That's a worthy goal too, but public transit takes years to build in the best of circumstances. In the meantime all the infrastructure needed for people to use electric cars (other than the charging stations) is already here.
Electric cars won't solve traffic jams, but at least you'll create less air pollution while you're sitting in them.
Pogue,
Thanks for posting those responses. I've been following Better Place for a while, and I was going to respond in the same way if you hadn't.
Some people need to do some research before opening their mouths (or in this case, begin typing)
Exactly what I was thinking! merreborn, freeyourcrt, Trent Hawkins and aj. Please read the article before making comments that are addressed in the article you're commenting on!
Again, read the article. The funding is from investors (100s of millions he's raised so far!). Also to note though is that virtually every major technological advancement of the past 50 years has been on the back of Government subsidies.
The reason you're reading this post on a personal computer connected to the internet is that massive Government subsidiaries went into computing research for decades through programs such as the US Defence Force and NASA.
Besides surely a Government investment into something that reduces reliance on oil, creates thousands of new jobs, starts putting in place Green energy infrastructure and results in cleaner cars is a good thing?
I know if Kevin Rudd (Australian Prime Minister) promised to spend $12billion on this instead of handing nearly every person in the country $900 (which he's recently done as part of an economic stimulus package) I'd finally think I'd voted for someone with vision.
Surely both would be the best outcome?
It seems like a good idea...
But then again creating gas stations without there being cars for them also seems to be a solution to a non-existent problem. Or basically you are playing the odds.
In a way its like say a cell phone. It used to be pagers, and the luggables. As the tech got cheaper and easier to replace; now they are everywhere. It didn't start off with total nationwide coverage. It started off with expensive limited area products. And as time and price adjusted, the features and availability grew.
I don't think a traditional battery is a solution to anything with an electric car. The power density is horrible compared to most combustibles (hydrocarbon or pure hydrogen), or even fuel cells. I think the better answer is something like those nano-carbon tube super capacitors. Good recharge speed with extremely high energy density. (I've always wondered what would happen to such a capacitor if it was punctured?)
@ David Pogue
Actually, I don't think you understood my point. ("Sheesh.")
The point is that once batteries come along that can be charged in minutes, particularly when they come already installed in the cars, there's going to be no need for Mr. Agassi and his swappable batteries.
Once charging a battery is as easy as filling up, the guy with the charging station that comprises just a few 240V cables is going to have greater margins than the guy who has to keep a very large number of batteries sitting around, charged and ready to go. Not to mention that I just paid for this here new battery, and you're suggesting that I have to swap it out for some older one when I could just charge it up in minutes?
By all means, Mr. Agassi's route (which has been proposed many times) is probably the best way to deal with electric cars until these great batteries come along, but there will come a point (in the not too different future, from the MIT results) when the technology will surpass him. At that point, the idea will seem as odd as needing to go to the store for a new iPod battery every day instead of just charging it.
Backing up a little to get a bigger picture, let's look at three ways of propelling our vehicles.
1.) Producing the energy on board, like our internal combustion engines, or fuel cells or tiny nuclear reactors or whatever, or
2.) Carrying stored energy, such as batteries, giant flywheels (it's been done!) or compressed air.
3.) Municipally provided energy- like cable cars, bumper cars, electric trains, and slot cars. It would be possible to charge an electric car in a charging lane, as you drive over it. Or charge in a parking space.
Now the factors to consider are practicality, safety, reliability, and marketability. Any of these could be made to work. I tend to favor electricity because it's so clean, but I'm keeping an eye on fuel cells. I'm also hoping that we find a way to make all hills downhill, so we can just use bicycles. d8^)
@22: Note that your examples of "producing your own energy" are actually examples of carrying stored energy.
There's really no difference between converting the stored energy in hydrogen bonds into electricity (fuel cells) and converting the energy in compressed air into electricity.
All of your examples of the first two categories take potential energy stored in some form (atomic bonds for oil, fuel cells; chemical energy for batteries; mechanical potential energy for compressed air, etc.). They also need some continuous way to "top them up," either by filling the tank, putting in new hydrogen pellets, swapping in new batteries or compressed air tanks...
I think the only technologies that would count as the car "producing its own energy on board" would be those that took energy from the environment: solar panels, thermovoltaic cells, etc. Unfortunately none of these (yet) can produce enough energy at such small scales to move a car reliably or cheaply.
Sam Sam,
You consider an internal combustion engine as storing enery rather than producing it?
As to fuel cells and nuclear reactors, it is my understanding that the processes of converting matter to energy are occuring on board, as opposed to, say, charging a battery bank or compressing air, or spinning a flywheel.
I dunno (sheesh), I live in SF and haven't seen any of these. Maybe right in front of City Hall near the Victory Garden, but not all around town as the dude suggests.
I do like the idea of swapping batteries as is now done with propane canisters. But paying by the mile instead of by the kilowatt hour sounds like an expensive rip-off. I would instead buy two batteries, charge one at home, and swap it when needed, instead of paying a premium to the "battery charging service provider."
I heard a Norwegian scientist, Ole Martin Løvvik propose a similar, albeit more conceptual, system using switchable hydrogen fuel cells, which stored hydrogen in metal powder (more effective). Every fuelling station would be a self-contained sustainable factory for recharging said cells. There was apparently an article about to be published in the International Journal of Hydrogen Energy.
Technically there is no such thing as 'producing energy'. Producing would imply you're creating more of something than you initially had which in the case of energy is never possible, you're simply converting it from one type of energy to another.
Itsumishi,
Detonating a compressed charge of fuel/air mix causes a rapid expansion of the gasses within the cylinder; it pushes the piston down and that turns the wheels. Where was that energy before the explosion?
stored in chemical bonds. And before that, fusing hydrogen nuclei m93 million miles away.
Cool! Thanks!
Takuan seems to have spelt out the specifics better than I would have. I'm just thinking in terms of high school physics which dictates energy cannot be created, only converted. Anything which is a 'fuel' is simply potential energy.
Also a rock sitting at the top of a hill is potential energy.
Batteries do not last forever. Would you swap out the brand new battery in your car for one that looks like it's going to last just 1 more week?
Would a battery station that starts off with 100 new batteries discover that it has 100 dead batteries that couldn't hold any charge, after just 1 week of operation?
hi all , for some time i have been thinking about a way to charge the batteries? the 4 wheels when turning will charge the batteries,allso the air vets collect air on the side off the car, front of car will make more energy,signal energy allso but this one is new.
Here’s dumb thought on my part
Better Place says it has committed to use only renewable energy sources.
How many renewable energy plants are in America to meet the demand required?
At this point and time i would have to say not nearly enough to make Better Places commitment possible or feasible, though i believe this could change in the future, although again in this country it is very difficult to get a new energy plant of any type built.
Also I must have missed the detailed part with who is responsible for installing and maintaining the charging stations and who reaps the profit.
One last thought, are all the vehicles the same size shape and dimensions? And do they all get the same I am not sure what you would call it electric miles per charge?
Is it powerful enough to tow a boat on a trailer, or move freight on a track trailer, and what do they get for electric miles per charge, what does a new battery cost and all sorts of other questions.
Good concept just never enough details for me.
My Name is Padraic.
I know I’m late to this.
poguenyt, thank you for highlighting some of the misconceptions.
Sam Sam, yes ideally you are right, if a battery existed today that could be charged in seconds there would be no need for Agassi's plan, however, there's a problem........PRICE, the price of current batteries are too expensive to expect an ordinary Joe to pay for and own, let alone a new technology. Plus Agassi’s project will bump up production of batteries, and push forward the development of your magic battery.