SSC's plug-in supercar would need the mother of all plugs

With billions in taxpayer moolah floating around to encourage the development of next-generation plug-in hybrids and electric cars, the public needs to be wary of claims of too-good-to-be-true technologies, magic batteries, cars powered by pollen, dandruff, zoo poo, whatever. At a minimum, we should keep a calculator on hand.

Consider, for example, a claim made by Shelby SuperCars, a Washington-based outfit (not affiliated with famed performance-car designer Carroll Shelby) that announced last week that it would build a revolutionary electric vehicle called the Ultimate Aero EV "that will set a new standard in the electric car industry –- one of 10-minute recharges, super horsepower and ranges up to 200 miles."

Thanks to SSC's "Nanotechnology Lithium-Ion" battery pack (buzzwords, anyone?), the car is "rechargeable in 10 minutes on a standard 110-volt outlet and has a 150-200 miles range on a single charge," according to the company's press release.

That sounds amazing, doesn't it? And more that that, completely freaking impossible.

Consider these fun facts: 110 volts times 20 amps (typical household current) equals 2,200 watts -– that's about the draw of two good hair dryers. In 10 minutes, that equals 0.36 kilowatt-hours. Now let's look at the SSC: It's a super-slick, tube-frame sports car weighing 2,950 pounds. It would also have to be shod with foot-wide high-performance tires to accommodate its purported 208-mph top speed. So add 5% for frictional drag. It has a coefficient of aero drag of 0.348, which is to say, it's not very slippery. It has two 375 kW three-phase AC induction motors for a total output of more than 1,000 horsepower.

Tally it all up and you're talking about a car that would require at least 250 watt-hours per mile, estimates electric car guru Tom Gage, whose company, AC Propulsion, supplies core technology to Tesla, BMW and others in the field. In other words, to go 200 miles on a charge, the car would require a 50-kWh battery pack. In itself, that's plausible; after all, the Tesla pack is 56 kWh. What's wildly, insanely not plausible, and is in fact a monstrous load of fertilizer, is the claim that you could recharge such a battery in 10 minutes on household current. For that you would need to plug into 300 kilowatts, or 0.3 megawatt, roughly the equivalent of a small neighborhood substation.

"You'd have to have a pretty big cable," Gage says. "What they are talking about has absolutely no relation to household current. It's completely bogus." I repeatedly tried to contact SSC, with no luck.

Finally, I called Philippe Harari, chief executive of Sheffield International Finance Corp., a Palm Beach, Fla.-based outfit that is shopping around SSC's investor prospectus. "All I can tell you is that many people have doubted [SSC principal] Jerod Shelby," Harari says. "And they've all been proven wrong."

Late on Thursday, however, journalists received a cryptic e-mail from the company, with this passage: "There was a premature release that was leaked yesterday, if there were posts made based on this release, there is one major change that needs to be made. The 10 minute recharges are possible via a 220v outlet NOT a 110v outlet. In addition, there are a few new items in this official release including an email address to register for our media event. I apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused anyone."

All well and good. SSC seems to want to walk back its wild claim. However, 220V doesn't help much. At 220V and -- oh, let's say 30 amps -- that's 6,600 watts. You would STILL need nearly eight hours to recharge a 50kWh battery. The 10-minute figure is, let's say, highly fanciful. And, just as a PS: SSC promises the battery will last 20 years. Do I hear 50? Why not 100?

-- Dan Neil

Photo: SSC

Comments

[Darryl Siry]

Dan,

Thanks for writing this. When I saw the news I was itching to write a blog about it since it is so friggin ridiculous. The EV movement has always had an issue with credibility, and people like SSC making these claims just exacerbates the issue. And the nonsense comment from Philipe Harrari is laughable. Are we to believe that Mr. Shelby is capable of changing physics? Either SSC is getting scammed by their vendors or suppliers or they are doing the scamming themselves. Either way it's not good.

Darryl Siry

[Emil]

I too reacted in a similar way, but as for the quick charging the cost of the vehicle could easily include a garage battery based charging station capable of recharging the car when needed.

[John Ellis]

The population is so dumbed down that elementary physics is totally over the heads of 99% of most persons. But any twitbrain should be able to figure this out. A 110v circuit is maxed out at about 15 amps; that is why you can plug in no more than a 1500W heater. You are looking at 24hours of 110 volt plug in time for this monster.

Such wild claims are doing nobody any good and they are bound to hurt the plug-in image. Battery claims are still in the snake oil time period.

[Dan Neil]

To Emil --
You'd need a recharger the SIZE of a garage.
Dan Neil

[Allen Braun]

Good BS sniffing. Worse than that: most household 110 AC outlets are breakered to 15 A, so 1.65 kW (assuming the recharge is all alone on that circuit).

[tonyE]

Aaaah, you got tripped on the physics, not the logistics.

What the company "really" claims, is that for the million dollar price, it includes a crew so that every 20 miles you can stop the car and replace the precharged battery. It takes a minute to replace the battery.

Since 10 batteries are included, you got your 200 miles and ten minutes of recharging.

Now the problem is that with single crew, you end up going around in circles.

[fstephens]

Are there any simple formulas for estimating range, speed, charge time etc. given a battery pack's KW rating, the motors current draw and the weight of the vehicle?

[Bob]

fstephens -

Try Uve's electric vehicle calculator -
"http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/lab/8679/evcalc.html"

Not so simple to make an EV

[Bob]

Dan,

Check out Uve's main EV page, lots of good stuff. Engineer, home built EV.

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/lab/8679/ev.html

[Greg M]

How about using all the power available to your whole house? Most newer homes have 200 amp service. 240V x 200A=48KW. This means it would take over an hour using all the power that can be supplied to your house.

[toby]

I'm not that interested in how long it charges. I really don't think it's that important.

They said my iPod would take 4 hours to charge, it took less than 20 minutes, they said my cell phone would take an hour to charge, and it took 4.

What I do care about is if they are actually building cars that work, and run for reasonable workable amount of time. A little reporting on that part would be nice (HINT HINT).

PS Does anyone here remember all the crap Tesla got after their first press release? It went down quit like this.

[Paul Scott]

All of us in the EV community need to call these charlatans out whenever we see them. Philippe Harari, chief executive of Sheffield International Finance Corp., and Jerod Shelby are liars and should be castigated in the press for trying to swindle investors out of their money.

Thanks to Dan Neil for doing it with such good humor.

[Nick]

Same thing here. We should always wait and see when it comes to flashy announcements. Maybe their PR firm is old school and thinks razzle dazzle still gets people, unfortunately, it will have a contrary effect. Flashy catch-phrase just don't cut it anymore. In the meantime, it would be best to wait and see until these folks can better explain themselves. We need to see more than hear now days. It just defies our current technology state. We hope they don't bring a negative to the EV world.

[paolo]

While it's good to see a story on electric cars that doesn't talk about golf carts, it would be even better to see a story that isn't EV-hating/sneering on some level.

True, they shot themselves in the foot with the 110v line, but as Greg M points out above the entire supply to your house is significantly more than what comes out of a single point - you have to run refrigerators/cookers/aircon all the time, and they use a LOT more than what you can get out of a single point. A small fridge uses at least 1.5 KW/h, constantly, a cooktop 3 to 4 times that, a small room airconditioner at least 2 KW/h.... add it up and you get the point. The power that goes into your house is much greater than what you can get out of a single power point.

How come we don't see stories about the exhaust of gas cars being as bad as cigarette smoke? It is, you know. Gas cars cause cancer. How's that for a headline....

[Magic Dog]

If anything, Dan was being quite forgiving to these people. No way will that car go 200 miles on a 50 kWh battery pack. It'll need at least 100 kw in the real world, and maybe more. The company is b.s.-ing people about the recharge issue because they know that ignorance of basic electrical physics is rampant. I didn't know anything about it myself until I looked into buying a converted electric vehicle.

Tesla is a story in itself. Those people claim a range of more than 200 miles in a charge, but the Brit at Top Gear, the estimable Jeremy Clarkson, took a Roadster out on the track and discharged 80% of a 56 kWh battery in 44 miles, thereby calculating a racing track range of 55 miles. True, fuel economy always suffers at top speeds, but a 4:1 ratio? Not likely.

With Tesla, they base their range claim on a constant speed of 60 miles an hour, with no heating or air conditioning being used. In the real world, no one drives like that. God only knows what the day-to-day cruising range of the Tesla Roadster really is. My guess is somewhere around 150 miles.

Also, in the Top Gear test, they had two Roadsters just in case. Turns out that Roadster #2's brakes didn't work. Busted fuse. No built-in redundancy. My, but isn't that comforting? Imagine losing your brakes at 70 miles an hour and being told, "No biggie. Just a fuse."

Dan, go out and do a real test on a Tesla Roadster and tell us how it works. And do see about the systems, especially the brake-by-wire and steer-by-wire. Bad enough to lose the brakes because the fuse flew out. Now just imagine losing the steering for the same reason.

[P H D]

You can't something for nothing. Electrics MAY be feasible for in-town short trips and daily commuting, but we're going to have to have another technology for moderate trips and vacations. We already have the infrastructure to distribute natural gas nationwide. Conversion/original manufacture of compressed natural gas engines -- in large numbers -- would only add $200 to the price of a current-day vehicle. One of each type of vehicle in each garage makes the most sense.

[ling]

Let’s consider what’s possible versus what’s practical.
WHAT’S POSSIBLE:
The current state of the art lithium nano phosphate battery can accept ridiculously high charge rates. This isn’t the wimpy lithium cobalt dioxide based battery in your cell phone. A 10 minute charge is just a 6C charge rate (C rate is a relative charge or discharge rating relative to capacity). Some of these batteries can be charged even FASTER than that. Charging at such high rates does horrible things to cycle life – but it is possible.
The power output from a standard household outlet is relatively low. However, it is possible to have the wall outlet power an external battery pack that powers the charger. This external battery can be “slowly” charged by the wall outlet. When the car battery needs a 10 minute fast charge – the external battery pack can provide the energy. Assuming the same capacity external battery pack as the car battery pack – this is still just a meager 6C discharge rate for the external battery. Current state of the art lithium batteries have already achieved a 50C discharge rating – so 6C is not pushing current state of the art at all.
WHAT’S PRACTICAL:
An external battery is expensive. The battery is a significant cost item, having 2 is pricey.
Assuming approximately a 300V battery – it would require 1000 amps at 300 volts to recharge that battery in 10 minutes. A wire to carry that much current would be…uh…big.
Then again, this isn’t a practical car – so anything is possible.

[KenJr]

This is just another example of an outrageous claim being made in order to get immediate press coverage and free name recognition/advertising. Now they've got our attention, this article proves it.

On the other end of the spectrum, I just watched the Washington Post video review of the Tesla. Tom & Ray (Car Talk) also ran this car through its paces not so long ago on PBS. The Tesla is definitely for real. Sure wish I had >$100,000 in loose change, I'd buy one on the spot.

[wick]

And when are we gonna talk about 6kwhr X 10 hours which equals at least $7 of electricity per day X 30 days = $200 per month just for this pricey piece of crap. Battery life of 20 years, yeh right. Must be Madoff's relative selling this thing.

[Bob]

Ling -

It's not a wire, it's 4" x 1/4" copper bar - 1000 amp capacity used in plating facilities. You could do chrome plating on the side.

[JRL@SFO.USA]

Of course it's possible to defy the laws of science. They're just based on numbers, and numbers are merely theoretical.

The investor prospectus was written in the fact-free, science-free, faith-based era of idiocy, headed by (former) President Bush. In that time, mere trifles like REALITY and PHYSICS and MATHEMATICS had no relevance to SCIENCE. For that matter, SCIENCE had no relevance to anything at all.

Alas, we've now entered the "Bad new days", where reality intrudes on our wishes, and science remains the basis of sound engineering, and sound engineering remains the basis of commerce (except when marketers are involved.)

So let the marketers have their say. They'll fund the next energy bubble. Maybe some of the materials scientists will put that venture money to good use inventing/discovering high-energy-density, low-weight batteries. Or maybe they'll just have fun at taxpayer expense. Either way, it's all good.

[Bush]

Wow.
I need to get one from my 16 year old son.

[Andrew]

Magic Dog: The brakes do have redundancy. They did not fail outright. Stop spreading lies.

The car does go well over 200 miles on a charge, with air conditioning ON. The EPA has certified this (244 mile range). Stop spreading lies.

A normal car will run out of gas after 55 miles on a track if driven that way. Stop spreading lies.

As for shelby's claim, it is a white lie, and i agree it is disingenuous.

This is an issue of PHYSICS. At 220 volts, it would require 1400 amps to charge the car in 10 minutes if it has a 50kWh battery. There are no two ways about this. What kind of a house has 1400 amp service? 100 is standard for many homes, 200 is generally the most you'd have. And you can't use all your amperage for charging the car unless you turn all the power off to everything else in the house.

[Dave]

@Magic Dog

"True, fuel economy always suffers at top speeds, but a 4:1 ratio? Not likely."

Look up the relationship between power and velocity. Hint: there is a velocity cubed in there. Yes likely.

"Bad enough to lose the brakes because the fuse flew out. Now just imagine losing the steering for the same reason."

They didn't lose the breaks, just the break assistance. From caining it for lap after lap.

The steering on the Roadster is not power assistance. Tell me - how does a blown fuse affect a metal steering column?

[James]

"A normal car will run out of gas after 55 miles on a track if driven that way. Stop spreading lies. "

The Lotus Elise the Roadster is based on has double the range if you compare the energy contents of their respective "fuel tanks". The Tesla Roadster is not a normal car - it's supposed to be a sports car.

The Lotus has 10+ gallons of fuel on board. The Tesla has the equivalent of five gallons of gas, if said energy would be produced by the Lotus engine. The trick is that race-car engines are actually more efficient than people-mover engines because they are tuned for higher output with less regard for reliability. Increasing the compression ratio increases your efficiency at the same time, for example.

It's a testament to how little energy the Roadster actually uses, but also a sore reminder of how underdeveloped the battery systems are. Put the Roadster on an fast oval track and hit the accelerator. It will cover approximately 25 miles before the battery management system cuts in and reduces your power for the remaining 1/5 of the charge, killing your acceleration and possibly the top speed.

As the battery voltage drops, current increases to maintain the power and there's a limit to how much current the BMS can handle. In an actual race or a track event, you'd have no more than a handful of laps around a track before it's time for your 5 hour pit-stop.