Slashdot Mirror


BMW, Mazda Keen To Meet With Tesla About Charging Technology

PC Magazine reports that following Elon Musk's announcement that Tesla would be freeing for other electric car makers to use the various patents that the company has amassed, at least two companies — Mazda and BMW — are said to be interested in meeting with Tesla, for a very good reason: According to undisclosed sources speaking to the Financial Times, both Nissan and BMW would be interested in working with Tesla to craft up some universal vehicle charging standards. To quote unnamed official: "It is obviously clear that everyone would benefit if there was a far more simple way for everyone to charge their cars."

21 of 137 comments (clear)

  1. nissan or mazda? by Mishotaki · · Score: 4, Informative

    i'm confused.... is it Nissan or Mazda that is interested?

    1. Re:nissan or mazda? by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Probably confused as Nissan have their own EV, the Leaf. I wouldn't be surprised if Nissan jump on the bandwagon too and gobble up that fast-charging / battery tech ASAP; It would make the Leaf a usable compact car. Current 8 hour charge cycle and ~90 mile range on a good day is pretty limiting, especially for £25k for the base model.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    2. Re:nissan or mazda? by ShadowRangerRIT · · Score: 4, Informative

      Nissan doesn't have problems with charge times (at least, no more than Tesla). The base model takes 8 hours to charge from empty, but they offer a 4 hour charge option (that runs off the same Level 2 charging stations) and a Quick Charge option that gets an 80% charge in 30 minutes. Pretty similar to Tesla.

      --
      $_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
    3. Re:nissan or mazda? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Negative. Fast charging (CHADEMO) was in the Nissan Leaf since the very first model (2011 if i remember OK).

      And BTW, the charging on Tesla models is more than twice faster than the Nissan's simply because battery packs on any Tesla is at least twice as big ( 24khw Nissan vs 60/85Kwh on the Model S).

      So, no, the problem is not with the technology itself, but the the limited 24 kwh or less batteriy packs offered by other manufacturers of electrical vehicles. The bigger the battery is, the longer it will take you, the longer it will last in year, the faster it will be able to recharge.

      Some maths:

      24kwh pack at 2C charging =~ 50kw charging capability (CHADEMO).
      85kwh pack at LESS THAN 2C charging =~ more than 100kw charging capability (Tesla own's).

      Yo see, Tesla's approach is even more conservative

    4. Re: nissan or mazda? by red_dragon · · Score: 4, Informative

      The i-MIEV is made by Mitsubishi.

      --
      In Soviet Russia, Jesus asks: "What Would You Do?"
    5. Re: nissan or mazda? by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The i-MIEV is made by Mitsubishi.

      Whoops. Massive brain flatulence. Just shows what posting before caffeination can do to you.

      Mazda does have an EV though, the Demio. It's only sold as a hybrid in most markets, and sometimes labeled the Mazda 2. At least it's got a rotary, so it's not lugging a heavy powerplant around.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:nissan or mazda? by milkmage · · Score: 3, Insightful

      charge time might be the same, but Tesla owns RANGE.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T...
      The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) official range for the Model S Performance model equipped with an 85 kWh battery pack is 265 miles (426 km)

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N...
      The US Environmental Protection Agency official range for the 2013 model year Leaf is 121 km (75 mi) and rated the Leaf's combined fuel economy at 115 miles per US gallon gasoline equivalent (2.0 L/100 km).

      yeah, a Tesla also costs 4x more than the Leaf, but if others get onboard and develop a standard... guess what - that cost goes down

      Musk is a smart guy

  2. It's Nissan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    For everybody who's confused by the title like me, it's Nissan (not Mazda) in TFA.

    I wonder why no american companies are interested in cooperating?

    1. Re:It's Nissan by N1AK · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Because under the socialist Obama administration

      Thank god that free market, not socialist at all Germany is interested then *rolls eyes* Fuck me some of you Obama haters are retarded.

    2. Re:It's Nissan by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Never mind that, here in the USSA, despite the cries of "Double Taxation!" and "Highest Tax Rates Evar! Death Taxes!!!", if a decent size multinational is paying an effective tax rate higher than the guy who scrubs out their toilets at night, they probably just need to fire their accountants.

    3. Re:It's Nissan by Rei · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The real problem is that they didn't standardize on high-power charging in the beginning. We got the SAE J1772 standard, but it tops out at 80 amps / 240V. Europe's a mess as it stands, with a bunch of competing connectors implementing IEC 62196-1, and again, no solid fast charging standard. This leaves everyone to have to pick and choose their own high-power coupler. It's idiotic, they should have standardized from the beginning, it's obvious that it's going to be a necessity for mainstreaming EVs. 20 minutes to charge your car while you take a lunch stop, fine. 3 hours to charge your car while you take a lunch stop, Not Fine(TM). Until you get fast charging standardized and available, the majority of consumers will continually hold that up as their excuse as to why they can't buy an EV (there's often some big holes in that logic, but that's neither here nor there).

      There are a couple other possibilities for mainstreaming other than fast charging, but I don't see them around the corner. One is to have a whole day's worth of driving - or most of a day's worth (enough that if you charge during your meal / rest breaks, it's a full day) - on a single charge. In such a case, the upper end of J1772 is enough for all but very high consumption vehicles to charge you to full while you sleep, so you can drive another full day immediately after. But that requires multi-hundred kilowatt hour packs which would weight 1-2 tons and cost $50-100k with today's tech. It'll happen eventually, batteries double in energy density every 8 years or so (price drops happen too but they're more irregular and harder to predict) - but we're not to the point yet where this would be a viable option. The other option is making available self-steering genset trailers, like the AC Propulsion Long Ranger. It seems such an obvious stopgap - you've got a generator when you need it but don't have to drag it around when you don't, you could buy them, rent them, share them, etc. Your car uses gasoline on those occasional long trips but otherwise is pure electric with none of the problems of PHEVs. Unfortunately no major automakers are pursuing this approach (I'm not really sure why, the Long Ranger got good reviews). As it stands, the majority of manufacturers are pursuing some form of fast charging, but as mentioned, the standards situation is a mess right now. :

      And then there's the issue of how fast charging changes incentives. As it stands, utilities *love* EVs because it lets them sell more power for rather little added infrastructure cost, they're largely stable nighttime loads. But once you start getting to 480V multi-hundred-amp daytime fast charges, it's just the opposite, that's horrible for them. It's possible to make them become once again something desirable for utilities by including a battery buffer inside the charger (trickle charges when not fast charging a car, then burst discharges), but I'm not aware of any fast chargers that come like that by default.

      The other option is to accept that disadvantage of allowing fast charging EVs in exchange for having EVs smart grid integrated, so that all the cars left plugged in during the day charge when demand is low and stop charging or even reverse flow during those brief peaks. It's possible to incentivize EV owners as well - let them pick at what time their car needs to be fully charged, whether they want to allow reverse flow, etc. The more flexible they are about timing, the more their car can wait to buy power when it's cheapest, and they could get a rebate on reverse flow power sold at higher prices during peaks. Such a system would work well, leaving owners with the ability to choose the balance between speed and price (even potentially to earn a net profit on their car if they're flexible enough), and it'd leave utilities with a nice smooth generation/demand balance, much better than today. Unfortunately, neither the grid nor current EVs are to that point.

      --
      Give a boy a gun and you arm him for a day. Teach him how to make a gun, and the whole metaphor breaks down.
    4. Re:It's Nissan by Overzeetop · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Never mind that, here in the USSA, despite the cries of "Double Taxation!" and "Highest Tax Rates Evar! Death Taxes!!!", if a decent size multinational is paying taxes, they probably just need to fire their accountants.

      FTFY

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    5. Re:It's Nissan by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Mostly because GM, Ford, and Chrysler are ran by some of the dumbest people on the planet. Which means we will get a standard that the European and Asian cars use along with tesla, and then something completely different from Ford, GM and Chrysler. Causing an even larger fall of domestic car buying with the executives having press conferences asking, "WE have no idea why people are not buying our cars"

      I remember the lots full of Escalades and other huge SUV's no one wanted a few years ago.

      At the same time that the big three have no idea what people want to buy, that incompatibility will hurt.

      But to their way of thinking, interface standardization is a socialist construct. Much better to invent a non-standard "freedom connector" that if you are lucky, you will dominate the market, and others will have to pay you royalties to use.

      Coupled with a non-trivial segment who wants to see electric vehicles fail, and their starting to sound silly sycophants, it is amazing that we don't have politicians trying to ban all EV's on patriotic grounds.

      As preposterous as that sounds, consider that "Heartbeat of America" (tm) Chevrolet were touting patriotism as a hallmark of their big trucks, and the present day efforts to ban Tesla sales in certain, states. There is enough money in the hands of people who would benefit at EV's failure to set the stage for some entertaining shenannagins.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    6. Re:It's Nissan by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Because under the socialist Obama administration, there's no point to innovating and trying to increase your company's profits: the taxman is going to take it all.

      Because under a Republican administration, there's no point to innovating and trying to increase your company's profits:

      With infrastructure crumbling, education failing and the middle class fading the environment that fosters capitalist success is fading away. Better to start up in a country like Germany that creates an environment where it's worthwhile trying to innovate.

  3. BMW already met with Tesla by brunes69 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Musk announced this days ago during a briefing call. BMW and Tesla are already talking. They were just at the plant on Wednesday.

  4. Re:Now we are arriving at critical mass by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 4, Funny

    if your battery goes flat a few miles from a charging station all you need is a state trooper

    Hah, finally an ethical use case for tasers!

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
  5. Standardization is critical by l2718 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    For wide adoption there needs to be a full market around electric vehicles: opportunities to build charging stations, sell home charging equipment and so on. Gas stations are possible since practically all cars use the same fuel, but also because they have very similar intake openings so that the pump can stop by itself.

    Tesla by itself is too small to set standards, so this is good news. It also shows how disclaim in patents helps: the benefit from a greater and more active market exceeds the payoffs from discouraging competition.

    1. Re:Standardization is critical by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 3, Funny

      Prepare to be burned as a heretic. Everyone knows that patents CAUSE innovation by forcing inventors to do the same mundane tasks differently. Plus, they help keep attorneys employed, which is vitally important. Disclaiming or sharing patent rights that you've already acquired is socialism, which is the ultimate evil.

  6. Thanks for straightening that out! by Two99Point80 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Now I'll be sure to remember how impractical my LEAF is as I drive to a morning meeting, then the mall for some mallwalking, then the free charging station near the gym for half a "tank" while I work out, then... Silly me, driving 2300+ around-town miles over the past three months for a total fuel cost of $9 (because one of my city's free charging stations is inside a parking deck) without ONCE realizing how impractical it was! :-)

  7. Re:Now we are arriving at critical mass by sjwt · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Gasoline gives you 12,200 Wh/kg
    University of California's currntly running a SC @ 39.3 Wh/kg So thats 310 times less, the gap keeps closeing.
      Worryed about the extra weight? Why not make your supercapacitor part of the load bearing structure of the car

    --
    You have 5 Moderator Points!
    Which Helpless Linux zealot/MS basher do you want to mod down today?
  8. Re:Generalizing your situation by Rei · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Leaf isn't designed to be a car for everyone. But it is a car that fits the usage patterns for a huge number of households, vastly more than its market penetration. For example, a large chunk of US households are multi-vehicle households, where one is used primarily as an in-town/commuting vehicle. Why, exactly, isn't a car like the Leaf appropriate for that?

    *No* car suits all needs. A vehicle that can be used to carry a load of gravel isn't going to be an ideal daily commuter. A car that's comfortable as a daily commuter might not be so comfortable on long trips with the kids. None of the above is probably great for the track. And that track car will suck off-road. And on and on. The fact that tradeoffs exist is why vehicles on the market are so widely varied. I don't get how you don't see that a vehicle like the Leaf fills a very common role in this diverse spectrum. No, it's not some universal, ideal all purpose vehicle. But there is no such thing as a universal, ideal all purpose vehicle. It, like all vehicles, is for its niche, and its niche alone. And despite how you want to portray it, it's not even that small of a niche, it's an extremely common one.

    --
    Give a boy a gun and you arm him for a day. Teach him how to make a gun, and the whole metaphor breaks down.