Aymeric Rousseau Argonne National Laboratory

1. Current and Future
Battery
Requirements
AYMERIC ROUSSEAU
AROUSSEAU@ANL.GOV
Argonne National Laboratory
Lemont, IL, USA
May 03, 2019

2. Battery Costs Depend on Volume, Material…
0
50
100
150
200
250
0 200,000 400,000
Cost,$/kWhUseable
Annual Production Volume, Packs/Year
NMC622-Graphite
85 kWhUse, $17/kg
Pack
Cell
Volume Impact
NMC622 – Graphite, 100 kWh, 85 kWh useable,
300 kW, 450 V from 120S-2P, 80% SOC raised in
30 minutes, Max. Current Density 4 mA/cm2
Source: BatPac, Ahmed Shabbir
Material Impact

3. … But Also on Energy and Power Requirements
One of the main objective of the US Department of Energy (U.S. DOE) Vehicle
Technologies Office (VTO) is to quantify the impact of its R&D on vehicle energy
consumption, cost as well as component requirements
The presentation focuses on energy storage:
– Evaluate the key figures and trends related to battery over time based on U.S.
Department of Energy (U.S. DOE) targets as a part of Vehicle Technologies
Office (VTO) goals to Benefits and Scenario Analysis.
– Demonstrate how large scale simulation is used to evaluate different vehicle
classes, timeframe and uncertainties in terms of battery performance targets
and costs
– Study the evolution of different performance metric such as battery power and
energy requirements, battery weights and cost over time across different
vehicle platforms and different powertrain options.
– Provide analysis of the different battery trend lines observed in electrified
vehicles in the market.

4. Large Scale Simulation Procedure
Study Conducted With Vehicle Simulation Tool – Autonomie
5 “lab years”:
- 2010
- 2015
- 2020
- 2025
- 2045
5 vehicle classes:
- Compact
- Midsize
- Small SUV
- Midsize SUV
- Pickup
3 technology progress levels:
- Low
- Medium
- High
3 powertrain configurations:
- Split HEV
- PHEVs (25/40/50 AER)
- BEVs (100/200/300 AER)
US
regulatory
cycles
Lab year : time frame for technology demonstration in experiments, prototypes.
5 year lag is expected between lab year and production year.

5. Vehicle And Components Improve Over Time
5
• Over 30 parameters identified in
vehicle model that can define
technology changes
• Forecast of technology
development from experts
• Uncertainty (low, med, high) is
considered in forecast

6. Autonomie Vehicle Models and Controls Developed
Across Powertrains Using Extensive Test Data
Models Validated within test-to-test variability
6
 All baseline models are based on test data.
 Control logic matches that of production vehicles.
 Dozens of vehicles have been validated using Autonomie library models

7. Performance Based Automated Sizing Algorithm
Ensures Fair Comparison of Technologies
 Automated vehicle powertrain sizing algorithms have been developed over the years for
multiple configurations to size the components to match a specific set of performances.
 The algorithms have been validated using specific vehicles
Main Assumptions
SizingAlgorithm
Sizing Validation
6

8. Vehicle Sizing Process
8
Motor sized for regen braking performance
Engine sized for acceleration, passing, grade
HEV Power Split Example

9. BATTERY MAIN ASSUMPTIONS
9

10. US DOE/VTO Battery Target Assumptions*
Lab Years 2015 2020 2030 2045
Technology
Progress
Ref Low Med High Low Med High Low Med High
Specific Power
(W/kg)
2750 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 5000 5500 6000
Specific Cost
($/kW)
20.0 20.0 18.0 16.0 18.0 16.0 14.0 17.0 15.0 13.0
HEV Battery Performance and Cost Assumptions
Lab Years 2015 2020 2030 2045
Technology
Progress
Ref Low Med High Low Med High Low Med High
Specific Power
(W/kg)
375 700 800 900 1000 1250 1500 1000 1250 1500
Specific Energy
Density (Wh/kg)
60 80 90 100 110 120 140 115 145 170
Specific Cost
($/kWh)
530 460 375 300 185 150 130 160 130 120
PHEV Battery Performance and Cost Assumptions
*Assumption values for Lab Years 2015, 2020, 2030 and 2045 shown only

11. US DOE/VTO Battery Target Assumptions*
BEV Battery Performance and Cost Assumptions
11
Lab Years 2015 2020 2030 2045
Technology
Progress
Ref Low Med High Low Med High Low Med High
Specific Energy
Density (Wh/kg)
189 189 222 256 255 298 340 298 319 340
Specific Cost
($/kWh)
270 180 165 150 140 120 115 120 115 100
*Assumption values for Lab Years 2015, 2020, 2030 and 2045 shown only
Long term targets for EV batteries calls for 80% increase in specific energy,
at 40% of the current cost.

12. IMPACT OF TECHNOLOGY CHANGES ION
ENERGY CONSUMPTION & COST FOR
MIDSIZE SEDANS
12

13. Technology Improvement Leads To >85% Battery Weight
Reduction And >67% Power Reduction For Split HEVs
Battery Pack Weight
13
Battery Pack Power
All simulation results represent Midsize vehicle class
The battery pack weight for gasoline HEVs
decreases by 69% to 85% by 2045 and by
72% to 93% for diesel HEVs.
The battery power requirement decreases by
about 46% to 67% for gasoline HEVs by 2045
and 45% to 72% for diesel HEVs.

14. 14
The battery energy requirement decreases
by about 18% to 28% for gasoline HEVs
by 2045 and 17% to 34% for diesel HEVs.
The batteries are about 30% to 35% cheaper
for midsize vehicle class compared to 2010
baseline vehicles.
Technology Improvements Leads To 28% to 34% Energy
Reduction And 30% to 35% Cost Reduction For Split HEVs
Battery Total Energy Battery Pack Cost (Manuf.)
All simulation results represent Midsize vehicle class

15. 15
The battery weight of both gasoline and diesel PHEV25 AERs reduces by 66% to 83% by
2045. The battery weight for both gasoline and diesel PHEV40 AER reduces by 58% to
80% by 2045 and the battery weight of both diesel and gasoline PHEV50 AERs reduce
by 59% to 80% by 2045
Battery Weights Reduced By 58% to 80% For
PHEVs
Battery Pack Weight (Gasoline) Battery Pack Weight (Diesel)
All simulation results represent Midsize vehicle class

16. 16
The battery power requirement for gasoline PHEV25 AERs reduces by 24% to 39% while the
diesel vehicles follow a reduction of 21% to 36%. The battery power requirement for gasoline
PHEV40 AERs reduce by 25% to 40% and the diesel vehicles follow a similar reduction trend.
The battery power requirement for both gasoline and diesel PHEV50 AERs reduces by 28% to
42% by 2045 compared to the baseline vehicle in 2010.
Battery Power Reduced By 24% to 42% For Different PHEVs
Battery Pack Power (Gasoline) Battery Pack Power (Diesel)
All simulation results represent Midsize vehicle class

17. 17
The battery energy requirement reduces by about 31% to 54% for both gasoline and
diesel PHEV25 AERs. The energy requirement reduces by about 30% to 56% for both
gasoline and diesel PHEV40 AERs. The energy requirement for PHEV50 AERs follow a
similar trend for both gasoline and diesel vehicles.
Battery Total Energy Reduces By 31% to 56% For
Different PHEVs
Battery Total Energy (Gasoline) Battery Total Energy (Diesel)
All simulation results represent Midsize vehicle class

18. 18
The battery pack cost of both gasoline and diesel PHEV25 AERs reduce by about 80% -
88% by 2045. PHEV40 AERs follow a battery cost reduction ranging from 73% to 80% for
both gasoline and diesel vehicles and the battery cost for PHEV50 AERs reduces by 78%
to 84% for both gasoline and diesel vehicles.
Battery Pack Cost Reduces By 73% to 88% For Different
PHEVs
Battery Pack Cost (Gasoline) Battery Pack Cost (Diesel)
All simulation results represent Midsize vehicle class

19. 19
The battery weight for BEV100 AERs
reduces by 56% to 71% by 2045. This
reduction ranges between 57% to 72% for
BEV200 AERs and 58% to 73% for BEV
300 AERs.
The battery power requirement decreases by
about 23% to 39% for BEV100 AER in 2045
compared to 2010. This reduction ranges
from 27% to 42% for BEV200 AER and 31%
to 46% for BEV300 AERs.
Technology Improvements Lead to 56% to 73% Weight
Reduction and 23% to 46% Power Reduction For BEVs
Battery Pack Weight Battery Pack Power
All simulation results represent Midsize vehicle class

20. 20
The battery energy requirement decreases
by 23% to 40% for BEV100 AERs, 27% to
42% for BEV 200 AERs, and 31% to 47%
for BEV300 AERs
The battery pack cost for BEV100 AERs is
expected to decrease by 63% to 77% by
2045. This reduction ranges from 64% to 78%
for BEV200 AERs, and 65% to 78% for
BEV300 AERs.
Technology Improvements Lead To 23% to 47% Energy
Reduction And 63% to 78% Cost Reduction For BEVs
Battery Total Energy Battery Pack Cost
All simulation results represent Midsize vehicle class

21. 21
Battery Power and Energy Evolution for HEVs
Battery Energy vs. Battery Pack Power of HEVs

22. 22
Battery Power and Energy Evolution for PHEVs
Battery Energy vs. Battery Pack Power of PHEVs

23. 23
Battery Power and Energy Evolution for BEVs
Battery Energy vs. Battery Pack Power of EVs

24. Summary & Conclusions
This study assumes that the component technology targets set by US DOE will be
achieved within the uncertainly levels
 Additional vehicle technology improvements will result in lower requirements for
battery power and energy.
 Battery improvements will contribute to overall weight and cost reduction,
especially for BEVs.
Improvements expected by 2045 for midsize sedans are summarized below
 Ownership cost analysis was also carried out. A detailed report will be available
soon at https://www.autonomie.net/publications/fuel_economy_report.html
24
Battery
Power
Battery
Energy
Battery
Weight
Battery
Cost
HEV 46% - 67% 18% - 28% 69% - 85% 30% - 35%
PHEV 20% - 40% 21% - 42% 60% - 80% 73% - 88%
BEV 23% - 46% 23% - 47% 56% - 73% 63% - 78%

25. THANK YOU