Details about the new 30 kWh pack

[RegGuheert]

Is the 30 kWh battery the same chemistry or different compared to the 24 kWh ?

Totally different.

Since the new packaging does not appear to provide any thermal benefits over the old approach, it sounds to me as if the enhanced capacity warranty must be based on Nissan's confidence in the new chemistry.

Here's hoping the new chemistry is better both in capacity and durability!

 

[GRA]

Is the 30 kWh battery the same chemistry or different compared to the 24 kWh ?

Totally different.

Since the new packaging does not appear to provide any thermal benefits over the old approach, it sounds to me as if the enhanced capacity warranty must be based on Nissan's confidence in the new chemistry.

Here's hoping the new chemistry is better both in capacity and durability!

At least with 8 years/100k miles, the battery can be expected to retain 70% capacity as long as the average new car is being kept by the original owner, which is just under 6.5 years now. It's a useful improvement, equal to some of the German companies' warranties, if still less than Kia's. I find it hard to imagine there'll be many takers for the S now, but I've been wrong before.

 

[dhanson865]

Is the 30 kWh battery the same chemistry or different compared to the 24 kWh ?

Totally different.

Since the new packaging does not appear to provide any thermal benefits over the old approach, it sounds to me as if the enhanced capacity warranty must be based on Nissan's confidence in the new chemistry.

Here's hoping the new chemistry is better both in capacity and durability!

or the extra capacity reduces the number of complete power cycles per thousand miles and thus less complete power cycles per day assuming your driving habits don't change with the extended range.

 

[Stoaty]

or the extra capacity reduces the number of complete power cycles per thousand miles and thus less complete power cycles per day assuming your driving habits don't change with the extended range.

I don't think that would help my Leaf, since the battery aging model (which gives a loss of 23% for my Leaf vs. 24% actual loss) shows 62% of my capacity loss is due to calendar aging, 28% cycling loss, 10% solar loading loss. A modest reduction in cycling loss wouldn't help my Leaf much. Of course, hopefully the new battery chemistry ages more gracefully than the old.

 

[evnow]

Totally different.

I'm not so confident.

What if the chemistry is the same as '15 - but the packaging (including of a cell) is different. Essentially they combined 2 modules - finding weight and volume reduction. This way they could make individual cells bigger to get more overall capacity.

 

[RegGuheert]

Essentially they combined 2 modules - finding weight and volume reduction. This way they could make individual cells bigger to get more overall capacity.

I think it is clear they have done precisely that, as I stated on the previous page.

What if the chemistry is the same as '15 - but the packaging (including of a cell) is different.

But imagining the chemistry to be the same is where I got hung up:

How they improve the battery warranty at the same time is what I haven't quite fathomed, yet.

In other words, if you ONLY make that packaging change, then you can increase the capacity OR the durability of the cell (by using more/better separaters,etc.), but I cannot see getting BOTH 25% more capacity AND 65% more calendar life out of these cells.

The chemistry must also have important improvements to allow the warranty improvement. But that also begs the question: "If there is a new chemistry for 2016, why build ANY batteries with the old chemistry?" All I can come up with is that the old chemistry must cost less to make, allowing them to hold the price down on the "S" trim level by using that chemistry (and smaller cells).

 

[GetOffYourGas]

But that also begs the question: "If there is a new chemistry for 2016, why build ANY batteries with the old chemistry?" All I can come up with is that the old chemistry must cost less to make, allowing them to hold the price down on the "S" trim level by using that chemistry (and smaller cells).

Some other possibilities off the top of my head:
1) They already have the production line set up, and queued to produce these batteries. The supply chain for production of this sort carries a lot of momentum.
2) They have to continue to provide replacement batteries for the 2011-2015 Leaf. We know they didn't make the effort to get the new battery backwards compatible. Maybe they ran the numbers and figured it's easier to keep the old line running.

 

[RegGuheert]

Some other possibilities off the top of my head:
1) They already have the production line set up, and queued to produce these batteries. The supply chain for production of this sort carries a lot of momentum.

Agreed.

2) They have to continue to provide replacement batteries for the 2011-2015 Leaf. We know they didn't make the effort to get the new battery backwards compatible. Maybe they ran the numbers and figured it's easier to keep the old line running.

I still have yet to see anything different about the new 30-kWh battery. I thought perhaps there was some sort of cooling included, but I didn't see that in the video that drees posted.

Hopefully they will be done holding out on selling us the 30-kWh battery by the time I need one!

 

[evnow]

To give better warranty they don't necessarily need a different chemistry. They need more data and proof on how the existing chemistry i.e. Lizard is performing in the real world.

 

[Firetruck41]

To give better warranty they don't necessarily need a different chemistry. They need more data and proof on how the existing chemistry i.e. Lizard is performing in the real world.

I agree this could be the case, combined with expected fewer cycles, due to larger range. And part of the reason for the difference in warranty could also be, to provide more differentiation and as a "premium feature" for the SV/SL.

 

[RegGuheert]

To give better warranty they don't necessarily need a different chemistry. They need more data and proof on how the existing chemistry i.e. Lizard is performing in the real world.

It's certainly a real possibility.

 

[GregH]

Coooool. Nice to see the video and get some of the stats on the new pack! I wonder how much of the capacity increase is due to chemistry tweaks vs the slight increase in cell volume (at the expense of module packaging). Sheez, even the harness looks the same. I wonder if the new BMS software will spit out Gids with the same energy content per Gid we've grown used to? That would be what, about 350-360 Gids on a full charge? oooooo.....

That's going to be a tough choice when my lease is up in 8 months.. 30kWh SL or a new Volt2.0... Or maybe extend my cheap $236/mo lease a few months and get some good end of year deals on a 2016 (and maybe a glimpse of 2017 stuff)

 

[RegGuheert]

According to Nissan at the Franfurt Motor Show, the new battery has "revised internal chemistry" and "new electrode materials"::

The new sector-first 30 kWh battery is at the heart of the new LEAF 30 kWh which too makes its global debut at Frankfurt. Thanks to revised internal chemistry and new electrode materials, the new battery transforms the Nissan LEAF driving and ownership experience and reinforces its position as the most capable, practical and affordable electric vehicle in the world.

 

[dhanson865]

According to Nissan at the Franfurt Motor Show, the new battery has "revised internal chemistry" and "new electrode materials"::

The new sector-first 30 kWh battery is at the heart of the new LEAF 30 kWh which too makes its global debut at Frankfurt. Thanks to revised internal chemistry and new electrode materials, the new battery transforms the Nissan LEAF driving and ownership experience and reinforces its position as the most capable, practical and affordable electric vehicle in the world.

With all the bad information in articles I don't trust insideEVs about technical details unless they name a source that I can verify.

I do use them for tracking sales numbers, they seem competent at counting.

 

[RegGuheert]

With all the bad information in articles I don't trust insideEVs about technical details unless they name a source that I can verify.

That information is in a quote box in the article. It is written in a manner which indicates it did not come from the InsideEVs writer, but from Nissan marketing. I suspect it was on a placard at the show.

In any case, we now have that information from two independent sources.

 

[RegGuheert]

This article gives further details about the chemistry of the new 30-kWh battery in the 2016 LEAF:

By "bigger" we are referring to its capacity as the battery's physical size is exactly the same as the current 24 kWh. It is 21 kg (46 lbs) heavier and features carbon, nitrogen and magnesium in the electrodes to enhance performance.

Assuming this information is correct, does this imply they are moving from MNO to some other chemistry for the LEAF battery? I'm having trouble finding ANY information about nitrogen being used in Li-ion batteries... Perhaps the author confused Nitrogen and Carbon for Nickel and Cobalt in NMC.

 

[GRA]

This article gives further details about the chemistry of the new 30-kWh battery in the 2016 LEAF:

By "bigger" we are referring to its capacity as the battery's physical size is exactly the same as the current 24 kWh. It is 21 kg (46 lbs) heavier and features carbon, nitrogen and magnesium in the electrodes to enhance performance.

Assuming this information is correct, does this imply they are moving from MNO to some other chemistry for the LEAF battery?

I'm going to take a flyer and suggest that the article's author is confusing NMC (Nickel-Manganese-Cobalt) chemistry with "carbon, nitrogen and magnesium". Virtually all anodes to date have been carbon (solid or graphite), with the variation in the cathode (Lithium-Titanate-Oxide batteries are the exception). NMC would be a change from the LMO (LiMn2O4) chemistry used originally.

 

[RegGuheert]

For reference, here are the spider diagrams from Battery University for LMO (is that what we currently have) compared with NMC.

LMO:

NMC:

If this is a valid comparison, it appears the benefits of NMC are seen in terms of specific energy, life span and low-temperature performance with no obvious drawbacks.

 

[GRA]

Just reposting (from the Wiki) Charles Whalen's remarks about the makeup of the origjnal LEAF and Volt batteries:

You’re correct that the Volt’s and Leaf’s respective battery packs have nearly identical chemistry, both using a lithium-manganese cathode. They both have the same sensitivity to high temps. Out of all the various lithium cathodic chemistries, lithium-manganese is the most heat sensitive and has the highest and fastest rate of capacity decay and degradation at higher temperatures.

The Leaf’s battery cell is manufactured by NEC, is a pouch type cell with stacked elements, a LiMn2O4 cathode from Nippon Denko, a graphite anode from Hitachi Chemicals, a Celgard PP dry separator, and an EC type LiPF6 electrolyte from Tomiyama.

The Volt’s battery cell is manufactured by LG Chem, is a pouch type cell with stacked elements, a LiMn2O4 cathode from Nikki Catalysis, a hard carbon anode (which is more robust and has better/longer calendar life properties than the graphite anode in the Leaf’s battery cell) from Kureha, a Celgard PP dry/SRS separator, and a PC type LiPF6 electrolyte produced in-house by LG Chem.

 

[evnow]

My skepticism about new chemistry is because of what they talk about in terms of gen 2,

After 5 years - they get a 25% increase - and in next one year they will get the other 75% increase - to double capacity ?

Remember - when news of LG Chem vs AESC battery leaked out - the price was supposed to be 10% better for LG. There was no talk of 7% better energy density.