Towards competitive European batteries Batteries GC NMP 2013
Towards competitive European batteries Batteries GC. NMP. 2013 -1 Grant. 608936 2020 INTERNAL WORKSHOP 24 May, 2016, Brussels Deliverable D 9. 7 Testing and ageing protocols for second life batteries. Understanding degradation 1
INTERNAL WORKSHOP Brussels – 24 th May AGENDA 1. IKERLAN – Second Life Testing Strategy (45 min. ) 2. JRC – SASLAB Project. Second Life Testing Strategy (45 min. ) 3. Round table (90 min. ) 2
INTERNAL WORKSHOP Brussels – 24 th May 1. - IKERLAN – Second Life Testing Approach Ø Second life definition criteria Ø Applications for second life batteries Ø Profiles generation Ø Testing Methodology. Ø Pros and cons of the testing approach 3
2 ND LIFE DEFINITION CRITERIA WHAT IS SECOND LIFE? NO in a t r Ce r! e w ans DEPENDS ON BATTERY OWNERSHIP SCENARIO: • OEM • THIRD-PARTY • USER EOL CRITERIA: • SOH THRESHOLD • BATTERY FAILURE • RANDOM [1] Sathre, R. , Scown, C. D. , Kavvada, O. , Hendrickson, T. P. , 2015. Energy and climate effects of second-life use of electric vehicle batteries in California through 2050. J. Power Sources 288, 82– 91. doi: 10. 1016/j. jpowsour. 2015. 04. 097 [2] Saxena, S. , Le Floch, C. , Mac. Donald, J. , Moura, S. , 2015. Quantifying EV battery end-of-life through analysis of travel needs with vehicle powertrain models. J. Power Sources 282, 265– 276. doi: 10. 1016/j. jpowsour. 2015. 01. 072 4
2 ND LIFE DEFINITION CRITERIA Typical EV Lifetime in EU: average years < 10 year - < 10000 km/year 100000 km total. EV range: Nowadays ≈ 100 -160 km Modern EV (Chevy BOLT – Tesla model 3) ≈ 340 km Total number of FEC: < 1000 FEC for current EVs – < 300 FEC for Modern EVs for mo 5
2 ND LIFE DEFINITION CRITERIA Typical EV Lifetime in EU: average years < 10 year - < 10000 km/year 100000 km total. EV range: Nowadays ≈ 100 -160 km Modern EV (Chevy BOLT – Tesla model 3) ≈ 340 km Total number of FEC: < 1000 FEC for current EVs – < 300 FEC for Modern EVs for mo 6
2 ND LIFE DEFINITION CRITERIA WHAT ABOUT RIN? Internal resistance proved to be a critical factor! 77
SELECTED APPLICATIONS APPLICATION SELECTION: Theoretical Application selection criteria: 1. Reduced stress (compared to EV). 2. Low P/E ratio. 3. Low cyclability Preferred applications: capacity (e. g. UPS or spinning reserve). Applications analysed: Five main functions for ESS on stationary applications: • Energy time-shift (Arbitrage). • Capacity provision. • Regulation. • Peak-shaving. • Variability mitigation. 88
SELECTED APPLICATIONS APPLICATION SELECTION: Our Application Selection: Two applications were selected: #1: Residential demand charge management • Energy time-shift (Arbitrage). • Capacity provision. • Peak-shaving. #2: Power smoothing renewable energy integration: • Variability mitigation. Motivation: • Different levels of stress: Power Smoothing app much more stressful (C-rate & DOD). • Residential application similar to the approach by some manufacturers (e. g. Nissan). • Different scale applications: Residential vs Large Scale (utility scale). • Capacity provision applications not sufficiently stressful for lab testing. 99
SELECTED APPLICATIONS RESIDENTIAL APPLICATION: [1] A. Saez-de Ibarra, E. Martinez-Laserna, C. Koch-Ciobotaru, P. Rodriguez, D. -I. Stroe, and M. Swierczynski, “Second life battery energy storage system for residential demand response service”, in IEEE International Conference on Industrial Technology (ICIT), 2015 . 10
SELECTED APPLICATIONS RESIDENTIAL APPLICATION: 11
SELECTED APPLICATIONS RENEWABLE INTEGRATION: [1] C. Koch-Ciobotaru, A. Saez-de Ibarra, E. Martinez-Laserna, D. -i. Stroe, M. Swierczynski, and P. Rodriguez, “Second life battery energy storage system for enhancing renewable energy grid integration”, in IEEE Energy Conversion Congress & Expo (ECCE) (Accepted), Montreal, 2015. 12
SELECTED APPLICATIONS RENEWABLE INTEGRATION: 13
APP. PROFILE SYNTHESIS CRITERIA Real profile testing implies difficulties for Lab testing: • Testing profile interrupted for checkups (every month). • Unequal profile from month-to-month. • Difficulties to handle sudden cycling interruption. • Programming on Digatron entails additional limitations. Criteria for simplifying lab testing: • Simplification of Lab testing (one-month profiles) • Testing acceleration: o. Pauses reduction/elimination. o. Testing temperature 35⁰C. o. Considered C-rate range. • Coupling between cycling and calendar 1414
APP. PROFILE SYNTHESIS APPROACH: PAUSES ELIMINATION Stepwise approach – Renewable app. Profile: 1. Elimination of the pauses 2. Selection of one-month length profile 3. Introduction of reduced storage time in the one-month profile Resultant profile: 2 year operation cycling and 15% storage time on a one-month profile. Stepwise approach – Residential app. Profile: 1. 2. 3. 4. Magnification of the current rate. Elimination of the pauses Selection of one-month length profile Introduction of reduced storage time in the one-month profile Resultant profile: 65% of 1 -year operation cycling and 2. 5% storage time on a one-month profile. 1515
APP. PROFILE SYNTHESIS APPROACH: PAUSES ELIMINATION 1 2 3 1616
TESTING METHODOLOGY 17
TESTING METHODOLOGY Cycling with synthesized realistic application profiles. Cell-Level characterization every month. • Two different test sequences: Short and Detailed Checkup. • Performed at 25⁰C • Every 3 months Detailed-CU Sequence Short-CU Sequence 18
TESTING APPROACH STACK CONNECTION: Homogeneous Aalborg University Heterogeneous IK 4 -Ikerlan 19
TESTING APPROACH: PROS AND CONS Main Pros: • Stack testing allows increasing number of cells analyzed with fewer resources (testing circuits). • Heterogeneous and Homogeneous stack testing comparison. • Cell level testing for further ageing evaluation (comparison with stack performance). • Cells coming from different 1 st life conditions. • Two different second life applications were analyzed. Main Cons: • Stack testing implies dedicated resources (larger voltage, cell level sensing). • Difficulties with heterogeneous stack testing. • Results do not allow lifetime modeling on second life (when changes in the main ageing mechanism are recorded). • Accelerated testing profiles No specific evaluation of calendar life effect in 2 nd Life. 20
INTERNAL WORKSHOP Brussels – 24 th May 2. - SASLAB Project. Second Life Testing Strategy Ø Analysis Methodology: Environmental, economic Ø Testing Procedure: Experimental facilities and physical modeling Ø Performance indicators 21
INTERNAL WORKSHOP Brussels – 24 th May 3. - Round table Ø Second life criteria Ø EV battery disassembly and repurposing Ø Battery 1 st life history: What do we need to know? Ø Batteries 2020 and SASLAB. Synergies and beyond 22
2 ND LIFE DEFINITION CRITERIA What is Second Life? 23
EV BATTERY DISASSEMBLY AND REPURPOSING • How is the transfer from EV to the 2 nd Life application conceived? – Direct transfer (No BP disassembly) – Module level disassembly – Cell level disassembly • Are changes in the BMS needed? – Cell balancing – SOH monitoring – Others… [1] B. Gohla-Neudecker, M. Bowler, and S. Mohr, “Battery 2 nd life: Leveraging the sustainability potential of EVs and renewable energy grid integration, ” Proc. 2015 Int. Conf. Clean Electr. Power, pp. 311– 318, 2015. [2] E. Cready, J. Lippert, J. Pihl, I. Weinstock, P. Symons, and R. G. Jungst, “Technical and economic feasibility of applyinng used EV batteries in stationary applications, ” 2003. 24
EXISTING STANDARDIZED TESTING PROTOCOLS • 2005/64/EC: Type Approval of Motor Vehicles with Regard to their Reusability, Recyclability and Recoverability. • SAE J 2997: Under development. Scope: To develop standards for a testing and identity regimen to define batteries for variable safe reuse. Utilize existing or in process standards such as Transportation, Labelling and State of Health. Add to these reference standards the required information to provide a safe and reliable usage. Rationale: The potential for the state of health standards to help maintain the batteries in their best reuseable and compatable condition should provide for the best way to lower the overall lifetime cost of the batterieis. Transportation standards will be necessary anyway to provide for multiple location resources to repackage and have storage logistics. Labelling will be necessary to authenticate the State of health and compatability with traceability. • Others? 25
BATTERY 1 ST LIFE HISTORY: WHAT DO WE NEED TO KNOW? • Industrial perspective: – Does cell history have effect over cell ageing in 2 nd Life? • Capacity fade evolution. • Internal resistance increase evolution. – Can 2 nd life cells be used after reaching the “knee”? – Can cell failure be detected with Battery pack level testing? And at module level? – … • Lab Testing perspective: – – What is needed to design a 2 nd life testing matrix? Is cell SOH a relevant parameter for 2 nd life ageing evolution? Is cell history a relevant parameter for 2 nd life ageing evolution? … 26
BATTERIES 2020 ANDSASLAB. SYNERGIES AND BEYOND • How can the work developed in the Batteries 2020 be extended? • Is there any possible synergy between the two projects? • Is a bidirectional information exchange possible? • We should learn from the difficulties and the limitations faced in the Batteries 2020 project for further achievements. Let’s Keep Working Together!!! 27
- Slides: 28