Design and Analysis of Aluminum/air Battery System For Electric Vehicles
Design and Analysis of Aluminum/air Battery System For Electric Vehicles
Design and Analysis of Aluminum/air Battery System For Electric Vehicles
Abstract
Aluminum (Al)/air batteries have the potential to be used to produce power to operate cars and other vehicles. These batteries might be
important on a long-term interim basis as the world passes through the transition from gasoline cars to hydrogen fuel cell cars. The Al/air
battery system can generate enough energy and power for driving ranges and acceleration similar to gasoline powered cars.
From our design analysis, it can be seen that the cost of aluminum as an anode can be as low as US$ 1.1/kg as long as the reaction product is
recycled. The total fuel efficiency during the cycle process in Al/air electric vehicles (EVs) can be 15% (present stage) or 20% (projected)
comparable to that of internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEs) (13%). The design battery energy density is 1300 Wh/kg (present) or
2000 Wh/kg (projected). The cost of battery system chosen to evaluate is US$ 30/kW (present) or US$ 29/kW (projected).
Al/air EVs life-cycle analysis was conducted and compared to lead/acid and nickel metal hydride (NiMH) EVs. Only the Al/air EVs can be
projected to have a travel range comparable to ICEs. From this analysis, Al/air EVs are the most promising candidates compared to ICEs in
terms of travel range, purchase price, fuel cost, and life-cycle cost.
# 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
0378-7753/02/$ – see front matter # 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 3 7 8 - 7 7 5 3 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 3 7 0 - 1
S. Yang, H. Knickle / Journal of Power Sources 112 (2002) 162–173 163
Table 3 Table 5
Composition of a good alumina [8] Comparable cost of aluminum production in 2001 [11]
synthetic cryolite (sodium aluminum fluoride). The molten 2.1.1.4. Electrolytic refining [8]. The Hall–Herout process
solution is contained in reduction cells or pots which are cannot ensure purity higher than about 99.9%; other
lined at the bottom with carbon (the cathode) and are techniques were therefore required when an extremely
connected in an electric series called a potline. Inserted high purity was desired.
into the top of each pot are carbon anodes, the bottoms of The principle of electrolytic refining, as described by
which are immersed in the molten solution. Betts in 1905, is still in use today. It is based on the use
The passage of an electric current causes the oxygen from of a bath containing three layers. The bottom of the cell,
the alumina to combine with the carbon dioxide gas. The which is a carbon anode, as well as its sides which are
remaining molten metallic aluminum collects at the cathode nonconductors of electricity, are covered with a dense layer
at the bottom of the pot. Periodically, it is siphoned off and of aluminum–copper alloy. Upon this layer rests another
transferred to large holding furnaces. Impurities are layer of electrolyte, which contains aluminum cations. The
removed, alloying elements added and the molten aluminum density of this layer is slightly below that of the aluminum–
is cast into ingots. The material and energy consummations copper alloy but above that of aluminum itself. Finally,
are listed in Table 4 [8]. covering these is a third layer, which is pure refined serving
A good portion of the metallic impurities present in the as the cathode. The metal may attain a purity of 99.995%.
raw materials, especially Fe, Si, Ti, V, and Mn, may also be The material and energy consummations are shown in
found in the aluminum. That is why the raw materials should Table 6 [8].
be prepared in as pure a state as possible. As a rule, the metal The cost of 1 kg of refined aluminum can be estimated as
is 99.6–99.8% pure. following:
The cost of aluminum (99.9% grade) can be estimated as refined aluminum cost
following:
¼ aluminum cost ð99:9% gradeÞ
aluminum ð99:9% gradeÞ cost þ electricity cost þ other material costs:
¼ alumina cost þ electricity cost According to Table 6, aluminum (99.9% grade) cost is
þ anode material cost þ cryolite cost: US$ 1.25/kg-Al and the electricity cost to refine 1 kg of
aluminum is US$ (18 0:06) ¼ US$ 1.08.
From Table 4, the electricity cost is US$ 0.06/kWh in the
Total cost of refined aluminum ð99:995% gradeÞ
USA and the production cost of alumina/kg-metal is about
US$ 0.30 [11]. ¼ US$ ð1:25 þ 1:08Þ ¼ US$ 2:33=kg-metal:
Total cost of aluminum/kg is about US$ (ð0:06 15Þþ
0:30) ¼ US$ 1.20 (excluding the cost of anode material and 2.1.2. Recycled fuel cost estimation
cryolite); this value approximately equals the cost listed in In an Al/air battery system, the anode used is of high
Table 5 (world wide average US$ 1.25/kg-metal). purity (99.995%) with a small amount of alloy elements that
Table 4 Table 6
Material and energy consumption of production for 1 kg of aluminum Material and energy consumption for production of 1 kg of refined
(99.9%) [8] aluminum (99.99%) [8]
Table 8
Thermodynamic properties of various chemicals [13]
Al(s) 0
Al(OH)3 1272.8a
Al2O3 1669.8
H2O 241.8
O2 0
Fig. 1. Refined aluminum production process. a
Source: [14].
Table 7
Estimated cost of anode materials from electrolytic refining and recycled
from Al/air EVs
Decomposition of 0.8 mol Al(OH)3 needs 260.2 kJ total cycle efficiency including recycle for the Al/air EVs in
energy to decompose into 0.4 mol of Al2O3. the steady state of (0:315 0:64) 20.2%.
3. The heat of reaction from Al2O3 to Al: From these efficiency calculations we construct Fig. 4. It
must be noted that, here the anode energy density of 564 kJ/
Al2 O3 ! 2Al þ 32 O2
mol (5.8 kWh/kg-Al, projected techniques; see Section 3) is
The heat of above reaction is 1669.8 kJ/mol. Electro- assumed. If the anode energy density of 418 kJ/mol
lyzing 0.4 mol Al2O3 needs 667.92 kJ in theory to (4.3 kWh/kg-Al, present techniques; see Section 3) is used
produce 0.8 mol of aluminum. Actually [8] industry uses in the calculation, the fuel energy efficiency in this cycle is
15 kWh to produce 1 kg of aluminum. Therefore, about 15%.
industry would use 1166 kJ to produce 0.8 mol alumi-
num.
4. Unused aluminum to anode plate: aluminum requires 3. Battery system analysis
only 26 kJ/mol to melt. So the energy requirement of
melting unused 0.2 mol Al is 5.2 kJ. 3.1. Cell performance model
2.2.2.2. Actual efficiency. From Fig. 3, the actual total where a ¼ V0 ; V0 is open circuit potential of the cell; r is the
energy required for recycling is made up of the three resistivity of electrolyte.
components the previous section (260:2 þ 1166 þ 5:2). The parasitic current is modeled as follows:
The total energy used is 1431.4 kJ. The energy efficiency
ip ¼ ip0 þ mi (2)
for regeneration and recycle is the energy produced from the
battery (451 kJ) divided by the energy required for recycle Eq. (1) can be rewritten as
(1431 kJ) or 31.5%.
V b c d
A battery efficiency of 0.8, and motor/transmission effi- 2
¼1þ ðirÞ þ ðirÞ þ ðirÞ3 (3)
ciency of 0.8, results in the EVs operating efficiency of V0 a a a
(0:8 0:8 100) 64%. These factors result in an actual
The power density is
Pd ¼ Vi (4)
Table 9
Parameters for calculating present and projected Al/air battery character-
istics at 1.0 M aluminate, 4N NaOH and 60 8C [12] (see Eqs. (1) and (2))
Fig. 7. Present voltage and power density characteristics for an Al/air cell with inter-electrode gap of 2 mm, and 1.0 M aluminate concentration at 60 8C.
168 S. Yang, H. Knickle / Journal of Power Sources 112 (2002) 162–173
Fig. 8. Energy density for the present stage Al/air cell at 60 8C. Fig. 11. Energy density for the projected Al/air cell characteristics at
60 8C.
Fig. 9. Projected voltage and energy density characteristics for an Al/air 3.2.2. Mass distribution and volume of Al/air battery
cell with an inter-electrode gap of 2 mm, and 1.0 M aluminate
system
concentration at 60 8C.
The mass distribution and volume of the Al/air battery
system are shown in Figs. 13 and 14. It can be seen from
Fig. 10. Projected voltage and power density characteristics for an Al/air cell with inter-electrode gap of 2 mm, and 1.0 M aluminate concentration at 60 8C.
S. Yang, H. Knickle / Journal of Power Sources 112 (2002) 162–173 169
Table 10
Present and projected battery characteristics
Fig. 14. Mass distribution of a fully fueled Al/air battery system (projected).
Peak power ¼ 34:8 kW, total mass ¼ 240 kg, total volume ¼ 329 l.
Fig. 12. Effect of power density on mass and volume of the battery
system.
Fig. 15. Cost distribution of a fully fueled Al/air battery system (2001
US$) (present characteristics). Peak power ¼ 34:8 kW, total cost ¼ US$
1120.
this value and are not used in our analysis). The cost of Al/air Table 11
battery is much less than the cost of the present fuel cell Manufacturing cost allocation by group and subgroup for ICEs [22]
stack (US$ 1219/kW) [18]. Vehicle group and subgroup Share of vehicle cost (%)
Group Subgroup
Table 12
Basic specifications of EVs analyzed
speed are assigned, the mass, volume and cost of the battery previous paragraph and some are set as default parameters,
system can be calculated (assuming the battery system to the such as energy density of aluminum anode, peak power/m2 of
traction motor efficiency of 0.85). the battery, concentration of electrolyte, and various material
The main choices in the power train design are dependent costs, etc. once the required parameters are set, then we can
upon the type of motor and controller to use. We analyzed perform battery calculation and cost analysis using the battery
the production of electric traction motor and controls under a physical model and cost program. The battery mass to vehicle
high volume production scenario. We assumed an induction mass ratio is confined to 0.2–0.3, which is generally accepted
motor in our cost analysis presented in this paper. The motor value. The output parameters are battery mass, vehicle mass,
costs US$ 17/kW and the controller US$ 45.50/kW [22]. battery manufacture cost (BMC) and vehicle manufacture
For the life-cycle cost analysis, the ICE car purchase price cost (VMC) and various cost related items.
is set at US$ 15,500. The fuel economy for ICEs is about
30 mpg [25]. Both ICEs and EVs are assumed to have a life 4.4. Specifications and cost allocations of vehicles
of 12 years and a range of 17,600 km per year. The total life- analyzed
cycle cost for the EVs or ICEs are calculated by adding up
the annualized initial user’s cost fuel cost and non fueling Table 12 indicates the basic specifications of vehicles
cost such as maintenance cost, tire replacement cost, insur- analyzed. The peak power to vehicle mass including 136 kg
ance cost, cathode replacement cost, and other cost. These of payload is kept at about 33 W/kg. Compared with lead/
are converted to annual cost/km. acid and NiMH EVs. Al/air EVs have less vehicles mass,
much higher battery capacity (at least 10 times that of lead/
4.3. Cost analysis procedures acid and 6 times that of NiMH). The projected improvement
of Al/air battery characteristics is due to the improvements
The schematic flow diagram of Fig. 17 describes the main of aluminum anode energy density from 4.3 to 5.8 kWh/kg
program for the EVs powered by the Al/air battery. The main and battery peak power from 6.0 to 7.6 kW/m2, thus the
input parameters are peak power of traction motor to vehicle resulting vehicles mass is lowered without sacrifice of the
mass (PWR), normal power, and by assuming the peak power battery capacity and vehicle range. The initial mass of the
of traction motor, we can calculate the vehicle mass. Other lead/acid and NiMH vehicles is quite heavy due to the initial
input parameters associated with vehicle and battery mass and high mass of the batteries of both these vehicles. The pro-
cost calculation are not shown here, some of them are stated in jected lead/acid and NiMH have battery mass comparable
Table 13
Cost allocation for EVs (%)
Common components and assembly 55.3 58.6 57.5 79.4 33.6 62.8
EV power train 28.1 25.6 23.0 7.7 13.1 6.1
Battery pack 14.5 13.6 17.3 10.6 52.0 29.3
Subsystem premiums 2.0 2.2 2.2 2.3 1.3 1.8
Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00
a
Data predicted for 2000 [22].
172 S. Yang, H. Knickle / Journal of Power Sources 112 (2002) 162–173
Table 14 5. Summary
Cost ratios of Al/air, lead/acid, and NiMH EVs in comparison to ICEs
Items Al/air Lead/acida NiMHa The cost of aluminum as an anode can be as low as US$
1.1/kg as long as the reaction product is recycled. The total
Present Projected
fuel efficiency during the cycle process in an Al/air EVs can
Price ratio 1.3 1.25 1.25 1.9 be 15% (present stage) or 20% (projected), comparable to
Fuel cost ratio 1.35 1.01
that of ICEs. The battery energy density is 1300 Wh/kg
Life-cycle cost 1.22 1.14 1.2 1.68
per km ratio (present) or 2000 Wh (projected), far better than other
Estimated range 400b 400b 130 180 electrochemical couples shown in Table 1. The cost of
a
the battery system chosen is US$ 30/kW (present) or US$
Data predicted for 2000 [22].
b 29/kW (projected), far less than the present hydrogen fuel
Battery has enough aluminum anodes to have a range 1600 km
requiring four stops for addition of water. cell stack (US$ 1219/kW).
We have conducted Al/air EVs life-cycle analysis and
(slightly less than) with aluminum/air, but sacrifice some of compared the results with that of lead/acid and NiMH EVs.
the battery capacity reducing the range of these vehicles. Only the Al/air vehicles can be projected to have a travel
Also, only the projected Al/air battery EVs have a vehicle range comparable to ICEs. The purchase price of aluminum/
mass (1088 kg) similar to the average ICEs mass and a range air EVs would cost 25–30% more than the present ICEs. With
(400 km) comparable with that of the ICEs. the decrease in cost of the power train, the purchase price will
Table 13 indicates the costs allocations of vehicle com- likely drop farther. The fuel cost of the Al/air EVs at present is
ponents for each type of EVs. Compared with ICEs, the Al/ 35% higher than that of ICEs. But with improvement in
air EVs common components and assembly costs are battery characteristics, the fuel cost would fall to a level
assumed to be 55.3%. This is much less than that of ICEs almost equal to that of ICEs. The life-cycle cost of Al/air EVs
at 78–80% due to the higher cost of the EV power train and is 14% (projected) and 22% (present) higher than that of
battery pack. Compared with the lead/acid and NiMH EVs, ICEs. Only the lead/acid EVs life-cycle cost is comparable to
the Al/air EVs power train cost decreases from 28.1 to Al/air EVs life-cycle cost while the NiMH EVs is the highest.
25.6%, a difference of only 2.5%, while the latter two types From this analysis Al/air EVs are more promising candi-
of EVs power train cost decreases from 23.0 to 7.7% and dates, than lead/acid or NiMH, for replacement of ICEs
from 13.1 to 6.1%. In our calculation, we keep the cost of the considering travel range, purchase price, fuel cost, and life-
power train of EVs constant, and in the lead/acid and NiMH cycle cost.
EVs calculation (Vyas et al. [22]) the power train and battery
pack cost are both projected to decrease.
Acknowledgements
4.5. Purchase price and life-cycle costs
This project is partially funded through the RI State
Table 14 compares various cost ratios for the three EVs of Energy Office.
Al/air, lead/acid and NiMH to those of ICEs. The calculated
results for the actual purchase price and life-cycle cost are
not shown in Table 14 but are summarized here. The References
purchase price for ICEs is US$ 15,500 and for that of the
Al/air EVs is US$ 20,150 (present techniques) or US$ [1] D. Linden, Handbook of Batteries and Fuel Cells, NAVSEA Battery
19,300 (projected techniques). Fuel cost for ICEs is Document (NAVSEA-AH-300), 1st ed., McGraw-Hill, New York,
3.1 cents/km and for Al/air EVs is 4.2 cents/km (present) 1993.
or 3.2 cents/km (projected). Life-cycle cost per kilometer for [2] T.A. Dougherty, A.P. Karpinski, J.H. Stannard, W. Halliop, S.
Warner, Aluminum–air: status of technology and applications, in:
ICEs is about 22.0 cents/km and for Al/air EVs is about Proceedings of the Conference on Intersociety Energy Conversion
26.8 cents/km (present) or 25 cents/km (projected). Engineering, IEEE V2 (1996) 1176–1180.
From the above results and Table 14, we can see that, the [3] A.R. Despic, D.M. Drazic, P.M. Milovan, Electrochemically active
purchase price of Al/air EVs is 25–30% higher than the ICEs. aluminum alloy, the method of its preparation and use, US Patent
This value is almost equal to that of lead/acid EVs, and is lower 4,098,606 (1978).
[4] B.B. Jovanovic, A.R. Despic, D.M. Drazic, Electrochemically active
than that of NiMH EVs. At the present stage of development, aluminum alloy and composite, US Patent 4,288,500 (1981).
fuel cost of Al/air EVs would be 35% higher than that of ICEs. [5] P.W. Jeffrey, W. Halliop, F.N. Smith, Aluminum anode alloy, US
But with the improvement of battery characteristics (projected Patent 451,086 (1988).
battery aluminum anode characteristics), the fuel cost would [6] J.A. Hunter, G.M. Scamans, W.B. O’Callaghan, Aluminium
decrease to a value comparable to that of ICEs. Life-cycle cost batteries, Alcan International Limited, Montreal, CA, US Patent
4,942,100 (1990).
of Al/air EVs would be 14 and 22% higher than that of ICEs. [7] Z. Solomon, C.C. Norman, R.M. Mazgaj, Aluminum-consuming
These life-cycle costs are similar to lead/acid EVs and much fluidized-bed anodes, J. Electrochem. Soc. 137 (6) (1990) 1851–
lower than that of NiMH EVs. 1856.
S. Yang, H. Knickle / Journal of Power Sources 112 (2002) 162–173 173
[8] F.M. Herman, J.M. John Jr., F.O. Donald, S. Anthony (Eds.), [18] K.S. Jeong, B.S. Oh, Fuel economy and life-cycle cost analysis
Aluminum and Aluminum Alloys, Encyclopedia of Chemical of a fuel hybrid vehicle, J. Power Sources 5 (1) (2002) 58–
Technology, 2nd ed., vol. 1, Wiley, New York, 1963. 65.
[9] http://www.eaa.net/pages/material/production.html, 2001. [19] A.K. Shukla, A.S. Arico, V. Antonucci, An appraisal of electric
[10] http://www.minerals.org.au/pages/page3_34.asp, 2001. automobile power sources, Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 5 (2)
[11] http://www.indianinfoline.com/sect/alum/ch07.html, 2001. (2001) 137–155.
[12] E. Behrin, R.L. Wood, J.D. Salisbury, D.J. Whisler, C.L. Hudson, [20] I. Rade, B.A. Andersson, Requirement for metals of electric vehicle
Design Analysis of an Aluminum–Air Battery for Vehicle Operations, batteries, J. Power Sources 93 (1/2) (2001) 55–71.
Transport system Research, Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, 1983. [21] R.F. Nelson, Power requirement for batteries in hybrid electric
[13] M.B. Gordon, Physical Chemistry, 3rd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, vehicles, J. Power Sources 91 (1) (2000) 2–26.
1973, pp. 779–784. [22] A. Vyas, R. Cuenca, L. Gaines, An assessment of electric vehicle
[14] http://www.eiu.edu/eiuchem/GenChem/downloads/tutorial8.pdf, life-cycle costs to consumers, in: Proceedings of the Conference and
2001. Exposition on Total Life-Cycle, Argonne National Laboratory,
[15] D.W. Gibbons, E.J. Rudd, Development of aluminum/air batteries for Graz, Austria, 1–3 December 1998, SAE Technical Paper Series
propulsion applications, in: Proceedings of the 28th Conference on 982182.
Intersociety Energy Conversion Engineering, vol. 1, Atlanta, 8–13 [23] Economic Indicators, M&S Equipment Cost Index, Chemical
August 1993. Engineering, July 1981 to May 1982 and May 2001.
[16] R.P. Hamlen, W.H. Hoge, J.A. Hunter, W.B. O’Callaghan, Applica- [24] Recommended practice for performance rating of electric vehicle
tions of aluminum–air batteries, IEEE Aerosp. Electron. Syst. Mag. 6 battery modules, SAE J1798, January 1997.
(10) (1991) 11–14. [25] Effectiveness and Impact of Corporate Average Fuel Economy
[17] M.L. Doche, F. Novel-Cattin, R. Durand, J.J. Rameau, Characteriza- (CAFE) Standards, Committee on the Effectiveness and impact of
tion of different grades of aluminum anodes for aluminum/air Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standards, National
batteries, J. Power Sources 65 (1/2) (1997) 197–205. Academy Press, Washington, DC, 2001.