5 ms·
Missing from the article: - Battery capacity: 1MWh [1] - Charging power: 6MW (assuming they charge the full battery in the 10 minutes mentioned in the article
by donquichotte 9y ago
Missing from the article:
- Battery capacity: 1MWh [1]
- Charging power: 6MW (assuming they charge the full battery in the 10 minutes mentioned in the article)
Unfortunately, I cannot find the article, but I believe I once read that charging the batteries that quickly caused problems with power grid stability, so they had "auxiliary batteries" at the ports that they charged with lower power, and then transferred the energy from those batteries to the ship batteries with high power, which effectively tripled the battery cost. [EDIT: the issue is actually mentioned in article [1], where they have two 410kWh shore charging stations]
[1] http://corvusenergy.com/marine-project/mf-ampere-ferry/ http://corvusenergy.com/marine-project/mf-ampere-ferry/
- Robotbeat 9y agoDepends. They can offset the cost of the stationary buffering batteries by using cheaper time of use electricity. I believe that's what Tesla does (when they can) with Superchargers. ...and this is /part/ of the reason why 7 cents per kWh for their Tesla Semi Megachargers isn't completely bonkers...
- toomuchtodo 9y agoTesla uses batteries at supercharger to avoid demand charges from spikes in power demand when vehicles are charging (load shaving).
- clort 9y agoThey don't need to charge the full battery in 10 minutes, since they didn't fully discharge it in the previous 20 minutes of cruising.. The article didn't say how long the service could be sustained without any charge but if the battery can be topped up at intervals so that the ferry can keep running all day until it recharges fully overnight then that would be a good result. Also there will be margin built in because it costs a lot more if you have to replace the batteries when they fall to 95% of the original capacity rather than 80% or less.