The present and projected performance and cost of double-layer and pseudo-capacitive ultracapacitors for hybrid vehicle applications

被引:22
作者
Burke, A [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calif Davis, Inst Transportat Studies, Davis, CA 95616 USA
来源
2005 IEEE Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conference (VPPC) | 2005年
关键词
D O I
10.1109/VPPC.2005.1554583
中图分类号
TM [电工技术]; TN [电子技术、通信技术];
学科分类号
0808 ; 0809 ;
摘要
The performance of carbon/carbon double-layer and pseudo-capacitive ultracapacitors are assessed based primarily on testing done in the laboratory at UC Davis. The useable energy density of commercially available carbon/carbon devices is between 3.5 and 4.5 Wh/ka. The corresponding power density for high efficiency (95%) discharges is between 800-1200 W/kg. The pseudo-capacitive devices have higher energy densities in the range of 10- 13 Wh/kg for constant power discharges less than 500W/kg, but the energy density decreases significantly at higher power densities. Projections of future development indicate that the energy density of the carbon/carbon devices will increase to 5-6 Wh/kg in the relatively near future along with higher power densities of 1500-3000 W/kg. In the case of the pseudo-capacitive approaches, the carbon/PbO2 device looks particularly promising from both the performance and cost points-of-view primarily because of its relationship to the low cost lead-acid battery. Costs of the carbon/carbon ultracapacitors are expected to continue to decrease from the present costs of 2-3 cents/Farad to about 0.5 cents/Farad. Further reductions in cost require a low cost carbon of $5-$10/kg. Comparisons of the costs of ultracapacitor and battery energy storage units for mild hybrid vehicles depend critically on the energy storage requirement (Wh) assumed for the ultracapacitor unit. If the storage requirement is less than 100 Wh, there is a strong possibility that ultracapacitors can compete with nickel metal hydride and lithium-ion batteries in the future hybrid vehicles.
引用
收藏
页码:356 / 366
页数:11
相关论文
共 20 条
  • [1] Amatucci G., 2001, P 11 INT SEM DOUBL L
  • [2] ANDERMAN M, 2005, P 5 INT ADV AUT BATT
  • [3] ANDERMAN M, 2005, P 14 INT SEM DOUBL L, P246
  • [4] BELIALOV AL, 1999, P 9 INT SEM DOUBL LA
  • [5] BURKE, 2004, P 4 INT ADV AUT BATT
  • [6] BURKE AF, 2001, EVALUATION IMRA PULS
  • [7] BURKE AF, 2003, FEASIBILITY STUDIES
  • [8] BURKE AF, 2004, TESTS SKELETON TECHN
  • [9] BURKE AF, 2002, P 2 INT ADV BATT C L
  • [10] BURKE AF, 2005, P 1 INT S LARG ULTR