Charging Ahead With a New Electric Car
An entrepreneur hits the road with a new approach for an all-electric car that overcomes its biggest shortcoming
- By Joshua Hammer
- Photographs by Ahikam Seri
- Smithsonian magazine, July-August 2010, Subscribe
In the middle of 2007, Shai Agassi, a software multimillionaire turned environmental entrepreneur, was pondering how to make an electric car affordable to the average Joe. At that point, the all-electric vehicle—as opposed to electric-gasoline hybrids such as the Toyota Prius—was widely derided as impractical. General Motor’s EV1 had appeared in 1996 and, despite its cultlike following, the company stopped producing it after three years, saying the program was not commercially successful. The most advanced electric vehicle, the Tesla Roadster, was about to be released; it would travel some 200 miles on a fully charged battery, but at $109,000, the sleek sports car would be accessible only to the affluent; the company says about 1,200 of the vehicles are on the road. More affordable cars, at the time mostly in the planning stages, would be equipped with batteries averaging just 40 to 100 miles per charge. The power limitations had even spawned a new expression—“range anxiety,” the fear of being stranded with a dead battery miles from one’s destination.
Then, on a scouting trip to Tesla’s northern California plant, Agassi had an epiphany: “I scribbled down on a piece of paper, ‘batteries consumable. They’re like oil, not part of the car.’ That’s when it dawned on me—let’s make the batteries switchable.”
Two years later, in a cramped booth behind the exhibition hall at the Frankfurt Auto Show, Agassi was celebrating the payoff of that epiphany. The California company he founded, Better Place, had just announced its biggest deal yet: an agreement with Renault, the French car manufacturer, to produce 100,000 all-electric vehicles, or EVs, for sale in Israel and Denmark starting in 2010. Around the corner at the giant Renault exhibition, a garishly lit display showed a stylized version of one of Agassi’s “switching” stations in action: a robot with a steel claw extracted and replaced a model of a 600-pound battery from a cavity in the bottom of the vehicle in three minutes.
“We use the same technology that F-16 fighters use to load their bombs,” said Agassi, an Israeli-American, who got the inspiration from a pilot in the Israel Defense Forces.
If Agassi’s dream once seemed premature, concern about global warming, government pressure to produce zero-emissions vehicles, high oil prices and rapid improvements in lithium-ion batteries have begun to make electric vehicles look increasingly viable. By 2013, several models will have hit the road, including the Smart Fortwo, made by Daimler; the Nissan Leaf; the Mitsubishi i-MiEV; the Chevrolet Volt; and Tesla’s Model S.
Governments are trying to accelerate the shift away from fossil fuels. The Obama administration is providing $2.4 billion in research-and-development grants to electric car and battery manufacturers to improve vehicle battery technology. The Chinese have pledged to put half a million alternative-fuel cars on the road by 2011.
“In 2007 you could barely see an electric car” at the Frankfurt Auto Show, says Agassi, an intense 42-year-old, coolly elegant in a black tieless suit. “If you walked around talking about EVs, everybody assumed you were smoking something.”
Agassi’s business plan is unique among electric-car service providers. Others will make the vehicles. He will lease the batteries to car owners, and sell access to his switching and charging network. He expects to make his money selling miles, much as a cellphone-service provider sells minutes. Subscribers to Agassi’s plan would be entitled to pull into a roadside switching station for a battery change or to plug into a charging station, where dozens of other cars might also be hooked up, for an overnight or workday charge. Agassi estimates his customers will pay no more for battery power than they would spend on gasoline to travel the same distance. As business grows and costs fall, Agassi says, profits will soar. He says eventually he might give cars away, just as cellular-service providers offer free phones to customers with long-term contracts.
Subscribe now for more of Smithsonian's coverage on history, science and nature.










Comments (20)
Why should you charge an electric car after 100 miles or so, the cars we have now uses an alternator to charge the battery. An electric car has so many moving parts that can be used to generate electricity to charge the batteries. This will be a much better system, cleaner air no pollution on a bigger scale no need for the power companies to expand If not I bet that in a couple of years to charge your car will cost as much as a tank of gas now, because somebody needs to make money.
Posted by Nico on May 3,2012 | 09:51 PM
Why use batteries and all that why can't we use cars that run on any thing that u put in the gas tank, just put it in and the car will shred it. Put anything u like!
Posted by Mohammed on January 25,2012 | 09:46 PM
Replacing gasoline with electricity means you now have a coal or natural gas or nuclear car. Until you solve the electric power problem you only have a battery and have traded automobile pollution for power plant pollution. "Renewables" of biofuel, solar, and wind, don't provide good energy and actually cause environmental harm. We know about the coal, gas, oil, and hydrocarbon problems. Nuclear plants are unstable thus prone to accidents and produce long lived nuclear waste.
The LFTR (Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor), a Thorium fueled Molten Salt Reactor, is an excellent canditate for clean energy that provides a new type of nuclear with inherent safety, lack of waste problems, and low costs.
Posted by Jim D on August 16,2011 | 07:17 PM
still have a way to go on this
http://angellabsllc.com/
http://pesn.com/2009/11/18/9501588_MYT_engine_SAE_guest/
Posted by BRIAN on August 16,2011 | 05:57 PM
Agassi is a slippy con man. ere is why.
what he is doing is replicating the architecture of the mobile phone industry where you essentially rent the phone and pay small monthly payments.
Ultimately the merchandise sellers are in a much better position to rent you something rather that sell it to you.
Here is the proof too. In Europe with 3 phase 400 volt to most homes, you can now charge most EV car batteries to 80% in 10 minutes using lithium Ion.
He knows this, but still hopes to sucker governments into the "Pay as you go" model and so have a monopolistic stake i n the ability to get fuel for you car.
Posted by gedw99 on December 29,2010 | 04:55 PM
I applaud Mr. Agassi. I think it's great that there are people out there who are creative enough to come up with ideas like his. Sadly, I fear that his current technology will only be a brief stepping stone to something better, and that his critics are right. Too much resistance to what's new in a universe that's constantly changing (how ironic), and competing factions will make it a long, hard road.
Posted by Glenn McGrew on November 1,2010 | 01:53 AM
The business about natural gas being clean has some dubious aspects for me. the combustion products are still CO2 and H2O. Other, more noxious species are lower than from hydrocarbon fuels, it does not appear that the overall greenhouse footprint is that much lower than that of gasoline. In addition the extraction of natural gas can have strong adverse impacts on the environment [http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/24/business/energy-environment/24gas.html]
The notion that gasoline substitutes made from renewable resources have lower carbon footprints than hydrocarbons is also a matter of public debate [http://earth2tech.com/2010/02/03/epa-sets-rules-for-sizing-up-ethanols-carbon-footprint-controversy-rages-on/].
To me the bottom line seems to be that there is no way to save the planet without REAL changes in human habits. There is no free lunch.
Posted by John Barnes on August 5,2010 | 09:14 PM
Letters;
In the "Charging Ahead" story you mistakingly refer to the upcoming General Motors Volt as an 'electric plug-in/gas hybrid'. That is a misnomer that continues to be made by many media sources. The Volt is and all electric car. It is powered by an electric motor ONLY. Its difference to all other electric cars is that it has a small gasoline engine that powers an on board generator that recharges the on-board battery. (not unlike the gas powered generators that you see at construction sites, or in some back yards in case of power failure) The concept is simple, the engineering is ingenius.
I can't help but feel if this truly revolutionary car was forthcoming from some foreign company, it would be heralded for the remarkable achievement that it represents instead to be grouped with less practical, rehashed concept cars from other companies.
Posted by Michael J. Genzale on July 27,2010 | 12:54 PM
Forget batteries, hydrogen, and biofuels, what we need is beamed energy. People will buy a car and have a contract for the beamed energy. This will make the weight of a car much less and consequently use less power.
The beamed energy could be obtained from solar, geothermal, wind, and water power.
Posted by Cy Berat on July 16,2010 | 02:51 PM
They've been doing low-tech versions of the battery switcharoo in electric pedicabs in Asia, for years.
Posted by Jon Orff on July 9,2010 | 04:47 PM
I am staggered by the level of mis-information on this forum.
Isreal is not 100% fossil powered! In fact, Israel has the largest network of Concentrated Solar power plants in the world! Israel has made great strides in this arena- just in the same way that Germany has in Solar Thermal, and Germany and Denmark has in off-shore wind. Too much rhetoric, plenty of readers and participants, but not enough INFORMED participants on this site. Don't believe the lies- EVs, Wind, and Solar are here to stay, and as the fossil resources get used up, the economics will be staring us in the face- Wind, Solar, and EV's will be the obvious and economic choice. You wait- I can promise you this much- give it time. "Instant karma's gonna get you, gonna look you right in the face!" -John Lennon
Posted by Matt on July 7,2010 | 09:00 AM
Someone further up said an electric car powered by a coal plant is dirtier than a gasoline car- I couldn't disagree more. The figures are that an EV powered from electricity made from a coal plant is still only 1/3 as 'dirty' as a gasoline powered car. Several reasons for this- first the electric drivetrain is inherently more efficient- so there's less wasted energy. Second- A car's small ICE cannot be made as efficient as a large electric power plant- because it's just too cumbersome to add on all the efficiencies onto a mobile platform. Furthermore- if most of our day in and day out transportation needs were met by EV's, then all that is left is to switch the electric grid over to renewables, so the equation for 'greening' would become simpler- less tasks to tackle. Here in the USA, I am still scratching my head why we don't make better use of wind power- we have an abundance of wind and in most places they are finding it is about on par for cost as it is to build a new Natural Gas or new Coal fired plant. A drive through rural Wyoming is evidence as to just how elegant windmills are. A wind farm 'obstructs' the view yes, but not in an unpleasant way, whereas the several coal plants you see don't 'obstruct' the view per se (even though they are in plain view) but are much more unsightly! Windmills are advanced, elegant, cost effective, and the US has abundant wind, the necessary space, and the workforce ready and eager to be put to work installing them! We should be harnessing this source of power more than we currently are. T Boone Pickens has a great idea in switching natural gas over from electricity generation over to powering 18 wheelers- while using EV's for personal transportation... wind, solar, and nuclear for electricity and we're virtually coal and oil free!
Posted by Matt on July 7,2010 | 08:55 AM
The article wants us to think that powering electric cars with a fast-change battery will somehow reduce fossile fuel use in Israel. Electrical power in Israel is generated by burning 76% coal, and 24% oil and natural gas, or 100% fossile fuel.
The battery is only a very narrow conduit for storing and delivering energy. This must be generated elsewhere by coal, oil, nuclear, hydro, bio-fuels, wind, geo-thermal, solar-electric in order of decreasing contribution.These are the sources of energy, not a battery.
Posted by G Ronald Dalton on July 3,2010 | 04:13 PM
What matters is that the world is fast running out of oil, and its rising price will again be back up over the point where businesses close, unemployment rises, and terrorists become more wealthy. Never mind that our sloppy consumption of fossil fuels are heating up the only planet we've got and poisoning our land, rivers, oceans, air, animals, fish, birds, and us!
Every time an oppressively loud motorcycle or old car goes by I think "trade that noisy, filthy, greasy, engine in for a quiet electric motor with only 1 moving part. Instead of fighting with it, enjoy it.
The size and cost of batteries are already coming down and with gov. support, things will get better, even faster.
Posted by greg on July 1,2010 | 01:59 AM
My plan for an EV still uses oil products for fuel (electric companies use fossil fuel) But this is affordable to the public and requires no change in their habits. This is not totally green (but what is)
Cars=260 plus miles per gal.(unlimited miles)
Motor Homes=200 plus miles per gal.(unlimited miles)
Tractor Trailers=150plus miles per gal(unlimited miles)
Vechicles can easly be converted and production would be simple for new cars.
The infastructure is already in place. No changing stations, charging stations, or new type of fueling station
Posted by Vince Shumate on July 1,2010 | 04:30 PM
Think outside the box (or am I thinking inside the infrastructure) I have an ideal that will make a tractor trailor get 200mpg
Posted by Vince Shumate on July 1,2010 | 04:09 PM
Electric and Hydrogen cars look clean at first glance. The reality is that they are only as clean as the source of the electricity or hydrogen. An electric car charged from a coal fired power plant is dirtier than a gasoline car. hydrogen derrived from electricity is the same or worse as it takes more energy to separate & compress the hydrogen than can be recovered when consumed by a car. There is always the ultimate question--How many miles to the dollar all the way from factory to junkyard?
Posted by Bob Albers on July 1,2010 | 03:35 PM
Far from it. There are plenty of reasons to move away from petroleum fuel: CO2, NOx, and particulate emissions, while not the most widely embraced, are the most pressing.
Posted by Liz Kirchner on July 1,2010 | 02:42 PM
We should use natural gas for fuel for cars. It has less BTUs than gasoline, so the drawback is more frequent refueling, but the advantages are: it's cleaner, it's cheaper, and it's a domestic resource. If you use natural gas for home heating, you can buy a compressor and fill up at home.
If you think it doesn't have enough power, go to Tokyo and take a taxi (they have used natural gas fuel there for decades).
Posted by Jim Hobbs on July 1,2010 | 07:58 AM
There is nothing wrong with powering our cars with gasoline as long as that fuel is made from renewable resources.
The winning solution will be the one that doesn't require the consumer to change anything, requires the least new capital investment and makes the best use of existing capital investment, and is cheap. Electric cars satisfy none of these requirements.
For more details see:
alum.mit.edu/news/WhatMatters/Archive/200111
Posted by Frank Weigert on June 28,2010 | 05:29 PM