| |
The cost of portable power
(BU51)
Electrical energy from non-rechargeable (primary)
batteries is expensive in relative terms and its use is limited
to low power applications such as watches, flashlights and portable
entertainment devices. Cell phones, laptops and power tools run
mainly on rechargeable (secondary) batteries.
In this paper we calculate the cost to produce 1000 watts of power
for one hour (1kWh) from different energy storage medias. We first
look at primary and secondary batteries; then compare the energy
cost derived from an internal combustion motor, the fuel cell and
finally the electrical grid.
The primary battery
Figure 1 reveals the cost of energy using commercial alkaline cells.
The right column shows a lithium battery for still cameras and memory
backup.
It can be seen that larger cells provide a lower cost per kWh than
small cells. The energy cost from the AA is more than half that
of the smaller AAA. The C cell provides the lowest cost per kWh.
The D cell has gone up in cost because of moderate use. Advanced
systems, such as lithium, provide very high energy density at a
premium cost. The energy cost of the 6-volt camera battery is more
than ten times that of an alkaline C cell.
| |
Figure
1: Cost of energy obtained by primary batteries. The energy cost from
primary batteries is high and increases with smaller battery sizes and systems
with high energy densities. _______________ *The nominal
voltage is used to calculate the Wh. Because of falling voltage during discharge,
the actual energy is less than what is shown. |
Primary
batteries hold more energy than secondary batteries per size and weight. Operational
readiness, long storage and instant readiness are other benefits. Primary batteries
contain little toxic substances and are considered environmentally friendly.
The secondary
battery Secondary batteries provide far more economical energy than
primaries, as Figure 2 reveals. This analysis is based on the estimated purchase
price of a commercial battery pack and on the number of discharge-charge cycles
it can endure before replacement is necessary. The calculated cost does not include
the electricity needed for charging, nor does it account for the purchasing cost
of the charging equipment.
| |
Figure
2: Energy and cost comparison using rechargeable cells. Older chemistries
are generally cheaper in costs per kWh than newer systems. Larger batteries are
more cost-effective than smaller ones. |
Newer chemistries provide higher energy densities than conventional batteries
per size and weight but the cost per kWh is higher. This cost is, to a large extent,
governed by the number of charge/discharge cycles the battery can endure.
The low costs of nickel-cadmium can only be achieved by applying a full discharge
once every 1-2 month as part of a maintenance program to prevent memory. If omitted,
nickel-cadmium is on par with nickel-metal-hydride and lithium-ion in terms of
cycle life. Lack of maintenance would increase the cost three-fold. Environmental
conditions, such as elevated temperatures and incorrect charging, reduce the expected
battery life of all battery chemistries. The calculated cycle life is based on
best cases. By far the lowest cost per kWh is lead-acid for wheelchairs
and scooters. Running a laptop off a large lead-acid battery would reduce the
energy cost twenty fold. This, however, would be a hard sell. The
combustion engine Figure 3 compares the energy cost to generate
1kW of energy from the primary AA alkaline cells, a nickel-cadmium pack, a combustion
engine used in a midsize car, fuel cells and the electrical grid. The cost estimation
takes into account the initial investment, fuel costs where applicable and eventual
replacement of the systems.
| |
Figure
3: Cost of generating 1kW of energy. This takes into account the initial
investment, fuel consumption where applicable, maintenance and eventual replacement
of the equipment. The lowest cost power source is the utility; the most expensive
is primary batteries. |
The fuel cell The fuel cell offers the most effective means
of generating electricity but is expensive in terms of cost per kWh. Fuel cells,
as a battery replacement, will only become economically viable once such units
are available in compact design at a reasonable price. Fuel cells for
stationary applications are still more expensive than diesel. The least viable
application in terms of cost is fuel cells for vehicles. The internal combustion
motor, as we know it today, is hard to beat. According to the US Department of
Energy, hydrogen is four times as expensive as gasoline and the fuel cell is ten
times as expensive to build as a gasoline engine. Incentives other than cost may
be needed to entice motorists to switch to the environmentally friendly fuel cell.
The lowest cost per kWh is electricity from the grid. The energy can be generated
in remote locations. The transportation maintenance and costs are relatively low.
All costing information is based on current estimates and assumptions.
_________________________
Created: June 2003, Last edited: July 2003
About the
Author Isidor Buchmann is the founder and CEO of Cadex Electronics Inc.,
in Vancouver BC. Mr. Buchmann has a background in radio communications and has
studied the behavior of rechargeable batteries in practical, everyday applications
for two decades. Award winning author of many articles and books on batteries,
Mr. Buchmann has delivered technical papers around the world. Cadex Electronics
is a manufacturer of advanced battery chargers, battery analyzers and PC software.
For product information please visit www.cadex.com.
Click here
for a printer-friendly version
©
Copyright 2003 - 2005 Isidor Buchmann
| |