Company That Developed Exploding Batteries for Phones Reveals Powerful New Energy Cell for Electric Cars

Matt Posky
by Matt Posky
company that developed exploding batteries for phones reveals powerful new energy

Earlier this week, Samsung’s SDI battery subsidiary announced a new cell designed for use in electric vehicles that will supposedly improve maximum range and possess a cutting-edge quick charge capacity.

Exhibited for the first time at the North American International Auto Show, the battery comes hot on the heels of Tesla and Panasonic’s own ultra-dense “2170 Cell” planned for use on the Model 3.

While Samsung didn’t elaborate on a specific testing platform, it claims the new battery should permit a range of 372 miles on a single charge, with an 80 percent restoration after a 20 minutes quick charge.

Korea’s tech giant also showcased an “integrated battery module” concept that, interestingly enough, makes use of the same cylindrical 21mm by 70mm format used by Tesla. This unverified tech is claimed to yield a 10-percent decrease in the number of units required, saving weight and offering better overall efficiency.

While Tesla makes its power cells in-house, Samsung plans to sell its new technology to “U.S. automobile startups,” meaning Lucid Motors and Faraday Future.

Still, the partially conceptual nature of the power application and the far-off mass production date of 2021 brings up a lot of questions regarding how convenient electric cars will be throughout this next generation.

Car companies have only recently started promising the swift normalization of electric vehicles on a global scale. In this year’s KPMG Global Automotive Executive Survey, 90 percent of car industry executives surveyed in the United Kingdom expected battery electric vehicles to dominate the automotive marketplace by 2025. With this battery technology potentially not rolling out until 2021, is it realistic to assume BEVs will be the new norm within the next decade? Doubtful.

However, assuming Samsung delivers, a shorter charging time and nearly 400 mile range could make battery-powered vehicles as convenient as their ICE counterparts. And, considering that you can plug your EV in at home, the biggest advantages of all-electric ownership are no longer mired by limited range and lengthy recharge times.

Join the conversation
2 of 33 comments
  • APaGttH APaGttH on Jan 12, 2017

    I know you guys are run with no budget (shame on you Verticalscope, TTAC deserves more $$$) but you couldn't find a public domain picture of a Panasonic lithium-ion cell, or other Li battery, so you choose a lead acid car battery picture for this story. Our 140 character or less society doesn't read anymore and now thinks their regular lead-acid car battery is a time bomb from Samsung. I saw it on TTAC...

  • SCE to AUX SCE to AUX on Jan 12, 2017

    I haven't checked to see if this 372 mile claim is for the European cycle, or the EPA cycle. If it's for the European cycle, then the EPA equivalent would be about 257 miles. This battery might be around 100 kWh, which means it is charging at about 2X the rate of a Tesla Supercharger (120-150 kW), meaning 240 kW. This is somewhat lower than the proposed next-gen EV chargers, which are supposed to be 350 kW or maybe 500-600 kW.

  • Inside Looking Out You should care. With GM will die America. All signs are there. How about the Arsenal of Democracy? Toyota?
  • DenverMike What else did anyone think, when GM was losing tens of billions a year, year after year?
  • Bill Wade GM says they're killing Android Auto and Apple Carplay. Any company that makes decisions like that is doomed to die.
  • Jeff S I don't believe gm will die but that it will continue to shrink in product and market share and it will probably be acquired by a foreign manufacturer. I doubt gm lacks funds as it did in 2008 and that they have more than enough cash at hand but gm will not expand as it did in the past and the emphasis is more on profitability and cutting costs to the bone. Making gm a more attractive takeover target and cut costs at the expense of more desirable and reliable products. At the time of Farago's article I was in favor of the Government bailout more to save jobs and suppliers but today I would not be in favor of the bailout. My opinions on gm have changed since 2008 and 2009 and now I really don't care if gm survives or not.
  • Kwik_Shift I was a GM fan boy until it ended in 2013 when I traded in my Avalanche to go over to Nissan.