Batteries which can be charged in 5 mins? How cool is that?

  • 19 January 2021
  • 16 replies

  • Community Manager
  • 5493 replies

Here’s some great news for EV drivers (or soon-to-be EV drivers) worried about battery charging times.

New batteries with a charging time of just five minutes are in production.

The project has investment from BP (who have also invested in Pure Planet) which owns ‘Pulse’ - the network of roadside EV charging points in the UK, previously known as Chargemaster.

I’m not a regular user of public charging points, but I did have to wait quite a long time for a charge when I went to London and back in between lockdowns last summer.

This is my white Leaf in a bit of a queue at a charging point on the A303.

Zoe, Leaf, Leaf - outside the Holiday Inn, Solstice business park, A303 


Luckily it was a fine day, and I was in no rush. Still, it was a wait of about 30 minutes, plus another 30 minutes while the charging happened. A second charging point about 200 yards to the left of the photo was out of action.

The Guardian reports that the new batteries would deliver about 100 miles of charge in five minutes.

Will the faster charging times encourage more drivers to go electric? 

16 replies

Userlevel 7
Badge +9

Great news ( wish I had an EV)

Great news ( wish I had an EV)

Hey @Angelabikerbabe check out posts by @ReallySwift1 about electric motorbikes! :slight_smile:

Userlevel 7
Badge +9

Great news ( wish I had an EV)

Hey @Angelabikerbabe check out posts by @ReallySwift1 about electric motorbikes! :slight_smile:

Eeee, I didn't even know they existed!! Thanks. Will Google 

Watch the Harley Davidson Motorbike TV Show @Angelabikerbabe!

Userlevel 7
Badge +9

Watch the Harley Davidson Motorbike TV Show @Angelabikerbabe!

Thanks @25 quid , ( don't think I can afford a Harley tho 😒)

Userlevel 2

With the Harley, you always have to pay the badge tax ;-)

Source: used to ride a Harley years ago :-)

I now ride a Zero DSR.

Userlevel 7
Badge +9

With the Harley, you always have to pay the badge tax ;-)

Source: used to ride a Harley years ago :-)

I now ride a Zero DSR.


Userlevel 7
Badge +11


If (big assumption there)  the 100 miles range is predicated upon 3.5 miles/kW that would mean 28.5kW in 5 mins or 5.7kW/minute charging rate,
One thing it wouldn’t be is cool (in temperature that is)

Ignoring any losses (you can’t ignore them but for the moment I will) ...Rapid chargers are currently rated at 50kW/hour which is 0.83kW/minute, but looking at the theoretical fastest, the Tesla supercharger that is rated at a max of 150kW which would be 2.5kW/minute, so if anything close to 5.7kW/minute becomes achievable that would be a major milestone I agree but I think it’s a good few years off for mainstream adoption.

Not only is battery tech still under development (several manufacturers) but more to the point the local physical high voltage infrastructure  required to carry the power from A to very local B with acceptable current losses (think National Grid and substations) just isn’t there. 


Hey @woz, are you confusing kW/hour and kWh maybe?

Tesla superchargers can do 150kW or even 250kW instantaneous power. After an hour that would determine the amount of delivered energy in kWh. Said another way, 150kW is the same over one minute or one hour (Said a third way, it’s a speed, not a distance). 

Maybe I’m confused, but I’m not sure I follow what you’re saying...

Userlevel 7
Badge +11

@25 quid I’m not confused but what I wrote was poor, I agree it is badly written  I largely missed the h out in the first part but the maths still stands so  ignore it. (I have very very bad toothache but that’s no excuse)

yes kW is power, kWh is energy.

I’ll try and explain what I meant, (it wasn’t clear, must admit I thought that a couple of times while I was writing it.)

Lets say you had a battery capable of supplying 60kW for an hour. 

If you charge it from a 60kW power source it would take an hour, from zero if you charged it from a 120kW source it would take 30 mins.(so 1/60 of a kWh per minute vs 1/30th of a kWh/minute)

Thus the rate of charge varies according to the power of the charger.

Assuming you used 1kWh to go 3.5 miles to gain 100 miles range you'd need  to top up 28.6kWh in 5 mins which is 5.7kWh/minute or a charger of 342kW

I’d assumed Tesla was generally 150kW, but if you can charge at 250kW the top Tesla isn’t as far away as I thought. I must admit I didn’t know  you could sustain 250kW, I wonder how long that works for before the thermal management throttles it.

For comparison an average house at very high demand ( electric shower and electric cooking with a few kettles and a tumble drier thrown in) could be about 25kW on a really bad day. Generally with diversity it’s a lot less. So if you assume the 342 figure to be anything like correct 1 Tesla supercharger is a lot (maybe 20 or 30) houses...hence my comment about the infrastructure.

Apologies for being so sloppy.

Yup, all good! Or a more efficient car, or a lighter right foot*!

*the easiest gain. A topic I’ve droned on about before in this forum (but unlike @Bev, the search fails me) .

Userlevel 7
Badge +11

@25 quid I’m afraid with 0-60 now available in 3 seconds, hitherto the dream of every wannabe boy racer, I fear that initially the temptation may be too great for many.

But yes, intelligent torque management, driver education and energy reclaim all have their part to play.

Personally (and I’ve said this before too) I try to use the brakes (I.C. engine) as little as possible, but with regen braking that doesn’t apply as much to EVs. (You can’t overdo it as they tend to seize if you are very light on them over an extended period)

(tangent warning: I did a test once over a couple of weeks and I could easily achieve 10% less fuel use or better. What I can’t understand is why so many drivers are in such a hurry to rush up to the lights and stop, and they get really irritated if you slow down naturally...) yes that was me in front of you...


Absolutely! See our conversation from a year ago: 

Finally found the thread. The main text being inside an image didn’t help (@Nataly) 🥸!

Whilst we’re on tangents. I had to post that link twice as the forum mangled the first link when it prettified it.

Oh @woz

Whilst we’re tangenting about fuel efficiency, there’s a trade-off I’ve not seen discussed.

Maintaining or increasing your minimum corner speed. To be fair, I have heard Lewis Hamilton discuss this in relation to high F1 lap times, but I think it applies to saving fuel too!

If you slow down more than necessary to take a corner or roundabout, you then have to accelerate more to get back up to speed. This uses more fuel. So I like to keep my speed up! 😉 

The only downside (apart from surprising people) is potentially increased tire wear. I wonder where the (wheel 🤣) balance lies…??? 

Userlevel 7
Badge +11

@25 quid I think this is a case of conserved momentum is your friend, the optimum for fuel has to be to slow down (preferably without generating frictional heat) to the maximum safe cornering speed and allow momentum to carry you around the corner, no brakes..

Try telling that to the judge.

Which of course involves taking the racing line mi lord. seems to sum it up! 😊 

I love the quote from that site: 

It’s a sensible strategy to brake earlier when learning the track and getting familiar with your car, then progressively shorten the braking zone as your experience grows. The rule of thumb is to reduce your speed and be off the brakes before turning into the corner, although a slight brake pressure on entry can help to reduce understeer and provide a better turn in (this is known as trail braking).


I once (about the same time I swapped my bathroom radiator) was fortunate enough to go on a AMG driving experience day (or hour or so) at Brooklands.

During a session on the track, I was experimenting with braking later and later on each lap, until at one point the instructor (co-driver with dual controls) intervened and said he thought one of us should brake. Heheheheeee!

Those AMGs are amazing and brutal all in one!

What a great day that was!