I would not mind my EV powering my house during a power failure, but it would take a humongous incentive for me to use my EV battery to power the grid…
Apparently it’s less about “powering” as much as it is about stabilizing. When we go from huge coal/nuclear turbines to wind power there’s a need to quickly ramp up/down power to the grid to keep the frequency within a certain range. V2G would be used for that, and would then only increase/decrease battery charge within single percentage digits.
I have a car with V2G support but the infrastructure is not here (Sweden) yet, so my electrical provider does pay me when charging is not done or done to help the grid, but cannot move electricity in the other direction yet.
Interesting! I didn’t know there are cars in the market able to handle V2G in accordance with the standard. What brand is that? For any large organisation with lots of cars, like a community, flexibility services for a hundred cars or so would add up quickly.
We need to move to Huddiksvall. There seems to be a city where its possible😁 But come to think of it, it all takes place from “behind the meter”, so with a connection that allows for solar power, the utility should be none-the-wiser.
Why? Your EV has 200-300 miles of range, and on any given day you’ll use 30-40 of that. Why not put the rest to work stabilizing and cleaning the grid and earn yourself a paycheck in the process?
Kempton found that groups of EVs could send power to the grid and receive compensation that would help to offset the costs of owning the vehicle. There would be almost no negative effect on battery life or the vehicle’s readiness for use.
Depends on your definition of “negligible” and “ready for use”.
A lithium ion battery cell wears out over time. The more you charge and discharge it, the faster the wear. Look at a ten year old phone or laptop battery for example — it still holds a charge, but not as much.
So if V2G is set to stop feeding when ten or twenty percent of the battery is depleted, I can see that being acceptable. But I don’t know that you’d get much money back from that. Maybe $1 at most. Especially with how stingy private power companies are about compensating power generation like rooftop solar.
Charging and discharging a lithium battery when it’s within the 20% to 80% level adds essentially no wear to the battery. Eg discharging from 40% down to 30% and then recharging it back to 40% basically does nothing to your battery
But I don’t know that you’d get much money back from that. Maybe $1 at most. Especially with how stingy private power companies are about compensating power generation like rooftop solar.
That’s the main problem with the concept, that the incentives and infrastructure isn’t available. I doubt many people would have a problem with minor battery degradation if it had provided them an income stream for 5-10 years. Heck, you could replace the battery and leave the old one to continue feeding the grid.
Actually old electric car batteries are being reused for this purpose already. It’s a major reason why we don’t see more electric vehicle battery recycling, it’s because the majority of them haven’t gotten to the Recycled part of the reduce reuse recycle
Feed-in tariffs around here assume that you’re using home solar and you’re feeding into the grid during solar hours, when everyone else with solar is also flooding the grid. So it’s hardly anything.
We don’t have higher rates for feeding in to the grid during the evening peak, because that hasn’t been a thing before.
We do have higher usage rates for peak times though, so it makes sense to use your car’s battery to power your house during those times which takes load of the grid. But we really need time of use rates for feeding into the grid too.
I would not mind my EV powering my house during a power failure, but it would take a humongous incentive for me to use my EV battery to power the grid…
Apparently it’s less about “powering” as much as it is about stabilizing. When we go from huge coal/nuclear turbines to wind power there’s a need to quickly ramp up/down power to the grid to keep the frequency within a certain range. V2G would be used for that, and would then only increase/decrease battery charge within single percentage digits.
I have a car with V2G support but the infrastructure is not here (Sweden) yet, so my electrical provider does pay me when charging is not done or done to help the grid, but cannot move electricity in the other direction yet.
Interesting! I didn’t know there are cars in the market able to handle V2G in accordance with the standard. What brand is that? For any large organisation with lots of cars, like a community, flexibility services for a hundred cars or so would add up quickly.
I have a VW ID.7, I think all their new cars do.
We need to move to Huddiksvall. There seems to be a city where its possible😁 But come to think of it, it all takes place from “behind the meter”, so with a connection that allows for solar power, the utility should be none-the-wiser.
Why? Your EV has 200-300 miles of range, and on any given day you’ll use 30-40 of that. Why not put the rest to work stabilizing and cleaning the grid and earn yourself a paycheck in the process?
V2H alone is a thing if that’s all you want.
V2G is about grid stabilising, charge with excess renewable, use when renewables not generating as much.
The few tests in Australia seem promising ahead of a wider rollout, use an energy broker to get better prices etc.
Why? You get paid for it, and there’s supposedly no impact on battery life
deleted by creator
That’s what the researchers said
Depends on your definition of “negligible” and “ready for use”.
A lithium ion battery cell wears out over time. The more you charge and discharge it, the faster the wear. Look at a ten year old phone or laptop battery for example — it still holds a charge, but not as much.
So if V2G is set to stop feeding when ten or twenty percent of the battery is depleted, I can see that being acceptable. But I don’t know that you’d get much money back from that. Maybe $1 at most. Especially with how stingy private power companies are about compensating power generation like rooftop solar.
Charging and discharging a lithium battery when it’s within the 20% to 80% level adds essentially no wear to the battery. Eg discharging from 40% down to 30% and then recharging it back to 40% basically does nothing to your battery
That’s the main problem with the concept, that the incentives and infrastructure isn’t available. I doubt many people would have a problem with minor battery degradation if it had provided them an income stream for 5-10 years. Heck, you could replace the battery and leave the old one to continue feeding the grid.
Actually old electric car batteries are being reused for this purpose already. It’s a major reason why we don’t see more electric vehicle battery recycling, it’s because the majority of them haven’t gotten to the Recycled part of the reduce reuse recycle
You need a lot more than just the battery pack to charge/discharge the battery.
Yes… You’re covering points that have already been covered in the article. In fact, that’s what the entire article is about…
You’d have to actually get paid for it, though.
Feed-in tariffs around here assume that you’re using home solar and you’re feeding into the grid during solar hours, when everyone else with solar is also flooding the grid. So it’s hardly anything.
We don’t have higher rates for feeding in to the grid during the evening peak, because that hasn’t been a thing before.
We do have higher usage rates for peak times though, so it makes sense to use your car’s battery to power your house during those times which takes load of the grid. But we really need time of use rates for feeding into the grid too.
Agreed, but that’s what the entire article is about, the lack of systematic support for the possibility.
It will always have some impact on the battery. Every charge cycle will degrade it a bit.
‘Almost’. Yes, there’s an impact, but it could be negligible compared to the benefits.