This appears to be a good move for Tesla to certify their charge station installations and further the third party charge station infrastructure. I see issues arising from grid operators wanting to control vehicle charge rates for reasons other than renewable efficiencies. While the leveling concept appears valid there should be concerns with regard to single source energy suppliers such as PG&E - a bottom line driven utility. Consider this future scenario: PG&E buys wind, solar from a variety of resources at rates below its coal/diesel/hydro generating costs. It buffers the lower cost energy into offline storage systems then instructs the smart V2G fleet to charge at it's regular off-peak rates (claiming the wind isn't blowing tonight.) The PG&E incentive is to resell it's low cost renewable energy at the higher daytime rates for greater profits.

Putting too much control of energy production distribution and billing into the hands of single source utilities is, like any monopoly a recipe for trouble. I would prefer to see the smart component rest in the vehicle/owner's hands. By tracking via third party software, the available grid energy and rate structures - the vehicle makes smart charging choices - putting the cost and usage where it belongs, in the hands of the consumers.

Further, for the lowest cost renewable structures we should encourage small grid concepts. Community, municipal PV/wind storage (via LiI banks) installations supplying localized (virtual) grids with supplemental energy. Single source grid monopolies should have competitors - like phone, cable, wireless services. De-centralizing the grid is the best method of mitigating losses from outages, shortages, equipment failures and security risks.

The oncoming BEV revolution should not engender another monopolistic industry like we have seen with petroleum. It should encourage the diversification of energy production, distribution and resale. The more people literally empowered by these new energy resources - the better for the community, environment and planet as a whole. IMHO...

The oncoming BEV revolution should not engender another monopolistic industry like we have seen with petroleum. It should encourage the diversification of energy production, distribution and resale. The more people literally empowered by these new energy resources - the better for the community, environment and planet as a whole. IMHO...

Great point.

If the charging rate fluctuates depending on grid electicity demand, how does this affect the longevity of the batteries? I would expect that a constant charging rate is better for batteries than one that varies. Does any one know if this is the case?

The thing of it is, these batteries are designed for rapid charging/discharging. Think about slamming on the brakes or the accelerator. I don't think the ramping up or down from the grid operator would be much different.

My understanding of the V2G techonology is that batteries would be used to provide ancillary grid services like regulation (tiny up or down changes in the amount of power on the grid) not as an ultimate power source.

Are BEV batteries the best ones for load balancing ?
They have to be light and have to be more robust than stationary batteries could be.

I would be inclined to separate the two, unless the utilities start to pay big bucks for power at peak times.

A smart charger makes a lot of sense - charge when there is excess power: wind and night time coal/nuke.

The key to renewables is energy storage - but getting it to scale to match (say) wind, at the right price is a major challenge - anyone who succeeds will become very rich.

Considering an average commuter is moving about 1-2hours per day in a car, that means 23-22hours potentially available at a charging station.

There are many advantages to Tesla and PG&E to move early in this area and to attempt to set the de facto standards, i.e., the plug, the interface and the interface control. In other words, set the protocols to favor their requirements and devices.

In keeping with the cautionary advice from gr: The standards agreed upon should also consider the requirements that it is compatible with home generated power and that any rules or specifications must be approved by a third party watching out for the welfare of the consumer. There are many companies that fully understand the concept that he who controls the distribution, sets the prices and controls the product. For a long time that has been the Oil Companies and they are still in the cat bird seat as long as fuel is pumped at stations. However, it could very well become the utilities as we move from oil to electrons. Let's get off to a better start this time.

Prof. Andy Frank (UC Davis) gave lecture here last spring on the topic of PHEVs and V2G. His proposals only included using a small fraction of the batteries total capacity mostly for regulation and replacement of spinning capacity (with application to peak power once enough storage potential was on the grid). The beauty of using only a small part of the battery was that it has almost no wear and tear on the battery (which are capable of millions of such shallow cycles) and virtually removes the chance that someone will be inconvenienced by driving off on a depleted battery.

Vehicle-to-grid power implementation: From stabilizing the
grid to supporting large-scale renewable energy

As someone else said this is not V2G but G2V. Our local power company already does this with central AC units. They will pay you $100 a year for control over your AC compressor. They claim to turn it off for less then a few hours a season at the worst peak times and not for long stretches for any one person. The control is actually radio control not a signal through the power line.

Considering an electric car is a larger load I suspect they would pay more for that control.

A more complex system would be to allow for varying electric rates and have a charger that YOU THE CUSTOMER can control to pick the rates and times of charging.

Bob,

I am using a digital term to refer to offline storage of electrical power, e.g. supercap banks, flywheels, or high end batteries like the ANanos. A single source distributor (PG&E) can purchase renewables at a discount, store the electrons, then sell them to customers at peak rates. Not a bad thing in a market economy but a problematic thing if it is a monopoly. I am arguing that we provide opportunities to diverse energy suppliers via the grid, rather than a single utility. Diversity encourages innovation and deflates monopolistic entropy.

hampden,

my point exactly. The intelligence i.e. "smart" capability is given to the consumer (vehicle). Energy is offered at varying rates by a diversity of suppliers. The "smart" car is then empowered to select which supplier at what rate and in what volume. The logics of this are not difficult - essentially the technology is currently off the shelf. We need critical mass demand to create new small energy suppliers who have a realistic chance of winning customers - sort of like the equalizing effect of the internet on corporate media. Diversity = empowerment = growth.

One other thing. Its MUCH smarter to have G2V under control on many vehicles then V2G on fewer. The batteries are not negatively effected on G2V control schemes but V2G can degrade a customers batteries. The financial equation becomes much more complex at that point. Of course the electronics of V2G are also far more complex then G2V control. Yes, I think V2G is sexy and neat but G2V should give the utilities most of what they need and the best benefit to the consumer.