ECOtality’s eTec Provides Hydrogen ICE Pickup to South Carolina Research Center
Angeleno Group Leads $15M Investment in Miles Electric Vehicles

V2Green Technology to Monitor Performance of 13 PHEVs in Seattle Project

V2Green’s vehicle-to-grid management technology (earlier post) will be used to monitor the performance of 13 plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV) in a Seattle demonstration project and control their charging.

Under a contract with the US Department of Energy’s Idaho National Laboratory, V2Green will provide a logging system to collect real-time vehicle performance data provided by the V2Green Connectivity Module (VCM) installed in each PHEV. A cellular modem will upload the data to the V2Green server where it is archived and made available for the Idaho National Laboratory’s analysis.

The lab will monitor fuel efficiency, electricity usage and other vehicle performance measures on each of the 13 converted Toyota Prius PHEVs.

Seattle City Light will operate three of the vehicles in the test. The City of Seattle will have one. The Port of Seattle will get two and the Puget Sound Clear Air Agency will get three vehicles. King County will test four plug-ins.

In addition to monitoring vehicle performance, V2Green’s technology also provides the capability of smart charging. By providing intelligent, two-way communication between plug-in vehicles and the electric grid via the VCM, Seattle City Light can control the timing, pace and extent of vehicle charging within driver-specified requirements. The utility can control its load requirements, ensuring that charging takes place during light load hours, protecting the distribution system and avoiding the need to buy power.

We believe this project will show how plug-in hybrid technology can reduce our dependence on oil and cut greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change.

—Seattle City Light Superintendent Jorge Carrasco

Seattle City Light is the city’s municipal electric utility.

V2Green technology also is being used to test two plug-in hybrids in Austin, Texas, and six from the fleet of Xcel Energy, using similar smart charging and data collection capabilities.

Comments

Jeff Baker

Hi Poet –
The above 1 HP return was suggested by John Taylor above, not me. I simply ran his numbers to illustrate that a solar panel on a vehicle was feasible, using his numbers. Now lets take a look at your numbers. You say that 300 watts can be generated from 2 square meters or about 20 sq ft at 15% efficiency. OK. I have 32 sq ft on my vehicle roof, so that’s 300 watts x 1.6 = 480 watts. We already have reports of 20% efficiency solar panels at half the cost. With several advanced panel designs in development now being reported, that efficiency will increase to 25%, within 3 years. So I’m going to project efficiency ahead 3 years to 25%. So now I have 1.6666 x 480 watts = 800 watts. That is a significant onboard power source for an advanced onboard battery charger. The key to using solar roof panels on electric hybrid vehicles is developing a pulse distributor battery charger that charges 10 to 40 batteries simultaneously with split-second pulses rotating from one battery to the next. This has already been accomplished. Search: Tom Bearden on the John Bedini battery recharging phenomenon. Now I take these solar panel figures, and I apply them to the roof of a Plug-in Hybrid Long Haul Truck – the roof of the sleeper cab is 4x8 = 32 SF + the roof of the trailer is 8x48 = 384 SF, for a total of 416 SF. Three years from now, in 2011, 32 sq ft = 800 watts. So 416 SF = 10,400 watts. I think that would supplement a long haul truck just fine, and also eliminate diesel idling by providing battery power for air conditioning and heating, while drivers are parked or resting. 10,400 watts onboard will displace a large amount of diesel fuel, air pollution, and green house gases. And at times, during prolonged parking and week-ends, there should be surplus power available to feed the grid via V2G.

gr

EP Blusters:

"adding 70% SOC to a 16 kWh battery (Chevy Volt) can be done using a 14-gauge extension cord (110 V @ 15 A, 1650 W) in 6.8 hours."

Using partial data to make one's claim is not in support of the scientific method. While 70% SOC may be achieved in 7 hours the FULL charge of a 16 kWh battery (@ 110V 15A) requires a finger-drumming 14 (fourteen) hours! Recently confirmed by the test fleet of iMIEVs in Tokyo. Thus, time sensitive consumers WILL absorb the added cost of the 220V circuit to reduce full charge time to reasonable 7 hours or three phase 80% SOC in 30 minutes.

If the ISO and utilities are certain of the load leveling advantages of V2G, they should be willing to finance the vehicle add-ons required to enable it. I for one would be willing to let my utility upgrade my BEV (provided warranty remains intact) at no cost and deep discount my electric rate for the privilege.

FYI Poet: "Troll," from the Swedish is a noun referring to a witch of large or minute size. Its indiscriminate use as a label for those you disagree with utters forth from the most overstuffed of straw men... and rhymeth not.

John Taylor


@ Jeff ~> I have no idea where EP gets his numbers from, but the 1 hp benchmark comes from the solar challenge cars that can generate about 1 hp with a full covering of solar cells, in the full sun of the outback, and must reduce drag to achieve success.

While some solar could be incorporated into electric cars, vboring clearly explains why it won't be done as a regular thing, and your own math shows why it won't provide all the capacity a normally driven car needs. I don't expect solar power to be cost effective on cars for quite some time to come.


@ EP ... Now again you are calling someone a troll, but without a shred of credible reasoning.
You pretend that gr failed to read the same report you accused me of failing to read, yet ignored my demonstration that I'd not only read it , but also understood it.

Lets have another look at your wild baseless claims

the CPU and logic are part of the car ~> This operating system has nothing whatsoever to do with interfacing with the utility, which will require a completely different program, and some different hardware.

the inverter is part of the motor drive electronics and is re-used for the reductive charging system ~> Only if AC 3ph grid voltage motors are used. So far, most PEV cars are not designed this way, and we have very good reasons to think they will not be.

the comms are the only new element required ~> What you are hoping for is a 2 way cell phone / Internet type communications network dedicated to power load leveling, and for near free. I like to order extra cloud topping and rainbow sprinkles on my pie in the sky.

If you count the fuel savings at the Volt's consumption ~> Neat idea! Lets all hand over all our fuel savings money to the utility when we finally get PEV's! ...... Not!

So, EP, you have yet to demonstrate even a rudimentary knowledge of engineering, perhaps you will do better if you show us some poetry. Can you come up with a rhyme for troll?

@ gr ~> Kudos to you for showing that there will be a cost to PEV infrastructure. It is incredibly cheap as infrastructures go, but still involves a significant initial cost.

K

I'll hazard the guess that E-P and gr are speaking of different things when arguing about battery charging.

E-P used the term 'adding' SOC. gr used the term 'achieving' SOC.

If SOC means State Of Charge then obviously you cannot add 70% unless the battery has fallen below 30%.

Battery charging is logrithmic - at least I sure hope so, my last EE course was 50 years ago - so you can charge 70% of what is uncharged.

gr seems to be speaking of starting from a totally discharged battery and going to 70%. His numbers maybe electrically correct but the discharged condition is not reality. None of these batteries are going to be totally discharged. EV and HEV vehicles have cutoffs that prevent the damaging low or total discharge of batteries.

I would think that the 110V would be sufficient as an overnight charging circuit in most cases. 220V would be better but the batteries are going to be at, say 60% before they even start an overnight charge. They will be topping off, not charging from zero.

I'll leave E-P and gr to sort out exactly what they meant as they wish.

SOC does pertain heavily to V2G plugout. As discussed days ago, there is probably no damage to a fully charged battery which sends a small percent of its power to the grid. But when you arrive at work and hook up your car won't be at full charge (if it is, the perfect EV has arrived).

The V2G instructions for the vehicle should therefore be to charge aggressively, even at a somewhat high price, before noon so there will be power to return to the grid in the hot afternoon.

Life gets complex, maybe it is best if the car can consider the weather forecast too.

A note about 'fully charged'. There is probably some definition, maybe 95%+, where the battery is considered fully available. Anyone care to comment on what level that is?


K

You can like solar too much.

There are at least two solar car competitions. The one in Australia is the best known. Conditions are ideal for maximum sunlight.

Australia is closer to the equator than the US. In the outback there might be as much as 300 w/m2 of sunlight at peak.

The cars designs vary tremendously but fall into the catagories of ultralight streamliners and sungrabbers.

The first have fewer solar cells but need less power at the wheels. Sungrabbers maximimize power by using large panels and aligning them with the sun; their penalty is extra weight and drag.

A Sungrabber with 8 m2 of cells could therefore intercept 2400 watts max. Just a little over 3 hp. From that, the solar cells might deliver perhaps 1 horsepower (these cars are using the best cells available.)

The basics just don't add up for solar powered vehicles. And they aren't going to. As battery chargers or auxillary power they can help. But solar cells have a weight and cost. The diesel engine is going to be pulling them around the country. There is no free lunch.

Jeff Baker

To John, K, and Poet – Thanks for the info. I live in Arizona where we get tons of sunshine. That’s why I see the possibilities. On the other hand if you live in Pacific NW where it rains a lot, why bother adapting solar to PHEVs. My only goal is to provide partial, supplementary power. As mainstream vehicles come down in weight, like the Toyota 1x 960 pound concept, even supplemental power may have a significant impact. I estimate that lightweight, thin films will become efficient enough and cheap enough in 3-5 years to integrate into the roofs of Plug-ins, EVs, and Hybrid Tractor Trailers. See you then.

Engineer-Poet

Claimeth gr:

the FULL charge of a 16 kWh battery (@ 110V 15A) requires a finger-drumming 14 (fourteen) hours! Recently confirmed by the test fleet of iMIEVs in Tokyo.
Wrong; only 11 hours for the 16 kWh pack, and that's
  1. Starting from 80% discharge, and
  2. Using a lower supply voltage than US standard.
Maybe you have a source which quoted different figures, but so far I'm not impressed.
Thus, time sensitive consumers WILL absorb the added cost of the 220V circuit to reduce full charge time to reasonable 7 hours or three phase 80% SOC in 30 minutes.
The 7 hour figure assumed 200 volts 15 amps; 220 V 30 A would reduce this to about 3 hours.

There once was a troll named gr
Whose flaming style once got him far
But his stuff got the axe
When it lost to the facts
And the readers said "Hardy har har."

Engineer-Poet

Claimeth (flameth?) the Taylor:

the CPU and logic are part of the car ~> This operating system has nothing whatsoever to do with interfacing with the utility, which will require a completely different program, and some different hardware.
The car's induction motor drive requires variable frequency, variable power factor operation in sync with changing motor speed. It requires generation of reactive power but absorption of real power for regenerative braking. Compared to this, interfacing to utility power is a piece of cake.
the inverter is part of the motor drive electronics and is re-used for the reductive charging system
Only if AC 3ph grid voltage motors are used. So far, most PEV cars are not designed this way, and we have very good reasons to think they will not be.
Claim without support, and probably irrelevant. Even motors with PM armatures require inverter drives under software control, and the capability to both produce and absorb power. Exactly what capability is going to be missing?
What you are hoping for is a 2 way cell phone / Internet type communications network dedicated to power load leveling, and for near free.
Dedicated? No more dedicated than the Blackberry network needs one (it piggybacks on the cell phone system). There's plenty of available broadcast bandwidth in other services, such as FM subcarriers.
Neat idea! Lets all hand over all our fuel savings money to the utility when we finally get PEV's!
Way to mis-read what I wrote. Since you
  1. Deride the conclusions of the report you say you've read, without giving any evidence which would support your position, and
  2. Similarly mis-read what I wrote,
I think this is adequate proof that you did not read and correctly understand either one.

gr

Harumphs EP:

"Maybe you have a source which quoted different figures, but so far I'm not impressed."

Nor do we seek such an impression. But well, yeah, I tend to question data from old press announcements prior to field testing. Your data is from 2006. And, had you read your own F*PR entirely you would note that field tests on the iMIEV were scheduled for 2007. Your V2G study is also dated - December 10, 2002. Get current poet!

http://www.evworld.com/article.cfm?storyid=1352

At least you have come round to accepting the fact that first gen PHEVs,eg MiEV, full charge will take 13-14 hours on household circuit or about 7 hours at 220V (requiring the $500 electrician visit.) However, it's clear you still have trouble understanding the economics of your V2G scheme.

Let's look at the comms package required: GPS $2500 full dealer option, or maybe a $300 chip, dedicated cell (fm subcarriers require directional radiators and antennae); wireless link receiving load regulation data transmitted in 5 sec increments x 23 hours connect time.) Even at landline rates .03/minute, 1.80 x 23 = $41.40 per V2G day. Maybe it's the accountants at the telcos we hear laughing...

there once was an engineer poet
when faced with a fact did not know it
so data he carefully selected
and truth he completely neglected!

But it ain't personal and all's good!



John Taylor

@ E-P ~> Mitsubishi gives figures to recharge to 80% where gr gave figures for a FULL charge. It is nice to see that when one actually reads the mfg specs, that the numbers are comparable.
Now while we should note that a full charge is seldom needed, highway recharge capability must be able to offer it and in a somewhat reasonable time frame.
The point being made is that a power source of 3 ph 100 amp 220v power *(or near this value) sounds necessary, and installing outdoor “pay-plugs” will have a cost, as will having a new circuit installed for your garage.

A secondary point being made is that offering insults along with your advice is silly.
Claimeth (flameth?) the Taylor:
Your attempts at poetry are no improvement on your attempts at understanding engineering.

> Compared to this, interfacing to utility power is a piece of cake. > Cake it may be, but it is pie in the sky to think it is the same thing.

> Exactly what capability is going to be missing? > matching voltage. Why would you think that 3 ph 220 grid voltage is going to be idea for running a car motor?

> Dedicated? No more dedicated than the Blackberry network needs one (it piggybacks on the cell phone system). > Since when, and where, do you get Blackberry network service for FREE? Last I heard there was still a charge involved. Having bandwidth available does not also indicate it's usage will be free. E-P may envision a totally free 2 way communications system, but I think it's more sky pie, and expect it to run on star twinkles.

>> Neat idea! Lets all hand over all our fuel savings money to the utility > Way to mis-read what I wrote. > I didn't mis read you. Your suggestion was that the initial fuel savings would pay for an infrastructure, and that could be installed in such a way as to benefit the utility. That is, quite equal to you suggesting we finance a utility benefit with BEV fuel savings. I simply projected this into an ongoing situation to show how little support such an idea would get. What you really were after was the “payback” time to recover costs. Two way metering is a different cost, and a different installation job than is placing a 220v plug into your garage. Also, I'm going to want my garage power GFI* protected, and don't think that mates well with a two way power transfer. *( Ground Fault Interruption )

EP Blusters is turning into a bigger job than I have time for.

Neil

Communications is a minor issue. It doesn't have to be wireless since anything using V2G must be plugged into the grid (there's your wires), just piggyback your comms through the grid. The technology for doing this has been around since the 80s.

Michael

Hey Jeff,

Don't let them get ya down. Solar cars, painted, windows, thin film are all on the way and will be utilized. They'll increase in efficiency and drop in cost. As solar becomes more economical, it will be utilized as you say. Once cost comes down, more practical concepts will be generated as more creative mind get involved. As the technology spreads, so do ideas in how to use it more efficiently and creatively.

I don't think the V2G is such a bright idea yet, but can see how in a long term future all things will be interconnected in ways we today cannot forsee.

sjc

Some rough math on solar car ports says that if a car port is 10 feet x 20 feet, that would be 200 square feet. If you can get 10 watts per square foot, that would be 2000 watts. If you can generate that 2000 watts for 5 hours per day, that would be 10 kwh. If you can get 4 miles per kwh, that would get you 40 miles of range. Not bad, except for the cost.

Jeff Baker

Michael: Your words are like a breath of fresh air – Thank you for the encouragement!

spinel

And keep in mind that in some countries excess power sold back to the grid is paid at up to 8 times the peak rate (Germany). This helps finance solar and speeds its widespread adoption. This V2G concept seems far fetched.

Engineer-Poet

Flameth gr:

Your V2G study is also dated - December 10, 2002.
Yes, so?  The two-slit experiment is much older, yet the results entirely current.  If you want to impugn the results, tell me what change in the grid has invalidated them and you'll enlighten us all.
At least you have come round to accepting the fact that first gen PHEVs,eg MiEV,
IMIEV is an EV, not a PHEV.
full charge will take 13-14 hours on household circuit
We've been over this before, and you Still Don't Get It.
  • The Japanese figures are for a lower-power connection than the US standard.
  • A PHEV will probably have a higher minimum state of charge than the IMIEV.
or about 7 hours at 220V (requiring the $500 electrician visit.)
Again, the Japanese figures quoted are for a 200 volt, 15 amp circuit.  A US circuit would be 220-240 V, 30-50 amps.  20 kWh at 6.6 kW is 3 hours; 20 kWh at 11 kW is under 2 hours.  For PHEV operation with a 30% lower SOC limit and a 16 kWh battery, multiply times by 0.56.

The IMIEV article claims 25 minutes to charge the 20 kWh battery using a high-power charger, so the battery is not the limiting factor in the charge rate at lower power.

I'm going to reformat the following as a numbered list so readers can track the claims against the refutations.

Let's look at the comms package required:
  1. GPS $2500 full dealer option, or maybe a $300 chip
  2. dedicated cell (fm subcarriers require directional radiators and antennae)
  3. wireless link receiving load regulation data transmitted in 5 sec increments x 23 hours connect time.)
  4. Even at landline rates .03/minute, 1.80 x 23 = $41.40 per V2G day.
And in response:
  1. GPS is built into current cell phones.  TracFone sells for under $40 with a case, keyboard, display and battery over and above what a car installation would need.
  2. FM subcarriers are broadcast services like any other.
  3. Wireless link receives data continuously; 10k BPS is plenty.  Current DSM systems use radio, so this capability is already there.
  4. Figure is simply ludicrous and irrelevant to the actual application.

Engineer-Poet

And quoth the Taylor:

Cake it may be, but it is pie in the sky to think it is the same thing.
Why don't you ask the people who do it? Oh, that's right; they consider it a fait accompli, as do all the makers of grid-tie inverters for solar and wind installations.
Exactly what capability is going to be missing?
matching voltage. Why would you think that 3 ph 220 grid voltage is going to be idea for running a car motor?
The voltage required by a PM motor is proportional to the rotational speed, more or less. The voltage required by an induction motor is a more complex function of speed, slip speed and torque, but it also varies over a wide range. The variable-voltage capabilities are already part of the motor drive. If that overlaps with the 110/220 V outlet voltage you're all set, and that's exactly what AC Propulsion did.
Since when, and where, do you get Blackberry network service for FREE?
You're going to get a hernia if you don't stop moving the goalposts. First you said V2G would need a dedicated system, which the Blackberry refutes. Now you're complaining that Blackberries aren't free. Well, gee, I bet using cell data services to set up V2G wouldn't be free either. What do you think it might cost to set up a connection when the car is plugged in, given the bulk buying power of the utility? You're talking less data traffic than it takes to keep track of which cell your phone is in, because the car doesn't move when plugged in; you only need to do it a few times a day. The car needs to communicate its position, connection power and state of charge. I could squeeze that and an account number into 256 bits with room to spare. That's a lot smaller than an SMS message.
I didn't mis read you. Your suggestion was that the initial fuel savings would pay for an infrastructure...
Specifically, the savings from a PHEV with a 110-volt connection would quickly pay for a much more powerful connection, which in turn would increase the potential savings.
... and that could be installed in such a way as to benefit the utility.
It would also benefit the owner, both by increasing the fuel savings and by increasing the value of V2G services and the amount the owner could get paid for them. Some people already have the wiring (electric dryer connections in attached garages); are you saying that the utility should pay everyone else, or that it shouldn't be done?

Folks like me would just install their own; 220 V wiring isn't difficult. Even subpanels are straightforward jobs.

EP Blusters is turning into a bigger job than I have time for.
Ooh, irony.

Engineer-Poet

Quoth sjc:

Some rough math on solar car ports says that if a car port is 10 feet x 20 feet, that would be 200 square feet.
That's definitely the way to go.  The carport has more useful area, doesn't impose any weight or drag penalties on the car, doesn't have the mechanical stresses of something on a car, and keeps heat off the car instead of absorbing it.

are there any recent news dealing with the results from this project?

The comments to this entry are closed.