Vandium redox flow batteries in current issue of Discover magazine.

[JohnWxy]

THere is a good article on the Vanadium redox battery in the Oct issue of Discover magazine. It's content is not available on the web yet so I couldn't give a link.

the article says because of it's ablility to be charged and discharged many thousands of times and its scalability the vanadium redox battery is a leading candidate for storage of power from wind and solar.

for mor e on this technology see: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=115&topic_id=47193

[Warpy]

1. Storage has always been the problem with solar

and batteries the most expensive part of the system as they required not only a high initial startup cost but costs for disposal and recycling.

Another solution is using excess power from PVCs to lyse water into hydrogen and oxygen and use those to power fuel cells at night, although having a nocturnal power source the size of a small barn is problematic for most small suburban lots.

Development of a battery system with a very long life is great news.

[tech3149]

3. I agree that storage is one of the big problems for solar

What I don't understand is the lack of discussion of solar thermal. PV is great and the increases in efficiency and reduction in production cost indicate that it could be a good part of our energy resources. Of course, using the excess energy to electrolyze water to generate a portable/store able fuel would be the best use.

Solar thermal is such a simple technology and very cheap to implement. It can work on both small and large scale installations. Storage again is a problem but it is possible with well insulated storage tanks to keep a turbine generator running well after the sun has gone down.

[Warpy]

4. The best solar thermal I've seen

has involved 5 gallon honey tins spray painted black, filled with water, and well sealed. They were stacked inside a Trombe-Michel wall and provided adequate heat to keep a small house in New England above 60 all winter long.

I'm not sure how efficiently warm water would power a turbine, though.

[DCKit]

2. Since I don't have a sizeable supply of vanadium lying about...

I'm assuming it's not all that common. Now, if I owned a Vanadium mine and processing facilities, I'd be paying to place articles like this one.

Is it reasonable to expect these batteries to be affordable?

[JohnWxy]

5. There is lots of data on the VRB Power website. In the Discover article it says that

vanadium batteries currently cost about $500 per kilowatt hr.

You can probably get more data here: www.vrbpower.com

These are not something for personal use. They are for big applications like wind farms and large solar panel installations. However, the inventor of this battery is working on downsizing them to be applicable for home use.

[JohnWxy]

8. supply of vanadium exceeds amount needed to store the worlds total electricity production -USGS.

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1913571

"As a plus, VRBs are not resource limited. The USGS’s estimate of the world vanadium resource is far greater than would be necessary to supply storage for total world electricity production."

[kristopher]

6. Lithium storage is more probable because of economics

V2G equipped EVs with lithium batteries are a much more probable answer to the storage issue. It utilizes the money already being spent on transportation to provide a dual benefit - transportation and grid storage.

These vandium redox batteries are good but their expense compared to using V2G will cause them to have limited applicability as more v2g EVs hit the market.

[JohnWxy]

7. This would require reading the article, but it gives reasons why vanadium redox batteries

are superiour to Li for this sort of application. The most important reason is Li cannot be discharged and recharged as many times as Vanadium Redox can.

"Witmer calculates that providing electricity using VRBs, assuming 15,000 charge–discharge cycles, should cost 10 U.S. cents per kilowatt-hour—the more cycles, though, the lower the cost per kilowatt-hour."

For more complete info, suggest you read article in Discover.

[kristopher]

9. That ignores the largest single economic factor: dual use

The V2G Li battery approach is nearly free of capital cost to utilities. The amount they need to pay for storage is heavily mitigated by the fact that automobile owners are making money selling and more fully utilizing the excess capacity they will already be buying for the times they want/need to drive more miles on a single charge.

Remember, most people only drive about 40 miles/day. Current generation LioN is expected to deliver about 120-150 miles /charge with rapidly improving performance over the next 10 years. So practically, people have excess juice just sitting in their batteries doing nothing most of the time. More than enough of these owners will be happy to offset some of their costs by participating in V2G. The cost to the utility will therefore reflect the avoided capital cost.

Your information is faulty on two points both related to nickle based batteries instead of lithium, first is the number of recharges. That isn't a problem with lithium - time is. They have a shelf life, but they don't experience 'fading' with multiple recharges like nickle. The other is toxicity, which again, is a problem with nickle based batteries, but not with lithium.

The flow batteries are good for many applications, but if we look at scaling up renewables to replace fossil fuels then the cost differential presented by adding $0.10/Kwh is prohibitive. That's why the V2G concept is such an integral part of the overall picture.


And for what it's worth, my information comes from peer reviewed research and direct interaction with researchers on this topic. I like discover, but there is only so much one should expect from its contents.

[madokie]

10. Why is it that I only read about V2G from you?

[kristopher]

11. I don't know.

But I expect it is because it is a very new concept (started being studied around 2000) that is being pushed mostly by utilities, not automobile manufacturers. FERC strongly supports it and it is already virtual certainty that it is going to be an important component of moving to electric vehicles. All the talk you are hearing about "let's move to renewables NOW" has been enabled by the extremely low cost storage offered with V2G.
I happen to know about it because a fellow at our local university is the originator and recognized guru of the idea and I've been following it since 2003. Even before he got a good sized slice of that Google green energy award last year he had gone from a guy in a somewhat sleepy, dusty little office to a globe trotting academic with a solidly booked schedule. In spite of the image I'm painting (it's accurate) it is still a pretty wonkish subject.

[Fledermaus]

27. WTF???

Prove it! Give us one link that supports your claims

[kristopher]

38. Sorry I missed your insightful critique.

First let me repeat something I've said many times before: The specific benefits of V2G change as market penetration for EVs increases. So when report or article talks about one particular benefit, it isn't excluding other scenarios that are part of a different level of market penetration.


From the Toyota blog pages:
IRV'S SHEET: On Batteries and Power to the Grid
"As you might imagine, a set of comments made Sunday at the North American International Auto Show by Katsuaki Watanabe, president of Toyota Motor Corp., received a great deal of attention, discussion and response.

Mr. Watanabe, you may recall, announced that Toyota has begun the planning for a production line for lithium-ion batteries, and we plan to have Prius Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEVs), powered by such batteries, in the hands of fleet customers by 2010, or sooner. It's just one part of Toyota's global plan to sell a million hybrids per year some time during the next decade.

One response to Mr. Watanabe’s announcement came from Jon Wellinghoff, a commissioner with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and it showed up right here on Open Road.

Commissioner Wellinghoff commended us for "stepping up to the plate with a commitment to begin delivering PHEVs to fleet purchasers in the U.S. within the next two years. This announcement supports what many have stated regarding lithium battery technology. It is viable for use in vehicles here and now."

And he continued, "I only hope that Toyota will also take an additional step when it rolls out these vehicles to fleet purchasers - make them vehicle-to-grid capable so that the benefits and synergies of storage support for the grid can be realized by Toyota from a more valuable product, the consumer from payments back from grid operators for the provision of grid support services, and society from a more efficient electric grid."..."
http://blog.toyota.com/2008/01/irvs-sheet-on-b.html



Here are the initial PERSONAL comments from Jon Wellinghoff, Commissioner at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and Willett Kempton, Professor, University of Delaware. Kempton is the guy I'm talking about.

"The following comments are provided to DOE on its PHEV
R&D Plan, External Draft, March 2007. They have been submitted
in outline form for efficiency and conciseness. The authors would
welcome the opportunity to provide additional input or
clarification to DOE at your convenience.

Our purpose in submitting these comments to DOE is to
bring to the attention of both DOE PHEV program managers and
senior DOE staff our strong belief that the expressed direction of
the DOE PHEV R&D effort as portrayed in the External Draft
ignores an opportunity to realize significant benefits that are
readily attainable. It is our opinion that the potential benefits of
vehicle-to-grid (V2G) PHEVs (or the “CashBack” hybrid) are so
compelling that the technology is clearly an enabler of both the
“smart grid” and the successful market penetration of the PHEV
itself. As such, DOE should incorporate the CashBack hybrid into
the PHEV R&D Plan.

No link as it is a pdf. You can find it with google.


Here is a report on the topic prepared by an independent investigator for the California Air Resources Board
and the California Environmental Protection Agency: http://www.udel.edu/V2G/docs/V2G-Demo-Brooks-02-R5.pdf


Here is an article on the plans of the Swedes to develop wind around the V2G concept:

Sweden isn't a hot wind power market in Europe, not compared to Germany (20,000 MW of capacity), Spain (11,000 MW) or even Great Britain (nearly 2,000 MW). In fact, the Swedes currently have a paltry 572 MW of wind capacity, generating about 1.2TWh of power last year - less than one percent of electricity produced in this Nordic nation.

But Sweden has audacious goals (4.9 TWh of generation by 2010), and is starting to formulate a big vision to go with its big plans, based on the idea of wind power helping to drive (bad pun alert) a new generation of plug-in hybrid vehicles creating plausible climate neutral driving.

The way the Swedish Windpower Developers Association (SVIS) sees it, the Swedish vehicle industry (Volvo and Saab) and Swedish windpower are a great fit.

There are a few reasons why these gung-ho Swedish wind proponents may have a chance. It is true that Sweden will probably need to vastly up its renewable generation and reduce CO2 emissions further in coming years, especially after the EU sets binding CO2 reduction targets for the post-2012 period, which it should do early next year.

Wind is one of Sweden's best bets. Hydro power is pretty developed, remaining rivers are already protected - and biomass resources, which benefited from a green certificate subsidy system, are also fairly well-exploited.

Combining turbines with hybrids in a distributed generation system may not be such a stretch for the Swedes. Wind generation is a bit fickle, and many grid systems including Sweden's are not built to handle lots of incoming electricity from the spots where the wind blows best. But in a vehicle-to-grid (V2G) system, many small wind installations feeding in power are balanced by electric or hybrid-electric cars plugged in and theoretically offering up their excess capacity during times of peak need, taking it back late at night or when demand is lower.

Two more points in the Swedes' favor: the first European lithium-ion battery developer just opened its doors in Sweden, and Volvo at least is heavily investing in hybrid-electric technology. Volvo Cars is now showing its C30 ReCharge hybrid-electric plug-in concept car, and perhaps as important, Volvo Trucks is at work on a next generation of all kinds of hybrid vehicles.

Also not to be overlooked: Volvo and Saab with their nice heavy (safe) cars, unfortunately have some of the highest fleet-average CO2 emissions in Europe, which they will need to rectify.

There are definite roadblocks - in spite of itself Sweden hasn't been able to yet streamline approvals for wind power projects, whether they are for 12 turbines or 1,200. The approval process for Lillgrund, the new offshore wind farm in the picture, took a decade! And many Swedes, grown up on a combination of clean hydro and nuclear, see wind power as great in theory but in practice, a NIMBY nuisance. There are also clearly technology hurdles - battery cost and sophistication are just two.

But SVIS is conviced that V2G is a great concept to sell to the environmentally-conscious as well as everyone else, and will put forth its vision to the government in a few days, hoping for a new national policy on wind power and a plan for how to form a Swedish V2G network.
http://peakenergy.blogspot.com/2007/10/v2g-in-sweden.html


http://www.calcars.org/calcars-news/865.html


There is lots more where that came from.

[Fledermaus]

46. You didn't miss my post and we all know it.

It just took you this long to cobble together a bunch crap. Basically all you have done is throw crap at a fan and hoped something will stick to the wall.

None of your post support your claims from post 11

FERC strongly supports it and it is already virtual certainty that it is going to be an important component of moving to electric vehicles. All the talk you are hearing about "let's move to renewables NOW" has been enabled by the extremely low cost storage offered with V2G.

:rofl::evilgrin:

[kristopher]

47. Well there are three possiblities

Either you didn't read any of the material, or you don't understand what you read, or both. I think you just don't have the candlepower to engage in critical analysis. The only "proof" you understand is when Limbaugh or some other such schlep tells you what to think. I mean, tell the truth, you think FERC is a terrorist outfit in Colombia, don't you? - K

First let me repeat something I've said many times before: The specific benefits of V2G change as market penetration for EVs increases. So when report or article talks about one particular benefit, it isn't excluding other scenarios that are part of a different level of market penetration.


From the Toyota blog pages:
IRV'S SHEET: On Batteries and Power to the Grid
"As you might imagine, a set of comments made Sunday at the North American International Auto Show by Katsuaki Watanabe, president of Toyota Motor Corp., received a great deal of attention, discussion and response.

Mr. Watanabe, you may recall, announced that Toyota has begun the planning for a production line for lithium-ion batteries, and we plan to have Prius Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEVs), powered by such batteries, in the hands of fleet customers by 2010, or sooner. It's just one part of Toyota's global plan to sell a million hybrids per year some time during the next decade.

One response to Mr. Watanabe’s announcement came from Jon Wellinghoff, a commissioner with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and it showed up right here on Open Road.

Commissioner Wellinghoff commended us for "stepping up to the plate with a commitment to begin delivering PHEVs to fleet purchasers in the U.S. within the next two years. This announcement supports what many have stated regarding lithium battery technology. It is viable for use in vehicles here and now."

And he continued, "I only hope that Toyota will also take an additional step when it rolls out these vehicles to fleet purchasers - make them vehicle-to-grid capable so that the benefits and synergies of storage support for the grid can be realized by Toyota from a more valuable product, the consumer from payments back from grid operators for the provision of grid support services, and society from a more efficient electric grid."..."
http://blog.toyota.com/2008/01/irvs-sheet-on-b.html



Here are the initial PERSONAL comments from Jon Wellinghoff, Commissioner at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and Willett Kempton, Professor, University of Delaware. Kempton is the guy I'm talking about.

"The following comments are provided to DOE on its PHEV
R&D Plan, External Draft, March 2007. They have been submitted
in outline form for efficiency and conciseness. The authors would
welcome the opportunity to provide additional input or
clarification to DOE at your convenience.

Our purpose in submitting these comments to DOE is to
bring to the attention of both DOE PHEV program managers and
senior DOE staff our strong belief that the expressed direction of
the DOE PHEV R&D effort as portrayed in the External Draft
ignores an opportunity to realize significant benefits that are
readily attainable. It is our opinion that the potential benefits of
vehicle-to-grid (V2G) PHEVs (or the “CashBack” hybrid) are so
compelling that the technology is clearly an enabler of both the
“smart grid” and the successful market penetration of the PHEV
itself. As such, DOE should incorporate the CashBack hybrid into
the PHEV R&D Plan.

No link as it is a pdf. You can find it with google.


Here is a report on the topic prepared by an independent investigator for the California Air Resources Board
and the California Environmental Protection Agency: http://www.udel.edu/V2G/docs/V2G-Demo-Brooks-02-R5.pdf


Here is an article on the plans of the Swedes to develop wind around the V2G concept:

Sweden isn't a hot wind power market in Europe, not compared to Germany (20,000 MW of capacity), Spain (11,000 MW) or even Great Britain (nearly 2,000 MW). In fact, the Swedes currently have a paltry 572 MW of wind capacity, generating about 1.2TWh of power last year - less than one percent of electricity produced in this Nordic nation.

But Sweden has audacious goals (4.9 TWh of generation by 2010), and is starting to formulate a big vision to go with its big plans, based on the idea of wind power helping to drive (bad pun alert) a new generation of plug-in hybrid vehicles creating plausible climate neutral driving.

The way the Swedish Windpower Developers Association (SVIS) sees it, the Swedish vehicle industry (Volvo and Saab) and Swedish windpower are a great fit.

There are a few reasons why these gung-ho Swedish wind proponents may have a chance. It is true that Sweden will probably need to vastly up its renewable generation and reduce CO2 emissions further in coming years, especially after the EU sets binding CO2 reduction targets for the post-2012 period, which it should do early next year.

Wind is one of Sweden's best bets. Hydro power is pretty developed, remaining rivers are already protected - and biomass resources, which benefited from a green certificate subsidy system, are also fairly well-exploited.

Combining turbines with hybrids in a distributed generation system may not be such a stretch for the Swedes. Wind generation is a bit fickle, and many grid systems including Sweden's are not built to handle lots of incoming electricity from the spots where the wind blows best. But in a vehicle-to-grid (V2G) system, many small wind installations feeding in power are balanced by electric or hybrid-electric cars plugged in and theoretically offering up their excess capacity during times of peak need, taking it back late at night or when demand is lower.

Two more points in the Swedes' favor: the first European lithium-ion battery developer just opened its doors in Sweden, and Volvo at least is heavily investing in hybrid-electric technology. Volvo Cars is now showing its C30 ReCharge hybrid-electric plug-in concept car, and perhaps as important, Volvo Trucks is at work on a next generation of all kinds of hybrid vehicles.

Also not to be overlooked: Volvo and Saab with their nice heavy (safe) cars, unfortunately have some of the highest fleet-average CO2 emissions in Europe, which they will need to rectify.

There are definite roadblocks - in spite of itself Sweden hasn't been able to yet streamline approvals for wind power projects, whether they are for 12 turbines or 1,200. The approval process for Lillgrund, the new offshore wind farm in the picture, took a decade! And many Swedes, grown up on a combination of clean hydro and nuclear, see wind power as great in theory but in practice, a NIMBY nuisance. There are also clearly technology hurdles - battery cost and sophistication are just two.

But SVIS is conviced that V2G is a great concept to sell to the environmentally-conscious as well as everyone else, and will put forth its vision to the government in a few days, hoping for a new national policy on wind power and a plan for how to form a Swedish V2G network.
http://peakenergy.blogspot.com/2007/10/v2g-in-sweden.ht...


http://www.calcars.org/calcars-news/865.html


There is lots more where that came from.

[Fledermaus]

26. He has some sort of Messiah complex

He's convinced that only V2G will save the world, and only he and a select few can see it.

If you don't believe and prove him wrong, then you are some sort of evil spirit.

[kristopher]

28. ...

[madokie]

33. And you know I was wanting to read about the flow batteries

as I think its a good idea. Instead here we are off on a tangent with a certain person pushing something that should be in a post of its own. If I go the using the ignore function then I can't follow the discussion because I am missing something that someone is saying that just may be relevant and I don't want to miss anything. I come here for one thing and thats to learn about subjects at hand and not to listen to, read, 'personalities.'

[kristopher]

37. So why don't you post a remark to the OP and start a talk about what you want?

Is there a reason that won't work?

[TreasonousBastard]

12. I don't get this about V2G...

if I am buying juice from the grid to charge the car, and then selling some of the same juice I bought back to them, how is this efficient or in my interest?

Even if I were to generate it myself, how is any small system in a car using any sort of fuel more efficient than the utilities' use of fuel?

I can easily see how the utilities would love this scheme, but what's in it for the rest of us if we don't charge our cars from windmills or solar panels?

[kristopher]

13. Good question.

What you see on your electric bill is an average+profit of the various wholesale purchases of electricity your provider made to get you electricity. The short version is that the wholesale price of electricity varies greatly minute by minute, hour by hour, day by day, and year by year. The reasons for the variance involve where the demand and supply are located relative to each other, routing of the electricity, fuel used to provide electricity, basic supply demand, and unexpected demand or unexpected loss of supply.

If you had an electric vehicle with v2g basically charge your vehicle at night when demand is lowest and next morning you figure predict much driving you expect to do that day and program the car to keep whatever you feel comfortable with. Say I plan to drive 25 miles so I add a cushion and set the car's computer for 40 miles; and tell it to sell anything above that to the electric company if they need it. This power would be called on during periods of high demand, say around 2PM in the summer when AC systems start coming on. It would be more expensive than the power you bought at night.

There are different predictions about the value of this to the customer depending on how many people are participating. It will be a good payoff in the beginning ($3-4000/year profit) but as there are more vehicles added to the fleet that number will drop.

The way this works into an all electric personal transportation fleet and an all renewable grid is substantially different. The real long term benefit would be improved battery storage (they are working on manufacturing techniques for LiSi batteries with 8X the capacity by weight of the ones we have now; expect them to take about 8 years) that is considerably less expensive than now. This would enable better use of home systems and reduce dependence on the renewable powered grid.

There is no known reason this can't be done with today's technology, the improvements in storage are icing on the cake.

There are quite a few people writing about this, so you can google it if you want to know more. You might also read something like wiki on how electric markets work.

[TreasonousBastard]

14. Feasible, yes, but marketable? I could see...

trying to sell a "car that pays for itself" but this is the US where it may not be so easy to get people to play along. I know that the "wasted capital" problem has been looking for a solution for years-- utilities have to have power available from somewhere during peak hours, but massive generators sit idle most of the time-- but this seems to be a little too far out of the box for now. Even while theoretically the car owners could net a bundle, utility billing can be pretty shaky as it is and adding complexity doesn't seem like it would end well. Having said all that, I personally know people who have electric bills under $10 a month around here after installing solar roofs. The typical bill is $150-200

The concept is interesting, but if it's going to work it might be lost on cars. Why not expand the idea beyond cars and sell battery packs for home and commercial use where people can at least partly run their houses off the batteries charged overnight and automatically sell the surplus back during the day? Areas that have service interruption problems might love the idea.

Some time in the future, when personal windmills, solar roofs, etc. are more common, I can see schemes like this evolving naturally.

[kristopher]

15. The switch to EV is a natural one brought on by high fuel prices

There is little to no chance that the price of petroleum is going into decline due to increasing world demand and efforts to deal with climate change. The best way to deal with this is to increase efficiency. People speak of increasing gas mileage, but there are limits to the efficiency that an internal combustion engine can achieve. The difference in efficiency between an ICE and a battery electric drive vehicle is extremely large. The ICE actually uses only about 12-15% of the energy you pump into the tank for propulsion. The EV uses around 90%. The end result is a decrease in cost/mile (it works out to about $1/gal equivalent) and pollution/mile - even if we are using the present energy generating mix containing around 50% coal.

The battery packs for home are referred to indirectly in my earlier reply to you, but we don't need that for quite some time. This is a long involved process and the first part involved getting money invested in plants to build batteries; we are already seeing that happen with a wide range of EVs scheduled for rollout starting around 2010.

Your point about the grid being shaky and problems billing is a good one. I said that V2G mitigates the investment required by utilities; the reason I didn't say 'eliminates' is because of the requirement to upgrade the grid in several ways. The aspect that addresses your concern is commonly stated as building a "smart grid". There are lots of things between now and the day we have a renewable grid powering electric cars, so it isn't possible to predict everything with precision. However, there are some economic factors that are pretty much undeniable after careful analysis. You don't need to believe a word I'm saying, I'm just sharing what I think is going to happen.

A large part of the problem lies with battery improvements in the pipeline. IMO the largest single obstacle to what I describe happening rapidly is that investors are afraid of investing in battery plants that are going to be outmoded in 5-10 years. If we get some policies put in place that insures them against such loss then things could move quickly. If we don't then it might take gas going to $5+ a gallon to motivate them.

[TreasonousBastard]

16. Here's my existential problem with the whole thing...

once again we're being sold on the idea of "ownership," which might end up being a con.

The utilities have the direct problem of storage, not us, but we would be asked to ante up the capital for storage, with no guarantee of a return. Just as our original concept of "freedom" in owning a car has become a costly requirement for modern existence, becoming a part of the grid could become a costly requirement for having power at all as the utilities come to depend on us but decide not to pay us.

In the long run, better use of bus and light rail should reduce demand for burnable stuff more than reengineering cars.

[kristopher]

17. Please....

That is arguing just for the sake of arguing.

Our population distribution rules out light rail and bus. It simply doesn't work. Whether you like it or not the system we have to work with is the system we have to work with. Wishful musings change nothing.

No one is telling you to pony up any money for the utilities. People want less expensive transport and the best way to provide that, energy security, and a renewable infrastructure that eliminates CO2 emissions is to switch to EVs. The V2G just makes it a win win situation for everyone. If you decide to buy an electric car, and if you don't want to participate, then don't. No one is going to force you. If you want to waste money in a fit of pique, then be my guest.

[TreasonousBastard]

18. I said it's an existential problem, not a practical one...

and I find inexcusable waste in large parts of our systems.

But, not a lot I can do about it.

[JohnWxy]

29. Utilities generate MOST of the power they sell. They only buy transrferred power from other parts

of the grid a small part of the time. YOur conception of this whole thing is simplistic to the point of childishness.

If the peak period is 2:00 in the afternoon where will your electric vehicles be then? - Parked at work right? do you have place for them to hook up?


anyway, proposing a method of supplying back up power to utilities that they do not own, do not control, and cannot have complete confidence in it's ability to meet there power needs when they need it (the extra demand can be needed at a moments notice) is laughable.

What do you think the utilities are going to do shine a bat signal in the air so all the people driving their elecric cars will see it in the clouds and pull over to hook up to give the utility that extra power. How many electric vehicles do you think would be needed (within say a given municipality) to be able to supply a given utilities needs? Have you figured that out?

Given that you will need a large number of electric cars to meet the need how long do you think it will take for people to acquire this number of fairly expensive (at least for the first ten to 14 yrs of availability) cars? It will most likely take http://journals.democraticunderground.com/JohnWxy/27"> 15 years or more to get 15 million electric (plug-ins and Volts ) electric vehicles on the road. Also, these cars would be spread all over the country. To get more cars on the road so you would have a considerable number in each city, for example, would take even longer (like 25 to 30 years). So, even if this idea were practical, which it isn't, it would be many years before it could even be possible to try it.

There is another impracticality to this idea of using elecric cars for Primary power storage for utilities (other than the fact that utilities would NEVER count on assets for primary storage that they themselves didn't have complete control of.) The typical vanadium redox storage device has a useful life with proper maintenance that is far longer than the what the useful life of the typical Li battery used in an electric car will be. There is some doubt that initially the Li batteries will last 100,000 miles. After a time they should get the batteries to last for 100,000 miles, so at that point, that would mean the investment in the batteries would be good for 14 to 20 years (considering high to low use of the car). The vanadium redox battery would be good for thousands of discharges and recharges and should last many years longer than that - thus bringing a much better return on the investment.

But mainly, the lack of control of the source of back up power and the lack of any certainty that some number (how many woule be required, does anybody know?) of electric cares could supply enough back-up power to satisfy a utillities needs makes this idea sort of buck-rogers kind of thinking. There is a complete lack of numbers or estimates of how much power these Li batteries in electric cars could supply. And then there is the question of how many cars would be not in use when the utility might need them - aat peak power demand - basically, I would think anytime from 12:00 noon to 5:00 (depending somewhat on where you are - e.g. Chicago versus Atlanta - Atlanta's power demands probably run later than Chicago's). Part of those time spans run right throught the times when people would be driving their cars.

It's certainly possible that in the future people will be able to plug in their hybrids or electrics and sell some power back to the utilities - but I seriously doubt that this will ever be a source of primary power back up for utilities.

[kristopher]

31. You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. N-O-N-E!!

:hangover: ???

[JohnWxy]

39. I thought you were 15 yrs old. Now you sound like a 2 yr old. LOL

[kristopher]

40. You pop out these strings of nonsense

You pop out these strings of nonsense where virtually everything is either an incorrect piece of data, a misinterpretation of data, a misrepresentation of data, or just something totally made up; and you think I'm going to invest the time to answer with more than a sample of your malcognizance? You made this huge convoluted forecast of EV penetration and you did it without even bothering to learn such a basic fact as the service life of the auto fleet.

I'm sorry but it merits only so much serious dialogue. If you wish to think a little and actually take the time to put together some real criticism, then I'd love to have a real discussion.

[IDemo]

21. The real value of V2G is in ancillary services

V2G isn't just about delivering 'juice' back to the grid. It's been estimated that the value of power quality monitoring and regulation ("ancillary services") a V2G equipped vehicle can provide would equal or surpass its value as simple energy storage, possibly even enough to more than recover the initial added cost of an EV or hybrid for the owner.

When the car is in the V2G setting, the battery's charge goes up or down depending on the needs of the grid operator, which sometimes must store surplus power and other times requires extra power to respond to surges in usage. The ability of the V2G car's battery to act like a sponge provides a solution for utilities, which pay millions to generating stations that help balance the grid. Kempton estimates the value for utilities could be up to $4,000 a year for the service, part of which could be paid to drivers.

http://www.udel.edu/PR/UDaily/2008/nov/car112807.html

Grid operators are must continuously match the generation of power to the consumption. In many power markets, this function, called regulation or automatic generation control (AGC), is unbundled from power generation, and is procured as an ancillary service. Grid regulation requires a power system that can ramp power up or down under real time control of the grid operator. Vehicles are well-suited to providing regulation due to their ability to respond rapidly to power commands, and because the net energy requirement for regulation usually nets out to zero. Because of this, even battery electric vehicles could perform regulation services on a continuous basis, without depleting the battery pack below a nominal level of 70 to 80 percent.

http://www.acpropulsion.com/reports/ACP_ENV2001.htm

[kristopher]

22. Exactly

Even at low penetration (I think that is assumed in those links) there is considerable incentive for all parties to pursue this strategy. The benefits change in relation to the percentage of V2G vehicles on the road.

[JohnWxy]

41. FINALLY, some links to look at. Much appreciated. I note this comment at the end of the second link

"Micro-transactions Capture V2G Value

Creating transactional systems to capture vehicle-to-grid value will become a fundamental element of the electric propulsion business. The propulsion system will provide motive power for the vehicle's primary function as transportation. The technology for feeding power from the vehicle to the grid is a feature that creates added value. Since every energy transaction can be recorded and valued, the way phone calls are today, the technology supplier for this beneficial feature may extract a fee in proportion its usage. This pay-for-use approach allows separating the value of the propulsion function from the value of the vehicle-to-grid function."

For V2G to work this is a critical capability to achieve. I don't know the cost of such a system. It certainly seems do-able though. Just a matter of figuring the cost of the system.



Also, this will really need the 240 volt hook-up to work so there is time available for back-up storage mode (110 volt system takes all night to recharge). OF course, the back-up power demand is not likely to occur at night but more likely during daytime hours. So hook-ups would be needed at parking facilities close to people's work (more on this later).

I still have fundamental question. ORdinarily the vehicles batteries will be carrying enough of charge to get people around. When back at home they would be charging to build up the charge lost during the days driving. IF the utility taps some of that charge (most likely to happen during the day as late as 5 PM) there will have to be time to recharge the batteries again before the car is driven again or else you will be operating on the ICE burning gas, (reducing the owners mpg). Now, while operating on the ICE you are not an electric car. The batteries will not be charged up enough during operation and will still require recharge when you get home. When you recharge the batteries from the utililty you charge up enough to drive the car the typical range and no more - the batteries are designed to hold a charge for just that range and no more than that.

So in the end extra power drawn from the batteries by the utilities would have to be replaced by the utilities in another charge cycle (before you drive the car again unless you don't mind driving with the ICE, using gasoline) which the car owner pays full retail rates for. When discharged by the utilities does the customer get paid a wholesale rate for the power drawn from the batteries? What does the extra charging and discharging mean for battery life (quoted as 5 yrs - didn't say how many discharges/charge cycles that means).

At any rate the owner may be paid for draws on his battery at a wholesale rate and paying for extra charges at the retail power rate plus absorbing the cost of shorter battery life (of course I'm asssuming there wouldn't be THAT many discharges on demand from the utility).

Another point - the article said cars are only used 1 hr out of the day. THat sounds a little light to me but ]that doesn't address how many would be available during the likely times of extra power demands (from 8 or 9 AM to 6 PM except in the south where A/C demands continue till later in the day). I wonder what proportion of cars would be in use from say 6 AM till 9 AM and from 3:30 PM till 6:00 PM. (often power demand peaks around 5 PM as that is in many areas the peak temperature time and A/Cs are going strong) My guess is the proportion would be pretty high - I mean the first purpose of getting the car is to get to work and back and other transportation needs. So how many cars would be available and adequately charged from 3 PM to 6 PM?

IF you want the cars to be ready for discharge during the day after a drive to work you would have to have hook-ups in parking garages where people work to have access to the storage during the day. OF course, after driving to work the car may need a significant charge and would not be ready for any disharge of power till such charge was completed. These (hook-ups) too would need to be 240 volt hook-ups or the charge process would take too long. I guess the utility is going to pay for the hook-ups at the parking garages. Given an estimate of how many cars would be needed to meet the power back-up needs of the utility how much would the appropriate number of hook-ups cost? What would the maintenance costs be on hook-ups not in private homes?

I may have missed it, just did a quick review of the links, but do they have an estimate of how many cars would be needed to meet the "likely" extra power demand (obviously the power demand is going to be a range but you have to be able to cover just about any likely power demand - that is, on the high end. Given a good estimate of how many cars would actually need to be available when peak power demands typically hit (3PM to 6 PM) how many cars would have to be out there. In other words, if 75% of the cars were on the road during time when peak power demand is likely, the total number of cars owned would have to be 4 times (1/(1-.75)= 4) the number of cars required to deliver the power requirements estimated for a power demand incident.

so you would need:

Power need most likely during the day when most of the cars would be parked at work OR ON THE ROAD DRIVING HOME. Need Power hook-ups in parking garages close to work. Presumably the utility would pay for these. Need an estimate of how many hook-ups would be needed and what the cost would be to supply and install them and what the maintenance (replacement rate/cost) would be. YOu would need to put in far more hook-ups than the number of electric cars being driven to make sure every electric car driven would be able to get access to a hook-up.

Need an estimate of how many cars would be required to meet power demand from utility. Divide that number by the fraction of cars expected to be NOT BE in use at the likely time of the power need (3 PM to 6 PM).

Will owners of electric cars go for the extra use of their batteries by the utility? Depends on whether the utility pays retail rates for power drawn so owners aren't paying more money for extra charges than they get paid for the discharges. If the power company pays retail rates for dishcarged power, is it economical to do this as opposed to other approaches to storing the power (must also consider cost of installing and maintaining charging hook-ups at work sites)?

[JohnWxy]

19. My guess is the authors of the article which you haven't read have checked thoroughly for good

sources. You say you have sources of good info. Got any links!

I mention Discover as this is a magazine most people will read. (PLus it's a sign that the technology is being more widely recgnized.) No sense mentioning a source most will not even look at. Connsider yourself, you haven't even read the Disover article.

Consider this re V2g: if people are driving their cars during the day ( and perhaps charging them in the parking garage, while at work, for the drive home and charging them up at night - when will they be available to utilities? ..on the weeek-ends?

Do you really think utilities are going to rely on a source of storage (for the primary storage) a soUrce which THEY DON'T EVEN CONTROL? A source which is variable and out of their control. How can they really use as a primary source of stored power a source they cannot control and do not have any way of knowing how much they can draw on exactly when they need it.

Regarding V2g, I'm sure it could supply some storage capacity in the future (i'm not at all sure how much that will be, as it depends on the whims and driving characteristics of all the Plug-in owners - Im sure you will have a very firm conviction and number for that, though.) (say 25 yrs from now - it will take about 25 years to have about 52 million Volts and Plug-ins on the road - assuming 433 mpg for the Volt and 39 mpg avg for an ICE). this is actuallly a very optimistic estimate as it assumes some pretty spectacular sales figures for these cars in the 'out' years (like over a million units sold per year!). How long do you think the cars (and the batteries will last)? Not only will you have initial car sales to meet to reach 52 million units on the road (in 25 yrs) but also replacement sales for those going out of service somewhere between 14 to 20 years after they went into service. So it could very well be longer than 25 years to reach 52 million electric cars. And the price would be (without any inflation about $72 billion ( and that's with a pretty aggressive learning curve bringing the price down to about 2/3rds the original over that time period - without inflation)

You said the utilities could avoid capital expenditures but somebody will have to come up with that $72 Billion extra dollars for the electric cars.

[kristopher]

20. You're

You're pulling those numbers out of your ass; they are based on an inept "analysis" you did several months ago, which in turn was based on absolutely nothing except your mis-perceptions and biases. Take your claims on vehicle rotation. The average milage of a driver in the US is about 20K/year and the bulk of the entire personal transportation fleet rotates in approximately 10 years (200,000 miles). The rest of your analysis is equally (if not more) flawed.

Added on edit: This post by kestrel addresses your lack of knowledge concerning the behavior of utilities: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x171270


Get back to us when you have a clue - and when you're sober.

[Name removed]

Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JohnWxy]

24. I forgot to address your comment re my knowledge of utilities: your comment and link content have

no relevance to what I said about utiities only committing to primary power storage facilities. The content of the link you provided is of no relevance to my statement re primary storage. YOu persist in offering nonsense as if it were of some value or relevance.

Please do not waste my time and others time on this site with nonsense. YOu are not amusing.
YOu make this site look bad to others.

[kristopher]

25. I don't find you very "amusing" either.

But hey, that's life.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=115&topic_id=170508&mesg_id=171286

[JohnWxy]

43. Here is the spreadsheet again, you can change the assumptions to suit yourself

and see how much difference it makes as to how soon the Volts or Plug-ins are make an appreciable reduction to total gallons of gas consumed. The 100 mpg for the initial performance of the Volts (on the average) came from Rick Waggoner, CEO of GM. For the 'out years' I used 433 mpg for Volt - about as high as I felt was realistic. Sales volume intial year I assumed 100,000 with 20% per year sales growth. As I said, anyone can change the assumptions to whatever they like but at 20% you get to over 1 million units sold per year after several years so that's a pretty 'strong' sales growth number.

But if anybody wants to use higher numbers they are welcome to and report what they get. THe surprising thing is the results do not change all that much. It's going to take 20 to 30 years for the Volts (or plug-ins) to make an appreciable reduction in the total gallons of gas consumed.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=115&topic_id=160775


If you thought my assumptions were faulty you could have offered some of your own or .... oh, uh well, maybe you couldn't have.

[kristopher]

44. Thank you for the opportunity, but I have no desire to do for you your reseach.

I have plenty of my own in the que.

[JohnWxy]

45. you are always good for comic relief: "your own research"

[JohnWxy]

30. Your "information" which apparently you have no legitimate sources for (you do not count) ignores

the reality that utilities are not going to rely on a backup storage device - that they do not have complete control of (assuming enough electric cars were around to provide enough storage needed (do you have an idea how much power would be needed for how long and how many cars it would take to supply it?) and assuming these cars happened to be parked and plugged in JUST WHEN the utility needed the extra jolt of juice). Electric cars providing primary storage to utilities - it's a laughable idea.

I suppose you think when a utility needs an extra supply of power they will shine some sort-of 'bat signal' (ala Batman) in the sky and expect all those electric car owners will see it and pull over and plug in - and very quickly). The utilities have to know that when they need the power they can supply it.

Even if these requirements were possible to meet, you do not get something for nothing - somebody is paying for the storage capacity. It still does cost something. But as I said in another post to this thread - realistically, most of the cars would be in use just when the power demand would be highest. Except possibly on week-ends. (i can't believe I'm talking about this like it's a serious idea.)

Re Li batteries recharge potential I'll quote the Discover article:

"For largescale storage, the rules are very different. Typical rechargeable batteries are unsuitable because it is difficult to get a lot of energy out of them quickly; when the grid is on the verge of crashing, you want an energy infusion now. Ordinary rechargeables also wear out easily. A typical laptop battery will die after a few hundred charge-discharge cycles. In contrast, flow batteries can be charged and discharged many thousands of times."

I gave you another source (and a link) in one of my other posts to this thread too.

Now, I'm sure the performance of Li batteries will be improved over time but they are not expected to match vanadium redox batteries in total number of recharge cycles (of course vanadium batteries will no doubt be improved over time too.).

There is another type of battery which is good for large storage applications and might prove to be better than Vanadium redox batteries and that is the sodium sulfer battery (made by NGK Insulators). They are less scalable but have attracted investors because it is a more mature technology.

I keep asking for links or references but you can't provide them. I read one paper on V2G and it was light on specifics. It wouldn't pass any serious review by any 'peerage'. I don't think it was submitted to any journal.

Since you can't provide links or references Ihave to conclude you don't have any.

Maybe you read about this in that journal of record: Marvel comics.

[kristopher]

32. Keep trying!!!

One of these days you might actually get at least one minor fact right.

So far you've got a goose egg.

Have you ever heard of EPRI? See what they have to say.

http://www.energetics.com/phev07/pdfs/Duvall.pdf

[Fledermaus]

34. Thats It?

Out of the whole power point presentation theres one comment with this caveat.

Need Comprehensive RD&D Plan for Electric Utility Interface to Realize the Full Potential of a Plug-in Hybrid as a Base Load and Peak Resource

:evilgrin::rofl::evilgrin:

[kristopher]

36. Good, you found it.

Now that you see who is an authoritative source you can track down some legitimate information on what you want to know.

You were provided several peer reviewed articles that you failed to understand. Try rereading those; or more probably, try reading them.

As to this power point, my airheaded friend, it addresses a number of items that another poster made claims about.

You'll notice, if you get someone to read those papers to you, a consistent pattern where the idea of storage by EV auto batteries is central to the future planning of the US electrical system.

If you really want to understand the reasons V2G is such a big deal (instead of just engaging in your usual mindless, totally off-target nit picking) I'd suggest you take a little time to educate yourself on the grid. Learn how it developed, why it operates like it does (physical and economic constraints) and how electricity is bought, sold and regulated.
That gives you a place to start in evaluating the potential ways our energy infrastructure might evolve.

[NNadir]

35. Ever hear of science?

Clearly not.

Don't try it.

It's clearly over your head and there's no sense burning more rubber.

The air's polluted enough because of anti-nuke illiteracy, and there's no sense trying to explain to you that science does not consist of a bunch of glossy pictures that you find by 15 seconds of dipshit googling.

[JohnWxy]

42. FINALLY you came up with a link to something. After a very cursory review of the info presented I

I didn't see any estimate of what the power requirements would be for a utility under emergency needs and how many PHEGs would be required to meet this need. Keeping in mind that the most likely times for peak energy demands are around 5 - 6 PM, usually this is also the time when most cars will be on the road or home either pretty low on charge or being charged. Not a very good time to be asking for extra power.

Still don't see any estimates of cost to install all the equipment needed and how many PHEGs with power to draw on would be availaable when it would be needed. I would note that utilities don't like probabillities when it comes to counting on back up power.

[kristopher]

48. But what you DO see is a prediction of EV market penetration

Which is about 100X as aggressive as that tripe you were peddling.