plug-in states and ghg

+1
[/quote]

It was a good report, highly speculative, but better than most. If we look at the 20% coal, and most of that in the mid west, it represents a big decrease in marginal ghg emissions. The grid in 2011 was 45% coal, so the added power for plug-ins is much less carbon intense. If we take there other number plug-ins will take about 3% of generated electricity, we see they will increase coal by 3%x20% = 0.6% versus having no plug-in cars. Since coal use is declining that represents not an increase, but the decrease in coal use will be a slight bit less than if we remained with a gasoline only fleet. That represents a loss of fewer coal jobs, and slightly higher utilization of coal plants that do not get shut down. Its not exactly a bad thing when compared with oil imports.

+1

That sounds about right. This strategy likely will only happen in California and Texas by 2030, and our states can make the mistakes. Both states are implementing smart grid programs to make this possible. Texas is vulnerable to changing winds and hot summers, california to hydro and bad rains and snow packs. The first real pilot of car to grid is being done for the army now
Green Car Congress: SwRI to demonstrate use of electric vehicles as part of emergency power microgrid under US Army SPIDERS program

Emergency preparedness may provide all the research money needed to make this work. This is mainly for future cars with frankenplug and other things to operate on the smartgrid.

Definitely

Each state varies. A state like texas could build enough wind turbines to provide 50% of its power. But that is only if some of the power can be buffered. Wind is not predictable. 50% wind means sometimes wind will provide 200% of the grids needs, and even if no other power is there, without storage, half would simply go to waste. Only about 30% would be reliable for peak power. Say cars could provide 6% of peak power, you could let them charge for free, and utilities would still make money getting the power back at peak. Most states aren't like this though.

 

It actually does require a smart grid to dispatch battery power instead of spin up turbines to account for by the minute changes in the grid. What you are thinking of is simple time of use, that relies on old data, not minute by minute changes in the wind or demand. That helps, but isn't as effective as peak shaving with real-time data.

The car or car charger have to be smart grid comparable in this system. IIRC both the SAE frankenplug L2 and L3 are smart grid compatible, all the major cars in North America have SAE L2 plugs, but not protocols to send energy back to the grid. Some new communication may be needed for this which we shall see from the trial. I would expect either the plug or the car would need to be programed to A) charge the car with peaks, but make sure it had a minimum charge of X kwh by Y time, and B) discharge the car at valleys but not faster than Z KW or bellow X kwh. Here home chargers could have the smarts not the cars, since they would be dedicated, but frankenplug allowing the car to have the smart grid compatibility is much better for pluging in non-dedicated chargers at work or public places.

Even rocket science isn't that tough anymore, but there is lots of testing needed to make sure the hardware and software work on something as complicated as the grid. Right now the grid operator is responsible to make sure all that solar being added is compatible, and because it is a small percentage it is rather straightforward. In hawaii where it is a large percentage on some islands they are having trouble.

Pretty simple video on what smart grid is

Not rocket science, but expensive, which is why only 2 states are pushing forward fast. It can save a lot of money though in electricity generation.