EV batteries

Boozehound

Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
Nov 7, 2016
Messages
2,492
Reaction score
8,091
@STS-134 you are missing the entire point. You can call the numbers absurd if you like but it doesn't change the bottom line. Let me repeat this for you: We are already at capacity. Your rationalizations as to why it's ok to add thousands of KWR in additional delivered power to an already strapped grid are ridiculous. You are in no position to say who will charge their EV and when. Seriously, where have you been? Do you not see the many people who are "recharging" their ICE vehicles all throughout the day? Do you not understand that our air conditioners run all day and up into the night if they're sized correctly? Sure, some people might charge on a regimen just like yours. But you have no guarantees as to how many.

Once again, we're being asked in the link above to limit our use of appliances that draw less than 5KW. And you think it's all good to add (let's use your example) a bunch of 11KW loads to an already strapped grid? You have zero ability to control when these loads are attached. You should admit that this is asking for trouble from a grid that is too often unable to sustain our existing loads.
 

STS-134

Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
Mar 6, 2014
Messages
12,380
Reaction score
13,933
Location
Saratoga, CA
@STS-134 you are missing the entire point. You can call the numbers absurd if you like but it doesn't change the bottom line. Let me repeat this for you: We are already at capacity.
No, you are wrong, we're not at capacity. You are misunderstanding a fundamental thing about electricity generation, transmission, and usage: electricity has to be generated, transported, and used instantaneously, with few exceptions. It cannot be stored.

This is the Cal ISO demand curve for August 14, 2020. The day California had rolling blackouts. Light blue line = actual demand total load on grid. Purple line = net demand (grid load - renewables). The only time there was a capacity crunch was around 6:30 to 7:30 pm, which was when Cal ISO ordered utilities to shed load. But between midnight and 2 pm, there was some 15,000 megawatts of spare capacity.
Cal ISO 14 Aug 2020.jpg

Your rationalizations as to why it's ok to add thousands of KWR in additional delivered power to an already strapped grid are ridiculous. You are in no position to say who will charge their EV and when. Seriously, where have you been? Do you not see the many people who are "recharging" their ICE vehicles all throughout the day? Do you not understand that our air conditioners run all day and up into the night if they're sized correctly? Sure, some people might charge on a regimen just like yours. But you have no guarantees as to how many.
Pricing should reflect scarcity at the times of day a resource is scarce. If people want to charge their vehicles between 4 pm and 8 pm, they'll be able to do so, and they will pay a premium for it. That's how market economies work. Most people will choose not to do so. I'd NEVER charge my Tesla between 5pm and 8pm (electricity most expensive) unless I absolutely have to. And we're talking less than 5 days a year, if even that.

Let's have gas stations raise prices by $3/gallon between 5pm and 8pm and see how many people fill up at that time. I mean, you'd only do that if you were on a road trip and absolutely couldn't do it at other times, right?
Once again, we're being asked in the link above to limit our use of appliances that draw less than 5KW. And you think it's all good to add (let's use your example) a bunch of 11KW loads to an already strapped grid? You have zero ability to control when these loads are attached. You should admit that this is asking for trouble from a grid that is too often unable to sustain our existing loads.
All of this business of asking people to limit use of anything is stupid. Don't ask, just adjust pricing to limit demand. Same goes with road capacity during commute hours, water during a drought, etc. Let the market do its thing.

But the fact of the matter is, we're not anywhere close to capacity. There's a ton of capacity that goes unused all night long.
 
Last edited:

Boozehound

Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
Nov 7, 2016
Messages
2,492
Reaction score
8,091
No, you are wrong, we're not at capacity.
Actually, you are wrong. Go back and read the story at the link in #159. I have a 4th grader across the street who I bet can understand this simple concept. We are already at capacity at certain times of the day on certain days. You have no way to control when people charge their EVs. You might find now you see it now you don't pricing too unpopular to implement in TX. Again, we don't have the capacity to run everyone's A/C right now. Can you look anyone in the eye with a straight face and suggest adding even 10,000 EVs charging at even the measly 5KW required for a typical air conditioner is going to be ok? Remember you have absolutely no control over when people charge their EVs. Do you actually not acknowledge the reality that some people may have run their EV batteries down and need to plug in before they can go out later that evening? Seriously...

Of course we don't have the single party super majority utopia that is Kalifornia here. Maybe that's the problem. I constantly see it suggested that the reason stupid policies fail is because we simply don't have enough of them. I'm not bashing EVs here but simply stating that our grid in TX can't handle a bunch more of them without improvements.
 

STS-134

Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
Mar 6, 2014
Messages
12,380
Reaction score
13,933
Location
Saratoga, CA
Actually, you are wrong. Go back and read the story at the link in #159. I have a 4th grader across the street who I bet can understand this simple concept. We are already at capacity at certain times of the day on certain days.
I did read it. You're exactly right. Certain times. NOT all the time. http://www.ercot.com/

Over 10,000 megawatts of capacity available all night long, and that's even with certain power plants taken offline (the decline of the orange curve) due to expected low demand.
ERCOT 2021-06-14.jpg

You have no way to control when people charge their EVs.
You have no way to control any individual person's behavior, but you can control large scale behavior with market pricing.
You might find now you see it now you don't pricing too unpopular to implement in TX. Again, we don't have the capacity to run everyone's A/C right now. Can you look anyone in the eye with a straight face and suggest adding even 10,000 EVs charging at even the measly 5KW required for a typical air conditioner is going to be ok?
Yes because you're charging those 10,000 EVs mostly when the green and orange curves diverge.
Remember you have absolutely no control over when people charge their EVs. Do you actually not acknowledge the reality that some people may have run their EV batteries down and need to plug in before they can go out later that evening? Seriously...
A few might have run the batteries down, but unless you are doing a long roadtrip, if you're stupid enough to not charge them earlier in the morning, that's on you, and you're going to pay for it. Being financially penalized for stupidity tends to make people change their behavior. It's seriously the easiest thing in the world to plug in an EV when you pull into the garage at the end of the day. Takes less than 5 seconds to do.
Of course we don't have the single party super majority utopia that is Kalifornia here. Maybe that's the problem. I constantly see it suggested that the reason stupid policies fail is because we simply don't have enough of them. I'm not bashing EVs here but simply stating that our grid in TX can't handle a bunch more of them without improvements.
Well what are you going to do about it? Just as I don't have direct control over when people charge their EVs, neither of us has control over what people choose to buy. And, the vehicle fleet isn't going to convert to 100% EVs overnight. Tesla's basically been making cars as fast as they can for several years now and they're still selling every car they make, and only a small fraction of the fleet has been converted. If TX can't figure out what's going on, anticipate demand, and build out the grid to support the small fraction of cars that need to be charging during the peak evening hours on roadtrips over the next 15-20 years as the vehicle fleet converts over, I don't know what to say other than put people in charge who know what they're doing.
 
Last edited:

Boozehound

Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
Nov 7, 2016
Messages
2,492
Reaction score
8,091
You have no way to control any individual person's behavior, but you can control large scale behavior with market pricing.
Many people won't accept a variable rate plan.

Yes because you're charging those 10,000 EVs mostly when the green and orange curves diverge.
You cannot state that as fact. There are plenty people who burn a tank in one day. I did today. They will charge their cars as needed.

if you're stupid enough to not charge them earlier in the morning, that's on you, and you're going to pay for it.
This is absolutely false in my state right now. Unless you bought a plan with rates based on time of usage. Most people do not.

the vehicle fleet isn't going to convert to 100% EVs overnight.
If 40% converted in the next year we'd be in one hell of a bigger mess than we're already in.

I don't know what to say other than put people in charge who know what they're doing.
That is a statement to behold coming from CA. Why do you ever have brownouts, poorly managed forests, people using the street as a relief area, and rampant theft in such a utopia that puts people in charge who know what they're doing? Holy crap, Venice Beach! CA used to be such a nice state. Why have so many businesses closed or moved from your state? Why is it so hard for so many to find work there? Why do so many leave for OR, WA, NV, AZ, TX, TN, and MT.

We're very far from utopia in TX. Our grid reliability has worsened over the years. We need more competent leadership just to make our grid work with the load we have. It amazes me when guys with your technical background suggest that we can take any extra unpredictable load as our grid stands. Sure, it could support some EVs off peak. But there is huge potential for chaos if people don't always charge when you expect them too. What if some people keep their A/C set to 72 and charge the car they just ran around town all day in? On days like today when we've been asked to limit power consumption. What if others want to wash clothes in the daytime? Do you grasp how ridiculous it is that this wasn't a problem decades ago but it is today?
 

STS-134

Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
Mar 6, 2014
Messages
12,380
Reaction score
13,933
Location
Saratoga, CA
Many people won't accept a variable rate plan.
Customers don't set the rates, the market does. Non time-of-use pricing is going away.
You cannot state that as fact. There are plenty people who burn a tank in one day. I did today. They will charge their cars as needed.
Those folks will pay more if they want to charge at peak times. But they're a minority. Most cars will not be doing this on any given day, and the people who will be doing it are a drop in the bucket compared to the total, especially if you consider that initially, most of the road trippers will be using gasoline cars.
This is absolutely false in my state right now. Unless you bought a plan with rates based on time of usage. Most people do not.

If 40% converted in the next year we'd be in one hell of a bigger mess than we're already in.
We can't even produce enough vehicles for rental car companies due to a chip shortage. And now you're talking about 40% fleet turnover in the next year?
That is a statement to behold coming from CA. Why do you ever have brownouts, poorly managed forests, people using the street as a relief area, and rampant theft in such a utopia that puts people in charge who know what they're doing?
This statement by someone from TX, which is one of the states with an even worse run grid than CA! I mean come on, we had one or two day with rolling blackouts for ~2 hours in the last 20 years, and TX has several days' worth of shutdowns due to cold. And this after the same thing happened in 2011. You know, unlike you, I'm not constantly insulting your state the same way you insult mine, and I've acknowledged the problems in mine.
We're very far from utopia in TX. Our grid reliability has worsened over the years. We need more competent leadership just to make our grid work with the load we have. It amazes me when guys with your technical background suggest that we can take any extra unpredictable load as our grid stands. Sure, it could support some EVs off peak. But there is huge potential for chaos if people don't always charge when you expect them too. What if some people keep their A/C set to 72 and charge the car they just ran around town all day in? On days like today when we've been asked to limit power consumption. What if others want to wash clothes in the daytime? Do you grasp how ridiculous it is that this wasn't a problem decades ago but it is today?
This is what happens when you let corporate greed dictate how the grid is planned and built. Oh well, at least the good thing is that TX isolated itself from the Western and Eastern Interconnections, so its problems won't affect anyone else.
 

Boozehound

Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
Nov 7, 2016
Messages
2,492
Reaction score
8,091
Customers don't set the rates, the market does. Non time-of-use pricing is going away.
Customers do have a say in it. Others have been making that claim for years but it hasn't happened here. Yet.
Those folks will pay more if they want to charge at peak times.
False, in my state. See above.
We can't even produce enough vehicles for rental car companies due to a chip shortage. And now you're talking about 40% fleet turnover in the next year?
Obviously that was a hypothetical. This would never happen in either TX or likely CA even if the cars were available.
This statement by someone from TX, which is one of the states with an even worse run grid than CA!
False again. Yes, we had major problems from an extreme winter weather event unseen in my lifetime and unlikely to be seen again anytime soon. But not impossible. The big question is how much do people want to pay to insure against a highly improbable event? Time will tell.

Over the years I had to generate for 8 days after Ike. I'm maybe a quarter mile from a major substation but the lines from there to here are aerial and a tree took them out right across the street from the substation. During the recent Global Warming Winter Freeze I had to generate for a couple hours but that was an outlier as I know many who were days without power. That's it. Centerpoint has maintained 122-124.5VAC per leg at my house for decades. I have never once seen a brownout and the freeze is the ONLY rolling blackout I've ever seen here. Quite a contrast with CA for the last 2 decades. I remember CA being in the news daily over its third world electricity problems. How ironic is that for the home of Silicon Valley?

You know, unlike you, I'm not constantly insulting your state the same way you insult mine, and I've acknowledged the problems in mine.
Fair point. I can find plenty to insult mine about too. Our leadership isn't quite as inept as yours but it's only a matter of degree. Both suck. Your taxes don't buy your amazing weather. What are you getting in return for that ass raping? How much is enough? Our property taxes in Houston are absolutely ridiculous, going up at many times the rate of inflation yet these assclowns can't even reliably pick up the garbage and fix a few potholes. Or stop jackholes from hijacking major intersections to do donuts and other stunts. But at least small business owners aren't having to clean up feces to open their doors in the morning or just watch thieves carry stuff off unabated because it's under the $950 threshold your police can arrest for. I saw a sheriff from the LA area speaking just a few days ago about his inability to get the DA to take charges for violent felonies in 60%+ of the cases brought. My sympathies to Californians who have never voted for such stupidity but are impacted by it daily. Same for Houstonians.

This is what happens when you let corporate greed dictate how the grid is planned and built.
We're in agreement here. Is there anything to be gained by substituting political graft? I too would love to see engineers do the engineering. But feeeeeeeeelings, right? We allow our crooked leaders to make decisions about technical things based on feelings rather than reality. Maybe corporate greed is indistinguishable from political graft. Big Tech's buying of so many leaders would be an example. The two seem to fit together.
Oh well, at least the good thing is that TX isolated itself from the Western and Eastern Interconnections, so its problems won't affect anyone else.
That has worked out very well for us here. I remember numerous incidents where there were big problems with Entergy and the Eastern grid. And also those on your side. I comfortably watched those events from my 72 degree air conditioned reliably powered home.

For all our differences I think we agree that the grid needs work in both states right now. Adding a bunch more EVs will only increase the need.
 

STS-134

Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
Mar 6, 2014
Messages
12,380
Reaction score
13,933
Location
Saratoga, CA
Customers do have a say in it. Others have been making that claim for years but it hasn't happened here. Yet.

False, in my state. See above.
So PG&E is moving everyone to time-of-use plans this month in my area, unless people specifically opt out. They eliminated the first set of time-of-use plans (called "A" and "B") and replaced them with the "C" and "D" plans that feature later peak rates. People on "A" and "B" plans are grandfathered for another 1-2 years but after that, the plans are being discontinued and they'll have to transition to a plan that's currently offered. They're eliminating the "E-6" plan, which was popular with solar customers and hasn't been offered for years, this year I believe.

It's not hard to see where this is going. The tiered rate plan (rates don't depend on time-of-use) is likely to be not offered to new customers next, followed by elimination for customers already on it.
False again. Yes, we had major problems from an extreme winter weather event unseen in my lifetime and unlikely to be seen again anytime soon. But not impossible. The big question is how much do people want to pay to insure against a highly improbable event? Time will tell.

Over the years I had to generate for 8 days after Ike. I'm maybe a quarter mile from a major substation but the lines from there to here are aerial and a tree took them out right across the street from the substation. During the recent Global Warming Winter Freeze I had to generate for a couple hours but that was an outlier as I know many who were days without power. That's it. Centerpoint has maintained 122-124.5VAC per leg at my house for decades. I have never once seen a brownout and the freeze is the ONLY rolling blackout I've ever seen here. Quite a contrast with CA for the last 2 decades. I remember CA being in the news daily over its third world electricity problems. How ironic is that for the home of Silicon Valley?
Okay well if we're going to use that as our metric, I haven't had a rolling blackout ever, because I wasn't one of the affected customers.
Fair point. I can find plenty to insult mine about too. Our leadership isn't quite as inept as yours but it's only a matter of degree. Both suck.
Agreed that both suck. I'm not sure which is more inept though. Both seem like they're vying for the prize.
Your taxes don't buy your amazing weather.
I'll still take the weather over Texas in July, thank you very much.
We're in agreement here. Is there anything to be gained by substituting political graft? I too would love to see engineers do the engineering.
Engineers should be writing the regulations. For one thing, if I were in charge of this, there would be severe financial penalties if the grid is ever unable to supply enough electricity and there's not an emergency. Extreme heat or cold doesn't count as an emergency. And the penalties should be severe enough that companies calculate that it's cheaper to properly plan for these events. There's no excuse for this to happen in a place that's not a third world country with a dysfunctional government. For these companies, this is just a calculation of what minimizes expenses. The role of the government is to set the penalties such that minimal expenses occur when they do what's best for society overall.
For all our differences I think we agree that the grid needs work in both states right now. Adding a bunch more EVs will only increase the need.
Yep. Agreed.
 
Last edited:

Deacon

TXCTG
VIP
Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
Nov 13, 2016
Messages
15,171
Reaction score
21,775
Location
Hill Country, TX
@Boozehound we are not routinely running at the ragged edge of capacity. Baking cookies (or charging an EV) isn’t going to cause a blackout. The only reason we’re even nearing any cause for concern at the moment is due to the early arrival of heat waves together with temporarily reduced generation capacity as non-winterized infrastructure is offline or producing at reduced rates while they complete repairs from February.

It’s not a question of the Texas grid being unable to handle the demand of A/C in the summer and therefore it can never handle charging more EVs than exist now. If our oil and gas lobbyists weren’t as successful at pulling the teeth of our legislature, reducing regulation to mere suggestions, we wouldn’t even be having this discussion right now, because our generation infrastructure would already be operating normally since at the very least 2011. And hundreds of dead people wouldn’t be dead and billions in damages and overcharges wouldn’t be undermining us. And we wouldn’t be handing tax dollars over to generators for the privilege of letting them charge 10,000x the price and just hoping they accept.

It’s not the grid that’s the problem, and even if you were convinced it were the issue, you can take solace in the fact that it will be a gradual shift with plenty of time to get ahead of whatever it is you think the limiting factors might be.

Is there anything to be gained by substituting political graft?
The options aren’t just unfettered monopoly or wanton political corruption. In fact, those two usually go hand in hand. It’s possible to set minimum operating requirements.

Adding a bunch more EVs will only increase the need.
It will slowly increase the overall load over time, but the need to address our broken system was not caused by a relative handful of EVs and will not be solved by fearmongering over them.

By the way, a lot of people using the wholesale rate companies in Texas are already on a continually variable rate that already encourages the effortless and simple step of setting the EV in their garage to charge slowly overnight. When someone gets home for the evening, they can just plug in and not think about it beyond that, and it will be charged to whatever preset level before they get in the next morning. It’s not difficult or complicated.
 

Boozehound

Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
Nov 7, 2016
Messages
2,492
Reaction score
8,091
@Deacon, first, welcome back. I didn't see what you posted that got you in trouble. Of course I understand that our grid isn't routinely in trouble. It's only on really hot days and when unexpected things happen at the same time. Having said that I'm uncomfortable with the number of times this has happened in recent years.

I also understand the ideal of charging an EV at night. But look around. People are stupid. @STS-134 is convinced that pricing is the answer to everything because he's smart enough not to overpay. Yet look at the business convenience stores do. Look at the idiots paying 60 cents a gallon more when they could go a quarter mile or sometimes right across the street and pay a competitive price for their fuel. I can name several stations in Houston like this. I'll never understand why people buy gas there. There's zero reason to think that there will be plenty of people who need to charge their EV in the afternoon or whenever they find it low.

The push is on to get rid of the ICE. I'm simply saying that we have a lot of infrastructure work to do before this can happen.
 

doubledge

PSL?
Intermediate User
Joined
May 14, 2019
Messages
1,137
Reaction score
1,507
The push is on to get rid of the ICE. I'm simply saying that we have a lot of infrastructure work to do before this can happen
As someone who has been driving an EV now for nearly four years, this I believe is the crux of our future success. From the grid and public charging networks to charging standards, politics and regulations, there are a lot of moving parts working at different speeds. So how we reach the finish line is hard to pin point but it will for sure involve some pain points along the way. The ship is too big and complex to move without some grief.

I think all three of you actually agree on more fundamentally than might be apparent. I’ve enjoyed following this thread.
 

Deacon

TXCTG
VIP
Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
Nov 13, 2016
Messages
15,171
Reaction score
21,775
Location
Hill Country, TX
@Deacon, first, welcome back.
Thanks. It was just some lame BS. I'm not the forum owner, so it is what it is.

Of course I understand that our grid isn't routinely in trouble. It's only on really hot days and when unexpected things happen at the same time. Having said that I'm uncomfortable with the number of times this has happened in recent years.
Really hot days aren't actually an issue in Texas. We're used to it, and the temperatures don't get hot enough to be destructive as compared to extended bouts of extreme cold, as we've seen. You'd think it would make good business sense to prepare for extremes so you can benefit from profiteering during extreme events like we saw in February. But instead we're giving the failed companies giant taxpayer-signed checks. So, cool. Despite our screwed up good-ol'-boy system that ensures the wealthy are floated by us plebes, when complete even extreme events like February's will not only not cause problems but also means temporary periods of underproduction should no longer be an issue.

Again, it's not the grid itself. It's not even a lack of generation. It's a perfect storm of greedy corporations meeting "misguided" politicians that STILL doesn't result in rolling blackouts. My A/C is running right now, and I can still type this out.

People are stupid.
True that. It's not difficult to solve, though. It's like when the area gets put under an air quality advisory to avoid fueling vehicles (and definitely not topping off) so as to avoid getting so dirty that new regulations automatically take effect. However, people either have no clue that even happened or else completely ignore it. The difference is that with EVs they're inherently able to be much smarter, the same with EVSEs. They could be delivered from the factory to charge overnight when parked at home, for example, with adjustable sliders for daily schedules (such as whether you leave at 5AM or 9AM). The EVSEs could do the same. And there can always be a manual override option for those instances where it's not a routine day.

The interesting thing is that for the most part current EV owners at least TRY to be smart, even if they're not, and will listen when Tesla says for daily use you probably should charge only enough to allow a comfortable cushion rather than literally topping off. Their settings already illustrate that concept in a simple, easy-to-use manner.

Allow me to digress. In high school a guy sat next to me in one class had a Walkman he enjoyed listening to mostly metal and punk. The earphones were already low quality, but he had both the two audio controls, the Bass and Treble sliders, both maxed out. Having already been toying with music, recording, and live event audio mixing, I pulled them back down into a decent balance with the source media and earphone balance. Not great, but so much better. I handed it back to him, he put it on his ears and immediately scrunched up his face. After a couple of seconds he looked down and found the sliders and jammed them all the way up again. "Why did you mess up my sound?" he said. "This is way better."

Why is that relevant? Well, EVs will continue to become more popular outside auto nerds, greenies, and the conspicuous-consumption image conscious, all of which will tend to be more conscientious about how they handle things. We'll end up with more of the gormless, careless, mouthbreathers who make up so much of our society. They might wear out the manual override button on the EVSE mounted to the wall and shorten their battery life by trying to supercharge to max in as little time possible when they get home for the night. It's difficult to protect people from themselves, much less keep stupid people from being stupid. But these are not all EV owners, and if we had not had the February disaster we would not even be having this conversation right now because there would be no unusual dip in production capacity.

The push is on to get rid of the ICE.
I don't think the push is to get rid of ICE. I don't know if that will even happen in my lifetime, barring a shocking and unexpected series of developments. I think the push is to continue to make EVs even better to the point where the only reason an individual would choose otherwise would be out of spite driven by stubborn pride.

That's the whole reason this thread started, excitement over the possibility of new battery chemistries that are cleaner, less ethically dubious, cheaper, lighter, smaller, and faster. It doesn't mean we get rid of ICE. It means ICE becomes obsolete. There was never a push to get rid of horses or to bankrupt buggy whip manufacturers. It's just that cars eventually ended up being so much overwhelmingly better than horses that horses were rendered obsolete, relegated to recreation, sport, and a handful of highly specialized applications.
 

Deacon

TXCTG
VIP
Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
Nov 13, 2016
Messages
15,171
Reaction score
21,775
Location
Hill Country, TX
An update from ERCOT via the Texas Tribune:

In a statement, ERCOT said a significant number of unexpected power plant outages, combined with expected record use of electricity due to hot weather, has resulted in tight grid conditions. Approximately 12,000 megawatts of generation were offline Monday, or enough to power 2.4 million homes on a hot summer day.

ERCOT officials said the power plant outages were unexpected — and could not provide details as to what could be causing them. The conservation request comes at a time of heightened anxiety around electricity after the state’s catastrophic February power outages left millions without power for days. Those outages, which were prompted by a severe winter storm, may have killed as many as 700 people, according to an analysis of mortality data by BuzzFeed News.

“This is unusual for this early in the summer season,” said Woody Rickerson, ERCOT vice president of grid planning and operations, in a statement. He said the grid operator would conduct an analysis to determine why so many units are offline.

At this time, it “appears unlikely” that the ERCOT grid would need to implement outages, like it did in February, to reduce strain on the grid, said Warren Lasher, ERCOT senior director of systems planning, during a Monday call with media.
 

Fireball

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Joined
May 17, 2020
Messages
445
Reaction score
630
Let's have gas stations raise prices by $3/gallon between 5pm and 8pm and see how many people fill up at that time. I mean, you'd only do that if you were on a road trip and absolutely couldn't do it at other times, right?
That's a false equivalency. An EV takes several hours to recharge, a car takes 5 minutes to refill. A gas station has the price per gallon posted in 20 foot tall numbers on top of the station, your meter has no such pricing information. People are going to plug their cars in when they park, head inside and be done with it for the night because that's the easiest way to do it. Saving a buck on power isn't going to register. Unless there's some sort of software in the car that can be programmed to not take a charge until X time, it's going to be charging right then. And, the first time the owner has to leave unexpectedly and the car's not charged because of this, the owner will remove the timed charge and that's assuming they ever set it up to begin with. Pretty much, everyone except STS-134 will leave work at 5PM, pull into their garage and 5:30, and plug in their cars. Up goes the load, right at the hottest part of the day. ACs running like mad, then suddenly a bunch of cars get plugged in? Down goes the power.

Mind you, I'm still good with a bunch of breeder reactors, or thorium reactors, or whatever going in to manage the power load, and with the power company building a bunch of small ones closer to the point of use than large ones that have to lose 20 percent of their generation transmitting the power hundreds of miles.
 

STS-134

Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
Mar 6, 2014
Messages
12,380
Reaction score
13,933
Location
Saratoga, CA
That's a false equivalency. An EV takes several hours to recharge, a car takes 5 minutes to refill. A gas station has the price per gallon posted in 20 foot tall numbers on top of the station, your meter has no such pricing information.
The meter doesn't, however, the pricing information is right here: https://www.pge.com/en_US/residenti...tions/time-of-use-base-plan/tou-weekdays.page

The fixed rate, time-of-use plans are becoming ubiquitous. This will at least get most people to not charge their EVs during the evening peak when net load on the grid maxes out. The challenge is going to be in the shift toward real-time pricing. I'd imagine that there won't be true exposure to market rates, like we saw in Texas, but that we could see a minimum and maximum price for each time interval and that information would need to be communicated to customers daily. But you can at least be assured that you're paying no more than a specific amount and you know that the higher demand is (very hot days, etc.), the more you're likely to be paying.

People are going to plug their cars in when they park, head inside and be done with it for the night because that's the easiest way to do it.
Exactly what I do. Plug in when I arrive and leave the vehicle plugged in until I depart.
Saving a buck on power isn't going to register.
Incorrect, as I have my car programmed to never charge between 5pm and 8pm, when electricity is most expensive.
Unless there's some sort of software in the car that can be programmed to not take a charge until X time, it's going to be charging right then.
There is. Here's how I do it on the Tesla: https://www.youcanic.com/wiki/configure-tesla-model-3-charging-settings

You can use "Scheduled Departure" (which starts charging at whatever time it has to charge in order to be finished at a specific time) or "Start Charging At", which starts charging at a specific time, irrespective of how long it'll take. I happen to use "Scheduled Departure". The vehicle also asks you what time peak rates start, and it'll try to finish charging prior to that time. I have the peak rate start time set to 5 pm, so it knows to avoid charging after 5.

For the Outlander PHEV, there's also the capability to set timed charging in the car itself. But I set this from the EVSE side: https://www.chargepoint.com/resources/how-schedule-charging-chargepoint-home/

For the record, I don't believe I've ever seen an EV that didn't have a charging schedule. Some are better than others; Tesla uses GPS info and can set multiple charging schedules based on location, and if you plug in at a public charger (location hasn't had a schedule set), it'll start charging immediately by default.

And, the first time the owner has to leave unexpectedly and the car's not charged because of this, the owner will remove the timed charge and that's assuming they ever set it up to begin with.
When my wife leaves in the morning, the Tesla is at 60% SoC. She returns with around 47% SoC and 170 miles of range. Even if I have to unexpectedly run all the way up to San Francisco, which is a 2 hour roundtrip, I still have enough range to do it without charging at all. So no, I'm not removing timed charging. There's absolutely no reason to. Even if I have to go 250 miles unexpectedly, I'll just stop at a supercharger and plug in for 7-8 minutes or so. But I can't think of a time I ever had to go more than 120 miles unexpectedly.
 
Last edited:

Fireball

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Joined
May 17, 2020
Messages
445
Reaction score
630
The meter doesn't, however, the pricing information is right here: https://www.pge.com/en_US/residenti...tions/time-of-use-base-plan/tou-weekdays.page

The fixed rate, time-of-use plans are becoming ubiquitous. This will at least get most people to not charge their EVs during the evening peak when net load on the grid maxes out. The challenge is going to be in the shift toward real-time pricing. I'd imagine that there won't be true exposure to market rates, like we saw in Texas, but that we could see a minimum and maximum price for each time interval and that information would need to be communicated to customers daily. But you can at least be assured that you're paying no more than a specific amount and you know that the higher demand is (very hot days, etc.), the more you're likely to be paying.


Exactly what I do. Plug in when I arrive and leave the vehicle plugged in until I depart.

Incorrect, as I have my car programmed to never charge between 5pm and 8pm, when electricity is most expensive.

There is. Here's how I do it on the Tesla: https://www.youcanic.com/wiki/configure-tesla-model-3-charging-settings

You can use "Scheduled Departure" (which starts charging at whatever time it has to charge in order to be finished at a specific time) or "Start Charging At", which starts charging at a specific time, irrespective of how long it'll take. I happen to use "Scheduled Departure". The vehicle also asks you what time peak rates start, and it'll try to finish charging prior to that time. I have the peak rate start time set to 5 pm, so it knows to avoid charging after 5.

For the Outlander PHEV, there's also the capability to set timed charging in the car itself. But I set this from the EVSE side: https://www.chargepoint.com/resources/how-schedule-charging-chargepoint-home/

For the record, I don't believe I've ever seen an EV that didn't have a charging schedule. Some are better than others; Tesla uses GPS info and can set multiple charging schedules based on location, and if you plug in at a public charger (location hasn't had a schedule set), it'll start charging immediately by default.


When my wife leaves in the morning, the Tesla is at 60% SoC. She returns with around 47% SoC and 170 miles of range. Even if I have to unexpectedly run all the way up to San Francisco, which is a 2 hour roundtrip, I still have enough range to do it without charging at all. So no, I'm not removing timed charging. There's absolutely no reason to. Even if I have to go 250 miles unexpectedly, I'll just stop at a supercharger and plug in for 7-8 minutes or so. But I can't think of a time I ever had to go more than 120 miles unexpectedly.
I still say people aren't going to be as diligent about it as you are, and they're going to slam the grid every afternoon when they get home. But, I suppose it's just going to be growing pains along the way to an all-electric society.
Post automatically merged:

You’re so much more patient than I am.
You could always put me on ignore. You know you wanna do it. Go on, do it, there's the button, do it! DO IT! HIT IT!
IGNORE ME! BWA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!!!!!
 
Last edited:

STS-134

Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
Mar 6, 2014
Messages
12,380
Reaction score
13,933
Location
Saratoga, CA
Just took the Tesla on the first long road trip. Day trip to Tahoe and back.

Miles Driven: 543
Total Energy Used: 152 kWh (76 kWh of usable energy out of the 82 kWh battery which has a 6 kWh lower end buffer was already in the battery when I departed the house). Therefore 152-76=76 kWh of the used energy was added via DC Fast Charging.

Departure SoC (from home): 100%

Stop #1 (Placerville, CA):
Arrival SoC: 33%
Duration: 18 minutes
Departure SoC: 67%
Reason for stop: Had to pee. Decided to buy shampoo while I was at Target and my wife decided to get something at Starbucks in Target.
NOTE: This was a V3 supercharger that for some reason acted more like a V2 that was sharing power with another car. Not sure what happened here because after 18 minutes on a V3, I should have been up over 80% SoC.

Stop #2 (Incline Village, NV):
Arrival SoC: 26%
Duration: 5.5 minutes
Departure SoC: 42%
Reason for stop: Had to pee.

Stop #3 (Davis, CA):
Arrival SoC: 4%
Duration: 35-38 minutes
Departure SoC: 84%
Reason for stop: Dinner. Quick service restaurant that got us in and out within 30 minutes. The other 5-8 minutes were spent walking to/from the restaurant and getting stuff from the car/putting stuff back into the car.

Arrival SoC (back at home): 36%

Number of minutes spent waiting for the car to charge: 0 (I was rather surprised by this)

In fact, in stop #3 I calculated that I could have made it home by departing with just 60% SoC (and I would have made it with over 15% battery left). If I had decided to just wait for the car to charge and then bail, I could have done so in as little as 15-20 minutes. Dinner at a quick service restaurant pushed the charge level up to more than 20% beyond what I needed.

Notice that the arrival SoCs got lower and lower, because my initial 2 stops were of insufficient duration to restore enough charge. This is about what I expected. But one quick meal after 400 miles of driving put me back up at 84%, which was more than enough to complete the entire trip with over 30% SoC to spare. And this was despite the fact that the parking lot I parked in for lunch in South Lake Tahoe didn't have a DC fast charger (if it had, I would have left that lot with 100% SoC and would have had enough to get home without charging). Hell, even if it had a Level 2 charger I would have picked up another 10-15% or so over the hour I was there. Also, selecting a DC fast charger that the computer thinks I can get to with 10% or more to spare, and then increasing speed to try to use up that 10% buffer works well. There's no range anxiety when you're deliberately trying to see how much of that buffer you can use up, and all you have to do if you find you're using too much energy is back off on the speed a little bit. I was deliberately pushing the car over 90 mph on the way to Davis just to see how much of the buffer I could use up, since anything taken off the lower end gets replenished at 250 kW, so long as you're below 20% SoC. In the end, I used up 6% of the 10% buffer. On a battery with 76 kWh of usable capacity, that's an extra 4.56 kWh. Charging at 250 kW, it took an extra 1 minute, 6 seconds at the V3 supercharger to replenish that.
 
Last edited:

Fireball

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Joined
May 17, 2020
Messages
445
Reaction score
630
Nice. Now, imagine you had aluminum graphene batteries, assuming they work as predicted.

Start at home, 246KWH battery, full charge available because AL batteries can be used from 100 percent to 0 percent with no damage. Assuming the same physical size battery pack as you Li batteries, since AL should have 3 times the power density.

Arrive at destination, making whatever stops you wanted, only without needing to find a supercharger.

Arrive at home, making whatever stops you wanted, only without needing to find a supercharger.

Miles driven, 543
Total power used, 152kwh
Range left, 94kwh, or 38 percent, or 335 miles of range, without a single recharge on the trip.
The AL batteries at your usage would have total usable range of 878.8 miles.
The Li batteries at your usage would have a total usable range of 271.5 miles.

Naturally, this means the AL battery pack could be a third of the size of the Li pack, saving weight for better performance, although that would also mean needing to recharge on the road. 10 minutes and you're on your way. Add in no need for temp control, no risk of fire like Li batteries have, no need for rare earth materials and no toxic material recycling, if AL batteries do pan out Tesla will switch to them just like everyone else. And, our grandkids will put fossil fuels and Li batteries in the same "what were they thinking" category.
 

doubledge

PSL?
Intermediate User
Joined
May 14, 2019
Messages
1,137
Reaction score
1,507
There is a lot of very cool battery tech to look forward to. The next 10 years will be very interesting. No matter what we transition to though, they have to make it more affordable. I think this is going to be one of the greatest near term challenges. Sometimes the pace of technology doesn’t let the cost come down enough, particularly when there is not enough good competition. I’m hopeful though.
 

Discord Server

Latest threads

Forum statistics

Threads
97,635
Messages
1,482,582
Members
24,734
Latest member
itfitz
Top