5 ms·

California's Green Dreams Mean Adding More EVs to a Rickety Grid

5 points by shaburn 4y ago

AtlasBarfed 4y ago
If you have a rickety grid, then you should go 1000% in with home solar so those BEVs will charge at home. And you'll likely get a distributed grid battery to boot. IMO Home solar should be hand in hand with grid solar. They are complementary, not adversarial (well, except on where the subsidies go, but there should be ample for both in a better world)
- LinuxBender 4y ago
  About 45% of Californian's are renters. [1] Are there any plans in the works to require rental homes and apartments to have solar and EV chargers? Or major tax incentives that would be appealing and compelling to landlords? The reason I ask is that I have looked into solar and even if a company were to get bulk discounts on gear, the cost of building out a low-end system to charge an EV's would be about $10k per tenant up front just for the panels and UL listed inverters and that is assuming a significant bulk discount. That does not include the costs to retrofit an apartment complex parking area digging, cables, charging stations, etc... And this is not even including power storage. People would mostly be charging at night. The AGM or LifePo4 batteries add up quickly and there needs to be a place to put them. If they are not kept topped off at night using commercial power then they will have to be replaced every few years. Apartments are built for space efficiency. I assume not all apartments would have space for battery rooms. I have no idea what discussions would occur around insurance adjustments for the battery rooms. [1] - https://www.deptofnumbers.com/rent/california/ https://www.deptofnumbers.com/rent/california/
  - AtlasBarfed 4y ago
    Generally speaking rental apartments are high density units, often with garages or parking lots. It sure probably looks daunting from an individual renter perspective, and most rental owners are a bit fat and lazy once they get their revenue streams, so they are slow to change. .... Anyway medium density apartments: SHOULD be very cost effective and efficient and centralized compared to home solar. There should be economic and policy targets around this due to the "bang for the buck", especially with the explosive growth of what I believe is called 5+1 apartments. If the % occupancy is that high for renters overall in the state, it should be front and center of Californian policy and really all urban prep for BEVs. Yeah I understand that it doesn't always work that way in politics. The other part of this is that rental owners need to realize that BEVs will be ubiquitous in urban housing and to maintain competitive position in the market place they'll have to provide this feature. Rental owners have long term revenue streams to offset or load against and reap longer term profitability, because solar is profitable over a couple decades of normal consumer power. It can also provide a luxury feature in an allegedly "rickety" grid. Do your "Luxury apartments" (everything is luxury apartments these days) provide air conditioning regardless of brownouts? Home solar + storage provides that. I'd say in california that would be a MASSIVE marketplace advantage. So we have the carrots. The whip will probably be a requirement to provide it, but that is city policy. Rental parking lots are perfect for solar arrays, and likely a spot can be sacrificed for a battery, if not there is usually roof space. High rise apartment buildings are different beasts, usually surrounded by commercial buildings that can have solar on their roofs and the net supply of rooftop solar should provide near-independence, and usually the grid isn't as big a deal in super high density cities. Home solar definitely needs policy attention to get the costs down. Long term solar is cheaper than not having solar, the issue is the upfront cost, and that is policy and incentives. If you are an apartment owner, or apartment owners in general, I'm sure there is a group or lobby that represents them. Get ahead of this, it should not be hard to argue for special apartment building incentives to get home solar and charging infrastructure to prep for BEV. They should NOT be the trailing adopters. I am a high rise condo occupant. It's tough because I want a charging station in my car space, but from the individual perspective I'm sure I'd get charged for providing the core capability of delivery to the building and that would be massive. These installations need top-down incentives, because they need a more "industrial" hookup and setup. Not that implies its more expensive per unit, but a sort of all-or-nothing thing is implied, and that needs policy to spur.
  - shaburn 4y ago
    Pay landlords the retail rate per watt and turn them into power providers at PG&Es expense.
- shaburn 4y ago
  Batteries required or same problems.
Gibbon1 4y ago
What makes the grid rickety is air conditioners.
- shaburn 4y ago
  Arizona. Nevada. Texas.
egberts1 4y ago
Not to mention that today a mining CEO said there is little lithium left in which to make EV batteries with. [1] Do expect EV prices to rise, along with the cost of expanding physical electric infrastructure. 1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32796594 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32796594
ZeroGravitas 4y ago
Is California's grid particularly 'rickety'? I know US grids are famously less reliable than European ones but isn't that just cost cutting, like overhead vs underground lines? Which to be clear, I'm not assuming is a bad call by the US, just a trade-off. But "green dreams" like distributed solar generation and battery storage, as well as EVs seem likely to help the grid more than hurt it. It generally doesn't seem to have had a negative impact on any other countries or state's grid that I'm aware of, though the usual suspects will regularly claim it has.
- shaburn 4y ago
  Yes. Very complex system demands with far too little cap ex in wires+ to pay for overpriced wind/solar projects and bad management.

5 points by shaburn 4y ago

If you have a rickety grid, then you should go 1000% in with home solar so those BEVs will charge at home. And you'll likely get a distributed grid battery to boot. IMO Home solar should be hand in hand with grid solar. They are complementary, not adversarial (well, except on where the subsidies go, but there should be ample for both in a better world)

LinuxBender 4y ago
About 45% of Californian's are renters. [1] Are there any plans in the works to require rental homes and apartments to have solar and EV chargers? Or major tax incentives that would be appealing and compelling to landlords? The reason I ask is that I have looked into solar and even if a company were to get bulk discounts on gear, the cost of building out a low-end system to charge an EV's would be about $10k per tenant up front just for the panels and UL listed inverters and that is assuming a significant bulk discount. That does not include the costs to retrofit an apartment complex parking area digging, cables, charging stations, etc... And this is not even including power storage. People would mostly be charging at night. The AGM or LifePo4 batteries add up quickly and there needs to be a place to put them. If they are not kept topped off at night using commercial power then they will have to be replaced every few years. Apartments are built for space efficiency. I assume not all apartments would have space for battery rooms. I have no idea what discussions would occur around insurance adjustments for the battery rooms. [1] - https://www.deptofnumbers.com/rent/california/ https://www.deptofnumbers.com/rent/california/
- AtlasBarfed 4y ago
  Generally speaking rental apartments are high density units, often with garages or parking lots. It sure probably looks daunting from an individual renter perspective, and most rental owners are a bit fat and lazy once they get their revenue streams, so they are slow to change. .... Anyway medium density apartments: SHOULD be very cost effective and efficient and centralized compared to home solar. There should be economic and policy targets around this due to the "bang for the buck", especially with the explosive growth of what I believe is called 5+1 apartments. If the % occupancy is that high for renters overall in the state, it should be front and center of Californian policy and really all urban prep for BEVs. Yeah I understand that it doesn't always work that way in politics. The other part of this is that rental owners need to realize that BEVs will be ubiquitous in urban housing and to maintain competitive position in the market place they'll have to provide this feature. Rental owners have long term revenue streams to offset or load against and reap longer term profitability, because solar is profitable over a couple decades of normal consumer power. It can also provide a luxury feature in an allegedly "rickety" grid. Do your "Luxury apartments" (everything is luxury apartments these days) provide air conditioning regardless of brownouts? Home solar + storage provides that. I'd say in california that would be a MASSIVE marketplace advantage. So we have the carrots. The whip will probably be a requirement to provide it, but that is city policy. Rental parking lots are perfect for solar arrays, and likely a spot can be sacrificed for a battery, if not there is usually roof space. High rise apartment buildings are different beasts, usually surrounded by commercial buildings that can have solar on their roofs and the net supply of rooftop solar should provide near-independence, and usually the grid isn't as big a deal in super high density cities. Home solar definitely needs policy attention to get the costs down. Long term solar is cheaper than not having solar, the issue is the upfront cost, and that is policy and incentives. If you are an apartment owner, or apartment owners in general, I'm sure there is a group or lobby that represents them. Get ahead of this, it should not be hard to argue for special apartment building incentives to get home solar and charging infrastructure to prep for BEV. They should NOT be the trailing adopters. I am a high rise condo occupant. It's tough because I want a charging station in my car space, but from the individual perspective I'm sure I'd get charged for providing the core capability of delivery to the building and that would be massive. These installations need top-down incentives, because they need a more "industrial" hookup and setup. Not that implies its more expensive per unit, but a sort of all-or-nothing thing is implied, and that needs policy to spur.
- shaburn 4y ago
  Pay landlords the retail rate per watt and turn them into power providers at PG&Es expense.
shaburn 4y ago
Batteries required or same problems.

Gibbon1 4y ago

What makes the grid rickety is air conditioners.

shaburn 4y ago
Arizona. Nevada. Texas.

egberts1 4y ago

Not to mention that today a mining CEO said there is little lithium left in which to make EV batteries with. [1] Do expect EV prices to rise, along with the cost of expanding physical electric infrastructure. 1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32796594 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32796594

ZeroGravitas 4y ago

Is California's grid particularly 'rickety'? I know US grids are famously less reliable than European ones but isn't that just cost cutting, like overhead vs underground lines? Which to be clear, I'm not assuming is a bad call by the US, just a trade-off. But "green dreams" like distributed solar generation and battery storage, as well as EVs seem likely to help the grid more than hurt it. It generally doesn't seem to have had a negative impact on any other countries or state's grid that I'm aware of, though the usual suspects will regularly claim it has.

shaburn 4y ago
Yes. Very complex system demands with far too little cap ex in wires+ to pay for overpriced wind/solar projects and bad management.