4 ms·
This really only makes sense for short-term, emergency storage: IE, if a major power plant suddenly goes offline, calling on EVs to push power back into the gri
by gwbas1c 4y ago
This really only makes sense for short-term, emergency storage: IE, if a major power plant suddenly goes offline, calling on EVs to push power back into the grid for 10-60 seconds. This is enough time for things like pumped storage and quick start generators to come online. (It also wouldn't cause noticeable wear.)
Likewise, even disabling charging for a short-term, emergency 10-60 second period might be more practical. Feeding back into the grid requires additional complexity / hardware that could add cost to the consumer.
For day-to-day storage: As soon as someone goes to use their EV in the morning, and they find out that the battery isn't full, they're going to turn it off.
- TheLoafOfBread 4y agoExactly. This is just offloading of expensive energy storage to consumers, so energy company can show bigger profits.
- schiffern 4y ago"Quick, don't make the world more efficient! The wrong people might also benefit..." This strikes me as the opposite of "planting trees whose shade you'll never sit under." If the latter makes civilizations great, where does the former attitude lead?
- TheLoafOfBread 4y agoThere is no reason to subsidize energy companies. They are operating renewable power plants, which have intermittency issues, they should be solving this problem. I don't see any reason why I should be part of their problem of their own making.
- bryanlarsen 4y agoThey solve their problem by paying me money. I'm fine with that. You don't have to get paid if you don't want to.