If we just downvote questions like this into oblivion, it kills the discussion and people continue on with their misconceptions, which never get addressed.
So I did some googling[1] and apparently, until 2030 there's only 1 million EVs planned to hit the roads in the US, which is quite shocking given the dire trends of climate change and toxic pollution on this planet.
Another interesting fact is that the costs of extending the power grid will be passed on to all its consumers in the form of increased rates (as it should, because if you don't drive an EV, you should be "taxed" on the extra pollution your car creates).
[1] https://www.bcg.com/publications/2019/costs-revving-up-the-g...
https://insideevs.com/news/340135/plug-in-electric-cars-sale...
It's to allow everyone else to see under the open light how weak the ax is, and what a dull blade it has, and what poor metal it was forged out of, and how it was never a good ax to begin with.
Instead of just saying (not that you directly said this, but downvotes kind of say it): "let's not talk about that."
GP's point is a good one although there is work happening to address that very problem. The point stands, though. EVs are a significant bump in both power and energy and will require significant investment in shoring up grid capacity. Sad this is downvoted.
>Steam turbines can take days to ramp up and connect to the grid
How is this relevant here? Also, the typical steam turbine takes hours to spin up and sync to the grid, not days. I am not aware of any steam turbines that require burning two day's worth of fuel just to connect to the grid.
>Several dams in my state barely reach full capacity and are not running 24/7.
Again, how is this relevant in a broader context? Lots of places have dams running dry just as equally many have dams overflowing.
>The co-op that supplies my power offers a flex plan that gives you free power from 11pm-6am.
Ok? This is not par for the course so i'm nor sure why you're mentioning it.
>You’re supposed to schedule your car to charge during that time.
And if you can't? What if offices suddenly have 50 EVs charging at the same time? Will this not lead to a capacity constraint? If you broaden the horizon, can this not lead to a localised collapse of the grid due to a demand surge?
>If half the cars in my county did this nightly it would be easier to predict the nightly loads.
It would also lead to a huge surge in power at the times when solar output is literally zero.
Also, I'd like to add some perspective with actual numbers: My whole house consumed 109.49 kWh yesterday, of which only about 12kWh was my car charging (I have a PHEV). That number wouldn't change significantly if I had an EV, as my driving habits would probably stay roughly the same.
So car charging accounts for ~10% of my electricity consumption these days. Yes, that's not insignificant, but it's also not 50-75%. It's probably less impact on the grid than adding a central heat pump to a house, and I don't see people spreading FUD about heat pumps.
For the grid itself, time-of-use is _the_ important factor, as the size of wires, equipment, etc. is what determines the peak load the grid can handle. If the actual demand exceeds that for even only one minute in the year, it means we need to upgrade the grid. Operators are very interested in flattening that peak, so will offer incentives to move electricity consumption to off-peak times. Here in Québec, the evening / night is peak time in winter, as we all have electric heating, and night-time is colder. If vehicle charging is a significant burden, they'll offer incentives to move that to daytime.
They do. No problems so far.
>Will this not lead to a capacity constraint?
No. Batteries and rooftop solar.
>If you broaden the horizon, can this not lead to a localised collapse of the grid due to a demand surge?
Not with batteries and rooftop solar, no. We good?
>It would also lead to a huge surge in power
It's not a "huge surge." Many other appliances are off at night. The grid has excess power at night. The larger problems are in the day, caused by things like massive use of AC, which problems will be ameliorated by installation of more rooftop solar. Win win.
>at the times when solar output is literally zero.
Batteries.
And, sometimes, when needed, you also, wait for it… use fossil fuels or other non-solar sources! We can cut fossil fuel use drastically and cut carbon emissions, but still use them when needed, and everything will be OK!
Not to detract from your core point as there are ways to solve this[1], but long term the necessary level of solution is 99.9% reduction over all sources of CO2, so no, it isn’t OK unless it’s no more than 8 hours per year[1].
[0] hydrogen, synthetic hydrocarbons, even burning wood instead of coal works in this situation, so long as the costs are lower than for fossil carbon
[1] on average, with a margin of error of way more than 100% depending on all the carbon sources that aren’t electrical
One thing I’ve realised recently, is that while this is an improvement compared to the status quo, at some point we’re likely to be running houses off car batteries in these hours and charging the cars off PV during the day. By the continuum hypothesis, at some point the net average power transfer into/out of cars/any given car is going to be zero, and I wonder what that will look like economically?
Can you sign up for that plan and just mine Bitcoin during that time?
Last year, my town's side streets were equipped with LED streetlights, which meant replacing 175W mercury-arc and 150W HPS fixtures with 40W LEDs that are noticeably brighter and produce a far more pleasant light.
where are you? how are crypto miners not all over this?
At the moment they're happy with "charge any time between these hours", once everyone starts doing it it'll probably be "free if you leave your car plugged in and let us decide when and how much to charge".
Shifting demand has a price and they'll pay that to the users that help them achieve it in some form or other.
After all, if you don't charge it then, they'll need to provide the power later when it could cost them many multiples, it's just good business sense.
It's a good job nobody is suggesting that then.
>Has anyone estimated the cost and time of upgrading the power grid for electric cars?
I don't know about the US but in the UK we just need to take generation back to 2002 levels to cover the whole fleet moving to electric.
I guess if you only need to charge at the same frequency as you would refuel you could have chargers in super market parking lots. Cars charge whilst you do your weekly shop. Or at work, if they have space.
I also heard about one idea to have chargers at every street light, as they already have an input from the grid in them.
Hopefully this is an issue that can be solved without having to re-wire huge portions of the urban areas.
I'm pretty sure, however, that the government has taken some initiative to expand the infrastructure. After all, electric cars are pretty well subsidized and you get everyday driving perks (like being able to drive in the bus lane). When folks are buying new here, they are buying electric and they aren't worried about meeting their "all-electric" goals. And realistically, government involvement, organization, and action are going to be the things that make it more difficult in, say, the US or the UK (From what I can tell: I'm American and am not as intimate with UK politics)
On the sidewalks. There are a number of chargers like that in the city I live that are more or less subscription based.
> Cars charge whilst you do your weekly shop. Or at work, if they have space.
That's one excellent solution. You can take the money that won't be spent with healthcare (because air pollution) and channel it as incentives to build out that infrastructure.
> I also heard about one idea to have chargers at every street light, as they already have an input from the grid in them.
That's another interesting idea, if the power is available. With the move to efficient lighting, the need for power has been reduced and I assume the cable gauges have reflected that.
> Hopefully this is an issue that can be solved without having to re-wire huge portions of the urban areas.
If the cars can recharge for hours, the need to rewire for higher currents is smaller.
This is already being done in London, and probably other areas.
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKaEhBjt1ls
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Frkw6aurVUY
Each area/street will probably have to examined individually to find the right solution for it.
Do it with wireless charging:
Let's not, then. The logistics of swapping 150 million cars in a single night would be a nightmare. Charging wouldn't be my first concern.
On a more realistic note, even if we outlawed the sale of ICE cars today and mandated that every single new car hitting the road was electric, the required growth of the grid would be feasible. It would take quite a few years to replace the entire fleet.
I have observed that discussion of this solution normally divides into these two groups:
(1) “That’s ridiculous, a car covered in with PV will only make enough electricity to go 10-30 miles per day!”
(2) “That’s a great idea, a car covered with PV will make enough electricity to go 10-30 miles power day, and most people only go 12-35 miles per day!”
When there is serious concern if the grid can cope, we should take all the mitigations we can get. Reducing aggregate charging demand by 90% is good even when every single driver still needs to use an external charger.