Hacker News Reader

Comment by tarr11 | Hacker News Reader

> The Stanford study points out that since charging electric vehicles takes time using conventional chargers, owners tend to leave their cars charging in the evenings and overnight, putting added pressure on the grid. Demand peaks between 5-9 pm as people return home from work and use electric appliances like televisions and kettles.

> If vehicle owners were to charge them during the day, this could cut costs and help the grid as the number of electric vehicles increase to meet sustainable goals, the authors say.

My EV (Tesla) already has a charging option for when rates are cheapest. I would assume that most EVs will have that feature if they don’t already?

Not sure I understand why this is considered a big problem.

View on HN

In the UK, my provider has a thing called Intelligent Octopus that allows them to control when my car charges.

They offer me discounted rates (41p KWH vs 7.5p KWH) if I charge between 2330 and 530, but I can plug it in when I get home, and they control that charging block. It allows them to turn on charging anytime they like if the load on the grid is low, and they charge me that lower rate even if it's outside the off-peak time.

With a connected car, the "charging block" can just be software running on the car.

More importantly, the direct payment plan with the utility company (which means waiting for 10,000 different utilities to switch pricing models!) can be replaced by an aggregation company (which only needs a handful of companies worldwide).

On the grid side, the aggregation company behaves just like any other company that owns a big battery, bidding on the wholesale electricity market like a power plant would. But in reality they actually command a "fleet" of smart car chargers and stationary batteries. By splitting some of the profit with these car/battery owners, an aggregation company can magically align the pricing model for everyone, without waiting for 10,000 utilities to get their act together.

If you follow JB Straubel's public talks[0] over the years, none of this should come as a surprise.

[0] https://youtu.be/4hNdbGjZfFU?t=2401

I don't want a connected car where the manufacturer or whoever compromises them can remotely disable charging on my car. I don't understand why that sort of access would need to be included in the car instead of the charger. It seems an unnecessary compromise of autonomy.

If you don't want any data connection, then—by definition—you must reject any sort of grid-interactive charging features of any kind. Baby, meet bathwater!

Fortunately the vast majority of regular users (eg bengale with their Intelligent Octopus device) aren't bothered by it. They'll happily save money on EV charging and improve grid stability at the same time.

> I don't understand why that sort of access would need to be included in the car instead of the charger

I didn't say it needs to be included. However if you already have a fleet of connected EVs (eg Tesla), you could instantly roll out this feature overnight without any additional hardware investment.... (hint hint...)

>If you don't want any data connection

Thats not what I said.

If there's a data connection which is used to stop charging, then if the data is hacked or spoofed it can—by definition—stop charging.

You can't have your cake and eat it too.

I don't think you understand what I said, and are arguing something else entirely.

That's always possible! Can you clarify your position, so we might better understand each other?

For a minute I did considered the possibility that you were leaning hard on the word manufacturer. However, I thought it was quite absurd that you would be fine with a situation where "[a third party] or whoever compromises them can remotely disable charging on my car."

I intentionally avoided that less-than-charitable interpretation of your words, since IMO it would violate the HN guidelines:

> Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.

Seems like charging at night is a problem if the grid is powered by solar, but a benefit if the grid is powered by nuclear. At least, if the chargers are timed to start later in the evening, when rates are cheaper.

I think they’re saying people don’t charge at work - a disconnected Tesla can’t charge.

Which is odd, I know people who only charge at work. Who knows, maybe that could be a perk to encourage RTO if management was so concerned.

How does that work?

There are chargers in parking lots at/near office buildings. People use them during the day. In residential areas without offstreet parking, there are few to no convenient chargers.

Interesting. My suspicion is that the amount of workplaces where this is an option is small compared to workplaces as a whole, but I've no idea! My (incorrect?) assumption is that the primary convenient option is for homeowners in suburbs to charge in their driveway or garage when home.

I live a city where the charging infrastructure matches my description. I do not speak for suburbanites with garages.

Even my rather ancient Leaf has a simple charging timer. I plug mine in when I get home from work, but it doesn't charge until after midnight.

My 2014 BMW i3 knows to charge during cheaper electric rate times. (Like your Tesla)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com