Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Vehicle to Grid - V2G

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
There seems to be a few companies trying. The exciting thing about Model S is that with 20 kW chargers, a mere 50 could get to the 1 MW threshold. I think a pilot project is in order.

an opportunity for tesla in california!
Or any place where 50 owners with a 20kw charger are available!
With scheduled charging it must be possible! Interupting or increasing chargingrate as needed!
 
There seems to be a few companies trying. The exciting thing about Model S is that with 20 kW chargers, a mere 50 could get to the 1 MW threshold. I think a pilot project is in order.
A check on this -- if the vehicles are charging at 20 kW, they'll charge twice as fast and you'll be able to sell the regulation service they offer in half of the hours. Of course, it's better to have the flexibility of the 20 kW chargers, but the real constraint is the battery size. Once the car is charged, it can't provide additional regulation.

This is the same optimization problem that pumped storage facilities have. You have to take into account both the flow limit and the energy limit. The good news is that we've got pretty good heuristics for optimizing pumped storage.

- - - Updated - - -

rolo, you've been following this project, I assume? East Penn Technology
 
Last edited:
A check on this -- if the vehicles are charging at 20 kW, they'll charge twice as fast and you'll be able to sell the regulation service they offer in half of the hours. Of course, it's better to have the flexibility of the 20 kW chargers, but the real constraint is the battery size. Once the car is charged, it can't provide additional regulation.

This is the same optimization problem that pumped storage facilities have. You have to take into account both the flow limit and the energy limit. The good news is that we've got pretty good heuristics for optimizing pumped storage.

- - - Updated - - -

rolo, you've been following this project, I assume? East Penn Technology

Of course this is the case. The optimization constraints will be something along the line of:

POP(t) + Rd(t) <= ChargerMax
sum(POP(t)+Rd(t),t) + SOC_I <= BatteryMax
POP(t) >=0
Rd(t) >= 0

The larger ChargerMax is the better. Plus the dispatch percentage is around 19% of capacity, so even though you'll bid all 20 kW, you'll only charge at around 5 kW.
 
What if a parking house operator equips all slots with smart EVSE? Would it be a business case to sell the managed electric demand of some 500 parked vehicles?
He could attract EVs, or - dare I say - plug in hybrids by offering parking capacity in a location where that comes at a price - say downtown NYC.
 
I would never want V2G. I do not want to waste the life of my EV battery.
What @rolosrevenge has in mind is different: in his idea, the vehicle doesn't put power onto the grid, so there's no degradation of the battery. Instead, he would control the rate of charging in response to grid conditions, which shouldn't harm the battery. Done right, such grid-controlled charging could be valuable to the EV owner, the charging aggregator, and society generally.

- - - Updated - - -

What if a parking house operator equips all slots with smart EVSE? Would it be a business case to sell the managed electric demand of some 500 parked vehicles?
He could attract EVs, or - dare I say - plug in hybrids by offering parking capacity in a location where that comes at a price - say downtown NYC.
Yes, but ... the parking operator needs to know what the requirements of the EV owners will be. If I'm just parking for 4 hours and am counting on getting at least 30kWh of charge, I'd be very annoyed to find that the parking operator instead added only 5kWh of charge to sell the regulation-down from my car.

Again, this isn't fatal; it just means that there needs to be a lot of communication (some of it automatic, some of it manual) to make this business model work for everyone. Mathematically, it just adds another constraint to the LP written out by @rolosrevenge.
 
Right, so I'm talking about only throttling the charging rate. Model S doesn't come with the hardware to discharge energy into the grid, so all of the after market hardware, warranty issues, interconnection issues, plus customer preferences, have long convinced me that such a system isn't going to happen any time soon for normal customers. Commercial fleets, however, is another matter entirely.
 
What @rolosrevenge has in mind is different: in his idea, the vehicle doesn't put power onto the grid, so there's no degradation of the battery. Instead, he would control the rate of charging in response to grid conditions, which shouldn't harm the battery. Done right, such grid-controlled charging could be valuable to the EV owner, the charging aggregator, and society generally.

+1

This is the exact idea I pitched to my energy/utility corporation during my 20+ year career there - the only downside is shorting the EV of energy the owner expected but would be a nice alternative to load shedding when the grid is in crisis state and they would not have gotten the energy anyway - demand Management is a viable ancillary versus regulation.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 
Last edited:
+1

This is the exact idea I pitched to my energy/utility corporation during my 20+ year career there - the only downside is shorting the EV of energy the owner expected but would be a nice alternative to load shedding when the grid is in crisis state and they would not have gotten the energy anyway - demand Management is a viable ancillary versus regulation.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
If the owner can schedule with the car when he would like it charged by, and the car can send that to the aggregator, it can be scheduled with almost 100% certainty that the car will be charged when it's supposed to, so there'll be no noticeable effect on the customer, unless they come for it early.
 
PJM, operator of the largest section of the US grid (roughly a triangle bounded by New Jersey, Chicago, and the NC Outer Banks), filed this interesting statement with FERC on Friday in Docket ER13-486-001:
As set forth in the enclosed responses, PJM is not presently capable of detecting
load reductions attributable to such pre- or post-commitment Limited DR activity,
because Demand Resources are not required by the PJM Tariff to have in place the real-
time telemetry that PJM requires of generation Capacity Resources. While it is
conceivable that Limited DR could gradually ramp down pre-commitment, or gradually
ramp-up post-commitment, such ramping cannot be separately distinguished in real-time
from other load changes, and therefore it is not presently predictable, dispatchable, or
verifiable in real time. Consequently, PJM dispatchers are not in a position to reasonably
rely on any pre- or post-commitment activity by Limited DR when they make their
dispatch decisions. Similarly, PJM’s other reliability planning studies make the same
type of assumption that PJM made in this proceeding, i.e., that Demand Resources will
respond to the maximum extent they are required to respond. In short, the approach PJM
has adopted in this proceeding is consistent with both its operations and its reliability
planning.
Deciphering: PJM has a ways to go before it can use distributed DR to provide ancillary services, like regulation.