Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Electric cars? for Aspies, Narcissists and Power Grid people

Jump to new
Garpal Gumnut

Garpal Gumnut

Ross Island Hotel
Joined
2 January 2006
Posts
13,344
Reactions
9,450
Sometimes there is a niche interest or problem that needs its own space. Therein lie many truths which the majority of people not only cannot understand but about which they have absolutely no interest.

Power in all its manifestations is important. Particularly electrical power. It's economics are fascinating.

I am fascinated by it.

I am also fascinated by the many worthy firms such as KPMG which have spent many millions of dollars of other peoples money having light bulb moments about the future, power, power loads, people, terawatts and other useful concepts.

KPMG is a stand out in my humble opinion. An absolute corker.

I just sometimes wish, often in the bath, "why doesn't somebody illuminate ASF on this fascinating topic.

gg
 
You tried GG...
But to be honest,things are so interlinked and complex/fragile that it is not funny
We can not really discuss Ev wo talking power/power grid yet EV can be a solution for renewable sucking peak production and releasing peak demand
Then if we have such a system, we might tweak renewable from wind to solar as regular peak solar would not be an issue anymore.
Add covid
As part of the great RESET, covid crisis is used in Europe at least to demand a "greener" economy
Car manufacturers are receiving subsidies to prevent bankruptcy only if they agree to meet green new targets
EV less diesel and ice.
Similarly, aircraft industry and airlines are receiving lifeline supports only if they agree to reduce their short distance offers...
The RESET is here , and interconnected
You are old enough i assume to have known USSR, and maybe experienced the East block:
Governments taking control of production and choostears.ing winners always end in
But whether we like it or not, we will be forced to EVs
 
https://themarket.ch/interview/russell-napier-central-banks-have-become-irrelevant-ld.2323

.... Banks are now under the control of the government. Politicians give credit guarantees, so of course the banks will freely give credit. They are now handing out the loans they did not give in the past ten years. This is the start.

What makes you think that this is not just a one-off extraordinary measure to fight the economic effects of the pandemic?

Politicians will realize that they have a very powerful tool in their hands. We saw a very nice example two weeks ago: The Spanish government increased their €100bn bank guarantee program to €150bn. Just like that. So there will be mission creep. There will be another one and another one, for example to finance all sorts of green projects. Also, these loans have a very long duration. The credit pulse is in the system, a pulse of money that doesn’t come back for years. And then there will be a new one, and another one. Companies won’t have any incentive to pay back these cheap loans prematurely.

So basically what you’re saying is that central banks in the past ten years never succeeded in getting commercial banks to lend. This is why governments are taking over, and they won’t let go of that tool anymore?

Exactly. Don’t forget: These are politicians.....

(Scottish economist interviewed by Swiss money managers )
 
Last edited:
I never had one at home but I had a very mean slot car I used to race on a 20 metre track.

Battered and ugly but with the biggest motor I could fit in it, didn't lose very often
 
The Europeans have already begun to experience problems with EV uptake and grid penetration:

"The Nordic EV Outlook 2018, published by the Nordic Energy Research [3], gives insight into the EV market in Nordic countries (i.e., Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden). In particular, the authors provide feedback from the industry in Norway, where the market share of EVs is high (1.9%), pointing out that the electrical grid experiences periodic issues in densely populated urban environments and recreational regions. This is attributed to the number of EVs charging on the grid. The Norwegian energy market regulator suggests that adding an average of 1 kW to the household peak load may result a 4% overloading of the transformers [4]. In Denmark, 20% EV penetration is believed to cause major grid overloading and under-voltage situations [5], while in the UK, a 20% level of penetration is likely to increase the daily peak load by 36% [6]."
(https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02093144/document)

Here is an interesting graph that provides a visual representation of energy for US household appliances:

upload_2020-7-20_20-34-19.png

(https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02093144/document)
 
Excellent contribution to the discussion Chronos.
I also noted the following observations

"Furthermore, EV charging involves a controllable load comparable to a washing machine or water heater. As such, EVs offer advantageous flexibility for demand response purposes, for instance, shifting charging cycles when electric demand is low. EV flexibility could be an important input for flexibility models, either at household level [12] or at the aggregated level [13]. Another promising perspective involves injecting the electricity stored in EVs’ batteries back into the grid, with so-called“vehicle-to-grid” projects [14]"

And later on when projecting the impact of a 30% take up of EV's by 2030 in South Central Texas the report noted.

"Forecast shows that even when a high number of EVs are added to the grid by 2030, their charging only moderately impacts the shape of the load curve at the regional scale of South Central Texas. The overall load is naturally higher with the additional EVs, especially in scenario 2 with larger batteries, but the current charging habits do not cause unmanageable peaks or unstable variability for the load.

Both simulations even show that, with the additional EVs, the load curve would be smoothed out during the night, diminishing the intra-day variation. With adequate planning, there should be no major problem with such market share growth. This is in line with other studies assessing the impact of EV charging, such as Luthander ’s et al in a Swedish case [33]. However, since there could be issues at a local scale, some kind of coordination is required to smart-charge the EVs [6], for instance by optimally scheduling the charging of EV fleets [34], or through targeted price incentives [35].5. "

In fact the report has echoed just about every comment made in the Electric cars thread which point out the issue needs to be addressed but there are relatively simple straightforward solutions that would in fact improve the whole power network.
 
basilio said:
Excellent contribution to the discussion Chronos.
I also noted the following observations

"Furthermore, EV charging involves a controllable load comparable to a washing machine or water heater. As such, EVs offer advantageous flexibility for demand response purposes, for instance, shifting charging cycles when electric demand is low. EV flexibility could be an important input for flexibility models, either at household level [12] or at the aggregated level [13]. Another promising perspective involves injecting the electricity stored in EVs’ batteries back into the grid, with so-called“vehicle-to-grid” projects [14]"

And later on when projecting the impact of a 30% take up of EV's by 2030 in South Central Texas the report noted.

"Forecast shows that even when a high number of EVs are added to the grid by 2030, their charging only moderately impacts the shape of the load curve at the regional scale of South Central Texas. The overall load is naturally higher with the additional EVs, especially in scenario 2 with larger batteries, but the current charging habits do not cause unmanageable peaks or unstable variability for the load.

Both simulations even show that, with the additional EVs, the load curve would be smoothed out during the night, diminishing the intra-day variation. With adequate planning, there should be no major problem with such market share growth. This is in line with other studies assessing the impact of EV charging, such as Luthander ’s et al in a Swedish case [33]. However, since there could be issues at a local scale, some kind of coordination is required to smart-charge the EVs [6], for instance by optimally scheduling the charging of EV fleets [34], or through targeted price incentives [35].5. "

In fact the report has echoed just about every comment made in the Electric cars thread which point out the issue needs to be addressed but there are relatively simple straightforward solutions that would in fact improve the whole power network.
Click to expand...

You missed the evidence which indicated that Norway, with just ~2% EV uptake, is already experiencing serious grid problems. Also you probably haven't been able to read the graph I posted, which is in a logarithmic scale highlighting the enormous relative electrical consumption of EVs compared to other home appliances.

Basilio; you're a typical radical left wing; always trying to hijack and dictate discussion. We are trying to have sensible discussion here, please go back to the other thread to post your disconnected opinions.

FINAL PARAGRAPH IN THE CONCLUSION: "However, the future of EVs is uncertain, especially concerning the battery capacity and deployment of fast chargers, which may lead to complications for the grid, requiring carefully coordinated charging planning for a large number of vehicles."
(https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02093144/document)
 
basilio said:
Excellent contribution to the discussion Chronos.
I also noted the following observations

"Furthermore, EV charging involves a controllable load comparable to a washing machine or water heater. As such, EVs offer advantageous flexibility for demand response purposes, for instance, shifting charging cycles when electric demand is low. EV flexibility could be an important input for flexibility models, either at household level [12] or at the aggregated level [13]. Another promising perspective involves injecting the electricity stored in EVs’ batteries back into the grid, with so-called“vehicle-to-grid” projects [14]"

And later on when projecting the impact of a 30% take up of EV's by 2030 in South Central Texas the report noted.

"Forecast shows that even when a high number of EVs are added to the grid by 2030, their charging only moderately impacts the shape of the load curve at the regional scale of South Central Texas. The overall load is naturally higher with the additional EVs, especially in scenario 2 with larger batteries, but the current charging habits do not cause unmanageable peaks or unstable variability for the load.

Both simulations even show that, with the additional EVs, the load curve would be smoothed out during the night, diminishing the intra-day variation. With adequate planning, there should be no major problem with such market share growth. This is in line with other studies assessing the impact of EV charging, such as Luthander ’s et al in a Swedish case [33]. However, since there could be issues at a local scale, some kind of coordination is required to smart-charge the EVs [6], for instance by optimally scheduling the charging of EV fleets [34], or through targeted price incentives [35].5. "

In fact the report has echoed just about every comment made in the Electric cars thread which point out the issue needs to be addressed but there are relatively simple straightforward solutions that would in fact improve the whole power network.
Click to expand...


After building 5 x 1GW nuclear reactors for South Central Texas alone, just for 30% EV uptake

upload_2020-7-20_21-15-54.png
 
Chronos it's a detailed report which legitimately covers as many bases as it can.

No one is denying the need to co-ordinate charging hundreds of thousands of EV's. That was the point of the exercise. But as has been repeatedly pointed out in the age of smart controls on chargers and power systems ensuring a balanced charging regime is necessary and quite do able.

And please. Will you stop the totally unnecessary slagging off at me and other posters. It's just rude and not a good look.:(
 
basilio said:
Chronos it's a detailed report which legitimately covers as many bases as it can.

No one is denying the need to co-ordinate charging hundreds of thousands of EV's. That was the point of the exercise. But as has been repeatedly pointed out in the age of smart controls on chargers and power systems ensuring a balanced charging regime is necessary and quite do able.

And please. Will you stop the totally unnecessary slagging off at me and other posters. It's just rude and not a good look.:(
Click to expand...

The needs are clear:

1. An enormous amount of additional electrical capacity.

2. An enormous amount of electrical consumption coordination.

As I said, Norway are already experiencing serious problems with only a ~2% EV uptake.

I would rather panic and have this EV issue covered, rather than take the real risk of melting down our grid, and not worrying about it.

I never started the slagging, I was bullied by a group of posters on the other thread; then someone was kind enough to provide an alternative thread so we can have a sensible discussion.

State your opinion, but don't try to misrepresent my posts or the evidence that I find.

I am willing to be more civil in our discourse moving forward, if there is reciprocity.
 
Sweden is feeling the power grid crunch from EVs:

"Sweden's ambitious plan to drastically cut emissions from transport by bringing millions of electric cars onto the road could be derailed by a lack of power capacity for new charging stations in major cities."

"Demand for electricity in Stockholm and other cities is outgrowing capacity in local grids, forcing new charging networks to compete with other projects from housing to subway lines to get hooked up."

(https://europe.autonews.com/automakers/swedens-ev-boom-under-threat-power-crunch)
 
Norway being forced to spend big on power infrastructure upgrades for EVs:

"The problem that EV charging is creating in Norway foreshadows the problems we could have in the US, but on a much larger scale."

"So, what does this all mean to us here in the US? It means that, unless we find some new, clean way to generate vast amounts of power with minimal expense, we're going to have to pony up some serious dough if Americans are going to continue to adopt electric cars at the rate they have been."

(https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/norway-electric-car-charging-infrastructure-upgrade/)
 
From the same article

"For the rise in electric vehicles to be manageable despite the lack of power capacity, Power Circle suggests that owners should get incentives not to charge and even send power back to the grid during morning and afternoon peak hours. If enough cars in the future are connected and willing to share their batteries with the grid, more electric vehicles would lessen the capacity problem instead of making it worse.

"Electric cars can make or break the grid," said Johanna Lakso, who heads the group. "When we are about to roll out the infrastructure why not be smart about it and use it to support the power networks?"
(https://europe.autonews.com/automakers/swedens-ev-boom-under-threat-power-crunch)
 
Part of the information Chronois shared was a Reuters story which headlined the following leader

Electric vehicle push in Norway could add $1.3 billion to power bills by 2040: study

Fair enough. But as usual its worth reading the full story to understand what has been said.
Long story short. If /when Norway goes full EV in 2040 there would be a number of EV charging options. (This is exactly what we have been talking about for days now.)

In a study conducted for Norway’s power regulator with DNV GL, state-appointed consultancy Poyry said a power grid investment of up to 11 billion crowns would be needed by 2040 if most passenger cars were by then powered by electricity and drivers maintained their current charging habits

“If nothing is done, charging every afternoon to evening seems most likely. In that case, the 11 billion ... grid cost is paid by all customers,” Poyry’s Norway director Kjetil Ingeberg told Reuters.

..However, Norway’s drivers could keep costs down by changing their charging habits.
Charging car batteries at night would drop new grid costs to almost zero, while charging in the afternoon and only when batteries are relatively empty would require just above 4 billion crowns of investment.

Pretty straightforward isn't it ? Use off peak charging and it's all sweet.:)

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...on-to-power-bills-by-2040-study-idUSKCN1T81Y0
 
basilio said:
From the same article

"For the rise in electric vehicles to be manageable despite the lack of power capacity, Power Circle suggests that owners should get incentives not to charge and even send power back to the grid during morning and afternoon peak hours. If enough cars in the future are connected and willing to share their batteries with the grid, more electric vehicles would lessen the capacity problem instead of making it worse.

"Electric cars can make or break the grid," said Johanna Lakso, who heads the group. "When we are about to roll out the infrastructure why not be smart about it and use it to support the power networks?"
(https://europe.autonews.com/automakers/swedens-ev-boom-under-threat-power-crunch)
Click to expand...

So the suggestion to use our EVs to send power back into the grid is an interesting concept. Surely that would impact the life cycle of the batteries.
 
basilio said:
Part of the information Chronois shared was a Reuters story which headlined the following leader

Electric vehicle push in Norway could add $1.3 billion to power bills by 2040: study

Fair enough. But as usual its worth reading the full story to understand what has been said.
Long story short. If /when Norway goes full EV in 2040 there would be a number of EV charging options. (This is exactly what we have been talking about for days now.)
In a study conducted for Norway’s power regulator with DNV GL, state-appointed consultancy Poyry said a power grid investment of up to 11 billion crowns would be needed by 2040 if most passenger cars were by then powered by electricity and drivers maintained their current charging habits

“If nothing is done, charging every afternoon to evening seems most likely. In that case, the 11 billion ... grid cost is paid by all customers,” Poyry’s Norway director Kjetil Ingeberg told Reuters.

..However, Norway’s drivers could keep costs down by changing their charging habits.
Charging car batteries at night would drop new grid costs to almost zero, while charging in the afternoon and only when batteries are relatively empty would require just above 4 billion crowns of investment.

Pretty straightforward isn't it ? Use off peak charging and it's all sweet.:)

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...on-to-power-bills-by-2040-study-idUSKCN1T81Y0
Click to expand...

Not really; evidence is stronger than assumption, and that is just a proposal based on assumption. So far the evidence is that Norway has experienced serious problems with just a ~2% EV uptake.

Not sure if you read this article yet:

"NSW could become the first jurisdiction in the world to tax electric cars based on distance travelled – and automatically track vehicle odometers – in an attempt to make sure they pay their fair share on the road.

The radical proposal to tax electric vehicles (EVs) per kilometre travelled would also eventually include petrol and diesel cars – and potentially bring an end to annual registration fees.

Drivers of electric cars currently avoid paying fuel excise, which is 42.3 cents per litre of petrol and diesel sold – a large portion of which goes into funding roads – because they charge off the electricity grid." (https://www.caradvice.com.au/862164/nsw-government-considers-electric-car-usage-tax/)
 
I wonder if there is a way for the grid to "know" if a load comes from an EV, and therefore to only charge it when conditions permit ?
 
Top