GM Centennial: How the Chevy Volt might affect the electric grid
Click above for high-res gallery of the 2011 Chevy Volt
Over at the RenCen yesterday, AutoblogGreen sat down with Britta Gross, GM's manager of Hydrogen and Electrical Infrastructure Development and Strategic Commercialization, and Mark Duvall, program manager at the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), to talk about how the Volt - actually, how millions of Volts and other plug-in vehicles - could change the way electricity is thought of in the U.S., and what the automaker and utilities are doing today to get ready for the day when it's normal to plug in your car.
Gross said that GM is working with dozens of utilities to figure out how to best sell the public on plugging in a car. AutoblogGreen readers might be anxiously counting down the days until their garage becomes a fueling center, but there are a lot of people who just don't get what plugging a car in might mean, and we could all use a bit more information, no? The major automakers have a long way to go before everyone knows what PHEVs are and how to best use them. Duvall said that it's not just the batteries in the Volt, but also what might happen to li-ion automotive batteries after they're used in cars that presents a real opportunity for consumers and utilities for energy storage from wind, solar or just nighttime power. It was an interesting talk, and you can listen in here (21 min):
For more from Duvall, click here.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Alex 8:21PM (9/17/2008)
ugh, Sebastian, please! all the GM talk is making me nauseous...
the figures on their vehicle's future electricity consumptions aren't going to be a dime in the bucket if both ends of the spectrum like new renewable energy sources are not cultivated. The government should impose a lien on the CO2 each GM internal combustion engine produces as a way to pay for their future BAIL OUT.
Reply
Mike!!ekiM 8:49PM (9/17/2008)
Wow, that's a dangerously good idea. Not just GM, all non-hybrid vehicles should pay a CO2 tax based upon horsepower.
Mikeeeee 8:17AM (9/18/2008)
How about you two paying a CO2 tax every time your furnace kicks on this winter.
Maybe a CO2 tax every time you cook hamburgers on the gas grill.
Maybe a C02 tax everytime you go out to eat and some cook cooks you a slab of fish.
Etc, Etc, Etc.
Get real!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
James Sonne 9:00AM (9/18/2008)
Or perhaps a fine every time we step on grass, since it is a CO2 sink, and killing it releases CO2.
At any rate, we definitely don't need more corporate taxes in America. Having the second highest corporate tax rate in the world is what has left innovation to other countries like China. Businesses simply can't afford to expand unless they've reached a monopolistic size or segment.
While smart charging is a good idea, it needs to be left up to the customer/owner to decide how the car should charge. I'm not about to let the power company determine when I can use my computer, and neither will I allow them to tell me when I can use my car. For most people, charging the car during off-peak night ours will be their PREFERENCE, for others, they might work off-shifts like night or evenings and NEED to charge during the day, or they might have several infrequent short trips that require intermittent charging.
If we're going to turn into a Socialist economy, like we're currently heading, I am CERTAINLY not allowing private companies such as utilities to be in charge, since I have now power to elect those leaders unless I pay for stock in the company ... and I'm more likely to go without electricity than go paying for my vote.
Just like we all do not produce all of our own electricity now, doing so through renewable means in the future is not the answer, either. Space based solar with focused terrestrial collection is not something I'm able to personally fund, and it is the most likely source of clean, 100% on time, and renewable source (in human terms) available to us.
Nuclear is the only other best option to totally stop CO2 emission, and certain people who call themselves "green" or whatever moniker they prefer simply don't want to look at the only viable option we have to control climate change at the only time that's important: now. We're not going to be able to replace all of our energy needs with solar,wind,tidal,and geothermal within the next twenty years. But we have the technology to replace it all with nuclear, which produces no emissions and recondition the very little waste material it does make in order to be recycled in the reactor!
Sonne Times: Social and Political Commentary
http://jsonne.blogspot.com
James Sonne 9:02AM (9/18/2008)
" ... since I have now power to elect those leaders ..."
*now should be 'no'
Alex 5:58PM (9/18/2008)
@ #3 Mikeeeeeeeeeeeeee
@ #10 Dan
You get real buffoon!
A lien should be imposed on CO2 produced by an combustion engine on a company that for 100 YEARS Ideology has been destroying electric mass transit systems in the early 1900s, fostering fascist doctrine and monopoly like with the Nazis during WWII, propagating the demise of electrical innovations during the 70s and 80s, crushing the EV1 program literally, and now greenwashing their reputation with the Volt and E-Flex systems because they have no stable footing in the automotive market and its future..
You don't make money off of breathing or cooking your redneck food because it is a NECESSITY. TRANSPORTATION is an INDUSTRY. Profits are made off of THIS SPECIFIC CO2 production.
Driving YOUR 6,000 lb truck to the supermarket 3 BLOCKS away to pick up pregnancy tests and more Budweiser since you can't afford another kid after your previous 5 bastards will obviously add a lot more to GLOBAL WARMING, HIGHER GAS PRICES, and a hundreds of other COSTS due to irresponsible ATTITUDES than a simple LIEN on CO2 production.
Which by the way is DIFFERENT FROM A TAX, Mikeeeee! YOU IGNORAMUS, where did you learn your BACKYARD economics?
PLUS, this idea is ALREADY HAPPENING in Europe and has been TESTED in California by Bill Lockyer, the previous California Attorney General, against the SIX BIG AUTO MAKERS, until a Republican Federal Judge dismissed the GLOBAL WARMING aspect as a public nuisance!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Lockyer
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/18/us/18pollute.html?ex=1347854400&en=1c9534f3606e5688&ei=5124&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink
Thank GM when Texas goes under water from Hyper-Hurricanes from global warming. It freaking ironic that all those oil drilling platforms are right there off the coast...
And I used to live in Houston, so I know there are people there and around the country that do depend on that gas/oil but that are a lot smarter than attacking ideas instead of proposing them!
-Alex
Jim Bimmer 6:18PM (9/18/2008)
...mmm, i am a little confused on why so many would be against taxing or putting a lien like what was said up above on carbon dioxide from cars. don't energy companies try to monopolize their energy sources to compete better. i mean it is the same with GM. they just played the wrong hand for so long.
also why should Bob Lutz and Rick Wagoner get away with double digit multi-million dollar salaries while hell is breaking loose, people are losing jobs, and money is shrinking from our pockets. and now GM wants a bail out? they should pay some way and not get a free ride.
...how long was this rosy dream going to last???
Alex 6:43PM (9/18/2008)
Found this too:
Auto Executives to Seek Government Help
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122083515707008703.html
Can we all say BAIL OUT!
I hope you have plenty of CO2 this winter to keep you warm.
ziv 10:06PM (9/17/2008)
The same problem we have with the small first and second year production for the Volt is part of the reason the grid will be able to accomodate EREV and eventually BEV cars with very little problem. 10,000 Volts in 2010, 60,000 in 2011, maybe 100,000 in 2012 and up from there mean nothing in relation to the total amount of electricity generated in the US. Most of the Volt owners will recharge at night anyway, and many of them are going to be buying wind generators and/or PV cells to allow them to drive for less, now that PV cells are getting cheaper.
If GM sells this car profitably for less than $40,000 they will change the way people look at their cars, and their fuel sources. It is kind of entertaining to see GM right up in the front of the pack developing EREV and BEV tech. I just wish that Ford had leveraged their hybrid tech for the Escape into other vehicles, I still think that the Crown Victoria would have been the perfect next vehicle to put the hybrid tech into. Every police department in America, every mayor, would have been boasting about how many Hybrid police cars they were buying, how green they were, and how much money they were going to save taxpayers. And the police officers would be able to use the battery to power their computers as they did their reports in their cars, instead of idling their car as they do now...
Reply
Anth 10:14PM (9/17/2008)
1. Vehicle-2-grid is a horrible technological idea. I don't want the power company taking energy out of my car, using battery cycles and prematurely shortening the life of the battery. Unless they use the Altairnano batteries or develop some batteries that get north of 5,000 cycles, I don't want the grid to lean on my car (and everyone else's car) to fill the peak demands. They'd be better off waiting for the good thin-film panels to come out in the next 5 years, and just start throwing them on rooftops (even if the panels are leased from the power company). The generator idea is pretty good, if the power goes out, use the car battery to power essential items (fridge, any medical equipment, etc).
2. However, what is a great idea is the ability of the grid to choose when I charge, given a window. E.g. I get home at 6p and leave at 6a, so it can recharge whenever in that window, as the grid can supply (or just recharge at a lower rate).
3. A PNL study shows that we can convert 43% of today's passenger vehicles to PHEVs like the Volt with a 6p-6a recharge window. If you have an all day recharge window its 72%. And that's with the power resources and transmission lines in 2006.
http://www.pnl.gov/energy/eed/etd/pdfs/phev_feasibility_analysis_combined.pdf
Reply
meme 2:22AM (9/18/2008)
1) A properly designed smart charging system leaves the *user* in charge. I.e., the user can set when they want their car charged by, whether they want the grid to be able to draw power from them (and at what rate) or simply just slow down the rate your car charges, and so on; the grid is required to get the vehicle charged by that time if it's at all possible, but beyond that the needs of the grid are served. The more lenient your parameters, the cheaper your power.
2) As you note, not all smart charging requires power *output*. Simply having it stop charging for a while while a peaking plant comes online to make up a shortfall would make a world of difference to power companies. Power out would be *even better*, but clearly they'll have to have nice incentives to get people to allow that.
3) Solar panels make the problem *worse*, not better. The amount of power produced by solar fluctuates between a huge amount and none. It goes away entirely all night, and during the day can stop with little warning if a band of clouds moves overhead. They're even worse than wind in this regard. The idea behind smart charging is to allow *more* solar and wind onto the grid without messing it up.
4) While AltairNano's cells are probably the best on the market, if you use phosphates or spinels gently, the impact on battery life should be quite minimal. If the power company is providing good enough incentives to make up for wear and tear, why not? I could envision a program where, for example, the power company provides a free, unlimited life warranty on your car's battery pack (probably with an exclusion for accidents) in exchange for you letting them draw power from it. I'd sign up for a deal like that. Would you? You help stabilize the grid (letting it make more use of renewables) and you never have to worry about your battery again; it'd be win-win. And probably worth it to the power companies, since their customers are paying the initial capital costs on the batteries and all they have to pay is maintenance.
Anth 12:31PM (9/18/2008)
I look at the power rates in California during the summer - nighttime rates are $70/MWh and daytime rates are $120-180MWh.
If I can buy power at 7c at night and sell it back for 18c/kWh during the day, with only a usable 8kw in the battery, that's a profit of 88c/day for that full 8kw, for 4kw its 44c/day. For the 90 summer days and 4kw sellback, that's $39 for the summer.
For me its a bad idea because my commute is 35-37 miles. And I cant sell any electricity back because I'll need it all to drive.
Dan 1:43PM (9/18/2008)
To post number 1 and 2 above - maybe we should impose a CO2 tax on you both, for the CO2 you let out when you breathe out?
Then, when you run out of money to pay the CO2 taxes (because you breathe out a LOT of CO2 over the years), you won't be allowed to breathe any more until you get more money, and we won't have to hear your stupid anti-car, anti-horsepower ideas any more.
Here's some numbers:
An average car getting 25mpg will produce around 5600lbs of co2 in a year, driving 10000 miles.
An average person breathes out around 850lbs of co2 a year.
That means we only need 6.5 of your big mouths to equal a car's output of co2 in a year.
An average car is not where we should be looking first to reduce co2 emissions - it's just the most convenient for people to target as "the enemy", and the easiest for toyota etc. to make money from.
Reply
Mikeeeee 2:18PM (9/18/2008)
Hey Dan, I like your come back for #'s 1 & 2.
Mikeeee # 3
Alex 6:01PM (9/18/2008)
@ #3 Mikeeeeeeeeeeeeee
@ #10 Dan
You get real buffoon!
A lien should be imposed on CO2 produced by an combustion engine on a company that for 100 YEARS Ideology has been destroying electric mass transit systems in the early 1900s, fostering fascist doctrine and monopoly like with the Nazis during WWII, propagating the demise of electrical innovations during the 70s and 80s, crushing the EV1 program literally, and now greenwashing their reputation with the Volt and E-Flex systems because they have no stable footing in the automotive market and its future..
You don't make money off of breathing or cooking your redneck food because it is a NECESSITY. TRANSPORTATION is an INDUSTRY. Profits are made off of THIS SPECIFIC CO2 production.
Driving YOUR 6,000 lb truck to the supermarket 3 BLOCKS away to pick up pregnancy tests and more Budweiser since you can't afford another kid after your previous 5 bastards will obviously add a lot more to GLOBAL WARMING, HIGHER GAS PRICES, and a hundreds of other COSTS due to irresponsible ATTITUDES than a simple LIEN on CO2 production.
Which by the way is DIFFERENT FROM A TAX, Mikeeeee! YOU IGNORAMUS, where did you learn your BACKYARD economics?
PLUS, this idea is ALREADY HAPPENING in Europe and has been TESTED in California by Bill Lockyer, the previous California Attorney General, against the SIX BIG AUTO MAKERS, until a Republican Federal Judge dismissed the GLOBAL WARMING aspect as a public nuisance!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Lockyer
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/18/us/18pollute.html?ex=1347854400&en=1c9534f3606e5688&ei=5124&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink
Thank GM when Texas goes under water from Hyper-Hurricanes from global warming. It freaking ironic that all those oil drilling platforms are right there off the coast...
And I used to live in Houston, so I know there are people there and around the country that do depend on that gas/oil but that are a lot smarter than attacking ideas instead of proposing them!
-Alex
Electric Janet 6:28PM (9/18/2008)
Boy, you guys who think being silly and criticizing CO2 effects and ways to fix this world problem are going to be the first ones to kill your neighbor when he/she supports ideas that will change your way of life. That's reality.
What are you afraid of boys?
Grow some balls and be part of the solution.
Now I have to go cook on my electric oven, or maybe I'll use my solar grill. I love the fact that my house adds to the power grid. What are you doing to help?
Alex 6:45PM (9/18/2008)
Found this too:
Auto Executives to Seek Government Help
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122083515707008703.html
Can we all say BAIL OUT!
I hope you have plenty of CO2 this winter to keep you warm.
Alex 6:58PM (9/18/2008)
Found this too:
Auto Executives to Seek Government Help
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122083515707008703.html
Can we all say BAIL OUT!
I hope you have plenty of CO2 this winter to keep you warm.
Dan 7:14PM (9/18/2008)
Actually, I'm not a redneck.. in fact I'm probably the furthest from that classification - I'm british.
I also do not drive a truck, or an SUV, or even a crossover. I never have, and I never want to.
I also own an electric oven (as if that's saving the world).
I also keep the heat about 7-8 degrees cooler than the average person in winter, and the AC either off, or 7-8 degrees warmer than most people in the summer.
I don't have an "eco-friendly" house, with solar power and wind turbines, and recycled water, because I'm not rich - but if I were rich, I would love to have these things.
Making your HOUSE, and BUSINESSES green is the quickest and best way to cutting emissions, and saving the world. Large corporations give off way more than any average car.
My only real argument is with this crazy idea people have, that the prius is a real marvel of modern engineering, and is SO economical... it's not. It's just marketing from toyota, and all the media following on the bandwagon.
I drove cars (with internal combustion engines) 7-8 years ago, in england, that got better fuel economy than the Prius does now, and it didn't need a fancy, overpriced hybrid engine, or a stupid looking body to make people notice "that's a HYBRID.. that person is RESPONSIBLE".
There are diesels available NOW in europe that also get better mpg than the prius, including fun-to-drive cars from audi and bmw, even from the US manufacturers, who sell their US cars with euro diesel engines, getting 45mpg+ over there.
I can't wait for the volt to come along and destroy the prius' reputation for "the best fuel economy".
Alex 8:19PM (9/18/2008)
@ Dan
You're British and you're giving CO2 engine levergaing a hard time? This from a man from THE country/empire that invented taxation?
So what about London's congestion charge, what do you think of that?
What about Jaguar, Aston, Land Rover, Rolls Royce, and several others that have fallen in the hands of American car company executives who "know better" what to do with your heritage...?
You're lucky the English Pound is resilient and your economy smaller, but this whole GM "leading the way" is like following a fool jump off a bridge. And maybe you should thank GM for doing the English a favor and mobilizing the Nazi forces during WWII with GM vehicles and engines. Not that it negatively impacted your material resources, manufacturing, power, food, and population, or anything... Their "bright" minds were just after a dollar or two more at your "cost." What else do you want to lose to their bottom line?
BUT, hey I can at least agree with you that the Prius is no Salvation on tires, but neither is a GM rip-off of Tesla & Toyota.
There is no defining solution big enough yet...
Now go drink your tea while somebody else cleans up after you.