GV70 - honest discussion

[PetevB]

I have built several Hydro-power facilities and a couple solar power facilities in conjunction with water infrastructure. A vast majority of the time, they dont make sense over conventional power generation, RIGHT NOW. They are still not as cost effective and efficient as they seem. The only reason they have been used to power the plants ive built, is to allow the municipality to increase rates because "green". Payback periods in almost every instance is longer than actual lifecycle of the equipment. Until the storage of energy is figured out to make it able to store the energy generated at a reasonable cost, it wont overtake fossil-fuels and wont eliminate the need for fossil-fuels.

Pacific North West? Hydro projects have always been challenged with long payback periods. As for storage, you only need it for higher renewables penetrations. The first project online gets great economics, then you want more until at some point the economics slip because there’s already a plant up the street so you add storage. And if there’s a sunnier area up the road your economics at your particular location are never going to pencil. Don‘t confuse this with “renewables don’t make sense”. Fossil fuel plants account for just 15% of new generating capacity added in the US today...

 

[EdP]

Cost doesn't dictate what laws of physics we follow. That mid day cost is low is great, what does that do for us when it's dark out? We can charge these EV's during the day, but how? Where? Who will pay for that? It will take decades to catch up to this "opportunity", Until then?...

Your questions will be answered in time. We buy gas during the day so we can figure how to charge cars at that time too. One of the things in the works is new batteries that can charge in ten minutes.
Another step will be chargers at restaurants and shopping centers as well as the workplace.

Who will pay? There are private companies installing charging stations that will put up the initial cost but like very other fuel, the consumer will pay in the end. It should not be tax payer funded. Electrify American intends to double their number in the next few years. 7-11 is putting 500 chargers in 250 locations.

Sure, there are issues but they can be overcome. Some seem to think we should just give up because they are too tough to deal with. There was a time we had no gas stations but that was solved too.

 

[Chad86tsi]

Your questions will be answered in time. We buy gas during the day so we can figure how to charge cars at that time too. One of the things in the works is new batteries that can charge in ten minutes.
Another step will be chargers at restaurants and shopping centers as well as the workplace.

Who will pay? There are private companies installing charging stations that will put up the initial cost but like very other fuel, the consumer will pay in the end. It should not be tax payer funded. Electrify American intends to double their number in the next few years. 7-11 is putting 500 chargers in 250 locations.

Sure, there are issues but they can be overcome. Some seem to think we should just give up because they are too tough to deal with. There was a time we had no gas stations but that was solved too.

All true, but we are selling carts during a horse shortage, and horse breeders cant keep up. Solution? More carts !

(reference : putting the cart before the horse)

 

[csu87]

Pacific North West? Hydro projects have always been challenged with long payback periods. As for storage, you only need it for higher renewables penetrations. The first project online gets great economics, then you want more until at some point the economics slip because there’s already a plant up the street so you add storage. And if there’s a sunnier area up the road your economics at your particular location are never going to pencil. Don‘t confuse this with “renewables don’t make sense”. Fossil fuel plants account for just 15% of new generating capacity added in the US today...

Southwest and mountain regions

as for storage, you need it when you cant produce. For solar, when the sun isnt out, for hydro, when the water isnt flowing, for wind, when the wind isnt blowing. Until this happens, the grid is still going to rely on an alternative source. Nuclear or fossil fuel are the best of the other sources right now and for the next few years at a minimum.

to your point of new generating capacity, the reason solar and wind are being added as such a high rate is mostly regulation and subsidies. The government is making a push for more renewable capacity and incentivizing utilities to add renewable sources to their grids. Pair with it the public perception about renewables and the ability to charge more for "green" energy, and its not hard to figure out why they are doing it.

 

[PetevB]

Cost doesn't dictate what laws of physics we follow. That mid day cost is low is great, what does that do for us when it's dark out? We can charge these EV's during the day, but how? Where? Who will pay for that? It will take decades to catch up to this "opportunity", Until then?...

I’m still stunned you think this is an unsolvable problem. At my last company we put in enough chargers for about 1/4 of the employees to charge their cars. We had shifts, morning, noon, and eventually afternoon, so that everyone with an EV could get time at a charger. Employees had to move their cars once a day. It was a cheap perk and the employees loved it (and EVs get the commute sticker here so they spent less time in traffic).

To be clear, the opportunity here is to effectively zero out everyone’s fuel bill: charge for essentially free as long as you charge at the right time. And you agree half the the cars sold will be EVs, so that’s zeroing out half the county’s fuel bill. But you’re asking who’s going to pay for the chargers? We will.

Those plans are all wind and solar because it's cheap energy and the payback makes sense. Still doesn't solve when the sun is down and the wind isn't blowing. The only new tech that has promise is new nuclear with "liquid salt storage". It's being retrofitted to decommissioned coal plants. It's about a decade away (being prototyped now). it will be several decades before capacity can be increased where we need it to be.

They also require "spinning reserve", where will that come from? We are forcing the grid to become unreliable/unstable. EV adoption is going to speed this up, and the solution hasn't been invented yet.

Molten Salt and Nuclear? Let me guess, Terrapower.
So let’s see… Nuclear power. Not economic, huge permitting issues, a decade until it’s production read. Molten salt, a storage technology with huge operational issues and a history of catastrophic failures (google Solar Reserve Crescent Dunes). I know, let’s put them together…

No, that’s not the only solution, or even a solution. Now google Siemens ETES. If you can charge that with nearly free solar and stick it on a coal plant why on earth would you chose nuclear instead? Oh, and guess what? We just solved your spinning reserve problem too...

You know the problems but can’t see the solutions. In large part because we’ve only been working on solutions for about 5 minutes- until renewables got cheaper these were not problems we needed to solve. Now they are, and there are now billions of reasons to solve them. You’ll be shock how quickly we find answers.

 

[Chad86tsi]

I’m still stunned you think this is an unsolvable problem. At my last company we put in enough chargers for about 1/4 of the employees to charge their cars. We had shifts, morning, noon, and eventually afternoon, so that everyone with an EV could get time at a charger. Employees had to move their cars once a day. It was a cheap perk and the employees loved it (and EVs get the commute sticker here so they spent less time in traffic).

To be clear, the opportunity here is to effectively zero out everyone’s fuel bill: charge for essentially free as long as you charge at the right time. And you agree half the the cars sold will be EVs, so that’s zeroing out half the county’s fuel bill. But you’re asking who’s going to pay for the chargers? We will.


Molten Salt and Nuclear? Let me guess, Terrapower.
So let’s see… Nuclear power. Not economic, huge permitting issues, a decade until it’s production read. Molten salt, a storage technology with huge operational issues and a history of catastrophic failures (google Solar Reserve Crescent Dunes). I know, let’s put them together…

No, that’s not the only solution, or even a solution. Now google Siemens ETES. If you can charge that with nearly free solar and stick it on a coal plant why on earth would you chose nuclear instead? Oh, and guess what? We just solved your spinning reserve problem too...

I'm stunned you aren't reading what I write. It's not unsolvable, it's currently unsolved, and actual solution timelines are not what is being put in peoples heads. EV's will take over before the decade is out, but the supply side will not be ready for them. Lets build the cars, and let the grid figure it out. I see how the grid works and how it's built (and more importantly the timelines). This is not a pretty picture.

You cite the Siemens solution. It's 10 years old, where is it being used at large scale? How about at any scale at all? Seems like 10 years on, they should be everywhere. Perhaps this stuff doesn't work on your perceived time tables.


Or perhaps it just doesn't work well:

Siemens tries to enter the ETES market, but offers 100% in, 45% out - Rethink

Everyone has got very excited by the claim this week from Siemens Gamesa, that is has a new form of storage – one well known, but mostly seen as impractical – based on heating rock – a form of electrothermal energy storage system or ETES. It has opened a pilot plant in Hamburg-Altenwerder which...

rethinkresearch.biz

Before we get too excited, recent white papers from Siemens Gamesa show that this technology is fine if you want to go from heat to heat, and is able to retain 98% of heat. But the round trip from electricity to heat back to electricity only outputs 45% of the electricity you started with.

Building cars is easier than changing the grid, very different time tables. Price isn't the only factor here.

We we’ve only been working on solutions for about 5 minutes-

now you see the problem. And we are pushing these cars anyway, or more to the point, having them pushed on us.

 

[EdP]

All true, but we are selling carts during a horse shortage, and horse breeders cant keep up. Solution? More carts !

(reference : putting the cart before the horse)

Supply and demand in the marketplace. Profit incentives tend to fix things like that. Meantime, don't lay off the cart workers. Horse breeders are working on artificial insemination for better efficiency.

 

[Chad86tsi]

Supply and demand in the marketplace. Profit incentives tend to fix things like that. Meantime, don't lay off the cart workers. Horse breeders are working on artificial insemination for better efficiency.

How long does it take to produce a horse, and now long does it take to produce a cart?

And breeders are still not sure where to stick the tube, let alone how to make it reliable and safe...

 

[EdP]

How long does it take to produce a horse, and now long does it take to produce a cart?

And breeders are still not sure where to stick the tube, let alone how to make it reliable and safe...

Given all the complains on this forum about Bluetooth connections, Navigation updates, cruise control not responsive enough we should go back to building '56 Chevys again, then never had those problems.

 

[PetevB]

You cite the Siemens solution. It's 10 years old, where is it being used at large scale? How about at any scale at all? Seems like 10 years on, they should be everywhere. Perhaps this stuff doesn't work on your perceived time tables.

Or perhaps it just doesn't work well:

Siemens tries to enter the ETES market, but offers 100% in, 45% out - Rethink

Everyone has got very excited by the claim this week from Siemens Gamesa, that is has a new form of storage – one well known, but mostly seen as impractical – based on heating rock – a form of electrothermal energy storage system or ETES. It has opened a pilot plant in Hamburg-Altenwerder which...

rethinkresearch.biz

Before we get too excited, recent white papers from Siemens Gamesa show that this technology is fine if you want to go from heat to heat, and is able to retain 98% of heat. But the round trip from electricity to heat back to electricity only outputs 45% of the electricity you started with.

Why isn’t a solution to a problem that’s 3 years old at scale everywhere already? Hmm, let me think... And exactly how big a problem is 45% round trip efficiency in a world where we’re dumping daytime solar and wind at the peak and it’s essentially free? If you think that’s an actual problem you’re still living in the world yesterday, where renewables were expensive and that type of efficiency hit mattered. Today it’s simply not in many places, tomorrow it’s not nearly everywhere. You don’t need to wait for some fancy new nuclear powerplant. Remember LA just signed a solar PPA at under $.02 per kWh- that turns into $.05 electricity any time you want it if you’ve got a used coal plant- no need to build out the grid, no need to wait for nuclear permits you’re not going to get, no need to build a plant and go through a bankability period. And yes, they and similar technologies are going to scale now.

Meanwhile your EV “problem” is going to end up working out much better than you‘re imagining. Most manufactures have already built the ability to remote-start charging, it’s simply waiting for the software and command. Some manufactures (Ford) have already built in the ability to discharge and support houses/ the grid when needed. These cars become one of the best, largest, fastest acting switchable loads on the grid, monetarily incentivized to charge on demand. Like NEST thermostats they’ll help absorb the peaks and reduce the troughs by switching on and off as needed, and this will have little to nothing to do with new hardware. I’m very familiar with the time it takes to change the grid: 7 years from inception to putting a new utility scale PV project online in California today. I’m also familiar with many of the fixes that won’t take nearly as long. You clearly see the problem, you apparently miss the opportunities that will come with it.

______________________________

Help support this site so it can continue supporting you!

 

[Chad86tsi]

Given all the complains on this forum about Bluetooth connections, Navigation updates, cruise control not responsive enough we should go back to building '56 Chevys again, then never had those problems.

More like justifying the need to have all that tech on every car made (whether you want it or not) to save the planet, only to find it doesn't work and still pollutes as much as some of the other crappy cars already on the market.

we need to get there, but jumping in with both feet and not even looking is usually not a good plan. Not listening to warnings from others that have some experience in what your are jumping in to makes it even worse.

You ever jump out of a plane with a prototype parachute that has never been tested? "Don't worry, we'll figure it out as you fall, your freefall will expedite discovery". Then someone tells you "oh, and it has been been designed so it only works on sunny days. Do you look out the window to see what the weather is like?

 

[Chad86tsi]

Why isn’t a solution to a problem that’s 3 years old at scale everywhere already?

the problem is more than 3 years old, it's been known since inception. Solutions (to a decades-known problem) are still being worked on.

And exactly how big a problem is 45% round trip efficiency in a world where we’re dumping daytime solar and wind at the peak and it’s essentially free? If you think that’s an actual problem you’re still living in the world yesterday, where renewables were expensive and that type of efficiency hit mattered.

I'm fine with 45%, but it means more than doubling the supply side for that storage facility to get "X" output during off-hours.

Meanwhile your EV “problem” is going to end up working out much better than you‘re imagining. Most manufactures have already built the ability to remote-start charging, it’s simply waiting for the software and command. Some manufactures (Ford) have already built in the ability to discharge and support houses/ the grid when needed. These cars become one of the best, largest, fastest acting switchable loads on the grid, monetarily incentivized to charge on demand. Like NEST thermostats they’ll help absorb the peaks and reduce the troughs by switching on and off as needed, and this will have little to nothing to do with new hardware. I’m very familiar with the time it takes to change the grid: 7 years from inception to putting a new utility scale PV project online in California today. I’m also familiar with many of the fixes that won’t take nearly as long. You clearly see the problem, you apparently miss the opportunities that will come with it.

Adding solar and wind is easy. Adding storage is the problem. Solar and wind is a well established many decades old tech. As you have said of the storage problem : We’ve only been working on solutions for about 5 minutes-

Until solutions are a well and sorted out matter (which may take decades), EV's will continue to be largely fossil fueled vehicles, and they will strain the already weakening grid. And to what ends? Storage solitons are being worked on in spite of EV's. EV's are not "solving the storage problem" merely because they are being pushed. We could outlaw EV's and this demand for storage will persist.

A real solution is to take that battery out of the EV and hang it on your wall in the garage so you can buy actual green power and used it whenever you need it. A nano-grid. That tech already exists too, and has been nearly perfected. Why not push that instead? That will make the grid way more stable and will actually eliminate a profound amount of C02 production. Putting that battery in a car and charging it with carbon-watts is stupid in comparison. Perhaps mandate that all EV's are sold with nano-grid charging. Then we'd be getting somewhere.

 

[EdP]

More like justifying the need to have all that tech on every car made (whether you want it or not) to save the planet, only to find it doesn't work and still pollutes as much as some of the other crappy cars already on the market.

we need to get there, but jumping in with both feet and not even looking is usually not a good plan. Not listening to warnings from others have tome experience in what your are jumping in to makes it even worse.

You ever jump out of a plane with a prototype parachute that has never been tested? "Don't worry, we'll figure it out as you fall, your freefall will expedite discovery". Then someone tells you "oh, and it has been been designed so it only works on sunny days. Do you look out the window to see what the weather is like?

Sometimes you just have to jump in and see what happens. So far, I don't see lines of EV along side of the road because they ran out of juice, nor do I see major blackouts of cities from too many cars charging.

I do look outside the window to see what the weather is like but often had to go out anyway in hurricane and blizzard conditions and I survived. Every major technology had its naysayers but they got through it and made it work well.

Much of my working life was running factories. We did a lot of planning but some of the best ideas came from a couple of guys BSing at break and saying, this sounds crazy but lets try this. . . . . and it worked.

 

[EdP]

A real solution is to take that battery out of the EV and hang it on your wall in the garage so you can buy actual green power and used it whenever you need it. A nano-grid. That tech already exists too, and has been nearly perfected. Why not push that instead? That will make the grid way more stable and will actually eliminate a profound amount of C02 production. Putting that battery in a car and charging it with carbon-watts is stupid in comparison. Perhaps mandate that all EV's are sold with nano-grid charging. Then we'd be getting somewhere.

It is being worked on. Battery swaps in 10 minutes or less.

 

[Unprocessed1]

Anyone else find the armrest lacking the right amount of cushioning? I sometimes find it to be downright uncomfortable.

 

[Chad86tsi]

It is being worked on. Battery swaps in 10 minutes or less.

Let me know when it gets here and is adopted by the public. That solution has been worked on this whole time, still not here...

Sometimes you just have to jump in and see what happens. So far, I don't see lines of EV along side of the road because they ran out of juice, nor do I see major blackouts of cities from too many cars charging.

I do look outside the window to see what the weather is like but often had to go out anyway in hurricane and blizzard conditions and I survived. Every major technology had its naysayers but they got through it and made it work well.

Much of my working life was running factories. We did a lot of planning but some of the best ideas came from a couple of guys BSing at break and saying, this sounds crazy but lets try this. . . . . and it worked.

My job (in part) is to see what might happen, and to prevent it when what might happen is bad.

You don't see long lines of empty gas powered cars either. That's human behavior, not technological advantage. google : range anxiety.

Why walk into a hurricane when you don't have to? If someone has the power to prevent hurricanes, and the tech that makes this work means we have to slow down some forms of adopting new technology (not stop, just slow) do you want "hurricane guy" to stop his work because someone wants to try this new idea right-freaking-now? Let him try his new idea, but let the "hurricane guys" do their job. I'm not aware of anyone in this topic that want's EV's to stop.

people have tried stuff since the beginning of time, sometimes they get it right. When they get it wrong, stuff breaks, sometimes people die. Texas learned about "unstable power" issues just recently.

What I feel like I'm hearing is "lets just trust the grid to figure out a solution to our problem, we'll be fine", and "if we double the problem, the solution will arrive twice as fast".

 

[Hawk]

Anyone else find the armrest lacking the right amount of cushioning? I sometimes find it to be downright uncomfortable.

Ehh I think it works out pretty nice for me......

 

[PetevB]

the problem is more than 3 years old, it's been known since inception. Solutions (to a decades-known problem) are still being worked on.

I'm fine with 45%, but it means more than doubling the supply side for that storage facility to get "X" output during off-hours.

Adding solar and wind is easy. Adding storage is the problem. Solar and wind is a well established many decades old tech. As you have said of the storage problem : We’ve only been working on solutions for about 5 minutes-

Until solutions are a well and sorted out matter (which may take decades), EV's will continue to be largely fossil fueled vehicles, and they will strain the already weakening grid. And to what ends? Storage solitons are being worked on in spite of EV's. EV's are not "solving the storage problem" merely because they are being pushed. We could outlaw EV's and this demand for storage will persist.

A real solution is to take that battery out of the EV and hang it on your wall in the garage so you can buy actual green power and used it whenever you need it. A nano-grid. That tech already exists too, and has been nearly perfected. Why not push that instead? That will make the grid way more stable and will actually eliminate a profound amount of C02 production. Putting that battery in a car and charging it with carbon-watts is stupid in comparison. Perhaps mandate that all EV's are sold with nano-grid charging. Then we'd be getting somewhere.

Ten years ago adding solar and wind was the problem- it was too damn expensive. It came down 5x in ten years, hence now storage is the problem. How given where we are how much do you think that’s coming down in 10 years, especially since now efficiency doesn’t matter? Every new solar project in California’s getting 4 hours of storage stapled to it...

Pushing nuclear projects that will never materialize and nano-grids that won’t be economic for a decade smacks of a disconnect with economic reality. It's expensive and hence it‘s pushing water up hill: it not going to happen any time soon. People on the other hand will do things that are in their economic best interest. You're proposing hanging a battery on the wall of your house. By putting it at your house that battery (and the solar that charges it) costs 3x what it would in utility scale. It competes with a ~50% efficient plant burning natural gas (the obvious alternative way to get energy at night). Hence you're pitching an expensive battery against a small amount of cheap fossil fuel.

Put the same battery in a car and it competes against a very different fuel: gasoline. Gasoline costs ~15x more than natural gas bought at wholesale on a kWh basis, and it's burned in a car engine that's below 25% average efficiency. Effectively the battery put in the car competes against a 30x more expensive fuel cost than the one hanging on your wall. A large part of the reason EVs are taking off and your wall hanging batteries won't for a long while.

We have big pieces of the puzzle now, we put them together correctly and we make an instant impact and prosper in the process. Charging cars when the sun shines isn't that hard. But you're making it seem impossible, hence we should sit on our hands waiting for future technologies (or spend a fortune pushing water up hill). The simple economics will win this argument every time...

 

[Chad86tsi]

nano-grids that won’t be economic for a decade smacks of a disconnect with economic reality.

Ten years ago adding solar and wind was the problem- it was too damn expensive. It came down 5x in ten years,

^ cognitive dissonance, disconnect from reality, or intentional "shell game" with terms and facts?

create the demand and the solutions will come and prices will drop post-haste, right?

You are fine with low efficiency utility scale thermal storage, but not low efficiency nano grid storage?

People on the other hand will do things that are in their economic best interest.

buying a Prius fits the bill. How many were sold last year? Prius sales have been on decline every year for the last 10 years in a row. Toyota Prius Family Sales Figures
despite inflation-adjusted declining MSRP's.

^ economics and C02 is not driving this behavior.

EV's are also not the solution to C02. Not as designed and implemented anyway. Adding daytime green energy does not change this, and we still don't have a solid plan for storage to shift when green energy can be used.

You're proposing hanging a battery on the wall of your house. By putting it at your house that battery (and the solar that charges it) costs 3x what it would in utility scale. It competes with a ~50% efficient plant burning natural gas (the obvious alternative way to get energy at night). Hence you're pitching an expensive battery against a small amount of cheap fossil fuel.

how about : it was too damn expensive. It came down 5x in ten years. Do you think this trend will apply to home storage? It seems like you are arguing both sides.

How about you put that EV cars battery in the power plant and you buy a prius to drive, you output the same C02 as an EV on dirty power, and now have a lower electrical generation price too. using your figures it will be way more efficient, and cost a whole lot less to put an EV cars battery at the power plant than to put it in a car and charge at home with home generation or daytime green energy. And remember : People will do things that are in their economic best interest.

Or perhaps this is all about rationalizing people that want their EV's (and to have others get them whether they like it or not), even if there are "issues" with the grid compatibility and actual C02 production.

Charging cars when the sun shines isn't that hard. But you're making it seem impossible, hence we should sit on our hands waiting for future technologies (or spend a fortune pushing water up hill). The

EV's have been available to almost all of us for over a decade (tesla), and there is still no way to charge at most peoples places of daytime business. Tesla has sold over 1 million cars. If it's not that hard, and we already know how to do it, why has it not arrived? I understand supply/demand cycles will force new supply where there is excess demand. The problem is the lag, and consequences of prolonged excess demand on critical systems (the power grid).

So you don't like the home wall storage idea, how about the same mandated extra storage battery concept, what if the 2nd battery is placed in a near by power plant? it will be cheaper in the long run, and : People will do things that are in their economic best interest. Simple economics will win this argument every time...

we should sit on our hands waiting for future technologies (or spend a fortune pushing water up hill). The simple economics will win this argument every time...

We should make sure technology B catches up with technology A, or system Z will crash. We are already spending a fortune federally subsidizing growth of technology A, and technology B is still unsettled and mostly "ideas". I care about system Z.

 

[EdP]

Let me know when it gets here and is adopted by the public. That solution has been worked on this whole time, still not here...

Won't get here for a long time due to the differing designs of batteries. China is making headway and IIRC, the Leaf can do it.

My job (in part) is to see what might happen, and to prevent it when what might happen is bad.

You don't see long lines of empty gas powered cars either. That's human behavior, not technological advantage. google : range anxiety.

Why walk into a hurricane when you don't have to? If someone has the power to prevent hurricanes, and the tech that makes this work means we have to slow down some forms of adopting new technology (not stop, just slow) do you want "hurricane guy" to stop his work because someone wants to try this new idea right-freaking-now? Let him try his new idea, but let the "hurricane guys" do their job. I'm not aware of anyone in this topic that want's EV's to stop.

people have tried stuff since the beginning of time, sometimes they get it right. When they get it wrong, stuff breaks, sometimes people die. Texas learned about "unstable power" issues just recently.

What I feel like I'm hearing is "lets just trust the grid to figure out a solution to our problem, we'll be fine", and "if we double the problem, the solution will arrive twice as fast".

What you are hearing is everything pessimistic and you want to stop advancing. What has crashed from EVs? Nothing yet.

The only solution offered by the pessimistic crowd is to stop. Just stop, make no more innovation because bad things may happen. You say slow down but you have not given actual figures of what will happen in the next year or the year after etc. Are you making assumptions or do you have facts to show? What is crashing from EV use?

Meantime, park your Chevy Bolt outside next to your G80, away from the house.