You’re right. It should be per 10 km.
Sorry
Somebody earlier was making an attempt at a point re: lithium ion batteries having been around for ~20 years with no recycling. There was no initial recycling because they were a niche market with no scarcity and no cost to just dumping them. Vehicle use only overtook (in Wh) portable and personal mobility use in the past few years. “End of life” is often marked at 3 years, but truth is most vehicle batteries remain in use after that, if not always in the original vehicle. There were more (Wh) batteries produced in the past three years than in all prior years.
The recycling industry was up to about 100 kt last year and growing. With the primary barrier being collection and distribution. That’s estimated at about 50% of batteries that have actually reached end of life.
First off, a nitpick: You don’t mean “125 megawatts per hour”, you mean “125 megawatt-hours per hour”, or more simply just “125 megawatts”. But you proceeded correctly from there, so no problem (this time, at least: That sort of carelessness with units can lead to major problems).
Second, you’re assuming that all of the vehicle charging is happening at peak, when in actuality, probably most of it will be overnight, when present-day demand is minimal.
And it gets even better with renewable sources like wind, because renewables and battery-charging complement each other. The biggest problem with wind is that it’s unpredictable on short time scales (the stability issue others have already mentioned in the thread). But with smart metering, you could arrange to charge a car only when the windmills are spinning, and turn off the charging when there’s a lull, and still have plenty of charge time to have your car ready for your commute in the morning. The technology to do this is quite simple, and could be done today, if anyone felt motivated to put the system together.
Don’t batteries charge at different rates depending on their current charge status? I seem to recall that last 10% taking almost as much time as the first 90%. Not to mention some batteries are smart now. My Pixel 6 phone can fast charge which is fast but I often see it not doing a fast charge and slow charging (presumably to save the battery). I am not sure how it decides when to do which.
But, the point being, the utility cannot necessarily just remember and needs to assess how the battery wants to be charged today.
There is work afoot in this area.
Wind blows through a narrow corridor that goes south north - through Texas. This area produces the most energy in the US, while the population (power demand) is further away from this area. (East coast and west coast).
There is the electron versus molecule tradeoff which breaks even at somewhere around 3000 km below which it’s economical to transport energy using wires and above which it’s economical to transport energy using hydrogen (obtained by electrolysis ). Hence the emphasis on hydrogen hubs.
Since large scale battery technology has not panned out, the plan is to store hydrogen in underground salt caverns (storing natural gas in salt caverns is fairly mature technology).
Yes, but level 2 charging, like I have at home, is almost trickle charging a car battery. At the 5.5kW that I charge with, it runs at full speed up to all but the last percent or two, if I’m filling to 100% for a trip. On a normal charge to 90%, it runs at full speed regardless of the batteries charge level. The phenomenon you talk about is very evident when supercharging, where it may start at 240kW+, and be down to 30-50kW above 80%.
Google calls this “adaptive charging” and my Pixel does it, too. Unless they’ve changed it, as Google likes to do, it runs at full speed up to 80%, and then drops to a low speed charge to 100%. Their explanation is it limits the amount of heat generated. They have some algorithm to decide when to do it, based on if you have a wake-up alarm set and how many hours until that alarm.
What I’d like is the utility to remember that I charge at 5.5kW at home, and just stick to that, instead of having to measure when I’m paying $0.14/kWh, instead of the overnight rate of $0.09/kWh. If my calculations are correct, it costs me almost $0.07, and that goes straight into their pockets!
On-shore wind, at least. There’s also a lot of wind offshore, close to the coastal population centers. Though of course offshore wind turbines have their own issues and tradeoffs. And of course there are a lot of engineers already working on all of these issues, and all of the alternatives (including fossil fuels) also have issues.
I never said nor meant to imply that electric vehicles would mitigate all of the issues with wind power. But one particular and significant issue, the lack of stability, they do mitigate wonderfully.
Here in Arizona new homes have 200A service if only because of the heat pumps everybody uses for heating and cooling. When we bought into our current home, built in the 1950s, it had 100A service but we paid to get it bumped to 200A. It involved a new breaker box and further dividing the branches in the house, not very expensive.
Good valid points. We are on the same page. I was trying to say that EV charging is a small number for wind. Here are the numbers :
Wind Power Installed Capacity in the US : 135 GW (Wind power in the United States - Wikipedia)
Total EV cars in the US = 3 million. Average charging power = 2kw.
So if all the EV cars are plugged in at the same time, they will withdraw 6 GW
135 GW versus 6 GW. Hence energy storage solutions are needed.
Why? (really asking)
If EVs draw 6GW and wind alone provides 135GW why do you need storage?
Did not make any assumptions of when charging would happen. Over all I was trying to make the point that the generating increase required, even in worst case is not that big. More wind power with decent storage can be rolled out to handle it.
We have tens of thousands of abandoned oil and gas sites that have infrastructure built out to them. They need rehabilitation at great cost. I think every one that is in a suitable location should be used for a wind turbine installation as rehabilitation.
The cost to drill all those dead wells, is about equal to placing turbines. So it can be done.
I calculated that if every dead well site was instead a turbine site, it would be about five times our maximum power capacity at present.
LiFePO₄ fast forced charging:
Then your area/state/region is more forward-thinking (and the demands on AC are obviously higher). When people start talking about carbon footprint, I think that my peak month natural gas use to heat my home was over 400cubic meters - probably my major contribution to global warming. That’s 10.5kWh in each cubic meter, so in a cold month, I’d use 4,000 kWh. Could I replace this with electricity?
That’s 130kWh a day, just over 5 kWh per hour. At 240V that’s 20A. Allowing for on-off cycles, say 80% on, that’s an extra 25A. It might be do-able on a 100A service, 10.5kWh equivalent of natural gas currently costs about 30¢ or less, while the equivalent electricity is about 95¢ so there would have to be a serious rise in a basic commodity price for electricity to be a reasonable alternative. How likely is it that energy prices would go through the roof? (ha ha)
But that’s using the same power around the clock, not at off-peak like charging a car. I do think the electrical grid would need upgrading when everyone does that. It would certainly raise the risk that charging the car would pop the main breaker. I suspect if I added that load to my house, the people issuing construction permits would require an upgrade to my electrical service too.
The main issue with some neighbourhoods, especially older ones, is the need to pull a new cable from the street. In my newer subdivision, the wiring is buried. I’m not sure how easy it would be to pull new cable, I suspect it would involve trenching and possibly drilling under a few driveways to reach the nearest electrical box. As the Far Side said about early plumbing, “this not be cheap.”
It sounds like you’re ignoring coefficient of performance, though. A good heat pump might get 3x the heating power compared to the energy input. Sometimes 4x when the conditions are right.
That is because storage is the holy grail for renewable energy. Wind and Solar are unpredictable and vary from day to day, and season to season.
Generally most wind power is produced during the night and not so much during the day. Chronos was saying that by charging the EVs at night, the increased load on the grid will balance out the extra production by wind. I was saying that there is a lot more energy available from Wind at night, so that all the EVs can be charged and there will be plenty left for storage. (If it is not stored then they have to turn off wind turbines. It is a lot easier to turn off wind turbines than turn off say a boiler which takes many hours to shut down or startup)
This is explored more here : What Do We Do With Too Much Renewable Energy? | Sierra Club
To store the rest of the energy that the windmills are providing, because it’s not necessarily produced when it’s needed for actual loads.
Though the 6 GW is for the current number of electric vehicles, which is still a fairly small fraction. It’d be a lot larger proportion of the wind yield if all cars were electric.
The migration to Led lighting has significantly reduced electricity demand on electricity grids over the past decade, so there will be some spare capacity available for EV charging.
EVs have the potential to be a huge distributed battery storage facility. Vehicle to Grid systems are being trialled by Nissan and others. Smart metering so you only top up your charge at the cheapest rate and allow the utility access some of the battery capacity at peak times. Delivery and public transport depots are going to have a lot of spare battery capacity laying idle. If these systems can be made to work at scale, a lot of grid problems could be addressed.
Whether local utilities supplying power are up to these challenges is another question.
Remember that utilities are in the business of making money. They will not be keen on paying customers for electricity. We’ve already seen this with people who have solar trying to sell electricity back into the grid. Some local providers have pushed back.
Well, presumably more than 135GW is being consumed. We are not really suggesting that there are only a few cars that all the windmills are charging. If the windmills are producing a lot the fossil fuel plant can back off and save money. If the windmills are not turning the fossil fuel plant revs-up.
I guess if you are running a utility as a private monopoly it makes business sense to discourage rival electricity generators or battery owner as much as possible. If you can cover your costs by passing them directly on to the customer why change?
Surely a case for anti-trust legislation?