Quote:
Originally Posted by Evans, Marv
We've had an EV since late last year. I've known all along resources needed for manufacture of the batteries and power generation carry baggage associated with operating the EV. If I remember right, CA says it will be going strictly to EV's in the not too distant future. I have serious questions about how this will work out, especially considering the current electric generation and distribution structure which will need huge mods & improvements. I've been watching our difference in power consumption since we started using it and will get a clearer picture on the 19th of next month, when our "true up" date arrives. My saving grace is the fact we generate almost 3 megs of extra power a year through solar, which finances/off sets all or much of the difference in power consumption (on a net metering program) from the EV. In the future, there will be ways governments will tax EVs, and solar will be receiving much less considerations from the power companies. I know the local power company is already complaining about those with solar generation not carrying their share of the costs associated with generation and distribution. Right now I'm enjoying puttiing it to the utility company, which charges some of the highest rates in the nation. I figure there is about a ten year window to find out how things get sorted out. Some time through that period I'm hoping I'll see the path things will be going, so I can make a decision on the next way forward.
|
Marv, if you don't mind saying, which utility serves your area?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Auskin
...snip...
The power company needs to play nice, and enable Vehicle-to-Grid technology. Good luck with that. Power companies want to sell power. When you're generating power via solar, or other and storing it in your vehicle for later use, the power companies lose.
...snip...
|
Generally not true. Power companies want to make a profit, which is regulated by each state's PUC. The PUC agrees to some profit percentage, say 9.5 percent with some wiggle room like +/- 0.5 percent. If the utility makes more than 10 percent the overage is refunded to customers. If the utility makes less than 9 percent, a temporary rate adjustment (price hike) kicks in.
Power utilities like big-ticket capital projects like new/upgraded generating stations (whether coal, gas, solar, wind, hydro, etc.) and transmission/distribution infrastructure; because of the guaranteed profit percentage the larger and more predictable cost base means bigger $$$.
Every U.S. power utility I know of works this way.
Many rate cases (agreements between PUCs and utilities on how much can be charged for what purpose) specifically include an energy efficiency recapture clause. This is a mechanism designed to encourage utilities to drive energy conservation. If the utility can demonstrate its energy efficiency/energy reduction programs are effective at reducing energy use, the utility gets paid for the cost of the program plus the revenue lost from reduced use. That's why electric utilities offer programs and rebates to upgrade appliances, HVAC units, water heaters, heat pumps, and in some cases EE windows; they get $$. I don't know if this is universal, but I don't know of an electric utility in the U.S. that doesn't have an EE recapture clause in its rate case.
Electric utilities are profit-motivated to build infrastructure,
including EV-to-grid. But the much more efficient and profitable route is to focus on commercial EVs (public transit/electric buses are the nirvana of this approach) because of the scale (bigger $$) and concentration (bigger projects in fewer locations).