quote:

Originally posted by Vgex:

quote:

Originally posted by smlsig:
...I can tell you right now that if some of this BS came my way I would tell them that they would have to pay me at least $2.00/kW (over 10x what I pay) to make it worth my while to consider it and since I’m the generator it will be a take it or leave it proposition, not some system to subsidize the years of mismanagement.

But it would be paid with Taxpayer dollars. IE robbing (you) to pay (you).

Not exactly, the power company would pay it with money from other power users, and then pass it on to the whole network as rate increase.

Governments don't receive the payments as tax or refund/pay out for this power from taxpayer money.

If you own a home, get solar, your neighbors are paying for much of it with state funded rebates, federal tax incentives, and protect yourself from the power company and government rules on things like this, however you will need the power walls to get off the grid.

Maybe I missed it, I haven't seen this mentioned, but I have a stupid question.

I can understand a utility using power from someone that is already attached to the grid because of excess solar generation and perhaps a powerwall. BUT, if you only have an electric car and typical type 2 charger, you aren't really setup to send power back to the grid, only draw from it. I mean, it's one thing to say, hey, we'll just use your battery as our battery, but that's not how a type 2 charger works is it?

Wouldn't you need a different charger design to do that? Wouldn't all the existing home use type 2 chargers need to be replaced as well? What am I missing here?

from the OP

"Right now today, there is no technology and no automotive manufacturer whose cars can actually send power beyond the home and up into the grid," said Mark Toney, of Turn (The Utility Reform Network).

But that doesn't mean it won't eventually happen, says Kurt Johnson of the Climate Center.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
from the OP

"Right now today, there is no technology and no automotive manufacturer whose cars can actually send power beyond the home and up into the grid," said Mark Toney, of Turn (The Utility Reform Network).

But that doesn't mean it won't eventually happen, says Kurt Johnson of the Climate Center.

Thanks sdy, I saw that and I guess I'm just "thinking out loud" regarding what it would take to actually implement something like this harebrained stupidity.

quote:

Patricia K. Poppe is the CEO of PG&E Corporation, a San Francisco-based utility company. She joined PG&E in January 2021 after five years as President and CEO of CMS Energy and its principal subsidiary, Consumers Energy.Patricia K. Poppe is the CEO of PG&E Corporation, a San Francisco-based utility company.3 She joined PG&E in January 2021 after five years as President and CEO of CMS Energy and its principal subsidiary, Consumers Energy. Poppe is the first female executive to serve as the CEO of one Fortune 500 and become CEO of another. She received total adjusted compensation of $51.2 million in 2021, including $41.2 million in stock awards, according to an S&P Global Market Intelligence analysis of the 10 highest-paid U.S. utility executives in 2021.

This summary from Brave using information from pgecorp.com, spcorp, and Wiki

quote:

Originally posted by HRK:

quote:

Originally posted by Vgex:
But it would be paid with Taxpayer dollars. IE robbing (you) to pay (you).

Not exactly, the power company would pay it with money from other power users, and then pass it on to the whole network as rate increase.

Governments don't receive the payments as tax or refund/pay out for this power from taxpayer money.

If you own a home, get solar, your neighbors are paying for much of it with state funded rebates, federal tax incentives, and protect yourself from the power company and government rules on things like this, however you will need the power walls to get off the grid.

Ah. I saw it as the Governor was attempting to get this online to supplement govt needed power requirements. As in taking private surplus of power and reimbursing the customer with taxpayer dollars.

I am afraid I don't see the point it taking private citizen's power back via the grid to redistribute to other private citizens, unless the were party donors, celebrites. You know the elites who are insulated from rules us lower class citizens have to follow.

How would the Power Companies determine the importance of power from one private citizen to the next?

quote:

How would the Power Companies determine the importance of power from one private citizen to the next?

Party Affiliation

Imagine they would simply pull the power and use it to offset power delivery in areas where they have problems.

For example, we participate in a energy program, get a credit on the bill monthly of $5, it allows them to put a box on the AC unit that will cut power to it if Duke Energy has a spike in use, this means anyone with the box will have the ac power cut, which reduces the load on the grid, say 100,000 people in the area have the box, then the total potential for reduction is significant. The net effect is the power company is producing the amount of power needed but the cut in power to some users reduces the total demand.

So they'd need some tech like that and as mentioned chargers would have to be able to facilitate flow back to the grid, and they'd need some way to track that flow if they are going to reimburse the car owner.

Imagine you charged your vehicle up to 100%, and they pull 50% of it's capacity back, now you need to recharge it, so you draw back on the grid the same power they took to help the grid.

How does that ease use on the total grid if a million people with EV's have to recharge their cars after PG&E pulls energy from them.

I would think it would actually increase the grid load overall.

quote:

Originally posted by HRK:
Imagine you charged your vehicle up to 100%, and they pull 50% of it's capacity back, now you need to recharge it, so you draw back on the grid the same power they took to help the grid.

This is one of the scariest potentials. What happens if there is an emergency and you have to leave the area or go to the emergency room, only to find your vehicle has been drained 50%, or even 75%, or 20%, because the power company determined YOU don't need it because statistically your power consumption is near zero at that time of day.

Sure hope you don't have to make an unscheduled trip, when AI determined your charge schedule based on your "typical usage".

Go look how South Africa went BACKWARDS with their electric power grid. Through a host of silly missteps the grid is terribly unreliable now.

I think the same can happen here, at least in certain areas. It can be as asinine as protesters taking fuel powered vehicles to go protest or damage SUVs they think burn to much fuel.

Of course after protesting they run home & connect to Wi-Fi and have the heating or air conditioner working.

quote:

Originally posted by HRK:


I would think it would actually increase the grid load overall.

Clearly it would. Charging isn't a 100% efficient process. Anywhere From 10 to 20% of the energy is lost (mostly in heat) during the charging process using the batteries that are available today.

As a rough example to get your 50 kWh battery from zero to 50 kWh it would take up to 60 kWh from the grid. (Again, rough example to illustrate the point)

A charging battery warms up slightly ---- hmmm, why is that