The State of California is mulling over the idea of requiring EVs to be bidirectional. That is, if the system needs power they suck it right back out of your car. The practical considerations would be considerable, and I don't know if the state is actually competent to design or create such a program. Certainly my state couldn't do it. Bidirectional charging may be required on EVs soon due to new CA law | Electrek Bill Text - SB-1006 Electricity: transmission capacity: reconductoring and grid-enhancing technologies. PS: The law appears to have shifted over into SB 59.
The state (lawmakers) just lays down an edict - It's up to us grunts to figure it out. Our grid currently doesn't have the ability to do that - everything needs to be overhauled and upgraded - that's assuming automobile makers are given time to build-in that feature into their cars. Realistically, we are looking at 15 - 20 years to get everyone onboard. Assuming no hick-up, law suits, and automobile manufacturers rolling over and saying-yes boss.... The other can of worms is your pulling back something that I've already paid for or how do I get home or do my job, now that you've emptied my pack.
It is not a big deal. My first Prius modification in 2005 was to add a 1.1 kW, modified sine wave inverter. Many EV work trucks provide 120/240 VAC. So letting the new EVs become emergency power would be exactly what is needed in the Hellen hurricane disaster areas. Or any other disaster or remote area. Bob Wilson
Yes, your correct in that's it's not a big deal - but it's going to add to the cost of a new hybrid or BEV. We all know that these cars cost 10%+ more than an ICE car. This will push the price up even higher. Average new car prices is already unaffordable to the nations median household income and on top of all that - even if subsidized the new car charging system with power feedback capabilities will be another cost that both homeowner/BEV owners will probably have to bear. This would slow down BEV adoption even further; throwing off predicted ROI and energy recovery/generation calculations Let's not forget that not too long ago; the power companies tried to charge or stop paying household solar systems, feeding back into the grid. They sell power at the highest tiered rate and pay the solar homeowner a fraction of the lowest tiered rate they charge customers. Doesn't really seem fair... Quoted from the article: ".And that ecosystem has been a bit of a hard sell so far. It’s all well and good to tell someone they can make $500/year by selling energy to the grid, but then you have to convince them to buy a more expensive charging unit and keep their car plugged in all the time, with someone else managing its energy storage. Some consumers might push back against that, so part of CEC’s job is to wait to pull the trigger until it becomes apparent that people are actually interested in the end-user use case for V2G – otherwise, no sense in requiring a feature that nobody is going to use."
I doubt that in volume it is a big cost. Doesn't Ford already have this on the Lightning at about $1300? And the part that sends power from your home back to the grid isn't that expensive...homes with solar already do this...send power back to the grid. Mike
It is a bi-directional charger/EVSE, and comes with the long range model. It costs that much to get it for the standard range one, plus a fee for the software. This is an 80 amp unit, so installation costs might run higher. More importantly, it isn't for 'to grid' use, but for emergency power. Which means also installing the hardware to cut the home's connection to the grid during a power outage. 2023 Ford F-150 Lightning® | Onboard Generator with Intelligent Backup Power What Can IBP Power.pdf (ford.com) I don't see V2G adding much to the car's cost. More likely to show up in the EVSE cost. Vehicle to grid requires more coordination than solar. Solar will just dump whatever energy it produces, and isn't used by the home, onto the grid. A meter that can read that outgoing electricity is only needed to get credit for what goes to the grid. With V2G, you need the means of informing the power company how much charge is in the EV, how much they can take, and when you need it back to 'full'. I don't think that will increase equipment cost much, but can be a point where mistakes can happen, and cause people to opt out.
People that have solar already have this and the equipment and installation is well known. This is basically all software...so there are one-time costs as well as costs to operate the system, grid-wide...but the per unit cost when mandated state wide is near zero. Mike
I have solar, and I don't have this. Which is the case for many grid tied solar systems. Without a battery or generator, home solar fluctuates too much for emergency back up. The system could run the house on a bright, clear day, but it could be overcast the next. It won't do much in the middle of the storm that knocked out power. I agree it won't add much to the cost of the car. I just think most people will opt not to take part of it. Along with the extra cost for the EVSE, I think many will have concerns about extra wear on the battery, and worries of the car being drained when they need it.
By "this" I was talking about this statement My utility required this for my solar -- an automatic cutoff from the grid when the grid was down. This is to protect the utility workers when they are working on lines to restore service. They don't want to lines to be live when they think they are off. I don't know how this is not a requirement everywhere Mike
That's anti-islanding. When the grid goes down, production from the solar is cut off, from the grid and the house. I believe that equipment is part of the shut off or control panel between the solar and house. If you want power to your house, from a generator, battery, or an EV, when the grid is down, you need a cut off between the house and grid. That is another set of equipment on the main line coming into the house. Solar without battery does not have that. Unless it is to replace a generator, people wanting to use a Lightning for emergency power won't have that, and it will add to the install cost of the EVSE. For V2G, it isn't needed, though anti-islanding will be as a precaution. That should be incorporated into the V2G EVSE.
Like Trollbait, my solar system has no hardware to disconnect anything from the grid, apart from regular circuit breakers. It is all software, the grid-tie inverters simply won't function when the grid is down. The pickup truck or home genset used as emergency local generator, need a mechanical transfer switch for grid isolation. Typical grid-tie solar systems don't need a transfer switch.
On my solar system something in the inverter shuts off output, somehow, when the grid is down. There is also a mechanical shutoff switch in a box about 6" x 6" between the inverter and my distribution panel as a backup...for whatever reason (emergency, maintenance, whatever) Mike
I should have added that mine does have a manual (not automatic) mechanical disconnect, a pull-out plug next to the production and billing meters. Not like a manual transfer switch with a socket for a local generator. Code has changed since then, but since my entire system can be shut down by pulling a single plug right where emergency responders would be looking for it, it may still meet the updated fire/electrical codes. (Code updates are usually not made retroactive.) My system is made up of many paralleled microinverters, one under each solar module. They are designed to operate only by following and syncing to the grid. They meet the "don't electrocute the line workers" requirement by shutting down when the grid's voltage or frequency drift out of spec, and not re-starting until the after the grid returns and stabilizes for a certain length of time. They cannot start up on their own, or work in island mode. No relays or mechanical switches are moved, the electronics are programmed to not self-start. Newer battery-based systems can be configured to operate in island mode, with the solar system charging the batteries and powering local loads. In the system architectures I've seen, a battery-driven controller flips its equivalent of a transfer switch to isolate the home island from the grid, then creates a 'synthetic grid voltage' for the solar inverters to follow. The solar inverters still behave in a grid-following manner, but following the local 'master' instead of the outside grid. Supposedly, my microinverters can get firmware updates to work in such a system, but this system requires significant hardware changes and additions between the service panel and utility meter. There are several system architecture variations that can meet code requirements, but all require significant electrical work. The project cost is higher than I'm currently willing to pay.
