California Offers Up To $4 Million In Funding For Smart Charging & V2G

FEB 22 2015 BY STAFF 13

California Energy Commission

California Energy Commission

Nissan LEAF V2G

Nissan LEAF V2G

“The California Energy Commission has issued a solicitation (PON-14-310, Driving the Integration of Electric Vehicles to Maximize Benefits to the Grid) to fund Applied Research and Development projects that will advance technologies and strategies for smart and efficient charging and vehicle-to-grid communication interfaces that will provide maximum benefits to both the electricity grid and the plug-in electric vehicle market.”

States Green Car Congress.

The state is offering up to $ million under PON-14-310.  Minimum funding is $500,000 per project and maximum is $1.5 million.

Green Car Congress adds:

To be considered for funding, projects must fall within the following project groups:

  • Group 1: Smart and efficient charging for integrating plug-in electric vehicles into the power grid.
  • Group 2: Grid communication interfaces for plug-in electric vehicle charging to support vehicle-to-grid services.

Source: Green Car Congress

Categories: Charging, General

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

13 Comments on "California Offers Up To $4 Million In Funding For Smart Charging & V2G"

newest oldest most voted

Hopefully one standard will emerge that will work with all vehicles and all the frequency stabilized grids like the ones in California and the USA. There will have to be another standard for voltage stabilized grids for places like Europe. What we don’t need is competing standards to slow things down like we see now with DC quick charging.

EV makers are competing to offer faster charging and longer EV ranges, so with each new “generation”, EVs will be built to accept higher and higher levels of current. So long as that continues to be the case, it’s unfortunately going to be difficult if not completely impossible to establish any standard which will last longer than a year or two.

Where will it end? I dunno, but I would guess that at a minimum we’ll get to the point that a 100 kWh pack can be 90% charged in 10 minutes. Note that the CTO (Chief Technology Officer) of Tesla said they were aiming to eventually get down to a 5-to-10-minute charge time.

Expect charging voltage to go up to 600v, too. Higher than 600v, the engineering and equipment get a lot more difficult and expensive, and the regulatory/safety requirements get much tougher for “high voltage” systems.

Didn’t theNEC change the High Voltage threshold to 1,000v in 2014?

[1] Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Systems: 690.80 (NEC 2014)
[2] Wind Electric Systems (NEC 2014): 694.80 (NEC 2014)
[3] Transformers and Transformer Vaults: 450.3 (NEC 2014)
[4] Resistors and Reactors: 470 (NEC 2014)
[5] NFPA Report on Proposals (2013)

Why are all of the grants and incentives for EV charging initiatives only given for “GRID” based systems or to the monopolies that control the GRID? Shouldn’t public money (or ratepayer money in this case) be given fairly to all EV charging infrastructure solutions that can enable more diverse electric vehicles and promote wider use and faster adoption in an area (today and for the foreseeable future, the GRID is the limiting factor to the growth of the EV ecosystem)? There should be a State program that provides the same amount of grants and incentives for OFF-GRID solutions and providers. With an OFF-GRID source of high power electricity for public EV fast charge there is no need for V2G/smart charging or all the other monopoly control initiatives that ultimately do not work for the EV user and only tether EVs more to the GRID (What happens in the future when there is a substantial amount of EVs on the road and the GRID fails, then transportation shuts down also?). There are much better GRID independent solutions available that can provide unlimited 24/7 power to the EV ecosystem without the restrictions imposed to accommodate the inadequacies of the GRID. One such… Read more »

I think u may have missed the point, what v2g is effectively doing (along with solar) is transitioning from grid to network. In a grid power is produced at a centralised point and distributed. In a network everyone chips in and the power is distributed from many different nodes. Networks only work if there is a benefit to each node and a way to control those nodes. It is the control that is important that is what they are asking people to develop. The benefit is easy, u want to use my battery or solar you pay. This is a far cheaper and more efficient way than everyone going off grid.

Hate to say it but I think ur missing the point. The cost to develop, implement, and ultimately operate a V2G system on the GRID, that may or may not benefit the EV ecosystem, is astronomical and has an unknown time frame…all of which will drive the cost of electricity per kWh two or three fold across the ratepayer base by the time its done.

Also for countries with bad power source mix, GRID is already non-starter.

(Poland – coal…..)

But then solar,wind,what-not usually gets separate incentives, right?

In my country there are some incentives for solar/wind. Non for EVs

Thanks for connecting the dots. I thought CEC and CPUC didn’t overlap, but looks like they do. We can’t be too surprised that rate-payer funding ostensibly goes back to rate payers, and not to more general public support of EVs (like “V2DG” 😉 ).

It’s “only” 4mm. We’re not talking about what hydrogen gets.

I think this should be combined with a proper EV charging infrastructure. California Energy Commission Fuels and Transportation Division 1516 Ninth Street, MS-27 Sacramento, CA 95814 16 February 2015 LET’S BUILD THE CALIFORNIA WEST COAST ELECTRIC HIGHWAY ! Dear California Energy Commission Members, I was the first person to drive an all-electric vehicle (EV) from Mexico to Canada, and first to travel across both Oregon and Washington using only DC quick charging along the newly opened West Coast Electric Highway in June 2012. Since that time, travel along intra-state corridors within California is nearly as non-existent as it was then (except for Tesla cars). What follows are my suggestions for our state’s financing of a true “California West Coast Electric Highway” that should be BETTER than what Oregon and Washington state have already done now, almost three years previously, with great success. California has been a signatory partner to the venture since 2009, along with Oregon, Washington state, and the province of British Columbia. For the purposes of my discussion, an “electric vehicle” is one that is solely “refueled” with electricity that comes from a charging station into the vehicle. Vehicles that are primarily refueled with electricity, but can also… Read more »


Wow. 🙂


Fast charge for highway trips is happening, but the low hanging “more efficient and effective” fruit is workplace charhing. And there’s no need for a microwave in a crockpot situation. If they are non networked then the cost is so low each space or even every two can be installed. See this link with facts:
Time for simple workplace charging!

Yes, as described above, that “low hanging fruit” doesn’t need government handouts.

Unfortunately, corridor chargers are NOT being built currently in California, and because it is low usage / high cost, it not something a private for-profit company will likely tackle any time soon.

Only the state can get this moving.