Tesla Might Consider Return To V2G Tech

Tesla Model 3

JUL 9 2018 BY DOMENICK YONEY 36

A Musk tweet raises the possibility

Tesla may be considering building vehicle-to-grid (V2G) capabilities back into its cars. We say “back” because, according to CEO Elon Musk, early vehicles from the automaker had that capability. From what we can tell, he may be referring to some very early Roadsters. The AC Propulsion TZero, which served in some ways as the inspiration for the automaking startup’s first car, also had this feature.

The technology does exactly what it sounds like it does: it allows energy to flow from the battery in your electric vehicle to the grid, as well as the usual direction from plug to car. This could allow the big battery in your Tesla to power your home in case of an emergency or, perhaps on a daily level, provide energy from the car during the day, when for many it is most expensive. One would then refill the vehicle from the grid at night, when it would be cheaper.

It could also possibly allow for V2V (vehicle-to-vehicle) charging, a use-case that could really come in handy in the future. Forget to plug in and run out of charge on the road? A passing car might be able to give you enough juice to get to a charger instead waiting on a tow truck.

The topic arose when Musk decided to respond to a tweet from @Cody_Walker9 —we assume his actual name is Cody Walker. He has asked the CEO whether it would ever be possible to plug two cars into each other, as we laid out in the scenario above. Musk’s reply included the statement, “Maybe worth revisiting that,” which, on the surface might seem noncommittal, but just the fact that he choose to reply to this tweet, out of possible hundreds of other inquiries, carries some amount of weight. We’ve embedded the exchange below.

Source: Teslarati

Categories: Tesla

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

36 Comments on "Tesla Might Consider Return To V2G Tech"

newest oldest most voted

It will make complete sense from a user perspective when the number of cycles for the battery goes up. It could help sell BEVs while reducing sales of powerwalls.

It would also make financial sense for grid operators trying to balance power levels of intermittent renewables.

That would be outstanding. More options from your EV, capability to bail out your home during emergencies, makes sense.

Do it!

If that were a set-up I would want it configurable, which it probably would be, smart in other words. Set power draw out maybe down to 40%. I would we concerned with constant up and down above 80% or below 40%, but that’s just my conjecture that would the most optimum for the pack.
It’s been proposed you charge up at a nearby SC then drive home and run your house off the battery for free if you have a Model S and/or X that have free SC access. You don’t have to pay for electricity.

Some local power providers raise their base fee after you install solar. I would love to go off grid with one or two power walls, but there can be these 1-2 very dark weeks in winter where I live. If I had vehicle to grid(home) in my (yet to come) Model 3, I could buy the power for those weeks from a supercharger.

Life is a Thinking Man’s Game..

Honestly, the main deterrent for people to go the storage way is the cost of the batteries. Still way too high compared to the $9/month connection charge to stay tied up to the grid….at least that’s my case.

With Musk going to China later this week, this would be a perfect market to try and get a Tesla V2G trial operation set up launched. Hopefully they can get up and running on a large scale, once it’s proven to operate as intended.

He’s worried about the $20,000 price increase on the model “S”. I’m sure he won’t let flights of fancy cloud his mind.

Hopefully, Trump will put the same tariff/VAT level on cars from China, that China has on all western cars.

China isn’t selling any cars in the U.S. El Trumpo’s beloved “reciprocity” doesn’t always work in the real world… not that he lives there!

“Might be worth revisiting”? That is hardly a rave.

Not that Tesla is that interested in efficiency, but nothing has happened with V2G at Tesla in ten years, or anywhere else, basically since it TRIPLES the car’s charge/discharge inefficiency. Utilities themselves have no interest in this.

V2G deserves to be where it PRIMARILY is, that of, with the Nissan Leaf, a car where the batteries wear out faster than on any other brand of EV.

Take the world’s WORST car battery, and make it charge and discharge uselessly many more times. That will increase its life, supporters will say, since you are exercising it more often.

Vehicle to grid is a poor use of a car battery, unless it is used very infrequently. Until car batteries can easily outlast the rest of the car, we shouldn’t be putting any extra cycles on it.

However, vehicle to vehicle emergency charging is a very practical thing. It’s almost a necessity in the long run. Teenagers will always push the limits of their cars and run out of gas or charge, and having to tow the vehicle is an impractical and expensive solution.

Pretty much going to say the same thing, we have to remember Tesla has to warranty the batteries and that they have powerwalls to sell…

actually, it makes good sense for home emergency use. I would think that allowing somebody to use it for emergency use would make great sense. Count them and if they use more than 2-5x / year, then knock off a year off the warranty.

I agree that home emergencies (power outages) are the real benefit. I’m not sure why you are advocating reducing the warranty for a paltry and insignificant 2-5 times per year of V2G / V2H use. Would you advocate a similar warranty penalty for supercharging?

I am still waiting for the day when the noisy, smelly, and dangerous gasoline powered home generator is replaced with the much safer, cleaner, and more convenient V2H alternative. Electric vehicle makers need to offer this capability as part of their value proposition to consumers.

People experiencing a power outage have been appalled to discover that even if their car is capable of that, their home solar power system isn’t set up to be powered by their EV. Not that it’s impossible, but it’s more expensive to set it up with that capability, and a typical home installation can’t do it.

If you live in Florida, it might be worth the investment.

@Mikey

You took the words right out of my keyboard! 🙂

Let’s see…The car is charging at night, powering my house during the day, when do I get to drive it?!?!

Cars are used on average 7% of the day. Plenty of time to rent it out, charge it up and use for emergencies.

I don’t think he is that serious about it. V2G doesn’t make much sense until cycle life has increased so drastically that a typical user will never use it up even with V2G and the manufacturer does not have to worry about warranty issues. While cycle life has gotten better, I don’t think it has quite reached that stage.

Number of cycles is not problem, if you have big enough battery…

https://pushevs.com/2018/04/27/battery-charging-full-versus-partial/

Extra cycles always cause battery degradation. Having a larger battery means you will put less cycles on it by normal use; but it doesn’t change the fact that V2G would put extra cycles on it, reducing available capacity over time.

Tesla batteries can last for 500,000 miles. https://electrek.co/2016/11/01/tesla-battery-degradation/

As they should. You don’t want the battery breaking down halfway through the car’s useful lifetime, just because someone thought it would be a good idea to misuse the battery for grid storage instead of getting a dedicated one specifically designed for that purpose…

.

(⌐■_■) Trollnonymous

V2G………NO THANKS!

This is a Net Loss.
I don’t want the grid taking my “Discharge Cycle”, I already paid for the electricity for it to get in my battery pack and there is a percentage of loss. If it went back to the grid, there would be loss again on they way out.
No mention of compensation and if there is, it’s way too…….not worth it.

I’ll keep my discharge cycle.

The Idea is to charge with cheap off peak power at night and sell it back at peak prices sometime during the afternoon/late afternoon (typically). Not a negative sum or zero sum game for the storage (car, power wall, etc.) owner. If the car is driven to and parked unplugged at work (or anywhere) or in use during the peak demand times it can’t work for storage. For those that can be so used the idea is they provide a net income (in money or electricity credits) to the storage provider.

Not legal in NY State for Net Metered (namely almost anyone who has solar panels) customers to use storage batteries, nor use any method to arbitrage rate schedules.

(⌐■_■) Trollnonymous

“Return”

Wait, were they ever in V2G????

Yes please. The occasional need for a backup generator makes V2G (or V2H) worth a couple bucks to me.

Buying and maintaining a generator is a royal pain. Kind of like a swimming pool. The only downside is that you can’t drive the car while it is powering the house. However, my car is at the house 4 days out of 7 anyway. With two vehicles, it’s really no big deal.

Going from an acknowledgement that V2V might be worthwhile, to concluding that Tesla is considering V2G, is quite a leap…

M3 Owned- Niro EV TBD - Former 500e and Spark EV,

Powerwall 2 is same battery as Model 3. Our PW2 cycles daily down to about 25% to support the house during peak, and recharges via Solar array during the day off peak times.

Would be great to piggyback our Model 3 through the PW2 on days like this week when temperatures spiked and started drawing off grid during peak period. Tesla could easily require a PW2 to allow for this and hence not cannibalize sales (would probably increase PW2 sales — so it may be financially beneficial).

The whole degrade batteries faster with more cycles is kind of crazy IMHO. If you drive home and plug in to support the house in the evening, that’s about 10kwH for most folk = 40-50 miles. That’s not much for the battery and doesn’t deep cycle even close to what the PW2 do on the same battery.

It adds up over time. If you’re only planning to keep the car for 2-3 years then the extra cycling might not matter to you, altho it certainly will to others.

Keep the car for 7 years or more, and you’ll certainly notice more loss of capacity if you’re letting the local power company use your car’s battery!

The Powerwall is *not* the same battery as Model 3. Tesla cars use high-capacity NCA cells. Tesla storage batteries use lower capacity, longer life NMC cells. (Almost certainly at lower voltage, too.) Powerwalls/Powerpacks are specified for 10 years of daily cycling, i.e. almost 4000 full cycles. That’s several times more than any Tesla car will ever do.

We are talking about emergency power, though, not daily cycling. Sure, for daily cycling, you would get a dedicated solution, but for providing power once or twice a year, or not even that, it doesn’t make sense to maintain a separate system when you could use your car at little cost.

Yeah, I guess this kind of use wouldn’t be much of a problem. It shouldn’t be called “V2G” though in this case, since it doesn’t actually push power back to the grid. Some use the term “V2H” to make the distinction clearer.