The Economist highlights a new report that says that electric vehicles could solve the electric utility “death spiral.” This spiral is projected to occur as more customers go solar and use less electricity overall, which means fewer customers to pay for the electricity infrastructure. Then rates go up on the remaining customers, which encourages them to go solar and buy batteries. And spiral ensues.
But is electric vehicle help on the way?
A modest 250,000 plug-in cars now glide silently along American roads, and they currently account for fewer than 1% of vehicles sold. But sales have been almost doubling each year (compared with about 5% annual growth for the entire car industry), and homes that own a plug-in car typically consume 58% more electricity, according to Opower, a seller of energy-conservation software. The Edison Electric Institute, a power-industry trade body, recently issued a report that called plug-ins a “quadruple win” for utility companies. In other words, they could help the industry increase demand, meet environmental goals, get closer to customers and cut costs by electrifying its own vast vehicle fleets.
The problem though is that many EV drivers get rooftop solar, so that negates the bounce in electricity usage. A better solution for utilities, as the article hints, is for them to fully embrace these new technologies, from EVs to rooftop solar to battery backup storage to EV charging facilities. In some case, regulations prevent them from engaging in these new lines of business. But if they were smart, they’d aggressively try to enter this market, offering customers an array of new technologies.
The reality though is that utilities are generally too risk-averse to be aggressive in this way. As incumbents, they’d rather try to strangle these new technologies in the crib. And maybe that stance is best for society anyway. After all, the utilities will likely fail in those efforts, and we may not want them (literally) monopolizing the new technologies. Perhaps it’s better to have utilities serve as a retail platform on which multiple companies can compete for customer services, with on-site renewables, energy storage, electric vehicle charging, and energy efficiency programs.
Electric vehicles are unlikely to be the savior alone, but they could help prompt utilities to re-imagine their future. Because as it stands now, the present course for utilities is not sustainable.
The UCLA/Berkeley Law webinar on repurposing electric vehicle batteries for grid storage is now on-line. The September 19th event discusses key recommendations from the new report “Reuse and Repower” and features Adam Langton, Senior Energy Analyst at the California Public Utilities Commission, and Randall Winston, Special Assistant to the Executive Secretary in the Office of Governor Brown.
You can watch the one-hour video here or below:
Electric vehicles in Hawaii should be a no-brainer. The limited island geographies make battery “range anxiety” either easy to solve through a few public charging stations or practically non-existent. The high gas prices make driving economically painful. And the abundant renewable energy there (solar, wind, and geothermal) means lot of potential for cheap, clean electricity.
But the U.S. Department of Energy “eGallon” website shows a critical disconnect. In most states, the equivalent “miles per gallon” of using electricity instead of gas for driving results in huge savings. The average U.S. gallon of gas costs $3.52, while the equivalent cost in electricity is $1.27. Pretty nice amount of savings, no?
Well, in Hawaii, we have an outlier result. The extremely high cost of electricity (most is generated from burning imported diesel), coupled with the high cost of gas, results in an unfortunate comparison: $3.79 for a gallon of gas vs. $3.75 in equivalent electricity costs. So you’ll save 4 cents per gallon going electric! Pretty weak.
That’s where rooftop solar comes into play. For residents of Hawaii with these systems, they can pay almost nothing in electricity through the state’s net metering program. This arrangement makes the savings from going electric probably greater than in almost any other state. In fact, in researching the report “Electric Vehicle Paradise” for Berkeley Law and Maui College last year, almost everyone I talked to who had purchased or leased an EV in the islands had rooftop solar. And they were motivated to go electric because they were producing too much solar from their roof.
That’s why our report recommended that Hawaii’s utilities, especially Hawaiian Electric (HECO), remove barriers to installing rooftop solar. At the time, the utility privately claimed to me that they really didn’t have any barriers, such as expensive interconnection studies. But shortly after we released the report they began clamping down aggressively on rooftop arrays with these studies.
But change is in the works. In response to an aggressive state public utilities commission directive, HECO now plans to go 65% renewable by 2030, which is great. But the utility wants to impose a fixed monthly charge of $55 on solar customers, which could undermine the economics of going solar. And HECO still needs to get rid of phony “interconnection studies” that can cost thousands of dollars for a property owner trying to install solar.
With rooftop solar, particularly in Hawaii, it’s not just about cleaning the electricity system — it’s about driving cleaner, too. Not to mention that more EVs ultimately boosts energy storage in the islands from repurposed electric vehicle batteries. So let’s hope HECO does the right thing, because the whole movement to a cleaner, cheaper energy system in Hawaii starts with solar.
The New Yorker runs a really frustrating article from a disgruntled EV owner. This Angeleno has no dedicated parking or charging at home and is relying on the public charging network. He rightly describes the frustrations with that network — the breakdowns, congestion, and inconvenience of it all.
But honestly: why would someone without dedicated home charging get an EV? The public charging network is just not there right now. The initial EV market needs to focus on people who can charge at home — or at least at work. Once you get that market ramped up and improve public charging (including more dedicated charging in condos and apartment buildings), automakers can expand the market to others.
That may not be of great comfort to those without dedicated home charging, but it’s the reality for an emerging technology.
Given that reality, why would the New Yorker privilege a story that highlights the inconveniences of a non-representative EV owner? And meanwhile, the national media is running all sorts of negative stories on EV sales, while LEAFs have record-setting sales.
I guess the bad story sells better, but it’s unfortunate to see this misleading picture presented to the general public.
The lights in the distance could be EV chargers
I always feel guilty talking to apartment or condo dwellers about the joys of electric vehicles. Without a dedicated parking spot with access to an outlet, they’re basically out of luck. Maybe if you have workplace charging, you can make it work. But otherwise, it would be unwieldy to have to rely on a spread-out public charging network to keep your vehicle battery full.
But there may be a way to blanket urban areas with EV charging spots. The answer? Streetlights. Cities already have extensive wiring in place for these lights, and they’re not used during the day. So that excess capacity could be harnessed to install street chargers without requiring expensive and invasive electrical work. A few companies seem to be all over this possibility, just based on a quick Google search.
Of course, there would be challenges to work out. For example, how do you ensure that the chargers are only active during the day or when there is excess capacity on the streetlight grid? Installing LEDs and other efficient lighting technology could help at night to free up capacity (assuming the lamps aren’t already more efficient), but daytime may not be the optimal time to charge for daytime workers who may be gone then. And who pays for the install? Is there a viable business model where the chargers earn enough to cover the installation and maintenance costs?
These are just a few questions that spring to mind. But it’s an intriguing possibility that would help solve the otherwise seemingly intractable problem of providing ubiquitous charging in compact urban environments — and therefore opening the EV market to a whole new segment of potential buyers.
Sometimes I get that feeling that the pro-transit (or pro-walking/biking) crowd is uneasy about the subject of electric vehicles, if downright negative. Why? Many transit advocates don’t like cars — viewing them as dangerous to bikers and pedestrians (which they are). They also don’t like how cars chew up the environment and create terrible traffic and isolation.
Not only that, but electric vehicles are frequently cited by transit critics as a reason to continue business-as-usual development patterns, in which we continue to build communities around cars, as opposed to walking- and biking-friendly communities oriented to transit. After all, if we’re moving toward electric and other clean vehicles, who cares any more about the pollution and negative public health effects from sprawl?
Electric vehicles won’t solve this
Certainly the advent of electric vehicles undercuts a key argument in favor of transit and more human-centered communities. It’s true that electric vehicles, if we can get there fast enough, will solve much of the pollution and public health challenges from sprawl. But it will take decades (most likely) to fully transform our existing fleet of cars to electric, as the technology is not fully developed and at this point not appropriate for all types of vehicle usage. So the public health and pollution problems from unabated sprawl will continue. But the writing, I believe, is on the wall for a cleaner transportation system.
So where does that leave public transit advocates in the long term? Well, we have to remember that the arguments against sprawl and in favor of more convenient, connected communities oriented around transit are not just limited to reducing pollution. Traffic is a miserable economic drag on our economy and quality of life. Biking and walking is fun and good for you, and it leads to communities with more social interaction, particularly for children, the elderly, and those who can’t or won’t drive. California’s severe housing shortage and changing patterns of demand argue in favor of building as many homes and jobs as we can around transit. And sprawl continues to eat up our valuable farm land and open space, as well as sensitive ecological areas.
I’m certainly in both camps. I love transit, use it every day, and walk and bike as much as possible. But I also see the need for electric vehicles. Not everyone can rely on non-vehicle forms of mobility for all their needs. Cars are here to stay. So we need to transition our fleets to clean vehicles. We also need to invest in battery technologies as a crucial way to decarbonize the electricity grid. Plus, electric vehicles are fun to drive (this from someone who never cared about cars or driving before).
Ultimately we’ll need both technologies going forward, and I don’t think anyone should hesitate to advocate for both.
For those in the San Francisco Bay Area, I’ll be on KCBS news radio (740AM) at 8:20am discussing the new UCLA/Berkeley Law report on repurposing used electric vehicle batteries for inexpensive grid storage. The report has gotten some nice coverage from Forbes, Scientific American, Charged Magazine, and the Daily Californian at UC Berkeley. Hope you can tune in!
UPDATE: You can listen to the broadcast here.
Some good laws are now in effect on both rooftop solar and electric vehicles in California. I blogged about AB 2188 once it passed the California Legislature, which will require local governments to adopt streamlined ordinances for permitting rooftop solar. The governor signed it, which will be helpful for reducing the cost of installing solar, possibly up to 20 cents per watt.
In addition, as I discussed on KCRW radio on Monday, the governor signed AB 2013 (Murastsuchi) to increase the number of “green stickers” available for partial electric/hybrid vehicles to access carpool lanes, as well as SB 1275 (De Leon) to limit cash rebates for electric vehicles based on income. The latter bill directs the California Air Resources Board to come up with an overall, long-term financial plan for supporting electric vehicles, taking into account anticipated price declines on the vehicles. That plan will likely include a phase-out for the rebates and may explore other options, such as point-of-sale cash rather than having to apply for the rebate after purchase.
With these bills, California is continuing its leadership on renewables and electric vehicles, and hopefully making our public sector incentives more efficient and streamlined in the process. I’m glad the governor signed them, showing that we’re making incremental progress on these vital technologies.
For anyone in Los Angeles or who has an internet connection with audio, I’ll be on KCRW radio today at noon talking about the new electric vehicle bills that Governor Brown signed into law this weekend. It’s the Madeleine Brand “Press Play” show, link here.
UPDATE: The broadcast is now archived here. I go on about 8 minutes in, for the second story of the day. You can also access it directly if you scroll down the page to the “Brown Signs Electric Vehicle Bills” link.
UC Berkeley Law will be hosting a webinar this morning from 10 to 11am Pacific Time on repurposing used electric vehicle batteries. It will feature:
- Adam Langton, Senior Energy Analyst, California Public Utilities Commission
- Randall Winston, Special Assistant to the Executive Secretary, Office of Governor Edmund G Brown, Jr.
The webinar will discuss the challenges and solutions to boosting a secondary market for the batteries. The market is still new and uncertain, and used EV batteries are only just now being deployed in various grid scenarios. The webinar comes on the heels of a new UCLA and UC Berkeley Schools of Law report, entitled Reuse and Repower: How to Save Money and Clean the Grid With Second-Life Electric Vehicle Batteries. I will be speaking on the key findings.
More information on the event can be found here, including the registration page. We will include time for questions from the audience.
