Solve the climate crisis: A thought experiment

[studiot]

38 minutes ago, wallflash said:

 

My post didn’t give quantitative numbers other than the unspoken implication of 1EV car for 1 gas car , with each EV car being a new addition to the grid ,

 

I suspect even these figures are incorrect.

Do you not have hybrid vehicles in the USA ?

Quote

Financial Times

The rise in green sales in October was driven by hybrids, which climbed almost a third to 7,950 vehicles, a market share of 5.5 per cent. Fully electric cars saw sales triple to 3,162, taking their market share in the month to 2.3 per cent.

https://www.ft.com/content/d57efdf6-ffad-11e9-be59-e49b2a136b8d

 

[wallflash]

51 minutes ago, studiot said:

 

I thought your thesis was broader than that.
I thought that you were adding to grid requirements all energy uses transferred from other sources - you specifically mentioned cooking and, I think heating did you not?

 

 

I think I enjoy having my post termed a thesis  

 

Yes, it was extremely broad , and involved how to remove all the fossil fuels possible from the system , including heating and cooking . My point in reply to you is simply that locally produced energy is not widely available right now . Power currently comes from the grid . Any switchovers from fossil to electric , whether car or appliances , must currently be connected to the grid , which isn’t going to be capable of any substantial immediate increases . 

 

I chose to limit the time frame to 5 yrs out to prevent fantasy scenarios of how things will be in 25 yrs in lieu of practical current time needs and capabilities. 

13 minutes ago, studiot said:

 

I suspect even these figures are incorrect.

Do you not have hybrid vehicles in the USA ?

 

 

 

We have some hybrids . I took the simple route of assuming replacing 1 gas car with 1 EV car . I’m not sure hybrids would change that any . They will still have to have a minimum mileage charge , so even if they can switch to gas they will pull from the grid to maintain that minimal mileage capability. 

[studiot]

4 minutes ago, wallflash said:

My point in reply to you is simply that locally produced energy is not widely available right now .

That is a statement I am challenging, more especially in the US than the UK, although I have given a UK example of local use.

You need to provide figures to back your statement up, just as I provided figures to back up my statement about all electric v hybrid cars.

Australia has recently announced plans for 'snowey 2'

This would be a copy of Australian version of the TVA project in the US.

Edited January 24, 2020 by studiot

[wallflash]

6 minutes ago, studiot said:

That is a statement I am challenging, more especially in the US than the UK, although I have given a UK example of local use.

You need to provide figures to back your statement up, just as I provided figures to back up my statement about all electric v hybrid cars.

Australia has recently announced plans for 'snowey 2'

This would be a copy of Australian version of the TVA project in the US.

 Honestly I don’t think I need to provide proof that electricity in the US comes from the grid . Where else would  it come from? Perhaps we are defining the terms differently . I mean having your house connected to the electrical supply system of your area, which gets power from a generating plant . As opposed to local sources like solar panels . If you don’t have your own personal power source that saves you from needing an electric meter and an electric bill, you are on the grid . 

Edited January 24, 2020 by wallflash

[swansont]

1 hour ago, wallflash said:

 Very true . But local generation of electricity by renewable sources does not exist in any appreciable quantities in the US today . My thread is based on the now , what can we do now, since the urgency to do it now is proclaimed over and over . This thread was about what we can do at max five years out from now , not a rosy picture of how things can be in 25 years from now . 

Your thread is also about the future, so the point about local generation is part of the discussion.

 

1 hour ago, wallflash said:

I’m not knocking the idea at all, simply pointing out the reality that if we start switching to EV cars tomorrow we WILL do so by powering them off the electric grid . 

Instantly switching to EVs is a valid premise but switching to rooftop solar is not?

[wallflash]

26 minutes ago, swansont said:

Your thread is also about the future, so the point about local generation is part of the discussion.

 

Instantly switching to EVs is a valid premise but switching to rooftop solar is not?

My thread is about the future , but the very near future , not the distant future where we can invent fantasy solutions that are unworkable in present time . This limitation is based on the insistence that we must do something NOW , so we must limit the solutions to what we can do now, and not what we think we might be able to do 25 yrs in the future . 

I’m  not sure where you see any opposition from me to solar panels . I do not object to anything as long as it is feasible in the present or very near future . Solar panels on every inch of every roof is certainly a viable alternative .  The impact of course will be the cost of install , as well as integrating the solar power into the other power sources since solar is unlikely to create 100% of the need and is intermittent. 

[swansont]

54 minutes ago, wallflash said:

My thread is about the future , but the very near future , not the distant future where we can invent fantasy solutions that are unworkable in present time .

Instantly switching to EVs is not a workable scenario for the near future. We don't have the manufacturing capacity to come anywhere close to doing that, even in the next several years.  

[MigL]

This is one of the most interesting threads on AGW in a long time.
It focuses on what can be done realistically and doesn't ignore problems associated with those actions.
Solutions to the AGW problem should be based on maximizing effect of reducing/eliminating GHG emissions while minimizing problematic effects on people/society.

In my province of Ontario, Canada, the biggest reduction in GHG emissions came from eliminating  coal generation, and replacing it with natural gas.
It would have been more expensive, but nuclear would have been an even better choice.

It is my understanding that coal generation has dropped from about 50 % to about 30 % in the US over the last 20 years.
A good first step would be eliminating coal generation altogether, and replacing it with natural gas, or even better, nuclear.

[wallflash]

17 minutes ago, swansont said:

Instantly switching to EVs is not a workable scenario for the near future. We don't have the manufacturing capacity to come anywhere close to doing that, even in the next several years.  

 

 

True . My point in bringing up EVs was that even solutions that are close at hand in some respects ( EVs DO exist and are not speculative) present difficulties in implementing . That is really one of the points of this thread . We do not have the power capabilities to use EVs en masse now . We don’t have the capability of manufacturing them quickly to make a quick switchover , even ignoring all other social and economic issues in making people give up gas cars for EVs . Yet this is technology we currently possess and by rights should be one of the initial steps to reducing CO2 emissions . 

The vast difficulty in implementing actual practical  changes in response to the cries that we must do something NOW is really one point of this mental exercise . 

Edited January 24, 2020 by wallflash

[swansont]

3 minutes ago, wallflash said:

True . My point in bringing up EVs was that even solutions that are close at hand in some respects ( EVs DO exist and are not speculative) present difficulties in implementing . That is really one of the points of this thread . We do not have the power capabilities to use EVs en masse now . We don’t have the capability of manufacturing them quickly to make a quick switchover , even ignoring all other social and economic issues in making people give up gas cars for EVs . 

The vast difficulty in implementing actual practical  changes in response to the cries that we must do something NOW is really one point of this mental exercise . 

Rooftop solar exists and is not speculative. Why do you get to invoke the difficulty of adopting EVs while discounting the possibility of the solutions being adopted at an equal pace?

[wallflash]

19 minutes ago, swansont said:

Rooftop solar exists and is not speculative. Why do you get to invoke the difficulty of adopting EVs while discounting the possibility of the solutions being adopted at an equal pace?

 

I’m not discounting anything . This is a thread created for posters to put forth their ideas . Please feel free to do so  . Power generation just happened to be the first topic on my list in the OP , and I have presented difficulties with it , including the increased pressure on the electrical grid if we move away from fossil fuel appliances and vehicles to electric ones , which seems a logical first step  given that electric cars and appliances currently exist . 

 

Can rooftop solar run an entire standard size house , including fridge , WH, dryer, stove and oven , heater , and now EV chargers ? It’s an honest question, I don’t know the capabilities of it . What happens on cloudy days ? What sort of storage is needed to provide for a whole house with EV charge capability when the sun is not shining ( as it does every day for an approximate  range of 8- 12 hours  ) ?

 

Im interested in realistic ideas , and reserve the right to point out flaws in idealistic ideas that don’t deal realistically with our current situation . 

Edited January 24, 2020 by wallflash

[Strange]

5 minutes ago, wallflash said:

including the increased pressure on the electrical grid if we move away from fossil fuel appliances and vehicles to electric ones , which seems a logical first step  given that electric cars and appliances currently exist . 

Although, all those vehicles plugged in to charge can also be a resource used to help load balance the grid. For example, people all drive home at about the same time, plug their cars in and go indoors to make a cup of tea or cook dinner. The grid can "borrow" power from the cars (they wont all be completely discharged) to meet that short term demand before going back to charging the cars.

A smart grid will also know not to start charging all the cars at the same time (massive surge in demand) but to enable them on a schedule - perhaps based on requests / priority information from the vehicles. Maybe if you have a doctor on call next door, she gets first dibs on power (perhaps even borrowing from your batteries, if they are already well charged) and then you get charged next. When the doctor is not working, but you are, then you get priority. 

(And, yes, systems are already being designed to do that sort of thing.)

[wallflash]

37 minutes ago, Strange said:

Although, all those vehicles plugged in to charge can also be a resource used to help load balance the grid. For example, people all drive home at about the same time, plug their cars in and go indoors to make a cup of tea or cook dinner. The grid can "borrow" power from the cars (they wont all be completely discharged) to meet that short term demand before going back to charging the cars.

A smart grid will also know not to start charging all the cars at the same time (massive surge in demand) but to enable them on a schedule - perhaps based on requests / priority information from the vehicles. Maybe if you have a doctor on call next door, she gets first dibs on power (perhaps even borrowing from your batteries, if they are already well charged) and then you get charged next. When the doctor is not working, but you are, then you get priority. 

(And, yes, systems are already being designed to do that sort of thing.)

 

In the US this will present enormous societal difficulties even if the technology were currently in place , which it isn’t and won’t be in 5 yrs .  Essentially you are saying that when a person drives home and plugs in his car the grid will have the right to drain his car to feed other sources outside his house , and that there will be a schedule of charging based on the perceived need and importance of the end user . This also doesn’t take into account things like emergencies . I come home , plug my EV in, the system depletes my already depleted EV ( since I just used it to go to and from work ) to send electricity elsewhere, but suddenly I have an emergency of any sort that I need to drive 100 miles to handle . But my car has been discharged to provide power back into the grid system , so now I am without a functioning vehicle if my destination is further than the mileage capability of my car . 

 

Even in the  best scenario , I can only charge my cars when the system allows me to charge them , and I must submit my needs to some authority for approval and classification . 

No American will willingly go for this arrangement  . You would have to pass legislation mandating this system as part of an overall climate crisis solution . And then find a way to keep people from leaving their EVs unplugged until the assigned charging time so the system didn’t drain from theirs beforehand .  

 

 

Im not trying to be contrary, I’m just trying to keep the discussion realistic and perhaps show the difficulties we face in many of the solutions . I prefer that over unrealistic ideas that might sound good and feel good but aren’t truly workable . 

Edited January 24, 2020 by wallflash

[swansont]

1 hour ago, wallflash said:

Can rooftop solar run an entire standard size house , including fridge , WH, dryer, stove and oven , heater , and now EV chargers ? It’s an honest question, I don’t know the capabilities of it . What happens on cloudy days ? What sort of storage is needed to provide for a whole house with EV charge capability when the sun is not shining ( as it does every day for an approximate  range of 8- 12 hours  ) ?

It doesn't have to. You're casting this as all-or-nothing and that's not the situation. Any local generation you add reduces the grid capacity requirement. If your solar provides you 500 W at some time in the day, then your demand from the grid has dropped by that amount. It's cloudy? Then solar drops, but then, demand probably does, too, as it's generally cooler when it's cloudy.

If you can generate all of your power from rooftop solar that's wonderful, but the point is that any local generation of power reduces stress on the grid.

Since demand is not constant, if the grid can handle transmission of peak demand then it's not an immediate problem if peak demand does't go up. One of the nice things about solar is that it roughly tracks the demand. AC demand is highest in the afternoon, when the sun is shining, which is when you are generating maximum solar. 

If your increased demand for e.g. EV charging is at night, so you are off-peak, and grid capacity is there.

 

Quote

Im interested in realistic ideas , and reserve the right to point out flaws in idealistic ideas that don’t deal realistically with our current situation . 

You and everyone else.

[studiot]

3 hours ago, wallflash said:

 Honestly I don’t think I need to provide proof that electricity in the US comes from the grid . Where else would  it come from? Perhaps we are defining the terms differently . I mean having your house connected to the electrical supply system of your area, which gets power from a generating plant . As opposed to local sources like solar panels . If you don’t have your own personal power source that saves you from needing an electric meter and an electric bill, you are on the grid . 

Sweeping generalisations are so much hand waving if not founded in fact. They are certainly not scientific statements.

I have presented facts concerning your claim that every electrical vehicle adds to the grid load its total energy use.

You have not answered this.

Perhaps as an american you can resolve this conundrum.

This site claims that in 2010 there were 125 million housholds connected to the USgrid(s)

https://sites.google.com/site/theuspowergrid/

This site claims that in 2010 there were 117.5 million households in the US

How does this arise?

 

In any case are you telling me that there are not many ranches, lineshacks, cabins, individual homes of all sorts in say Alaska, Texas, New Mexico, Montana, Idaho, etc that do not have their own generator ?

Secondly you claim that the existing grid cannot absorb the extra load.

Where is your engineering evidence for this?

Such a claim is untrue in the UK and Europe generally.
Some countries are already making specialist charging points compulsory and they are optionally available in the UK.
Are you telling me that the grid needs to be upgrades to service these?
What about housing estates?
Are you telling me that new lines have to be laid all the way back to the power stations?
I don't think so

 

 

Just now, swansont said:

You and everyone else.

+1

[Strange]

1 hour ago, wallflash said:

In the US this will present enormous societal difficulties even if the technology were currently in place , which it isn’t and won’t be in 5 yrs .  Essentially you are saying that when a person drives home and plugs in his car the grid will have the right to drain his car to feed other sources outside his house , and that there will be a schedule of charging based on the perceived need and importance of the end user . This also doesn’t take into account things like emergencies . I come home , plug my EV in, the system depletes my already depleted EV ( since I just used it to go to and from work ) to send electricity elsewhere, but suddenly I have an emergency of any sort that I need to drive 100 miles to handle . But my car has been discharged to provide power back into the grid system , so now I am without a functioning vehicle if my destination is further than the mileage capability of my car .

And this is exactly the sort of problem I highlighted in my first post: people may come up with clever-sounding ideas that don't work because they don't understand all the details. Then other people (you, in this case) may dismiss perfectly sound ideas with straw man arguments because they haven't looked into all the details and assume it can't possibly work.

 

1 hour ago, wallflash said:

You would have to pass legislation mandating this system as part of an overall climate crisis solution .

Or, more realistically, the power company offers a deal where you get a slightly lower rate if you will allow them to borrow, say, 10% of your battery's charge - with guarantees about when/how this can happen to ensure that you are not inconvenienced and can drive your car in an emergency.

But feel free to carry on with your assumption that no car manufacturers and infrastructure companies have thought about how this could work practically.

wallflash: "I would love to hear everyone's ideas on how we can tackle climate change"

wallflash: "No, that won't work"

wallflash: "No, I don't agree"

wallflash: "No.

wallflash: "No"

If we have this much difficulty coming up with purely hypothetical ideas between friends, imagine how much harder it must be for people who actually have to solve the technical, economic and political problems to get anything done. It is amazing that any progress is being made at all.

[wallflash]

4 minutes ago, Strange said:

And this is exactly the sort of problem I highlighted in my first post: people may come up with clever-sounding ideas that don't work because they don't understand all the details. Then other people (you, in this case) may dismiss perfectly sound ideas with straw man arguments because they haven't looked into all the details and assume it can't possibly work.

 

Or, more realistically, the power company offers a deal where you get a slightly lower rate if you will allow them to borrow, say, 10% of your battery's charge - with guarantees about when/how this can happen to ensure that you are not inconvenienced and can drive your car in an emergency.

But feel free to carry on with your assumption that no car manufacturers and infrastructure companies have thought about how this could work practically.

wallflash: "I would love to hear everyone's ideas on how we can tackle climate change"

wallflash: "No, that won't work"

wallflash: "No, I don't agree"

wallflash: "No.

wallflash: "No"

If we have this much difficulty coming up with purely hypothetical ideas between friends, imagine how much harder it must be for people who actually have to solve the technical, economic and political problems to get anything done. It is amazing that any progress is being made at all.

 

 

I merely present realistic problematic issues with the idea. These issues are, or will be, real, whether one likes it or not. It isn't "it wont work, it wont work, nanny nanny boo boo" , it's be more realistic and less rosy in painting the picture .  Often times such ideas are based on the best case, pie in the sky projection and ignore basic reality.  That new nuclear plant will cost only 3 billion. Later on its, well wait, now its 7 billion. At the end its well, it ended up costing 11 billion. Cost overruns. You expect that Americans will be willing to submit to having to register for charging times on the EVs, accept some sort of ranking of importance on when their cars get charged, and be willing to allow the utility to DIScharge their car when it gets home  for use elsewhere. We can hold differing opinions on the likelihood of this ( mine is its about the same as winning the lottery  ) , but to build a system based on this presumption would be folly. It would have to be mandated by law to be sure this was going to work.

 

 

[Strange]

4 minutes ago, wallflash said:

I merely present realistic problematic issues with the idea.

"I merely present problems I see because I haven't looked into this at all."

(I will refrain from using the "i-word" to describe someone who doesn't know what they are talking about.)

6 minutes ago, wallflash said:

It would have to be mandated by law to be sure this was going to work.

Do you really think that the industrial standards that allow you to connect any computer to an Ethernet port, or use the same type of memory card in your computer, camera and phone are mandated by law?

8 minutes ago, wallflash said:

That new nuclear plant will cost only 3 billion. Later on its, well wait, now its 7 billion. At the end its well, it ended up costing 11 billion.

"I am going to counter the information about a real project being worked on by car makers and power companies by inventing some numbers about a completely different technology"

[wallflash]

27 minutes ago, Strange said:

"I merely present problems I see because I haven't looked into this at all."

(I will refrain from using the "i-word" to describe someone who doesn't know what they are talking about.)

Do you really think that the industrial standards that allow you to connect any computer to an Ethernet port, or use the same type of memory card in your computer, camera and phone are mandated by law?

"I am going to counter the information about a real project being worked on by car makers and power companies by inventing some numbers about a completely different technology"

 

We are “looking into it “ as part of this discussion . The fact that we seem to disagree in no way indicates a lack of knowledge on my part  

 

I am not sure what relevance you see in comparing it to the Internet . Are we allowed to access the Internet only at approved times based on how important we are judged to be when we apply for Internet access? I don’t see the connection you wish to make between the Internet and a utility removing electricity from my vehicle for use elsewhere, made , ironically, while simultaneously mocking my example of a cost overrun in making a point about pie in the sky projections instead of realistic ones

Edited January 24, 2020 by wallflash

[Strange]

5 minutes ago, wallflash said:

The fact that we seem to disagree in no way indicates a lack of knowledge on my part

Well, the fact you are raising irrelevant objections and don't know how the proposed system will work might be a clue.

6 minutes ago, wallflash said:

I am not sure what relevance you see in comparing it to the Internet .

I didn't mention the Internet. But that is another good example of an international standard that was developed without legislation. (And, interestingly, the scheme I am talking about was nicknamed the "Internet of Power").

 

[wallflash]

2 hours ago, studiot said:

Sweeping generalisations are so much hand waving if not founded in fact. They are certainly not scientific statements.

I have presented facts concerning your claim that every electrical vehicle adds to the grid load its total energy use.

You have not answered this.

Perhaps as an american you can resolve this conundrum.

This site claims that in 2010 there were 125 million housholds connected to the USgrid(s)

https://sites.google.com/site/theuspowergrid/

This site claims that in 2010 there were 117.5 million households in the US

How does this arise?

 

In any case are you telling me that there are not many ranches, lineshacks, cabins, individual homes of all sorts in say Alaska, Texas, New Mexico, Montana, Idaho, etc that do not have their own generator ?

Secondly you claim that the existing grid cannot absorb the extra load.

Where is your engineering evidence for this?

Such a claim is untrue in the UK and Europe generally.
Some countries are already making specialist charging points compulsory and they are optionally available in the UK.
Are you telling me that the grid needs to be upgrades to service these?
What about housing estates?
Are you telling me that new lines have to be laid all the way back to the power stations?
I don't think so

 

 

+1

I will link a  couple of sites I saw recently when I find them . Both make the case that the entire electric grid will have to be rebuilt for the modern all electric no fossil fuel age . One put the rebuild estimate at about $5 trillion in current dollars , if I recall . The other made the point that part of the necessity of the rebuild is to make the grid “smarter “ , to be able to read and adjust to peak demands and low demands in various locations at once and reroute things as necessary. 

 

https://www.fastcompany.com/3035149/how-to-fix-the-ailing-electric-grid

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/theconversation.com/amp/the-old-dirty-creaky-us-electric-grid-would-cost-5-trillion-to-replace-where-should-infrastructure-spending-go-68290

 

 

Note that the system described as dirty , old , and creaky is referring to the CURRENT system based on supplying our CURRENT needs . Not what could possibly be twice what we use now if our society goes total electric in homes and businesses . 

While I can’t speak for Europe, although I suspect it is similar, the US is not overbuilt .It is  built to peak demand , which may only happens for minutes at a time a few times a day , and so for the vast majority of the day is “overbuilt “ relative to normal demand, but you have to build to peak demand . This confuses some folks who see 20% of the capability being used most of the day .  But as more things go on the grid , that peak demand rises along with it , and the grid is not purposefully overbuilt to handle unlimited growth . 

 

I experience this first hand . We just built a million square foot building . The original plans calculated out to a 4000 amp transformer from the utility company. The owners have plans for doubling their capacity in the next couple of years so they wanted an 8000 amp one . The utility asked for the plans and load calculations on this extra expansion . The owner replied they don’t have it, it’s future planning . The utility company replied they don’t build for what may happen in the future, you have to show you need the 8000 now . The utility company ended up putting the 4000 amp in . That’s how it works . 

 

As to a few scattered places with generators and off the grid , certainly there are . They make up a small percentage of the total . I’m not really sure what the original point was in questioning whether most of the country is connected to the power grid , but they are . A small fraction that is not does not change that . Most  are fossil fueled generators   with fossil fuel appliances in the house , so in effect these places are for the most part 100% CO2 emitting homes   , which I took to be the problem here , and not an example to follow   

1 hour ago, Strange said:

Well, the fact you are raising irrelevant objections and don't know how the proposed system will work might be a clue.

I didn't mention the Internet. But that is another good example of an international standard that was developed without legislation. (And, interestingly, the scheme I am talking about was nicknamed the "Internet of Power").

 

If your Ethernet port connection was not a reference to connecting your computer to a utility providing internet connection  to establish a similar comparison for the electric utility pulling power form your vehicle , then I again  don’t see the relevance . My objections though do not come from the technological aspect of it . You may feel that people resisting being assigned charging times and having to submit info to establish your proper “need” , and  be ranked in order of importance to have their vehicle prepared for use to be irrelevant . I assure you those folks will not feel the same if and when such a plan is attempted to be put in place. Folks that , in the US anyway, get to vote  .  

Edited January 24, 2020 by wallflash

[studiot]

40 minutes ago, wallflash said:

I will link a  couple of sites I saw recently when I find them . Both make the case that the entire electric grid will have to be rebuilt for the modern all electric no fossil fuel age . One put the rebuild estimate at about $5 trillion in current dollars , if I recall . The other made the point that part of the necessity of the rebuild is to make the grid “smarter “ , to be able to read and adjust to peak demands and low demands in various locations at once and reroute things as necessary. 

 

https://www.fastcompany.com/3035149/how-to-fix-the-ailing-electric-grid

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/theconversation.com/amp/the-old-dirty-creaky-us-electric-grid-would-cost-5-trillion-to-replace-where-should-infrastructure-spending-go-68290

 

 

Note that the system described as dirty , old , and creaky is referring to the CURRENT system based on supplying our CURRENT needs . Not what could possibly be twice what we use now if our society goes total electric in homes and businesses . 

While I can’t speak for Europe, although I suspect it is similar, the US is not overbuilt .It is  built to peak demand , which may only happens for minutes at a time a few times a day , and so for the vast majority of the day is “overbuilt “ relative to normal demand, but you have to build to peak demand . This confuses some folks who see 20% of the capability being used most of the day .  But as more things go on the grid , that peak demand rises along with it , and the grid is not purposefully overbuilt to handle unlimited growth . 

 

I experience this first hand . We just built a million square foot building . The original plans calculated out to a 4000 amp transformer from the utility company. The owners have plans for doubling their capacity in the next couple of years so they wanted an 8000 amp one . The utility asked for the plans and load calculations on this extra expansion . The owner replied they don’t have it, it’s future planning . The utility company replied they don’t build for what may happen in the future, you have to show you need the 8000 now . The utility company ended up putting the 4000 amp in . That’s how it works . 

 

As to a few scattered places with generators and off the grid , certainly there are . They make up a small percentage of the total . I’m not really sure what the original point was in questioning whether most of the country is connected to the power grid , but they are . A small fraction that is not does not change that . Most  are fossil fueled generators   with fossil fuel appliances in the house , so in effect these places are for the most part 100% CO2 emitting homes   , which I took to be the problem here , and not an example to follow   

 

 

Support information ? Hmm let's see.

The first link is a self confessed advertisement from a an electrical facilities design company.

The second is largely journalistic fluff, heavily economics biased, but they also acknowledge that

Quote

In recent years, where we get our power has changed dramatically. The oldest generators are large power plants, with many located in the eastern part of the U.S. Most recent additions have been smaller and more spread out – think rooftop solar panels or wind farms. Some experts have even said that this model of more distributed generation closer to where power is consumed – along the edge of the network, rather than central power plants – is the new norm.

So they are saying what I said.

 

So no real facts or figures and no answers to my questions either.

[MigL]

If I may...

The fact that JEDEC certifies standards for the connectors and cabling of things like Ethernet ports, Memory sticks, etc., is similar to the standardised connector and cabling regulations for your EV charging station.
JEDEC is not telling you when, or in what priority, you can use your Ethernet or memory.

[wallflash]

34 minutes ago, studiot said:

 

Support information ? Hmm let's see.

The first link is a self confessed advertisement from a an electrical facilities design company.

The second is largely journalistic fluff, heavily economics biased, but they also acknowledge that

So they are saying what I said.

 

So no real facts or figures and no answers to my questions either.

 

What real facts and figures do you want ? I have supplied links to sites describing the condition of the grid . You choose to denigrate them , even though one is an excerpt from a book and not an ad piece, and I’m not sure how the other counts as “fluff” unless one is simply searching for a reason to reject it  . I think the fact that most homes and businesses in America are connected to the grid to be self evident . It’s like asking me to prove that most Americans drive cars . 

 

Local distributed   generation simply  means plants closer to the locations they serve . They are still on the grid. 

 

So if you can be more specific I would be glad to see what I can do  . I have the facts on my side , so I do not mind presenting them if I know which ones are desired, and I know that they will be duly considered and not summarily rejected because they do not say what the questioner desires    

Edited January 24, 2020 by wallflash

[Strange]

2 hours ago, MigL said:

If I may...

The fact that JEDEC certifies standards for the connectors and cabling of things like Ethernet ports, Memory sticks, etc., is similar to the standardised connector and cabling regulations for your EV charging station.
JEDEC is not telling you when, or in what priority, you can use your Ethernet or memory.

Exactly. But there are higher level protocols (e.g. quality of service) that will prioritise some users' traffic over others. No legislation required. It works by a combination of consent and market forces. The same would apply to using electric vehicles as temporary power buffers.