GM Updates 250,000 EVs with Vehicle-to-Grid Firmware, Announces Grid-Scale Sodium-Ion Batteries (fortune.com) 91
"Battery breakthroughs will lessen AI's demand on the electricity grid," argues The Washington Post's editoral board, arguing that GM's latest moves "offer a fresh reminder that resource constraints can be solved by innovation."
Or As Fortune put it, "America's electric grid is buckling under extreme weather, aging infrastructure, and an AI build-out that is quietly rewriting U.S. power demand — and General Motors wants to turn that crisis into a business." They describe GM's plan as offering itself "as a distributed utility in disguise... stitching together hundreds of thousands of battery-powered cars, new grid-scale storage, and a unified charging platform into what amounts to a virtual fleet of power plants." The bet puts GM on a collision course with Ford's newly branded Ford Energy unit as both Detroit rivals race to repurpose underused EV capacity for a more urgent problem: keeping the lights on in the AI era. GM's case rests on three planks. The first is its existing fleet. GM says more than 250,000 of its EVs on U.S. roads can already charge bidirectionally — pulling electricity from the grid and sending it back. "Every evening, a quiet transformation occurs across the American landscape," GM Energy vice president Wade Sheffer writes in an open letter to utilities and regulators, describing the EVs sitting in driveways as "a massive opportunity to aggregate energy storage capacity."
A firmware update is rolling out to customers with GM Energy's vehicle-to-home hardware, converting those systems into full vehicle-to-grid assets with no new hardware and turning home backup systems into grid resources when utilities need them. GM is piloting the idea in Michigan with DTE Energy at 30 employee homes, and has sketched a 2030 vision with Pacific Gas & Electric in which more than 52,000 GM EVs help balance the grid out of a projected 130,000 vehicles in the area.
GM is also "seeking partnerships with utility companies nationwide to assist in offering such vehicle-to-grid services for customers," reports CNBC, noting it's one of two moves "meant to address concerns about rising energy costs amid an artificial intelligence boom."
Forbes reports that GM's second goal "is to leapfrog the dominant battery cell tech used for energy storage packs right now" — right past the LFP (lithium-iron phosphate) stage, "which is dominated by China." Sodium batteries are cheaper to use than LFP because they don't need an additional cooling system. They also have a 20-year usable life and are made from materials that can be sourced from within the U.S., the company said at a briefing in San Francisco on Tuesday. "Sodium-ion actually is the better chemistry for that application. And when I say sodium-ion is better, I mean GM's version of sodium-ion," Kurt Kelty, GM's battery chief and a long-time Tesla battery executive, told Forbes. He said GM is seeing great results from its prototypes, even at scorching temperatures of 55 Celsius (131 Fahrenheit).
"Sodium-ion-powered energy storage systems have the potential to operate without active cooling and with much less system complexity," Kurt Kelty, GM's vice president of battery and sustainability, said Tuesday in a blog post. "In large energy storage systems, that matters." Not having to cool the battery cells could lead to lower upfront costs as well as operating costs, the automaker said.
TechCrunch reports on GM's big new partnership with energy-storage startup Peak Energy to develop GM's sodium-ion battery chemistry for grid-scale deployments: GM wouldn't share with TechCrunch how much money it is investing in this energy-storage effort. But we do know the company has committed $900 million to commercialize new battery chemistries, an investment that includes a new battery-development center. .. The first GM cells are expected to enter trial production at the company's Battery Cell Development Center in 2028.
"Our next-generation sodium-ion cell development will drive energy density higher," promises GM's blog post, arguing they're extending the company's battery expertise and technical infrastructure "into the electrical grid itself. If we get this right, we will not just build better batteries. We will help create a more resilient, more affordable and more flexible energy future... Every improvement we make strengthens the development stack that supports both EVs and energy storage."
"The message: GM isn't just selling cars into a stressed grid; it's supplying the batteries to stabilize it," argues Fortune.
And GM also announced they're augmenting their apps with an "Energy Pass" offering "seamless access to Tesla Supercharger, IONNA, Electrify America, and soon, ChargePoint and EVgo networks." Their goal is to simplify the charging experience with an app "that covers nearly 70% of all DC fast chargers in the United States, plus many Level 2 chargers, all through one app."
Or As Fortune put it, "America's electric grid is buckling under extreme weather, aging infrastructure, and an AI build-out that is quietly rewriting U.S. power demand — and General Motors wants to turn that crisis into a business." They describe GM's plan as offering itself "as a distributed utility in disguise... stitching together hundreds of thousands of battery-powered cars, new grid-scale storage, and a unified charging platform into what amounts to a virtual fleet of power plants." The bet puts GM on a collision course with Ford's newly branded Ford Energy unit as both Detroit rivals race to repurpose underused EV capacity for a more urgent problem: keeping the lights on in the AI era. GM's case rests on three planks. The first is its existing fleet. GM says more than 250,000 of its EVs on U.S. roads can already charge bidirectionally — pulling electricity from the grid and sending it back. "Every evening, a quiet transformation occurs across the American landscape," GM Energy vice president Wade Sheffer writes in an open letter to utilities and regulators, describing the EVs sitting in driveways as "a massive opportunity to aggregate energy storage capacity."
A firmware update is rolling out to customers with GM Energy's vehicle-to-home hardware, converting those systems into full vehicle-to-grid assets with no new hardware and turning home backup systems into grid resources when utilities need them. GM is piloting the idea in Michigan with DTE Energy at 30 employee homes, and has sketched a 2030 vision with Pacific Gas & Electric in which more than 52,000 GM EVs help balance the grid out of a projected 130,000 vehicles in the area.
GM is also "seeking partnerships with utility companies nationwide to assist in offering such vehicle-to-grid services for customers," reports CNBC, noting it's one of two moves "meant to address concerns about rising energy costs amid an artificial intelligence boom."
Forbes reports that GM's second goal "is to leapfrog the dominant battery cell tech used for energy storage packs right now" — right past the LFP (lithium-iron phosphate) stage, "which is dominated by China." Sodium batteries are cheaper to use than LFP because they don't need an additional cooling system. They also have a 20-year usable life and are made from materials that can be sourced from within the U.S., the company said at a briefing in San Francisco on Tuesday. "Sodium-ion actually is the better chemistry for that application. And when I say sodium-ion is better, I mean GM's version of sodium-ion," Kurt Kelty, GM's battery chief and a long-time Tesla battery executive, told Forbes. He said GM is seeing great results from its prototypes, even at scorching temperatures of 55 Celsius (131 Fahrenheit).
"Sodium-ion-powered energy storage systems have the potential to operate without active cooling and with much less system complexity," Kurt Kelty, GM's vice president of battery and sustainability, said Tuesday in a blog post. "In large energy storage systems, that matters." Not having to cool the battery cells could lead to lower upfront costs as well as operating costs, the automaker said.
TechCrunch reports on GM's big new partnership with energy-storage startup Peak Energy to develop GM's sodium-ion battery chemistry for grid-scale deployments: GM wouldn't share with TechCrunch how much money it is investing in this energy-storage effort. But we do know the company has committed $900 million to commercialize new battery chemistries, an investment that includes a new battery-development center. .. The first GM cells are expected to enter trial production at the company's Battery Cell Development Center in 2028.
"Our next-generation sodium-ion cell development will drive energy density higher," promises GM's blog post, arguing they're extending the company's battery expertise and technical infrastructure "into the electrical grid itself. If we get this right, we will not just build better batteries. We will help create a more resilient, more affordable and more flexible energy future... Every improvement we make strengthens the development stack that supports both EVs and energy storage."
"The message: GM isn't just selling cars into a stressed grid; it's supplying the batteries to stabilize it," argues Fortune.
And GM also announced they're augmenting their apps with an "Energy Pass" offering "seamless access to Tesla Supercharger, IONNA, Electrify America, and soon, ChargePoint and EVgo networks." Their goal is to simplify the charging experience with an app "that covers nearly 70% of all DC fast chargers in the United States, plus many Level 2 chargers, all through one app."
Do they have Carplay now? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
OnStar still spies on people unless they've been forced to stop, which I don't think they have (yet).
I dont want to waste car charge cycles (Score:3)
on the grid. Use stationary batteries that you can replace without throwing out the car with it.
Re:I dont want to waste car charge cycles (Score:5, Interesting)
It all depends on what the warranty is. IIRC VW limit the number of lifetime kWh you can use for this, and then the car just refuses to do it anymore.
If you don't drive the car regularly it might actually help to cycle the battery a bit regularly. Also, not all cycles are equal - 70-60-70% is not the same as 100-90-100, and not 1/6th of 80-20-80.
It also depends how much you get paid for it. The battery will probably outlast the car anyway, so it might be worth doing to extract more value from your asset.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:I dont want to waste car charge cycles (Score:4, Informative)
No the battery will not outlast the EV unless some breakthrough in reliability.
Have you looked at recent data on EV battery lifetimes? There have been a number of breakthroughs in reliability.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: I dont want to waste car charge cycles (Score:2)
I suspect most vehicles suffer the same fate as my first one (an accident or major repair being due totals the
Re: (Score:2)
Fantastic car, I wish GM kept making them.
Re: (Score:2)
False. Batteries these days are seeing minimal degradation after 100-200k miles.
Re: (Score:2)
Spoken like someone who hasn't tried to actually utilize Chevy's warranty. It obviously varies by the dealership, but my local dealer doesn't do loaners and you'd probably have to contact corporate to get any sort of rental reimbursement. I'd rather not wear out my battery.
Monetizing software updates (Score:2)
GM... as a distributed utility in disguise
So, it's a business. How much does GM get paid for using their customers' property vs. how much do customers get paid? Can anybody shed some light on this?
Talk about ROI: Looks like GM's only investment is a software update which probably includes other fixes they needed to do anyway!
Re: (Score:2)
Why would you throw out your car if it has a dead battery but be okay with replacing a stationary battery?
Re: (Score:3)
I shouldn't have to explain this, but EV batteries are vehicle specific. The main reason early Nissan Leafs are junk yard fodder is because it's just not cost effective to put a brand new battery in them, and there's not enough of the cars for competition to kick in and do its thing at making the batteries cheap.
This same sort of thing happens with old ICE cars, too. Eventually the parts go out of production and get rare, and before you know it you're in a bidding war against five other people on eBay for
Re: (Score:2)
BS. I had a 2003 Honda Civic Hybrid and I had the option to replace the battery when it died in 2012. Both from the deal AND private 3rd parties.
Battery replacement on an EV almost always makes financial sense unless the rest of the car is in bad shape.
Re: (Score:3)
Assuming you went with the 8 Ah upgraded battery, your Civic Hybrid has a 1,152 Wh battery. These days, that's roughly the capacity of a $500 portable power station. That's nowhere near what a replacement battery for a BEV costs, so you're comparing apples to oranges.
Re: (Score:2)
The point was that even in its infancy 15 years ago there were fairly reasonable options.
EVs are bigger sure, but tech has advanced considerably in 15 years.
Re: (Score:3)
At least in Europe there is actually a market for repairing or replacing Leaf batteries now, although to be cost effective it helps to DIY it. While they aren't great batteries, the do have the advantage of being simple. Just a couple of power cables and some bolts. You can swap one out on your driveway with a trolley if you really want to.
They are also easy to fix, and the most common failure mode is one or two cells go bad. So you get a scrap one for next to nothing and swap some good cells in, which agai
Re: (Score:3)
I shouldn't have to explain this, but EV batteries are vehicle specific. The main reason early Nissan Leafs are junk yard fodder is because it's just not cost effective to put a brand new battery in them, and there's not enough of the cars for competition to kick in and do its thing at making the batteries cheap.
Except car batteries are cheap. If I went out today and priced a home battery system the same size as the battery in my car it would come to roughly 4x the cost of a replacement car battery through the dealer. People wildly misestimate just how fucking massive batteries in cars are.
Here's an example: Last year there was a cyclone which knocked out the power in SEQ in Australia for a couple of days. One of my friends had a V2L car, plugged it back into the house (they have some nice changeover switches, cour
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
China has you covered. https://www.npr.org/2026/04/18... [npr.org]
expectations (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:expectations (Score:5, Insightful)
I think I would be pretty dismayed to hop in my car to head out for work in the morning and discover that it dumped half it's charge for datacenters...
My car has a range of 300 miles, and I have a commute of ten miles. The average American car is driven about 35 miles per day. I wouldn't mind if I hopped in the car to head for work and discovered half of the range miles that I don't use had been sold.
As long as I can turn off that feature when I have a long trip scheduled the next day, I wouldn't mind buying electricity at low rates and selling it back at high rates.
and that GM took profit out of that, to boot!
All of the discussions say that the utilities pay for the electricity they buy.
Re:expectations (Score:4, Interesting)
Today you can convert that unused capacity into longer battery life by reducing charge capacity (and you change the charge capacity for those same long trips). All you're really saying here is that you might want to profit from selling your car's lifetime to electrical utilities when they should be able to do a far better job. It's a terrible idea, but it appeals to people like you because you're easily duped with promises of profit. What should you care, once you ruin the lifetime of a car you can unload the problem on someone else, what should you care as long as there's a dollar in your pocket.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Today you can convert that unused capacity into longer battery life by reducing charge capacity (and you change the charge capacity for those same long trips). All you're really saying here is that you might want to profit from selling your car's lifetime to electrical utilities when they should be able to do a far better job. It's a terrible idea, but it appeals to people like you because you're easily duped with promises of profit. What should you care, once you ruin the lifetime of a car you can unload the problem on someone else, what should you care as long as there's a dollar in your pocket.
Posting AC to preserve mods but I agree this is just further enshitification of the energy grid. As steady state sources are replaced with more intermittents first you get time based pricing, so you are encouraged to use electricity when they want you to use it, not when you want to use it. Next they want to offload the required additional storage onto consumers. They will appeal to your sense of independence, look at me with my backup battery on wheels.
In the end though, very few people have the abil
Re: (Score:3)
In many cases they aren't paying just for the kwh, they're paying to not have to build additional capacity or prevent black outs.
EV battery storage will *dwarf* grid scale battery storage when both are built out fully. Like 3-4x larger. It's financially stupid not to leverage that in the design of the grid.
That said, do I trust the oligarchy running our grid to do it well? no, no I don't.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
All you're really saying here is that you might want to profit from selling your car's lifetime to electrical utilities when they should be able to do a far better job. It's a terrible idea, but it appeals to people like you because you're easily duped with promises of profit. What should you care, once you ruin the lifetime of a car you can unload the problem on someone else, what should you care as long as there's a dollar in your pocket.
GM's batteries currently have a lifetime charge cycle of 1500 charges before the battery wears to 80% of its original charge. That means if you charge your car once a week you will get 30 years of charge cycles before it lessons to 80%. If you are worried about accelerating your battery wear so you only get 27 years of usage before reaching 80% wear, you must keep your vehicles MUCH longer than most people. A 30 year old EV that still gets 240 mile range out of its original 300 mile range is doing great!
Your rant sounds more like fearmongering to me. Let me guess, you're invested in the fossil fuel industry.
I am very smart and will refute your argument with (checks notes) general motors marketing claims. Bravo.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
once you ruin the lifetime of a car you can unload the problem on someone else, what should you care as long as there's a dollar in your pocket.
There's a real need for battery systems which report the history and health of the battery, that's an actual concern. But V2G won't necessarily do that, depending on how it's implemented. Do I trust GM to get it right no, but they might if they are cautious enough in fear of lawsuits and recalls. Some low-C use of your battery that changes its charge state by 20% or so will barely affect its lifespan.
Re: (Score:2)
All of the discussions say that the utilities pay for the electricity they buy.
If it's anything like how they pay for solar, they'll tack on so many bullshit fees you'll be lucky to break even.
I really only see this working out for corporate customers who have a surplus of fleet vehicles that sit parked for prolonged periods.
Re: (Score:2)
All of the discussions say that the utilities pay for the electricity they buy.
If it's anything like how they pay for solar, they'll tack on so many bullshit fees you'll be lucky to break even.
Hopefully more than the pay for solar, since they buy solar when the seller has extra power, while they will buy battery power when they need extra power.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why? Do you drive 150miles to work? My car battery is currently 30% full, well below half, and I can't be fucked going to plug it in. I'll probably do that on Tuesday. In any case, all V2G systems are user configurable. If you are dismayed it's because you yourself screwed up and set the system to allow it to discharger more than you wanted. You should go tell yourself to stand in the corner and think about what you did.
and that GM took profit out of that, to boot!
100% of V2G setups result in the end user getting paid for electricity. The fact that a
Re: expectations (Score:1)
V2G is user configurable until they push an OTA update and then it isn't. Maybe I'm just a pessimist, but I could see a scenario where GM, Tesla or whoever just up and decides to sell your battery capacity, or maybe they're forced by the government to do it.
In any event, I'd welcome being able to use my car as a giant battery bank to power *my* house / refrigerator / heater in the event of a prolonged power outage. Everyone else can suck it.
Re: (Score:2)
V2G is user configurable until they push an OTA update and then it isn't.
So then unplug the car?
Maybe I'm just a pessimist
My friend you're far worse than that. You're tethering on the edge of truth seeker territory (I heard conspiracy theorists don't like that term anymore).
In any event, I'd welcome being able to use my car as a giant battery bank to power *my* house / refrigerator / heater in the event of a prolonged power outage. Everyone else can suck it.
That's called V2L and it also exists. Enjoy paying more for electricity than those who can use their spare storage to sell to the grid at inflated rates. You do you, other people will take the money you left on the table due to some what-if scenario.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:expectations (Score:4, Informative)
This tech has been in use in Europe for years, and the way it works is to tell the car you need X% by Y time, and the system makes sure you have it. Typically the amount sent to the grid is maximum about 10% of the battery anyway.
There is a similar system where you get lower charging costs by allowing the energy company to decide when you car charges. Again, you tell it you need X% by Y time, and it selects charging slots to make sure you have that in the morning. You can also override it manually whenever you want, although you don't get the lower rate energy if you do.
And if you are really into it, you can have your own system using open source software to play the market and charge when energy is cheapest, even negatively priced, with a minimum of X% by Y time. People with solar often do it because they get paid more to export the solar than it costs to charge from the grid overnight.
Re: (Score:2)
Plus, you pay to recharge the car, don't you? Even if you're lucky enough to have a charge park that is 100% solar or something, you still get billed.
If GM or whoever even pays you for the power your car sends to the grid, it'll be in the thousandth of a cent range.
Not to mention, before V2G, your full charge could last you the week (or at least a few days)... now, you'll have to charge daily (because gotta keep "Clod" running at night, and you're not gonna come out to find the AI/LLM-AI data center only u
GM is not supplying anything (Score:1)
Coming headline: GM shut down by the government... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
way to not remember history, GM choose to go bankrupt, Ford chosse not to go bankrupt and Chrysler had no choice but to go bankrupt.
all about the too big to fail bullshit.
Not your batteries (Score:3)
>"The message: GM isn't just selling cars into a stressed grid; it's supplying the batteries to stabilize it," argues Fortune.
GM doesn't own/supply ANY of those batteries. They are just assuming that consumers will be willing to sign up for something and leave their vehicles connected which will impose significant additional battery wear, and risk not having the charge they want/expect when they want it. My EV is not GM nor Ford, but I probably wouldn't participate, even if paid (which would likely be a pittance).
As for sodium-ion, those can be as low as half the kWh for the same weight. So although they might be cheaper, have a longer life, and be safer/simpler, it is a significant downgrade for range/performance compared to the current advanced lithium formulations.
Re: (Score:2)
"As for sodium-ion, those can be as low as half the kWh for the same weight. "
And they can be higher than that as well. That is the primary challenge for the technology if it is to succeed in mobile applications. For stationary use it's not a problem.
Remember that solar companies were selling Lithium Ion into "power walls" installed into home garages, an appalling solution. What should anyone expect from an Elon Musk company? Your death is your problem, as long as he's the first trillionaire.
"My EV is n
Re:Not your batteries (Score:4, Insightful)
Nice theory, but back in reality:
- The additional ware is minimal, the V2G current is minor compared to you stepping on the accelerator or the brake. These systems already exist (GM is late to the party here) and there's no evidence of massive car battery degredation.
- There's zero risk involved. It's your EV. You set the parameters of how much can and can't be discharged. If your car is empty it's because you fucked up.
- Depending on rates the payment for dynamic energy export can be incredibly lucrative.
- Downgrading range is okay for many people. People masturbating over range numbers are ultimately those who are unable to apply thought to their situation. Yeah there are those who need a long range vehicle, but the vast majority of people don't. (My own car is 30% full right now, and I just can't be fucked to go plug it in, I'll probably plug in at work on Monday or Tuesday.) A car with half the range will still be just as suitable for me and 99% of people out there.
Re: (Score:2)
>"The additional ware is minimal,"
Wear. It is similar to a charge cycle. And that absolutely wears the battery. How much will depend on how much power and for how long and how often. If it did that daily for even something small like 20kWh, that would be more than 7 times as much wear as my average weekly driving. No thanks.
>"There's zero risk involved. It's your EV. You set the parameters of how much can and can't be discharged"
As long as the customer has full control, then that is probably acce
Re: (Score:2)
Wear. It is similar to a charge cycle.
It's not. The V2G use is incredibly shallow and while it "wears" the battery, it does so at a completely irrelevant pace.
If it did that daily for even something small like 20kWh, that would be more than 7 times as much wear as my average weekly driving. No thanks.
Given the lengths of your average weekly driving it would result in your car going from being scrapped due to mechanical defects to being scrapped due to mechanical defects. 20kWh daily load on a vehicle is not out of the ordinary for drivers representing a round trip slightly above the average daily commute distance. Data from the taxi industry has conclusively shown that you can put 4x
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
OK, I read it. But there is no theory behind why imposing additional cycling would be "good" for the batteries. Besides, they just say "potentially disproving." I am way beyond skeptical.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm with you on this point though. As much of an EV fanboi as I am, that doesn't make much sense.
Re: (Score:2)
In warm weather, lithium ion outperforms sodium ion. In cold weather, sodium ion outperforms lithium ion.
Besides being cheaper, sodium ion cells also last much longer than lithium ion, so for those two reasons battery wear is less of an issue.
Re: (Score:2)
don't forget FAR better cold temp performance for Sodium Ion.
Re: (Score:2)
They are just assuming that consumers will be willing to sign up for something and leave their vehicles connected which will impose significant additional battery wear, and risk not having the charge they want/expect when they want it.
I have 40 kWh of batteries in my home, for backup and time-shifting, and I participate in a grid-stabilization program with my power company. The grid never draws significant energy from my batteries -- grid stabilization doesn't need a lot of energy, just a brief spike of power to keep things stable while the operator makes other adjustments. Historically this has been unnecessary because generation was from big spinning turbines and their inertia was enough to smooth out spikes and dips in demand. But r
Re: (Score:2)
>"I have 40 kWh of batteries in my home, for backup and time-shifting, and I participate in a grid-stabilization program with my power company."
OK, I was thinking more like grid backup, not just stabilization.
>"The grid never draws significant energy from my batteries [...] I see an otherwise-unexplained spike of 5-10 kW flowing from my batteries and into the grid, for a period of 2-5 minutes. 10 kW for 5 minutes is ~0.8 kWh, which is 2% of my house battery storage. I see a draw that large maybe once
another EditorDavid failure (Score:2)
"Battery breakthroughs will lessen AI's demand on the electricity grid,"
No it will not. AI demand on the grid will be whatever it is, and that will never lessen. Batteries may help the grid cope with that demand, but demand won't be lessened a single watt.
And we should all thank EditorDavid with leading the story with this incredibly stupid claim. It's almost as if EditorDavid doesn't know what an editor does. An editor edits stories, correcting bullshit part of the job, bullshit that EditorDavid is too
Peak shaving [Re:another EditorDavid failure] (Score:2)
"Battery breakthroughs will lessen AI's demand on the electricity grid,"
No it will not. AI demand on the grid will be whatever it is, and that will never lessen.
Depends on what you define as "the grid". If you define the grid as merely the transmission lines, but not including the power sources, then you are correct. Most people, however, will loosely define "the electrical grid" as the transmission systems including the generators that power it. In that case, batteries will lessen AI's demand, since the grid's limiting factor is providing power at peak demand, and every watt provided by batteries is one watt less for the grid to provide.
It's called "peak shaving"
Re: (Score:2)
Recently heard the definition:
Batteries - Time machines for electrons
Shaves the peak of excess to lessen the peak of demand - which is literally what a grid will do in the full renewable future.
Re: (Score:2)
They publish puff pieces for GM?
If GM is finally starting to compete, then good (Score:2)
But they need to demonstrate convincing delivery, which US OEMs have been shit on, because CATL, Gotion and BYD are all on the cusp of mass production of sodium chemistries.
Also, I'm guessing the 20 years claim relates strictly to stationary industrial storage applications with a lot of deep cycling, but even then it seems short, when you consider an LFP in a car can manage 3000 to 6000 full cycles, and sodium is supposed to be massively better than that.
Dispersed power can be more robust. (Score:4, Interesting)
Fire easily destroys or disables concentrated "force loss multiplier" fratricidal storage designs. Not just accidents, but terrorist-style attacks can take them out easily via drones using simple electric triggers.
https://theconversation.com/wh... [theconversation.com]
Disperse batteries far and wide and they'll be much more difficult to interfere with if they're designed to function without grid power during emergencies. A controlled, graceful shutdown is better than abrupt power interruption.
Re: (Score:2)
Dispersed power can be more robust yes, but it's also potentially a greater threat, because your local fire department[s] can only respond to a limited number of incidents at once. In areas made up of a bunch of smaller towns with small volunteer fire departments, they might literally only be able to handle one major fire with the use of resources from most of those departments.
If the attack on those batteries is via internet, cellular network etc., then having them dispersed might in fact not make them any
Who would sign up for this? (Score:2)
I've wondered about this for a while. I was considering getting solar panels and a home battery and this is an option there. But then I thought, I'm buying the battery to tide me over a blackout. If power drops, I want that battery topped off at all times. I don't want to use it as a grid smoothing device because that's just leaving me vulnerable to not having the power I bought it for.
Same thing for an EV. I still have range anxiety. I want the battery always at 100% full when I leave my garage. You'd have
Re: (Score:2)
I've thought about it from the perspective of using my vehicle's battery for backup power for my home. The reality is that my Bolt's battery holds roughly the amount of power my portable generator can generate in about 13 hours. Sure, I know some people manage to stretch it by running just the essentials (and realistically, you're limited to drawing about 1kW from the Bolt, as there's no true V2L support - power has to be drawn from the 12v system via an inverter), which could last for several days. But.
Re: (Score:2)
But car batteries are quite large. Even my shitty Honda Prologue that was less than $35k new has an 85kwh battery. Yeah, you might not want to give up 50% of your battery. But giving up 20% of your capacity? That's as a Tesla home battery, which is a decently substantial amount. And you'd still get hundreds of miles of range.
USA average house consumes 30kWh/day. That and solar power and a little care not to run the AC or clothes dryer and you could probably run off the grid indefinitely.
Re: (Score:2)
Not running the AC in the summer in Florida? Have fun with that.
Sure, there might be some controls over how much you let them take from your car into the grid, but I bet the people who set those limits get paid way less than the ones who let V2G siphon the whole battery (if they get paid at all), and I'd bet an OTA software update will be coming sometime to disable that limit (because people don't _only_ want "Clod" available part-time)... and, the power draw from all the DCs isn't going to go down, ever.
So, when I ... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A firmware update is rolling out to customers with GM Energy's vehicle-to-home hardware, converting those systems into full vehicle-to-grid assets with no new hardware and turning home backup systems into grid resources when utilities need them.
And I see nothing about configuration capabilities being left for the vehicle owner once this is pushed out. In fact, I see nothing about benefits to owners at all in TFA.
Utility demand response is a contractual thing. Once you sign up, you are obliged to load shed at the utilities request. Or face penalties. V2G just goes a step further than unidirectional (V1G) flow control in that GM can just take power back. Note that it is GM on the other side of the deal. Not your local, regulated and answerable to s
Changing energy demand (Score:2)
AI is not quietly changing the demand. Anyone with a power bill sees it, many are complaining, and the US government is the only one turning a blind eye to it.
GM V2G still vaporware (Score:2)
GM energy rep did not know anything about V2H when I spoke on tuesday.
And their V2H system is hopelessly overpriced. $10-$12k to install. The 9.6 kW output power limit on the Equinox EV is not enough for V2H for my home. 9.6 kW would be fine for V2G. With 2 cars each delivering 9.6 kW, it would work. Except of course their charger hardware does not support it. And they just haven't delivered V2G.
2030 with PG&E is a joke. Tesla and Ford already do both V2H and V2G in the current PG&E V2X pilot.
GM
Re: GM V2G still vaporware (Score:2)
Typo : they did not know anything about V2G.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My Equinox EV dealer last year knew a ton about the car actually - he was driving one himself. I did not inquire about battery backup at the time.
I feel there is a lot of standardization needed for all these grid-tied batteries and solar PV as well.
I have a huge solar PV system with Enphase with 42 IQ8+ and 28 M215. Even if I want Enphase batteries, I first need to upgrade the M215 to IQ series before I can install them due to communication protocol changes. If I want 3rd party (non-Enphase) batteries, or a
Bezos paper explains data centers fine actually (Score:2)
WAPO offers "a fresh reminder that resource constraints can be solved by innovation."
Translation: stop worrying about the power bill you can no longer afford and go buy a car you can no longer afford so that we can improve AI enough to make literally everything "something you can't afford". Now *that's* innovation.
Anybody remember where we put those damned pitchforks? Democracy Dies in Darkness; who knew it was a mission statement?
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like a good solution to me.
No thanks (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The battery is one of the most expensive parts of the car. Why on earth would someone want their battery to wear out sooner?
Batteries degrade even if you don't use them. A battery which is rated for 10,000 full cycles might be able to do 100,000 partial cycles or more, depending on the charge and discharge rates. Why would you not want to get paid for owning a battery that always degrades?
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know about most people, but I don't want the power source in my car (be it ICE or BEV or Hybrid) having to be replaced before the vehicle itself is a piece of rust on wheels (do new cars even rust anymore?).
For an ICE, a trip to the junk yard, $800, and a little wrench-time, and you have a usable engine; how much would you trust a junkyard BEV battery-pack, and what would it cost?
Consumer cost (Score:2)
Fool me thrice (Score:2)
"Stay in your homes so you don't die from a 1% mortality disease. Don't worry, we'll just print money and give it to you...I mean corporations."
"You're using an EV? Fuck you! You're ruining the power grid and contributing to global warming, you asshole! We need that power for AI datacenters so we can control you!"
I adore the bit about "aging infrastructure" (Score:2)
You know, where they keep raising the price of electricity, and use if for ROI rather than the FUCKING MAINTENANCE THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING.
The electrical infrastructure needs to be *nationalized*. No megabuck CEOs, only GS salaries.