AF has been operating a full EV fleet since 2014, followed by two-year V2G research project that revealed multiple challenges

Los Angeles Air Force Base became the first federal facility to replace its entire general-purpose fleet with plug-in vehicles in a two-year V2G research project

 by  & filed under FeaturesInfrastructure Features. ChargeDev  Vehicle-to-grid project reveals challenges of the early days

Los Angeles Air Force Base became the first federal facility to replace its entire general-purpose fleet with plug-in vehicles in a two-year V2G research project

Vehicle-to-grid (V2G) is a technical and policy-based effort to optimize the way EVs interact with the electrical grid. V2G developers view EVs as “resources” within an electrical network. In V2G literature, the word resource is often used instead of cars or vehicles.

The notion of a resource is based on the idea that a vehicle linked to a charger can (and should) do more than just take on fuel. At night or during the work day, the car’s battery can store power when overall electrical demand is low but wind and solar facilities are generating inexpensive power. When demand and generation shift, the battery can send power to the grid, offsetting the need for additional generation. EVs can also provide ancillary services, helping to regulate the stability of the grid.

Obviously, such benefits will not be delivered by just one EV, perhaps not even by 1,000 or 10,000. But eventually, it’s expected that a grid/EV dynamic will develop that is dependable and mutually beneficial for vehicles and the network.

Also obviously: this ain’t easy. Right now, V2G is still pretty theoretical. It could happen, if…

California, as in all things EV, leads in V2G research. For state policymakers, V2G is a must, not a want, required by Governor Brown’s Executive Order B-16-2012, which directs that “electric vehicle charging will be integrated into the electricity grid” by 2020, less than two years away. Policymakers need this working sooner, not later.

In December, a major V2G research project concluded in California, closely watched because of its scope and its utility market interaction. The project, which ran from October 2015 to December 2017, was a partnership between Southern California Edison (SCE) and the Department of Defense (DOD), specifically Los Angeles Air Force Base, part of a $20-million DOD research investment. The base became the first federal facility to replace its entire general-purpose fleet with 41 plug-in vehicles, including automobiles, pickup trucks and a passenger van.

In December, SCE filed its V2G report with the California Public Utilities Commission. SCE calls the project successful because the work supported “a pioneering customer in the direct participation space.” SCE writes that “the greatest accomplishment of the V2G Pilot is that it has paved the path for smaller resources to participate in the ancillary services market going forward.” On its web site, SCE writes that a successful pilot could be the “proof of concept” that helps establish the viability and scalability of V2G technology.

From SCE’s December report, viability and scalability seem to advance somewhat, but unevenly – the phrase “bits and pieces” comes to mind. SCE’s report makes it hard to assess how much this project (pardon the sports metaphor) moved the ball – 3 yards, 30 yards, or perhaps even close to the goal line.

One thing is certain: the project required a lot of remedial work. SCE and Air Force engineers started almost from scratch, expending a lot of effort just to get to the work at hand. SCE and the Air Force repeatedly confronted challenges which, taken together, belie any notions that V2G is at the almost-ready stage. SCE writes of shepherding “the pilot through myriad testing, qualification and participation wickets.”

For example, engineers hoped to take advantage of V2G work from the University of Delaware (UD), work that was favorably referenced among V2G proponents. It turned out, though, that UD’s components were proprietary, and couldn’t be used for the new project. Furthermore, UD communications protocols did not comply with SAE standards. Surprisingly, UD’s inverter was not utility-certified, something which is required throughout the US. In sum, UD’s work didn’t provide any advantage for SCE/Air Force. This is more than disappointing, and it’s not only about technology. V2G’s success depends on an open, common body of knowledge – secrets are a setback.

Another unexpected problem: even in California, there were no commercially available vehicles and electrical supply hardware, other than for the Nissan LEAF, capable of meeting all of the tasks and functions required by the project.

The project started with the Nissan LEAF, a bus from Phoenix, and trucks from EVAOS, EVI and VIA Motors. None of the equipment could pass initial testing in its manufactured configuration. Issues included, but were not limited to: limited charger functionality; standby load that was higher than SCE’s recommendations for charging infrastructure; heavy parasitic loads that reduced the reliability of the vehicles; and inverter issues. Each vehicle had to be recalibrated and all compliance and functionality issues readdressed. Interestingly, the manufacturers couldn’t perform the requisite tests, which eventually took over two years. SCE expected testing to take six months.

In fact, the trucks were never used – they were shipped to Texas. That left 29 vehicles – a somewhat puny fleet, in retrospect, considering this was supposed to be the largest V2G project in the world. Among the vehicles, quality and performance issues were troubling. Some vehicles that passed the certification test in October 2015 were no longer reliably operational just one year later.

One important project goal was to show that EVs could participate in CAISO’s wholesale market. (The California Independent System Operator is the entity that organizes and oversees generation and transmission within multiple utility service areas.) SCE calls this a success: “The Pilot was successful in providing frequency regulation to the CAISO market for a total of 243 MWh of Regulation Up and 102 MWh of Regulation Down from May 2016 to September 2017.” (Up/Down refers to receiving or sending power from or to the grid.)

However, market interaction had problems. The vehicle fleet could not provide accurate information to CAISO. This impacted day-ahead market awards, and it impacted vehicle performance because it’s related to battery issues. New tools are needed, SCE writes, to automate energy bidding but still track power. Consequently, the Air Force had to reduce the number of hours its vehicles were in the market, a move completely contrary to V2G’s potential benefits.

It’s important to note that a fleet presents different V2G characteristics than do individual EVs. The Air Force’s fleet needed to be ready on demand, which conflicts somewhat with the idea of using an EV as a grid resource. An individual EV owner would likely take advantage of a more predictable V2G schedule, staying connected at night, for example, or during the workday when the vehicle is parked.

There were other challenges. Communication software didn’t work, which meant the vehicles’ market performance wasn’t stabilized until early 2017. Problems compounded: CAISO had to decertify some of the EV resources from certain activities because of inaccurate and insufficient data. Again, a big hit when thinking of EVs as assets.

The project used two communications standards: Open Charge Point Protocol 1.5 (OCPP) and the SAE Smart Energy Profile 2.0 (SEP2). They didn’t work. It took months for engineers to make corrections and build new operating features. Some engineers questioned why two standards were used, when one was likely sufficient. OCPP was chosen very early in the project’s development by the DOE’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory; it was retained, even though engineers knew early on that its performance was questionable.

The re-tooled software got the job done. But again, to what end? SCE’s report does not say whether these fixes just kept this particular project going or whether they are the kind of advances that could lead to standardized applications. When asked about a metric for progress, an SCE spokesperson said (via email) that “the V2G pilot moved knowledge forward towards COTS (commercially available off the shelf) products. Additional insight would need to come from the customer, the Department of Defense.”

One reason that every electron needs to be accounted for within a V2G system is because money is involved – for the resource owner, the utility, ratepayers, taxpayers, grid operators and new entrepreneurs who want to provide services in “this direct participation space.”

Importantly, the Air Force did realize income from its energy trades, despite the extensive communication-software problems. Revenue per vehicle ranged from $25 to $72 per month, with an average of $41 per vehicle-month.

Aggregated gross revenue was $7,639. Unforeseen, however, were high monthly participation fees. SCE had to charge a manual billing fee of $118 and a meter data feed fee of $216. The biggest hit was a $1,000 monthly fee for a CAISO scheduling coordinator, a person certified to participate in trades. In total, the project lost about $17,000.

SCE’s report suggests that the fees could possibly be reduced by “utilizing a significantly larger resource,” i.e., more EVs linked together, lowering the cost per vehicle. How many vehicles would that be? SCE’s answer is a bit of a riddle: “By ‘larger resource’ we mean more vehicles included in an aggregation. The order of magnitude question depends on the desires of the EV owners.”

CAISO’s $1,000/month charge took project planners by surprise. When asked about the coordinator’s role, SCE explained that “Scheduling coordinators deal directly with the CAISO for bidding, self-scheduling and financially settling participatory resources. In short, it would be costly for each EV owner to be his or her own scheduling coordinator. Scheduling coordinator services can be purchased that would support aggregation of many EV owners’ vehicles into a resource through aggregation and thus share fees.” Obviously an issue needing further attention.

DOD’s V2G work will continue, including testing vehicle-to-building technologies. DOD will present its own final report in early 2018.

This article originally appeared in Charged Issue 35 – January/February 2018 

Electric Vehicles Drive to Back Up the Grid By Brittany Patterson and ClimateWire / Published July 14, 2015 0

 AF tests first all-electric vehicle fleet in California Published November 14, 2014
July 14, 2015 —

First of a three-part series.

Last November, the Air Force rolled out the federal government’s first fleet of plug-in and hybrid electric vehicles. Parked at Los Angeles Air Force Base (LA AFB) in El Segundo, Calif., about 20 miles south of downtown Los Angeles, the 42-vehicle fleet features 13 Nissan Leafs as well as Ford F-Series pickup trucks and a 12-passenger van among other electrified vehicles. For the Department of Defense, which manages more than 200,000 nontactical vehicles, switching to electric vehicles could provide serious fuel cost savings.  But this pilot project is about more than just—decarbonizing the transportation sector.

This fleet is not just sucking electricity out of the grid, the electric cars can provide power back into it through something called “vehicle to grid” technology, or V2G. When plugged in, the electric vehicles (EVs) at LA AFB produce more than 700 kilowatts of electricity, or enough to power about 140 American households during a hot summer day. At this scale, the LA AFB pilot is the largest demonstration of V2G in the world.

“It opens up that in the future the utility could dispatch these connected vehicles as a distributed energy source,” said Michael Liu, North America regional manager for energy storage with BYD America Corp.

Currently, in the United States, plug-in electric cars make up less than 1 percent of the roughly 250 million vehicles in the country, and even in California—which leads the nation in electric vehicle sales—about 5 out of every 1,000 registered vehicles are plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs), according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

As the technology evolves and battery prices fall, though, many believe the future looks bright for the electric vehicle industry, which could in turn provide a backup power source for the aging electric grid.

Virtually every major auto manufacturer in the world—Mercedes-Benz, BMW, Kia, Nissan, Toyota, Chevy and more—are developing or have developed a PEV. Then of course there is Tesla, which leads the all-electric vehicle pack with its Model S. The carmaker offers two choices of battery capacity—a 70 kilowatt-hour version, which gets an EPA estimated range of 240 miles, and an 85-kWh version for an EPA-rated range of 270 miles. The Model S is still expensive, with the 70-kWh-powered car starting at $75,000, however the Silicon Valley automaker plans to produce its more affordable Model 3 vehicle starting in 2017 (ClimateWire, Aug. 1, 2014).

Also spurring growth in the industry is a number of pro-electric vehicle policies and incentives that have been adopted in California, in part because the state is counting on electric vehicles to help it meet its ambitious climate change goals.

In 2012, through executive order, California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) set a target that by 2025 1.5 million zero-emission vehicles will be roaming the streets. Brown signed legislation last September calling for 1 million zero or near-zero emissions cars to be on the road by 2023.

Emissions from the transportation sector account for about 40 percent of all of the state’s greenhouse gas emissions, so boosting adoption of low-emissions or emissions-free vehicles is a crucial part of meeting the governor’s climate change targets, which include slashing transportation-sector emissions 80 percent by 2050, compared to 1990 levels.

With that level of scale-up projected in the near future, utilities and representatives from the EV industry are beginning to do the math and see potential for V2G.

Consider if California were to see a 2 percent electric vehicle penetration by 2020, or about 1 million EVs on the road, Liu said. If all of those cars have access to fast-charging technology, he calculates the grid would have access to about 10 GW of vehicle charging power.

“Some utilities see this is unpredictable power to the grid, I see this is a resource,” he said, speaking at the EVs and the Grid Summit held in Los Angeles last week. “At the most, we have a couple of years to recognize this distributed resource.”

Electric vehicles pose both challenges and opportunities for the grid, said Noel Crisostomo, a public utilities regulatory analyst for the California Public Utilities Commission. If, for example, one neighborhood has a high concentration of electric cars charging simultaneously, it could cause residential transformers to overload. As adoption increases, utilities will have to figure out the best way to have enough electricity on the grid to charge more and more cars without affecting rates and reliability for those with and without electric cars, he said.

But on the other hand, electric vehicles are basically just a dressed-up battery, which makes them a form of storage for utilities, a coveted resource. Proponents of V2G technology argue EVs can improve grid reliability as well as lower fuel and overall utility bill costs.

“It’s better to have demand to manage than no demand to manage at all,” said Crisostomo, speaking at the summit. “More than anything, the electric vehicle offers opportunities for renewables integration and grid reliability through vehicle grid integration.”

Changing drivers’ behavior
To leverage the potential load of electric vehicles on to the grid in an impactful way, a vast majority of the cars will need to be plugged-in simultaneously, which is to say the cars will need to be aggregated and operated as one.

This will require vehicle owners to be active participants in when, where and how they charge their cars, said J.R. DeShazo, director of the Luskin Center for Innovation at the University of California, Los Angeles.

“This is a supply-side problem,” DeShazo said during the summit. “Drivers are creatures of habitat. They don’t like to make complex decisions, and we need to make technologies and strategies that recognize that.”

Charging data collected from early electric vehicle adopters show most owners do not connect their PEVs during the day. As batteries evolve, ranges will increase, which will exacerbate the problem.

DeShazo suggested better incentives need to be offered in order to entice site owners and companies into installing public charging stations. In some cases, that could mean asking EV owners to pay for their charging or offering parking privileges in exchange for plugging in. Both strategies have been shown to increase the rate of daytime charging, which is what utilities want because that is when there is often less demand on the grid.

At night, the question becomes how do utilities incentivize drivers to keep their cars off the charger through peak hours and begin charging around midnight when demand is not as high.

With a Department of Energy grant awarded to General Motors, Bill Boyce, supervisor for electric transportation with the Sacramento Municipal Utility District, said his utility modeled a few electric vehicle pricing schemes and found they were able to manage the impact of charging on the grid by educating their customers on the best time to charge. Many car owners set their vehicles to automatically charge during off-peak hours.

“A rate is a very powerful tool,” Boyce said.

At Tesla, Cal Lankton, its director of global electric vehicle infrastructure, said they have also seen evidence that these “time of use” rates can be an effective way to influence car owner behavior to benefit the grid. The key, he added, is communicating the reasons behind the actions.

“There needs to be a clear benefit for them, both economically and altruistically to the grid,” he said at the summit.

Some glitches still to fix
There are some technological bugs that still need to be worked out in order for utilities and consumers to seriously consider V2G as an option, said Alexander Keros, manager for advanced vehicle infrastructure policy at General Motors.

“Turning on 1 million vehicles at once is very complicated,” he said, speaking at the summit.

For one, not all car manufactures are equipping their vehicles with inverters that can used for bi-directional electricity flow. The technology that communicates between a plugged-in car and the utility still suffers from reliability issues in some instances. The utility must also have the capacity to verify and accept electricity from the car.

There are also questions as to how cycling energy back to the grid affects the battery and if car manufactures consider this use to be in violation of the battery’s warranty.

In one of the first pilots of V2G technology, the University of Delaware and NRG brought 15 electric vehicles online in order to analyze if there would be battery degradation from this type of electricity cycling, as well as if they could reap the economic benefits of selling electricity to the grid (ClimateWire, July 22, 2009). They tested both V1G, when an electric vehicle is left plugged in and the utility is able to optimize the flow of energy into the vehicle to the benefit of the grid. They also tested V2G, or when power can be sent from electric vehicle batteries back onto the grid.

“The issue around V1G or smart charging was that it was too difficult to make any revenue—it was almost a joke,” said Scott Fisher, director of alternative energy services with NRG. “The amount of frequency regularly that we could offer to the market was significantly higher with V2G.”

Speaking at the summit, Fisher added at this point he doesn’t think the industry can yet answer the cost-benefit question.

For Willet Kempton, a professor in the University of Delaware’s School of Marine Science and Policy and director of the school’s Center for Carbon-free Power Integration, it’s not the technology that will be the greatest hindrance to greater adoption of V2G, but a lack of policy from both the regional transmission system operators and utilities.

“To make it economically attractive, most states need to add two words, ‘electric vehicles,’ to their net-metering laws,” said Kempton, who is credited with developing the idea for V2G in 1996.

Through the University of Delaware experiment, Kempton said, they have shown the technology can be installed for a few hundred dollars and bring drivers extra income and grid operators flexibility. As more automakers add the needed V2G technology into the vehicles, he suspects V2G will have the potential to take off.

“What we’re talking about are cars sitting in driveways not being used for 23 hours a day,” he said. “In the future, we’re talking about a tremendous amount of storage.”

Still, many in the industry said more research needs to be done—including large-scale pilot projects such as the Los Angeles Air Force Base program—in order to understand if and how V2G could be used.

“V2G is the pinnacle,” added Lankton from Tesla. “Determining where the opportunities are, developing standards, moving past the pilot phase, although more are needed, that’s where we need to go. Eventually, we’d want to get to a plug and play as a consumer and they can opt in or out.”

Tomorrow: How to spread EV adoption beyond California.

Reprinted from Climatewire with permission from Environment & Energy Publishing, LLC., 202-628-6500