Yes indeed, what I had in mind was a much higher price than the base price on the highway for non-sharers. As you noted it should remain lower than that of gas, but this leaves plenty of room for modulation doesn't it?
Michel 2009/8/25, Stephen A. Lawrence <[email protected]>: > > Michel Jullian wrote: >> Just thought of a possible way to make V2G viable, for the sake of the >> ubiquitous availability of fast charging it would allow without need >> for dedicated stations: the utility could make away-from-home fast >> charging (e.g. along highways) available at a much cheaper price to >> past sellers, modulating the price according to how much energy they >> have sent back to the grid. > > Given the low "natural" cost of a charge, to make this an interesting > incentive you'd need to assume the utilities were charging a rather huge > premium for access to the fast-charge facilities on the highway for all > but their "charge-sharing club" members; see next paragraph. > > For a discount to be interesting the base price must be sufficiently > high, and at 25 cents/KWh I don't think it would be even close. 50 KWh, > which would cost maybe $12.50, is enough to cruise for a couple hours > with a moderately efficient car on the highway, and that's a reasonable > time to go between "fill-ups". To make this work, you need a *big* > incentive, and discounting from that $12.50 "natural" fast-fill price > isn't going to do it for most drivers, certainly not for enough drivers > to make the plan fly. > > What's more, the future contains serial hybrid cars, and unless highway > fast-charge stations are common and *cheap* there simply won't be a lot > of pure-electrics traveling long distances. > > >> >> Michel >> > >
