Cleaner to Charge at Night? This Article Surprised Me

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Like most generalizations about the fuel sources for electricity, this needs a skeptical view. Fuel sources for the base load at off peak times vary widely by region. Coal is not the universal base load fuel. Where available, Nuclear and Hydro are also base load sources. A quick Google produced studies that showed coal as a base load fuel ranging from 0% to 70%, depending on the region. Plus the utilities decision making on what resource to bring online for marginal power is way more complex than what is the cheapest fuel.

IMHO, too much over-thinking. Plug in when you want to.
 
Even where that's true, some of that base capacity is going to go to waste anyway, we might as well charge our cars with it...and if the number of cars charging at night causes usage to rise, they won't necessarily fill the gap with more coal.

The way I see it, it just shows the importance of continuing to promote a cleaner grid while we bring EVs to the world. I never thought buying an EV was the total solution.
 
The author got close to, but didn't touch on the fact that "base load" plants don't run according to demand. They crank out pretty much the same amount of energy and produce the same amount of CO2 regardless of the time-of-day. It's peak load or load balancing plants that come online according to demand and can more easily adjust their consumption of fuel to fit that demand.

In other words: Yes, it takes coal power plants to power a LEAF. Yes, the LEAF has a carbon footprint. But the LEAF's footprint is being left in a much bigger footprint that is the wasted excess power generated from these base load plants at off-peak hours (at night, precisely the time most people charge at home). Until there are plenty more electric cars on the streets, I highly doubt that plugging in at night is causing any more coal to be burned than if you were to be unplugged.

Electric cars balance the demand, make use of wasted base load off peak power, and still can get us places at a fraction of the cost of gas. So I don't buy the "EVs are dirtier than gas cars" thing. And I'm not even remotely as environmentally concerned as most of you here are, so I have no bias to support EVs from an environmental viewpoint. My current gas car is a 17MPG V8 sedan. Gulp gulp gulp. I just like EVs because they are cool. :p
 
I think I understand where you're coming from, but in the utility we don't refer to generation as being "wasted". Power is exactly generated to match the demand for a 60Hz grid. There certainly may be excess capacity to take advantage of with respect to generation (and we do that by charging at off-peak times), but power is not generated in excess late at night that is actually wasted if car charging or other load doesn't use it...
 
I'd really like to know where the truth is with this one. Some people cite that nuclear power plants have excess energy at night because they vent steam instead of running it thru generators at off peak hours (
http://www.torquenews.com/397/senator-alexander-unused-electricity-our-greatest-national-resource), others talk about wind farms getting shut down at night because their is already too much electricity in the grid (combined hydroelectric dams can't spill b.c. of contrived salmon issues). Then there this counter intuitive statement saying that the base load plants are mostly coal, even though coal makes up less than 46% of the electricity in the US and natural gas is the cheaper fuel these days. If true it basically says that the US pollutes more during off peak than it does during peak generation hours which I find difficult to believe. The last paragraph in the article did however conject what was discussed in the "depends where you charge thread" (http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=8548)

Personally I'm thinking this study is not accurate for many regions, verging on FUD. There is also another very important reason to charge at night: it should not increase the max load on areas served by transformers. At a neighborhood level there are transformers which are placed to serve the calculated peak load for a localized area. If one charges at night, for most households the demand should still be less than the peak level (AC, ovens, etc) so the transformers will not need to be replaced with new units for higher peak loads. If everybody charged during the day, then that new load increases the peak load and new transformers would need to be installed.

So charge at night, it's better for the grid in many different ways and I'm pretty sure it is better for the environment in most areas.
 
If you are in the California Independent Operator System area then this will tell you the composition of your electricity by the hour with data that goes back a couple of years.

http://www.caiso.com/green/renewableswatch.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 
Nekota said:
If you are in the California Independent Operator System area then this will tell you the composition of your electricity by the hour with data that goes back a couple of years.

http://www.caiso.com/green/renewableswatch.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Would be interesting to get all that data and run some averages, but my gut tells me that the "super off peak" hours of midnight to 7am tend to be the cleanest for the following reasons:

1. We has a good amount of nuclear which runs at peak power regardless of the time of day.
2. The wind tends to blow hardest at night and tend to fall off at 7am and then ramp back up by 7pm.

For example, if we look at the data for 4/19/2012 we see that minimum load was around 4am and we had this much power from these sources:

3957 MW 20% Renewables
2262 MW 11% Nuclear (we are currently down about 2GW thanks to San Onofre being offline)
1387 MW 6% Hydro
6966 MW 35% Thermal
5457 MW 27% Imports
20029 MW Total

That's 37% carbon free electricity at least - too bad we don't know what constitutes "Imports".
 
The big picture from those graphs is that most of the peaking in CA is done using "thermal", which I believe is essentially all natural gas. There is some peaking assist from imports and large hydro, but don't be confused - large hydro is ramped up and down dramatically, like 2:1, for peaking, but it is a small enough constituent of the whole that the numeric difference in generation doesn't come close to the difference in natural gas generation. If I remember correctly, CA is about 6% coal overall, and I expect that is virtually all buried in "imports".

So the bottom line in CA is that late night charging is lowest in natural gas, coal, and large hydro, with large hydro being a fraction of natural gas. It can't help but be cleaner.

Ray
 
I think the issue here is something called Dispatch Order. Power plants, in general, are dispatched according to economics, specifically marginal cost. Nuclear has an enormous proportion of fixed costs, and are hardly ever ramped down. Coal is the next-cheapest fuel, while natural gas is the most expensive conventional fuel.
In California, where the OP lives, some utilities own shares of out-of-state coal plants (including LADWP), but the predominant fuel at the margin is gas. Within gas plants, they are dispatched by least-cost, measured mainly by their Heat Rate (Btu's per Megawatt-hour). Less fuel burned means fewer emissions. Since California is a summer-day peaking region, the cleanest gas plants run day/night, while the dirtiest are only called on for summer/daytime use. There are numerous other constraints, many noted in earlier posts, such as ramp-rates (how fast a plant can get to full power) and low-output efficiency, but in general, in California, the cleaner plants run at night, so charging off-peak will minimize emissions to charge your car (or run your dishwasher, etc.).
 
EricH said:
I think the issue here is something called Dispatch Order. Power plants, in general, are dispatched according to economics, specifically marginal cost. Nuclear has an enormous proportion of fixed costs, and are hardly ever ramped down. Coal is the next-cheapest fuel, while natural gas is the most expensive conventional fuel.
In California, where the OP lives, some utilities own shares of out-of-state coal plants (including LADWP), but the predominant fuel at the margin is gas. Within gas plants, they are dispatched by least-cost, measured mainly by their Heat Rate (Btu's per Megawatt-hour). Less fuel burned means fewer emissions. Since California is a summer-day peaking region, the cleanest gas plants run day/night, while the dirtiest are only called on for summer/daytime use. There are numerous other constraints, many noted in earlier posts, such as ramp-rates (how fast a plant can get to full power) and low-output efficiency, but in general, in California, the cleaner plants run at night, so charging off-peak will minimize emissions to charge your car (or run your dishwasher, etc.).
Anyone know the ramp rate of a gas turbine? I've seen statements that hydro can go from 0-100% in two minutes or less, making it very easy to adjust the supply. Steam plants (nuke/coal/some gas), OTOH, have very slow ramp rates, so they operate as baseload. As I understand it gas turbines are primarily peaking plants, operating at a much lower capacity factor (and thus a higher cost/kWh).
 
GRA said:
Anyone know the ramp rate of a gas turbine? I've seen statements that hydro can go from 0-100% in two minutes or less, making it very easy to adjust the supply. Steam plants (nuke/coal/some gas), OTOH, have very slow ramp rates, so they operate as baseload. As I understand it gas turbines are primarily peaking plants, operating at a much lower capacity factor (and thus a higher cost/kWh).

Some information for you to consider - 500 MW Combined cycle NG plant has a 10% ramp rate (50MW/Min) and a 60% thermal efficiency with a push button 30 minute startup.

http://www.ge-energy.com/products_and_services/products/gas_turbines_heavy_duty/flexefficiency_50_combined_cycle_power_plant.jsp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


An overview of energy and engines max ramp rates (note GT = GasTurbine, Combined cycle is GT + Steam) :

Diesel engines 40 %/min
Gas engines 20 %/min
Aeroderivative GT 20 %/min
Industrial GT 20 %/min
GT Combined Cycle 5 -10 %/min
Steam turbine plants 1- 5 %/min
Nuclear plants 1- 5 %/min

From : http://www.optimalpowersystems.com/stuff/fundamentals_of_power_plants.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 
Nekota said:
GRA said:
Anyone know the ramp rate of a gas turbine? I've seen statements that hydro can go from 0-100% in two minutes or less, making it very easy to adjust the supply. Steam plants (nuke/coal/some gas), OTOH, have very slow ramp rates, so they operate as baseload. As I understand it gas turbines are primarily peaking plants, operating at a much lower capacity factor (and thus a higher cost/kWh).

Some information for you to consider - 500 MW Combined cycle NG plant has a 10% ramp rate (50MW/Min) and a 60% thermal efficiency with a push button 30 minute startup.

http://www.ge-energy.com/products_and_services/products/gas_turbines_heavy_duty/flexefficiency_50_combined_cycle_power_plant.jsp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


An overview of energy and engines max ramp rates (note GT = GasTurbine, Combined cycle is GT + Steam) :

Diesel engines 40 %/min
Gas engines 20 %/min
Aeroderivative GT 20 %/min
Industrial GT 20 %/min
GT Combined Cycle 5 -10 %/min
Steam turbine plants 1- 5 %/min
Nuclear plants 1- 5 %/min

From : http://www.optimalpowersystems.com/stuff/fundamentals_of_power_plants.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Thanks, exactly what I wanted. I was aware that CCGT was the most thermally efficient (I've seen 60-65% quoted as above), versus something like 40%? for coal and 33%? for nukes, but had never seen ramp rate listed for them.
 
dlich18 said:
Interesting article about whether it is more environmentally friendly to charge during high usage or low usage periods. According to this study, energy produced during low usage periods is dirtier (coal) energy.

http://energyathaas.wordpress.com/2...rage-generation-the-case-of-the-electric-car/

Who is this author? As soon as the very comprehensive and excellent report from the Union of Concerned Scientist comes out this fellow "auffhammer" immediately produces this article casting disparaging thoughts about electric cars and plugging them in. He starts by saying, "I have a Fantasy......"

I don't think he has a Fantasy, I think he has a Job and some organization is paying him to write this stuff.

My Fantasy or Dare to Mr Auffhammer is for him to discuss/write about his "concerns" for every gallon of gasoline that he pumps into his ICE -

I agree with some of the thoughts expressed above that we need to keep moving toward cleaner grids. Thanks for the links on tracking use of alternative forms of electricity in California - interesting and easy to understand graphs.

I mainly charge at night and will continue to do so!!

And no matter how the electricity is produced, I will know that I am also not send 50% of my dollars overseas as I would be if buying gasoline.
 
GRA said:
Anyone know the ramp rate of a gas turbine? I've seen statements that hydro can go from 0-100% in two minutes or less, making it very easy to adjust the supply. Steam plants (nuke/coal/some gas), OTOH, have very slow ramp rates, so they operate as baseload. As I understand it gas turbines are primarily peaking plants, operating at a much lower capacity factor (and thus a higher cost/kWh).
Gas turbines are basically jet engines bolted to a concrete pad, spinning a generator. They can ramp very quickly (as you may have noticed, if you've flown in a commercial jet) - think 0-100% in under 10 minutes. They are cheap to buy ($/MW) but costly to run (fuel cost/kWh), so are used mainly for peak load. Combined-cycle gas plants (blow jet exhaust across radiator, boil water, blow steam across turbine blades to power 2nd generator with 'waste' heat) are more costly, but far more efficient. The steam cycle typically takes much longer to ramp than the gas turbines.
 
Back
Top