AUTOBLOG: Obama: 1 million plug-in hybrid vehicles by 2015.
UPDATE: Dave Ivers is unimpressed:
Great. Just great. Where the heck is he going to get all the electricity from? No new nukes. No new coal-fired plants. Certainly no new oil-fired plants. I'm pretty sure we're not all going to drive to West Texas each night and plug into Boone Pickens' windmills. I'm near Detroit. Maybe a 1500 mile-long cord from my place to West Texas?
Seriously. Is anybody paying attention to a guy who is beginning to look pretty obviously dumber than the MSM ever claimed Dan Quayle was? What the hell has happened to his 'handlers' and 'policy people'? Can anyone on that campaign staff do elementary math?
Actually, I think the grid could easily absorb a million plugin hybrids, since they'd mostly be charging at night when consumption is way off-peak. But ultimately you've got to have lots more nuclear power if you want to switch to even mostly-electric cars and you don't want to pollute the air, so it's fair to raise that point.
ANOTHER UPDATE: Reader Gene Smith writes:
As a Californian who pays attention, I can point out 2 more limits on charging cars which do apply at night...
Much of our peak power comes from natural gas which has had price shocks of its own in the last decade. And that gas comes in by pipelines which run near capacity. The local storage rises during the night, and falls during the day. And the inability to keep up with supply needs over a multi day period was on factor in the blackouts/price spikes.
I don't know to what extent the problem has fixed itself, although I do know there was nimby opposition to new capacity, but a search of:
california natural gas pipeline overnight capacity
on google gets 368,000 hits. And that does not seem to me likely to be spam sites grabbing traffic:)
Reader Chad Irby also thinks I'm too optimistic about the overnight charging:
What will really happen is that people will drive to and from work, then plug their cars in the second they get back to their homes, putting a massive load on the grid between 5 PM and 7 PM. Good night, California.
Unless, of course, someone makes it illegal to do so, which screws people who HAVE to plug in at that time due to shift work, or who need another fifteen miles of charge for errands after work.
It also makes it less possible for the electric companies to take plants offline at night for maintenance, so we get even MORE failures in the system.
This is an argument for more intelligent power-management, something Lynne Kiesling has written about before. Plus, in a pinch, plug-in hybrids, unlike pure electrics, can always charge themselves. And reader David Stine emails:
Professor,
I'm a retired EE.
Long story short: In *some* areas of the US (maybe, oh, Texas and the midwest) the US grid might absorb a million hybrids.
In California or the northeast? No way. Not even at night. There's serious lack of transmission capacity in the summer months in both regions.
California, especially, has been short of transmission capacity for years.
BTW -- plug-in hybrids assume that you have a household power service of 200 amps and that most of that capacity is available (ie, you're not using it for heating, hot water, cooking, etc). If you're an apartment dweller, or live in an older home that doesn't have 200 amp service, you're basically SOL as far as charging a hybrid or electric car in an overnight scenario and having it fully recharged the next morning.
Many electric car advocates have ignored the transmission infrastructure issues that need to be addressed for widespread deployment of rechargeable cars. Everyone who isn't an EE keeps flapping their yaps about generation capacity. Generation is simple. Transmission and scheduling of loads is far more challenging than mere generation of power. EE's are working on ideas for a "smart grid" to allow consumers to match their demands for power with available generation and transmission capacity, but those upgrades would cos t10's of billions of dollars. Are consumers going to fork up that much extra on their power bills?
If we're going to shift the amount of power consumption we're talking about for personal transportation from gasoline/diesel to electrical power, then we have to invest in not only power plants, but power transmission - down to the household level.
Like I said . . . . On the other hand, reader John Beckwith thinks Obama is a piker:
1MM pluggable hybrids is nothing. It is less than 10% of cars sold per year. It should happen in a few years naturally without government intervention. As you note, the grid can easily absorb it. In fact, plugging hybrids (and their large batteries) into the grid might actually help stablize our creaky old grid if the charging is managed by the utility. It is likely that pluggables will largely replace 'spinning reserves' in that they can put power back when needed. I know of at least one startup that is marketing this capability. Network enabled energy storage elements will make the grid way better than it is now.
Obama's energy plan is lame for other reasons. At best, it mandates and subsidized things the market is already doing on its own. At worst, it will become yet another pork vehicle that crowds out true innovation. The best thing the government can do is remove barriers to permitting nukes (and maybe also to selling retrofit kits for older vehicles so they can become PHEVs) and otherwise get out of the way. Clever, greedy people will take care of the rest. Obama can then villify and tax them.
As I said, intelligent power management is key. And as for vilifying and taxing success -- that's what government is for. Otherwise the rest of the citizenry might develop self esteem problems. This was all addressed by Robert Heinlein, natch:
Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.
This is known as "bad luck."
Yeah, I've quoted this before, but it's evergreen.
MORE: Steve Schubart writes: "You have some really smart readers." Yes, I do.
STILL MORE: Reader Christopher Villarreal emails:
Since I work at the California PUC, the issue of when to charge a PHEV is something we are very interested in and working to facilitate. One of the benefits that we are hoping for with PHEV's is to take advantage of our wind sources. Specifically, California's wind peaks at night- in other words, we can't use wind when it's hot since it's hot because there's no wind. The California ISO has a graph that I could probably find for you tomorrow, if you're interested, that shows wind and peak are inverse to each other- peak times (3-6 PM) is when wind is at its lowest, and wind is at its highest when demand is at its lowest (night time).
So, what does all that mean- having PHEV's charge at night would allow wind powered generation to actually meet some amount of demand. PHEV is being viewed as a sort of distributed generation during the day and afternoon to help meet some demand, then charge up at night and be used to help integrate wind.
Additionally, there is work already going on to deal with the timing issue, such as having timers on the PHEV's outlet at home so that you can set when the car will be charging. Coupled with a expectation of having more dynamic prices for residential (one day) that represents local prices (LMPs), there should be some price signal sent to the customer showing when one can charge relatively cheaply (although I imagine that initially there will be an extra (higher) rate for a PHEV owner who charges at home- I have a friend trying to convince his work to pay for the charging facilities and make use of their on-site generation).
That doesn't even go into all the ways businesses are looking at matching solar installations with plug in facilities, such as parking lots that install solar arrays over the parking lots and allow customers to charge whilst shopping.
However, I do think that the transmission and distribution system will be stressed to integrate the power needs of a lot of PHEV's coming on to the grid. Without a major upgrade of the nation's distribution system, the additional power that will be coming or going out of houses and apartment complexes will be very challenging for utilities. Which is also why California is beginning to do some serious work on defining standards for a Smart Grid so that all of these new toys can integrate smoothly. I think your reader David Stine is essentially correct, although I think there's enough night time capacity for PHEVs.
Very interesting, and worthy of more investigation.
By Michelle Malkin • August 6, 2008 12:02 AM
My syndicated column today compares Nancy Pelosi’s sanctimonious self-help advice for America’s daughters to her obstinate inaction on energy policy and feckless refusal to allow up-or-down votes on GOP drilling proposals.
Thanks to everyone who sent their fish-in-a-barrel, five-minute photoshops of “Know Your Power.” I’m including some of the best below with the column.
***
Photoshop credit: Leo Alberti
What America’s daughters need to know about Nancy Pelosi
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2008
The Democrat Speaker of the House–and a co-author hired to try and add flavor to bland Beltway establishment oatmeal–have penned a self-help book for “America’s daughters” to help them “Know Your Power.” It’s a dreadfully pedestrian text (”As long as we recognize the power within us, we will continue to have choices, and we will continue to lead”), surpassed only in its dreadfulness by the rather unfortunate timing of its publication.
With congressional approval ratings at an all-time low and the Democrat Congress under fire for taking a five-week vacation instead of working on energy policy, perhaps this wasn’t the best time to send Nancy Pelosi jetting from coast-to-coast to tell our daughters how to save the planet, manage our households, and run our government.
Sorry, Nan. There aren’t enough carbon offsets to compensate for this tree-wasting dud and its accompanying gas-guzzling, hot air-emitting publicity tour.
Intended to inspire young women to public service, Pelosi’s preachy tome (”Courage springs from the heart”) stands in stark contrast to her refusal to stay and work this summer in Washington on a host of energy bills and drilling proposals. “Know Your Power” merely underscores the true message of Pelosi’s actions (or rather, inaction): “Do as I say, not as I do.”
Photoshop credit: David Johnson
While Madame Speaker advises America’s daughters to “never draw a line in the sand,” she refuses to return to Washington and allow up-or-down votes on Republican energy proposals.
While Madame Speaker advises America’s daughters “to defend your position with facts,” she has demonstrated blinking ignorance about the price of gas in her own district and the laws of supply and demand.
While Madame Speaker advises America’s daughters to “treat one another in a civil way,” she has resorted to business-as-usual demagoguery against her ideological opponents. Over the weekend, Pelosi jeered at the conservative revolt on the House floor last week to object to the Democrats’ five-week recess as “a war dance of the handmaidens of the oil companies.”
While Madame Speaker advises America’s daughters that “you have to know what you’re talking about, you can’t grandstand,” she gave a pitiful performance on ABC’s “This Week with George Stephanopoulos” when pressed repeatedly to explain her stubborn stonewalling of up-or-down votes on energy bills.
Photoshop credit: PBlakeney
In classic grandstanding style, Pelosi mischaracterized GOP proposals as drilling-only, blustered about drilling not having an immediate effect on lowering gas prices, criticized Republicans for not divining the right parliamentary moves to get their legislative plans through, and then sniffed imperiously that “they’ll have to use their imagination as to how they can get a vote.”
Spoken like a true leader filled with “courage,” fueled by “passion” for public service, and driven by her caring for struggling families feeling the impact of high energy costs and limited access to American oil.
Assailing Republican bills as “diversionary,” Pelosi spent 10 painful minutes attempting to divert a simple question:
PELOSI: “…This is a diversionary tactic from failed energy policies.”
STEPHANOPOULOS: But if you feel you have the better arguments, why not give a straight up or down vote for drilling?
PELOSI: Because the misrepresentation is being made that this is going to reduce the price at the pump. This is again a decoy, it’s not a solution.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, if you’re right, why not let it be debated out and have the vote?
PELOSI: We have a debate every single day on this subject.
Except on the House floor, where Pelosi forebade debate on GOP amendments and where the lights and cameras have been darkened to prevent debate.
Rather than exercise her power responsibly by calling lawmakers back to the Capitol to address Americans’ concerns about gas prices and energy independence, Pelosi has dismissed oil and gas drilling as a “hoax”—even as she reportedly encourages vulnerable Democrats to embrace drilling to bolster their electoral prospects. In 2006, she blamed a Republican congress for high gas prices. In power for 19 months, Madame Speaker now blames the Republican minority for gas prices that have nearly doubled.
Nancy Pelosi’s real lesson for America’s daughters: Women in power are just as capable of mastering Washington double talk, blame avoidance, and partisan hackery as men.
Imagine that.
Repeal Jimmy Carter's idiotic EO banning the recycling of nuclear fuel, and get rid of this Red Herring & Talking Point:
of that long conflict). John Noonan is 
Somebody, please tell me that that ghastly doggerel was a lame attempt at satire...Posted by: backhoe at August 9, 2008 3:50 AM