This is the third in a six part series.
Here are links to Part 1 and Part 2~ctm
Guest post by Rud Istvan,
The second SoCalEd component to its roadmap to decarbonization by 2045 is 75% vehicle electrification.

Thanks to the California DMV annual registration database, we can learn what that implies. There were in 2018 about 25.6 million registered automobiles, 5.3 million non-CVRA trucks (pickups, delivery vans), 0.5 million CVRA trucks (Class 7-8 diesels), and 1.8 million ‘Foreign IRP’ trucks (CVRA licensed in another state but also registered to operate in California). The total is about 33.2 million vehicles excluding trailers and motorcycles. Since it is impossible (despite Elon Musk’s TESLA fantasies) for working pickups and big trucks to be meaningfully electrified with foreseeable battery technology, the SoCalEd roadmap implicitly means virtually all automobiles (25.6/33.2=>77%) will be full electric in 2045.
That virtue signaling ‘vision’ has three highly improbable implications. First and foremost is the vehicle cost to California consumers. Second is the impact on the California grid. Third is the impact on lithium ion battery materials.
Vehicle Cost
Edmunds has the actual average 2019 US car price at about $37,000. That probably is also about correct for California. Lets compare California’s famous new common man’s electric vehicle, the TESLA Model 3. The current starting list price for the basic Model 3 is ‘only’ $39,900 (although Tesla is presently not filling any of those orders). Edmunds also notes this is lower than all other comparable electric vehicles today—even though you cannot buy one today.
But only IF the color you want is black, like Henry Ford’s Model T. IF you want a color other than black, the upcharge is $1500-$2500 depending on the color.
Now if you want a Model 3 with reasonable amenities (‘midrange’ per Edmunds) the price is about $44,000. And if you want the Edmunds recommended ‘loaded’ Model 3 (meaning with an extended range battery giving 50 more miles per charge) the price is about $57,000. Kelley Blue Book reports the present actual Model 3 price is about $50,000, so about half midrange and half loaded.
That means that SoCalEd plans ALL California car buyers to be willing and able to shell out about (50-37) $13,000 more per car. Probably not going to happen unless California makes it illegal to operate non-electrified vehicles. They may be crazy enough to try it.
Grid Impact
California’s duck curve illustrates the intractable grid problem.

The duck curve is simply the comparison between generation and demand. Renewable generation peaks mid-day thanks to California solar, while demand peaks in the early evening as people return home, crank up the AC, and cook dinner. It is called a duck curve because it always was and always will be shaped like a duck waddling to the right as the day progresses.
That is an electrified vehicle problem that SoCalEd cannot solve by decarbonizing electricity (post two in the series). Cars take people to work and shopping during the day. Electrified vehicles will mostly be recharged at night while their owners sleep, during ‘duckbill’ and ducktail’ time. All the expensive SoCalEd desert Ivanpah and equivalent solar capacity is useless for vehicle electrification.
And California nixed the Eagle Crest pumped storage project, the only realistic way to time shift its solar generation. (See essay California Dreaming at Climate Etc or in ebook Blowing Smoke for details.)
There is another big grid issue worth pointing out. There are large required upgrades to grid infrastructure to support the additional electrical loads of ~25 million electric cars. It is possible to range the magnitude of this problem. The average California household presently consumes about 6500 KWh per year, or about 18 KWh/day. The current Tesla Model 3 ‘fast charger’ (240V) uses about 17.2KWh per 50 miles of charge. So IF Californians only drove 50 miles per day (they don’t, it is more) then the grid infrastructure ONLY has to double by 2045. That is VERY unlikely.
Minerals Impact
More than 25 million electrified California vehicles mean one heck of a lot of lithium ion batteries. These require lithium. The automotive ones like Tesla also require cobalt for the cathodes. There just isn’t that much lithium and cobalt available, at least not without drastic price increases to utilize lower grade ores and brines. This is a subject much debated elsewhere. Since not an expert on minerals and mining, perhaps other WUWT folks can contribute more information on this last point.
2 points: battery storage, especially grid scale, hits directly at the neck of that duck
secondly: why can’t you recharge at work, during the middle of the day? your car is just sitting there for 8 hours…
and if you are like some people I know you aren’t getting out of the shopping mall in under 2 hours… or longer
You are way out of your league here. Who is going to put the charging stations at each parking space? Who is going to pay for the electricity that they use? Who is going to pay to put in the wiring, load boxes, etc. to supply them? How are the parking lots going to expand to allow all these charging stations to be installed? They do take up space that will end up kicking some current parking out of the parking lot!
It’s really easy to sit in you chair and dream up ideas but tremendously harder to fill in the nitty gritty details that go along with them.
Who says every parking space?
Can the electricity for charging and the charging units themselves not be supplied by a 3rd party?
I see an opportunity to become an EV energy supplier, rather than a huge capital increase for employers and business owners. Vehicle owners sign up with an electric supply service. They park in charger-equipped spots, swipe / login, go about their business, pay for the kWh (or time) that they use (note that this is governed by state law, not business). The supplier pays to / shares capital cost with parking lot owners (which where I live are often not the employer or business anyway), then they work out a deal for sharing the supply profit, if at all. The employer / business owner, in the end, experiences little effect from the parking upgrade, though they’ll probably tell potential employees & customers that the lot is EV-charging-equipped.
The chargers themselves are no larger than a parking meter above ground and therefore require no additional space, as you asked. [Go look at hotels that have EV parking spots.]
Griff may be a dreamer, but closed-minded ranting is just as bad. Engineering can solve a lot of the gap between Griff and the bulk of the WUWT crowd.
The socialist agenda being advanced in California, all be it under a Green canopy of necessity has been tried before in the USA. It was explored in Detroit, once the second most prosperous city in the Union. The socialists found the perfect way of converting that amassed city wealth into rubble of zero value. They simply kept spending money on systems that had no financial benefit.
Most people with wealth fled. The result is a city with less than half its population, bankrupt and an active policy of turning real estate into native scrub land.
That is what will happen in California, unless someone steps up and calls a halt to the lunacy being pushed ever more urgently into the lives of normal people.
The people will leave, the wealth will leave, it is happening it will continue and it will accelerate. The ones left behind will be the ones without economic capacity to make good the damage.
Welcome to the socialist Detroit syndrome, State wide.
Electric trucks lack the range of modern diesel tractor trailers which typically can go 500 miles with one tank and 1,000 miles for a long haul truck with two tanks though drivers will stop and refuel before the get low. Commercial buses are the same. Daimler and Tesla EV truck prototypes have demonstrated a 250-300 mile range but have just begun real-world testing. They, like electric buses may work for inner city local delivery and some regional applications.
https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1124546_daimler-builds-first-electric-heavy-duty-semis-for-fleet-test
The current grid’s vulnerability to cyber attack is real and a Smart Grid offers more pathways for grid-level attacks. Besides, Russia, China, North Korea and Iran there are non-state hackers that would likem to turn the lights out.
https://www.eenews.net/stories/1061111289
Imagine the loss of value on all the ice cars, from classics to modern day 1 million dollar Lamborghini or mclarens… People will have billions of dollars of cars and spare parts doing nothing… Those who have loans on the cars will be left broke, spare part stores, manufacturing, all will close… But as warren says “they will have to transition to other jobs, unlike me, as I am a millionaire already”…. 😐. These “greens” have taken things to far, london mayor is trying to put in place a ultra low emissions zone across all of london, the small zone in the inner city is constant busy, but its the common man/woman who will suffer.
Sean: “Turn the whole thing backwards. Charge cars during the day while working then drive home and plug into the grid to provide utility backup power while sleeping. Hopefully there’s enough reserve to get back to work the next day. Give everyone a day off when it rains or is cloudy.”
Erik Magnuson: “Almost there, use the cars to feed the grid from 4PM to 9PM and start charging again sometime after 11PM. Cars will have to be set up for fast charge as the solar surplus is 9AM to 4PM.”
Suppose EVs and their onboard batteries became a major source of power storage capacity for use in balancing the duck curve or in stabilizing the grid. What kinds of impacts on the life of an EV battery pack would that kind of use have?
Assuming that some portion of an EV’s battery’s predicted service life is being consumed by its use in balancing the duck curve or in stabilizing the grid, is the vehicle’s owner expected to bear the additional costs of replacing the battery pack earlier than it might otherwise have to be replaced?
That’s a legitimate concern, though the amount of power needed from each EV in this scenario is inversely proportional to the number of EV’s connected to the grid. Assuming all of the “25 million” EV’s projected for Calif in 2045 are connected to the grid, I’d figure each would be supplying about 1kW during the 4 to 9PM peak demand time. This would be roughly equivalent to driving 20 miles at 4MPH, so would be a relatively mild load on the battery. (Note that this neglecting what happens during commute time). Big killer for Li-ion batteries is high temperatures at >80% charge and high charge/discharge rates.
Alexander Brook wrote a short paper on using EV’s to stabilize the grid circa 1999.
I strongly agree with Sean and a couple of other posters in that charging EV’s at work is desperately needed to keep solar generation from destabilizing the grid (pointing fingers at the Cal State government).
Rud
Nice posts as usual, thanks
Two points
1- One of the key issues for distribution utilities in California currently is cleaning up, stabilizing and integrating, monitoring the alternative sources of minor “generation” from domestic etc solar and other into the network.
2 – I look forward to your estimation of increased stable generation, transmission and distribution capacity to meet the 75% threshold stated above in main post. A simple calculation would be to take 75% of all diesel, petrol and gas used for transportation. Turn that into kw of energy (average), and then you have a basic number.
Sure we have some over nite capacity now, but can the network support that, and other comments above confirm that some customers don’t have access to power point load capacity. This is when the 110/120 volt system stats to show weakness. It just was not designed for large distribution demand for the vast percentage of customers.
Regards, hope all is well with you and yours.
Martin
Yesterday the BBC had a report that a trial had started in Spanish waters to ascertain what possible damage could ensue when deep sea mining commenced. Deep sea mining being the only possible source of the extra cobalt that will be required for all the new batteries that will be needed for electric vehicles that we have been promised.
I apologise if I have slightly misquoted but I was not paying much attention to he Boris Bashing Corporation news.
The eco friendly solution for latitudes up to 30:
https://www.google.com/search?q=electric+scooter&oq=electr&aqs=chrome.
– latitudes over 30 get https://www.google.com/search?q=frozen+barren+land&oq=frozen+barren+l&aqs=chrome.