EV batteries alone could satisfy short-term grid storage demand as early as 2030

If you keep the charge between 20 - 80%, your battery will last for far more cycles than when charging 0 - 100%. So you'll only get 60% of the kWh per cycle, but the battery will do 3-6 times as many cycles.

In fact, the battery management system won't even let you fully charge or discharge the battery for exactly this reason. When it shows 100%, there will still be 1-2 kWh empty and the same for a zero percent charge.

For example, a Toyota Yaris use a tiny (0.7 kWh) lithium ion battery and it gets charged/discharged constantly while breaking/accelerating, but it still last a long time because the charge is kept at about 50%.

There is thermal management and then there is thermal management.

Nissan leaf had cell level voltage and temperature monitoring, it also had a rudimentary heating element that would not let the battery freeze solid.

Its battery also was poorly designed so some of the cells had worse conditions than others and the batteries "died" because a few cells went out of limits and the BMS would limit the performance/range of the car. The rest of the cells could go much further. Also you should never charge lithium batteries (other than LTO) below freezing as it forms crystals that are lost to the capacity. Leaf did not to my knowledge compensate for this.

Moreover 24kWh battery doing 1000 cycles is about 100 000 km of driving.

Then there is Tesla batteries that have liquid cooling and heating of the whole pack. Battery is never charged below freezing, also above freezing the charging is adapted to the cell temperatures and for fast charging the battery temp is raised up to 60C, above 65C the cooling kicks in.

The batteries are much larger in Teslas, typically say 80kWh. That combined with better efficiency, better battery management, lower power draw per cell, etc means that they get more than 1k useful cycles out of it. Say 2k (tho they claim more, and there is considerable variability due to use and environment). So 500km * 2k cycles is 1 million km.

The battery may degrade due to age before it reaches its cycles.

Also as mentioned above. Tesla does draw up to 300kW out of the battery. The onboard AC charger is 11kW so if that is bidirectional then the it is really gentle on the battery.

That said, I'm not dissing Nissan, they were truly innovative and we owe them lots of gratitude for popularizing EV's and they have also evolved their tech considerably. Others are doing battery management very well as well nowadays.

Or, you know, we could just build more nuclear power plants instead of such an overengineered solution which requires millions of car owners to be cooperative citizens.

I cannot claim that it is impossible to run a lithium ion battery pack in an EV application without a BMS but I can claim that if you do that it will almost certainly catch on fire. Quote below from (https://batteryuniversity.com/article/bu-908-battery-managem...):

"The purpose of a BMS is to:

1. Provide battery safety and longevity, a must-have for Li-ion.

2. Reveal state-of-function in the form of state-of-charge and state-of-health (capacity)

3. Prompt caution and service. This could be high temperature, cell imbalance or calibration.

4. Indicate end-of-life when the capacity falls below the user-set target threshold.

Not all BMS offer all these features. The most basic functions are battery protection and showing state-of-charge (SoC)."

Without battery protection and while running many hundreds of individual cells your battery will catch on fire. I will bet the house on that. No EV maker would ever make an EV without a BMS.

You have gone beyond ignorance at this point by claiming that you are insulted and asking for an apology. I won't ask you for one, but I will ask for a public correction and acknowledgement that you were wrong.

> But night-time is exactly when the vehicles are charged in people's homes

Average wind production over the last 2 years in the UK is 5.8GW, with the peak (>6GW) between 1400 and 2200, and trough (But that's only a 5% variation between high and low.

Total demand though is lower at night than in the day. It's 25% down on the low at 0300-0400 and 17% up on average from 1800-1900, which more than offsets the daily variation in wind.

Throw in grid solar and sure, more renewables during the day (domestic solar isn't measured aside from a drop in demand) and you get an average 24% of current UK electricity driven by renewables, with a peak of 33% at midday and trough of 18% from 1900-2100.

But if you doubled wind that average peak would be 52% at 1200 for renewables, and a trough of 36%.

Assuming an infinite capacity grid (as the data isn't readily available), doubling wind+solar energy would save 40TWh of gas a year even with current demand. Tripling would save 60TWh, increasing 5-fold would save 76TWh, reducing Gas usage from 88TWh a year to 11TWh a year.

Those savings are based on real world generation and demand data from 2021.

Sure wind and solar can't entirely replace gas on its own, but it can knock usage down by 90% quite easily by putting up more strings between areas of the grid and simply building more.

You don't need to eliminate fossil fuels completely to make a difference.