 Today, our speaker is Dr. Mateo Bibinatori from NREL. He's going to talk about ESU vehicles, great integration. This should be an interesting talk. I want to remind everyone, the next presentation is in two weeks. So someone from the industry will talk about cybersecurity in the future quiz. There's a chair here. And we might permanently move to this room, so I'll let everyone know. So it's between this room and that room. So I'll let everyone know. So this is for those who are joining us remotely. Use the Q&A feature if you have any questions for the speaker. So all these questions will be answered at the end of the presentation. So a quick introduction of our speaker, Mateo is a distinguished researcher at NREL. And he leads and manages the Transportation Energy Transition Analysis group to explore system-level sustainable solutions for the transformation of the transportation sector. So he got his bachelor and master degree from the Polytechnic University in Milan. And his PhD in mechanical engineering will remind you statistics from Ohio State University. So without further delay, I'll let you start your presentation. Most of you have already heard about national labs. But perhaps not everyone knows there are 17 national labs as part of the Department of Energy complex. We are located in Golden, Colorado, right outside of Denver. We have about 3,000 people. And we have one big mission, energy efficiency and renewable energy. That's what we've been doing for almost 50 years now. And so that's an area that we really focus on. As I said, I'm going to start at a pretty high level. That's the US energy use over the past couple of centuries. And energy use has increased very significantly and is very closely tied to our lifestyle. Think about everything that you do in your life. How you move around, how you communicate, the buildings that you live in, the comfort, the refrigerators, the cooking, the objects that we use every day in our everyday life is all tied to energy. So incredible growth in our lifestyle and in our energy use. And so far, most of that has come from fossil fuels. It's about 80% in the US today. That has been great, right? Our lifestyle has increased significantly over the last couple of centuries, but nothing comes from free. And the major price of fossil fuels are some of the geopolitical implications that I'm not going to touch on today and a lot of the environmental implications. So I just want to go through a couple of examples. Air pollution kills an estimated 7 million people every single year. And that's largely due to the combustion of fossil fuels. You'll see pictures like this, water and land being contaminated. And many people talk about climate change as our generation's biggest challenge. I have a couple of quotes here from the IPCC. It's a very long report, but if you're interested in this topic, I suggest you take a look. But recent changes in the climate that were spread, they're rapid, they're intensifying, and they are unprecedented in thousands of years. You might hear otherwise in the media, the scientific community is now fully behind the fact that it is indisputable that these human activities that are causing this, right? And it's not just a long-term effect. Extreme events are becoming more aggressive and more frequent. So overall, we don't think there is any going back. We have done significant damage to the planet that we live in already, but we can slow down some of these changes. We can stop some of those changes. And what's gonna be needed to do that is very strong, very rapid and sustained reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, right? It is now imperative and it is now very urgent. I can't stress it enough. When you think about energy systems, you talk about 2050, like it was very far into the future. Well, keep in mind a lot of our energy systems last for several decades. So it's not even one turnaround of the system between now and 2050, right? The time that we have available to solve this problem isn't a lot. And so we do a lot of work and a lot of research to try and inform what does that transformation look like? How do we go from where we are today to a system that is sustainable by 2050, which is when we think we might have a chance of getting to a system that hasn't completely destroyed our plant. So I'll go back here a little bit now in more details about our energy system. I told you about 80% of the energy that we use today comes from petroleum. You see that in the pie chart. Petroleum, natural gas, coal, so sorry, fossil energy. Fossil energy is about 80% of our energy used. The other 20% is roughly split in half between nuclear and renewable, about 20%. The battle on the rights there are interesting. They show how we use industry energy across different sectors of the economy. And the top one is transportation. Transportation uses about a third of the total energy that we use in the country, so that they are roughly equally split, but you see a lot of red there. 90% of the energy that we use to move around today is from petroleum, right? In the other sector, you see a little bit more diversity, a lot of natural gas in industry. You see buildings that are already split roughly in half between electricity and fossil fuels. And then you see down there how we are producing electricity. And I'll talk a little bit more about that later on. But transportation is really a boring sector when it comes to energy. It is petroleum and petroleum. And it has been like that for a very long time. But hopefully we have a plan on how we're gonna change what the energy system looks like today. Biden administration has published now three years ago the long-term strategy of the United States. This is basically articulating how are we gonna go from where we are today to a system that is sustainable in 2050? And you see there, different sectors are gonna evolve in different ways. The solutions that we imagine are gonna be needed to decarbonize buildings and to decarbonize transportation and to decarbonize industry are different. Today, I'll start zooming in a little bit and we'll talk about the transportation sector. About a third of the energy used by the larger stores of greenhouse gas emissions in the country today. Because it's heavily reliant on petroleum. There is more diversity in other sectors. So their emissions are proportionally a little bit smaller. Transportation is very polluting. It's the dirtiest, it's really responsible for a lot of poor air quality. We see very disproportionate impact on certain disadvantaged community that happen to live close to freight centers or highways and ports and areas of the country that have worse air quality. Is the second largest house of expenditures? Is a major driver of global petroleum demand? Again, tying back to the geopolitics a lot of implications coming with that. And so we really feel strongly that it is a key sector for decarbonization and we need to eliminate nearly all emissions that cancel transportation by 2050. I'll keep you on this team. So like we have a plan, the same way that we have the long-term strategy of the United States, we have a plan on how to decarbonize the economy. The Department of Energy, the Department of Transportation and Environmental Protection Agency came together and just over a year ago, published this big blueprint that basically explains what do we think is the path to decarbonize transportation system? And it fundamentally relies on three principles, three pillars. We need mobility to become more convenient. It's really hard to decarbonize transportation when you have to drive 40, 50 miles a day each way. So almost 100 miles round trip when you live in a community where it's heavily car dependent and you don't have any other option to reach services and workplaces and schools. And so really increasing the convenience of mobility and rethinking the way that we have designed transportation system is a key pillar. The second biggest big pillar is efficiency. If we can improve efficiency at the system level, if we can shift travel to mode of transportation that are more efficient, for example, rail, for example, transit, for example, micro mobility and bikes and scooters, that really helps to reduce emission. And perhaps not surprisingly, that the third pillar is what we call here clean. But if instead of burning gasoline, we use clean fuels like electricity, like perhaps hydrogen, like perhaps sustainable biofuels, that will really help reduce transportation emissions. So all three of these pillars are gonna have to play a big role for transportation to become sustainable by 2050. But I'll highlight that from a climate perspective, when it comes to reducing emissions, the third pillar, the clean, is really where we expect about 80 to 90% of the benefit to come from. When you think about quality of life, when you think about time spent in traffic, the convenience is a lot more important. But when it comes to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, it's really transitioning what we have today, which is mostly gasoline and diesel to something that is clean. And electric vehicles are a great solutions to do just that. I mean, I bet everyone here has been on an electric vehicle at this point. Has anyone not been on an electric vehicle? Okay, when I gave talk like this, just five years ago, many people would raise their hand. The advance of electric vehicles has been impressive. I'll tell you, you know, I've been working on clean energy for maybe 15 years now. And the big thing in clean energy has been renewables for a very long time. That was the game changer. It's like, well, now we have solar and wind and they are cost competitive. And we are replacing fossil fuel generating power plants with renewables. This chart is really interesting. This is from Bloomberg New Energy Finance. And it shows the last year, over $600 billion were invested in renewables. A growth of 10% from the previous year. So really big number, right? Again, this is a game changer for the energy system. Well, guess what? Last year, electric vehicles investment where $632 billion is $10 billion more than renewables. So here I laughed about renewables. Last year we invested more in electric vehicles than we did in renewables. So, you know, I wanted to show you this chart because sometimes you see those big plans from government and you have these strategies. And some of the comments I get is like, yeah, that's really good talking, but are we actually walking the talk? Are we doing this? We are, you know, $600 billion invested in an electric vehicle just last year, right? We really think this is gonna be a game changer for transportation and for the power sector. And that's my next zoom in. Let's start looking at that intersection a little bit. Electric vehicles are really a game changer for transportation. This picture is from a couple of years ago, but I really like the subtitle. So I'm not willing to change it to the 21 and 22 and 23 edition is entering the decade of electric rights. Okay, we are really transitioning from, you know, gasoline vehicles are the norm to electric vehicles are the norm. Battery costs have declined. There is plenty of support. There is plenty of availability. Everyone now has been on electric vehicle. So we really think that EVs are coming on very rapidly. Every time that I update my talks about electric vehicle, I need to update our projections of how quickly EVs are coming online. So I keep being told that I'm too optimistic and then I keep shooting too low and every time I have to update my projections. But last year, one in 10 vehicles told in the US was electric. Globally, we're still not leading. 14% of vehicle globally was electric. There are countries like Norway that where they are 90% sales. There are countries like Europe and China where they are, you know, between 20 and 30%. California is around 30%. So I guess you guys are doing quite well. Some other states are still lagging a little behind. But it is impressive. One vehicle in 10 sold in the US was electric last year. And we are seeing this really skyrocketing. If you think about technology adoption and you have done some modeling work, you have heard about S-curve and S-change. You know, you start slow as the technology matures and it becomes really competitive and available. And then it just shoots up, right? Adoption skyrockets. We're right there at that inflection point. We are seeing it skyrocketing. And I don't know how much should I ask at the beginning how many of you are in a transportation program. But if you have taken transportation classes, this is a very typical figure. So I wanted to share it with you guys. The figure on the left is New York City in 1900. And if you look at that, people are moving around with horses for the most part. And there is one car in there. And then you look at the figure on the right, which is the same street in New York just 13 years later. And I guess I should make a joke here. You should try and spot the horses really hard. There is one horse in there and everything else is a car. So that gives you a good idea of how quickly things could change. Just 13 years over a century ago, where communication wasn't as widespread as it is today, it was a lot harder to get to know new technologies and new solutions. But that how long it took for the automobile to took over horses. And there was a lot of pushback for automobiles. There was a lot of people that made the same argument that they hear about gasoline vehicles today, right? How the gasoline automobile wasn't going to be any better than horses ever. Same way that you might hear, oh, electric vehicles are going to be better than gasoline vehicles ever. Only took 13 years, right? So this is a good thing to keep in mind. So I believe EVs will be coming very fast. And there are two key elements that I wanted to touch on a little bit more today. One is charging infrastructure. As we transition from one fuel to another, a key element is, well, I need infrastructure to be able to charge those vehicles. And one of the key points of electric vehicles is that you can charge them in a way that is a lot more convenient than what you do today with gasoline vehicles. On average, a vehicle is parts for 95% of the time. And that is all downtime that you can use to recharge your electric vehicle. You can't use it to refuel your gasoline vehicle because you need to go to a gasoline station to do that. We have electricity everywhere. Like it's a great advantage. And so we do a lot of work on assessing electric vehicle charging infrastructure. That was probably baked somewhere in the very long bio. But if you are interested in this, come check out some of our results. I'm not gonna go too much into detail. But one of the key messages is that you shouldn't think about charging infrastructure for electric vehicle as a replacement for gasoline stations. We're not trying to replace gasoline stations with charging stations that do what gasoline stations do. We're trying to do something better. When you charge while you're sleeping, when you charge while you're working, when you charge while you're watching a movie or grocery shopping, and it literally takes no time. That's the key element. It's not how long do I need to wait at the gasoline station. You shouldn't be waiting at all. The vehicle should just be charged while you do something else. So there is a lot of slogans like slow charging, it's convenient charging, but really think about charging as a whole different new paradigm. And it's not an alternative to go into a gasoline station. It's something different. And then there are implications for the energy system. You saw earlier those big red charts, right? If all of that petroleum becomes electricity, well, of course that's gonna have major implications for the power system. EVs are expected to be the largest source of growth in electricity demand. I have a couple of slides that talk a little bit more about this. And not just that, the power grid is really transforming, right? Renewables are the game changer, right? They've been the big deal. And so we are going from a system that uses fossil fuels to produce electricity to a system that uses renewables to produce electricity. And this new system is gonna be less flexible. And EVs bring in that flexibility back into the system. And again, I have a couple of slides to go in detail into this, but it's a really big topic. Overall, the key message that I like to leave you with, you probably have read a lot of news titled that electric vehicles are breaking the grid. They're gonna cause a lot of brownout and disruptions and whatnot. What our research is showing is that if we integrate electric vehicles in a smart way, they strengthen the grid. They reduce cost and they increase resiliency. So it's exactly the opposite. If these are not the bad news for the grid, they are great news for the grid. So I just wanna sort of contextualize things. I'll keep these couple of slides, but if you're interested in charging infrastructure, it's a very fascinating topic, very interesting. We have done a lot of work in this space. And so there are a lot of reports that you can check out. But let's talk about vehicle grid integration. I've told you electric vehicles are going to be the biggest source of electricity demand or low growth. This is a study we did now almost five years ago and it's called electrification future study. We basically looked at what the economy would look like if all sectors were to electrify. We use more electricity in this, we use more electricity industry and we use more electricity in transportation. But what we found is that transportation is really expected to drive this growth in electricity demand. Because in the other sectors, first of all, you already have large use of electricity today and you can offset some of the growth with efficiency gains. So you electrify your buildings. Now you use an electric stove this is a very natural gas stove. You also make your windows better. So you use less energy in general for air conditioning, for heating. And so those two things sort of work one against each other and sort of wash the growth in electricity out. Transportation is not like that. You go from gasoline to electricity. So of course your demand for electricity is going to go a lot. That's the electricity demand in the US for the last 70 years. The scene has been roughly split in three. Presidential building, commercial building industry roughly a third each. They have all grown very much until about 20 years ago and then loads have been pretty stable for the past 20 years. And transportation is invisible. It's about 0.2% of electricity demand today. This was a few years ago. Now it's 0.3% very small still. We think that by 2050 that's 0.2, 0.3% is going to go to about 25%. So to all this money to grow in the importance of transportation for the power system. You see that all of the future projections there blue is where the growth comes from. Blue is transportation, which is what you don't see in the past. And we have done a lot of studies to look at these from different perspectives. If this is a topic that you're interested in we just published this paper in Nature that looks at what does it take to decarbonize transportation? And we really see, you know, electric vehicles are a key element. You don't get to a clean transportation system unless you convert to electric vehicles. You need to do other things as well but unless you do that, you won't get there. And we try to estimate how much electricity is it going to take to get to a fully decarbonized transportation system? So similar to the figure that you saw before this is a little bit more nuanced and there's a lot of different scenarios. There is a lot of uncertainty. You know, are people going to buy larger SUVs or are they going to buy compact cars? How much is population going to grow? How much are we going to travel? There are a lot of variables that are subject to significant uncertainty. And so we looked at, you know, how much electricity could we possibly need to power transportation? And we came up with these numbers that are pretty mind blown. So today we consume about 4,000 terawatt hours for the entire economy. That's our total electricity demand. In 2050, we might need up to 3,000 just for transportation. That's a huge number. Again, 2050 is only 25 years away. You're talking about almost doubling the size of the power system. That's a bit of an extreme. That's everyone drives a ton. Everyone buys SUVs. They're very inefficient. We don't invest in energy efficiency. So maybe it's a little bit of a worst case scenario unlikely to materialize. We see that on average, you know, around 1,500 terawatt hours is what we're going to need to power transportation. So still 4,000 plus, you know, 1,500 is a big number. It's going to be a big, big growth in electricity demand. You probably already know this. I'm still going to say it anyway, but how does our power system work? Well, the fundamental principle is that the demand for electricity and the supply for electricity must match at every instant, right? That means that if you turn on the light, somewhere in the power system, there is a power plant that's generating a little bit more electricity to power your lipo. You know, keeping that balance is the key element of the power system. And up until today, the way that that has worked is that we consume electricity whenever we want and whenever we need it. And the supply side adapts, you know? You turn on the light, there is a gas turbine somewhere that starts spinning a little bit faster and generates a little bit more electricity to keep that balance. Well, the power grid is changing. We're not going to have gas turbines. We're not going to have coal-fired power plants that you can, you know, sort of modulate or dispatch. It's the technical term that's used in power system. We're going to have solar and wind plants and you can't tell the sun that he needs to shine a little bit more right now because I want to turn the power on or the wind that he needs to blow a little bit more. And so you are losing flexibility on the supply side of the power system. You can't regulate how much electricity you produce anymore. You get what you get. And so it becomes incredibly important to add that flexibility back on the demand side. Okay, demand and supply needs to match. We can't control supply. Can we control demand? That's the old concept of electric vehicle manager. The electric vehicles are parked for 95% of the time. Usually you get back home, you plug in your vehicle and you have 10 or 12 hours to charge for those 30, 40, 50 miles that you drove that day. And that only takes an hour or two. So really the vehicle is sitting there doing nothing for most of the time and you can easily decide when you want to do that charging without impacting the ability of the vehicle to drive you where you need to be, when you need to be. And so we have done a ton of work on managed charging. Like we see a terrific value there for power system. We see value for transportation systems and we've done a lot of studies to really try and understand how can we leverage this resource and how valuable it is. So the first step is really understanding when and where do we need electricity. I've told you a lot of numbers about how much electricity we need. That's important, right? What is the size of the pie? Well, when we were talking about petroleum and gasoline that was the whole story, right? How much petroleum do we need? It doesn't matter if you use it at noon on a Saturday or at midnight on a Friday. It's the same thing, refineries work the same way. We can put it in big tanks and store it. It's not a big company. For electricity, it's a huge deal. You consume electricity at 5 p.m. on a Friday. Again, supply and demand must match. We need to supply to give you that power. If you consume it on a Wednesday night at 2 a.m., it's a lot easier because no one else is consuming electricity, right? So the first step was really try and go from, this is how much electricity we need, to where and when do we need that electricity? So there was a lot of modeling that happened in the transportation community over the last decade. So really stop thinking along those lines. It's a big, for modelers and analysts, it's a big game changer, right? It's not just how much, but where and when. So I need to think about time. I need to think about space. It's complicated. We have developed new models. This was a big push for the last decade when it comes to transportation research. I'll give you an example here, but there are many, many other examples. Some of your professors here have published a lot of great work in this space. But we published this last year. This is county level. You see here, aggregated at the state level, but the underlying data is at the county level. At the hourly level, how much electricity are we gonna need to charge electric vehicles? It's a great data set. I wanted to put this slide in here because if you are doing work and researching this space, you can just go grab this data and use it for your purposes. Most of the work that we produce is publicly available. So it's on our website. And if you have troubles accessing it, you can email us. We're always happy to support people, especially students, using our data and our resources. But I just wanted to give you an idea of what this looks like. When you look at different areas of the countries, people tend to drive more or less depending on where they live. If you live in New York City, you drive a lot less than if you live in Erugal, Montana, right? You drive different kinds of cars, pick up trucks versus compact or mid-sized cars have very different energy needs. The weather changes during the year, which impacts electric vehicle consumption in major ways. Plus or minus 50% between peak summer and shoulder season. So it's a big deal. So we really took a deep dive here to understand how these EV charging loads were gonna change in space and in time over the next few decades. And you see some of those curves there. 0.9 or 0.3, those are normalized. The absolute number doesn't matter of that much. It's a three-ax difference in electricity demand. So it's a big deal. When you think about integrating EVs with the grid, really keep in mind where you are and when you're thinking about matters a lot. The next step, once you own it, the next step, you know how much electricity you need, you know where and when you need it, and then you start thinking, well, so EVs are really flexible, right? I can charge them different ways. I can leverage that flexibility. But well, how valuable is that flexibility and how should I charge EVs? So we did this study maybe three years ago now and we really look at the entire spectrum of the power system and we asked ourselves, what could EVs do for the power system? And we came up with a lot of different answers. You know, you could reduce the amount of generating capacity that you need. Like if you can shift the load around, instead of needing X gigawatt and you need to build that many power plants to produce it, you might be able to need less power plants. So you need to build less transmission lines, less power plants, and all the implications associated with that. You can also increase resilience to extreme events. Heat wave, heat California, and everyone turns on their air conditioners. Can you push back and be charging by a couple of days and drop 25, 30% of your load? Yes, you can, and that's extremely valuable. You don't have brownouts, you don't need to turn off air conditioners and you can still get to charge your vehicles the next day, and it doesn't impact you in any way. You can support commitment and dispatch decision if this is something that you're looking at in terms of power systems. You know, you can better operate the power plants that you have. So not only you need to build less, but the ones that you build, you can operate in a more efficient way. You can improve power quality, power quality, voltage regulation, frequency regulation, make sure that the power system works in a better way. And in general, do that instead of deploying devices that do that specifically, which lowers your cost. So instead of spending $200 a month in your electricity bill, maybe now you spend 180 or 190 because your EVs are doing some of the services that otherwise would have taken more devices. And of course, you can support other consumers. You've seen this a lot in recent commercials, for example, the F-150 lighting, like you go somewhere and you power what you need to power with your vehicle. And so think of a scenario where all of a sudden there is a brownout and all of your food and your freezer is going bad and you can just power your freezer with your vehicle. Or you can keep your modern working and you can take a very interesting class from Stanford University instead of being in the dark. So there is a lot of value there. Over the next couple of slides here, and then I'll wrap up, I'll show you a couple of case studies. So there has been probably thousands for sure several hundreds of studies to understand what is the value of electric vehicles in some of these columns. Different researchers, again, including some of your professors, Ram has done a lot of work in this space, really looking at what can electric vehicles do for this? What can electric vehicles do for that? I just wanna apply this, that we're still waiting for the study that rules them all that understands what could vehicles do for the entire power system? What are the trade-offs between supporting capacity expansion requirements versus dispatch decisions or improving resiliency? As far as I know, that study doesn't exist. Yeah. So if you're doing research, that's probably a very, very exciting area for us. We have a few projects in this space, but it's a very complicated question that we haven't answered yet. I'll probably skip this slide and show you those cases, right? So how valuable is man charging for different parts of the power system? Going back to the study that I mentioned earlier, the electrification future study was a big study. We electrified the whole economy. We see what happens. But we saw that most of the electricity demand growth came from electric vehicles. And most of the flexibility that you can add to the system came from electric vehicles. So we use some of our detailed model. You might have heard of the REEDS model. It's an open source model of the power system that you can allow the play with, basically tied to projects. What does the power system looks like 20, 30 years from now under different scenarios? You know, how much solar are we gonna have? How much wind and how are things going to evolve? And we saw that by introducing electric vehicles and exploiting this flexibility in how you charge electric vehicles, we reduce the expansion, the capacity expansion requirements by about 10%. So you need to build about 10% less power plants just by exploiting electric vehicles. And this is huge, right? When it comes to power systems, you hear a study saying like, oh, we could save 1% capacity and it's a big deal, right? 1% of a huge system is a big deal. This is 10%, like this number is incredibly large. It's $84 billion in savings. It's really big number, right? So a lot of value in terms of not needing to expand the system quite as much. And the other comment I'll make is not just cost, but it's also feasibility. Can we build enough transmission lines? Can we deploy solar and wind fast enough to achieve our objectives? A lot of the time the answer is like, well, it's gonna be really hard, right? I don't wanna say it's impossible, but it's gonna be really hard. And so reducing how much we need is gonna be really helpful, right? Not only it costs us less, but maybe we can actually do it instead of being stuck in a system where, yeah, we would like to do it, but we don't have enough capacity due to workforce, due to permitting, due to a million other reasons to transform the power system. So that's what the power system looks like, capacity expansion, how many power plants we need to build, how many transmission lines do we need to build. But the other angle that TVs can support this like, well, given a system, the system is what it is, but now I have electric vehicles, can I operate the system in a better way? So this is a different study that we did just last year, and we use a different model that doesn't project what the power system looks like, but projects how you're gonna operate the power system. So you have those power plants, how do you use them? How do you make the system work? And we saw that EVs leveraging, managed charging, right? If you have EV charging in a dumb way, well, nothing happens, but if you start introducing managed charging, and you do smart choices, you reduce cost, you reduce emissions, you reduce peak load requirements, and you reduce charging costs for vehicles, which again is a self-reinforcing cycle. But now I pay less for electricity, it costs me less to charge, that the vehicles are even a better proposition than they were before, so there's sort of a reinforced cycle, and then you have even more vehicles, and you can have even more value as saved with normal models. So very interesting study there. I'll also flag, I don't know how many of you are looking into power markets, but one interesting finding that we got is sort of the size of those markets and the diminishing value that you get as you have more and more vehicles participating into those programs, which is kind of expected, right? There is a service that you can provide with EVs, and if there are only a few vehicles providing that service, they get a lot of revenue out of it. Now as you start increasing the number of people that participate into those markets and provide those services, the marginal value per vehicle that you add diminishes, right? So there are some interesting dynamics there that haven't really been resolved on how do we make sure that electric vehicle owners get enough compensation for these programs to engage, right? If you're saving $10 a month, you're probably not willing to do anything for that, right? It's not even worth your time to look into how that works. If you get tens or hundreds of dollars, things change, right? So there are a lot of interesting discussions going on on electricity market design and how something like this is gonna impact those design. And then the last case study I wanna show you and I should have said this when I showed you that the power system charge. Power system has generation, it has transmissions and it has distribution. Those are the three big pieces of the power system. Generation is about 60% of cost today. When you pay electricity, about 60% of what you pay is for generating electricity. About 10% is for transmitting electricity. Those are over long distances, big transmission lines, and about 30% is for distribution networks. Those are the transformers that you see behind your houses that you connect to, right? The very last mile, if you will, of the system. By the way, we expect distribution cost to become a bigger proportion of system costs in the future because of distributed energy resources and a lot of other things. But this is a very contentious point with electric vehicles integration. They're gonna stress distribution system more, right? Because they're big loads. Think about what you have at home. You use your refrigerator and your stove and your microwave and then all of a sudden you're touching an electric vehicle that might be seven kilowatts of load. It's a big deal, not even thinking about big trucks which is the point of this study. We looked at what happens when we connect plus eight semi-trucks. Those are the 18-wheelers, the big Tesla semi-trucks. You see those on the highway, big beasts. And what happens to the distribution network when you start charging those big trucks? Well, we found a couple of very interesting things. One, which I myself did not expect and I'm supposedly a transportation expert. But about 70% of those big trucks only really drive less than 100 miles a day. And so when you think about charging them, it doesn't have to be, again, megawatt level, extreme fast charging you get in and in 10 minutes you need to get out. Some trucks are gonna need that. They drive Los Angeles, New York, nonstop. They have two drivers. They wanna be on the road as much as possible. But 70% of them do not. So we found electricity demand for charging numbers much lower than we were expecting. In this study we see between 10 and 74 kilowatts. So if you're not overly familiar with that, 10 is what a light duty vehicle does. If you plug in your Tesla or whichever EV you have, hopefully you have an EV. But that's roughly the power level that you're talking about. But now you're charging this huge semi-truck, right? So much lower power levels than we were expecting. And we found, we did this study in Texas with a large utility. They serve about a million customers in Texas. And we found that about 80% of the substations that they operate today would accommodate 100 of these semi-trucks without any change in the system. So it's interesting. And it's probably a bit of discussion because the general thinking is well, as soon as you buy one of those trucks, you need to replace the entire grid, right? It's gonna just destroy everything and you need everything new. Well, it depends. We saw that in many cases that's not gonna happen. But I also wanna highlight our distribution networks are very heterogeneous, right? So what happens in a study that you do in an era in Texas is gonna be very different from what happens in a study that you do in another area. And so if you're looking for interesting areas for research, this is another good topic of like, how do we do a study that sort of represents what happens in general? There are millions of distribution networks in the country, like millions. Keep in mind, we have about 110 million households and this system usually covers five to 10 houses, right? So tens of millions of distribution networks. So a lot of variability is still not really clear how we're gonna do a study that models all of them. But what we've seen is that in some cases, it's not as bad as some might think. In other cases, it will be. So this was the last case study I wanted to show you. Just to give you an idea, depending on what we look at in the power system and what vehicles can do, we get out of interesting result. And again, the trade-offs between those different solutions is something that is still a little bit unexplored. But I'll leave you with a couple of points. This ended in my last slide. What we see is that on the horizon, there is the future where we're gonna have abundant and cheap clean electricity. And that's gonna open up this unique opportunity to clean up the transportation sector. It's gonna be a lot of electric vehicles. There might be some production of energy that's low-carbon fuels, hydrogen, e-fuels, and other solutions that might be needed, for example, to decarbonize aviation, to decarbonize international shipping, and things like that. But really, the cleaning up of the grid is giving us finally an opportunity to clean up transportation. And this is a win-win situation because by introducing EVs, we can make it easier to decarbonize the grid because we add that flexibility back into the system. And this is the beauty of this manner of charging is that one needs the other to be successful. There is this symbiotic relationship with your renewables and EVs. That's very fascinating. And it's a great use for the plant, because now we get to decarbonize the two biggest emitters of emissions in the economy. So we're doing a lot of work in this space. A lot of other organizations, including Stanford, are doing a lot of work in this space. But if this is the topic that you guys will passionate about and you're interested in, again, a lot of our data and tools are available on our website. We are constantly looking for interns, postdocs, researchers, and people to work in this area. So if you're interested, reach out to us. We'd love to collaborate with you guys. We'd love to have you come and help us solve some of these big challenges. And with that, I have a long slide of references. So if you're interested in, oh, that sounded interesting. I wanna know more. I can probably talk about any of this topic for 15 hours, but it's a lot more effective to go and read some of the studies. You have my contact. And again, yeah, thanks for having me. And maybe we can have a little bit of a Q&A and debate. Yeah, go ahead. So the fundamental answer is a little bit of all of the above, right? Today, what we see is mostly price-varying, time-varying pricing, right? So your price of electricity changes, I don't know, in Denver, where I live at 7 p.m., price of electricity drops from 24 cents to 6 cents. And so people naturally, so the program they release to start charging at that point in time, right? And you can think about more sophisticated way of doing that where instead of always being fixed at 7 p.m., you get the signal, your meter, and you can do that in a little bit more dynamic way between the consumers and the utility. But we think that value price is gonna be a key mechanism to implement mana charging. I have a big fund of programs that are not necessarily designed that way. And those are already largely used. Again, my own personal example, where we live in Colorado, I get $40 a year, and the utility can turn off my air conditioner three times a year. And I don't even know that. I don't even know if they've ever done it, right? Because they turn off my air conditioner for 10, 15 minutes, even if it's running, I have no idea. I literally never notice if they've ever done it. And I make $40 a year without fundamentally doing anything. That could be another mechanism to leverage reflexivity, right? You can stop your charging at some point and it doesn't really impact you. But you mentioned another really good point. We also see good value for what we call aggregators, right? And so that's a third party in between utilities and consumers. And they sort of interface with both, right? And they sell services to utilities. So that value of the flexibility is something that they put into the market and they bid on and they sell to utilities. And then they find ways to engage consumers, which could be a fixed premium per month. It could be variable pricing and whatnot. The reason why I told you like it's a little bit of all of the above is that we are still experimenting. We are in the U.S. and all over the world, people are. And we see really good responses. We see really good outcomes from multiple programs. I don't think we're gonna converge into a single way of doing it. I think it's gonna be a lot of different solutions. And they're all gonna play the role. I mean, is there anything more to be done if you're speaking out of the type of tool signal or the real time signal? Yeah, a really good point. So V to G, V equal to a grid. Not only you are choosing when you charge a vehicle, but you provide power back. And in Alcavia, there are two ways that this is useful. One is what I was mentioning, you power our other loads and that has a value or you just inject it back into the grid. So effectively now your vehicles are a storage device. The grid puts electricity in EVs at some point and takes it back when it needs it. It is valuable. All our studies, all the studies that I've seen show that clearly if you can do that, it adds value on top of just scheduling when you can charge EVs. What we're seeing is that the value is there, but it's not significantly larger than just scheduling vehicle charge, right? So, and scheduling vehicle charging is a lot simpler because it does really impact consumers from a mobility perspective, right? If I get back home and I need to charge over 10 hours and you tell me like, oh, you can charge in the first two hours and in the last two hours, I fundamentally don't care. If you're telling me you might discharge your vehicle, you will get a lot of sort of cerebral results with anxiety saying like, what if an emergency happens and I need to drive it on my EVs, discharge them or not? I keep in mind people buy vehicles to move around. That's the main goal, right? Not to support the grid. So this to say, we see value in there. I think it's gonna happen a little bit later. I think people are gonna get used to manage charging and get comfortable with EVs. Those are two big concepts that are different from today and V2G is gonna come as a sort of a, as a turn step down the line. And where we see most of the value is not so much in reducing costs or reducing maybe great requirements, but it's in emergency situations like resiliency and a situation that which is really important, right? And so what if by discharging your vehicle, you can prevent a brownout for your entire neighborhood for the next 12 hours or so, right? That does a lot of value. So we see the resiliency angle be the winning angle for V2G. Yeah, that's a really good question. So, and let me maybe clarify, we are gonna need to upgrade the grid, right? It's not, we're gonna consume a lot more electricity. The system needs to be bigger, which is not a bad news, right? You know, when you're in utility and your business is selling power, someone is telling you, well, can you sell 20 or 30% more power? Well, usually businesses are happy about that, right? So the system needs to expand, but it's not, at least in my view, as dramatic as like, oh, you adopt three EVs and you need to replace the whole grid, right? It's gonna be gradual, it's gonna take time. We think that hydrogen could have a big role in decarbonizing heavy duty transportation, not for passenger vehicles, probably not for buses, but when it comes to big trucks, especially the ones that drive long distances, they might require very high charging levels otherwise that are a lot more impactful on the grid. You know, we think that hydrogen could play a big role there. Two things to keep in mind is a technology that is one step behind the electric vehicles, right? As I was saying, we are selling millions of electric vehicles, they are cost competitive, they are commercial technology, they're selling tanks of hydrogen vehicles, right? So it's sort of one step behind. So the technology needs to still improve, it needs to be proven, and we're not quite there yet. And hopefully we will, we have, you know, millions of dollars invested at the federal government level to get there, but I think there is still a big difference between, we have the point EVs as fast as we can, we are still trying to develop technology for hydrogen fuel cells to get to that point. And there is also another interesting thing to keep in mind that at the local level, yes, you have a hydrogen station, instead of adding a big electric load, you refuel your hydrogen drive, and that's a lot less stress on the system, sorry. But if you produce hydrogen from electricity, you still need about twice as much electricity overall than to power EVs. So it might be in a better location, it might be a better time of the day, so it might not require distribution upgrades, but you still need to expand the power system twice as much, because overall you need twice as much. That's roughly the math. So keep that in mind. Every time you think about hydrogen, if it's made from electricity, you need about twice as much electricity than a comparable electric. I don't know if there are questions online, just unmute yourself and participate. So in the PG&E territory, generation is about 10 cents a kilowatt hours and transmission and distribution plus other is suddenly about 30 cents a kilowatt hours. Will increase electric vehicles across the same asset degrees, I guess, decrease rates like the math suggests? Well, it's complicated, right? Yeah, I like to look a little bit more into this. Overall, again, when it comes to distribution systems, it gets very complicated very quickly because they're all so different, right? And so it's really hard to generalize and say, well, this is gonna happen. There is always going to be an example or one case, well, the opposite happens, right? And it's really hard to do statistics because again, with millions of this, it's hard to model them all and it's hard to even keep track of what happens. Even utilities have much lower monitoring level distribution system than one might perhaps expect. And so it gets complicated quickly. I think it's important to look at the, sort of statistics, say like, well, okay, in this one case cost my double, but in nine other cases cost drop by 10%. So when you have other things out at the end, you have a 8% cost savings or whatever it is, right? So keep that in mind, drilling down when it comes to this system is really hard. And utilities are well used to this, right? If you build a house in a remote area, well, they need to serve that load. So they're building a whole distribution network that's maybe two miles long and might cost a million dollars to serve one house. And that cost gets spread over everyone. And in general, some houses are cheaper to serve and some houses are more expensive. And one of the principles has been that we spread those costs among all consumers. It shouldn't be like, well, you live a little bit farther away. And so you should spend $3,000 a month in your electric vehicle. And so here is a little bit of the same principle. The system is gonna be more efficient. This is gonna benefit everyone. And in general, some, you know, if you are a heavy driver and you drive a lot, it might benefit you a little bit more. If you don't have a car, it's not gonna benefit you, but it's a little bit of table of the average. Does that answer your question? And yes, we can pass the slides. Sorry that you guys couldn't see. I was pointing at a lot of graphs. So it's probably was probably a little boring to hear, but we'll post the slides. Or at least you feel free to send out the slides. I have a question about also a little bit of a transition and the generation level. What is the difference between the generation level and why do you want to rate it, since it's a tiny renewable generate or that's a primary tax-on. Cartees, et cetera. Columbo, et cetera. There is energy already in it. So how does the family manage targeting and accommodating for both of these departments on the other side? And I think that's more of a generation. Yeah, it's a really good point, you know, and that's what I was referring to when I say like the trade-offs between what EVs can do isn't really fully understood. And those needs are actually often very conflicting, right? Today the pricing is usually, you're right, based on generation, and you say, like, oh, we have a lot of solar in the middle of the day, can you charge your EV, right? And you get an incentive because price is low, or if you are in an era with a wind, can you charge in the middle of the night because we have a lot of wind and no one wants to consume power. On the distribution side, you would want the opposite, right? Well, it's the middle of the day, yeah, you have a lot of solar, but there are other loads, it's hot, my transformer is already hot, you want more load, now you're overloading my transformer, right? And so you're benefiting on the bulk power side, but you're losing on the distribution side, or you can do the opposite. And I don't have a good answer for you, we have a project that just started a couple of weeks ago to look at those tradeoffs, but as far as I know, no one has looked into that, right? You know, people look at like, oh, what can you do for distribution? What can you do for generation? And the tradeoff between the two, you know, there is a global optimum somewhere in there, but we don't know where it is. And also keep in mind that in today's system, generation overwarns the cost compared not with the other ones, but it's significantly higher than distribution. And so the reasoning is like, well, if you can save it out on generation, sure, maybe you spend a little bit more on distribution, but those costs are lower anyway, so maybe it doesn't matter. As the system evolves and the two get closer, those generation gets cheaper and distribution gets more expensive, those tradeoffs are going to become even more important. So you have a great idea in there, I don't have a good answer, but it's a really fascinating topic. Yeah, I didn't touch on any of that. But the actual bloodshade, if you will, you know, whether you use one or the other, doesn't really matter all that much, but consistent communication and control protocols are absolutely critical for any of these two work, right? If you want utilities and grid operators and distribution system operators and electric vehicle owners and pleads to all work together, they need to be using the same standard, they need to be able to communicate with one another. And so there is a huge push on the standardization of all of these protocols and systems. It is, it is a hard part in my mind, like if we don't get there, the shape could be different, it doesn't really matter. But if you can communicate with one another, this is never going to work, right? And communication becomes more and more important as you push to more sophisticated systems, right? If you just tell me, like, well, at 7pm, your price of electricity is going to drop and it's like that every single day, you can just easily program it in your car, no big deal. Just saying, well, the price is dynamic and today is 7pm, tomorrow might be 8pm, the day after might be midnight, and you still start to need a bit more communication. And the end goal to me is to have two way communications where vehicles not only can inject power back into the grid, but can they can inform the grid of how much flexibility is available, right? We have that in our parking garage, and when I go in and plug in my vehicle, he asks me at what time I'm leaving and how much am I going to have to drive when I need. So with those two pieces of information, he decides how much charging I get and when so that I can do the driving that I need to do and I can I can have the vehicle charged when I need to leave, right? But that requires that the vehicle, in this case, the charging station communicates back with the supply side. And the only way that I can see doing that at large scale is if we consistently use the same protocols. Otherwise, you know, the system is just not going to work. We already have enough reliability issues with charging. We I don't think we need multiple protocols and systems. So it's really important, not something that I want personally a lot on, and that didn't talk a lot about at all about it. But I think it's a healthy process for me to work.