As I read this, it's basically saying that a battery used for V2G power would spent more time at a lower state of charge which doesn't degrade the battery as fast, to such a degree that this factor outweighs the extra cycles on the pack? Seems like an extraordinary claim - I'd want to see it demonstrated experimentally and not just assumed based on a model (no matter how many times they say the model is 'verified').
I don’t think reducing the effective range of your car to preserve battery life will be very popular; people want the freedom to drive as far as they can, because it’s hard to predict when they will need that capability, and charging is very slow. If someone does have a very predictable routine they can just not overcharge their car in the first place and save the discharge wear.
> people want the freedom to drive as far as they can, because it’s hard to predict when they will need that capability, and charging is very slow
For most people, if they really need to drive hundreds of miles unexpectedly, I doubt spending 15 minutes at a high-speed charger to top up the batteries will be an issue.
As someone who drives an EV, I can tell you that it’s not the long distance trips, it’s having an unexpectedly busy day of errands in cold weather that gets you—realizing that you’re starting out at only 50% charge, which means you can’t make that last trip into the suburbs at the end of the day. There are very few fast chargers in densely populated areas and they’re often malfunctioning, or have queues. They also hurt your battery, so not to be used on a regular basis.
In Norway where chargers are a lot more common, it's not an issue. Of course if I want to charge at 4pm at a popular place it may be a queue but most of the times many chargers are available and functional.
> There are very few fast chargers in densely populated areas
I live in Norway so not a huge issue, and I expect it to get better. Circle K for example is pushing hard to build high-speed chargers at their stations.
