What to choose, what to choose?

[Jodokk]

Succinctly stated, and my exact situation.

Sponsored

 

[Jodokk]

I'll certainly research that option. Sometimes I wish I hadn't chose an Enphase microinverter system, as it gives them that extra permission-level required to step outside the garden.

 

[chl]

That's unlikely since Ford and Tesla both use proprietary HW and SW with private protocols that are subject to change without notice. For example, Ford requires Bluetooth comms as part of their proprietary control system for power discharging that is not part of the yet to be finalized open standards which use power line comms. It's highly doubtful that third-party bidirectional chargers (e.g. dcBel, WallBox, Enphase, etc.) would invest in the reverse engineering and add proprietary HW and SW to support the likes of Ford and Tesla. Especially when these EV makers have explicitly stated they do not support third-party bidirectional chargers and can easily break any reverse engineered integrations with SW updates. There is little incentive for Ford or Tesla to support third-party bidirectional chargers when they offer their own. For Tesla, it's even more so as they offer their own home solar and battery equipment. It's no accident that Tesla requires use of their proprietary home battery or power switch for bidirectional power transfer in homes. Of course, the solar vendors (e.g. Enphase) are no better in terms of open standards support. I also have Enphase for solar and they refuse to support open standards/access for monitoring and control of their solar and battery equipment for integration with third-party equipment. For example, Enphase does not provide the necessary protocol/API access to their equipment for full integration with third-party smart electrical panels (e.g. Span). These companies all think they can be the Apple of their market.

The software to adapt the Lightning as the EV input might not be all that complex.

While the Ford UI (user interface) for controlling the bi-directional charging may be proprietary, at it's core operational level it is ISO 15118 and DIN 70121.

--------
Abstract
This document, as a basis for the other parts of the ISO 15118 series, specifies terms and definitions, general requirements and use cases for conductive and wireless HLC between the EVCC and the SECC.

This document is applicable to HLC involved in conductive and wireless power transfer technologies in the context of manual or automatic connection devices.

This document is also applicable to energy transfer either from EV supply equipment to charge the EV battery or from EV battery to EV supply equipment in order to supply energy to home, to loads or to the grid.

This document provides a general overview and a common understanding of aspects influencing identification, association, charge or discharge control and optimisation, payment, load levelling, cybersecurity and privacy. It offers an interoperable EV-EV supply equipment interface to all e-mobility actors beyond SECC.

The ISO 15118 series does not specify the vehicle internal communication between battery and other internal equipment (beside some dedicated message elements related to the energy transfer).
https://www.iso.org/standard/69113.html
---------

So it should be possible for the Lightning to communicate with other equipment besides the Sunrun (Delta) V2G equipment - the other equipment should be able to be paired in a manner similar to the way the Sunrun equipment is during setup.

Other equipment should be able to emulate the Sunrun equipment without too much effort.

The Ford proprietary software would not need to be modified. The equipment emulating the Sunrun/Delta equipment would have to respond/interact the way the Sunrun equipment does.

Since there is a standard (ISO 15118) for V2G communications, this should possible.

 

[chl]

Why not just use the Lightning as a generator? The Powerwall 3 can accept a generator input. Let Tesla handle the software and grid integration (since the Sunrun stuff is kinda sketchy anyway) and just let the Lightning be your backup generator.

Actually, the generator input goes to a transfer switch not directly to the power wall, but an automatic transfer switch can be integrated so that when the powerwall gets low switching to the generator input occurs.

See: https://truesouthsolar.net/does-tesla-powerwall-work-with-a-whole-home-backup-generator/

If using the Lightning 240V 30A outlet as the generator input, the transfer switch has to be wired so that the neutrals for the circuits being transferred are switched otherwise the neutrals will be grounded in two places and the GFCI in the Lightning will open as has been discussed extensively in other posts.

Of course you will only get 7.2kW (240V 30A) from the Lightning this way.

The Sunrun system "Model E4_BDI Delta-designed HIS takes the DC feed from the FCSP (that is provided by the bottom two prongs of the charging cord), and inverts that to 9600 watts, 240v, 40A" according to their documentation.

A much cheaper solution than a V2G home integration system with its inverters and controllers and controlling/communicating software.

The Lightning already has inverters that provide the 240V and 120V ProPower onboard by inverting the DC output of the HV battery to AC.

 

[Jodokk]

This guy?

 

[Jodokk]

Thanks! It's worth a deep dive.

 

[v2h8484]

These walled-garden approaches eventually destroy businesses, and really irritate end-users. I used a book which is a great overview of this cycle for my Technology and Society courses and it's worth a look.
The Master Switch: The Rise and Fall of Information Empires https://a.co/d/5cMfzwD

Thanks for the book reference. I think the key phrase is "eventually destroy businesses". Unfortunately many tech company founders/management subscribe to the approach described in books like Zero to One by Peter Thiel (i.e. don't compete build monopoly instead) to extract the max profit possible as quickly as possible. I doubt things will change much in the mindset until big walled-garden companies (e.g. Apple) suffer sustained business loss/decline.

 

[v2h8484]

The software to adapt the Lightning as the EV input might not be all that complex.

...

Since there is a standard (ISO 15118) for V2G communications, this should possible.

I certainly agree that it's totally possible technically. However, it's quite risky for third-party companies to rely on reverse engineering for sustainable business so most will not do it. It's not a practical approach in general. For example, all home solar inverters in the US connecting to the grid are now required to support the SunSpec open standards for monitoring and control by the utilities but companies like Enphase simply block access by owners and third-party companies via proprietary mechanisms. Most likely it will require the government step in at some point to change things like they did for the car industry to ensure a level playing field for third-party/after-market service and product providers.

 

[chl]

I certainly agree that it's totally possible technically. However, it's quite risky for third-party companies to rely on reverse engineering for sustainable business so most will not do it. It's not a practical approach in general. For example, all home solar inverters in the US connecting to the grid are now required to support the SunSpec open standards for monitoring and control by the utilities but companies like Enphase simply block access by owners and third-party companies via proprietary mechanisms. Most likely it will require the government step in at some point to change things like they did for the car industry to ensure a level playing field for third-party/after-market service and product providers.

Yes, if "locked" then no go. That would be short-sighted - not that being short-sighted ever stopped anyone.

But any EVSE with J1772 can charge any EV so standardization should be coming - ISO 15118 is an attempt to do that.

So I'm thinking if V2H becomes a "thing" in higher demand, there will be standardization and interchangeability.

The sooner the better.

Anyway, I don't really know if Ford would be the one's saying no you can only use the Sunrun (Delta) system for V2H or if the inverter/transfer switch maker would be the one saying no.

The Lightning seems to have built-in controls for V2G and Pro Power On-Board that protect the battery. Those built-in controls limit how much energy can be taken from the battery and how fast via the FCSP. So it doesn't seem to me that there would be any danger to the battery using a Sunrun (Delta) system or an Enphase system.

Right now Tesla will void your EV battery warranty if you use it for V2H, except maybe the Cybertruck - not sure if the V2H has been implemented in the Cybertruck yet.

It would make sense for Ford AND the home integration system makers to play nice from a business standpoint.

We don't have to use Sunrun to install the HIS, we can buy the equipment for around $4000 and have any licensed electrician install it.

Of course a $400 Generac transfer switch and the 240V 30A outlet on the Lightning is a lot cheaper to implement, though 10A less current (which means 7.2kW vs 9.6kW power).

It doesn't integrate a solar system, but if you already have the solar system with battery and inverters etc., the Lightning could be used via a Generac transfer switch when the solar system battery gets low, couldn't it?

 

[v2h8484]

Yes, if "locked" then no go. That would be short-sighted - not that being short-sighted ever stopped anyone.

But any EVSE with J1772 can charge any EV so standardization should be coming - ISO 15118 is an attempt to do that.

So I'm thinking if V2H becomes a "thing" in higher demand, there will be standardization and interchangeability.

The sooner the better.

Anyway, I don't really know if Ford would be the one's saying no you can only use the Sunrun (Delta) system for V2H or if the inverter/transfer switch maker would be the one saying no.

The Lightning seems to have built-in controls for V2G and Pro Power On-Board that protect the battery. Those built-in controls limit how much energy can be taken from the battery and how fast via the FCSP. So it doesn't seem to me that there would be any danger to the battery using a Sunrun (Delta) system or an Enphase system.

Right now Tesla will void your EV battery warranty if you use it for V2H, except maybe the Cybertruck - not sure if the V2H has been implemented in the Cybertruck yet.

It would make sense for Ford AND the home integration system makers to play nice from a business standpoint.

We don't have to use Sunrun to install the HIS, we can buy the equipment for around $4000 and have any licensed electrician install it.

Of course a $400 Generac transfer switch and the 240V 30A outlet on the Lightning is a lot cheaper to implement, though 10A less current (which means 7.2kW vs 9.6kW power).

It doesn't integrate a solar system, but if you already have the solar system with battery and inverters etc., the Lightning could be used via a Generac transfer switch when the solar system battery gets low, couldn't it?

ISO 15118 is the yet to be finalized standard I referred to in earlier posts. It's a good standard but it's still unclear how many American EV makers will support it and when. I doubt Tesla will support it any time soon. Hopefully, Ford will support it but probably only in new models and highly doubtful existing Lightnings would ever get it.

Again, there is no technical issue that could not be solved. It's all very doable technically. Nissan supported V2H based on the ISO 15118 pre-cursor more than a decade ago. Close minded/greedy business mindset is the real obstacle. Just look at the effort and time it took for Apple to finally support third-party repair.

 

[Jodokk]

Yes, if "locked" then no go. That would be short-sighted - not that being short-sighted ever stopped anyone.

But any EVSE with J1772 can charge any EV so standardization should be coming - ISO 15118 is an attempt to do that.

So I'm thinking if V2H becomes a "thing" in higher demand, there will be standardization and interchangeability.

The sooner the better.

Anyway, I don't really know if Ford would be the one's saying no you can only use the Sunrun (Delta) system for V2H or if the inverter/transfer switch maker would be the one saying no.

The Lightning seems to have built-in controls for V2G and Pro Power On-Board that protect the battery. Those built-in controls limit how much energy can be taken from the battery and how fast via the FCSP. So it doesn't seem to me that there would be any danger to the battery using a Sunrun (Delta) system or an Enphase system.

Right now Tesla will void your EV battery warranty if you use it for V2H, except maybe the Cybertruck - not sure if the V2H has been implemented in the Cybertruck yet.

It would make sense for Ford AND the home integration system makers to play nice from a business standpoint.

We don't have to use Sunrun to install the HIS, we can buy the equipment for around $4000 and have any licensed electrician install it.

Of course a $400 Generac transfer switch and the 240V 30A outlet on the Lightning is a lot cheaper to implement, though 10A less current (which means 7.2kW vs 9.6kW power).

It doesn't integrate a solar system, but if you already have the solar system with battery and inverters etc., the Lightning could be used via a Generac transfer switch when the solar system battery gets low, couldn't it?

Yes, with the Enphase Smart Switch, from what I have garnered from some research on the topic.

Sponsored