The Future Promise of Vehicle-to-Grid (V2G) Integration: A Sociotechnical Review and Research Agenda
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vehicle-grid integration (VGI) describes various approaches to link the electric power system and the transportation system in ways that may benefit both. VGI includes systems that treat plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) as controllable load with a unidirectional flow of electricity, such as “smart” or “controlled” charging or time-of-use (TOU) pricing. VGI typically encompasses vehicle-to-grid (V2G), a more technically advanced vision with bidirectional flow of electricity between the vehicle and power grid, in effect treating the PEV as a storage device. Such VGI systems could help decarbonize transportation, support load balancing, integrate renewable energy into the grid, increase revenues for electricity companies, and create new revenue streams for automobile owners. This review introduces various aspects and visions of VGI based on a comprehensive review. In doing so, it identifies the possible benefits, opportunities, and barriers relating to V2G, according to technical, financial, socio-environmental, and behavioral components. After summarizing our sociotechnical approach and the various opportunities and barriers indicated by existing literature, we construct a proposed research agenda to provide insights into previously understudied and unstudied research objectives. We find that the majority of VGI studies to date focus on technical aspects of VGI, notably on the potential of V2G systems to facilitate load balancing or to minimize electricity costs, in some cases including environmental goals as constraints. Only a few studies directly investigate the role of consumer acceptance and driver behavior within such systems, and barely any studies address the need for institutional capacity and cross-sectoral policy coordination. These gaps create promising opportunities for future research.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".