>The grid as it exists today has taken into account running them both simultaneously.

The grid doesn't directly care how efficient something is. It only cares about how much power is being drawn. A central AC is roughly 3 to 5kW. A dryer is roughly 2 to 5kW. That's 5 to 10 kW, and a level 2 EV is right in the middle of that range. So, by your statement, "the grid" can handle EV's charging at night, since it can already handle AC+dryer during the day.

>Programming vehicles to charge between any times doesn't guarantee that it will always be so, again what you are describing is an ideal situation. Even with programming you cannot guarantee that the day wont ever come that people wont charge their vehicles during peak hours. This is not due to stupidity, maliciousness, arrogance, or anything of the sort. It may come in the form of an emergency where people may have to evacuate, or other unprecedented scenarios. Think about it like this if there is ever a situation where you think you might lose power are you really going to wait to charge your vehicle?

Of course it's no guarantee, but money is a powerful motivator. Yes, we have accidentally charged our car during mid-peak hours, which costs me not quite double what off-peak costs. Of course mistakes like that will happen, but so what? Every EV owner is not going to make this same mistake at the same time. You keep insisting that the grid needs to plan for this extremist nonsense. And I say, no, it doesn't. That would be throwing tons of infrastructure money away, overdesigning for a theoretical edge case with a likeliness of occurrence so low that it may as well be zero. That is not how you do capacity design.

As for emergencies...so what? If I lose power, guess what? The battery in my car still holds its charge. And unlike an ICE vehicle, it doesn't consume a significant amount power while idling in traffic (an ICE engine burns roughly 1/4 to 1/2 gallon per hour while idling). Remember that big snowstorm in the NE? EV's, it turns out, did just fine. More than fine.

If a storm is coming, maybe I'll charge to 80% even if I'm not down very much. So what? That's going to be a really short charging session. Or, if I am especially worried, maybe I'll take the extra hour and go to 90% so give me more usable miles. Most ICE car owners will also gas up to a full tank, too. It's the same strategy, only I don't have to wait in line to do it.

If it's a sudden disaster, like an earthquake? The car is the last thing I am worried about.

You're way too lost in whataboutism.

>far as trusting you goes I'm having a hard time doing so (I'm not sure if you truly meant kW or kWh two different things one is power the other is energy you consume energy and power is the rate in which you consume that energy it seems they may have gotten mixed up)

The "7 to 8 kWh" figure I used for Level 2 charger, stating kWh instead of kW, was a simple typo. I know those are unusual on the internet, but there you go.

>If any of it gives you FUD that's because life is that way there are many things we don't know such as how the future will play out, there is a lot of uncertainty in reality, and doubt is something we all deal with everyday. Ignoring the facts doesn't make any of that go away.

It's FUD because it's based on hypotheticals and extreme cases. Read that third article you linked to, again. The grid is able to handle current adoption rates. There is plenty of time to plan for years from now, when adoption rates will be forced to accelerate further. Money has been allocated for exactly that purpose.