Even Scientific American can get it wrong...

1) the article equates energy production with grid capacity
2) it indicates that power is cheaper at night in California, which has not been true for years
3) It assumes existing EVs can do V2G, which 95%+ can't
4) It boils up the issues to the point where the quotes seem to make real issues disappear.

There are distribution issues for supporting EVs and building electrification.

There are energy production issues on very hot and very cold days - which WHEN vehicles and chargers can support V2G may be able to help, but will you drain your vehicle to keep some one else's lights on?

It is too bad that they did a "poli-sci' article instead of doing what they are famous for and breaking down the issues so that non-industry people can understand them, rather than saying "nothing to see here, move along"