7 manufacturers support J1772 L3 DC Quick chrgr over CHAdeMO

[TonyWilliams]

Has anyone here suggested it to SCE ? Might be worth considering. In any event . . . I've said it before, and I'll say it again. If we could get a bunch of us Leafers here to clunk down some dough, we could work with a regular ol' filling station in San Clemente to push through an L3.

The utilities in California are prohibited from being in the auto charger business. That's what SDGE is petitioning the CPUC to change now, for "underutilized" areas, which will be everywhere.

So, are you cool with this proposal?

ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING SAN DIEGO

If you’ve noticed a lack of ChaDeMo quick DC chargers in San Diego, and California in general, you’re not the only one. For Nissan LEAF and Mitsubishi iMiev owners with the ChaDeMo port, it appears likely that there may be very few ChaDeMo chargers installed here in the near future.

A group of us are in the exploratory stages of an organization that would buy, install, and operate several DC ChaDeMo quick chargers throughout San Diego. Each of us has who have purchased or leased a LEAF will receive a $2500-$5000 check from the State of California, and either a $7500 tax credit, or almost $100-$200 per month savings on a lease per month with the tax credit that Nissan passed on to you. The money is out there to build a private infrastructure that will be available sooner, than later.

The sell is simple. Each of us invest $1800 - $2500, and when we hit each financial landmark of enough to install a charger (about $50,000+ each installed), we vote on where the next charger should be installed, and go to that area to seek out a host. That means one charger per about 20-25 cars. It also means that these would most likely be available 24 hours per day. They will be where we want them, and we have equity in a product. Our host doesn’t pay us anything, which makes finding hosts a bit easier, we hope.

Your cost to charge would be something like $3-$5, which largely covers just the electricity. Once a basic network is installed, there is the possibility of offering memberships to the public, which would pay the market rate for a DC fast charge. If you’re interested, please contact:

Tony Williams, San Diego LEAF owner, TonyWilliams *at* LoveMyLEAF *dot* com 858-245-8217

Or friend us on Facebook at “Nissan LEAF Lovers San Diego”. We’d love your input.

 

[walterbays]

While I'm fantasizing about having regulatory power ( http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=141946#p141946 ) I'll add one thing. To qualify for the eFuel rate, charging station operators would have to accept stringent demand reduction conditions. In a (stage 0) warning, charging prices might be surcharged 20-50%. In a Stage 1 emergency, car charging might be limited to 20 kW or 15 kW instead of 49 kW, and/or the price might double or more. In a State 2 emergency, car charging might be prohibited. So in a real power crisis we might have to turtle over to an L2 station, or leave the car and take the bus, coming back to retrieve it at night when loads are low. But if we managed to get a rate structure favorable to EV's in order to help the grid, we could not have an event where EV quick charging could plausibly be blamed for pushing the grid over the edge of collapse.

http://www.caiso.com/outlook/SystemStatus.html

 

[TonyWilliams]

In a Stage 1 emergency, car charging might be limited to 20 kW or 15 kW instead of 49 kW,

Why not pencil that up, and send it to our pals at the CPUC ?

 

[smkettner]

http://www.caiso.com/outlook/SystemStatus.html

I see today we have 40,000 MW available and 32,000 MW used. I think below 95% utilization there is no restrictions. So looks like we have 6,000 MW available and if each car takes 50 kW..... we could be QCing 120,000 Leafs simultaneously just in CA. And just like those of us that permit our air conditioner to be shut off if needed this entire QC network could be throttled back or shut down as needed. I don't think our air gets shut down unless we hit stage 2 and conditions continue to degrade. I think we would need 5 to 10 million QC EVs on the road in CA to approach this utilization.... let alone get the chargers installed.

Looks like virtually no stress on the grid to me.

 

[walterbays]

I think we would need 5 to 10 million QC EVs on the road in CA to approach this utilization.... let alone get the chargers installed.

Looks like virtually no stress on the grid to me.

Yeah, I think 5-10 million EV's is about right.

Clearly building demand management restrictions into an eFuel rate would be looking to the future - to the far future. But it would also be so that under no circumstances could any EV hater plausibly assert that EV's were responsible for or substantially contributed to a blackout. They're looking for any excuse to roll back incentives, infrastructure spending, regulatory preferences, and any subsidy - except for oil subsidies of course. If they never get any such opening to attack, so the production volumes go up and costs come down, and the infrastructure is built out, then we might just get to that 5-10 million EV's.

 

[ElectricVehicle]

Vehicles capable of vehicle to grid (V2G) - where the car charges from the grid, but occasionally discharges to support the grid during grid peaks is the kind of thing we need for a sustainable economic model if we're not getting any revenue from avoiding burning oil. If your car supports the grid on most days, then the power company might finance quick chargers as a reciprocal payment for all the help (and cost savings to the utility) that the EV provided at other times. Currently, none of the production EVs I'm aware of support or have provisions to support V2G.

 

[garygid]

It appears that SDG&E is also trying to "milk" the little PV systems.

Generate 20 kWh during peak and get credit at 5¢ per kWh
(but they sell my power to my neighbor at 25 to 35¢ per kWh),
then if I use the 20 kWh that same evening/night, they want
to charge me around 14¢ per kWh to use the energy.

Basically, they want to make a BUNDLE on my Prime-Time generation,
pay me essentially nothing for it, and make me pay regular rates for
any incoming electricity.

That "incentive" will force me to charge my EV during PEAK hours.

I hope the CPUC does not believe SDG&E's BS.

 

[hill]

It appears that SDG&E is also trying to "milk" the little PV systems.

Generate 20 kWh during peak and get credit at 5¢ per kWh
(but they sell my power to my neighbor at 25 to 35¢ per kWh),
then if I use the 20 kWh that same evening/night, they want
to charge me around 14¢ per kWh to use the energy.

Basically, they want to make a BUNDLE on my Prime-Time generation,
pay me essentially nothing for it, and make me pay regular rates for
any incoming electricity.

That "incentive" will force me to charge my EV during PEAK hours.

I hope the CPUC does not believe SDG&E's BS.

Thank you, other Gary - and this EXACTLY part of the reason I jumped ship when it came to TOU. The utility Co set up such a complex system to milk the PV system, that good ol fashion grid tied works best for many. The utility works trying to make the system work best for them, that they shoot their self in the foot trying to squeeze every penny. The same would happen if we grid tied our cars. The utility Co will skew a rate structure so it hardly makes it worth considering.

But if I can segway back to Chademo, and GM/SAE's involvement, HERE's an interesting read ... a GM dealership comments how there's no market for the Chevy Volt:

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2011/10/chevy-dealing-congressman-there-is-no-market-for-the-volt/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I’m a Chevrolet dealer… we have a Chevy Volt on the lot, it’s been there now for four weeks. We’ve had one person come in to look at it, just to see what it actually looks like… Here’s a car that costs $45,763. I can stock that car for probably a year and then have to sell it at some ridiculous price. By the way, I just received some additional information from Chevrolet: in addition to the $7,500 [federal] tax credit, Pennsylvania is going to throw another $3,500 to anybody foolish enough to buy one of these cars, somehow giving them $11,000 of taxpayer money to buy this Volt. ..."

That's pretty sad, that GM's own dealerships seem to feel the electric benefit of the Volt is essentially outweighed by its cost, and its small size. Yea - let's see if they can even sell their hybrid, before anyne lets them re-invent the wheel (quick charge plug).

 

[scottf200]

But if I can segway back to Chademo, and GM/SAE's involvement

Why keep *attempting* to put this on GM. There are 7 pretty good sized companies that are going with this International SAE standard.
SOURCE Ford Motor Company

DEARBORN, Mich., Oct. 12, 2011 /PRNewswire/ --
Audi, BMW, Daimler, Ford, General Motors, Porsche and Volkswagen agreed to support a harmonized single-port fast charging approach for use on electric vehicles in Europe and the United States

That's pretty sad, that GM's own dealerships seem to feel the electric benefit of the Volt is essentially outweighed by its cost, and its small size. Yea - let's see if they can even sell their hybrid, before anyne lets them re-invent the wheel (quick charge plug).

And you believe that B.S. from *one* dealer. Clearly you have an agenda against GM. Volt VINs are over 7000 at this point. People WITH actual order numbers have found *their* car on those aggregate *for*sale* sites so they are just being computer feed with cars produced it seems and not real cars for sale.

What next you'll quote Mark Monica as fact the ex-Saturn dealer with an agenda. See this post: http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=142107#p142107" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If I had a nickle for every...

 

[EVDRIVER]

I believe it is a demo car and he can't sell it, he has an agenda and bone to pick and the entire BS is not worth the bandwidth.

 

[hill]

But if I can segway back to Chademo, and GM/SAE's involvement

Why keep *attempting* to put this on GM. There are 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . snip . . . . . . . Clearly you have an agenda against GM. . . . . . . .

oh pah-leeez . . . you can't truly believe some folks DON'T have agendas? Must be nice to live in that world.
1) - GM is the largest of the anti Chademo-NO EV producing companies - so it's fair game - and that's the 1st choice therefore, when one takes aim at those trying to muddy the waters for no valid reason. Chademo works. Chademo is proven technology. Leafers have chademo. There you go. agenda. If Toyota wasn't pro Chademo, I'd take aim at them, and find THEIR motive suspect.
2) - Corporate GM (both pre and post bankrupt) leadership has proven itself time and time again, to run with minimum integrity, minimum character, minimum honesty - whether it be 6 decades ago when they dismantled electric trolleys ... or 2 decades ago when they lied about crushing EV1's ... or whether they're making flag waving apple pie good ol' U.S.A. commercials about american made cars, even as they outsource to Canada, Mexico, China, etc ... or commercials about "we paid back all the money" ... though the Fed's still own a huge chunk of the company. Never mind the hundreds of acres of post bankrupt GM manufacturing sites that are now toxic nightmares that the public have to pay for. Never mind GM exec's that fly in corporate jets to congress to beg congress for money. Need I go on? No ... sorry, if you want to talk agenda, Leafer's agenda is teeny comparred to GM. But don't EVEN think that, "you must have an agenda" sells as an alibi to defend GM.
I hope the Volt sells, despite its issues, and despite GM.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

But if I can segway back to Chademo, and GM/SAE's involvement

Why keep *attempting* to put this on GM. There are 7 pretty good sized companies...

do you think that if "someone" could not convince a whole bunch of auto manufacturers to go "anti-green" that they would have spoke up on their own??

have you already forgotten GMs very recent stand on the technology?

do you really believe their token entry into the 100% EV market is due to some sort of deeply hidden environmental concern??

believe what you want as i will do the same

 

[scottf200]

it be 6 decades ago when they dismantled electric trolleys

Nice. You should go to the graves of those folks that were at GM at the time and spit on them or stomp on them to show how much "GM" (personification) did to all of us.

Please tell us some good stories about the other 6 you despise. Start with Ford as they were in this PRNewswire.
SOURCE Ford Motor Company

DEARBORN, Mich., Oct. 12, 2011 /PRNewswire/ --
Audi, BMW, Daimler, Ford, General Motors, Porsche and Volkswagen agreed to support a harmonized single-port fast charging approach for use on electric vehicles in Europe and the United States

DaveinOlyWA, all these companies are global business. USA is not the largest market. All these companies have various 100% EV projects going on for many months/years in other countries. Current EV companies are in it to make a long term profit ... or I could be confused

 

[edatoakrun]

...DaveinOlyWA, all these companies are global business. USA is not the largest market. All these companies have various 100% EV projects going on for many months/years in other countries. Current EV companies are in it to make a long term profit ... or I could be confused

You are confused.

Only Nissan and Mitsubishi have actually invested in mass production of BEVs.

They are the only auto manufactures who can profit from BEV sales in the next few years, and they are the only manufactures who's auto sales will benefit from DC charging infrastructure.

GM, which has invested most heavily in the plug-in hybrid model, which will likely be obsolete once the fast-charge network is available, arguably has the greatest incentive to block DC charging, to try to sell as may Volts as it can and recover it's investment before BEV fast charging closes it's market "window".

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

it be 6 decades ago when they dismantled electric trolleys

Nice. You should go to the graves of those folks that were at GM at the time and spit on them or stomp on them to show how much "GM" (personification) did to all of us.

Please tell us some good stories about the other 6 you despise. Start with Ford as they were in this PRNewswire.
SOURCE Ford Motor Company

DEARBORN, Mich., Oct. 12, 2011 /PRNewswire/ --
Audi, BMW, Daimler, Ford, General Motors, Porsche and Volkswagen agreed to support a harmonized single-port fast charging approach for use on electric vehicles in Europe and the United States

DaveinOlyWA, all these companies are global business. USA is not the largest market. All these companies have various 100% EV projects going on for many months/years in other countries. Current EV companies are in it to make a long term profit ... or I could be confused

you are under the impression that oil-based automobile manufacturers are willing to give up market share to EVs?

you are under the impression that said companies have weighed the benefit of EVs verses what they have to offer and are willing to accept that?

you are under the impression that FUD in business is not an accepted and long practiced tactic to influence consumers?

anyway, i have already stated you and I will believe what we believe.

as far as other companies, i applaud Ford (mostly because that is where all my American auto sentiment lies) because they have a very good entry into the Hybrid Market that is a bit high end but does produce the numbers. and it is a pretty nice ride. now their letting the Escape Hybrid go is disappointing but at the same time, i never felt it had that much of a market anyway.

but they are also dragging themselves into the EV market. and lets face it. the financial future of these companies is not really in question. they have cut back, laid off and banked cash. but the ability of the consumer to buy their product is suspect, so they are hesitant in spending billions to develop a product that will sell for $30,000+ and i dont blame them but at the same time; i have the ability to see past my nose

 

[scottf200]

...DaveinOlyWA, all these companies are global business. USA is not the largest market. All these companies have various 100% EV projects going on for many months/years in other countries. Current EV companies are in it to make a long term profit ... or I could be confused

You are confused. Only Nissan and Mitsubishi have actually invested in mass production of BEVs. They are the only auto manufactures who can profit from BEV sales in the next few years, and they are the only manufactures who's auto sales will benefit from DC charging infrastructure. GM, which has invested most heavily in the plug-in hybrid model, which will likely be obsolete once the fast-charge network is available, arguably has the greatest incentive to block DC charging, to try to sell as may Volts as it can and recover it's investment before BEV fast charging closes it's market "window".

Thanks for your perspective and more common sense oriented remarks. I can respect those sort of remarks regardless of whether I agree with the outcome or each companies motivation. I'm glad you understand businesses are here to make a profit as a main motive vs eco-altruism as a minor motive.

Certainly Nissan and Mitsubishi make most of their profit from oil/gas based vehicles. Let's not kid ourselves.

Let me be perfectly clear. I admire Nissan's guts in all this.

 

[hill]

Certainly Nissan and Mitsubishi make most of their profit from oil/gas based vehicles. Let's not kid ourselves.
Let me be perfectly clear. I admire Nissan's guts in all this.

I agree Scott - and imo feel both Mitsu and Nissan quickly grasped that the more EV's they sell (CHEEP ones, so they can sell in higher volumes) ... the more guzzlers they can continue to sell, without having to face CAFE penalties, as Mercedes often does, due to low corporate fuel economy. So, who knows - some of Mitsu/Nissan's motive may be gutsy ... but some of it may be that EV sales have a dirty benefit, in that more expensive technology doesn't have to be invented and installed in higher volume / lower mileage vehicles just to get CAFE mileage up above 30mpg.

 

[SanDust]

How about this map:

I'm just saying what the current map looked like. No chargers north of Solana Beach (I'm assuming that would be at the train station?) in San Diego County. The map didn't show any chargers in south Orange County either, though that may have been because this area is outside San Diego.

I'm assuming that you were there since your flyer was on my windshield. Did you see something else?

 

[GaslessInSeattle]

...DaveinOlyWA, all these companies are global business. USA is not the largest market. All these companies have various 100% EV projects going on for many months/years in other countries. Current EV companies are in it to make a long term profit ... or I could be confused

... snip:

GM, which has invested most heavily in the plug-in hybrid model, which will likely be obsolete once the fast-charge network is available, arguably has the greatest incentive to block DC charging, to try to sell as may Volts as it can and recover it's investment before BEV fast charging closes it's market "window".

That's the most convincing argument for GM working against CHAdeMO that I've read so far.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

all kidding aside. the seven are running scared and will be known as "they" below

1) they feel that it would be a marketing nightmare to not introduce some sort of super green option.

2) they are not prepared to spend billions

3) they feel (wrongly) that the EV market is very limited and by the time they get to market in 2 years, there will only be slim picking left.

4) they are realizing that Nissan's "suicide" mission (at least that is what most felt it was 3 years ago. remember Nissan was on the brink of bankruptcy less than 10 years ago) may actually pay off.

all in all, Nissan is truly an underdog. even Mitsubishi has not committed anywhere near the level of resources. Fact of the matter; if the Leaf does not sell out for the next 3 years, Nissan is probably in big trouble. i have to hope that 1 million new EVs per year will be sold worldwide in less than 2 years time since it appears that most will be on board by 2013 about 12-18 months away.

i have said that before. afterall, it was supposed to be 2010 that most would be on board... kinda funny. when i said that in early 2009, Nissan was not one of the companies listed there. wow!, i guess i really dont know what i am talking about.

one thing for sure. i am rooting for Nissan. more for their "different drummer" attitude, their guts, their huge gamble, but mostly because i feel their actions are talking MUCH louder than they's words and really displays Nissan's total confidence in their product. its no longer lip service. its put up or shut up