Quick survey for So Cal residents

[Valdemar]

Seriously, how often do you wait for someone to finish charging on L2? If it's taken you just move on or call for a tow truck.

 

[thankyouOB]

reservations, or at the very least a way to see whether the charger is available.

 

[KeiJidosha]

My favorite location. I use Burbank sites frequently when travel requires public charging. Locations close to shopping and freeways. 240 volt service from reliable ChargePoint EVSEs that show availability and pricing on-line. Pricing is fair, prorated, and promotes availability based on need. A blueprint for success.

But why no charging sites at the airport?

 

[mikeyd810]

but seriously, why does per kwh billing get so much favor? timed billing is better in all respects.

as charging rates slow down, people have to consider whether its worth it to get that extra kwh at double the cost. something you might want them to think if you are 3rd in line behind him.

also, we pay a hybrid premium to go farther on that gas and i paid extra for a faster charger so why should i pay the same for power that someone who chose to save money and stick with the 3.3?

sorry but the pay per kwh logic is weak because it uses "hydrocarbon" logic and we all know where THAT got us

Timed billing is better if you have a faster charger versus a slow charger, it's only better in all respects in your opinion. From a power usage standpoint though in the middle of a day during peak usage charging by kwh used is a more effective way to bill for actual cost used and protect from people taking advantage of the system. If I have a 7.2 or 10kwh charger I'm reaping a potential benefit of cheaper electricity with timed billing while others with a 6.6kwh or 3.3kwh charger are penalized.

 

[Valdemar]

But why no charging sites at the airport?

I suspect there will be in the new structure that's currently under construction next to the Metrolink station. The "Yahoo" complex on the opposite site of Hollywood Way has 4 chargepoints, $2/hr + parking fees. Very good availability. One caveat it is restricted to tenants, but I suspect the building management will be open to new customers as at these prices there aren't too many takers amongst them. You need "Worthe Real Estate Group/Charge at Work" connection in your CP portal to be able to charge there.

 

[Valdemar]

but seriously, why does per kwh billing get so much favor? timed billing is better in all respects.

as charging rates slow down, people have to consider whether its worth it to get that extra kwh at double the cost. something you might want them to think if you are 3rd in line behind him.

also, we pay a hybrid premium to go farther on that gas and i paid extra for a faster charger so why should i pay the same for power that someone who chose to save money and stick with the 3.3?

sorry but the pay per kwh logic is weak because it uses "hydrocarbon" logic and we all know where THAT got us

Timed billing is better if you have a faster charger versus a slow charger, it's only better in all respects in your opinion. From a power usage standpoint though in the middle of a day during peak usage charging by kwh used is a more effective way to bill for actual cost used and protect from people taking advantage of the system. If I have a 7.2 or 10kwh charger I'm reaping a potential benefit of cheaper electricity with timed billing while others with a 6.6kwh or 3.3kwh charger are penalized.

Sounds like Dave has a 7kw charger and is now on crusade to stop all whiners with low power chargers from pushing the pay what you got model because he thinks we stand in the way of his getting ROI. He probably doesn't realize that if I need 10kWh to get home I will stay at that charger as long as necessary to get that regardless of the price. If he's inclined to wait it's his choice.

 

[KeiJidosha]

But why no charging sites at the airport?

I suspect there will be in the new structure that's currently under construction next to the Metrolink station. The "Yahoo" complex on the opposite site of Hollywood Way has 4 chargepoints, $2/hr + parking fees. Very good availability. One caveat it is restricted to tenants, but I suspect the building management will be open to new customers as at these prices there aren't too many takers amongst them. You need "Worthe Real Estate Group/Charge at Work" connection in your CP portal to be able to charge there.

An unrestricted ChargePoint at the food court mall across the street from yahoo would be more useful to airport pick-up/drop-off traffic. I'd also use the Yahoo site if unrestricted. Currently use Sport Chalet or Burger King when needed.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

but seriously, why does per kwh billing get so much favor? timed billing is better in all respects.

as charging rates slow down, people have to consider whether its worth it to get that extra kwh at double the cost. something you might want them to think if you are 3rd in line behind him.

also, we pay a hybrid premium to go farther on that gas and i paid extra for a faster charger so why should i pay the same for power that someone who chose to save money and stick with the 3.3?

sorry but the pay per kwh logic is weak because it uses "hydrocarbon" logic and we all know where THAT got us

Timed billing is better if you have a faster charger versus a slow charger, it's only better in all respects in your opinion. From a power usage standpoint though in the middle of a day during peak usage charging by kwh used is a more effective way to bill for actual cost used and protect from people taking advantage of the system. If I have a 7.2 or 10kwh charger I'm reaping a potential benefit of cheaper electricity with timed billing while others with a 6.6kwh or 3.3kwh charger are penalized.

Sounds like Dave has a 7kw charger and is now on crusade to stop all whiners with low power chargers from pushing the pay what you got model because he thinks we stand in the way of his getting ROI. He probably doesn't realize that if I need 10kWh to get home I will stay at that charger as long as necessary to get that regardless of the price. If he's inclined to wait it's his choice.

could be my bad. were we not talking about switching from fast charge to L2 to finish? i think i am working too many threads at once

 

[smkettner]

I prefer the kWh billing method and $1 per hour minimum charging or not.

 

[MichaelBornstein]

I'd like to comment even though I don't have a dog in this race (I don't travel near Burbank and I don't have a Leaf) I do have a RAV4 EV with a 9.6 kW charger and a Volt with a 3.3 kW charger. At current gas prices, the equivalent cost of electricity is approximately $.35/kWh.

If I were to charge at a public station, I would use that as a rough number to see if it would be beneficial to charge there or to look for a cheaper station. Since very few stations put out the 40A that my RAV4 EV will drink, I am assuming that the Chargepoint stations are 30A or between 6.2 (208V) and 7.2 (240V) kW systems. Thus it would be worthwhile to charge your car if it had a 6.6 kW charger, but not worthwhile if you had a 3.3.

Personally, I probably wouldn't bother to charge my Volt at a public station unless it was free (thats the advantage of a range extender engine)

With my RAV4 EV, I would charge if I had to, but being cheap, I would look for a $1/hr system.

Charging by the kWh is the ideal situation when you have enough charging stations that nobody has to wait (thats the situation for ICE cars now).

Charging by the hour is essentially a penalty for those with a 3.3 kW charger, making them pay twice as much as the others, but then they hog the charge ports for twice as long as the others.

I am very much in favor of placing time limits on chargers with a whopping penalty or tow for those that exceed the limit. :roll:

Personally, I don't believe that PiP's should be allowed to use a public charger if anyone else is waiting (or perhaps at all :evil: ). I was about to say the same thing about Volts, but I can see the situation where someone wants to use as little gas as possible on a daily commute. I am in favor of employers placing L1 chargers in their lots for employees and L2 systems for their customers. This will eliminate the well known Volt problem at Northridge Fashion Mall. Similarly popular commuter spots (train stations, airports, etc) should be filled with L1 chargers for the commuters, and a few L2 for visitors.

 

[smkettner]

Charging by the hour is essentially a penalty for those with a 3.3 kW charger, making them pay twice as much as the others, but then they hog the charge ports for twice as long as the others.

If RAV and LEAF are basically empty and need 80% charge who is faster on a 30a EVSE assuming the LEAF is 3.3?
I believe it would be close to the same time.

 

[MichaelBornstein]

You have a point, but not necessarily a good one. To answer your question, I have not done the math.

But the RAV will have travelled much further to get to that point. so the net amount of time spent at the charger normalized over a few days will be less. (i.e. the RAV would only charge every other day rather than every day)

If both the RAV and the Leaf were making the same trip, the RAV would need a much smaller charge time to have enough power to get home.

If we do a reductio ad absurdum experiment, put your Leaf against a Tesla S. The Tesla would have to sit at the station all night and then you'd never see it again, while your Leaf would be coming back day after day. (Actually the Tesla wouldn't be caught dead at that station, he would just get enough of a charge to drive to the nearest SuperCharger station and laugh at both of us all the way home :lol: )

 

[Graffi]

I am still new and learning, but here are my thoughts from what I have learned so far. Please feel free to correct me if I am understanding anything incorrectly.

1. In California the PUC dictates rules to the various Electricity Providers in the state who hold a monopoly in their area of service.
2. One of those rules dictate that only these Providers can sell electricity, therefore none of the Charging station operators are allowed to charge by the KWHr.
3. The Charging Station Operators must pay commercial rates for electricity (which can be much higher that we pay at home), including a demand charge. In this regard, I was told by one of the NRG EVgo representatives at yesterday's gathering that there was a situation in which a L3 DCQC was used one time during the billing month, yet the Operator was billed over $1,600 because of the demand charge (even though that demand was for only one time during the billing cycle). I suspect that if that person charged at home the cost of the electricity would have been closer to $1.00, maybe $2.00.

Therefore the way I see it, there is only ONE way that public charging will ever be sustainable:

1. The electricity sold at each charging station must be sold by the respective Provider.
2. The California PUC must dictate a single rate that the electricity must be sold by these providers, at maybe the lowest residential rate, or even lower (I currently pay $0.11 per kwhr baseline and I never exceed baseline). Maybe a rate of $0.10 would be a good starting rate to encourage the use of EVs. In addition, there will not be a demand charge on any of the charging stations, just a low rate for the electricity used.
3. The various Charging Station Operators would contract with the Provider to collect these funds from the EV's that utilize the Charging Stations.
4. In addition to the electricity cost, the Operators could then charge a connect charge to cover administration and maintenance costs. This cost could be either as a rate per kwhr, or by the minute connected, or a combination of both. In addition, there could even be an increased per minute charge for any connection greater than 20 or 30 minutes on the L3 DCQC or connection greater that 60 or 90 minutes on the L2 240v EVSE.

This way the Operators would be able to continue in the business beyond the Government Grants as they could now operate at a profit. In addition, because the cost of using the Public Charging Stations would be somewhat consistant across the state, more EV drivers would be willing to use them and the operators would be able to collect more fees to help cover costs and profit.

As it is now, I do almost all my charging at home on the L2 EVSE at a cost of only $0.11 per kwhr. I have never used a pay charging station, and do not use the free ones except to get enough charge to get back home. My time is more valuable to me than the "free" electricity, even at the Nissan Dealer's L3 DCQC.

The way I see it, the current system will never work because the Operators will have to charge soooooooo much more than it would cost to charge at home and many EV drivers, myself included, would rather take my ICE vehicle for longer trips than spend the additional time charging when the cost of using the charging stations causes the per mile cost to exceed the cost of using Gas.

Please give me your thoughts on my suggestions above, and correct any inaccuracy I may have made.

 

[smkettner]

No the EVSE can charge by kWh. Disneyland has ten that do.
I don't think commercial electric rates are as high as you think for a simple 30a 240v.

 

[mikeyd810]

It's be nice one day if all manufactuers has a common charger speed, probably will never work out that with technology advances but once we get to fast enough would be nice

 

[cwerdna]

2. One of those rules dictate that only these Providers can sell electricity, therefore none of the Charging station operators are allowed to charge by the KWHr.
3. The Charging Station Operators must pay commercial rates for electricity (which can be much higher that we pay at home), including a demand charge. In this regard, I was told by one of the NRG EVgo representatives at yesterday's gathering that there was a situation in which a L3 DCQC was used one time during the billing month, yet the Operator was billed over $1,600 because of the demand charge (even though that demand was for only one time during the billing cycle). I suspect that if that person charged at home the cost of the electricity would have been closer to $1.00, maybe $2.00.

#2 is totally untrue now. Something in CA law has changed awhile ago. This is has been discussed on the SF BayLeafs Facebook group before and possibly here too. I can't find the link now.

There are PLENTY of Chargepoint L2 charging stations in the Bay Area which charge per kWh, many at $0.49/kWh (too high, IMHO).

Yes, demand charges are a problem for DC FC and if there are too many L2s or if L2s push a business over a certain threshold.

 

[cwerdna]

Charging by the hour is essentially a penalty for those with a 3.3 kW charger, making them pay twice as much as the others, but then they hog the charge ports for twice as long as the others.

If RAV and LEAF are basically empty and need 80% charge who is faster on a 30a EVSE assuming the LEAF is 3.3?
I believe it would be close to the same time.

I first read your statement one way and was about to say that you're wrong. The 3.3 kW OBC is significantly slower, esp. since neither car would have started tapering yet if you're trying to only charge to 80%.

The Rav4 EV would max out the EVSE. My work has 30 amp EVSEs running at 208 volts. I've seen the Tesla Model S that charge pull ~6.2 kW. My '13 Leaf SV pulls 5.7 to 6.0 kW (depends on the station, typically 5.8 to 6.0 kW). The '11 and '12 Leafs pull only 3.7 kW while the Volts I've seen pull only ~3.1 kW.

But, I re-read it another way now... I see what you're saying given that the Rav4 EV has about 2x the battery capacity of the Leaf.

 

[DNAinaGoodWay]

The survey is still up, I just took it.

If more workplaces and apt/condos had units, there'd be less demand for public.

A public fee structure based on kWH, but increasing after a set time, then increasing astronomically 15 minutes after charging ends would deter hogging.

 

[walterbays]

I was told by one of the NRG EVgo representatives at yesterday's gathering that there was a situation in which a L3 DCQC was used one time during the billing month, yet the Operator was billed over $1,600 because of the demand charge (even though that demand was for only one time during the billing cycle). I suspect that if that person charged at home the cost of the electricity would have been closer to $1.00, maybe $2.00.

Yes, this is the killer. As long as the CPUC maintains its rules on demand charges, all of the other state incentives for EV's combined (rebates, carpool stickers, charging station incentives) will not count for much. Demand fees are meant to level demand. But by keeping QC stations from being built, keeping range anxiety high, and keeping more EV's off the road, the CPUC actually exacerbates grid demand imbalance. Because even with plentiful QC opportunities 90%+ of charging would be done at home overnight.

I'd like to see demand charges split into the portion assignable to construction of generating capacity and long distance transmission lines, and the portion assignable to short distance distribution within a region. The latter arguably could still apply to EV QC load since the utility needs enough transformers and lines in an area to support the QC stations in that neighborhood. I think the former portion is much bigger, and this is where EV's help instead of hurt imbalance. So CPUC should assign only the short distance distribution portion of demand charges to QC.

They should also apply demand charges on a regional basis rather than on a site by site basis. For example SDG&E would monitor the aggregate demand of all eVgo stations in the service area, and assess the demand fee accordingly. Statistically this would be much more fair given the highly variable nature of serving QC customers. It would also give NRG an incentive to do what would most benefit SDG&E and its customers - implementing demand management region-wide. Say someone starts to charge in Carlsbad, 50 kW. Then someone starts in San Ysidro and total demand is up to 100 kW. Someone starts in Fashion Valley and in Del Mar, but by then the car in Carlsbad has reached 80% charge and ramped down to 20 kW, so the total is now 170 kW. If NRG had a regional target of 150 kW demand they might deliver 43 kW to three cars and 20 kW to the fourth. As one car ramps down or finishes charging they could reallocate its kW to other cars charging in the region. Their target might be lowered in times of CalISO electrical grid emergencies.

 

[MichaelBornstein]

If more workplaces and apt/condos had units, there'd be less demand for public.

A public fee structure based on kWH, but increasing after a set time, then increasing astronomically 15 minutes after charging ends would deter hogging.

I agree, but for small companies the cost is astronomical. My company (a medical practice) has over 200 employees at three locations. So far there are only two people with EV's, myself with a RAV4 EV and a Volt, and a partner with a Leaf, Although the cost of an EVSE isn't bad ($1309 for the Clipper Creek), we've had estimates of $10000 for the trenching to get the power out to the parking lot. I personally would only use the system if it were free (thanks to the range of the RAV4 ). My partner would use it occasionally as he lives further away. If there was more of a demand from the employees, we might consider it.

The hospital at which I practice had the offer of a free EVSE from Chargepoint, but their cost of trenching was even higher. We could only find a handful of doctors and employees that would utilize the system, so the CEO said NO!

The State might start requiring the installation of EVSE's with new construction, and of course the cost is much less when you don't have to tear up an existing lot. Until then it will be very hard for existing businesses to install systems for their employees unless A) there are a large number of employees demanding it, or B) the business is large enough to absorb the cost.

In the smaller communities, the commutes tend to be shorter so most people charge at home. I only use public chargers for my RAV4 when I have to drive to LA for service. I never use them for my Volt.