UC Irvine charging stations

[Valdemar]

Is there typically a demand charge from utility companies for L2 installs? That may explain the high price. If there is none then I wonder what factors are considered when coming up with an actual number, which I believe is set by the landlord. UCI used grant money to acquire the charges according to their web-site, so how did they settle on the $2.50/hr price-point? I can almost see a Coloumb "consultant" telling the UCI official the typical price range and UCI just opting for the highest number.

 

[richard]

I can almost see a Coloumb "consultant" telling the UCI official the typical price range range and UCI just opting for the highest number.

Bingo.

Coulomb CEO Richard Lowenthal said he "thinks consumers will pay up to $2 per day, or half the price of gasoline per mile." How did this turn into $2.50 per hour?

 

[TonyWilliams]

Is there typically a demand charge from utility companies for L2 installs? That may explain the high price. If there is none then I wonder what factors are considered when coming up with an actual number, which I believe is set by the landlord. UCI used grant money to acquire the charges according to their web-site, so how did they settle on the $2.50/hr price-point? I can almost see a Coloumb "consultant" telling the UCI official the typical price range range and UCI just opting for the highest number.

The demand fee is not an installation fee. For a place as big as UCI, with proper power management, they could probably mask a whole bunch of L2 charges and pay no additional demand fee. The amount of electricity they use would be a rounding error in their month power bill. Of course, somebody would need to pay for the power management equipment and installation, service, etc.

Coloumb is taking a cut, of course. They don't work for free. Somebody has to collect money, upkeep the units, pay for the parking spot that it occupies, etc., and MAKE A PROFIT.

The demand fee threshold is typically 20kW-50kWh.

This is a recurring theme. I can't count how many times somebody has said on this forum how they'll only pay zero, or next to zero, for this type of service.

We're our own worst enemies. I'm confident that if nobody pays $2.50/hr, the price will go down, or they'll eventually just remove the units and place them elsewhere.

 

[91040]

I will charge as needed, whatever the price. That isn't to say that I won't look for the best deal. The market will determine what the fair price is. We have been lucky that, as early adopters, we have gotten so many freebies!

 

[smkettner]

Is there typically a demand charge from utility companies for L2 installs? That may explain the high price. If there is none then I wonder what factors are considered when coming up with an actual number, which I believe is set by the landlord. UCI used grant money to acquire the charges according to their web-site, so how did they settle on the $2.50/hr price-point? I can almost see a Coloumb "consultant" telling the UCI official the typical price range and UCI just opting for the highest number.

UCI must burn $200,000+ in electric each month. Do you really think an extra $500 is going to even matter?

 

[Valdemar]

I'm confident that if nobody pays $2.50/hr, the price will go down, or they'll eventually just remove the units and place them elsewhere.

Still, most think $2.50/hr is too high and ultimately this is what matters and not necessarily what is right. Couldn't they do at least a rudimentary research and set the price at the level which would not guarantee to scare off most EV drivers? If they couldn't set it lower because they would start losing money it would be a different story, but based on what I'm reading here it does not appear to be the case.

 

[Valdemar]

UCI must burn $200,000+ in electric each month. Do you really think an extra $500 is going to even matter?

I do want the charging infrastructure to be sustainable, but not overpriced no matter if out of greed or ignorance.

 

[TonyWilliams]

I'm confident that if nobody pays $2.50/hr, the price will go down, or they'll eventually just remove the units and place them elsewhere.

Still, most think $2.50/hr is too high and ultimately this is what matters and not necessarily what is right. Couldn't they do at least a rudimentary research and set the price at the level which would not guarantee to scare off most EV drivers? If they couldn't set it lower because they would start losing money it would be a different story, but based on what I'm reading here it does not appear to be the case.

I don't agree that you have any idea what their costs are, nor have you done any price poll. What you have is a few people posting the usual.

You think it's too high. I don't.

This reminds of a few classic lines I've read here. In one case, a poster here thought that since there was a DC charger sitting in Dallas not being used, and in his opinion, the price was too high to use that $50,000 piece of equipment, that it should be free, therefore more users.

Honestly, please don't use it at this crazy high price for you. But, I want chargers available, and will gladly pay. Your actions actually jeopardize my opportunity to spend my money for the service that I want.

 

[Valdemar]

I'm confident that if nobody pays $2.50/hr, the price will go down, or they'll eventually just remove the units and place them elsewhere.

Still, most think $2.50/hr is too high and ultimately this is what matters and not necessarily what is right. Couldn't they do at least a rudimentary research and set the price at the level which would not guarantee to scare off most EV drivers? If they couldn't set it lower because they would start losing money it would be a different story, but based on what I'm reading here it does not appear to be the case.

I don't agree that you have any idea what their costs are, nor have you done any price poll. What you have is a few people posting the usual.

You think it's too high. I don't.

This reminds of a few classic lines I've read here. In one case, a poster here thought that since there was a DC charger sitting in Dallas not being used, and in his opinion, the price was too high to use that $50,000 piece of equipment, that it should be free, therefore more users.

Honestly, please don't use it at this crazy high price for you. But, I want chargers available, and will gladly pay. Your actions actually jeopardize my opportunity to spend my money for the service that I want.

I don't necessarily fully disagree with you, but if you think you can educate all people good luck with that. An average Joe will not bother understanding all the details and just think that $2.50/hr is too much and EVs don't make sense. Unfortunately we need average Joe's support in order to make EVs widespread. Once that happens charging infrastructure will pickup. Inflated charging prices just slow this process down. If $2.50/hr is what it takes to keep the chargers available then so be it, however I won't be surprised if the latest EV initiative will eventually die off as it already happened multiple times during the course of automotive history.

 

[coolfilmaker]

$2.500 is way too high. People with PHEVs will of course just drive on gas for half the price which kills that environmental benefit. I have a prius that gets 45 mpg so this price that they're charging is ridiculous to me.

 

[waitingforaleaf]

Seems that the more prominent academic institutions are the ones currently offering the more expensive rates for charging. At Stanford, it's 3 dollars an hour for charging and you're billed for as long as you're plugged in (whether or not your car is still charging). While I'm not aware how those EV spots are signed if they follow California AB475 then you'll be towed from the spot if you're not plugged in. While SOME people may get some use out of them, I find it not unusual that all their charging spots are generally available.

 

[walterbays]

Unfortunately we need average Joe's support in order to make EVs widespread. Once that happens charging infrastructure will pickup. Inflated charging prices just slow this process down.

Here is Ecotality's view of these questions: https://www.blinknetwork.com/membership-faqs.html

...
When will access fees begin?

ECOtality will be instituting access fees in the spring of 2012 – until which point, charging is free.

...Why will there be access fees?

Fairly priced access fees allow wide placement of Blink chargers, cover operational costs for commercial hosts and help influence consumer behavior to optimize the grid. These fees support a stronger customer experience that includes reservations, mapping, directions, and charging notifications. Not only do these fees ensure publicly available chargers are properly maintained, but they also provide incentives for users to move out of a parking space when they are done charging their EV. For businesses, the access fees offer the opportunity to recoup ongoing operational costs and ensure that consumers and EV drivers that need it most use the space.

...For a low $30 annual fee (now waived until the beginning of 2013), Blink Plus members charge at an access rate of $1 per hour. Blink Basic members have no annual fees and are charged an access fee of $1.50 per hour. Guests are always welcome to charge for an access fee of $2.00 per hour.

 

[Valdemar]

Here is Ecotality's view of these questions:

Looks like a fair pricing structure to me, if only I could find public Blink chargers in my area.

 

[TonyWilliams]

$2.500 is way too high. People with PHEVs will of course just drive on gas for half the price which kills that environmental benefit. I have a prius that gets 45 mpg so this price that they're charging is ridiculous to me.

I'm not sure I'd want a gasoline burning car using that one charging spot. Sounds like a win/win for me.

 

[coolfilmaker]

$2.500 is way too high. People with PHEVs will of course just drive on gas for half the price which kills that environmental benefit. I have a prius that gets 45 mpg so this price that they're charging is ridiculous to me.

I'm not sure I'd want a gasoline burning car using that one charging spot. Sounds like a win/win for me.

So you'd rather have a car out burning gasoline than being charged in a spot?!? I don't like PHEVs much either but they can be used almost as efficiently as EVs if people wouldn't make stupid moves like this.

 

[TonyWilliams]

$2.500 is way too high. People with PHEVs will of course just drive on gas for half the price which kills that environmental benefit. I have a prius that gets 45 mpg so this price that they're charging is ridiculous to me.

I'm not sure I'd want a gasoline burning car using that one charging spot. Sounds like a win/win for me.

So you'd rather have a car out burning gasoline than being charged in a spot?!? I don't like PHEVs much either but they can be used almost as efficiently as EVs if people wouldn't make stupid moves like this.

As opposed to me walking, yes.

 

[coolfilmaker]

It's fine to be extremely cheap (and I am truly amazed at how many here would drive the oil burner to save a nickel and not give any consideration to the TOTAL costs to environment, oil money funneled to terror groups, our tax payer funded military protecting oil assets around the world, etc), but when you factor all the true costs, even at $2.50/hr charge rate, it's still cheaper to take the LEAF.

WTF Tony. You're being a bit of a hypocrite. You say that everyone should be driving electric cars because of the benefits and then you say that you don't want PHEVs to charge. Which is it?

 

[TonyWilliams]

It's fine to be extremely cheap (and I am truly amazed at how many here would drive the oil burner to save a nickel and not give any consideration to the TOTAL costs to environment, oil money funneled to terror groups, our tax payer funded military protecting oil assets around the world, etc), but when you factor all the true costs, even at $2.50/hr charge rate, it's still cheaper to take the LEAF.

WTF Tony. You're being a bit of a hypocrite. You say that everyone should be driving electric cars because of the benefits and then you say that you don't want PHEVs to charge. Which is it?

I wouldn't look that far into it. No, I don't want swarms of Volts blocking all the spots when BEVs actually need those spots. Volts can always buy gas... I saw that on their TV ad.

So, again, given the choice of me walking, or a Volt spending a few minutes at a gas station, I know which I'd choose. I'm not against PHEV.

 

[Herm]

We have the power to solve this problem.. install your EVSE so its accessible to anyone parking on your driveway while you are at work.. yes perhaps your bill will go up a bit but sometimes you will charge at some elses house and compensate. If just a few of us did this we would have a huge network of free chargers across the city.. and most likely not iced. No reason to get grants, or get Blink involved etc, just keep it simple and install your EVSE outside your home.. if you cant, at least provide a 120V socket for L1 charging.

 

[coolfilmaker]

We have the power to solve this problem.. install your EVSE so its accessible to anyone parking on your driveway while you are at work.. yes perhaps your bill will go up a bit but sometimes you will charge at some elses house and compensate. If just a few of us did this we would have a huge network of free chargers across the city.. and most likely not iced. No reason to get grants, or get Blink involved etc, just keep it simple and install your EVSE outside your home.. if you cant, at least provide a 120V socket for L1 charging.

I like your thinking but it makes more sense to get businesses to install chargers because they get cheaper electricity and tend to already have infrastructure set up. UCI did which is why it is especially annoying that they're charging so much.

Plus, I am already paying over $200 a month for electricity.