UC Irvine charging stations

[TonyWilliams]

I don't think Blink or ChargePoint will be eager to adopt any business model that would reduce their profits but trying to rape EV drivers with outrageous fuel costs will not only ensure that they fail but will slow the adoption of EVs. How many people are going to want to buy a car with limited range if the fuel costs are more than that of a ICE vehicle?..... Almost everyone will simply charge at home and avoid the high cost of using these chargers.

DC QC stations will actually give us something useful that we can't get at home. But if the Level 2 charging rates are any indication of the greed these companies have, they'll shoot themselves in the foot while trying to extract money for the use of their DC QC stations as well. :roll:

The one business model that I see that could actually give EV driver's real value and make these companies a lot of money would require that they work together and come up with a flat subscription rate

In Texas, there is a company with a flat subscription rate plan for DC charging now:

https://www.evgonetwork.com/Charging_Plans/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[smkettner]

That's exactly right. We need an exception in the law to allow the resale of electricity for the purpose of charging electric vehicles.

Even if it existed I don't think charging station owners would be very eager to adopt the consumption-based model as the cost of electricity itself is just a small portion of the total price they set (as in this UCI example).

As if a gasoline station did not need huge capital investment to comply with all regulations. And yet they don't get anywhere close to 100% or 200% markup on gasoline.

 

[garygid]

In CA, the CA Public Utility Commission has stated that
one who retails e-fuel is not a (regulated) Public Utility (PU).

 

[EricBayArea]

In CA, the CA Public Utility Commission has stated that
one who retails e-fuel is not a (regulated) Public Utility (PU).

If I recall earlier in this thread or another, that is precisely why they must charge (in CA at least) by time (hour, day, etc.) and NOT by WATT, because only regulated utilities can resale electricity.

 

[TonyWilliams]

In CA, the CA Public Utility Commission has stated that
one who retails e-fuel is not a (regulated) Public Utility (PU).

If I recall earlier in this thread or another, that is precisely why they must charge (in CA at least) by time (hour, day, etc.) and NOT by WATT, because only regulated utilities can resale electricity.

On July 29, 2010, the... PUC ruled that the ownership or operation of a
facility that sells electricity at retail to the public for use
only as a motor vehicle fuel does not make the corporation or
person a "public utility" within the meaning of the Public
Utilities Code.

 

[Luft]

I don't think Blink or ChargePoint will be eager to adopt any business model that would reduce their profits but trying to rape EV drivers with outrageous fuel costs will not only ensure that they fail but will slow the adoption of EVs. How many people are going to want to buy a car with limited range if the fuel costs are more than that of a ICE vehicle?..... Almost everyone will simply charge at home and avoid the high cost of using these chargers.

DC QC stations will actually give us something useful that we can't get at home. But if the Level 2 charging rates are any indication of the greed these companies have, they'll shoot themselves in the foot while trying to extract money for the use of their DC QC stations as well. :roll:

The one business model that I see that could actually give EV driver's real value and make these companies a lot of money would require that they work together and come up with a flat subscription rate

In Texas, there is a company with a flat subscription rate plan for DC charging now:

https://www.evgonetwork.com/Charging_Plans/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Their "Home" plan looks interesting to me for people who want to get a level 2 EVSE installed at no cost. It looks like they lock their customer's into a three year contract at about $50 per month in order to ensure they get their investment back. Still this is not a good long term deal for customers.

Their "Complete" plan that they mark as "Smart Choice" is the worse plan. Almost $90.00 per month for a Level 2 EVSE rental and they cover the cost of the installation and electricity.

The "Mobile" plan they offer allows "Unlimited charging at eVgo network stations." I assume that eVgo has DC QC stations. They're bundling a free installation of a Level 2 EVSE with unlimited use of their "network stations." It's this bundling that will make this a bad deal in the long run.

I think what is needed is a wide network of DC QC stations that will allow customers to extend their range to anywhere they want to go while keeping the cost low for their customers. This is possible only if there is either a large monopoly or if most or all of the DC QC station owners ban together. Customer's are not going to want to pay $38 to each owner of DC QC stations. That would be too expensive but if the e-fuel providers could centrally collect the money and work out a fair way to divide the money among themselves the business model could work. It would require a large pool of subscribers and assumes that most subscribers aren't going to use the DC QC stations as their standard charging method.

The inconvenience of waiting around for twenty minutes while the car charges will probably cause a lot of people to mostly use the stations on extended trips or in emergency situations. The peace of mind that comes with knowing that you won't get stranded and that you can go anywhere you want will make the low cost subscription worth having even if it's not used frequently.

It's hard to say how this will all shake out but one thing we don't want is to break free from the oil cartels only to get raped by newly formed e-fuel cartels.

 

[TonyWilliams]

I think what is needed is a wide network of DC QC stations that will allow customers to extend their range to anywhere they want to go while keeping the cost low for their customers. This is possible only if there is either a large monopoly or if most or all of the DC QC station owners ban together. Customer's are not going to want to pay $38 to each owner of DC QC stations. That would be too expensive but if the e-fuel providers could centrally collect the money and work out a fair way to divide the money among themselves the business model could work. It would require a large pool of subscribers and assumes that most subscribers aren't going to use the DC QC stations as their standard charging method.

I honestly don't think your proposal will work. To begin with, it's clear that any cost to the EV driver that is more than a bit above the wholesale price of electricity is too much for you, and many others who post on this subject on this forum. Let's just say that the cheap skate concept probably won't work out to well to entice businesses into EV charging.

You keep preaching how these companies are all raping you, and I'll see how many companies show up to sell you 50 cents worth of electricity from their $50k vending machine.

**********************************************
Practices that suggest collusion exists include:

Uniform prices
A penalty for price discounts
Advance notice of price changes
Information exchange

Collusion is largely illegal in the United States, Canada and most of the EU due to competition/antitrust law, but implicit collusion in the form of price leadership and tacit understandings still takes place.

 

[Luft]

I honestly don't think your proposal will work.

Well, it's not really my proposal. There are oil companies in Japan think that a $38.00 / month subscription fee will work or they wouldn't be trying it. We'll just have to wait and see if they are correct. I believe that they are and you apparently don't.

I agree that for the new e-fuel providers to cooperate they may need to thread a legal needle so as not to go afoul of anti-trust laws but I think that it can be done. I'll leave it to lawyers to work out the details but this would not be the case of separate companies fixing prices but rather companies forming a coalition so that people can pay a set fee once and have access to all charging stations in the coalition.

The electricity from the not $50K but if Nissan is telling the truth about $9K chargers would have the cost spread out over all subscriptions. The Japanese companies are betting it would be a profitable business model. Sure there would be a few who use more electricity than the subscription fees pay for but more people won't use that much electricity. That has got to be the thinking of these Japanese companies or they wouldn't be doing it.

If it is so expensive to live in Japan compared to the USA and yet these companies are going to offer the subscriptions for $38.00 then why would it be so infeasible to offer the same thing here where it is relatively cheap to live?

What these e-fuel companies need to realise is that their future is tied to the adoption of the EV and that adoption is not unrelated to their business models. If they're too greedy adoption could falter and they're business will fail. If they offer reasonable subscriptions it will promote the adoption of EVs and there business will flourish. It just takes not being short sighted.

 

[TonyWilliams]

I honestly don't think your proposal will work.

Well, it's not really my proposal. There are oil companies in Japan think that a $38.00 / month subscription fee will work or they wouldn't be trying it. We'll just have to wait and see if they are correct. I believe that they are and you apparently don't.... That has got to be the thinking of these Japanese companies or they wouldn't be doing it.

Do we know that these Japan QCers aren't subsidized in some way?

The electricity from the not $50K but if Nissan is telling the truth about $9K chargers would have the cost spread out over all subscriptions.

Every time I read about the Nissan QCer, the price seems to get cheaper. It was supposed to be available in the USA in Jan 2012. Today is Jan 31. No Nissan/Sumitomo charger.

Like virtually every low ball dream, the only costs are your $9k charger and wholesale electricity. Good luck.

it is so expensive to live in Japan compared to the USA and yet these companies are going to offer the subscriptions for $38.00 then why would it be so infeasible to offer the same thing here where it is relatively cheap to live?

Again, are there subsidies? With over $100 million taxpayer dollars, I can count on my fingers how many QCers Ecotality has installed in the USA.

If they're too greedy adoption could falter and they're business will fail. If they offer reasonable subscriptions it will promote the adoption of EVs and there business will flourish. It just takes not being short sighted.

My bigger fear is extremely frugal EV drivers, who would burn oil instead of paying the same or more for an outstation electric service. We just disagree. Nothing personal, and nothing to be gained by going back and forth on it.

 

[smkettner]

Looks like my kid will drive past UCI and head to Loyola Marymount. 14 Blinks ALL FREE

 

[coolfilmaker]

Looks like my kid will drive past UCI and head to Loyola Marymount. 14 Blinks ALL FREE

Isn't blink gonna start charging in a few months?

 

[smkettner]

I would think the amount charged would be up to the site owner.

 

[thankyouOB]

Looks like my kid will drive past UCI and head to Loyola Marymount. 14 Blinks ALL FREE

Ecotality will inaugurate a cost for charging at LMU in June or July.
Currently, parking on campus is free but you need to get a permit to park--available as you enter, I am told.

 

[coolfilmaker]

For those interested there are now two EVSEs in the UC Irvine research park. One is a Blink and one is a Chargepoint. They are both currently free. They are separated by a space so it looks like they might put in a third one in between. Hopefully the chargepoint will at least stay free in the spring. Maybe they just put in the Blink to light up the area. :lol:

By the way, has anyone seen other organizations installing each type of pay station? I sure hope they don't think EVSE networks will become similar to cell networks.

 

[richard]

For those interested there are now two EVSEs in the UC Irvine research park. One is a Blink and one is a Chargepoint. They are both currently free. They are separated by a space so it looks like they might put in a third one in between. Hopefully the chargepoint will at least stay free in the spring. Maybe they just put in the Blink to light up the area. :lol:

By the way, has anyone seen other organizations installing each type of pay station? I sure hope they don't think EVSE networks will become similar to cell networks.

Thanks, cool.. Can't wait to try these out.

 

[hill]

I honestly don't think your proposal will work. To begin with, it's clear that any cost to the EV driver that is more than a bit above the wholesale price of electricity is too much for you, and many others who post on this subject on this forum. Let's just say that the cheap skate concept probably won't work out to well to entice businesses into EV charging.

You keep preaching how these companies are all raping you, and I'll see how many companies show up to sell you 50 cents worth of electricity from their $50k vending machine.
.

I've seen the price of the Q.C. drop into the $7K's (with incentives) ... so I'm trying to figure out what $50k vending machine is being spoken of.

Q.C. charging offers a perk WAY above L2 ... namely "time". For folks needing to get on down the road, the time saved on a Q.C. (I'd bet MANY will agree) compared to L2 is worth paying a moderate premium. That premium can make or break a Chademo owner. If the station is located in a spot where demand fees are already charged, then the Q.C.'s primary cost of operation is for it's electrical power (some for maintenance too). Take a simple $10 Q.C. fee (or base it off $5 for each 15 minute parking stall use). Let's say the Q.C. can adequately handle 20 charges per day. That's $200 ... or $1,400 a week. At commercial rates locally, that represents about 2,800kWh spent ... or about $1,000 a week for the Q.C. juice. There's a lot worse investments than that going on every day, and if one adds (or already has) a PV array, then all the better. At 1st blush, it doesn't look to be that horrible of a business plan.

Also - I don't think he's saying that ALL of the L2 companies are raping him ... rather just some. Like in any L.O.B. - it happens. If U.C.I. hopes to capture some poor EV slob - down on their luck ... and stranded - having to recharge at their location (for $15) ... you can be certain that the $15 is a tad more than, "a bit above the wholesale price of electricity". In fact ... it's a lot more than, "a bit above the retail price" ... even a lot more than some of the highest tiered electricity charges. One doesn't have to be a cheep skate to recognize that. But if you're stuck at U.C.I. and you don't have your auto club dues paid up - then you do so at your own peril.

What time do the ZEVNET people show up at the train station?
(Or, did I not understand correctly?)

Sorry for the delay Gary - I missed your question. It turns on the RAV4-EV user's schedule. IE, it varies. I see the largest amount at the train station though, on Sunday.

That's exactly right. We need an exception in the law to allow the resale of electricity for the purpose of charging electric vehicles.

Isn't the same effect realized by simply charging a parking fee of somewhere around 50¢ / hour at an L2 parking stall?
.

 

[TonyWilliams]

I've seen the price of the Q.C. drop into the $7K's (with incentives) ... so I'm trying to figure out what $50k vending machine is being spoken of.

Ok. There all gunna be $7k, with taxes, title, doc fees and insurance. And they're all gunna make $1400/week. Awesome.

We should see hundreds just around the corner any day now.

 

[hill]

I've seen the price of the Q.C. drop into the $7K's (with incentives) ... so I'm trying to figure out what $50k vending machine is being spoken of.

Ok. There all gunna be $7k, with taxes, title, doc fees and insurance. And they're all gunna make $1400/week. Awesome.

We should see hundreds just around the corner any day now.

Wow ... so much negativity. Sorry about the 'dark cloud' feelings and I'd never deprive one of needed hand wringing. Fact is, you look at a map of Japan's Q.C. network, any you can't see the map of Japan for all the Q.C. infrastructure. It started with 'dozens' being installed in Japan ... then the quantity grew. If you look at the plugshare map of the U.S. now, it shows there are 'dozens' here ... and like pennies ... a few here ... a few there ... and before you know it, you have real money. And I'd hate to take away the case of the $50K Q.C. ... but like computers ... they keep getting cheeper and cheeper. I'm sure the fake paper money the U.S. continues to print in the trillions will effect price ... as does copper and other metals. See, I said that last part, so no one would think of me being too upbeat.

 

[Herm]

How much are they charging in Japan for an L3 QC?

 

[walterbays]

Wow ... so much negativity.

Tony knows the obstacles to L3 better than most. Like all of us he's watched the endless string of promises and forecasts while we continue to wait for the first commercial L3 charger in California... someday. But Tony also tried to put together a non-profit co-op to build our own charging stations while the companies and government agencies dithered, and in so doing learned about the obstacles. Some obstacles like California's demand charge I know, having tried myself to pencil out a plausible business plan for the non-profit. I'm sure there are other obstacles I don't know.

I think the truth is somewhere between Tony's view and the rosy view of all the press releases, and L3 will finally arrive. The most hopeful sign is that companies like EVOasis and Chargebliss know all the obstacles as thoroughly as does Tony, and they still plan to build quick charging stations and make a profit from it.