Failure to Understand Macro-issues for Recharging Networks

I am a civil engineer/transportation planner with some thoughts on promoting a major development of PRACTICAL recharging infrastucture. I would like to establish communication with like-minded people who might be receptive to the ideas presented as follows.
Most travel involves home-to-work home-to-school trips, etc. So the simplificatin and cost-reduction of the at-home charge location is primary, and the type of work such as accomplished by Phil Sadow hits that nail on the head. But there is the need to recharge at the 'remote' (from the home) location. The initial focus needs to be at the workplace. That is the "low-hanging fruit"
The presently proposed schemes of recharge "stations" and battery changeout facilities are costly non-starters. They would be inconvenient, costly and impracatical. Recharge stations have been manufactured by some major companies, and would involve a pedestal with current-measuring and payment-collection to provide high voltage/fast charge capabilities. The impracticalities are very high cost per unit, lack of ready utility connections for over 220v, and need for elaborate safety interlocks for over 220v. Even with Level 3 charge, the wait time would be at least a half hour or so, and the limited rage of the vehicles would thus require up to a cumulative hour wait-time equivalent compared to a single fill-up time of 5 min. for liquid fueling. Vehicle turnover would be a problem. The driver would not stand by for a half-hour wait, but would walk away to the local Starbucks, leaving the 'station' blocked from access by subsequent users.
Battery change-out also makes no economic sense because the large batteries are very costly and maintaining a large inventory of them of various sizes will be prohibitive. Also the robotics needed for change-out is highly complex, and requires costly underground stuctures, maintenance access galleries and on-call staff, and expensive real estate.
So what is the answer?
Most vehicle are STATIONARY most of the time. Recharging must take place WHERE THE VEHICLE NORMALLY STANDS--not at a special 'station'. Therefore, NUMEROUS, low-cost plug-ins are the answer, using 220v max and WITHOUT costly current metering or electonic payment devices. Payment for electricity would be accomplished by administrative and statistical means.
Establishing this type of network could be a profitabe endevor with relatively low level of investment, because the infrastucture is deliberatly kept simple and cheap.
Did you know that the first railroad cars were converted stagecoachs? That is because emulating the existing examples seems logical only at first, until the new prototype can evolve to serve the new need. The 'Recharge Stations' are nothing more than a misguided attempt to copy a gas pump. EV recharge is fundamentally different than liquid fueling, and needs a totally rethought infrastructure.
Please contact me if you have any interest in this subject.
Gary PO Box 5278, San Mateo, CA 94402 (650) 868-3399

I'd be interested to see where this thread goes. I have 9,500 miles on my LEAF, at least half of which I've charged away from home. Because of the acute lack of a modern EVSE infrastructure, I've been forced to use an AVCON EVSE adapter, which opens my ability to "opportunity charge" at the many legacy sites still in operation. It's no problem, during my typical day, to exceed the car's battery range by at least 50%. DC quick charging has more than doubled my car's range in a day. I look forward to a time where access to convenient electricity (conductive or inductive), allows me to go anywhere...

what are the safety and liability issues to widespread charging with 240 volt outlets at work places?
I thought the J1772 was a way to reduce or negate that exposure.
not true?

GAW said:

But there is the need to recharge at the 'remote' (from the home) location. The initial focus needs to be at the workplace. That is the "low-hanging fruit"
...snip...
Most vehicle are STATIONARY most of the time. Recharging must take place WHERE THE VEHICLE NORMALLY STANDS--not at a special 'station'. Therefore, NUMEROUS, low-cost plug-ins are the answer, using 220v max and WITHOUT costly current metering or electonic payment devices. Payment for electricity would be accomplished by administrative and statistical means.

Click to expand...

As a future LEAF owner (I'm in PA, I reserved with Nissan last year, and will order as soon as they permit me), I think you make vaild points:
1. Vehicles are parked most of the time; charging needs to be available in many parking places.
2. Work is the low hanging fruit; the office is probably second only to home as the spot where vehicles a parked most of their life.

I believe what we are waiting on is lower cost EVSEs. I also believe in what Phil is doing by modifying the Nissan/Panasonic unit; I have one of his modified EVSEs even though I don't have a LEAF yet which I've used already with a rental LEAF from Hertz.

Given the length of time vehicles are parked at the office, even 120 "trickle charge" would make a difference. I think what we need are simple, inexpensive EVSE units with J1772 connectors, both in 120V and 240V varieties, which can be permanently mounted in the parking areas of offices. Having to pull out and connect a portable EVSE every day might get to be a drag, not to mention the security issues surrounding a portable EVSE with which a casual thief could easily and quickly pick up and walk off. Maybe video surveilence needs to be part of the solution...

Now, here's the part that doesn't often get discussed. Many drivers are in the same situation I'll be in. On a normal day, I won't need to charge at work, however it would be nice to know it's available for the few cases where I'll need it. Ditto with locations other than work.

OTOH, if charging becomes plentiful enough, I could see myself plugging in and topping off (at least to 80%) whenever I can. IMHO, in the future, plugging in could become a habit, just like putting money in the parking meter, etc.

There are already three replies to my post. I see no disagreement yet with my thesis that the 'recharge stations' are not practical. To elaborate---a Recharge Station must be able to operate at OVER 220v in order to complete a short-duration charge to one EV after another. But even that will take a half-hour or more. My point is that such a duration, requiring going to A SPECIAL LOCATION, is unrealistic. But the Charge Station MUST focus on short-duration charging because the station is costly, hence there can only be a relative few of them. Ji772 safety feature is adwquate only up to 220v. For the higher voltages needed at a charge station, additional costly safety devices are needed.So each one needs to process many EVs, one after another. Follow the logic? My altermnative is to install MANY lower-voltage charge (110 & 220v) locations at 'regular' parking locations, such as in parking lots at industrial parks and other work places.
No one so far has indicated an understanding of the problem in OBTAINING PAYMENT for electricity. I assume that 'legacy' locations are free. That works only if there are few EVs to exploit them. Otherwise the cost of electricity becomes a burden on the owner of the plug-in. I am proposing a new method of payment, not needing current metering.

I am like-minded.

Need access or on/off control, mostly after hours, nights, weekends.

One dual 120v socket could serve at least 6 spaces.

Demand Charges must be delt with by the PUC.

Daytime (Peek Load) PV generation must be encouraged, to offset the at-work charging loads.

Cost and "subscription" access must be delt with.

Guest access must be considered as well.

Parking meters are apparently profitable.

Smart access cards might be needed.

GAW said:

There are already three replies to my post. I see no disagreement yet with my thesis that the 'recharge stations' are not practical. To elaborate---a Recharge Station must be able to operate at OVER 220v in order to complete a short-duration charge to one EV after another. But even that will take a half-hour or more. My point is that such a duration, requiring going to A SPECIAL LOCATION, is unrealistic. But the Charge Station MUST focus on short-duration charging because the station is costly, hence there can only be a relative few of them. Ji772 safety feature is adwquate only up to 220v. For the higher voltages needed at a charge station, additional costly safety devices are needed.So each one needs to process many EVs, one after another. Follow the logic? My altermnative is to install MANY lower-voltage charge (110 & 220v) locations at 'regular' parking locations, such as in parking lots at industrial parks and other work places.
No one so far has indicated an understanding of the problem in OBTAINING PAYMENT for electricity. I assume that 'legacy' locations are free. That works only if there are few EVs to exploit them. Otherwise the cost of electricity becomes a burden on the owner of the plug-in. I am proposing a new method of payment, not needing current metering.

Click to expand...

I would not assume consent.

The other issue at work and other places it the power available. Typically a 30a charging station needs 40a circuit. So 10 stations needs 400a circuit. This contrasts with only 5 to 10 amps really needed to charge the vehicle while at work all day. Similar at LAX if you are there for three days only 2 to 5 amps is needed. Suddenly a 400a circuit can accomodate 80 to 200 charging spots. Cost of pulling all this heavy wire just to have a handful of EV spots is somewhat more expensive than needed.

Some type of load sharing could also help with larger installations. Let the few charge fast but limit current when all stations are being used.

Once it becomes more econmical to install more stations places can just flood an area with stations and not necessarily require EV only spaces. This keeps more spaces in general use rather than restricted. Could also be used to migrate people that need a charge to a lesser used area of the parking lot making it more efficient for everyone.

Billing based on Carwings energy usage is interesting but rife with potential manipulation.

Just some random thoughts, good luck.

If I operated a public parking garage, I would want only 120 volt recharging stations (at no additional cost to the parker), because I charge by the hour for you to park, and you are likely to keep your car in my garage longer if you're charging at a leisurely 120 V. Yet the existence of free chargers lures you in to my garage, rather than going to that other garage down the street. If you have a contract, odds are you will be there for 8 or 9 hours anyway, so a quicker charger shouldn't matter most of the time.

Thanks for your responces.

I did not know about 'Carwings', but the basic approach of metering electric use ON BOARD the EV (instead of at the plug-in) is a good one. The cost of the metering device is thus not a burden placed on each outlet, so the cost of installing an outlet is minimized. Apparently, the Carwings accuracy needs improvement. However, consider this: Why is it necessary to have an EXACT measurement of electricity used and paid for? Why not just a good APPROXIMATION? This assumes that that there would be some overall advantage (including cost advantage)to billing based on approximations. Is anyone aware of other commodities that are paid for by consumers based on approximate measurement???? As for fraud, consider that turn-back of a vehicle odometer is a felony. Can tampering with a Carwing device (or equivatent) also be treated this way? aside from on-board measurement, there maybe ways to avoid measurement altogether.

It is true that some locations such as public parking garages and shopping centers may wish to provide free recharge opportunities as incentives. But keep in mind that these are only a small percentage of trip ends. The main game is home-to-work trips.

It is true that parking meters can pay for themselves. There are some sophistocated ones now in service with credit card readers. However, these meters only measure time, and the sophistocated ones serve numerous stalls without actually being located at all the stalls. The length of the cable connector to the EV needs to be short to avoid hassles in use, so there needs to be a separate plug-in at each stall. A parking meter that measures electrical current separately for each stall would be much more complex and costly than just the conventional time meter. At some point, the parking meter becomes almlost the same as a Charging Station, with the same cost disadvantages. The cost of the high-tech meter has to be included in the bill for the electricity. This diminishes the entire attractiveness of the EV (except for those of strong environmentalist leanings) because cheap refueling will be the main motivation for their mass use.

If we want to transition to an electric future we need to install a lot of quick chargers on our nation's highways. I think we need something around 40 or 50 chargers per mile on our major highways.

LKK said:

If we want to transition to an electric future we need to install a lot of quick chargers on our nation's highways. I think we need something around 40 or 50 chargers on out major highways.

Click to expand...

For the USA? The world? Your town?

We need charging stations in many sizes. 120v is fine for long term airport parking, 240v for sitting at a shopping mall or restaurant, and 480v for seriously traveling.

(As someone who doesn't own a Leaf yet...)
Agreed that the workplace is low hanging fruit, but what it accomplishes really depends on the driver and their commute. For some, if they can't make the roundtrip commute w/o charging at work, they are dependent on a charge every workday to get home. For others, I'd envision it as being a occasional topoff if they need to run errands or go somewhere after work that would take them beyond safe range to get home. This would mean they'd need to be able to reserve it and depend on a working station. For yet others, if charging at work is free, then it's just a savings to the EV owner.

As for your L3 station being tied up, that's why there needs to be some sort of protocol/etiquette between EV owners regarding what to do once the car is full. Per http://www.chademo.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;, there are plenty of CHAdeMO chargers in Europe and Japan. Whatever was in Europe was enough for these Dutch goes to do http://green.autoblog.com/2011/06/02/video-dutch-duo-drives-nissan-leaf-779-2-miles-in-24-hours/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

Agreed about battery change-out being impractical. We can hardly get L2 or L3 charging stations in the US, let alone keeping an inventory of various sized batteries on hand in addition to staffing and other equipment.

Then there's the pesky issue of L3/DC charging standards. There's CHAdeMO, which is almost certainly the most widely deployed, another as mentioned by http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=6202" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; and Tesla is doing their own for their Model S. I don't follow this standards battle/proliferation so others here can elaborate and chime in...

There was a thread (can't find it anymore) where folks here were debating where to put charging stations between Nor Cal and So Cal. My 1st instinct was I-5, of course. Others chimed in with 99 and 101, for various reasons. Until that thread, I had no idea about taking 99 to So Cal in the first place. There were also other interesting issues that came up in that thread. Maybe someone can point to it?

Another big problem w/the way charging stations are designed is copper theft. There are bunch of threads on this and I posted a whole bunch of instances of copper theft at http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=131826#p131826" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;. Some folks here have reported charging stations disabled due to copper theft, which are left only with a stump. It might become cost prohibitive/unprofitable for the station owner to keep fixing them and they just might give up.

I find it funny that you've included a snail mail address given this day and age w/email, forums, social media, etc.

GAW said:

I am a civil engineer/transportation planner with some thoughts on promoting a major development of PRACTICAL recharging infrastucture. I would like to establish communication with like-minded people who might be receptive to the ideas presented as follows.
Most travel involves home-to-work home-to-school trips, etc. So the simplificatin and cost-reduction of the at-home charge location is primary, and the type of work such as accomplished by Phil Sadow hits that nail on the head. But there is the need to recharge at the 'remote' (from the home) location. The initial focus needs to be at the workplace. That is the "low-hanging fruit"
The presently proposed schemes of recharge "stations" and battery changeout facilities are costly non-starters. They would be inconvenient, costly and impracatical. Recharge stations have been manufactured by some major companies, and would involve a pedestal with current-measuring and payment-collection to provide high voltage/fast charge capabilities. The impracticalities are very high cost per unit, lack of ready utility connections for over 220v, and need for elaborate safety interlocks for over 220v. Even with Level 3 charge, the wait time would be at least a half hour or so, and the limited rage of the vehicles would thus require up to a cumulative hour wait-time equivalent compared to a single fill-up time of 5 min. for liquid fueling. Vehicle turnover would be a problem. The driver would not stand by for a half-hour wait, but would walk away to the local Starbucks, leaving the 'station' blocked from access by subsequent users.
Battery change-out also makes no economic sense because the large batteries are very costly and maintaining a large inventory of them of various sizes will be prohibitive. Also the robotics needed for change-out is highly complex, and requires costly underground stuctures, maintenance access galleries and on-call staff, and expensive real estate.
So what is the answer?
Most vehicle are STATIONARY most of the time. Recharging must take place WHERE THE VEHICLE NORMALLY STANDS--not at a special 'station'. Therefore, NUMEROUS, low-cost plug-ins are the answer, using 220v max and WITHOUT costly current metering or electonic payment devices. Payment for electricity would be accomplished by administrative and statistical means.
Establishing this type of network could be a profitabe endevor with relatively low level of investment, because the infrastucture is deliberatly kept simple and cheap.
Did you know that the first railroad cars were converted stagecoachs? That is because emulating the existing examples seems logical only at first, until the new prototype can evolve to serve the new need. The 'Recharge Stations' are nothing more than a misguided attempt to copy a gas pump. EV recharge is fundamentally different than liquid fueling, and needs a totally rethought infrastructure.
Please contact me if you have any interest in this subject.
Gary PO Box 5278, San Mateo, CA 94402 (650) 868-3399

Click to expand...

With all due respect, I think you are unaware of the “Macro-issues” of BEV charging economics.

What will be most different about BEV recharging, as opposed to ICEVs, is that the concept of the "fill-up" will largely disappear. So your comments about DC charge time are largely irrelevant.

BEV's will greatly increase the efficiency of the electricity grid only by charging at night, when generation capacity is in surplus, and electricity costs are lower. To extend battery life, most BEV drivers will only "fill-up", charge to 100% of battery capacity, if they expect to need that charge level to reach their immediate destination.

If a BEV driver’s destination exceeds the total range of their BEV, they will want to recharge only enough to reach that destination, and do so as quickly as possible. Most DC recharge sessions will be 5-30 minutes, for the vast majority of BEVs, having 10-30 kWh battery capacity. The cost per kWh will be a large multiple of the off-peak cost, providing an incentive to the vendor, but a disincentive to the BEV driver to fast-charge, unless necessary.

Installing chargers in the the workplace for unattended slow charging using expensive peak power, is redundant and an unnecessary expense, for the vast majority of BEV drivers, whose daily commute does not exceed Their BEV’s range, received from their secure, cheap, and convenient, night charge location.

Public 240 V charge locations will probably only supplement fast charge locations, and be located in secure for-charge parking locations, or to attract customers as “free” parking is now offered by many businesses today. The charge received is easily metered, and will be provided at a profit or loss, depending on the marketing plans of the supplier.

I agree with TonyWilliams comment...

The idea has been stated that work-place recharging is not so important because it is on-peak of the electrical supply and thus more costly than off-peak charging at home.

Of course EV owners will want to make the most of cheaper electricity at night! No argument there! However, the work-place recharge nevertheless stands next in rank of importance. Only the most frugal users with shortest commutes will not be afflicted with "range anxiety" to some degree. The work-place top-off (or maybe a "semi-fill up") will remain attractive because it is human nature to want a margin of safety and flexibility. I have made the point that a lower-voltage supply at work is likely more suitable than a dash to a high-cost, high-voltage charge station (where you have to wait a half hour and maybe stand in line also).

I am interested in the fact that proponents enthuse over low electric rates at night, but have no idea of the capital costs of the exotic recharging station scenarios.

The onboard LEAF charger is only capable of 3.3 kW, or 12.5 LEAF miles range per hour of charge. That's 240V @ 16A, 3.3 kW.
Common public charging stations support 240V @ 30A, 6.6 kW. The J1772 standard can go up to 80A. Tesla's use high powered J1772 at 70A - 240V @ 70A, 15.4 kW - 58 miles of range per hour of charging.

Charging faster than 70 miles of range per hour of charging - 20 kW is entering the territory of Quick Chargers that go from 20 kW to the more common in the US 50 kW and some outfits make a 250 kW fast charger.

Charging at home at night is the best for the grid and low electricity costs. Some people take advantage of free daytime public charging when all their needs could be met by charging at home. That practice uses more costly electricity and produves more emissions, though the driver isn't paying for it.

Public charging is a necessity to increase the utility of the LEAF for those over 70 - 90 miles in one day trips.

Also consider that there are numerous clients of charging:
17 mile electric only range Plug In Prius Plug In Hybrid (gas after that)
40 mile electric only range Chevy VOLT Plug In Hybrid (gas after that)
90? mile range Ford Focus EV
100 mile range Nissan LEAF
160 mile range Tesla Model S
230 mile range Tesla Model S
300 mile range Tesla Model S

Also consider where the charger is located and some may see constant or over-utilization while others may only see one EV charging in a month - more EVs will lead to higher utilization, though once there's a reasonable payment scheme relative to the energy used from a charging station, people use public charging only when they have to - not very often on average - and charge for less money at home, at night.

There's a lot of different requirements, costs points and time allowed for charging. We need a broad spectrum of solutions to get the most utilty out of our EVs. We also need monetary components both from the driver and money derived from the benefits of not burning another gallon of gas to encourage people to plug in instead of burning gas, to plug in at the best time - overnight at home, unless they MUST charge during the daytime to make their trip on dirtier (still much cleaner than gas), more expensive daytime electricity.

The issue ends up being fairly complex, especially when you consider scaling from 5,000 Plug In Vehicles in California to 50,000 ... 500,000 ... millions. I pick California as an example, clearly may other states are deploying EV and contributing many innovations as we get more EVs on the road throughout the US.

Good ideas and solutions are always welcome. Keep in mind that many people of varying skill levels and economic interest are already working on the issues trying to find solutions that work and are sustainable. including economic sustainability - money has to come from somewhere to cover the costs of the parking space, the EV charging hardware, installation, maintenance and energy (electricity) costs.

I am aware of the costs of fancy networked charging stations, Quick Chargers and the standard 240V dryer outlets along with common 120V plugs. Some can be lower costs, especially an exsiting relatively dedicated 120V outlet in your garage, or maybe at your workplace. Keep in mind - a physical parking space for any type of car is worth over $200/month - or capitalized over it's lifetime - $40,000+. Then you have liability, weather proofing issues in some applications, etc. I wish there was a very low cost solution that worked on most or all applications and that there isn't a contention for parking spaces where dedicating a parking space to an EV charger doesn't have a cost and doesn't reduce the parking for non-plug in gas cars. Things like common dryer plugs are tempting, but they're not designed for frequent mating and it's not the type of plug you want consumers who are unaware or even afraid of electricity using, especially if they are not GFI protected.

Ps. GAW "I am a civil engineer/transportation planner" - you're background in these areas is one of the many different perspectivves and stakeholder view points we need to help sort out sustainable, cost appropriate, cost effective public EV charging.

Regarding surplus electricity at night, if you haven't seen http://www.caiso.com/Pages/TodaysOutlook.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;, it is insightful. It's also interesting to look at that page during heat waves, esp. when CA ISO sends out energy conservation alerts during extreme heat. While writing this post, I came across http://www.caiso.com/awe/systemstatus.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

It's not just about cost but it being bad idea to be charging BEVs in the day when there are alerts or emergencies declared.

IMHO, good employers will offer the free use of 120 V outlets as a perk. Compared to the cost of other employee benefits, this would be a drop in the bucket and could earn considerable goodwill. Charging during the day, when necessary due to range limitations, is still a whole lot better than burning gasoline.

cwerdna said:

Regarding surplus electricity at night, if you haven't seen http://www.caiso.com/Pages/TodaysOutlook.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;, it is insightful. It's also interesting to look at that page during heat waves, esp. when CA ISO sends out energy conservation alerts during extreme heat. While writing this post, I came across http://www.caiso.com/awe/systemstatus.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

It's not just about cost but it being bad idea to be charging BEVs in the day when there are alerts or emergencies declared.

Click to expand...

Cwerdna - You've nailed the resources to look at if you want to understand the CA grid better and see how it's doing today, even up to the minute. These are excellent resorces that I've been using since I got my GM EV1 and Solar PV system on my roof in 1999. Checking out these resources makes it real obvious when you want to charge your EV during a day, and the time periods when you only want to charge it if you have to - at least from the viewpoint of making the best use of our electric grid and lowering the emissions!