Colorado issues $10M RFA for private sector partners to build fast charging stations along major highway corridors

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

GRA

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 19, 2011
Messages
14,018
Location
East side of San Francisco Bay
Via GCC: http://www.greencarcongress.com/2018/04/20180412-colorado.html

The Colorado Energy Office (CEO) has released a request for applications (RFA) inviting private sector partners to build fast-charging stations for electric vehicles (EVs) along most major highway corridors in Colorado, including I-25, I-70, US 36, US 40, US 50, US 160, US 285 and US 550. The state is investing approximately $10 million in this program: the ALT Fuels Colorado Electric Vehicle Direct Current Fast Charging Corridor Grant Program.

The plan will add 33 direct-current fast-charging locations, with 50 to 70 miles between stations. Each Fast-Charger will be capable of delivering 150 kW to a single vehicle, recharging the battery to full capacity in approximately 20 minutes. . . .

The Colorado Electric Vehicle Plan was released in January 2018 in support of Executive Order D 2017-015, Supporting Colorado’s Clean Energy Transition. The plan states that lack of EV fast-charging stations along major transportation corridors limits the ability of EV drivers to engage in intra-and interstate travel and is a major barrier for current and prospective EV owners.

According to the US Department of Energy (DOE) Alternative Fuels Data Center, Colorado currently has 53 EV fast-charging stations (138 EV fast-charging ports). The Colorado Electric Vehicle Plan estimates that to support the medium-growth scenario of 302,429 EVs in Colorado by 2030 as projected in the Colorado EV Market Implementation Study, a total of 204 stations (817 EV fast-charging ports) will be required, with many installed along Colorado’s transportation corridors.

Under the high-growth scenario of 940,000 EVs by 2030, as many as 632 stations (2,530 ports) will be needed. . . .
There's a map showing planned locations.
 
GRA said:
Via GCC: http://www.greencarcongress.com/2018/04/20180412-colorado.html

The Colorado Energy Office (CEO) has released a request for applications (RFA) inviting private sector partners to build fast-charging stations for electric vehicles (EVs) along most major highway corridors in Colorado, including I-25, I-70, US 36, US 40, US 50, US 160, US 285 and US 550. The state is investing approximately $10 million in this program: the ALT Fuels Colorado Electric Vehicle Direct Current Fast Charging Corridor Grant Program.

The plan will add 33 direct-current fast-charging locations, with 50 to 70 miles between stations. Each Fast-Charger will be capable of delivering 150 kW to a single vehicle, recharging the battery to full capacity in approximately 20 minutes. . . .

The Colorado Electric Vehicle Plan was released in January 2018 in support of Executive Order D 2017-015, Supporting Colorado’s Clean Energy Transition. The plan states that lack of EV fast-charging stations along major transportation corridors limits the ability of EV drivers to engage in intra-and interstate travel and is a major barrier for current and prospective EV owners.

According to the US Department of Energy (DOE) Alternative Fuels Data Center, Colorado currently has 53 EV fast-charging stations (138 EV fast-charging ports). The Colorado Electric Vehicle Plan estimates that to support the medium-growth scenario of 302,429 EVs in Colorado by 2030 as projected in the Colorado EV Market Implementation Study, a total of 204 stations (817 EV fast-charging ports) will be required, with many installed along Colorado’s transportation corridors.

Under the high-growth scenario of 940,000 EVs by 2030, as many as 632 stations (2,530 ports) will be needed. . . .
There's a map showing planned locations.

Fortunately this RFP has an expedient completion date;

" final installation for each corridor will be completed and stations operational within 12 months of contract execution. "

California set a March 31, 2021 deadline in it's DCFC corridor RFP (GFO-15-603) and activity seems to be glacial.
 
Looks like a good start, although two charging spots per location is short-sighted and they better have a maintenance plan.
 
SageBrush said:
Looks like a good start, although two charging spots per location is short-sighted and they better have a maintenance plan.
While it is expected that all proposals for Tier 1 sites will include 4 DCFC, CEO will consider
proposals that include two DCFC if accompanied by a strong justification. Awarded proposals
that include Tier 1 sites with 2 DCFC will be eligible for up to 80% of equipment and non-labor
project costs of up to $220,000, whichever is lower.

Tier 2 Sites

Station sites designated Tier 2 sites in the tables included within Section 2 are eligible for up
to 90% of equipment and non-labor project costs up to $250,000, whichever is lower, to install
at least 2 DCFC.
The Tier 1 sites are along the interstates, or in the Denver - Boulder Metro area plus Estes Park, which are the major traffic corridors. The interstates will be part of Electrify America's corridor, and IIRR their plan requires a minimum of 4 QCs per site. Two QCs per site along the lesser-traveled U.S. Highways should be fine for a while:
Station sites shall include sufficient real estate for the addition of future DCFC
stations. It is required that there be enough space to double the initial
installed capacity (i.e., Tier 2 sites with two parking spots should have space to
double to four spots in the future as demand for fast-charging increases).

I particularly like these sections of the spec:
Locations

a. All proposed station sites must be within one mile from a highway interchange,
though closer proximity of less than 0.5 miles is highly encouraged
. Exceptions
may be made for areas without access to sufficient amenities or where access
to 3-phase power is limited. Stations proposed for site locations further than
one mile from a highway interchange must provide a detailed rationale. . . .

Facilities
a. Station site shall have 24-hour access to the chargers and well-maintained,
illuminated restrooms. The restrooms should be supplied with municipal water
and have a clean, operable drinking fountain. . . .

7. Safety
a. Station sites shall have dusk-to-dawn area lighting and a reasonable level of
public activity. The sites must provide or have access to shelter for inclement
weather. . . .

8. Public Amenities

a. At a minimum, the sites shall supply basic amenities such as vending machines
or fast food.

b. Stations shall have access to Wi-Fi and/or cellular service for customers while
they charge.

c. Access to full-service amenities within a short walking distance is preferred,
such as local restaurants, retail shopping, or tourist attractions.

9. Charging Equipment Requirements

a. Stations with two DCFC must be capable of providing at least 150 kW charging
for a single vehicle and at least 50 kW simultaneous charging for two vehicles
.

b. Stations with four DCFC must be capable of providing at least 150 kW
simultaneous charging for two vehicles and at least 50 kW simultaneous
charging for four vehicles
.

c. Stations must be backward compatible to CHAdeMO v0.9 and SAE J1772
Oct2012 or other similar standard to allow model year 2010 or newer DC
charging equipped vehicles to charge at lower kW. . . .

10. Operation and Maintenance. . . .

c. The applicant must address any issues such as, but not limited to, malfunctions
and repairs. The applicant must propose a plan to ensure that the equipment is
operational at least 97% of the time based on a week of 24 hours a day and 7
days (no more than 5 hours’ cumulative downtime in a 7-day period)
. It is the
applicant’s responsibility to ensure the 97% uptime requirement is met. For
significant or complex issues leading to extended downtime (such as
vandalism), applicants shall:

i. Notify appropriate sources so drivers are aware including, but not
limited to, website and application hosts, as appropriate.

ii. Inform CEO via email within one business day to explain the situation
and management plan to mitigate the problem.

d. Applicant shall include snow removal plan to ensure access during/after
inclement weather. . . .

15. Future Proofing

a. All stations shall be designed in a way that allows for future upgrades to a
charging capacity of at least 350 kW/dispenser
through installation of
additional power conversion hardware without replacement of installed
dispensers, electrical distribution, or power conversion hardware.

b. Future-proofing considerations should include total simultaneous charging
power for a station capacity of at least 150 kW/dispenser
for future dispenser
requirements.

c. At a minimum, sites shall have sufficient space that allows for future expansion
to double the initial number of charging stations installed under this
solicitation. This should include access to sufficient real estate.

d. Applicants shall include future-proofing strategies such as larger or additional
concrete pads, transformers and other utility-related equipment, and larger
and/or additional conduit to avoid having additional construction and conduit
costs in the future.

e. Applicants are strongly encouraged to consider opportunities for current or
future use of onsite storage, dispatchable load, and renewable energy.

Applicants should speak to these elements in their business pro forma as well
as sustainability and innovation sections of their proposals.
 
This is great news! There's a chance the ol' Leaf will be more usable. If I could I would only drive it. This might make it possible! Or at least a step in that direction anyhow.
 
so, AFTER a "contract" is agreed upon, you get 12 months to make it happen. Okay...so when does anyone foresee a "contract" happening? soon? Next year?

California is aiming for 2021? 3 years? wow, that seems glacial indeed considering Tesla is a bit further along than ALL of this.

More DC-QC, in more locations, at higher power (speeds), and as soon as possible. Let's get this done. Oh, wait, Tesla has those attributes now.

It's uphill from here. But I can be an optimist once in awhile. Bring on the DC charging!

Maybe ice-mfgs really are gonna wait for the chargers then bring us the 150 kW-capable EVs. hmmmmm.

PS From experience, the future TMS-Leaf may indeed come along right when the infrastructure for it is built. Anyone trying to do multiple QC with the non-TMS Leafs (at 30 kW of power or less!) are not gonna be happy in a couple of years. I speak from experience. Lithium in a box doesn't last long at 120 degrees F. For normal commuting, sure, L2 and the box o' batteries is somewhat ok...
 
finman100 said:
But I can be an optimist once in awhile. Bring on the DC charging!
I can also be a pessimist... Someone who's doomed to drive a 1985 VW diesel the rest of their life because EV's will never be within the reach of anyone outside of the upper class.
 
finman100 said:
so, AFTER a "contract" is agreed upon, you get 12 months to make it happen. Okay...so when does anyone foresee a "contract" happening? soon? Next year?
Grants are scheduled to be awarded in September, and part of the grant scoring involves the status of the land:
For each station site, note the status of access to property. Proof of access must be shown by

  • evidence of property ownership, a lease, or a letter from the property owner indicating
    permission or commitment to good faith negotiations. Applicants should clearly describe the
    existing relationships or agreements that will facilitate access to the property
    .

    • Required Documentation and Attachments: For each primary and backup site
    include an aerial photo, labeled site plan, and proof of access to property.
In addition,
8. Project Schedule

A project schedule that includes a list of project tasks and milestones must be submitted. The
schedule should identify a reasonable and timely plan for contracting, permitting,
construction, and opening for each station; core areas of work; lead individual and/or agency;
and the amount of time to complete
. A chart (Gantt or similar) should be used to outline
project tasks and milestones.

Applicants should note issues or conditions that will need to be resolved before the project
can begin and highlight barriers that could delay the proposed timeline
. All stations must be
complete within 12 months of contract execution. Proposals with timelines beyond 12 months
must provide a rationale for the extended timeline. Applicants are strongly encouraged to
complete the project earlier than 12 months, if possible.
So, figure one or two of the corridors will be able to break ground late this year on a few sites and finish them all within 12 months, but most will probably not start before spring 2019.
 
IssacZachary said:
I can also be a pessimist... Someone who's doomed to drive a 1985 VW diesel the rest of their life because EV's will never be within the reach of anyone outside of the upper class.
I think that level of pessimism is well-falsified already, unless you think I'm upper class for driving a $10K EV. (Yes, used. But barely.)
 
wmcbrine said:
IssacZachary said:
I can also be a pessimist... Someone who's doomed to drive a 1985 VW diesel the rest of their life because EV's will never be within the reach of anyone outside of the upper class.
I think that level of pessimism is well-falsified already, unless you think I'm upper class for driving a $10K EV. (Yes, used. But barely.)
I was referring to the notion that "Tesla is the only way to go" as finman100 seemed to be expressing.

Don't get me wrong, Tesla is a great company and all and I would love to own a Tesla. But all I can afford is a used $10,000 EV as well. And I would like that used $10,000 EV to be able to go places, not just sit at home as an expensive lawn ornament. This is why the electrification of Colorado is do exciting!

Say I want to go down to the capital, Denver. Right now my options are to either take an ICEV or take my EV and do Level 1 charging right in the middle on the way there and on the way back. (Which I have done before). Or say I simply want to go to the next town over, which I usually do twice a week. Right now my only option is to crawl along at 35 mph down the highway because there's no place to charge there and back. (Yep I've done this one too on several occasions).

Now that there are plans to put these things called "charging stations" along the highways here in Colorado now I'll actually be able to use my EV for what it was designed for, to go places, instead of resting all my hope on that some day I'll be able to pick up a used Tesla for under $10,000.
 
My next EV has to get me out of state, in reasonable time, with NO worries about fueling. I'm NOT leaning towards anything else but Tesla.

My Leaf has and continues to be awesome! I don't like the variability, shall we say, of the current network of Chademo. And i live in Chademo heaven (PNW). But one DC charging spot per location? Reliability of said one-spot DC spaces is suspect. Speed of Chademo is currently NOT "fast", in my opinion. My range is down 21% per Leaf Spy.

Leaf has compromises for what people like to do with cars. I've compromised for 4 years and one other company has not. I've LOVED what driving electric means. I want more from my next EV.

I see Tesla having fewer of those compromises for the foreseeable future, for my use/needs, and providing me with more of what Nissan isn't. See above comments about DC charging spaces and battery degradation.

I do hope a longer range Leaf with TMS and a nationwide charging network happens. The Tesla forums do not have as many threads about broken DC charging hardware, or threads about loss of range, etc.

$10,000 Leafs are great...but still limited. $35,000 Teslas have't been made yet, but they would seem to be less limited, to me anyway, for my use/needs. We'll see how this all works out.
 
@Finman100,

Your post fits me exactly, although between Colorado and the Feds a very nice tax credit is also available so if money was tight I would end up buying a Tesla for quite a bit less than $35k.
 
SageBrush said:
@Finman100,

Your post fits me exactly, although between Colorado and the Feds a very nice tax credit is also available so if money was tight I would end up buying a Tesla for quite a bit less than $35k.
Do you know what the current situation is between the Federal Tax cut and Tesla? I know I wouldn't get quite the full $7,500 due to lower income, but I'd hate to get a Tesla that doesn't even qualify for half that.


finman100 said:
$10,000 Leafs are great...but still limited. $35,000 Teslas have't been made yet, but they would seem to be less limited, to me anyway, for my use/needs. We'll see how this all works out.
I'm glad that's what you meant!

Sometimes I feel like there are quite a few on this forum out to make anyone who owns a Leaf feel like they've made the biggest mistake of their life when in reality a Leaf is a whole lot better then driving around an ICEV like my 1985 VW diesel.
 
IssacZachary said:
Do you know what the current situation is between the Federal Tax cut and Tesla? I know I wouldn't get quite the full $7,500 due to lower income, but I'd hate to get a Tesla that doesn't even qualify for half that.
The Federal Tax credit has nothing specific about Tesla, it is a $7500 non-refundable tax credit.
Colorado has a $5,000 refundable tax credit.

Google knows the difference between the two types of tax credit.
 
SageBrush said:
The Federal Tax credit has nothing specific about Tesla, it is a $7500 non-refundable tax credit.
Colorado has a $5,000 refundable tax credit.

Google knows the difference between the two types of tax credit.
Yes, I understand the difference between the Colorado and Federal tax credits.

The last time I looked there was a report that most Tesla Model 3 buyers would not receive the full federal tax credit. Basically the numbers are showing that you have to get a Tesla this year or by the first quarter of 2019 to get the $7,500 tax credit. If you get your Tesla within the second or third quarter of 2019 you only get half. And if you get your's by the end of 2019 or in 2020 it's cut in half again before it disappears altogether.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/class...federal-ev-tax-credit-cut-20180413-story.html

So that tells me I either have to jump on getting a Tesla ASAP or forget about it for the time being and just stick with the Leaf I have. I'm not in a position right now to purchase even a $22,500 Colorado Tesla (actually more around $25,000 for me since I'm expecting to pay the feds only around $5,000 at the end of this year.) Maybe if I sold both my Leaf and my 1972 Beetle for a good price I could, but so far I haven't been able to sell either.

But that's just me and my own personal circumstances of course. ;) If you can get a Tesla then go for it!
 
IssacZachary said:
SageBrush said:
The Federal Tax credit has nothing specific about Tesla, it is a $7500 non-refundable tax credit.
Colorado has a $5,000 refundable tax credit.

Google knows the difference between the two types of tax credit.
Yes, I understand the difference between the Colorado and Federal tax credits.

The last time I looked there was a report that most Tesla Model 3 buyers would not receive the full federal tax credit. Basically the numbers are showing that you have to get a Tesla this year or by the first quarter of 2019 to get the $7,500 tax credit. If you get your Tesla within the second or third quarter of 2019 you only get half. And if you get your's by the end of 2019 or in 2020 it's cut in half again before it disappears altogether.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/class...federal-ev-tax-credit-cut-20180413-story.html

So that tells me I either have to jump on getting a Tesla ASAP or forget about it for the time being and just stick with the Leaf I have. I'm not in a position right now to purchase even a $22,500 Colorado Tesla (actually more around $25,000 for me since I'm expecting to pay the feds only around $5,000 at the end of this year.) Maybe if I sold both my Leaf and my 1972 Beetle for a good price I could, but so far I haven't been able to sell either.

But that's just me and my own personal circumstances of course. ;) If you can get a Tesla then go for it!
The termination of the $7,500 credit will be followed for 3 months by a $3,750 tax credit, which is then followed by a $1,775 tax credit for another 3 months.

I have enough income to take advantage of about a $4,000 tax credit so a modest delay in my getting the car will not change the final cost for me. Anyway, I only wanted to point out that a Model 3 can cost quite a bit less than $36k for a Coloradan.

But it should also be said that Colorado has generous car taxes. Depending on where you live the sales tax is 4 - 9%, and registration tax adds another 6.9% over the first 4 years. It works out that the Colorado credit about covers state taxes.

----
Enjoy your LEAF! And hopefully infrastructure will come to your area sooner rather than later.
 
GRA said:
"...I particularly like these sections of the spec: ...
Authors seem to have learned from the disappointing experience of other public/private partnerships (DoE/Blink). I hope these RFAs produce the intended results. Since buying access to Tesla's Supercharger network seems unlikely, these partnerships are the short term hope for expansion of public charging infrastructure.
 
KeiJidosha said:
GRA said:
"...I particularly like these sections of the spec: ...
Authors seem to have learned from the disappointing experience of other public/private partnerships (DoE/Blink). I hope these RFAs produce the intended results. Since buying access to Tesla's Supercharger network seems unlikely, these partnerships are the short term hope for expansion of public charging infrastructure.
I agree, the RFA does look like they've taken note of all the factors that have led to delays and failures of other public grant charging network station buildouts (and maybe H2 stations as well) over the past 7 years, and done everything they can to avoid repeating those errors. Planning timelines, monthly reporting requirements during construction noting and explaining any delays, their cause and what steps are being taken to get back on schedule, maintenance plan requirements extending out five years with quarterly reports once the stations are open, only providing part payment per station until the entire corridor is open, ownership reverts to the state if the company goes out of business during the term, etc. It looks like a much more mature process than has been the case previously.

Of course, that doesn't guarantee that they'll have bidders for every corridor or that no delays will occur, but it appears to me to be about as tightly designed as such efforts can be. The one final piece is we've got to hope that the prices to charge are competitive with liquid fuels, so that the stations will be used. That will be assessed and weighted in the business model section of the application, and the equipment spec does require that payment allows for flexible pricing, by minute, hour, kWh and TOD.
 
IssacZachary said:
The last time I looked there was a report that most Tesla Model 3 buyers would not receive the full federal tax credit. Basically the numbers are showing that you have to get a Tesla this year or by the first quarter of 2019 to get the $7,500 tax credit. If you get your Tesla within the second or third quarter of 2019 you only get half. And if you get your's by the end of 2019 or in 2020 it's cut in half again before it disappears altogether.

At this point, it looks like Tesla will hit 200,000 cars sold in the US by the end of June, which means the full $7500 tax credit will run out September 30th. If they are able to hold off selling the 200,000th car until July 1, by sending as many as possible to Canada, and holding off deliveries to US customers, the full $7500 tax credit will run out December 31, 2018. After that, you will get half the tax credit ($3750) for another 6 months, and then 1/4 credit ($1875) for the following 6 months.

"Qualifying vehicles manufactured by that manufacturer are eligible for 50 percent of the credit if acquired in the first two quarters of the phase-out period and25 percent of the credit if acquired in the third or fourth quarter of the phase-out period. Vehicles manufactured by that manufacturer are not eligible for a credit if acquired after the phase-out period."
 
Back
Top