7 manufacturers support J1772 L3 DC Quick chrgr over CHAdeMO

[SanDust]

Same analysis, install a $15k QC for $10k (25k total, so 6x better), make 10%, depreciate over 8 years, locate where food is sold ... then you have a possible business case!

I think I saw a thread in the last couple of days where the City of Encinitas was installing a J1772 charger on land it got for free and their estimate was that it would cost $6000-$16000 for the install. And Nissan is talking about a QC for $10,000 but the target date for that is five years away. Practically speaking most businesses probably can't get that level of service and to upgrade to it would be prohibitively expensive. At this point the idea of installing a QC for the prices you're suggesting just isn't realistic.

But if you could get the prices down to the level you're talking about, and if there were enough EVs with QCs on the road, then I do think your model could work. I'm thinking of a gas station not a restaurant. They could set it up to where you got X kWh for every dollar of stuff you bought, or something else. If it only took ten minutes then, with electricity being as cheap as it is, the numbers could work out. Moreover, if you could get the prices down to this level, and if you could get a few million EVs on the road, then all sorts of business models are possible, though you'd still have the peak pricing issue.

But my point is that we won't see many QCs, and this lack of QCs will be due to economics not competing connector standards.

 

[SanDust]

Apparently SDG&E thinks they can compete with ChargePoint, Blink, etc. ...

The biggest competitor to public charging is home charging. All those special low home charging rates make it very difficult for the public chargers, and doubtless serve to dissuade investment in this type of infrastructure. I wouldn't invest in public charging because at any time the utility could raise your rates and lower your customer's rates, effectively putting you out of business. (Same idea of totally changing the rules for net metering after you've put the system in place).

SDG&E is a good case in point. They seem to always be screwing with, I mean adjusting, your rates without even providing notice. It's a horrible business climate.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

As long as we continue to use yesterdays logic to solve todays problems with tomorrows technology we will continue to have very compelling arguments...as long as we can keep the three ideologies straight when rationalizing our poohs of view.
I am not that organized in my head and I am not fast to grant either so j will now out of this conversation and concentrate on future options only.

That seems to be the only area I have success in. I try to concentrate on g the very near near future

 

[SanDust]

At the Ecotality presentation today in San Diego, the word was that after a year of knocking on doors, and even with offering to pay 80% of the installation costs, Ecotality has only convinced approximately 5-10 entities to install CHAdeMO chargers in San Diego County. The results for even J1772 chargers was not much more encouraging. Only about 300 of those will be installed, as opposed to the 1450 originally estimated.

For Level II chargers there are lots of hurdles but the big issue for potential hosts is utilization. For DC chargers you have more hurdles -- construction problems and landlord problems and operational costs (aka demand charges).

Obviously public charging is off in the future and will have to grow organically. Until there are substantially more EVs on the road hosts simply won't commit because they can't how the projected utilization rates will provide a decent ROI.

 

[Herm]

Ecotality has only convinced approximately 5-10 entities to install CHAdeMO chargers in San Diego County. The results for even J1772 chargers was not much more encouraging.

Perhaps the solution will have to be government owned L3 stations since the potential for profit is low, not many of them are needed if it only takes 30 minutes and the driver must remain with the car.. my guess is that 10 stations at the right places would take care of a large county. What is your guess?

 

[smkettner]

I keep thinking there must be enough power near San Onofre to put in an L3. Great spot to get from LA to SD or SD to LA.

 

[walterbays]

Ecotality has only convinced approximately 5-10 entities to install CHAdeMO chargers in San Diego County. The results for even J1772 chargers was not much more encouraging.

Perhaps the solution will have to be government owned L3 stations since the potential for profit is low, not many of them are needed if it only takes 30 minutes and the driver must remain with the car.. my guess is that 10 stations at the right places would take care of a large county. What is your guess?

That would be one solution.

Another would be a larger number of "L2.5" stations - DC QC limited to 20 kW to avoid the demand fees. These could be operated commercially and/or by driver co-ops.

Another is the scenario I know some people fear: your local utility as the sole eFuel provider. Exxon with a 100% monopoly. Utilities are the only organizations that could operate QC stations without worrying about the demand fee levied by the utility. The CPUC has barred utilities from operating charging stations because they want to avoid this, but the demand fees they left in place leaves this as perhaps the best commercial option.

Another is for the CPUC to *allow* utilities to set special eFuel rates only for separately metered EV charging stations. The rates might be time-of-use sensitive, but not prohibitive. The utilities intent, if it wanted to offer such a rate, would be to suffer a little extra peak daytime demand in order to incentivize thousands more EV's, and in return get a much flatter overall demand curve as those cars mainly recharged at night. In this scenario the utilities would be like gasoline wholesalers, monopoly, but regulated.

Another is for the CPUC to *force* utilities to offer eFuel rates, in recognition of the broader societal benefits of EV's. E.g., recharging with night time wind power that would otherwise go to waste, clean air, etc. In this scenario charging station owners would still be independent businesses but their wholesaler (the utility) would be selling to them at a government mandated price.

 

[hill]

Interesting.

Kind of funny how only one of those 7 companies actually has an EV in production, and the Volt is really just a Plug-in which doesn't really benefit as much from L3. . . . . . . . . snip

benefit ? uh, no, GM's hybrid doesn't benefit at ALL. It's not even planned that it'll ever be made to quick charge. The OP's title, 7 manufacturers ought to include a bit more data . . . like, "7 manufacturers who don't even sell EV's" . . . :lol:
You gotta laugh ... these poor slobs will try anything to slow down the gap as they fall farther and farther behind in EV technology. No EV's . . . and they want you believe they need to re-invent the wheel.

 

[hill]

NONE of these manufactures have any vehicles on the road with a fast charge port on them.

But they have goals:
http://www.cleantechblog.com/2011/10/chevrolet-spark-ev-with-a123-nanophosphate-lithium-ion-batteries.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ford may be the first carmaker to sell 100,000 cars annually that includes lithium batteries. When I lasted interviewed Nancy Gioia, Director Ford Global Electrification, she said that Ford has a 2020 goal of 10 to 25 percent of its vehicle sales including lithium batteries. Her best guess is that 70% would be hybrids, 20 to 25% plug-in hybrids, and 5 to 10% battery-electric.

Who ever it was that wrote that article couldn't have gotten any more mistakes in there:

Reuters reports that Nissan LEAF’s U.S. sales through September were about 27,500

27,500? That's a lotta Leafs! ... even if they'd have been talking world wide production. Then there's THIS not too correct statement:

"... Both the Chevrolet Spark EV and the Chevrolet Volt will be successful ..."

Really? There's THAT many people in the market for a $40,000 car that needs Premium fuel, only seating 4? Who knew! I'm still hoping they can build one that hits SULEV status. As for the Spark ... aren't they claiming that if/when they build any EV versions, that it won't be until 2013? And aren't they only going to be making them available in Calif? Isn't that the kind of marketing they did with the EV1?

 

[scottf200]

NONE of these manufactures have any vehicles on the road with a fast charge port on them.

"7 manufacturers who don't even sell EV's" . . .

We are not talking about what is going on in the next year or two. That standard adopted by the 7 manufacturers is to cover a decade or more. All these companies are planning out in advance.

Really? There's THAT many people in the market for a $40,000 car that needs Premium fuel, only seating 4? Who knew! I'm still hoping they can build one that hits SULEV status. As for the Spark ... aren't they claiming that if/when they build any EV versions, that it won't be until 2013? And aren't they only going to be making them available in Calif? Isn't that the kind of marketing they did with the EV1?

Audi, BMW, Daimler, Ford, General Motors, Porsche and Volkswagen are global companies and have various cars in test fleets around the globe. We are just not talking about the USA here. USA is not even the largest market anymore.

It is crazy that GM requires premium for the Volt. I'm sure they did it just to stick to consumer and for no other reason.
BTW, I do know a guy personally that drove his Volt last week over 250 miles. He used 0.17 gallons of gas all week. That premium gas at like $0.30 over regular cost him a whole nickle for that 250+ mile week. Crazy!!

 

[electricfuture]

it is readily apparent to me that the great majority of auto manufacturers hate the EV concept and are doing nothing much more than paying lip service

Every road block will be employed by US auto industry for 2 reasons:
1. Much if not most of their money comes from spare parts, i.e. engine/tranmission components, cooling systems, exhusts, etc. whereas the Leaf just basically has a battery pack and a long life electric motor.
2. They are and always have been tied to the oil industry.

 

[derkraut]

I keep thinking there must be enough power near San Onofre to put in an L3. Great spot to get from LA to SD or SD to LA.

Now...that is a fact; and an L3 there would get qa lot of use, imho.

 

[SanDust]

Perhaps the solution will have to be government owned L3 stations since the potential for profit is low, not many of them are needed if it only takes 30 minutes and the driver must remain with the car.. my guess is that 10 stations at the right places would take care of a large county. What is your guess?

That would be one solution.
...
Another is for the CPUC to *allow* utilities to set special eFuel rates only for separately metered EV charging stations. The rates might be time-of-use sensitive, but not prohibitive. The utilities intent, if it wanted to offer such a rate, would be to suffer a little extra peak daytime demand in order to incentivize thousands more EV's, and in return get a much flatter overall demand curve as those cars mainly recharged at night. In this scenario the utilities would be like gasoline wholesalers, monopoly, but regulated.

Herm, I think you'd need more than 10 since San Diego County is very spread out. The map showed one charger in North County and that was in Solana Beach, leaving the route to Orange County empty. I also think that most of these chargers are government installs. Ecotality tried to put a happy face on it but it seemed like the vast majority of installs were either government or government affiliated entities like UC San Diego. Interestingly the presenter said that gas stations wouldn't work because of all the safety issues of high power in close proximity to gasoline fumes.

I'm not very big on government operated fast chargers. What would probably happen is that the charger would go in but there won't be an operating budget. The result would be chargers which are out of commission as often as they were working. It would probably be better not to have a charger than to have one working sporadically.

Walter's policy argument that you should suspend demand chargers for fast chargers since it would lead to more EVs and an overall flattening of the demand is ingenious. Works. Nice job. If the utility wanted to do it that would be a valid justification, though hard numbers would of course be lacking. However, demand charges aren't the primary hurdle at this point. The biggest hurdle is the lack of or uncertainty over utilization. The only way that will be solved is to put a lot more EVs on the road, and that will take some time.

The good thing is that fast chargers, or for that matter, public charging of any type, doesn't seem necessary. It's a "nice to have" rather than a "need to have".

 

[thankyouOB]

I keep thinking there must be enough power near San Onofre to put in an L3. Great spot to get from LA to SD or SD to LA.

Now...that is a fact; and an L3 there would get qa lot of use, imho.

I dont think they want the visitors all day, every day.
they get neeerrrrrvous about security as they are a fuse waiting to be lit.

 

[garygid]

I guess we don't really NEED gas stations either, but they are
convenient ... if one wants to encourage oil-based transportation.
Also, ... some, rather few here, still have bathrooms for EREVs.

 

[SanDust]

I guess we don't really NEED gas stations either, but they are convenient ...

As the Ecotality representative pointed out, in the early days of the automobile drivers had to carry their own gas until there were enough cars on the road to justify the stations. If you really are intent you could carry gas and a generator. Then you could stop for a bathroom break.

 

[hill]

I keep thinking there must be enough power near San Onofre to put in an L3. Great spot to get from LA to SD or SD to LA.

Now...that is a fact; and an L3 there would get qa lot of use, imho.

I dont think they want the visitors all day, every day.
they get neeerrrrrvous about security as they are a fuse waiting to be lit.

San Onofre has TONS of acreage all around the domes. an L3 obviously doesn't have to be w/in the immediate vicinity of the generation area. Heck ... 70+ % of the place is SCE owned. Who better to push L3?!! Has anyone here suggested it to SCE ? Might be worth considering. In any event . . . I've said it before, and I'll say it again. If we could get a bunch of us Leafers here to clunk down some dough, we could work with a regular ol' filling station in San Clemente to push through an L3. Let me be the 1st to say that I'd be willing to fling a few thousand towards that worthy cause. ANYTHING to stop the numb-skulls of SAE and GM from being successful in derailing Chademo. Otherwise ... maybe GM and SAE deserve to be successful - if the Chademo crowd is so apathetic that they can't put their wallets where there mouths are. Just a thought.

.

 

[smkettner]

State park right there also for day use and camping. Public access is already in place.
The environmental impact report would be an interesting read.
And good luck with the coastal commission :roll:
Someone will find the emf will interfere with the breading of the sand flys or some other nonsense

 

[TonyWilliams]

Herm, I think you'd need more than 10 since San Diego County is very spread out. The map showed one charger in North County and that was in Solana Beach, leaving the route to Orange County empty.

How about this map:

Here is Ecotality's proposal:

 

[TonyWilliams]

State park right there also for day use and camping. Public access is already in place.
The environmental impact report would be an interesting read.
And good luck with the coastal commission :roll:
Someone will find the emf will interfere with the breading of the sand flys or some other nonsense

The government couldn't throw $110 million at the project and make it happen. I could only imagine the nightmare to get approvals, and all the government restrictions, insurance, etc, to operate on public land.

If we're are looking for a charging network in the shorter term, that ain't it.