Blink QC charging fees

[ELROY]

Went to the new DCQC in Thousand Oaks last night. It said my fee for the charging session would be $5 regardless of how much energy I was using. I checked the Blink app, and it looks like they are all charging $5 now. Based on my experience of using a few Blink QC stations the other week...it is hard to get to a 70% charge level indicated on my Bluetooth SOC meter even though I had the Blink set to 90%. So going from 20% to 70% (50%) would take about 4hrs tops on my level 2 home charging. At .38 cents an hour (.10kwh utility rate) Im looking at under $1.60 for the same charge level that Blink charges $5. So effectively I am now paying $10 a gallon gas equivalent fees. And suddenly the costs are no less than driving a Prius or high mileage ICE vehicle. And if you just needed to top off on your route to add another 20-30 miles of driving or so...it becomes even less cost effective. If we had 85kWh Tesla battery packs...that would be fine. Same costs whether you are taking 5kWh or 24kWh? Same costs day or night? Something has to be wrong with this pricing structure. Hopefully we can all convince Blink to come out with something a little more realistic. Should be per kWh, and be somewhat competitive with the home rate with perhaps a 25% surcharge. Not 300% more!

Its kind of like having a gas pump that charges you $100 whether your car can hold 1 gallon or 100 gallons. The one that benefits the most is the person with the 100 gallon gas tank. Not the person with the 1 gallon gas tank, or even the 100 gallon capacity car that only needs a 10 gallon top off to make it to the next destination.
It just doesn't happen in other real world applications of car refueling.

Here in Chicago the scam company that installed and ran our network of Chademo chargers (350green) was charging folks (anyone who would use their system in desperation) $8 per session! Regardless of the electricity used. Basically the equivalent of tanking up with two gallons of gas. About = 40 MPG then. Well hello Prius C....

Nissan must compete with Tesla regarding QC units in cities and on highways, where people either don't have home chargers, or need QCs for longer, or intercity travel -- like Tesla, Nissan needs to install its own units, at all its dealers, not just some, and they must be free for Leaf drivers. Because this whole privatization of the 'public' charging industry is not working well. Not with prices like that. Otherwise, if the state and federal governments really do care about clean air, etc., they need to install these units themselves.

Here in Illinois they had the brilliant idea to install L2s at dozens of Wallgrens and charge $2 per hour, with a min $2 charge. Who the hell goes to a drugstore for an hour or more....? Boggles the mind who plans these things. Free or fairly priced L3s are what the public needs. Hopefully the Nissan guy is reading these posts and telling his bosses what people experience in the real world.

Yes, they need to get this right. This is so crucial to the adoption of the EV highway. On my recent 200 mile trip, I was happy I was able to make the trip with access to 3 different quick chargers on the way. Had it cost me $15, (+ home charging costs), it would not have been that much better than a Prius, which could have made the trip non stop.

 

[Bateman]

Looks like the issue is being heard back at Blink: http://blinkshare.blinknetwork.com/blink/topics/blink_dc_fast_charger_fees" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[GRA]

Looks like the issue is being heard back at Blink: http://blinkshare.blinknetwork.com/blink/topics/blink_dc_fast_charger_fees" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Unfortunately, it's deliberately not being heard by Blink. Asking for per-minute rates is near unanimous, so why on earth is Blink ignoring all the comments and choosing to start with a payment mode that's being almost universally panned, while claiming that they want to hear from their customers? It's disingenuous to say the least, but if they insist on forcing this down people's throats the only option people have is to 'vote' with their wallets, and let the grass grow at Blink QCs. The local one is seeing a lot of use while it's free, so everyone who absolutely doesn't need a charge should avoid using these units until Blink responds to their customers' clearly stated preference (or some competitor arises who is more responsive to customers).

Then, if people find that they don't like per-minute charging as much as they thought, Blink can change it to something else. As it is, they're choosing to begin with the one payment model that the vast majority consider the least efficient and most unfair.

 

[vsaphill]

Hi Phill,

Thanks for contacting us.
The DC Fast Charger fee that you were charged today is for the session, not for the energy consumed. The fee is not related to the source/provider of the electricity. The fee charged is by Blink Network.

Thanks for being a Blink member and please feel free to contact me if you have other questions.

Charge On.

Sharon

 

[SanDust]

I think most posters are very confused about what you're paying for. The idea seems to be that you're paying for a kWh. Blink can't charge per kWh so you want them to do the next best thing and charge per minute.

That completely misses the point. You're paying for the SPEED with which Blink delivers the kWh, not the kWh. You can get a kWh using a 120v outlet. That infrastructure for this might cost $10. You can get Level II AC charging. That infrastructure might cost $3000. Or you can get DC charging. That infrastructure might cost $30,000. Blink is absolutely right not to go down the kWh/time path because that invites price comparisons with home charging, a comparison which Blink will never win and which will create all sorts of bogus complaints about overcharging.

If you want DC fast charging you're going to have to pay for it. If you don't like the prices don't use the chargers. If you do use them, which means you think they're worth the price, stop complaining and be grateful you have the option. I doubt that at five bucks per charging session Blink is making any money and I don't see how cutting the price will increase utilization given that DC charging price per kWh will necessarily always be far above other alternatives like home charging.

 

[hyperlexis]

I think most posters are very confused about what you're paying for. The idea seems to be that you're paying for a kWh. Blink can't charge per kWh so you want them to do the next best thing and charge per minute.

That completely misses the point. You're paying for the SPEED with which Blink delivers the kWh, not the kWh. You can get a kWh using a 120v outlet. That infrastructure for this might cost $10. You can get Level II AC charging. That infrastructure might cost $3000. Or you can get DC charging. That infrastructure might cost $30,000. Blink is absolutely right not to go down the kWh/time path because that invites price comparisons with home charging, a comparison which Blink will never win and which will create all sorts of bogus complaints about overcharging.

If you want DC fast charging you're going to have to pay for it. If you don't like the prices don't use the chargers. If you do use them, which means you think they're worth the price, stop complaining and be grateful you have the option. I doubt that at five bucks per charging session Blink is making any money and I don't see how cutting the price will increase utilization given that DC charging price per kWh will necessarily always be far above other alternatives like home charging.

Blink and all these private for-profit companies got hundreds of thousands if not millions in tax credits and/or other free government sponsored funding to install their EV chargers. So no, it is not near as costly a capital expense burden for these profiteering companies to bear, launching their new equipment. Blink's $5 charge is a made up number, admittedly, thus far.

Yes, DC charging is fast because, it is by design -- but eventually L3s may likely evolve to be the norm, not the exception, for public chargers. Especially as cheaper and cheaper units, like Nissan's, are rolled out. So L3s justifiably shouldn't demand such a huge cost premium (do you pay more for 4G data on your cell phone plan now in 2013?) The fact is that slower L2s only work in locations where people spend long hours to be able to charge -- at work, basically, or shopping malls. Possibly a grocery store. But who in the world spends an hour or more at a drug store? And what about on highways for long distance travel. That is where L3s will be so important going forward. Especially in cities where people cant charge at home. L3s could eventually even be added to gas stations themselves, as an option.

So if I had a choice between driving to a Blink L3 and paying $5 or driving over to a Nissan dealer and using their L3 for free, I'll do the latter. And perhaps Blink doesn't even care whether people use their chargers? The gravy train of government money and tax breaks may be the method to their madness. Like credits for EV compliance cars. Install more and more chargers, take the credits and that's it. The whole business model may not even depend on people charging their cars.... How long would it take to pay for a $50k charger with use charges? The machine would likely have rusted into the ground before that ever happens.

So Blink isn't anything special -- it's L3s aren't anything special, and if they (like many other private L3 operators) want to charge EV drivers exorbitant rates, just because they can, then people should not use them -- and explicitly tell the company you wont do so and why.

Hopefully if Nissan emulates Tesla and equips all its U.S. dealers with free L3s for Leaf drivers, it will force companies like Blink to fairly price their charging stations.

 

[EVDRIVER]

There are simple solutions, vote with your wallet and do not use these stations if you disagree with their policies. Besides the point of the fees being fair or not I fundamentally disagree with some general business practices and tactics some companies have used with consumers in the the EV project and for that reason I will not support some companies regardless of charging fees. I support businesses that have a vested interest in the EV community in some way, not companies that open shell offices and do not even have charge stations where they reside, or ones that try to slip in sneaky contact language under the guise of a warranty extension, etc, etc. Some companies in the EV related business exist to foster the betterment of EVs while making a profit and some are there to make a quick buck any way they can. Let your wallet decide how you feel, personally I see the need for some basic business values before I spend even a dime, even if it is the best deal in town. I tend to overpay in situations where I see companies doing the right thing or having values that support their customers in some way but not just a quick opportunistic buck on the back of tax dollars. Owning an EV has a unique meaning for each of us and for more than 10 years I have been an EV owner and have great respect for those that have made EVs possible through hard work and advocation, I support those principals through my efforts and finances as I see appropriate.

 

[hyperlexis]

There are simple solutions, vote with your wallet and do not use these stations if you disagree with their policies. Besides the point of the fees being fair or not I fundamentally disagree with some general business practices and tactics some companies have used with consumers in the the EV project and for that reason I will not support some companies regardless of charging fees. I support businesses that have a vested interest in the EV community in some way, not companies that open shell offices and do not even have charge stations where they reside, or ones that try to slip in sneaky contact language under the guise of a warranty extension, etc, etc. Some companies in the EV related business exist to foster the betterment of EVs while making a profit and some are there to make a quick buck any way they can. Let your wallet decide how you feel, personally I see the need for some basic business values before I spend even a dime, even if it is the best deal in town. I tend to overpay in situations where I see companies doing the right thing or having values that support their customers in some way but not just a quick opportunistic buck on the back of tax dollars. Owning an EV has a unique meaning for each of us and for more than 10 years I have been an EV owner and have great respect for those that have made EVs possible through hard work and advocation, I support those principals through my efforts and finances as I see appropriate.

Could you be a bit more specific? Which companies should one look to in this respect. On the scale of things, which EV charger company(ies) are in the better, pro-ev camp, vs the others?

 

[SanDust]

If you think $5 is an exorbitant for a fast charge and/or you want to apply EV purity tests to businesses, then we will never have a DC fast charging network.

Since I'm not a fan of Chademo I think having Nissan dealers offer free Chademo charging is a great idea. That's because free Chademo charging will ensure that all other commercial DC charging stations use SAE only.

 

[ELROY]

If you think $5 is an exorbitant for a fast charge and/or you want to apply EV purity tests to businesses, then we will never have a DC fast charging network.

Since I'm not a fan of Chademo I think having Nissan dealers offer free Chademo charging is a great idea. That's because free Chademo charging will ensure that all other commercial DC charging stations use SAE only.

Ridiculous to keep changing the connector standards. How many SAE combo chargers are out there now? Not one show up in California. Is that true? Is there even a car currently out there that uses this connector. The Spark plans for it in the future...but no QC port on the car at the moment.

 

[DaveEV]

That completely misses the point. You're paying for the SPEED with which Blink delivers the kWh, not the kWh. You can get a kWh using a 120v outlet. That infrastructure for this might cost $10. You can get Level II AC charging. That infrastructure might cost $3000. Or you can get DC charging. That infrastructure might cost $30,000.

While I think this is a great point, I think you underestimate the cost of installing public charging infrastructure by a factor of 2-3.

Blink and all these private for-profit companies got hundreds of thousands if not millions in tax credits and/or other free government sponsored funding to install their EV chargers. So no, it is not near as costly a capital expense burden for these profiteering companies to bear, launching their new equipment. Blink's $5 charge is a made up number, admittedly, thus far.

Again, I think you overestimate the amount of subsidies that goes towards an installation. It's pretty obvious that Blink (Ecotality) is still losing money and aside from Chargepoint is pretty much the only real player in the market.

 

[EVDRIVER]

If you think $5 is an exorbitant for a fast charge and/or you want to apply EV purity tests to businesses, then we will never have a DC fast charging network.

Since I'm not a fan of Chademo I think having Nissan dealers offer free Chademo charging is a great idea. That's because free Chademo charging will ensure that all other commercial DC charging stations use SAE only.

I never made any conclusion as to pricing being fair or not. It is also not an issue of EV purity my decision is based on other ethical considerations that I would apply to any type of business. In addition, dealers should not have the burden of free QC, unless someone would pay for that installation and the related repairs and electric bills. Clearly if that were voluntary by dealers it would be great but it should not be required or expected just like public QC should not be free either but that does not mean there are alternative cost/value models. I would be more concerned of only one network with no competition unless businesses are offering competitive charging services in exchange for patronage.

 

[GRA]

I think most posters are very confused about what you're paying for. The idea seems to be that you're paying for a kWh. Blink can't charge per kWh so you want them to do the next best thing and charge per minute.

As the DoE paper linked earlier points out, Ecotality can charge by the kWh in 9 states, including the three (California/Oregon/Washington) with the greatest number of PEVs, so this isn't a valid reason. There's nothing to stop other states from amending their laws to allow charging by the kWh, just as the 9 states that now allow it did.

I agree that QCs should charge by time, though, for the speed reason you state. Indeed, all chargers should have the prices linked to their charge rates even if they charge by the kWh, L1s having the lowest rates, L2s higher, and QCs highest of all. You're paying more for convenience and flexibility as well as the installment and operating costs and the effects on the grid (ToU should be mandatory as well). Eventually, QCs will have their max. charge rate listed on Plugshare etc., so that people who need a faster rate know where to go.

At the moment, QCs in the S.F. Bay Area are located so that their primary usefulness is for inter-city trips within the 9-county metropolitan area. Only the QC in Fairfield [Edit: meant the one in Vacaville; IMO Fairfield would be a better location for Bay-Sacto], and to a lesser extent the ones in Concord and southwards along I-680, will see use primarily for travel between metropolitian areas, i.e. S.F. Bay Area - Sacramento Met. Area. At the moment, then, short boost charges will likely predominate, and charging flat fees for long time intervals will be (seen as) a rip-off.

As on board ranges increase owing to lower battery prices, to the point where no normal daily driving will require more than a single charge at home (or work), the need for QCs on intra-metropolitan area trips will diminish to almost nothing, at which point they will assume their ultimate role of enabling long-distance travel. Tesla has already demonstrated this to be so with the S combined with their supercharger network, and the rest of us just need the costs to come down for this to happen universally.

At that point, the need to be able to QC in short increments of time will diminish, because everyone will be using them for road trips where a big charge is essential, and you can have people pay in fifteen, twenty, thirty or even sixty minute increments without them feeling they're being ripped off.

 

[Turnover]

I contacted Blink about not receiving the 100% charge I selected and paid for at Tacoma Market in Fife. : :?


Thanks for the information Michael. I had been traveling between Vancouver and Everett the past two days using QC units and this was the only time I came up three feathers short and as many miles. In fact I used the same unit on Sunday without this result. - pat

Sent from my iPhone


On Aug 26, 2013, at 5:51 PM, "Support, Blink Network" <[email protected]> wrote:






Pat,



Thank you for the additional information. The Nissan Leaf will charge at 10% less than what you pick when charging on a fast charger. This due not to the blink unit but the software in the vehicle. The software in the Nissan Leaf prevents the battery from charging at 100% to prolong the life of the battery.



Best Regards



Michael Olszewski

Blink Network Contact Center

e: [email protected]| d: +1.888.998.2546



:? Thanks for the information Michael. I had been traveling between Vancouver and Everett the past two days using QC units and this was the only time I came up three feathers short and as many miles. In fact I used the same unit on Sunday without this result. - pat

Sent from my iPhone


On Aug 26, 2013, at 5:51 PM, "Support, Blink Network" <[email protected]> wrote:






Pat,



Thank you for the additional information. The Nissan Leaf will charge at 10% less than what you pick when charging on a fast charger. This due not to the blink unit but the software in the vehicle. The software in the Nissan Leaf prevents the battery from charging at 100% to prolong the life of the battery.



Best Regards



Michael Olszewski

Blink Network Contact Center

e: [email protected]| d: +1.888.998.2546

 

[TimLee]

The Nissan Leaf will charge at 10% less than what you pick when charging on a fast charger. This due not to the blink unit but the software in the vehicle. The software in the Nissan Leaf prevents the battery from charging at 100% to prolong the life of the battery.



Best Regards



Michael Olszewski

Blink Network Contact Center

e: [email protected]| d: +1.888.998.2546

This isn't exactly correct. On the 2011 and 2012 LEAF, if the LEAF battery % charge is > 50% (not 6 of 12 status of charge bars on the LEAF display, but the % that the LEAF internally uses and that most DCQC units display) then the LEAF will charge to 100%. But if it is < 50% when the charge starts, the LEAF will stop short of getting to 100%. Usually around 90% indicated on the DCQC display. But that will usually be just short of getting to 10 of 12 status of charge bars on the LEAF display. Usually stops about 1 minute prior to getting to the 10 of 12 bars. Not very many kWh short though, because the LEAF has throttled down the DCQC amperage a lot by that point in time. Depending on the LEAF battery temperature, the DCQC rate is usually down to something in the 18 amp to 25 amp range at the point the LEAF automatically terminates the DCQC.

 

[sc540i]

The Nissan Leaf will charge at 10% less than what you pick when charging on a fast charger. This due not to the blink unit but the software in the vehicle. The software in the Nissan Leaf prevents the battery from charging at 100% to prolong the life of the battery.



Best Regards



Michael Olszewski

Blink Network Contact Center

e: [email protected]| d: +1.888.998.2546

This isn't exactly correct. On the 2011 and 2012 LEAF, if the LEAF battery % charge is > 50% (not 6 of 12 status of charge bars on the LEAF display, but the % that the LEAF internally uses and that most DCQC units display) then the LEAF will charge to 100%. But if it is < 50% when the charge starts, the LEAF will stop short of getting to 100%. Usually around 90% indicated on the DCQC display. But that will usually be just short of getting to 10 of 12 status of charge bars on the LEAF display. Usually stops about 1 minute prior to getting to the 10 of 12 bars. Not very many kWh short though, because the LEAF has throttled down the DCQC amperage a lot by that point in time. Depending on the LEAF battery temperature, the DCQC rate is usually down to something in the 18 amp to 25 amp range at the point the LEAF automatically terminates the DCQC.

My experience on using Blink QC to 100% is unlikely achieved in one charge session. I've been using DCQC 3 to 5 times a week before they post fee on it. Each charge session is limited by time (< 35 minutes). I have done two session of charges consecutively to get the level near 98% but both sessions stop after 34 minutes. I realize there is software control from Leaf to control charging current after 80%. Time to charge by DCQC from 80% to near 100% is more than the time required for charging 10% to 80%. In one occasion while waiting for a charge with one other Leaf (no driver) being charged, the Leaf at charging was at 98% when I first pull in my car and it took 15 mins to move 1 %. Now with fee imposed to DCQC, I see the session of a charge is still limited to < 35 min. That said it is unlikely we can charge the Leaf to 100% in one session.

 

[TimLee]

My experience on using Blink QC to 100% is unlikely achieved in one charge session. I've been using DCQC 3 to 5 times a week before they post fee on it. Each charge session is limited by time (< 35 minutes). I have done two session of charges consecutively to get the level near 98% but both sessions stop after 34 minutes. I realize there is software control from Leaf to control charging current after 80%. Time to charge by DCQC from 80% to near 100% is more than the time required for charging 10% to 80%. In one occasion while waiting for a charge with one other Leaf (no driver) being charged, the Leaf at charging was at 98% when I first pull in my car and it took 15 mins to move 1 %. Now with fee imposed to DCQC, I see the session of a charge is still limited to < 35 min. That said it is unlikely we can charge the Leaf to 100% in one session.

But you have a 2013 LEAF, Right?
The 2011 / 2012 LEAF DCQC is different, and to the best of my knowledge what I stated.
But although I've done 60+ DCQC sessions, only 3 or 4 were to 100% charge.
And only one of these was with Blink DCQC. The others were with Eaton DCQC.
But the LEAF is controlling the DCQC, behaviour should be similar with different DCQC.
Other than the Blink having selection of different % charge levels that can cause the DCQC to stop earlier than the LEAF would automatically stop.

 

[Turnover]

Thanks for the information/discussion. I charge to 100% frequently with QC as I may be going over the Coast or Cascade Ranges or trying to cover the possibility of a charger being out of order within my line of travel. Just completed 12K and all appears right with the battery.

 

[johnrhansen]

So how long has it been since blink started charging for QC? Last time I charged a month ago at Harvard Market on capitol hill it was still free.

 

[edatoakrun]

,,,At the moment, QCs in the S.F. Bay Area are located so that their primary usefulness is for inter-city trips within the 9-county metropolitan area. Only the QC in Fairfield [Edit: meant the one in Vacaville; IMO Fairfield would be a better location for Bay-Sacto]....

Note report of the NEW DC in Fairfield under const. as of 8/6.

http://www.plugshare.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I drove by after my DC at Vacaville last week, but didn't have time to check it out myself.