SAE Planning vote to formally deny CHAdeMO in US

[ztanos]

I think you should try viewing this from the Big 9 manufacturer's point of view. You see them as trying to stop Nissan. Why couldn't the Big 9 say the same thing? They don't want to have to fight for taxpayer funding because taxpayers are ticked off that their money was foolishly "wasted" in a technology that only one company could use, and goes largely underused, when 9 (probably 12 or more) manufacturers had announced a plan to use the standard.

I think if you look at it from both sides you'll start to see their point. It shouldn't just be the Big 9's point, it should be all of ours. I want to only drive EV from now on, and if Nissan was, in some strange twist of fate, able to block the Big 9 from making cars the EV future is doomed. And, that's what they're attempting to do. They know what the standard is, they know who the big manufacturers are, yet they chose to install a system that was popular in Japan and Europe then tell the U.S. government to install it or else.

If I look at it from the Big 9 point of view (which is slightly skewed because it didn't start as 9) I see that there is a plug in cars already. Two of them actually. Both the Nissan's and the Tesla's. So instead of working with these companies to figure out if their product works and invest in this product and make it more worth while, I think we will slow down progress, confuse everybody and make sure that we are the only ones making money. Starting from scratch costs unwarranted money. Ask Tucker how his auto company ended up. How about John Delorean. While I know that there are better examples and even examples of companies that succeed, I ask you why? Why would you swim through dirt if you saw that there were two streams already dug out a couple of feet away?

 

[Nubo]

I think you should try viewing this from the Big 9 manufacturer's point of view. You see them as trying to stop Nissan. Why couldn't the Big 9 say the same thing? They don't want to have to fight for taxpayer funding because taxpayers are ticked off that their money was foolishly "wasted" in a technology that only one company could use, and goes largely underused, when 9 (probably 12 or more) manufacturers had announced a plan to use the standard.

When I look at it from the "Big 9" point of view, my conclusion is that they were late to the game, and had no compelling technical reasons to poison an existing market. Therefore they are doing so for anti-competitive reasons, because they think they can.

 

[edatoakrun]

SAE, AKA PWC.

At CHAdeMO's General Assembly 2012, held yesterday in Tokyo, the Asian team responded. According to Hybrid Cars, CHAdeMO president Toshiyuki Shiga (who is also the COO of Nissan) said, "in the U.S. and in Europe there is a movement to eliminate the CHAdeMO by making the combo a regional standard." At the event, the SAE Combo option was repeatedly called "the plug without the cars."

GM and Balch are clearly fighting against Nissan's pure EV dominance, but they can't change the fact is that CHAdeMO is leading the way....

http://green.autoblog.com/2012/05/23/gm-strikes-out-against-chademo-dc-fast-charging/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[JeremyW]

If only Nissan would have also formally announced that it's ok to use red stop/green start buttons in America... :roll:

Jeremy

 

[palmermd]

When I look at it from the "Big 9" point of view, my conclusion is that they were late to the game, and had no compelling technical reasons to poison an existing market. Therefore they are doing so for anti-competitive reasons, because they think they can.

please don't attribute dan's comments to me!

 

[Nubo]

please don't attribute dan's comments to me!

Sorry, that was unintentional. Fixed.

 

[palmermd]

please don't attribute dan's comments to me!

Sorry, that was unintentional. Fixed.

It is far too easy to do with this forum. It happens frequently.

 

[DANandNAN]

I think you should try viewing this from the Big 9 manufacturer's point of view. You see them as trying to stop Nissan. Why couldn't the Big 9 say the same thing? They don't want to have to fight for taxpayer funding because taxpayers are ticked off that their money was foolishly "wasted" in a technology that only one company could use, and goes largely underused, when 9 (probably 12 or more) manufacturers had announced a plan to use the standard.

When I look at it from the "Big 9" point of view, my conclusion is that they were late to the game, and had no compelling technical reasons to poison an existing market. Therefore they are doing so for anti-competitive reasons, because they think they can.

Or, you could say they were prudent in experimenting longer and will avoid a lot of the issues that Nissan experienced by rushing to market.

Just because they were first doesn't make it the standard. I'm sure they're more than willing to let Nissan join though.

 

[TonyWilliams]

Just because they were first doesn't make it the standard. I'm sure they're more than willing to let Nissan join though.

ChadeMo is currently the world fast charging standard; both deployed and in use, and proven. All lacking in the Frankenplug. There will be more Tesla DC chargers in the next couple years than Frankenplugs. Note that Tesla makes no effort to hinder GM, or vice versa. And Tesla doesn't hinder ChadeMo either. Funny, but you haven't suggested Tesla join the Franko club.

GM, et al, will in fact deploy this as they did in the past with their dead end charging standards. There is no doubt in my mind, as they are just repeating history from only 10-15 years ago. So, you'll get your chance to see who "wins".

ChadeMo will be happy to accept GM's membership also, however I predict they would just go running to the government for help (wait, already done that, and currently doing that) rather they join the established standard from the way ahead competition.

 

[TomT]

Remember that Betamax was technicality far superior to VHS...

ChadeMo will be happy to accept GM's membership also, however I predict they would just go running to the government for help (wait, already done that, and currently doing that) rather they join the established standard from the way ahead competition.

 

[smkettner]

Remember that Betamax was technicality far superior to VHS...

Yes then VHS improved to match quality. And I believe more movies were available on VHS.
Also VHS was less money.

And it seemed Betamax was controlled and exclusionary compared to VHS was more ubiquitous and open source style.

Not sure where CHAdeMO & SAE-GM fall into those catagories..... so far there is only one functioning.

Sony's Betamax came out 18 months before JVC's VHS but Sony was too controlling in the marketplace.
SAE-GM sounds more like Sony to me.

 

[dgpcolorado]

Remember that Betamax was technicality far superior to VHS...

Yes then VHS improved to match quality. And I believe more movies were available on VHS.
Also VHS was less money.

And it seemed Betamax was controlled and exclusionary compared to VHS was more ubiquitous and open source style.

Not sure where CHAdeMO & SAE-GM fall into those catagories..... so far there is only one functioning.

Sony's Betamax came out 18 months before JVC's VHS but Sony was too controlling in the marketplace.
SAE-GM sounds more like Sony to me.

My recollection is that Sony came up with both standards and sold the rights to VHS to JVC and others because they considered Betamax technically superior.

The reason VHS won out was that it could record more hours per tape and it was supported by more manufacturers (think MS Windows versus Apple Mac OS). Early adopters in the VCR market—I was one—used them to time shift TV programs; the prerecorded-movies-on-videocassette rental/sale market came a bit later (and eventually became the dominant use, to the point that the majority of VCR owners didn't even know how to program them).

 

[evnow]

Just because they were first doesn't make it the standard.

The same way - just because it was approved by "a" std committee doesn't mean it will trump in the marketplace. Afterall HD DVD was the official HD format approved by the DVD forum - but BluRay won because they had more devices on the ground.

The only goal of "The plug without cars" is to delay adoption of EVs.

 

[DANandNAN]

You're asking for someone to install (probably with some taxpayer dollars) a charging station that costs at least $50,000 because you bought a car that only travels 65 miles. A station that can only be used by 10k Leaf owners yet costs $50,000.

Forgive me if I'm not excited for this. $50,000 per station, and you want them installed up and down highways and the Leaf is the only car that can use them. Yet, they won't use them in numbers great enough to make them profitable or even break even.

Forgive me if I'm not excited for this.

 

[palmermd]

You're asking for someone to install (probably with some taxpayer dollars) a charging station that costs at least $50,000 because you bought a car that only travels 65 miles. A station that can only be used by 10k Leaf owners yet costs $50,000.

Forgive me if I'm not excited for this. $50,000 per station, and you want them installed up and down highways and the Leaf is the only car that can use them. Yet, they won't use them in numbers great enough to make them profitable or even break even.

Forgive me if I'm not excited for this.

don't forget that we paid a quarter million in taxes for your car. http://hotair.com/archives/2011/12/21/govt-subsidies-for-chevy-volt-up-to-250000-per-car/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; I hope you like it.

 

[DANandNAN]

You're asking for someone to install (probably with some taxpayer dollars) a charging station that costs at least $50,000 because you bought a car that only travels 65 miles. A station that can only be used by 10k Leaf owners yet costs $50,000.

Forgive me if I'm not excited for this. $50,000 per station, and you want them installed up and down highways and the Leaf is the only car that can use them. Yet, they won't use them in numbers great enough to make them profitable or even break even.

Forgive me if I'm not excited for this.

don't forget that we paid a quarter million in taxes for your car. http://hotair.com/archives/2011/12/21/govt-subsidies-for-chevy-volt-up-to-250000-per-car/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; I hope you like it.

The name of that website says it all Palmer. Hot air.

 

[padamson1]

You're asking for someone to install (probably with some taxpayer dollars) a charging station that costs at least $50,000 because you bought a car that only travels 65 miles. A station that can only be used by 10k Leaf owners yet costs $50,000.

Forgive me if I'm not excited for this. $50,000 per station, and you want them installed up and down highways and the Leaf is the only car that can use them. Yet, they won't use them in numbers great enough to make them profitable or even break even.

Forgive me if I'm not excited for this.

Actually the price of the charger itself is only $10k now, there are other significant costs but it shouldn't be $50k (OK yeah if the government is doing it they'll probably find a way to pay twice as much as they should, so maybe you're right on the cost). But it is not $50k in the trash. If they want to convert the unit to SAE many EVSE manufacturers have said that they support both standards, so it should be a cable and PC Controller board (for the new protocol) which should only be $3k at most. In Oregon most of these units have an L2 with the L3. According to the SAE consortium, there will eventually be other cars that support L3. In the meantime we should invest in units that have cars on the road (90% of LEAFs sold have a CHaDeMO) so that we can learn how the chargers are used, what demand they draw, etc so that when there are more cars on the road the system can be optimized.

Putting the stations close enough to support the 65mi range cars means that when the 150mi range cars are available, there won't be a line to use them. This is an infrastructure investment for electric charging, no matter what standard these EVSE supports, having the units installed at prime locations on the ground is what the country needs to hedge its bets on the future of personal transportation.

Sure it's not exciting to hedge, but when one does it usually pays dividends in the future. When I built my house I plumbed wiring and setup my electrical panels so that I could use both a generator and solar power, even though solar was way out of my price range. My electrician thought I was nuts paying for an extra (half empty) panel and running conduit to my roof. When Solar prices fell to half the cost, I installed a system at a fraction of the cost (of retrofitting) because I made that small investment when I built the house. A few million in the federal budget is a lot less than what I invested relative to my total house budget, and I got at least seven times my money back in less then three years.

Oh and that extra panel had open slots that I used to charge an EV that I never even knew would exist when I built my house (total EVSE installation cost $110 including a dedicated meter to track usage). If I had listened to that electrician and only thought about the present, I would've paid him at least $1000 to get my EVSE.

 

[DANandNAN]

You're asking for someone to install (probably with some taxpayer dollars) a charging station that costs at least $50,000 because you bought a car that only travels 65 miles. A station that can only be used by 10k Leaf owners yet costs $50,000.

Forgive me if I'm not excited for this. $50,000 per station, and you want them installed up and down highways and the Leaf is the only car that can use them. Yet, they won't use them in numbers great enough to make them profitable or even break even.

Forgive me if I'm not excited for this.

Actually the price of the charger itself is only $10k now, there are other significant costs but it shouldn't be $50k (OK yeah if the government is doing it they'll probably find a way to pay twice as much as they should, so maybe you're right on the cost). But it is not $50k in the trash. If they want to convert the unit to SAE many EVSE manufacturers have said that they support both standards, so it should be a cable and PC Controller board (for the new protocol) which should only be $3k at most. In Oregon most of these units have an L2 with the L3. According to the SAE consortium, there will eventually be other cars that support L3. In the meantime we should invest in units that have cars on the road (90% of LEAFs sold have a CHaDeMO) so that we can learn how the chargers are used, what demand they draw, etc so that when there are more cars on the road the system can be optimized.

Putting the stations close enough to support the 65mi range cars means that when the 150mi range cars are available, there won't be a line to use them. This is an infrastructure investment for electric charging, no matter what standard these EVSE supports, having the units installed at prime locations on the ground is what the country needs to hedge its bets on the future of personal transportation.

Sure it's not exciting to hedge, but when one does it usually pays dividends in the future. When I built my house I plumbed wiring and setup my electrical panels so that I could use both a generator and solar power, even though solar was way out of my price range. My electrician thought I was nuts paying for an extra (half empty) panel and running conduit to my roof. When Solar prices fell to half the cost, I installed a system at a fraction of the cost (of retrofitting) because I made that small investment when I built the house. A few million in the federal budget is a lot less than what I invested relative to my total house budget, and I got at least seven times my money back in less then three years.

Oh and that extra panel had open slots that I used to charge an EV that I never even knew would exist when I built my house (total EVSE installation cost $110 including a dedicated meter to track usage). If I had listened to that electrician and only thought about the present, I would've paid him at least $1000 to get my EVSE.

The $10,000 chargers aren't available, they've been promised but they aren't available yet. Even if there was a 10K station, that is just for the station. Getting that kind of current to a station is not cheap. Then it has to be installed. Then it has to be maintained. And, someone has to use it.

Your house panel story is nice and I'm happy it worked out for you. But, this is a 50,000 dollar investment that's going to sit unused by most Leaf owners out in the weather.

I'm fine with companies that want to spend the money, and I hope they make a profit. In major cities they might/should. I just think we, as EV owners, should think long and hard about what those Faux News stories on unused CHAdeMO stations will do for EV - especially if they receive taxpayer funding. Look at what they're doing to U.S. solar panel companies. I'm expecting the stories about the gouging that's gone on with L2 installs, where taxpayer subsidized installs are costing 10x what it should because installers know the money is there, will hit in a few months. EV owners didn't gouge anyone, it was the electricians but that won't matter. They're great at creating blame and animosity and the fact that stations could be converted to SAE won't matter.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions. I could go on, but you get the point.

 

[TonyWilliams]

You're asking for someone to install (probably with some taxpayer dollars) a charging station that costs at least $50,000 because you bought a car that only travels 65 miles. A station that can only be used by 10k Leaf owners yet costs $50,000.

Forgive me if I'm not excited for this. $50,000 per station, and you want them installed up and down highways and the Leaf is the only car that can use them. Yet, they won't use them in numbers great enough to make them profitable or even break even.

Forgive me if I'm not excited for this.

You seem pretty excited about the proposed Frankenplug PWNC (plug with no cars), which does somewhat the same; well, except it handles zero cars instead of over 10,000 in the USA (30,000 worldwide). The only two cars proposed (GM Spark and BMW i3) to use the proposed Frankenplug PWNC will also have the same sub 100 mile range of the LEAF.

But, Frankenplug PWNC's will have precisely the same cost issues as the 1400 existing ChadeMo world standard chargers. They will be very expensive, and take years more to implement. All the same issues that ChadeMo is working with now.

GM Sparks and BMW i3, the only two cars announced to be optional with Frankenplug PWNC will be very limited production. Spark is merely a compliance car for California Air Resources Board (CARB). BMW is obviously a compliance car, but I'm confident that BMW will sell beyond merely compliance. They are actually investing in the future. Also, I predict they will be burned the worst with the Frankenplug PWNC folly, because they will have the Frankenplug CWNP (car with no place to plug).

Not a single other one of the 9 breakaway car companies have announced a car to use Frankenplug PWNC. Not Ford, nor Chrysler, nor Daimler, etc. PWNC, indeed !!!!

Toyota Rav4 will not use either standard, and is merely a CARB compliance car. Tesla has their own standard. Renault will absolutely offer ChadeMo, which they just announced, even with their tepid "joining" the other 8 breakaways for Frankenplug PWNC.

So, like you, I'm not excited about the proposal. It fractures the market, and does a disservice to EVs for simply the reason of trying to slow down Nissan. There is no proposed advantage to Frankenplug PWNC; it handles the same power and does the same basic job.

It would be wise for SAE to look to the next generation, because they've already lost this one.

 

[91040]

To DANandNAN:
“The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over” -Joseph Goebbels

This is my only comment to you. I will not answer any PMs. I will not engage in a one sided debate.