SAE Planning vote to formally deny CHAdeMO in US

[edatoakrun]

I wish CHAdeMO was a little more timely in updating its installation reports.

Not that the updated number is really that vital, when the SAE number will remain zero for years(?) to come.

The number of DC Quick charger installed up to today is 1393.
-- (Japan 1154 Europe 207 Other 32) last update 2012.04.27

http://www.chademo.com/00_main.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



OK, there must be close to 100 DCs in the USA by now, all CHAdeMO of course.

How about we try to come up with a State-by-State total?

California, AFAIK has a rather pitiful total of 5.

3 in the bay area, and 2 (sort of) in S CA. Let's leave the Vacaville DC off the list, as it appears buried under a deep layer of bureaucratic incompetence.

 

[simpleleaf]

At least 10 in Houston and at least 6 in DFW. Since eVgo is a private company and headquartered in Texas they have worked without having to wait for too much government support except on the local permitting level. On the other hand no one seems to be throwing too many roadblocks in the way here except some slow permit applications and making sure the local grid can support them.

 

[Nekota]

Can someone explain the instability issues with the SAE plug? I remember reading that it wasn't as safe, but nobody went into great detail. I have been sitting back and reading the posts for a while now. I do think that a single port would be "convenient." Is it necessary? No. Do I believe that companies are waiting on the "standard" plug to become available before putting out DC chargers? Absolutely. Is this going to slow down EV cars? It already has. If SAE is faster, cool, but if it isn't as stable and will end up hurting the charger or the car, not cool. Please somebody (Dan) enlighten me onto the stability issues aforementioned as I am interested in knowing about it.

In addition to Tony's comments is the contact resistance changing when the plug is moved by someone stepping on cord or tension stress loads on the hanging cord from the charger to the car. When the 125Amps are flowing a change in the contact resistance would result in arcing and hot welds in the connector mating surfaces. I'm hoping the UL testing will clear up any of these issues if they exist.
Another concern is the piloting of the connector when plugging in - how well do the pins and surfaces align such that the number of insertions is maximized. With the large connectors on the bottom and a concentric shell on the top, there appears to be much more misalignment (tilt up, tilt down, rotation, and yaw or sideways tilt) of the mating surfaces during plugging which will wear the contacts and reduce the insertions.

 

[91040]

From experience, the Yazaki CHAdeMo connector is able to stay connected and charge at its extreme length with the full weight of the cable pulling on it, i.e. suspended in the air from the machine.

Closer parking was blocked by a Mitsubishi and a Volt!

 

[Ingineer]

Since SAE has not even finalized their "frankenplug", let's stop all this speculation and see what their final design is. I agree that what they have put out as of now is not a good design for a number of reasons, but that's why they do this, so that SAE members can comment, and they can refine the design.

Personally, I agree, they shouldn't bother at this point, as there is already too much momentum for CHAdeMO, and fragmentation will not do anyone any good long-term.

Regardless, they apparently are committed to come up with a standard. Let's see what they come up with before we waste more time speculating though. Spend this time instead on promoting EV's!

-Phil

 

[smkettner]

The only thing I see as better is to feed the DC direct through the existing J plug.
All SAE has to figure out is a signal that insted of max amps it tells the car DC available.
Once the relay is set the car would call for power direct into the battery.

 

[GaslessInSeattle]

meanwhile, those who say it can't be done are ignored by those who are doing it! The SAE can chew on this just announced: Ribbon cutting with the Governor in Bellingham on May 30th! Finally the electric highway is being lit up in WA state! 5 of the 8 CHAdeMO chargers are showing operational already in my AV account!!! EV driving from Vancouver BC through WA and OR and across the CA border will officially be possible very soon (and probably already is)!!

Charging Station Inauguration Event Marks the Expansion of the West Coast Electric Highway in Washington State
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/ch...ectric-highway-in-washington-state-2012-05-22

 

[TonyWilliams]

meanwhile, those who say it can't be done are ignored by those who are doing it! The SAE can chew on this just announced:

Bravo to Nissan (and no doubt the ChadeMo Association) for announcing the 400 free ChadeMo in Europe for this well timed announcement. GM and BMW can't even GIVE away a Frankenplug for years.

The only hope is what GM and the whatever Euros who are pushing this; pray they can get government to slow / stop / obfuscate / anything to slow the this up.

1400 installed, 400 more going in. Frankenplug zero for the next several years.

 

[EVDrive]

Having DC chargers is what we need, as many as we can get our hands on in the fastest time possible. Dual plug CHAdeMO stations today should easily be upgradable on one side to support the Tesla, the SAE or whatever future standard.

Let's go CA, no time to waste listening to GM's effort to slow Nissans EV efforts. Electrify the freeways and the big cities so we can be rid of our polluted air and be energy independent faster.

 

[SanDust]

The better standard invariably prevails, though better may not be technically superior. It can just be more practical. In any event, if CHAdeMO is superior then it will become the standard. If not then why worry about it?

The reality is that DC fast charging as a solution to limited range battery packs is technologically but not economically feasible. When you look at the costs of construction, the costs of operation, the potential utilization rates, and the potential charging rates, there is no business model for DC fast chargers. That means you have to turn to governments. Two things prevent government from providing an effective fast charging solution. One is that the investment necessary is simply too much. Second is that governments invariably prove much better at building things than maintaining them. DC charging stations may get built, but they'll end up inoperable a large percentage of the time since governments simply won't provide a sufficient budget for the necessary care and feeding.

We're not going to see many DC fast chargers in CA anytime soon. This has nothing to do with GM and BMW and a new SAE standard. It has to do with the fact that one of the disadvantages of living in the People's Republic of California is that it takes forever to get permits and even longer to build. You can wait one or even two years for permits just to lay some fiber, much less high voltage power lines. From the siting studies to the EAs to the permits to government employees who aren't there because of cutbacks, you may be looking at years before you can get the stations on line. (This is why you need to link into new construction -- it greatly eases the regulatory burden).

 

[Herm]

The more I think about that 43kW Chameleon AC charger in the Zoe the more I am interested.. and the ZOE is not an expensive or large car.

You could have 43kW charging at home if your service allowed it..

 

[KevinSharpe]

You could have 43kW charging at home if your service allowed it..

43kW Charging Stations are very cheap to build... here's my portable 70A 1 Phase (16kW) Charging Station that can easily be upgraded to 63A 3 Phase (43kW) by changing the Contactor, RCBO, and fitting in a slightly larger box;





Note: this is a 32A Type 1 ("J1772") to Type 2 (mennekes") cable... the 70A version is a lot thicker

 

[edatoakrun]

At least 10 in Houston and at least 6 in DFW. Since eVgo is a private company and headquartered in Texas they have worked without having to wait for too much government support except on the local permitting level. On the other hand no one seems to be throwing too many roadblocks in the way here except some slow permit applications and making sure the local grid can support them.

Thanks for the report.

I started a new thread, and quoted your report there.

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=8938" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

IMO, DC is likely to really take hold first where utilities have to compete for customers.

Every time I talk to a rep from one of the private or public electric utility monopolies in California About BEV charging, i get the same response.

"Yes, its a great idea, and we are studying ways to make public EV charging easier for our customers."

But you can practically read their minds:

"I could follow up on this, but it would mean more work for me, and it's not like my employer is compensating me to increase sales or profits."

 

[Randy]

Ed,
So much to address in your post.

Utilities in California cannot own or operate public charging per the CPUC decision last summer. So when you ask someone who works at the local utility (like I do) about PEV charging in California, their answer should indicate a thorough understanding of that CPUC decision.

I can tell you that we are very actively trying to help or assist any and all parties that are thinking about installing public charging equipment, from site selection to utility power requirements to billing analyses. We are doing whatever it takes to help potential host sites. That is my full-time job and it is a lot of work. Not every site is a good candidate for this type of installation (by a longshot).

However, we are making progress and more sites will be coming on-line in the weeks and months ahead. Ultimately, though, these host sites will have to pay for the equipment, installation, and electricity (with some relief available through the DOE grants such as the EV Project for the hardware and some of the installation). But overall the installations are usually not free and the hosts have to balance the economics of the installation with the revenue they may be able to bring in. Some hosts are willing to suffer a loss on the installations to get more business, and others aren't willing to do that and must make the installation pay for itself.

We want the market (and the rollout of EVs) to succeed in San Diego and are doing all we can to make that happen...

My suggestion: Be willing to support the new public charging stations, whenever possible, and try to acknowledge and/or thank the host, store manager, etc. so that they get reinforcement that the decision was a good one to install the equipment. Maybe that will lead to more installations...

 

[DANandNAN]

I don’t know what else to say, I know some are mad and some have acted like a child and blocked me because I keep repeating the same statements. But, the facts are the facts and you folks make it too easy with your ridiculous claims and numbers. In the next few years there aren’t tens of thousands of U.S. CHAdeMO users. It’s going to take a miracle for there to ever be. Leaf sales have been steadily declining since June of last year. All this talk about about how the CHAdeMO stations creating an EV infrastructure that will boost Leaf sales has been debunked. Stations are out there, and have been out there, but no one wants to drive an hour, park and hour to charge and then repeat that hour of charging again in an hour to go 200 miles. That’s 6 hours when it could have taken 3! And, almost no Leaf owner wants to pay what it actually costs for stations to be "profitable" when they could drive a long-range ICE - see Tony Williams thread for proof. DC charge stations are a Band-Aid for limited range BEV and no one is using them because it effectively doubles your transit time. You might be cruising at 70MPH, but if you’re forced to sit for an hour to charge you’re actually only traveling at 35MPH. Sounds like fun. Yea, there’s more stations going in. But as the Leaf’s terrible sales numbers show that’s not helping EV. The solution isn’t more 50 minute DC stations from CHAdeMO or SAE, it’s better, longer range batteries.

The big manufacturers are going with a standard, and when the cars roll out it’s going to make the Leaf’s sales even smaller than they already are. Think about it. 9 companies. Let’s say only 4 roll out cars with the standard in 2014. The Leaf sales are still going to be in the mid teens in the U.S. and high 30’s worldwide (and that's only if Nissan decides to continue down their lonely CHAdeMO road - I'm betting they'll switch). How long will that take the Leaf to be surpassed by 4 manufacturers? BMW, GM, Audi and others already have cars in the works. The Volt is selling really well and building a customer base for GM. The 1st BMW is sold out. The Leaf’s just not selling. No matter what the excuses are, Leaf’s are available but no one is buying and that’s not a fluke, it’s a trend. The numbers are what they are. The Infinity? It’s going to help, but when and how much have yet to be seen. Who here wouldn’t jump at a Porsche, BMW or Audi EV?

There aren’t 200 vehicle manufacturers on CHAdeMO’s list. There’s a few battery manufacturers but they have no reason to show CHAdeMO loyalty. There’s 4 vehicle manufacturers and only one, maybe 2 that are semi-large. Three of those are going to switch to the standard leaving Nissan to be the last switch. The rest of those companies don’t have a vested interest to care - yes, they paid 10k to be one with CHAdeMO, but 10K is pocket change for companies. And, who are those companies? Actually look at the list that's touted so proudly, look at what the companies do – there are LOTS of companies that have no business on that list but they’re there to pad it. Really, that list should be Nissan and ... that’s it.

It’s funny really. A lot of folks here will talk down about the Volt because its EV range is 40+ miles and it has an on-board generator, yet you’re hoping the government gives you a MUCH LESS convenient off-board station to hide the Leaf’s limited range (65+ miles). And, you’re asking for a Band-Aid that no other manufacturer is going to use! You’re excuse? “Our cars are here now.” Ok, then pay actual usage charges & costs and start using the ones that are already out there and we'll reevaluate in a year (and yes, Randy is definitely right about saying thank you and patronize the owners company). If Tesla folks were making this argument that their stations should be installed instead of CHAdeMO you guys would be calling them snobs that were trying to hurt the future of EV. Pot – kettle?

Eh, whatever. Some of you folks are hopeless. You claim that your so worried about what will happen to EV when the standard starts competing, but it’s obvious that your more interested in making sure you have a charging station for your car – a station that no one would actually pay to use because no one wants to make a long distance trip and travel 35MPH. What a debacle Nissan created with their Band-Aid to limited range batteries.

Go ahead and trash GM, SAE, and me. Obviously that’s where the fault lies :lol:

 

[edatoakrun]

Where do you work, Randy?

I am aware of the position all California utilities are in regard to CPUC policies.

My point is directed to the fact that in any region where electricity distribution is a publicly controlled monopoly, as California, there are multiple layers of Public and private regulations and policies to overcome.

Demand charges on public DCs in imposed by many utility rate programs, for instance, are mandates imposed by the CPUC.

And the prohibition on utilities operating DC sites, is a corollary to a CPUC policy of preventing public utilities from expanding their present monopoly positions, into the BEV charging market.

Both policies have merit, but the result is a decidedly DC charger-unfriendly business climate for California.

There simply is not a great financial incentive for the electric energy supplier to increase their market and sales, by developing new customers, EV owners, as there is for the competing petroleum fuels industry.

So, for now, Californians will probably be dependent on the efforts of the public programs, which (I assume) you are referring to.

I fully support these programs, and I hope you take no offence at my remarks, above.

I just want to make the point that we like in a economy where delivering goods and services is primarily the responsibility of private efforts, and yes, the profit motive. While government policies are important, the primary determination of the reliability of the future DC infrastructure, will be by the operator of DC charging stations, profiting from my charge visit.

Ed,
So much to address in your post.

Utilities in California cannot own or operate public charging per the CPUC decision last summer. So when you ask someone who works at the local utility (like I do) about PEV charging in California, their answer should indicate a thorough understanding of that CPUC decision.

I can tell you that we are very actively trying to help or assist any and all parties that are thinking about installing public charging equipment, from site selection to utility power requirements to billing analyses. We are doing whatever it takes to help potential host sites. That is my full-time job and it is a lot of work. Not every site is a good candidate for this type of installation (by a longshot).

However, we are making progress and more sites will be coming on-line in the weeks and months ahead. Ultimately, though, these host sites will have to pay for the equipment, installation, and electricity (with some relief available through the DOE grants such as the EV Project for the hardware and some of the installation). But overall the installations are usually not free and the hosts have to balance the economics of the installation with the revenue they may be able to bring in. Some hosts are willing to suffer a loss on the installations to get more business, and others aren't willing to do that and must make the installation pay for itself.

We want the market (and the rollout of EVs) to succeed in San Diego and are doing all we can to make that happen...

My suggestion: Be willing to support the new public charging stations, whenever possible, and try to acknowledge and/or thank the host, store manager, etc. so that they get reinforcement that the decision was a good one to install the equipment. Maybe that will lead to more installations...

Well, as soon as there is a single DC between the Oregon border and the Bay area, that is operational (See the PG&E DC in Vacaville for an epic fail in the public effort) I will...

 

[palmermd]

Eh, whatever. Some of you folks are hopeless. You claim that your so worried about what will happen to EV when the standard starts competing, but it’s obvious that your more interested in making sure you have a charging station for your car – a station that no one would actually pay to use because no one wants to make a long distance trip and travel 35MPH. What a debacle Nissan created with their Band-Aid to limited range batteries.

Go ahead and trash GM, SAE, and me. Obviously that’s where the fault lies :lol:

I guess you really don't understand what we are complaining about. First of all you seem to think ChaDeMo = Nissan. That is not true, it is a group of companies that decided on a DC standard. Nissan when designing their electric cars has opted to install this hardware in their vehicles because it is the ONLY option available right now. I am quite sure that when the SAE option is available, NIssan will offer either port as an option, or none, just like you do now. The big complaint here is that GM is promoting the SAE option and they are trying to deny the installation of the ChaDeMo dc chargers in the mean time. Why stop the installation of these charge stations? If SAE is the better way to go it is a simple change to install a new cord and plug and then change the control circuit board in the charger to use the SAE protocol. The main power components which are the expensive items in the charger are going to be exactly the same. And the installation is really the big cost, and SAE could expand quickly by converting old units. You would think they would be happy to let ChaDeMo expand to have the infrastructure ready for the SAE rollout. Lets let the currently existing technology continue to grow and if the SAE is a better solution, it should take over and ChaDeMo will die a natural death. If SAE is not better, then no big deal as nothing has been halted.

The "real" reason those 8 companies want to deny installation of the ChaDeMo chargers is because they were all caught asleep at the wheel. Ghosn and Nissan have a big head start with electric cars, and they are trying to slow him down so they have a chance to catch up. I say let SAE work on their plug. I hope they come up with something better that can truly become a world standard. I say let the 8 other car makers build some cars. I hope they come up with some innovations that improve the technology. Let the battery makers work on better batteries so we can all drive further and charge faster. What I don't want is to have some stupid regulation limiting this growth because somebody has something on paper that might be better than what is currently available.

Can you imagine if the computer industry stopped building things because another company had something better on paper. Nothing would ever get built for production. Every time I've purchased a computer there are announcements of some better version at the time I purchased. If I waited for the announced computer to arrive, there would be another announced computer which is even better, wait again, and then another. I'd never buy anything. This seems to be what you would like us to do. Just wait until SAE is ready...it will be much better. No thanks. I'll just use what is available today, and I'll upgrade if the new one is ready and it is better.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

Ed,
So much to address in your post.

Utilities in California cannot own or operate public charging per the CPUC decision last summer. So when you ask someone who works at the local utility (like I do) about PEV charging in California, their answer should indicate a thorough understanding of that CPUC decision.

that is incredibly stupid and shows just how antiquidated the laws truly are. PSE could EASILY issue cards and create a special charging rate that would simply be added to the customers bill or too a credit card of the customers choosing. its selling power. the reason they cant do it is because this is a new area that has yet to be addressed and the power company as a PUC has the same tact as any other in that their policy is "unless it VERY specifically states something can be done, then it is absolutely forbidden.

that is the problem. to fix it, simply need to get them in a room with pencil and paper to get it done. OR did it and look at them!

a state with the least amount of money, resources, people, etc. but also a state with no oil, refinery capacity, etc. to them, not doing EV means supporting the largest cash flow out of the state at the rate of 3 Billion a year. iow, they have no lobby working against them (or if they did, the lobby got their ass kicked)

so ya simply need to do some ass kicking is all

 

[DANandNAN]

I guess you really don't understand what we are complaining about. First of all you seem to think ChaDeMo = Nissan. That is not true, it is a group of companies that decided on a DC standard. Nissan when designing their electric cars has opted to install this hardware in their vehicles because it is the ONLY option available right now. I am quite sure that when the SAE option is available, NIssan will offer either port as an option, or none, just like you do now. The big complaint here is that GM is promoting the SAE option and they are trying to deny the installation of the ChaDeMo dc chargers in the mean time. Why stop the installation of these charge stations? If SAE is the better way to go it is a simple change to install a new cord and plug and then change the control circuit board in the charger to use the SAE protocol. The main power components which are the expensive items in the charger are going to be exactly the same. And the installation is really the big cost, and SAE could expand quickly by converting old units. You would think they would be happy to let ChaDeMo expand to have the infrastructure ready for the SAE rollout. Lets let the currently existing technology continue to grow and if the SAE is a better solution, it should take over and ChaDeMo will die a natural death. If SAE is not better, then no big deal as nothing has been halted.

I guess you really don't understand that it's really not that simple. The changeover isn't just swap a cable - yes, I saw where a spokesperson said that, but it's not true. They use different protocols and it's more than just a cable and won't be cheap. Not throw it out expensive, but not cable cheap. And CHAdeMO = Nissan + 3 smaller vehicle manufacturers that will switch. The rest of the list is companies that don't care, are able to use the standard, could switch tomorrow, and will switch.

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.

 

[smkettner]

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.

Why exactly are SAE-GM reinventing the wheel? How is it so hard for them to use CHAdeMO?
There are no cars to retrofit because there are none built.

If SAE-GM plug was truely better then fine but I don't see it. Time will tell.

The only thing I see as superior would be enable existing J-plug to use high voltage DC or 3 phase power.