Electric4Me
Well-known member
Are those new? I was at the outlet mall last Sept. and looked for EVSEs...Clippy said:
[MOD NOTE: Thread split from Vacaville L3 Chargepoint thread]
Vacaville L2 Charging
- Thread starter Electric4Me
- Start date
Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:
[MOD NOTE: Thread split from Vacaville L3 Chargepoint thread]
GeorgeParrott
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2010
- Messages
- 207
The L2 chargepoint units at the Vacaville Outlet Mall (located near the New Balance Store on the South and West side of the overall mall area (there are NONE on the East Mall area (Nike, etc.) are set at $2/hour use.
PLEASE do NOT USE THESE unless you are desperate. We need to use "market force" to encourage the mall owners to reduce or at least change the fee process to "per kilowatt" or something more fair than $2/hour.
And I have "heard" that it is possible to unlock the L3 charger for use.
PLEASE do NOT USE THESE unless you are desperate. We need to use "market force" to encourage the mall owners to reduce or at least change the fee process to "per kilowatt" or something more fair than $2/hour.
And I have "heard" that it is possible to unlock the L3 charger for use.
grommet
Well-known member
GeorgeParrott, aren't those mall units owned by 350Green? As such, 350Green (RIP, soon to be owned by CarCharging, Inc) and not the mall controls the pricing... which is $2/hr & $2/min for all their L2 ChargePoint units. (CarCharging Inc is known to be even more costly, so I wouldn't expect relief after the acquisition.)
GeorgeParrott
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2010
- Messages
- 207
I do not know who "owns" them, but I know it is not Chargepoint, as I asked them late last week.
Further there is no absolute reasoning for WHY anybody is charging at an hourly rate here in California rather than by actual kW used. So if we generally boycott those L2 chargers at the current pricing rate AND communicate with the feedback forms available from the nearby Mall office, THEN there is every reason to believe the costing structure will be changed to a more equitable format.
Further there is no absolute reasoning for WHY anybody is charging at an hourly rate here in California rather than by actual kW used. So if we generally boycott those L2 chargers at the current pricing rate AND communicate with the feedback forms available from the nearby Mall office, THEN there is every reason to believe the costing structure will be changed to a more equitable format.
grommet
Well-known member
Those ChargePoint units are definitely owned and operated by 350Green, which also pays ChargePoint/Coulomb for the privilege of using their products and service. Feel free to send them feedback as well while they are still in business. http://350green.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
waidy
Well-known member
The Town of Los Altos Hills, charged $2/hr when the chargers were installed. I wrote the following letter explaining the unreasonable $/kWh, and with the help with other Los Altos Hills residents who made calls and emails, there is now no cost ($0) for charging the EV in the EV charging stations in Los Altos Hills. Perhaps we could do the same by writing them.GeorgeParrott said:
Dear all, there are lots of complaints in the Nissan LEAF forum on the EV charger fee imposed by the Town of Los Altos Hills. Given the fact that President Obama is promoting EVs and the City of San Francisco announced a few days ago that EV charging is free until 2013, the $5/hr fee charge by the Town of Los Altos Hills is unreasonable.
Let do this simple math here. To fully charge a LEAF is 24kWh at a charge rate of 3.3kW. Therefore, if the LEAF were to completely empty, it would take 7.27 hrs. No one depletes their battery pack before charging and no one is going to wait for 7 hours doing nothing at the Town so to charge their EVs (let's be real).
Let's say the worst case, if some one really wants to juice up their pack on depletion, they will use a maximum of 24kWh of electrons. I am paying $0.11/kWh so if I were to fill it up at home it will cost me $0.11*24=$2.64 in compare to the town which charges $5/hr*7.27hr = $36.35
This is a *BIG* *HUGE* difference in cost of electrons between $2.64 and $36.35. Please re-consider to adjust your charge.
Also the spots (on both locations) are not marked for electric vehicle only and can be blocked by non electric vehicles. I will be glad to buy you the sign.
Please let me know so I could post your reply/decision on the forum.
Best,
Waidy Lee
grommet
Well-known member
Waidy, the Los Altos Town Hall one is free now, yes... but the one by Purissima Field is an affordable $.50/hr. (Nobody used them at all at the previous rates... I think one of them might have been higher than $2/hr initially!) Thanks for helping there...
waidy
Well-known member
Here is the history: Both of them were used to be $2/hr when they were installed in May 2011. Both of them were again reduced to $0.5/hr after my letter. One of them became free of cost of charging few months ago after the residents made few phone calls and emails.grommet said:
My point is that it would help to make the process faster if we would explain to the hosts with our concerns, it may be better than a silent protest.
Building on Waidy's analysis, that $36 would buy a half a tank of gas for an ICE. At around 25mpg that car could drive close to 200 miles for $36 compared to around 80 miles for a leaf. Quite a premium to pay for responsibly going electric.
EricBayArea
Well-known member
I agree that $5/hr let alone $2/hr is too much to pay for hourly use of a public EVSE. I have actually been in contact with a city government over my particular thoughts on the matter, as they are looking to add a few stations.
However, playing devil's advocate to the previous statement, we all paid a premium for going electric - so perhaps some think we'll continue to pay a premium to juice up in public. I think it's our responsibility to turn them down (and write them) whenever we don't need it, so they understand our side.
detlefo said:
However, playing devil's advocate to the previous statement, we all paid a premium for going electric - so perhaps some think we'll continue to pay a premium to juice up in public. I think it's our responsibility to turn them down (and write them) whenever we don't need it, so they understand our side.
I think that it is "not legal" for anyone other than a utility to sell electric energy to another entity.EricBayArea said:
I believe the work-around for this is to charge for the use of the parking spot (time-based) or for a "facility charge" (equipment-based) while providing the energy for free.
Or perhaps this has been amended in California?
EricBayArea
Well-known member
rclams said:
California does allow for entities to provide unregulated electricity as fuel for light-duty electric vehicles (see California's AB 631).
grommet
Well-known member
Yes, you can bill per kWh in California legally... but I've never seen any L2 owners have much interest in doing do. If they choose to charge a fee, most bill for the time occupied (some with a minimum fee), and some charge per "session."
I'll remind folks that Coulomb/ChargePoint typically charges L2 site owners (like 350Green, CarCharging Inc, your local city government, etc.) 50 cents per charge session, ~7% of any fees they charge, and a monthly "network fee" for each unit. If they only billed the customer for the actual cost of kWh used, they still wouldn't break even.
I'll remind folks that Coulomb/ChargePoint typically charges L2 site owners (like 350Green, CarCharging Inc, your local city government, etc.) 50 cents per charge session, ~7% of any fees they charge, and a monthly "network fee" for each unit. If they only billed the customer for the actual cost of kWh used, they still wouldn't break even.
planet4ever
Well-known member
Your pointer was to a background discussion of the bill. Here is the codified text: http://legiscan.com/gaits/text/353952.EricBayArea said:
grommet's post seems to suggest the rate charged for the electricity itself can't be higher than the cost of the electricity, so companies add on monthly, hourly, and/or per session charges. I don't see any such restriction in the law. It just states that if the companies only sell electricity for EV/PHEV charging they cannot be regulated as utilities. That would allow them to charge any rate per kWh that they wanted to.
Ray
grommet
Well-known member
No, I wasn't trying to imply that... I'm just echoing the many statements I've seen here that providers shouldn't "rip you off" on the electricity costs. They are free to charge as much as they think they can get.
EricBayArea
Well-known member
planet4ever said:
Thanks. I updated my original post.
edatoakrun
Well-known member
grommet said:
I don't expect low kW public L2 to ever become a significant factor in public charging. PHEVs will probably never be willing to pay the high real costs for L2, and BEV drivers will prefer the more convenient and cheaper per kWh fast charge stations, once they are built.
The basic, and IMO, likely fatal flaw in L2 public charging, is the problem of allocating charges for the two services, parking and charging, for which different customers have very different price-points.
But it is a promising trend, that the newest ChargePoint update will give operators (for the first time, AFAIK) the option to break down charges for the two disparate services, at charge sites:
http://insideevs.com/chargepoint-announces-new-platform-and-intelligent-networ/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I think the major benefit of separate time and kWh charges will be for fast charging, to discourage slow "topping off", or worse, leaving an unattended BEV in a charging space, after the session is over.
And as I've said before, due to it's strategic location, and PG&E's no-demand-fee-rate options, Vacaville is one of the best locations in the USA for a profitable (~50 kW DC) public charge station.
rawhog
Well-known member
It is unfortunate that Adam Egbert and Ulric Kwan of PG&E, and Brian Mclean of the City of Vacaville have stopped responding to querys regarding this QC. Right after Brian told me that the city was being gifted a new UL listed QC from Eaton, The guys from PG&E stated that they were unaware the Eaton unit had gotten UL listing (despite the fact that it was fairly well covered in the news media). And that they were aledgedly in converstions with the city to open the TEPCO unit for public use. This after they have been claiming that they could not allow public use of it do to lack of UL listing, and that they had abandoned efforts to get the TEPCO UL listed.
Phoenix
Well-known member
edatoakrun said:
What do you mean by "PG&E's no-demand-fee-rate options"? Is such an option possible? I thought even Vacaville has to pay the demand charges or is there an exemption for municipalities?
How is the demand charges now being paid since I understand CARB and other "experimental" vehicles (such as iMiEV and LEAF manufacturers) can officially use the Quick Charge? I suppose PG&E is just eating those charges now since they are still the owner of the QC.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Tesla Destination EVSE and J1772 adapter- Latest: John Trindle
-