Blink QC charging fees

[vsaphill]

Blink should give the customer a choice to pay per session or for some customers like me I would like to have a flat monthly rate like $50 as I drive over 130 miles a day so at $5 a session I would be paying over $100 a week and that's not going to happen.

 

[Deleted member 8423]

Blink should give the customer a choice to pay per session or for some customers like me I would like to have a flat monthly rate like $50 as I drive over 130 miles a day so at $5 a session I would be paying over $100 a week and that's not going to happen.

Sounds like you picked the wrong car then.

 

[vsaphill]

Blink should give the customer a choice to pay per session or for some customers like me I would like to have a flat monthly rate like $50 as I drive over 130 miles a day so at $5 a session I would be paying over $100 a week and that's not going to happen.

Sounds like you picked the wrong car then.

No the car is great, I just wont be using Blink

 

[DaveEV]

I don't see the value of per minute increments for DC charging. DC charging will rarely if ever take more than an half an hour much less an hour, and a flat fee for the first hour is pretty standard.

If it were $5 / 30 minutes I could see your point. But look at the usage patterns of people who typically need to use QC - it's not all that common that you actually need a full 30 minute charge - most often you just want to top-off so you can get to your destination and then L2 charge.

TaylorSFGuy, DaveinOlyWa, for example - those guys frequently do 5-10 min QCs - just long enough to get them where they need to go. Do you think they are going to charge for longer or shorter when they are now paying $5 / session? You can bet they will be more likely to wait a bit longer before leaving.

Heck, just Sunday I used the QC at San Juan Capistrano. Charged for 13 minutes, got 5 kWh (25 kWh charger) and was charged $2.22. I got what I needed to get home and had no issues with unplugging at any time since I knew I was "getting my money's worth". (I actually could have used a bit more but I underestimated my charge level - forgot that QC display reads higher than actual when charging from under 50% - and 3 other people were waiting to use it).

So now imagine that I paid a flat $5 in that situation - you think I would be more or less satisfied with the experience? I can tell you right now that the majority of the times I've needed to QC 10 minutes would be plenty - and paying a flat rate will only encourage me to hog charging infrastructure for longer.

With queues forming at QC stations already, encouraging people to stay does not help.

$8 for an hr of Quick charge? I don't think so. My Leaf has been/will continue to be used solely for round trips of 70 or less miles from my house. My wife and I love it. For all other traveling, My 49 mpg 2006 Prius is looking better all the time.

Oh please. Drive the Prius. And leave the QC infrastructure available for the rest of us. Just keep in mind that if you actually did the math properly - you'll find that even at those high rates it's not any more expensive than driving the Prius.

I think you overestimate the influence that per-minute charging would have. It sounds like your fear is those damn 80-100% DCFC users that are ruining our fast charging 80% lives. That by letting them sit there and get their $5 worth they are going to cause backups at the DCFC stations. Do you really think 'that guy' is going to worry that the pricing changed from approximately $4 for the first 80% and then approximately $1-3 for the remaining 20%?

It already happens now and charging is free. Do you think someone is more or less likely to hog a charger when they are have already paid a flat price (which is more expensive than charging at home) for as much juice as they can slurp down in a session? People already try to time their Blink L2 charging sessions so they end right around an even hour. I know I do. But I shouldn't. And that's only $1!

Blink should give the customer a choice to pay per session or for some customers like me I would like to have a flat monthly rate like $50 as I drive over 130 miles a day so at $5 a session I would be paying over $100 a week and that's not going to happen.

Sounds like you picked the wrong car then.

I don't think a monthly flat fee is the right way to go, either. High usage customers like vsaphill ought to be Blink's bread and butter - sure - give them a discount, but you should still bill by the minute. Otherwise these high usage customers will just cost Blink money - or Blink will have to charge a high enough monthly fee that only the very high usage customers would opt for it.

 

[vsaphill]

Blink should give the customer a choice to pay per session or for some customers like me I would like to have a flat monthly rate like $50 as I drive over 130 miles a day so at $5 a session I would be paying over $100 a week and that's not going to happen.

Sounds like you picked the wrong car then.[/quote]

I don't think a monthly flat fee is the right way to go, either. High usage customers like vsaphill ought to be Blink's bread and butter - sure - give them a discount, but you should still bill by the minute. Otherwise these high usage customers will just cost Blink money - or Blink will have to charge a high enough monthly fee that only the very high usage customers would opt for it.

Not true, SCAQMD paid for the blink QC with grant money as do most of the locations and they have a solar system paid for with grant money, blink does not pay for the electricity at this location so to get a 90% soc would take two sessions = $10 so I think $5 a session is out of line for this location.

Phill

 

[DaveEV]

Not true, SCAQMD paid for the blink QC with grant money as do most of the locations and they have a solar system paid for with grant money, blink does not pay for the electricity at this location so to get a 90% soc would take two sessions = $10 so I think $5 a session is out of line for this location.

What makes you think that Blink is getting all the money from charging fees?

 

[vsaphill]

Not true, SCAQMD paid for the blink QC with grant money as do most of the locations and they have a solar system paid for with grant money, blink does not pay for the electricity at this location so to get a 90% soc would take two sessions = $10 so I think $5 a session is out of line for this location.

What makes you think that Blink is getting all the money from charging fees?

I have talked with the AQMD and they stated that all 33 of there charging stations were to be a no charge to the public.

Phill

 

[GRA]

With a monumental sigh of exasperation:
Why, in Babbage's name, do the stations have to be limited to a single pricing policy?

Blink's charging stations are computerized. They read an individual user's RFID card to initiate charging. If Blink doesn't want to offer a menu of different pricing options at the beginning of all sessions (at the same time that one selects the desired "percent of charge") they could/should at least access the individual pricing preference associated with the scanned card. That is, after all, what Blink's three different grades of subscription were supposed to do.

But I agree that the pricing should encourage brief, partial charging while an errand is run, rather than encouraging folks to stay plugged in for an hour just to ensure that they've gotten their flat fee's worth of energy.

Actually, it might work pretty slick to just have the various selectable "charge percentage" goals labeled by the computed fee for dispensing that much energy. So if you pull up at a 40% state of charge, you might see choices of "50% : $0.6 + $0.1/minute from completion to disconnect",
"60% : $1.2 + $0.1/minute from completion to disconnect",

.. and so on.

Agree that there's no need for a single pricing policy. Some people will just need occasional short top-ups, while those who are going to be getting large charges on a regular basis will want something like a monthly minutes plan ala cell phones. And we also want to distinguish between peak and off-peak rates, just as Oasis does in San Juan Capistrano.

I think you overestimate the influence that per-minute charging would have. It sounds like your fear is those damn 80-100% DCFC users that are ruining our fast charging 80% lives. That by letting them sit there and get their $5 worth they are going to cause backups at the DCFC stations. Do you really think 'that guy' is going to worry that the pricing changed from approximately $4 for the first 80% and then approximately $1-3 for the remaining 20%?

It already happens now and charging is free. Do you think someone is more or less likely to hog a charger when they are have already paid a flat price (which is more expensive than charging at home) for as much juice as they can slurp down in a session? People already try to time their Blink L2 charging sessions so they end right around an even hour. I know I do. But I shouldn't. And that's only $1!

I've been reading "The High Cost of Free Parking" by Donald Shoup: http://www.amazon.com/High-Cost-Parking-Updated-Edition/dp/193236496X" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

There's a wonderful photo sequence from a study done in London in 1965, showing the effects of going from free parking in Grosvenor Square, first adding meters and charging 6 pence/hr., and then boosting the rate to 24 pence (2 shillings) per hour. I don't have the book handy so don't remember what 2 shillings equates to now, but it would be around $5/hr.

Grosvenor Square is about as high end as you can get, so that group should be the least concerned with or affected by parking cost. In the first, pre-charge and pre-meter photo, the curbside parking is filled with double parked cars, among them several Rolls-Royces. Post-meter and 6p/hr. the double-parked cars are gone, but all curb spaces are filled so people would still have to cruise for parking. Post-quadrupling with meters, there are open parking spots along both curbs. See it here, page 12:

http://www.itdp.org/documents/European_Parking_U-Turn.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Even the rich respond to pricing signals.

Edit: Corrected some details.

 

[DaveEV]

So this is funny - read this and tell me what you guys think: Electric Vehicle Public Charging - Time vs. Energy

 

[Bateman]

This is a fascinating discussion and really interesting to see the various opinions and points made by enthusiasts, companies, and regulating bodies on this developing need.

I think the ecotality white paper put it best; simple pricing structures provide simple metering and easy-to-understand terms for the customer. This entire thread started because Blink plans to charge a flat DCFC rate, which goes against the suggestions in their own paper. Of course, I think L2 charging and L3 charging are different animals and we need to keep that in mind when talking about pricing.

L2 charging could take anywhere from 1 to 6 hours, depending on charge and onboard equipment. An hourly fare makes absolute sense here. L3 'fast charging' by definition is fast. (10 to 40 minutes vs 1 to 6 hours)

Given this tighter range of time I can see why it makes sense simplify the pricing scheme and pay a flat rate. In the end, I think the DCFQ arguments really boil down to 'did the jerk infront of me spend 10 extra minutes charging' vs the concern of someone parking their Volt in an L2 spot all day.

 

[Deleted member 8423]

So this is funny - read this and tell me what you guys think: Electric Vehicle Public Charging - Time vs. Energy

I think they nailed most of the important points in the "time based access" section. But gee, strange how they left out the part about how customers feel ripped off without per-minute billing

Most of the info in the "fees based on energy consumed" section is a load of hooey. It was obviously written with a conclusion in mind.

And even back when this was produced, there were cheaper DCFC options than $30k, right? Anyone know which unit is $80k?

 

[walterbays]

I think the DCFQ arguments really boil down to 'did the jerk infront of me spend 10 extra minutes charging' vs the concern of someone parking their Volt in an L2 spot all day.

Given how DC charging ramps down to such a slow rate at the end, the harm in a flat rate pricing scheme like Blink's is much greater.

It's: did the jerk in front of me take 60 minutes instead of 30 minutes at the charger in order to get his money's worth out of his $5 fee, saving maybe 40 cents over what it would cost him to fill that last bit at home? Did he (and others) effectively cut the availability of QC in the region by 50% when it was already pathetically low? Did he prevent people from seeing a viable EV charging infrastructure that would make them comfortable giving up gasoline?

Or, maybe, did he actually *need* that last 20% of charge at this particular time and place? Who knows besides himself? Certainly not me.

 

[GRA]

This is a fascinating discussion and really interesting to see the various opinions and points made by enthusiasts, companies, and regulating bodies on this developing need.

I think the ecotality white paper put it best; simple pricing structures provide simple metering and easy-to-understand terms for the customer. This entire thread started because Blink plans to charge a flat DCFC rate, which goes against the suggestions in their own paper. Of course, I think L2 charging and L3 charging are different animals and we need to keep that in mind when talking about pricing.

L2 charging could take anywhere from 1 to 6 hours, depending on charge and onboard equipment. An hourly fare makes absolute sense here. L3 'fast charging' by definition is fast. (10 to 40 minutes vs 1 to 6 hours)

Given this tighter range of time I can see why it makes sense simplify the pricing scheme and pay a flat rate. In the end, I think the DCFQ arguments really boil down to 'did the jerk infront of me spend 10 extra minutes charging' vs the concern of someone parking their Volt in an L2 spot all day.

I agree that L2 and QC are different animals, and think the former should be charged by the kWh delivered (as onboard chargers can currently vary by a factor of 5 or more, from 3.84kW up to 19.2 kW), and the latter by time connected to encourage people to move when charged.

 

[GregH]

So this is funny - read this and tell me what you guys think: Electric Vehicle Public Charging - Time vs. Energy

I think they nailed most of the important points in the "time based access" section. But gee, strange how they left out the part about how customers feel ripped off without per-minute billing

Most of the info in the "fees based on energy consumed" section is a load of hooey. It was obviously written with a conclusion in mind.

Agreed. Some of the "energy" points are valid. Over all the time based system makes the most sense for the drivers, especially if there is finer granularity to the charge (ie per minute on a DCQC or 5 or 10 minutes on a L2). The price should be high enough to discourage squatters but low enough to encourage moderate usage. If $1.50/hr makes it high enough to discourage all but the most hard core PHEVs that makes it more likely to be available when I need it. Ultimately the station owner can set the price to maximize utilization and efficiency (and hopefully allow access for those who really need it).

 

[JPVLeaf]

Not true, SCAQMD paid for the blink QC with grant money as do most of the locations and they have a solar system paid for with grant money, blink does not pay for the electricity at this location so to get a 90% soc would take two sessions = $10 so I think $5 a session is out of line for this location.

What makes you think that Blink is getting all the money from charging fees?

Nor does the AQMD necessarily gets any/all of the money from Blink QC charging fees recently started at this location. Having said that, QC units in general, their installation and their operation are never totally 'free'. At some point, the money has to come from somewhere. Most Leaf drivers want them, but some don't want to help pay for them ... at all, or beyond home electricity costs. As to which pricing scheme, I favor some type of per minute fee (or other increment less than 1 hr).

 

[ERG4ALL]

It is laughable in this computer age that the article seems indicate that these are "set in concrete" options. I would think it rather easy for Blink to have a PLC in the unit that could be programmed to meter the electricity by kWh as well as have some other fee per minute for a PEV hooked up but not charging. However, that still would not penalize some non-PEV jerk from parking in the space. That would require the same policing as non-handicapped jerks parking in handicapped spaces.

 

[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.

 

[edatoakrun]

It is laughable in this computer age that the article seems indicate that these are "set in concrete" options. I would think it rather easy for Blink to have a PLC in the unit that could be programmed to meter the electricity by kWh as well as have some other fee per minute for a PEV hooked up but not charging. However, that still would not penalize some non-PEV jerk from parking in the space. That would require the same policing as non-handicapped jerks parking in handicapped spaces.

Due to the high cost of providing the grid access time, as well as the kWh provided, all BEV public charging will probably eventually bill for both charger use time of use and kWh downloaded.

And the time charge will have to reflect not plugged in time, but charge space time.

Blink DC's, like almost all of the first-generation fast-chargers, are not designed to do this, so none can provide a market efficient billing solution.

Whatever methods is use to identify charging vehicles to determine DC access time billing, can also be used to eliminate the problem of ICEing/PHEVing of DC stations.

For example, license plate reading technology at a DC station would not only give automatic account access (and initiate and terminate the "parking space" time billing) but would also allow immediate ticketing and/or the summoning of a tow truck to remove any offending vehicles using charge spaces as parking spaces, in violation of the law.

 

[LEAFfan]

It is laughable in this computer age that the article seems indicate that these are "set in concrete" options. I would think it rather easy for Blink to have a PLC in the unit that could be programmed to meter the electricity by kWh as well as have some other fee per minute for a PEV hooked up but not charging. However, that still would not penalize some non-PEV jerk from parking in the space. That would require the same policing as non-handicapped jerks parking in handicapped spaces.

In AZ, only utilities can charge by the kW h.

 

[hyperlexis]

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.