DC Fast Charging $$$$ Fee Poll

[DaveinOlyWA]

It is really hard to say what will happen when we have all the EVs anyone would want and where that collective need will take us. Right now it all seems do out of reach, way beyond any ones reach

Wondering what NASA thought when Kennedy made his Moon speech...well if they had been around at the time our what Detroit said when Roosevelt said they had 28 months to supply its European Theater?

But those scenarios were probably exceptional and ancient. But what about speech recognition? I was pay of a
on 96 that surrendered the seemingly insurmountable challenges computers faced...



Its all relative . either EVs will be what the public wants or it won't

 

[TonyWilliams]

But those scenarios were probably exceptional and ancient.

Those two large scale events (moon shot and WW2) were paid for with almost unlimited government dollars. The financial pay back was never considered.

 

[planet4ever]

I wouldn't use it very frequently, but when I need it I would be willing to pay quite a bit. In fact, my criterion might be "less than a tank of gasoline"!

Please quantify "quite a bit" and "tank of gas".

Right, good point. Our other car is a Prius, so for me a tank of gas is about 10 gallons. That makes "quite a bit" be roughly $40 right now, but that will change with time. (Cheapest gas around here at the moment seems to be $4.399.)

Ray

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

But those scenarios were probably exceptional and ancient.

Those two large scale events (moon shot and WW2) were paid for with almost unlimited government dollars. The financial pay back was never considered.

oic, so oil then is a completely different story then? ya, i guess. what was i thinking?? that getting off foreign oil was that important... musta got too much Sun today!

 

[N1ghtrider]

B1.

 

[TonyWilliams]

B1.

The Prius is out ahead by a landslide !!!!!! Ya, Toyota !!!

 

[abasile]

The kind of money that would need to be raised is insane. I'm going to suggest that the demographic that drives the LEAF is not going to be that source of capital. Even if all the infrastructure were paid for by wealthy and generous folks, I don't think you'll find the general LEAF population will even pay enough to maintain ongoing costs. Which means the cost gets higher per charge unit, instead of cheaper. Failure is inevitable, if it even would start.

My suggestion at this time is that donors contribute (not "pay") the ongoing costs, assuming one or more generous benefactors have paid for the initial setup.

How much do you figure it will cost to keep one QC unit in operation for a month? Some of that could come from usage fees, ideally about $5 per session, but at minimum enough to pay for the kWh. Perhaps the remainder could be split among at least ten donors. I wonder how many folks would be willing to sponsor at least $50 per month. If there aren't enough donors, then a given unit would either have to be turned off or throttled back to a lower power level.

I suppose this sounds much like paying for an evgo subscription. But I submit that appealing to folks' altruistic side could work better than making them pay (not donate) the true costs, which invites Prius comparisons, etc.

As QC units should be considered critical infrastructure if our nation is serious about using less oil, this is something the government really should be doing. The problem is, they've tried, we got Blink, and now a bunch of shortsighted thinking seems to be in the way of moving forward with a better contractor.

 

[TonyWilliams]

.
How much do you figure it will cost to keep one QC unit in operation for a month? Some of that could come from usage fees, ideally about $5 per session, but at minimum enough to pay for the kWh. Perhaps the remainder could be split among at least ten donors. I wonder how many folks would be willing to sponsor at least $50 per month. If there aren't enough donors, then a given unit would either have to be turned off or throttled back to a lower power level.

First, for anything I would be involved in, it will be throttled back to whatever the threshold is for not paying a demand fee. That's the starting point. If a site should be so wildly successful that cars are lined up to use it, then it can be opened up... maybe.

So, our electricity should be relatively cheap, but even that can get out of hand. SDG&E can hit $1/kWh on the commercial rates. During those times, of course, a full charge could be $25 in electricity alone.

Even if you could get 10 guys at $50, that covers the insurance. Now what? How about maintenance? One broken nozzle could be several thousand dollars. And we haven't compensated the host in any way, or paid any permits or fees, or the big one; paying for the unit, its installation and its depreciation.

No employees got paid, no cash reserves, no spare parts, no nothing.

Who absorbs all the risk when your ten people don't want to participate anymore? Even shutting it down has all the above costs already made. I guess that original guy just gets stuck?

No, the only way to adequately do a donor model is to start with a donation of about $10,000 -$20,000 for expenses for the year (above the start up capital of $30,000-$100,000 to install the thing), and then the site should be able to weather the storm for one year.

Then you'd have to do it all over again the next year. Again, if you don't get the donor capital, then it gets shut down and the original guy who installed it just got stuck again.

And this is all so we can sell fast charging at below Prius prices? If you think finding hosts is difficult now with "free" Ecotality/Blink DC chargers, I'll suggest finding donors to give away money so that others can get subsidized DC fast charges will be far smaller.

 

[hill]

B1.

The Prius is out ahead by a landslide !!!!!! Ya, Toyota !!!

Naah . . . . It's just that us "H's" are lurking on the side lines in stead of partaking in the poll. being the consummate odd man out, I vote H.

 

[walterbays]

So I guess you're seeing a lot of people who won't pay any more than gas costs in a Prius, a few people who would pay whatever it takes to extend their EV mobility, and a fair number of people who would pay high prices only in an emergency. Yet to operate a QC and amortize astronomical demand charges you need a lot of customers.

Eventually we may see some QC operators doing yield management pricing, like airlines. Plan your trip and schedule your charge in advance and get one price. Drop in and get another price, space available. A set of 4 QC units could be managed so the aggregate power never exceeded, say, 50 KW - so there would be a demand fee but not 200 KW of demand fee. A single car could use the entire power. Four cars towards the end of their charge events would get no slow down. And four cars all just starting their charges would want to draw 50 KW each but would draw only 12.5 KW each.

The operator doesn't have to allocate power fairly though. He could allocate it like airlines allocate overhead bin space and knee room. The guy who paid $250/month "platinum plan" for unlimited charging could be given 40 KW while the other 3 cars each get 3.3 KW. Or the guy who paid the "silver" $150/month could be given 30 KW while the other 3 cars each get 6.6 KW. Etc.

I don't necessarily hope for this outcome but it seems likely to me. And even if I'm driving "coach class" I guess it's preferable to the current situation of no usable QC units at all.

 

[TonyWilliams]

I guess the next logical step in my study is to take my DC charger and a generator, and park it in Oceanside, and see how many actually do come through to pay $ xx for a charge.

That is the spot for the highest likely demand that I can foresee in all of SoCal, between to large metropolitan areas. Vacaville would be another good spot to study. Maybe Oxnard (between LA basin and Santa Barbara), and San Bernadino for LA basin to Palm Springs.

 

[linkim]

I guess the next logical step in my study is to take my DC charger and a generator, and park it in Oceanside, and see how many actually do come through to pay $ xx for a charge.

That is the spot for the highest likely demand that I can foresee in all of SoCal, between to large metropolitan areas. Vacaville would be another good spot to study. Maybe Oxnard (between LA basin and Santa Barbara), and San Bernadino for LA basin to Palm Springs.

I attended the dedication for the QC at Stanford Shopping Center in Palo Alto yesterday (5/15). The number mentioned is the QC is used about 3-4 times/day. This is the only point-of-reference I have heard for commercial QC use, but the numbers could be much different for the VW QC in Belmont and Mitsubishi QC in Cypress, but they offer free charge so far.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

I guess the next logical step in my study is to take my DC charger and a generator, and park it in Oceanside, and see how many actually do come through to pay $ xx for a charge.

That is the spot for the highest likely demand that I can foresee in all of SoCal, between to large metropolitan areas. Vacaville would be another good spot to study. Maybe Oxnard (between LA basin and Santa Barbara), and San Bernadino for LA basin to Palm Springs.

i think your best bet is to put it at a destination. not sure how the logistics would be managed as i am guessing they would be monumental. But i think the QC provides the biggest value by being placed AT my destination rather than on the way to the destination.

now, this DOES NOT mean i would trade one for the other. only that destination charging i would rate more valuable is all i am saying and if you have only one and so on...

but if i can go somewhere, spend the day there and just before leaving, plug in to catch a charge then go home, i would prefer that.

if its a waypoint charge. that would imply using it twice once coming and going. i find on day trips, my motivation to do stuff is much higher going than coming. (if you have a 5 YO with you, u will understand this)

another thing; its hard to quantify how many people will be going from point A to point B and passing thru point C.

if point C was the destination, then you would have people traveling from both point A and B to get to C

 

[smkettner]

And we haven't compensated the host in any way,

Your equipment creates a customer that is captive for 30+ minutes. The host should pay you for each customer you bring in.
Sure if you were clearing $1,000 per day they would want a piece of the pie but I think the idea should be that you are creating a 30 minute destination for a customer.
The question is how much will the host pay per month or per customer.

And maybe this would be a tough sell. Business is not easy.

 

[TonyWilliams]

And we haven't compensated the host in any way,

Your equipment creates a customer that is captive for 30+ minutes. The host should pay you for each customer you bring in.

WOW !!!! I had a gut wrenching laugh out of that one. Thanks!!!

So, according to you, Blink can't give these away to hosts with $120 million of your tax dollars, but you think the host should pay to have them. Keep on thinking.

Quite the reverse is more likely. With NRG now "required" to install 200 quick chargers in California over four years, I think you'll see them paying hosts for the privilege of using their parking spot. Then, when LEAF drivers only use them "for emergencies" (which means almost never), or just drives the Prius because the minimum charge is $7 (up to $15), they will fail, HUGE.

Hey, some good news for the utilities, like SCE. if they collect $1500 in demand charges, and now NOBODY uses the charger at all for the next 12 months, they can still charge $1500 month for the demand charge ($18,000 for the year). Awesome, huh?

I don't want anybody to take from this that if there just wasn't a demand fee, all would be well. It won't. As long as there are free chargers around, like Mitsubishi in Cypress, it will take away from sites that need the traffic just to break even. Free chargers are a detriment to the expansion of more chargers. Demand charges are a detriment. High installation costs are a detriment. High electricity costs (again, up to $1 at SDGE) are a detriment. High insurance is a detriment. Host reluctance (for all the aforementioned reasons, and more) is a detriment. High maintenance on these chargers is a detriment.

But none of that compares to the very customers who wouldnt use and pay for it anyway.

 

[TonyWilliams]

another thing; its hard to quantify how many people will be going from point A to point B and passing thru point C.

if point C was the destination, then you would have people traveling from both point A and B to get to C

Oceanside and San Clemente are unique because there is exactly one road between two multi-million population metropolitan areas. I would not limit a DC charger to a destination; that's for L1 and L2.

 

[hill]

And we haven't compensated the host in any way,

Your equipment creates a customer that is captive for 30+ minutes. The host should pay you for each customer you bring in.

WOW !!!! I had a gut wrenching laugh out of that one. Thanks!!!

So, according to you, Blink can't give these away to hosts with $120 million of your tax dollars, but you think the host should pay to have them. Keep on thinking.

Quite the reverse is more likely. With NRG now "required" to install 200 quick chargers in California over four years, I think you'll see them paying hosts for the privilege of using their parking spot. Then, when LEAF drivers only use them "for emergencies" (which means almost never), or just drives the Prius because the minimum charge is $7 (up to $15), they will fail, HUGE.

Hey, some good news for the utilities, like SCE. if they collect $1500 in demand charges, and now NOBODY uses the charger at all for the next 12 months, they can still charge $1500 month for the demand charge ($18,000 for the year). Awesome, huh?

I don't want anybody to take from this that if there just wasn't a demand fee, all would be well. It won't. As long as there are free chargers around, like Mitsubishi in Cypress, it will take away from sites that need the traffic just to break even. Free chargers are a detriment to the expansion of more chargers. . . . . . . . . . snip . . . . . .

Something about the term "Free Chargers" that just won't bode well me me. It's like saying, "cheep gas" (which we somehow grasp, when we realize it's only cheeper than asian & european markets due to heavy subsidies). There's such a turn off to "Free (cheep) Charging" ... yet the other 99.99% of ICE transportation? ... there, the subsidy thing is acceptable (shaking head). Thank you Tony for your willingness & efforts to swim upstream - against the extreamly heavy current.

 

[TonyWilliams]

I attended the dedication for the QC at Stanford Shopping Center in Palo Alto yesterday (5/15). The number mentioned is the QC is used about 3-4 times/day. This is the only point-of-reference I have heard for commercial QC use, but the numbers could be much different for the VW QC in Belmont and Mitsubishi QC in Cypress, but they offer free charge so far.

I think 100-150 charges per month would be a good number to work with for a really good location. My understanding is that Palo Alto is unique because it has its own utility that does not charge a demand fee. This is NOT the norm in California.

So, 125 uses per month times the minimum $7 fee equals $875 in gross revenue. I'll guess that folks are "getting their money's worth" and sucking up 20kWh per charge (18kWh into the battery at 90%), which means $2 in electricity per charge at 10 cents per kWh, $250 for the month total.

That leaves $625 to pay for insurance, maintenance, depreciation, and payment to the host for their "free" parking spot. Oh, almost forgot that little cost to pay for the DC charger and installation, permits, and fees. Good thing they don't have a $1500 demand fee !!!

And, of course, employees, shareholders, advertisers, etc don't need to be paid.

 

[mkjayakumar]

I would pay the equivalent of gas charges plus some small additonal fee, as I would be using the QC for long trips and emegencies anyway which would be around 10 times a year.

 

[TonyWilliams]

Something about the term "Free Chargers" that just won't bode well me me. It's like saying, "cheep gas" (which we somehow grasp, when we realize it's only cheeper than asian & european markets due to heavy subsidies). There's such a turn off to "Free (cheep) Charging" ... yet the other 99.99% of ICE transportation? ... there, the subsidy thing is acceptable (shaking head). Thank you Tony for your willingness & efforts to swim upstream - against the extreamly heavy current.

Of course it's not free charging; it's subsidized by Mitsubishi in Cypress. Oil issues really aren't part of this discussion, because DC charging costs are not in anyway indexed to oil costs (whether subsidized or not).

Which gets back to first question I regularly hear (and read) when I bring up paying for charging. Somehow, it has to compete against the Prius for every drive, when it is more likely to be cheaper to drive the LEAF overall (while paying "outrageous" DC charger fees).