July 16 Survey Email

[LTLFTcomposite]

Maybe the higher 6.6kw charging rate is out because it places additional strain on the battery. Without the experience of real world usage across a population of consumers for years of use, Nissan may want to reduce risk wherever possible. Not to mention the 3.3 rate presents less demand to the electrical system, and they'd rather not push their luck there either.

Besides is 4 hour charging really of any value compared to 8 hour? 18 hours using the 120V cord doesn't cut it, but the assumption is probably that people buying $25k cars have day jobs, hence the overnight charge is not an issue.

 

[evnow]

Maybe the higher 6.6kw charging rate is out because it places additional strain on the battery.

No - when you consider they allow fast charging.

3.3kw is close to the max std rate countries use. (250V/16A).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AC_power_plugs_and_sockets

 

[AndyH]

Maybe the higher 6.6kw charging rate is out because it places additional strain on the battery. Without the experience of real world usage across a population of consumers for years of use, Nissan may want to reduce risk wherever possible. Not to mention the 3.3 rate presents less demand to the electrical system, and they'd rather not push their luck there either.

Besides is 4 hour charging really of any value compared to 8 hour? 18 hours using the 120V cord doesn't cut it, but the assumption is probably that people buying $25k cars have day jobs, hence the overnight charge is not an issue.

Overall I can't fault your reasoning. I just don't expect 6.6kW will adversely affect the pack. 3.3kW and a ~350V nominal pack means we're only pushing 4.7A into each cell (2 in parallel). 6.6kW brings us to 9.4A. If we have the AESC-listed 33Ah cells we need to push 33A for a 1C rate - and 50A is 1C if Don's 50Ah cell size is accurate. 3.3 and 6.6kW should be absolutely loafing for this pack.

 

[LTLFTcomposite]

No - when you consider they allow fast charging.

Yeah, but maybe they'd prefer it be the exception, not the norm.

Let's say there was no warranty on the battery and the risk for its longevity was all on you. Which charging rate would you prefer?

 

[EVDRIVER]

Maybe the higher 6.6kw charging rate is out because it places additional strain on the battery. Without the experience of real world usage across a population of consumers for years of use, Nissan may want to reduce risk wherever possible. Not to mention the 3.3 rate presents less demand to the electrical system, and they'd rather not push their luck there either.

Besides is 4 hour charging really of any value compared to 8 hour? 18 hours using the 120V cord doesn't cut it, but the assumption is probably that people buying $25k cars have day jobs, hence the overnight charge is not an issue.

Overall I can't fault your reasoning. I just don't expect 6.6kW will adversely affect the pack. 3.3kW and a ~350V nominal pack means we're only pushing 4.7A into each cell (2 in parallel). 6.6kW brings us to 9.4A. If we have the AESC-listed 33Ah cells we need to push 33A for a 1C rate - and 50A is 1C if Don's 50Ah cell size is accurate. 3.3 and 6.6kW should be absolutely loafing for this pack.

Exactly, this was a cost cutting issue and I expect the later models to have a larger charger and the early models to lose quite a bit of value once people figure out the benefit of doubling the charger rate, and if 6.6kw makes any significant impact on the leaf pack then there would never be level 3 as it's a huge difference on a 24kwh pack. I'll even pay $1000 to get 6.6 kw now.

 

[mwalsh]

Exactly, this was a cost cutting issue and I expect the later models to have a larger charger and the early models to lose quite a bit of value once people figure out the benefit of doubling the charger rate, and if 6.6kw makes any significant impact on the leaf pack then there would never be level 3 as it's a huge difference on a 24kwh pack. I'll even pay $1000 to get 6.6 kw now.

I would imagine that the architecture of the 6.6kw unit wouldn't be that much different from that of the 3.3kw version, at least if Nissan were smart about it. If that were the case, it should be easy to retrofit V1 models.

 

[evnow]

I'll even pay $1000 to get 6.6 kw now.

I've never really understood why it is important to a typical owner - I personally don't care whether it recharges from empty in 8 or 4 hours. Can you explain why this would be important ?

 

[mwalsh]

I've never really understood why it is important to a typical owner - I personally don't care whether it recharges from empty in 8 or 4 hours. Can you explain why this would be important ?

Doesn't matter much to me. Unless we're horribly wrong about how many miles we can squeeze out of the 24kwH, all my recharges are going to be overnight.

 

[JasonT]

I've never really understood why it is important to a typical owner - I personally don't care whether it recharges from empty in 8 or 4 hours. Can you explain why this would be important ?

For overnight charging, you're absolutely right - it doesn't matter how long it takes, as long as it is full when you wake up. However, there are other circumstances where a quicker charge would be nice. Let's say your daily round-trip is typically 50 miles. So when you come home from work, your car is down to 1/2 of its charge left. Perhaps I don't want to just go to work that day, but I want to go out that evening - if I'm home for just an hour, I can add an additional 25 miles to the car if I've got 6.6kw charging (I am being very linear here, and yes, I realize it won't necessarily come out that way). But if I've got 3.3, I'm only adding an additional 12.5 miles - which might be enough, or might not, depending on where I am going.

Same with getting a charge when going shopping. I don't know about you, but I can't shop at just about any place for more than an hour or so - being able to get 25 miles more of charge in that time instead of 12 1/2 could drastically reduce range anxiety.

For me personally, I wish it had the faster charger. I work from home, so I have no "daily commute", but I live outside of town - just going to the grocery story is a 25 mile trip. I'm also hoping my girlfriend will take the Leaf when she has to go in for work which is a 65 mile trip. The Leaf will meet most of our needs, but I suspect there will be times when we will have to take the other car because I won't be comfortable with how much is left in the Leaf's "tank".

Is the car manageable with a 3.3kw charger? Certainly. But having the 6.6 would give that much more flexibility. Most people that plan to drive under say... 30 miles a day couldn't care less about a 6.6kw charger. But many people with say... a 50 or more miles/day average would really appreciate being able to charge quicker.

 

[LTLFTcomposite]

Same with getting a charge when going shopping. I don't know about you, but I can't shop at just about any place for more than an hour or so - being able to get 25 miles more of charge in that time instead of 12 1/2 could drastically reduce range anxiety.

Unless they come up with a four minute charger it wouldn't significantly increase my range during the time I spend at the mall. It just isn't going to be a solution for dudes. Wives on the other hand can use the 120v plug.

 

[evnow]

So when you come home from work, your car is down to 1/2 of its charge left. Perhaps I don't want to just go to work that day, but I want to go out that evening - if I'm home for just an hour, I can add an additional 25 miles to the car if I've got 6.6kw charging...

I can understand that. But considering that many would rather not spend the $1K but use 110V trickle charging, I think people ready to pay $1K more for 6.6kw instead of 3.3kw would be a small number. I'd probably pay for a bigger difference - like a 13kw charger ...

 

[Dav]

I've never really understood why it is important to a typical owner - I personally don't care whether it recharges from empty in 8 or 4 hours. Can you explain why this would be important ?

One thing to consider is that "Super-Off-Peak" utility rates only happen a few hours per night. Certainly not 8 hours.

So if it takes longer than the charging window optimally available, you end up paying more for electricity at 3.3 vs. 6.6.

 

[hill]

One thing to consider is that "Super-Off-Peak" utility rates only happen a few hours per night. Certainly not 8 hours.

So if it takes longer than the charging window optimally available, you end up paying more for electricity at 3.3 vs. 6.6.

I thought most TOU meters count from 6pm until 10am as plain ol' off peak. That's 16 hours.. I've never heard of such a thing as "super-off-Peak". What time is that? ... Link please?

 

[mwalsh]

I thought most TOU meters count from 6pm until 10am as plain ol' off peak. That's 16 hours.. I've never heard of such a thing as "super-off-Peak". What time is that? ... Link please?

Super off-peak is on SCE's "TOU-D-TEV" rate structure. This is the one we're going to be on when our PV system goes live. Super off-peak is 12am-6am every day.

http://www.sce.com/CustomerService/rates/residential/electric-vehicles.htm

 

[Nubo]

If/when the Leaf gets a 200-mile pack, or another Nissan vehicle has a 200-mile pack or more, then there will be more incentive to go to the higher rate, to keep the charge to 8 hours.

 

[evnow]

One thing to consider is that "Super-Off-Peak" utility rates only happen a few hours per night. Certainly not 8 hours.

But you don't need 8 hours of charging daily - otherwise you are driving 36K miles a year. "Super-Off-Peak" is 6 hours.

 

[LEAFer]

I've never really understood why it is important to a typical owner - I personally don't care whether it recharges from empty in 8 or 4 hours. Can you explain why this would be important ?

For overnight charging, you're absolutely right - it doesn't matter how long it takes, as long as it is full when you wake up. However, there are other circumstances where a quicker charge would be nice.

I'm with Jason on this. Another situation of interest to me is ... a 150-200 mile destination. I'd be willing to compromise a little to reach it by slowing down a little, but I will need a charge-up about half-way. I am willing to sit/spend/shop/eat for a couple+ hours. In that time I expect to get enough charge to get to my destination. I don't expect a fast charger half-way (for example) between Sacramento and Yosemite, due to the low traffic, but I am hoping for and will accept a Level 2 at 6.6kW. Being stuck with 3.3kW in such situation just about rules out the prefered ZeroEmission visit to Yosemite !

 

[IBELEAF]

One thing to consider is that "Super-Off-Peak" utility rates only happen a few hours per night. Certainly not 8 hours.

But you don't need 8 hours of charging daily - otherwise you are driving 36K miles a year. "Super-Off-Peak" is 6 hours.

Does anyone know what time is super off peak hours?

Anyone know Super Off Peak hours and rate for PSE?


I looked at my bill and I don't see any mention of Off peak hours.

06/17/10 06/30/10 Basic Charge $3.38
06/17/10 06/30/10 Energy Charge 132.07 KWHS @ $.085544 Per KWH $11.30
06/17/10 06/30/10 Electric Conservation Program Charge 132.07 KWHS @ $.004617 Per KWH $.61
06/17/10 06/30/10 Power Cost Adjustment 132.07 KWHS @ $.00 Per KWH $.00
06/17/10 06/30/10 Energy Exchange Credit 132.07 KWHS @ $.007269CR Per KWH $.96CR
06/17/10 06/30/10 Wind Power Production Credit 132.07 KWHS @ $.001684CR Per KWH $.22CR
06/17/10 06/30/10 Merger Credit 132.07 KWHS @ $.000374CR Per KWH $.05CR
06/17/10 06/30/10 Regulatory Asset Tracker 132.07 KWHS @ $.002684 Per KWH $.35
Charge Total $14.41

 

[LEAFer]

Peak, Off-Peak, Super-Off-Peak, etc. etc., are terms that vary depending on the utility that serves you. And these terms typically apply only to a residence that is on a "TOD" (Time-of-Day) or "TOU" (Time-of-Use) schedule or rate. If these terms sound unfamiliar or do not appear on your electric bill your are probably NOT on a TOD/TOU rate.

To find out what time slots these various terms apply to ... a general answer can not be given.

The TOU schedule and its rate(s) is/are defined by your utility's tarif, and you need to do some research on your own. I guess we could post the links to the tarifs in each sub-forum in the Regional/Utilities discussions. But be aware that some utilities "fine print" (gobbledygook) is very hard to interpret. The rate structure can vary by season and by location (rural for example), and even whether your heat is electric or gas (reducing revenue that would otherwise go to your electric utility). After reading about some of these utilities' rates and rules I am coming to realize how "simple" SMUD's rules are. But even SMUD has exceptions and tricky fees and charges that make it hard to analyze.

 

[EVDRIVER]

So when you come home from work, your car is down to 1/2 of its charge left. Perhaps I don't want to just go to work that day, but I want to go out that evening - if I'm home for just an hour, I can add an additional 25 miles to the car if I've got 6.6kw charging...

I can understand that. But considering that many would rather not spend the $1K but use 110V trickle charging, I think people ready to pay $1K more for 6.6kw instead of 3.3kw would be a small number. I'd probably pay for a bigger difference - like a 13kw charger ...

If you plan to drive longer distances in the same day it is essential and that would be a "option price" inflated in the world of auto pricing. It is ridiculous that Nissan offers only one EVSE price option at $2200 installed for such a laughable benefit at 3.3kwh. I'm going to bet this is very short lived and the early buyers who don't have EV experience will get a sour taste when they learn the new chargers are far better and not upgradable.