Nissan Gears Up for US LEAF Production by Doubling Workforce

[GaslessInSeattle]

From the perspective of early adopters and EV enthusiast, Smidge is correct whereas from the perspective of mass marketing and adoption, I'd have to side with SanDust.

From a marketing perspective it's really confusing to break down charge rates for people, their eyes immediately glaze over. People are often apprehensive and confused about electricity, they are so used to turning off light switches to save energy that they think it costs a lot. It needs to be kept very simple, IMHO. The first thing I tell people is that the car charges to 80% in a half hour using a DC quick charging network but that most of the charging is done at night in ones garage while sleeping for about $30 a month, using a 240 V outlet, equivalent to an electric clothes dryer or electric stove. IMHO, I agree whole heartedly that L1/110 should be framed as for emergency use and not even included in the introduction of the vehicle in advertising. I can't tell you how many people only remember 19 hours, how that's what gets emphasized in articles causing folks to only shake their head and close their mind. Sure some people will find L1 doable but for the pre-owner, it's unconscionable and is a big turn off for most, so much so it's better off not mentioned.

IMHO, we need to focus our requests for more chargers on L3. I believe L3 should be rolled out in a given geographic area first, it's the most impressive and requires a big push to make happen and takes advantage of the high level of attention the press gives at first. Create the skeleton with L3 then "flesh the bones" with L2. L3 will quell the public's fears, help get them behind the wheel and help them discover that L2 is adequate most of the time... a happy discovery after the fact.

What we've got here in the northwest is L2 being placed somewhat hastily, apparently to use up the federal funding before contracts expire. charging several dollars an hour to charge in a garage that charges several dollars an hour to park, across the street from free parking just doesn't seem like a viable business model. It's hard to tell from this vantage point and maybe I'm just ignorant of the reasoning, but I sure do hope there is some method to the madness.

One L3 charger will prove to be hundreds of times more valuable to the public image of EV's than hundreds of L2's. Of course the biggest secret is that most EV driving can be done with no network at all, but the masses won't believe that until they experience it for themselves.

As they've found in Japan, the network is a crucial security blanket for the early days of "merely adequate" battery capacity.

No it doesn't. The LEAF will charge just fine on a standard 15A wall socket, albeit at roughly half the rate of a 240V supply. Whether or not you "had" to have a 240V connection is a function of your driving habits and needs.

You can dig post holes with a spoon but most people don't find it convenient. Nissan doesn't think trickle charging provides a good ownership experience and I agree with them.

Your subjective opinion that the 120V charging option is too slow does not change the fact that 120V is possible, and so your original comment that the LEAF requires a 240V connection is still objectively false. Neener neener.
=Smidge=

 

[Smidge204]

From the perspective of early adopters and EV enthusiast, Smidge is correct whereas from the perspective of mass marketing and adoption, I'd have to side with SanDust.

Back on page 2 I originally commented about the perceived necessity of a charging infrastructure as a requirement for EV adoption, playfully suggesting that the person I was replying to didn't have an electrical outlet in his house (I even used a :lol: !). The point I was trying to suggest is that your house is your primary charging location, and a vast public charging network is not as important a prerequisite as some people think.

Then SanDust decided to get irrelevant (and stripped off my smiley!), so I got pedantic. Sorry but it seems I derailed the topic a bit as a result.

I agree 100% that the different charging rates can get confusing for some people, and that explanation needs to be kept simple. I disagree that mentioning DC quick charge right off the bat is a good idea, at least until such chargers are widely available and there are more vehicles capable of using them... Instead I'd try to explain it in terms of miles (of range) per hour (of charging). Use the included 120V EVSE? About 5 miles of range per hour of charging. Using a 240V EVSE is double that. (I don't mention that I'm using 3.5mi/kWh as an underlying assumption.) Then I explain that you don't have to recharge the entire battery each time, you only have to recharge what you used so far - "Top it off" - which is important to emphasize. Then I explain that the charging happens while you're busy doing other things, like working or sleeping, so you rarely if ever "wait" for the charge to complete.

This way, they don't have any specific times set into their memory. Let THEM do the math. There's no shock value like there might be telling them it takes 18+ hours to recharge at L1 from 0% to full, and you don't have to try and undo that damage by explaining you rarely, if ever, actually have to recharge from 0%. You can instead say, for example, "With my driving habits, at 30 miles per day, my car completely recharges in no more than 6 hours at worst case."

So yeah, public charging infrastructure is not an absolute requirement but, as you said, a security blanket. Nice to have but there's still a good market out there to tide over manufacturers and give installers reassurance that there will be cars to use them.
=Smidge=