padamson1 said:
So in summary L2 chargers are cheaper, can be located in more places without additional infrastructure investment and serve almost every type of EV/PHEV. Whether its more convenient to end users or not, from business perspective CHAdeMO certainly doesn't look like a better allocation of limited funds. ...
Sorry, but IMO, you are arguing That government funds should be invested, to a support the relatively small number of individuals, who made a poor decision, to purchase QC-incapable BEVs.
There is already a large L2 legacy network, for those BEV vehicles.
And, IMO, L2 limited PHEVs themselves, may be largely obsolescent, once the QC network is established.
The charger itself is a small part to of the total investment including a suitable QC location, and the connection to existing infrastructure.
It looks like it will be many years, before any manufacturers put any large number of SAE, or other alternate standard, fast-charging BEVs, on US roads, and if there are any manufactures who are willing to "put their money where their mouths are", in the future, Charge stations can simply be redesigned to accommodate future demand.
At his time, CHAdeMO is the only practical standard, for the required BEV fast charge network, and the de facto standard, worldwide. EVERY QC capable car on the road in CA today is CHAdeMO .
The QC standard has been set, by the market, already. We should build the QC stations required, now.