Calif Pushing for Hydrogen Pumps But No Quick Chargers

"California’s air-quality regulators Wednesday plan to roll out another in a string of landmark initiatives to control tailpipe emissions, this one pushing automakers even harder to accelerate production of vehicles that use little or no gas."

This is terrific, but:

"Moreover, the oil industry is resisting a plan that would require companies like Chevron and Shell to pay for a certain number of costly hydrogen refueling spots, even at independently owned stations."

Note that quick chargers were not mentioned. It seems to me that mandating the installation of quick chargers at gas stations makes a lot more sense than hydrogen pumps. After all, EVs are rolling out from more and more manufactures, but there are no production fuel cell vehicles.

Complete story at:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/dec/06/state-pushes-tougher-auto-emission-standards/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I'm not a California resident, but CARB sure needs to listen to all the EV owners out there - and not oil & gas "professionals". Seems to me existing station owners can install a L2 or L3 QC for far less money than a hydrogen fueling station.

From the article,

A third part of the program will require oil companies to be responsible for installing hydrogen access points at selected locations once a predetermined number of fuel cell vehicles are on the road.

Click to expand...

Depending on what this predetermined number is, this sounds like it may never come close to happening, given the pace at which hydrogen car development has proceeded. Now that the former Governator has gone back to action films, we may have heard the last of the hydrogen highway.

I say "Follow the money trail" and you will find who's manipulating the whole install/non-install thing -- whether oil and gas, electric lobbies, or manufacturers. Remember that who ever has the most money and buys the most politicians gets the prize.

CARB will respond if enough EVs are sold and enough people start asking and whining about it. Every EV owner in CA should be petitioning their legislator for changes.

*fines for ICE'd EV charging spots
*tax credits for businesses that install/support EV charging. the faster the charge the better the credit.
* forcing PUDs to change their BS demand charge structure for EV QC stations

It would be more efficient to have a capstone generator fast charge EVs then a hydrogen station to fuel and run cars.

coqui said:

Seems to me existing station owners can install a L2 or L3 QC for far less money than a hydrogen fueling station.

Click to expand...

While it may seem that gas stations are a natural fit for EV charging locations, I heard the head of the EV Project here in San Diego say that the code compliance/safety issues of mixing high voltage equipment with dispensing of flammable fuels actually makes the logistics of such installations very difficult. The EV Project at one time was touting Arco stations as partners in the project, but to date, I don't know of a single charger installed at an Arco station (or any functioning gas station) in San Diego. There is talk of one at the Pearson Fuels station on El Cajon Blvd. but it is not in yet.

i am not sure that gas stations are the best fit. i would rather see QC's at strip malls or "fast food row" areas. where parking and eating would be the ideal.

might not want to eat, but a bathroom break (not sure gas station bathrooms are my first choice) or grabbing a drink of something or another.

after all around here, fast food is one of the few things that outnumber gas stations

In Burbank CA they have an Hydrogen station, and a bus that sits unused that is hydrogen powered. They installed an Aerovironment 480 charger to charge the batteries of the bus, but while the hydrogen is available to the public, the 480 charger was placed inside the public works yard where the public cannot see it. It is right next to where the underground fuel tanks for diesel and gasoline are. I have been told the 480 charger is not UV listed and has never been used, although it was installed over a year ago on christmas eve.

Would be nice if a news outlet would take up the story, and pressure the politicians to do more than waste money. Burbank did shift to CNG for many vehicles and wants to better the air quality it seems, so I don't want to knock them too hard. They take advantage of government grants, and 11 charge stations are being put in around town, placed where they should be, near resteraunts, theaters, and such.

Fast chargers should be put where people have something to do, like a valet stand where people often park. Who wants to sit around an ARCO for 20 minutes? Hand the keys off and get the car washed while it charges and you grab a good cup a joe.

Who will create a chain called Charge up! Coffee, wash, and charging at all levels. I know a great location in the middle of Burbank. Electric rides to those who want to park all day to the studios all over Burbank. For those people that live in the AV and want to get rid of the gas car to commute from Palmdale this is a perfect fit. Could likely get $100 a month for the parking and L1 charging of 8 hours, add $20 for drop - pick up services. Drive through coffee, pricey L3, cheaper L2, and monthly L1.

Anyone here who would use this service?

not sure i can believe this high voltage/gas fueling issue is an issue. is there not a report on this site about Japanese gas stations installing QCs?

Calif also pushing Hi speed rail. 800 miles & $45 billion dollars. Just $1 of those billion would pay for 20,000 QC Ev chargers or 25 QC EV chargers for each mile of the 800 miles. Did I do my math right?

jkyu99 said:

Calif also pushing Hi speed rail. 800 miles & $45 billion dollars. Just $1 of those billion would pay for 20,000 QC Ev chargers or 25 QC EV chargers for each mile of the 800 miles. Did I do my math right?

Click to expand...

Yup, you sure did! Really helps give some concrete meaning to that "billion" term that people keep tossing around.

As a global warming nut you would think that I would be a strong supporter of CA high speed rail, but I have been leery of this proposal for a number of years. I'm just not sold on how many people would use it between the LA area and the Bay Area. Of course, I'm also not sold on how many people would be willing to QC their LEAF for that same distance. San Jose to pretty much anywhere in the LA basin is going to need 7 or more QC stops, adding 3½ or 4 hours to a trip that is already 6+ hours at legal freeway speeds; probably closer to 7 hours if you want to take your LEAF 50 miles between 65% charging stops.

Ray

I don't really like the idea of QC at gas stations either. Lets face it, even a QC takes a lot longer than filling up a tank with gasoline. People are going to want something to do while they wait. Lets also face the fact that most people will not tolerate driving their car some distance that requires them to QC everyday, especially if they have to sit there for 30 minutes and wait for it. QC will always be used for emergency and the odd longer-trip than usual situations.

Maybe that is why I feel that L2 stations are "almost" as good as QC stations. Since I would plan to be inside some place of business for a while anyway, I guess the charging time isn't that important. That would especially be true if the Leaf had that faster internal charger that could charge the whole car in 4 hours.

adric22 said:

I don't really like the idea of QC at gas stations either. Lets face it, even a QC takes a lot longer than filling up a tank with gasoline. People are going to want something to do while they wait. Lets also face the fact that most people will not tolerate driving their car some distance that requires them to QC everyday, especially if they have to sit there for 30 minutes and wait for it. QC will always be used for emergency and the odd longer-trip than usual situations.

Maybe that is why I feel that L2 stations are "almost" as good as QC stations. Since I would plan to be inside some place of business for a while anyway, I guess the charging time isn't that important. That would especially be true if the Leaf had that faster internal charger that could charge the whole car in 4 hours.

Click to expand...

The High Speed charging network that Tesla is planning on bulding for the Model S, 240 & 300 miles versions can give the car 160 miles of range back in 30 minutes, is what they are saying, so that might work out for them... not going to help the Leaf so much though. Their idea is to make cross country travel possible in an EV.

25 QC placed every mile is used to point out the absurd notion of a $45 billion 800 mile railroad equivalency (and of the absurd notion of pushing for hydrogen pumps made from CNG). Also note that unlike filling my gasoline tank to full, I often just want enough of a QC to get home to my garage charger. I drove 50 fwy miles to a business and spent 15 minutes there and to get home without anxiety would be a desire to charge +25 miles. 10 minutes of a QC about halfway home should do it. The other day the same trip took me an hour to boost up in the AQMD parking lot (not exactly a popular shopping center).

A typical 2-hour (one way) weekend outing trip might take 6 hours (each way) with 8 hours of L2 charging. That kills most of the day.

However, with QC, the 2-hour trip beomes perhaps 2.5 hours. Not a bad extension at all.

The L2 is not even close to QC in extending day-trip range!

DaveinOlyWA said:

not sure i can believe this high voltage/gas fueling issue is an issue.

Click to expand...

You can believe what you will, and maybe things are different up there in the PNW, but I can tell you as a former licensed general building contractor here in CA that there are strict codes regarding distances required between any fuel-dispensing equipment that involves possible release of flammable vapors and any possible ignition source (electrical or otherwise). This includes both the gasoline pumps, piping, and underground tanks at a filling station, as well as the above-ground storage tanks for LP gas that are often co-located there. These minimum distances, combined with the relatively small area available at most filling stations for the dedicated parking spots necessary for the charging stations, has presented a great challenge in the logistics of designing code-compliant installations and "selling" owners of such sites on the idea. This was reiterated by the local head of Ecotality yesterday at our San Diego owner's group meeting.

Beyond this, however, the greatest impediment to QC charging in CA is our own Public Utilities Commission rules regarding demand tariffs on commercial users, as advocated by the utilities. Without a change to this tariff structure, QC installations are facing a very difficult financial viability situation that is discouraging any investment whatsoever here. The great irony is that it may be the electric utilities themselves that kill the growth of EVs in CA. :evil:

is there not a report on this site about Japanese gas stations installing QCs?

Click to expand...

I haven't read about that, and have no knowledge of what Japanese building codes might be like. Do you have a link to the article? The only thing I have read is that Nissan is installing L3 chargers at all the dealerships in Japan, and I think the UK. I wish they would do that here. An L2 EVSE is fine for the home charging solution, but it will take a large L3 network for opportunity charging to really increase the utility of EVs for a broader segment of the US market and eliminate the "range anxiety" question in the minds of many potential buyers. L2 by itself just doesn't cut it in my mind for public charging. Waiting 4 hours for an 80% charge vs. 25 minutes is going to make a big difference to many potential buyers, but if the cost of an L3 charge ends up being more than the cost of gasoline, the advantage of an EV over an ICE car is not going to be nearly as obvious to people.

TT

If you belive electric powered vehicles could, and will become a significant portion of the transportation segment, then it follows that gas stations will face a decline in business. So what should they do to replace this lost revenue? It seems to me selling energy for transportation, albeit in a different form, makes good sense. Hydrogen is another source, but fuel cell vehicles are a long way off, electric is here now and is growing.

LKK said:

If you belive electric powered vehicles could, and will become a significant portion of the transportation segment, then it follows that gas stations will face a decline in business. So what should they do to replace this lost revenue?

Click to expand...

What are they doing now? U.S. gasoline use has dropped 5 percent in the last four years, without any significant inroads by alternative fuel usage. My guess is that they have and will continue to raise margins to make up for loss of volume. It will be many more years before EVs become "a significant portion of the transportation segment."

I'm not losing any sleep over the future profitability of the oil and gas industry. They have proven to be quite capable of taking care of themselves. As demand has fallen in the US, they have simply turned to exporting refined product overseas. They will take care of their dealer network as well, rest assured. If EV charging represented as great an opportunity for profit, they would jump in with both feet, but it doesn't, and won't for quite some time, if ever.

TT

LKK said:

If you belive electric powered vehicles could, and will become a significant portion of the transportation segment, then it follows that gas stations will face a decline in business. So what should they do to replace this lost revenue? It seems to me selling energy for transportation, albeit in a different form, makes good sense. Hydrogen is another source, but fuel cell vehicles are a long way off, electric is here now and is growing.

Click to expand...

I've heard gas station operators whine for years about only making a penny or two on every gallon of gas they sell regardless of what the price is. Hence their efforts at getting people to come into their stores where they can make their real money selling Cokes for $2.39. The latest tactic is to have their debit card system "broken" so if you want to use debit you have to go inside to the cashier. I have to say, ever since pay at the pump, I rarely went into the store, so that innovation probably did hurt them to some extent.

So along comes quick charging and the typical wait times for the charge. If there is a critical mass of EV owners out there, you would think they would be all over that as people would pretty much always come into the store to come in and buy a hot dog or something while they waited for their charge.