GRA
Posts: 9104
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

IEVS: PORSCHE SAYS NO TO FREE FAST CHARGING, COST CLOSE TO GASOLINE

Mon Mar 26, 2018 6:47 pm

https://insideevs.com/porsche-no-free-fast-charging-cost-close-gasoline/

. . . When Porsche Mission E owners first pull up to the fast-charging power pump, they will be reminded that the price of the juice needed by their premium EV was not included in the original invoice. Unlike Tesla, whose mission is “to accelerate the advent of sustainable transport…,” and offered, until recently, free lifetime Supercharging to owners of the Model S and Model X, the German automaker is a little less altruistic.

This, according to Gearbrain, who reported that the company’s deputy chairman of the executive board, Lutz Meschke, replied to a question about whether Porsche would run its charging facilities as profits centers thusly:

    Yes, we want to earn money with the new products and services. Of course. Yes.

When asked whether the electricity “would be cheaper than gas or a similar” price, Meschke answered that the price would be similar. Lower fueling costs have always been a popular selling point for electric vehicles, but if your EV is also a Porsche, small things like electricity costs probably aren’t an issue for you. . . .

Good. Energy (in a usable form) should never be or be thought of as 'free'. And the QC infrastructure will only grow rapidly if it can be made profitable while also competitive with gas prices. We still don't have the ability to do this, as it requires renewables plus much cheaper storage to eliminate demand fees, but it's essential if ICEs are to be replaced by BEVs (absent BEV ranges so long that recharging times don't matter).
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

SageBrush
Posts: 2685
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:28 am
Delivery Date: 13 Feb 2017
Location: Colorado

Re: IEVS: PORSCHE SAYS NO TO FREE FAST CHARGING, COST CLOSE TO GASOLINE

Mon Mar 26, 2018 8:04 pm

I guess Porsche will get to see what the market will bear. The Porsche market anyway, since I think they are first movers in the 800v charging space. Everybody else can go buy some popcorn.
2013 LEAF 'S' Model with QC & rear-view camera
Bought off-lease Jan 2017 from N. California
Car is now enjoying an easy life in Colorado
3/2018: 58 Ahr, 28k miles
-----
2018 Tesla Model 3 LR, Delivered 6/2018

User avatar
LTLFTcomposite
Posts: 4541
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:06 pm
Delivery Date: 10 Dec 2011
Leaf Number: 5926
Location: Central FL

Re: IEVS: PORSCHE SAYS NO TO FREE FAST CHARGING, COST CLOSE TO GASOLINE

Tue Mar 27, 2018 2:41 am

They will fail. Not because of this though.
LTL
White 2012 SV delivered 10 Dec 2011 returned 25 Nov 2014 replaced with stopgap ICE Sentra
[35 months] [35K miles] [9 Bars]
2013 Volt replaced after 36 months/30k miles with ICE Rogue
2016 SV-adjacent May 2016 lost 4th bar March 2018

webeleafowners
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2015 5:37 pm
Delivery Date: 06 Oct 2015
Location: Okanagan Valley British Columbia

Re: IEVS: PORSCHE SAYS NO TO FREE FAST CHARGING, COST CLOSE TO GASOLINE

Tue Mar 27, 2018 6:31 am

So can these Porsche’s only charge at Porsche charge facilities or can they charge at home like all the rest of us. If so, their analogy kinda seems silly.
2015 Smart Electric Drive convertible.
2016 Nissan Leaf SV 30KWh
EV only Family...well except for the big diesel motorhome. :shock:

edatoakrun
Posts: 5222
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 9:33 am
Delivery Date: 15 May 2011
Leaf Number: 2184
Location: Shasta County, North California

Re: IEVS: PORSCHE SAYS NO TO FREE FAST CHARGING, COST CLOSE TO GASOLINE

Tue Mar 27, 2018 7:01 am

GRA wrote:...the QC infrastructure will only grow rapidly if it can be made profitable while also competitive with gas prices...

No, gas prices are largely irrelevant, since most BEV drivers only need to buy a few dozen gallons worth of range per year form public DC stations.

I think most rational BEV drivers are currently far more concerned with reliability than price when choosing their DC charge sites, and will remain so until DC sites become ubiquitous, and gas stations disappear.

Once that happens, competition among DC sites should ensure lower-than-gas prices.

GRA wrote:...it requires renewables plus much cheaper storage to eliminate demand fees...

No, public DC sites can (and should) be exempt from demand fees.

The public benefits of doing so far outweigh the costs.
no condition is permanent

User avatar
RegGuheert
Posts: 6293
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 4:12 am
Delivery Date: 16 Mar 2012
Leaf Number: 5926
Location: Northern VA

Re: IEVS: PORSCHE SAYS NO TO FREE FAST CHARGING, COST CLOSE TO GASOLINE

Tue Mar 27, 2018 8:28 am

GRA wrote:Good. Energy (in a usable form) should never be or be thought of as 'free'. And the QC infrastructure will only grow rapidly if it can be made profitable while also competitive with gas prices. We still don't have the ability to do this, as it requires renewables plus much cheaper storage to eliminate demand fees, but it's essential if ICEs are to be replaced by BEVs (absent BEV ranges so long that recharging times don't matter).
That's right, GRA: Fight the good fight against free fuel!

But ONLY fight that fight when that free fuel is electricity. When the fuel being provided for free is hydrogen gas, remain completely mute on this important issue of free fuel, even when the problem is pointed out to you by other posters on this forum: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8.

I didn't even mention the MANY occasions where you quoted another reference on the internet here in which they pointed out that hydrogen was being provided for free yet you managed to restrain your righteous indignation and said nothing about it in ALL cases.

Instead, I see that your indignation is reserved for companies which dare to charge enough money for their hydrogen products to attempt to cover their costs and make a profit:
GRA wrote:The station's right on Norris Canyon Road, a double-sided dispenser with 350 bar on the north side and 700 bar on the south side. But the price is $20.16/kg.! They've got to be kidding!
and here:
GRA wrote:After three years of $0.00/mile H2, see what the current price of H2 is. If it isn't competitive with gas, turn the car in and lease again if you choose, getting another three years free (or more likely, a lower level of subsidy to make it competitive, if H2 has come down in price but is still more expensive than gas).
So, does everyone get it now?

- When ELECTRICITY is free: "Energy (in a usable form) should never be or be thought of as 'free'."

- When HYDROGEN is free: "After three years of $0.00/mile H2, see what the current price of H2 is. If it isn't competitive with gas, turn the car in and lease again if you choose, getting another three years free..."
RegGuheert
2011 Leaf SL Demo vehicle
10K mi. on 041413; 20K mi. (55.7Ah) on 080714; 30K mi. (52.0Ah) on 123015; 40K mi. (49.8Ah) on 020817; 50K mi. (47.2Ah) on 120717; 60K mi. (43.66Ah) on 091918.
Enphase Inverter Measured MTBF: M190, M215, M250, S280

User avatar
EVDRIVER
Moderator
Posts: 6456
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 7:51 am

Re: IEVS: PORSCHE SAYS NO TO FREE FAST CHARGING, COST CLOSE TO GASOLINE

Tue Mar 27, 2018 10:18 am

Since a 12V Porsche battery is $1000 at the dealer I hate to think what a traction pack or any EV parts may cost!

GRA
Posts: 9104
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: IEVS: PORSCHE SAYS NO TO FREE FAST CHARGING, COST CLOSE TO GASOLINE

Tue Mar 27, 2018 4:36 pm

RegGuheert wrote:
GRA wrote:Good. Energy (in a usable form) should never be or be thought of as 'free'. And the QC infrastructure will only grow rapidly if it can be made profitable while also competitive with gas prices. We still don't have the ability to do this, as it requires renewables plus much cheaper storage to eliminate demand fees, but it's essential if ICEs are to be replaced by BEVs (absent BEV ranges so long that recharging times don't matter).
That's right, GRA: Fight the good fight against free fuel!

But ONLY fight that fight when that free fuel is electricity. When the fuel being provided for free is hydrogen gas, remain completely mute on this important issue of free fuel, even when the problem is pointed out to you by other posters on this forum: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8.

I didn't even mention the MANY occasions where you quoted another reference on the internet here in which they pointed out that hydrogen was being provided for free yet you managed to restrain your righteous indignation and said nothing about it in ALL cases.

As I've often pointed out, H2 will only succeed when it's cost-competitive with gas. If companies and governments wish to subsidize it in the early stages of deployment, okay, but that inevitably means roll out will be very slow, as is the case with Tesla's SCs and public charging deployment. Gas stations proliferated rapidly because lots of people were willing to build and operate them as a business, as they were profitable. No one (to my knowledge) is doing that yet with either public charging or H2, as they both remain dependent on public subsidies (or corporate, in the case of Tesla/Toyota/Honda/Hyundai). Only when those are no longer needed will we see rapid growth of public charging or H2 fueling infrastructure. As to 'free' H2, see below.

RegGuheert wrote:Instead, I see that your indignation is reserved for companies which dare to charge enough money for their hydrogen products to attempt to cover their costs and make a profit:
GRA wrote:The station's right on Norris Canyon Road, a double-sided dispenser with 350 bar on the north side and 700 bar on the south side. But the price is $20.16/kg.! They've got to be kidding!
and here:
GRA wrote:After three years of $0.00/mile H2, see what the current price of H2 is. If it isn't competitive with gas, turn the car in and lease again if you choose, getting another three years free (or more likely, a lower level of subsidy to make it competitive, if H2 has come down in price but is still more expensive than gas).
So, does everyone get it now?

- When ELECTRICITY is free: "Energy (in a usable form) should never be or be thought of as 'free'."

- When HYDROGEN is free: "After three years of $0.00/mile H2, see what the current price of H2 is. If it isn't competitive with gas, turn the car in and lease again if you choose, getting another three years free..."

See above. Everyone's aware that H2 remains too expensive and is being subsidized, and the amount of that subsidy ($15k total, provided by the auto manufacturer rather than the government) is known. No one thinks that it's really free, only that it's being subsidized so that a limited quantity is provided to the consumer, essentially as part of their total payment. I'm against any imputation that usable energy for transport is free - it always costs something to put it into usable form. I was against Tesla's Free Supercharging for life for the same reason (along with the fact that it was unsustainable if they wanted to move into the mass market), and was much happier when they said they were changing that to a yearly allowance plus costs for any extra, which is essentially the method now being employed for H2; straight payment per use is even better.

I'd hope/expect that Toyota et al would reduce the amount of the subsidy for second leases, as the car itself should be less expensive. My personal preference for handling energy subsidies is that you'd be always be paying out of pocket for any refueling/recharging using say a company-issued credit card, but the company would pay some amount per kg or kWh and you'd be on the hook for the rest. That way everyone would have a direct reinforcement that energy is never free, and it would encourage people to shop around for the least expensive energy. Of course, given the limited deployment of both public charging and (even more so) H2 stations now, there often isn't enough competition in many areas to make shopping for price a viable option yet.

As to Linde's price in San Ramon, it's liquid H2 transport which is supposed to be cheaper to transport than gaseous, yet it's priced $3.38/kg. MORE than First Element's gaseous H2 in the Bay Area ($16.78/kg.), not to mention the $9.99 that Air Products is charging at their stations in SoCal for their gaseous H2, so I do find that outrageous. As the San Ramon station is at Toyota's HQ, I suspect that the high price may be designed to reduce some of the subsidy in a back door way, by Linde kicking something back to Toyota.

H2 will only succeed if they can reduce the price to be competitive with gas, and the same goes for electricity. The recent increase in gas prices in California (avg. $3.474 for regular today), along with eVgo's decrease in their prices, make both public charging and H2 more competitive with gas, although the latter still has a ways to go. The question is whether companies like eVgo or the H2 providers can be profitable at those prices.
Last edited by GRA on Tue Mar 27, 2018 7:20 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

GRA
Posts: 9104
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: IEVS: PORSCHE SAYS NO TO FREE FAST CHARGING, COST CLOSE TO GASOLINE

Tue Mar 27, 2018 4:51 pm

edatoakrun wrote:
GRA wrote:...the QC infrastructure will only grow rapidly if it can be made profitable while also competitive with gas prices...

No, gas prices are largely irrelevant, since most BEV drivers only need to buy a few dozen gallons worth of range per year form public DC stations.

I think most rational BEV drivers are currently far more concerned with reliability than price when choosing their DC charge sites, and will remain so until DC sites become ubiquitous, and gas stations disappear.

BEV drivers have largely been buying only a few dozen gallons worth of range/year from QCs because their BEVs were so poor for anything other than local use. As range, charging rates and infrastructure increase so that BEVs can be used for all trips, that will change. Reliability is a requirement regardless.

edatoakrun wrote:Once that happens, competition among DC sites should ensure lower-than-gas prices.

That will only be true if costs are also lower than gas; otherwise, you'll have a succession of short-lived price wars until each QC station goes out of business.

edatoakrun wrote:
GRA wrote:...it requires renewables plus much cheaper storage to eliminate demand fees...

No, public DC sites can (and should) be exempt from demand fees.

The public benefits of doing so far outweigh the costs.

Terrific, now all you have to do is convince the public, the utilities and the PUCs to agree to that. Good luck!
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

SageBrush
Posts: 2685
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:28 am
Delivery Date: 13 Feb 2017
Location: Colorado

Re: IEVS: PORSCHE SAYS NO TO FREE FAST CHARGING, COST CLOSE TO GASOLINE

Tue Mar 27, 2018 10:40 pm

GRA wrote:BEV drivers have largely been buying only a few dozen gallons worth of range/year from QCs because their BEVs were so poor for anything other than local use.

How do you explain the 80-90% home fueling percentage of the Tesla ?
For most people, and that includes ICE cars, the daily grind eats up most of the miles and fuel is local.
2013 LEAF 'S' Model with QC & rear-view camera
Bought off-lease Jan 2017 from N. California
Car is now enjoying an easy life in Colorado
3/2018: 58 Ahr, 28k miles
-----
2018 Tesla Model 3 LR, Delivered 6/2018

Return to “Business / Economy and Politics”