CHAdeMO dead?

[SageBrush]

I watched a YouTube video from Out of Spec Motoring. They visited EA and he asked several questions and it seems as if EA plans to minimally support CHAdeMO and will focus more on CCS. Interesting enough they (EA) has partnered with Tesla to supply battery storage for EA.

EA seems to be doing the bare minimal (legally required?) to "support" CHAdeMO given that they're VW of America owned and EA was part of their dieselgate penance. They got to spend $2 billion of their own $ on a network where they could stack the deck in favor of their own brands (VW, Audi, and Porsche) and their US-market interests by setting a trend/forcing the hands of other automakers, including Nissan.

Nissan and CHAdeMO are no worse off now than what they would be had EA never existed.
VW is giving free infrastructure to EVERY CCS EV in America. If any 'deck stacking' is happening , it is from the S. Korean brands
And of course nothing is stopping Nissan from spending a couple $B of their money to build out a network that 'forces' the hand of others.

In my opinion the US regulators acted foolishly, but not because they supported CCS. CHAdeMO should have been ignored, and Tesla cables added to the EA network instead, as befits the scope of EPA/CARB to maximize the reduction of pollution. That is done by supporting the charging protocols of the cars that the majority of the public are buying.

 

[DougWantsALeaf]

You assume Tesla wanted to play with EA... 2 years ago guessing they didn't.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

You assume Tesla wanted to play with EA... 2 years ago guessing they didn't.

Actually it was the other way around. Tesla was more than willing to participate but VW was against anything that would have helped Tesla in any way and guessing that feeling hasn't changed a bit.

I see a LOT of people warming up to VW because of EA as if EA was born out of generosity and I am quite frankly a bit perplexed. They have proven nothing to me but I know people who are acting like VW has been an established leader in the EV field coming out with it latest greatest innovation including gushing over a product learned thru VW ads and social media postings.

 

[SageBrush]

I see a LOT of people warming up to VW because of EA as if EA was born out of generosity and I am quite frankly a bit perplexed. They have proven nothing to me but I know people who are acting like VW has been an established leader in the EV field coming out with it latest greatest innovation including gushing over a product learned thru VW ads and social media postings.

No problemo

They took their 'clean diesel' adverts and changed 'diesel' to 'vw'
Voila ! 'Clean VW' is born

 

[SageBrush]

You assume Tesla wanted to play with EA... 2 years ago guessing they didn't.

Actually it was the other way around. Tesla was more than willing to participate but VW was against anything that would have helped Tesla in any way

Sounds about right. I think the regulators were also in favor of only supporting 'open' standards. And you can bet that Nissan rode the 'open' standards horse gleefully to gain even the token cables they were given. That has not changed, by the way. Every publicaly subsidized charging I have ever read about touts the same language. In this case though, 'open standards' is just a pandering excuse or echo chamber rather than well thought out social policy.

IIRC, EA is mandated to run and maintain the network for 10 years. We'll see who the owner becomes then, and how they choose to outfit cables when the market prevails. 7 more years to go ?

 

[WetEV]

CHAdeMO should have been ignored, and Tesla cables added to the EA network instead, as befits the scope of EPA/CARB to maximize the reduction of pollution. That is done by supporting the charging protocols of the cars that the majority of the public are buying.

In Elon's dreams.

Tesla's supercharger network is a dagger to the throat of every other auto maker out there. Why would VW pay to make the threat bigger?

 

[SageBrush]

CHAdeMO should have been ignored, and Tesla cables added to the EA network instead, as befits the scope of EPA/CARB to maximize the reduction of pollution. That is done by supporting the charging protocols of the cars that the majority of the public are buying.

Tesla's supercharger network is a dagger to the throat of every other auto maker out there. Why would VW pay to make the threat bigger?

For the same reason that non-Tesla CCS is open to Tesla in Europe
For the same reason that VW is offering the S. Koreans access

Remember: it was VW money, but the US regulators had the final say. They could have rejected the 'open standards' ploy that VW and Nissan trotted out.

 

[WetEV]

For the same reason that non-Tesla CCS is open to Tesla in Europe

Oh, and why is Tesla CCS open to everyone in Europe?

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

CHAdeMO should have been ignored, and Tesla cables added to the EA network instead, as befits the scope of EPA/CARB to maximize the reduction of pollution. That is done by supporting the charging protocols of the cars that the majority of the public are buying.

In Elon's dreams.

Tesla's supercharger network is a dagger to the throat of every other auto maker out there. Why would VW pay to make the threat bigger?

Because this is the US and VW does not wield the power that forced Germany to require CCS adapters for Tesla. The reality is we failed. We allowed ourselves to be manipulated.

 

[alozzy]

Mass adoption and scale necessitates a single L2 standard and a single DC L3 standard that's viable for the next 20 years (at a minimum). So, ALL these proprietary BS "standards" have to go.

Any mass infrastructure rollout needs to be delayed until the EV industry and governments figure this out. The world wide EV charging infrastructure cost is going to be staggering, so there's no way we can afford to get this wrong!

 

[SageBrush]

Mass adoption and scale necessitates a single L2 standard and a single DC L3 standard that's viable for the next 20 years (at a minimum). So, ALL these proprietary BS "standards" have to go.

Any mass infrastructure rollout needs to be delayed until the EV industry and governments figure this out. The world wide EV charging infrastructure cost is going to be staggering, so there's no way we can afford to get this wrong!

I agree that single standards are preferable but the lion's share of the cost is not the socket or the cable.

 

[DougWantsALeaf]

That's a good point. Insideevs did make a point once that the multi standards are confusing to many consumers, butthat includes the difference between L2 and L3. Oddly, J1772/Chademo dual ports helps in that regard as it shows clear delineation whether you are doing an AC plug in or DC.

We need to get to the point where every freeway exit has 2 or 3 DC stations. At this point I don't care if they are all 50KW, we just need many more locations.

 

[alozzy]

Mass adoption and scale necessitates a single L2 standard and a single DC L3 standard that's viable for the next 20 years (at a minimum). So, ALL these proprietary BS "standards" have to go.

Any mass infrastructure rollout needs to be delayed until the EV industry and governments figure this out. The world wide EV charging infrastructure cost is going to be staggering, so there's no way we can afford to get this wrong!

I agree that single standards are preferable but the lion's share of the cost is not the socket or the cable.

If the only difference between CCS, CHADEMO, Tesla Supercharger, etc was the socket or connector, then I would agree that "the lion's share of the cost is not the socket or the cable"...

But that's the problem - a single "socket" type, to which EV owners plug-in an adapter cable to the DC charger, doesn't exist. That's what's missing and why I'm arguing that standardization is a necessity at this point.

Instead of deploying a simplified DC charging machine, that's standardized with a universal "socket", there exist literally hundreds of different DC charging machine designs with little or no standardization. Not only does that make the machines more expensive to design and manufacture, but it also confuses EV newbies. Enthusiastic early adopters have been willing to put up with the confusion of machine designs, connector types, etc but your average car owner won't be so forgiving.

Case in point - typical combo DC chargers that are designed to provide both CHADEMO and CCS charging options, but they can only supply power to one at a time? Just plain stupid...

It's like the lack of standardization for AC mains voltages and frequencies all over again, which resulted in a mish mash of residential voltages (110V/120V/220V/230V/240V) and frequencies (50 vs 60 Hz) across the world - not to mention differences in 3-phases supplies too.

That's why I'm arguing that Biden's plan to deploy 500,000 new EV chargers, before a single DC charging standard exists, is likewise dumb. To invest an estimated $5B on a mish-mash of EV DC fast chargers is a poor long term investment IMHO.

 

[SageBrush]

Case in point - typical combo DC chargers that are designed to provide both CHADEMO and CCS charging options, but they can only supply power to one at a time? Just plain stupid...

That is a good example of why I think you are looking at this wrong.

The one-at-a-time limitation has nothing to do with two different cables, it reflects the power plumbing. In the same vein, it is very common to find DCFC stations that have two identical cables, of which only one is powered at a time.

I'm pretty sure that costs of DCFC are analogous to those seen with EVSE installations: The EVSE is moderately priced, while the installation can be anywhere from cheap to prohibitively expensive. The wiring to the station, need for a transformer or control circuitry, upgrade for more power ... those are the high cost items.

@GerryAZ, anything to add or correct ?

 

[ejm4]

To my knowledge CHAdeMO can only charge up to 50kw? Most of the new BEV's are able to charge at higher rates. I am all for standardization.

I also read where EVGO DC chargers will now offer Tesla charging connectors.

I also own one of the VW diesel-gate Passats and it operated flawless.

 

[SageBrush]

To my knowledge CHAdeMO can only charge up to 50kw?

It varies by location

Your LEAF is limited to 100 or 125 Amps however, so no amount of charger 'standardization' at e.g. a high power rating is going to help increase your charging rate.

I'm looking forward to reading at least one post from someone who is in favor of 'standardization' who is not swayed by false assumptions.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

To my knowledge CHAdeMO can only charge up to 50kw? Most of the new BEV's are able to charge at higher rates. I am all for standardization.

I also read where EVGO DC chargers will now offer Tesla charging connectors.

I also own one of the VW diesel-gate Passats and it operated flawless.

200 amp stations are available which implies an 80 kw charging speed. Highest I saw was 205 amps so not sure what the LEAF top end is. Nissan implies it would be 250 amps maybe? Only see this on Plus models at this time.

 

[WetEV]

I'm looking forward to reading at least one post from someone who is in favor of 'standardization' who is not swayed by false assumptions.

Why don't we standardize on Tesla Supercharger, and get rid of all the competition?

Then Tesla wouldn't have to care anymore.

 

[ejm4]

To my knowledge CHAdeMO can only charge up to 50kw?

It varies by location

Your LEAF is limited to 100 or 125 Amps however, so no amount of charger 'standardization' at e.g. a high power rating is going to help increase your charging rate.

I'm looking forward to reading at least one post from someone who is in favor of 'standardization' who is not swayed by false assumptions.

I should have been more clear in my previous post. I understand the limitations of my Leaf, however I only leased the Leaf for two years until my reserved a Mustang Mach E GT arrives that will benefit from the faster charging speeds.

 

[coulomb]

Case in point - typical combo DC chargers that are designed to provide both CHADEMO and CCS charging options, but they can only supply power to one at a time? Just plain stupid..

If you were charging two vehicles at once, they would be requiring different voltages and currents. It's not like you can parallel the high current terminals, and of course, the protocol will be vastly different if one is CCS and the other is CHAdeMO. So you need completely separate power electronics for the two handles.

Even so, the latest Tritium charrgers (RTM75) have provision for this, and they say it will be an extra cost option available in the next few months. This will be very useful in Australia, which is very sparsely populated outside a handful of large cities, and EV adoption is embarrassingly low due to our federal government being in the pocket of big oil and coal. A typical fast charrger installation has one or sometimes two heads, usually with CCS and CHAdeMO handles. We have a fair number of grey market Leafs and (i)MiEVs imported from Japan (also a right hand drive country), so CHAdeMO is still needed here for quite some time. The Tritium literature indicates that dual charging will be a world first.