Street Smart in San Diego

[garygid]

1. Please, I do not understand. What do you mean by "utterly stupid on steep hills"?

2. I assume you are joking about "... banned ... future ... orders", hopefully?
(Oh, good, now I see the "" at the end.)

 

[indyflick]

Thought of something else. When I spoke with SDG&E, I asked about the second meter. I wanted to know if they were going to have to install a second panel. He said, "no, the meter will be connected to the 240v circuit to the EVSE". I asked why they couldn't just use the EVSE as the meter. He said because the billing system only works with their specific meters. I asked if the second meter would be a smart meter and he didn't know. I have a smart meter now and it's tied into Google Powermeter Gadget. I didn't ask this but it appears my bill will show total kWh from the original meter then they'll need to back out the kWh recorded from meter 2 (to the EVSE). The kWh from meter 2 will need to grind through whatever tariff I'm randomly given. The sum of those two amounts will be my bill for the month.

By the way, I had a disagreement with him on the whole trial tariff analysis. He said in order for the data to be useful we needed to be assigned a random tariff and see how it effected our behavior. I say BS. We already know how far we drive on average any day of the week. With an excel spreadsheet and the three tariffs, I could select the best tariff for my situation in a few minutes. I'm not going to change my driving pattern based on a SDG&E tariff.

 

[LEAFguy]

walterbays, thank you for a detailed report on your findings. This was much more useful than much of what we find available, and your research is appreciated.

 

[garygid]

I thought the three test SDG&E EV tariffs vary to save only a cent or two for EV charging, but go up nickles or dimes at "peak" times. That is OK for EV charging on a 2nd meter, but generally not good for whole-house use with afternoon A/C as the biggest load.

Also, SDG&E does not appear to have a good way for solar PV generation to offset EV charging. Currently, one-meter net-metering seems closest (almost) to "fair" for those with PV and EV (is that PVEV?).

 

[indyflick]

Here's a tidbit. One of the Nissan reps told me there are presently five vehicles being developed at Nissan which utilize the LEAF platform. He said there was a van, a crossover SUV, a sedan, and wouldn't elaborate on the other two. I said is one a sports car? He smiled, but said nothing. But he also said the van would be unveiled in a couple of weeks as a concept car. I think a sports car at say $25K would be really cool.

 

[Bob4017]

There was a 6' 2" gentleman who sat in the drivers seat while I was in the passenger seat and he said that he was dissatisfied with his "fit" in the car. The drivers seat only goes back so far. It was okay for me at 5' 9"...

I'm the 6'2" gentleman (thanks) who sat in the drivers seat. What I experienced in regards to leg room was this: When I drive, I like my right leg to be almost fully extended. I could not do this in the Leaf. Dissapointing, but I'll still be buying the car in January. :|

 

[Randy]

Great thread, lots of good information. I thought of another tidbit.

The Nissan rep didn't know exactly, but said that there would be something like 12 or 14 cars at the upcoming test drive event, and he thought perhaps even a DC fast charger to help keep things moving...I thought that would be interesting...

 

[Randy]

Whoops, thought of one more tidbit...

Bill Blindell from ECO told me that the ECO rollout of public chargers will begin in February for L2's and March for L3's. Those of us with December or January deliveries evidently won't be able to find ECO EVSEs to plug into for a bit....

 

[ttweed]

There was a 6' 2" gentleman who sat in the drivers seat while I was in the passenger seat and he said that he was dissatisfied with his "fit" in the car. The drivers seat only goes back so far. It was okay for me at 5' 9"...

I am almost 6'4" and felt the leg and headroom was adequate for me in both the front seat and rear seats. Driving position was far more comfortable than in my wife's Miata.

When I drive, I like my right leg to be almost fully extended.

As a driving instructor, I can say this is not a recommended seating position for safety and control reasons. If your leg is "almost fully extended" in your normal driving position, a full power application of the pedals and well-leveraged steering inputs may not be possible in an emergency situation. It may be more comfortable and "cool" that way, but not as safe. Last Sat., I instructed in the Tire Rack Street Survival School for teenagers, and they love to sit way back and way low. The first thing we do when getting in their cars is tell them to move their seats closer and upright enough so that they can fold their wrists over the steering wheel with their backs still against the seat, and so their right foot can depress the clutch fully (or reach the floor on the left side of the brake pedal) with some bend in the knee still.

YMMV,
TT

 

[ttweed]

Whoops, thought of one more tidbit...

Bill Blindell from ECO told me that the ECO rollout of chargers will begin in February for L2's and March for L3's. Those of us with December or January deliveries evidently won't be able to find ECO EVSEs to plug into for a bit....

The 60 L3 chargers they are planning for SD will make a big difference in the utility of the Leaf, but there are 17 L2 chargers already installed within 30 miles of downtown according to the charging map on the EV Project site. I know we have had several installed at UCSD since the days of the GM EV1. Are these not compatible with the Leaf charger? They may not be as fast, but could provide enough juice within an hour or so to make the last leg home if you were on a depleted charge. Then there will be L2s installed at the dealers as well by the time we take delivery, no?

TT

 

[Bob4017]

There was a 6' 2" gentleman who sat in the drivers seat while I was in the passenger seat and he said that he was dissatisfied with his "fit" in the car. The drivers seat only goes back so far. It was okay for me at 5' 9"...

I am almost 6'4" and felt the leg and headroom was adequate for me in both the front seat and rear seats. Driving position was far more comfortable than in my wife's Miata.

When I drive, I like my right leg to be almost fully extended.

As a driving instructor, I can say this is not a recommended seating position for safety and control reasons. If your leg is "almost fully extended" in your normal driving position, a full power application of the pedals and well-leveraged steering inputs may not be possible in an emergency situation. It may be more comfortable and "cool" that way, but not as safe. Last Sat., I instructed in the Tire Rack Street Survival School for teenagers, and they love to sit way back and way low. The first thing we do when getting in their cars is tell them to move their seats closer and upright enough so that they can fold their wrists over the steering wheel with their backs still against the seat, and so their right foot can depress the clutch fully (or reach the floor on the left side of the brake pedal) with some bend in the knee still.

YMMV,
TT

I said that "When I drive, I like my right leg to be almost fully extended". That means that I do drive with a bend in my knee. I am 66 years old and way past driving "cool". If you are my height, 6' 2", you will drive the Leaf with a large bend in your knee.

 

[garygid]

I do not "know" many cars or vans, but there are none that I know of that
allow me to drive with my leg "almost" extended. In fact, in most I have to
sit so far back (to get sufficient headroom) that I am not close enough to
the steering wheel for a comfortable arm position. I am also 6' 2" in height.

 

[LEAFer]

... but there are 17 L2 chargers already installed within 30 miles of downtown according to the charging map on the EV Project site. I know we have had several installed at UCSD since the days of the GM EV1. Are these not compatible with the Leaf charger?

Not yet ... the paddle-type definitely are not. The Avcons rely on the old J1772 spec which uses a different "head". But many of the sites are part of a replacement/upgrade project. See here: http://evconnect.com/newsdetail.php?newsID=24

 

[wsbca]

I thought the three test SDG&E EV tariffs vary to save only a cent or two for EV charging, but go up nickles or dimes at "peak" times. That is OK for EV charging on a 2nd meter, but generally not good for whole-house use with afternoon A/C as the biggest load.

Also, SDG&E does not appear to have a good way for solar PV generation to offset EV charging. Currently, one-meter net-metering seems closest (almost) to "fair" for those with PV and EV (is that PVEV?).

According to this article:

http://www.greentechmedia.com/artic...c-approved-for-time-of-use-ev-charging-pilot/

two of the tariffs have a relatively low super-off-peak, but one is actually higher than current tier 1 DR at off-peak. If I "randomly" get stuck with that one, then even if I am credited properly with an AB920 buyback on my main meter (and the way they are setting up the secondary meter downstream of the first doesn't give me much confidence that will occur smoothly), I'll be paying out of pocket to charge at a net rate that is higher than the low test rates, even though my net KwH usage is zero.

If the only purpose of the EV Project was for SDG&E to fiddle with rates and behavior, that would be one thing (my behavior would be to simply not participate)...but my understanding, or at least my feeling, is that there's a lot more to the Project than that, and collecting data on our usage of the infrastructure should make us eligible for the study as a whole without having to pay to play. Translation: Of course I want my "free" charger and L3 port, which I don't believe is a direct cost to SDG&E, and I want to share my data, but I don't want to be penalized for simply having gone too far too soon down the path of doing something sustainable (generating much of our own supply, at considerable expense).

I'm not sure what I wish would happen...maybe an adjustment to the distribution of the 3 test tariffs such that a PV equipped site can be assured of getting one of the low two super-off-peak versions and not the high one. Or maybe eligibility for some sort of Project slot distinct from the 1000 SDG&E controls.

 

[Frank]

For those of you that talked with SDG&E reps at the event, did they say that two seperate meters could not be "netted" for net metering customers? What I mean is that if you already have net metering (e.g. solar) with one meter, could the additional Leaf meter also be "netted" for billing purposes? I assumed that this might be possible for present net metering customers that are generating excess kWhs for their home and want to use that excess to charge their Leaf. Netting two meters is a simple biling process.

I was disappointed to hear that EV Project participants will be randomly assigned to one of the three experimental SDG&E rates. As previously mentioned, this is the price you pay for the free L3 charging port and a free home charger It makes a big difference in cost if you plan to only charge in the off peak period. The lowest cost time period rates (e.g. off peak) range from $.067/kWh to $.17/kWh. So if you only plan to charge off peak, you could be paying 2.5 times (.17/.067) as much for the electricity if you are in the $.17/kWh group.

 

[Frank]

I am doubting that the LEAF made it 130 miles (from LA to San Diego), at least not without recharging. There, the LEAF indicated as being near "full", presumably after being charged overnight.

I heard that the Leaf at the event traveled from somewhere near Mission Viejo to San Diego and that seems doable.

 

[garygid]

MV to SD, 75 miles, possible, but how did they do it?

Did they drive at some moderate speed to help compensate for the hills, and perhaps without the A/C turned on?

It would be interesting to know what they did to "make it".

 

[wsbca]

For those of you that talked with SDG&E reps at the event, did they say that two seperate meters could not be "netted" for net metering customers? What I mean is that if you already have net metering (e.g. solar) with one meter, could the additional Leaf meter also be "netted" for billing purposes? I assumed that this might be possible for present net metering customers that are generating excess kWhs for their home and want to use that excess to charge their Leaf. Netting two meters is a simple biling process.

If you're talking about the EV Project, the answer is no, explicitly not, according to Gary the SDG&E guy. That's what has me miffed. Basically I have to "decide if the Project is for me", because I will not be able to use my surplus (right now we're putting around 300KwH/mo back into the grid - you're welcome...) to charge my Leaf if I'm in the Project. I _may_ be able to recover about .05/KwH at true-up in the future due to AB920, but if I end up in the ".14-.17" off peak tariff model instead of the .067 or .076 super off peak, I will be writing a check despite having a zero KwH footprint.

Now, if you mean in general - if we bail on the project (and who knows what the implications of that are for our car order), I'm pretty sure we can buy our own EVSE and put it downstream of our current (analog) meter and just continue with net metering. Which is the model we anticipated when we bought our panels, and if we do stay in the project, we hopefully can revert to that without a big re-wiring (re-stucco etc.) expense when it's over. If we stay in the project and share our data, the data might not be so great since we'll be sorely tempted to do as much level 1 charging directly from the house account as is feasible.

 

[Frank]

For those of you that talked with SDG&E reps at the event, did they say that two seperate meters could not be "netted" for net metering customers? What I mean is that if you already have net metering (e.g. solar) with one meter, could the additional Leaf meter also be "netted" for billing purposes? I assumed that this might be possible for present net metering customers that are generating excess kWhs for their home and want to use that excess to charge their Leaf. Netting two meters is a simple biling process.

If you're talking about the EV Project, the answer is no, explicitly not, according to Gary the SDG&E guy. That's what has me miffed. Basically I have to "decide if the Project is for me", because I will not be able to use my surplus (right now we're putting around 300KwH/mo back into the grid - you're welcome...) to charge my Leaf if I'm in the Project. I _may_ be able to recover about .05/KwH at true-up in the future due to AB920, but if I end up in the ".14-.17" off peak tariff model instead of the .067 or .076 super off peak, I will be writing a check despite having a zero KwH footprint.

Now, if you mean in general - if we bail on the project (and who knows what the implications of that are for our car order), I'm pretty sure we can buy our own EVSE and put it downstream of our current (analog) meter and just continue with net metering. Which is the model we anticipated when we bought our panels, and if we do stay in the project, we hopefully can revert to that without a big re-wiring (re-stucco etc.) expense when it's over. If we stay in the project and share our data, the data might not be so great since we'll be sorely tempted to do as much level 1 charging directly from the house account as is feasible.

Yes, I meant as an EV Project participant. I should have stated that. I understand why you would be miffed about this. My PV system generates about 95 percent of our use so I'm not in the same position as you are. We can only hope that SDG&E will change its position on this because I doubt there is an existing law or regulation that would not permit two meters to be "netted" against each other at the same residence.

 

[wwhitney]

Basically I have to "decide if the Project is for me", because I will not be able to use my surplus (right now we're putting around 300KwH/mo back into the grid - you're welcome...) to charge my Leaf if I'm in the Project.

The expense is probably not worth it, but you could put a manual transfer switch on the output of the inverter to switch which meter its output goes to. Then you could manually load balance once per billing period. Of course, depending on whether the EV Project could instrument it properly they might not like it.

Cheers, Wayne