Why do you want QC charging for the Leaf?

[DANandNAN]

The L2 stations are cheaper, install is cheaper, the electricity is cheaper

I do not believe you are right, for what it provides a QC is cheaper:

- charger around $10000 (the cheap Nissan) or 10L2 EVSEs.
- installation of 7 L2 can be more expensive than a QC (assuming that Burger King already has the 480V, you will need more conduit, wires and LABOR for 7 L2)
- if 7 L2 are charging at the same time at the same location the cost of electricity will be the same (L2 might be more efficient).
- you only take one parking space
- the fact that will eliminate any "range anxiety", "lost 1 capacity bar" and "16 hours to charge" stories PRICELESS

And the auto manufactures that are behind know it.

Why is a single Burger King putting in 7 L2 stations in your example? To make the costs the same? Why wouldn't they do what most places do, and put in one or two L2 stations? If you're going to stack the deck in your sides favor, why not make it 15-20 L2 stations? Then the cost difference would definitely go your way

L2 is cheaper.

 

[EricH]

My biggest reason for wanting QC in an urban environment is.... I've never seen a QC station ICE'ed. However, I've lost count of the L2's I've found ICE'ed, or blocked by fully-charged EV's/Volts (yes, LAX, I'm talking to you). Because I know I can use it, even if I have to wait 20-30 min, a QC is worth five or six (maybe seven?) L2's.

 

[Randy]

I'm just asking how you came up with your numbers. You seem so sure about them that I assume you have some sort of basis where they come from? For example - you say $100,000 for construction, how do you get to that number? And, you say $100,000 for demand charges, do you have a calculation that you used to get to that number? Just askin.

There are so many different variables that two locations in the same general location may have very different costs. But on average my experience tells me that it will be $100,000. But don't take my word for it. Start asking contractors who do this kind of thing in your area. Once you get beyond the "it depends on lots of things" you should get some good numbers. FWIW the NRG settlement says 10,000 Level II chargers and 200 DC fast chargers for $100,000,000. If the J1772 chargers cost $2000 a pop, that leaves $80M for 200 DC fast chargers, or $400,000 per install. That's much higher than my number.

The demand calculation is just multiplying the demand charge per kW times the number of kW you need to draw. $1600/month for 60 months = $96,000. http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=8323&p=193924&hilit=demand+charges#p193924" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The proposed NRG settlement contains a few details that are relevant...The 200 Freedom Stations (DC Fast Chargers) are valued in the agreement at $50.5M (or $252,500 each). If NRG installs the 200 DCFC stations for less money, then they are obligated to install more stations until they reach the $50.5M threshold. These sites could end up with a Chademo / SAE combo charger, or it could end up being separate Chademo and SAE units. So the sites will have to be "plumbed" to deliver over 120 kW (expensive).

In addition, the 10,000 make-ready stub sites valued in the agreement at $40M are just for the L2 infrastructure and don't include any EVSEs. The host sites will own that infrastructure, and can make a deal with NRG to outfit the stubs with EVSEs or the hosts can wait through the initial 18 month period and get EVSEs installed by another vendor or provider...

 

[smkettner]

Somehow the cost will be at least the $252,000. Everybody and their cousin will be a consultant on this job. :shock: :roll:

 

[DANandNAN]

I suspect you will have a very different response once you have owned a Leaf for a year... I would put money on it that you will wish you have ordered it with a QC port. 10 minutes on a QC can make a huge difference to one's plans, so I disagree, QC's make a lot of sense in major metropolitan areas and along arterioles. 30 minutes gives an 80 charge which I can easily go 60 miles on in real world conditions. One or two quick charges opens up travel between major cities in the northwest, and I know i'm not the only one excited about that, it's about all we talk about on the local FB page.

I suspect that the reason we bought a Volt first is because the Leaf's range is short and I don't want to be turtled. I don't need to own a Leaf for a year to know that. If we get a Leaf we'll get the L3, but it won't matter because there are none and no one is putting them in around here. The 6.6 will get a lot of use though.

CHAdeMO is a poor range Band-Aid, so are public L2 stations, and so is the on-board generator. But, CHAdeMO is a diamond crusted Band-Aid while the Volt's on-board generator is one that I pay for when I need it (something most Leaf owners won't do). L3 doesn't make sense right now, look at the numbers Tony and others have posted and run before.

I wouldn't get used to those public stations, they make no fiscal sense. Someone suggested they'd pay double what gas cost, but with this few users, double isn't going to sustain it for long. Until there's a large number of cars all using the same port, L3 isn't going to make it. The country is leaning really far Right and city's & states will start charging real rates and usage will drop further which will drive up costs and close down stations.

 

[DANandNAN]

My biggest reason for wanting QC in an urban environment is.... I've never seen a QC station ICE'ed. However, I've lost count of the L2's I've found ICE'ed, or blocked by fully-charged EV's/Volts (yes, LAX, I'm talking to you). Because I know I can use it, even if I have to wait 20-30 min, a QC is worth five or six (maybe seven?) L2's.

So, instead of changing the laws to stop ICE'ing, you'd put in a station that costs 7 times as much to install and way more than L2 costs users? And, you're making this decision based on anecdotal evidence?

Also, L2 at an airport isn't blocked if an EV is fully charged. It's an airport, think about it - it's where people leave their cars, long term. Unless the EVSE is in a waiting lot no one is being blocked. It's more of a lack of stations than anything else.

 

[brettcgb]

I posted the following (quoted) comments on another forum recently, but they are equally relevant here, so I'm reposting:

The imminent 6.6kW vehicle charging standard will dramatically narrow the gap between the L2 and L3 charging experiences. And, when the cost differential is factored in, L3 becomes far less attractive as an option.

L2 charging changing from 8Hr(3.3kW) to 4Hr(6.6kW) helps, but neither really compares to 0.5Hr(50kW, L3/DCFC). We're talking about the difference between hours and minutes. Cost is a factor IF you have the time to actually wait hours for a charge. If you don't have the time, cost isn't a factor.

Finally, the "format war" between CHAdeMo and SAE is inevitably going to continue to muddy the waters and, in the short term at least, discourage L3 deployment.

Chademo is already a "defacto" standard for which there is no alternative. SAE (combined L2/L3 connector) will eventually replace Chademo, but it has at least a 5-10 year wait before most existing Chademo vehicles retire, even if it hits the streets tomorrow. In the mean time, L3 chargers will likely offer both Chademo and SAE connectors - 2 port chargers will suddenly become 3-4 port chargers, serving two (or more) parking spaces.

I don't think Chademo vs SAE is going to impact L3 adoption in the least. The consumers are demanding fast charging, and don't care about connectors as long as they work. Manufacturers are working to lower the cost of the equipment (reasonable and expected).

 

[DANandNAN]

I posted the following (quoted) comments on another forum recently, but they are equally relevant here, so I'm reposting:

The imminent 6.6kW vehicle charging standard will dramatically narrow the gap between the L2 and L3 charging experiences. And, when the cost differential is factored in, L3 becomes far less attractive as an option.

L2 charging changing from 8Hr(3.3kW) to 4Hr(6.6kW) helps, but neither really compares to 0.5Hr(50kW, L3/DCFC). We're talking about the difference between hours and minutes. Cost is a factor IF you have the time to actually wait hours for a charge. If you don't have the time, cost isn't a factor.

Finally, the "format war" between CHAdeMo and SAE is inevitably going to continue to muddy the waters and, in the short term at least, discourage L3 deployment.

Chademo is already a "defacto" standard for which there is no alternative. SAE (combined L2/L3 connector) will eventually replace Chademo, but it has at least a 5-10 year wait before most existing Chademo vehicles retire, even if it hits the streets tomorrow. In the mean time, L3 chargers will likely offer both Chademo and SAE connectors - 2 port chargers will suddenly become 3-4 port chargers, serving two (or more) parking spaces.

I don't think Chademo vs SAE is going to impact L3 adoption in the least. The consumers are demanding fast charging, and don't care about connectors as long as they work. Manufacturers are working to lower the cost of the equipment (reasonable and expected).

Eh, it's slow v slower (L2 v L3). Neither is "fast". Charging for an hour and only being able to drive for an hour isn't fast. If it was consumers would actually be demanding it. Right now, demand is low, but maybe this months Leaf's numbers will be better. And, as we see from current Leaf owners, most aren't willing to pay, saying that cost only stops being a factor in an emergency.

 

[TonyWilliams]

I wouldn't get used to those public stations, they make no fiscal sense. Someone suggested they'd pay double what gas cost, but with this few users, double isn't going to sustain it for long. Until there's a large number of cars all using the same port, L3 isn't going to make it.

There is the first thing you said that I agree with... maybe even a couple:

1. Public charge stations are very likely to never pay off (until gasoline hits $10/gal or more)

2. All the cars should use the same charging port. That is brilliant. Thanks for finally coming to our side.

 

[GaslessInSeattle]

Dan,since the biggest challenge to get people to adopt EV's is largely psychological, charging infrastructure must be out ahead of adoption of the vehicles. This will require a high per use investment until adoption really takes off, and even then, it's still likely to require subsidy. The cost of our dependence on foreign oil is so great that we can not wait for the free market to perform it's magic through supply and demand and market competition.

There is a much larger questions begging, which is whether public charging infrastructure, slow or quick, will ever be a financially viable venture. IMHO, for a long time to come, it won't be, which if we went along the lines of your thinking, we wouldn't fund it at all. Battery technology is already far enough along and at a price point where we can buy a car that gets 75-100 miles to a charge, which is more than double what the average person drives (33 miles) in a day, making public charging unnecessary for the vast majority of everyone's daily driving needs. Today's for-profit gas stations work well in the free market because they provide something people can't get at home for cheap. With EV's, the public purchase of electricity will likely be the exception, especially as batteries get bigger. It's possible that public charging is going to have to be seen as a public service of sorts, at least the initial install of the chargers, like bridges and roads, all necessary and paid for through public funding because they are in the country's best interests as a whole. The argument you make against QC's and for L2, could actually be made against both QC's and L2 stations, neither will make economic sense in the typical free market model, at least not for a long time to come. At least initially the economics of the charging stations is not going to make sense by normal free market measure and possibly never will, until you begin to imagine what the benefits to the economy overall will be of freeing up thousands of dollars per year per household for spending domestically, money that is currently going toward buying gas, funding regimes that hate us and funding the resulting wars (in the trillions over time). Regardless of the cost of the domestic energy infrastructure, the impact on national security of de-funding terrorist regimes will of course, be priceless! Funding 10's of thousands of DC QC stations across the country is key to helping cajole the country toward energy independence and is well worth the cost, particularly when compared to millions of L2 stations.

I suspect you will have a very different response once you have owned a Leaf for a year... I would put money on it that you will wish you have ordered it with a QC port. 10 minutes on a QC can make a huge difference to one's plans, so I disagree, QC's make a lot of sense in major metropolitan areas and along arterioles. 30 minutes gives an 80 charge which I can easily go 60 miles on in real world conditions. One or two quick charges opens up travel between major cities in the northwest, and I know i'm not the only one excited about that, it's about all we talk about on the local FB page.

I suspect that the reason we bought a Volt first is because the Leaf's range is short and I don't want to be turtled. I don't need to own a Leaf for a year to know that. If we get a Leaf we'll get the L3, but it won't matter because there are none and no one is putting them in around here. The 6.6 will get a lot of use though.

CHAdeMO is a poor range Band-Aid, so are public L2 stations, and so is the on-board generator. But, CHAdeMO is a diamond crusted Band-Aid while the Volt's on-board generator is one that I pay for when I need it (something most Leaf owners won't do). L3 doesn't make sense right now, look at the numbers Tony and others have posted and run before.

I wouldn't get used to those public stations, they make no fiscal sense. Someone suggested they'd pay double what gas cost, but with this few users, double isn't going to sustain it for long. Until there's a large number of cars all using the same port, L3 isn't going to make it. The country is leaning really far Right and city's & states will start charging real rates and usage will drop further which will drive up costs and close down stations.

 

[brettcgb]

The imminent 6.6kW vehicle charging standard will dramatically narrow the gap between the L2 and L3 charging experiences. And, when the cost differential is factored in, L3 becomes far less attractive as an option.

L2 charging changing from 8Hr(3.3kW) to 4Hr(6.6kW) helps, but neither really compares to 0.5Hr(50kW, L3/DCFC). We're talking about the difference between hours and minutes. Cost is a factor IF you have the time to actually wait hours for a charge. If you don't have the time, cost isn't a factor.

Eh, it's slow v slower (L2 v L3). Neither is "fast". Charging for an hour and only being able to drive for an hour isn't fast. If it was consumers would actually be demanding it. Right now, demand is low, but maybe this months Leaf's numbers will be better. And, as we see from current Leaf owners, most aren't willing to pay, saying that cost only stops being a factor in an emergency.

Charge for 0.5Hours to drive 1.0Hr is more realistic. Typically, my FC have been less than 0.3Hr (this roughly corresponds the time an ICE needs for a refueling stop mid-trip). Otherwise, I do the majority of my charging at home - no other "pit stops" required.

The times I use DCFC are when I'm making a round trip out to the edge of my cars one-way range - This happens two-three times a month. The fast charge makes it possible to start back home in a few minutes rather than a couple hours. Having DCFC almost makes my trips the same as ICE. Not having DCFC doubles my round trip time. In my book, that makes DCFC "Fast", even when compared to ICE.

 

[garsh]

Dan,since the biggest challenge to get people to adopt EV's is largely psychological, charging infrastructure must be out ahead of adoption of the vehicles.

I disagree. There is one main reason why EVs will remain niche vehicles (for now):

The batteries.

When compared to a gas tank:

• The capacity is too low.
• The cost is too high.
• They take too long to refill.

Even if we had QC charging stations at *every* gas station in the world, most people would not want to deal with a vehicle with such a short range. While plugging in at home overnight is a huge win (time-wise), plugging in at a QC station in the middle of a trip is a huge negative compared to filling a gas tank.

 

[WetEV]

There is one main reason why EVs will remain niche vehicles (for now):

The batteries.

When compared to a gas tank:

• The capacity is too low.
• The cost is too high.
• They take too long to refill.

Even if we had QC charging stations at *every* gas station in the world, most people would not want to deal with a vehicle with such a short range. While plugging in at home overnight is a huge win (time-wise), plugging in at a QC station in the middle of a trip is a huge negative compared to filling a gas tank.

The first and second points are both really the same, and are both currently correct. BEVs are too expensive for most people, and have ranges too small to keep the price down. Only with subsidies do they come close to breaking even on cost.

The third point is only for the few people that often drive very long distances. For most people, rechanging in the garage might well take hours, but happens while they are sleeping, so no worries.

The cost of fossil fuels is likely to rise with time. The only reason why oil companies are spending millions of dollars to drill one well in deep water to produce oil that can only return of profit if the price stays over $100/barrel is that the easy to get cheap oil has mostly been drilled, pumped and burnt.

The cost of batteries is likely to fall with time. Most of the cost is in the assembly, not in the raw materials.

When the cost of batteries gets low enough, or the price of gasoline gets high enough, then the economics will become compelling. Pure ICE cars might be a niche market and BEVs might be the common car. When? Might be a few years, might be many decades.

The future is unknown. We, as a society, need to keep options open so we can change when conditions change.

 

[Ogi]

There are many large and medium sies cities in which people park on the street and not in dedicated or public garages. And in which public transport is not compeehensive enough to eliminate need for a car. Outer buroughs of New York City for example outlying areas of Brooklyn or Queens. For these people quick charging is vital if battery electric cars are to be a realistic choice.

 

[davewill]

These sites could end up with a Chademo / SAE combo charger, or it could end up being separate Chademo and SAE units. So the sites will have to be "plumbed" to deliver over 120 kW (expensive). ...

I would expect that "combo" units would charge CHAdeMO or SAE, not both at once, so no need to "plumb" at 120kW.

 

[TonyWilliams]

These sites could end up with a Chademo / SAE combo charger, or it could end up being separate Chademo and SAE units. So the sites will have to be "plumbed" to deliver over 120 kW (expensive). ...

I would expect that "combo" units would charge CHAdeMO or SAE, not both at once, so no need to "plumb" at 120kW.

The way I understand the agreement, they are two separate DC charger installations per site (plus an L2). No mention that they will operate one or the other, but I'll bet it ends up that way (since the agreement doesn't preclude it).

For permitting, it would have to meet the 120kW power requirement. $$$$$

 

[EcoCarRental]

The proposed NRG settlement contains a few details that are relevant...The 200 Freedom Stations (DC Fast Chargers) are valued in the agreement at $50.5M (or $252,500 each). If NRG installs the 200 DCFC stations for less money, then they are obligated to install more stations until they reach the $50.5M threshold. These sites could end up with a Chademo / SAE combo charger, or it could end up being separate Chademo and SAE units. So the sites will have to be "plumbed" to deliver over 120 kW (expensive).

In addition, the 10,000 make-ready stub sites valued in the agreement at $40M are just for the L2 infrastructure and don't include any EVSEs. The host sites will own that infrastructure, and can make a deal with NRG to outfit the stubs with EVSEs or the hosts can wait through the initial 18 month period and get EVSEs installed by another vendor or provider...

I learned yesterday that our County government was quoted ~$125k to install a 50kw DCFC/L2 combo station, so it's interesting that the Freedom Stations are valued at twice as much. It will be interesting to find out what the final install cost is.

Shaun

 

[N952JL]

Dan,since the biggest challenge to get people to adopt EV's is largely psychological, charging infrastructure must be out ahead of adoption of the vehicles.

I disagree. There is one main reason why EVs will remain niche vehicles (for now):

The batteries.

When compared to a gas tank:

• The capacity is too low.
• The cost is too high.
• They take too long to refill.

Even if we had QC charging stations at *every* gas station in the world, most people would not want to deal with a vehicle with such a short range. While plugging in at home overnight is a huge win (time-wise), plugging in at a QC station in the middle of a trip is a huge negative compared to filling a gas tank.

Right now, all three items are valid points. However, there are batteries in the Labs now that demostrate three times the range, and they state in mass production will cost 1/3 to 1/2 as much as current. What that means is 200 to 250 interstate mile range which is about 3 hrs drive for the same or less cost. :mrgreen:

That means about 30 to 40 mins recharge for every 3 hrs of drive time on trips. That will be a game changer.

Do I need a 200 plus range. YES. I've had my leaf for almost six months and it has handled 98% of all my trips, but only about 80% or less of my mileage. Last Sun I went to visit a friend in the hospital. The problem the hospital was in Atlanta GA. The drive there and back in one day put more miles on a vehicle than my normal drive for two weeks. If I visit my sister for the weekend, I'll put two months worth of driving in two days.

If IBM's new zinc air batteries pan out, we might be able to go 300+ miles on a one hr recharge for about the same or less cost for batteries as today. To me that would make BEV's the same as ICE. :mrgreen:

 

[GaslessInSeattle]

There are tens of millions of households that could easily make the Leaf work but can't wrap their mind around the fact that they only drive around 33 miles a day on average, when I say the first major hurdle is psychological, that's what I'm referring to. Something like 60 million households have two cars. While more range will certainly appeal to more people and improve adoption, I think the primary thing holding people back is psychological and quick chargers will help shift the thinking substantially, IMHO. bigger batteries and a quick charging network and yes it will be game over for gas. Fortunately it seems that much more energy dense, less expensive batteries are on the way!

Dan,since the biggest challenge to get people to adopt EV's is largely psychological, charging infrastructure must be out ahead of adoption of the vehicles.

I disagree. There is one main reason why EVs will remain niche vehicles (for now):

The batteries.

When compared to a gas tank:

• The capacity is too low.
• The cost is too high.
• They take too long to refill.

Even if we had QC charging stations at *every* gas station in the world, most people would not want to deal with a vehicle with such a short range. While plugging in at home overnight is a huge win (time-wise), plugging in at a QC station in the middle of a trip is a huge negative compared to filling a gas tank.

 

[GRA]

There are tens of millions of households that could easily make the Leaf work but can't wrap their mind around the fact that they only drive around 33 miles a day on average, when I say the first major hurdle is psychological, that's what I'm referring to. Something like 60 million households have two cars. While more range will certainly appeal to more people and improve adoption, I think the primary thing holding people back is psychological and quick chargers will help shift the thinking substantially, IMHO. bigger batteries and a quick charging network and yes it will be game over for gas. Fortunately it seems that much more energy dense, less expensive batteries are on the way!

Seeing as how they've been 'on the way' for over 100 years now, although I'll be happy if they arrive I'm not holding my breath. Typically it takes 3-5 years for a new battery to go from the lab to a manufacturer, and another 3-5 years to commercialization.

Nor do I think the price of current batteries is likely to drop significantly. Economies of scale will bring them down a bit, but manufacturing is pretty much a known process so I don't see large improvements there, nor do I see large drops in material costs. That leaves technology improvements to bring costs down - see previous paragraph.

So,I think we've got to do what we can to introduce as many people to EVs with current characteristics now, and not assume that we'll see any major battery improvements in the next five years or so.