Electrify America Network

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I haven't seen any new EA stations coming soon around my area - is their an easy access list of their future plans stations / next phase? I remember reading some documentation that showed the next phase would build out more in the cities. But I'm still hoping for more chargers along the highways and interstates to fill in gaps.

Or any word if EA has applied for the federal funding?
 
danrjones said:
I haven't seen any new EA stations coming soon around my area - is their an easy access list of their future plans stations / next phase? I remember reading some documentation that showed the next phase would build out more in the cities. But I'm still hoping for more chargers along the highways and interstates to fill in gaps.

Or any word if EA has applied for the federal funding?


I don't see how EA would be eligible for federal funds - after all, they were required to build out the network rather than having had to pay even heavier fines to the government. Giving them other people's money would reward them for being the scum that they were.
 
GRA said:
I don't see how EA would be eligible for federal funds - after all, they were required to build out the network rather than having had to pay even heavier fines to the government. Giving them other people's money would reward them for being the scum that they were.

Confusion in the above post, VW had to fund EA, but EA isn't VW as Ford and others have added funding. EA is an independent company.

EA isn't scum.
 
Seriously though, why wouldn't EA be eligible and apply for the federal funds that were approved to buildout EV infrastructure?

Rumor has it that the reason tesla is "considering" adding CCS chargers is because they are going to use said federal funding to do so, ie, having CCS will be a requirement to use the federal funds.
 
WetEV said:
GRA said:
I don't see how EA would be eligible for federal funds - after all, they were required to build out the network rather than having had to pay even heavier fines to the government. Giving them other people's money would reward them for being the scum that they were.

Confusion in the above post, VW had to fund EA, but EA isn't VW as Ford and others have added funding. EA is an independent company.

EA isn't scum.


But VW was, and EA only exists because VW was required to establish and fund it as part of the settlement. See https://www.epa.gov/enforcement/volkswagen-clean-air-act-civil-settlement

under "Mitigation" and "Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) Investment". If other companies choose to give EA money that's their business, but the government shouldn't be doing so until the terms of the settlement have been fully carried out, including EA operating and maintaining the network for the full 10 year term. Otherwise the feds are simply helping EA establish a non-Tesla charging monopoly.

There are plenty of other ways the feds can spend money on charging infrastructure, e.g. by giving money to the states and letting them award contracts to companies other than EA, as has mostly been done with the VW money received in mitigation.
 
Well I'm not a legal or contracts expert, so I don't know.


But the one issue I do see (if EA is blocked from the funds) is that those funds are meant to expand interstate and freeway charging infrastructure.

In my area, the only high speed chargers are built by EA (and tesla, of course).
All of the other charger brands - Greenlots, Chargepoint, EV connect, and Caltrans chargers are ~ 50 kW.

No one else has anything close to EA's 150 and 350 kW chargers. And while I've found the new chargepoint chargers to be some of the more reliable chargers, 50 kW (or 62.5 kW) isn't good enough for intestates and highways.
 
danrjones said:
Well I'm not a legal or contracts expert, so I don't know.


Dan, me either, but my primary rationale against giving EA government money is not so much from a legal as from a moral position. They (their corporate parents) are being punished by the government by being forced to spend some of their ill-gotten gains in a certain way they would not have chosen to do voluntarily, for the benefit of others, so shouldn't be rewarded with money by that same government to do the same thing until the punishment is over.


danrjones said:
But the one issue I do see (if EA is blocked from the funds) is that those funds are meant to expand interstate and freeway charging infrastructure.

In my area, the only high speed chargers are built by EA (and tesla, of course).
All of the other charger brands - Greenlots, Chargepoint, EV connect, and Caltrans chargers are ~ 50 kW.

No one else has anything close to EA's 150 and 350 kW chargers. And while I've found the new chargepoint chargers to be some of the more reliable chargers, 50 kW (or 62.5 kW) isn't good enough for intestates and highways.


No argument that 50-62.5 kW FCs are inadequate for extended road trips. Perhaps you've forgotten that the first 150 & 350 FCs were installed by EVgo in Baker, CA on I-15 to serve the LA - Vegas traffic, so it's not as if no one but EA has done or can do this: https://www.evgo.com/press-release/...per-fast-ultra-fast-chargers-open-ev-drivers/

States e.g. CO & MT have been spending settlement money on establishing charging networks both on interstates and U.S. highways, admittedly mostly lower power and in Montana's case just a single FC per site, which is totally inadequate for reliability never mind potential extended wait-times, but there's nothing to preclude states or the feds from requiring more powerful and more numerous FCs per site as a condition of receiving money.

As the energy majors and other auto manufacturers increasingly move into charging (e.g. Shell owns Greenlots here; BP, Total etc. own some European networks while BMW/Daimler/Ford/Hyundai/VW own the high power, widespread Ionity network) we'll see more private money being invested, especially as more and more of manufacturers sales and profits will depend on PEVs.
 
The Electrify America charging station has opened at 70 Yellow Creek Rd, Evanston, Wyoming 82930.

Until Rawlins opens this just leaves you hanging in western Wyoming on I-80, unless you're heading up to the Wind Rivers (BTDT), and good luck getting back without destination charging. And Rawlins is too far for comfort, so at least one site in between is also needed.

BTW, Dan, here's the only info I'm aware of as to what EA's current plans are; scroll down to Cycle 3: https://www.electrifyamerica.com/our-plan/
 
GRA said:
WetEV said:
GRA said:
I don't see how EA would be eligible for federal funds - after all, they were required to build out the network rather than having had to pay even heavier fines to the government. Giving them other people's money would reward them for being the scum that they were.

Confusion in the above post, VW had to fund EA, but EA isn't VW as Ford and others have added funding. EA is an independent company.

EA isn't scum.


But VW was, and EA only exists because VW was required to establish and fund it as part of the settlement. See https://www.epa.gov/enforcement/volkswagen-clean-air-act-civil-settlement

VW is pushing electric cars now, is that worse than Exxon? Worse than buying bonesaw Saudi oil? How about some hospital shelling Russian crude?

Really? With a straight face?


GRA said:
There are plenty of other ways the feds can spend money on charging infrastructure, e.g. by giving money to the states and letting them award contracts to companies other than EA, as has mostly been done with the VW money received in mitigation.

Sadly, much of the State funded EV charging has less than useful. L2 at a park? Almost never used. 50kW units for yesterday's EVs rather than 150kW and 350kW for tomorrow's EVs.
 
GRA said:
No argument that 50-62.5 kW FCs are inadequate for extended road trips. Perhaps you've forgotten that the first 150 & 350 FCs were installed by EVgo in Baker, CA on I-15 to serve the LA - Vegas traffic, so it's not as if no one but EA has done or can do this: https://www.evgo.com/press-release/...per-fast-ultra-fast-chargers-open-ev-drivers/

States e.g. CO & MT have been spending settlement money on establishing charging networks both on interstates and U.S. highways, admittedly mostly lower power and in Montana's case just a single FC per site, which is totally inadequate for reliability never mind potential extended wait-times, but there's nothing to preclude states or the feds from requiring more powerful and more numerous FCs per site as a condition of receiving money.

As the energy majors and other auto manufacturers increasingly move into charging (e.g. Shell owns Greenlots here; BP, Total etc. own some European networks while BMW/Daimler/Ford/Hyundai/VW own the high power, widespread Ionity network) we'll see more private money being invested, especially as more and more of manufacturers sales and profits will depend on PEVs.

Good point the Vegas route has other brands of high speed charging - but is the Vegas route an anomaly?

Admittedly, I'm not along an interstate. But at least in my area - CA-14, US 395, its all been EA (sparsely though), Chargepoint and EVConnect.

EVConnect stations in Inyokern and Mojave have been horrible for reliability. Charge point has been pretty good, but as mentioned, limited speeds. I guess if it wasn't for the CEC initiative, we wouldn't even have Chargepoint.

Still, if I look at the I40 route to AZ, it only has a few EA stations, and nothing else. So you are spot-on for the Vegas route, there are others.

So that federal funding, is it only for interstates or will it also be spent on US highways?

I think I remember looking at that phase 3 EA document and it didn't tell me if any additional chargers were coming, say along I-40, or CA-14, or US 395.

Part of me hopes Tesla will open their older stations to us non tesla folks. In Inyokern, they have both a 12 stall V3 and a 4 stall V2. Opening the old V2 to CCS would be big - it would allow 4 new 150 kW chargers. I've heard in many areas Tesla sold / dismantled their old v2's when the V3 went in - but they DID NOT do that here in Inyokern. Even then, I'd love to see more EA stations, or someone else as well.
 
Back from my trip with a lot of catching up to do, so here's a start. Two sites I was monitoring have opened:

The Electrify America charging station has opened at 3790 State St, Santa Barbara, California 93105

and

The Electrify America charging station has opened at 21200 Olhava Way NW, Poulsbo, Washington 98370.

The Santa Barbara site provides redundancy, density and capacity on 1/101 along with the nearby EA site in Goleta, for those who can benefit from high power DC FCs. There are now a few other DC FC sites in the area as well, but below 70kW.

Poulsbo adds redundancy etc. with Port Orchard, while also being more convenient for people traveling to/from the ferry at Kingston.
 
2 EA sites showed up in my plugshare today (Orland Park and Tinley Park IL) both appear to list Chademos. I thought EA was done with Chademo for new installs this year going forward?
 
I imagine it's a matter of when they were started. Poulsbo took forever, and it has a CCS-CHAdeMO. OTOH, Evanston was started recently, yet finished before Poulsbo and doesn't have one, just 4 CCS.
 
TIL from https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/electrify-america-general-discussion.249553/page-21#post-6853039, Baker, CA is getting their next-gen chargers.

From https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/electrify-america-general-discussion.249553/page-22#post-6867023, the one there is from BTC Power.
 
I haven't noticed any new coming soon EA stations around me (just ones that are broken!), but I have noticed new EA stations in AZ.

I saw one coming soon on Plugshare near Grand Canyon, and one in Payson AZ already under construction.
So it looks like the current EA phase might be more focused on outside CA.

Now if only they would fix their broken stations.
Certainly CA's mandate for 2035 is on shaky ground if we can't get about 99.99% reliability out of chargers.
 
Saw that coming soon site in Tusayan, and it's obvious and much needed.

That reminds me, while I was otherwise occupied and not reading or posting for the past month plus, I received notices that a couple of sites I was monitoring had opened.

The Electrify America charging station has opened at 2222 E Main Street, Albert Lea, Minnesota 56007.

That one's on I-90, and the one in Worthington west of it just opened also, essentially duplicating SC placement. It'll be interesting to see if this continues west along I-90. Maybe there just isn't enough existing electrical infrastructure to allow much choice in siting.


The Electrify America charging station has opened at 24201 Valencia Blvd, Valencia, California 91355.

So the Santa Clarita - Castaic area now has 3 EA sites with a total of 16 chargers, one site with 350kW and the other two limited to 150kW, on the south side of the Grapevine adjacent to I-5.

A site also opened in Santa Barbara, so there's now redundancy in that area along with Goleta.

Some of the California sites I'm monitoring are in Santa Cruz, Kettleman City, Atascadero and Morro Bay, plus Primm, NV.

In Oregon, there's now a Coming Soon site in North Bend, just north of Coos Bay on 101, needed to connect Crescent City to Newport. As this site is 135 miles from Crescent City they need at least one more site between them, although given the lowish speeds along here 200+ mile BEVs should be able to make it.

There's another Coming soon site in Madras, at the junction of U.S. 26/97, on the main route between Portland and Bend.

Wyoming has Coming soon sites in Casper, Cheyenne and Rawlins, and still needs at least one more on I-80 between Rawlins and Evanston

Montana has two Coming soon sites, in Great Falls and Billings.

South Dakota has one Coming soon site in Rapid City.

North Dakota has a Coming Soon site in Jamestown (I-94/U.S. 52).

Wisconsin has a Coming soon site in Howard, just NW of Green Bay (and reasonably close to Lambeau Field, duh).
 
GRA said:
Saw that coming soon site in Tusayan, and it's obvious and much needed.

More L2 in the park would be a better choice to build. Cheaper to build and more convenient. We stayed at Yavapai Lodge, with L2 nearby, and it was a very pleasant experience. Maswik Lodge also has L2, which would be not too far from Bright Angel Lodge.

Some of the lodging doesn't have L2, such as El Tovar. Or the tent camping area. I guess if you are staying in one of those.

L2 is cheaper to install, more reliable, less grid connection needed and if near lodging, far more convenient. While not heavily used yet so reservations not needed, adding the ability to reserve for a night would be ideal as utilization increases.
 
danrjones said:
I haven't noticed any new coming soon EA stations around me (just ones that are broken!), but I have noticed new EA stations in AZ.

I saw one coming soon on Plugshare near Grand Canyon, and one in Payson AZ already under construction.
So it looks like the current EA phase might be more focused on outside CA.

Now if only they would fix their broken stations.
Certainly CA's mandate for 2035 is on shaky ground if we can't get about 99.99% reliability out of chargers.
Agree Dan. EA kiosks at Cost Junction are unreliable. I got 1 out of 4 to charge. Lot of time wasted and I only need a 10 min charge too to climb to Horseshoe Meadow. Caltrans kiosk was occupied or I would have preferred it. I now stop at the Caltrans first and the EA stations are the back up. ;)

Paul
 
Rivian is working with Adopt-a-Charger to install L2 in several National Parks. I've been in contact with the responsible NPS person in Yosemite for where to install them here, and was told that NPS policy is that charging be put in at concessioner-operated facilities only, and maintained by them.

For people like me who virtually never stay in campgrounds let alone concessioner lodgings, but are just driving to trailheads and heading out into the backcountry from there, L2 at concessioner-operated facilities is better than nothing, but L2s at trailheads (which NPS won't do even if the electricity is available) and DCFCs outside the park are greater value. NPS policy and infrastructure limit Yosemite and I'd expect most other parks to L2 inside the park, so FCs have to be outside..

Tusayan has several motels and those should have L2, but FCs are still needed there, at Jacob Lake and in Cameron or as close as possible to it.
 
Back
Top