Level 2 Charger Confusion

[evnow]

Since nobody from Nissan is looking at these questions, I'll merge this with your other thread.

[pgrovetom]

In Telecom is often the case where one supplier closes an interface so it can charge whatever it wants. BUT - If a Federal Tax credit is being paid - Is it really ok and fair that taxpayers flip the bill so I only have to pay $1100. Of course not! Just because something has a tax credit, it doesn't make it ok, it makes it fraud. In free markets, anyone can charge whatever they want so long as the market will bear it. If the market will bear it because all the other American taxpayers have to pay 1/2 its just wrong!

After credits the EVSE is $1,100. So, it is less than 5% of the car cost of 25K after credits

Nissan USA CAN say that they will only 'support' using an AV EVSE - all that means is that 'if you need help operating your Coulomb EVSE, don't call us!'. Think about this for a moment - the EV Project is NOT using AeroVironment EVSE hardware - they're using Coulomb. There are a number of companies selling J1772 EVSE devices - and they ENTIRE point of these standardized devices is that they work with all EVs that use J1772.

Here's a real-world example of how this can affect a manufacturer. Bombardier Recreational Products (BRP) stated in their 2009 owners manuals that "Use of other engine oils may cause severe engine damage and may void the limited warranty" and "no known equivalent” to Bombardier (BRP) oil on the market. When notified by a US oil manufacturer that the language in the owners manuals violated Federal law, BRP agreed that it will no longer say that using non-BRP branded products may void the warranty, that they will make clear that their product recommendations are clearly labeled as 'recommendations rather than requirements, and they will no longer comment on availability of equivalent products.

[EVDRIVER]

Nissan won't sell any future EVs if they only make you charge at approved stations, this simply is NOT going to happen, they don't own the EV charging infrastructure and this is why their are standards. They are being political and attempting to protect deals with partners. It's silly to think they ever could or would do such a thing and it would vastly limit their charging network, besides there is no way to really know. All the car needs is the control signal from the charger to be correct. This is all very silly misinformation.

[johnr]

I agree. It is in their best interest to make cars that conform to the J1772 standard and can charge at as many locations as reasonably possible, even if some of the chargers are built by non-affiliated companies. Anything to increase the utility of the vehicle and put to rest range anxiety is all good.

[pgrovetom]

It's pretty clear you're not listening, pgrovetom, and that's unfortunate, as a number of people here have taken a bunch of time to take you by the hand and show you exactly how and why the sky is NOT falling.

Clearly the sky isn't falling and I do listen.

[pgrovetom]

http://blogs.edmunds.com/greencaradviso ... -leaf.html

By the way. This Chargepoint unit is a Commercial Networked Station, not one intended for a garage. I have yet to see any of the low cost garage EVSE's claim compatibility with the Leaf as yet. I'm sure they will but early Leaf adopters as yet can only use the Aerovironment unit. If you read my post about the San Diego Infrastructure document, they indicate a $780 unit price for the EVSE. The rest of the $2200 is labor and wiring material costs.

[evnow]

I'm sure they will but early Leaf adopters as yet can only use the Aerovironment unit.

As I've said before, this is not correct. EV project will use ECOtality chargers.

[AndyH]

http://blogs.edmunds.com/greencaradviso ... -leaf.html

By the way. This Chargepoint unit is a Commercial Networked Station, not one intended for a garage. I have yet to see any of the low cost garage EVSE's claim compatibility with the Leaf as yet. I'm sure they will but early Leaf adopters as yet can only use the Aerovironment unit. If you read my post about the San Diego Infrastructure document, they indicate a $780 unit price for the EVSE. The rest of the $2200 is labor and wiring material costs.

The large Chargepoint units are commercial - quite correct - but the points are 1. As long as an EVSE manufacturer builds a J1772 unit there is NO NEED to 'claim compatibility' with any EV that requires a J1772 EVSE. In spite of being redundant, 2. companies ARE affirming compatibility because they now have to not only provide a technical solution but also have to overcome FUD in the market space. And 3. Coloumb is providing the EVSE for the Dept of Energy study customers - so yes - the devices they install in garages also have to be compatible with the Leaf.

http://www.coulombtech.com/chargepoint- ... ndards.php
(Emphasis mine)

The ChargePoint Network is founded on an open, standards-based architecture providing both station owners and drivers a flexible and consistent platform for plug-in electric vehicle fueling.
The network allows the integration of systems and hardware from multiple suppliers providing station owners the freedom to choose the best charging options available - accommodating the evolving vehicle charging needs of today and tomorrow.
The network's IP based protocols and standard interfaces allow the network to easily scale and integrate with existing business systems. Published, open XML API interfaces to the CPNOS provide seamless integration into a company's office systems or a Utility's AMI systems. The network also provides opportunities for custom applications and new businesses. Charging station location and availability information can be used in custom mobile phone applications and more.
Open standards create a consistent, familiar experience for drivers using the ChargePoint Network to obtain electric fuel. Implementing standards based connectors such as the J1772TM Level II connector ensure drivers can easily plug-in and fuel their vehicle with any ChargePoint charging station. The stations' integrated RFID reader supports ISO 15693, ISO 14443, MiFare, and contactless credit cards enabling drivers to activate charging sessions anywhere in the world using a ChargePass Card or a credit card.

[pgrovetom]

As I've said before, this is not correct. EV project will use ECOtality chargers.

The EV Project is a specially funded project which is not controlled by Nissan and if ECOTality got the home charger contract, its was not available to regular Leaf buyers last week. My discussions here and with Nissan and AV last week were concerning the regular Leaf rollout where both Nissan and AV said in no uncertain terms, I had no other choice except AV installed by AV approved installers. Its not terribly meaningful nor does it address my points unless its available outside the EV Project which according to their website is not available in my area even though I did sign up.

I'll call Nissan again and verify they haven't changed their plans but what is happening inside the EV Project is not relevant to people who are waiting to get a Leaf now who are not in the EV Project who I believe is providing them free. We all know that eventually everyone will have done compatibility testing with everyone else and EVs and EVSEs will be widely inter-compatible.

All my comments are revolving around the first group of Leaf buyers and how Draconian Nissan was when I spoke with them. I'll repeat myself because someone else who was not listening to me accused me of that. I'm only talking about the first Leaf buyers and the excessively tight attitude Nissan and AV have around the EVSE and it's install and compatibility now. I

[evnow]

The EV Project is a specially funded project which is not controlled by Nissan and if ECOTality got the home charger contract, its was not available to regular Leaf buyers last week.

I was responding to your particular statement. BTW, most of the initial Leaf buyers are likely to be EV Project people ...

Anyway, as LEAFer posted, ECOtality will announce their EVSE prices in July. So, they will be available to everyone ...