TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker or making a Paypal contribution here: paypal.me/SupportTMC

10,000 California Charging Stations Funded

Discussion in 'North America' started by green01, Mar 23, 2012.

  1. dsm363

    dsm363 Roadster + Sig Model S

    Joined:
    May 17, 2009
    Messages:
    18,220
    Location:
    Las Vegas, NV
    Are they all going to be the low powered 30A J1772 or CHAdeMO DC fast chargers? There is also the SAE DC fast charging standard coming at some point. I know only Tesla can accept J1772 at any significant rage currently but it would make sense to put in the fastest level 2 chargers possible. This would ideally be in places where it's too expensive to currently put a DC fast charger.

    I agree. SAE should just adopt Tesla's Supercharger as standard and move on.
     
  2. dadaleus

    dadaleus 4GETOIL P85#S70,FdrX,S85D

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2009
    Messages:
    884
    Location:
    Solana Beach, California, United States
    Straight from NRG with regard to the California settlement: "The price of the monthly subscriptions has not yet been set, but the pay-as-you-go price will be between $10 and $15 per use, an NRG spokesman said." From California to gain new EV charging stations under NRG settlement - latimes.com

    Re CHAdeMO, I think the more places I could grab a charge if I'm going long distance the better. Sure, it would be great if everyone used the same standard, but my more realistic wish would be for Tesla to offer an adapter like they do for J1772. Sure, I seek out a Tesla HPC (or HPC converted to J1772 because that's still 70 amps) rather than a standard 30 amp J1772 when I'm road tripping in the Roadster. Superchargers vs. CHAdeMO would be just the same if there was an adapter, but where there is no Supercharger it would still be great to be able to use a CHAdeMO or other DC quick charger.
     
  3. evchels

    evchels Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2010
    Messages:
    95
    Actually, according to this article, NRG/EVGo gets exclusive access to those customers for 18 months.

    As has been mentioned, I just can't see how this is a great deal for ratepayers or EV drivers in CA. NRG has basically been handed an exclusive $100m non-competitive contract to develop their own privatized network with what was supposed to be a ratepayer settlement. If they were donating that infrastructure to the state with no strings attached, there might be a stronger argument for this being a win. But to get this absolute gift of business territory from the state, as well as the right to charge whatever they want for use to use the infrastructure we paid for? This reeks of a corrupt arrangement and misuse of public funds.

    I highly doubt that the only other alternative would have been to settle only for $20m in cash, but that still would have been preferable to a deal and infrastructure that reflects negatively on EV technology and the industry.
     
  4. Norbert

    Norbert TSLA will win

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2009
    Messages:
    4,424
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    Lots more details about the deal with NRG, in this article:

    California Utility Commission Defends $100 Million EV Charging Deal | KQED QUEST

    For example:

     
  5. doug

    doug Administrator / Head Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2006
    Messages:
    15,876
    Location:
    Stanford, California
    Fees for fast charging are capped at $10 per session during off-peak hours, and $15 during peak hours.

    How much time or kWh do you get per "session"?
     
  6. GSP

    GSP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2007
    Messages:
    1,950
    #26 GSP, Mar 31, 2012
    Last edited: Mar 31, 2012
    It looks like the ratepayers did get $20M in cash ("assistance," probably for low income households) as well as $100M worth of infrastructure. This doesn't seem like a bad deal.

    Does anyone have an estimate of how much the ratepayers lost due to outages and exorbitant prices durring Enron's and Dynegy's unforgivable shenigans? This would be needed in order to know if this settlement is adequate compensation or not.

    Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room (2005) - IMDb

    GSP
     
  7. Norbert

    Norbert TSLA will win

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2009
    Messages:
    4,424
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    (Unfortunately) it also depends on how much success they could have expected from tedious legal action. (Within the lifetime of those hurt, sort of.) (and NRG bought Dynegy, but not necessarily those responsible, and they surely didn't get that money).
     
  8. Larry Chanin

    Larry Chanin Model S Perf Sig 1055

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2011
    Messages:
    4,240
    Location:
    Sarasota, Florida
    Electric car fast charging controversy clouded by California's new plans

    Larry
     
  9. Robert.Boston

    Robert.Boston Model S VIN P01536

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2011
    Messages:
    7,842
    Location:
    Portland, Maine, USA
    This settlement is as to a long-term contract signed in 2001 and has little to do with actions that allegedly manipulated power markets in the 2000/2001 period. The claim was that Dynegy used the power shortage to get unreasonably high prices in its contract. California's claim on this point was extremely shaky--it's hard to claim that the professionals whom California hired to negotiate the contract, including the head of LADWP, were naive and taken advantage of, especially when the governor issued a press statement praising Dynegy for agreeing to help California out. There was lots of litigation risk on both sides, however, so settlement was a reasonable way to put this behind and move forward.
     
  10. vfx

    vfx Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Messages:
    14,792
    Location:
    CA CA
    Though less problematic this time since adapters are user friendly.
     
  11. Larry Chanin

    Larry Chanin Model S Perf Sig 1055

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2011
    Messages:
    4,240
    Location:
    Sarasota, Florida
    True. However, I know the term "fast" is relative, but even if Tesla eventually provides an adapter for CHAdeMo chances are it won't really be very fast using these low capacity fast chargers on a moderately depleted 85 kWh battery pack.

    Larry
     
  12. jkirkebo

    jkirkebo Model S P85+ VIN 14420 EU

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    947
    Location:
    Fredrikstad, Norway
    50kWh in 1 hour is plenty fast for me. That is 3 hours of driving after a 1 hour break. For a day of driving that is 4 hours driving, 1 hour break then 3 hours driving. Shortening that break to 35 minutes does little for me, I usually prefer to sit down and have a better meal after 4 hours of driving anyway.
     
  13. Larry Chanin

    Larry Chanin Model S Perf Sig 1055

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2011
    Messages:
    4,240
    Location:
    Sarasota, Florida
    I suppose I could have worded my remark a little better. :redface:

    It is true that the eVgo DC faster charger's 160 miles of range per hour is pretty fast. It's just not as fast as the Tesla Supercharger's 300 miles of range per hour. :wink:

    To drive 160 miles in 3 hours requires an average speed of 53 mph, which in most US major interstate highways, although perhaps legal, would be too slow for safety. Here in Florida, for better or worse, almost everyone travels 10 mph over the posted 70 mph speed limit. So realistically that 160 mile of range would be exhausted in closer to 2 hours for typical drivers. Traveling 2 hours, charging for an hour, repeat is not so appealing, nor is traveling at 53 mph on an interstate highway.

    By the way, I believe my calculations are optimistic because they assume that the charge rate remains constant for a full hour. However, we know that to be not true because as the car charges the charge rate slows down. So even though the rate of 160 mph sounds pretty fast, in actual practice its not very practical for extended road trips on interstate highways, particularly for EVs with limited range.

    Larry
     
  14. jerry33

    jerry33 S85 - VIN:P05130 - 3/2/13

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2012
    Messages:
    12,602
    Location:
    Texas
    Perhaps that's the problem. I've found that traveling on the interstate highways is an unpleasant experience regardless of speed--and even if you are going 90, there is still always someone on your tail. State highways often parallel the interstate, are free of most traffic, and have more to see and do. I leave the interstates to the truckers and RVs. If you are going to drive between 500 and 700 miles--which is all I care to drive in a day--you've pretty much shot the day regardless of speed so you might as well slow down and enjoy it.
     
  15. ckessel

    ckessel Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2011
    Messages:
    4,264
    While I can appreciate that mindset, the sheer volume of traffic on the main highways between towns would indicate that's not going to be a mindset that's applicable to most drivers.
     
  16. Larry Chanin

    Larry Chanin Model S Perf Sig 1055

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2011
    Messages:
    4,240
    Location:
    Sarasota, Florida
    Hi Jerry,

    I agree and I probably will change my driving habits when I get my Model S. I'll probably drive more, take the slower more scenic routes more often than than I do now, and stop after about 200+ miles of highway driving at hotels that can accommodate an overnight charge.

    Perhaps I have this wrong, but I'm under the impression that most of the eVgo DC fast chargers will be installed at locations adjacent to interstate highways. If so, my point is that these fast charges may not be as practical as we would like for protracted interstate highway driving.

    Larry
     
  17. Robert.Boston

    Robert.Boston Model S VIN P01536

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2011
    Messages:
    7,842
    Location:
    Portland, Maine, USA
    Hi, Larry,

    It's hard to say at this point because eVgo has been installing chargers exclusively within a metropolitan region, rather than between them. This is natural outgrowth of a user-base with <100mile batteries, I suppose, but doesn't bode well for relying on eVgo to build the waystations for long-distance travel -- at least, not until those waystations are themselves local markets, e.g. small towns that want a charger at the downtown coffee shop.

    ~Robert
     
  18. jkirkebo

    jkirkebo Model S P85+ VIN 14420 EU

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    947
    Location:
    Fredrikstad, Norway
    Over here, the big rigs are restricted (by speed limiter) to 56mph, so I can just go behind one of them. The max speed limit is 62mph anyways, and only on a select few roads. Mostly I have problems averaging over 45mph on long drives if keeping to the speed limit as the prevalent speed limits are 43mph and 50mph (70&80kph) with some 37mph here and there.

    The big 85kWh battery should be able to take 50kW until at least 80% full I think. So if you start the charge at ~20% and end at ~80% you will probably get close to 50kWh in an hour.

    The Leaf starts to ramp down at 50-60% full, depending on temperature. But with a 24kWh battery that is a maximum of 2C charge rate, on the 85kWh Tesla battery 50kW is only 0,6C.
     
  19. GSP

    GSP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2007
    Messages:
    1,950
    +1

    I find this a much better way to travel. Great for out of town, but in-state, trips in my Volt.

    GSP
     
  20. GSP

    GSP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2007
    Messages:
    1,950
    Good idea. In the US, many trucking companies are setting the speed limiters on their tractors to 62 mph. Just stay behind one of them. With adaptive cruise, you could set it at 70 mph, and then just stay behind a 62 mph truck. Adjust the following distance to get a nice aerodynamic tow! With active lane keeping, you could just relax and read a book, or catch up on email and TeslaMotorsClub chatter! :tongue:

    GSP
     

Share This Page