AC vs. DC fast charge

[stopcrazypp]

It's not bad idea and this is not new idea to use inverter. It's patented and have some isolation issues. If they licenced it or developed, I think it will cost more thant 150 €. You even can't buy plug for 150 €.

Ok. Other want few thousands for charging higher power for some reasons. Tesla not using it any more. I'm looking foward to know why.

I think you answered your own question. Tesla stopped using the AC Propulsion's charger design (which uses the motor winding as part of the charger) because they have to pay for licensing the patents and that requires negotiating. A separate modular charger gives Tesla more freedom (plus it makes the supercharger possible). Similarly other companies will likely avoid the Cameleon charger for patent reasons. Keep in mind the patent owners are not required to license the patents to everyone and can charge as much as they want.

I think the 150 € in the slides only refer to the additional cost on top of a standard 3kW charger. So say for example a 3kW charger cost 1000 €, then the Cameleon charger cost 1150 €. But I think their prices are way off. When the DC CHAdeMO hardware was still an option, it cost $700. Even if Nissan was charging the customers twice the cost, that's $350 or 275€.

 

[Bipo]

I've found more info about reductive charging. It looks like the type of rotor is irrelevant while charging at one-phase. But when charging at three-phase I think a wound rotor is necessary to stop the induced magnetic force in the rotor. If you use a standard squirrel-cage rotor or a permanent magnet rotor you may have problems, as long as I understand. But with three-phase only. Using one-phase or split-phase looks safe.

Here I found how it works:

SourceForge.net: Charger - tumanako

Charger

The inverter includes many components that are also required for a vehicles battery charger. There is a trade-off between having an onboard charger (heavy, and power limited) and offboard chargers (not with you when you need it). AC Propulsion, the brains behind GM's EV1 inverter, found a neat solution: use the inverter and motor components also as a charger. They called it reductive charging - US patent 5341075.
For a background on the switchmode boost converter that these chargers employ see wikipedia. The motor is the inductor, the inverter bridge is the switch and diode, the battery the load, and the mains the supply voltage. The complication is that the mains is not a DC source. With careful control and an extra IGBT or two the boost converter can still be used. This is essentially the same circuit used by high power factor computer power supplies.


AC Propulsion Reductive Charger

The key to the invention is two switches - one to disengage one of the motor windings from the associated inverter bridge, and a second to engage the two now loose ends to the vehicles power inlet.
The solution is neat in that an EV inverter is generally sized to the storage battery and the motor. By using the inverter as the power input and the motor as the switchmode inductor, nearly all of the components required for the charger are already present. The tradeoff is the additional motor rated contactor (the second contactor, between the inlet and the HV system will arguably be necessary with any user coupled charging system).
Another very cool feature is that the car cannot easily move whilst charging, despite the motor having current in it because one phase is physically disconnected from the inverter.
One condition that has to be met with this type of charger (in "boost" mode) is that the battery voltage must always be higher than the peak mains voltage. In the case of 230Vac network, which can be as high as 253Vac, the peak voltage can be up to 360Vdc. If the pack voltage was to be drained below that peak it would be unsafe to connect the charger to the mains.
A second outcome is that the battery is not galvanically isolated from the mains, so extra care must be taken while the vehicle is plugged in.
Another solution is described below:


Tumanako Combined Inverter / Charger

This solution draws much on the above invention, however distinguishes itself as it does not interrupt the link between the inverter and motor. It works in conceptually the same way, however instead of utilising 4 of the inverter transistors it uses just two.
Two extra transistors are required, but these extra transistors do not need to be PWM controlled, or even current monitored. They must be the same voltage rating as the main inverter, and must be able to handle the full charging current. In the case of the Tumanako inverter, which is using 200kW components, the additional charging IGBTs will be much smaller and cheaper than the motor bridge. Two 100A IGBTs can be sourced for less than a total of US$40. Compare that with what a single 400A Contactor costs.


Comparison of the two technologies

Each solution has its merits and drawbacks. Briefly: The Reductive charger is good as by disconnecting one of the motor leads a fair degree of vehicle immobilisation can be assured whilst in the charging state. The Tumanako solution should be less expensive, particularly for the higher powered inverters.


AC Propulsion Reductive Charger:

Tumanako Inverter/Charger:

Both are brilliant ideas


Here you can yound more info about it:

Magnetic Saturation



If the Renault charger uses the first option (reductive charger) it would need a three-phase 400V-63A contactor, but it is not expensive at all! Here I've found one for 120 € only!

Contactor 63A 4NA 400V Hager ES463

So it looks like a very affordable option to get on board fast charging.


I've found some additional info about the cost of Chameleon-like chargers:

The cost savings of Reductive charging are remarkable. Only $300 worth of additional components are needed to make the drive system into a 18-kW charger. Conventional EV hargers cost $2000 or more, and high-power EV chargers cost $10,000 and up.

Took from here: AC Propulsion | Creating electric vehicles that people want to drive


So I think that, if Tesla wants, it can use this type of on-board charging without big mods on the existing power electronics. IMHO, the problem is not technical but about patents and its price.

 

[Norbert]

As far as I know, AC will be limited, in practice, to about 44 kW.

However, in the near future, fast charging will be 90+ kW. The Tesla connector is apparently designed for up to 120 kW DC.

In the context of waiting times, that is a crucial difference. Currently, in Europe, there may be advantages in 44 kW charging vs DC charging (for overnight charging, 10 kW and even more so, 20 kW, is enough). Especially it seems to be what the power utility companies want.

However, for fast-charging, it is an intermediate step and technologically, a dead end, except perhaps if a car can support both: Then 44 KW will be useful for "destination charging", where you remain at the destination of your journey, for a longer time, anyway. However that will require a lot of 44 kW support since there are a lot of destinations. Although a 44 KW plug as an outlet is very cheap compared to a DC charger installed there, the cost of making 44 kW power available (especially for multiple cars) is much higher than the "just-an-outlet".

 

[Kane]

Johan good post. Tesla did good job.

But all those transistors exist already because, as long as the Zoé has a wound rotor, it needs P.E. to feed the wires in the rotor!! So the additional cost should not be very high.

I know that they exist and just tyring to tell you that they exist in every 3-phase motor, no matter what rotor type You have. OMG.

Renault has developed the optimum system for the Old World

I don't think it's "optimum". They will probably not tell others about their brilliant idea, so this AC 43.5 kW points will be useless for others.

However, for fast-charging, it is an intermediate step and technologically, a dead end, except perhaps if a car can support both: Then 44 KW will be useful for "destination charging", where you remain at the destination of your journey, for a longer time, anyway. However that will require a lot of 44 kW support since there are a lot of destinations. Although a 44 KW plug as an outlet is very cheap compared to a DC charger installed there, the cost of making 44 kW power available (especially for multiple cars) is much higher than the "just-an-outlet".

AC 43.5 kW is about 3 times cheaper, but cost of maintenance isn't too much less.

 

[Eberhard]

the question of AC or DC is also a question of the infrastructure. If you charge in the wild, only having access to the grid via a standard socked, you only can do AC.
If you are on a long distance trip and you are going to charge together with 20 or more other electric cars on multi supercharger stations, then the power will be delivered via a mid-voltage line like 20kV, then it may be easier and more efficient to get the DC direct from the grid without transforming the voltage down to 240V and then transform it to DC via a dedicated charger.

 

[jkirkebo]

As far as I can tell, the reductive charging method need a contactor that is rated to the full motor current when the car is driven. How big and expensive would such a contactor be that could handle the 1200 amps of motor current ? 1200A is quite a lot of amps...

 

[Bipo]

As far as I can tell, the reductive charging method need a contactor that is rated to the full motor current when the car is driven. How big and expensive would such a contactor be that could handle the 1200 amps of motor current ? 1200A is quite a lot of amps...

With the Tukamako technology is not necessary

 

[Fernando M]

Fast Charging an EV: AC/DC Questions and Renault's Answers

"When it comes to electricity, AC versus DC is an old battle. It dates back to the 19th century with George Westinghouse against Thomas Edison. Nikola Tesla was involved, and alternating current famously won. Nearly everything today is AC—the grid provides AC electricity and all modern electric cars have AC motors.

Even gas cars switched from DC generators to alternators 50 to 60 years ago. The conflict would be over if there wasn't a problem: it's impossible to store AC electricity. A battery can only store DC electricity, so a conversion is needed. AC to DC to charge the battery from the grid; and DC to AC from the battery to the motor to power the car. Fortunately, AC/DC or DC/AC conversion is no big deal. The real issue is how the conversion happens. Let's look at how the world's best selling EV is doing it.

The Nissan LEAF has two charging ports. One is designed for standard AC home electricity, the other one for high voltage DC. But the AC/DC distinction is misleading here because a battery can only accept DC. The difference is that with home charging, the charger and the AC/DC converter are fitted inside the car—whereas with fast charging, the charger and the AC/DC converter are outside, in the charging station. So that makes two charging ports, two chargers and two AC/DC converters. Renault has found a smarter way.

In the Renault Zoe, the French brand introduced a new technology it called the Chameleon Charger. The Zoe has one single port for charging, one single charger and one single AC/DC converter, and it accepts any current from 230V 10A 1-phase up to 400V 63A 3-phase (43 kW). Best of all, it's self adaptive.

The driver only needs to plug in, and the car will charge as fast as it can (actually, it's possible to program the process). The 3.3 or 6.6 kW charging limit between the Nissan LEAF and the Ford Focus is totally irrelevant here. The Renault's way is easier forthe driver, and it's also considerably cheaper on the infrastructure side. EVSE manufacturers who had hoped to sell thousands of expensive DC chargers in every country hate the Chameleon charger because it ruins all their business plans. But it's real. Two other car manufacturers, Smart and Volvo, have already endorsed fast AC charging, and others should follow soon (at least in Europe).

Smart and Volvo are doing it conventionally though, just like the Nissan LEAF, only with a 22-kW charger. Only Renault does it with a system where the charger is integrated, and part of the vehicle drive system. Some say it's not really a charger, and they're not totally wrong, so let's say it's an electronic device doing the charging job. But the more worrying thing is that several electrical engineers are dubious of the technology. American company AC Propulsion looked into it and designed a system called Reductive charger, but Renault's system is different, safer, more robust and better in every way. Most notably, it's much stronger with the ability to sustain 43-kW charging. It's also new technology, fully owned and patented by Renault. And yet, quite surprisingly, I've been told Renault would be very open to the idea of sharing it with other car manufacturers. The Renault-Nissan alliance has invested more than any other brand in EV tech, and they just want the electric car to succeed.

Italy has been convinced, and fast AC chargers are being installed in the country now. It may be too early to dump all the DC chargers we have today, but more and more people are betting that AC will prevail because of its lower cost. An AC fast charging station is only a quarter of the price of a DC one. Few bean counters will hesitate between the two.

Back to the electric car, their specifications sheet used to list many separate elements: a motor, inverter, charger, AC/DC converter, DC/DC converter, etc. If the Renault Zoe shows the way (and I think it does), there will be fewer elements in the future. Things will be more integrated with one component able to have several functions."

 

[Norbert]

AC 43.5 kW is about 3 times cheaper, but cost of maintenance isn't too much less.

We might be talking about different things.

in so far as I understand from descriptions here, providing 44 kW AC to electric cars requires not much more than a plug, which costs almost nothing compared to a DC charger. And also requires very little maintenance.

However, the utility needs to make that much power available at a specific location, and the cost for that only depends on the power (kW) made available at a specific location. Since DC chargers usually use 3-phase as input, the utilities' cost to make the power needed for two 44 kW 3-phase outlets available, should be the same as the cost to make the power for a 90 KW DC charger available.

In the US, the utilities cover this cost by asking for a monthly "demand charge", which is more or less based on the maximum power consumption at any point in time during that month. This "demand charge" can be quite high, and while I don't know how that is handled in Europe, the utilities will have similar costs and will need to somehow pass them on to the consumers. This cost should be much, much higher, over a longer time period, than the installation cost of two 44 KW 3-phase outlets.

 

[TEG]

Wow, I hadn't looked at this thread until now. Interesting discussion here!

Some related links:

AC Propulsion | Creating electric vehicles that people want to drive
Renaults 43 kilowatt fast charge system for ZOE and other electric cars - Green Transportation
Fast charging for electric vehicles - Renault Z.E.

Renault ZOE Marks a New Era of Electric Vehicles for All | AnyAuto

...
The Chameleon charger revolutionises electric vehicle charging
ZOE is the only electric vehicle to feature the Chameleon charger. Patented by Renault, this charger is compatible with all power levels up to 43kW. Charging batteries at a charging station can take between 30 minutes and nine hours. For example, ZOE can be charged in an hour at 22kW. This intermediate power level extends battery life and puts less pressure on the power grid than the fast-charging of batteries at 43kW.The Chameleon charger allows fast-charging at charging stations at a quarter of the cost

Fast-charging stations are currently equipped with high-power chargers. Now that the Chameleon charger is fitted to the vehicle, there is no longer any need for chargers at charging stations. New fast-charging stations will be opened which are easier and more cost-effective. They will cost less than €3,000, a quarter of the cost of existing fast-charging stations.
...

 

[widodh]

- Long very good story -

In Europe 3-phase 63A (44kW) can indeed be installed at a low cost in terms of hardware.

However, utility companies charge you for the connection you have. For example, I got my house with 3-phase 25A, would I upgrade to 3x40A I had have to pay 700 euros per year extra for the connection.

I did a quick lookup at my local network company: DELTA Netwerkbedrijf

A 3 x 80A connection costs EUR 1800,00 per year, not awfully expensive, but it has to be paid by the user. If the charger is only used once a day in the beginning you'd be looking at 5 euros per charge.

The same problem also exists with a DC charger, that also needs that 3 x 80A input, so that doesn't matter.

With AC charging we are however limited to 44kW, I don't see it going over that any time soon.

44kW is fun for the smallish batteries like the ZOE has, but when you are doing a real road trip with the Model S, you probably want more then 44kW and go with ~100kW like the SuperCharger does.

Still, charging on 44kW with the Model S is nice, it will give you some nice km/hr of charging.

In know that here in the Netherlands they are currently only installing CHAdeMO chargers, but in the future it will be "hybrid" chargers.

 

[VolkerP]

In Germany, residential grid connections are 3x63A or 3x50A. Monthly meter fee is around 9€. Some AC charging enthusiasts covered nearly all of Germany with 22kW outlets: http://www.drehstromnetz.de/karten/DSL_110403.gif

 

[Kane]

Fast Charging an EV: AC/DC Questions and Renault's Answers

Nothing new in this article.

We might be talking about different things.

in so far as I understand from descriptions here, providing 44 kW AC to electric cars requires not much more than a plug, which costs almost nothing compared to a DC charger. And also requires very little maintenance.

However, the utility needs to make that much power available at a specific location, and the cost for that only depends on the power (kW) made available at a specific location.

In Europe 3-phase 63A (44kW) can indeed be installed at a low cost in terms of hardware.

However, utility companies charge you for the connection you have. For example, I got my house with 3-phase 25A, would I upgrade to 3x40A I had have to pay 700 euros per year extra for the connection.

I did a quick lookup at my local network company: DELTA Netwerkbedrijf

A 3 x 80A connection costs EUR 1800,00 per year, not awfully expensive, but it has to be paid by the user. If the charger is only used once a day in the beginning you'd be looking at 5 euros per charge.

The same problem also exists with a DC charger, that also needs that 3 x 80A input, so that doesn't matter.

With AC charging we are however limited to 44kW, I don't see it going over that any time soon.

44kW is fun for the smallish batteries like the ZOE has, but when you are doing a real road trip with the Model S, you probably want more then 44kW and go with ~100kW like the SuperCharger does.

Still, charging on 44kW with the Model S is nice, it will give you some nice km/hr of charging.

In know that here in the Netherlands they are currently only installing CHAdeMO chargers, but in the future it will be "hybrid" chargers.

Yes. I wanted to tell You that maintenance (total costs) will be comparable for 50 kW DC and 43.5 kW AC. Because the biggest cost is connection to power output (1500-2000 EUR/year). Hardware cost isn't so important if station will work 10-20 years. So prices of AC charging will be the same or higher then DC.

I like idea of reductive charing system, but I think it isn't good above 10-20 kW. For fast charging 50+ kW You need DC port, and if You have DC port You don't need high power AC at all.

DC is flexible. It can work with every car (even i-MiEV with 10.5 and 16 kWh small pack can accept for while 50 kW before charging power will drop after 50% SOC). You can have higher power DC chargers up to over 100 kW. AC is limited to 3-phase 43.5 kW (in Type 2 standard), and limited only to few models - Zoe have 43 kW and smart 22 (but expensive option only). Other cars will use few kW and AC point is useless or not full used (lose money). You can't charge 43 or even 22 kW in typical house in Europe (maybe 10 kW will be posible in most houses) so high on-board power isn't needed. Adding simple 3-phase plug in DC charger to make it universal is stupid cost addition, because if someone instaled DC network why cars don't have cheap DC port?

I think that in 10-20 or more yeras we will have DC fast chargers only and cars will don't have any on-board chargers, because on the market will apear stationary DC chargers for home instalation - this chargers will be used for bi-directinal application and home energy systems.
http://www.idealpowerconverters.com/pdf/NREL and IPC demonstrate V2G_16Oct2012.pdf
Ideal Power Converters | Bidirectional Vehicle Charger
http://www.idealpowerconverters.com/pdf/IPC_EV charger_whitepaper Oct2011.pdf

This is the future. But even now AC don't makes sens for me.

In Germany, residential grid connections are 3x63A or 3x50A. Monthly meter fee is around 9€. Some AC charging enthusiasts covered nearly all of Germany with 22kW outlets: http://www.drehstromnetz.de/karten/DSL_110403.gif

9€ only? Anyway if You have homes in rich country with 3x63A or 3x50A (others don't have so high outputs) You still can't use 43 kW for car, becuse it will shut down house. 22 kW is probably max.


Ok. Lets see the prices for AC in US. Ecotality starts with 1$/hour - in plan for often use. They have 7.7 kW points probably. Cars like Leaf, i-MiEV have 3.3 kW. So the price for energy is 2x higher then US average - for slow charging. I asume that if You have higher charger the price will rise, and if You chose other plan or are guest price is higher. Even 4x US average energy cost.
Blink - Membership

CarCharging want $0.49 per KWh so over 3 times US average.
Electric vehicle charging service ratesCarCharging
Nobody will pay so much for AC slow charging. They not earning money at all, not even close. AC 22 and 43.5 kW need more hardware cost and more utility cost so price will not drop. DC 50-100 kW need to sell energy 4-5 times higher then average cost in home to be profitable and offers really fast charging virtualy for any car with inlet for DC. This is why I think DC will win in the end.

But I'm open for the AC idea and who knows, maybe I will change my mind if there will be some reasons. Now I don't see it.

For me Renault don't know what to do. They did Fluence Z.E. with Better Place (not selling well). Fluence and Kangoo Z.E. both have Type 1 inlet (1 phase about 3 kW on-board charger). But new Zoe have Type 2 inlet. Zoe don't have battery switch option (few years ago they said it will). Twizy have only home plug so it can't use Type 2 points. Any Renault car don't have CHAdeMO - I don't understand it, because they owns Nissan and Nissan heavly invested in building and promoting this stations. Every their car have different charge philosophy. Now think. They will do second generation of Zoe in few yeras, and probably will add DC Combo 2 inlet? And then they will let AC points die? Strange.
Nissan strategy is much better and constant - interesting question is what charging inlets they will use in new generation Leaf in Europe and US. Maybe CHAdeMO + Combo 1 (J1772 + DC) in US, and CHAdeMO and Combo 2 (Type 2 + DC) in Europe. Will there be small or big on-board charger or reductive charging? This will tell us a little more about the future of AC vs.DC.

 

[GSP]

Fast Charging an EV: AC/DC Questions and Renault's Answers

Interesting link with nice photo of the drive system and charger. The caption says that the charger is on top. It has its own liquid cooling ports, and is separate from the inverter and its cooling ports. It also is larger than the inverter. Perhaps Renault's "Chameleon charger" is not the cost effective re-use of the inverter like we thought!

GSP

 

[Eberhard]

one of my concern with inverter-charger is the efficiency. dedicated charger like Brusa NLG6 are up to 95% whereas inverter-charger around 90% and less.

 

[eledille]

I've checked the Tesla web and the Model S has neither a permanent magnet nor a wound rotor motor, but an induction squirrel-cage rotor. Anyway, as it has not a wound rotor, it is not compatible with the Chameleon technology from Renault (if it works as we suspect, using the motor to rectify AC into DC).

I can't imagine you need a wound-rotor motor to use the Chameleon charger. If they need a big inductor they would probably use the stator windings, and you can do that with an induction motor too. This is the kind of stuff that was going on with the AC Propulsions Reductive Charger, but that is patented, and Renault has its own patents, so they are doing something else. We don't know if the motor is directly involved at all, and if so for what.

I wanted to tell You that maintenance (total costs) will be comparable for 50 kW DC and 43.5 kW AC. Because the biggest cost is connection to power output (1500-2000 EUR/year). Hardware cost isn't so important if station will work 10-20 years. So prices of AC charging will be the same or higher then DC.

Same or higher, when you remove completely a good chunk of the cost? Also, hardware cost is very important for medium power charging, because shopowners, hotels etc often have spare available power. All they need is to pull a few meters of wire and put up a charge pole. Try to tell them to pay for a DC charger and they will think you're mad.

I like idea of reductive charing system, but I think it isn't good above 10-20 kW. For fast charging 50+ kW You need DC port, and if You have DC port You don't need high power AC at all.

Oh, yes you do. There will be literally millions of Type 2 outlets in France alone within a few years, quite simply because they are cheap to install compared to DC chargers. And e.g. to fill up a Model S overnight you need 11 kW - easily doable at hotels, etc etc. Why would I want to drive around to find a DC charger and then hang around for an hour if the car can charge in the garage while I sleep?

A 16A, 400V connection costs maybe 500 euro and delivers 11 kW, and the charger is onboard, practically for free.

Interesting link with nice photo of the drive system and charger. The caption says that the charger is on top. It has its own liquid cooling ports, and is separate from the inverter and its cooling ports. It also is larger than the inverter. Perhaps Renault's "Chameleon charger" is not the cost effective re-use of the inverter like we thought!

GSP

It is reusing the inverter. According to this article, the box on the top contains connectors and the control unit (I suspect noise filters too).

The article states that reuse of components allows the charger to have a cost comparable to a standard slow charger. The price of 150 euro that Bipo quoted is the additional cost compared to the slow charger that would have been necessary anyway. Never in my life have I heard of such a fantastic, incredible, awesome deal.

one of my concern with inverter-charger is the efficiency. dedicated charger like Brusa NLG6 are up to 95% whereas inverter-charger around 90% and less.

I suspect no-one will care one whit whether its 90% or 95% efficient if you can have single phase and three phase up to 44 kW for the cost of a 16A single phase charger. But where have you heard that it's 90% efficient? Why would it be less efficient than a dedicated charger? Your Brusa charger is also an inverter.

 

[widodh]

Oh, yes you do. There will be literally millions of Type 2 outlets in France alone within a few years, quite simply because they are cheap to install compared to DC chargers. And e.g. to fill up a Model S overnight you need 11 kW - easily doable at hotels, etc etc. Why would I want to drive around to find a DC charger and then hang around for an hour if the car can charge in the garage while I sleep?

A 16A, 400V connection costs maybe 500 euro and delivers 11 kW, and the charger is onboard, practically for free.

That's exactly what I said in my letter to Tesla: http://zooi.widodh.nl/ev/tesla/model-s/3-phase_charging_europe_model_s.pdf

We are doing the same story again: AC and DC will co-exist. There is a use-case for 11kW, 22kW and 44kW "destination" charging or just topping up while at an appointment somewhere.

Yes, we will see 50 ~ 100kW DC charging along side the road, but I think we will never take the charger out of the car.

I also go to locations for a couple of days where I could charge on 13A 230V, that is sufficient to top off a Model S within 48 hours while I'm staying there.

They don't mutually exclude each other.

 

[Bipo]

I can't imagine you need a wound-rotor motor to use the Chameleon charger. If they need a big inductor they would probably use the stator windings, and you can do that with an induction motor too. This is the kind of stuff that was going on with the AC Propulsions Reductive Charger, but that is patented, and Renault has its own patents, so they are doing something else. We don't know if the motor is directly involved at all, and if so for what.

When you use one phase, the motor will not rotate at all, so the rotor type is irrelevant. But I guess that when you use it as an inductor for the three phase, you are in fact creating a rotating field inside the motor and the only way you can prevent the rotor to rotate is if you have a wound rotor and you disconnect the wires. In a permanent magnet rotor you have the problem of hold the rotor using the brakes, quite dangerous!! And in an induction motor there will also be a large current inducted in the wires/squirrel cage that will burn them in a short amount of time.

Anyway, I can be wrong so please tell me if you disagree

 

[Kane]

Same or higher, when you remove completely a good chunk of the cost? Also, hardware cost is very important for medium power charging, because shopowners, hotels etc often have spare available power. All they need is to pull a few meters of wire and put up a charge pole. Try to tell them to pay for a DC charger and they will think you're mad.

I think same or higher prices of charging per kWh of energy.

RWE AC points:
2x11 kW 3-phase: 3.699€ without instalation (private point) => 168 € / kW (if two cars using it)
2x22 kW 3-phase: 6.995€ without instalation (smart point with user autorization) => 159 € / kW (if two cars using it)
Produkte Services | Ãœbersicht

AeroVironment AC points:
7.2 kW 1-phase: $1,099 instalation not needed (private point) => $153 / kW
News & Events: AeroVironment Introduces New Easy-to-Install and Moveable Home Electric Vehicle Charging Station - AeroVironment, Inc.

DC Nissan points in US:
Basic model CHAdeMO (indoor) 44 kW: $9,900 without instalation => $225 / kW (in Europe can be about 225 €)
Advanced model CHAdeMO 44 kW: $15,500 without instalation => $352 / kW (in Europe can be about 352 €)
NISSAN | NISSAN, SUMITOMO BRING LOW-COST ELECTRIC-CAR QUICK CHARGER TO U.S. MARKET
NISSAN | Nissan Begins Japan Sales of new Quick Charger for EVs
Nissan Quick Charger - CHAdeMO DC Fast Charging for Electric Vehicles
I'm not sure why 44 kW in US, and 49 kW in Japan. In Europe probably 49 kW.

As You can see difference isn't so big. If You will add instalation costs (same for AC & DC when same power) You will see over 2 times higher price per kW for DC 50 kW then AC 43.5 kW. And power connection costs will be comparable. So in 10-20 years prices must be comparable.

Additionaly thousands of cars currently on the roads and almost all models on the market have on board charger about 3-4 kW. So Your AC point will not be used at full blast. Less utilization = higher price per kWh of energy. DC will be more used because if You have CHAdeMO inlet You can use full power for a while (in i-MiEV, Leaf, and other cars in Japan). And when You driving far You will prefer more power (50-100 kW) to limit charging time (Spark will charge from DC combo 1 up to 100 kW in 20 minutes, Zoe 30 minutes from 43 kW AC). When battery packs will be bigger in the future DC high power will be better then AC for fast charge.

Oh, yes you do. There will be literally millions of Type 2 outlets in France alone within a few years, quite simply because they are cheap to install compared to DC chargers. And e.g. to fill up a Model S overnight you need 11 kW - easily doable at hotels, etc etc. Why would I want to drive around to find a DC charger and then hang around for an hour if the car can charge in the garage while I sleep?

A 16A, 400V connection costs maybe 500 euro and delivers 11 kW, and the charger is onboard, practically for free.

Maybe if government will buy them. 2 millions of Type 2 of AC 22 kW = 6 995 000 000 € on todays RWE prices (without instalation). This is still not fast charge and you need to rise prices for other cars to use Renault patented solution. 10 000 DC 100 kW for whole country for 30k € (without instalation) will cost only 300 000 000 € and You don't need anything more (You will use it only when need fast charge, 90-95% charging at home).

It is reusing the inverter. According to this article, the box on the top contains connectors and the control unit (I suspect noise filters too).

The article states that reuse of components allows the charger to have a cost comparable to a standard slow charger. The price of 150 euro that Bipo quoted is the additional cost compared to the slow charger that would have been necessary anyway. Never in my life have I heard of such a fantastic, incredible, awesome deal.

This is the only chance for high power AC charging to be in some applications profitable.

 

[jkirkebo]

I think same or higher prices of charging per kWh of energy.

RWE AC points:
2x11 kW 3-phase: 3.699€ without instalation (private point) => 168 € / kW (if two cars using it)
2x22 kW 3-phase: 6.995€ without instalation (smart point with user autorization) => 159 € / kW (if two cars using it)

Why would a hotel pay for that expensive thing ? They only need to provide this:

http://www.highlite.nl/silver.econt...tors_380v/cee_form_32a_5_pin_wallmount_female

€9.95 + wiring should be cheap enough for most.

And ZCW is shipping 32A single phase boxes with Mennekes for £299:
http://www.zerocarbonworld.org/shop

I don't think a three-phase version would be much more expensive.