This stall size is smaller than typical classic Supercharger stalls. East Palo Alto is the first installation I've seen that uses the Urban pedestals back to back like this.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Are we seeing the end for building non-Urban superchargers in So Cal?
- Thread starter 4SUPER9
- Start date
Forgive me, but this looks more like a layout scenario, rather than anything specific to a type of charger. I still do not see how building Urban stalls allows a tighter configuration than the classic. It seems to me that either type can be configured this way, and it is more a matter of parking design than functionality. In fact, I believe there is another classic California charger where they laid it out back-to-back.
Agree with this. And there are "classic" superchargers with this design as well. Tucson-Rita Road comes to mind, but there are better examples. Just can't remember where they were! Once you hit 600 superchargers, they start to blur together a bit
Uncle Paul
Well-Known Member
Lakesbutta
Member
Calabasas has Urban-type chargers on site. Someone ripped open one of the boxes. Look here. I've seen it also to confirm.
Supercharger - Calabasas (permit and location found, Tesla equipment crates onsite!)
No.
Tesla is cost-cutting so cutting back on Supercharger build-out generally.
California's main problem is capacity rather than coverage, and if that's due to alt-home charging urban Superchargers are a better solution to that.
If Tesla overcomes its current production problems, travel charging build-out will resume.
Maybe the design of having a massively large SC area might not be a good solution as it requires a lot of capital in a limited space availability. I think Tesla should partner up with major chains such as Starbucks, Costco, Target, and alike and set up smaller volume SC but in a sense more widely distributed. Having the 3-5 spots in many places might be a lot more useful than the 10-20 locations in a limited area.
Who knows, they might be able to strike a deal with these chains to cover some of the cost because it does drive traffic to them.
Who knows, they might be able to strike a deal with these chains to cover some of the cost because it does drive traffic to them.
K3Man
Member
Agree with you on this, but...
Doesn't your suggestion describe the "Desitnation Charger" concept already in-place?
Doesn't your suggestion describe the "Desitnation Charger" concept already in-place?
It's is but destination charger is more suited in a place where they can spend longer times at like the hotels, amusement park, etc.
But urban distribution to a larger area to provide quicker charge for on the go people like McD or Starbucks
I am not sure the 3-5 spots are going to cut it. I was at Fremont Hub Target on Saturday at noon. All 12 spots were full. When I came out all 12 were still full but with different cars and one person was waiting.
To me, Target and Supercharging is a good match. Many Targets now have Starbucks in them, so you can plug in, grab a coffee, and do a bit of shopping to kill time. Win-win.
Having 4 spots in a single locations would be ideal IF they were ubiquitous: 4 at McD's, and another 4 down the street at Starbucks, etc. One could envision this for the future. For now, these are expensive to build, and need to be in key locations to allow proper charging between destinations, hence, 12-20 in one spot.
Having more plugs at fewer locations is far more efficient when you need a charge.
Capacity of Superchargers Using an Erlang-B Model
Ulmo
Active Member
I keep wanting to see solutions that are effective at delivering sunlight directly to cars. This can take many forms, and I think of it as employee parking.
I think it is a total mistake for Tesla to claim that the best place to charge your car is at home. To the personal user who wants to know what their lifetime experience must depend upon for its lowest common denominator, that is the best target base point for Tesla customers and what they must provision at home, so it makes sense to have that as an initial sales attitude, but going longer term, the goal of EV charging, by Tesla, by Tesla owners, by EV manufacturers, by EV owners, and by all civil engineers, should be to charge all electric vehicles during sunlight hours in employee parking lots direct from local solar resources.
Here are the easiest ways to do this, starting with the very easiest, least expensive, most flexible, fastest, most beneficial, and I think best starting point, #1, and increasing with cost and complexity after that:
I think it is a total mistake for Tesla to claim that the best place to charge your car is at home. To the personal user who wants to know what their lifetime experience must depend upon for its lowest common denominator, that is the best target base point for Tesla customers and what they must provision at home, so it makes sense to have that as an initial sales attitude, but going longer term, the goal of EV charging, by Tesla, by Tesla owners, by EV manufacturers, by EV owners, and by all civil engineers, should be to charge all electric vehicles during sunlight hours in employee parking lots direct from local solar resources.
Here are the easiest ways to do this, starting with the very easiest, least expensive, most flexible, fastest, most beneficial, and I think best starting point, #1, and increasing with cost and complexity after that:
- Tent-like solar canopies in existing parking lots that have support columns made out of charge posts with integrated chargers built in. I know Tesla has thought of this in the past with one of their first SuperChargers. But in my description, I'm talking about EV charging in general, tailored for worksites, where people are going to be parked all day anyway, because they have to be every single workday, so slower chargers that don't damage EV batteries are what's provisioned at employee parking. Since this would be for worksites and not Tesla long distance drivers, it should be J1772 to work for all brands. This would help alleviate SuperChargers that are used to top up cars that are about to go to or from work to other errands, appointments, or long distance drives, even if it is after a turnaround at home (drive home from work, get ready to go on a trip, get back to car, and find that it hasn't already charged up fully from the days' commuting yet, something that often happened to me). This is the most advantageous type of charging infrastructurally, since the sunlight can be collected right where it's put into the car, and there doesn't need to be any grid connection, grid transformer, grid paperwork, etc.; only structural, seismic, wind, fire, and electrical codes for the local jurisdiction need to be followed. A small battery pack and load distributer would be necessary for it to properly function, but no attempt would be made to put in huge batteries to make it work during cloudy days; then, those people would just have to stop at a SuperCharger if in a Tesla or just put off errands if in some other type of low range car. Having said that, batteries and grid connection should be optional, and could be installed asynchronously with the rest of the system, such that the grid and/or batteries could take years longer to install than the solar canopies with columns made out of charge pedestals. Solar canopies with charge columns would be able to be sold, provisioned, permitted, paid, and installed within weeks.
If I was wealthy, I would already have started this business (of manufacturing and servicing employee EV charging solar canopies), but since I am not, someone else who has the money to do such things should start such businesses.
- Employee parking J1772's could hook up to nearby buildings via conduit kept seperate from utility connected grids (only sharing a ground wire for safety). New solar arrays that cover entire business roofs (with slots for venting pipes) could be put up. They could select tracking mounts for the solar panels if the volume of cars is too big for the roof with fixed arrays. Inverters would bring the electricity down to the parking lot, and trenched pipe to the pedestals for the J1772's. Charge distributors would hand out the amount of charge according to how much sun energy was available. If there is excess energy available, then optionally grid hookup could be provisioned after installation or at the same time as initial installation, and the charge controllers could allow unused energy to be sent to the grid. Optionally, batteries could be installed (regardless of grid connection) to allow time shifting and smoothing according to needs. This would be a similar idea to parking lot solar canopies, but more interesting to businesses that are more comfortable with mounting panels on their own roof, or where their roof may have more sun exposure than parking lots (such as parking lots in shade of buildings, trees, or other things).
- Block-sized associations could be created that allow placing of large solar arrays in places with space for solar, and conduit to be placed in between business properties to deliver that sun energy to large parking lots where J1772's would be placed. The advantage of associations is that sometimes large parking lots are not in the same place as a lot of sunlight where solar canopies would work. This could be true for already-covered parking spots such as large parking garages that are nevertheless near large office buildings, or for parking lots that require architecturally acceptable sunlight for parking but where nearby there is still ample coverable space where solar could be installed (such as rear parking lots, tops of buildings, etc.) Block sized associations would also allow people to park in the parking lot to which they were assigned but share the pooled resources of very large solar arrays in a more distributed and even fashion, requiring only one citing, one charge distribution controller, and even one grid connection uplink for excess or eventual importation from upgraded grids, saving a lot on more numerous installations with questionable utilization. This would require inverters to output in higher voltage ranges than local solar canopies. Building-top solar arrays for many office buildings in #2 above would also benefit from higher voltage output from inverters. This would allow lower losses and smaller diameter wiring, etc., but proper higher voltage provisioning should be heeded. Something like 480VAC would at least fit within 600VAC rated insulated wire, plus it would be compatible with many office-sized transformers if grid interconnection were to ever happen. I was thinking transformers would be provisioned by the association (by a servicing company) and not the local utility, but it would also be worth looking into the option of the marketplace developing J1772 pedestals that each downstep the AC as needed rather than sharing one large box; if the downstepping overheated for any one pedestal, that pedestal could simply turn down the amperage to cool itself down, rather than having an expensive large transformer.
- Existing or new large campuses of businesses and office buildings could fully integrate all energy provisions and overspec local solar and battery provisions to amply supply both EV's and offices. Charging during the day could be done whenever the sun shines brighter. Employees who wish to adjust their charge rate higher for more errands could raise their maximum-price and minimum-charge sliders for days when they have more trips to do after work, and employees who lived further, had a heavier foot, and/or a heavier car, could also keep their charge rate selection higher, demanding a fuller charge during the day, whereas those drivers who live closer to home could lower their intake and just get excess during the more excess sunlight parts of the day. It makes sense to me to have battery banks smoothing power for such campuses in a general fashion, but not primarily time shifting the loads, unless the battery banks were much larger than usual for more out of the way campuses in which case that would make much more sense. Large campuses tend to be higher up off the ground, so space would always be at a premium; every unshaded spot should be covered with a tracked solar panel to get early and late sunlight as well as midday, since office work starts early and ends late. The biggest difference between big campuses and small solar canopies mentioned in #1 is that large campuses have economies of scale that allow full integration of all parts and full management software and hardware that can allow a much higher fine grained and well tuned approach to all aspects of the systems, allowing such things as charging cars at a higher cost from grid during darker days, and sharing loads between office buildings and cars with smoothing by way of the car charge controllers, reducing most of the need for local smoothing battery arrays (but that system would require a few just to deal with a car arriving or leaving).
Last edited:
The reason that your home is the best place to charge is that it is under your control. You can make sure that you have access to a sufficiently sized electrical outlet.
I agree that workplace charging from on-site solar is better, but if Tesla said that, it would inhibit their sales by making people think that a Tesla car is not good for them because their employer doesn't have solar charging yet.
I agree that workplace charging from on-site solar is better, but if Tesla said that, it would inhibit their sales by making people think that a Tesla car is not good for them because their employer doesn't have solar charging yet.
Ulmo
Active Member
Totally agreed. I'm talking about from a business opportunity and civilian planning perspective. I'm aware that what I'm pushing for requires some infrastructural conceptual changes, but the increased efficiency must counteract that. One of the biggest problems coming up with EV's will be grid expansion; parking lot solar canopies that directly charge cars simply skip all of that grid expansion question, much like cell phones skip the landline question. Solar is wireless; why invest in expensive wires when it's already wireless to begin with? To me it seems so basic, and admittedly as a niche in some ways, but I want to see if I could start up a critical mass of employer parking lots in some concentrated EV areas that people start to expect something like a 20% to 50% chance of having solar parking at work.
Your suggestions are all interesting. Perhaps, forward thinking is the best way to describe this. That being said, we are far from there yet. Once EVs become mainstream, and ICE's become the oddity, such charging implementation strategies can gather traction.
SilverSp33d3r
No Longer Silver
I was just at the baker, Ca site. It appears to be 100% solar powered with Powerpack backup for night charging. Tesla uses the natural resources when possible, but permitting large solar canopies vs ev chargers creates many additional challenges.
I definitely agree though we should be utilizing the sun much more, especially for charging purposes.
I definitely agree though we should be utilizing the sun much more, especially for charging purposes.
Eno Deb
Active Member
Solar canopies are a nice idea on paper, but one of the problems is the required surface area. A car like the Model 3 occupies a parking space of around 10sqm. Solar panels can produce around 200W/sqm under ideal conditions, so even covering an entire parking lot at best provides enough energy for L1 trickle charging if the lot is fully occupied. And it's even worse when you look at multi-story parking structures and areas that don't get a lot of sun ...
Similar threads
