Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Charging Infrastructure

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
The arguments I am reading say that asking for money is bogus. They will make more guaranteed profits. So they have to upgrade some transformers. It will happen slowly and start out in wealthier neighborhoods. Also the power companies have been pleading for EVs to charge at night to balance the day load and help pay for powerplants that are essentially half used.
 
http://cet.berkeley.edu/dl/Utilities_Final_8-31-09.pdf

However, some states such as California have implemented revenue decoupling for utilities. This means that profits are independent of the quantity of electricity sold and utilities are incentivized by the regulators to reduce the electricity consumption per customer. As such, selling more electricity is not an opportunity for all utilities, and for some operators it may actually be a threat.

This sounds like big problem to me. I'd think that it is critically important that the utilities have strong incentives to support EV charging, specifically at night time. I hope this is in the process of being changed.
 
Scare, scare, scare and scare.

Good to know this BEFORE the anti-plug-in crowd uses it for more fodder.

Or supposedly pro-plug-in crowd. Note Witzenburg's ABG article
Pacific Gas & Electric chairman Peter Darbee warned that even a fairly small number of PEVs using 220V chargers simultaneously in a residential neighborhood could overwhelm local circuits and cause blackouts, since each would be drawing as much power as an entire house. On the other hand, an EV charging on 110V house current draws only about as much power as a hair dryer, said Michigan Consumers Energy CEO David Joos.
 
Ripple control?

That only a few plug-ins in an area should be problematic is a bit hard to understand. It is currently quite normal that a whole neighbourhood starts cooking at about the same time with no problems. This is a pretty heavy load. To compensate, in some areas in Switzerland washing machines and dryers are switched off during those hours. In areas with weak wiring it should be possible to put those chargers on ripple control e.g. in parallel with water heaters.
 
http://cet.berkeley.edu/dl/Utilities_Final_8-31-09.pdf
This sounds like big problem to me. I'd think that it is critically important that the utilities have strong incentives to support EV charging, specifically at night time. I hope this is in the process of being changed.

I don't think this is too big of a problem. Right now they do this by having rates go up depending on usage based on tiers (100% baseline, 130%, 200%, 300%, 300%+ usage). But they have a plug-in/EV charging program where you can put your car on a separate meter (you can opt for a single meter instead too) and be billed according to your time of use (which is cheaper than normal except when on peak). This program still has the condition of rates going up with usage based on tiers, but it provides an incentive to use an EV, since it is cheaper than normal rates.

Here's how the tiered system works:
Understanding Baseline Quantities

Many people may misunderstand and think if you get pushed over to the next tier by an EV, you pay extra for your whole usage, but the way the system works is you pay extra only for the percentage of usage that is over.
 
I don't think this is too big of a problem. Right now they do this by having rates go up depending on usage based on tiers (100% baseline, 130%, 200%, 300%, 300%+ usage).

Perhaps you know more about this than I do, yet the paper from U of Berkeley, which I quoted above, suggests that the fact that the consumer pays more doesn't mean that the utility makes more profit, and so doesn't necessarily provide an incentive to proactively support and encourage building a well-working EV charging infrastructure.

But they have a plug-in/EV charging program where you can put your car on a separate meter (you can opt for a single meter instead too) and be billed according to your time of use (which is cheaper than normal except when on peak). This program still has the condition of rates going up with usage based on tiers, but it provides an incentive to use an EV, since it is cheaper than normal rates.

That would sound good, however according to PG&E's website, dual meters are allowed only in 2 out of 7 cities (for example, perhaps ironically, not in San Francisco).

http://www.pge.com/includes/docs/pdfs/shared/environment/pge/cleanair/ev4pt2.pdf
 
Norbert ... that's a very OLD document you linked to. (It contains references like " UL is performing tests on the equipment and hopes to complete the listing by the end of 1999.".)

Yes, I've noticed, but it is still one of the main documents there. I haven't found any indication that things have changed since then. Or, the lack of up-to-date documents could be taken as another indication that the utilities don't have sufficient incentives to actively support or even promote EVs.
 
Perhaps you know more about this than I do, yet the paper from U of Berkeley, which I quoted above, suggests that the fact that the consumer pays more doesn't mean that the utility makes more profit, and so doesn't necessarily provide an incentive to proactively support and encourage building a well-working EV charging infrastructure.
Actually I misunderstood that part. Looking up "revenue decoupling," it seems this refers to a different mechanism. Rather than the state fixing the rates of the utility, it allows the utility to adjust rates to maintain a certain level of revenue. This is useful for conservation in general, but not for EVs, since more demand doesn't equal more revenue. So there is a need for the state to give additional incentive for utilities to help adopt EVs.

That would sound good, however according to PG&E's website, dual meters are allowed only in 2 out of 7 cities (for example, perhaps ironically, not in San Francisco).

http://www.pge.com/includes/docs/pdfs/shared/environment/pge/cleanair/ev4pt2.pdf

The page about the EV rate schedule doesn't say anything about this, but I suppose dual meters will depend on local codes. If more EVs are widespread I don't see why the codes can't be changed to accommodate EVs.
Electric Vehicle Charging Rate and Economics
 
Villaraigosa announces electric car infrastructure plan | Money & Company | Los Angeles Times

In a plan announced today, [LA Mayor] Villaraigosa said the city intends to update 400 existing stations around the region while adding 100 new ones. The permitting and inspection process for the stations will be steamlined, local building codes could be revised to encourage more charging options and utilities will develop a specialized customer service process to deal with electric vehicle owners.
I wonder what that means for existing EV owners that use those existing stations.
 
I put this down as part of an insidious plan to cut the EV technology down at the heels.
NYC Tells Electric Car Owners to Get Their Own Outlets - Auto - FOXNews.com
Early adopters do not appear to need a high-density public charging network. While the availability of charging at retail and curbside locations may be reassuring to the average driver concerned about range limitations, the study suggests that the earliest consumers will be willing to change their driving behavior and parking location, given their strong desire to purchase EVs.
 
^ that's completely contradictory to the study carried out for London, which advocated a very dense (read: unaffordable?) charging network to kick start things.
I wouldn't say the studies are contrary. The conclusions aren't even contrary. It's what people derive from the studies that is contrary. New York Times and Fox slam EVs, so they focus on the early adopters who are willing to forgo convenient charging stations. London wants to encourage adoption, so they recommend convenient charging stations.