Combined Charging System (CCS) 2.0

[widodh]

I think you misinterpreted my statement. Yes, CCS-Combo 2, CHAdeMO and Tesla Supercharger stations are ALL being built in Europe.

My statement was directed to the several people who want to believe that Tesla will install a CCS-Combo 2 inlet directly on a Tesla car.

Understood

I only see a hybrid inlet (In Europe) being present on future cars. Can accept both SuperCharging and CCS.

 

[jbcarioca]

At the time Musk made those comments, German auto manufacturers and German politicians were attempting to pass a law that REQUIRED the CCS chargers at Tesla Superchargers within Germany. That effort failed.

I'll bet you don't hear much about CCS in the future (except for Tesla / CCS adaptors).

CCS, as I think you agree, will continue to grow rapidly if only because of German BEV And PHEV. Tesla will sell those adapters just as soon as charging infrastructure makes it a practical wise move, not before, not after. After all Tesla is a full member of Charin

 

[scaesare]

However, we both know that the Tesla SC standard is not going to be the dominant L3 DC charging standard and it will be CCS.

How do we "know" this?

Also, this may depend on your definition of "dominant".

 

[jbcarioca]

How do we "know" this?

Also, this may depend on your definition of "dominant".

Good questions.
We know this because the CharIN group:
News: Charging Interface Initiative e. V. (CharIN e. V.)
includes all major European BEV/PHEV manufacturers as well as Tesla, most of the major charging networks and charging equipment manufacturers.
The standard has been accepted for the vast majority of new charging networks now being put in place and planned for the next two years.
So, despite the present modest and non-to-fast CCS deployment, the prospect is for much faster and far more nearly ubiquitous CCS coverage in Europe and NA, as well as most of the rest of the world.
It remains to be seen what happens with China and Japan once all this actually happens, but it is a safe assumption that CHAdeMO will gradually cede to CCS, rather as 8-track did to VHS.

Tesla will clearly continue to develop Superchargers, but because CharIN provides for robust payment options open networks will build rapidly, ultimately giving Tesla a large incentive to gradually merge with evolving CCS, while preserving proprietary advantages in their own network. JB has long said the Supercharger network could be made available to other manufacturers, the question there is when, not if.

Brovane was completely correct. That detracts nothing from the phenomenal accomplishments of Tesla in Supercharging, only about standard connectors

FWIW, tesla never wanted to be THE standard. When they built out the Supercharger network there was no standard so they have had to make one. I'm sure they did not intend it to be permanent.

 

[jbcarioca]

... I know that long term Musk has visions of grid independent Tesla SC with solar panels and Tesla powerpacks. However, we both know that isn't realistic and neither is a good expenditure of Tesla's capital.

I am not at all certain that your second sentence will be true. There are too many variables to reach that conclusion right now IMHO.

However, the connector standards are a different story, and there the admittedly clumsy and inelegant CCS will be the standard, just as the US domestic electricity standard is the really stupid 120V, making wiring more expensive in housing and electricity use to be less efficient.
There is no inherent advantage to the Tesla connector, nor to CCS, other than size and elegance. The standards winners have often not been the technological best, but those that reached a critical mass of manufacturers and user support. CCS, with utilities (make no mistake, public utilities will be dominant in the debate), electrical equipment makers and vehicle producers all playing roles. Almost all of those are solidly behind CCS. A few years from now we will not even think about that, except with elderly people who remember those elegant proprietary Tesla Supercharge connectors, back when Superchargers themselves were pretty slow, only 140 kw or so.

 

[TexasEV]

Meanwhile, in the U.S., Tesla continues to build more superchargers than there are CCS stations being built, and building more cars with the Tesla connector than there are cars being built with CCS. There may be more companies involved with CCS, but until they start putting product out there which people want to buy and use, it's a "standard" in name only.

 

[techmaven]

If we look at the 3 different L3 DC Charging standards, CCS has the most support among the various auto manufacturers. I don't see either the CHademo or the SC standard as being viable beyond the end of this decade especially as CCS 350kw stations come online.

[...]

If the eventual goal is that EV's are mainstream cars, there needs to be one standard for L3 DC Charging and for all practical purposes CCS is going to be that standard.

Nope.

As long as auto industry and the electric car charging industry continue to invest non-optimally aka incorrectly into charging infrastructure, Tesla has to stand alone. In that way, Tesla controls the charging experience. The CCS charging experience is going to be extremely chaotic, which means much worse user experiences which will limit the adoption of electric vehicles, quite possibly enough to prevent them from becoming mainstream cars.

By the time the rest of the industry is actually capable of charging at 350 kW, Tesla will have moved on. Tesla's interest in a less bulky connector includes both a better user experience for the mainstream driver and for robotic plug/unplug for autonomous vehicles. The last thing Tesla will want is to put their faith into standards bodies that have more interest in blocking Tesla than promoting the overall electrification effort. They do not want a repeat of the J1772-DC debacle.

Besides, Tesla's global marketshare of high power DC charging vehicles (> 200 amps) is likely well above 50% for the next 3-4 years. Right now, it is 100%.

 

[scaesare]

This...

We know this...

is not the same as:

...the prospect is...
it is a safe assumption that CHAdeMO will...

And I will use your rather humorous non-sequitur comparison of an audio format to a a video format...

as 8-track did to VHS.

...to point out that proposed standards developed by committees often don't have a great track record as compared to standards championed by focused vendor and adopted by the marketplace.

 

[scaesare]

There is no inherent advantage to the Tesla connector, nor to CCS, other than size and elegance.

The Tesla connector indeed has the advantage of being rated for ~330A, whereas the CCS connector is rated for 200A.

 

[McRat]

The Tesla connector indeed has the advantage of being rated for ~330A, whereas the CCS connector is rated for 200A.

That is going to be a huge surprise to ChargePoint when they install the 125kW's in the Mojave Desert Corridor soon. You should probably warn them before they finish.

 

[Jeff N]

The Tesla connector indeed has the advantage of being rated for ~330A, whereas the CCS connector is rated for 200A.

An advantage that will last another few months.

 

[scaesare]

That is going to be a huge surprise to ChargePoint when they install the 125kW's in the Mojave Desert Corridor soon. You should probably warn them before they finish.

1) He was speaking present-tense... and presently the CCS connector is limited to less than the Tesla connector

B) As per your own post such stations neither exist or are even approved

III) What's the planned voltage on those stations?

 

[jbcarioca]

The Tesla connector indeed has the advantage of being rated for ~330A, whereas the CCS connector is rated for 200A.

Both are quite easily upgradable. Present tense is not quite so important when the topic under discussion is future tense, probably two years or more to significant high power deployment. Then questions of voltage and amperage become very important through the entire chain, including all aspects of transmission including connectors, and of course battery absorption capacity.

 

[Brovane]

Meanwhile, in the U.S., Tesla continues to build more superchargers than there are CCS stations being built, and building more cars with the Tesla connector than there are cars being built with CCS. There may be more companies involved with CCS, but until they start putting product out there which people want to buy and use, it's a "standard" in name only.

Can you share where you found the statistics showing how many CCS stations built in the US for 2016? I have not been able to find that statistic online. I know informally from what I can see in Southern California, combination CCS and CHademo stations seem to be being built all over the place.

 

[mrElbe]

As it stands today there are two types of non compatible CCS standards / connectors - The European spec using Mennekes connector with 2 high voltage ones underneath and the North American one using J1772 with 2 high voltage ones underneath. The CharIN spec is supposed to define a combined universal one. As of this date I have not seen a picture or installation of this proposed connector.

 

[Brovane]

I am not at all certain that your second sentence will be true. There are too many variables to reach that conclusion right now IMHO.

I just did some math.

A SC site that has low volume with a max usage of 20-cars a day with an average charge of 50kw.

So we will need 1000kw of electricity. If we assume a average capacity factor of 25% for solar we would need a 4000kw system. I am ignoring inverter lose etc., just going for rough figures.

• Solar system at a cost of $1000 per kw (Commercial pricing) installed and with a requirement of 4000 per kw will cost $4M.
• Battery system will need 3000 kwh (not building in any extra factor for cloudy days etc) and with a install cost of about $200kwh will cost $600k.
• Total system price of $4.6M to make the SC site completely grid independent for 20-cars a day.
• Panels with a assumption of 12 watts per square foot will require 8 acres of panels.

I don't see how realistic that is unless the SC site has a lot of extra land nearby. Please feel free to check my math our if you think my assumptions are in-correct. I tried to make assumptions in favor of Tesla during my calculations.

 

[jbcarioca]

I just did some math.

... Please feel free to check my math our if you think my assumptions are in-correct. I tried to make assumptions in favor of Tesla during my calculations.

I do not argue with your calculations,even though nearly all solar installations will be in places where sunlight will average 6 hrs a day or more, and many others, West Texas for example could easily be powered by wind.

 

[LargeHamCollider]

I just did some math.

A SC site that has low volume with a max usage of 20-cars a day with an average charge of 50kwh.

So we will need 1000kwh of electricity. If we assume a average capacity factor of 25% for solar we would need a 4000kw system. I am ignoring inverter lose etc., just going for rough figures.

• Solar system at a cost of $1000 per kw (Commercial pricing) installed and with a requirement of 4000 per kw will cost $4M.
• Battery system will need 3000 kwh (not building in any extra factor for cloudy days etc) and with a install cost of about $200kwh will cost $600k.
• Total system price of $4.6M to make the SC site completely grid independent for 20-cars a day.
• Panels with a assumption of 12 watts per square foot will require 8 acres of panels.

I don't see how realistic that is unless the SC site has a lot of extra land nearby. Please feel free to check my math our if you think my assumptions are in-correct. I tried to make assumptions in favor of Tesla during my calculations.

The math you just did is wrong.

1000kWh will be generated by 1000kWh/4h, or a 250kW solar array for an installed price of ~250k.

The 1000kWh is divided by 4 because you get the equivalent of about 4 hours of direct sunlight per day on a normal non-tracking array.

 

[jbcarioca]

This...


is not the same as:




And I will use your rather humorous non-sequitur comparison of an audio format to a a video format...

...to point out that proposed standards developed by committees often don't have a great track record as compared to standards championed by focused vendor and adopted by the marketplace.

Was I drunk? OK, I meant 8-track (Lear, Ampex, Ford, GM, Motorola, RCA) vs cassette (Philips), and for that matter CD (Philips/Sony) after.
As for committees, like it or not standards do end out involving some collegial efforts, usually formal committees. It is not pretty, but...

 

[Brovane]

The math you just did is wrong.

1000kWh will be generated by 1000kWh/4h, or a 250kW solar array for an installed price of ~250k.

The 1000kWh is divided by 4 because you get the equivalent of about 4 hours of direct sunlight per day on a normal non-tracking array.

Thanks for checking my math.

The figures look better, substantial but not completely unmanageable.

20cars a day, 250kw system=$400k+21k, square feet of space required for panels.
50cars a day, 625kw system=$600k+52k, square feet of space required for panels.