I wouldn't. At least here in the Twin Cities, there are plenty of L2 chargers around. Most seem to get little use. I never use them even when driving outside the metro area because they're just two slow. A NEMA 14-50 outlet would be a better choice in my book. DC fast chargers would be even better. The would provide people a real reason to stop somewhere. Yes, they cost more, a lot more, but I just don't see any value in L2 chargers. I think they're rather a waste of money.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Boatguy
Active Member
For theme parks, sports stadiums and hotels where people are going to spend at least 3-4hrs that makes perfect sense.
Yes it does look better and if you have a valet then you probably have a higher end restaurant which would perhaps be shifted more to the Tesla end of the spectrum rather than Bolt/Leaf owners. That said, we have both an MS and BMW i3 and use the i3 exclusively in San Francisco, so you can't quite read the customer by the car.
I suggest you contact Tesla and pose the question - "How much for two SC stalls", since I think two is probably the minimum for the way they've done the engineering. They'll be confused at first and what to tell you about an HPWC, so be persistent and tell them you want a number for an SC. It will end all of our speculation and be interesting to hear!
Boatguy
Active Member
True, but that's a vehicle problem not a charger problem. Teslas charge at 18-20kw AC. There's little reason other vechicles can't have high rate AC charging.
Only until people shift from the the legacy ICE paradigm of empty vs full. 50 miles charge is 50 miles traveled, regardless the size of the battery.
AndreSF
Member
Not really the point I was making... L2 charges are mainly for slow and steady charging, hence work well when cars are parked for expended period of time (home/work/destination). And to be completely honest, I don't see much of a point of dual-charger setup or really high level A/C chargers (it still takes too long to get any meaningful range with those in short period of time).
Did not quite get your second point, but larger batteries will remove most range anxiety associated with around town travel IMO. As long as these charges are in the prime parking spots at the stores/malls, etc., there will be abusers.
Last edited:
Yes, slow L2 makes sense at home/work. But the charging solution for a future EV fleet has to be more comprehensive than home/work.
If the L2 the chargers are fast, they can make sense at places like restaurants and even grocery stores. Sure, not for a quick 10 min stop and grab, but at a ~mile/minute charging rate a 30-45 minute Safeway run puts in a real amount of charge, let alone what you get from a 2 hour dinner at a nice restaurant.
Conversely, a DC fast charger doesn't do much good for either situation. One or two DC fast chargers will often be in use, creating inconveniences and inefficiencies in the 10 minute stop. On the other side of the coin, especially as technology increases, a DC fast charge will often top off a car in less than a longer grocery visit, blocking the charger for other patrons. And...its a horrible idea at a restaurant unless you have a valet managing the charger and a willingness to turn away patrons if the queue is too long.
For the same cost as a DC fast charging system, a ~tenfold amount of L2 chargers can be deployed in the same lot, servicing significantly more people with significantly less inconvenience. You get past that mental hurdle of EV vs ICE parking spot, because so many spots can support both vehicles.
I don't agree with your assessment. 58 miles per hour charging (a 20kw tesla on 240V) is very meaningful. That's a 30-45 minutes of fast L2 charging per day for the average daily commute. When you bounce that against the typical things people do during the week (go out for lunch/dinner, go the the gym, take the kids to practice, etc.), that's a significant population that could get by without home/work charging. That's huge, because as more and more people buy into more and more affordable EVs, a larger percentage of EV owners won't have access to home charging.
Sure, but they don't eliminate the need for chargers. As referenced above, the need for public charging will accelerate faster than the EV fleet's growth.
Boatguy
Active Member
Not exactly. Standard Tesla charger is 48a = 48 x 240 = 11kW max ~ 32mph
Last edited:
AndreSF
Member
Well, that's where we disagree entirely... I think all these "get a few miles, while at dinner" scenarios are not relevant when you have large enough battery to deal with all local travel for the day, and charge at night at home or during the day at work (where your car is parked for several hours at the time, where you don't really care for the speed too much, hence no need for 58mi/hr charging). For other scenarios such as those involving folks without home charging, DC charging is the way to go, hence my point about L2 stations at the malls, etc. being useless.
PS. that was a reply to @bxr140
PS. that was a reply to @bxr140
AndreSF
Member
That is the exact scenario I was referring to, but not at the shopping malls... These charges would be much more effective in the parking garages/business buildings, condos, train stations, even public parking lots, etc. And there, where cars parked for a long time, speed of charging is not that critical, so high level chargers in the cars would not make too much of a difference.
DC charging for speed, A/C for home/office, etc. IMO.
Many Teslas charge at 72 or 80 amps. Many L2 EVSEs [that are not HPWCs] can supply 80 amps. The technology is there. Any EV OEM can implement it if they choose.
I contest that fast L2 charging significantly minimizes the need for fast DC charging, and it does so much more economically.
The picture is bigger than that. Not everyone has a home or work charging solution. Again, as the EV fleet grows, the ratio of those who don't have home/work charging will go up. Bottom line, the solution to charging the EV fleet has to be more comprehensive than just home or work charging.
With existing fast L2 charging (up to 20kw), fast DC charging makes very little sense except for long distance travel.
I had to look up Palm Harbor, FL but found lots of DCQC's in the area, several J1772 L2, some Tesla destination chargers (heck, even at Dimmitt Automotive Group Collision Center), plus a Tesla SC just on the other side of Tampa in Brandon. While I think it's admirable, and I would normally say yes, in this case you might be better off with several J1772 stations (like a 60 amp ClipperCreek). You should contact the Tesla Destination Charging program. If you have enough electrical supply, they will provide two 80 amp HPWCs and one 40 amp ClipperCreek plus something like $5000 to help with the installation. Dedicating parking spaces is always hard, but if properly placed (away from the main entrance, between spaces and/or between rows, spread apart), you may be able to provide charging stations but without "giving up" one or more dedicated spaces. Here's an example of such an installation. Notice how each station is located between four parking spaces. With a 25 ft cord, it is even possible to plug in from any one of EIGHT adjacent spots.
Boatguy
Active Member
I'm not sure I understand what you're saying with regard to L2 versus L3, but putting larger rectifiers (the core of a charger) into every car is not less expensive them putting a few larger rectifiers at L3 charging stations. It takes almost nothing on the car side to support L3 charging.
I'm saying that for a given cost the big picture EV fleet charging solution is better off with more L2s vs fewer L3's [in context, 'destination superchargers']. DCQC is the right solution for long distance travel, not daily recharging.
The difference in vehicle hardware cost will barely break through the noise floor.
AndreSF
Member
The picture indeed is bigger, but it's your approach I don't agree with. L3 charging is the future IMO, especially for ppl without home solution. L2 will not go anywhere soon, but counting on L2 being higher power and having extra hardware in the cars just does not make sense to me, nor I have any supporting data that many ppl actually have the capabilities to use more than 6.6Kw L2 service that I've mostly seen here around Bay Area. So, based on what you are saying both sides (L2 EVSE) and car hardware needs to be upgraded, while fair amount of EVs already support L3 without any additional changes to their vehicles.
A complete solution certainly needs to satisfy folks without home charging option, but hopefully those folks don't use those cars 24x7, and such solution should be available where ppl park the longest IMO. L3 due to its speed is actually a great solution for ppl without home charging IMO.
Boatguy
Active Member
I don't think you're looking big enough. Its not about the individual. Its about the fleet. Its about the infrastructure. Because of that its always going to come down to cost vs volume serviced, which is always going to favor L2s.
Random points:
1. DCFC will always be less convenient to access than L2, as there will always be more [less expensive and easier to deploy] L2s.
2. DCFC can be quite inefficient for multiple users. Some of what we see with SCs are just the tip of the iceberg, like waiting for a stall or getting reduced charging rates (from pairing). Deploying more L2s for the same cost services more people more efficiently. I don't know about you, but I'd much rather get less guaranteed charge [from a place that I know will have an open L2] than roll the dice that I won't have to wait 10 minutes for a DCFC station to open up.
3. DCFC has higher peak demands than even a significantly higher number of L2s. L2s smooth out the peaks, and with dynamic loading solutions (like the experiment in Pasadena) managing customer demand with electrical supply will become significantly easier, efficient, and cost effective.
4. The future of higher capacity batteries only makes the L2 case stronger. Even for those without home/work charging, a week's worth of L2 opportunity charging (especially faster L2, like Teslas) will more than cover a week's worth of driving for the vast majority of vehicles.
5. The future of autonomous driving/charging makes the L2 case stronger. Being able to full charge in 30-60 minutes is pretty useless when a car has many opportunities throughout the day to charge itself.
AndreSF
Member
You seem to be going off point further and further, but initial discussion was on whether or not L2 EVSEs at the malls, restaurants, etc. are a good idea. IMO they are not. L2 in situations where cars are parked for an extended periods of time (home/work, "destination charging"), absolutely the way to go, and I have not disagreed on that at all. For that, faster L2 is not required.
Neither you nor me know the future, so I guess will see how things will play out.
Similar threads
