You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Check out the thread on the Levis supercharger for an example of the timelines. Construction work was first noted on July 5. It is now September 15 and it is still not completed - apparently some of the electrical contractors have been sent done to Georgia to help restore damage from Hurricane Irma.If it were Dec 14 I would understand the pessimism and near anger in the thread but it's September 14th... I got a sunburn today and then went swimming. It's not like it's new years eve yet.
Wasn't there also speculation about battery swaps for the semis?
And now multiply that by 20 so that you can charge 20 semis at once. You will need to run a 500kV line into the truckstop. Or put a truckstop at Pickering, Darlington, Tiverton, Niagara Falls, etc.I do think the semis could charge fairly quickly by having multiple separate battery packs. Imagine 10 Model S's plugged in and charging simultaneously like at a busy supercharger. But now imagine that all of those 10 battery packs are powering one semi.
Since the cost of distribution is factored into the end cost of electricity, this feels like a non-problem. We will build more infrastructure. It's the utility's problem.And now multiply that by 20 so that you can charge 20 semis at once. You will need to run a 500kV line into the truckstop. Or put a truckstop at Pickering, Darlington, Tiverton, Niagara Falls, etc.
Ryan - I am not so sure that is the case.Since the cost of distribution is factored into the end cost of electricity, this feels like a non-problem. We will build more infrastructure. It's the utility's problem.
Now multiply that by 10 or 20 for charging 10 or 20 semis at once.Most sites are outside of municipalities and would be served by Hydro One Networks who have notoriously high rural delivery charges. In addition, the cost of "bringing in" power to these sites must be borne by the site owner (OnRoute) and cannot be spread into the rate-base (this is an OEB rule which makes sense if you think about it). In order to minimize those capital contributions toward infrastructure costs, they probably tried to minimize the amount of new electric utility infrastructure that needed to be built.
Keep in mind that a single 240 volt HPWC will have an electrical demand equivalent to about 4 homes, and a 10-stall Supercharger site usually has a 1 MW (1,000 kW) dedicated utility transformer supplying it, which is about what a 400 home subdivision (without electric cars!) would draw.
No problem. The power required to charge that many semis should be more than enough economic incentive to stretch high voltage distribution to just about anywhere.Ryan - I am not so sure that is the case.
@mknox should know as he is a retired electrical utility executive. Here is what he posted in the chademo thread about EV charging at OnRoute sites:
Now multiply that by 10 or 20 for charging 10 or 20 semis at once.
For the utility to bring that type of service to a new area. How do you think high voltage service gets anywhere? The utility builds a business case around the utilization of the assets. Where there's sufficient demand, the infrastructure will follow.Economic incentive for who? Tesla? Do we know what their pricing model will be for charging for semis? Especially go in an expensive electricty jurisdiction like Ontario. At places like highway truck stops they may have to be pulling a LOT of wire.
They'll make it underground!And then they'll have to deal with the protesters who like electricity but object to transmission lines.
For the utility to bring that type of service to a new area. How do you think high voltage service gets anywhere? The utility builds a business case around the utilization of the assets. Where there's sufficient demand, the infrastructure will follow.
Sort of... the regulator requires that any developer wanting to electrically service their building (or whatever) is required to pay upfront for it in the form of a "capital contribution" to the utility. The utility is then required to perform an economic evaluation to determine what new revenues they will realize as a result of the new load, and then will offset this contribution in the form of a rebate based on "actual" consumption a year or so later. The utility itself does not make the business case.
If someone gambles on the "build it and they will come" model, and they don't come, it could be a very expensive proposition.