Evie EV charging networks

[Anubis]

is there a usual turn around time on these projects ?

My observations is that they are at least a 6 month project, possibly even 9 months.
There is site scouting and selection.
Then approvals.
Then from ground breaking to commissioning itself can take six months. Mudgee was a good example of that.

Hopefully Evie (and the others) have already done the bulk of site selection in the lead up to the announcement.

 

[moa999]

Will definitely by interesting how much site selection and discussions with the grid operators have taken place.

 

[Candleflame]

Always seems a bit suspicious to me how Evie gets all of this funding with a history of slow/limited roll-outs... And ChargeFox has a history of deploying sites quicker with less holdups and gets less funding.

Sort of feels like a SpaceX/Boeing situation.

evies biggest problem is that they are falling in the usual Tritium pittrap. Tritium as a company is a total disgrace to EV users - they dont seem to understand what users actually need.
Noone needs this sluggish 350kw rollout which is VERY expensive to maintain and roll out. Too much electricity and it doesnt make that much difference to charging speeds.
They should have build 100kw chargers or 75kw chargers from the start which are much easier to set up.

instead Tritium built a 50kw charger first followed by a 350kw charger. Yes, great futureproof concept. A 50kw charger which is too fast to be a slow charger and to slow to be a fast charger and a 350kw charger which no EV will be able to use for a long time and which is essentially impossible to be deployed in semirural australia and very expensive and labourintensive to be deployed everywhere else. Just weak for an australian company.

Evie should have been deploying 75kw chargers from the start with an accelerated rollout and then later fill their sites with 350kw chargers etc.

 

[technerdx6000]

evies biggest problem is that they are falling in the usual Tritium pittrap. Tritium as a company is a total disgrace to EV users - they dont seem to understand what users actually need.
Noone needs this sluggish 350kw rollout which is VERY expensive to maintain and roll out. Too much electricity and it doesnt make that much difference to charging speeds.
They should have build 100kw chargers or 75kw chargers from the start which are much easier to set up.

instead Tritium built a 50kw charger first followed by a 350kw charger. Yes, great futureproof concept. A 50kw charger which is too fast to be a slow charger and to slow to be a fast charger and a 350kw charger which no EV will be able to use for a long time and which is essentially impossible to be deployed in semirural australia and very expensive and labourintensive to be deployed everywhere else. Just weak for an australian company.

Evie should have been deploying 75kw chargers from the start with an accelerated rollout and then later fill their sites with 350kw chargers etc.

Tritium has a 175kW charger now too. This what Chargefox and Evie should be rolling out.

It should go

50kW for shops/shopping centre in the cities
75kW for low travelled regional areas where power is scarce
175kW for highly travelled highways.

This way you are (basically) maxing out all current EVs and 175kW is nothing to sneeze at anyway, you get two stalls on the highway for the same amount of power (compared to 350kW).

Evie was up in Townsville recently to fix the Cluden charger which has been down for 3 months and I told the guys to install the 175kW tritiums in new locations instead of the 350kW.

 

[moa999]

Don't think Tritium is much different to the other global players. ABBs big seller is the 50kW unit, and they also do a 350kW unit

Indeed Chargefox used ABB for its early 350kW units, before switching to Tritium

 

[Chuq]

For most EVs, the benefit of a 350 kW charger over a 175 kW charger is negligible. It might be different for Teslas, but I think even the M3 SR+ maxes out at 170 kW. I've also been told it's about the point where water cooled cables are needed, introducing more points of failure/reliability drop.

I'm really hoping Evie's sites are RTM-175 units with power sharing between two connectors. Their RTM-75 units wouldn't be powerful enough to meet the grant requirements (two cars at 50 kW simultaneously) and the 175 is the next level up. The only downside is that it can't charge two CCS2 cars at once but that still falls within the grant requirement. And even if a Leaf is charging that still leaves 125 kW of capacity.

Of course it's also a possibility that they install RTM-175 units at a lower combined capacity.

 

[cafz]

For most EVs, the benefit of a 350 kW charger over a 175 kW charger is negligible. It might be different for Teslas, but I think even the M3 SR+ maxes out at 170 kW.

The RTM175 is only 350A though, so in practice it will max out at ~125kW on a Model 3.

 

[technerdx6000]

The RTM175 is only 350A though, so in practice it will max out at ~125kW on a Model 3.

Ahhh, I didn't know that. Still is a good trade-off in my opinion. Apparently sites for the 350kW chargers are really hard to find. Anything over 100kW is still very fast. Still, is a bit misleading to call them 350/175kW chargers by Tritium when most EVs have 400V battery packs.

125kW is ~3%/min for a Model 3 LR

 

[cafz]

Apparently sites for the 350kW chargers are really hard to find.

Chargefox has deployed the 350's at sites with undersized feeders by deploying them alongside a large battery, which as well as allowing for a faster charging rate, also flattens out the network demand a bit, making them cheaper to operate.

 

[Hairyman]

Chargefox has deployed the 350's at sites with undersized feeders by deploying them alongside a large battery, which as well as allowing for a faster charging rate, also flattens out the network demand a bit, making them cheaper to operate.

It was a pretty smart solution

 

[Candleflame]

For most EVs, the benefit of a 350 kW charger over a 175 kW charger is negligible. It might be different for Teslas, but I think even the M3 SR+ maxes out at 170 kW. I've also been told it's about the point where water cooled cables are needed, introducing more points of failure/reliability drop.

I'm really hoping Evie's sites are RTM-175 units with power sharing between two connectors. Their RTM-75 units wouldn't be powerful enough to meet the grant requirements (two cars at 50 kW simultaneously) and the 175 is the next level up. The only downside is that it can't charge two CCS2 cars at once but that still falls within the grant requirement. And even if a Leaf is charging that still leaves 125 kW of capacity.

Of course it's also a possibility that they install RTM-175 units at a lower combined capacity.

Even the benefit of i.e. a 125kw charger over a 75kw charger is largely neglible. however, the benefit of increasing charging rates from 50kw to 75kw is huge.

 

[Candleflame]

Evie was up in Townsville recently to fix the Cluden charger which has been down for 3 months and I told the guys to install the 175kW tritiums in new locations instead of the 350kW.

i would hope so. This may actually mean we will get the gordonvale or prosperine charger one day. Evie has posponed the proserpine charger twice now by a year - it is evident that they have no clue how to get 350kw x 2 power to rural australia.

 

[RareEarth]

Even the benefit of i.e. a 125kw charger over a 75kw charger is largely neglible.

With the advent of new EVs like the Ioniq 5 which seems to have a fairly flat charging curve, 125kW chargers will be the minimum required on long haul routes. Manufacturers will be going all out to reduce the gap between EV charge and ICE refuel times. This will require higher powered chargers.

 

[technerdx6000]

Even the benefit of i.e. a 125kw charger over a 75kw charger is largely neglible. however, the benefit of increasing charging rates from 50kw to 75kw is huge.

I disagree. My Model 3 can charge at rates over 100kW all the way up to 60%. The difference in time is about 40% greater at a 75kW charger compared to 125kW while maxing out the charge rate.

So for 10-60%
50kW* charger is about 60 mins
75kW* charger is about 31 mins
125kW* charger is about 18 mins

*From my experience from existing tritium chargers, the nameplate charge rate is never achieved due to battery heating, A/C and other power draws. This is why the 50kW chargers are more like 35kW chargers and I'm betting the 75kW charger will be more like a 65kW charger and the 125kW charger will be more like a 115kW charger.

it is evident that they have no clue how to get 350kw x 2 power to rural australia.

I spoke to the Evie reps about this. Power isn't an issue apparently as they pay for transformer upgrades required to deliver it. The issue is they cannot find any sites willing to work with them. So, what I am going to do and my suggestion others do in regional QLD is start calling locations and persuade them to work with Evie/Chargefox.

 

[Candleflame]

I disagree. My Model 3 can charge at rates over 100kW all the way up to 60%. The difference in time is about 40% greater at a 75kW charger compared to 125kW while maxing out the charge rate.

So for 10-60%
50kW* charger is about 60 mins
75kW* charger is about 31 mins
125kW* charger is about 18 mins

*From my experience from existing tritium chargers, the nameplate charge rate is never achieved due to battery heating, A/C and other power draws. This is why the 50kW chargers are more like 35kW chargers and I'm betting the 75kW charger will be more like a 65kW charger and the 125kW charger will be more like a 115kW charger.



I spoke to the Evie reps about this. Power isn't an issue apparently as they pay for transformer upgrades required to deliver it. The issue is they cannot find any sites willing to work with them. So, what I am going to do and my suggestion others do in regional QLD is start calling locations and persuade them to work with Evie/Chargefox.

power is absoloutely an issue as evident by the townsville disaster.

 

[aegidius]

This is why the 50kW chargers are more like 35kW chargers

A 15kW deficit is pretty bad. I usually get 46-47kW on a 50, and 115-117 on a supercharger, when I first plug in (before any battery taper) so the deficit is probably just calibration noise. The AC is not running because the car is locked while I go elsewhere.

 

[OzVic]

A 15kW deficit is pretty bad. I usually get 46-47kW on a 50, and 115-117 on a supercharger, when I first plug in (before any battery taper) so the deficit is probably just calibration noise. The AC is not running because the car is locked while I go elsewhere.

I have ODB adapter and can see what it's doing mostly.

With my P- (LR), it's 350V * 125A = 44kw. As it charges the V goes up, going near 400V at 100%, so might see higher kw for a short time.

Although, in this cold winter, the cell temperatures can start off anywhere between 15 degrees to 22 degrees. It uses 6kw to heat up the front and rear stators to then pump that heat around to heat up the batteries to 52 degrees C. Depending on starting temperature, this can take up to 30 minutes!

If sitting in car and have AC on, there's another 2kw, or more if heating.

Now and again it will cool or heat the batteries for a couple of minutes if they're going in the wrong direction (using 6kw for short time).

 

[technerdx6000]

A 15kW deficit is pretty bad.

Yeah, and also a significant percentage of 50kW. I haven't seen over 40kW since last year on a 50kW charger. 40kW is usually the max nowadays, however while the battery is heating it often sits around 33kW. Not sure if this is due to Tesla software updates, Tritium updates or power supply issues.

My car has no issues maxing out a supercharger or receiving 190kW on a 350kW charger.

I have ODB adapter and can see what it's doing mostly.

Me too, I can see the max battery power hardly ever goes above -39.5kW (when charging) and this is when there is barely any power draw from other components.


Teslas should be smart enough to not heat the battery if the charge rate is maxing out at some value <50kW. Else, determine the maximum charge rate of the charger. Battery heating should not be required for <1C charge rates, unless of course the battery temp is less than freezing.

 

[technerdx6000]

power is absoloutely an issue as evident by the townsville disaster.

While possible, this doesn't explain how Evie is able to install chargers in tiny towns like Tarcutta, NSW. Also how Tesla plans superchargers in Childers, QLD.

 

[moa999]

Yeah, and also a significant percentage of 50kW. I haven't seen over 40kW since last year on a 50kW charger.

You've got to be low SOC and with a hot battery to hit the high numbers.

I suspect also many single 50kW sites are actually just running off a couple of 3-phase 32A feeds, which means they probably practically top out at 44kW.

Power will depend site by site.
Some places will have excess that can be tapped.
In others the operator might be up for big $$s in upgrades

Even within cities power can be tough. I know of a commercial laundry a few years ago who tried multiple factory sites in the inner west of Sydbey continually being limited in what they could draw.