and you can combine the Tesla Typ 2 with the two extra CCS pins and use all ob them at the same time.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
German bill requires CCS and L2 plugs at every new fast charge point.
- Thread starter ScepticMatt
- Start date
and you can combine the Tesla Typ 2 with the two extra CCS pins and use all ob them at the same time.
Really the requirement should be a 1.5C charge rate, rather than a kW rating.
Take the B Class Mercedes, which I honestly believed was going to be the first non Tesla car that would be able to use the network, with a 36kWh battery capacity it would struggle with a 2.5C (90kW) without hurting the batteries. If it only used a 50kWh charge it would still occupy a bay for the same length of time as a Model S.
My hunch with the Mercedes is the price points didn't work out. £2000 as an extra on a £30000 car is quite a difference to £2000 on a £50000(+, who orders one with zero options?) car.
I have a 60, and I'm not prepared to pay for Superchargers, they aren't on my normal routes yet (the nearest is 70 miles away), and I only use the car for my commute, or "in range" journeys (which in the UK is most
of them if you live in the middle of the country). This price/value equation becomes an even bigger problem for cheaper EVs
Retrofitting is going to cost me very little extra due to the taxation treatment I can apply, so I'm just going to hang fire until they become more compelling for my use, (or I trade my car in for a P85D in a couple of years time )
chickensevil
Active Member
I'm sorry, what? CA requires a non subscription based credit card option on their chargers? How is Tesla able to have their chargers then and why are they forcing a specific business model onto people? The reason Tesla can run there chargers at a cost that makes sense to them is because of the prepay... You have to hire and pay people to handle the card payments and troubleshooting and such and then you also have to pay the rather high credit card fees... This is why, among other reasons, blink and charge point are not doing so good financially speaking. If you then force thus business model on everyone you are basicjally ensuring that all of them will fail.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
CA doesn't have any law requiring a specific charge connector (so even if Tesla adds a credit card system, the other cars can't use it anyways) and I guess Tesla isn't really considered a subscription service under that law because the $2000 supercharger cost is a equipment charge, not really a subscription.
http://www.autoblog.com/2013/05/08/californias-electric-vehicle-charging-stations-open-access-act/
On paper that law does make sense though as it's frustrating to have multiple charging networks, each with their own subscription service (different from how gas stations operate, where you can just pull up and use your credit card).
However, the EU case is a special case for Tesla. If Tesla's only way around allowing other cars to charge at superchargers (enabled by mandatory CCS connector) is by changing the supercharger fee into a "subscription fee", they may run into the issue of "non-discriminatory" payment and also similar credit card system requirements.
William13
Active Member
Although this bill is stiflingly to Tesla and makes one want to cry foul, the technical solution to prevent slow charge blocking is to arrange the stall to be accessed from two sides simultaneously.
Really the requirement should be a 1.5C charge rate, rather than a kW rating.
Take the B Class Mercedes, which I honestly believed was going to be the first non Tesla car that would be able to use the network, with a 36kWh battery capacity it would struggle with a 2.5C (90kW) without hurting the batteries. If it only used a 50kWh charge it would still occupy a bay for the same length of time as a Model S.
My hunch with the Mercedes is the price points didn't work out. £2000 as an extra on a £30000 car is quite a difference to £2000 on a £50000(+, who orders one with zero options?) car.
I have a 60, and I'm not prepared to pay for Superchargers, they aren't on my normal routes yet (the nearest is 70 miles away), and I only use the car for my commute, or "in range" journeys (which in the UK is most
of them if you live in the middle of the country). This price/value equation becomes an even bigger problem for cheaper EVs
I believe there needs to be both a highway range and a charging rate requirement. In order to keep contention down it's important to keep the time spent at Superchargers down, and shorter-range BEVs would have more need to stop at a Supercharger.
Phoster
Member
Technically the chargers are in the electrical cabinets near the transformers rather than the connection points at the charging stalls, so hopefully Tesla could run cables to new charging stalls down the line such that the superchargers stalls would not be blocked. That assumes the property owner has additional parking spaces that could become charging locations (which may increase lease costs). I would recommend limiting these CCS connection points to ~24 kW to meet the minimum requirements of the law. I should think the power sharing scheme could prioritize the superchargers such that the CCS charger gets what is left over after any Tesla(s) on the same circuit start to taper off.
May be more cost effective to turn management of these CCS chargers over to a third party, such as a German equivalent to ChargePoint. Charge them for the electricity and some reasonable fee to try to recover capital investment and let them deal with payment collection, customer service, etc.
May be more cost effective to turn management of these CCS chargers over to a third party, such as a German equivalent to ChargePoint. Charge them for the electricity and some reasonable fee to try to recover capital investment and let them deal with payment collection, customer service, etc.
Johan
Ex got M3 in the divorce, waiting for EU Model Y!
Guys before we argue the different possible technical solutions let's take a wider perspective and remember that should this law pass, anywhere in the world, Tesla's best answer will be to continue building Superchargers and cars just they way they are today and take the fight to the courts. Common sense often prevails. If not they'll just keep stuff going for years in court and in the meantime so much will have changed when it comes to EV/battery technology, adoption, public opinion, business wise etc. that both the law and the issue will be moot.
chickensevil
Active Member
It won't work that way, unfortunately. Because the law will block them from getting new permits for new locations. So they can't just keep on keeping on. The network will go stake and be blocked from further growth.
RobStark
Well-Known Member
This is simple enough. By the end of 2017, you install all the Superchargers you need in 2035.
German Tesla customers and any European Tesla customers driving through will be in Supercharger Nirvana.
Tesla now has the cash to float Tesla GmbH.
While I dislike government intervention in these things, TM will still have two years to build out their SC system that is meant for long distance travel. Is the average German Tesla owner using home charging for daily commuting? I ask because I do not know.
^^^^Edit: Rob S beat me to it :wink:
Sounds like a case of good intentions versus unintentional consequenses. The proposed law is more likely to dissuade sites from installing chargers, rather than encourage infrastructure rollout.
There will be different versions of that law all over Europe, Germany will be the most onerous, others more open.
William13's solution to prevent slow charge blocking is to arrange the stall to be accessed from two sides simultaneously. is one obvious avenue
other avenues include emphasis on AC charging 22kW and above.and Superswapper.
and larger batteries
Globally the law won't progress much, together Chademo and Tesla Supercharger are just too strong, even for the Germans. So expect a level of technological Galapagos to occur for manufactures pursuing CCS Combo.
Look 5 to 10 years out, Tesla SuperCharger covers China, USA, EU and Japan.
Chademo covers EU, Japan and USA
China GBT standard covers China
Supercharger and Chademo will continue their competitive but symbiotic relationship. As will a Supercharger and China GBT
EU Combo covers EU
US Combo will cover about 200 station in USA (mostly California)
AC 22kW will continue to dominate Europe charging landscape,
AC 20kW will become important in USA.
differing electrical standards have a long term permanence about them, differing electrical plugs doesn't stop electrical factories being located anyway in the world.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
I think the intent and the result of the law is quite good. It has made CCS installations explode and grow at a rapid pace that even CHAdeMO has not seen. I have no doubt CCS will be the dominant standard going forward in the EU (and the intent of the law is exactly to establish that market certainty). The only thing that gets caught in there is special cases like Tesla's network.
The ideal situation is Tesla gets some kind of exemption. It would also be good if CCS adopts the changes Tesla made to allow for higher current charging.
As far as Audi, Porsche, BMW etc are concerned, the intent behind the law is to give Tesla special treatment.
TFF Forum - Tesla Fahrer und Freunde Handelsblatt: Bundesregierung standardisiert Ladesäulen
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
While it does give Tesla problems, I think the original target is CHAdeMO (plus Type 1 & Type 3). The original draft of the EU directive was a complete ban of other non-Type 2 standards and CHAdeMO would be the most affected (Tesla's connector at the very least is still a Type 2 variant so had at least a chance of getting away from such a ban). Right now it was changed to CCS/Type 2 minimum, but the intent of the law is still mainly to give CCS a leg up above CHAdeMO. Tesla just got caught in the cross-fire.
Respectfully disagree
the original draft of the EU directive was always incompatible with tesla' free charging business plan
the original draft always intended to eliminate current and future competition to the frankenplug
the vision behind the original directive includes control of grid effects via price adjustment of charging
On the flipside to this argument, is the shorter range BEVs will still need somewhere to charge. Locations and power supply aren't unlimited.
So when considering a planning application for a proprietary station (Tesla) who realistically are the only ones with a big enough battery to hit 90kW, or a CCS/CHAdeMO site that can serve potentially many more people, the planners will opt for the second option.
We are already starting to see this sort of tension here in the UK, and it's had negative effects on where Superchargers are located.
Tesla Motors accused of bullying to grab key car charging sites in the UK | Environment | The Guardian
An easy argument for Ecotricity to make before the judge in that case is there are relatively few Tesla's compared to the combined share of i3 + Leafs + Outlanders + Zoes, so they should be given priority for the best spots. (All new Ecotricity points being rolled out are DC only CHAdeMO/CCS, and they have all the best locations.)
As it stands now, in certain cases it can even be quicker to use a 22kW Ecotricity point as a "splash and go", rather than head into a heavily populated urban area to get to the Supercharger (or set a much longer route that includes an SC). In a perfect world I'd like the Model S to be natively CCS compatible, because the roll out is happening here at quite a pace, it just opens so many more options.
Saying that I'd love for Tesla like levels of reliability and up time on the Ecotricity charge points... but that's a different story
Last edited:
Not true. Nov 18, 2017 is the EU wide deadline. The German ordinance bill could come into effect sometime after Jan 21,
and Tesla would have 3 months after that to build superchargers in Germany.
They also have to add CCS any time they want to update existing superchargers (e.g. more stalls, power increase)
EU directive said:
BSM ev said:
Last edited:
There are several solutions for Tesla.
The one I think would be best is simply to change the supercharger plugs to combo2 plugs and make them CCS compatible. This would of course mean they have to supply CCS adapters to all cars but that also have the benefit that the MS can charge at other CCS stations.
Another alternative would be to put a fence around all new supercharger stations with a gate that can be opened by anyone with a Tesla. Don't know for sure but then I don't think it counts as publicly available anymore.
The one I think would be best is simply to change the supercharger plugs to combo2 plugs and make them CCS compatible. This would of course mean they have to supply CCS adapters to all cars but that also have the benefit that the MS can charge at other CCS stations.
Another alternative would be to put a fence around all new supercharger stations with a gate that can be opened by anyone with a Tesla. Don't know for sure but then I don't think it counts as publicly available anymore.
