A business owner might be better off putting the charger farther away, to avoid the hassles if ICEd spots.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
A business owner might be better off putting the charger farther away, to avoid the hassles if ICEd spots.
I would make it clear that non-EV vehicles will be towed at the owner's expense, and I would actively have ICE vehicles towed from those spots if they are in violation. That's how I would handle it if I owned a retail location. That would tick off those people who feel it's okay to hog an EV spot, but I don't like those kind of people anyway.
Biz model.
When charging at the Atascadero CA Supercharger/Roadster site I went for a walk looking for food away from the movie theater. There were some homeless/rough types outside the nearby fast food restaurant. Thinking about all those unattended expensive cars sitting not too far away, I can imagine that at some point there may be "protection" being offered to owners plugging in and wishing to walk away.
I provide carging for my patients for free. To make charging available for others: I calculated the average cost of electricity at full 70 amps draw and added $1 per hour for the cost of equipment, installation and maintenance.
Again, TMC members charge for free during business hours.
Again, TMC members charge for free during business hours.
Why such Leaf hating? If everywhere you parked had a charging station, then the vast majority of driving would be fine with a "range crippled EV". It takes the range from 95% of all driving to 99%.
And how is a Leaf not all much better than an ICE? It has the same EV advantages as a Tesla just not the ability to do road trips. And day to day is more efficient. Is it sexy and fast - no. Not exactly fair to compare $28k to $72k but both drive on the same fuel.
Obviously I have a Leaf. I do all my charging at home except for the free top offs in various locations. Honestly for me, charging stations are not needed since travelling over 30 miles each way is always a road trip and we take the ICE (or Tesla eventually). But for those that live in large metropolises with 50 mile destinations, ubiquitous charging would be very helpful. I would think that if you traveled 50 miles to go somewhere, that you would stay long enough to get a charge even with a ridiculously slow charger like the Leaf (sarcasm).
While you can make arguments for different battery sizes, there is no question that a smaller battery is lighter and therefore more efficient to carry around all the time. It also allows for a smaller sportier car. Carting around enough battery for 250 miles when the average trip is under 20 miles is fairly wasteful.
And how is a Leaf not all much better than an ICE? It has the same EV advantages as a Tesla just not the ability to do road trips. And day to day is more efficient. Is it sexy and fast - no. Not exactly fair to compare $28k to $72k but both drive on the same fuel.
Obviously I have a Leaf. I do all my charging at home except for the free top offs in various locations. Honestly for me, charging stations are not needed since travelling over 30 miles each way is always a road trip and we take the ICE (or Tesla eventually). But for those that live in large metropolises with 50 mile destinations, ubiquitous charging would be very helpful. I would think that if you traveled 50 miles to go somewhere, that you would stay long enough to get a charge even with a ridiculously slow charger like the Leaf (sarcasm).
While you can make arguments for different battery sizes, there is no question that a smaller battery is lighter and therefore more efficient to carry around all the time. It also allows for a smaller sportier car. Carting around enough battery for 250 miles when the average trip is under 20 miles is fairly wasteful.
I really wanted to like the Leaf and even put down a deposit, but the more I learned about it, the less enthused I became. It also didn't help that the dealers would only sell one if they were forced to. Given another 150 miles of range the Leaf could be a viable car, but as it is about 25% of my driving would have to be done in a rental ICE. The other 75% woul just be inconvenient because there is almost no place I could go without having to charge along the way.
So if you are forced to use a gas car much of the time you lose a lot of EV advantages. I really wish that wasn't so because, other than the battery issues (max 50 miles in year two) the Leaf isn't a bad car.
So if you are forced to use a gas car much of the time you lose a lot of EV advantages. I really wish that wasn't so because, other than the battery issues (max 50 miles in year two) the Leaf isn't a bad car.
Last edited:
With a Tesla - perhaps. But it's going to be some time before everyone can afford a Tesla-like-EV - short-range EVs and PHEVs will make up the majority of the plug in market for decades to come.
I don't think my driving habits are all that abnormal - I typically spend about $5/month on public charging on average with my LEAF. Typical month might be a couple hours of L2 somewhere ($1/hr) and/or a QC session or two ($5/ea). There are probably plug-in owners that never use public charging. And there are others that do it daily.
If I had a Tesla - yeah - very little public charging would be needed except on road trips - and then most of that would be done on Superchargers - though if there were L2 charging available at other stops I would probably not hesitate to plug in for 30-60 minutes on L2 just because.
There's a lot of energy in big battery packs, not to mention cost - for that reason alone it will be some time before 200+ mile EVs are readily available to the masses barring some breakthrough in battery tech.
In the meantime PHEVs and short-range EVs will be the largest part of the market - and making sure those vehicles are as useful as possible by providing useful public charging will only help accelerate the momentum of the EV market as a whole.
Right. I see similar problems holding back CNG.
$100/kWh => $3,600
$200/kWh => $7,200
The rental idea depends on the incremental costs, vehicle design, driving patterns and rental cost. I think the biggest blocker for rental is the franchise system, so I think Tesla has posibilities for Gen 4 and beyond, and that's also where the hybrid battery comes in.
As a personal example of driving pattern:
- We drive 105 miles round trip on the majority of weekends, with a stop of about 2 hours. Over 95 miles of that is 65mph highway. We'd likely have climate control on. Rental would be expensive and inconvenient.
- When flying on vacation we drive over 75 Interstate miles to link to public transportation. That's beyond range and we wouldn't rent just to drive there.
- I have a 41.4 mile round-trip commute. If/when my position becomes redundant it's very possible my commute would need to be 150 mile round trip, at least until we'd be able to relocate somewhere between our work locations. That wouldn't work in a Leaf.
The fundamental problem I think the Leaf has is that Nissan hasn't designed it for high-speed travel and as a result its efficiency and range at highway speeds is severely affected. With the cost of rental being high, that limitation means you end up with PHEV+BEV and a Catch 22 for ubiquitous charging to add to the future risk of cheaper long-range BEV or more efficient HEV and PHEV.
While I think that Nissan deserves a lot of credit for bringing the Leaf to market, it also deserves a lot of criticism for how it is treating its customers. In Arizona, the Leaf will lose up to 30% of its battery capacity within a year if operated during our peak summer where ambient temps on hot pavement can easily exceed 120ºF. The Leaf's battery pack is not thermally managed, unlike the one in the Model S. Leaf owners expecting to get a 90 mile range are getting closer to 60-70 miles here in Arizona. Nissan's response to this issue is that the battery is operating as designed and within specifications. Nissan has the nerve to tell its owners that yes, they can expect a 30% loss in battery capacity because using the battery during peak summer months in Arizona and driving high mileage can reduce capacity substantially and such loss is expected. Yet, none of those Leaf owners in Arizona were told about this limitation or were provided with a disclosure to this effect. Many Arizona Leaf owners are looking at the lawsuit option, while many have had Nissan buy the cars back under the state's lemon law.
At least in Arizona, the Nissan Leaf is kind of a joke. That does not reflect upon you as a Leaf owner, just on the car which is essentially useless here.
While the current LEAF isn't all that great for those trips, another 20-30% range or 100mi real-world range - which happens to be what I feel is really required for mass adoption of EVS - would allow it work great with sufficient public charging.
Scenario 1: Drive 52.5 miles - charge 2 hours at 30A (20-25mi/hr) and you're nearly full again for the trip home
Scenario 2: No problem with a 100mi LEAF. Even possible with current LEAF if you stop 20 min for a QC (or you can drive 30-45 mph).
Scenario 3a: No problem in current LEAF or future 100 mile EV unless you drive extremely inefficiently and/or it's extremely cold out.
Scenario 3b: Would be fine with workplace charging. With adequate QC infrastructure and workplace charging at least it's possible, though not fun. 10 min QC would be plenty to get you to work, charge all day at work, and then a 10 min QC on the way home.
It's actually not all that bad despite being a hatchback, though it could be better. Compared to the Volt, it draws about the same amount of power from 45-70 mph.
http://avt.inel.gov/pdf/fsev/fact2011nissanleaf.pdf
http://avt.inel.gov/pdf/EREV/fact2011chevroletvolt.pdf
http://avt.inel.gov/pdf/EREV/fact2013chevroletvolt.pdf
Gizmotoy
Active Member
To be fair, even the depleted 60 mile range is probably not "essentially useless" for a great many people. Obviously Nissan should be being upfront with prospective buyers (and compensating current owners), and there are certainly some subset of buyers that need those 30 lost miles to complete their commute, but I still wouldn't call the vehicle useless.
Similar threads
