There are so many 100-250 mile sweet spot destinations that people would call their "longer trips". Putting together the longer range BEVs which are coming, with the consideration that these mileages represent pre-taper charging just to get those last ~50 miles, I think the DCFC on the Pike and maybe a few other places will work. It will make cars like the Chevy Bolt, or even ~140+ miles BEVs, long distance vehicles.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Mass Pike getting new EV charging stations
- Thread starter ModelNforNerd
- Start date
There are so many 100-250 mile sweet spot destinations that people would call their "longer trips". Putting together the longer range BEVs which are coming, with the consideration that these mileages represent pre-taper charging just to get those last ~50 miles, I think the DCFC on the Pike and maybe a few other places will work. It will make cars like the Chevy Bolt, or even ~140+ miles BEVs, long distance vehicles.
It will take about 45 minutes to get enough range to drive about 2 hours, which is pretty poor IMHO. My concern is that it will just exacerbate the public's feeling that BEV's aren't practical vehicles.
Parents with children probably won't be very pleased to be hanging around a highway service station for 45 minutes.
Parents with children probably won't be very pleased to be hanging around a highway service station for 45 minutes.
This rollout appears aimed at "the other guys". Let someone in a Volt or a Leaf worry about the charging times at these places. If done right, a Tesla shouldn't need these chargers at all, between home charging, destination charging, and existing Superchargers in MA already.
While I hope that @3mp_kwh's optimistic view works out, I fear that @RDoc's points are more likely to predominate. I think the public continues to have a strong impression of EVs-as-weirdmobiles, and the conversations around lower-range EVs and their battery issues are painful.
I personally tend to recommend the Chevy Volt for people who are (a) "ordinary" car users, e.g., parents with kids and (b) can't afford the much more sensible Tesla option, at least in terms of initial capital outlay versus a TCO-lifetime analysis. The reason I recommend the Volt is because you basically don't have to think about it at all if you are used to filling up a car with gasoline. Hopefully, you also remember to plug the thing in but, if you don't, no real worries. Drive it wherever you want to, like the pure-ICE you are replacing.
I like that the Leaf and the other EVs exist, and I deeply respect the people who buy them, as they are almost always making such purchases driven by their commitment to carbon dioxide emissions reductions and/or other environmental considerations. These people are analyzing their commuting pattern, figuring out how to make their EV work for them. They are also making smart decisions about cost.
But trying to educate an "ordinary" person about the real range of these EVs, and winter battery degradation due to temperature (yes, also an issue for a Tesla, but not nearly to the same extent), and charging times, and long-distance limitations... So painful.
Every time I stop at a Supercharger in a public area, and I notice someone looking at the car, and I call them over and put them in the passenger or driver's seat, and talk to them about the car, and answer their questions... Nearly every time I wind up thinking that my victim has walked away thinking that one day they might buy a Model 3. Or even an S or X. Not a single time have I ever picked up the "this thing looks weird" vibe, or even the "can't go far in this thing" vibe (instead, it's the "free long distance travel!" vibe).
Finally, I have come to think that the main thing driving Massachusetts' EV behavior from a state government perspective is "optics". And the MA environmental community as a whole seems somewhat unfriendly towards Tesla. They are always worried that the car is expensive. That the owners have too much money. That it "looks bad" to support Tesla owners. I've heard environmental group representatives worry that there is not enough focus on assisting the poorest people with EV purchases, and that even the middle class should be driving Leafs instead of Teslas. No matter how much I explain that a Tesla can be a complete replacement for an ordinary ICE vehicle, these representatives and environmental groups seem to miss the point that the "lesser" EVs have severe range restrictions and those middle-class people who can afford one almost always have a second car "for other things". And so the Pike can't be seen to be supporting a charging solution for rich Tesla owners but instead must support charging options for vehicles that will be painful to use along the Pike. Yes, some EV owners will benefit from these chargers, and for that I'm glad. But it's hard on an owner to stop every 50 miles, and not at all attractive to an "ordinary" person, and so these chargers perpetuate a paradigm of seeming EV near-uselessness.
From the standpoint of the "ordinary" person, one kind of charger promotes the view that a weird-mobile can only go 50 miles between charges while the other kind of charger (Supercharger) promotes an aspirational view of a cool, high-performance car that almost every "ordinary" person would like to be able to acquire.
But I rant. Sorry.
Alan
I personally tend to recommend the Chevy Volt for people who are (a) "ordinary" car users, e.g., parents with kids and (b) can't afford the much more sensible Tesla option, at least in terms of initial capital outlay versus a TCO-lifetime analysis. The reason I recommend the Volt is because you basically don't have to think about it at all if you are used to filling up a car with gasoline. Hopefully, you also remember to plug the thing in but, if you don't, no real worries. Drive it wherever you want to, like the pure-ICE you are replacing.
I like that the Leaf and the other EVs exist, and I deeply respect the people who buy them, as they are almost always making such purchases driven by their commitment to carbon dioxide emissions reductions and/or other environmental considerations. These people are analyzing their commuting pattern, figuring out how to make their EV work for them. They are also making smart decisions about cost.
But trying to educate an "ordinary" person about the real range of these EVs, and winter battery degradation due to temperature (yes, also an issue for a Tesla, but not nearly to the same extent), and charging times, and long-distance limitations... So painful.
Every time I stop at a Supercharger in a public area, and I notice someone looking at the car, and I call them over and put them in the passenger or driver's seat, and talk to them about the car, and answer their questions... Nearly every time I wind up thinking that my victim has walked away thinking that one day they might buy a Model 3. Or even an S or X. Not a single time have I ever picked up the "this thing looks weird" vibe, or even the "can't go far in this thing" vibe (instead, it's the "free long distance travel!" vibe).
Finally, I have come to think that the main thing driving Massachusetts' EV behavior from a state government perspective is "optics". And the MA environmental community as a whole seems somewhat unfriendly towards Tesla. They are always worried that the car is expensive. That the owners have too much money. That it "looks bad" to support Tesla owners. I've heard environmental group representatives worry that there is not enough focus on assisting the poorest people with EV purchases, and that even the middle class should be driving Leafs instead of Teslas. No matter how much I explain that a Tesla can be a complete replacement for an ordinary ICE vehicle, these representatives and environmental groups seem to miss the point that the "lesser" EVs have severe range restrictions and those middle-class people who can afford one almost always have a second car "for other things". And so the Pike can't be seen to be supporting a charging solution for rich Tesla owners but instead must support charging options for vehicles that will be painful to use along the Pike. Yes, some EV owners will benefit from these chargers, and for that I'm glad. But it's hard on an owner to stop every 50 miles, and not at all attractive to an "ordinary" person, and so these chargers perpetuate a paradigm of seeming EV near-uselessness.
From the standpoint of the "ordinary" person, one kind of charger promotes the view that a weird-mobile can only go 50 miles between charges while the other kind of charger (Supercharger) promotes an aspirational view of a cool, high-performance car that almost every "ordinary" person would like to be able to acquire.
But I rant. Sorry.
Alan
Nikxice
Active Member
A worthy rant! It's unfortunate that MA has kept Tesla off the Mass Pike versus little or no resistance when contracting with large companies such as Gulf or McDonald's. Contrast the Pike with the I-93 Hooksett N & S Rest Areas. To the best of my knowledge Tesla's proposal didn't experience any controversy. There wasn't a government agenda or a few environmental group members put off by Tesla. Just a straightforward review and approval of a 30 year contract. Probably recognized for what it is, a win for everyone. Today these two charging stations are models of what any ordinary Joe would expect to see on a family trip. Convenient and efficient EV charging, along with ample facilities. There's the added bonus of EV promotion. Weekdays alone, hundreds of travelers take notice of these Superchargers. Visitors inside the facilities might watch the NH state promotional video loop, where it's pointed out on the big screen, 'Free Tesla Vehicle Charging'. So a nice little public service commercial for Tesla (we all know they're not paying for it!) plays every minute or two. Over the next few years plenty of Model ≡ owners with MA plates will be utilizing Hooksett, maybe some attitudes will eventually change on the Pike?
Great idea offering curious bystanders a seat to watch how fast the miles roll up. Having witnessed one of your generous spontaneous test drives, there's a unique satisfaction eroding the concept of EVs as weirdmobiles. If I recall the story correctly, EV advocacy doesn't get much bolder than your experience in Leominster MA!
Great idea offering curious bystanders a seat to watch how fast the miles roll up. Having witnessed one of your generous spontaneous test drives, there's a unique satisfaction eroding the concept of EVs as weirdmobiles. If I recall the story correctly, EV advocacy doesn't get much bolder than your experience in Leominster MA!
I live less than 20 minutes from the Rt 2 rest stop in Leominster. That would be a great spot for a Supercharger, especially in the fall, when Mass is trying to promote "leaf peeping" along the Mohawk Trail.
And if I did ever use that SC (when I get my Model 3), I'd be sure to "be an ambassador", especially for using a SC so close to home.
And if I did ever use that SC (when I get my Model 3), I'd be sure to "be an ambassador", especially for using a SC so close to home.
Alan,
Don Pettey at MassDOT told me when I spoke with him recently that there were discussions between Tesla and Mass. DOT about putting Superchargers along the Turnpike at one time. It is my understanding that Tesla can rent space at the Travel Plazas if they wish. Is it possible to have Superchargers, and CHAdeMO/CCS at the Plazas?
Huh. You said something that I wasn't smart enough to be doing but you're right it's an interesting thought: have the passenger watch how fast the miles roll up when charging. I'm normally pointing the passenger's attention to all the options, the two screens, the interior. If the charging is near completion, I try to persuade them to take a little ride with me... Helps if I don't have any blood dripping down off my fangs that day.
As for Leominster... outside the Buffalo Wild Wings... with three 20-somethings fresh from the bar/restaurant late at night... one random 60-something drunk off his ass... around 11 at night... sticking the kids behind the wheel of a fully optioned P85+... what could go wrong?!
But definitely a long game to turn that crowd into future Tesla customers.
As for Leominster... outside the Buffalo Wild Wings... with three 20-somethings fresh from the bar/restaurant late at night... one random 60-something drunk off his ass... around 11 at night... sticking the kids behind the wheel of a fully optioned P85+... what could go wrong?!
But definitely a long game to turn that crowd into future Tesla customers. I dunno if Tesla will have anything along Route 2 anytime soon. I'm not sure a lot of Tesla-type people commute along that road. I've spent a lot of time and a lot of trips roaring up and down that road between Greenfield at one end and Boston at the other. A lovely, scenic area that really struggles with poverty, drugs, alcohol, and a greatly diminished economic base. What I've found is that my P85+ has plenty of range for making a full round-trip between my old home at the intersection of I-95 and I-90 and, say, Orange. With some additional charging along the way or on the way back, Greenfield is certainly feasible. I became great friends with the NRG/Chargepoint charger located at a Chili's a little bit east of Leominster. Ironically, if you are going out Route 2 and heading north or south at the intersection with I-91 (Greenfield), your trip may actually become easier because there are Superchargers located in both directions on I-91.
Not that a Supercharger located around, say, Leominster, wouldn't be most welcome! But I've spent enough time around Orange, Athol and Gardner to know that I probably wouldn't enjoy spending time there while I was charging, which may make those areas tough propositions for Tesla as Supercharger locations.
That said, compared to when I shivered at 50 mph with the heat off in the right hand lane while taking my family from Boston to DC for Thanksgiving, 2013, hoping against hope to make it to the Darien, CT SC, it's a whole new and wonderful ballgame today. A $35K Tesla that can travel throughout most of the US is gonna be hard to beat by any other EV; can't believe that GM thinks they can price a Bolt at or slightly above an entry-level Model 3.
Alan
Hi, @Lanny,
Everything you just said is news to me. If there are discussions, that's great! If there were discussions... well, maybe they died do to the whole "optics" <sarcasm on>problem<sarcasm off>.
It is certainly possible to locate Superchargers and other types of chargers nearby, or even really close together. There are examples of this at other SCs. For all I know, Tesla is even required to supply some of these other types of chargers as a condition of leasing the space.
But for CHAdeMO/CCS, not to mention the issue of getting any of those solutions to even come close to matching the speed of an SC, much less going *beyond* that, as Tesla surely plans to do... well, there's a huge chicken-and-egg problem. In fact, that problem exists even with the L3/L2 Chargepoint/Blink/whatever chargers. Nobody wants to make the investment because it's hard to figure out how to recoup the investment. Chargepoint/Blink/whatever hope to make money by charging for the charges, but guess what, there aren't a ton own EVs out there commuting busily along highways and byways. It's only in the cities that any of these chargers really get used, because the EVs that use them simply aren't sufficiently capable to take out of a small radius. So the cross-country expansion of third-party charging networks seems to be heavily limited by lack of EVs that can get to them. The EVs that *can* get to them are... well... Teslas. And the Tesla owner is very grateful to have an L2/L3/whatever charger as a backup plan, but would much, much prefer to go to a Tesla Supercharger rather than spending the rest of his lifetime waiting for a puny charger to fill his battery. When the Bolt rolls out, if GM wants its Bolt customers to be able to travel cross-country, they're either going to have to do a deal with Tesla or build their own charging network. OR.... wait for it.... everybody then does a chorus of, "the government should build it for us! it's the government's fault!" A position that the builders of credit-seeking compliance cars is all too happy to fall back on.
But in my mind, Tesla is a hell of a powerful example that private industry can take on the whole charging problem by itself.
The whole "optics" discussion is so self-defeating. It leads to poor use of public money. I'd much rather subsidize a middle- or lower-class person buying a Tesla than buying a Leaf. I'd be a big advocate for means-tested incentives. Let's not have the environmental politerati dictate which EVs get more of an investment boost. Let's instead acknowledge some deep-rooted, Massachusetts-ish progressive values, and focus our assistance on those who are least able to make the jump into EVs. Then, if people want to take their incentive dollars and spend them on some Fiat EV disaster, by all means, off they go and good luck to them. If they want to stretch for a Model S, then dammit, let's help them.
And let the MassPike open up to whatever charging networks want to come in and pay for space, optics be damned.
Alan
I've been keeping an eye on it. I can easily get to either Greenwich or Darien southbound, even in winter. but yes...having Auburn and or W. Hartford along the way as fail-backs is nice peace of mind.
Alan, Consider what RDoc said: "It will take about 45 minutes to get enough range to drive about 2 hours, which is pretty poor IMHO."
People don't start out empty. A better way of putting what 50kw DCFC represents on the Pike might have been:
"It will take about 45 minutes to get enough range to drive about 4 hours", which is reasonable and comes with an assumption that a person travels maybe ~350 miles, to recreate.
Um, 50kw * 0.75h = 37.5kwh * 3.3mpkwh = ~112 miles. At the pike speedlimit, that adds about 2 hours. I don't think people will add in that they drove 2 hours already. With that logic, some gas cars have a range of 1000 miles, if you leave with a full tank, and stop to fill it up once. I think you have been mezmorized by 'Elon math'. Most people I know become distrustful pretty quick when they encounter creative interpretations of simple math.
At the Pike speed limit, sure, that may add 2 hours, but we all know the practical speed on the Pike anywhere west of 128 in Weston is closer to 80mph, so it's going to be a little less than 2 hours. LOL
In my use case scenarios, I should never need to stop on the Pike if I'm leaving my home and going on a trip.
If I'm returning from somewhere, the Pike would still only be a last resort, as I would easily be in Supercharger range.
If I'm returning from somewhere, the Pike would still only be a last resort, as I would easily be in Supercharger range.
I think you'd have to be an idiot to start a trip in an empty EV. Safe assumption? That was my main point, and what waiting "45 minutes to get enough range to drive about 2 hours" seems to pre-suppose. That's wrong. With common sense, you'd start out driving >2 hours before beginning the 45 minute wait, that would then apply to your 3rd and/or maybe 4th hour of driving. Don't need enough for a 4 hour trip? Then, you aren't even looking at 45 minutes.
I think 200 mile cars can work w/50kw DCFC. Part of that belief is trusting people won't leave empty.
FWIW, I used a 'Greenlots' DCFC in central NY, yesterday, that failed. I pulled into Albany with 9 miles left. Since NYS is using the same hardware (Signet/Thruway), I hope the greater problem in all of this isn't simply EVSE reliability. Comments on PlugShare are pretty mixed on these things.
I agree on the not starting empty. One of the great things about charging at home is you don't have to start your trip with the same 'fuel' level that you got home with the night before. I guess my comment was on your simplified choice of wording:
I would be worried about the easily misunderstood meaning of your statement. As an EV driver, it is obvious that you would start with full, but all ICE car ranges are presented as 1 full tank of gas. Honestly I'm a bit ashamed at how Tesla presents the cost of its cars. They should just present the numbers as they are, mention any federal or state rebates that might apply, and mention that the fuel cost is less, you can often charge at home or work, and you never have to go to a gas station, or get an oil change (though modern gas cars have an oil change interval almost the same as Telsa's 'yearly service'.) Tesla shops are pleasant, and I like the people that work there, so it's not a huge deal - but my Tesla has required WAY more maintenance than any ICE car I've ever owned. I bought the car because I believe in the mission, and it's a great car -- not because it was affordable, or required less service (because - actually, both of those are false for me).
Didn't mean to go off on a tangent.
[EDIT: Fixed some grammer]
Hey, folks, sorry I'm not able to keep current with the threads right now. Too much going on at home. That said,
@3mp_kwh - I think I have to stop myself for a moment. One problem for me is that it's too easy for me to fall into a mode of thinking I might know the answer and therefore let's rule out all the other possibilities. There are times and places to make decisions. There are other times to step back, admit I don't know, and then turn to other ways to solve the problem. I think EV charging fits the "don't know" pattern. I don't know how battery technology and charging curves are most likely to play out; I don't know enough about consumer buying patterns; I don't know how other automobile companies might finally respond; etc. What I *really* want to do is open up the playing field as much as possible for (1) capitalism to fully engage and (2) to allow public-sector responses as well. Capitalism is my friend.(*) It will drive many different solutions than I would ever think of by myself. Musk didn't start a charity or an NGO or a c3 nonprofit; he started a business. And for that business, the absolute right answer was to take ownership of the end-to-end charging problem and build out their own charging network **with great urgency** and funded out of their own cash flow.
And, yes, I should want to encourage public sector initiatives, because I *don't* know how they're going to play out. Maybe what starts out as a Weirdmobile Enablement Network (I'm deliberately trying to phrase this in the most negative light) ultimately morphs into a valuable resource for a broad variety of cars down the line.
I am reminded how upset I was with the MOR-EV crowd last fall and winter over the whole MA state rebate for Tesla kerfuffle. Probably the greatest problem I had with their approach was that they refused to honestly acknowledge their bias against Tesla based on the price of its vehicles. To pin the blame on "optics" is to evade responsibility. It was a public-sector initiative to encourage private-sector responses that took a left turn (and I am conscious of the entendre) when confronted with the success of a more expensive EV solution. Far, far better to have acknowledged a desire for a progressive solution -- one that took the buyer's income into account when deciding how much rebate to provide(**) -- while refusing to dictate price levels (and hence vendors) for the delivered vehicles. I advocated for enabling more capitalism, with a public-sector incentive, rather than trying to figure out which vendor or price level should be "optically correct".
So I should do the same here, with charging, too.
Alan
(*)Capitalism doesn't exist in a vacuum. The rules we set up for it matter a great deal. For instance, the issue of unpriced externalities such as carbon emissions.
(**)The MOR-EV response was, essentially, "it's too hard to figure out the buyer's income, we'd need access to their tax data, and we're not part of the Department of Revenue". To which I would respond, "OMG! So go figure out how to solve this problem!".
@3mp_kwh - I think I have to stop myself for a moment. One problem for me is that it's too easy for me to fall into a mode of thinking I might know the answer and therefore let's rule out all the other possibilities. There are times and places to make decisions. There are other times to step back, admit I don't know, and then turn to other ways to solve the problem. I think EV charging fits the "don't know" pattern. I don't know how battery technology and charging curves are most likely to play out; I don't know enough about consumer buying patterns; I don't know how other automobile companies might finally respond; etc. What I *really* want to do is open up the playing field as much as possible for (1) capitalism to fully engage and (2) to allow public-sector responses as well. Capitalism is my friend.(*) It will drive many different solutions than I would ever think of by myself. Musk didn't start a charity or an NGO or a c3 nonprofit; he started a business. And for that business, the absolute right answer was to take ownership of the end-to-end charging problem and build out their own charging network **with great urgency** and funded out of their own cash flow.
And, yes, I should want to encourage public sector initiatives, because I *don't* know how they're going to play out. Maybe what starts out as a Weirdmobile Enablement Network (I'm deliberately trying to phrase this in the most negative light) ultimately morphs into a valuable resource for a broad variety of cars down the line.
I am reminded how upset I was with the MOR-EV crowd last fall and winter over the whole MA state rebate for Tesla kerfuffle. Probably the greatest problem I had with their approach was that they refused to honestly acknowledge their bias against Tesla based on the price of its vehicles. To pin the blame on "optics" is to evade responsibility. It was a public-sector initiative to encourage private-sector responses that took a left turn (and I am conscious of the entendre) when confronted with the success of a more expensive EV solution. Far, far better to have acknowledged a desire for a progressive solution -- one that took the buyer's income into account when deciding how much rebate to provide(**) -- while refusing to dictate price levels (and hence vendors) for the delivered vehicles. I advocated for enabling more capitalism, with a public-sector incentive, rather than trying to figure out which vendor or price level should be "optically correct".
So I should do the same here, with charging, too.
Alan
(*)Capitalism doesn't exist in a vacuum. The rules we set up for it matter a great deal. For instance, the issue of unpriced externalities such as carbon emissions.
(**)The MOR-EV response was, essentially, "it's too hard to figure out the buyer's income, we'd need access to their tax data, and we're not part of the Department of Revenue". To which I would respond, "OMG! So go figure out how to solve this problem!".
Similar threads
- Article
