SAE vs CHAdeMO

[stopcrazypp]

Nissan provided funds for many of the USA's dual standard stations that are not in California. Obviously they are capable of accepting CCS, but until a CCS company coughs up 'matching' money, they don't get the the CCS side activated.

perhaps its all rumor, feel free to ignore it. What happens to the money that comes when the CCS side is enabled? I don't know, but its highly likely that one-way or another, its funneled back in installing more dual standard DC chargers.

Physically Tesla users can readily access these using Tesla's Chademo adapter? but do Tesla drivers want the hassle of subscription based, just in case DC chargers?

AFAIK Nissan donated the stand-lone CHAdeMO units, they did not have any involvement with the dual standard units you have pictured. In that case, all that will happen is the CCS side is activated, and then evgo pockets the money is a "CCS" side donates (or evgo activates themselves). If all Nissan paid is a half of the cost of installation, EVgo presumably paid the other half and would be reimbursed for it.

What Nissan donated is the CHAdeMO charger on the left in this picture here. The ABB CCS unit on the right is what evgo is recently installing.

Here's a Nissan branded unit for reference. You will see it is identical to the unit on the right in the picture above.

 

[renim]

“The only reason someone would still request a CHAdeMO-only fast charger is if they’ve only been able to secure funding for the CHAdeMO portion of a project,” explained Anderson. “We’ve had a couple folks buy the chargers with CHAdeMO only, then work to try to get financing for the SAE Combo side as well. And when that happens, they can upgrade the unit even if it’s already installed. We can go onsite and update the power cabinet with some more components inside and the second connector.”

Charged EVs | Gaining traction at last: Efacec instals over 600 DC fast chargers worldwide

 

[Cosmacelf]

BMW pushing 50 kW CCS Combo 1 is a real waste of money and shows just how short sighted these companies are in relation to Tesla. EVgo is having monetary problems as it stands, so of course, doing more of the same makes sense. < 100 kW DC charging is a complete waste of money that is better spent on J1772 destination charging at 40 amps+ and 100+ kW DC charging.

Actually, I've used 50 kW Chademo several times with my Model S and have found it very useful indeed. Recently I only charged 20 minutes, which gave me 45 extra miles which is all I needed to complete the trip.

More chargers at any power level are welcome. And I trust Tesla to eventually create a CCS adapter should the network actually get built out.

 

[stopcrazypp]

“The only reason someone would still request a CHAdeMO-only fast charger is if they’ve only been able to secure funding for the CHAdeMO portion of a project,” explained Anderson. “We’ve had a couple folks buy the chargers with CHAdeMO only, then work to try to get financing for the SAE Combo side as well. And when that happens, they can upgrade the unit even if it’s already installed. We can go onsite and update the power cabinet with some more components inside and the second connector.”

Charged EVs | Gaining traction at last: Efacec instals over 600 DC fast chargers worldwide

That says nothing about Nissan paying for half or the requirement that another whole charger has to be installed with the CCS funding. In fact it doesn't seem to have anything to do with the evgo network.

What I am reading is exactly what I expected. Someone may only be able to afford the CHAdeMO half at first, so they install it first and then pay to add CCS later. In the end you end up with a single charger that can do either CHAdeMO or CCS.

I'm not seeing how there is any scenario where you start out with a CHAdeMO charger (that can be dual standard) and end up with 2 CHAdeMO and 2 CCS as you suggest.

 

[techmaven]

Actually, I've used 50 kW Chademo several times with my Model S and have found it very useful indeed. Recently I only charged 20 minutes, which gave me 45 extra miles which is all I needed to complete the trip.

More chargers at any power level are welcome. And I trust Tesla to eventually create a CCS adapter should the network actually get built out.

Of course, when you need to charge, the faster the charge, the better. The problem is that 50 kW dual EVSE's are extremely expensive... Roughly 10x the cost of high amperage J1772. They are too slow for truly supporting long distance travel and their great expense means that usually only 1 plug is installed at a location. This leads to unsustainable business dynamics and it is extraordinarily expensive to support a large number of EVs, especially as battery sizes increase. So if you care about widespread EV adoption, 50 kW DC charging is setting us back wasting large amounts of capital.

 

[Cosmacelf]

No, you can't say 10 J1772 chargers is equivalent to one 50 kW fast charger. On long distance trips, I cannot use any J1772 chargers, they are too slow, but I can make use of a 50 kW charger. They are used for different purposes. In fact, I would say the J1772 chargers are the waste of money since people can get a slow charge at home or work.

 

[miimura]

That nonsense with the NRG charger that only has a CHAdeMO "hose" doesn't happen in California because the settlement between NRG and the state requires all sites to have both SAE Combo and CHAdeMO. NRG has also not been installing the SAE-Combo only ABB charger pictured up-thread, except the very first ones. The only sites I saw that had them was the San Diego area location pictured and Nob Hill Foods Mountain View. Over time, the Mountain View site has gone from Nissan + ABB 53C (SAE-only) to Nissan + ABB 53CJ (Dual CHAdeMO/SAE Combo) to two ABB 53CJ's.

There are actually quite a few sites now that don't use Nissan chargers at all. Fresh & Easy Sunnyvale has two BTC dual standard chargers and there are other sites in the East Bay that have two ABB dual standard units instead of the standard Nissan + ABB setup. It appears that the BTC chargers are used at sites that have high current 120Y208V power available instead of 277Y480V that is required by the ABB units.

 

[bxr140]

So if you care about widespread EV adoption, 50 kW DC charging is setting us back wasting large amounts of capital.

This times eleventy.

More 50kw chargers will set back EV adoption. 50kw will not serve the need of multiple vehicles traveling long distances and will cloud DC fast charging as a poor investment.

 

[Dave EV]

So what would you rather do?

Wait 3-5 years until other automobile manufacturers and charging station manufactures catch up to Tesla?

Perfection is the enemy of good - we should deploy the best technology that's widely available now. Perhaps make sure that you do the install so that higher power chargers can be dropped in at a future date with minimum extra install costs.

If we take your logic, even Tesla's 120 kW charging is still too slow if you are aiming for ICE type refueling times. 200 miles needs to be charged in 5 minutes to catch up. A typical gas pump tops out around 10 GPM - even 2 minutes is enough for 200 miles in a 20 MPG vehicle, but let's say 5 minutes or 4 GPM is fast enough. In an EV, you need to dispense about 70 kWh to pick up 200 miles of range. To do that in 5 minutes you need to push 840 kW. Once you factor in tapering you really need to be able to handle 1 MW, if you want to match the refueling times of ICE vehicles - a whole order of magnitude faster.

50 kW is difficult enough in many cases to get installed and 30-60 minutes still gets you a good amount of usable range if your EV can take maximum power for the duration. Good enough for cross country trips? No, but really 100 kW is also just barely fast enough to make it feasible. We should be looking at 200 kW+ and it's going to take more than just 200 kW charging stations to make those kinds of rates feasible - on-site storage to mitigate demand charges - higher power batteries to handle faster charging rates - it's also likely that we'll see battery pack voltages double to 800V before we get to 200 kW+ charge rates.

 

[jerry33]

SIf we take your logic, even Tesla's 120 kW charging is still too slow if you are aiming for ICE type refueling times.

If that's true, then why is the overall time the same driving from DFW to Nebraska as when I had an ICE car?

 

[techmaven]

I have posted at length about the issues with slow and expensive DC charging, I will have to dig up the threads. I probably should make a blog post. The simple answer is that to support lots and lots of EVs on the road, we need lots and lots of destination charging, ideally sipping energy in a grid friendly way at night. J1772 L2 40-80 amp EVSE's will handle the foreseeable future of BEVs and therefore makes a ton of sense as the ROI is the best, with an install lifespan approaching 15-20 years.

L3 DC charging at 100kW or faster is necessary to have a minimum support for long distance travel. DC charging of any sort is likely not a money maker and subject to a lot of change. Therefore install lifespan is short and cost is high. Factor in the possible amount of EVs supported by the cost and L2 DC charging is a loser. It is very likely that 50 kW DC charge network will look like the 20-24 amp J1772 Blink charge network that was installed at great taxpayer advance. They ended up with slow chargers at the wrong places that no one really used, especially when the costs were charged through, had significant uptime issues, and fell into bankruptcy.

 

[jerry33]

The simple answer is that to support lots and lots of EVs on the road, we need lots and lots of destination charging, ideally sipping energy in a grid friendly way at night. J1772 L2 40-80 amp EVSE's will handle the foreseeable future of BEVs and therefore makes a ton of sense as the ROI is the best, with an install lifespan approaching 15-20 years.

This is true as long as you define "destination charging" as hotels, motels, campgrounds, etc. Destinations such as theatres, amusement parks, etc. need at least 80 amp charging because you're only likely to stay for two to four hours.

 

[techmaven]

This is true as long as you define "destination charging" as hotels, motels, campgrounds, etc. Destinations such as theatres, amusement parks, etc. need at least 80 amp charging because you're only likely to stay for two to four hours.

Given that most BEVs in the 2019-2020 timeframe will have 150 or so miles or range, the need for charging at locations where one is at for 2 hours like the theater is low. Amusement parks usually charge significant fees so one typically stays for 4-12 hours. It is far for important that at locations where the car sits for 4-16 hours that it can sip electricity. So motels, amusement parks, campgrounds, and so forth will be better served with 10 x J1772 @ 40 amps than a single 50 kW DC EVSE.

 

[jerry33]

Given that most BEVs in the 2019-2020 timeframe will have 150 or so miles or range, the need for charging at locations where one is at for 2 hours like the theater is low. Amusement parks usually charge significant fees so one typically stays for 4-12 hours. It is far for important that at locations where the car sits for 4-16 hours that it can sip electricity. So motels, amusement parks, campgrounds, and so forth will be better served with 10 x J1772 @ 40 amps than a single 50 kW DC EVSE.

No question that motels, campgrounds, etc. are better served by 40 amp chargers, and of course, anything is better than nothing if you need a charge. Unfortunately, the 150 miles that some car makers are saying they may have are marketing miles, not actual range under real conditions, so I'm not convinced about the theatres, etc. needing only 40 amps. (of course, 40 amps would be better than the current 30 amp standard.)

 

[Tony]

If I owned a hotel or a long-term parking lot Id install 14-50 plugs and charge an hourly or daily rate for parking with access to electricity based on service size (all ev owners can now buy their own mobile chargers).

If I owned a restaurant or shopping mall I'd install DC and 80 amp AC charging stations and charge a per minute rate for access to the equipment based on service size. You pay as much for tying up my equipment as for electricity.

If I was Tesla I'd look at expanding the Supercharger network to include pay as you go services that support non Tesla cars and model 3. BEVs will all be 250 mile + by 2020 .. so may as well just build for that.

 

[Larry Chanin]

This is true as long as you define "destination charging" as hotels, motels, campgrounds, etc. Destinations such as theatres, amusement parks, etc. need at least 80 amp charging because you're only likely to stay for two to four hours.

Hi Jerry,

I agree.

However, with regard to Tesla, Sales has done a poor job at communicating the advantages of the dual on-board chargers, and that they are needed to fully utilize 80 amp charging.

As you probably know they discontinued the factory option of ordering dual chargers. So new or prospective owners are not tipped off to the fact in the ordering process that dual chargers are even available.

So unless Tesla addresses this ordering policy and education issue those 80 amp destination chargers are not going to help most new Tesla owners since most of them are unaware that they need dual on-board chargers to fully utilize those 80 amp chargers.

Larry

 

[renim]

Hi Jerry,

I agree.

However, with regard to Tesla, Sales has done a poor job at communicating the advantages of the dual on-board chargers, and that they are needed to fully utilize 80 amp charging.

As you probably know they discontinued the factory option of ordering dual chargers. So new or prospective owners are not tipped off to the fact in the ordering process that dual chargers are even available.

So unless Tesla addresses this ordering policy and education issue those 80 amp destination chargers are not going to help most new Tesla owners since most of them are unaware that they need dual on-board chargers to fully utilize those 80 amp chargers.

Larry

perhaps Tesla is considering just going to a 48 amp or 72 amp single charger?

a more fundamental question is not SAE vs Chademo/SC but DC vs AC

most people want to spend at least as long at a destination as the combined time driving to and from the destination. That has relevance for AC charging, once AC charging is higher than a certain level, it crosses over into providing usefulness akin to DC charging, but at far cheaper infrastructure cost. (assuming the vehicle has a full size battery)

IMHO unless DC charging includes a battery for demand cost optimization, then its difficult to see a long term future for smaller DC compared to AC infrastructure.

 

[Larry Chanin]

perhaps Tesla is considering just going to a 48 amp or 72 amp single charger?

If Tesla is planning on offerring just 48 amp on-board chargers that would be a good way to undermine what they are achieving with their destination charging network in which the majority of HPWCs are installed with full capacity at 80 amps. A move to 72 amp charging is a slight step backward.

To reinterate my point, the problem with regard to ordering Model Ss is that Tesla has failed to adequately inform new or prospective buyers that they need dual charges to fully benefit from 80 amp HPWCs and they don't even offer a factory option for dual chargers.

The problem with the Model X ordering situation is that Tesla is still circling for a landing regarding the ordering process. First it's 72 amp, then it's 48 amps then it's 72 amps for the Founders & Signature series and still the General Production reservation holders have no idea what will be offered as standard and we still don't know whether a factory option for 72 amps will be offered.

a more fundamental question is not SAE vs Chademo/SC but DC vs AC

I agree.

Some of the cheaper CHAdeMO chargers cost about $6,500. They offer only 24 kW of capacity. They weigh 125 pounds and require a 277/480 volt utility service. In constrast an HPWC costs $750 retail. It is almost the same capacity at 20 kW. It weighs only 20 pounds and only requires a 208 or 240 volt service. Obviously the installation costs of an HPWC is significantly less than any CHAdeMO charger.

Earlier this year Elon stated that in the long-term there will be 10 times the number of destination chargers as Supercharger locations. It would be a real shame if most owners couldn't take advantage of the full capacity of most of those destination chargers.

Larry

 

[cwerdna]

I have posted at length about the issues with slow and expensive DC charging, I will have to dig up the threads. I probably should make a blog post. The simple answer is that to support lots and lots of EVs on the road, we need lots and lots of destination charging, ideally sipping energy in a grid friendly way at night. J1772 L2 40-80 amp EVSE's will handle the foreseeable future of BEVs and therefore makes a ton of sense as the ROI is the best, with an install lifespan approaching 15-20 years.

L3 DC charging at 100kW or faster is necessary to have a minimum support for long distance travel. DC charging of any sort is likely not a money maker and subject to a lot of change. Therefore install lifespan is short and cost is high. Factor in the possible amount of EVs supported by the cost and L2 DC charging is a loser. It is very likely that 50 kW DC charge network will look like the 20-24 amp J1772 Blink charge network that was installed at great taxpayer advance. They ended up with slow chargers at the wrong places that no one really used, especially when the costs were charged through, had significant uptime issues, and fell into bankruptcy.

I'll agree that DC FCing is rather expensive and I cared so little about it that my current '13 Leaf that I bought used doesn't even have a CHAdeMO inlet. I'm ok with that. My used Leaf was $9325 + tax and license. Wasn't worth paying $1K to $1.5K extra for the quick charge + LED package so that I could pay much more than it cost to fuel my Prius, have to wait and possibly deal w/adventures of broken or ICEd DC FCs, besides having to take detours to use them.

I'd previously leased a '13 Leaf SV w/both packages so I had CHAdeMO. I used its CHAdeMO inlet about 16 times, all on free DC FCs. There were few free ones then and few now. Most of the ones (all?) I used are now no longer free.

As for J1772 L2 40-80 amp EVSEs, well, other than Tesla-powered vehicles, nobody else is even shipping a BEV or PHEV w/an above 30-amp OBC. Heck, GM is still brain dead w/including a 3.6 kW OBC w/the '16 Volt and not providing an optional higher powered OBC. And, there are still tons of 3.x kW OBC cars shipping, mostly PHEVs.

As for 100 kW DC FCing, well, doesn't seem like anyone besides Tesla's shipping a vehicle that can sustain rates like that. The pre-'16 Leafs ramp down from 50 kW pretty quickly already. 100 kW is useless overkill for them, for now.

You must feel that the 24 kW Combo1 DC FCs from BMW/Bosch are really useless then: Bosch BMW Announce 24 kW DC Charger For North America At $9,995. They're still being deployed. I've heard of other non-BMW/Bosch Combo1 DC FCs that are only 20-24 kW being deployed.

In Japan with over 5484 CHAdeMO chargers (CHAdeMO Association), there are apparently "intermediate" chargers, like 10 kW CHAdeMO. See CHAdeMO Make/Model Review — Using with a Tesla - Page 16 and CHAdeMO Make/Model Review — Using with a Tesla - Page 16.

There aren't even any PHEVs in the US w/DC FCing capability. And, there are numerous BEVs being sold in the US that also don't have it, not even as an option.

 

[mmccord]

I don't see the point of 80a destination charging, except to reduce queuing if it's a busy destination. I'm not likely to drive >200 miles to a destination, and need to turn around 4 hours later to drive 200 miles back.