From NJ Tesla owners club members. Several members spoke to NJ state authorities as well as Tesla employees at the service centers around here. AFAIK Tesla has gone the private land route off the highways but nobody knows exact location yet and various sources have said it's going to be around Edison/Woodbridge (around where NJT and GSP intersect).
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
From NJ Tesla owners club members. Several members spoke to NJ state authorities as well as Tesla employees at the service centers around here. AFAIK Tesla has gone the private land route off the highways but nobody knows exact location yet and various sources have said it's going to be around Edison/Woodbridge (around where NJT and GSP intersect).
The problem with this is that it's hearsay but keeps being reported as a fact. Conflicting reports come from Tesla employees all of the time.
Would love to see a heavy push of L2 chargers, particularly in areas here in the Midwest and other rural locations that won't have supercharger options for years to come. At least with 80amp charging a longer distance trip becomes somewhat practical, if not convenient.
TonyWilliams
Active Member
Those costs added up fantastically... 7 CARB-ZEV credits per car!! And they didn't have to build a single swapping station.
Tesla has sold over $60 million in CARB-ZEV credits, and you can bet that many millions of that is because of the increased credit value of battery swapping "fast-refueling".
California Air Resource Board (CARB)
Zero Emissions Vehicle Requirements
Type V - 300+ miles range with fast refueling - Credit 7
Type IV - 200+ miles range with fast refueling - Credit 5
Type III - 100+ miles range with fast refueling - Credit 4
Type III - 200+ miles range……………………... - Credit 4
Type II - 100+ miles range…………………….... - Credit 3
Type 1.5 - 75-100 miles range………………... - Credit 2.5
Type 1 - 50-75 miles range…………………..... - Credit 2
TonyWilliams
Active Member
They may... but have not done so yet. If Tesla is smart, they will fight any battery swap disqualification until 2017, when all the cars are capped at 3 credits max each for model year 2018.
I'll bet they can pull that off.
ChadS
Last tank of gas: March 2009
CARB is meeting today and tomorrow to discuss the battery swap issue and other ZEV regulation changes. I agree that it doesn't make sense for Tesla to get swapping credits now, when swapping is not available - tying the credits to a demo of the technology was a bad move on CARB's part. But it is a worse idea for CARB to remove the credits entirely; battery swapping will help CARB meet their goals, and the whole point of the credits is to incent manufacturers to get these new technologies in to the marketplace. Plug In America wants CARB to tie the credits to a minimum number of installed stations. Perhaps the same number of stations needed for (ugh) hydrogen credits (incidentally, they will get *9* credits per hydrogen car in 2015-2017).
Gizmotoy
Active Member
Did they seriously do that? That is indeed a terrible move. If the goal is driving manufacturers to fast charging solutions that actually benefit drivers in the state, tying funding to a demo that's never likely to be rolled out is not a great idea. I realize they probably wanted to tie it to the demo so that the money earned by selling the additional credits would help fund rolling out the infrastructure that was developed, but in this case it's pretty clear battery swapping is probably not something that's likely to happen.
I tried searching the site, but came up empty-handed. How does CARB define "fast charging"? Obviously the Superchargers don't count. Is there some time threshold?
TonyWilliams
Active Member
That would be a rule change then... do you have a link to this? Is this going to be a "Type VI"? I can only imagine that Toyota, et al, will hammer on CARB to extend the 7 or 9 credit maximum past 2017 so that they can sell the minimum number of hydrogen cars at maximum credit in California through 2025.
Type V - 300+ miles range with fast refueling - Credit 7
Ok, I found the 9 credit modification, amongst other proposals to be discussed today in Sacramento:
Green Car Congress: ARB hosting public hearing on ZEV modifications; battery swapping out for fast refueling of ZEVs
Modifying fast refueling definition to exclude range accumulation through battery exchange. ZEVs with the ability to refuel to 95% of full capacity within 15 minutes are allowed (§1962.1.d.5.A) to earn more credit:
A Type IV ZEV (200+ mile range, and fast refueling capable, i.e., 190 miles of range in <15 minutes) earns 5 credits in 2012-2014, and 5 credits in 2015-2017.
A Type V ZEV (300+ mile range, and fast refueling capable, i.e., 285 miles of range in <15 minutes) earns 7 credits in 2012-2014 and 9 in 2015-2017.
By contrast, a Type II ZEV (>100 miles range, no fast refueling), earns 3 credits.
(The 2013 Tesla Model S is currently classified as a Type III (40 kWh variant); Type IV (60 kWh variant); or Type V (85 kWh variant) ZEV.)
Staff is proposing to remove battery exchange from qualifying under the fast refueling definition, starting in 2015 model year. Hydrogen fast refueling capable Type V ZEVs will still earn 9 credits each in model years 2015 through 2017 upon placement in service. ARB Staff believes it is important to maintain the difference in credit level between the two ZEV technologies to ensure appropriate incentives are in place to support hydrogen technologies as infrastructure ramps up through 2017.
Hydrogen remains a long-term solution for all vehicle classes, and is essential for meeting California’s long-term air quality and GHG reduction goals, according to ARB.
*******************************
Moderators, could you move all the ZEV credit and CARB posts to this thread?
ZEV credits
Last edited:
When politicians want to "make something happen", this sounds like a good idea.
"They say it can't be done so let's reward people for developing the technology even if they don't roll it out." Heck, U.S. patents even work like this to some degree. "Method and implementation for..." doesn't say anything about "... with actual distribution and customers".
In the software industry, sometimes all it takes is a prototype to get the ball rolling. It's not a crazy idea, but IMO it's a gambit for the private sector not the public sector.
GlennAlanBerry
Member
It would be great if Tesla would provide a free HPWC to any U.S. hotel/motel that made it available for public use. 
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
That's a good idea, except the CA government is paying for those hydrogen stations while Tesla is paying for their own swap stations. So in the end it'll still be skewed towards hydrogen (as designed).
It would be great if Tesla would provide a free HPWC to any U.S. hotel/motel that made it available for public use.
Hotels don't need HPWCs. Cheap NEMA 14-50s work just fine and would cost less actually than a free HPWC (since the HPWC needs higher current).
ChadS
Last tank of gas: March 2009
Ha, that would be cool. I assume you know what was meant, but just to be clear (somebody else was confused in an email conversation recently):
Tesla did implement swapping technology to do a demo of swapping. Which is great, but
Tesla did not deploy swapping as an option for their customers to use. Which is really required for swapping to do anything towards CARB's goals.
Nevertheless, Tesla is getting more CARB credits for each car they sell based on the demo.
Tesla should not get credits for a mere demonstration; I agree CARB should close that loophole.
However, CARB is trying to fix the problem by taking away swapping credits altogether. That is counter-productive to CARB's goals, and not in-line with how they incent other technologies. Swapping credits should remain in the ZEV plan; it should just be modified so they are only granted on rollout of commercial swapping stations.
- - - Updated - - -
Yup. Sigh.
- - - Updated - - -
HERE is the meeting agenda. And HERE is the staff's reasoning for the suggested changes. Critical portions:
Last edited:
jvonbokel
John VonBokel
They don't need them, but there are other advantages to having an HPWC besides faster charge. And I believe they can be installed on a 50A circuit as well.
For example, with a permanently installed HPWC, the Tesla owner can keep his/her UMC safely locked in their car, or even leave it at home in some cased (I'm not recommending that, just saying it could be possible).
Also, obviously from Tesla's perspective, getting to put a Tesla-branded charger at a hotel gives them a form of free advertising, and helps promote the idea that Tesla cars are easy to find charging for, whereas non-owners would likely not even notice a NEMA 14-50, let alone realize it could be used to quickly charge an EV.
Similar threads
- Question
- Question
