Tesla submitted a proposal for a heavy duty charging standard (3MW)

[doghousePVD]

The

Source: https://assets.ctfassets.net/ucu418...HPCVCS_Task_Force_update_6.10.2019_Rustam.pdf
EPRI Public Site (see 04 - Bus and Truck Working Council June 2019 - CharIN HPCVCS Task Force update 6.10.2019 Rustam)

Tesla also is a member of the committee, so even if they don't use the Tesla proposal there's a good chance the Tesla semi will use whatever standard comes out.

Interesting, and biased document. Really downplays Tesla, even though they are a member. Claims maximum L2 charging is 7.7 kW. I charge my X at 15 kW, and some older S charge at 17 kw. All Tesla hardwired chargers are rated for 17 kW.

Claim the Chademo charges at 400 kw. Yes, theoretically, maybe, but last I heard the committee in Japan still had not finalized the spec, and all installed chargers are 50 kW.

Claim the US CCS1 chargers do 500 kW. Huh? I've read that the max, if and when installed, will be 350 kW.

Amazing how wrong a report from just June can be.

The Tesla prototypes have been using existing SC. My guess is there will be a Tesla Megacharger (already rumored). See Close-up look at the Tesla Semi "Megacharger" charging port and Tesla Semi's temporary 'Megacharger' system glimpsed in Madonna Inn sighting which supposedly will charge at 1.6 MW.

I doubt there will be much love between the CCS redux group and Tesla. Going to their site News it seems they STILL have not decided on a standard, even though the PPT from June said a decision had been made. Politic, sausages, and cesspools ...

 

[Ulmo]

The



Interesting, and biased document. Really downplays Tesla, even though they are a member. Claims maximum L2 charging is 7.7 kW. I charge my X at 15 kW, and some older S charge at 17 kw. All Tesla hardwired chargers are rated for 17 kW.

Old 80A (2x40A) Tesla Model S's can pull 80A at 240VAC, maybe up to 250VAC. That's 20kW. My HPWC is wired for that, but I doubt it can actually do it, since the wiring from the utility isn't good enough, but if my PowerWalls are full and my solar panels are at peak, it just might do it at around 235VAC (almost 19kW). No Tesla car since the original S's can do that. (Maximum since Model X and then S refresh came out was 72A, but since then has been falling, falling, falling ...)

 

[electracity]

The



Interesting, and biased document. Really downplays Tesla, even though they are a member. Claims maximum L2 charging is 7.7 kW. I charge my X at 15 kW, and some older S charge at 17 kw. All Tesla hardwired chargers are rated for 17 kW.

Claim the Chademo charges at 400 kw. Yes, theoretically, maybe, but last I heard the committee in Japan still had not finalized the spec, and all installed chargers are 50 kW.

Claim the US CCS1 chargers do 500 kW. Huh? I've read that the max, if and when installed, will be 350 kW.

Amazing how wrong a report from just June can be.

The Tesla prototypes have been using existing SC. My guess is there will be a Tesla Megacharger (already rumored). See Close-up look at the Tesla Semi "Megacharger" charging port and Tesla Semi's temporary 'Megacharger' system glimpsed in Madonna Inn sighting which supposedly will charge at 1.6 MW.

I doubt there will be much love between the CCS redux group and Tesla. Going to their site News it seems they STILL have not decided on a standard, even though the PPT from June said a decision had been made. Politic, sausages, and cesspools ...

The semi is probably designed to be chargeable using four connections, assuming the bus is designed to be capable of isolating battery packs and motors. So Tesla will probably be able to do 1MW with tech they have today.

It's entirely reasonable to require commercial drivers to plug in four cables.

Large truck charging will probably be done exclusively on company property for years. The large corporate users who will begin buying these vehicles in the 2020s will also be buying chargers. So a single standard soon probably doesn't have a lot of use.

 

[GlennH]

This was the original Tesla proposal....

 

[GlennH]

I recall that Nikola Tesla did, in fact, bring down the power station that supplied electricity to his lab with some of his experiments...

 

[jgs]

Local solar would also reduce the grid transformer size.

Unless I've slipped a decimal place somewhere, an array with a nameplate rating of 1MW would require around 3,333 panels, which works out to around 58,500 square feet, or a square 240 feet on a side, ish. Call it 100 yards on a side, conservatively, because you need some spacing between rows to get in for maintenance. I guess that's small by utility scale but it seems substantial if collocated with a truck stop... and it's only enough to power one single Megacharger, and only when the sun is at zenith.

Doesn't seem like you can count on local solar to let you cheap out on grid transformers.

 

[mongo]

Unless I've slipped a decimal place somewhere, an array with a nameplate rating of 1MW would require around 3,333 panels, which works out to around 58,500 square feet, or a square 240 feet on a side, ish. Call it 100 yards on a side, conservatively, because you need some spacing between rows to get in for maintenance. I guess that's small by utility scale but it seems substantial if collocated with a truck stop... and it's only enough to power one single Megacharger, and only when the sun is at zenith.

Doesn't seem like you can count on local solar to let you cheap out on grid transformers.

The premise was using MegaPacks to average the power load reduce the gird connection size. Once you are planning for only X% duty cycle, solar allows for more charging even if can't support the MegaCharger on its own. Like Kettleman, they can set up sloped structures with the solar panels.

I think the post was also around the time Elon mentioned having all the chargers off solar, so I may have been thinking colocated fields of panels.

 

[Jeff Hudson]

Doesn't seem like you can count on local solar to let you cheap out on grid transformers.

In my opinion you are correct. The best local solar PV with battery storage can hope for is to reduce the maximum charging load demand at any given moment in time which is financially significant over the long term. In theory people charging could pay less for the dispensed electricity. This is a decision Tesla will find itself making as these installations are built and possibly could give Tesla's Supercharger network even more of a consumer boost with lower electricity pricing.

 

[electracity]

The real world problem of charging OTR trucks does provide a defensible case for using hydrogen or some other carbon neutral fuel instead of batteries. But there is still a very good case for a great many battery semis, IMO.

 

[mongo]

The real world problem of charging OTR trucks does provide a defensible case for using hydrogen or some other carbon neutral fuel instead of batteries. But there is still a very good case for a great many battery semis, IMO.

Is there a scalable source of carbon neutral hydrogen other than electrolysism (maybe CO2 sequested natural gas conversion to offset, but not neutral) If not, then skip the middle man and use that green power to charge the semis directly.

 

[Jeff Hudson]

If not, then skip the middle man and use that green power to charge the semis directly.

Point made - period, full stop. Carbon is carbon no matter how it is separated from nature and redistributing it by aerosol byproducts into our planet's atmosphere is what is known as pollution and what really counts.

 

[electracity]

Unless I've slipped a decimal place somewhere, an array with a nameplate rating of 1MW would require around 3,333 panels, which works out to around 58,500 square feet, or a square 240 feet on a side, ish. Call it 100 yards on a side, conservatively, because you need some spacing between rows to get in for maintenance. I guess that's small by utility scale but it seems substantial if collocated with a truck stop... and it's only enough to power one single Megacharger, and only when the sun is at zenith.

Doesn't seem like you can count on local solar to let you cheap out on grid transformers.

I think these solar numbers are fine. A couple hundred acres is a small farm. If that land can produce 150 MW charging while the sun shines looks easily doable. The issue becomes when it rains all day. And if extra energy can be sold.

Scale isn't a problem. 3333 panels per charger is fine if the power produced by those panels is economic. Timing without a huge amount of storage is the problem as I see it. Clearly trucks will have to operate under optimization schemes. The spot price for truckstop electricity will likely vary wildly.

 

[Jeff Hudson]

Somewhere in flyover country I envision a Tesla Megacharger composed of about 100 acres with 10 - 15 acres devoted to physical Semi refueling, parking and general infrastructure composed of diner, convenience store, showers and lodging. Another 5 acres devoted to grid connection would hold as many Megapacks Megapack | Tesla as are needed and the remainder would be a solar PV array. With proper planning I think a single site like this could be built and operational within one year.

 

[chokai]

Unless I've slipped a decimal place somewhere, an array with a nameplate rating of 1MW would require around 3,333 panels, which works out to around 58,500 square feet, or a square 240 feet on a side, ish. Call it 100 yards on a side, conservatively, because you need some spacing between rows to get in for maintenance. I guess that's small by utility scale but it seems substantial if collocated with a truck stop... and it's only enough to power one single Megacharger, and only when the sun is at zenith.

Doesn't seem like you can count on local solar to let you cheap out on grid transformers.

60,000 square feet is interestingly the size of a small warehousing or distribution center. Your average Costco for comparison is well over 100,000 square feet. I suspect such facilities will offer mega-chargers for drivers to top up before heading off to wherever they are going. Especially if the facility is part of or does a lot of business with someone who has a fleet of trucks (say UPS).

We'll also likely see a lot of charging stations at the rail and port container yards (which are notorious for long waits for truckers) and possibly CFS stations.

 

[kaffine]

I can see a few companies installing chargers at their loading docs and then start pushing all trucks at their facilities to be EV. A few years ago a few large companies were pushing for alternative fuel trucks mostly Natural Gas.

I don't think any banned diesel but for large contracts they gave preferential treatment to companies that would deliver to their facilities using Natural Gas.

When you have a few hundred trucks in and out of a facility a day I can see it making a difference for workers. One place I worked we had a truck parked inside that got used maybe 3 times a year. One of the employees got tired of smelling it so he called safety when they started it up. Safety came out and said we don't have the correct exhaust ventilation system and the truck can't be parked inside until we get one.

I used to like the smell of diesel exhaust but not anymore.

 

[Jeff Hudson]

It would be great if a member with lots of trucking experience would take the time to comment on the viability of an electric truck. I've never driven a truck for a living but I do understand numbers well. I also do not have any business experience either. But operating a business is all about making a consistent profit. Consider the importance of the single main asset of a trucking business to be their trucks. If the truck asset can be fueled less expensively then I believe trucking companies will adopt electric propelled trucks. Insofar as trucking businesses are concerned I think there are two main types -- long haul and short haul. Simply due to the predictability of the cost of electricity and the efficiency of EV transport I can easily see an economical based business decision being implemented with a short haul trucking company seizing the initiative by upgrading their electric service at the necessary locations and installing charging equipment to fuel their newly purchased EV trucks.

 

[EfficientWatts]

Interesting development from the meeting notes from the working group. (No slides available unfortunately)

https://assets.ctfassets.net/ucu418...adcb9407de8aa/00_BTWC_Notes_March_10_2020.pdf (source: EPRI Public Site)

The part that sticks out to me is this:

New solution - not backward compatible with CCS 1 and 2

Originally they said they wanted something that stacked on top of the existing CCS1/2 plugs, though they did leave room to go to a dedicated connector. It looks like they may be going that route now.

Besides a completely new connector that we don't know about, I can only think of a few other possibilities:

• The Tesla Megacharger plug
  • I have some doubts that the plug seen on prototypes today is going to be the final connector, though I could be wrong
• The ChaoJi plug that China/Japan is developing.

 

[EfficientWatts]

The CharIN path to Megawatt Charging (MCS): Successful connector test event at NREL

First publicly available image of what I think is the proposed connector. Can't see much but this is all that's out there for now. At the next EPRI bus and truck virtual meeting in November I think we may hear more.

 

[Buckminster]

Tesla is working with mysterious third-parties to deploy Megacharger network for electric semi trucks - Electrek

 

[TSemi]

Musk: Tesla Semi ramp-up depends on battery cell supply—and infrastructure partners