Why US drivers may be thinking about EVs all wrong.... BBC article....

[Jonathan S.]

What Ford dealer in VT has a truly fast charger?
The only two Ford dealers I'm aware of in VT each have the usual 62kW ChargePoint duo, which delivers ~80kW if nobody else is there).
(The CCS1 at the Ford dealer in Montpelier is not open to the public.)

According to both the published charging curve and my personal experience, the Taycan rate barely tapers off at a 50kW or 62kW charger until around 95%.
And such chargers are woefully inadequate for a roadtrip that requires something like 10%>90%, i.e., in the winter, somewhere between about an hour to an hour-and-a-half of charging time for only two-and-a-half hours of driving time.

I have the 400v option, and it works fine at the two Magic Dock stations that I have visited (Brewster NY and Enfield CT).
Speaking of Tesla, the TSCN cover in northern New England is such a stark contrast with CCS1:

• I-93 corridor north of Manchester NH: Tesla = 54; CCS1 = 2, both of them 50kW. (The upcoming stations in NH funded with the 2021 NEVI appropriation are not scheduled to be operational until mid or late 2025.)
• I-91 corridor north of Greenfield MA: Tesla = 40, CCS1 = 16 (or 15 now, as one seems to be permanently broken), only four of them sometimes getting into the kW triple digits (and back on Labor Day, all four of those were broken, since it's an EA station).
• I-90 corridor west of Auburn MA out to I-87 in NY: Tesla = 56; CCS1 = 9 (or really 8, since the single-station EVgo 50kW last worked in July ... of 2022), but four of those are at an EA (the very first EA in the nation, installed in May 2018) of which two are usually broken with the others recently in the 30s and 40s, another four at a hotel of which only one or two have recently been working and only in the 40s.

Sponsored

 

[Jonathan S.]

I may be wrong, but there is no downside to having a higher-powered charger over a lesser one? I am assuming that the location has sufficient power available (as in electric main), and that the total cost of a station would not differ significantly between all-50kW and all-350kW chargers. [...]

Higher demand charges.
Although the EA so-called balanced 350kW chargers that are really shared chargers get around that problem (by never delivering their ostensible rating unless they're not being shared).

Tesla V3 Superchargers also share power, but in a way that maximizes driver throughput far better.
Some detailed analysis here:

https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/thr...ercharger-cabinets.158697/page-2#post-5497276​

Some telling excerpts here:

https://www.wsj.com/business/autos/...-federal-money-for-charging-networks-85a058dd​

​

"So far, Tesla is the winning bidder to build chargers at about 18% of the sites selected by states using the federal dollars to fund fast chargers, more than any other company, according to data from EVAdoption, an EV and charging analytics firm. Tesla has won around $8.5 million of the roughly $77 million awarded so far."​

​

"Five states—Ohio, Hawaii, Pennsylvania, Maine and Colorado—have selected winners at this point, and full details on sites and designs aren’t yet available. Tesla’s bids averaged around $392,000 a site compared with an average of $795,000 from others."​

​

"In most cases, Tesla plans to install eight chargers, and in some cases a dozen. Most companies are sticking to the minimum required by the federal government—at least four fast-charging ports at a station."​

 

[WasserGKuehlt]

Higher demand charges.
Although the EA so-called balanced 350kW chargers that are really shared chargers get around that problem (by never delivering their ostensible rating unless they're not being shared).

But that's the thing - if you have 350kW of available power, why does it matter if you share it among 7 full-capacity 50kW, or n > 1 shared power 350kW ports? If the occupancy rate is below 1 (or 100%), then faster charging would help both drivers and the seller/provider of electricity - can sell more per unit of time.

Interesting article, thanks for sharing; the difference in the cost of a cabinet is staggering. Guess I better see about getting a Tesla account ?.

"Tesla’s price advantage is in part because it makes its own chargers. In one Maine bid, it estimated hardware costs of $17,000 a charger, compared with $130,000 by another company, according to EVAdoption."

 

[Jonathan S.]

The other factor is the severe space limitations in Walmart parking lots that prevent EA from installing more than four chargers.
Okay, so that wasn't even remotely funny.
But then again, neither is waiting for one of four (or one of three working, or of just two working) EA chargers in a Walmart parking lot that at its other end has 16 Tesla Superchargers.

Now back to trying to find that article I read about the impressive TSCN growth in 2023 compared to CCS1.
Meanwhile, I've been taking lots of two-hour and three-hour roundtrips, which are just absolutely perfect for the Taycan -- such a joy to drive (even when stuck on secondary highways behind traffic driving slightly under the 50mph limit), so convenient to recharge at home (along with my wife's i4), and great fun to hit the cabin heating icon at the top of my final skinning lap (returning to a toasty cabin in my frozen and/or damp lycra).

 

[bluedonkey]

But that's the thing - if you have 350kW of available power, why does it matter if you share it among 7 full-capacity 50kW, or n > 1 shared power 350kW ports? If the occupancy rate is below 1 (or 100%), then faster charging would help both drivers and the seller/provider of electricity - can sell more per unit of time.

Typically they only share in pairs. Not sure why, but I suspect the power electronics in the backend cabinets becomes too expensive / complex to group more. The thing about sharing is that some people might want to get in & out quickly, and others might prefer to spend an hour or so getting food while their car charges slower.

A mix of dispensers, perhaps with high power ones having time limits and steep idle fees (if your car can benefit from a 350 kW charger you probably don't need more than 30 minutes) would help. I often see cars that only take 50 kW plugged into the 350 kW charger. I get it if it was the only one open, but when most are available it is either inconsiderate or just not understanding (most likely the latter).

 

[bluedonkey]

"Tesla’s price advantage is in part because it makes its own chargers. In one Maine bid, it estimated hardware costs of $17,000 a charger, compared with $130,000 by another company, according to EVAdoption."

The price on some of these is doubtful. Here in Alameda there is an open permit for a new 12 stall Tesla super charger site, and the city permit lists the job value as $300,000. The earlier one here (done in 2018) showed just $140,000 as the job value. Can't find the permit for the original EA site here, but the recent upgrade ("REMOVE (6) BTC POWER UNITS INSTALL (3) BTC GEN IV POWER UNITS REMOVE (5) BTC GEN I DISPENSERS INSTALL(5)BTC GEN IV DISPENSERS") was listed as $83,000. That would be about $10,000 per unit (assuming dispensers and the power units are similar in cost, which is probably not the case).


Links:

EA Upgrade Permit: https://bit.ly/48vanm2

New Tesla SC Permit: https://bit.ly/48CwB5U

Original Tesla SC Permit: https://bit.ly/47iQg9C

 

[Jonathan S.]

All of that could be consistent given the additional cost items beyond what the WSJ seems to be referencing for just each individual charger. Plus everything is more costly in California, right?

 

[bluedonkey]

All of that could be consistent given the additional cost items beyond what the WSJ seems to be referencing for just each individual charger. Plus everything is more costly in California, right?

The labor for sure could be more here, but the hardware shouldn't be different. The upgrade of the EA site is probably the closest I could get for equipment cost. They swapped out 5 of the 6 dispensers (left the CHAdeMO one) and switched the power cabinets all for $83,000. That suggests those units don't cost more than $10,000 each to me - the labor must have been a reasonable chunk of that cost, but there was no new wiring or concrete etc - just swapping boxes.

The new Tesla site is 12 stalls, but will need wiring, pedestals etc, so $25,000 per charger doesn't seem unreasonable. I'm just not buying the $130,000 vs $17,000 for the charger hardware claim in the original article. I do wish EA would think bigger and install 10+ chargers at each location rather than the 4-6 I tend to see around here.

 

[WasserGKuehlt]

The labor for sure could be more here, but the hardware shouldn't be different. The upgrade of the EA site is probably the closest I could get for equipment cost. They swapped out 5 of the 6 dispensers (left the CHAdeMO one) and switched the power cabinets all for $83,000. That suggests those units don't cost more than $10,000 each to me - the labor must have been a reasonable chunk of that cost, but there was no new wiring or concrete etc - just swapping boxes.

The new Tesla site is 12 stalls, but will need wiring, pedestals etc, so $25,000 per charger doesn't seem unreasonable. I'm just not buying the $130,000 vs $17,000 for the charger hardware claim in the original article. I do wish EA would think bigger and install 10+ chargers at each location rather than the 4-6 I tend to see around here.

I'm not familiar with what goes into the cost declared on a permit, but it would make sense for that to be 'net' - ie cost of new cabinets (+ other materials and labor) minus recuperated cost of the existing ones (which would go on to be refurbished etc.) Would be interesting to see similar data for a brand-new location.

Sponsored