EV parking priority

[vfx]

[vfx]

...

I'm just not sure that regulation or legislation is the answer. Look at the backlash from the California AB 475 "illegal to be unplugged" law, which surely started out with good intentions...

Related:

http://evchels.wordpress.com/2011/09...and-curiouser/

http://www.mychevroletvolt.com/california-ab-475-public-ev-charging-etiquette-laws

http://www.fastcoexist.com/1678439/gm-vs-plug-in-america-over-the-best-way-to-implement-electric-car-charging-infrastructur
e

[smoothoperator]

Yes, I do think there will be enough public infrastructure. When I look at where I could charge publicly just a year ago in SF, it was Pier 29. Now just 12 months later, there are countless places to charge. In just a year, without a huge increase in the number of electric vehicles. Look at the new charging companies on the scene - they see profit. Hotels and restaurants are starting to put in chargers. Walgreens! States are setting aside dollars for infrastructure. I think we're right on the brink of exponential growth. When I took a 1300 mile roadtrip last summer, it was only remarkable because it wasn't remarkable - meaning, it wasn't newsworthy like it would have been a year earlier - because charging was not a challenge.

I'm a strong believer in the theory of abundance - meaning we do not always have to compete for resource, but rather sometimes we can actually all benefit. The larger the population needing chargers, the more chargers there will be - giving us more choice than we would have had, had we chosen to fiercely protect our territory.

I guess there is an inherent philosphical difference..I believe in free charging where an EV station is the lure to shop at a business ,where as you see charging as a business opportunity. I like to (and will go out of my way) patronize businesses and shopping centers that allow for free charging . I believe this goes further (worth of mouth) than some business owner trying make a few dollars profit on someone charging for an hour or two. Small fish vs big fish IMO.

[GSP]

.... By initially limiting spots to EV's this ensures that those who need the charge the most will be able to.

How will we know which EVs *need* to charge? Require drivers to file a "flight plan" with their planned route like pilots do, and register their miles remaining to prove they do not have a sufficient reserve?

That way the charging station would be kept available in case someone who *truly needed it* comes along.

GSP

[bonnie1194]

I guess there is an inherent philosphical difference..I believe in free charging where an EV station is the lure to shop at a business ,where as you see charging as a business opportunity. I like to (and will go out of my way) patronize businesses and shopping centers that allow for free charging . I believe this goes further (worth of mouth) than some business owner trying make a few dollars profit on someone charging for an hour or two. Small fish vs big fish IMO.

I'm trying to see where I implied that charging was a business opportunity.

I did say that perhaps charging for charging was a good way to filter out people who didn't really need to charge. The hotels and restaurants putting in chargers are rarely charging a fee - because, yes, it draws customers to their business. It's the ideal solution. So going back to an earlier post ... if a hotel puts in a charger, is it up to us to decide who can and cannot charge there? No, of course not. It's up to the business. (And it's doubtful a hotel will tell a customer that they cannot charge their vehicle because they're not pure EV.) And if our desire to keep all the chargers exclusive to EVs then contributes to a non-share atmosphere at public charging stations, we deserve the lack of cooperation we receive as a result.

Look at how many new charging stations have popped up in just the last 12 months. That's because some companies see business opportunity, some businesses see a way to draw customers, and some of us have contributed (financially or through advocacy) to getting those in place. There is no reason to believe that won't keep growing.

Charging station prices will drop as there is more consumer demand. http://fuelfix.com/blog/2011/08/24/r...pected-in-u-s/

And if you were a new Volt owner, hoping to save on gas -- wouldn't you also become an advocate for the infrastructure? I'm now participating in four Earth Day events this month -- and there will be Volts side-by-side with each Tesla, Coda, and Leaf at each EV area. That's fantastic! Because they can talk to the people who are not yet ready to make the jump to pure EV. (I like vfx' training wheels analogy.)

So again, the more people supporting, the faster the EV infrastructure will grow. So I vote for sharing the plug and hoping that the next vehicle charging at a station that I desperately need, will share my sentiments and let me charge.

I carry a little stack of notes in my car saying 'Happy to share once I get enough range - please call my cell at xx' and I tuck it in the window nearest the plug. I've gotten a few phone calls - and have met some really nice people. One was a Volt owner. And I am willing to bet he now leaves a note so that people can call him & ask to share. What goes around comes around.

[rabar10]

The hotels and restaurants putting in chargers are rarely charging a fee - because, yes, it draws customers to their business. It's the ideal solution. So going back to an earlier post ... if a hotel puts in a charger, is it up to us to decide who can and cannot charge there? No, of course not. It's up to the business. (And it's doubtful a hotel will tell a customer that they cannot charge their vehicle because they're not pure EV.)

+1

For free privately-sponsored chargers, the lot owner/sponsor can make whatever rules they choose. But if the only point is to increase business or attract new customers, why then would they turn away some plug-in cars but not others? Now if the sponsor wants to explicitly encourage the take-up of pure EVs, then they can put restrictions on use of their charger. But the trade-off will be in the cost and hassle of enforcing those rules.

For commercially-driven chargers (companies wanting to make money from the actual use of the chargers) in high-traffic areas, they can enforce a billing scheme that works to maximize both their profit as well as the availability of the charging spot to the highest number of customers -- i.e. continue billing even if the car is full. A simple solution for this commercial approach would be to install a generic charger and then put standard parking meters in the spots in front of or around it. No need for fancy point-of-sale charging units etc. This would prevent the spots from being ICEd, and it also lets the meter companies do what they are good at (collecting funds from people that park in spots) and the charger companies do what they are good at (providing a charge for plug-in cars).

Finally, here's a compromise -- for installations with multiple chargers, why not have two separate signs for those spots -- 'Pure Battery EV Parking Only' and 'Plug-In Vehicle Parking Only'? Show preference towards pure EVs by reserving a charger/spot that is exclusive to them, while not excluding other plug-in cars from using other chargers/spots.

Even if this doesn't prevent some PHEV owners from taking the BEV spot when they arrive and the others are full, it would at least give grounds for the owner of the BEV that arrives afterwards (when all spots are now full) to politely ask him/her to make the spot available.

[jkirkebo]

I think a good way to deal with that problem is to treat charging stations like parking meters. If you are parked and not actively charging, you could be subject to a ticket. The meter could blink red when not charging, green when charging, just like many meters do now. Of course, there is a contingent of EV drivers that would protest the inability to park at a charging station and NOT charge!

Having to move my car at once when it's full would make public charging useless to me. Say I need two hours of charge to make it home, and I have a three-hour meeting. The car is full after 2.5 hours and the meeting turns into a four hour one. Should I leave the meeting in the middle to go hunting for a different parking spot for my Leaf ? No way, I'd take the VW TDI instead if the Leaf couldn't be left alone for the duration of the meeting.

The same goes for seeing a movie. I'm not leaving in the middle of the movie to move my car.

[smoothoperator]

How will we know which EVs *need* to charge? Require drivers to file a "flight plan" with their planned route like pilots do, and register their miles remaining to prove they do not have a sufficient reserve?

That way the charging station would be kept available in case someone who *truly needed it* comes along.

GSP

i was referring to EV's vs PHEV"s....it is more likely that an EV would need a charge vs a PHEV.

[daniel]

... what exactly is your point?

My point is that we are a heterogeneous society. We are a variety of individuals with different interests, opinions, needs, desires, etc. If we can learn to cooperate, we will be much better off than if we are always quarreling. When you demand that taxpayer money be spent for a service, and that service be limited to just your particular group, you invite dissension and conflict. You argue that chargers should be for pure EVs only, because they may need it to get home, so are you willing to exclude EVs who at the moment have enough range to get home?

You insist that the reason for public chargers is so that EVs will be able to make the trip. But others will argue that the reason for chargers is to reduce the total amount of gasoline consumed. Who is right? I say that there are many reasons for chargers, not just one reason alone. And if you want to ask the public to pay for a service, then the public has a right to set the rules of that service. And in the long term, as Bonnie points out, we'll get more chargers installed if we make common ground with Volt drivers than if we set ourselves up against them and claim to be "better" than they are because we are more "pure" and have made a "higher" commitment to electric transportation than they have.

[smoothoperator]

My point is that we are a heterogeneous society. We are a variety of individuals with different interests, opinions, needs, desires, etc. If we can learn to cooperate, we will be much better off than if we are always quarreling. When you demand that taxpayer money be spent for a service, and that service be limited to just your particular group, you invite dissension and conflict. You argue that chargers should be for pure EVs only, because they may need it to get home, so are you willing to exclude EVs who at the moment have enough range to get home?

You insist that the reason for public chargers is so that EVs will be able to make the trip. But others will argue that the reason for chargers is to reduce the total amount of gasoline consumed. Who is right? I say that there are many reasons for chargers, not just one reason alone. And if you want to ask the public to pay for a service, then the public has a right to set the rules of that service. And in the long term, as Bonnie points out, we'll get more chargers installed if we make common ground with Volt drivers than if we set ourselves up against them and claim to be "better" than they are because we are more "pure" and have made a "higher" commitment to electric transportation than they have.

Have you ever been in a situation where you needed a charge but were unable to due to a non ev vehicle being parked in an ev spot? If you have not it would be hard for me to explain it .

Nobody is claiming to be better, I am just claiming that some cars that are parking in EV spots are not EV"s and do not really need to charge. It is far more likely that an EV would need to charge compared to an PHEV.

Lets go with your scenario though, say the goal is really for "reducing total amount of gasoline consumed." How much gasoline will be consumed when a PiP driver is plugged into an EV charging station and, a Leaf driver that tried to use that station is unable to charge and is forced to be towed home/dealership etc? Which scenario would consume more gasoline? Please advise.