MA Clean Vehicle Project - $50k QC Deployment Awards

Good job MA, always a progressive state.

I wonder if the existence of this program will help remove what I've heard from an insider is the objection to Tesla Superchargers at Mass Pike service areas - that the State doesn't want to be seen as providing public support for something only wealthy people who can afford a Tesla can use. This even though everything is paid for by Tesla. A very different attitude from our neighbors in CT, though on the other hand they apparently still won't let Tesla open a showroom there...

I was hoping for Superchargers at the Charlton service area but I guess it's kind of moot with Auburn coming online soon - though getting on and off the Turnpike will add a few minutes of driving and some incremental toll cost.

Wow. What an absurd waste of public money.

Think of the government money that went into installing the Blink network of J1772 24A chargers. In 5-10 years, we will look upon 50kW DCFC just like we look upon 24A J1772's. Nearly useless, nice if if you have nothing else, but at large amounts of public money. Nissan, BMW and others will need 100kW charging by 2017/2018 if you believe their projections. Certainly by 2020, 50kW will look quaint.

However, even with 150kW sized packs, 80A L2 charging is adequate for overnight charging. Within 10 years, we are not likely getting bigger than 150kW (overall solution to range is more charging opportunities, not much bigger packs), especially non-Tesla vehicles. Further, we need *many* more plugs. So for $50,000, you can partially fund the install of a single dual standard DCFC at a single location that will be obsolete within 4 years, or you can fully pay for the installation of 30-40 high amperage destination charging in many locations. Until almost all of the hotels, shopping malls, and so forth have 60-80A L2 charging, why are they spending money on DCFC?

DNAinaGoodWay said:

As primitive as these QCs will be in a few years, they're better than the practically nothing that exists now. I think the idea is to do what they can to help foster adoption by reducing range anxiety.

Click to expand...

The problem is that very real money needs to be spent on an infrastructure that will last a far longer time - higher powered L2 charging pretty much everywhere someone is likely to stay for many hours, like every hotel and motel in the state. Also, reaching places that are very difficult for private enterprise to install or make a profit, like parks and recreation areas. DCFC at this stage is just wasting limited money.

MA isn't the only state making this folly in investment ... Maryland is doing the same thing. Completely ridiculous.

DNAinaGoodWay said:

I must disagree. My car won't accept more than 6kW on L2, no matter how high powered the station is, but with 25 or 50 kW QC, I'm good to go. I'm 50 miles from Logan Airport, and it's been less than a year since I could use QCs within 16 miles of Logan to transport someone there. Before that, I would have had to spend hours in Boston on L2. Just recently, a hotel added QC that's only 3 miles from Logan, it's made it much easier. Turnpike QC will make the journey simpler yet. I can't wait. I think the expenditure is justified as cars like mine will predominate for at least the next 3 years, probably 6. I think it's better to install what we have now, and expand with higher power when the time comes, and if the power required exists at each site.

Really, at the snails pace of govt action, I'm thrilled it's happening at all.

Click to expand...

Again... screw the long term BEV future because Nissan/whomever was short sighted in putting in low powered L2 charging into the car? Nissan/BMW/Kia/etc. themselves will not be selling that car in 2017/2018. They are all counting on changes in NMC chemistry for 40-60kWh packs. But the boondoggle of spending $50k each on DCFC will outlast that car. Precisely because the government is slow and the funds are scarce, the they shouldn't be wasting money like this because you bought a first generation battery pack and charger.

Nissan is has a huge part in the mess that is L2 charging in the U.S. Now they are screwing us further with promoting idiotic DCFC solutions. Didn't we waste enough money on the Blink network?

techmaven said:

Now they are screwing us further with promoting idiotic DCFC solutions.

Click to expand...

What do you propose? Doing nothing while waiting for something better to come along in four years?

RiverBrick said:

What do you propose? Doing nothing while waiting for something better to come along in four years?

Click to expand...

First thing is to look at the BEV's that will be on the road in 2020 and 2025. We're talking 40kWh is likely the minimum, with the vast majority clustered between Telsa's existing 60kWh and 85kWh battery packs. Realize that if they do get the advanced NMC chemistries out the door (next generation Leaf, etc.) in 2017/2018, by 2020 we're talking DCFC at 100kW+. Also, we're hoping to be talking about hundreds of thousands of BEV's being sold year, hopefully going into million's by 2025.

DCFC is very expensive right now and will continue to be expensive. The Bosch CCS unit for 25kW is $6,500, and that's w/o outdoor pedestal or a method for payment. A typical combo CCS/CHAdeMO unit is around $50,000-65,000. That's all without installation. Installation costs are huge for 3 phase 480v. 50kWh DCFC total cost is something like $20,000 (heavily subsidized) to $75,000 for *each plug*. On the other hand, you can buy an 80A J1772 (20kW) for $2,500 with pedestal that will be reasonable to charge a 150kWh battery pack overnight in 2025. That investment will be amortized for at least 10 years. The 20kW J1772 can charge pretty much every EV sold in the U.S.

However, we have a chicken and egg problem. Since Nissan amongst others have been myopic at the L2 charging amperage, we have a lot of L2 charging installed at 24A and 30A and they are in the wrong places (Walgreens, Whole Foods, etc.). In 2025, pretty much every hotel, every shopping mall, ski resorts, parks, etc. need high amperage L2 charging and a lot of it. Again, remember the 5:1 to 10:1 cost differential. For a 60kWh Nissan BEV, does it make sense to charge at 24A? With 200 miles of EPA range, do you really charge at your local grocery store? No. We need lots of destination charging. Like 200 plugs at an airport. Like 10-20 for each hotel. 25-50 for each ski resort. Think of what it would mean for 50 BEV's to travel to ski resort and try to charge. We need to be able to fill a 60kWh battery in 6 hours... it doesn't help to fill it in 1.25 hours and have a line of 10 people waiting. Are you getting off the slopes to move your car from a DCFC? 25-65kW DCFC doesn't cut it, because it is too expensive and therefore too few plugs and it is both too fast for overnight (at a hotel, are you moving your car at 2:00am to let someone else charge?) and too slow to realistically support long distance travel. Until that infrastructure is built out, why would we want to waste government money on DCFC?

Instead of pushing for more DCFC, we should be pushing Nissan/BMW and others for higher speed L2. At least 10kW (40A J1772), preferably 20kW. That infrastructure is necessary no matter who is supplying the BEV and will make sense even in 2025. If Nissan ships a 60kWh BEV, does it makes sense for them to have only a 6.6kW L2 charger? No... they have to ship at least 10kW at point in order to be able to charge the car in under 8 hours overnight at home. Then those owners will look around and have the problem that we have so many 24A L2 charge points. At least the Mercedes B class can take 10kW charging - it should have an option for 20kW and that makes more sense than putting in CCS. It makes more sense for Nissan to move the money that they spend on subsidizing 50/60kW DCFC to higher speed L2 - a retrofit for existing cars. The battery pack in their cars can take 20kW from a J1772, but they'd rather play a marketshare game with CHAdeMO instead. And therefore we waste money installing idiotic DCFC.

techmaven said:

We need lots of destination charging.

Click to expand...

Yes, destination charging is needed and L2 can handle that , but 50 kWh DCQC is for another purpose, regional trips. For example, the gold standard where I live is Quebec City to Montreal, which can be up to 175 miles one-way. Indeed, many people here tell me they will not consider acquiring a BEV unless it allows them to complete this journey in a reasonable time, even if they only make the trip twice per year.

If you double the range of the existing LEAF you still come up about 13 kWh short of making it without recharging. This is in good conditions. Factor in the prevailing wind from the West, cold Canadian temperatures, battery degradation, and a 20% safety margin and it's more like 33 kWh. Even driving at the legal 100 kph instead of the prevalent 115 kph (which is hard enough to convince people to do) would leave a deficit of ~15kWh.

80A L2 is only 20kW for the ultra-rare times there's 250V service. The median voltage I see at commercial sites is ~200V, so I'd expect most 80A public stations to be ~16kW. This translates to 1-2 hours of recharging for a 175-mile trip, well over the public's threshold of tolerance. However, 50kW reduces that to an acceptable 20-40 minutes.

Maybe it won't take off, but I think you can make the economic case for L3 highway charging @50kw. So much of it will be top-offs, and seeing people getting used to having to plan an extra 30-45 minutes along a highway seems like a good trade-off, if its not the main use of the vehicle and otherwise saving them thousands in gas money every year.

All this is assuming economics explain behavior. Myself, I think EREV works best.

Since when has government been efficient or long-term thinking in how they spend money. That being said, I think this is an amazingly great idea. Those of us that have embraced BEV, and own BEVs, see writing on the wall, and we assume everyone else does too. That isn't the case. (Here's hoping that Elon's vision is correct). We don't have the next generation (or 2) of cars or charging technology or charging infrastructure to use. This is what we've got. There is nothing prohibiting them being updated in the future if (when) the above 3 items change. Also, this investement is literally nothing compared to what will be invested in the future for infrastructure around the world if BEVs are truely successful. My thoughts are that it is good there is political will to making this happen, we should embrace and encourage it while it lasts (just in case). Also, Tesla isn't the only player, and the BEV movement will likely fail if it remains the only serious player. Putting in chargers that can accomodate multiple vehicle manufacturers is a must. (Now, if we could just get our hands on that elusive CHADEMO adapter.)

DNAinaGoodWay said:

I so wanted to attend the big EV rally in Montreal this year. If VT also builds out sufficient QC by the next one, we will come up. We love Montreal.

Click to expand...

Any idea why all the Vermont CHAdeMO and dual CHAdeMO/CCS Combo installations are clustered in the Northwest of the state? Are there different utility companies and the one up North is pro EV infrastructure, whereas the one in Brattleboro doesn't see the need?

DNAinaGoodWay said:

What ever happened to Tesla's CHAdeMO adapter? I thought it was available already. I've seen pics of some on PlugShare anyway.

Click to expand...

Those pics are from beta-testing, or from people who have been lent the adapter for special occasions. It's not yet for sale. Apparently, there are compatibility issues to resolve with certain CHAdeMO stations. afaik it works with all the major players in this corner of North America. (Quebec's AddEnergie, AV, Fuji, Nissan and Eaton) so I wish I had it.