Kia Dealership In California Installs ABB Multistandard Fast Charger – CHAdeMO + CCS

3 years ago by Eric Loveday 41

Image Via PlugShare

ABB Multi-standard Fast Charger at Kia Of Stevens Creek – Image Via PlugShare

The Kia Soul EV launches in the U.S. this month, but ahead of that launch some Kia dealers in the U.S. are already charging up for the automaker’s first mass-produced electric vehicle.

Though the Kia Soul EV supports the CHAdeMO fast-charge protocol, Kia dealers in the U.S. are generally installing the ABB Terra 53 configured for multi-standard (CHAdeMo + CCS) DC fast charging.

One of the first dealerships to install this fast-charge unit is Stevens Creek Kia in San Jose, California.

Terra 53 is described by ABB as follows:

The Terra multi-standard DC charging station 53 CJ combines a CCS (Combo) and a CHAdeMO outlet and has a total output power up to 50 kW.

The Terra 53 series is the successor of the popular Terra 51/52 series. Terra 53 CJ is compatible with electric vehicles using the CCS (Combo) standard or the CHAdeMO standard. Typical charging times range between 15 and 30 minutes.This charger is a cost effective solution to charge all open standard DC capable cars en route. The Terra 53CJ is also highly suitable to complement an existing AC charging network.

Some are now wondering why Kia is supporting CCS too.  Is it just a fluke?  Maybe the dealership mistakenly ordered the wrong charger.  Officially, Kia’s stance is that it aims to promote and support the entire electric vehicle community, not just those who happen to own a CHAdeMO-capable EV.

If you hit up PlugShare, you’ll find the following comments on the Stevens Creek Kia fast charger:

Screen Capture Of PlugShare

Screen Capture Of PlugShare

In fact, over in Europe, Kia recently installed the continent’s highest-powered multi-standard fast charger to date (100 kW CHAdeMO and, presumably 100 kW for CCS too).

So, it’s no fluke.  Kia will support both fast-charge standards.  Wouldn’t it be swell if others automakers followed Kia’s lead?

Meanwhile, over in Europe Kia is installing ABB multistandard fast chargers capable of 100 kW.

Meanwhile, over in Europe Kia is installing ABB multi-standard fast chargers capable of 100 kW.

Tags: , , ,

41 responses to "Kia Dealership In California Installs ABB Multistandard Fast Charger – CHAdeMO + CCS"

  1. mutle says:

    Tesla (or possibly the owner of the locations) has also installed a CCS/CHAdeMO multi-standard charger at the location of their new Super Chargers in Italy.

  2. Bill Howland says:

    So how much to charge there? Or is this being done under the rubric of Greenwashing?

  3. Brian says:

    If we’re going to have multiple standards, I’m glad to see that at least some entities will support both. Isn’t Kia part of the SAE CCS camp? Ultimately it could be that they want to move their EVs over to SAE without abandoning existing drivers. Using CHAdeMO today lets them take advantage of existing chargers in the ground.

    1. Al S says:

      Kia is in the CHAdeMO camp.

      The CCS camp is

      1) GM (produces a limited number of Sparks w/CCS)
      2) Ford (no DCQC port)
      3) VW
      4) Audi (no DCQC)
      5) Mercedes (no DCQC)
      6) Fiat/Chrysler (no DCQC)
      7) BMW
      8) Porsche (no DCQC)
      9) Renault (no CCS)

  4. Ocean Railroader says:

    Lately I have been more worried about them putting in some more DC fast chargers then them raising the capacity of the existing EV batteries on the road.

    If the costs of a muti standard charger are only 10% to 15% more then a one standard charger then it would make sense to go for a muti. This reminds me of the reason why I bought a DVD and video player VCR in that I could buy DVD’s but not have my old videos have to get thrown out.

    The only thing I hope Kia does is that they put some of these muti standard chargers in the EV Badlands in California. Along them trying to put some DC chargers that go from San Fransisco to Denver or Salt Lake City. Also I really hope they put some muti standard chargers in the EV void in Appalachia.

  5. Lou says:

    I find this very heartening news. It tells me that they truly do support the overall expansion of EV’s, not just one charging standard over another. Frankly, if I were a car dealer looking to sell EV’s, I would love it if there was a steady stream of cars parked at the QC station (or their Level II’s) as it would constantly reinforce that EV’s exist, they work great and charging them is hardly a problem. Just putting it out there on a regular basis that an EV can be a great choice for a buyer will help sell their KIA Soul EV. In addition, the goodwill shown towards other EV brands’ drivers cannot hurt, as we will remember those dealers who treated us well. Now, let’s get the KIA dealerships in Philly to sell the Soul EV.

    1. Ocean Railroader says:

      If they put in two more quick chargers near the middle of the New Jersey Turnpike in Central New Jersey and two quick chargers in Aberdeen Maryland it would make it possible to drive 300 miles in one day in a Mitsubishi i-miev.

      If Kia is spending money to build quick chargers then it’s starting to look like Kia wants some of Nissan’s sales action. More then the Kia being a car they have to build. In that a lot of the complacence cars don’t have DC quick charging on them.

  6. So an 125A DCFC.

    Kia Soul EV:
    Max. Battery Voltage: 360V
    Connector: CHAdeMO
    Max. Charging Power: 45 kW … note: not 50 kW as going 500V at 100A would destroy the battery! Expect charging power above 50% SOC to be significantly reduce below max. power available.

    name: ABB 53 CJ
    Maximum output power: 50 kW … max. number like a redline on ICE
    output type: C (CCS), J (CHAdeMO) … ABB connector type codes
    Maximum output current: 125A … most important number to look at for determining charging speed.
    Output voltage range: 50-500V … only need to check if your EV pack voltage falls in operating range for the charger (voltage set by battery, not charger)


    BTW: the 10-20 kW CCS/CHAdeMO Wall Charger on page 6 is interesting! 😉

    For speed, it’s better to Amp-up than to Power-up!

    1. wraithnot says:

      I used the new ABB CHAdeMO/CSS charger at Point Reyes Station this weekend to test out the fast charging capability of my wife’s new BMW i3 and the specs marked on the charger connector were 50 kW and 500 V 165 A for the CCS side and 500 V 120 A for the CHAdeMO side.

      I don’t know if this is the same model charger as the one at the Kia dealer and I don’t know how much power the i3 can handle because 1) BMW doesn’t show you any useful charging stats other than “charging active” and a guesstimate when charing will be complete and 2) we arrived with 72% state-of-charge (per the i3 iPhone APP) since I didn’t want to be stranded if the charger was broken. But based on the 165 Amp rating for the CCS, it seems the charger I used should be able put out an honest 50 kW at a voltage that corresponds to a nearly empty EV battery.

  7. Tech01x says:

    Again, 50kW DCFC is a waste of money.

    To really help out the EV cause, they should be helping establish the L2 charging infrastructure that makes sense for the long term. More time, effort and money into L2 charging at hotels, parks of all sorts, tourist attractions, and so forth. For each DCFC they put in they could install 4-10x L2 charging.

    Each of these DCFC installs will have a short service life. They are sized too small and put in the wrong places. When it comes time to install 100kW+ DCFC, they will all have to be pulled, new wiring and possibly new transformers have to be installed. Almost all of the investment for the 50kW EVSE will be thrown away.

    1. Brian says:

      I was going to disagree with you vehemently, but I’m glad I finished reading first. I think that DCQC will be very important for transitioning from EREVs to BEVs. But I agree that the chargers should all be the full 100kW. Even though today’s cars cannot all use it, tomorrow’s cars will. We also need DCQC to be installed along freeway rest stops and truck stops. Installing them at dealerships may help sales in the near term, but is not a good long term strategy.

      1. Al S says:

        Electricity rates will have to be changed to allow 100kW. Except for the largest commercial clients, that kind of power will cause huge “Energy on demand” charges.

        1. Bill Howland says:

          Yeah, every time I say the same thing they act like I’m taking the punch bowl away at the party.

          Demand charges are a fact of life, unless someone gets a really cheap deal on solar panels and battery packs.

          1. Bill Howland says:

            On the plus side, the cars aren’t there for long, so a business case could be made that a long line up of cars queuing up would mitigate the rather hefty demand charge. 45-50 kw isn’t the end of the world for a big dealership, and there’s the ‘intangible’ marketing benefit of appearing ‘more green’ than their competitors.

          2. Another option is scaling power level based on use … as a station is used more often, then average power level raises reducing demand peaks.

            Billing options could inclued non-demand and demand pricing. In normal use the the periods of demand will become a regular pattern. Additionally some that would have gone to paying utility demand charges could be used to add 10-20 kWh of battery storage capacity. This could be used to burst charge 20-40 kWh charge, or to spread grid power draw over multiple 15 min. demand windows to lower average power spike.

            The way to reduce demand charges is scaling grid power to match the amount of usage a location receives. The busier a DCFC is the greater the opportunity to eliminate demand charges. Something that Charging Networks need to think about and adjust their billing models accordingly.

          3. Brian says:

            I hear you guys. I’m not oblivious to demand charges, and it’s a problem that needs to be solved. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try to solve it. Bill – if you’re just saying that this is a problem that will never be solved, I would say that is a little bit like taking away the punch bowl. No, you are just pointing out that the punchbowl is attracting flies 😉

            Tesla’s approach is to buffer their superchargers with a battery bank. This makes sense to me. If you just have an occasional car topping off, then the batteries can slowly recharge between cars. If you have a long line of cars such that the batteries can’t keep up, well maybe it’s worth paying the demand charge because you have so many customers!

            1. Bill Howland says:

              Battery Bank on Tesla Superchargers? AS for any of the ones showcased on InsideEvs, there haven’t been any solar panels or batteries, unless they’ve added them later.

              A few high profile ones, such as ones in Arizona have solar panels. But I have not seen a battery pack system showcased on Inside EV’s yet.

              Rather suprising since I was under the impression that was what the Solar City Plant currently being built in Buffalo was supposed to make. Maybe if they put in a token 2-car model s charger they’ll also put in a solar panel or 2 plus a battery cell or two.

    2. DaveMart says:

      That is assuming that the underground work only allowed for one 50kw charger.

      If it allowed for two or more than it can be re-purposed for instance for the dual charger as used by Kia.

      Its not necessarily true that all the people doing the specifications will not have a clue about future proofing.

      Some won’t, but some likely will.

    3. Ocean Railroader says:

      I disagree with there needing to be more level twos. In that when I go on to plug share there are tons and tons of level twos. But with the level twos it takes 16 hours to charge a Mitsubishi i-miev from empty to full. So in away the level twos are kind of useless if you need to travel 200 miles in a day. In fact I think the government when they spend money on electric car chargers should spend most of it on new DC Fast Chargers. In that the DC fast chargers allow you to take long road trips.

      In fact on plug share when ever I plan out a road trip I only look at the DC fast chargers and not the level twos. In that I would plug in the car that the hotel room. But the DC Fast chargers really open up things when I’m on the open road.

      1. Tech01x says:

        In the U.S., Level 2 charging is up to 20kW using 80A J1772. The advantage of 80A J1772 is nearly every EV sold in the U.S. can charge there, albeit at a slower rate.

        Most BEV’s will fully charge overnight on a L2 – the onboard charger is usually specifically sized for that situation. Therefore, full day parking (6-10 hours) or overnight (8-10 hours) will substantially or completely charge a BEV. At 20kW charging, 6 hours will be about 100 KW into the battery. We are not likely substantially exceeding 100 kW in a BEV for quite some time (pressure will be to hold prices down).

        The cost to install a 80A J1772 is about $2,500 for the EVSE + install costs, which should be roughly $3,500 to $5,000 at most commercial venues. It can use existing 240V single phase service.

        A 25 kW CCS charger offered by BMW, for instance, is $6,500 + install costs. Most combo CCS/CHAdeMO EVSE’s cost $25,000 to $50,000 with an additional install cost of $10,000 to $25,000. This cost is basically lost within a few years as everyone starts shipping cars that will have long distance cadences that require 100kW+ charging.

        Further, we need lots of destination charging. Many outlets, not just one here or there. 25kW to 65kW DCFC, whether CCS or CHAdeMO are a short term “fix” that is a complete waste of money.

        1. “In the U.S., Level 2 charging is up to 20kW using 80A J1772”

          This is the SAE standard, in theory.

          In reality over 95% of Level 2 J1772 chargers in the US are not capable of providing more than 7 kW. eg: The EV Project Blink EVSE have been restricted to 24A vs. 30A restricting max power to 5.2 kW vs. 6.6 kW.

          A big gap in charging equipment exists between 7 kW and 50 kW. This is why there is strong demand for both AC and DC chargers in the 10-25 kW range of power. It does really matter if the connector is CHAdeMO, CCS, or J1772 … anything is better than nothing. (cost for CHAdeMO vs. CCS or dual connections is minimal).

          1. Tech01x says:

            80A J1772 is not “in theory” because you can actually purchase products that support it:



            This will charge a Model S with dual chargers at 20kW, or roughly 60 mph. Further, it will also charge anything else that supports J1772 (there are some compatibility issues, hence the ability of this EVSE to support 70A instead of 80A charging).

            Even more economical would be this:

            At 48A for $899, this EVSE will charge a Model S 85 kWh pack with dual chargers in about 8 hours.

            Most DCFC require 480V 3 phase service which is far more expensive to get… or they are 25 kW at more than 3x the price of 80A J1772.

            For those cars that have 30 kWh or less battery packs, 20kW charging means charging to full in ~1.5 hours while retaining compatibility with any number of EVs. Again, the cost is 1/3 to 1/10 the price of slow DCFC.

            We have a chicken and egg problem. Since only Tesla Model S’s with dual chargers and Tesla Roadsters really use > 40A charging, many EVSE’s don’t support anything higher than 40A. In reality, since the original Nissan Leaf only had a 3.3 kW charger, lots of the original EVSE’s were installed with only 24A charging. A complete disaster and misread of what a proper EV national EV charging network should look like by 2025 or 2035. Instead of clamoring for slow DCFC, EV enthusiasts should be pressing Nissan, BMW, and others for 80A J1772.

            1. Tec101x@

              I’m with you on the need for >40A charging being deployed. Not so much on board with blaming auto manufactures for the hold-back on infrastructure.

              When the Dept of Energy awarded contracts to install 15,000 Level2 EVSE to ChargePoint and ECOtality they could have set a minimum spec. After all the goal of the EV Project was to deploy infrastructure that was to be an example between 2010 and 2020 (10 years) .

              The choice of 3.3 & 6.6 kW seems even more odd when the GM Saturn EV1 had 6.6 kW and the Detroit Electric had 7.2 kW in 1914.

              Realize the cost of a AC-to-DC conversion power electronics is the same regardless if its onboard a vehicle, or mounted on the wall. A 80A AC J1772 EVSE is just a fancy plug and nothing without an onboard charger. eg: $6500 BMW DC charger will take up similar space and add similar cost to a vehicle.

              Adding more costly AC charging would likely mean reducing battery capacity to keep costs down. As an option 10-20 kW does make sense.

              The advantage of public DCFC is it can be used by many EV so the costs are shared. Also, by not having extra AC-to-DC power electronics onboard removes the added cost and weight. This can reduce the cost of the EV, or be used to provide a better user experience in other ways (putting value towards better infrastructure, or added battery capacity).

              For the majority of BEVs in the next 3-5 years, it will not be common to find greater than 10 kW onboard AC charging. Public DCFC of 15-25 kW deployed for ever 100-200 BEVs will cost much less that installing 15-20 kW onboard AC charger in ever BEV a manufacture produces.

              1. Bill Howland says:

                The turn of the century Baker ELectic that Jay Leno has had an even simpler “EVSE”. Since you charged it up at some public charge points in the downtown areas, you merely had a resistor box to drop the 105-125 volts from the Edison DC network down to the 72 volts (or when charging, more like in the 80’s) until the car was charged.

            2. Bill Howland says:

              480 volt 3 phase by most utilities is the same price under the same rate schedules as 120/240 single phase service. If you say otherwise, that’s just perpetuating a myth.

              Another myth is that they only operate on 480. Several manufacturers offer multiple voltage inputs, and the only reason single phase models are not that common is for the above first reason, namely you can get 3 phase at exactly the same price.

              Even if a homeowner purchases a small used fast charger, obtaining 3 phase at any voltage is a low-cost endeavor. A 50 hp (37 kw) phase converter is under $3000. Assuming the fast charger is especially fincky about phase balance on the input, it should be good enough for any 25 kw fast charger.

        2. Bill Howland says:

          80 amps is almost never 20kw. Another myth.

      2. Tech01x says:

        To further clarify, the initial L2 charging current, 24A was basically sized for the Leaf or MIEV type of vehicle. It’s terrible.

        But L2 charging in the U.S. actually means up to 80A J1772, which is 20kW. You can install that yourself for $3k. You can buy a BMW sponsored CCS charger that will do 24kW for $6500 + install. Which one makes more sense?

        Would you put in multiple 50kW CHAdeMO at your hotel or tourist attraction at $30,000 to $75,000 each? Or does it make more sense to install 10x 80A J1772 for $30,000?

        Destination charging is the backbone of the EV revolution. Part if it is at the home. Part if it is at common destinations where your car may spend 6-12 hours. That’s always going to be more convenient than going to any DCFC, including Tesla’s Superchargers due to the relatively slow speed of charging.

        1. wraithnot says:

          The hardware to convert AC to DC is pretty similar whether it’s in the car or in the stationary charger. At least initially, Tesla used a stack of twelve 10kW chargers identical to the on-board model S chargers in each of their superchargers. The best overall solution would be to minimize the amount of time this charging hardware sits idle whether it’s in the car or in a stationary charger.

          If each charging location is only used occasionally then you probably want to put the expensive charging hardware in the car and make the charging locations as cheap as possible. But if charging locations are heavily used (e.g. the Fremont Tesla supercharger) then it makes more sense to put the expensive hardware in the stationary chargers and keep the on-board car chargers cheap.

          Anyway, my point is that 50 kW DC chargers definitely have a place as long as the majority of EVs have ~20 kWh batteries that can’t handle 100+ kW of charging power. I think the Tesla Model 3 will be quite successful and I’ll probably plunk down my deposit as soon as Tesla will take my money. But I also think there will be far more 80-100 mile commuter EVs out there in the foreseeable future- especially when the unsubsidized price falls below a Honda Civic or a Toyota Corolla.

          1. Tech01x says:

            No, 50 kW charging never makes sense. It’s too expensive for too slow. For 20-30 kWH cars, does it really matter if it charges to 80% in 20 minutes or 40 minutes if the price of having it done in 20 minutes means 10x less plugs?

            Imagine a world with 100x the number of BEV’s. We can’t have these single DCFC plug installations. The costs of 50kW EVSE’s are sky high for what they actually deliver.

            Further, by 2020, < 30kWh BEVs are likely gone as battery improvements means 40-100 kWh BEVs are normal.

            1. Wraithnot says:

              At least on Tesla supercharger stops, there is a BIG difference between a 20 minute stop and a 40 minute stop if a sit down meal isn’t involved. 20 minutes is a walk to Starbucks and a bathroom break. 40 minutes is a walk to Starbucks, a bathroom break, and 20 minutes waiting for the car to finish charging. Besides, even an 85 kWh Model S tapers down to 50 kW when it has about 190 miles of range.

            2. Wow … good thing Tesla decided on 120 kW chargers vs. 50 kW chargers. (because “50 kW never makes sense”)

              It’s a case of building a network for a strategic use case vs. one-off charger installations. In Tesla’s case the network is for BEVs with 180+ mile range with en-route charging notes spaced ever 150 miles or less.

    4. wraithnot says:

      I disagree. I find standard L2 charging suboptimal for basically all my applications. The standard 30A flavor is simply too slow to fully charge my 85 kWh Model S battery overnight on a road trip (I always choose the hotel with a 50 amp 14-50 outlet vs the hotel with standard L2 charging for this reason) and it’s excruciatingly slow when you are waiting for the charge to finish. My wife just bought an i3 BEV and 50 kW would be perfect for the one day a month when she needs to drive a bit farther for her work than the car’s range (the current plan for those occasional trips is to either hang out at the Stonestown Galleria and use their L2 charger or borrow my Model S).

      The main use-case for 50 kW charging is short range EVs that occasionally need a bit more range while driving around large metro areas. And I imagine cheaper EVs will have reasonably short ranges for at least the next several years.

      1. Tech01x says:

        L2 charging includes 80A charging, or 20kW. That 14-50 is L2 charging, just without the benefits of an EVSE. There is no good reason why L2 is 30A except for Nissan and Mitsubishi’s myopia in concert with the DoE. They basically rushed product out the door and the DoE was complicit in helping fund an inadequate L2 charging network for widespread BEV use.

        We really need to push for higher speed L2 charging to be installed in most places where people park for a while in anticipation for the new BEV’s due to arrive in 2017-2020. Does anyone really think that Nissan’s upcoming Leaf is going to stay at 24 kWh? To compete against a Model 3, all the various BEV’s are going to be 40-60 kWh in battery sizes. The patterns and needs for BEV charging is dramatically different in a U.S. where 50 kWh battery packs are the norm.

        1. Wraithnot says:

          I’ve gone on quite a few road trips in my Model S and I’ve encountered exactly one 70A J1772 (the bowlin’s travel center in Picacho peak AZ). If I had opted for twin chargers for an extra $1,500, it would have saved me about 30 minutes since we only needed to top off a bit between Quartzsite and Tucson. I value my time, but my time isn’t worth $3,000 an hour.

          I agree it would be nice if J1772 chargers were all 70 or 80 amps, but that’s not how things turned. And since there are so few EVs that can take full advantage of such chargers, I don’t see the situation changing anytime soon.

  8. Mike I says:

    Some California NRG eVgo Freedom stations that are being upgraded to have SAE Combo chargers are also installing this ABB 53CJ station. This is good because it is in addition to the (usually Nissan) CHAdeMO charger that is already installed. This allows two concurrent CHAdeMO sessions or one CHAdeMO and one SAE Combo at the same time. However, some locations like the Mountain View one just have the old Nissan charger plus the ABB 53C, so it’s still only one session for each type.

  9. Al S says:

    They might consider triple-standard stations. (They already exist in Europe with the 3rd being AC Type 2 43kW).

    Except with the 3rd being the Tesla standard, now that the patents are open.

    Nissan, BMW and others may migrate to the Tesla technology in a few years and of course there are already more Teslas on the road than CCS compatible EVs. Naturally, you would start by installing in areas not covered by Superchargers.

  10. Bill Howland says:

    I find it interesting that, with Tesla being the one exception to this, everyone else seems to be very concerned about the electricity bill.

    As a for instance, I went to a SUNCOUNTRYHIGHWAY gathering in Hamilton, Ontario (‘e-mazing race’), and, at their new recreational center (basically 2 indoor hockey ice rinks), they had the most number of EVSE’s in one location in all of Canada!

    Depending on your point of view, the possible discouraging fact is that all 10 EVSE’s are, while SunCountryHighway installed and branded, are only the 24 amp 195 volt models, (around 4.5 kw tops – some of the more distant evse’s only had 192 volts at my roadster).

    When one thinks SunCountryHighway, one automatically thinks of 80 amps charging docks. Not here. Someone had to think of the cost of the 600-208 volt transformer, (I don’t think the local hydro utility allows much cheaper and more efficient autotransformers – an archaic restriction in my opinion), or else there was also concern that with ten 80 amp docks there wouldn’t be enough juice left over on the 600 volt 800 amp service for the 2 chillers, pumps and evaporative condensers besides all the lighting.

    So in one way this facility sets a national record (10 evse’s at one location), but also has the distinction of having those be the third smallest evse’s available, second being the 16 amp models and the smallest normal evse being the GM VOLTEC at 15 amps.

    1. Al S says:

      Not in one location, but Montreal may hold the dubious record for the most public 208V-240V stations without any unit being over 30A.

      The ALT-Germain Hotel group is set to install HPWC’s at their dozen or so properties in Canada, including one in Montreal, but even that wouldn’t help your Roadster.

      1. Bill Howland says:

        Yeah, but those 206 1/4 volt 16 amp evse’s would charge my VOLT at full speed if I ever decided to visit.

  11. Lou says:

    For a great many readers(probably a statistical majority right now)this argument is superfluous, because many of us don’t even have access to _any_ public Level II stations, or they are so few and far between that any charging speed setting would be better than nothing. However, as the batteries increase in size, drivers will want to take advantage of the faster charging speeds possible. Funny that much of the comments above deal with overnight stays at hotels(what hotel even has charging? It’s not typical here in the Northeast)or LONG trips in S’s. Probably the largest % of EV drivers are driving LEAF’s or Volts(with plenty of Tesla’s, admittedly, but a minority in the overall numbers)and we simply don’t take really long trips yet in 24 Kwh battery cars. QC makes longer trips possible, but not an everyday occurrence. So, I think that this discussion is actually focusing on future EV batteries. It brings up several important issues, as once a car has a 50 KWH battery, then it will allow the driver to easily take long trips, and the availability of fast charging takes on much more importance. Keep up the discussion, I am learning a lot from the comments. Thanks!

    1. Bill Howland says:

      Agreed with your comments Lou….

      Another misconception is that you always need a full charge. The vast majority of the time I use a public charger, it is just to get a bit more, maybe 15 – 20 %. Depending on the time I’m going to be at the location, even a 16 amp charging docking station is adequate.

      The only time I need more is when I’m going to those “drive electric” things in Syracuse, Ny, which is far from home, and way beyond the range of my battery round trip.