Almost 15,000 Charging Stations Now In Place For France. 85,000 More To By 2020

NOV 9 2016 BY MARK KANE 11

15,000 Charging Points In France - October 2016 (source: Avere-France)

Almost 15,000 Charging Points In France – October 2016 (source: Avere-France)

France has reached a milestone of 15,000 charging spots located at some 4,507 places, and is now accelerating the pace of new installations.

Renault ZOE

Renault ZOE

As a comparison, the U.S. has over 37,000 charging spots at over 14,600 places

In total, the number of charging stations increased in France by 50% in about a year’s time, as the country just passed the 10k mark last September.

It is interesting to note that more than half of the charging stations in France are concentrated in three regions: Ile-de-France (with 1,631 locations), Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes (at 461) and New Aquitaine with 395 spots.

It is expected by the end of 2017, the total number of charging points will reach 20,000 units.

However, if a new government proposal launched from the Paris Motor Show has its way (via an additional EUR 10 million worth of support targeted locations in residential areas and business parks), the next three years will bring a really big move – up to ~100,000 charging points by 2020 (up from the previous goal of 45,000).

source: Avere-France

Categories: Charging

Tags:

Leave a Reply

11 Comments on "Almost 15,000 Charging Stations Now In Place For France. 85,000 More To By 2020"

newest oldest most voted

What’s the percentage of electricity coming from nuclear power plants in France? Ca. 75% or more?
Never mind, just always call it “green” 🙁

notting

That ratio can be reduced by deploying more renewable energy sources.

Nuclear is the greenest power there is. Even solar panels output more CO2 than nuclear per kWh produced, over the total lifespan of both. No wonder climate scientist James Hansen (and several more) calls out for more nuclear power.

Nuclear is clearly not the greenest power there is. Is not true that solar outputs more CO2 nor does it wind power, and you have forgotten the radioactive residues and the risks (Chernobyl, Fukushima, etc.).

It is true. That is a fact. Nuclear has the lowest carbon foot print per kWh generated electricity of all currently commercial sources.
So installing wind or solar in France to replace nuclear would increase the emissions.

You know that it also kills a lot less humans than solar and wind. Even when including 40-50 year old first and early second gen reactors and their accidents.
Compared to new reactors and their safety the difference is a lot higher in favor of nuclear.

It is very sad that one of the absolute greenest sources of energy gets dismissed too often, even by fairly intelligent people, based on irrational emotions.

Can you explain how solar and wind power kill humans?

Have you heard about the casualties caused by Chernobyl accident through decades? And all the other accidents…

If you say that solar and wind power produce more CO2 that nuclear, I suppose that you have some independent report which states it, could you share it?

I can. Since solar, wind and nuclear don’t have emissions in regular operation to kill people the ways to kill are by producing the parts, building the plants, operating and repairing them or by accidents. For solar it’s mostly about installments, especially roof top installments which leads to deaths. For wind it’s mostly about installments but also during repairs. There have also been accidents involving both solar and wind. Yes I know about the accident of the obsolete technology and safety systems (or rather lack thereof) plant in Chernobyl that killed people. If you compare deaths per kWh generated then nuclear is a lot safer. So if we would choose to generate it that way fewer people would die. (but none of solar, wind or nuclear is dangerous…what’s dangerous is coal, oil, natural gas and biomass that kill many many many times more than solar, wind and nuclear combined) A couple of questions to you. What is safer out of driving across the country or flying? And why are more people very afraid of flying than driving? Here you got the conclusions from a report from IPCC to read: https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg3/ipcc_wg3_ar5_annex-iii.pdf What is interesting is that onshore wind now is down… Read more »

I don’t have the answers to your questions, and honestly I don’t understand why are you asking them. I can only give my opinion: people is usually afraid of flying because of psychological reasons: lack of control, sensation of vulnerability, etc. While driving a car, they are the ones controlling the steering wheel, when flying they can only sit and let the pilot control the plane.

Again, I think that your statement that there are more casualties because of installations than because of radiation leakages and explosions should be accompanied by data, otherwise it seems overestimated and subjective opinion.

That said, I completely agree with you that the real problem are coil, oil and natural gas.

Yes it is about that percentage. It’s great, one of the countries with the greenest electricity.

If only more would have done like France and gone green.
Imagine if massive polluters like Germany or Poland would have done the same, how the environment and everyone that needs to breath the air in those countries and around them would have thanked them.

For Northern Europe, The south of France is a popular holiday destination still in reach within a car drive.
Therefore France is known for its infamous black saturdays in August.

Many Northern Europeans have (plugin or full) electric cars. So expanding the chargers network cuts both ways. For the France inhabitants as well for the many tourists. It makes France more attractive for tourist with electric cars.

France has cheap electricity, even cheaper at night. EVs will be interesting from the point of how they use utility energy.