California Earmarks $5 Million For Install Of 475 Charging Stations

JUN 20 2014 BY STAFF 33

More Public Chargers Are Always Welcome

More Public Chargers Are Always Welcome

The California Energy Commission (CEC) approved substantial funding for the install of public charging stations:

“To continue building the infrastructure needed to charge California’s growing number of electric vehicles, the Energy Commission approved 15 grants totaling more than $5 million to install 475 electric vehicle chargers in communities throughout California, including the cities of San Francisco, Burbank, Torrance and San Diego and the counties of Ventura, Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo, Orange, Riverside and Los Angeles. These grants are funded by the Alternative and Renewable Fuel and Vehicle Technology Program (ARFVTP).”

CEC Commissioner Janea A. Scott, adds:

“The Alternative and Renewable Fuel and Vehicle Technology Program continues to support California’s goal of 1.5 million zero-emission vehicles on the road by 2025.  These community investments assist in building the network of charging stations needed, and help accelerate growth in the electric vehicle market.”

More public chargers, to the tune of 475, coming soon to select cities in California.  That’s the summary of what was announced yesterday by the CEC.

Categories: Charging

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

33 Comments on "California Earmarks $5 Million For Install Of 475 Charging Stations"

newest oldest most voted

I wonder if they will be a variety of chargers or a single charger design with all 3 charging abilities, SAE/Chademo/J1772

If any are QCDC, then it’s hard to believe they wouldn’t be CHAdeMO at least.

The question is whether the i3 is popular enough in the eyes of those receiving the grants to justify the cost of adding CCS1 hoses as well.

Are there any regulatory requirements regarding charging type linked to the grants?

Don’t forget the Spark EV, too. It also has CCS.

I think it’s safe to say that any QC stations funded will be required to support both CHAdeMO and CCS given that the eVgo locations that are being installed in California are also fairly soon required to be retrofitted with CCS plugs.

You really think the state should not install the standard endorsed by the Big 3 US automakers?

Why don’t the big 3 US automakers (2 actually) install DC fast chargers for their customers?


No doubt, there will be some complainers out there griping about the money spent to put in charging stations and how unfair it is.

Then, they and their children will go through another asthma attack and still won’t put the relationship between those fossil fuels they continue to love and the deterioration of their lung capacity.

I hope the buildout of new stations goes well and provides the benefit to the population that they are hoping for. Wouldn’t it be great if, like Tesla, they would erect solar panels at the charging sites to help offset the energy used to recharge the future.

Blueindy is going to install more than double this… and in a Midwestern town.

“The BlueIndy car sharing program beginning December aims to flood downtown Indy by the end of 2015 with 1,000 level 2 chargers and 500 Bolloré Bluecars available from 200 locations for smartphone-app-guided, RFID-wielding customers to hop in and use.”


If they put in a few DC Fast Chargers I would be able to use them more then level 2 in that DC Fast Chargers would really help out when I take my new EV from Chicago to Virginia.

That is $10,500 per station. I hope at least some of the stations are DC fast charge.

Not likely at an average contract price of $10,500. This price-point typically includes ~8,000 for a Level2 kiosk and ~$2,500 for network connectivity and operational costs.

Here is a similar $109M contract for SoCal that breaks out to $59M deployment & $44M operational grant for 5500 Level2 stations (550 sites with 10 L2’s each)

A. I hope they learn from Tesla who has follow a true transportation highway model. Rationale: a significant number of people Who Actually Own an electric vehicle,do main charging, whether 120 or 240, at home.

With that in mind:

A possible plan would be to place chargers 1. just off or near highways with 2. fewer or no chargers placed in congested downtown shopping malls 3.none directly near store entrances where ICE customers block them, but rather a bit more distant. 4. and have a much greater proportion of DC fast chargers.

In regard to rental/car share ev’s I really don’t have any thoughts to suggest on placement, but feel that is a separate issue. I’d love to hear Chelsea Sexton’s thoughts on the charging of car share charging. Myself, I belong to an informal ev car sharing. We have access to the university ev car charging solar array. I suppose downtown stores who want business could pay to have chargers placed near them and some code redeemable by customers could avoid fees…

They could also work w/employers & apartment complexes to push home & work charging. Use the $ to offer some incentives.

Public parking decks are good locations for L2 chargers as well since people use them for home & work parking.

Absolutely – that money would be better spent to provide incentives for apartment and condo “home” charging facilities.

Excellent idea. Workplace charging would be another better use of money also.


The Tesla charging model is awesome except for one thing . . . it requires huge expensive batteries for it to work. And that is great for people that can afford the Model S. And if they can push battery prices down so a 200 mile range EV can be purchased for $35K, it will cool. But for now, it is a pretty small system.

FYI: The Tesla SuperCharger network is designed for a PEV with a 150 mile or greater operational range. Many distances between two Superchargers are 120 miles, or less. (common where terrain has hills)

Bureaucratic efforts in this area have been ineffective (to put it mildly). The SuperCharger model is the polar opposite. I hope they pay close attention to it. However, I have my doubts as the people charged with the success of the CEC program don’t live and die by the success of their program, unlike Tesla. I bet there aren’t even that many EV drivers in the bunch.

What I would like to see first is a “philosophy” discussion about the goals of EVSE placement. Are they using a “filling station” model or a “distance travel” model like Tesla? In the past there hasn’t been much thought as to the where and why of placement and how it fits general usage patterns.

Also, they probably could make more headway toward increased EV uptake by focusing on the “apartment problem” rather than sprinkling a few chargers here and there.

See p 4-5

Looks like just the CEC is just dumping more money into obsolescent and nearly useless slow-charge AC stations.

I don’t see a single DC charge station in the list.

Actually there appear to be several “fast” or DC chargers but that’s the exception, not the rule.

Taken in aggregate, this is a pathetic showing. It’s mainly a bunch of L2 (and some L1!) chargers in locations that will, for the most part, see little usage unless they are free. There are several fleet charging station and workplace parking requests that will get usage so it’s not totally a waste.

Yes, looks like Riverside will get 4 DC’s.

Did I miss any others?

Yeah, the Ontario CNG station wants to install 2 “fast” chargers at 75K a pop. Those are almost surely something above an L2.

And, I love that Honda wants to install 58 workplace chargers at their national headquarters. I want to see the look on upper exec’s faces when they see all those non-hondas charging up at work.

Ah, yeah, since they cancelled the Fit EV…that’s awesome. I hope an employee takes a picture when the chargers are installed and used.

Nice find. You can find more details of each specific grant here:

Sad. DC fast chargers are best for public charging.

The government bureaucrats that think this stuff up do not drive EVs, so they make poor decisions.

Save the L2 AC stations for home and work.


I hate to sound like a broken record, but if the plan does not include CHADEMO chargers on highway 5 north of Los Angeles, then it is worthless.

Highway 5 is the backbone of California, it goes from Mexico to Oregon and is the main path of travel from north to south in a state that is far longer from north to south than west to east.

Tesla understands this, and completed their Mexico to Oregon supercharger network. Chademo chargers north of LA? 0. Zip. None.

It would be much more effective to install QC stations along HWY 101 than I5 between LA/SF.

Current cars that can QC would be much better suited to the speeds seen in HWY 101 and population density is higher as well.

The only EV that is suited to the ~400 mile trek from LA to SF is the Model S and Tesla already has their SuperCharger network deployed very effectively.


Hwy 101 is much better for the low range EVs, and Tesla has taken care of I-5.


Until there are other cars with big batteries, I don’t see much point to DC-fast chargers on I-5 besides the Tesla ones.

Would rather see a smaller number of fast chargers along 101 and I-5 corridors… that would make more sense.

What the hell does Honda want with 58 charging stations at their Torrance campus?

This facility is not easily accessible to casual traffic and one must have a pass to be there.

Surely they don’t expect the overpriced Accord PHEV to start setting any sales records and the FitEV compliance program is just about complete. So… does Honda have something big coming?

The company has always been very tight-lipped about new product until right before customers can go buy it. Maybe there’s something electric coming from Honda for the LA Auto Show?

Maybe their fuel cell cars will be plug-ins?