CHAdeMO Remains Leader Of Fast Rechargeable Cars Sales So Far This Year

JUL 23 2016 BY MARK KANE 49

Worldwide DC Fast Rechargeable Electric Car Sales (estimated) – EV Sales Blog data

Worldwide DC Fast Rechargeable Electric Car Sales (estimated) – EV Sales Blog data

CHAdeMO plug and inlet

CHAdeMO plug and inlet

Plug-in electric car sales data combined with estimations of DC fast charging capability via EV Sales Blog shows that it’s not that easy to overcome CHAdeMO and its first-mover advantage in the plug-in space.

In the first five months of 2016, the number of CHAdeMO-compatible EVs sold was ≈42,750 – three times higher than the ≈13,500 CCS Combo registered (U.S. and European versions) and twice more than the ≈21,700 Tesla standard (separate in North America and Europe).

Editor’s Note: See also the full report for the end of 2015 here.  For this exercise we are omitting the Chinese GBT standard (which is growing the fastest of any DC charging protocol) due to its regionality.

The race between charging standards should gain even more momentum with an upgraded Nissan LEAF arriving in early 2017, and more CCS-compatible models hitting the market, while Tesla continues to ramp up production and deliveries on its own.

Stay tune for more volatile changes in the near-future.

DC Fast Rechargeable Electric Cars Fleet (estimated) – EV Sales Blog data

DC Fast Rechargeable Electric Cars Fleet (estimated) – EV Sales Blog data

source: EV Sales Blog

Categories: Charging

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

49 Comments on "CHAdeMO Remains Leader Of Fast Rechargeable Cars Sales So Far This Year"

newest oldest most voted

Upgraded Nissan Leaf in early 2017 or new Nissan Leaf? Tell us more, when we should watch a car show, Paris or LA? :-).

I’m guessing Paris, mostly because I hope so.. 😀

“…it’s not that easy to overcome CHAdeMO and its first-mover advantage in the plug-in space…” Why would there be an assumption otherwise? The CHAdeMO standard isn’t the most popular worldwide by a very large margin simply because it was first. I suspect that most new installations worldwide (except Japan / Korea) include both CHAdeMO and whatever regional standard is applicable (CCS Combo 1 in US/Canada, CCS Combo 2 in Europe / UK, and 22kW/43kW Chameleon also in France / Europe). CHAdeMO retains its lead for many reasons: 1) Yes, first mover is important. CCS was so slow to be committee designed that the first US manufacturer to actually use DC charging had to make their own (Tesla Supercharger). 2) It’s recognized worldwide as an official player. Yes, even in EU, where German politicians / auto makers did their best to stop / delay / outlaw CHAdeMO. The international body IEEE also recognizes it as “System A”. 3) It’s the exact same plug worldwide. The folks who are driving around the world in 80 days in a bunch of Tesla cars can’t even use the Superchargers on different continents. Sad, really. So, what do you think they are using for DC… Read more »

Heck, I almost forgot the number one reason, but I’ll make it six:

6) The number one sales volume EV in all history uses CHAdeMO exclusively, worldwide.

Tony, do you understand why they put limits on voltage and current in these standards? I can’t see any good reason to do this. If someone makes a car that can draw 350A it will still be able to charge on a charging station that can only provide 100A. The same is true the other way so why limit things in the standard?

I also don’t fully understand what happens if you build something that exceeds the standard. If you build a DCFC that can operate at a higher current is it a problem? The only thing that I thought might be an issue is if it related to the communication between the car and the charger. Do you know where I can get my hands on the chademo CAN bus communication protocol?

The CHAdeMO and SAE CCS Combo 1 standards are both “open” protocols. For about $50 to $150, you can buy the specification from the respective association.

I’m not sure if I understand your question, however. If the charger is 350 amps (like CHAdeMO will have next year), then what that means that it can charge from 1 amp to 350 amps in one amp increments. It will be compatible with any battery between 50 and 500 volts.

So, if you plug in a 2011 Nissan LEAF to this future “350kW” charger, it will still charge at 120 amps / 48kW max, because the VEHICLE ALWAYS CONTROLS THE CHARGE RATE.

As the battery get full, it will reach it’s maximum voltage (395 volts for a LEAF). The current MUST be reduced so as to not exceed the voltage of the cells, per Ohm’s law. The vehicle’s BMS will send a message to the charger repeatedly requesting less and less amps until the battery is full.

Then the vehicle will request “zero amps”, which is the shut off message.

I hope this helps.

Hi Tony, thanks for the response, I’ll have a look at the standard.

I am still unclear as to why the associations limit the current. As you point out it is not possible to overload either the car or the charging station so why specify a limit on either? Seems crazy to me, even the upper voltage limit seems a bit bizarre. I can under stand a minimum operating window for voltage to make sure car and charging station are compatable but why put an upper limit in place. Its not like a modern day leaf charges at 500V so why not set minimum upper voltage to 500V and let the manufacturers decide where to stop.

Well, all the hardware in the protocol will be sized to meet the 350 amp requirement.

So, sure, you could build a 10000000 amp charger and a car that car handle 10000000 amps. But, the pins that are designed to interchange in all other CHAdeMO compatible cars will likely melt.

Not much of a standard then, eh?

As crazy as it sounds I don’t think that setting a 10000V and 10000A limit would be such a bad thing. If you design a car that can only handle 400V and 350A it will never ask for more and if you design a charging station that can only output 400V and 350A it will never dispense more. I guess what they are trying to avoid is people making cars that need 500V and charging stations that can only provide 400V but if that is the case then perhaps they should specify a minimum – i.e. the “maximum voltage the unit can supply must be greater than 400V”.

Thinking about it, I just can’t help but feel that perhaps if the standard hadn’t been limited then Tesla might have at least adopted the communication protocol of Chademo for super chargers. Even if the plugs had been different if the communication was the same then we would be in a far better situation right now or at least Tesla owners would have a smaller adapter. I can’t ever imagine a future where someone plugs their Nissan Leaf 2.0 into a supercharger.

The second part to your question, if I understand it correctly, is what if the car is 350 amp capable, but the charger is only 100 amp capable.

The answer is EXACTLY what happens today when a 120 amp capable LEAF plugs into a 100 amp charge… the car will get between zero and 100 amps.

The request ramps up at a maximum of 20 amps per second, therefore after 5 seconds from the start of the charge, when the 350 amp capable car requests 101, 102, 103, 104, etc, it obviously will only get 100.

The car can request any amperage between 101 and 350, and it will still just get 100.

Love our LEAFs… CHAdeMO works reliably almost everytime… Never left me stuck. Looking forward I hope Nissan and others continue to support it. Also wouldn’t mind having a CCS on the JPlug just to have a few more chargers available. CHAdeMO just works.

I think that’s a great idea, too, but I suspect that they won’t for obvious marketing reasons.

The same reasons that Tesla doesn’t add competitors inlets to their cars.

> but in reality it is 350 amps * 500 volt capable = 175kW

That is in theoretical reality then. In the physical world, as it is today, there simply aren’t any vehicles out there that can charge at 500V. Practically every single EV (excluding garage projects and other outliers) on the market uses a charging voltage up to 400V.

In practice, therefore, you cannot draw more than 400V * 350A = 140 kW. If they advertised this as 175 kW they ought to be fined for false advertising (unless it was made clear that 175 kW is a theoretical number currently unachievable regardless of what car you choose).

It’s not “false advertising”… it’s a technical limit. Should somebody make a car capable of the full capacity of the 175kW charger, it will charge at 175kW.

They are NOT advertising that, however. They are advertising 150kW.

I was attempted to show the disparity in Public Relations specifications versus the actual limit. As you know, the 100kW / 200 amps chargers obviously don’t do 100kW on a 400 volt car, either;

200 amps * 400 volts = 80kW max

Tony, I respect and admire what you’ve done with CHAdeMO conversations but I am afraid you are beating a dead horse, at least in the United States. One thing I know is that people buy simplicity over reason and the single CCS plug design is much simpler than the two plug CHAdeMO design. And now with the federal government pushing hard for a standard, plus with most the US and European manufacturers adopting CCS, there is going to be a lot of pressure for CHAdeMO to disappear.

But don’t fret, it took us over five years to get ourselves in this mess and it will at least as long to get ourselves out of it.

The U.S. federal government isn’t “pushing for one standard”. There have been attempts in other countries, like Germany and EU, but so far, they have all been unsuccessful.

Even China and Japan has their local standard plus Tesla Superchargers.

Sorry, Charlie.

The federal government plans to invest billions of dollars in development of electric charging infrastructure. Do you really think the government is going to want to squander that money on competing technologies, especially technologies that are not supposed by American manufacturers? Your blind if you can’t see CHAdeMO being forced off the table.

Well, I don’t think they’re going to do any more, or any less “squandering” of money than normal.

Yes, the U.S. government will support what industry tells them to support, which based on the ACTUAL companies listed, means:

1) CHAdeMO
2) CCS Combo 1
3) Tesla Supercharger

Thats what I expect. They will squander a whole bunch of money on other competing alternate fuel sources, like hydrogen, natural gas, etc.

Don’t worry… they’ll burn through 4.5 billion in no time.

For the sake of the country, I hope you’re wrong.

Is the country falling apart if there was the following in every town and city in this great land?

85.5 octane
87 octane
89 octane
91 octane
95 octane

Oh, wait… we already have all that.

Wow … ~25k + ~50k + ~125k + ~225k + ~350k + ~400k =
~1,175,000+ Electric Cars with DC Fast Charging CHAdeMO connectivity.

In Norway the Chademo percentage of registered BEVs with DC fast charging is 51%. CCS is 34% and Tesla is 15%.

There would be a higher percentage for Chademo if the Outlander PHEV was counted but it isn’t economically or practically viable to use the Chademo port on these. Charging for 30 minutes and paying some 75 NOK (9 USD) for 35 km is silly and afaik the chademo port is removed for future Outlander PHEVs. I don’t know the price for fast charging in other countries or if their version of the Outlander PHEV even has the Chademo port but the statistics in this article might be somewhat misleading if these are counted.

I’m sure you are right, but what they really should have done is make the battery pack larger rather than remove the CHAdeMO port. Or better yet, make the pack larger and equip the car with a decent onboard charger like the ZOE has. Then you’d AC charge with Type 2 for NOK 1,- per minute at up to 43 kW, and a CHAdeMO port wouldn’t be needed anymore. I think it is a real pity that nobody focuses on the onboard chargers at all. In time, we ought to get a *lot* of type 2 points. These are ideal for destination charging because they are cheap to implement and it’s easy to make flexi-chargers with multiple points sharing a single power supply (so that when not all points are in use, the not-used power otherwise needed for one point can be re-routed to the points that are in use). But nobody focuses on this. So today the ZOE can charge essentially exactly as fast as any CHAdeMO or CCS car at any fast charging station using Type 2 and paying less than half (which is only fair because type 2 is really cheap to implement), but can charge 12-15… Read more »

In Italy nearly all the chargers faster then slow are 22 kW AC chargers. But there are hardly any DC chargers, CHAdeMO or not, apart from Tesla SuperChargers. So you can go on holiday in Italy with a Zoé and with a Tesla. No other options yet.

The Outlander PHEV was counted in the Chademo numbers.

True, probably many Outlander users won’t use the Chademo plug, just like many other PHEV owners that don’t really charge their cars, be it at home or outside, but there are others that will use it.

Although the Outlander PHEV will not charge at maximum rate because of the small battery, there are users that use Chademo when available.

To give an example, i know one Outlander PHEV owner that only fueled his car with gas 6 months after buying, because he took it the on summer holidays, during those first months, he charged it everywhere he could, at home, at work, during grocery shopping, etc…

Watch CCS will gain and become number one, just give one or two years.

I hope not. I’d rather see that CCS gave up. We don’t need multiple standards, in fact it’s detrimental to the market.

Funny, that’s what people were saying almost 2 years ago when I leased my Leaf and first started looking at EV sites. Still hasn’t happened.

Have you noticed the increase in CCS stations in the last six months? Texas has gone from having zero CCS stations to having more than fifty. The only reason there are still more CHAdeMO stations is that a lot of Nissan dealerships have CHAdeMO charge but even some of those are dual CHAdeMO/CCS chargers.

Does this ever get old?

The very real fact is that CHAdeMO, CCS and Supercharger are all going to be around quite a while. Why?

Because all three will have the relatively equal capabilities. Just like a Ford, Dodge and Chevy / GMC pickup. Just like a Microsoft and Apple computer. Just like an iPhone and Samsung phone. Just like Exxon and Chevron.

Just like BetaMax and VHS, just like BlueRay and HD DVD, some technology is going to be dominant in the end and it’s not likely to be CHAdeMO.

You’re completely right… it may be something COMPLETELY different, like when DVD surpassed both VHS and Betamax.

Almost all new chargers in regions with CCS Type 1 or CCS Type 2 are double standard. The fight is over, you can forget it and calm down. Nothing is going to change, they’ll slowly reach parity. In other regions like South East Asia CCS is never going have a foot, and look how good is it for them. Japan has single standard high density charging network, except few attempts by Tesla to obstruct standard.

I don’t think a handful of Tesla Superchargers will “obstruct” the 6000-7000 CHAdeMO chargers in Japan!

In China, however, the government is putting pressure on Tesla to use the GB/T chargers. I suspect they will win in China, particularly since Tesla just signed a deal to build the cars in China.

I think CHAdeMO is losing. I am not able to evaluate the technical prowess of any charging standard, but at the end of the day manufacturer support is what will determine the outcome. People forget that we are in the “much less than one percent” stage of development. Far more charging points will be added in the next few years than have been built so far – so the current situation can change quickly and dramatically. Right now, it seems to be only Nissan left supporting CHAdeMO. PSA has announced it will switch to CCS, and with that I believe every single European manufacturer is on the CCS side. Tesla has been a member of CharIN since its inception, but upgraded from “associate” to “full” member earlier this year and presumably supports CCS over CHAdeMO (it’s own Tesla charging is based on Type 2, which actually supports DC charging as well as AC 1-phase and 3-phase – making it a bit difficult to see why one should bother with these huge, awful plugs that both CHAdeMO and CCS utilize). Hyundai (and thus KIA) has also abandoned CHAdeMO in favor of CCS. GM supports CCS. I bet Ford will too, and… Read more »

Tesla Supercharger is not based on CCS protocol. All DC protocols worldwide use CAN communication, EXCEPT the CCS protocol.

Yes, in Europe, Tesla uses a Type 2 Menekkes plug, and that is for one simple reason… they needed three phase AC charging in Europe.

Sorry, Charlie.

I didn’t say Tesla used CCS protocol – theirs, like the plug in Europe, is based on Type 2. Type 2 has specified both 1-phase and 3-phase AC, and DC charging. It’s just that typical Type 2 power points almost never implement DC and offer either 1-phase 230V or 3-phase 400V AC instead.

Anyway, you didn’t reply to my main point, that of manufacturer support, which to my mind makes your “Sorry, Charlie” appear less sharp than was perhaps intended.

Do you think Nissan (and, at best, the other Japanese manufacturers) can carry CHAdeMO alone?

I agree that it will be a good while until it is gone, but in my opinion the sooner we decide to focus our investment on a single standard, the better. And the only realistic option then appears to be CCS.

I’d rather have a 110 new locations with only one standard than 100 new locations with CHAdeMO and CCS. If the marginal cost of adding in CHAdeMO support is so low that we get the same number of locations for a 0.2% higher price I’m ok with adding more multistandard stations. But I don’t believe the overhead is that low.

If there was to be a current day “one size fits all” plug, it would be the Mennekes Type 2 plug. That is specifically NOT a CCS plug, as that plug has two large pins kludged on the bottom, and also, it is only used in Europe. The Mennekes Type 2 plug is not used in the USA. *** Do you think Nissan (and, at best, the other Japanese manufacturers) can carry CHAdeMO alone? **** They don’t need to “go alone”. As long as CHAdeMO equipped cars control 50% of the EV market, it doesn’t matter if it’s one manufacturer, or 100. Yes, I believe that the several protocols will be around a long time. *****I agree that it will be a good while until it is gone, but in my opinion the sooner we decide to focus our investment on a single standard, the better. And the only realistic option then appears to be CCS.**** I’m getting a little queasy with you thinking that a kludgy CCS plus (or a CHAdeMO plug) is our future. They’re fine for now, but I sincerely hope we can do better in the next generation. Sorry… Charlie…. I don’t subscribe to CCS as… Read more »

Kia did not yet dump CHAdeMO. And there are complete countries you cannot cross from one side to the other with CCS, but you can with CHAdeMO. Examples: France and Estonia.

…and Japan.

Hyundai has announced that it’s going to use CCS going forward – for both brands. How is that not to dump CHAdeMO?

The Soul EV is still selling with the Japanese system, if that’s what you meant. But that clearly isn’t relevant to the future of each protocol.

The statement was… crossing from one side of a country to the other.

You can do that in Japan with CHAdeMO.

Also, I never saw that Kia was also to get CCS. That wouldn’t surprise me (with Hyundai using CCS), but I’ve never seen that press release.

Just a lot of speculation.

That is an indictment to the pathetic offerings of CCS cars and CCS charging availability.

What do we have for CCS?
-eGolf . . . boring LEAF clone delivered 5 years late
-BMW i3 . . . quirky car with polarizing looks, a high price, and a lawsuit slamming the REx.
-Spark EV . . . nice little commuter car that is not very attractive and is only a compliance car with limited availability.

Meh weak offerings. At least the Ford Focus is adding CCS so we get one more. But it is a clunky gas-car conversion.

Ironically, the best selling pure EV from the big 3 that endorsed CCS is the Fiat 500e . . . and it DOESN’T have CCS. If it did, I probably would have bought one by now.

Well, at least there is one good CCS car on the way . . . the Chevy Bolt. A 200+ mile EV with CCS is decent. (But the Tesla Model 3 will completely overshadow it if Tesla is able to deliver.)


LEAF – sure, that’s great
iMiev – short range, barely in production
Outlander – even shorter range, only in Japan and Europe
Kia Soul EV – just plugging along

Your talking about individual models but most of the US and European auto manufacturers have adopted CCS. The US and European auto manufacturers have been slow to provide models that use CCS but these are some of the largest auto manufacturers in world and momentum is growing in providing CCS electric vehicles. Next year we should see a flood of EVs on the market that use CCS. CHAdeMO is going to have a very hard time maintaining its dominance after next year.

If CHAdeMO (or any other product or service in the world) is not “selling”, it likely won’t be around long.


The Bolt doesn’t have CCS either, by default. In what has to be said basically constitutes a cheat to pretend the price is lower, Chevy has made it “optional”. Although you’d have to be retarded to leave it out, IMO.

Weirdly different tastes we’ve got! I think the e-Golf is quite desirable. It’s certainly a lot cooler looking and more up to date (naturally) than my LEAF. BMW i3 is an *awesome* little car. I would have chosen it has there been used ones a few years old so I could avoid some of the worst depreciation, but in March 2015 when I got a car this aspect made the LEAF appear the only real option. (e-Golf too simply being too new!) It’s the most efficient car on Earth. It is light for a battery-laden car. It’s agile. It’s zippy. It’s groovy and ultra modern. It’s got interiors made from recycled materials. It is itself nearly 100% recyclable. For me – a single old bachelor with no kids – it’s not such a bad choice. It’ll be good to see hundreds more BEV models make it to market, but I know which camp I expect to make more cars that appeal to me. It’s not soulless Toyotas, that’s for sure. It could possibly be Fords – although I hate their stance today and their current crop of compliance cars, they certainly know how to make a good chassis and cars… Read more »