EVgo Installing First 350 kW Ultra Fast Public Charging Station In The US

Electric Cars

DEC 15 2016 BY JAY COLE 175

Given the recent news of ‘ultra fast’ DC fast charging stations soon to arrive in Europe, it was only a matter of time before the first unit would be installed in the US.

As it turns out, EVgo has announced today that it has broken ground on the first 350 kW public charging station to be added to its network.

Like the "classic" NRG EVgo stations, the new 350 kW terminals will feature both CHAdeMO and CCS protocols

Like the “classic” NRG EVgo stations, the new 350 kW terminals will feature both CHAdeMO and CCS protocols

Dubbed the “World’s Tallest Thermometer High-Power station“, apparently because of its location to the …World’s Tallest Thermometer in Baker, California, the station will actually feature four high-power DC fast chargers, all capable of outputting 350 kW each (perfect for 2019 Porsche Mission E owners).

Terry O’Day, Vice President, Product Strategy and Market Development at EVgo said of the event

“EVgo is laser focused on the needs of our customers and they want faster charging at more locations. The World’s Tallest ThermometerHigh-Power station is an important step for the EV industry,as this new standard will open the EV market to even wider audiences. When this station opens to the public next year, EV drivers will enjoy a new level of freedom.”

Not satisfied at just the stations themselves, the location also includes a solar canopy for power generation, and back-up batteries for storage.  As for charging protocols, the units are equipped with both CHAdeMO and CCS connections.

EVgo expects to have the station completed by June.  Currently the network is in over 60 US markets and feature more than 800 DC fast charging locations.

Categories: Charging

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

175 Comments on "EVgo Installing First 350 kW Ultra Fast Public Charging Station In The US"

newest oldest most voted

Ok, someone needs to plug in a Bolt into this station once it’s online to find out what the Bolt’s max take rate really is. 😉

You should fly to LA area and take a trip to Las Vegas before having your Bolt shipped to MD. Baker is on the way to Vegas, and it’s an excellent location. Just one or two more along I15 freeway, and even SparkEV would be capable of Vegas trip.


Better Not plug in a Bolt it’ll Blow Up!


jim, can you be any more of a fanboi hack?

Are you like 14 and hiding in your parents basement so you won’t have to get a life?


I think you’re giving him too much credit. More likely he’s an asylum patient, and the staff sometimes lets him use their computer because it distracts him from bothering the other patients as much.

Part II of my Bolt blogging adventure.


Part II of my Bolt blogging adventure!


Whoops, not sure how that happened.


Awesome! EVgo has the absolute best charging stations in the Dallas area.

Now that these stations are being installed, there is no reason for automakers to stick with 50kW.

I hope they bring these to Texas ASAP! I45, I10 and I35 between major cities please! 🙂

I’ve read horror stories about their customer service though. Like you have to pray you have no billing issues, otherwise you enter CS hell worse than Comcast. 😮


Yeah I heard that, especially in some of the early years people had issues with them! It would help if they had an app like chargepoint or blink so that you could monitor the charge.

For me, the local EVgo has been my primary charging station for about 2 years now. Charging there once a week (it is a block from my apartment) I have had no issues so far. 🙂

The only billing error was in my favor when a technician set it to “free vend” after installing the CCS station and forgot to switch it back for about a month lol.


Thanks. He’s no longer working for us.

Assuming you really work for EVgo…

Helloooooooooo…..develop an app already that can handle charging station activation/billing, and all that jazz. Chargepoint has had one for years, why can’t you guys come out with one?


Isn’t it just Terawatt?


It certainly is Terawatt’s avatar. Not saying that nobody could steal that, but what are the odds?


Well, crud. Shoulda kept that to myself. I wanted him to install the next upgrade too…


Rule #1 of a good hacker: don’t brag.


Lol Very good advice. Hackers are so wise.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ sven

Do both sides of the roof have a solar canopy or does only the presumably southern facing one have a solar canopy?

Bryan Whitton

Probably both sides with an east – West facing. Frameless, bifacial modules possibly Sunpreme 370 modules. 370 top and 40 watts bottom. They should be using Darfon G320 microinverters as well but I doubt it. In fct I know they don’t.


Means if these panels at higher end 330W pannels and they can fit maxi Qty=100 on this assembly using both sides entirely, this would deliver at best 33KW at best sunny times… Likely half of this in real conditions… So this is a greeny gimmic to show these pannels on the roof here, as they will only provide a 2.2% fraction of the power required here (4x350KW = 1500KW when all 4 chargers work at full power). The 350KW class still is a HUGE achievement if real sustained and some cars get created that could take advantage of this vs < 120KW for the best Tesla P100D with largest/latest 100KWH batteries today.


You would need a nearby solar farm with Battery Storage to run one of these off grid !

John Hansen

You have a partial point, but it’s not as bad as you make it out to be. It all depends on how high the utilization of the station is. If the utilization is near 100%, you’re right. But if the utilization is 10%, then the panels could provide 22% of the electricity.

In any case, what is the downside of putting the panels over the chargers, vs putting them in a field somewhere? They provide a little shelter from the rain and they free up a field for agriculture. Win win. It only doesn’t make sense if it’s substantially more expensive to put them here vs in a field (e.g., expensive racking), or if this wasn’t an optimal location for solar panels (e.g., if it’s shaded by trees).


Rain? Yeah, I hear Baker got some rain just a few years ago….


Baker will get a light intermittent mist in the next 48 hours, as for rain, well not in this storm.


John Hansen said:

“But if the utilization is 10%, then the panels could provide 22% of the electricity.”

That would be only 2.2% of the electricity needed for full usage. Not much to brag about! It’s like putting up a wind turbine at your house. It’s a visible sign that you’d like to use renewable energy, but it doesn’t actually make much of a dent in your monthly electricity bill.

But nothing wrong with this. It’s nice they put up a canopy to keep the rain off, and if it provides a small amount of solar power as a side benefit, then that’s good too.

no comment

baker, california is in the middle of the desert. it is one of the best places in the US to put solar panels.


They needed a sun shade anyways to keep cars from baking in the sun while charging. They might as well put a few solar panels on while they are at it. Seems like a no-brainer.


Exactly. It is not like these panels are going to provide all the electricity for the station but if you are going to build some type of carport structure, why not make the roof surface out of solar PV panels?

That should be true not just at EV charging stations, but EVERYWHERE. And in my area, it is largely becoming true . . . any new carport structure built at a school or corporate campus is generally built out of solar PV panels.

no comment

first, baker is an ideal location for solar panels. second, it’s not like there are a lot of electric vehicles on the road. even if baker is on a heavily traveled road, very few of the cars are going to be electric vehicles. so, assuming that the panels generate 2MWh/month and assuming 40kWh to 50kWh per charge, this station could generate enough solar energy to recharge 400 to 500 electric vehicles per month.


I doubt that they would have 4 cars charging full power non stop 24/24. That would be 100% loading. In reality it is probably less then 10% loading, so that is way less energy. If they get 2% photovoltaic power at 100% loading then that is 20% at 10% loading.


Imagining a demand charge, on 1.5MW, I’d guess they may be better off investing in batteries, to even out a day’s visits?


It says that it has solar and batteries.


I don’t know what demand charges would be in Baker, but assuming quite high though real life $42/kW/month and 4 Porsches getting to the plugs and charging simultaneously at least once every 12 months, and charger(s) actually allowing it, it would end up as 1500*42*12=$756,000 per year. May be cheaper than $2,700,270 list price for 1,500 kW and 6,300 kWh PowerPack installation, that can only last 4 hours at that power and takes a lot of space.

Funny how some die-hard battery zealots like Pu-pu were screaming how unreasonably expensive are $1 million a pop hydrogen stations that can dispense 100 kg in 3 hours, close to 1 MW equivalent 😉

Since I have something to say which is hopefully informative and interesting on this topic, I’m going to ignore most of the anti-EV FUD which zzzzzzzzzz has posted, since it’s obvious his only purpose here is to sabotage useful discussion. * * * * * I think someone in this very thread put their finger on the best approach to equipping EV fast-charging stations with battery packs: The packs should be sufficient to take the extra charge from chargers that are tapering off charging one car, so they will be able to provide extra charge when the next car is connected. The highest charge is only provided for a few minutes, and after that it starts tapering off. So it’s the average charge which needs to be maintained, and battery packs can be used to average out the demand over time. It would be a foolish waste of money to equip EV charging stations with sufficient battery backup to charge EVs faster than the average power draw provided by the grid. Large office buildings all over the world are provided with a high amount of power without anyone endlessly whining about demand charges, and without making them too expensive to… Read more »

$42 quite high? That’s a ridiculous estimate.

The basic large industrial demand charge is $18.nn for SCE.

Do some freaking basic research.

Bill Howland

Many utilities have seasonal demand charges – charging the most when they’re likely to run short of juice.

But your point is taken that during much of the year the demand fine is likely to be closer to $18 than $42.

Most utilities charge much more for ‘low voltage’ customers, as all SC’s I’ve seen articles on to date, are.

My Utility offers a great discount on demand charges for taking electricity delivery at over 4kv, and offers a much larger savings still for taking distribution at 23 kv or higher. The problem is, my Utility requires 2 separate electric services, since they will not GUARANTEE, either particular service will be energized at any given time- hence the huge discount.

But its compelling enough that almost all large supermarkets in my area are *NOT* low voltage (unlike the SC) customers.

Bill Howland

Well I did some research… SCE’s terminology is a bit confusing to an easterner, but if they ever use, or are likely to use 500 kw (TOU-8 schedule)( in other words if the station has a whopping 2 cars charging at once), then the summer on-peak demand almost doubles. And then if there is any battery storage, or ‘distributed generation’ – I assume thats some solar panels – the kwh charge bumps up, ESPECIALLY under ‘option A’ which I think EVGO might be forced into.

It would be illuminating to see an actual bill, since we haven’t even considered Energy charges, which I bed are higher there than they are by me, since alot of their juice is Nuclear, from Arizona.


Yes, I snickered to myself over that solar canopy as soon as I saw it. Even smaller than Tesla Supercharger solar canopies!

Well, its primary function is to keep the rain off, and as a fringe benefit it can provide a few watts. Maybe even sufficient power to offset the energy used for lighting the station?


Primary benefit to keep the sun off.

This is Baker, CA where the average rainfall is <5 inches per year and the average July day temps are 109F.


Obviously it is not grid independent station :/

Some 60 or 100 300W panels would generate significant energy to offset electric bill until the station is heavily utilized. I don’t know what electric power plans utility offers in Baker, but in some places it may allow to avoid hitting high power customer limit and mandatory demand charges that would raise station maintenance cost up to the roof.


PHEVfan said:

“Primary benefit to keep the sun off.”

Look at the photo again. The canopy is mostly transparent, and not providing much shade.

I see what you mean about rain; the annual rainfall in Baker, California is only 3.72″ per year!

But if this is the first deployment of what’s meant to be a standardized station, then it makes sense to put in a rain canopy even if this particular location doesn’t need one.

Josh Bryant

Nice job EVgo!

Now we need some cars that can use it.


I wonder how long before Supercapacitors will render the ICE obsolete ?

It’s moving in that direction.

no comment

while supercapacitors offer super fast charging, they lack charge density. that’s why people are still using batteries.


I would imagine we are at least 5 years away if not 10 sadly.


They also leak charge (self discharge) rather quickly compared to batteries.


There’s some sort of battery/S.C. breakthrough it seems every other month, so far NONE have made it to production…


On the now-defunct TheEEStory forum, on average about once every two weeks or so, someone would link to a new breathless, wide-eyed claim about an orders-of-magnitude breakthrough in battery tech, supercapacitor tech, or some kind of hybrid between the two.

You may notice we’re still waiting to see even a single one of these to appear on the market. So take all of these claims with more than just a pinch of salt.

I do hold out hope for a sudden dramatic improvement in energy density in mass produced batteries or supercapacitors, someday. Heaven knows lots of companies and research teams are working to find a way to do that. But there’s no way to predict when that will happen. It could happen tomorrow, or it could be decades away.


Even if supercapacitors would not work in cars, they would make high power charging stations more realistic by removing high power peaks that electric grid can’t handle.


No. Supercapacitors simply can’t store much energy, period. Not even for just a few seconds. They can charge and discharge instantly, but the amount of energy they can store is very low as compared to batteries.


If only we could diamond coat the capacitor electrodes, we could increase the voltage to 20 times higher values.. Diamond has an amazing dielectric strength of 2000 MV/m.



Alan said:

“I wonder how long before Supercapacitors will render the ICE obsolete ?”

That hope drove my participation in TheEEStory forum (R.I.P.) for several years. You may notice we’re still waiting.

It’s possible there will be a significant breakthrough in the field, but don’t hold your breath.


It’s never too soon!


When was the 350 kW standard confirmed? 7x power? I’ll speculate the site is designed for this level of power but the equipment is not yet. Maybe by late 2017?
At least this is future proofing the site.

no comment

does anyone know what the voltage is at the charger head? it’s hard to imagine that you could do 350kWh with 240V.


It’s DC, it’s whatever voltage the battery needs, so long as it’s within spec of the standard. Usually around 400v DC.

no comment

you can’t arbitrarily set the voltage. so when the voltage is set, you have to deliver enough current to hit the power target. that’s the problem – high current means high heat dissipation, which means that the cord and charger head could get too hot. my thinking is that it would have to deliver at least 600v-800v at the charger head, but who makes an electric vehicle with a battery that can accept that voltage?

the reason why i mentioned 240v is because tesla has probably done about as much as you can do with a 240v power source in the supercharger, which delivers around 130kW. to deliver 350kW from a 240v power source would mean that the power source would have to deliver current in the mega-amp range.


Where do you get that supercharger operate at 240 volts?
Like any actual DCFC, it’s regulated 360-400 v.d.c.

But otherwise, 350 kW would not be pratical if even possible at 400 volts

no comment

unless you happen to believe that supercharger stations magically create their own power, the power used at a supercharger station has to come from some power source. in the US, power is distributed off the grid at 240v.


US Residential electricity single-phase 120/240V. US Commercial electricity is 3-phase and can be 120V, 208V, 240V, 277V, or 480V. Likely superchargers use 480V mains.


Ahum I seriously doubt that a supercharger installation goes for 400 volt. They are likely hooked up to the feeeder net of 10kv to 50kv via their own transformer at least that the way its done in europe


The utility transformer feeding the supercharger equipment would be high voltage on its primary side, as you say. But, the secondary side of that transformer (which is what feeds the supercharger equipment) isn’t outputting anything greater than 480V AC.

Bill Howland

They don’t operate at 480 volts. They operate at 277 volts. Just like the ones in the cars.

no comment

so, in europe is tesla setting up its own substation and then running its own distribution system to the various supercharger stations? or are they taking a 50kV feed for a single supercharger station?

Bill Howland

I don’t know about Europe – but most run off the standard 240Y/416 system they have there.

Just look at a Supercharger Nameplate.

The one thing I’m unsure of is whether they use the chargers from the Euro Teslas in the Euro Sc’s or do they use the American Chargers? They’d seemingly get a bit more power with the 416 volt Euro Stuff, but in the states and Canada, they use 277 volts, even though 277 is non-standard for Canada. But Lowe’s does it so what the hell. Also, supposedly GM. I went to McMaster University and I was surprised that everything was 480 volts. I asked and was told that the basically AMERICAN auto industry is not going to change just because Canada in general doesn’t use it.

no comment

i could see using 3-phase power if you were running a factory that used rotating machinery. but why would you use 3-phase power in a supercharger station?

Mike I.

DC Fast Charge is basically a rectifier. If you have all three phases rectified you are most of the way to a smooth DC supply.

By the way, here are the actual label specifications of a Tesla Supercharger cabinet:
380-480VAC 3-phase 4 wire L1/L2/L3/N 192A max per phase.
So, on an American utility transformer outputting 277Y-480V, you would have 277V * 192A * 3 = 159,552 VA They put as many as 6 of these on a 750 kVA transformer because the transformer can take more than the nominal rating for short periods and the chance of all 12 stalls demanding maximum draw is pretty small.


DCFC is more than a rectifier. With DCFC the charger also has to transform the voltage to what the vehicle requests.

So if a car asks for 350V you have to give it 350V, not simply at least 350V.

So you’ll have to have a rectifier, smoothing capacitor and a switch mode power supply in there with output regulation (not just primary regulation).

no comment

thanks for the information.

Bill Howland

“why would you use 3-phase if there is no rotating machinery?’

Well the chargers that make up the supercharger bay are all single-phase units, but are all running off a 3 phase circuit due to the total loading.

It varies greatly in the states – Commonweath Edison has a 500 kw single phase limitation, but my utility – British owned National Grid, in my area has a 100 kw limitation.

Since most Supercharger charging bays draw over this from even just 1 bay, it would be reasonable to assume the ‘bay’ will run on 3-phase in my area, and of course, most SC have multiple charger bays.


277V is not 3-phase. It’s a single phase of 3 phase 480V (IIRC).

There’s not really any chance superchargers run on higher than 480V. The insulation requirements become annoying and the semiconductors needed to convert from a higher voltage to 480V would be pricey.

It’s much cheaper to just use a transformer to 480V and then input that to the supercharger conversion circuits (multiple parallel superchargers). So I’m sure that’s what is done on superchargers and in Europe.

Also, one of the ads on this page is completely messing up the ability to input text in Chrome. It doesn’t happen with ads blocked. Please don’t put ads on the page that make the page harder to use, you just encourage blocking.


U.S. households are delivered split-phase 240V, but commercial installations are delivered 3-phase power at considerably higher voltages, depending on the needs of the customer. I am certain that a 350W DC charger would be powered by much higher voltage than split-phase 240V.

1) Electrical power is distributed at up to hundreds of thousands of volts AC in the powerlines and at the transformer next to a Tesla Supercharger at whatever voltage it happens to be. That’s worldwide. Yes, there is some DC distribution in the world. 2) The transformer takes those thousands of volts AC and turns it into a 480 V three phase AC output. Each leg of the three phases is 277 volts each. The transformer that Tesla tends to use at an eight stall installation is a 500 kVA transformer. 3) The Tesla Superchargers consume 480 V three-phase AC. The output is 250-430 VDC. Each Supercharger has a maximum capacity of 135 to 145 kW total. Each Supercharger contains 12 single phase charging modules consuming 277 VAC at about 40 amps each, which each produce about 11 to 12 kW maximum output DC. 4) The Tesla car can consume about 270 V to 403 VDC, and up to 365 amps from a Tesla Supercharger. Tthe power limit is 120 kW into the car. If two Tesla cars were charging at the same time on the same charger, then each car would be limited to the maximum share of the… Read more »

In Europe, the transformers output 380 to 400 V AC three phase, which is about 230 V AC per phase, plus or minus a few volts.

Obviously, the Superchargers are capable of operating at any common three phase AC voltage worldwide. In Canada, that transformer voltage output can be 600 V AC or 347 V per leg.

no comment

let me tease out a bit more detail on this to make sure that i am understanding the operation of the tesla supercharger. what comes into the tesla supercharger is a 3-phase, 4-wire connection. the relative potential difference between each phase (i’ll refer to them as p_a, p_b and p_c) is 480VAC, the relative potential difference between each phase and neutral is 277VAC. four supercharger modules are connected to p_a and neutral, four modules are connected to p_b and neutral and four modules are connected to p_c and neutral. each group of modules rectifies its respective phase resulting in delivery of a smoother rectified DC voltage with a sum of the currents produced by each of the 12 modules.

Bill Howland
“The transformer Tesla tends to use is 500 kva” Except in the general case although it could be, it is NOT tesla’s transformer. The site preparation has to be done by the customer, however the transformer ownership remains the utility’s and they are charged full retail rates since these are considered ‘LOW’ Voltage services. The transformer sizing is the utility’s decision. Canadian superchargers get 600 – 480 volt isolation transformers in addition to the utility transformer, at least this is what I was told when asked. They could save money by using autotransformers but they don’t (isolation isn’t needed in this application). The ripple without filtering coming out of this arrangement (or any 3-phase connection) is 4%, and also applies to any portable supercharger bays hooked up 240 DELTA. But then battery charging is such a forgiving activity – after all some teslas charge at North American homes at 19.2 kw with seemingly horrendous ripple (at least compared to 3-phase operation), and the battery seems to charge just fine. They could always add a bit of trivial filtering at the input stage of the charger modules, and indeed must add a bit of incidental filtering to peform the powerfactor correction… Read more »

Yes, I think you understand the concept… 3 legs of 277 volts, each with 4 Tesla charging modules at 11-12kW each.

By the way, it’s the same charging module sitting under the rear seat of a Tesla Model S or X. Yes, you can plug any Tesla powered car (except the Roadster and maybe the original Smart ED) into 277 VAC.

One interesting twist is that as of last year, these modules were redesigned to handle 72 amps @ 277v = 20kW.

With a little imagination, you can imagine the same Supercharger box with 12 of the 20kW capable modules, correct? 240kW capable?

Does that sound anything like what the Porsche car will be doing? About 350 amps DC * 700 VDC “peak” = 245kW

Starting to see any other trends?

Bill Howland

They don’t but they could. Look at a SC charger bay nameplate.


If I remember correctly the Model S has 74 parallel series of 6 cells and 16 such modules in serial configuration.
So in first view they could make 37 parallel series of 12 cells and 16 such modules in serial configuration to get double the charging voltage, or 800 v instead of 400 v. When charging is over connection switch transform it into 37 parallel series of 12 cells and 2 parallel series of 8 such modules to get back to 400 volt for car driving operation. Charging at 400 v would also still be possible.


The new standard will be 350A at 1000V. (Vs 200A at the current 100kW/ 500V peak standard we’ve currently got.) Remember, these are DC, so it only sort of compares to the 240 delivered to your house.

AKA if you keep the same battery configuration most cars have (~400V) they will peak out at ~140 kW, which is still plenty!


The 400 v will perhaps remain for operation of the car but the battery charging configuration voltage will likely go higher then even 800 v and end up at 1600 v, perhaps even 3200 v or 6400 v, although 1600 v is the most likely medium term outcome. That means 4, 8 or 16 times smaller charging cable sections or indeed for a same section 4, 8 or 16 times more power transfer capability.

Yes, 140kW is almost the same as today’s Tesla Supercharger: Power = volts multiplied by amps 350kW = 350v * 1000a Current production EV battery voltage is 350-400 volt maximum. The Porsche car may have 800 volts. THERE IS NEVER A TIME WHEN MAX BATTERY VOLTAGE AND MAX AMPS HAPPEN AT THE SAME TIME NEVER ****************** MAXIMUM PROTOCOL AMPS: Tesla – 365 amps max CHAdeMO – 350 amps max CCS – no specific public specification, likely over 300 amps ****************** So, how fast will these “350kW” charges charge different cars? All voltages are the estimate of when maximum amps reaches the PEAK CHARGE voltage during max amps: Porsche future EV – 245kW = 350 amps @ 700 volts (just a well educated guess… it won’t charge that fast for very long… a few minutes maybe) Kia Soul EV – 74kW = 200 amps @ 370 volts GM Bolt EV – 74kW = 200 amps @ 370 volts (NOTE: assuming the car is programmed to handle 200 amp, like the Kia Soul EV with its battery at half the size) Nissan LEAF – 47.5kW = 125 amps @ 380 volts Tesla Model S/X/3 – 47.5kW = 125 amps @ 380 volts… Read more »

You generally have a point about 350kW being the cap of the standard and actual EVs aren’t likely to operate right up to that level. But your statement that “max amps never occur at max volts” isn’t really true, or at least you can’t make that blanket statement. I worked at an EV manufacturer where that was exactly the case – constant current at max current up to max voltage, and then ramp down current while holding max voltage, standard CC-CV charging algorithm. There’s no law of physics that would prevent Porsche from doing something similar, or at least get really close.

Current eVgo’s ABB chargers are 62.5 kW peak (500V, 125A) and they are marketed as 50 kW units. It’s possible they are changing their conventional marketing figure to bloat 350 kW, but it is also possible that it is indeed capable of 350 kW if a car demand it.

The big question is, what is the current rating for these high power chargers? If they’re playing marketing game, they could have non-spec compliant 3.5kV at 100A to boast 350kW when it’d only be 40 kW peak (400V, 100A) for today’s EV.

A side note, I saw a Mercedes B class charging at public L2, and felt so bad for her. I hope you can help those poor souls with Jdemo for them soon.


Tony Williams said:

“…no car will ever operate at that speed at 350 amps * 1000 volts. None.”

As Priusmaniac said, we can expect future EVs to be built to accept charging at much greater power than the power at which their powertrains operate.

Charging a BEV for, let’s say, 350 miles of range in ~8 minutes is going to take a heck of a lot more power than the amount the car’s battery pack puts out to push the car down the highway!

Interesting to see serious discussion here of 1000+ volt charging. I’ve seen far too many short-sighted claims that EV chargers will never, ever use high voltage charging, which in the USA is anything over 600 volts. I think it’s inevitable that will happen, and perhaps within just a few years. In fact… perhaps that is already happening with some of the newer PEVs?

no comment

the reason why i am skeptical about high power charging is that by the time that you are delivering kilovolts to the charger head, you are probably going to see a highly automated charging system. that is probably going to be an expensive charging system. then there the question of how often this expensive charging system would be used. if people do most of their charging at home, they might only need public charging once a month, or so. in that case, how would the economics of public charging work out? you would have an expensive charging station, which could see less traffic than a typical gas station.

unless government regulations forces auto companies to stop making gasoline cars (good luck with that one…at least in the united states) people will have to be convinced to abandon ICEVs for BEVs. most of those people will not be EV enthusiasts. so the proposition is that the BEV would have to offer comparable cost, comparable range and comparable recharge time to what the consumer has come to expect in an ICEV.


Indeed it seems like it would be difficult to put in a charger and simply have it pay for itself on use fees right now. Even if it’s right on the middle of the LA to LV route (as this is) will people really even try to use it if there is only 4 and they might all go down (or busy) at once?

“no comment” commented: “…how would the economics of public charging work out? you would have an expensive charging station, which could see less traffic than a typical gas station.” Well of course. But then, a typical gas station gets about 1100 customers per day, at least according to one website on California statistics. So far at least, EV charging stations get much, much less traffic. Selling gasoline is so competitive, which means selling at such a low profit margin, that gas stations typically have an attached convenience store to generate the overwhelming majority of the station’s income. That’s not likely to happen with for-profit EV charging; you’re not likely to see an EV charging station on every corner. With fewer stations, competition will be less fierce, and profit margins will be fatter. Hopefully that means they can be profitable with substantially fewer sales per day. The down side, of course, is that with most EV charging happening at home or at work, EV charging stations will be less common and harder to find than gas stations, even when the EV revolution is complete and gasmobiles are almost vanished from the roads. But with every car wirelessly connected, actually finding one… Read more »
no comment

as it turns out, the tesla cto has discussed plans for a 750kW/500A charging station (which would deliver 1,500V at the charger head). the objective would be to be able to recharge a tesla in an amount of time that is comparable to the time that it takes to refill a fuel tank. i don’t know what plans tesla has for developing a battery that has the c-rate to handle this though…

i don’t understand the assertion that you would never reach peak voltage and peak current at the same time. wouldn’t you be at or near peak for both current and voltage right before entering the absorption charge phase of the recharge cycle?

If the battery were a million kWh, sure, it’s possible that it could take 350 amps at maximum pack voltage of 1000 volts, but then what? The charge rate MUST reduce in order to not exceed the maximum voltage.

Ohm’s law.

no comment

i wasn’t trying to suggest that you would be siting at maximum voltage *and* maximum current for hours on end. i was just questioning the assertion that at *no* point in time would maximum current ever exist concurrent with maximum voltage.

the answer to the question: “then what?” is that after you leave the bulk charge phase, you would enter the absorption charge phase where the current starts to decrease.


It isn’t just for cars but for buses and trucks too. So batteries with capacity higher than 60-120 kWh are certainly possible and they are even on roads in few cases.
Not that I heard of many realizations of 350A/800V CCS/Chademo vehicles, it is new thing, just announced. But transit buses that charge at stops in seconds/minutes using much higher power are not news. They use LTO batteries, too expensive/low specific power for cars, but something other like LTO may come up in the future.
Ultimately it is issue of economics. It is not that difficult to provide much higher power technically, but the question is how many will be willing to pay for this rather expensive feature, and if only few persons would be willing to pay, it would get even more expensive.

Proterra’s EV bus charger charges at 500 kW, but of course that bus has a much larger battery pack than a passenger car. Doing that with current battery tech in a passenger car… well, probably not gonna happen. If we want superfast chargers (ultrafast? hyperfast? whatever…) that can charge a typical BEV for 350+ miles of charging, in 5-10 minutes, then I think we really are gonna need a breakthrough in making batteries with much lower resistance to charging, so they can be charged very fast without overheating. As I’ve posted many times, that can be achieved using electrodes coated with graphene, but that tech has yet to be mass produced despite years of effort. Maybe superfast-charging batteries will have to come from another direction, such as solid state batteries? I don’t see the utility of building an EV charging station that’s set up for ordinary passenger cars which can charge them in only two minutes. First of all, you’d have to build the car to accept that fast a charge without shorting out or overheating the battery pack. The size of the internal cables, wiring, and fuses needed to carry that current would be unnecessarily large and expensive. The… Read more »
Bill Howland

Mr. Williams always gets himself into trouble when hes starts doing


In this instance, since the 350 kw charger is such an expense, there would certainly be an incentive to put a relatively cheap ‘up/down converter’ in the car to increase the current when the battery voltage is low, and similarly, to increase the voltage when the current is low, so that the 350 kw charging rate is maintained for the quickest ‘quick charge’.

A fast charge is the point of these ridiculous rates after all, right?

Bill Howland

And as far as that went, there’d be absolutely no reason why the protocol couldn’t be modified slightly so that the stationary charger itself performed this function.

If the need exists it will be done. The adaptive 8-9 volt chargers for cell phones running into the micro-usb jacks are one example of a need being easily satisfied.

Bill Howland



So what? Putting a magnifying glass on what is happening at the battery terminals in no way prevents someone from coming out with a 350 kw constant power charger.

My ELR and volt have 3.3 kw constant power chargers – they charge the same whether the battery is dead or near full.

I have to admit, many times I’m at a loss to understand the basis for some of your dribbles. At no time did I indicate that there wouldn’t be 350kW chargers. There are already buses that charger FASTER (that’s in capital letters for emphasis) and I guarantee that Tesla will make something faster. There is a ferry boat that charges at over 1MW. It appears you completely missed the point, which is common in my experiences with reading your comments. Yes, you have a car that can charge at a constant power of 3.3kW., with a battery of 16kWh, making the charge rate about 3.3 / 16 = 0.25C. Any of the current “fast” DC chargers can charge a car at 1C to 2C, This is typically a 48kW charger with a 24kWh LEAF or a 120kW Tesla Supercharger powering a 60-100kWh Tesla. By using a “350kW” charger to recharge any car, using today technology, would require a much faster charge rate that is not feasible today, and a LOT MORE (capitalized for emphasis) vehicle side heat exchanging for the waste heat. I’m confident the charger side will require bigger heat exchangers, too, but there’s no real limit to weight… Read more »
Kevin C.

How does this business model work?
Having a solar grid-tied canopy with batteries is brilliant. And the expense should be enormous.
Selling fast charges should take a long time to break even.
Even when producing it’s own power.
EVgo does not sell a high performance luxury car to help subsidize it’s costs.
I hope they build these stations all over my Red state.


Interesting question. Presumably in the near term, there will be limited EV usage. EVGo can still make some revenue by selling solar power back to the grid. So even an idle station makes a little money during a sunny day. As the number of users ramp up, the energy sold to the grid disappears. It is replaced by energy sold to EV drivers at a much higher rate.

Now does this make business sense? Probably not. It likely won’t make money, only stem the bleeding. Still, it’s fun to think about.

no comment

putting this station in the middle of the desert is good for solar power use. but it is a bit out of the way, so i wonder who will be using it? i suspect this is more of a “proof of concept” station.

as to the business model; it is undoubtedly a risky venture. but this is a period in which the automotive industry is undergoing technological change. in industries that have experienced periods of change, you typically have multiple candidates for the next technology with separate camps that develop to promote each candidate. bets (by way of investments) get made in support of each camp to see who will “win” in the game of market adoption. when there was a period of technological change in the communications industry in the 1990’s, the “winner” was the technology that most easily fit with existing data communications technology with features of alternate candidates integrated into those of the “winning” candidate.

using that as a model, my thinking is that, in the automotive context, the “winner” will be fuel cell with an integrated battery.


Baker is on the heavily traveled Los Angeles to Las Vegas route. It should get plenty of use (from the Tesla Taxi guy, if nothing else).


How does this business model work?

You charge your car up, and you pay us lots of money.


Once there are a lot more PEVs on the road, it may make sense for electric utilities to get into the business of building superfast EV chargers. There isn’t a realistic way to use solar power to power these, at least not directly; the solar farm has to be much too large to be on-site in an urban area or near a highway. The cost for land would be far too high. Solar farms need to be located in remote areas where land is cheap.

It makes a lot more sense for electric utilities to provide a high-power hookup directly to the EV superfast charging station. That would be a new source of revenue for them, which should help offset their loss of revenue from people using more and more solar power for homes and other buildings.


This is how supercharger should have looked like.

Does that his mean 800v batteries are the next standard?

Did VW/Porsche help fund this?


December 15, 2016 at 11:38 am

This is how supercharger should have looked like.

It would make sense to lay out an EV charging station like this EVgo station, which uses the layout of a small gas station, if it took only 5-10 minutes to charge a PEV. But since the average charge time at public chargers is more like 20-45 minutes, I think Tesla has the smarter approach. Setting up Supercharger stalls like stalls in a parking lot minimizes wasted space, and provides more opportunity for expansion at the same location.


I was talking about solar roof. Shading is so important in the summer.


It is next version of CCS standard, backwards compatible. Chademo will probably go the same way with the same backwards compatible plugs.

EVgo doesn’t mention in their press release automaker help. But these automakers are part of the CCS working group and have done their work designing & testing the standard.



Maybe the 350kw format has future tractor-trailer charging in mind?

I hope it does.


Isn’t that roof a little low for tractor-trailers?

John Hansen

Probably. Also, the placement of two charging stations on either side wouldn’t be optimal for tractor trailers, since only one would be able to occupy each side.


unlucky said:

“Isn’t that roof a little low for tractor-trailers?”

The power rating of 350 kW is a little low, too. Proterra city bus chargers use 500 kW.

I expect future BEV semi-tractor chargers to be set up a lot like truck stops; a much bigger layout than the typical small gas station, which is the layout used by this EVgo charger.

no comment

no, it would take too long to recharge a tractor-trailer. this is for car recharging. even at 350kWh, it would take 20 minutes for an 80% recharge of a battery enough energy storage for 400 miles of range.


I understand the 350KW DC Specs for CCS Combo ar now out pushed by Porsche 800v initiative, but ChaMedo 350KW … When is that expected to become a defined standard ?
Then the Batteries are mandatory here. For 1500KW = 4 x 350KW maxi power specified here a direct connexion to the Grid woul create huge costs and contrains, so I bet they will connect to the Grid at only a fraction of that power and use batteries to secure the 350KW per charger as needed.


If that’s the case, the average power rating of the station would also be important to know. Suppose it only provides a 500kW grid connection. A fully utilized station will approach a limit of only 125kW per stall. While that’s still good, it would be frustrating to expect 350kW but only get 125kW.

Mike I.

That’s what the batteries are for – augmenting the power delivered during the short duration that a vehicle can take more than 125kW. A 500 to 750 kVA transformer would be more than adequate for this 4 charger site. Tesla does 12 stalls connected to 6 cabinets that draw up to 160 kVA each, for 960 kVA max on a 750 kVA transformer.


Yes, I understand that. But the batteries are finite. If you put one of these in a busy enough location, you will eventually use up that reserve. At THAT point, you care about the average power rating. That’s what I was referring to.

Mike I.

Baker is pretty much in the middle of nowhere between LA and Vegas. It will take a long time for there to be enough cars that can pull the high power AND travel this route for this to even be an issue. Remember, you also have the charge taper for each vehicle to catch up and fill the batteries for the next peak also.


Baker is (hopefully) just a demonstration/pilot location. I think we are all hoping to see these propagate throughout California and the Northeast, at the very least.


I wonder if a charging station could get a cheaper high power connection if for instance located at Hoover dam or similar.


I would guess the cheapest place to build one would be immediately next to an electric utility substation. Since long-distance transmission of electric power is quite efficient — average transmission losses only 7% — there probably isn’t much advantage to building right next to Hoover Dam, nor (closer to home) the Wolf Creek Nuclear Power Station, here in Kansas.


“I understand the 350KW DC Specs for CCS Combo are now out”

That isn’t entirely correct. Both EVgo and the EU 350 kW chargers are moving forwards with projects to begin building out 350 kW chargers before the standards are finalized.

It will either be a “just in time” situation, where they start the build out in anticipation of what the standards will be, and finalize construction once the standards are finalized. Or it may be a “substantially compliant” situation where they roll out early chargers before the standard is finalized based upon what has been agreed to up to that point, and then retrofit any software or hardware changes that might be required to meet the finalized standards.


The 400Kwhr freighter or bus that can take juice that fast isn’t going to fit under the awning 😉

But seriously, they’ve got a station whose total output is 350kW. That is freaking awesome. 4 300 mile cars could use it simultaneously at near peak uptake. This is Tesla-level specs. Plus a well-done awning.


So does this mean that SC now stands for So-so Charging?

Way to go EVgo. Now we just need the vehicles that can charge at that rate 🙂


350kW x 4 = 1.4MW.

So I would call this a Mega-charger


Nope, that’s when individual charger give 1000 KW.


Is that like 1.21 GigaWatts?


Great Scott!


That’ll need to wait until BEVs come equipped with flux capacitors. Otherwise, you’re gonna need a pretty long charging cable to hit 88 MPH while plugged in!


For those of you not familiar with the area, this is brilliant placement by EVGo. Once this station is operational it will enable Southern California residents to get to Las Vegas in their ~140+ mile CCS EV for the first time. It is exactly in the middle of the existing CCS in Victorville, CA and Las Vegas. 94 miles to each, but with some good elevation changes you’ll need 140+ rated range.


Took the words right out of my mouth!

no comment

at full rate, you can get about 80 miles of range in 5 minutes. that is the equivalent of less than 3 gallons. this might be good for existing BEV owners, but does it really do much to increase BEV ownership?


I see the following advantages:
Faster charging.
Decreasing differential with gas cars.
Reducing number of chargers needed for a same number or car “fill ups”.
Less area needed for the charging station overall.
Less cost per charging station for a same number of “fill ups”.

btw Jay, can you provide an update to the “Bolt EV $500 Farm Bureau” story? I can’t find anything that says it is eligible except for that link to the Chevy page that looks half-broken.


go to chevy.com.
At the top right you will see a search box.
Enter “Farm Bureau” and click the magnifying glass.

Remember however, that it cost $75.00 to join, so your net incentive is only $425.00. In addition, this incentive is not valid with ANY other private offer. Call 800 950-CHEV to see if you have a private offer.

Nope, it is valid with MOST other private offers! How do I know? I’ve already used it 3 times this year! And each time, I used it in conjunction with a $1,000 Chevy.com private offer I managed to have pop.

Awesome news.

With careful (i.e., not-too-crazy) driving, the Bolt can get there from LA (~180 miles and one pass to cross) on a single charge, at least 9 out of 12 months.


There’s already CCS in Victorville to help out in the winter months for that.


Building 350kW chargers is actually a horrible idea. Once we get a lot of EVs on the road we will need also a lot of chargers. Those chargers will need an enormous upgrade of the electric grid at the places they are installed (if they are to be 350kW) This upgrade will cost a lot of money (that will increase the cost of charging at these chargers) and the huge capacity will be used only a couple of hours a day. And the high price of charging might also discourage people from buying EVs. 150kW is the sweet spot for fast chargers. This will be the optimum that will give a reasonable price of charging, reasonably short time to charge and will allow a fast expansion of the charging network. 350kW only makes sense if you want to turn EVs into expensive luxury items. Hmm, I guess this will be the new strategy of the ICE car manufactures to slow down the EV revolution.


The cost of building them should come down. I think most of the cost for a charging station like this is in the land costs, getting a good big connection to the grid, the cost of installation (digging, running wires, concrete, roads, curbs, carport structure, etc.), etc. Thus the cost difference between the 150KW and 350KW equipment may only be a relatively small increase in the price of the entire charger station.

So why not just plan for the future instead of having to pull permits and do the work of an upgrade a year or two later? This might be the cheaper way to do it in the long run.

Lindsay Patten

Whether you put in 4 350kW chargers or 10 150kW chargers the peak draw off the grid will be the same. With the 350kW the charges will be faster whenever there isn’t a queue, provided the cars can handle it.

If the majority of cars can’t handle the higher rate for a significant portion of their charging then a larger number of lower powered chargers will result in better total throughput when congested.

So I think the merits depend on the charging rates of the cars themselves. So, how fast car charging rates will increase relative to the rate of increase of number of electric cars travelling that route…

I think it’s too early to judge. Having at least a few prototype high power chargers around is probably a good thing.


Tesla’s Supercharger design has each cabinet supplying power to 2 plugs. 1st car gets priority, then as the charging tapers the 2nd car gets more power. That helps makes the most of the total available power.


tosho said:

“Building 350kW chargers is actually a horrible idea… This upgrade will cost a lot of money (that will increase the cost of charging at these chargers)… And the high price of charging might also discourage people from buying EVs.”

That’s pretty short-term thinking, innit?

That’s like arguing that we shouldn’t buy these newfangled motorcars, we should stick to horses, because if lots of people drove motorcars then we’d have to pave all the highways and city streets, and rebuild our cities to put in parking lots and stop lights!

Future superfast EV charging is going to require much more distribution of high electric power to many places. Yes, that will cost money. But as that becomes commonplace, the economy of scale will bring down prices for individual installations.

And really, what is the alternative? To keep running our cars by burning fossil fuels? No. We need to invest in the future, and that means building out a much more robust and much more powerful electric grid to support EV superfast charging.

Let us look to the future, not to the past!


Is the “World’s Tallest Thermometer” there to remind us about global warming? :-O


So . . . has anyone even announced a car that can take 350KW?


Isn’t EVGo a “utility” subsidiary or something like that? This is all about increasing electricity demand to fill the reductions that are occurring from LEDs, efficiency, net-zero housing, and renewable additions. I’d be willing to bet that they don’t pay demand charges and maybe even get base power at wholesale.

Mike I.

EVgo has been spun out into a separate entity with its own venture backing. It is no longer connected to the NRG Utility business.



EVGO rumored to put the next one in Charlottesville, VA. Home to the world’s worst college football team, former home to zima

Nope, home of the world’s worst football team is in East Hartford, CT….home of the UConn Huskies (yeah, they actually have a football program…..by definition). 🙁


FyI UVA lost to Uconn


Put a diner there, half hour of charging at 120 kW would take you another 200 miles.


If I remember right, the thermometer was put up to advertise a diner.


Ladies and Gentlemen….let me present to you…..the Ultracharger.


Wonderful news! Good to see someone out there is a forward-looking for-profit public EV charging vendor. This station might actually last 5 years or more before needing an upgrade!

Now, will other vendors follow suit? Or will they continue to install chargers which are already outmoded, and soon to be obsolete if they aren’t already? Sadly, I think the latter is the correct answer.


Perhaps this station could also recharge a bus or a coach. It would then not be so fast anymore but still much better than anything undedicated available now. Also a Nicola semi-truck. What about coming Tesla truck or why not an ev motorhome. With that kind of power more becomes possible.

This is all interesting to watch. Go EVGO.

If you have a Tesla you already have a really nice network at your finger tips…..so much easier than waiting for sufficient EVgo stations:)


EVGO is my new GO 2 EV electron provider. Blink I am putting U on the Blink. Step up Chargepoint, you are the Value Leader in Southern California. Who will follow NRG/EVGOs huge upgrade, Greenlots or Chargepoint in So. Cal?

jim stack

I see a Blackout coming.

Who can take 350 kW. I do like the solar and batteries on site. They should do that at every site.

Bill Howland
Just a brief comment: The 600 volt limitation is dated info: the 2017 NEC changes all this to 1000 volts now being considered ‘high voltage’ – utilities still consider this to be in the realm of ‘low’. The driver for was Solar string inverters now being standardized for 1000 volts max instead of the 600 volt things I have in my home. Also, the maximum voltage a Tesla charger or Supercharger can run on is 277 volts nominal. Due to the power levels involved they are almost always 3 phase, but I don’t see why they couldn’t rewire one to work on single phase if necessary as all the individual chargers in the bay run on 240 or 277 volt power anyway. I wish people would stop calling our household single phase distribution SPLIT-PHASE. This is the term used in Britain where it is somewhat rarely used, but it is a big misnomer, and the term means something totally different to Americans and is a perfectly proper term if talking about a motor starting method. Its a misnomer because the phase is indeed not split, it is exactly in time synchronism to all the other wires since there is only… Read more »

Wow! There’s a single new fast charger somewhere in the world! So amazing. So glad to know about it.


It’s August 23 2018 and the 350kW chargers are nowhere to be found. Two 50kW units are up and running and 2 150kW chargers are not connected.