Nissan’s Alliance Partner Renault Joins CharIN CCS DC Fast Charging Group

JUN 21 2016 BY MARK KANE 20

Renault ZOE at fast charging station in France

Renault ZOE at fast charging station in France – 3-phase AC charging (Type 2)

On the 15th of June 2016 the CharIN e.V. Steering Committee accepted membership of eight new companies: atieva, Circontrol, Clever, Faraday Future, FCA, Hubject, Lafon and Renault Group.

On the 15th of June 2016 the CharIN e.V. Steering Committee accepted membership of eight new companies: atieva, Circontrol, Clever, Faraday Future, FCA, Hubject, Lafon and Renault Group.

The CharIN e.V. Steering Committee announced list of new members of the initiative supporting CCS Combo DC fast charging standard, which is being adjusted to handle up to 150 kW in the next few years.

Among the most recent members added, we see Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA) – which is not a surprise, and newcomers like Faraday Future, but the most significant new entry is Renault.

“On the 15th of June 2016 the CharIN e.V. Steering Committee accepted membership of eight new companies: atieva, Circontrol, Clever, Faraday Future, FCA, Hubject, Lafon and Renault Group.

Some of them already joined the new members meeting last week with the opportunity of introduction to the other members and committees. In the first half of this year CharIN e.V. grew by 24 members. Together with the ten founding members and the new members of 2015 the association is now supported by 36 leading international companies.”

CCS (Combined Charging System) - single inlet for AC charging and fast DC charging

CCS (Combined Charging System) – single inlet for AC charging and fast DC charging

Renault has extremely close relations with Nissan through the Renault-Nissan Alliance, and also has the same CEO – Carlos Ghosn, while the two companies also share the same bold commitment to all-electric cars.

And while Nissan has pursued CHAdeMO from the start, Renault has not.  The French company originally romanced with three-phase AC charging, using a Type 2 inlet. The CCS inlet today would be easy addition for the Type 2.

If Renault does move exclusively to CCS Combo, Nissan will become pretty lonely with CHAdeMO in Europe, but perhaps Renault is still weighing options before reaching a final decision on charging solutions for next generation EVs.

However to us, the EU mandate for the installation of CCS units across Europe (with CHAdeMO allowed to piggy-back) pretty much forced Renault’s hand, and will do the same to Nissan ultimately as well.

Earlier this year PSA (formerly on-board with CHAdeMO) also announced a switch to CCS.

Categories: Charging, Renault

Tags: , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

20 Comments on "Nissan’s Alliance Partner Renault Joins CharIN CCS DC Fast Charging Group"

newest oldest most voted

The smaller form factor and ability to install a single receptacle in the car is likely a big factor in the move to CCS over CHAdeMO.
If you can save even $10 on 100K cars, that’s a million bucks added to the bottom line. I expect the added cost of the CHAdeMO receptacle alone far, far exceeds that $10.
Cheap Chinese knockoffs on Alibaba start at $58 in volume. A name brand inlet with 1 meter pigtail sells for $799 on a well known EV parts site.

Smaller than ChaDeMo, sure. But that ‘single’ plug is really two plugs (L2 top, High Voltage DC, Bottom) fused into one. Many CCS ports have two flaps to cover each section of that ‘single’ socket. 😉

Very inelegant looking. And this is why some people have taken to referring to it as, ‘FrankenPlug”.

“Inelegant” compared to what? Certainly not CHAdeMo. Yes, it would be wonderful if all cars used the elegance of Tesla’s design, but that’s not going to happen. The “frankenplug” insult went out long ago, once CHAdeMO fans realized that a two-plug design makes a lot MORE sense than two ridiculously large plugs.

The 200+ mile EVs coming to the US and Europe will have the CCS chargers. It is the standard for the US and Europe by the way. Nissan included.

ChAdeMO will remain the standard in the tiny market of Japan.

But inductive charging levels the playing field for all standards, as it won’t matter what plug you use, as long as the inductive equipment under the car is ‘standard’. And cheap enough to be at a parking spot in an apartment/condo complex.

Back to plugs…..in the next few years EVs will be at 300+ miles and charging at 150kW for public long distance travel.

Tiny market of japan? Japan is like 15% of total sales in the world. Tiny?

OK Nissan, finish it off and call it quits on Chademo.

Just be sure to give us loyal early Nissan Leaf people some sort of upgrade path to replace our existing charge ports with a CCS connector.

If we can get to a common DCFC standard, then the cost to install a DCFC unit gets reduced slightly, and helps get more chargers installed sooner. Besides- most of the CCS+Chademo charger units I have seen can only charge one or the other, but not both at the same time.

It is not going to change anything for you anyway. Open standard chargers will have two plugs as before in Europe and North America for foreseeable future just because of existing Leafs. Removing one plug would not reduce charger price much as you have noted.

For world market automaker, it will be forced to test and support multiple regional standards across the world and it has its cost. CCS Type2 in Europe, Type1 in US, GB in China, Chademo in rest of Asia and big mess in border regions. What is the point? Better look to force Tesla to use some open standard and stop fragmenting charging infrastructure with their walled garden approach, that may make real difference in charging network expansion.

I hope Nissan adds the CCS to the J1772 port on the next LEAF or whatever they call it. Keep CHAdeMO at least as an option for some areas where there are loads of them. Don’t really care what plug as long as they are plentiful and functional.

this was always the design philosophy for Renault, to wait for the European plug to exist.

As it stands, USA will for the future up to and including be 350kW be SuperCharger/Chademo dominant. Breaking the market standards does not work well in USA. The combo plug car manufacturers have made their beds, now they get to lie in them.

The real question is how much extra does it really cost to support both standards in the charging stations? Especially since they seem to be very similar in the power levels and really only seem to be a difference in pin-out and signalling protocol something easy to overcome with minor hardware changes and software. It looks like both standards are coming up with very similar power levels when it comes to the 150kw standard as well. Again how much cost difference do the plugs and additional protocol support actually cost especially when the bulk of the cost is getting the power to the station in the first place. Their is a reason almost all new stations in the US are dual standard. When the cost difference between supporting only 1 standard and support both is under 1K out of an overall package of 20k it is a no brainier to support both.

Thanks
Robert

Having two is always going to be more expensive than one, and I think the overhead is significant. Just the fact that there’s twice as much to test is an issue since every single installation must be tested.

It amazes me how much clutter could be avoided if governments were able to competently set some technical standards. Consider the simple case of a low power DC standard – which the late Douglas Adams (author of the Hitchhiker’s Guide To The Galaxy) wrote about several decades ago:

http://www.douglasadams.com/dna/980707-03-a.html

Government and competent are antonyms. If the government were to set the standard, it’d weigh a ton, opening the size of the entire fender, cost 100X what it could be, and on and on.

Then there’s the issue of which government. We don’t have one world government, and each country might end up having different standard, all of them far less competent than current three.

As bad as two is (or 3 if you include Tesla), it’s far better than any government standard.

The cost of an additional receptacle can’t be significant when compared to the cost of an entire charging station: Getting the significant current/voltage supply, any batteries needed for intermediate storage, and of course the real estate (which is likely the most significant part of the cost). Testing is a one-time cost on installation.
Sure, receptacles might need to be replaced/repaired occasionally, bit I doubt that’s more than once every few of years.

Nissan cannot ditch ChaDeMo yet. Japan is most important for Nissan and in Japan there are basically no CCS chargers. Since installation of ChaDeMo compatible charger has not stopped, there is no risk to continue with it at least in the short run (Leaf 2).

As long as ChaDeMo outlets are used more than once a week they remain a valuable addition to any DC charging station.

In my eyes, the fact that Renault dropped 43 kW AC charging and limited it to 22 kW for the R240 Zoe already was a hint of things to come.

Since Renault is very much aware that real fast charging (as opposed to 22 kW ‘fastish’) is vital, this move was only a matter of time.

Renault-Nissan and others partner for 300 Multicharger in Europe:
http://blog.alliance-renault-nissan.com/blog/renault-and-nissan-are-partners-new-european-fast-charging-network

So they don’t use the same fast charging plug today, they also could do that in future.

The initiative that you linked to is clearly CHAdeMO and CCS, plus 22kW three phase AC (Cameleon).

“will use multi-standard fast chargers with both AC and DC connections. This means electric vehicles such as the Nissan LEAF or Renault ZOE will be able to charge up to 80 percent of their battery within 30 minutes to one hour.”

I really think we would be having these feuds between CSS and Chamo if all electric cars had both ports on them allowing them to use both CSS and Chamo.

I see the lack of standardization as yet another attempt by manufacturers to slow the transition to eV’s. There is no reason why buyers cannot choose whatever charging method they desire as that would allow both new owners and later owners change the charging method as required to allow for future charging protocols. We might even see “second hand” chargers used in some third world areas which would allow more of them to be installed for the same money.