Potential Nissan Options In The Case Of CHAdeMO Withdrawal

APR 18 2016 BY MARK KANE 134

Nissan Says It Will Assist The Charging Markets Around The World On A Case-By-Case Basis, And That The US Is Rapidly Approaching 1,700 CHAdeMO Points Today

EVgo charging station – CHAdeMO and CCS Combo side by side

Nissan is the most important participant of the Japanese CHAdeMO Association.  One could even suggest due to the lack of participation by the other members of late, they are the only participant.

For certain, Nissan is the strongest promoter of the CHAdeMO DC fast charging (including V2G capability) and has by far the most CHAdeMO-enabled cars on the roads.

Nissan’s efforts to spread CHAdeMO are indeed supported by Mitsubishi and few other carmakers on a smaller scale (Toyota too), but in general there are some doubts over the position of CHAdeMO in the world (aside from Japan, where CHAdeMO recently crossed 6,500 chargers!).

Beside Japan, there are three large markets Europe and North America – where CHAdeMO is used along with the CCS standard (China has own DC fast charging standard – GBT). Separately, there is the proprietary Tesla DC fast charging standard, at least for now.

Moving forward there is a primary doubt whether CHAdeMO’s popularity will be strong enough to exist long term with CCS, especially if CCS will be used by most of the automotive industry as they begin (or are forced) to embrace plug-in technology  – GM, Ford, FCA, Audi, Porsche, Volkswagen, BMW, Daimler, Volvo, Hyundai,etc., while also the regulatory environment in Europe is forcing future adoption of CCS.

The answer to the multiple standards today, is quite obviously multi-standard chargers, or simply two chargers (CHAdeMO and CCS) side by side.

Audi e-tron quattro concept - charging inlet CCS Combo

Audi e-tron quattro concept – charging inlet CCS Combo

The second doubt is whether CHAdeMO will see its 100 kW and 150 kW version adopted and upgraded (CCS alliance is already gearing up for 150 kW, while Tesla uses no less than 120 kW, up to 135 kW today).

At this time, there is no sign from Nissan to abandon CHAdeMO, but clearly CHAdeMO is losing its early mover advantage from being first on the market, with frequent 50 kW DC stations dotting the globe.

We could imagine potential solution for Nissan (and the rest of the group) in case of the continued fading of CHAdeMO:

  1. The first (and perhaps best way to save face short term) is to introduce an option to add CCS fast charging inlets alongside CHAdeMO in the car. The charging doors would need to be bigger, but not that much because J1772 inlet already is present and CCS in only larger.
  2. Make both the CHAdeMO and CCS inputs a selectable option for customers at point of sale based on their preference – using the existing-sized charge doors.
  3. In longer term CCS would become the standard option.
  4. Eventually, the CHAdeMO inlet would be removed even as an option. Older cars could an get option to convert CHAdeMO to CCS – at cost to the owner of course.

In those four steps Nissan could nearly painlessly go through the switch.

However in terms of volume, the Japanese are still the leaders, and with new-generation models on the horizon (potentially very high sellers)  they could still fight for the win. Growing sales of future CHAdeMO models if wildly successful, and introducing higher power CHAdeMO chargers for long-range EVs could defend the standard.  But the question is now more and more becoming, “Is it worth it?” for Nissan to defend the position against all up and comers and why do it?

Categories: Charging, Nissan

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

134 Comments on "Potential Nissan Options In The Case Of CHAdeMO Withdrawal"

newest oldest most voted

Proof will be incars on the street. CCS around Seattle is still as rare as a compliance car, and “most of the automotive industry” is putting less effort into marketing EVs than Nissan alone, let alone installing CCS infrastructure. I’d buy a 2011 LEAF out of Arizona before buying a CCS car based on the hope of future infrastructure.

CCS is growing quickly, there are now a number of stations around Seattle – that wasn’t the case even just a year ago. And some older stations are being swapped out: just noticed that the old and unreliable blink station in Capitol Hill has been replaced by a dual-standard station from evGo.

CHAdeMO is growing quickly, too.

This article is just silly.

Not really, because as soon as the industry changes to 150kW, or even more, those 50kW chargers would have to be replaced, or loose a lot of their value for the customer.

Imagine, in 5-10 years, you would have the decision to charge at a 350kW CCS socket, or a 50kW Chademo, your charging time might be 7 times as long with the 50kW one, thats the difference between a relatively short and a very long stop.

And of course, that will decide which car the consumer chooses and even if CCS would still have fewer chargers, most would still go with 300 miles in 15 minutes, over 300 miles in one hour and 45 minutes.

Then there are charging networks built by independent companies, those will rather choose CCS, than Chademo, if there are more potential buyers using CCS. Possibly both, but if you plan to build ten thousands of chargers, even small savings amount to a lot of money.

So Nissan would have to decide if they want to play the “more power game”, or change to CCS. And thats why this article isn’t as silly as you assume.

This restricted power Chademo idea is complete fantasy. If you look at current higher power 100+kW chargers, they can do the same high power on both on CCS plug or on Chademo plug. It isn’t very likely Nissan IDS will be able to use more than 100 kW. Just like other 60 kWh cars. Model S 60 doesn’t need even 100 kW.

Right now Chademo has more chargers in the US and 100% dominance in Japan. There is no advantage to go with CCS right now if you have a choice. Any third party charging network, not some proprietary automaker owned one would have both Chademo and CCS plug anyway. Leafs already on the road are not going anywhere for years. Something may change after 10 years or so, but by that time you will be driving other car anyway.

Yep…. just like the hydrogen hucksters, these anti-CHAdeMO debates always assume:

1) the market leader fails (entirely possible, of course)

2) the market leader stays the same (not likely at all)

3) the competition magically has something better that the market leader cannot get (like 150kW charging)

4) somehow the big, clunky CCS nozzle (which are different in their respective regions) is somehow superior to the size of the CHAdeMO inlet (that is the same around the world)

5) for whatever bizarro reason, these detractors have to believe that market leader Nissan wants to dump market leader CHAdeMO.

Again, there is no basis for ANY of these doomsday predictions.

Don’t you have a conflict of interest on the matter due to the need to sell (soon to be) legacy Chademo products?

Tony Williams for Quick Charge Power LLC

I’m not sure if this was directed at me, or not, but we sell and design products around CHAdeMO specifically for the reasons I cite over and over:

1) CHAdeMO is (by far) the market leader

2) CHAdeMO is the same around the world

3) CHAdeMO is a mature, safe design

4) CHAdeMO continues to expand

5) the world EV leading company, Nissan, exclusively uses CHAdeMO, as well as the second place volume manufacturer, Tesla, which offers an adaptor for CHAdeMO

Should any of the above change any time soon, we will be happy to sell any Electric Vehicle charging equipment that the world requires.

6). It is apparently the most expensive, especially since you have to have an entire additional jack on the car in addition to the standard one that comes with the car.

That is what apparently is driving the change. If there was nothing to it, people would stop trying. But they aren’t stopping.

Now maybe Chademo will outlast all the challengers. But the writing on the wall is there.

Sorry, I don’t agree that “the writing is on the wall”. We will have CHAdeMO, Tesla Supercharger and CCS intermixed for a long time in the western world.

CHAdeMO solely in Japan
GB/T in China

CCS, in particular, is not even clear if 150kW and 300kW will be interchangeable with previous regional versions at 25-50kW.

Good points, Tony, and I will rebut: Nissan is CURRENTLY the world’s EV sales leader. We don’t know how the world will respond the the Bolt, but GM will have at least a one-year head-start on everyone else, and likely two, for selling an everyman-priced 200+ mile EV with FCDC capability. And it will be CCS. 60,000 Bolts on the road by 2018, plus whatever BMW adds to the mix may change the momentum. All the US domestic auto makers (except Tesla) and EU mfgrs are on the CCS path, not Chademo. It isn’t just Germany. CharlN, an EU-based consortium, has all the EU majors in Europe (and GM behind the scenes) working on a 150-300 kW CCS-based standard extension that even has Tesla joining in. The California Energy Commission just awarded $9 M in grants for new FCDC chargers up and down cA- all either CCS or CCS/Chademo dual-head. Even without that, the fast-charge “desert” on I-5 and 99 between Sacramento and Oregon has been quietly-populated by 3rd-party CCS chargers tucked away in various parking lots, close enough that a 100 mile EV can make the drive. Even Sierra Nevada Brewery in Chico added a CCS at their brew… Read more »
***Nissan is CURRENTLY the world’s EV sales leader.*** I have no illusions that Nissan will be the leader forever, but even the Bolt is not a serious challenger to a LEAF 2.0 (presumably also with a 60kWh battery) if it is: 1) limited to 25,000 to 30,000 units annually 2) GM does not get off its arse and support CCS Nissan will build far more LEAF 2.0s, and they continue to distribute CHAdeMO chargers around the world. Every public charging network that offers DC charging also offers CHAdeMO units. ***We don’t know how the world will respond the the Bolt, but GM will have at least a one-year head-start on everyone else, and likely two, for selling an everyman-priced 200+ mile EV with FCDC capability. *** You know when the LEAF 2.0 (with 150-200 mile range) will be released? Do tell !!! ***And it will be CCS. 60,000 Bolts on the road by 2018, plus whatever BMW adds to the mix may change the momentum.*** Well, momentum is not something that CCS has in the USA, that’s for sure!!! ***All the US domestic auto makers (except Tesla) and EU mfgrs are on the CCS path, not Chademo. It isn’t just… Read more »

Thanks Tony. Good information.

Another story that casts doubt, FUD, regarding CHAdeMO.

A similar article could be written regarding the demise of CCS.

Look at the aggressive rollout plan GM announced to coincide with the Bolt….

Look at the resoundingly strong selling CCS equipped nationally available cars, such as the Spark EV, VW Golf.

(They’re compliance cars sold in low volume in CA only!)

Nissan, Kia Soul EV, Mitsubishi have so far supported CHAdeMO. Tesla has an adapter available.

The real winner these days is Tesla’s supercharger network.

“Look at the aggressive rollout plan GM announced to coincide with the Bolt….”

Why would it matter as long as there are demand with the car? So you are switching from car to chargers now?

“Look at the resoundingly strong selling CCS equipped nationally available cars, such as the Spark EV, VW Golf.

(They’re compliance cars sold in low volume in CA only!)
Nissan, Kia Soul EV, Mitsubishi have so far supported CHAdeMO.”

Kia Soul EV and I-MiEV is about as popular as Spark EV and E-Golf. So it is still only left with Nissan holding the CHAdeMO up.

The next generation Hyundai are coming CCS option in the US.

What about BMW and next generation MB/VW/Volvo/Ford EVs?

The sum of them are still larger than Nissan potentially. The Bolt alone can kill off the future LEAF if Nissan delays LEAF 2.0 further.

Don’t forget that Tesla cars could use CHAdeMO but not CCS

could = can currently

Two things
Number of cars already on the road with Chademo
Number of times I hear CCS with the words “they will be installing more in the future”
This will change if the companies selling CCS cars actually sell them in reasonable numbers.
They and better hurry, when the Model 3 ships in numbers (just as likely as getting more CCS) they will soon be the most common EV on the road and there will be more Tesla charger cars than any other.


People seem to forget that ChaDeMo is still the tour-de-force charger worldwide!

Ah, the future… just around the corner. The go-to response from the hydrogen hucksters.

“Every street corner will have a hydrogen (or CCS) station, so cheap to use, it will be free !!!”

It will just happen in the future… always the future.

scott franco (No M3 FAUX GRILL!)

What does it matter? We are going to keep changing charger standards until we reach 600kW or more.

Go ahead, ask me how I arrived at 600kW… I dare ya.

How did you arrive at 600KW?

scott franco (No M3 FAUX GRILL!)

At 24kWh, the leaf takes an %80 charge at 30 minutes, meaning that, at 48kWh, you get %80 charge at about the same rate as the charge, ie., 1 H at XkW gives you %80. Extrapolating, we get:

a 50kWh leaf needs 100kW charge to get the same %80@30 minutes. Assuming that a 50kWh car is “adequate” (about 200 miles max range), we get:

200kW = 15 minutes
400kW = 7.5 minutes
600kW = 5 minutes

At which time I think everyone would agree that we have reached fill time parity with gas cars. Thus, for most existing cars with 200-300 miles range, 600kWh or more is a car with equivalence to gas cars, both in range and “fill” time.

Being equivalent to a gas car is not important.


Could not agree more.


alternately, charge station vendors could offer good coffee, wifi, waterless car washes and foot massages. Maybe dry cleaning while they’re at it.

Time spent waiting is relative. TSA robs an hour of my life every time I fly and I don’t even get a smile while they scan my body cavities and return my pocket change.

I’d totally trade 5 minute refueling for a reasonably competent 20 minute chair massage after a 3 hour drive.

The rest of the time, I’ll sleep through the experience.

1. We don’t need 5 minutes! 15-20 will be just fine. Remember, 90% of charging will be slow destination induction charging… Probably?
2. So your 50Kwh LEAF would need to charge at 12C!!! …forget it!
3. So imagine a station with 6 points @ 600Kw… = 3,6Mw!! You’re going to need massive buffering for that! Massive!
4. Is going to be a hell of complicated charging point. Either multiple cable or complicated very strong cooling system.

I think if 10 years from now 100Kwh batts will become the common standard (by that time they will), and we can charge at 240-300Kw initially (180 or Kw average?), we can congratulate ourselves!

I agree, Fred. Gas pump parity is not necessary. Once charging gets to 100 kW charge rates, it will be ok. Once it gets to 150 kW, it will be fine. Given the infrequency of charging for roadtrips, building a car to fit the roadtrip profile makes little sense. 100 kWh packs and 150 kW charge rates mean you can pull into a charge station with a decent reserve in the pack and charge 20 minutes at full rate with no taper and pull out with 50 additional kWh in your pack giving you and additional 180 miles of range at a decent speed.
That is what is technically known as “good enough” for most people. Design for the majority, not the minority that “needs” super fast charging.

Technically all this buffering and anything can be done and it would not be that difficult really. The problem is that it would be prohibitively expensive, and only few rich people would be able to afford to charge at such stations. Limited niche market means even higher price. Remember that even current 40-50 kW chargers may cost you more than gas for road trips. Higher power = more expensive.

Exactly… A $400,000 Porsche with an 800 volt battery may easily charge at 300 kw, and the ‘charger location’ may have a stationary battery to keep the electric bills within reason, but: 1). How many of the ‘Niche’ Porsche’s are going to be sold in a poor town like mine? 2). How many ‘300 kw’ charging stations are going to be provided anywhere near where I would need them? 3). Assuming the US Military isn’t paying for this party (where costs are no object), if John Q. ev Driver has to pay anywhere near a significant percentage of the cost of the station by his usage, how exhorbitant is the ‘price per fill-up’ going to be? I’m sure many prospective EV buyers think about the first 3 items generically – and end up substantially buying a VOLT or else a Ford Fusion Energi – where they don’t have ANY extra expenses. If they drive too far, the gas station is always there as their emergency backup, and they are driving 60-90% of the time electrically anyway, which is good enough for everyone except a purist. Since most Volt owners don’t even bother with a 15 amp 220 volt wallbox, and… Read more »

90 liter of gasoline in 5 minutes
= 90*9kWh/l = 810 kWh/5min
= 810*12 [kWh/h] = 9720 kW

Meaning a gasoline pump is nearly a 10MW charger.

A electric motor is around 3-4 times as efficient as a gasoline motor. So a 2430-3240 kW charger is the eqivalent in added range to a gasoline pump.

I don’t think we need a 3MW charger to compete, but this is what is standard now. We might need to convince people a bit that a 300kW charger (one tenth of what is standard now) should be fine for a electric car.

And we need big batteries, so you can stop charging before the charge tapper starts 😉

There are several issues with 600 kW power. I actually explore this in my as yet unfinished blog post, so I can’t point to my blog and this reply will be long. 1. Most battery can’t even handle 3C charging. Even the king of fast charging SparkEV today tops out at about 2.6C. Then max power for 50 kWh battery is under 150 kW. 2. Peak power to 600 kW is HUGE. If power is to be delivered like now via transmission lines, that will have very bad consequences without major grid upgrade. Remember, it’s not constant power, but switching randomly all the time. 3. Assuming less than 1kV, 600 kW would be more than 600A (vs ~100A with today’s 50kW chargers). To deliver that much current, wires have to be more than 6 times thicker area, not to mention more insulation for higher voltage. Even today’s wires are way too thick and heavy, 6 times more will be unwieldy. 4. All of the above will add cost. Given that EV are already on thin margin compared to gas cars, adding even more cost doesn’t make sense, especially if it’s not used much. 5. There’s already been 5 minute “charging”… Read more »
scott franco (the evil EV owning republican)

Respectfully, you are thinking residental power. Industrial zones use this kind of power all the time. 480V is an industrial standard. The line voltage (that thing at the top of the pole before the transformers) is minimum 13kv. Most industrial concerns have their own transformer on premises, and the user can pick their own voltage. Industrial users present large and varying loads all the time, industrial metal presses, injection molding, etc.

Typically if you have high power draw and ask the power company to supply it, your biggest issue is cleaning the floor after they wet themselves.

Ie., not an issue.

Those industrial sites are not turning on/off 600 kW every 5 minutes, either. Granted, grid upgrade or local storage could solve that problem.

Then there’s the Physics issues such as 600 kW cables becoming unusable due to thickness and weight; maybe robotic cables? Then you run into the same issue as why not just do robotic battery swap, which failed.

But the biggest problem is the high cost for very rarely used event. If one uses DCFC once a week for 200 miles range EV, paying huge extra to save 15 minutes compared to 2.5C charging is not economically sound. I suspect this is the problem why battery swap failed: cost.

Fast charging is important even if you need it once a year. The traffic jams which occur in the summer in many European countries when what seems like entire population going on holiday need to be seen to be believed especially in France. If all these drivers switch to evs and it takes 20 minutes to charge the car then you are loking at having a charger at every parking space at services along the motorway. EU will want to ban ICE cars sooner rather than later but getting 200 miles of range will need to be reduced to 10 minutes.

No, gas cars take more then 5 minutes. 5 minutes is the filling-up. In Europe you still often have to pay at a pay desk or do a lot of typing when paying by card.

And don’t forget the pee! The realistic time spent at a gas station is 10 minutes.

I pay for my charge by just swapping a card and pee while charging. So when charge plus payment takes 10 minutes, it’s on parity with a gas station.

scott franco (the evil EV owning republican)

I think you miss the point. The electronics industry does bigger/faster/better. Eventually, when EVs take off, they will be racing charger times.

The downside is that we will be continually remaking charger standards and discarding them by then. With no real need.

I find it hard to believe that if Tesla has standardized on the (sometimes) 120 kw (60 kw if the next stall is being used) rate, why there will be suddenly something 5 times as big.

Our friend Tom M. has taken the BIG step of installing a 25 kw charger (one of them).

I don’t think I’ll live long enough to see 600 kw chargers. Sounds like the stuff we were all promised with Nuclear Power being “Too Cheap to Meter”.

I’m still waiting for THAT 60 year old promise to be fulfilled. But I think that is more likely to be fulfilled sooner, then 600 kw charging stations.

Since FORD for instance wants ‘at least’ 150 kw, why does their new Ford Focus EV go just a ‘whopping’ 100 miles?

As Long as wall street loves Tesla, I’d expect that all the innovation charging wise would come from them, and not FORD, who seems very much like a “Me TOO!”., although I’m sure they are making plenty of money on their substantial PHEV sales.

I think CCS will be the standard for the same reason Wi-Fi and SD cards are — the non-proprietary standard usually prevails. However, the big logistical challenge for DC charging stations is running the power. Once the power is run to the charger it’s not hard to support CHAdeMO and CCS.

There may be reasons for Nissan to abandon CHAdeMO but the charging connector should not be one of them.

“the charging connector should not be one of them”.

It is hard to imagine anyone saying that who has actually used the Chademo connector and the alternatives. That Chademo is like a bazooka. Clumsy does not begin to describe it. The vendor that Eaton used is a little better than the Nissan version but Eaton withdrew form the market.

Ha ha. Yes I’ve used the bazooka a few times. Definitely bulky and not easy to use. But these things will be fixed.

Yeah, I don’t understand why everyone defends Chademo when looking at the designs. It’s huge and requires another port. The last thing I want on my car is more ports/doors.

Why not just go with the better design?

Whatever bad design you have, it is much much better than a mess of different incompatible designs, clumsy adapters and standard wars.

Bad design can be easily improved in compatible way, and after all it is likely you will not need to connect cables manually in few years, it will be done by robots or wireless chargers.

It is classic error of beginner engineer who is too lazy to do his homework and make research what is already done in the field. “I’l make this and that much better”. Sure you can make, but you are not alone and when everybody does the same you have a hopeless mess without a way out for decade.

You lost me. We have a good design in the field, and we have a bad design in the field. Let’s stop using the bad design, or put in a plan to phase it out.

You can’t do it until you become king of the world. You should have done things in compatible way and not have released that “good” incompatible standard (which one out of several ones you call “good”?) in the wild, now it is too late, you are stuck with multiple incompatible “standards”.

Why do we have to be “stuck” with anything? If Nissan stopped putting Chademo in their cars it would be phased out. Same with any other standard. Stop putting more of them in the field. Or do like the article suggests and make the Leaf able to use CCS as well.

You are focusing on your own location and failing to see broader picture. Nissan can (lets assume) stop using Chademo in Europe or US, but no way it will help to switch to single standard. Nobody in Japan is going to switch to some US or European CCS version (which one do you think?). Chademo is JIS and is used exclusively there, even BMW uses Chademo in Japan. The same is for China. You want push Nissan to some regional standard in your own region but it is much more convenient for him to use the same unified one in all his cars. Maybe EU regulators can force CCS eventually within several years but not US.

It’s going to be regional when you talk about Japan. They don’t buy very many cars outside their own country so they can do whatever they want.

It is some US-centric or EU-centric view of the world. I can say the same to you, you may invent whatever regional standard and force all cars sold in the US to use it (but it isn’t going to happen in the current political climate as US is not some absolute monarchy). The world isn’t going your way. Biggest car market is China nowdays, not US. Japanese automakers are not going to follow your wishes easily as it makes no sense neither to them, nor to their customers. It doesn’t look like CCS type 1 or CCS type2 is going to become world standard any time soon.

That argument can go either way. Chademo required a separate or large opening. For gas-modified-to-ev, having same size opening as gas filler cap was more keeping with traditional design (ie, lower cost).

Chademo require two separare connectors while CCS and Tesla need only one. Whatever few pennies they save by having only one is probably “worth it” to the bean counters.

In effect, I think the cost is going to kill Chademo more than anything else. As any seasonsed engineer can tell you, bean counters always win.

Tesla can take CHAdeMO with the same inlet port that is used for AC and DC Supercharger.

Problem is you have to carry around a big adapter. And same with CCS. My fear is someone stealing my adapter (or vandalizing it)

The adaptor locks to the Tesla.

Why would you worry about an adapter being damaged or vandalized but not your car or the charging station but seems a little peculiar? (almost as peculiar as the ongoing “CHAdeMO demise” debate).

Locks are easy to break. And what locks the adapter to the Chademo connector? It’s essentially a loose piece. And I did worry the times I’ve used my EVSE in public.

As far as debate goes, there’s nothing wrong with it. I wouldn’t use the word “demise” though.

“Tesla can take CHAdeMO with the same inlet port that is used for AC and DC Supercharger.”

That’s even more expensive when you need an adapter. What they should’ve done is to make Chademo+1772 in one connector. I don’t see dual connector Chademo being cheaper than single connector CCS. Which is too bad, because I like Chademo over CCS.

Any bean counter or engineer with production experience can tell you that producing one version of a product is much cheaper than producing 4 different versions for 4 regions: CCS Type 2 for Europe, CCS Type 1 for NA, GB/T for China, Chademo for Japan.

With CCS, primary market is US/Europe. They only need one connector per car, though they need to carry inventory for two. With Chademo, every car needs two connectors. Chademo is still more expensive.

Even for Japan, market is small enough that I don’t think two connectors for all cars even outside Japan would be cheaper.

If the decision was made by engineers, everyone should’ve licensed Tesla connector.

Any engineer with a clue would vote for single item inventory. Multiple alternative items in inventory means multiple paths to design and testing, duplicated effort prone to errors, and it is in current already tiny electric car market. Tesla wasn’t able to make their mind themselves what plug to use. In North America it is one, in Europe they needed another, I guess because they goofed and didn’t left space for extra connectors for 3 phase AC that is needed in Europe. In Japan it is total white crow with 100% Chademo charging network requiring clumsy adapter. Type 2 that Tesla uses in Europe may be standard, but again it is some regional invention that isn’t even supposed by its inventors to be used outside Europe. Of course China had some national pride and invented their own plug too, they are not worse than Europeans :/ I don’t see any advantage of going with regional standards exclusively and fragmenting market further because it doesn’t lead to single world wide standard – it is a mess and it will stay so anyway. At least Chademo is open standard, first you need to try to force Tesla to use some open regional… Read more »

Any engineer with a clue would not opt for Chademo as it requires TWO items for every car. That means keeping 3 items in inventory vs 2 for CCS. Here’s a list.

Chademo + US L2 + EU L2

As for testing, CCS is again easier with just one connector and various modes can be selected with software. Chademo requires one to test cases with just Chademo, just L2, both connected, and they require physical removal of handles. Again twice the effort, or even more as two handles introduce other modes such as insertion order.

Compared to Tesla + CCS, Chademo is the worst for inventory and test and cost. Any engineer with a clue will tell you, those reasons should be enough to ditch (or modify) Chademo. Sticking with it even when Tesla + CCS came up with single plug was poor choice. Now I’m afraid it’s too far gone.

3 points

the numerically,

1st globally most popular standard will be China’s GBT. China plug in market is about the size of EU and USA combined.

2nd using EV sales own data I get significantly less CCS vehicles, it feels as if some low power AC charged PHEVs have inflated their CCS figures.

3rd Chademo figure count relevance is materially increased due to Tesla SC/Chademo adapter, that however is often not included in simple presentation. The double count is reality, even if it is difficult to quantity.

#3 But Tesla will soon have a CCS adapter, so this point is moot.

Things do seem eerily quite about CHAdeMO updating their standard to a higher kW level.. about as quiet as the next gen LEAF. It will be interesting to hear any news…
Ohhhh… spooky… wonder what’s going to happen…?..

You just aren’t listening… 300a * 500v = 150kW is coming for CHAdeMO, too.

And which cars will support Chademo charging at 150kW? 2nd Gen Leaf? Anything else?

Which cars support 150kW CCS? None have been announced.

The current CHAdeMO equipped Kia Soul EV can take about 80kW max (that is advertised as “100kW”, but is actually 200a * 400 volts = 80kW).

So, based on some of the hysteria here, CHAdeMO is the only highest power available non-Tesla protocol with available cars…. OMG!!! CCS is dead !!!

The Kia Soul EV already can charge at 100 kW. The problem is: only a few 100 kW CHAdeMO chargers exist in Europe.

CHAdeMO has been a very useful charger for my family and our 2 LEAFs. We have extended our journeys many times with them and they make trips all around the SF Bay Area trivial and much less delayed for charging.
I think the strategy mentioned would be fine especially if they allow us to add the CCS to our older existing cars to make them more flexible. As long as it works and is installed in enough places who cares what plug is used.

If you’re looking 3-5 years down the road, the installed base of truly useful CHAdeMO and CCS charge points is currently 0. Until either/both of them provide AT LEAST 100 kW, long distance travel will be painful. The current 50 kw (or the BMW 24 kW CCS) leave you with (at best) drive a hour and a half, stop for 30-45 minutes. Rinse and repeat.
At least the IONIQ is coming with 100 kW CCS capability. Doesn’t look like the CCS option on the Bolt will be more than 50 kW.

Yes, beyond the 24 kWh batteries that are common today, the present non-Tesla DC chargers are very limited.

“Doesn’t look like the CCS option on the Bolt will be more than 50 kW.”

How do you know?

I sat down with the Bolt’s chief engineer, Josh Tavel at NAIAS and one of the things we discussed in length was the DCQC charging speed of the Bolt. He said he couldn’t officially confirm what the maximum charging rate of the Bolt would be but that he’s comfortable saying 50kW would most likely be the maximum rate at launch.

He said they could increase that in the future if and when there are DC fast chargers that could deliver more than 50kW, but for now, 50kW will most likely be the maximum charge rate.

This along with GM’s recent statement that they won’t be building CCS stations is very disappointing to hear. You would think with them being the leader of SAE, they would be at the forefront in promoting their own standard (like Nissan is with CHAdeMO).

GM also didn’t build gas stations at the dawn of the ICE era.

This is not the dawn of the ICE era… This is the beginning of the end of the ICE era.

New ballgame…

I think the manufacturers should put their weight behind chargin infrastructure!

That was then and this is now.

GM did not even exist in the 19th century. By the time GM was formed there was no need for them to provide fueling oppertunities to get more customers.

GM is just not serious about EVs. Still.


Besides what was mentioned by the others, in the early days gasoline could easily be purchased at a store from canisters or drums and it was a profitable side business for such stores.

There is no such alternative for EVs. Slow L2 charging can still be subsidized by businesses (although it is still money losing), but DC charging so far is still a huge money loser because the population of capable cars are so low (even lower when talking purely about CCS). Relying on third parties isn’t going to expand the network anywhere near fast enough to be practical (esp. in US where government isn’t spending as much on charging infrastrucure unlike Japan and Europe).

How can they be so dumb? This is the hen and The egg senario all over. They dont want to make 100kW CCS because there are no chargers out there? Why do they think charging supplyers would make 100kW chargers if there are no cars out there!?

A car is kind of an investmemt. If Bolt would have 100 or 150 kW charging People would pay more for the car even if they cant use it right now. Id pay around 3000usd more to get 150KW charging instead of 50kW and 5000usd more for 150 instead of no dc at all. The charging matter for the Bolt is definitly the largest minus with the car right!

What I would like to see is for GM to build a 1000 kW charger as a test unit and stress Bolt until it “pops”. There was a time in past when engineers would go and do such wacky things, like trying to light BBQ coal in seconds, but today’s young’ins just aren’t curious like we were despite so much effort by Mythbusters.

“He said they could increase that in the future if and when there are DC fast chargers that could deliver more than 50kW, but for now, 50kW will most likely be the maximum charge rate.”

Thanks Tom.

The point is somewhat true as there are currently no standards that would support more than 50kW on CCS (despite what Hyundai/Kia claims) in the US.

So, until there is a 100kW CCS standard in the US, it is all moot point.

Once there is a higher standard, then we can claim that Bolt isn’t capable…

The question will be when will the next standard be set and how does that schedule match up with Bolt launches.

There is a “100kW CCS” standard in the US. They copied the CHAdeMO specs almost exactly:

200 amps * 500 volts = 100kW

Both CHAdeMO and CCS will go to 300 amps in the future. The “300kW” will just double the voltage from 400 to 800 volts.

Originally, CCS was published at 450 volts max (90kW). None of those voltages matter much, since the vehicle battery voltage is about 400 volts max.

Most CHAdeMO stations are 120 amps (and of course, if the station also has CCS, it will also be 120 amps).

Virtually all the stand alone CCS is low powered (20-25kW).

Sorry, but I drive 3 hours and charge 25 minutes. That’s with my Kia Soul EV, with which I travel long distance frequently, but mostly by inland roads.

I drove nearly 2000 miles this week, from San Diego to Sacramento and return, all with CHAdeMO.

Tony my question is why? Why did you spend a minimum of 28-30 hours driving when you could do in as little as 6 hours rt?

The only way to travel 2000 miles in 6 hours (round trip no less) would be in a supersonic jet.

San Diego to Sacramento is 550 miles one way, 16 hours round trip, driving with gas.
If I drive 75mph for one hour, charge for 1/2 hour, I average 50 mph, and take 44 hours.

Math 🙁
I presume the “6” in the earlier reply was supposed to be “16”, just like my “44” was supposed to be “22”

What about a CHAdeMO to CCS connector similar to the CHAdeMO to Tesla UMC ?

Being on my 2nd Leaf now, and the second one being a purchase instead of a lease, I would like to see the charging wars brought to an end. I have always thought CCS was a better option since it eliminates the need for two completely different charging ports.

I would gladly pay to have the Chademo port removed and replaced with a CCS port.

As I look around the Denver/Colorado Springs/Boulder areas – there are only about a dozen or so DCFC locations presently, and of those about half are out of order with a couple of those being inoperable for well over 6 months.

I say lets bite the bullet, cut the current minuscule loss of current infrastructure to reduce all the extra costs moving forward, and then get working, standardized DCFC deployed to GOOD locations that are usable. Note to Nissan – dealer lots are HORRIBLE places to deploy DCFC.

Love my Leaf, hate the state of the current DCFC charging. Looking forward to keeping the Leaf for short commutes and having a Tesla Model 3 for the longer trips with a real charging network that actually makes sense.

I wish auto-dealers would just sponsor chargers at good locations, like along the expressway. Put a video display on it, and have commercials to advertise their dealership while people are charging.


About 8 years ago I pulled in to a familiar gas station late at night for a fill-up close to home.

New monitors and blaringly loud speakers mounted on the pump(s) assailed my senses with ads inanely irrelevant to my purpose at the time.

The experience was appalling and I vowed never to go back.
(Well, I did go back a couple months later, having forgotten the trauma, but that was the LAST time).

So please, don’t encourage that level of crass commercialism. It would drive most of us crazy!

Well, have to do something to make the idea appealing to dealerships. They won’t do it for free.

Look at the global picture. Nissan is not just for Denver. They have the same Chademo that they can use in a car all over the world. Low power AC plug is different, but it is low power and AC, it is cheap and easy to deal with adapters, retrofits when you more car to other country, or whatever.

Now you have CCS Type 1 in US, CCS Type 2 in Europe, GB/T in China, Chademo (Japanese Industrial Standard) in Japan. Instead of 1 you have 4 different regional standards and you need to implement negotiation protocol for each of them, test connections separately, order from suppliers separately. All this waste is for smallish electric car market. Nissan may have other reasoning, I don’t know, but going from global standard to set of regional standards doesn’t look like attractive option to me.

How does CCS magically make machines that don’t break or get proper service?

It doesn’t.

What will happen, whether you want it to or not, is that eventually those stations will be replaced with dual protocol stations that will hopefully be dependable.

The protocol isn’t what decides the dependability.

You won’t have to change anything on your car. There will be some 200 amp and even 300 amp chargers in the future, in addition to the current 125 amp machines.

The problem with car lots around here is that they are all locked at close of business, and full during business. No access to L2 or DC.
Public L2 are over crowded where there are 1 or 2, and empty at the businesses with six (Kaiser hospitals).

CCS is different in europe and The US I am almost certain of. In Europe the CCS is made from a type 2. Nissan today uses Chademo and type 1. With the transfer to CCS they either need to remove the type 1 and replace it with a type 2 or they will have to have type 1 + Chademo + CCS under the charge port.

They will have to switch to Type-2 by 2017, as the EU regulations will force manufacturers to use the EU-standard Type-2 plug.

Unfortunately in this regard, Nissan is the worst. Providing just a Type-2 instead of a Type-1 would already be an advantage. In the last years no Type-1 stations have been built anywhere in Europe. Leaf owners need to use an adapter cable (Type-1 on the car’s end, Type-2 on the station’s end), because the car does not have a standard AC plug.

In europe the Chademo chargers are generally installed at shopping centers and highway reststops.
But the real point is that basically all new chargers are Chademo & CSS & Type 2

It wasn’t but less than two weeks ago that we had an entire thread about Nissan allegedly leaving CHAdeMO, and yet here it is again.

It will be interesting to see what Nissan partner Renault will do with the Zoe.

The ‘old’ model can be fast charged on AC43 kW (over the standard Mennekes plug).

The newer R240 model has a new motor/charger that can only charge at a max power of 22 kW, making the car far less attractive and versatile. I for one would not sacrifice a true fast charging capability for a few km’s of extra range.

The question is: will Renault add CCS to the R240? Or will they forego true fast charging and stay on 22 kW?

I never understood why they removed the 43kW option. 43kW AC charges as fast as 50kw ccs or chademo in practice since they can stay on optimum voltage and current a longer time. 43kW for the zoe is plenty and enough but 22kW is not enough, especielly if it gets a much needed range upgrade. But everything is about price and gear.

A 43kW option with the same range as for 17.000 eur incl owning the battery could work great as a city car.

A zoe with 22kW AC combined with 100-150kW CCS with a 45kWh battery would be epic. Price 25.000 eur incl. battery.

AC 43kW is very expensive!
Its all about costs – there will be more EVs than fast-chargers so it is more reasonable to have the higher cost componenents in the chargers. We have DC fast chargers mostly because then the cars can be cheaper as they do not need powerful AC-DC conversion.

Not the way Renault did it. The Chameleon charger is pretty smart and doesn’t require that much extra components since (among other things) they re-use motor windings in the charging circuit.

And not to forget, the added advantage is 11 kW, 3-phase charging at home. Or on the street. You fill it up in ~2 hrs, which is just about the time of a shopping trip. No other affordable EV can do that.

Many public chargers are 22 kW, the Zoe can take advantage of those too and charge in an hour or so. Try that with a LEAF or i3 or Soul.

It is still more expensive than DC to implement on the car side. I do agree that it is convenient currently but as EVs, PVs and battery arrays proliferate DC charging will most certainly take over and we will see only comparatively low power AC charging.

It costs 4000 euros less than a comparable LEAF. So whatever it is costing more, it is not noticeable in the selling price.

The 43 kW Chameleon charger had a lot of problems with random charging stops and randomly not charging at some stations.

As a result of how the 43 kW was made, it ment that slow charging (which is done with the same Chameleon charger) was very inefficient and took 23 hours. You just couldn’t charge at grandma and return home the next day.

Renault dropped the 43 kW for 22 kW, so the slow charging could get as ‘fast’ as that of a Leaf (one night).

I think nissan and Renault are the answer, give me an AWD 6 wheeled 60 kWh leaf with 66 kW ac charging (22kw per phase) and 50 kW chademo dcfc.

It is unlikey to be any uglier than my current leaf and it would be far more capable as a vehicle

Has anyone in the industry thought about simply changing the Chademo plug with something small and convenient? It would be really easy to convert all existing cars and charging stations if you only had to replace the plug.

Now THAT is a good idea!!! With a ground wire added, it could also do split phase AC.

You could take the current Tesla plug (North America and Japan) and add 5 small pins along the bottom… CHAdeMO from a svelt Tesla sized plug that is capable of 370 amps.

Note: of course, the plug locking mechanism would have to be moved to the vehicle, just like Tesla.

Nissan should’ve done that after falling out with CCS camp. Now the horse has left the barn, and things are not looking good.

I don’t suppose your company could lead the revolution, especially for legacy EV conversions? Small port opening for both J1772 + Chademo would be great, but that will introduce yet another charging handle. Maybe Nissan and others could license it from you, though I don’t know if there are any patent issues.

Nissan didn’t “fall out” from CCS. Nissan was DELIVERING Nisan LEAFs with CHAdeMO before there even was a CCS standard.

The same is true of Tesla (although they did try to work with SAE with their then proposed CCS).

We wouldn’t make any new standard plug without consultation with CHAdeMO.

The Kia Soul EV also uses CHAdeMO. Asia will likely continue to stay CHAdeMO; Europe will forcibly be CCS.

In Texas, we have 6 CCS charging stations and 17 CHAdeMO. For the entire state. Ugh.

List of major car manufacturers/brands with EVs compatible with CHAdeMO:


[South Korea]




It would be feasible for CHAdeMO (EVs and chargers) to switch to Tesla.

Eventually I think everything will go DC, even home charging. It only makes sense.

Now that charging infrastructure is being deployed, take the charger out of the car. Make a 1kW 120V portable standard, with an upgrade for a wall mounted 6kW model. Ditch the J1772 connector and only have CHAdeMO or Tesla connector.

This is why I like CHAdeMO and Tesla, because they’re not tied to an AC standard.

I would like to see a small, mass-produced, 240VAC to 300VDC charger for home use.
(or whatever DC voltage is required)

scott franco (the evil EV owning republican)

I thought I remembered something like that, doesn’t exactly fit his “mass-produced” criteria though.

From that site though you can see, that the most expensive piece would not be the chargers or controllers, it would be the connector because of licensing fees.

I’m curious how much a 1kW 120V one could be produced for. I don’t think it would cost much more than the j1772 120v adapters and they could eliminate the on-board chargers. It would all come down to licensing fees though.

Yes, needs to be mass-produced/cheap. $500 or less.

We are a generation away from ubiquitous DC charging, but that day will come.

Yes, AC chargers will first be optional, then like spare tires and radiator grills, will fade away into the sunset.

With 200 mile ranges, is L2 all that important?

It would be interesting to see a survey of Model S owners, to see how often they NEED to charge away from home on an L2.

You might be confusing L2 which means AC charging with the speed of the charging the answer to your question of course is that every night while sleeping weather at home or at a hotel any current vehicle with a 100kWh battery or smaller only requires about 10-15kW of power to fully replenish it in 8 hours.

The current 30 amp / 208 volt public L2 / J1772 works well for this task.

In the future, I suspect those could be real DC chargers, with speeds of 5-15kW.

CHAdeMO has a clear plus nobody is talking about. Not only there are more CHAdeMO chargers then CSS, they have less traffic since all the CSS models are charging elsewhere.

I person think this CSS replacing Chamo is more of a case that the other car makers who are not Nissan want to throw a red herring at EV sales and electric car charger construction. The reason why I say this Chamo still out numbers CSS three to one and on top of that most of the new CSS chargers being build are only 25 kilowatt ones or duel chargers being built along side the Chamo ones.

At the same time this is going on the rivals with CSS are not really entering the highways in any real large numbers.

What would fix this war is if the electric car had both a Chamo and CSS charger mounted on it.

..and a Tesla SC port… and maybe the old induction paddle too, just to cover all the bases.

As a person who doesn’t follow EV stuff as much as most of enthusiasts here, let me help you to see the truth: it’s all about the market share and convenience for consumers.

Betamax vs VHS.
SACD vs MP3.
Blu-Ray vs Streaming.

Do you think people give a piece of crap about comparing better technology? If people see the convenience to find CHAdeMO stations over ‘superior’ CCS during road trips, companies will find a way to improve CHAdeMO instead of CCS. If it’s convenient for them to build dual-standard charging stations for consumers, that’s the way it’ll be.

Whoever owns bigger market share, while providing convenience to consumers will win. General public won’t care extra 8 minutes of charging time. As long as the market leader keeps up competitive edge, it’ll be fine.

I honestly think wireless charging stations for home will be a bigger market than station-standard fight. People usually park their car for more than 8~12 hours a day, and it’s much more common scenario than road trips.

You discount political power in this equation.

The German government is fully at war with CHAdeMO and Tesla, passing laws to mandate the German CCS standard at least in the charging stations.

Generally, as we have already seen, CHAdeMO continuous to flourish.

Yeah, Germany can have “some” effect of the outcome. EU tried their best to whip U.S companies with heavier tax, monopoly laws or whatever. Did they work? Nope.

It made few dents, but for that U.S is now giving a whole lot of ass-whooping to VW with fines and public shaming. Even U.S government is suing VW to let everyone know that who’s running the show.

Japan being a strong ally to U.S., I do agree with you on CHAdeMO expanding their market share. Unless if Europeans can come up with a technology so very effective in both cost and convenient, so much that it may change Nissan’s and Tesla’s operation, then I’d start care about claims of CCS being superior or becoming an only standard.

And your point about EU pushing their own standard is probably an inevitable outcome.

But it won’t do much for the most active market in the world. U.S still runs the show, and we will let Japanese to test the water first. Then once the ROI hits the right range, U.S will either invest most money on the 1st runner(CHAdeMO or Tesla), or come up with their own standard while working with the 1st runner.

Actually, the EU has made CHAdeMO an official standard, so no, I don’t believe that it will be outlawed there.

I was specifically referring to the protectionist laws in Germany in favor of their homebrew CCS. Even Tesla will have to install at least one CCS at each Supercharger location within Germany.

For now I think most new chargers are going to be dual standard and unless Nissan decides to drop CHAdeMO we aren’t seeing CHAdeMO go away anytime soon. Personally I expect CCS to outnumber CHAdeMO chargers in the US by this time next year.

What is “funny”(bad choice I know)is that Chademo or CCS, we need to see a Tesla-like approach to charging locations. Nissan dealers (some of them)have been doing their part by offering access to their QC units(and Level II’s)but that is just not going to cut it long term. Maybe the advent of the 200+ mile BEV’s will lessen the urgency of having access to public charging. Maybe focusing on destination charging sites(as Tesla has done) will be key. But right now everyone but Tesla is just dipping their toes into the water.

Who is paying you for this repeated hate war against CHAdeMO and Nissan?

I feel I just got Charged to 80% by all these commments