Are Tesla Superchargers, CHAdeMO, and CCS DC Fast Charging Locations Set to Change?

NOV 5 2015 BY MARK HOVIS 94

Tesla Supercharger network

Tesla Supercharger network from PlugShare

Recently, Christian Ruoff of Charged EV Magazine posted DC Fast Charging Maps Highlight the differences between Tesla and ChAdeMO/DCC rollouts.  Christian is using Maps generated from PlugShare’s quaterly infrastructre reports posted here.

Through Q3 2015, Tesla Motors had crossed the 200-mark of US supercharger locations, with over 1,250 charging outlets. (232 as of this post)  In comparison, the US CHAdeMO DC fast charging outlets had also crossed the 1,250 mark and the the US CCS DC fast chargers were slowly growing to 470 outlets. There is one glaring difference, the CHAdeMO locations were 939 and the CCS locations were 270. The three PlugShare plots tell the tale.

CHAdeMO Fast Charging Locations

CHAdeMO Fast Charging Locations from PlugShare

CCS DC Fast Charging Locations

CCS DC Fast Charging Locations from PlugShare

From the onset, Tesla Motors set out to build cross-country corridors running north-to-south and east-to-west. The CHAdeMO and CCS DC fast chargers have provided a totally different cluster strategy to support the existing 80-mile BEV market primarily serving the city EV. This will most likely remain this way until the 200-mile BEVs start to arrive.

The Debut Of The Chevrolet Bolt Is Putting Pressure On Other OEMs To Not Get Left Behind

The Debut Of The Chevrolet Bolt Is Putting Pressure On Other OEMs To Not Get Left Behind

Well, get ready for all three charging maps to change. GM has the Chevy Bolt on the production schedule for 2016 Q4. The Chevy Bolt will certainly be the first of many economic 200-mile BEVs to hit production with little more than a year before they start to arrive. With this EV, drivers will begin looking for interstate EVSE corridors to open. Likewise, if Tesla Motors is successful at selling 100,000 Model III annually, they are only a couple of years from needing increased fast charging options. As of this post, California has 36 Tesla Motors Supercharger stations open, 3 under construction, and six more permitted.

The needs for all three standards will be challenged within a two to five year window.  Increased EV traffic will not only require more fast charger locations to connect the corridors, they will most likely require stations with more outlets. Currently, Tesla Superchargers typically are outfitted with six outlets, while CHAdeMO and CCS DC fast chargers typically have one or two outlets.

Someday We'll See Gen 3 Tesla Parked Next to the Model S and Model X at Supercharger Stations

Someday We’ll See Gen 3 Tesla Parked Next to the Model S and Model X at Supercharger Stations

The next few years promise to be exciting in the growth of EVs. With that growth will come the growing pains of the charging infrastructure.  Even as the EV fleet remains as a few percent of the autos on the highway, the image of 100,000 weekend vacation commuters could produce tens if not hundreds of EVs encountering one dual fast charger, and that is horrifying. Likewise, 50,000+ Tesla models accumulating each year in the California market will require a little more charger clustering as well.

With three standards, adapters will be necessary for the immediate future. CCS configured EVs like the Bolt would benefit from a CHAdeMO adapter, and the reverse for CHAdeMO configured EVs will be true as more CCS locations grow. Tesla Motors currently offer a CHAdeMO adapter as an option. The CCS most likely will follow.

This is a problem we have been looking forward to for some time, too many EVs on the highways! How many DCFCs will be needed per 1000 PEVs now that they will serve more than a metro area only? What will future maps of fast charging locations look like and how many outlets will be required? Tesla Motors has provided an insight through 2016.

Give us your thoughts.

Categories: Charging

Tags: , , , ,

Leave a Reply

94 Comments on "Are Tesla Superchargers, CHAdeMO, and CCS DC Fast Charging Locations Set to Change?"

newest oldest most voted

All I know is that here in Texas… our EV infrastructure grew very fast a few years ago, then suddenly stopped. And, if anything is now shrinking due to some stations being removed, others are eternally ICE’d making them useless, and others are perpetually broken with no intent of repairing them.

At this point PHEVs are the best option for us.

IT WOULD REALLY SPEED UP “EV” PROGRESS…, If all EV Makers were to work together towards “ONE GOAL” & Form An alliance to make all the Chargers “COMPATABLE” to charge all “EV’s” at all Locations…This would remove some more stumbling Blocks & Really speed up EV growth……..As The 0ld saying goes., Together we stand., Divided we fall. …..Let’s all get with the program ASAP ! ……

Or, just put both a CCS and CHAdeMO connect on each DC charger. It would add no more than 3% to the cost of it. MW

In Canada we have the ChadeMO and CCS togetter on the same charger . One side is CHAdeMo and the other CCS and they poping up fast lately specialy in Quebec.
almost one a week we got a new one all supply by Hydro or wind power .

Along with building almost only hybrids, not getting involved in the charging infrastructures is also a great way for ICE car makers to delay the massive adoption of Electric cars.

Gasmobile makers never got involved in the process of building gas stations. Why should EV makers be expected to get involved in building EV charging stations?

Tesla has done so more to promote its own sales than anything else; Supercharger use is seen as a “perk” for Tesla owners. You’ll note that no non-Tesla cars are charging up at Supercharger locations!

In my opinion, EV enthusiasts clamoring for more EV makers to install their own network of public chargers is just a sign that the EV revolution is still very much in the early adopter era. We’ll know that it’s starting to mature when we start seeing for-profit public EV chargers become commonplace… and actually being used, instead of PEV owners hunting around until they find a free charging station.

Interresting question.
In 1900 there was not many “horseless carriages” around. The energy source had to be developed side by side with the cars. The Rockefeller monopoly did the trick with Ford, building inefficient dangerous noisy stinking machines. Will we see the same absurd paradygm grow with the FCVs?

In my book. Petroleum cars took the market because the Oil monopoly pushed them hard, not because Ford built them. Henry was partner with John D.

All the advantages of BEVs over ICE cars seems so obvious… What can go wrong?

The environmental situation call for emergency measures. Forcing a pro rata erection of fast chargers by the car companies along with forced introduction of massively built EVs would be one of them.

Actually in the year 1900, most cars were steam driven, electrics were gaining in popularity, and only a little fraction were ICE.
Without the secret Ford Standard Oil alliance, Edison would have had it his way : as most hoses were on the country side with familial farms, he envisioned wind mills and his famous Nickel-Iron storage batteries everywhere, and an electric grid growing from peer to peer as Internet did.

In my opinion, there need to be incentives to get the utilities build chargers, because they seem to have all the profit they wish for. They are the ones selling the resource and private start ups are not so eager to deal with the fluctuation of their prices.

Incentives will be better spent directly to builders for home solar and wind power, for a cleaner future, FAST.

Three standards really frustrates me. One would have been nice… the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few…

Multiple standards is just the way it goes with new technology. At least Tesla is helping by making an adapter. They are the only automaker that supports more than one technology in the US.

+1

Yeah, don’t see Ford or GM selling CHAdeMO to CCS adapters for their vehicles… 😛

Agreed. If the CCS consortium hadn’t dragged their feet, then Nissan and Tesla would probably have used their standard. And now those two companies are too vested/stubborn to change course.

Not that CCS is the best standard, either. Just that CHAdeMO was the closest thing to a standard when Nissan/Tesla started selling quick-charge capable cars. Nissan went the path of least resistance. Tesla rolled their own. And now we have three standards.

The silver lining is that all three standards max out around 150kW. And we don’t approach gasoline refueling speeds until at least 250kW, maybe even 500kW. So with any luck, the next-generation of fast charging will converge on a single standard, obsoleting all three of today’s. Hey, I can dream can’t I?

I still don’t know if AM radio interference problem with Leaf DCFC is due to Leaf, Chademo standard, or chargers. SparkEV CCS doesn’t have problems. Any ideas?

http://sparkev.blogspot.com/2015/10/radio-interference-by-leaf-or-chademo-or.html

That’s a random question. I wouldn’t know – I have zero experience with QCing a Leaf. There are really no CHAdeMO’s nearby, and my Leaf doesn’t have the port anyway.

Do people still listen to AM radio?!?

It’s not random in Chademo vs CCS question. I was all for Chademo and CCS were bunch of idiots until I came across this problem. That’s why I’d like to know if this is spec problem or product problem, and if they can put a fix ASAP before government snoops poke their dirty fingers in it.

It also helps if I don’t miss “WTHDJJS?” while charging. I think it’ll be on tonight!

Well, this is the first I’m hearing of the problem, and you replied to my comment with the question, hence my confusion. It looks like you are asking me.

Hi Brian, You seem like a smart chap, I read in the press the other day that scientists have managed to un-boil an egg could you, in 140 words or less, explain too me what relevance this has to the plastics recycling industry? ok so my sense of humor is a bit abstract. With respect to the fast charger. The fast charger, or a component in it, hasn’t been properly shielded and is emitting an AM signal. It is no more or less dangerous than the AM signal you are already picking up to listen to your radio show. In fact it is much weaker than the signal that your radio station puts out which is why you only notice the effect when you are close to the charging station. I am not sure what the laws in the US are but the government would probably only get involved if the interference was so great that it started to affect things a long way away from the station (like a house next door) or if it was in a frequency range that could jam a police radio (which is unlikely). The affect is likely to be related to one component… Read more »

Then why would the same ABB station using CCS with SparkEV not cause interference? Did ABB skimp on Chademo side to cause more interference while shielding CCS side better? Why?

Another question would be, do Tesla superchargers cause radio interference, AM or otherwise? I’m sure there’s some, but if it’s in band of existing radios, that won’t be good.

Why are you pushing your agenda / blog on an unrelated post?

Topic is are fast charger locations set to change. If RF interference problem is real, that will affect the charger locations. Pushing agenda? What would that be?

As far as AM interference goes, the Tesla Roadster was always notorius for very bad AM interference. (When driving, it would sound like there was an engine overpowering your radio).

I complained to my Tesla Advisor, who stated I’m lucky I purchased just the cheap radio. People who spent mucho bucks for the infotaninment option got just as much AM interference and they were more upset.

He also said Tesla enginneering was more worried about other things so that AM radio interference was best left to when you were parked and not using the Unshielded Power Equipment Module.

Interestingly, the 2011 Volt has perfect AM reception so I guess their drive module is fully filtered.

SparkEV makes what sound like low level piano sound in AM radio when accelerating hard, but never bad. When driving normally, there’s no interference. I’m curious if Volt would do the same under hard electric acceleration.

Your experience with Roadster is disappointing. I thought I might get one one of these days (long time from now), but now? Hmmm.

I’m a little surprised you don’t simply stream your talk radio through your phone. Much better audio quality, you can pause, and listen at 2x.

Thanks!

@Nick,

I didn’t know you could stream AM broadcasts through a flip-phone without data service. Please tell me more about this!

@Sparkev and Nick:

It is only the rAdio – didn’t buy the car for it.

Haha!

I have no solution for time travlers.

You must acquire a phone for the era you’ve arrived in. 🙂

Interference with AM signals could be caused by the isolation transformer. A BEV connected to DC charger only is seeking a DC signal so has no need to generate an AC signal.

Have you noticed more / less interference at different charging locations? Start making a note of DC charger model and other equipment connecting to the local grid. The source could be any of a number external to the BEV.

So far, no AM interference with SparkEV on any DCFC. But Leaf is always so. Since I only encounter Leaf at DCFC these days, I don’t know if it’s Leaf problem or other cars do the same. I also don’t know if this is US or CA problem or other places have the same problem.

Brian said:

“…with any luck, the next-generation of fast charging will converge on a single standard, obsoleting all three of today’s. Hey, I can dream can’t I?”

Oh, it’s inevitable that sooner or later, we’ll have an actual EV charging standard. The only question is whether industry will get together and actually agree on one, as they did with DVD and Blu-ray standards, or if it will have to be government imposed, as happened with seat belts and unleaded gasoline.

But either way, the sooner the better for the EV revolution. The lack of standardization is really holding back installation of public chargers.

Or it could create market for converter cable companies. I saw Tesla charging from Chademo. It was small and neat. I hope others make something like that. At least short term, or even long term if not single standard emerge, that’ll alleviate “charger anxiety.”

Texas is an example of what happens when a government actively discourages something. Their anti-Tesla laws (no direct sales in Texas) probably had something to do with the lack of charger growth.

Is anybody making money from these chargers yet? I don’t think the economics work, except for Tesla’s unique model.

The reason you see a bunch built and then stop is because it’s typically a government or other initiative that provides the up front money.

And the reason the infrastucture starts to decay after a few years is that no thought or money is allocated to maintenance.

I find electric car charger repairs in a very vague area unless it’s a charger owned or operated by a car charging company. But even then they are unpredictable.

I don’t think Tesla will develop an adapter to use CCS as it did for CHAdeMO. With the growth of the Tesla supercharger network and the usual co-location of CCS with CHAdeMO, there will be very few routes where the only charging option is CCS.

What I really wish is that if they made a CSS and Chamo adapter that you could mount into the the car instead of having to lug around a CSS or Chamo adapter for us low range evs.

While I would love to see the situation change within 5 years, I don’t think that it will. not significantly anyway. Nobody has figured how to create a network that is both profitable and scalable. I don’t see governments continuing to shell out money to build chargers. I suspect that in the next 5 years, the infrastructure growth will stagnate. Maybe once the 200-mile BEVs really start selling in significant numbers, someone will find that an independent network of chargers could be built profitable.

Brian said:

“Nobody has figured how to create a network that is both profitable and scalable.”

How about the EV-line charging system in South Korea?

It’s a subscription service which uses “smart” portable EVSEs that the EV driver plugs into a Level 2 outlet which has a wirelessly controlled off/on switch.

http://cleantechnica.com/2015/05/19/ev-line-can-turn-any-outlet-in-south-korea-into-a-level-2-charger/

Ultimately, after there is an actual charging standard adopted, EV makers can start building their cars so that no EVSE is required; so the car can be plugged into the charger directly, and the car’s own software will communicate with the charger to arrange billing. But the EV-line technology seems like a practical interim solution.

I don’t know how profitable EV-line is, but it seems that it could be if it’s managed well. No EVSE required at the outlet, just a wireless off/on switch. Perhaps it would pay electric utilities to install those. If not, the subscription service should be willing to install them, to increase revenues… just as cell phone companies pay to install cell towers.

I’m not sure where my reply went, but the EV-line solution sounds like a novel approach to the problem of billing. But I was referring to quick-charge networks, preferably 100kW or faster. Only Tesla and a handful of others have any type of network. We have yet to see if Tesla’s network will remain profitable/scalable when Model III arrives, or if it’s a giant pyramid scheme. The others are losing money hand over fist, and have no incentive to maintain the chargers they have today, let alone expand them further.

This is why I am a fan of the idea of making EVSE’s publicly funded and operated. This may be an unpopular idea (and frankly, I don’t care if it is) but it seems to me that, in order to see the kind of wide-spread adoption we are all hoping for, and in order to keep costs down, EVSE’s should be publicly funded and operated to see the type of widespread expansion that would really help support EVSE’s. Even if it is a case that their construction is supported with public funding and is operated privately (while the infrastructure is built and maintained publicly) then I think we can achieve that type of necessary expansion for supporting the potential PEV tidal wave.

Let’s not forget that oil companies still enjoy significant public subsidies. Asking EVSE networks to compete without subsidies against oil companies with massive subsidies is the very definition of unfair advantage (for the oil companies).

+1

If it is one thing that anyone should be well aware of, it’s that infrastructure tends to take a LONG time to get built. On the surface, it may seem that EVSEs are easy to add, but a lot of utilities will need to upgrade their utility lines and breakers to handle the increased load in a lot of these locations. And that is expensive.

Underinvestment in L2 urban charging is looking more like it will only hasten the adoption of “200 mile” cars, and L3/DCFC infrastructure. It is what i see, in the city. Fed funded 1772 breaking down, and only $500/mnth garages installing it.

L2 is still an important link, to broader adoption.

The almost complete lack of charging stations around Detroit and Michigan in general is surprising. If you’re going to develop the technology lead the way. Unless Detroit is billing things like the Bolt as a second car only.

The municipal government of Detroit is in the throes of a long-term financial crisis, due to people leaving the city in such numbers that much of the area is completely depopulated. It’s hardly surprising they’re not using money for non-essentials such as paying for free public EV charge points.

That is a good point but the state of Michigan, GM, Chrysler, or Ford could have paid for them.

Holy crap! You are so right! How can they possibly launch the Bolt presumably with SAE-CCS for DC fast charging when they don’t even have such chargers in their home territory!

Either GM has quietly licensed access to Tesla Superchargers or they are sleepwalking into the worst EV launch ever.

(This is where this response belonged.)

CCS cars “would benefit from a CHAdeMO adapter”, absolutely! But it is not necessary for CHAdeMo car to have CCS adapter, as most CCS DCFC are piggy back to CHAdeMo as dual-standard station, there are very very few CCS only station.

Holy crap! You are so right! How can they possibly launch the Bolt presumably with SAE-CCS for DC fast charging when they don’t even have such chargers in their home territory!

Either GM has quietly licensed access to Tesla Superchargers or they are sleepwalking into the worst EV launch ever.

What’s missing here is how many people use the fast chargers, because they are free? If it’s not free, are they likely to use as often? I suspect many chargers will be freed up, though it’s hard to tell at what level demand will cause long waiting.

When (if?) long range EV become more popular, fast chargers will be used even less, mainly used for longer distance travel, maybe 1% of the time or less. While that may be good news in terms of wait times, I don’t know if that’s good news for those who want to setup fast chargers to make money.

Each EV owner may be using public chargers less with increased EV range, but more EVs on the road mean more potential customers for the for-profit EV charge network.

But I think most EV supporters fail to realize there are actually two different markets:

1. “Destination” chargers, for slow charging of cars parked for hours or overnight

2. Ultra-fast-chargers; chargers which will charge a long-range EV completely (or up to 80%) in 10 minutes or less

Of course, demand for #2 will have to wait until long-range EVs (BEVs, and future long-range PHEVs with a range bigger than the Volt’s) are built with the capacity to be charged that quickly.

Stations servicing the market for category 2 may look a lot like current gas stations, or Supercharger stations, with multiple ultra-fast-chargers at one location.

Category 1 will be serviced by individual 220v outlets with a wireless off/on switch, and automatic computerized billing. Category 1 chargers will be distributed rather than clustered, except in parking lots.

I’m somewhat dubious that it makes sense to construct a long distance charger infrastructure with current technology. Until charge times are significantly reduced the number of chargers needed to service peak travel dates won’t be economical. Tesla probably has the right idea with a per car charge that goes toward charger infrastructure, so that infrastructure scales with the number of vehicles, but I’m not sure even that will scale once you move into mass production of less high-end vehicles. Until battery and charging technology improve it might not be practical for masses of people to expect to use EVs for long distance travel. It’s just hard to see how the holiday weekend scenario works out.

Although technology improves, the laws of physics are not changing. I’m sure the current charging speed of the Superchargers can be improved a bit, it can’t go an order of magnitude higher because of thickness required for the wires, the strain on the grid, the size of the connector, the strain on the battery receiving the charge, thermal issues, etc.

I don’t personally think that charge rates needs to improve by an order of magnitude. I think 250kW is where it starts getting close enough for most people (just my own WAG). Combine that with larger batteries, which can keep the charge rate up near 250kW for much longer, and you get a much faster effective charge rate.

Oh I agree. In fact the current Tesla Supercharger system is pretty much good enough. 200+ miles covers all local driving. For those RARE long distance trips, it is true that the Tesla will require you to wait an hour or so to supercharge up during stops and thus will take a little longer. But you need to factor in all the time you saved during your regular commute weeks NEVER having to ‘fill-up’ and instead just take 5 seconds to plug-in at night. A forced hour break during long trips will also improve safety because people will not be driving nonstop with only 5 minute gas-ups.

+1

I also think that about 250-300 kW (about 10 minutes for 200 mile charge) will be maximum for practical and economic reasons for foreseeable future. Above that there is diminishing returns at increasing cost. Going from 10 minutes to 7 minutes charging time is likely as expensive step as going from 20 minutes to 10 minutes, but it’s not nearly as significant for consumer.

Speculawyer said: “Although technology improves, the laws of physics are not changing.” Fortunately, high current electrical wiring is an engineering problem which has already been solved, and is in everyday use. “I’m sure the current charging speed of the Superchargers can be improved a bit, it can’t go an order of magnitude higher because of thickness required for the wires, the strain on the grid, the size of the connector…” Nonsense. That green metal box on the ground beside every large commercial building contains a transformer capable of handling more current than would be needed to ultra-fast-charge a few cars at once. I don’t understand why people keep talking about that as if it will be new territory for electrical engineers. http://www.csemag.com/single-article/selecting-sizing-transformers-for-commercial-buildings/4efa064775c5e26f27bfce4f0a61378e.html As far as the internal wiring in the car, it’s true that will have to be beefed up quite a bit for ultra-fast-charging. Using copper for that would be expensive, but aluminum wires are much cheaper, and conduct almost as well. “…the strain on the battery receiving the charge, thermal issues, etc.” Certainly the battery cells being currently used won’t be able to handle that much current, and they would overheat if they could. But there have already… Read more »
+10 “The laws of physics…” Well I know them, and I know that sometimes they are used as an excuse not to progress. Most people think that they don’t change, but history has shown that we are far from knowing all laws of physics. How long did we think superconductors would only be possible in the <10K range? What's with that theoretical resolution of an optical microscope? What about quantum effects? Anyone here remembering the times when LED was only RED, GREEN or ORANGE/YELLOW? So many lessons learned over the last century, yet people use physics as an excuse. Fast charge capability of a battery is highly dependent on internal resistance, which is likely to be reduced in further generations. Cable thickness is dependent on voltage and resistance. "The unchangeable laws of physics" offer two ways to reduce cable thickness. Both will help. Engineers can even add cooling which will add another factor. Is cooling a "law of physics defeating device???" No one can predict at what voltages and what currents we will charge in 5 years, but definitely both will be higher than today! Back to the topic: which plug? Right now we have the situation that different standards… Read more »

@Lindsay

I think uou are right that building out a DCFC network along highways right now with 50 kW speeds is not a good idea. But, in a year or two from now beginning to install charging stations with 100 kW capability would be a good thing along highways at rest stops etc. Let it grow from there!

Speculawyer’s point is a valid one. Why are all the BIG EXPERTS (who have already admitted they don’t understand this stuff, except as a generalist) instantly so quick to insult him and say he is wrong? I’m not really worried about whether something is technically possible: almost anything charging related is possible if you throw enough money at it.. My basic question on fast chargers is “who is going to pay for it?” Apparently where I live, even though New York state offers a magnamimously generous 50% business tax credit, there are no takers within the range of the new BOLT (other than way out of the way in Ontario, Canada), in .most of the directions I’d want to travel. So if I do pick up a new Bolt, I probably wouldn’t bother with the fast charge option since I either just plain couldn’t use it, or I’d use it so seldom that waiting around for the level 2 evse to charge it up for the rare times I’d need it. What I WOULD insist on, is hopefully GM will at least offer as an option, at least a 6 kw charger in the car, since the 15 amp (3.3… Read more »

Tesla will be the winner. Just look how logically those Superchargers are placed. I just hope the other 200+ mile EVs take Tesla up on their offer to join the network.

I think Tesla’s superchargers are at a point were they might break down due to rising demand. In that Tesla has spent letters to people asking them not to use the supercharger network for the shake of charging locally due to all the demand and lines at the chargers.

There is no need for a winner.

Superchargers are logically placed for cross-country travel. They cover a huge area with nearly the lowest possible amount of stations.

Chademo adresses the city-people. Different approach.

A combination of both will be necesarry and it will come once we have a common plug.

They main problem I see is this “vaccation time” problem. This is not specific for EV’s, every year the highways are full, every year there are waiting lines at gas stations when vaccation starts. This is the reason why vaccations start at different weeks in different countries in europe. We’ll see the same thing when EV’s gain percentage. However I really think that in the long run EV’s will even help to overcome this problem, as infrastructure is not that hard to build. What is the investent when you want to build a gas station? Can gas cars charge at home before starting for vaccation? Prices for charging stations will decrease as components are mass manufactured. Once set up they require less maintenance than a gas station. We should not forget that we are talking about an emerging technology.

Vacation charging has a solution, or better said the problem differs from the obvious issue of long lines at charging stations. If one is spending time at a hotel, most vacationers would always want to plug in overnight at the hotel. The QC would be used for that full charge needed to get to your destination or get home from your destination. Now, I admit that there are very few hotels that offer charging to guests. That may change thought, and it would not require the same level of effort as installing banks of Level III chargers.

Lou

Oh man . . . those maps reveal why the legacy automakers cannot compete with Tesla even if they do build a good long-range EV. Those CCS & Chademo charging infrastructures are USELESS for long distance driving. They are too slow and poorly placed.

They will need to license from Tesla or start a big build-out.

I saw a news story a while ago that to put in a dual CSS and Chamo quick charger would cost $50,000 dollars. The story was interesting in that Nissian funded the DC quick charger but the Virginia Clean Cities collocation picked out the location and did all the permitted work for it while Nissan funded it.

Now show two maps of Japan. One with CHAdeMO chargers and one with Tesla Superchargers.

Everyone knows Japan is Chademo territory. Why do you think Tesla built an adapter to use Chademo chargers? Duh.

I think trying to predict the future by looking at the current condition of public EV chargers is as futile as looking at the future of motorcar fueling, back in the horse-and-buggy era, before the first gas station was built, and you had to buy gasoline in a can at a drug store or hardware store.

When there are enough plug-in EVs on the road to create demand for for-profit EV charging stations, only then will we see any real long-term trend developing. And I predict we won’t see that until after most EV makers agree on an actual charging standard, rather than different companies using competing formats.

It’s still early days yet in the EV revolution.

It would be great if the government would mandate all gasoline filling stations have at least a two plug DCFC in a well lighted & easy to spot location on the property along with a law to tow, at the vehicle owners expense, any vehicle blocking it while not using it to charge their vehicle.

What this article doesn’t take into consideration is the fact that for Teslas (or any EV that has more than 200 mile range), about 97% of charging is done at home. So for long-range EV’s public charging infrastructure is only needed for long trips. This is reflected in Tesla’s SuperCharger map. So for Tesla, accommodating growth is more about adding plugs to existing locations.

Also, another factor that doesn’t get much attention is Tesla Destination Chargers (at hotels, shops, restaurants, etc), as well at the network of ~90,000 Tesla chargers in owners garages that are often shared among the Tesla owner community.

The trouble is, that remaining 3% will tend to be clustered around certain times. Take for instance the upcoming Thanksgiving holiday. A supercharger that is vacant 97% of the time may not be able to handle the surge on the day before Thanksgiving.

That is true. Tesla should work on ways of address that. Perhaps have some temporary stations like when the Kettleman City charger went down. And help people use the chargers most efficiently . . . stop charging and leave when you have enough charge instead of waiting another 20 minutes as it slowly charges up the last few percent.

I’ve been on a lot of 800 mile plus trips were charging can not be done at home. Also if you pull up to a family member or friend’s house and they will get aggressive about not letting you plug in. A quick charger even in a small town would solve a lot of troubles for people who are on long road trips and have to stop there.

I’d hate to meet any of these friends you keep that are aggressively not letting you plug in! That sounds harsh. Anyone is welcome to charge for free at my house since 2007. Ive even installed an extra j1772 station in addition to mine and a 14-50 for Tesla owners. Ive had everything from a Think City to a Model S stop by. Anyone is welcome, friends, family, or complete strangers. I even had some cold drinks and magazines available when Benswing stopped by on his roadtrip. Before there was a thing such as public charging stations, i relied on 240v outlets at friends houses or campgrounds to do 200 mile plus one way roadtrips in the Mini E. Was someone you know really concerned with how much electricity your car would use? Do they realize its a max of $1 an hour on 240v 30amp and only $.25 an hour on 120v regular outlet?

Yeah, there’s one in every crowd that spoils it for everyone. There is one guy in my area, that just because he can afford an 85 kwh S, and usually does ALL his charging at the Clarence (Buffalo) NY Supercharger – when he is at ‘Drive Electric’ events he always insists on hogging one of the J1772 EVSE’s (usually running at 15 or 30 amps – 3 or 6 kw), when he could easily charge up FOR free at the Supercharger the night before and do the round trip to the event without charging at all.

When you politely ask him that he has enough range to get back home – even though he always ‘forgets to charge at home’, he says , “OH! I need a CUSHION just to make sure I can get HOME!”.

If you have a Leaf or MITSU you can just wait until the dude gets bored and decides to leave. Now me, I just find a 110 volt plug somewhere since all the J1772’s are used up.

Would it not make sense to install DCFC at existing fuel stations? Just replace one pump with a DCFC and have a decent coffee shop nearby. Oh, and keep the prices reasonable (squinting at you EVGO)

We should let the gas station owner decide for himself whether it makes sense to install an EV fast charger at his station.

If I was a gas station owner, I’d resent the government telling me I had to install something to service the competition, just as I’d resent it if I was a cinema owner and the government told me I had to sell DVDs and Blu-rays at the box office and the concession stand.

Why at the gas station?
Gasoline and high voltage is not a good mix.
Coffee shops and roadside restaurants compliment EV charging better.
Can you imagine if McDonalds or Starbucks put a L3 station at each of its locations.

Indeed. A half-hour charge (or longer) is not a good fit to gas station operations. They want their customers to get in and out in five minutes or less, on average, to make room for the next customer coming along. The gas station owner isn’t going to want a single car sitting there occupying space for a half hour or more, or at least not many of them.

A half-hour wait is a better match to a restaurant or a shopping mall.

I personlly hate stopping at gas stations in that they are smelly and creepy looking. Also they are very crowded with cars going in and out all the time.

I would love for quick chargers to be located at places were you do want to spend a half a hour there.

Most gas stations in europe make more money from selling stuff than from selling gasoline. That’s why most of them nowadays have some kind of bistro/bakery/coffee machine included…
Some of them even start to add Fast Chargers on their own, because they don’t want to loose their customers. It is actually good for them if customers stay a bit longer and buy overpriced items. Don’t know a lot about the situation in the US, maybe it’s different.

Nope, US gas stations are pretty much the same. They sell the most overpriced bad food in America, and dirty magazines.

RE: “The CHAdeMO and CCS DC fast chargers have provided a totally different cluster strategy” There are really have been two separate deployment strategies for both CHAdeMO and CCS DC Quick* Charger networks. 1) deployments at “local” ‘dealer locations’, and 2) deployments for “extended range” travel. (typically Fast* charging refers to AC Level2 outlets) Tesla only is replying SuperChargers for “extended range” travel. For “local destination” charging Tesla has deployed HPWC (High-power Wall Chargers). These are 20 kWh AC Fast charging outlets. If comparing BEV charging infrastructure; the context to compare needs to be by use-case (destination, extending-range) rather than charging communication protocol types (standards committees). For Example; there are clear differences in states like GA, OR, WA vs CA, TX in usefulness when using CHAdeMO or CCS for “extended-range” EV travel. Both CA & TX have clustered deployments within metro centers, vs GA, OR, WA that have focused more on electrifying corridor along inter-regional routes. Further examples of “extended range” electrification are the deployments by Ecotricity in UK, Fastned in the Netherlands and Germany. The US charging infrastructure industry has to get over fixation on fast (AC) charging outlet numbers and DC charging protocols … and get down to… Read more »

These two artworks sum it up why I’m mad with the current low range ev charging infrastructure.

http://oceanrailroader.deviantart.com/art/Weevil-s-It-s-like-a-EV-paradise-570352875

And this one shows a group of Teslas and Mitsubishi i-miev’s fighting over these same chargers. Not to mention what could happen if self driving cars start getting intelligent like animals. They might start viewing the quick chargers as a food source and get aggressive if this food source is cut off.

http://oceanrailroader.deviantart.com/art/Weevil-I-think-that-might-be-Elroy-Minsk-in-there-570354020

This is a great article. I had pretty much decided against either the Bolt or Lead II simply because they didn’t have a network of intercity superchargers. If that changes, then that makes either of these cars quite attractive.

One of the great things about EV travel is that the cost of building a supercharger site is much, much less than the cost of building a gas station.

Of course, those who seek to generate revenue directly from providing EV Charging, as if it was a gas pump, fail to realize that, unlike EXXON or Royal Dutch Shell, or BP, etc, that are providing a commodity they own, most EV Charging services are paying another party for the ‘Fuel’ (Electricity) they are delivering.

That alone makes the first problem in the EV Charging Gas Pump business model.

Next comes the general problem of them not having a possible Licence to Sell Electricity at Retail!

It is those reasons, which makes me think that EV Charging should be provided as a benefit of doing business at a given Business, which installs EV Charging as part of their Advertising Budget, just as they would budget a Billboard or Radio or TV Ad.

Payment systems on chargers just make the hardware that much more expensive, and the related communication networks just add extra overhead in running costs, weather you have users or not.

Better to offer the service at no charge, with an option of a small donation, if felt required.

Alternatively, L2 20A @ 240V (3.3kW) could be offered free, with small fees for higher levels, like 6.6 kW and up.

All true!

And this is why ALDI decided to install free DC quick chargers at 50 of their stores.

Hope more companies follow!

Every business that already has a parking lot can benefit by adding chargers. It’s advertising as you said.

The trouble is, any free station cannot be relied on to be available. Ever. As more and more people drive EVs, there will be more and more people who will simply park at the free EVSEs to avoid paying anything for their fuel. Then someone else comes along, in genuine need of a charge to continue their trip, but cannot find an available charging station. Free L2s may work as a nice perk to attract business, but we NEED paid QCs to be profitable in order to enable reliable long-distance travel in an EV.

Agree 100%!!

I don’t think there is need for Chamo to CCS or CCS to Chamo adapters in the future. New stations are more likely to have bot standards and even old stations may be modified to dual standard.

You get premium and regular from same gas station. Why would EV cahrging be any different?

Agreed. Regular, Premium, Diesel, E85, heck even Kerosene can all be found at some gas stations. They clearly installed separate tanks, pumps, meters, etc for each. In the case of CHAdeMO/CCS, the fuel is identical, but the “pumping” (connector and communication with the car) differs. Many companies already make a QC charger with two cables. Hopefully this pans out as you envision.

You would think that someone out there, business savvy, would be able to come up with an enterprise that incorporates EV charging with gas station like convenience stores, coffee shops, etc. Maybe we are just a few years away from the need being so great that someone can afford to lease land, install 6 QC units, another 3-4 fast Level II’s along with some sort of retail shop, bathrooms, small tables, etc. Who would have thought that coffee shops would proliferate with WiFi offerings? Make perfect sense now, but someone had to get the light bulb to go on and figure out how to make it profitable for a customer to come in, sit at a table for 30-60 minutes and sip coffee while they surf the net. Just a thought…

Lou

Yep, cannot imagine why Starbucks has not jumped in, write it off to advertising
‘charge free @ Starbucks’.
Pull in, plug in, go in, charge begin immediately, but times out after 5m. Place your order and Rep presses ‘continue’ for your charge. surf & sip.