I noticed on the Tesla website under Model S charging they have a charge
time and cost calculator near the bottom of the page:
http://www.teslamotors.com/charging#/calculator
If you click up on the kind of outlet you use, you notice that 110 V 12A
standard outlet is more costly and uses more energy to charge than using
240 volt would.
I'm wondering if this is common to the charging setups for other vehicles?
I can understand 110 charging is slow process, and good for balancing
energy company loads over a longer time, but for the end user, the
indication here is a loss of efficiency and higher cost.
One thing I realized on the cost differential of the Tesla Model S base
60kw and 85kw models is that though it is shown as $10K, for the 25Kw
battery difference it is $8k. The other $2k is for supercharger enabling
for the 60Kw model, which is free on the 85Kw model.
In thinking about the range situation maybe a look back at gasoline cars
is in order.
When we look back in time at gasoline cars, initially people went to the
general store to buy a can or bottle of gas. Then the development of the
gas pump out front using gravity feed made it easier to fill the tank.
Later gas/service stations with pumps were developed, and then we come
to the primarily gas or gas only stations we have now. During this
transition automobiles went from small tanks of say 10 gallons or less
and range of 100 miles as speeds were low and if they were lucky in the
1920's, to more modern tanks of 18-20 gallons or more on SUV's and
higher speed with ranges in the 3-4 miles or more. 1950's cars were
getting probably 250 miles on a tank of gas. More efficient vehicles
like the hybrids can go 500 miles on say 10 gallons of gas now. So the
expectation of the modern driver has changed with developments over the
years.
If we liken that to current EV driving, seems like we are coming into
the 1950's with 200 mile range and more developments and longer range on
the horizon.
Don
On 3/8/2015 8:21 AM, tomw via EV wrote:
/"...But what's not irrelevant is our charging infrastructure. We're
building out L3 charging which, I believe, will be too slow once 200+ mile
range cars are out..."/
I agree Peri. I think we failed to move from the lead-acid range mentality
to anticipate longer range vehicles. Less than a decade ago people who drove
evs were always looking for places to opportunity charge from 120VAC because
they only had about 15-25 mile range, and 120VAC was what was more
available. One of the main topics of conversation at ev club meetings was
the location of various opportunity charging points. Addition of 5 miles
range was significant then, 20% to 33% extension, and could make the
difference for getting back home from across town.
Compared to charging from a 120VAC outlet L2 EVSEs seemed really fast, so
more than adequate. The L2 network was put in place to give people peace of
mind that they wouldn't run out of charge driving around town, but they
weren't going to anyway. I pointed that out after I converted my car in
2009 but the people in the local ev club who had driven lead acid evs for
years were still understandably focused on opportunity charging.
The main purpose of L2 EVSEs now is for people from out of town to charge,
since vehicles with greater than around 50 mile range rarely charge anywhere
but at home for around town trips. But L2 EVSEs are too slow for adding 50
more miles or so. It only works well if you leave your car charging while
you do something else such as go for a hike, bike ride, eat a meal, or do
some work on your computer at a coffee shop (with a note on the windshield
stating time it is ok to unplug). It also is fine for charging at work, but
then 120VAC would do the job there for most people.
I think it likely we are now repeating the same mistake we made going from
20 mile evs to 80 mile evs. In several years people will likely be driving
140 - 200 mile range evs, wanting to add much more range per charging
session, and wondering why we installed all these unbelievably slow L2
EVSEs. It is a situation common to quickly moving technologies.
--
View this message in context:
http://electric-vehicle-discussion-list.413529.n4.nabble.com/Re-EVLN-BASF-sez-1k-mi-NiMH-EV-Pack-700Wh-kg-lighter-weight-tp4674091p4674131.html
Sent from the Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list archive at
Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
--
Don Bradley
PO Box 141
Forestville, Ca. 95436
Maker of Signal Generators for Chladni Plate Tuning
_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
