Can InsideEVs find out why Electrify America stations in Washington state aren't yet operational?

I already told you the answer, EA is not going to be highly motivated to increase their footprint until VW companies EV's are available after all it is their charging network to do with as they wish. Actually the issue for some of them is on the utility side, some of the stations require utility circuit upgrades, and this takes time for the utilities to figure out what the increased demand means on their existing infrastructure. Some of the stations also have lease terms that dictate when they can open.

BTW, Mount Vernon, Everett, and Renton opened the last 2 weeks, and a few others are testing currently, so I would guess there will be others opening soon.

 

No, EA cannot do as they wish (even though they may be doing so). EA was an off-shoot of the settlement due to diesel gate and it is encourage EV usage without favoring themselves. So they are required to do what is in the community interest, not their interest.

https://cleantechnica.com/2017/04/03/electrify-america-detail-emerge/

.....The dieselgate settlement in California alone totalled $800 million broken out into four 30-month-long waves of $200 million each. Before kicking off work for each wave, the plan must be reviewed with and approved by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to ensure that it sufficiently balances the intent of the penalty — encouraging and supporting adoption of clean air vehicles — without giving the VW brand disproportionate benefit from the program.

That they need to build the chargers irrespective if their products are available. As regulatory scrutiny has diminished, EA is noot moving at the pace the

 

Uh Huh, Now back from LA- LA land... EA is a "sole owned" and "for profit corporation" under VW... There is absolutely no regulation specific to what they can or cannot do outside of a certain amount of spend, the timing, and the the system has to be gender neutral... Tell that to Chademo users Including older Tesla S and X as they are not CCS compatable... 1 plug per station... VW can pretty much run the network any way they choose, and they are.

I am not sure what you are talking about with regulatory scrutiny going away, and EA not moving fast enough? EA is still ramping their rate deploying stations, Each month over the last year (other than NOV, and DEC) they have set a record for deployments and spend... My friends are building many of the stations here in WA, and they are getting pretty fast at knocking the stations out. It takes about 2 months to fully construct a typical station, but some stations have logistical, utility, and jurisdictional challenges that cause them to take longer. They get 3 months to build the 8-10 stall stations.

 

I do to know what is going on with WA State... They sure do talk a big talk, but not much follow through from the clowns in Olympia.

I think most of the Cycle 1 EA stations in WA will be open this summer, they have already submitted some cycle 2 stations for permit, and are starting work on one as soon as the permit is issued. It seems to take them about 3 tries to get the permits approved in WA, not sure if that is B and V dragging it out so they can bill more consulting hours, or if it is just the nature of the beast?

 

Do you explore the links that I post

Here is actual the verbiage from the link. The settlement for Diselgate requires them to get CARB approvals for investments in California. This includes community education. Do you have any proof that this agreement was not reached. If so please provide it. There is no la la land, they have a signed agreement so that they did not get punished more for the diesel emissions scandal. That is why they have agreed to invest so much. They were forced to do it.

The dieselgate settlement in California alone totalled $800 million broken out into four 30-month-long waves of $200 million each. Before kicking off work for each wave, the plan must be reviewed with and approved by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to ensure that it sufficiently balances the intent of the penalty — encouraging and supporting adoption of clean air vehicles — without giving the VW brand disproportionate benefit from the program.





VW’s plan for the first wave of funding was just published (PDF) and is broken out into three primary prongs:


1) Investing in electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure to increase availability of chargers, with construction starting in 2017. Our planned investments will focus on:

• Installing chargers locally in approximately 16 metro areas consisting of 300+ stations (L2 or DC Fast Chargers (50 to 150+ kW))
• Developing a high-speed, cross-country network consisting of 200+ stations (DC Fast Chargers)

Given the deployment versatility of EV chargers, locations could include:

• Multi-family homes (e.g., apartment complexes)
• Workplaces (e.g., office parks)
• Retail (e.g., stores, malls, restaurants, hotels, refueling stations)
• Communities (e.g., municipal parking lots, street parking spots)

Initially, we plan to focus on charger installation in metro areas that could benefit from increased charging infrastructure (e.g., densely populated) and highly trafficked cross-country highways.


2) Increasing awareness and fostering education about EVs, charging availability, and the benefits of electric mobility through various means such as ride and drives, multi-channel advertising, website, social media, and educational programs.


3) Launching a Green City initiative in a yet-to-be-named California municipality to pilot future concepts of sustainable mobility, such as a ZEV-based shuttle service, EV-based car-sharing program, or ZEV transit application.


The California deployment requires a thorough alignment with CARB and will proceed in parallel to the nationwide deployment of the program, which includes the full $2 billion settlement scope. The entire scope will happen under the Electrify America umbrella and is similarly tracking against the same themes as the California plan.

 

Like I said, VW can run the network any way they want.... there is nothing about how much they charge, how well they maintain, when they open stations, etc...

 

Again only partially true. You started off by saying that VW can do what they wish. Now you have changed it can run the network they way they want. That may be true but they then they have to put the stations where the state wants them to. If they put the stations and then there is no business, it makes no sense.

States have the right to regulate VW on how they spend this money as part of the settlement. VW is bound by the rules. Problem is that many states are not forcing VW to behave. One state that is is Washington, which I think is your state.. Please read this article before you respond

Dieselgate disaster — which states may squander their emission settlement funds…on diesel?
https://electrek.co/2019/05/23/dieselgate-disaster-squander-funds/

Nearly $3 billion in funding from Volkswagen’s Dieselgate settlement designed to go toward cleaner transportation in the US is being underutilized in EV infrastructure and adoption, according to a recent study which grades all states based on their spending plans. In fact, at least 14 states could see all of their allotted funds go toward diesel vehicle projects.
Some of the criteria include...

1. Is charging infrastructure eligible?
2. Is the state using 15 percent of its award on charging infrastructure projects

here are the grades

And here are the resulting grades:

 

Please don't put words in my mouth, or creatively edit what I said to meet your agenda... here is what I said... "There is absolutely no regulation specific to what they can or cannot do outside of a certain amount of spend, the timing, and the the system has to be gender neutral" Adding to that CA is a different situation with CARB involved, but EA still was about to pretty much ignore Chademo, with only 1 connection per station

Yes, WA is getting 23 stations in Cycle 1, which is already more than the TESLA Supercharger network has in WA. Cycle 2 is also being focused partially in Seattle area, as I understand it WA will get about 35-38 stations total in Cycle 1 and 2 combined. A budget has also been set aside to expand stations that see too much activity, and all highway stations are designed with utility hookups that allow for doubling in charger count if needed in the future.

 

Lynnwood EA station officially opened yesterday , so that is another on in May... See, E-Tron getting closer, so the pace of station openings has increased dramatically here in western WA.

 

Let us make it clear, I have no agenda. In this forum I have supported Tesla/Elon when I think they are right and called them out when I did not agree. The agreement calls for certain performance measures, but it is left to the states to enforce what they want. States can for example dictate location. Now theoretically, EA can open a station in a location where they are mandated and then keep it open for two hours a day. But then it is now on their dime.

This disucssion started with this statement of yours (you can look at your original statement you made before made accusations that I was in la-la land.

(italics and underline are mine)

It may be their network but they cannot do as they wish as they have to get regulatory approval especially in California.

When I pointed out that to you, changed your statement to

When I challenged you on that, you attacked me and came up with this statement

Fact of the matter is they may be sole owned, they may be for profit, but they have to invest more than in just charging infrastructure. They have to do community education and other activities to reduce emissions. So there is regulation on what type of activities they are required. It may not apply to WA, I do not know or care, but CA is very clear that there is more expected than just opening some charging stations. They dictate location also.

 

Fact of the matter this discussion is about their charging network infrastructure and how they manage it... You can twist this, into a discussion about community outreach, which is a completely different topic and has nothing whatsoever to do with the charging network infrastructure management. And for the the record most states governments including WA and CA had very little input to charging station locations, VW or EA did their own analysis and community outreach to figure out the best locations, ultimately they ended up at many Walmart and Target locations where the space lease price was very low, and many think was zero (booked as green credit for those corporations).

 

Lacey is officially open today, thats 5 stations in the last 30 days in WA state...

 

You've raised an interesting question.

Tesla Superchargers


Spread apart, the SuperChargers are located where they can support long distance, Tesla travel.

Electrify America Chargers


Concentrated in urban areas, long distance support is weaker than the Tesla Superchargers.

CCS Chargers


The interesting problem is the concentration of other CCS charger networks. The others provide the long distance charging needed for cross country travel. However, they are also already concentrated in the area Electrify America is building. So the challenge becomes how to compete and that may lead to a 'price war' in the urban area while outside, the other CCS networks can cover their urban costs.

Bob Wilson

 

I think I see where you were going with this, even though the comment was unfinished. And I suspect you've gotten to the heart of the matter.

I don't know why anyone would be tempted to believe anything written by the hardcore serial Tesla basher who calls himself "David Green". He is against everything InsideEVs stands for; he's only here to tear down Tesla's good name, and attack all EVs as collateral damage.

If you want to see where "Mr. Green" gets his pravduh from, just visit the TslaQ website. But be prepared to give your mind a thorough washout afterward!

* * * * *

Interesting (if a bit disturbing) reading: "Confessions Of A Twitter $TSLAQ Troll"

Here's a quote:

When Tesla fans would counter the utter bovine excrement I was tweeting with facts, figures, and ideas, I was surprised to find that when I was in “troll mode” that facts didn’t matter. At all. Why? Because there’s no cheap thrill to be gained arguing over facts. It’s easier to mock, belittle, and ignore, then go onto the next target for abuse.​

I've often pointed out that there is something about becoming a serial Tesla basher which causes people to start completely ignoring the value of truth as opposed to falsehoods. But I didn't realize just how true that is!

 

Thanks @Pushmi-Pullyu. I hope you will agree, given that we have butted heads on an occasion or two, that I try to be objective. My point here is simple, even if Electrify American can get away with doing what they want, they are required to do what is in the communities best interest, not their own interest. This is atonement for dieselgate. On the other Tesla Supercharger network or anyone else can do what they want within reason.