EV charging subsidy

  • Thread starter Thread starter bwilson4web
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 54
  • Views Views 7K
bwilson4web

bwilson4web

Well-Known Member
Subscriber
The proposed infrastructure bill includes adding EV charging. Unfortunately, there are risks such as requiring one type of fast DC charger plug, CCS-1. About 79% of all EVs are Teslas so a CCS-1 mandate means only 21%, about 1-in-5 new EVs. But there are subsidies that could work:
  • bi-directional grid buffer - so the fast DC charging stations won't sag and can help buffer the grid.
  • peak rate above 1,000 kW - urban delivery and service vehicles need a way to 'top off' without having to drive back to their depot.
  • mix of J1773 and fast DC charging - parking lot lights should have access with managed rates for grid load mitigation.
  • density mitigation - spread the EV chargers to match the density and need. For example, truck stops need to handle cross country and semi-trailer truck charging.
  • mix Tesla, CCS-1, and CHAdeMO with counts based on measure usage. Multi-mode chargers get a maximum subsidy while single standard get little to none.
  • anti-idle or parking abuse - some way to free the parking spots for those needing a charge. For example, bright or colored parking lane light when not charging. When charging, dim the lane light with a color change to yellow to identify the vehicle should move.
Bob Wilson
 
Totally agree. One problem I see is why would a tax payer support Tesla charging? It's a closed system that only a part of users can use. Yes, maybe currently it's a big part but with upcoming manufacturers it's going to be a niche protocol and therefore should not be supported by tax payers money.

At some point Tesla will have to switch to ccs anyways, just like in Europe. There is no point in investing money in a dying protocol.

Look at CHAdeMo.
 
Esprit1st said:
One problem I see is why would a tax payer support Tesla charging?
Click to expand...
I think a better question is why Tesla owners are being taxed for service they can't use without buying an adapter? Washington state charges a 200 dollar fee on every BEV, including Teslas, some of which is suppose to go for pay charging infrastructure.
 
Good point.
Well, if tesla would actually stay true to their company statement of accelerating adoption of electric transportation, they will have to think about opening up their charging network.
I think in the end it's detrimental to keep it closed. And it's only going to be harder the more Tesla vehicles that are out there that are incompatible with the rest of the world.
In the end it's Tesla's own choice.

BTW. That's one of the reasons I didn't buy a Tesla. In the long run it's not going to pay off to have your own standard. Looks like even Apple is forced to use USB type-C at some point in the future.

It was better to have one video Cassette Standard, even though it wasn't the best quality wise.
 
Calliope said:
For the same reason childless people are charged taxes for schools.
Tesla owners can charge at CCS stations with a free or inexpensive adapter, but the reverse isn't true.
Click to expand...
BTW. Why wouldn't Tesla want free money from non-Tesla customers using their chargers? They didn't have to build the car! Just cashing in the money for nothing. Put a non-Tesla charging app out there just like every other auto maker. And sell an adaptor for a couple hundred bucks. It's freaking free money sitting out there.
 
I would be happy with a point system for the fast DC charger stalls. Let the market drive the types of connectors. I note that EVgo has figured out how to add a Tesla plug.

From an industrial design standpoint, the Tesla connector is smaller, simpler, and lighter than the CCS-1 (Frankenstein plug.) Smaller, less strong customers like my wife and her kids can operate a Tesla plug easily.

Bob Wilson
 
Exactly, right now non-Tesla chargers are always available. Superchargers are not. But that will change with more EVs coming into the market.
 
Twice I’ve seen a second EV at an Electrify America station, 1-350 kW, 3-150 kW, and one CHAdeMO. The two ChargePoint EVSE at Whole Foods has been running: 10% full (no charge for me); 30% one other, and; 60% both empty.

In contrast, in town SuperChargers seldom, less than 20%, are empty. Adding subsidy SuperChargers makes ‘good use’ of public funds.

I would be happy that any Federal contractor must have ‘n’, L2, EVSEs. Before I retired, I was unable to get any simple EVSE installed at work.

Bob Wilson
 
I would support public finding for Tesla chargers of tesla opens up their network.

Tesla taxpayers whose money goes to non-Tesla charging infrastructure are still able to use those chargers with an adaptor.

We however are not able to use Tesla superchargers. So it's a one sided spending of funds.
 
Esprit1st said:
I would support public finding for Tesla chargers of tesla opens up their network.
. . .
We however are not able to use Tesla superchargers. So it's a one sided spending of funds.
Click to expand...
I have no problem with Tesla opening the SuperCharger network to non-Tesla EVs using an adapter. Just make the cost 1.5-2.0 times (*) that of a non-adapter Tesla. The premium covers the missing capital expense of the parasite EV makers.

Bob Wilson

* - Actually I have no problem with the cost of a Tesla adapter for a SuperCharger being priced at the cost my Tesla purchase was increased to build out the SuperCharger network.
 
As far as I know, Superchargers and destination chargers are currently eligible for the 30% federal tax credit for charging infrastructure. So they’re already being subsidized.

IMHO they shouldn’t get any support for any level of government (including, for example, leasing land at rest areas) for charging infrastructure that isn’t accessible to all EVs.
 
It's a terrible idea to get the government involved with charging infrastructure. Government involvement practically always makes things more expensive than they need to be at the expense of the taxpayers.
 
SouthernDude said:
It's a terrible idea to get the government involved with charging infrastructure. Government involvement practically always makes things more expensive than they need to be at the expense of the taxpayers.
Click to expand...

I don't see that way. Without government involvement, we would be stuck with only Tesla, and even Tesla needs government involvement.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree.
 
TRSmith said:
charging infrastructure that isn’t accessible to all EVs
Click to expand...
Who would buy an EV from a company that cares so little about what they're selling that they won't support its use by supporting charging infrastructure when that is relatively cheap and is essentially free advertising as a bonus?
It would be as bad as not providing service.
Of course, many who have bought a BMW i3 or Fiat500e, and tried to get service from their respective companies or dealers, would know what that is like as well.
I know so many hate Tesla but most of the hatred seems to be from jealousy in the fact that Tesla actually supports their customers (excellent charging infrastructure, over-the-air updates, service rangers, etc), unlike the rest. The rest (GM, Toyota, Ford, and Honda) have taken EVs away from happy customers, with threats of attacking credit reports, and crushed them. One even charged for minor scratches on cars that were destined for crushing.
 
Here's a novel idea. Should provide free charging and subsidies to buy EVs, but only in areas where near 100% of electricity is renewables and there is an excess of electricity produced. And then penalize EV buyers with extra fees and taxes in those areas where the majority of electricity is not renewables, and/or there is a shortage of grid power resulting in brown/black outs. That might incentivize govts and corps to change how electricity is produced, and push off the coming crisis where more BEVs would completely cripple the grid infrastructure. And might also incentivize other types of EVs like HFCEVs which don't just depend on the electrical grid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top