Electric vehicle drivers get candid about charging: 'Logistical nightmare'
abcnews.go.com
abcnews.go.com
I understand that most people would (ideally) be charging up at home overnight, but the logistics of taking a long trip are, if not daunting, at least very different from today's "pull into a gas station, fill up, hit the restroom, and get back on your way in fifteen minutes."
If a supercharger the car needs to do a way better job letting you know the charge after 80% is far, far slower and just not worth it. You'd be way better off doing 2 different charge sessions, both from deeper state of discharge. Your total time would have been less than half. If you're on a multi-stop trip with Tesla's charge curve you're actually better off stopping around 50-60% and heading off to the next charger.
I have road tripped my tesla 1000s of km and only once have I ever stayed at a supercharger more than 30 minutes. That was -15C in a snowstorm with a large gap to the next charger and I have the small battery model 3. On 8-9 hour drives I only add about 40 minutes of total charging time. When combined with the necessary bathroom and food breaks the car is pretty much always ready before I am.
If it was L2, then the rule is ABC, always be charging. Sometimes you can't avoid hanging around since L2 isn't that fast, but most of the time you should practice pro-active charging and just grab a little juice any time you get the chance. That's harder when you don't have driveway charging, but it's going to get easier and easier as more infrastructure gets built out.
All this information needs to be far better presented to drivers, especially ones new to EVs. Gas pumps don't get slower the closer to full you are whereas battery charging varies greatly based on state of charge. There is a learning curve and manufacturers are not doing enough to teach their owners (likely for fear of scaring them away)
Actually (and pedantically) some here do. Just as you approach full they will drop back to a slower pumping speed for the last few drops.
50% people in EU are living in apartments. In Eastern Europe apartments were built 3:1 - 3 apartments per 1 parking space. It is very difficult to park there, it is impossible to park where you would like to.
Some people who are living in older houses (19th, early 20th century) does not have drive way nor garage, because it was not needed at that time.
It is never going to be "most" who are overnight charging. It is a niche feature for few rich.
What’s actually somewhat complex and luxurious is the parking space itself: as you point out, cities and towns don’t build/maintain enough public parking spaces for the entire population because setting aside land and maintaining public areas for the sole purpose of car storage is expensive. Once you’ve committed to that investment, running wires to your expensive parking spaces is a relatively small comparative investment, and it’s one that actually pays for itself if cities add a modest surcharge to the electricity cost.
That's easily said than done. You can't build it wide enough, because maintenance and upkeep (you need to pay for reserved power) for big system will eat you alive. And if you build it small so maintenance and upkeep is as smallest fraction of revenue as possible, it won't make a difference for a comfort of BEV drivers compared to today.
And all of that is under assumption that your local substation has spare power. And that's usually not the case.
We tend to think of street parking as “free” or “cheap” but that’s just because we pretend that asphalt and pavement and public land falls from the sky, rather than being a massive expense that taxpayers have born and continue to pay for. There are some good articles (mostly US focused) that talk about the replacement cost per-household of rebuilding new parking in even land-rich cities and the cost is staggering, close to $100k per household even in Wyoming. (It is hard for me to believe that these costs are lower for historically-preserved dense European cities.) Compared to these sunk costs, running 240V wiring for the equivalent of several new households per block doesn’t seem like a massive investment. The ongoing maintenance costs will certainly not exceed the cost of street maintenance.
As far as how much power we need: the average European driver travels 32.9km/day. At a (Tesla) usage of 166wH/km that’s 5.461kWh/day, or 273W continuous average power draw assuming most people drive for 4H/day and park the rest of the time. You’re absolutely correct that even this level of new consumption is going to require us to upgrade city grids and substations, but that’s already baked into the EV transition. We’ll have to upgrade substations even if everyone stores their cars in private garages off the street.
This sounds like a problem of your unfamiliarity with the area. There were probably multiple places to charge, but because you didn't live there, you didn't know where to go.
That sounds like a problem that will work itself out. Right now there are gas stations on every corner because we spent a century building gas stations on every corner, and you know what to expect from them. The similar infrastructure for cars is brand new.
Perhaps the place you were is even further behind than some. But if your trip had been to my town, I could name you a dozen places to go charge up: the shopping center, several grocery stores, most gas stations. And I'm not an electric car owner; I'm just somebody who lives here. There are always free spots at all of them.
https://youtu.be/eSX7L8_vLIE?t=5m40s (Starts at 5:40 in)
Until watching, I didn't know that Tesla superchargers were that much better than Electrify America and others.
Maybe available power infrastructure is part of the issue.
Meanwhile, the autonomous driving features are a huge help on the highway. Whatever you think about autonomous driving in the city, on the highway it's fairly solid and much less tiring than manual driving.
All of the above applies only to Teslas. I would never attempt a drive away from home in a non-Tesla EV.
Even in eastern parts of Europe you will find chargers in even the most remote places. I know, because I've tried it. In Scandinavia you'll be closer to a fast charger than a gas station at any given moment.
You can verify all of this by just looking at websites like PlugShare: https://www.plugshare.com
My favorite route planning app Elton says total travel time of 24 hours, 1927km, 8 charging sessions on 250-350kW fast chargers in winter conditions with an added 10% extra consumption on top of that. Total time spent charging 2,5 hours.
You don't need to use a Tesla service senter to fix your car, in the unfortunate event that it breaks down.
You won't spend hours, you can charge a Tesla Model 3 from 20% to 80% in like 45 minutes at a 50kW charger. Ideal? No. Problematic? Hardly.
Until they sort out the incentives I wouldn’t consider a non Tesla EV (and I have never in 10 years waited for an hour at a supercharger unless I was waiting for access which has happened)
This is why you buy a Tesla. Although Tesla isn't perfect, its charging network is a LOT better than the others.
> Even Quiroga's team of reporters has to carefully plan and calculate how far EV charging stations are when they conduct comparison tests among manufacturers. "These comparisons tests are a logistical nightmare. We need to have the battery at 100% or close to it to test a vehicle's performance."
This is absurd. The average driver does not need to run comparison tests for magazine articles. The average driver just needs to charge to 80% or 85% and continue their trip. The difference is significant. Charging to 100% is much slower than charging to 80%. It's ludicrously irresponsible, bordering on fraudulent, to single out charging problems that are specific only to reporters who review EVs for a job, and extrapolate these problems onto the general public.
It's especially infuriating that this mendacious lie is what the headline writer chose to put in the headline. This entire quote is based on nonsense.
> Quiroga's sister, who lives in Northern California, takes her internal combustion car -- not her Tesla Model S -- when she needs to drive across the state.
California might be the one place in the country where you routinely have to wait in line for a public charger. Let's see if Tesla steps up to match demand.
Also, if you're buying an EV, pay attention to charging speed -- not just in terms of energy per hour, but how far that energy gets you, i.e. efficiency. A Model 3 doesn't charge any faster than a Model S in terms of energy per hour, but it charges faster in terms of drivable miles per charging hour.
> [John Voelcker] does not expect Tesla to commit to additional charging stations. "Tesla does not want its highly reliable and tightly integrated charging network to be clogged with people whose cars can't charge as fast as Teslas," he told ABC News.
This is just false. Tesla specifically stated that they are using federal funding to build additional charging stations which will be open to all, and making them open to all is a legal requirement in order to get the federal funding.
> "The incentive right now is to get stations in the ground," he said. "It's not making sure they actually work."
Again, this is why you get a Tesla. Tesla alone, out of all charging network companies, has a clear incentive to make sure that their charging network actually works.
> In December, Quiroga was in Florida driving BMW's luxury i7 all-electric sedan. He watched as its range dropped from 240 miles to 220 as soon as he turned on the heat. "You use the luxuries ... and the range plummets," he said.
Again, this is why you get a Tesla. Teslas have heat pumps which are much more efficient than traditional heaters.
> The sales associates at his local Hyundai dealership were unknowledgeable and poorly trained about the intricacies of EV ownership, he explained. "The dealership experience is so far behind. I get solicitations for oil changes. The staff is so disconnected from the product they're selling," he said.
This is why Tesla has no dealers and insists on having no dealers.
Pay attention to the conspiracy, folks. Non-Tesla automakers are sandbagging their EVs in order to sabotage the market for EVs. Consumers buying non-Tesla EVs get frustrated by their ownership experience and go back to gasoline cars. This suits non-Tesla automakers just fine since they're losing money on EVs and making money on gasoline cars. The media goes along with it and amplifies the FUD because Tesla doesn't advertise on paid media, and other automakers do advertise on paid media.
I don't think that is the case. Losing much service revenue is only a threat to the current business model. The new business model is carry little inventory and have huge markups. And the smart ones will follow Tesla's lead and stop advertising and pass those saving to customers.
I foresee some dealers opening much smaller retail presences in urban cores that are EV-only and have no on-site inventory besides showroom cars. People living in the city usually find themselves 30 minutes away from a traditional dealer.