Indiana Senate Bill 309

[Sunking]

Well JPM that is the downfall of EV's. There will be no battery standardization in our lifetimes. Every EV manufacture uses different chemistry, size, and shape. Today if you own an EV requires you to own an ICE vehicle for those long trips and cold weather.

As a consumer like myself I demand 400 to 500 mile range with 5 minute refill or as long as it takes me to drain the ole lizard while on a road trip. An EV average wh/mile efficiency is roughly 300 wh/mile for a small EV. More for a family size sedan which does not really exist. Using 300 wh/mile efficiency and 400 mile range requires a 120 Kwh battery. That is a monster battery that does not exist yet. Such a beast would weigh in around 850 Kilograms or 1900 pounds. Guess what? A battery that large does not get 300 wh/mile with my fat butt in the car. Having said that let's pretend I am Dan and believe in such nonsense. If you use a standard 120 volt outlet in your home using 16 amps max rate from the outlet without burning it up would take you roughly 120,000 wh / 1900 watts = 63.15 hours or 2-1/2 days.

If you unplug your dryer and use a 240 volt 30-amp circuit would take 120,000 wh / 6000 w = 20 hours. Still not usable. To get to say 10 minutes would require a 720,000 watt charger. That would require a 3-phase 480 volt is 120,000 / 1.732 * 480 *.8 = 180 amp service. That amount of power is about what a large Walmart uses at any given moment in time. All I can say it is possible.

[J.P.M.]

If a standard 20Amp 120v outlet is enough to recharge an EV then I agree that is a better plan. But from what I have seen all EV manufacturer's encourage the owner to install a "fast charger" in their home so it does not take all night to charge. Similarly a slow charger at work may not get you what you want especially if you use that vehicle to go somewhere at lunch.

IMO people want to get a "fast charge" for every thing they own including their cell phones. That is why phone technology has changed to meet the demand of "I want it now and I don't want to wait" attitude.

With respect to your second point, I'd guess a charging scenario as close to what is currently done for ICE/gasoline fueled with respect to time, convenience and familiarity would be something easier to sell to the public, but it would take a lot more cooperation than we're probably capable of mustering any more.

Standardized batteries and vehicle systems that would accept and operate on all vehicles. Unfortunately, or not, it I'd also guess that looks to be a hard up front sell to the public and a big commitment from mfgs.

Think of the 25 lb. propane cylinders such as those used for gas grills. You own the grill, not the tank. For vehicle batteries, you don't (necessarily) own the container that holds the fuel, you swap it out. For vehicles, you'd pull into a charging station that might look like a carwash or a Costco gas station, etc. Vehicle goes on the line, old battery dropped, new one inserted. 5 min. ? Larger vehicles --->>>> multiple batteries. Home charging would still be an option.

As usual, the devil's in the details. Way down the road, if ever, but maybe a contribution to marketing ideas to help overcome objections/roadblocks if the powers that be are serious about gaining pubic acceptance.

[SunEagle]

While I agree, keep in mind that "charging network" can be nothing more than "a whole lot of outlets."

We were installing J1772 chargers for a while at my place of work. We got up to about 12 total, but 1) they cost about $5000 each to install (with capital, installation and BOS costs) and 2) they were a source of neverending complaints - "Why isn't the blue Leaf moving his car? He's been charged for 3 hours and I have to charge if I want to make it home!"

So instead we started just installing NEMA 5-20 AC outlets. They are about 1/20th the cost each, and since they are inherently low power (max about 1.3kw) there's no moving of cars to be done and no complaining on the mailing lists. We're up to about 100 of them so far.

If a standard 20Amp 120v outlet is enough to recharge an EV then I agree that is a better plan. But from what I have seen all EV manufacturer's encourage the owner to install a "fast charger" in their home so it does not take all night to charge. Similarly a slow charger at work may not get you what you want especially if you use that vehicle to go somewhere at lunch.

IMO people want to get a "fast charge" for every thing they own including their cell phones. That is why phone technology has changed to meet the demand of "I want it now and I don't want to wait" attitude.

[SunEagle]

That helps, thanks.

So you're pessimistic that increasing EV charging will save ratepayers money by keeping grid utilization higher outside peak hours. And even if it did save ratepayers money, you'd still oppose it because you don't think it's fair that EVs don't have to pay fuel taxes. Does that sum it up? (Apologies if I mangled your opinion, paraphrasing is hard.)

.........)

Yes I am a little pessimistic that being able to charge an EV during the day is going to help everyone save money.

While this may be true for some areas of the US I don't think it would be true everywhere due to how power is generated and used. Not everyone has the same culture or follows the same action of usage. So IMO there would be a % of the electric customers that would not benefit cost wise if there were more EV charging done during the day.

[DanKegel]

So instead we started just installing NEMA 5-20 AC outlets. They are about 1/20th the cost each, and since they are inherently low power (max about 1.3kw) there's no moving of cars to be done and no complaining on the mailing lists. We're up to about 100 of them so far.

Appropriate technology

[jflorey2]

I still hold firm to my statement that without a charging network out at the workplace the sale of short distance EV's will stay flat due to people not wanting to have their car stop working on the way home.

While I agree, keep in mind that "charging network" can be nothing more than "a whole lot of outlets."

We were installing J1772 chargers for a while at my place of work. We got up to about 12 total, but 1) they cost about $5000 each to install (with capital, installation and BOS costs) and 2) they were a source of neverending complaints - "Why isn't the blue Leaf moving his car? He's been charged for 3 hours and I have to charge if I want to make it home!"

So instead we started just installing NEMA 5-20 AC outlets. They are about 1/20th the cost each, and since they are inherently low power (max about 1.3kw) there's no moving of cars to be done and no complaining on the mailing lists. We're up to about 100 of them so far.

[DanKegel]

Again I really don't care if anyone (car manufacturers, poco, off shore investor, deep pocket greenie) invests in charging systems for EV's as long as those costs don't get transferred to me or anyone else who doesn't own an EV.

It is bad enough that the EV folk don't pay "road taxes" because that is charged at the pump per gallon. All that means is the state will somehow increase my tax to cover those that do not pay it to keep the roads up for everyone to drive on.

That helps, thanks.

So you're pessimistic that increasing EV charging will save ratepayers money by keeping grid utilization higher outside peak hours. And even if it did save ratepayers money, you'd still oppose it because you don't think it's fair that EVs don't have to pay fuel taxes. Does that sum it up? (Apologies if I mangled your opinion, paraphrasing is hard.)

You're not alone in that last one. A bill has been introduced in Kansas to charge an extra $150/yr for electric vehicles, cjonline.com/news/local/2017-01-28/kansas-house-bill-calls-special-registration-fees-electric-hybrid-vehicles
(There's no recorded sponsor other than the Transportation Committee, but I see from followthemoney.org/entity-details?eid=13000464 that the chair of that committee got twice as much in contributions from the oil and gas industry as from electric utilities. Could just be coincidence, but KCP&L still might want to up its game here.)

[SunEagle]

The pickings for plug-in SUVs are indeed slim at the moment: pluginamerica.org/vehicles/?fwp_class=four-door-suv
Do you think it's wrong for POCOs to move on electric charging before plug-in SUVs arrive? Smaller vehicles still have significant market share.

Again I really don't care if anyone (car manufacturers, poco, off shore investor, deep pocket greenie) invests in charging systems for EV's as long as those costs don't get transferred to me or anyone else who doesn't own an EV.

It is bad enough that the EV folk don't pay "road taxes" because that is charged at the pump per gallon. All that means is the state will somehow increase my tax to cover those that do not pay it to keep the roads up for everyone to drive on.

[DanKegel]

The Bolt is a first step but if size is a factor most people want a bigger car. Just look at the sales of SUV's. They have replaced the old station wagon/van purchasers. Going from that to a small EV is probably not a large market.

The pickings for plug-in SUVs are indeed slim at the moment: pluginamerica.org/vehicles/?fwp_class=four-door-suv
Do you think it's wrong for POCOs to move on electric charging before plug-in SUVs arrive? Smaller vehicles still have significant market share.

[SunEagle]

EVs are getting larger batteries (the Bolt has a range of 238 miles, and recent low-end EVs now go over 100 miles), so that part is sorted.

Trying to understand your position.
Are you opposed to POCOs competing with oil companies for the energy market? (Presumably not, competition is good.)
Are you opposed to POCOs trying to increase usage of their grid during off-peak hours for some reason? (Presumably not; we got into this discussion by looking for ways to avoid increasing electric rates as the customer base gets more efficient.)
Or do you think that it's not cost-effective for them to do it by trying to jump-start ev sales? That's the bet they're making -- that this is going to save them money in the long run.

Competition is always good in the market place.

I am not opposed to the POCO's jumping in to increase the number of charging stations for whatever their reason as long as it does not increase my electric rates.

As far as I am concerned, more chargers = more EV's which should drive down the cost per unit. The Bolt is a first step but if size is a factor most people want a bigger car. Just look at the sales of SUV's. They have replaced the old station wagon/van purchasers. Going from that to a small EV is probably not a large market.

[DanKegel]

More than likely a reason for the POCO's to "seed" the market with charging stations is really an attempt to increase revenue and take it away from the Oil companies that sell gas.

I still hold firm to my statement that without a charging network out at the workplace the sale of short distance EV's will stay flat due to people not wanting to have their car stop working on the way home.

So install more charging stations or develop larger batteries for longer driving distances. Both are motivation for the EV business and not really something for the POCO to invest in.

EVs are getting larger batteries (the Bolt has a range of 238 miles, and recent low-end EVs now go over 100 miles), so that part is sorted.

Trying to understand your position.
Are you opposed to POCOs competing with oil companies for the energy market? (Presumably not, competition is good.)
Are you opposed to POCOs trying to increase usage of their grid during off-peak hours for some reason? (Presumably not; we got into this discussion by looking for ways to avoid increasing electric rates as the customer base gets more efficient.)
Or do you think that it's not cost-effective for them to do it by trying to jump-start ev sales? That's the bet they're making -- that this is going to save them money in the long run.

[SunEagle]

It's a virtuous cycle. The utilities are seeding the market with chargers ahead of demand.
They're betting this will drive EVs sales, and as people see their neighbor saving time and money with their EV, yet more EV sales and yet more even demand... lessening the need for peakers and other POCO investment. We'll see whether it works.

(How many EVs on 6kW chargers would it take to make a difference? Well, KCP&L has a bunch of 77MW peaker plants... 77 MW of flexible ev charging load might let them get away with one fewer. That's about 12,000 cars on smart chargers. There were 1200 EVs in KC last year, so it may be a while before they hit that.)

More than likely a reason for the POCO's to "seed" the market with charging stations is really an attempt to increase revenue and take it away from the Oil companies that sell gas.

I still hold firm to my statement that without a charging network out at the workplace the sale of short distance EV's will stay flat due to people not wanting to have their car stop working on the way home.

So install more charging stations or develop larger batteries for longer driving distances. Both are motivation for the EV business and not really something for the POCO to invest in.

[J.P.M.]

I admit, it's hard to argue with clear, logical, well-reasoned posts like that. You win!

And a whole lot easier than looking for common sense and anything useful in your stuff.

Good. Well, that's a start. Now learn how to think before you write. Then think some more about how what your write may affect others. You're not the only one playing in this sandbox.

[DanKegel]

And [unlikely things will happen] soon as well. Did you read that in some treehugger rag ? Or is it more of your homegrown wishful and ignorant nonsense ? Any logic behind what you're writing ? Sounds more like your usual pie in the sky, ill informed nonsense to me.

I admit, it's hard to argue with clear, logical, well-reasoned posts like that. You win!

[J.P.M.]

It's a virtuous cycle. The utilities are seeding the market with chargers ahead of demand.
They're betting this will drive EVs sales, and as people see their neighbor saving time and money with their EV, yet more EV sales and yet more even demand... lessening the need for peakers and other POCO investment. We'll see whether it works.

(How many EVs on 6kW chargers would it take to make a difference? Well, KCP&L has a bunch of 77MW peaker plants... 77 MW of flexible ev charging load might let them get away with one fewer. That's about 12,000 cars on smart chargers. There were 1200 EVs in KC last year, so it may be a while before they hit that.)

And [unlikely things will happen] soon as well. Did you read that in some treehugger rag ? Or is it more of your homegrown wishful and ignorant nonsense ? Any logic behind what you're writing ? Sounds more like your usual pie in the sky, ill informed nonsense to me.