I agree, also with multiple long distance (multi-day+) Mach E trips under our tires by now.
Demand charges do not have a negative effect unless the commercial load has a poor load factor. If the commercial load operates at peak load for about 75% of the day then the demand charge are a wash. If they have a greater load factor than 75% their electricity actually becomes cheaper. The utility has to build facilities large enough to meet the commercial loads peak. They have to recover that through sales. They guarantee cost recovery through demand charges. Otherwise the costs are passed on to others. Rate making is a cost causer cost payer exercise. Just a personal pet peeve because many complain about demand charges without understanding why they exist and for a normal consistent electric load they do not increase costs.Businesses have to be able to get off the ground to begin with. It's the chicken-and-egg problem: If they can't scale up, they can't make money. If they can't make money, they can't scale up. There are lots of incentives out there to get DCFC prices lower for consumers at the beginning of this transition, but over time, those incentives are going to slowly dry up, letting the companies sink or swim on their own.
This isn't a conspiracy; it's well-known that DCFC takes a lot of financial investment. Demand charges are very real, and very high - something everyone is actively working to reduce. It's also why most networks are switching to per-station real time pricing.
Lower cost of fueling shouldn't be the sole reason for EV transitions, but I suspect I'm actively veering into dangerous territory there
?
No, just that demand charges are not expensive as long as there is a high load factor. Basically just because it has a demand charge does not make the electric charge high. If you look at the overall rate it will have the demand that looks high cost but then the per kWh charge is low. As a matter of fact if the load factor was above 75% (or there about as it depends on rate making) the electric cost will be less than residential. Then the only additional cost would be the charger and profit. Of course the issue is very few DCFC have a load factor approaching 75% but the alternative would be to pass on the cost to others and that is not fair.
Yep, which is why I think we act like early adopters and make excuses for a crappy experience because the technology is so cool. I do it also.
That's the max for a Magic Dock charging a Mach-E. The MD's are only rated for 350A max. The Mach-E battery pack voltage is roughly 355V. 350A * 355V = 124kW.
Lets hope the Ford adapters will be rated for more.
Almost all of the DCFC charging curve is 124 kW or lower. Mostly lower. So the total impact is very minimal. If the MME could keep a sustained charge rate of above 124 kW for 20 minutes I would be concerned. It can't.
I rarely charge above 60% when road tripping. Also try to stay under 20 minutes at each stop, unless we are eating. People that charge to 80% or more at each stop are the ones causing the lines.
I guess we will just disagree. Using 40% (60 - 20) of my battery, or 36kW, means stopping every ~100 miles, is inefficient and too often for me. More likely, you won't find a charger every 100 miles on many routes. Every 150 miles is much more likely. Also, every stop takes at least 5 minutes on each end. Your 20 minute stops are 30. My 30 minute stops are 40.
I can go 150 miles using 10-60% on my CR1, at 70-75mph. My Rivian does the same. I am typically last in first out at chargers. On my latest trip of 750 miles, I did it with 4 stops, averaging 25 minutes. We ate at 2 of those stops. I skipped many chargers.
On one trip I took this summer, I needed to charge to 100% because my next stop didn't have any chargers and I planned to be driving around quite a bit. It took an hour.
