US 2 looks like it's out of reach for my MME for a while. I was disappointed to see this.Problems still exist in rural areas- UP of Michigan as an example- where small rual electrical companies are demanding 1000 a month per site for such sudden high demad capacity and this is for dated 62.5 kW chargers not the 150 kW rated ones specified. The elwctric al grid needs more capacity and updated for this to become a reality.
Since you think it was such a bad idea, feel free to boycott all Electrify America stations to make your point.Nice, another government funded program, should be very efficient and effective.
Electrify America is a smashing success with it's Dirselgate mandated stations! Top of the line!
L2 charging is a necessity given the number of people who live in rental property without the ability to install their own evse. Itās also useful in business districts. They help take tte pressure off DCFC and are far cheaper to install.an observation after reading through a few states... Oregon, Michigan, Georgia, California. It looks like the states were instructed to, or chose to include level 2 chargers. I had hoped and assumed that the focus was solely DCFC.
It strikes me like that including level 2 charging in this discussion, is analogous to including G3 cellular in a mobile data plan.
Yes, there is allowance for L2 chargers in the policy:an observation after reading through a few states... Oregon, Michigan, Georgia, California. It looks like the states were instructed to, or chose to include level 2 chargers. I had hoped and assumed that the focus was solely DCFC.
It strikes me like that including level 2 charging in this discussion, is analogous to including G3 cellular in a mobile data plan.
I agree that the charging infrastructure won't get better until it can be profitable/taken out of the hands of the central planners. Tesla has a model where they have skin in the game. I don't care for Tesla but it's no surprise why they have the best network.Nice, another government funded program, should be very efficient and effective.
Electrify America is a smashing success with it's Dirselgate mandated stations! Top of the line!
Thanks for the source doc reference.Yes, there is allowance for L2 chargers in the policy:
"The inclusion of a requirement that each DCFC charging port must be at or above 150kW would benefit the charging industry primarily in communicating standards with individual utilities that may not be accustomed to EV industry preferences. Section 680.106(d) would include several such components describing power level requirements for coordination between charging station owners/operators and utility providers. This regulation would also outline minimum requirements for the participation of DCFC and AC Level 2 chargers in smart charge management programs to ensure a consistent charging experience and prioritize charging speed. This section would also outline power level requirements for any AC Level 2 ports, including a proposed requirement that all AC Level 2 chargers have the capability to deliver at least a maximum power level of 6 kW per port simultaneously across all AC ports (these charger types would only be allowed after the minimum requirement in Ā§ā680.106(b) is met). The FHWA requests comment on how longer-dwell parking locations and locations that offer battery swapping technology should be addressed."
https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...ectric-vehicle-infrastructure-formula-program
You might be right, but I'm not convinced on the need for government funded L2 chargers. At least not until DCFC is ubiquitous.L2 charging is a necessity given the number of people who live in rental property without the ability to install their own evse. Itās also useful in business districts. They help take tte pressure off DCFC and are far cheaper to install.
I was curious about Kansas too. They don't appear to have anything published or in draft form yet - this appear to be where this info will eventually be shared:Where is Nebraska, Kansas, Iowa, Idaho, Oklahomaā¦ you knowā¦ all those places long haulers are depending on!? Not to mention all the Northern routesā¦Wyoming, Montana, the Dakotas.
andAs for apartments, HI might be different, but broadly, apartment dwellers will be among the last to adopt EVs because EVs are expensive, not because they can't charge them in their apartments.
I'm in line with the goals. I think evidence suggests that investing in DCFC will accelerate adoption and focusing on apartment dwellers will not.and
Apartment dwellers donāt buy BEVs because they canāt charge at home. No chargers for apartment dwellers because they donāt buy BEVs.
Itās a climate justice issue. We need to bring BEVs into reach of folks who currently canāt make them work to encourage adoption. Thatās also why the new climate bill has money for buying used BEVs.
Are you involved with your local electric vehicle association? Based on discussions at EVA-DC meetings, there are a lot of EV owners trying to get their condos and apartments to install L2 charging. One local condo association just installed a bank of L2s. There are also issues with homeowners in tight urban/suburban areas with no off-street parking. Our county is installing L2s at libraries and county parks (especially local neighborhood parks) to help fill L2 charging needs close to homes where folks don't have access.I'm in line with the goals. I think evidence suggests that investing in DCFC will accelerate adoption and focusing on apartment dwellers will not.
I respect your opinions but here is something to think about.Are you involved with your local electric vehicle association? Based on discussions at EVA-DC meetings, there are a lot of EV owners trying to get their condos and apartments to install L2 charging. One local condo association just installed a bank of L2s. There are also issues with homeowners in tight urban/suburban areas with no off-street parking. Our county is installing L2s at libraries and county parks (especially local neighborhood parks) to help fill L2 charging needs close to homes where folks don't have access.