How is paid charging going to look in Ireland?

Orebro

I'm wondering about the shape paid charging will take when it eventually comes in. I see in the UK you have charge points where you pay your £6 for 30 mins charge. I've heard it mentioned here that the ESB were going to charge €17 per month - although this is up to the Commission for Energy Regulation I believe.

What would your preference be? A monthly fee and charge as much as you like from that? (although that might benefit the people like our famous taxi driver in Gorey that already takes the p1ss). Maybe a monthly charge with a fair usage attached?

Not sure about the pay per charge one mainly due to it not being fair between different cars e.g. a 24kwh Leaf paying the same as say a new model 40kwh one for the same amount of time & charge level.

Personally I'd be happy out with a monthly sub.

n97 mini

A monthly sub would be a disaster. We charge between zero and twice a month on a public CP, and we already pay a monthly sub (standing charge) in the house.

I'd prefer to have the cost per kWh just added to our domestic bill, at the same rate as we currently pay for domestic electricity so that it still pays to shop around.

ESBN can keep ownership of the network/infrastructure and fund maintenance and expansion out of their​ ?200+ million annual profits.

unkel

Zero monthly charge.

Slow chargers: kWh used added to your domestic bill at your own standard day or night rate. No more investment in any further slow chargers - being phased out over the next 10 years.

Fast chargers: Direct debited off your bank account @ 2 times the typical day rate (whether it is night or day) plus a fixed charge of €0.10 per minute (so €3 per 30 minutes). This should be enough to boost further investment in a national motorway / national road network of very fast chargers. I realise these are not commercially viable rates, this money needs to be significantly topped up by government subsidies for the foreseeable (partly paid for by increased excise and motor tax on diesel - hey we all have to pay for our environment)

Water John

Def not a monthly flat charge.
I see merit in Unkel's suggestion. Rates obviously for discussion.
However not sure who to trust to make good use of the money raised by the fixed charge.

n97 mini

As ESB group is making €200 million profit a year and has spent €6 million to date on the EV charging network there is no requirement for further subsidies.

n97 mini

unkel wrote: »

Zero monthly charge.

Slow chargers: kWh used added to your domestic bill at your own standard day or night rate. No more investment in any further slow chargers - being phased out over the next 10 years.

Fast chargers: Direct debited off your bank account @ 2 times the typical day rate (whether it is night or day) plus a fixed charge of ?0.10 per minute (so ?3 per 30 minutes). This should be enough to boost further investment in a national motorway / national road network of very fast chargers. I realise these are not commercially viable rates, this money needs to be significantly topped up by government subsidies for the foreseeable (partly paid for by increased excise and motor tax on diesel - hey we all have to pay for our environment)

You're proposing two different billing methods, which makes things awkward and is very unlikely to happen.

But take your FCP proposal. An Ioniq that picks up say 24kwh in 30 mins will be billed at around 32c per kwh (twice the current daily rate) x 24, or EUR7.68, plus the time charge of EUR3.... EUR10.68 in total! In the UK GBP6 per 30 minutes is already seen as a major disincentive and is likely to be scrapped in favour of something more meritorious.

KCross

n97 mini wrote: »

I'd prefer to have the cost per kWh just adgded to our domestic bill, at the same rate as we currently pay for domestic electricity so that it still pays to shop around.

ESBN can keep ownership of the network/infrastructure and fund maintenance and expansion out of their​ ?200+ million annual profits.

Serious question, is that a tongue in cheek suggestion or are you actually serious?


You have zero hope of the ESB utilising its profits to fund your travel. Thats a mad suggestion. ESB profits need to be used to maintain the grid, not private transport, surely?!

And why would the rate be the same as your home rate? The cost to buy, install, maintain an FCP has no relation to your home rate so it can't be tied to that. Long term it has to wash its own face.

n97 mini wrote: »

As ESB group is making €200 million profit a year and has spent €6 million to date on the EV charging network there is no requirement for further subsidies.

It will have to be subsidised for years to come. The capital costs to expand and operate a 24/7 service cannot be funded by the EV users as there just aren't enough yet.


Something along the lines of unkels suggestion is what it should be BUT not until we get to some reasonable level of EVs in the country.... Maybe 20000. Until that happens it should stay as is, funded via the CER.

unkel

n97 mini wrote: »

But take your FCP proposal. An Ioniq that picks up say 24kwh in 30 mins will be billed at around 32c per kwh (twice the current daily rate) x 24, or EUR7.68, plus the time charge of EUR3.... EUR10.68 in total! In the UK GBP6 per 30 minutes is already seen as a major disincentive and is likely to be scrapped in favour of something more meritorious.

On the face of it €10 for most of a charge seems like a lot, it would only cost about €1.50 at home.

But the carrot here is that you should charge mostly at home (or at work, or anywhere that is privately owned) for next to nothing

On the occasions that you need to fast charge (someone doing long distance travelling, someone going on holiday, someone just doing massive mileage all over the country, commercial users), you must pay a premium. And a premium of something like €5 per 100km seems reasonable enough to me

Now obviously these amounts can be discussed / refined, but I feel my principle is fair. It also punishes cars that charge slowly (hogging up the expensive charger) and people keeping connected to the charger, while not charging. And it rewards station owners with fast chargers as these can take in more margin

I.e. a future FCP that can spit out 400kW can charge say 40c/kWh charge minus 10c/kWh cost plus €6 per hour = €126 max theoretical gross profit per hour and one of these ancient efacec 45kWh yokes will only make €19.50 max theoretical gross profit per hour for the owner. This will stimulate ongoing investment in ever faster chargers.

Think of it like this......

If paying per min, an Ioniq driver will get nearly twice the Kwh over a Leaf in the same time, do the maths on that one .... future electrics will charge even faster getting much more Kwh per min.

By all means pay per Kwh if you want, I'd choose per minute....

Sure, the Leaf owner looses out but in fairness the majority of EV owners won't ever charge as slow as the first gen electrics such as a Leaf, Zoe, E-Golf, I3 etc when they change to EV , by that time range iwll be north of 300 Kms and 100 Kw charging will be considered slow.

By all means , pay per Kwh.......

unkel

This is not a Leaf or Ioniq issue. This is about the mid term future of public charging. As in maybe some time in 2018, maybe 2019 when we start having to pay. It won't be free forever folks, and please try to think beyond the car that you currently own and what would suit your own personal circumstances. This is about the greater good here.

grogi

n97 mini wrote: »

You're proposing two different billing methods, which makes things awkward and is very unlikely to happen.

But take your FCP proposal. An Ioniq that picks up say 24kwh in 30 mins will be billed at around 32c per kwh (twice the current daily rate) x 24, or EUR7.68, plus the time charge of EUR3.... EUR10.68 in total! In the UK GBP6 per 30 minutes is already seen as a major disincentive and is likely to be scrapped in favour of something more meritorious.

The primary source of charging should be at slow chargers, preferably at home.

Fast chargers should be only used for topping-up during the journey - and cost of 10EUR for 200km topup sounds reasonable to me. That's around the price of the diesel travel - but would disincentive people from using public chargers when they should charge at home.

grogi

Deleted User wrote: »

Think of it like this......

If paying per min, an Ioniq driver will get nearly twice the Kwh over a Leaf in the same time, do the maths on that one .... future electrics will charge even faster getting much more Kwh per min.

By all means pay per Kwh if you want, I'd choose per minute....

Sure, the Leaf owner looses out but in fairness the majority of EV owners won't ever charge as slow as the first gen electrics such as a Leaf, Zoe, E-Golf, I3 etc when they change to EV , by that time range iwll be north of 300 Kms and 100 Kw charging will be considered slow.

By all means , pay per Kwh.......

Electricity is cheap and is almost everywhere. It is the chargers that are sparse, even in Norway you'll find people queuing to use them.

I don't care how fast you're charging and how much electricity you are taking. What's much more important is that you are consuming a valuable resource - a fast charger. When we have much more fast chargers deployed and cars charging much faster - so you'd have to drive the country for a year and only queue for a few times - that's when the charging model should change.

jamesthepeach

I was about to buy a new Nissan leaf when news of the charges came out. I was actually already agreed on a price with the dealer and was going to go in and pay the deposit the week after the news of the charging structure came out.

I didn't proceed.

unkel

grogi wrote: »

Fast chargers should be only used for topping-up during the journey

Exactly and because of the relatively high cost of charging (discouraging most EV owners to use them but rarely), we should only need a fairly minimal network of fast chargers (but still enough so that there will not be any queues). We need to make sure these are extremely fast and efficient, say in 5 years time an 80kWh battery needs to be charged from say 20% to say 80% in say 8 minutes (350kW charger)

grogi

jamesthepeach wrote: »

I was about to buy a new Nissan leaf when news of the charges came out. I was actually already agreed on a price with the dealer and was going to go in and pay the deposit the week after the news of the charging structure came out.

I didn't proceed.

Are you saying it was only joyriding that attracted you to an EV?!

grogi

unkel wrote: »

Exactly and because of the relatively high cost of charging (discouraging most EV owners to use them but rarely), we should only need a fairly minimal network of fast chargers (but still enough so that there will not be any queues). We need to make sure these are extremely fast and efficient, say in 5 years time an 80kWh battery needs to be charged from say 20% to say 80% in say 8 minutes (350kW charger)

How about charging per maximum energy the particular charger could deliver? A 350kW charger would cost 3x more per minute than a 120kW one.

unkel

unkel wrote: »

............ I realise these are not commercially viable rates..............

I think the charging needs to be on a pay per use system and if not commercially viable at least not requiring subsidies from the government.

We have a not commercially viable public transport service which is fair enough, subsidising private motorists isn't IMO.

unkel

jamesthepeach wrote: »

I was about to buy a new Nissan leaf when news of the charges came out. I was actually already agreed on a price with the dealer and was going to go in and pay the deposit the week after the news of the charging structure came out.

I didn't proceed.

That seems drastic, James?

First off, it was only an announcement. Charges didn't happen and won't even happen until next year at the very earliest.

Second, you would have qualified for a free home install. You might be too late now. With your home install you could have charged your presumably 24kWh Leaf from completely empty to full for about €1.50

Even if only half of your charging, or even most, was done at home, you would have saved a lot of money in fuel compared with driving an ICE if the full proposed charge was implemented...

unkel

Augeo wrote: »

We have a not commercially viable public transport service which is fair enough, subsidising private motorists isn't IMO.

Almost every move the government wants the people to make has to be incentivised. Wealthy people (who can afford buying brand new cars) were given big subsidies in the form of government scrappage and discounts on motortax for buying brand new diesels from 2008 / 2009, remember?

A subsidy can more than pay for itself if rightly applied. Not in the above case obviously, but a subsidy on EVs that will bring down the €400 million fine we have to pay soon for exceeding our emissions could be a smart investment.

grogi

Augeo wrote: »

I think the charging needs to be on a pay per use system and if not commercially viable at least not requiring subsidies from the government.

We have a not commercially viable public transport service which is fair enough, subsidising private motorists isn't IMO.

But it is in everyone's interest to encourage people to ditch the diesels and start driving EVs. If fast chargers network (that majority would use sparingly) is what would make people to change their mind - I am all for it.

unkel

unkel wrote: »

Almost every move the government wants the people to make has to be incentivised. Wealthy people (who can afford buying brand new cars) were given big subsidies in the form of government scrappage and discounts on motortax for buying brand new diesels from 2008 / 2009, remember?

A subsidy can more than pay for itself if rightly applied. Not in the above case obviously, but a subsidy on EVs that will bring down the €400 million fine we have to pay soon for exceeding our emissions could be a smart investment.

grogi wrote: »

But it is in everyone's interest to encourage people to ditch the diesels and start driving EVs. If fast chargers network (that majority would use sparingly) is what would make people to change their mind - I am all for it.

I can see your points chaps
I wasn't in favour of the diesel incentives either truth be told.
There are subsidies now to buy EVs greater than what was available for diesels, to be fair.

If the government were keen to bring down the €400m fine they'd be better off having hybrids and EVs as BIK free and allow businesses VAT back on petrol.

You'd get lots of the reps on the road into hybrids and out of diesels over a few years and also lots of one man shows driving commercials due to the 5% BIK would go hybrid passenger too.

Also making EVs really attractive by subsidies on charging longterm makes public transport less attractive. In Dublin the private car is a bit of a nuisance at a high level

jamesthepeach

grogi wrote: »

How about charging per maximum energy the particular charger could deliver? A 350kW charger would cost 3x more per minute than a 120kW one.

I wasn't looking to have to sign up to a subscription for something I might hardly ever use, but might need to at some point.

grogi

jamesthepeach wrote: »

I wasn't looking to have to sign up to a subscription for something I might hardly ever use, but might need to at some point.

I can only hope that everyone understands that subscription would have an opposite effect than is needed.

Personally, if I pay a monthly fee, I want to get as much as possible out of it. People would queue to charge at fast chargers only to get their money back...

n97 mini

KCross wrote: »

Serious question, is that a tongue in cheek suggestion or are you actually serious?


You have zero hope of the ESB utilising its profits to fund your travel. Thats a mad suggestion. ESB profits need to be used to maintain the grid, not private transport, surely?!

Very serious. ESB fund the mains network out of their existing pot. I see the EV network as a logical extension to that. You also have to remember it's making 200m a year profit which is being handed to the mininster for finance. They not funding my travel, the same as they're not funding me watching the telly. I pay for the electricity I use.

KCross wrote: »

And why would the rate be the same as your home rate? The cost to buy, install, maintain an FCP has no relation to your home rate so it can't be tied to that. Long term it has to wash its own face.

Because it would be sold by the same supplier as I currently use.

The cost of installing an FCP is not relevant, it's just part of the infrastructure that delivers electricity. It's no different to a mains transformer at a local substation. It's only an issue because ecars are whinging about it. They are a vested interest.

jamesthepeach

grogi wrote: »

I can only hope that everyone understands that subscription would have an opposite effect than is needed.

Personally, if I pay a monthly fee, I want to get as much as possible out of it. People would queue to charge at fast chargers only to get their money back...

Iwnould have used it rarely.
Like paying a subscription for the year for sky sports and only watching one random match every couple of months.

And the ESB were going to charge subscription AND usage both together. It would be like getting spit roasted.

Water John

Of course the cost and installation of the FCP has to be in the charge.
If I'm using electricity in my factory, the supplier only supplies a feed, what is done with it afterwards is my cost which I include in the products I would make.
So a public FCP has two costs, the electricity supplied and the infrastructure on site.

olearydc

jamesthepeach wrote: »

Iwnould have used it rarely.
Like paying a subscription for the year for sky sports and only watching one random match every couple of months.

And the ESB were going to charge subscription AND usage both together. It would be like getting spit roasted.

Agreed - -also regarding subscription

What would happen if visitors from abroad need to use the network without subscription. Maybe something like a PAYG card that you could top up if needed?

KCross

n97 mini wrote: »

Very serious. ESB fund the mains network out of their existing pot. I see the EV network as a logical extension to that. You also have to remember it's making 200m a year profit which is being handed to the mininster for finance. They not funding my travel, the same as they're not funding me watching the telly. I pay for the electricity I use.



Because it would be sold by the same supplier as I currently use.

The cost of installing an FCP is not relevant, it's just part of the infrastructure that delivers electricity. It's no different to a mains transformer at a local substation. It's only an issue because ecars are whinging about it. They are a vested interest.

I don't get your logic.

The 7c/kWh you pay at home won't pay for the extra infrastructure costs AND operational costs (24/7 support) required to support the FCP network. So you are taking the existing grid profits and expecting that to cross subside your travel.


Your analogy of the substation and the FCP costs being similar are not valid either, imo. The grid today pays for itself... hence the 200m profit. The EV infrastructure has to pay for itself too (when the time is right). Utilising grid profit to pay for it would be a terrible idea, imo.


Regardless of whether we agree or disagree on your logic.... how likely do you think your system would/could/should be implemented. I'd hazard a guess at 0.1%, simply because there is no such thing as a certainty!

n97 mini

KCross wrote: »

I don't get your logic.

The 7c/kWh you pay at home won't pay for the extra infrastructure costs AND operational costs (24/7 support) required to support the FCP network. So you are taking the existing grid profits and expecting that to cross subside your travel.

For the second time, I am happy to pay for my own travel: 15c daytime, 7c night time, as needed. As regards infrastructure there is plenty of surplus coming from the rest of the ESB group that if 1% per annum was spent on EV infrastructure (1% = EUR2 million). Michael Noonan currently gets this and spends it on who knows what. He could still keep the other EUR198 million.

KCross wrote: »

Your analogy of the substation and the FCP costs being similar are not valid either, imo. The grid today pays for itself... hence the 200m profit. The EV infrastructure has to pay for itself too (when the time is right). Utilising grid profit to pay for it would be a terrible idea, imo.

If the EV infrastructure is put on the same balance sheet as the rest of the infrastructure then the whole lot is vastly profitable. You're looking at sections in isolation.

KCross wrote: »

Regardless of whether we agree or disagree on your logic.... how likely do you think your system would/could/should be implemented. I'd hazard a guess at 0.1%, simply because there is no such thing as a certainty!

Very simply. Link your CP access card to your electricity provider's billing system, in the same way your domestic meter is. All CPs are online so the "meter readings" are virtually instant.

KCross

n97 mini wrote: »

For the second time, I am happy to pay for my own travel: 15c daytime, 7c night time, as needed. As regards infrastructure there is plenty of surplus coming from the rest of the ESB group that if 1% per annum was spent on EV infrastructure (1% = EUR2 million). Michael Noonan currently gets this and spends it on who knows what. He could still keep the other EUR198 million.

But if you are expecting the grid to cross subsidise the EV infrastructure you are not paying for your own travel. You are only partly paying for it. Do you disagree on that point?

Don't forget Opex costs as well, which is significant here.

n97 mini wrote: »

If the EV infrastructure is put on the same balance sheet as the rest of the infrastructure then the whole lot is vastly profitable. You're looking at sections in isolation.

Yes I am looking at them in isolation because they are not related. One generates and transports electricity. The other charges cars for private travel. The only link is that electricity is involved in both. They should be isolated from a cost perspective. Just my opinion, but you are entitled to yours as well.

KCross

n97 mini wrote: »

Very simply. Link your CP access card to your electricity provider's billing system, in the same way your domestic meter is. All CPs are online so the "meter readings" are virtually instant.

I'd agree with that system of paying and it should be technically possible. However, I don't think it should be at normal domestic rates. Thats where we differ I think.

n97 mini

KCross wrote: »

But if you are expecting the grid to cross subsidise the EV infrastructure you are not paying for your own travel. You are only partly paying for it. Do you disagree on that point?

Energy delivery and use are different. But whether it's either one or the other is not really important. What I pay via my electricity bill is cross-subsidising many things already, some of it isn't even related to electricity at all. (Some would argue all ESB's profit should be reinvested in the network)

KCross wrote: »

Yes I am looking at them in isolation because they are not related. One generates and transports electricity. The other charges cars for private travel. The only link is that electricity is involved in both. They should be isolated from a cost perspective. Just my opinion, but you are entitled to yours as well.

No. Generation is separate from infrastructure. ESBN owns all the infrastructure (grid), but increasingly less generation. It owns from outside the power station to outside my house. I'm happy for the bit that goes to outside my car to be owned and run by the same people out of the same pot, and usage to be billed similarly.

n97 mini

KCross wrote: »

I'd agree with that system of paying and it should be technically possible. However, I don't think it should be at normal domestic rates. Thats where we differ I think.

Which basically comes down to your belief (which you're entitled to) that the ecars infrastructure should be funded out of a separate pot, whereas it's my belief there is stacks of money in the existing pot to more than adequately fund it.

Evd-Burner

To be honest I would much rather pay more than I pay at home in the knowledge that there would be more fcps available and they wouldn't always be in use by people being opportunists.

I would happily pay 20c per minute for a 45kwh charger. More per minute for a faster charger.

Water John

The petrol retailer, who has a lorry of fuel delivered to his station, doesn't give that out at the same price. He takes a margin.
This doesn't matter whether the petrol station is owned by an individual or by the company, eg Topaz, Applegreen who delivered the fuel.

Two different functions that must be priced into the retail price. Thinking anything else should or will happen in relation to FCPs isn't reality.

It's the price of the electricity, plus the margin for whomsoever owns the FCP.

You should have the choice, as an EV owner, to charge at home as much as possible, and pay for the FCP when you need it. I would not agree with a monthly charge.
Saying, unless I sign up that and pay a monthly base charge, I don't have access to FCPs, is wrong. It's like saying one needs to pay a charge each month or you don't have access to the motorways and have to stay on the secondary roads.

n97 mini

You have to remember that 15c (or whatever the current rates are) is not the wholesale price, and already includes a margin.

KCross

n97 mini wrote: »

You have to remember that 15c (or whatever the current rates are) is not the wholesale price, and already includes a margin.

Not enough to cover OpEx of the charging infrastructure, not to mind CapEx and the electricity itself!

Evd-Burner

KCross wrote:

Not enough to cover OpEx of the charging infrastructure, not to mind CapEx and the electricity itself!

How much does an FCP cost to buy and install?

It would be good to show how much energy would need to be consumed to just pay off that. Not including any operating costs.

goz83

The home rate plus a small per minute fee (maybe 5-10c) would be the best compromise. High fees would only slow down EV adoption. The ESB should take a "stack em high, sell em low" approach. Get more users and cover the costs.

KCross

Evd-Burner wrote: »

How much does an FCP cost to buy and install?

It would be good to show how much energy would need to be consumed to just pay off that. Not including any operating costs.

Vague recollection of an FCP costing €50k which will of course vary by site. Im sure cros13 will give us exact figures!

The Opex cost, according to the eCars report is about €4m/yr!!!
And then maintenance on top of that again.

The average charge session is 6kWh's which will only go up as larger batteries become available but 6kWh is the current figure as per the eCars report.

Domestic rates are roughly 15c/kWh day and 7c/kWh night. I'll let you run the numbers but it doesn't stack up if you rely on domestic rates to cover even the OpEx not to mind CapEx and the base electricity costs.

n97 mini

KCross wrote: »

Not enough to cover OpEx of the charging infrastructure, not to mind CapEx and the electricity itself!

Not at current market penetration. But it will be at some point in the future.

n97 mini

goz83 wrote: »

The home rate plus a small per minute fee (maybe 5-10c) would be the best compromise. High fees would only slow down EV adoption. The ESB should take a "stack em high, sell em low" approach. Get more users and cover the costs.

Why a per minute charge? Not all cars charge at the same rate per minute.

KCross

n97 mini wrote: »

Not at current market penetration. But it will be at some point in the future.

At day rate you are talking about ~€1 per charge (6kWh average @ 15c/kWh) which would require 4 million charge sessions per year to break even to cover just OpEx. There aren't enough hours in the day to make that work even if we doubled the number of chargers and everyone had an EV.

Bear in mind your 15c/kWh that you are paying at home is also supposed to cover the electricity generation, some profit for ESBn, profit for your provider and also take out VAT so there is a lot of that 15c gone before you ever get to profit to cover the EV infrastructure..... I just dont think your ideal is remotely realistic based on the numbers.

Of course we'd all love it to be as you said but it has to be paid for and robbing Peter (the grid) to pay Paul (EV infrastructure) is where we differ in our opinions.

Apart at all from the fact that the government will need to replace the lost revenue anyway so subsidising your travel further (by reducing ESBn profit) just isn't going to happen. It has to wash its own face in the long term.

cros13

n97 mini wrote: »

You have to remember that 15c (or whatever the current rates are) is not the wholesale price, and already includes a margin.

The FCP owner should get a fixed fee say ?2 per charge and then the actual electricity use billed back to a customer supply company.

Water John

If a FCP costs 50K capital.
Then I pull up and charge for 30 mins.

So the max return is 4 euro an hour, or 100 euro per day, to the owner of the FCP.

BTW, what is stopping anyone setting up a charge station other than planning and getting EirGrid supply connection?

n97 mini

cros13 wrote: »

The FCP owner should get a fixed fee say ?2 per charge and then the actual electricity use billed back to a customer supply company.

Sure, if it's a privately owned FCP.

goz83

n97 mini wrote: »

Why a per minute charge? Not all cars charge at the same rate per minute.

To discourage overstaying.

To encourage people to buy newer, faster charging cars.


No matter what way you cut the cake, someone is going to feel like they got shafted. I think a modest charge per minute on top of an electricity charge is the best compromise.

n97 mini

To discourage overstaying, do the Tesla on it. Start charging per minute when they actually start overstaying.

goz83

n97 mini wrote: »

To discourage overstaying, do the Tesla on it. Start charging per minute when they actually start overstaying.

I don't mean overstaying after the battery is fully charged. If someone only needs half a charge, they are overstaying if they stay longer. So, the modest per min charge would encourage people to only stay for as long as they need, rather than have them stay for as long as they want.

Only yesterday, I found myself needing a quick topup at an FCP for the wife to get to town and back comfortably. There were 2 Leafs parked at the CP. One was fully charged and still plugged in. 10 minutes later, the owner returned with his kids and drove off. The other guy plugged in and I decided to get the car washed after I waited 20 minutes. There was a queue for the car wash and 40 minutes had passed in total when the car was washed. I figured the guy was staying for a full charge, so I headed back, as the wife needed the car.

If all you need is a topup, then you don't need to stay until you hit 80% or more! I doubt either of those cars would have been plugged in for as long as they were, had they been getting charged as I suggested.

Thankfully the wife made her journey and back. I suggested she use eco mode just to be safe. Leaf had 10% in the tank on her return. She would probably have run out of charge in normal drive mode.

n97 mini

Yeah but you're throwing the baby out with the bathwater by introducing per minute charges for everyone, every time.

In your example if Leaf #1 was full, it can be unplugged, you don't need to wait. You could have asked Leaf #2 how long he would be, and maybe he didn't need it as much as you did so would have let you in before him. There's no point in sitting in the car at and FCP and trying to guess what others are doing... get out and talk to them!

discostu1

There is a plan for ESB Networks to roll out Smart metering to the whole country in the coming years. Now this is Ireland and it may never happen. But ond of the foundations of Smart metering is TIme of Use Billing, so at 8am to 12pm the cost is say 18c from 12pm to 4pm might be 14c but from 5pm to 8pm the cost is 35c and from 8pm to 5am the cost is 9c.....these are not the actually figures but a rough idea of how it works in most countries.5pm to 8/9pm is probably the dearest time with the pre lunch post lunch time slot also expensive.
Would the charging system have to reflect Time of Use Billing ??