When will ESB start charging for Public charging ?

celtic_oz

Just wondering when they will stop providing free charges .. maybe this date has been set already ?

Also what do people think will the charge be and what do you think a fair cost per KW would be ?

KCross

Its awaiting the CER's decision which is expected within days. There are unlikely to be charges this year but maybe next year if eCars get what they want.

As to fair cost.... a few other threads have extensively discussed that already so I don't think you'll get a different set of answers on a new thread!
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=103412678
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057515691

No No, please not another ESB charges thread !

thelikelylad

KCross wrote: »

Its awaiting the CER's decision which is expected within days.

Within days? Really?

Didn't think there was a timeframe for the decision. Sooner this comes to an end the better.

KCross

thelikelylad wrote: »

Within days? Really?

Didn't think there was a timeframe for the decision. Sooner this comes to an end the better.

They said in Jan that they would make a decision in Q2 2017... so thats Friday this week!

Of course, they could slip the date but it won't be long before we know I'd say.

ELM327

*fingers crossed for the following*

35 minute time limit after which a €6 "connection fee" applies.
Option to then charge also per kWh.

Most important, more than anything else, is that the network remains a regulated asset and is not released for non regulated commercialisation by ESBn/ecars

Orebro

I know it's been done to death on here, but if they start charging for it now then they'll kill EVs in Ireland - know lots of people interested in getting one but not a single person that would jump from ICE if its going to cost them money to plug in. Nobody expects it to be free forever, but it's far to early.

Surely they must know with the tiny amount of EVs in Ireland that they'll end up making buttons from it at this stage anyway?

No Seriously it really has been "done to death" here !

Paying for charging won't kill what isn't alive , most people will charge at home for most of the time and those who can't won't buy ev in the first place.

Don't forget free charging for the last 6 years has not encouraged lots of people to EV !!!!!!

ELM327

It's about establishing procedure and removing the bad practices that have developed.
When things are free they get abused. People charge to 100% at a fast charger to save €2-3? Ridiculous.
The network is not ready to be privately commercialised but there should be both (a) a token charge for the electricity used and (b) time limits of 30/35 minutes per hour of FCP use.
If you use more than 35 minutes in any hour, then you get punitively charged.

35 mins isn't good enough for 40 Kwh Zoe owners not 90 Kwh Model S owners or any other EV with more than 24-30 Kwh of storage.

What we need is a lot more chargers and chargers capable of a lot more than 65 Kw power. The Ioniq seemingly the best EV here for charging power.

celtic_oz

i hope theres no monthly fee that would really be annoying

The monthly fee is ridiculous especially for those who don't frequently use the chargers.

ELM327

Deleted User wrote: »

35 mins isn't good enough for 40 Kwh Zoe owners not 90 Kwh Model S owners or any other EV with more than 24-30 Kwh of storage.

What we need is a lot more chargers and chargers capable of a lot more than 65 Kw power. The Ioniq seemingly the best EV here for charging power.

Tesla owners have a supercharger and will have more soon.
35 minutes is plenty if someone is queueing behind.

ELM327

celtic_oz wrote: »

i hope theres no monthly fee that would really be annoying

Deleted User wrote: »

The monthly fee is ridiculous especially for those who don't frequently use the chargers.

agreeed

ELM327

ELM327 wrote: »

Tesla owners have a supercharger and will have more soon.
35 minutes is plenty if someone is queueing behind.

But Tesla drivers might not have a super charger on their route and 35 mins won't cut it for Zoe owners and 35 mins really may not be good enough for someone with the 40 Kwh battery if they're in a long trip.

ELM327

Deleted User wrote: »

But Tesla drivers might not have a super charger on their route and 35 mins won't cut it for Zoe owners and 35 mins really may not be good enough for someone with the 40 Kwh battery if they're in a long trip.

35 mins at 43kW isnt enough to get you to the next charger?

Depends, why should they risk the charger being down or in use ? and also, the chargers were designed to charge electrics of about 15-24 Kwh worth of storage so at 100 Kw it would be a lot better or with the 65 Kw Ioniq charging power, it makes a good difference.

TBi

The limit could be imposed on the DC chargers. Not the AC chargers for the moment.

Why would you do this ? the very idea of the 30 min limit came from the average time it took to charge the original electrics to 80% , it just so happens that to charge the zoe 40 to 80% could take the guts of 50 mins.

In my opinion that would p1ss off a lot more people than if they had to pay for charging.

thelikelylad

I like the new ecotricity model granted the prices are steep.

I would loosely implement the ecotricity model with some changes. These only apply to FCPs of course.

- 45 min charge session max
- 2 tiered connection fee (€x for first 35mins, €x for remaining 10 mins)
- Charge per kWh
- Subscription and non-subscription option. Monthly subscription offers a more favorable € per kWh (for heavy users)


The connection fee is a big thing because it will discourage PHEVs from using FCPs. Also a 2 tiered connection fee will discourage the abandoning of cars at FCPs. After the connection fee a charge per kWh is fair once the esb don't go to town on the rates.

As for actual prices I've no idea. Wishful thinking I like the idea of paying €5 for 200km :P

You wouldn't tell ICE owners they could only get 10 litres of petrol or diesel would you ?

The answer is more and more chargers.

Orebro

We can't even come to a consensus amongst ourselves as to what the best way to implement it is - no wonder it's taking the CER so long to announce anything.

I think the one thing we can be certain of is no matter what they say it's going to massively annoy a big proportion of us.

Well one thing is for sure, it will annoy those who just suck all the free electricity they can without consideration for anyone else.

ELM327

Deleted User wrote: »

Well one thing is for sure, it will annoy those who just suck all the free electricity they can without consideration for anyone else.

But it helps those of us who are forced to wait 35-45 mins (or more) in a queue behind someone who is just taking free electricity


PS we could have different limits on the AC side due to low usage

I think we should just realise that those with larger batteries will need more than 35 mins and older Leaf drivers of 24 Kwh batteries might need a bit more especially in Cold weather where it can take 50 mins to get to 85%.

A time limit simply isn't fair and won't work. But paying for charging in some way will in my opinion greatly cut down on those using the chargers for free electricity.

AC has huge potential for those with 6+ Kw chargers in particular the Zoe with it's on board 22 Kw charger, the AC points become fast chargers especially if they can leave the car for an hour or more, just 2-2.5 hrs is plenty to charge the 40 Kwh.

I3 buyers can choose a 3 phase 11 Kw charger with the upgraded battery.

ELM327

Deleted User wrote: »

I think we should just realise that those with larger batteries will need more than 35 mins and older Leaf drivers of 24 Kwh batteries might need a bit more especially in Cold weather where it can take 50 mins to get to 85%.

A time limit simply isn't fair and won't work. But paying for charging in some way will in my opinion greatly cut down on those using the chargers for free electricity.

AC has huge potential for those with 6+ Kw chargers in particular the Zoe with it's on board 22 Kw charger, the AC points become fast chargers especially if they can leave the car for an hour or more, just 2-2.5 hrs is plenty to charge the 40 Kwh.

I3 buyers can choose a 3 phase 11 Kw charger with the upgraded battery.

I strongly disagree.
And if those owners want to use a charger for over 30-35mins then they should pay for the privilege.
As battery sizes grow, so should DC speeds. In 5 years I think we will laugh at 50kW DC speed.

PS it has never taken me 50 minutes to get to 80%. In minus 5 degree temperature with 4 bars heat (coldest I've seen on both) It takes 32-36 mins max, if starting from single digits.

ELM327

Also, if we really think that 40+ mins at a fast charger is going to be the new norm for the foreseeable future then we **REEEEEALLLYYY** need more than one FCP per site.

You cannot expect someone to buy an ev and wait in a queue for 40 minutes at one single charger then pay to use the charger for another 40 minutes.

I said 85%.

Well I wouldn't like to be you when you tell a ZOe 40 Kwh owner that they shouldn't be there more than 35 mins........

Granted they'll have more range to begin with and chances are they might use the AC points a lot more and not need the fast chargers but you don't know the circumstances of the person charging to know whether or not they require more than 35 mins worth.

Charging longer than 30 mins and sucking only 5 Kw from a fast charger would annoy the hell out of me much, much more than someone needing longer than 30 mins and still sucking 45 Kw from the charger meaning it's a lot more of a waste of a charger to be pulling only 5 Kw or even less than pulling 45 Kw.

ELM327

There needs to be a balance, and it needs to get the guy abusing the DC side taking <10kW in his leaf, while potentially allowing 40 mins on an AC side. Maybe if there was an option to select "im queuing" and allowing a longer time if no one queuing selects the "im queuein" option?

PS in a 24kWh leaf charging to 85 is not cool if someone is waiting. IMO.
Unless it's an exception where there is no charger within range or something.

It's cool if you have to use it. Not everyone's circumstances are the same.

There could be at least 2 AC points that someone can get a charge while they're waiting or for someone to continue charging when the charging power reaches the point it makes no sense to stay on the fast charger.

BTW an Ioniq will still charge at 30 Kw at 90%, a 24 Kwh leaf 35 Kw from about 50% and it's a smaller battery.

The solution if faster chargers and more chargers and longer range electrics.

ELM327

Deleted User wrote: »

It's cool if you have to use it. Not everyone's circumstances are the same.

There could be at least 2 AC points that someone can get a charge while they're waiting or for someone to continue charging when the charging power reaches the point it makes no sense to stay on the fast charger.

BTW an Ioniq will still charge at 30 Kw at 90%, a 24 Kwh leaf 35 Kw from about 50% and it's a smaller battery.

The solution if faster chargers and more chargers and longer range electrics.

We may differ on the rest of your post (especially since ecars removed the SCP that used to be at most FCP sites - which the leaf could use, whereas it can't use the tethered AC) but I agree obviously with the bolded part, along with payment for charging and penalties for abuse.

liamog

ELM327 wrote: »

*fingers crossed for the following*

35 minute time limit after which a €6 "connection fee" applies.
Option to then charge also per kWh.

Most important, more than anything else, is that the network remains a regulated asset and is not released for non regulated commercialisation by ESBn/ecars

I don't think there is scope for it to remain in the regulated asset base.

ELM327

liamog wrote: »

I don't think there is scope for it to remain in the regulated asset base.

For what reason?

KCross

liamog wrote: »

I don't think there is scope for it to remain in the regulated asset base.

Its not part of RAB at the moment but it is being considered by the CER so it is in scope.

The 4 options eCars suggested were:
- Assets become part of Regulated Asset Base
- Sale via Public Tender – single lot
- Sale via Public Tender – multiple
- ESB ownership

The first one is the only regulated one. Option 4 is what eCars want.

Of those 4 I hope they pick option 1. All the others will result in disaster, imo.

Another option is to leave it as is and continue to fund it as is (DUoS funding).

ELM327

Option 1 is the only realistic outcome. With the other 3 there will be disaster. No new ev's sold, and the existing ones used as "city cars" not traveling outside their range. I know that's what I'll be doing! If they bring in ridiculous charges for charging or move the network out of public ownership to the ESBn or to others, I'll buy an old ICE car for longer journeys until I can afford my CPO model S!

BoatMad

liamog wrote: »

I don't think there is scope for it to remain in the regulated asset base.

of course there is . The state merely needs to see funding of the charger infrastructure as an incentive in the medium term and provide funds

BoatMad

I think that premature commercialisation of the network would be a huge mistake and simply arguing for a pricing regime simply to remove a " class " of EV user that you dont like is elitist

discounted or free FCP use should be guaranteed for a minimum period or until we have 10,000 EVs on the road

There will be NO charger network if there are NO EVs

The CER have stated at the Dail committee that they cannot use the DUoS to fund the network any longer under EU rules. The state needs to subvent the running costs of the network . Privately thats seems to be a preferred option for the CER

TEH ESBs only contribution at the Dail committee was to whinge about the 6 million its owned , Its a pathetic organisation with no vision for EVs in Ireland

KCross

BoatMad wrote: »

The CER have stated at the Dail committee that they cannot use the DUoS to fund the network any longer under EU rules. The state needs to subvent the running costs of the network . Privately thats seems to be a preferred option for the CER

The DUoS funding is the current funding mechanism. Correct?

Is transferring it to RAB considered within EU rules? No issues with the state supporting it? Usually when the state props something up, EU have an issue.

Or is the state funding you refer to something different to RAB?

BoatMad wrote: »

TEH ESBs only contribution at the Dail committee was to whinge about the 6 million its owned , Its a pathetic organisation with no vision for EVs in Ireland

Do you happen to have a link to a transcript or oireachtas video of that session?

BoatMad

KCross wrote: »

The DUoS funding is the current funding mechanism. Correct?

Is transferring it to RAB considered within EU rules? No issues with the state supporting it? Usually when the state props something up, EU have an issue.

Or is the state funding you refer to something different to RAB?

The CER are caught in reality between EU rules that forbid it subsidising activities that are not part of the Core Network. This was " got round" by describing the existing project as a R&D project.

Now that project is officially finished , and the CER cannot expand or commit operational monies to the charger network

However it has been argued by people like Eamon Ryan TD, that the EU rules are flexible enough to be " bent" to allow continued funding

The EU has basically stated that EV public charging must be provided on a commercial basis

( many thing the EU rules on are far too neoliberal in my view )

The Irish state now needs to step up to to the plate and subsidise the network for a medium term , The 120 million in fines beginning next year, provides a lot of head room !!!

Do you happen to have a link to a transcript or oireachtas video of that session?

http://www.irishevowners.ie/june2017-meeting-oireachtas/

liamog

It's hard to argue that the charging points should be part the regulated asset base, when there are multiple examples across the rest of the EU where charging infrastructure is privately held.
State funding of the infrastructure as a way to incentivise EV usage is a different policy decision.

Full commercialisation is not doable at the moment which implies that subsidisation is required. The EU are ok with subsidies and subvention provided that the opportunity to avail of the subsidy is open to competition.

So for instance we could have a policy to subsidise a 50kW charger at every fast food outlet in the country. eCars can do it, but equally FastNed could bid to provide the infrastructure and service.

BoatMad

It's hard to argue that the charging points should be part the regulated asset base, when there are multiple examples across the rest of the EU where charging infrastructure is privately held.

Yes , and not at all successful either, major rethinks in Belgium , UK . Norway had free charging for a considerable time

commercialisation has led to a plethora of incomplete system, multiple smart cards, multiple standards and huge user issues. France is a mess, for example with 6 companies and no interoperability

IN that regards what we have is quite unique and arguably ahead of its time ( even given its drawbacks )

Irelands is the model for Europe actually , not the others way around

There is no issue in the state undertaking a time limited funding of the charging network, The issue is getting the state involved in the FIRST place

The output of the CER at the nail committee and Dail committees view on incentivise keeps missing the point, THE biggest incentive is free " fuel" , this is almost solely behind the rise of imported 2nd hand EVs in anecdotal feedback

The IEVOA are in contact with the CER and are hopeful of a meeting in the near future

So for instance we could have a policy to subsidise a 50kW charger at every fast food outlet in the country. eCars can do it, but equally FastNed could bid to provide the infrastructure and service.

The mistake in the EU policy is to allow subsidies to BUILD networks, but what should be done is to subsidise the operation of them not the build ( or as well as ), its ridiculous to allow the states money to fund a commercial network

liamog

Network interop needs to be dealt with on an EU level, charging needs to be available on the basis of zero membership or pre planning.
Vending machines in Spain have figured out how to integrate NFC payments, it shouldn't be too difficult to do the same.
It's going to have to be this way to protect freedom of movement etc... and removes any potential for a natural monopoly to form.

Free fuel is a strong incentive for users, but I'd argue that it strongly discourages any network operator.
Using figures from RCN, it would take around 8 charges a day for a 50kW charger to pay for itself over an expected life of 8 years and that's using the 3x wholesale rate.

In an Ioniq it would work out as around €5 per charge (23.5kW) and giving you 180km of range, this should be more than enough of a saving compared to the range you get from €5 of diesel.
With numbers like that, it's not clear that operating a network requires any subsidy, the capital expenditure is the biggest cost and this is where I believe any subsidy should be implemented.

As has been pointed out many times, there is no charging infrastructure without EVs on the road, and one of the resistance points to getting more on the road is the lack of charging points/queueing. It's a classic chicken and egg problem and one of the places where government intervention is directly warranted.

The claim that Ireland with it's single points of failure and 80 50kW chargers is the model for the EU to follow is laughable.

By the time mass EV adoption occurs , range will be 300+ Kms so the need to charge at FCP's will be small, though having said that apartment owners will most likely have to use them but I would expect if you have parking then the issue of charging in apartments should be resolved.

Mass EV adoption, I would consider that 10 years time at least so time to get working on the issue and that is how the issue of billing can be addressed so that each individual pays for his or her own electricity or do you have the costs included in the management fees and those who don't drive will have to pay or those that do drive pay more ?

If the cost of fast charging for the couple of trips a year work out as expensive as diesel then so what ? and if that are the case as I said most people will charge at home and those that have no home charging will most likely not buy EV simple as that, my Brother included who would have bought an EV this year but has instead got another diesel because he lives in an apartment and the management agency have said no because the issue of billing at this time can not be and will not be addressed and certainly not by the management company. So he chose Diesel as stupid as that is he won't pay more to buy a petrol Audi and will drive diesel for about 10-12 Kms a day.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

By the time mass EV adoption occurs , range will be 300+ Kms so the need to charge at FCP's will be small, though having said that apartment owners will most likely have to use them but I would expect if you have parking then the issue of charging in apartments should be resolved. ...............

Apartment parking is an interesting one. I've just got an assigned space (after 13 years of unassigned spaces) that's a footpath away from my electricity metre ..... I doubt the managment co would favour a cable duct/cover thing though.

The management companies first response is usually no, however if tell them you'll run it under the path and foot the bill I'm sure there'd be no issue.

In my brothers situation running the cable is no issue, they just tap into a suitable feed as long as it's not lift supply or emergency lighting . water pumps etc. The issue was metering and the administration involved they were not prepared to get into it but would review the matter if he came up with a suitable solution, and he did, he got another poxy TDI !!!