ESB eCars

slave1

ELM327 wrote: »

Although, athlone is pretty well served with the circle k Ionity nearby.

It is, from memory

ESB fast charger, triple head
Three 22kW dual headed
One 7kw dual headed at the train station
Two 7kw dual headed at Town Centre car park
Four Ionity 350kW at Athlone Service Station
One Circle K fast charger at Athlone Service Station - CCS/Chademo
One Chargepoint 22kW dual headed charger at Athlone Service Station

as well as a couple of private company employee chargers

kanuseeme

Black_Knight wrote: »

What cars 5 and 6? Maybe Dublin has its own bubble, but I've never seen more than 2 cars at a charge point since the fees were introduced.

2-4 cars charging at once it's a damn sight better than 1-2. And 2 CCS points at a site means redundancy. If the chademo cars are limited to 50kW then there's loads left over for CCS cars with higher capability.

Its reduced speed after car no 4 in a 4 stall site with V2 chargers, and true about the fee's but with Tesla model S/X you get free supercharging, (unless CPO) so any one who lives near or is a passer-by of a super charger that can afford an S/X (and its becoming easier with each year) will be sucking on free electrons to there hearts content, plus all the model 3/y's that need it and they would also have free credits.


E cars free charging nightmare Version 2.

As for the Dublin bubble, I would consider a number of smaller hubs better than one single huge hub, it would spread the cars among several hubs i.e a car needing a charge will go to its nearest small hub rather than all cars going to the huge hub.

Its coming as more switch to EV.

liamog

unkel wrote: »

Interesting BTW that Ionity calls their 350kW (for one car) charge points "high-speed" while the ESB calls their 150kW (shared per 2 cars) charge points "Ultra-Fast"

says it all really...

There is a photo of the eCars 150kW charger on FB its branded as High Power Charge Point

liamog

kanuseeme wrote: »

As for the Dublin bubble, I would consider a number of smaller hubs better than one single huge hub, it would spread the cars among several hubs i.e a car needing a charge will go to its nearest small hub rather than all cars going to the huge hub.

For a given level of demand, you are less likely to queue (or queue for a shorter time) at one hub with 10 chargers than two hubs with 5 chargers.

kanuseeme

liamog wrote: »

For a given level of demand, you are less likely to queue (or queue for a shorter time) at one hub with 10 chargers than two hubs with 5 chargers.

How are you reaching that conclusion? Surely time spent traveling to a super hub would be better spent charging at a smaller nearer hub. (it would require ideal placement of the smaller hubs)

Also there are more benefits with 2 hubs there is redundancy e.g a Tesla catches fire, 1 hub is now none

A parcel of land to fit 20 cars would be harder to find than 2 pieces of land to fit 10 each.

liamog

It's basic network queuing theory, you can use a tool called Erlang C to model it. I used it extensively for modelling call patterns in a call centre.
I had more advanced tools where you can run a model, but this simple calculator should help demonstrate.
https://planetcalc.com/3151/

Let's assume 50 cars an hour need to charge, each charge takes 45 mins, permissible wait time is 10 mins, and we want 90% of customers to achieve that wait.
We can use erlang C to calculate the number of agents (chargers) needed to serve that demand within the SLA's.

The answer is 43, now if we split the load across two site 25 & 25, we need to install 24 chargers at each site to ensure the same level of service.
If you split the load across 10 sites, then each site needs 7 chargers.

So in this case, to serve 50 cars in geographic area with that SLA needs 43, 48, or 70 chargers depending on whether we concentrate them in 1, 2, or 10 locations.

It's also assuming we get an ideal split when spreading the load, it's more likely some locations will end up overloaded, whilst others end up underutilised.

KCross

Ah liam, dont mind all that theory stuff.... every charger needs to be 350kW... end of!

Kramer

KCross wrote: »

Ah liam, dont mind all that theory stuff.... every charger needs to be 350kW... end of!

What was required was 6 or 8 small hubs, on the motorway network, each with 4x CCS, 150kW chargers. Exactly as Ionity did, some of which are operating over a year now.

Why couldn't ECars, with ample state funding, not even manage that?

Going by my experience of local FCPs, tinkering with SCPs, which will almost certainly be largely unused once they introduce charging fees, should have been secondary to getting the motorway hubs installed & operating.

They will now just add more chargers where there is already good service from EasyGo, Ionity & Tesla, where there is easily accessible grid capacity.

I'm not having a go at the ESB or anything, that's unkel's niche, but just saying....


#defundtheesb

liamog

Kramer wrote: »

What was required was 6 or 8 small hubs, on the motorway network, each with 4x CCS, 150kW chargers. Exactly as Ionity did, some of which are operating over a year now.

Why couldn't ECars, with ample state funding, not even manage that?

My main issue with constant criticism of the rollout of eCars plan is that it ignores the fact there is a plan, or just repeats the same criticism every time any rollout occurs.

What's eCars motivation for installing a network? As far as I can tell, it's mostly about stopping rural TDs complaining that there is no fast charger nearby.

It's going to be a while before they can run eCars as a commercial concern, even if they do start making money on a couple of well used motorway hubs they are still going to need to fund the geographic network.

Ionity and Tesla installed there networks to enable sales of EVs, they are able to install proper infrastructure because it doesn't really matter whether or not it gets used. Easygo appears to be the only operator here that has an interest in running a commerical charging network, they've managed to install 5 fast chargers.

KCross

liamog wrote: »

My main issue with constant criticism of the rollout of eCars plan is that it ignores the fact there is a plan, or just repeats the same criticism every time any rollout occurs.

What's eCars motivation for installing a network? As far as I can tell, it's mostly about stopping rural TDs complaining that there is no fast charger nearby.

It's going to be a while before they can run eCars as a commercial concern, even if they do start making money on a couple of well used motorway hubs they are still going to need to fund the geographic network.

Ionity and Tesla installed there networks to enable sales of EVs, they are able to install proper infrastructure because it doesn't really matter whether or not it gets used. Easygo appears to be the only operator here that has an interest in running a commerical charging network, they've managed to install 5 fast chargers.

No no no... you're not listening liam.... 350kW chargers... everything else is just ridiculous.

Dont mind commerical realities, dwell times, what cars are capable of..... 350kW is all thats needed.... do you get it now?!

ELM327

Ionity is a commercial company that is installing hubs of 350kW chargers.

KCross

ELM327 wrote: »

Ionity is a commercial company that is installing hubs of 350kW chargers.

No its not. Its a loss leader for signed up manufacturers who got state funding. They have skin in the game of selling EV's.

Private operators (Tesla excepted) are VERY different to Ionity.

unkel

KCross wrote: »

No its not. Its a loss leader for signed up manufacturers who got state funding.

This Ionity being paid by the European tax payers was mentioned a few times lately, I can't remember, but have we covered the details of this?

liamog

Just as the eCars programme is a piece of work funded by Irish taxpayers. The largest segment of the Ionity network is being delivered under a plan called europ-e (https://europ-e.eu/).

The plan includes €195.5 million euro to deliver 340 High Power Charging Stations. (or about €575,000 per site).
Funding for it came from Ionity (VAG, MB, BMW and Ford), and €39.1 million of EU co-funding.

unkel

So 80% is privately paid and just 20% came from the EU taxpayers. Ireland's population is about 1% of the EU total, so simplifying things, Irish tax payers paid 1% of €39 million, or €0.4 million. Irish tax payer pays more than other tax payers, so let's round that up to one million, €1 million. For Ionity. For that we already got several super high power multiple bay charging hubs. More to open soon.

And we paid €10 million to the ESB. For which we might at some point in future maybe get some fast charging hubs

Which of the two is slightly better value for money for the Irish tax payer?

unkel

And before a smartass gets in, of course the Tesla Supercharger network is the best value for money, we already have 4 superhubs with more to come and they didn't cost the Irish taxpayer a cent.

KCross

Simplistic analysis unkel. eCars provide more than DC charge points.

And the point wasn’t just that Ionity are part state funded but that it’s not a private operator like others. It will be going cap in hand to its OEM partners for years to come to fund itself.

Look at the big picture not just what you’d like to see happen. There are commercial realities that need to be appreciated.

slave1

unkel wrote: »

And before a smartass gets in, of course the Tesla Supercharger network is the best value for money, we already have 4 superhubs with more to come and they didn't cost the Irish taxpayer a cent.

...and Tesla paid for destination chargers, I know not loads but there are quite a few around now

liamog

Exactly, we can extrapolate from the Ionity project that each Ionity hub costs about €575,000.

eCars are delivering 6 of those, 16 half hubs, and a large number of other DC chargers spread around the country to improve geographic coverage.

Suddenly the value for money appears to be in eCars favour.

KCross

unkel wrote: »

And before a smartass gets in, of course the Tesla Supercharger network is the best value for money, we already have 4 superhubs with more to come and they didn't cost the Irish taxpayer a cent.

And to give Nissan some teeny tiny bit of credit they made an effort too by installing a bunch of rapids back in 2010, which I presume cost the taxpayer nothing also... built into the price of their car like Tesla did.

Unfortunately Nissan didnt follow it up with more rapids.


But the thing is, if we leave it to the market all you are going to get is Ionity and a few small time operators like Easygo. That is no where near enough even for this tiny country. Ionity's long term plan is not that ambitious for this country and only covers motorway routes (that's in their mission statement).

The reality is you need eCars.

I'll say it again, the only real criticism of eCars is that they havent delivered the hubs yet. Liam's recent post showing some possibility of progress in that area is to be welcomed. Lets see what they do.

bodgerfederer

€1 million. For Ionity[/I][/B]. For that we already got several super high power multiple bay charging hubs. More to open soon.

Which cost .79 per kWh. I drive a vw and I’ve not been offered cheaper charging - so I’m paying as a tax payer, a vw customer and for the charge.
And yes, I know, I have a Maingau card but that’s only because I’ve the patience to read these threads and fight with a German website.

Also, i’ve used them 4 times, 3 of those times I’ve had to call customer services to start or finish the charge, they’re not particularly user friendly.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m glad they’re there and sticking them on main roads is the way to go. But the price hike leaves a bad taste in my mouth and if the goal is to get more people into evs then ionity aren’t going to achieve it.

unkel

bodgerfederer wrote: »

Which cost .79 per kWh.

So? 99% of the time you fill your car up for nearly free and then on the rare occasion that you do need a fast charges when you are out and about on a long journey, paying a bit more is not going to kill you is it? I'd rather pay 79c for a very fast services that is reliable and where you don't have to wait, instead of queuing up or finding a broken charger which only costs 29c when my family is on board and I have to explain to them that we have to wait for 2 hours or have to find another charger

Also, it is hardly fair to ask the petrol and diesel payers to subsidise the fuel of the electric car. If 79c is the charge for it to be commercially viable to operate private fast chargers paid for by private investments, so be it

That said, it's not 79c at Ionity, you can get it much cheaper and continental Europe has shown us that a more normal competitive price for fast charging is around 35c. In countries where electricity is far more expensive than here

liamog

bodgerfederer wrote: »

Which cost .79 per kWh. I drive a vw and I’ve not been offered cheaper charging - so I’m paying as a tax payer, a vw customer and for the charge.
And yes, I know, I have a Maingau card but that’s only because I’ve the patience to read these threads and fight with a German website.

It's almost as if Ionity have no interest in providing a functional charging network, and instead are just using it as a device to solve the "long distance charging" problem when selling you a new car.

unkel

liamog wrote: »

It's almost as if Ionity have no interest in providing a functional charging network, and instead are just using it as a device to solve the "long distance charging" problem when selling you a new car.

It would be interesting to have an inside view of what its aim really is. Maybe it was not meant to be a loss making promotional structure. Maybe it has to make do with very limited funding once setup / initial capital costs are paid for by the consortium. Maybe it's even meant to pay for itself and has to be break even including the capital costs.

I doubt it was setup as an enterprise to maximise profits though as an unrelated / independent commercial entity (i.e. like Fastned) would

Irishjg

Off topic slightly but will VW ID3 drivers be able to avail of their “free“ up to 2,000 kWh charging during the first 12 months of ownership on both Ecars and/or Ionity when they get their cars.

markpb

KCross wrote: »

Simplistic analysis unkel. eCars provide more than DC charge points.

I wonder how useful the 7 and 22kW charger points are in terms of encouraging the take-up of EVs. Who do they benefit? If you’re going on a longer drive and don’t have the range to complete your journey, you want to be very stuck to rely on them.

Who uses the ones in shopping centres? The people who go to a shopping centre so far away that they don’t have enough charge to get home? These people also need to be there for such a long time that they get a useful charge.

You could argue that they’re useful for people in apartments or houses with no off-street parking but since you can’t rely on getting them, are they a viable alternative to home charging?

To me, FCPs solve an actual problem. SCPs are a sop to EV owners because they get free charging instead of paying 9c night rate.

Am I wrong or missing a use case?

Black_Knight

markpb wrote: »

Am I wrong or missing a use case?

No no, nail on the head. They're useful for commuters at work (handy for visitors traveling distance to top up over 1-2 hour meeting), long stay locations like IKEA, stadiums, shopping centers, hotels (less so for overnight, but for conferences etc). Note that none of these really fall into the category of esb charge points.

At the moment, they're used by locals saving a few cent every day (it adds up), but if they cost money, they'd be freed up for visitors to towns/cites. I've used 1 once for this reason. Going to a match in Galway (remember when those were a thing) and I got the last slow charger in the city (8 in total I think there). In that scenario I was delighted to have a slow charger. A fast one would of had me sitting in the car for 30+ minutes.

AndyBoBandy

I’ll be heading down to Waterford in a few weeks to visit family, when restrictions allow it.

I’ll probably have enough charge to get down, and about 1/3 of the way back (driving motorway speeds).

I figure my charging options are either stopping on the way down and back at the FCP in Kilcullen on the M9 for quick top ups.

Or while down there, going over to the next village (Dunmore East, 10 minutes drive away), and using the SCP for about 2-3 hours to get enough juice to get me back home the following day. I could leave the car and get a lift back to the family home we’d be staying at, and get dropped back a few hours later to collect the car when sufficiently charged.

Option 3 of course is Granny Charging as soon as I arrive in the hope it puts enough in to get me home, but I’d prefer not to have to rely on this option.

So in this situation the SCP would very much work in my favour as a sort of destination charger.

Busman Paddy Lasty

markpb wrote: »

I wonder how useful the 7 and 22kW charger points are in terms of encouraging the take-up of EVs. Who do they benefit? If you’re going on a longer drive and don’t have the range to complete your journey, you want to be very stuck to rely on them.

Who uses the ones in shopping centres? The people who go to a shopping centre so far away that they don’t have enough charge to get home? These people also need to be there for such a long time that they get a useful charge.

You could argue that they’re useful for people in apartments or houses with no off-street parking but since you can’t rely on getting them, are they a viable alternative to home charging?

To me, FCPs solve an actual problem. SCPs are a sop to EV owners because they get free charging instead of paying 9c night rate.

Am I wrong or missing a use case?

We've done a day trip to Waterford and a weekend in the north west back in January. The SCPs were very useful. Left Waterford public car park with 100%, more than enough to get home to north Dublin.

Up in Donegal town also charged to 100% at the Quay which was also enough to get us home to Dublin without stopping - we did stop in Supermacs new place but didn't need to.

I'd be happy to pay for it when it saves me a stop at a fast charger. Great use case for tourist spots and end of the line destinations.

ELM327

liamog wrote: »

Exactly, we can extrapolate from the Ionity project that each Ionity hub costs about €575,000.

eCars are delivering 6 of those, 16 half hubs, and a large number of other DC chargers spread around the country to improve geographic coverage.

Suddenly the value for money appears to be in eCars favour.

ecars is delivering nothing that could be compared to an Ionity hub, 4*350kW chargers without load sharing.


I take the point earlier about it not being a strictly commercial company due to other interests but still, what they are installing is much better than anyone else except Tesla.