Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules

When will ESB start charging for Public charging ?

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    liamog
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 7,816 Mod ✭✭✭✭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.


  • Options
    #33
    ELM327
    Registered Users Posts: 21,535 ✭✭✭✭ELM327


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

    For what reason?


  • Options
    #34
    KCross
    Registered Users Posts: 12,084 ✭✭✭✭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).


  • Options
    #35
    ELM327
    Registered Users Posts: 21,535 ✭✭✭✭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!


  • Options
    #36
    BoatMad
    Registered Users Posts: 13,702 ✭✭✭✭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


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    BoatMad
    Registered Users Posts: 13,702 ✭✭✭✭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


  • Options
    #38
    KCross
    Registered Users Posts: 12,084 ✭✭✭✭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?


  • Options
    #39
    BoatMad
    Registered Users Posts: 13,702 ✭✭✭✭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/


  • Options
    #40
    liamog
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 7,816 Mod ✭✭✭✭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.


  • Options
    #41
    BoatMad
    Registered Users Posts: 13,702 ✭✭✭✭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


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    liamog
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 7,816 Mod ✭✭✭✭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.


  • Options
    #43
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 21,179 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    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.


  • Options
    #44
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 17,728 ✭✭✭✭ [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.


  • Options
    #45
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 21,179 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    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 !!!


Advertisement