nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

ESB eCars

liamog

Details from the dail on the eCars €10,000,000 expansion programme.

The key elements include six high speed charging hubs on motorways capable of charging eight vehicles simultaneously; 16 high speed charging hubs capable of charging four vehicles simultaneously; additional high power chargers at 34 current 50 kW locations; upgrading over 50 22 kW chargers to 50 kW, and replacing up to 264 locations with 528 charge points at the pre-existing pilot grade of 22 kW to next generation high reliability models.

https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/question/2019-01-24/10/?fbclid=IwAR1eGLQjNFuywCoaB__FJADns7gNOD09DaR9XLueHAKZ8vljfd-kL-_LpDs

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

_dof_

Black_Knight wrote: »

2 locations in Galway City

Galway isn't well served by SCPs at the moment, very few available around the city centre area and none at all out in Salthill. There should be a bank of SCPs in the public car parks in Salthill, that's a destination that people travel a distance to get to and tend to spend they day there, ideal for SCPs.

I don't think putting 50kW+ FCPs in the city centre car parks is a great idea, since most people are going to be parking there for multiple hours and having an FCP with a 45 minute limit (until the overstay fee kicks in) isn't a good idea. FCPs are better suited to radial routes for cities and interurban routes, like the motorway service areas.

DC chargepoints in the city centre car parks of up to 22kW would be good. They shouldn't be too expensive, wouldn't need new grid capacity and would let most cars get a meaningful charge in a couple of hours, like the Zoe and dual charger Model S owners can.

slave1

_dof_ wrote: »

and it replaced one of the newer 22kW posts too, so the theory that they're only replacing the older ones isn't true.

Sure the dopes have replaced new 50kW charge points with 150kW charge points too, no strategy

[Deleted User]

slave1 wrote: »

Sure the dopes have replaced new 50kW charge points with 150kW charge points too, no strategy

Yeah instead of putting the 150 Kw beside the 50 Kw they removed, Gob****es.

liamog

slave1 wrote: »

Sure the dopes have replaced new 50kW charge points with 150kW charge points too, no strategy

They installed a 50kW charger temporarily until they finished the technical validation and purchasing of the 150kW unit, would you have preferred they left the empty space.

slave1

liamog wrote: »

They installed a 50kW charger temporarily until they finished the technical validation and purchasing of the 150kW unit, would you have preferred they left the empty space.

I'd prefer proper planning, the purchasing/transport/installation/validation of a charger costs resources, time/money/effort and all with economical/environmental impact. Why was the 150 not ready on time to match the installation is probably a more appropriate comment.
As an EV owner 3.5years eCars have spiraled from their excellent penetration phase to abandonment of infrastructure ever since. I experience charger outages on a weekly basis, often multiple times a day.
Hubs are what we need, any business with single source of supply is taking a big continuity risk and eCars push that risk to us with lack of Hubs.
Proper strategy would be to install that 150 alongside the two existing 50s and yeah, their first proper hub.
Ionity, 4 stalls, Tesla 6,8 stalls, it's not as if they have to reinvent the concept.

innrain

Black_Knight wrote: »

4 or 8 vechicle 150kW charging hub - Monasterevin (M7)

1 x 150kW + 1 x 50kW chargers:
Kilcullen - Complete
Galway Plaza - Complete
Portlaoise (interesting, because they can barely get 40kW outta the existing DC in portlaoise)
Ballinalack, Westmeath
Carraick on Shannon
Lahey, Donegal
Kells

I think Portlaoise will be in a different location. BTW just got a notification on plugshare that somebody added this new one

https://www.plugshare.com/location/253326

Unconfirmed though as no pictures and noting official from ecars. Maybe the new 50kW units removed from M9/M6 will go there.

Black_Knight

innrain wrote: »

I think Portlaoise will be in a different location. BTW just got a notification on plugshare that somebody added this new one

https://www.plugshare.com/location/253326

Unconfirmed though as no pictures and noting official from ecars. Maybe the new 50kW units removed from M9/M6 will go there.

Oddly corresponding with the kilcullen chargers disappearing from the ecars map.

The ID for the charger (1268) was previously associated with Kilcullen. I don't scrape the data regularly, but he's a snapshot from yesterday and mid July:

[Deleted User]

The ESB are just relocating chargers so they can have more blue dots on the map making it look like they're doing a great job.

liamog

slave1 wrote: »

I'd prefer proper planning, the purchasing/transport/installation/validation of a charger costs resources, time/money/effort and all with economical/environmental impact. Why was the 150 not ready on time to match the installation is probably a more appropriate comment.

Let's run with the idea that a provider has decided to install 2 chargers at a newly commissioned service station. They plan to install a 50kW charger and a 150kW charger as this is not one of the planned hubs. The service station opens before the provider has completed the technical acceptance testing of their 150kW charger. They have 2 choices, install 1 50kW charger today and wait until the 150kW charger is available, or install 2 50kW chargers and swap it out when it's ready.

I think people miss the point that eCars as a semi state, they cannot just go out and purchase chargers willy nilly, they have to run the work through an EU level tendering process.

[Deleted User]

liamog wrote: »

Let's run with the idea that a provider has decided to install 2 chargers at a newly commissioned service station. They plan to install a 50kW charger and a 150kW charger as this is not one of the planned hubs. The service station opens before the provider has completed the technical acceptance testing of their 150kW charger. They have 2 choices, install 1 50kW charger today and wait until the 150kW charger is available, or install 2 50kW chargers and swap it out when it's ready.

I think people miss the point that eCars as a semi state, they cannot just go out and purchase chargers willy nilly, they have to run the work through an EU level tendering process.

They've had bloody long enough!

liamog

Black_Knight wrote: »

Oddly corresponding with the kilcullen chargers disappearing from the ecars map.

The ID for the charger (1268) was previously associated with Kilcullen.

Something very odd indeed is happening there. The site id for Kilcullen is listing the two chargers, but the GPS for all of them has screwed up and is now reporting the site as M9 junction 2, the site is still described as Kilcullen, but as you've seen the chargers description say Portlaoise

liamog

Deleted User wrote: »

They've had bloody long enough!

It's 21 months into a 36 month plan since the funding plan was agreed in Oireachtas, as state bodies go it's not the worst I've seen.

unkel

liamog wrote: »

I think people miss the point that eCars as a semi state, they cannot just go out and purchase chargers willy nilly, they have to run the work through an EU level tendering process.

liamog wrote: »

It's 21 months into a 36 month plan since the funding plan was agreed in Oireachtas, as state bodies go it's not the worst I've seen.

Good points. All the more reason state bodies should not install infrastructure, particularly not when the private sector is already doing it. Quicker, with far superior solutions and costing us a lot less money.

Will someone in cabinet with a bit of sense pull the plug here? Let the ESB concentrate on strenghtening our grid and making it ready for a much higher percentage of renewables. That is their core business and that is where we all need them. Not for setting up some mickey mouse charging solutions

innrain

Black_Knight wrote: »

Oddly corresponding with the kilcullen chargers disappearing from the ecars map.

The ID for the charger (1268) was previously associated with Kilcullen. I don't scrape the data regularly, but he's a snapshot from yesterday and mid July:

It's sorted now. That's probably the triple which was at Kilcullen. When they added it back to the map they've used the same Id and moved the GPS pos.

Anyway that is a very nice location for driving on M7/M8.

KCross

unkel wrote: »

Good points. All the more reason state bodies should not install infrastructure, particularly not when the private sector is already doing it. Quicker, with far superior solutions and costing us a lot less money.

The private sector is not going to give us what we need. If you think they will you are being very naive.

- Tesla is proprietary so largely irrelevant to EV adoption.

- Ionity will be 6-9 sites on motorways only and that will be it. Nothing else.

- EasyGo are small time and dont have the resources to put in multi-million euro hubs.

Who else is going to give us what we need? Its fancilful to say pull the funding from eCars and let the market decide. We would get exactly nothing if we did that.

Like it or not we need taxpayers money to go to eCars to get this done. As said a million times before on this forum the issue is the speed at which they are doing it. The plan they have is quite good, the execution not so much.

innrain

I think a tender approach would have been more beneficial for everybody. Even for ecars.

unkel

KCross wrote: »

The private sector is not going to give us what we need. If you think they will you are being very naive.

- Tesla is proprietary so largely irrelevant to EV adoption.

Nonsense. In most other countries the private sector is doing exactly this. You won't find any state operated network of fast charging stations in the Netherlands, a country years ahead of us when it comes to EVs and their infrastructure. There are fast charging hubs everywhere and no queuing either.

If you believe a state company will give us what we need in terms of fast charging at reasonable cost and with reasonable speeds, then it is you who is naive. Or maybe you should emigrate to the CCCP anno 1975 :pac:

Tesla is not proprietary BTW, they are rapidly moving to CCS, all their new superchargers are CCS only, all the new cars they sell are CCS only and they convert all their cars, even ancient ones like my own, to CCS for very little money. I reckon they lose money doing this, so they are effectively subsdising the move to CCS!

KCross

innrain wrote: »

I think a tender approach would have been more beneficial for everybody. Even for ecars.

They did.

The climate action fund (€500m) is open to anyone that wishes to utilise it.

eCars submitted their plan and got €10m, I think, to support their plan as well as €10m of their own money.

The reality is that we are a small island with not alot of financial viabiity for operators to spend millions and make a decent profit over the next 5-10 years. Subsidy is required.

liamog

KCross wrote: »

They did.

The climate action fund (€500m) is open to anyone that wishes to utilise it.

eCars submitted their plan and got €10m, I think, to support their plan as well as €10m of their own money.

The reality is that we are a small island with not alot of financial viabiity for operators to spend millions and make a decent profit over the next 5-10 years. Subsidy is required.

The only change I would make, instead of allowing company x to apply for funding to build a network, the NTA should of designed a viable network and allowed companies to tender for the design and build of tranches of sites. This would more closely match how networks were started in the Nordic countries.

KCross

unkel wrote: »

Nonsense. In most other countries the private sector is doing exactly this. You won't find any state operated network of fast charging stations in the Netherlands, a country years ahead of us when it comes to EVs and their infrastructure. There are fast charging hubs everywhere and no queuing either.

If you believe a state company will give us what we need in terms of fast charging at reasonable cost and with reasonable speeds, then it is you who is naive. Or maybe you should emigrate to the CCCP anno 1975 :pac:

So, who is going to come into this small island and spend 10s of millions in the next few years? The economics of it are not there.

Pointing to Netherlands doesnt fix it for us. If it was viable FastNed would be here. They're not. Face up to reality here.

Possibly in time it will happen but we need it now, not 5 years time.

unkel wrote: »

Tesla is not proprietary BTW, they are rapidly moving to CCS, all their new superchargers are CCS only, all the new cars they sell are CCS only and they convert all their cars, even ancient ones like my own, to CCS for very little money. I reckon they lose money doing this, so they are effectively subsdising the move to CCS!

You dont understand the word proprietary so!
If only a Tesla can use it, its proprietary.

Tesla say its open to others to use if they pay for it but no one has signed up so for now it is proprietary..... but you knew that!

MJohnston

unkel wrote: »

Nonsense. In most other countries the private sector is doing exactly this. You won't find any state operated network of fast charging stations in the Netherlands, a country years ahead of us when it comes to EVs and their infrastructure. There are fast charging hubs everywhere and no queuing either.

That's a really overly simplistic comparison. The Netherlands has 3.5 the population of Ireland, but more than that, they're part of a contiguous Europe-wide charging network.

A charging network investment in Ireland is for a tiny market, and it's only for that market.

The free market has no interest in investing in Ireland for chargers, and the only option without ESB will be for the government to force petrol station companies to provide them.

liamog

In fairness, The Netherlands is a great example, the government put out exactly the kind of construct and operate tenders that I want to see here.

KCross

liamog wrote: »

The only change I would make, instead of allowing company x to apply for funding to build a network, the NTA should of designed a viable network and allowed companies to tender for the design and build of tranches of sites. This would more closely match how networks were started in the Nordic countries.

I'd agree. The horse has bolted now though, hasnt it?

As Ionity, Tesla and eCars build out their networks there wont be much room for other operators to come in. We have a small motorway network with the prime sites already now spoken for.

I guess there are opportunities for local authority hubs still.

unkel

KCross wrote: »

You dont understand the word proprietary so!
If only a Tesla can use it, its proprietary.

It's not proprietary, it's CCS. Which is the only standard of fast charging we have in Europe going forward.

Tesla controls who can charge on them though, same as the ESB, Ionity and all others control who can charge on their CCS chargers. Which are also non-propietary

Black_Knight

innrain wrote: »

It's sorted now. That's probably the triple which was at Kilcullen. When they added it back to the map they've used the same Id and moved the GPS pos.

Anyway that is a very nice location for driving on M7/M8.

So... is there a new multibay charge point at portlaoise now?

Cyrus

KCross wrote: »

I'd agree. The horse has bolted now though, hasnt it?

As Ionity, Tesla and eCars build out their networks there wont be much room for other operators to come in. We have a small motorway network with the prime sites already now spoken for.

I guess there are opportunities for local authority hubs still.

You’d imagine as range increases then the use case for public chargers will decrease , not disappear but certainly decrease.

If you have more evs and say 600km real world range the likelihood is that anywhere you are visiting will have a charger anyway and if not 600 gets you there and back to a lot of places in Ireland

ELM327

Black_Knight wrote: »

So... is there a new multibay charge point at portlaoise now?

Yes
At Midway, but the other side of the road on the same offramp
Crazy location as there was already a services there.

Black_Knight

ELM327 wrote: »

Yes
At Midway, but the other side of the road on the same offramp
Crazy location as there was already a services there.

Very nice. A welcome charge point on that road. Cashel, Portlaoise.

liamog

Cyrus wrote: »

You’d imagine as range increases then the use case for public chargers will decrease , not disappear but certainly decrease.

If you have more evs and say 600km real world range the likelihood is that anywhere you are visiting will have a charger anyway and if not 600 gets you there and back to a lot of places in Ireland

Its one of those great ironies, the utility of cars with smaller batteries goes up as the number of available chargers increases. I'm going to drive to the EV meetup in Birdhill using my e-Up, that's a journey I would of never contemplated when I bought the car in 2018. Now I'll be driving past 7 different CCS sites, with two of them having more than one CCS charger.

KCross

unkel wrote: »

It's not proprietary, it's CCS. Which is the only standard of fast charging we have in Europe going forward.

Tesla controls who can charge on them though, same as the ESB, Ionity and all others control who can charge on their CCS chargers. Which are also non-propietary

Splitting hairs.
I cant go onto Tesla's website, create an account and connect my CCS car to their supercharger.. can I?! Therefore it is proprietary. Until such time as Hyundai, VW etc pay Tesla to allow access to their SuC network it is proprietary to Tesla.... you know this. Neither of us needs a lesson in it or have CCS explained.

You are being obtuse and not addressing the real points.