Fees for public charge points - not realistic anymore

ELM327

Dardania wrote: »

Why - how many km would that get you? And how many km would the equivalent petrol or diesel car cost?
The EV will always come out cheaper, particularly when people charge at home mainly.

Taking 60c/kWh.
Generally I get around 125-170 wh/km, other more inefficient EVs are at >200 wh/km.
That's about 4-5km per kWh, or 60c per 4-5km.
Approximately 13c per km.

bipedalhumanoid

Free charging isn't helping, it is actively hurting EV adoption. It is the cause of the network being so poorly maintained, which gives EV driving a bad reputation.

Far from suggesting we expand the network from its current state, where we have approximately one CP for every three BEVs on the road, the EU recommendations suggest we should have one for every ten.

Can you imagine a government that has already admitted it is worried about lost fuel excise money — and that through its actions has shown it is only willing to do the bare minimum to "encourage" EV adoption — actively spending more money to exceed the EU recommendations by even more than it already has?

I can't.

The current network is more than adequate with a couple of small adjustments:
1: Make it costs more to charge there than at home so people stop cloggging up the network with unnecessary charging
2: Make sure the cost structure is time based to stop people hogging the charge points
3: Add a second FCP to each FCP location so two vehicles can charge at once


There really are two options. Implement the above and fix the network, or keep bumbling along as we have been with a free network.

Dardania

ELM327 wrote: »

Dardania wrote: »

Why - how many km would that get you? And how many km would the equivalent petrol or diesel car cost?
The EV will always come out cheaper, particularly when people charge at home mainly.

Taking 60c/kWh.
Generally I get around 125-170 wh/km, other more inefficient EVs are at >200 wh/km.
That's about 4-5km per kWh, or 60c per 4-5km.
Approximately 13c per km.

Okay, and in comparison, I recall paying E11.6 per 100km for my not particularly efficient Ford Focus - so around 11c/100km. Let's round that down to 8c to allow for comparisons with more modern diesels.
Int he ICE example, you pay that price, always. Whereas with an EV, you only pay the 13c per km if you're driving long distance (and the rest is much cheaper home rates). Overall, you're still far better off with an EV compared to the alternative.

NIMAN

creedp wrote: »

No point incentivising more EV's onto the road if they can't be charged in a reliable and timely manner. Otherwise we will continue to have the current position where many people will only contemplate an EV as a second runaround car while maintaining the 'diesel' for longer journeys. Look at the Tesla model, invest in the infrastructure first and the demand will follow.

I still think incentives have a massive part to play. And if you have something that people aren't buying into, you simply have to incentivise it more (imho)

Remember that the majority of charging is done at home, so isn't free. I do 100% of my charging at home. I have only used a public charger 4 times in 9 months of ownership (admittedly the EV is our 2nd car).

ELM327

bipedalhumanoid wrote: »

Free charging isn't helping, it is actively hurting EV adoption. It is the cause of the network being so poorly maintained, which gives EV driving a bad reputation.

Far from suggesting we expand the network from its current state, where we have approximately one CP for every three BEVs on the road, the EU recommendations suggest we should have one for every ten.

Can you imagine a government that has already admitted it is worried about lost fuel excise money — and that through its actions has shown it is only willing to do the bare minimum to "encourage" EV adoption — actively spending more money to exceed the EU recommendations by even more than it already has?

I can't.

The current network is more than adequate with a couple of small adjustments:
1: Make it costs more to charge there than at home so people stop cloggging up the network with unnecessary charging
2: Make sure the cost structure is time based to stop people hogging the charge points
3: Add a second FCP to each FCP location so two vehicles can charge at once


There really are two options. Implement the above and fix the network, or keep bumbling along as we have been with a free network.

Completely agree with everything here.
Seriously.... this post is written exactly what I wanted to say. Scary.

Dardania wrote: »

Okay, and in comparison, I recall paying E11.6 per 100km for my not particularly efficient Ford Focus - so around 11c/100km. Let's round that down to 8c to allow for comparisons with more modern diesels.
Int he ICE example, you pay that price, always. Whereas with an EV, you only pay the 13c per km if you're driving long distance (and the rest is much cheaper home rates). Overall, you're still far better off with an EV compared to the alternative.

But no one will buy an EV if that;s the cost. And we'll be stuck with the EU emissions fines year after year.

DrPhilG

The issue of costs at FCPs with a 5x per kWh charge is as much about perception as anything. People don't ask about the overall cost and the fact that they will probably (depending on their circumstances) charge mostly at home on a night rate tariff.

If FCP costs are more expensive than equivalent range in an ICE, people will scoff at the thought of buying a more expensive car, having to consider where you can charge, and then also paying more per km to charge it.

The only requirement for public charging figures at this point is for it to be more than home charging. 25c per kWh would be fine as that's about 3x night rate or 1.5x day rate. That would make a 10%-80% charge around €4.

The 3 questions I get asked about EVs in order are:
1 - range
2 - charge times
3 - charge costs

When I answer number 1 I get a screwed up face, not impressed. Answer 2 (80% in around 30-40 minutes) gets a softening of the sneer. Answer 3 (free for now) gets raised eyebrows and that glazed look that tells me they are doing the math.

If number 3 answer was "about €13 for a 70% charge, then that combined with answer 1 would kill the conversation stone dead.

It doesn't matter that a home charge from 10% to 100% costs me less than €1.50, they focus on the worst case scenario.

Dardania

ELM327 wrote: »

Dardania wrote: »

Okay, and in comparison, I recall paying E11.6 per 100km for my not particularly efficient Ford Focus - so around 11c/100km. Let's round that down to 8c to allow for comparisons with more modern diesels.
Int he ICE example, you pay that price, always. Whereas with an EV, you only pay the 13c per km if you're driving long distance (and the rest is much cheaper home rates). Overall, you're still far better off with an EV compared to the alternative.

But no one will buy an EV if that;s the cost. And we'll be stuck with the EU emissions fines year after year.

It's not the cost - it's a small fraction of the cost. 
Really simplified / rough / unrealistic example: If I charge up 365 times in a year - 350 times at home at 15c/kwh and 15 times at a FCP at 60c/kwh.
My combined total is: (350 * 30 * 0.15) + (15 * 30 * 0.6) = E1575 + E270 = E1845. 
To drive say 64,411km using your 170wh/km figure
Whereas with a diesel that costs say 8c/km that same 64,411km would cost E5152 total.
You're still coming out far better, and the cost for the FCPs is more adequately related to the actual cost of providing them.
Look at NIMAN's post before yours, where they note they've only used the public network 4 times in 9 months- all other charging is at home

Padraig Mor

bipedalhumanoid wrote: »

The current network is more than adequate with a couple of small adjustments:
1: Make it costs more to charge there than at home so people stop cloggging up the network with unnecessary charging
.

I don't agree. People abuse the charging network because it's free. It doesn't need to be more expensive than home to stop hogging, just the same price - why would someone hang around charging, or go out of the way to charge, if they save no money over charging at home? Charging should be linked to your home electricity bill at the same price - charge in the street and simply add the kW to your home bill. AFAIK the infrastructure is there to enable this, but of course the CER have ruled that EV drivers are not the 'buyers' of electricity at chargers!

bipedalhumanoid

Padraig Mor wrote: »

I don't agree. People abuse the charging network because it's free. It doesn't need to be more expensive than home to stop hogging, just the same price - why would someone hang around charging, or go out of the way to charge, if they save no money over charging at home? Charging should be linked to your home electricity bill at the same price - charge in the street and simply add the kW to your home bill. AFAIK the infrastructure is there to enable this, but of course the CER have ruled that EV drivers are not the 'buyers' of electricity at chargers!

As you alluded to, there are legislative barriers to them charging for electricity. Also, there's the entire aspect of my argument that you ignored, which is that the inability of the ESB to effectively fund the network is damaging the reputation of EVs. Charging for electricity alone does nothing to fund the maintenance of the network.

creedp

Cloudhopper wrote: »

Charge per kWh.
3 times domestic rate for SCPs and 5 times domestic for FCPs.
If the car finishes charging, start charging for occupying the spot at either the next top of or half past the hour. 5 or 10 euros per 30 minutes to discourage dumping cars at chargers like it's done nowadays.
The car and charger communicate, there is unique information to clearly and uniquely identify the car that is plugged in.
If a non plugged EV is found at a charger, take a picture of it showing the number plate and a one time fee of 120 euros (akin to a clamping fee) is applied to their account.

Mandate that 60 to 80% of all revenue generated have to be used to maintain and expand the network and that no chargers are allowed to be older than 4 years.

And all of a sudden you have A LOT of available charging spaces and a working network.
simples.

Way too expensive .. a common theme for Irish public policy ... if something doesn't work or is not fit for purpose we'll design a solution that is punitive to the end user .. in this case if the charging framework is crap lets not improve it but instead make it so difficult / expensive for the end user that demand will collapse .. yet again job done.

Shefwedfan

This thread comes around every so often and all it turns into is a load of electric car users looking for more hand outs....

Electric cars are not the answer to Irelands problems. Putting people onto public transport is the answer.

I know this is electric car forum but seriously people need to stop looking at themselves and actually think of the country. That is if you are actually concerned about the environment.

Putting in a train/bus/tram system into major cities to remove 10,20,30k cars off the road is the answer

So my option
1. Continue with current incentives for electric cars...push manufacturers like Kia to make sure they offer EV options
2. Make the charging system payable, but reasonable. Fine any user that hogs a fast charger, After 50 mins they get a ten euro fine every 30 mins.
3. Ban taxis from bus lanes
4. Close city centre to traffic. Have single bus lanes and the rest with access to bikes...in Dublin close Phoenix Park to traffic apart from bus
5. Fill roof landscape with Solar PV, any access electricity can be sold into European grid
6. Move diesel to Agri/Commercial/Private. Private diesel to move to same cost as petrol by upping the tax over a 3/4 year period
7. Install large banks of slow chargers in destination train stations like M3 Parkway etc. Slow chargers to not include fine after 50 mins
8. Large shopping centre, blanchardstown, get incentive to install large banks of slow charge points

They are just a starting point...In my view better than filling the bus lanes with a load of electric cars....

Padraig Mor

bipedalhumanoid wrote: »

As you alluded to, there are legislative barriers to them charging for electricity. Also, there's the entire aspect of my argument that you ignored, which is that the inability of the ESB to effectively fund the network is damaging the reputation of EVs. Charging for electricity alone does nothing to fund the maintenance of the network.

The CER looked at a number of options for the charging network and went with the (IMHO) predetermined worst option. Having EV owners pay for the maintenance of the network themselves, at least for the next X number of years, is lunacy and something that will kill EVs stone dead - I ran the figures a year or so ago and AFAIR you would be looking at each of the current EV owners paying approx €1500 per annum for maintenance - just not a runner. The best option would have been to fund the maintenance of the network (a small sum in relative terms) through the levies imposed on electricity bills (which pay for, e.g. street lighting), and for EV drivers to pay for the electricity they consume on their home bill, as above.

creedp

NIMAN wrote: »

I still think incentives have a massive part to play. And if you have something that people aren't buying into, you simply have to incentivise it more (imho)

Remember that the majority of charging is done at home, so isn't free. I do 100% of my charging at home. I have only used a public charger 4 times in 9 months of ownership (admittedly the EV is our 2nd car).

I'm have no objection to charging for use of public chargers ... my main point is the charging infrastructure is substandard and this needs to be rectified quickly before the increased number of EVs on the road overwhelm it. The more EVs are incentivised the more 'not fit for purpose' the public charging network becomes. 2 primary solutions - make it more difficult to use the network so demand falls or improve the network to cater for the demand other incentives will induce. Which is easier to implement?

ec18

Personally I think the two main things that inhibit EV adoption are 1) range anxiety and 2) the cost of a decent sized car.

This is a very quick comparison but if i look at carzone for cars under 15K essentially my only option is a leaf or ZOE, which isn't enough choice for most people

ELM327

Shefwedfan wrote: »

This thread comes around every so often and all it turns into is a load of electric car users looking for more hand outs....

I'm not... I'm looking for the opposite.

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Electric cars are not the answer to Irelands problems. Putting people onto public transport is the answer.

Public transport is not the answer.

creedp

Dardania wrote: »

Okay, and in comparison, I recall paying E11.6 per 100km for my not particularly efficient Ford Focus - so around 11c/100km. Let's round that down to 8c to allow for comparisons with more modern diesels.
Int he ICE example, you pay that price, always. Whereas with an EV, you only pay the 13c per km if you're driving long distance (and the rest is much cheaper home rates). Overall, you're still far better off with an EV compared to the alternative.

I wonder are petrol drivers asking the question why the diesel driver is getting a 10c fuel duty reduction given that diesel cars are inherently more economical to drive that petrol cars? Even without this reduction wouldn't diesel drivers be far better compared to petrol drivers?

Shefwedfan

ELM327 wrote: »

I'm not... I'm looking for the opposite.


Public transport is not the answer.

You already asked for access to bus lanes, free road tax and free tolls...Sounds very much like a hand out to me

How is public transport not the answer?

Filling the road with cars is the answer?

ELM327

Shefwedfan wrote: »

You already asked for access to bus lanes, free road tax and free tolls...Sounds very much like a hand out to me

How is public transport not the answer?

Filling the road with cars is the answer?

The Norwegian solution is the answer.
Otherwise we all (and that includes you, me and every other taxpayer) has to pay 600 million next year in fines with the prospect of more to come.


Public transport is a step back. We now own cars. I'm not prepared to surrender my liberty and ride the bus like a schmuck.

creedp

ELM327 wrote: »

The Norwegian solution is the answer.
Otherwise we all (and that includes you, me and every other taxpayer) has to pay 600 million next year in fines with the prospect of more to come.


Public transport is a step back. We now own cars. I'm not prepared to surrender my liberty and ride the bus like a schmuck.

Ah now ... everyone who uses public transport is a schmuck? At least Thatcher only called people over 40 losers for using public transport!!

Dardania

creedp wrote: »

Dardania wrote: »

Okay, and in comparison, I recall paying E11.6 per 100km for my not particularly efficient Ford Focus - so around 11c/100km. Let's round that down to 8c to allow for comparisons with more modern diesels.
Int he ICE example, you pay that price, always. Whereas with an EV, you only pay the 13c per km if you're driving long distance (and the rest is much cheaper home rates). Overall, you're still far better off with an EV compared to the alternative.

I wonder are petrol drivers asking the question why the diesel driver is getting a 10c fuel duty reduction given that diesel cars are inherently more economical to drive that petrol cars? Even without this reduction wouldn't diesel drivers be far better compared to petrol drivers?

On this metric, yes, but on other metrics petrol might better. Maintenance on a diesel is more intense (costly)
To answer your first question, I doubt the typical driver knows how much of their fuel costs are duty or not, in order to compare the two fuels. To be honest, I only ever even consider the duty as a portion of it when the Budget is announced as they discuss the topic on the news, or when I travel abroad to low fuel cost places like USA or Russia.

ELM327

creedp wrote: »

Ah now ... everyone who uses public transport is a schmuck? At least Thatcher only called people over 40 losers for using public transport!!

No. But life is about progressing forwards
As a society we are used to freedom of travel. Why should we surrender this?

creedp

Dardania wrote: »

On this metric, yes, but on other metrics petrol might better. Maintenance on a diesel is more intense (costly)
To answer your first question, I doubt the typical driver knows how much of their fuel costs are duty or not, in order to compare the two fuels. To be honest, I only ever even consider the duty as a portion of it when the Budget is announced as they discuss the topic on the news, or when I travel abroad to low fuel cost places like USA or Russia.

They may not know the value of the fuel duty discount now but they sure would work it out pretty quickly if it was removed in the morning. I'd be fairly sure it would accelerate the current trend back to petrol

creedp

ELM327 wrote: »

No. But life is about progressing forwards
As a society we are used to freedom of travel. Why should we surrender this?

Agree from a purely individualistic perspective I not only want a car I want a supercar and a yacht and a ... however, all of this is not optimal for society at large. This is where Government's are supposed to come in and ensure that the rights of society at large are not subordinated by the individual's rights.

Of course in our capitalistic system these rules only apply to the common Joe/Jane while the high flyers can afford anything they want

Shefwedfan

ELM327 wrote: »

No. But life is about progressing forwards
As a society we are used to freedom of travel. Why should we surrender this?

:p:p:p:p

Says it all......

:p:p:p:p

No wonder the country if f**ked

ELM327

creedp wrote: »

Agree from a purely individualistic perspective I not only want a car I want a supercar and a yacht and a ... however, all of this is not optimal for society at large. This is where Government's are supposed to come in and ensure that the rights of society at large are not subordinated by the individual's rights.

Of course in our capitalistic system these rules only apply to the common Joe/Jane while the high flyers can afford anything they want

But you are free to get education, get a better job, win the lotto, anything and you can buy those too.
Capitalism encourages us to aim for progress.

Shefwedfan wrote: »

:p:p:p:p

Says it all......

:p:p:p:p

No wonder the country if f**ked

Country hasn't been "f**ked" for years now, recovery is passed and the economy is booming. I heard in my car on the way in this morning on newstalk, one commentator issuing warnings of overheating the economy based on construction, like we had in 03-04.

Shefwedfan

ELM327 wrote: »

The Norwegian solution is the answer.
Otherwise we all (and that includes you, me and every other taxpayer) has to pay 600 million next year in fines with the prospect of more to come.


Public transport is a step back. We now own cars. I'm not prepared to surrender my liberty and ride the bus like a schmuck.

22% of travel in Norway is on foot, 4% on bike and 8% on public transport

10%(which is up in 2017) is car....

That the Norwegian way...

Maybe do some reseach.....also Norway doesn't give electric cars access to all bus lanes, their is select bus lanes.

If you didn't notice Ireland also allows access to bus lanes. Outside of rush hour.

liamog

To use an e-Golf vs a diesel golf as an example for an average 17000km driver.

Diesel Golf 3.9l/100km@€1.349/l, total €894
e-Golf 12.7kWh/100km@€0.35/kWh, total €755

I'd save €10 per month, I'll probably just go ahead and buy the diesel car. At 20c/kWh I'd save €40 a month, for that I'd consider it worth making the switch.

samih

Public transport in urban areas is the answer, i.e. 90 passengers on single double-decker instead of a kilometre of traffic jam but it doesn't apply to rural Ireland in most cases.

The public transport will need to try harder, i.e. buses that connect directly from A to the nearest urban centre instead of calling in every house on the way and taking 90 minutes for 20 km. Even on the bicycle it takes less than an hour to cover 20 km, ffs. If the prioritised bus took 30 minutes and the car 60 minutes for the distance many more folk would actually use buses.

Why does every fecking 66 bus from Maynooth have to also collect passengers from Leixlip, Lucan, Chapelizod when they actually pretty much fill up early on the route? Just stay on the motorway I say and the same for the other towns instead of slow one every 15 minutes that will take you 3 times as long as a direct one would take. Most of the people are either heading to Dublin City Centre or are going to change in Dublin to a different public transport. Just have an hourly direct express service from any town with fixed pickup points (but exit on demand on every stop on the route) and make sure there is plenty of free or cheap park and ride space at these towns (with plenty of chargers for people that arrive from other cities by car). Even if you had to walk from nearest motorway stop to your destination you would actually save time as opposed to calling to every single house on the way. To cater for the people traveling between smallish town you could keep a very limited number of old style 66 around.

A bit off topic, but he chargers were mentioned.

Shefwedfan

liamog wrote: »

To use an e-Golf vs a diesel golf as an example for an average 17000km driver.

Diesel Golf 3.9l/100km@€1.349/l, total €894
e-Golf 12.7kWh/100km@€0.35/kWh, total €755

I'd save €10 per month, I'll probably just go ahead and buy the diesel car. At 20c/kWh I'd save €40 a month, for that I'd consider it worth making the switch.

The diesel Golf will on its bum get anywhere close to 3.9l/100km

Most electric cars are used in city so at best 6 but probably circa 7...

My Galaxy, Qashqai, SMAX, Golf etc all hoovered around 7-8...the A6 was down to 5 when doing long distance but 9+ in city....

creedp

ELM327 wrote: »

But you are free to get education, get a better job, win the lotto, anything and you can buy those too.
Capitalism encourages us to aim for progress..

Sure but in progressive urban societies private cars are gradually being frozen out in order to improve the lifestyle of all. Doesn't mean you won't be able to use a car but your freedom to do so in future in urban settings will be severely restricted. That's progress which is required and appropriate because societies are better educated and wealthier than ever before.