Random EV thoughts.....

ELM327

MJohnston wrote: »

Is the Nissan network actually a closed one or just honour-system closed?

I went into Frank Keane VW Liffey Valley the other week for some enquiries and I saw a couple of fast chargers there (none of them on any of the charging map apps btw). So I plugged my i3 in without asking anyone at all, it worked, for free, right away.

Had I just sat in the car, I very much doubt anyone would have stopped me, or even looked in my general direction. Are the Nissan chargers any different?

I tried to charge my Tesla at the Nissan dealer in Airside but it didnt work with my chademo adapter. I've charged without issue using the adapter before and since.

slave1

Could it be the Verison number, CHAdeMO adapters were all the rage a few years back as Tesla piggy backed on Nissan's network and other CHAdoMe charge points before their Supercharger network was up and going, US especially then the UK
Or maybe that Nissan dealer charge point can exclude other makes?

garo

unkel wrote: »

I believe market works best (within a legal framework)

The problem in Ireland is not that things were left to the "market". It's the opposite. A semi-state company installed and controls the public charging network, funded mostly from tax payers money. Their chargers were free to use for many years. This is completely the opposite of how a free market works. That is the problem.

Read up on this history of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_Railway. How the market took a public utility and ran it to the ground. Or the way Uber is currently destroying taxi networks heaping misery upon their employees - nay contract workers. Or the British Rail privatization.

I think it is a mistake to say that market works best or central planning works best. The true answer is - it depends.

It is fine to let Tesla have its exclusive supercharger network IMO. But not at the cost of having a poorer charging network for everyone else. What if ESB says we can't put anything else in this rest area because Tesla has taken up all our capacity? That's crowding out competitors isn't it?

AndyBoBandy

garo wrote: »

What if ESB says we can't put anything else in this rest area because Tesla has taken up all our capacity? That's crowding out competitors isn't it?

but Tesla didn't really take it did they?

They asked, and the ESB gave it to them..... (and presumably Tesla paid the market rate for the works undertaken)

Surely it would have been prudent of ESB to install the additional capacity they would need in the future while the Tesla work was being carried out? i.e. piggy back on the work Tesla are paying for to minimise the cost to them of future upgrade works...

garo

Well there are leccy substation constraints. If ESB had said no to Tesla I am sure many here would complain about ESB foot-dragging

liamog

AndyBoBandy wrote: »

Surely it would have been prudent of ESB to install the additional capacity they would need in the future while the Tesla work was being carried out? i.e. piggy back on the work Tesla are paying for to minimise the cost to them of future upgrade works...

This is where good planning should come in, the NTA and CRU should be making plans to supply all motorway services with high capacity grid connections. I wonder if any thought about this has gone into the North South Interconnector project.

AndyBoBandy

garo wrote: »

Well there are leccy substation constraints. If ESB had said no to Tesla I am sure many here would complain about ESB foot-dragging

Pi$$ or get off the pot.

ESB were not pi$$ing, and Tesla were stood there with cock in hand ready to go so...

And if I remember correctly (or just look on Plugshare), ESB were in Castlebellingham long before Tesla ever showed up there, and ESB actually reduced the number of chargers they had at Castlebellingham, so again, hardly Tesla's fault..

All I see is Tesla & Ionity doing what ESB were subsidised to do by installing actual hubs.......

garo

Oh I am not talking about this specific instance. I have a lot of gripes with ESB myself. I am just saying as a matter of principle there should be some oversight that makes sure the first mover does not crowd the rest of the field out.

AndyBoBandy

garo wrote: »

I am just saying as a matter of principle there should be some oversight that makes sure the first mover does not crowd the rest of the field out.

Very true, but when the first mover is the only mover, what's the point......

And as it happens, In almost every site where Tesla/Ionity are based, the ESB were there first!!

Should Tesla/Ionity just sit around waiting for the ESB hubs to arrive before they can go around and pick up the scraps?

garo

Absolutely not. That's not what I said. I'm saying we should make sure ESB doesn't get a chance to crowd out others. Ditto Tesla or Ionity.

We could really do with a company like Fastned here.

AndyBoBandy

I don't think there's any fear ESB will crowd out anyone in fairness. Their idea of a hub is a 150kW twin head unit beside a 50kW triple head unit, so at best you'd get 4 cars charging at once*

Of course for 4 cars to charge at once, one will have to be a Zoe (or any other car using the AC43), and another will have to be a chademo Leaf or Outlander Phev.

AndyBoBandy

liamog wrote: »

This is where good planning should come in, the NTA and CRU should be making plans to supply all motorway services with high capacity grid connections.

We were in the position only a few years ago where we didn't even have any motorway services, so they were all mostly built from scratch, so they all should have been built with the required grid connections for future mass EV usage..

but then you remember this is Ireland....

build it first - build it cheap, then build it right the 2nd time

liamog

You forgot at least 4 sets of consultant reports pointing out how it should be done, then a final consultant pointing out that too much was spent on consultants.

AndyBoBandy

liamog wrote: »

You forgot at least 4 sets of consultant reports pointing out how it should be done, then a final consultant pointing out that too much was spent on consultants.

Followed by the final consultants findings to "Just install more AC22's in Tesco carparks"

liamog

AndyBoBandy wrote: »

Followed by the final consultants findings to "Just install more AC22's in Tesco carparks"

I thought that fell under the "build it cheap" heading

AndyBoBandy

With the revenue the AC22's are now generating, we should get a new 150kW unit every 5-7 years or so..... but first we've to wait about 2-3 years for the AC 22's to pay for themselves first.....



I shouldn't even be getting so worked up about this, as I'll do 99% of charging at home, and then driving a Tesla, between superchargers (current & planned) & Tesla Destination chargers, most trips outside the Pale will be taken care of (Ionity/EasyGo/eCars/eCars AC's as backup's if I'm really stuck), but I genuinely want to see a million or more EV's on the road...

I know the electricity still needs to be generated somewhere, but Gas Turbines are a hell of a lot cleaner than petrol/diesel cars (and gas turbine stations generally not located in city centres), and then you have ever more green produced electricity coming online, as well as hopefully a big home generation sector about to kick off....

unkel

garo wrote: »

It is fine to let Tesla have its exclusive supercharger network IMO. But not at the cost of having a poorer charging network for everyone else. What if ESB says we can't put anything else in this rest area because Tesla has taken up all our capacity? That's crowding out competitors isn't it?

Now that is the real role for the ESB and what they should solely concentrate on: to maintain our grid and to make sure it can handle future growth.

They shouldn't be involved in installing and maintaining public chargers. And certainly not if they can only do this with subsidies from the tax payer

unkel

AndyBoBandy wrote: »

I shouldn't even be getting so worked up about this, as I'll do 99% of charging at home, and then driving a Tesla, between superchargers (current & planned) & Tesla Destination chargers, most trips outside the Pale will be taken care of (Ionity/EasyGo/eCars/eCars AC's as backup's if I'm really stuck), but I genuinely want to see a million or more EV's on the road...

I'm the same, I don't need the public fast charging network at all. In fact I couldn't even use it if I wanted to

It's good to be passionate about this though and it is good to make sure the tax taken from our hard work is used wisely. And not just to give state employees fat salaries and pensions.

Cyrus

unkel wrote: »

Now that is the real role for the ESB and what they should solely concentrate on: to maintain our grid and to make sure it can handle future growth.

They shouldn't be involved in installing and maintaining public chargers. And certainly not if they can only do this with subsidies from the tax payer

thats eirgrid

garo

AndyBoBandy wrote: »

I shouldn't even be getting so worked up about this, as I'll do 99% of charging at home, and then driving a Tesla, between superchargers (current & planned) & Tesla Destination chargers, most trips outside the Pale will be taken care of (Ionity/EasyGo/eCars/eCars AC's as backup's if I'm really stuck), but I genuinely want to see a million or more EV's on the road...

I know the electricity still needs to be generated somewhere, but Gas Turbines are a hell of a lot cleaner than petrol/diesel cars (and gas turbine stations generally not located in city centres), and then you have ever more green produced electricity coming online, as well as hopefully a big home generation sector about to kick off....

I hear you. We could just put up more wind turbines and solar. Even without, gas turbines are 55-60% efficient vs most ICE engines that are 20-30%. And that's before all the NOx in city centres.

AndyBoBandy

garo wrote: »

I hear you. We could just put up more wind turbines

The Arklow offshore wind farm (7 nautical miles offshore), of which there are 6 units, was originally planned to be 200 units at 3.2MW each. That farm should be completed. (at the time those 3.2MW units were the largest offshore units available, so Ireland was the test bed for them).

Then over on the west coast, go about 12-15 nautical miles offshore (so they won't be seen and ruin the locals pretty views), and install a 2,000 turbine wind farm, and as long as the wind blows, 100% of our energy will be green/renewable (with about 1,500-2,000MW additional generated that we export to France/UK/whoever wants it).

Then encourage/subsidise tidal energy (granted this technology is still in its early stages, but it's gaining lots of traction). We have some very strong tidal flows in Ireland, and the tide rises and falls twice a day without fail, so it's guaranteed generation. Utilise it. Billions of tons of water coming and going twice a day......

Subsidise Solar farms. They are popping up all over the U.K. lately.

All the free energy is there (Ireland really couldn't be better placed in this regard), we're just terrible at harnessing it.

Cyrus

AndyBoBandy wrote: »

The Arklow offshore wind farm (7 nautical miles offshore), of which there are 6 units, was originally planned to be 200 units at 3.2MW each. That farm should be completed. (at the time those 3.2MW units were the largest offshore units available, so Ireland was the test bed for them).

Then over on the west coast, go about 12-15 nautical miles offshore (so they won't be seen and ruin the locals pretty views), and install a 2,000 turbine wind farm, and as long as the wind blows, 100% of our energy will be green/renewable (with about 1,500-2,000MW additional generated that we export to France/UK/whoever wants it).

Then encourage/subsidise tidal energy (granted this technology is still in its early stages, but it's gaining lots of traction). We have some very strong tidal flows in Ireland, and the tide rises and falls twice a day without fail, so it's guaranteed generation. Utilise it. Billions of tons of water coming and going twice a day......

Subsidise Solar farms. They are popping up all over the U.K. lately.

All the free energy is there (Ireland really couldn't be better placed in this regard), we're just terrible at harnessing it.

It would all be done already if it was economically viable , it’s not , or at least it wasn’t 10/12 years ago when I was doing financial models for these kinds of projects.

garo

Prices have come down dramatically in the last 10-12 years. Solar is about 85% cheaper and offshore wind about 35-40% if not more.

AndyBoBandy

Cyrus wrote: »

It would all be done already if it was economically viable , it’s not , or at least it wasn’t 10/12 years ago when I was doing financial models for these kinds of projects.

So then we are not subsidising or incentivising enough private companies to come and do this for us... and we pay how much per year in EU fines for not meeting our emissions targets?? (it might be small change in comparison to the cost of such mega projects, but its money we might as well just be burning in a stove!!),

If you've ever flown to Liverpool/Manchester you'll see the hundreds and hundreds of offshore wind turbines off the coast of North Wales... a farm like that (even half of a farm like that) would be sufficient for our entire energy needs (in the right conditions). Then you have the fast start gas plants available to start when wind generation drops off..

Cyrus

AndyBoBandy wrote: »

So then we are not subsidising or incentivising enough private companies to come and do this for us... and we pay how much per year in EU fines for not meeting our emissions targets?? (it might be small change in comparison to the cost of such mega projects, but its money we might as well just be burning in a stove!!),

If you've ever flown to Liverpool/Manchester you'll see the hundreds and hundreds of offshore wind turbines off the coast of North Wales... a farm like that (even half of a farm like that) would be sufficient for our entire energy needs (in the right conditions). Then you have the fast start gas plants available to start when wind generation drops off..

again depends on the economics now, they will have changed a lot since i looked at it, but at what point does a subsidy makes sense, the thing has to wash its own face at some point, and those CCGT plants cost a billion each as well, the ESB built a lovely one in Manchester

slave1

As a Finance head I totally get the economics/financial argument.

But it's about more than money cost, what cost on depletion of finite resources, what cost on pollution, what cost on health impact?

Water John

We never do whole cost.
It really would need to be a joint Govn't project along with private enterprise, with connector also to both countries.

unkel

Wind electricity is by far the cheapest form of electricity generation now and Ireland has the best location for wind ..................................... in the wurrrllld

We need to produce 200-300% of the electricity we use now with wind over the next decade or two. Excess to be sold via inter connectors. And shortage to be bought via inter connectors.

But that's for another forum

Linky

garo

https://www.rechargenews.com/transition/offshore-wind-power-price-plunges-by-a-third-in-a-year-bnef/2-1-692944

78E/MWh is bang in line with the latest CCGT plants. And you don't need to worry about importing gas. Don't need to build additional pipeline infrastructure or worry about gas prices going up 5 years from now.

kennethsmyth

ELM327 wrote: »

I tried to charge my Tesla at the Nissan dealer in Airside but it didnt work with my chademo adapter. I've charged without issue using the adapter before and since.

A tad cheeky Elm?