Jaguar I-Pace EV400 Forum banner

21 - 40 of 61 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
268 Posts
EA isn't designed for cars charging at 80kW. It's designed for cars charging at 150, 320kw. It charges by the minute so becomes much more affordable that faster the car can charge. They're building the network for tomorrow, not today.
In some states only utilities can charge per kWh. Others must charge by the minute. In those states Tesla charges one per minute rate if the charge rate is over 60kW and 50% of that if it is under 60kW.

In other states like California the provider has the choice of charging either per kWh or per minute. At least thus far EA has chosen to charge per minute everywhere, and the same rate regardless of whether you are connected to a 150kW feed or a 350kW feed. I expect that to change once there are more EA stations live and more EVs using them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
141 Posts
In some states only utilities can charge per kWh. Others must charge by the minute. In those states Tesla charges one per minute rate if the charge rate is over 60kW and 50% of that if it is under 60kW.

In other states like California the provider has the choice of charging either per kWh or per minute. At least thus far EA has chosen to charge per minute everywhere, and the same rate regardless of whether you are connected to a 150kW feed or a 350kW feed. I expect that to change once there are more EA stations live and more EVs using them.
I also think its by design to charge per minute. They want to discourage slow charging cars from using them as they will take more time to charge.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
121 Posts
I also think its by design to charge per minute. They want to discourage slow charging cars from using them as they will take more time to charge.
Certainly makes sense with Tesla Superchargers, at least from Tesla's viewpoint. You get half the charge rate once another car pulls up to the other supercharger sharing your feed. That gets Tesla double the revenue at no additional cost to them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
427 Posts
First long trip requiring charge stops from Orlando to Ft. Lauderdale

Had an opportunity to drive from the Orlando, FL area to Fort Lauderdale, FL. There was enough time to allow for charging mishaps along the way. Definitely ran into one.
The total one way distance was 202 miles. I had a full charge (100%) with an estimate 217 mile range based upon my normal heavier highway usage in my daily commute.

Since I'd be driving between 75 and 85 mph along the way, I didn't expect to get 200 miles on the charge and planned for a mid-point stop in Vero Beach where there is a 50Kw EVgo charger named "Antonio". Was planning to just add 30 to 50 miles of charge to get me comfortably to Ft. Lauderdale. Didn't work out as planned. The fast EVgo charger never got past the "Communicating with Vehicle" stage. Called customer service and they tried resetting the charging station. I've used EVgo a couple of times in other locations with no problem. So I drove the car to the nearest Jaguar dealer (Treasure Coast Jaguar), where they gave me enough charge to comfortably finish the trip to Ft. Lauderdale.

While in Ft. Lauderdale, I found another 50Kw EVgo charger and was able to bring the car up to 50% charge for some local driving. Before the final trip back, I charged the car to 80% or about 180 miles. I had planned to stop and try Vero Beach again, but had a plan B and plan C location just in case. Got to Vero Beach, and same problem. EVgo 50kw charger "Antonio" could not complete the communicating with vehicle. So I'm sitting there with an estimate 27 miles on the GOM and two options that were about 30 miles away. Decided to back track to the Jaguar dealer again. They charged me up enough, after 90 minutes to finish the trip back home. Got to the Jaguar dealer with 1 mile on the GOM.

For me, this was a science experiment to understand my options on the longer drives. For my wife, it was high anxiety. Learned a couple of things.
1) Navigation system found fewer charging stations than Plugshare. Plugshare really seems to be my go-to as there are a number of different charge providers.
2) On this route, there were a number of Tesla Superchargers, but only one active 50Kw+ charger that was operational. There are two 150kw expected to go in from Electrify America, but nothing useful yet. For the next 6 months to a year, Tesla wins via charging.
3) Even chargers on the same network might not work. I suspect that Antonio was a newer charger and perhaps different software version. If an update for the I-Pace does anything for the charging system, I plan a trip back to see Antonio in Vero Beach.
4) Treasure Coast Jaguar was great. They even offered to wash the car before I left the second time. However, they have very little experience with the I-Pace. The dealer didn't show up on Plugshare or the Navigation system. I just looked up Jaguar to see if any were near. The Jaguar dealer doesn't have their Chargers publicly accessible like they do a the Nissan dealer that was next door, which may be why they didn't show on Plugshare.
5) Lastly, my wife doesn't want to join me on the next science experiment. I'll need to make sure the route has adequate stations in advance, otherwise, we take the RAV4 :wink2:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
548 Posts
Discussion Starter #25
Sbingham60, I'm heading to Orlando again this weekend - 260 mi round trip from Sarasota - this time with the whole family. Hyatt Regency next door has Level 2 charging, but my fallback will be those *fantastic* EA stations 7 mi away at the Florida Mall! No science experiment for me. I'll gladly pay the EA kwH premium for reliability and speed... and shouldn't get much spousal pushback given that, unlike a Jag dealer, the mall has food and shopping. :wink2:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
268 Posts
Certainly makes sense with Tesla Superchargers, at least from Tesla's viewpoint. You get half the charge rate once another car pulls up to the other supercharger sharing your feed. That gets Tesla double the revenue at no additional cost to them.
It doesn't work that way:

- The car originally charging at the pair gets whatever they need until they finish. The 2nd car gets whatever is left over. Once the first car leaves the 2nd car now gets whatever they need. This paired sharing is eliminated with the V3 Supercharger architecture

- If your charging rate is less than 60kW then you pay half as much per minute which seems fair
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
427 Posts
Sbingham60, I'm heading to Orlando again this weekend - 260 mi round trip from Sarasota - this time with the whole family. Hyatt Regency next door has Level 2 charging, but my fallback will be those *fantastic* EA stations 7 mi away at the Florida Mall! No science experiment for me. I'll gladly pay the EA kwH premium for reliability and speed... and shouldn't get much spousal pushback given that, unlike a Jag dealer, the mall has food and shopping. :wink2:
Yes, charging at a mall would have eased the tension. If my round trip south had been 230 miles, there also would not have been a problem. The 400+ roundtrip was the test.

I've used the chargers at the Florida Mall also and find they work well. Hope we get more locations along the major routes in Florida soon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
427 Posts
Heard back from EVgo customer support last night. I had sent them details about chargers that worked and the one that did not. They replied that they will repair "Antonio" and it should be fine soon. There appear to be two different 50kw charger models in Central and South Florida for EVGo.
- The ones that worked for the I-Pace are ABB Terra 53 CHAdeMO and CCS
- Antonio, the one that didn't work is BTC EVFC / CHAdeMO and CCS Combo

There is another BTC model in Lakeland that I'll try out in a couple of weeks. It's within a 70 mile distance, so if it doesn't work, the round trip won't be a problem. I'll just recharge at home. Mostly I'm interested in seeing if there is a problem with a specific model or if the problem was just a coincidence.

All the EVGo fast charges in the Orlando area are the ABB Terra 53.
 

·
Premium Member
2019 I-Pace HSE - Borasco Grey
Joined
·
205 Posts
I thought I'd add to this informational thread and post the results a short experiment I ran this morning. Most of the DC chargers I see in Texas are only 50kw, so here's a short test I did trying to understand charge times on those before an upcoming road trip.

This was using a ChargePoint 50kw DC charger. The car was at 128 miles range when I started. I tracked miles instead of percentage since the result is more directly applicable to driving range in my head. I thought to start closely tracking times after a few minutes just as the car reported hitting 134 miles during the initial charge.

134 to 154 miles: 10.5 minutes (1.9 miles per minute)
154 to 174 miles: 10.5 minutes (1.9 miles per minute)
174 to 194 miles: 13.5 minutes and slowing quickly (1.5 miles per minute)

Looking at the time as a whole, I added 71 miles in 40 minutes for a rate of ~1.7 miles per minute on average.

The charge graph from ChargePoint is attached, the last drop at the end is from when I stopped the charge.

As expected, up to 80% the charge rate was pretty steady and started dropping off after that. The bottom line is that it looks like if I'm low on charge, then I can expect a charge rate of almost 2 miles per minute at a 50kw DC fast charged up until I hit 80% or so.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,494 Posts
There is an internet video comparing the charge rate of the 150kW large battery Model 3 vs the 120kW large battery Model 3. It's not much of a difference.
For a 45 minute CCS2 charge, the 84kW I-Pace adds 58.x kWh, and the 150kW M3 adds 60 kWh.

So the differences aren't as much as the numbers would imply.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
2,266 Posts
There is an internet video comparing the charge rate of the 150kW large battery Model 3 vs the 120kW large battery Model 3. It's not much of a difference.
For a 45 minute CCS2 charge, the 84kW I-Pace adds 58.x kWh, and the 150kW M3 adds 60 kWh.

So the differences aren't as much as the numbers would imply.
There's something wrong in that video. You can't have a higher rate of charging for a while, then the same rate, and then end up with the the same amount of charge added. It's possible that the result is correct, but if it is, the charging didn't happen at the rates they report.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
245 Posts
I thought I'd add to this informational thread and post the results a short experiment I ran this morning. Most of the DC chargers I see in Texas are only 50kw, so here's a short test I did trying to understand charge times on those before an upcoming road trip.

This was using a ChargePoint 50kw DC charger.

As expected, up to 80% the charge rate was pretty steady and started dropping off after that. The bottom line is that it looks like if I'm low on charge, then I can expect a charge rate of almost 2 miles per minute at a 50kw DC fast charged up until I hit 80% or so.



Had similar experience on EVGo in California; ~2 miles / minute <80% total charge.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
268 Posts
The Q1 report from Electrify America to the California Air Resources Board is out. I was disappointed to learn that due to costs and permitting issues EA is reducing the planned number of Cycle 1 locations in CA from 150-160 to 100-120. This is not good news for i-Pace, e-tron and Taycan owners (I have a deposit on a Taycan)
At this time, the cost to build Electrify America’s ultra-fast charging stations average more than 30% higher in California than in the rest of the nation. While many factors contribute to station costs, the additional burdens imposed by permitting – including costs to relocate and redesign stations repeatedly, to enclose power cabinets in stone enclosures, to provide accessibility consistent with California-specific guidelines, and to incorporate aesthetic requests of local jurisdictions such as screening and landscaping – appear to be the primary cause of these additional costs, along with higher labor costs. This higher cost per station necessarily means that California will receive fewer stations per dollar invested by Electrify America.

During Q1 Electrify America revised its planned station investments in Cycle 1 due to these factors, establishing a new goal of completing construction on 100-120 station sites. Electrify America also cancelled or placed on long-term hold planned stations in jurisdictions with onerous requirements and lengthy permitting timelines that could not be met within Cycle 1 timeframes and budget requirements, in order to focus resources on the stations that can feasibly be built. Electrify America also began evaluating alternative locations for Cycle 1 projects for which permits cannot be obtained consistent with AB 1236 best practice timelines.
https://elam-cms-assets.s3.amazonaws.com/inline-files/2019 Q1 Electrify America Report to CARB.PDF

EA is required to invest $200M in California as part of Cycle 1. In addition to DCFC they are also spending on J1772's for workplaces and apartment buildings, EV evangelism, and Sacramento as a "Green City" showplace with electric shuttle buses and shared cars.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
997 Posts
California has absofuckinglutely stupid laws about building. It's a crying shame. Building laws are massively abused, allowing horrible projects in one place and then preventing wonderful projects in others.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,494 Posts
The Q1 report from Electrify America to the California Air Resources Board is out. I was disappointed to learn that due to costs and permitting issues EA is reducing the planned number of Cycle 1 locations in CA from 150-160 to 100-120. This is not good news for i-Pace, e-tron and Taycan owners (I have a deposit on a Taycan)

https://elam-cms-assets.s3.amazonaws.com/inline-files/2019 Q1 Electrify America Report to CARB.PDF

EA is required to invest $200M in California as part of Cycle 1. In addition to DCFC they are also spending on J1772's for workplaces and apartment buildings, EV evangelism, and Sacramento as a "Green City" showplace with electric shuttle buses and shared cars.
VW did not offer enough bribes. California is one of the most corrupt states in the country. The entire government is for rent.

It hard to get solar permitted, they nerfed the HOV stickers, sales tax on EVs is far higher than the 'rebate', there is now a EV Ownership Fee, and electric tariff changes for commercial entities make DCFC and solar unviable. EA is going very well in states other than California. I wonder why? No, I don't, I know why.

Somebody needs to bribe them in a hurry. The East Coast has better EV support than "Green California" does. And that applies to Tesla too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
268 Posts
VW did not offer enough bribes. California is one of the most corrupt states in the country. The entire government is for rent.

It hard to get solar permitted, they nerfed the HOV stickers, sales tax on EVs is far higher than the 'rebate', there is now a EV Ownership Fee, and electric tariff changes for commercial entities make DCFC and solar unviable. EA is going very well in states other than California. I wonder why? No, I don't, I know why.

Somebody needs to bribe them in a hurry. The East Coast has better EV support than "Green California" does. And that applies to Tesla too.
If all it took was bribes VW would be in the catbird seat. The entire Electrify America operation exists because of a $2B penalty imposed on VW for emissions cheating.

Actually EA's support on the East Coast isn't great either, especially in the Northeast. Here's an EA vs. Supercharger comparison as of a week ago:

CT - 2 vs. 9
NH - 0 vs. 4
NJ - 0 vs. 14
NY - 2 vs. 31
MA - 3 vs. 13
ME - 0 vs. 4
PA - 4 vs. 18
RI - 1 vs. 1
VT - 0 vs. 3

That's 12 EA locations operational north of the Mason-Dixon line. Tesla has 97 locations in the same area vs. 106 in California.

Where EA has done really well in rolling out chargers is in the Midwest and South. Permitting is a lot easier there and there are a lot of Walmart locations which is EA's primary location partner. The more populous areas like the Northeast and California have much more onerous permitting processes which accounts for most of the disparity IMO.

I do expect EA coverage to get much better. They are required to spend the $2B whether they can make a profit or not. That makes them unique among the charging companies - no ROI analysis needed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
125 Posts
VW did not offer enough bribes. California is one of the most corrupt states in the country. The entire government is for rent.

It hard to get solar permitted, they nerfed the HOV stickers, sales tax on EVs is far higher than the 'rebate', there is now a EV Ownership Fee, and electric tariff changes for commercial entities make DCFC and solar unviable. EA is going very well in states other than California. I wonder why? No, I don't, I know why.

Somebody needs to bribe them in a hurry. The East Coast has better EV support than "Green California" does. And that applies to Tesla too.
Wow, sounds like someone is a little grumpy. I have been born and raised in California and love the state, is it perfect, no, but I would not call it corrupt. We have politics just like every other state and sometimes people don't agree with how things work or are run.

I had my solar permitted in a week, it took more than the normal 3 days because I did a battery with the system that required extra review. California has done tax rebates for EV's and batteries with Solar, so they are not EV unfriendly. They also weight the EV rebate against income which I think is fair.

I tend to agree that they pulled back on the HOV stickers, this is pushing people to move to yet more efficient EV vehicles if they want to enjoy the carpool lanes and also pulling out some of the crowding in the lanes that has come about with higher usage.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,494 Posts
Wow, sounds like someone is a little grumpy. I have been born and raised in California and love the state, is it perfect, no, but I would not call it corrupt. We have politics just like every other state and sometimes people don't agree with how things work or are run.

I had my solar permitted in a week, it took more than the normal 3 days because I did a battery with the system that required extra review. California has done tax rebates for EV's and batteries with Solar, so they are not EV unfriendly. They also weight the EV rebate against income which I think is fair.

I tend to agree that they pulled back on the HOV stickers, this is pushing people to move to yet more efficient EV vehicles if they want to enjoy the carpool lanes and also pulling out some of the crowding in the lanes that has come about with higher usage.
My solar permitting started in Aug 2017 and did not get the PTO until March 2018. I was operating unlicensed for 4 months. I just got fed up, and turned it on without a PTO, or ability to get credit for the power surplus. They fought me every step of the way, both the gov't and the utility (SCE). Bathroom blueprints? Really? Now they switched our Super Off Peak to 8am-4pm to minimize solar power financial benefits and pretty much negate battery systems. Are you going to save your day solar to use when the business is closed? Of course not.

The final plan for the California EV Corridors was approved and funded in Dec 2015. Seen any? The Mojave Corridor is not California's project. Your ability to get to Las Vegas has nothing to do with California tax dollars collected or the Fed Funding collected for EV infrastructure. That is private or EA. AFAIK, no California EV Corridor stations have actually been started. They used the money for other things. I'm guessing toll lanes and H2 stations. They have spent a lot in our area on toll lanes and are still expanding.

Concerning corruption, few states (any?) have recalled a governor. Does any state have as many ballot initiatives to override state laws as California does? A great example would be our death penalty law. The people want one thing, and pass a Proposition, and the government does the opposite. While I don't believe in the death penalty personally, it is a classic example how Sacramento totally ignores the will of the people. There are dozens if not hundreds of examples. When solar hits a residential saturation rate as high as commercial output, your Super Off Peak will switch to days also. And you will get the TOU and Demand tariffs as well.

Yes, I was born in San Diego and watched it snow there. I remember when the entire state had a say in the government, and California had perhaps the best public school system in the USA. We invented the Freeway (which are changing to toll roads) and had the best controlled access highways in the US. San Diego was once recognized as a California city. We even had a booming auto industry. Now the 3rd largest city (SF) controls our policies, and manufacturing is scorned by mandates. But the good news is if you live in SF, you can now go skiing in your EV. They used state monies in a non-corridor project to allow SF residents to take their EVs to the mountains. You might notice you didn't get anything in SD County. Heck, not even Tesla acknowledged SD's existence for a long time.

Trivia - Some HOV stickers were only good for 18 months, maybe less. I learned this the hard way. Our late 2017 expired 5 months ago. At one time Calif gave HOV stickers to Hondas and Toyotas, but not the Chevrolet Volt, which ran on pure electricity unlike the Honda and Toyota.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,494 Posts
And I apologize for being grumpy that day. It is certainly frustrating to be told one thing and they do the opposite.

If California in 2015 wanted EVs on the road:

1) EV corridors. There are a lot of <100 mile range EVs. This was known. So they made the sounds and spent money. But no EV corridors by the state.
2) Sales tax exemption for EVs. Especially since they stated they want the poor and middle class buying more EVs. Point of sale discounts are much better than waiting months. And the 'EV credit' programs is basically a make-work bureaucracy.
3) Enough with the H2. It's not working, they are spending massive amounts per car for what amounts to a petroleum relocation of emissions, not true reductions. It's better to use natural gas to make power to run EVs, than use natural gas to make hydrogen to run EVs. Less footprint, cheaper operational and capitalization costs.
4) Get rid of income limits for EV purchasing credits (see 2). This hurts a California EV manufacturer, Tesla.
5) Stop Demand Based Metering for EV charging. This makes low-use DCFCs like remote locations not financially viable. The more a DCFC is used in California, the cheaper the power. So there are few that are in remote locations.

#1 was promised but not implemented.
#2 is does a better job of democratizing EV purchasing.
#3 is lack of oversight or worse, corruption. H2 is oil industry fuel that has a large CO2 footprint at the refinery. Lithium batteries made the fuel cell a losing technology.
#4 helps a California business survive and expand, and gives a people a bigger incentive to buy all kinds of EVs.
#5 was simply an ambush by the CPUC which is effectively run by the utilities.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,494 Posts
If all it took was bribes VW would be in the catbird seat. The entire Electrify America operation exists because of a $2B penalty imposed on VW for emissions cheating.

Actually EA's support on the East Coast isn't great either, especially in the Northeast. Here's an EA vs. Supercharger comparison as of a week ago:

CT - 2 vs. 9
NH - 0 vs. 4
NJ - 0 vs. 14
NY - 2 vs. 31
MA - 3 vs. 13
ME - 0 vs. 4
PA - 4 vs. 18
RI - 1 vs. 1
VT - 0 vs. 3

That's 12 EA locations operational north of the Mason-Dixon line. Tesla has 97 locations in the same area vs. 106 in California.

Where EA has done really well in rolling out chargers is in the Midwest and South. Permitting is a lot easier there and there are a lot of Walmart locations which is EA's primary location partner. The more populous areas like the Northeast and California have much more onerous permitting processes which accounts for most of the disparity IMO.

I do expect EA coverage to get much better. They are required to spend the $2B whether they can make a profit or not. That makes them unique among the charging companies - no ROI analysis needed.
There are literally hundreds of DCFCs in California. Support is weak outside of urban areas though. Using Plugshare aimed at my house, there are 40 CCS chargers, and 4 Tesla sites. Aimed at SD, 33 to 6. LA 233 to 28. SF 149 to 30. However, CCS support for major interstates has the Tesla network winning. This is what the 2015 California EV Corridors were supposed to resolve. Only recently has CCS/CHAdeMO begun to support the 5 fwy in Central California and the 15 into Las Vegas. I don't believe any of the State/Fed EV Corridor funding has installed a single site.

California approved the vendor, approved the plan, had allocated the funds, for a 50 mile interval from LA to LV called the Mojave Corridor. It finally requires a minimum of 100 miles range, with no Cal State EV support yet. Up until Dec 8, you needed perhaps 200 miles EPA range minimum.

California chose to postpone the approved corridors for years so they could use the monies elsewhere. It's even hard to find out information on them now.

California has roughly 50% of all EVs in North America today. The total amount of taxes collected from these is ~$2 billion and climbing. California does give sales tax breaks to promote social change. Race horses have a sales tax break (not pleasure horses), entertainment industry equipment, real estate, and other areas where they want to encourage purchases.
 
21 - 40 of 61 Posts
Top