EV charging in the US is broken: Verge article

sevengroove

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2020
Messages
596
Reaction score
1,266
Location
Seattle, WA
Vehicles
2019 Lexus RX 350
EV CHARGING IN THE US IS BROKEN — CAN JOE BIDEN FIX IT?
https://www.theverge.com/22419150/ev-charging-us-joe-biden-infrastructure-plan
The president’s plan to take EVs mainstream will first need to contend with a fractured charging network
By Andrew J. Hawkins@andyjayhawk May 11, 2021, 10:00am EDT
VRG_ILLO_4551_EV_Biden_Plan_site.0.jpg
Illustration by Grayson Blackmon / The Verge
If you buy something from a Verge link, Vox Media may earn a commission. See our ethics statement.


Aaron Fisher first came face to face with the US’s inconvenient and broken electric vehicle charging infrastructure two years ago. Driving a borrowed BMW i3 from New York City to Hartford, Connecticut, for his grandmother’s 90th birthday party, he assumed the journey would be a short, three-hour jaunt. Instead, it lasted a grueling seven hours.

“I had charger issues, I had payment issues, I had customer service issues, I had routing issues, because of the fragmentation around electric vehicle charging,” Fisher said. As for his grandmother’s birthday? “I missed her dinner,” he said ruefully. “She was not mad, but very disappointed.”

There are approximately 41,000 public charging stations in the United States, with more than 100,000 outlets. But finding one that actually works or isn’t locked inside a gated parking garage can be a bit of a scavenger hunt. The charging experience in the US is almost comically fragmented, especially for non-Tesla owners. While Tesla’s Supercharger network has been praised for its seamless user experience and fast charging ability, the opposite appears to be true for pretty much everyone else.

Fisher, a former management consultant who also briefly interned in the Obama White House, was so frustrated by his experience trying to drive an EV in the US that he founded his own company, EVPassport, based on the principle that charging your electric vehicle should not require signing up for a dozen different smartphone apps.

“You shouldn’t have to hand over your birthday, you shouldn’t have to hand over your email address, you shouldn’t have to hand over your full name, or anything in an application or agree to any type of privacy policy necessarily, in order to charge your vehicle,” Fisher said. “You don’t have to do that when you get gas. Why do you have to do that when you’re trying to do something better?”

Fortunately, the whole system appears headed toward a massive overhaul. President Joe Biden, an avowed muscle car guy who is currently trying to claim the mantle of “most environmentally friendly president in history,” recently introduced a $2 trillion infrastructure plan, $174 billion of which is earmarked for electric cars. As part of that plan, Biden wants to build 500,000 new EV chargers by 2030 — 11 times the current number of stations.

Biden will have his work cut out for him. Despite rapid growth in sales over the past few years, EVs are still a niche product, making up just 2 percent of the new car market and 1 percent of all cars, SUVs, vans, and pickup trucks on the road. That said, sales are expected to pick up in the next few years, depending on new incentives and point-of-sale rebates that are currently being debated. But when they do, there are real questions about whether the nation’s disjointed, low-tech, outdated charging system will be up to the task.

“There’s no APIs in the charging marketplace,” Fisher said, referring to the software intermediary that allows two apps to communicate. “It’s kind of like banking in the ’90s.”
ahawkins_20210503_4551_0015.jpg
An EV charging station in Clifton, New Jersey. Photo by Andrew Hawkins / The Verge
THE CHARGING PROBLEM
On paper, the EV charging network sounds like it’s doing pretty good.

A closer look reveals how incredibly uneven it is. One-third of those stations are located in one state: California, with a whopping 22,620 stations, according to a recent study by Pew Trust. Other states have few, bordering on none. North Dakota has 36 public chargers, Alaska just 26.

But don’t mistake California as some sort of bastion of enlightened EV ownership. A recent study published in Nature Energy by a research team from the University of California, Davis found that about 1 in 5 EV owners — 20 percent of plug-in hybrid vehicle owners and 18 percent of pure battery-electric vehicle owners — eventually switched back to gas-powered vehicles. The top reason cited was “dissatisfaction with the convenience of charging.”

This shouldn’t come as a surprise. “Range anxiety,” or the fear of running out of power before finding the next charging station, has long been cited as a major barrier to mass EV adoption. But while range has steadily improved over the years, with many EVs now able to travel 300 miles or more on a single charge, the anxiety has shifted to the inadequacies of the charging network.

Chargers can be hard to find, and the act of charging takes much longer than refueling a gas car. The research team at UC Davis noted this in their study. “The way in which a [plug-in electric vehicle] is charged has not changed, whereas vehicle range has been increasing since [plug-in hybrid electric vehicles] and [battery-electric vehicles] were introduced,” they conclude. Electric vehicle owners “have the option to purchase longer-range vehicles, whereas they cannot yet purchase a vehicle that is charged differently.”

EV boosters say that much of the problem stems from a faulty frame of reference. We see how many gas stations are available — around 150,000 by some estimates — and believe that the same should be true for chargers if EVs are ever to replace their gas-powered counterparts.

This ignores the fact that most EV owners do their charging overnight while parked in their driveway at home. But if EVs are to become a more attractive option to car buyers, charging stations are going to need to become more pervasive like gas stations. People need to see the expansion with their own eyes in order to overcome the psychological hurdle that prevents them from imagining an electric future.
akrales_20210504_4551_0082.jpg
Electric vehicle charging stations in New York City are often inside paid parking garages like this one in Manhattan. Photo by Amelia Holowaty Krales / The Verge

akrales_20210504_4551_0053.jpg
Photo by Amelia Holowaty Krales / The Verge

akrales_20210426_4551_0004.jpg
A parking garage in The Bronx, New York, with charging stations. Photo by Amelia Holowaty Krales / The Verge

akrales_20210426_4551_0032.jpg
Photo by Amelia Holowaty Krales / The Verge
There are educational obstacles, too. The way car companies communicate the amount of time it takes to charge an EV completely misses the point, said Chris Nelder, manager of Carbon-Free Mobility at the Rocky Mountain Institute. Automakers avoid talking about kilowatts and kilowatt-hours, instead relying on the nonsense metric of miles-per-minute of charging.

“We all understand this when it comes to gasoline,” Nelder said. “We all know what a gallon is. We all know how many gallons of gas our tanks can hold. We all know how many miles per gallon our vehicles get. But for some reason everybody operating in this space is afraid to explain to a customer what the equivalent is on the electric side.”

This is one of the educational hurdles that the Biden administration will confront in its quest to get more people in EVs. But it’s not clear the administration is focused on education, so much as incentivizing the purchase of more EVs through tax credits, point-of-sale rebates, and direct subsidies to automakers.
Money, the policymakers have determined, will be the thing to spur this shift.

THE MONEY PROBLEM
The White House has said it will spend at least $15 billion to begin rolling out the new charging stations. But experts say far more will be needed to shore up charging infrastructure to meet the growing demands of EV ownership.

Wedbush Securities has estimated that at least $60 billion will be needed to build 500,000 chargers by the end of 2030, as Biden has stated. Another analysis by industry consultant AlixPartners said $50 billion would be needed to grow the US charging network to meet the demand within the next decade. That means Biden will need at least $35 billion more, either from private investments or state and local government matching funds, if he is to meet his goal.

Installing EV chargers can be expensive, depending on the level of charging that’s being offered. The higher the level, the quicker the charge and the more expensive it is to install. A public Level 2 charger might cost $2,000 out of the box, but a DC fast charger of 150kW or more can cost between $100,000 and $250,000, Nelder said.

The federal government could intervene in making those costs cheaper, but it won’t be easy. That would require sitting down with utility companies and regulatory commissions in all 50 states, as well as the private EV charging companies, to bring down the capital investments for charging stations through “make ready” programs. These are programs in which public utilities and local governments identify sites that are intended for EV charging and allow companies to submit bids for installation. There is no federal “make ready” program, though, and only a few states employ this method of fast-tracking EV charger installation. The Biden administration could make things a lot easier by creating a national system for states to use.
ahawkins_20210503_4551_0002.jpg
An EV charging station in Clifton, New Jersey. Photo by Andrew Hawkins / The Verge
Another looming problem is utilization and how utilities charge for the electricity they provide. Most EV charging stations sit unoccupied because EVs still only make up a tiny fraction of the overall car market. That means the business case for building more chargers is very difficult to make.

“It’s that first few years where you want me to put a quarter million into a station, and then I can’t get better than 5 percent utilization,” said Henry Lee, director of the Harvard Kennedy School’s environmental and natural resource program. “I lose my shirt in the first three or four years, but by year seven or eight, I could be making money on it.”

Lee noted that the cost of electricity is another problem for EV charging companies. Demand charges from utility companies tend to dominate charging companies’ operating costs, further complicating the business case for building more charging stations. The total cost of electricity is higher based on the level of charging they provide. These calculations need to be rethought if the government wants to incentivize the EV charging industry.
“How you restructure this formula for these kinds of stations is something that we haven’t quite figured out,” Lee said.

THE TESLA PROBLEM
Tesla’s Supercharger network is often held up as the best possible example of an EV charging network: fast, reliable, and plentiful. But Tesla’s network is also exclusive to Tesla owners, meaning someone driving a Volkswagen EV wouldn’t be able to use it.

Other EV companies have expressed interest in a proprietary system. Rivian, backed by Ford and Amazon, said recently it would build its own network of 3,500 fast chargers at 600 locations around the country by 2023.

These kinds of close systems are worrisome if more car companies decide they want their own networks. But Nelder said that two automakers building their own exclusive charging networks isn’t necessarily an indication of where things are headed for EV charging. First of all, Nelder said that Rivian’s goal of 3,500 fast chargers in two years was almost impossible, given the intense and expensive amount of work that each site requires.
“I literally laughed out loud,” he said.



But even then, Nelder said he hopes that the Biden administration is strict about what kind of charging projects are eligible for public money. “To whatever extent public money is being spent, it should only be spent on sites that are available to the public,” he said, “and that’s certainly true for this Biden infrastructure spending plan.”

Ideally, more electric vehicles will include the Plug and Charge standard that was initially introduced by ISO 15118. This standard enables an EV to automatically identify and authorize itself to a charging station on behalf of the driver. For example, when it goes on sale in the US later this year, the Mercedes-Benz EQS will be compatible with about 90 percent of the public charging stations in the US without the need to download an app or sign up for an individual charging service, thanks to the Plug and Charge system.

But there are many EVs coming onto the market without Plug and Charge, such as the Volkswagen ID 4 and Chevy Bolt EUV, and it’s unclear why. This is another source of frustration and confusion for Aaron Fisher of EVPassport. It’s a sign that for all the good news on the horizon, the EV charging infrastructure in the US will remain opaque and challenging for months, if not years to come.

“It feels like they’re missing some very core decisions at a high level,” Fisher said of the auto industry. “I don’t know if it’s a lack of planning, or just they’re trying to focus on cars and getting them out the door.”
Advertisement

 

DuckTruck

Well-Known Member
First Name
Duck
Joined
Dec 23, 2020
Messages
1,543
Reaction score
3,677
Location
PNW
First Name
Duck
Vehicles
Corvair, BMW325, Acura Legend, XC60, '16 Caddy ELR
Getting the overall charging system right and having charging stations almost as ubiquitous as gas stations is really the newest $64,000,000,000 challenge. Convenient Plug & Charge or other easy and reliable payment facilitation will be critical, as pointed out here.

The writer should have noted that Rivian's stations won't be exclusive to Rivian, and that they will incorporate the more "universal" CCS set-up, rather than the proprietary Tesla-like arrangement.
 

SeaGeo

Well-Known Member
First Name
Brice
Joined
Jan 12, 2021
Messages
1,229
Reaction score
2,131
Location
Seattle
First Name
Brice
Vehicles
Xc60 T8
Occupation
Engineer
Getting the overall charging system right and having charging stations almost as ubiquitous as gas stations is really the newest $64,000,000,000 challenge. Convenient Plug & Charge or other easy and reliable payment facilitation will be critical, as pointed out here.

The writer should have noted that Rivian's stations won't be exclusive to Rivian, and that they will incorporate the more "universal" CCS set-up, rather than the proprietary Tesla-like arrangement.
Isn't the RAN DCFC exclusive to Rivian?
 

Trandall

Well-Known Member
First Name
Travis
Joined
Jan 13, 2021
Messages
373
Reaction score
701
Location
Upstate NY
First Name
Travis
Vehicles
Subaru Ascent, Honda Accord hybrid
Occupation
Construction Management
Good article, I hope this Nelder fellow is wrong about Rivian's plan to build 3500 DCFC being "almost impossible".
 

cwoodcox

Well-Known Member
First Name
Corey
Joined
Mar 31, 2021
Messages
182
Reaction score
192
Location
Montreal, QC
First Name
Corey
Vehicles
2012 Ford Expedition
Occupation
Software Engineer
Isn't the RAN DCFC exclusive to Rivian?
Yep. The connectors aren't, but they will be software restricted to Rivian owners. I imagine that will change eventually, though.
 

CommodoreAmiga

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2020
Messages
1,299
Reaction score
2,260
Location
USA
Vehicles
N/A
Isn't the RAN DCFC exclusive to Rivian?
Yes. The DCFC will be exclusive to Rivian vehicles, at least initially. The "destination" chargers (10k L2 chargers) will be open to all, afaik, however.

I know this would eliminate the exclusivity of the DCFC RAN, but I personally think we should mandate J1772 support on all EVs, limits on rates EV networks may charge, and say that all commercial EV chargers must be opened to all brands.

This would eliminate exclusivity of the Tesla Supercharger network (and Rivian DCFC RAN). Tesla got their exclusive benefit for years, in exchange for making the investment to build their infrastructure. But now that exclusivity should end. I also think that Tesla should move their new production over to J1772 so we can unify on a single standard, which ultimately helps EV adoption, overall.

I also think we need limits on what can be charged by a commercial EVSE -- both for time, and per kWh. If Tesla (or Rivian) wants to offer their customers a subsidy (even a 100% subsidy) on their chargers then that's fine... But we need a cap on what can be charged to the general public.
 

IHScout

Well-Known Member
First Name
Waid
Joined
Oct 2, 2020
Messages
154
Reaction score
388
Location
Phoenix, AZ
First Name
Waid
Vehicles
Chevrolet Volt, Expedition
Yes. The DCFC will be exclusive to Rivian vehicles, at least initially. The "destination" chargers (10k L2 chargers) will be open to all, afaik, however.

I know this would eliminate the exclusivity of the DCFC RAN, but I personally think we should mandate J1772 support on all EVs, limits on rates EV networks may charge, and say that all commercial EV chargers must be opened to all brands.

This would eliminate exclusivity of the Tesla Supercharger network (and Rivian DCFC RAN). Tesla got their exclusive benefit for years, in exchange for making the investment to build their infrastructure. But now that exclusivity should end. I also think that Tesla should move their new production over to J1772 so we can unify on a single standard, which ultimately helps EV adoption, overall.

I also think we need limits on what can be charged by a commercial EVSE -- both for time, and per kWh. If Tesla (or Rivian) wants to offer their customers a subsidy (even a 100% subsidy) on their chargers then that's fine... But we need a cap on what can be charged to the general public.
I am in favor of a universal standard, similar to gas pump nozzle sizes and electrical plugs. I think this will help accelerate EV adoption.

I am not in favor of the government mandating that companies who invested capital to build out a changing network be forced to open the network to everyone. That's just my opinion.
 

Sdvictor

Well-Known Member
First Name
Victor
Joined
Mar 13, 2021
Messages
126
Reaction score
236
Location
Seattle, WA
First Name
Victor
Vehicles
E-Wagon
First of all, Nelder said that Rivian’s goal of 3,500 fast chargers in two years was almost impossible, given the intense and expensive amount of work that each site requires.

“I literally laughed out loud,” he said.
He's not wrong. 3500 chargers is super aggressive and I think Rivian is already behind on that. Alot of EA chargers take at least 18 months to build due to power and other real estate requirements.
 

Trandall

Well-Known Member
First Name
Travis
Joined
Jan 13, 2021
Messages
373
Reaction score
701
Location
Upstate NY
First Name
Travis
Vehicles
Subaru Ascent, Honda Accord hybrid
Occupation
Construction Management
I understand Tesla has benefitted from a variety of government incentives/ subsidies but didn't they generally speaking pay for the design and building of the supercharger network? If so why should they be forced to allow bolts and leafs to use it at the detriment of Tesla customers who bought into a brand that had an exclusive charging network? Sounds like more government intervention into private companies than I prefer.
 

kylealden

Well-Known Member
First Name
Kyle
Joined
Feb 25, 2021
Messages
215
Reaction score
772
Location
Seattle
First Name
Kyle
Vehicles
2020 Tesla Model Y, 2013 BMW F800GS, 1969 Jeep CJ5
Occupation
Software Engineering
I am in favor of a universal standard, similar to gas pump nozzle sizes and electrical plugs. I think this will help accelerate EV adoption.

I am not in favor of the government mandating that companies who invested capital to build out a changing network be forced to open the network to everyone. That's just my opinion.
The way the EU did this is mandating that all new cars accept CCS; Tesla then starting adding CCS ports to their cars and dual-output cables to superchargers (as well as selling adapters). With sufficient advance notice, this seems reasonable for the US as well.

I don't believe the EU actually mandated opening the supercharger network to other manufacturers, but connector interop is the key unlock for customers; Tesla owners shouldn't be locked in.
 

IHScout

Well-Known Member
First Name
Waid
Joined
Oct 2, 2020
Messages
154
Reaction score
388
Location
Phoenix, AZ
First Name
Waid
Vehicles
Chevrolet Volt, Expedition
The way the EU did this is mandating that all new cars accept CCS; Tesla then starting adding CCS ports to their cars and dual-output cables to superchargers (as well as selling adapters). With sufficient advance notice, this seems reasonable for the US as well.

I don't believe the EU actually mandated opening the supercharger network to other manufacturers, but connector interop is the key unlock for customers; Tesla owners shouldn't be locked in.
That seems very reasonable and something I could support.
 

DucRider

Well-Known Member
First Name
Gary
Joined
Oct 21, 2019
Messages
1,449
Reaction score
2,507
Location
rRegon
First Name
Gary
Vehicles
Clarity Electric
The Government should not dictate who can and cannot use equipment a private company installs and maintains. If, however, they take incentives that may be offered, it could (under some conditions) be reasonable for a provision be attached to mandate open access.
But I can also see cases where this should not apply. Should Amazon be required to allow any ID.4/e-tron/R1T that want to to enter their terminal and charge at will? I consider the 30% charging infrastructure credit a good thing to promote EV adoption with lots of long term benefits. Requiring that I let my neighbors use my EVSE at will in order to get the tax credit is a disincentive, and even more so for those looking to convert fleet operations.

Rivian, EA, EVGo, Chargepoint, Tesla, etc can get a 30% Tax Credit (up to $30K) per location for building a charging network. So can Amazon for the equipment to support their Electric vans, and a landscape company that starts using electric pickups. Should only some of those qualify for the Tax Credit (or other incentives)? What about companies that install workplace charging and restrict access to only employees? Many potential EV owners do not have a way to install charging where they park at night. Workplace charging can help many that otherwise would not be able to drive an EV.

As to mandating a specific connector/protocol: Is that really any different than mandating a certain sales model like franchised dealers? If Tesla (or any other company) wants to make vehicles that cannot use the infrastructure being built/supported, does the government have any business telling them they must? Or should the consumer be able to look at the pros and cons of the various offerings and make a choice that fits their wants/needs? Tesla (and 3rd parties) could offer an adapter that allows their vehicles to use CCS. At some point not being able to use CCS will move firmly into the "con" column - let the consumer decide.
 

DuckTruck

Well-Known Member
First Name
Duck
Joined
Dec 23, 2020
Messages
1,543
Reaction score
3,677
Location
PNW
First Name
Duck
Vehicles
Corvair, BMW325, Acura Legend, XC60, '16 Caddy ELR
Isn't the RAN DCFC exclusive to Rivian?
Oops!

SeaGeo, I believe you're correct that the DCFC stations within the RAN will initially be limited to Rivian, although the level 2's will be open to all. That does water down my argument a bit 🥴 because no winner of an EV Cannonball event will ever be crossing the country on L2 charging.

That said, and If I remember correctly, Rivian was open to the possibility of the DCFC plugs in Salida becoming available to others in the future. This may not be a uniform arrangement, as I remember mayor P.T. Wood asking for that agreement when working out the details of Salida's contract with Rivian. I think the Rivian Rep's response was something along the lines of "We have no problem with addressing that down the road".

Coming back to the question of proprietary vs. non-proprietary, Rivian's adoption of the CCS plug standard will at least make opening some or all of our DCFC plugs to others an easy possibility. With Tesla's funky plug, not so much...

As a hoarder, it reminds me of what I'm up against at home. No matter how many times I try to play my SuperBeta Hi-Fi tapes in my VHS machine, not one of my 45 episodes of "The Monkees" are viewable. Luckily, I can still enjoy them on vinyl, in 45's, LP's, and 8-Track!
 

CommodoreAmiga

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2020
Messages
1,299
Reaction score
2,260
Location
USA
Vehicles
N/A
I understand Tesla has benefitted from a variety of government incentives/ subsidies but didn't they generally speaking pay for the design and building of the supercharger network? If so why should they be forced to allow bolts and leafs to use it at the detriment of Tesla customers who bought into a brand that had an exclusive charging network? Sounds like more government intervention into private companies than I prefer.
Fractured standards increases the amount of infrastructure needed (now we'll potentially have a different charger for each manufacturer) and slow adoption rate. Consumers say their biggest barrier to buying an EV is charging, so allowing the fractured charging standards to continue merely prolongs the timeframe for EV to take over.

Manufacturers should compete on building the best vehicles. The charging networks should not be walled gardens that lock people in. Look at gas stations. A Honda owner isn't limited to Shell while GM is forced to use ExxonMobil. They are interchangeable.
 
OP
OP
sevengroove

sevengroove

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2020
Messages
596
Reaction score
1,266
Location
Seattle, WA
Vehicles
2019 Lexus RX 350
Fractured standards increases the amount of infrastructure needed (now we'll potentially have a different charger for each manufacturer) and slow adoption rate. Consumers say their biggest barrier to buying an EV is charging, so allowing the fractured charging standards to continue merely prolongs the timeframe for EV to take over.

Manufacturers should compete on building the best vehicles. The charging networks should not be walled gardens that lock people in. Look at gas stations. A Honda owner isn't limited to Shell while GM is forced to use ExxonMobil. They are interchangeable.
Completely agree here. I think one part the article missed is diving in to the intent of why companies like Rivian are pursuing their own charging infrastructure in the first place. It's because customers like us want seamless interoperability. If Rivian wants customers to pay $80k for a vehicle, those customers are going to expect both a high level of product (the vehicle itself) and experience (primarily charging). Rivian looked at existing charging infrastructure and decided that they could not rely on it for the seamless charging experience that their customers are going to expect. The problem with this approach is that it does very little to build out an interoperable charging network that will benefit every EV owner in the long run.

Can you imagine how much further along the road (hah) we'd be if Tesla owners hypothetically did not have the supercharger network? Those are like 90% of EVs on the road, and they would've raised a sh*tstorm about the state of our infrastructure years ago. Our public infrastructure would have had to make huge strides to accommodate their needs. Instead, Tesla owners are understandably happy in their walled garden.
 
Advertisement

 
Advertisement
Top