When will the US get true fast charging?

[mkhuffman]

Right now it seems we need additional chargers more than faster ones.

I agree.

We also need more L2 destination charging so that we can charge when we are sleeping or eating or just doing something else. Having to stop to DCFC isn't as good as charging whenever the vehicle isn't being used.

It is very frustrating how many hotels still don't have destination chargers.

Sponsored

 

[beatle]

My ideal (pencil sketch) solution would entail pulling up to a DC Fast Charger, plugging in for less than a minute, and then going on your way. What happens in that minute? The fast charger dumps power into an onboard ultracapacitor built into the EV of your choice. Maybe it stores enough power to take you another 100 miles or so. The ultracapacitor then could charge your EV while your are traveling instead of needing to stay parked to charge.

Even if you're getting 3mi/kwh, that's still 33kwh needed to go 100 miles. To charge that in 60 seconds would require 2 megawatts of power. Capacitors are more than an order of magnitude less dense than a lithium battery, so the vehicle would look more like a box truck.

Plus, with this strategy, you're still stopping every 100 miles or less. The equation looks even more ridiculous if you want to go further or your efficiency is worse than 3mi/kwh (like the R1).

Ultracapacitors are used in F1 so they can charge and discharge super fast. They're only used for bursts of energy as part of a hybrid drivetrain, not as primary propulsion.

 

[Greg Chick]

My experience is that the public chargers claim a high charge capacity, but rarely not that high, and if the charge starts at that high rate, it falls to less than half that said rate. I recognize that after about 80% things get slower, but the charging experience is no where as friendly as Gas Stations.

 

[carsly]

Even if you're getting 3mi/kwh, that's still 33kwh needed to go 100 miles. To charge that in 60 seconds would require 2 megawatts of power. Capacitors are more than an order of magnitude less dense than a lithium battery, so the vehicle would look more like a box truck.

Plus, with this strategy, you're still stopping every 100 miles or less. The equation looks even more ridiculous if you want to go further or your efficiency is worse than 3mi/kwh (like the R1).

Ultracapacitors are used in F1 so they can charge and discharge super fast. They're only used for bursts of energy as part of a hybrid drivetrain, not as primary propulsion.

yes, what you've written is historically accurate. But innovation means pushing past what was possible.

Graphene and other materials are showing promise to bring down the size/weight/power density issues of current generation ultracapacitors.

Maybe solid state batteries end up being a thing. Maybe not. Maybe there is room for other possible solutions to the problem since the rate of improvements on standard cell-based batteries isn't fantastic. I always like flow batteries, where you would "fill up" like you do at a gas station by swapping out the electrolyte but that never quite took off.

More attempts at more possible solutions just get us there faster. The answer to make radical progress is rarely everyone working down a single path.

 

[2kwik4u]

To you it may be "backward looking," to others it may just be that the value proposition for EVs hasn't reached a point of mass adoption. I love my EV, but I certainly understand the hundreds of millions of Americans who are still skeptical of the benefits.

RJ has it right, it's up to the manufacturers to make a compelling reason to drive an EV, and buyers will vote with their feet.

The value proposition is driven by the consumer, and I agree it's on manufacturers to provide compelling products.

The incentivizing of consumers to move on a particular industry is driven by policy and investment, in particular in emerging markets. We're quite backwards in this aspect. Pulling funding for infrastructure investment, removing incentives to help increase the value proposition early in product lifecycle. Relaxing emissions and manufacturing standards instead of ramping them up.

If we wanted to increase say bicycle travel, we wouldn't pull funding for bike lanes right? Same premise here. I suppose one could argue that we're simply removing the incentives to go that way and "letting the market figure it out"......well, that only leads to stagnation. SOMETHING has to get the population to move off center, or we'll never change. IMO, policy should be doing that for us to escalate the timeline, not relax it.

 

[2kwik4u]

I agree.

We also need more L2 destination charging so that we can charge when we are sleeping or eating or just doing something else. Having to stop to DCFC isn't as good as charging whenever the vehicle isn't being used.

It is very frustrating how many hotels still don't have destination chargers.

I love this take.

The premise of charging "while you're doing something else" is really great. It reduces both instant demand on the grid for fast charging, and completely negates the charge time conundrum. Also allows for you to "come in hot" to the last stop of the day, likely eliminating a final fast charge stop on a road trip.

I've found it significantly difficult to find good/reliable chargers at hotels, and other such destinations. Even when they do exist, they are often expensive 3rd party units, or they're poorly installed leading to all sorts of issues.

 

[ndmiller]

I think the wavering forward look of the US Government towards EV and electrification technology is keeping investment out of the space. I wouldn't invest if the political winds could enhance or crush my projects on a political whim......who would.

Once the US gets beyond this flip flopping and standards start to emerge it will be better for consumers and investors as they can plan for the future. Going to be another decade in my mind as even if the future state was clear as everyone here has mentioned, US is behind.

 

[kurtlikevonnegut]

The value proposition is driven by the consumer, and I agree it's on manufacturers to provide compelling products.

The incentivizing of consumers to move on a particular industry is driven by policy and investment, in particular in emerging markets. We're quite backwards in this aspect. Pulling funding for infrastructure investment, removing incentives to help increase the value proposition early in product lifecycle. Relaxing emissions and manufacturing standards instead of ramping them up.

If we wanted to increase say bicycle travel, we wouldn't pull funding for bike lanes right? Same premise here. I suppose one could argue that we're simply removing the incentives to go that way and "letting the market figure it out"......well, that only leads to stagnation. SOMETHING has to get the population to move off center, or we'll never change. IMO, policy should be doing that for us to escalate the timeline, not relax it.

I don't think that policy should be used to drive changes in consumer choice so we'll have to agree to disagree.

Regarding the idea that allowing the market to "figure it out" leads to stagnation is a silly idea. If that's the case it's only a temporary stagnation as that will drive entrepreneurship to take advantage of a stagnant market with innovation.

 

[beatle]

yes, what you've written is historically accurate. But innovation means pushing past what was possible.

Graphene and other materials are showing promise to bring down the size/weight/power density issues of current generation ultracapacitors.

Maybe solid state batteries end up being a thing. Maybe not. Maybe there is room for other possible solutions to the problem since the rate of improvements on standard cell-based batteries isn't fantastic. I always like flow batteries, where you would "fill up" like you do at a gas station by swapping out the electrolyte but that never quite took off.

More attempts at more possible solutions just get us there faster. The answer to make radical progress is rarely everyone working down a single path.

I realize technology moves on, and some of these variables may change, but they are way out of proportion for this to be viable. Even if they were possible, you're still only getting a relatively small amount of energy into the vehicle. There's really no need to charge a capacitor at such a rate. And really, what's the goal here? Have charging stops match gas stops in duration? If so, we're looking at around 5 minutes or so.

To put 60% into a 100kwh battery in that amount of time, you need an average of 720kw, which is a 7.2C average. The current Zeekr 001 is pretty close to that already, taking about 7 minutes to go from 10-70% with an average of 480kw. Granted this is only 60% of the overall capacity, but commonplace L2 charging will go a long way to reducing the need for blistering DCFC to support people who can't charge at home and don't want to dedicate frequent lengthy charging stops on a regular basis.

 

[2kwik4u]

I don't think that policy should be used to drive changes in consumer choice so we'll have to agree to disagree.

Regarding the idea that allowing the market to "figure it out" leads to stagnation is a silly idea. If that's the case it's only a temporary stagnation as that will drive entrepreneurship to take advantage of a stagnant market with innovation.

If policy shouldn't drive changes in consumer buying trends; then things like farm/crop subsidies shouldn't exist. Or drug price controls. or right to repair laws. Or import tariffs. or minimum wage laws. All of those directly affect consumer purchasing trends. The premise of a truly free market is great, but we haven't had that for decades now. So it's not really an agree to disagree thing. These already exist in a multitude of other markets.

Innovation(or disruption if that word is better) rarely moves the market as a whole. The largest "changes" in consumer choices have largely been from where they buy, not so much what they buy.

 

[kurtlikevonnegut]

If policy shouldn't drive changes in consumer buying trends; then things like farm/crop subsidies shouldn't exist. Or drug price controls. or right to repair laws. Or import tariffs. or minimum wage laws.

You've got my vote!

Although right to repair is more a property rights issue than policy, but other than that I'm on board.

 

[mkhuffman]

I don't think that policy should be used to drive changes in consumer choice so we'll have to agree to disagree.

Regarding the idea that allowing the market to "figure it out" leads to stagnation is a silly idea. If that's the case it's only a temporary stagnation as that will drive entrepreneurship to take advantage of a stagnant market with innovation.

The amount of innovation that comes from businesses trying to make money is mind boggling. I mean Ford with the Model T wasn't created and manufactured because some regulation encouraged it.

The way you get innovation is to eliminate regulations, not create more.

 

[mkhuffman]

I love this take.

The premise of charging "while you're doing something else" is really great. It reduces both instant demand on the grid for fast charging, and completely negates the charge time conundrum. Also allows for you to "come in hot" to the last stop of the day, likely eliminating a final fast charge stop on a road trip.

I've found it significantly difficult to find good/reliable chargers at hotels, and other such destinations. Even when they do exist, they are often expensive 3rd party units, or they're poorly installed leading to all sorts of issues.

Yeah, L2 destination charging is pretty horrible in my experience. I almost always have some sort of issue.

I will pick a hotel if it has reliable charging. Most do not, so I rarely check any more.

 

[azbill]

As far as I know within Tesla only V4 chargers are 800V compatible, earlier versions are 400V. I don't know what the ratio of V4 to other Tesla chargers is but, not sure V4 dominates.

I also don't see many 400kW chargers out there, which would be 800V, 500A but I do agree there aren't too many vehicles taking full advantage of even the 350kW chargers. That's why new vehicles like the BMW iX3 will have an advantage over the R2 (in my opinion). The average consumer doesn't care about 400 vs 800V but they do compare charge times even if they never end up using DCFC.

Ionna, BP Pulse and Walmart have all deployed 400KW chargers. Tesla only has one charger in the US that supports more than 450V, just one. And that one is only open to Teslas at this time.

Sponsored