Electric Vehicle Charging Stations in Ottawa-Gatineau

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

^ Park and rides are a very dubious investment even when they are not electrified. Recent lots have cost upwards of $45K per spot. There are cheaper ways to entice people onto transit. Transit oriented development near transit stations will generate more ridership than huge parking lots.

Absolutely. But this is Ottawa where all things suburban dominate. So....

If we are going to have PnR, I would hope they can encourage EVs with them. I'd like to see them charge for parking and include some kind of trickle charging at every spot. Say $10 per day and include a 110V outlet at each spot. For the average worker bee who is away from their vehicle for 9+ hrs, they can get ~40km of range in. Should cover the average commute. Charge more for an L2 equipped spot.

[waterloowarrior]

Metrolinx removed their park and ride EV chargers due to low demand
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/metrolinx-ev-charging-stations-1.4972890

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

Metrolinx removed their park and ride EV chargers due to low demand
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/metrolinx-ev-charging-stations-1.4972890

Who knows if that was really ideological from Ford....

Thag said I strongly suspect that the vast majority using a Park n Ride are driving from suburban homes where they can charge. Apartments and condos are usually in transit friendlier locations, not necessitating a car to access the station.

[CanadaGoose]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Absolutely. But this is Ottawa where all things suburban dominate. So....

If we are going to have PnR, I would hope they can encourage EVs with them. I'd like to see them charge for parking and include some kind of trickle charging at every spot. Say $10 per day and include a 110V outlet at each spot. For the average worker bee who is away from their vehicle for 9+ hrs, they can get ~40km of range in. Should cover the average commute. Charge more for an L2 equipped spot.

I cant think of any EV owner who would pay for that (when there is free park and ride parking around).

The 110V outlet is nice but I would sit there worried that my $370 charger is sitting outside charging my car and can easily be unplugged then sold on Kijiji. Again, J1772 is the standard.

Also, $1 of charging in Quebec gets 50km per hour.

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

Metrolinx removed their park and ride EV chargers due to low demand
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/metrolinx-ev-charging-stations-1.4972890

It says in the article that it’s 0.8 times a day which sounds like:
- people were plugging in for a regular 9-5 day only and 20% of the chargers weren’t used.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Pick any other place. The point stands. Putting chargers up there is an incredibly inefficient deployment of capital.

Why is it my job to prove your point?

Quebec has substantially better infrastructure in their more settled areas though. They didn't just start out building up north and out east before making sure their major corridors were properly covered.

Ontario does have the 400 and 401 well covered. It is now time to move to the secondary corridors.

My family stops 1-2 times. We've never stopped more than twice. I would say that is fairly typical. And you really only need about 20 mins of total charging time if the chargers >= 100 kW.

Previously you said you always stop twice. If you ever want to only stop once, highway 7 is the better route, especially in winter.

It's not just my opinion. It's fact. The malls are being redeveloped because they are not financially sustainable, specifically because they lack the traffic and attendance they used to. Giving them chargers won't change much. But in any program where corporate entities get subsidies for installing chargers, I have no doubts that malls would participate.

Who is saying they should be given them (as in for free)?

It really depends on how common L2 charging is. Yes, the grocery store will not be enough. But if we're spreading the money around to put L2 everywhere, then hopefully the gym, the coffee shop, and the mall will have one too. In that ways, the 5-6 hrs of L2 charging can be met by accessing different L2 charging at various times throughout the week. Though, to be honest that starts to look as or more painful than putting gas in your car once a week.

That is my point. We shouldn't be restricting them to grocery stores though.

Yeah. I don't consider multi-decade long timeframes "reasonable".

I tend to agree, but you didn't answer my question. What is reasonable in your opinion? 1 year? 2 years? 5 years? 10 years? Then the corollary to that question is, is it reasonable?

This is how politicians think. And I sincerely hope most EV drivers don't think this way. Reeks of, "— you. Got mine." Ideally, I hope there's enough coverage so that 100% of urban and suburban residents can access a charger conveniently enough to meet their needs by 2030.

You are taking things way too personally!

I want to see everyone switch to EVs and am looking at the long game as to how we can achieve that. While some people (like CyrusKafaiwu) can make it work without charging at home even he admitted that it would be much easier if he could. I am not convinced the average person would be willing to put in that same effort and would just buy another ICEV instead. When you can charge at home, EVs really shine.

Charging at home also has the societal benefit of helping the electrical grid and making electricity cheaper for everyone. The grid is built to meet peak demand (some of the capacity is only needed for a few hours a year) and is under utilized at night (so much so that electricity rates often go negative). Having people charge during the day will further increase that disparity, but by having most EVs chargie at night, we flatten out the curve and raise the baseline load without significantly increasing the peak. By selling more electricity with the same infrastructure, the average cost will go down.

Correct me if I'm wrong. But I have understood the $100 000 cost to be per station, not per charger. UBS had estimated that a Tesla Supercharger station costs US$250 000 to build and most of those had 4-6 charging stalls per station. So I would think a $100 000 subsidy per station would be sufficient. It's a subsidy. I am not suggesting the government foot 100% of the bill. They need enough to close the business case and get the ball rolling on forming partnerships between them and the charging networks.

My reference was this interview in January with Louie Tremblay, CEO, FLO Canada, in which he says, a DCFC costs between $100k and $150k and can cost over $200k. Part of the confusion may come with what constitutes a "station." Is it the entire location (analogous to a gas station) or is it a single box (analogous to a computer workstation)?

Looking at the the article you linked to, they say:

• 30,000 new chargers
• $250,000 per station.
• $8 billion investment

Some quick math 30,000 x $250,000 = $7,500,000,000, which rounds up too $8 billion, so it seems like they are referring to a station as a charger, not a location. Having said that, I am never put much confidence in the media getting their facts straight.

Not really. If your plan is to only support 30% by 2030, then no condo board has to install chargers for at least another decade or more. Since most of that 30% can be fleet and suburban home dwellers.

It is a balancing act. With less than 1% of vehicles on the road being plugable, a condos with 100 vehicles would statistically have only 1 plugable vehicle (on average). It is unfortunate, but given the higher cost of installing charging stations at condos combined with the potential for better economies of scale when installing multiple stations at once, it makes sense to wait until utilization has the potential to be higher. Admittedly this is a chicken and egg scenario, but there is wisdom in not buying chickens until there is a reasonable demand for eggs.

"— the condo and apartment dwellers till 2040." is a strategy. I'd just like to know if that's what the various levels of government are actually aiming for. It certainly looks that way from where I sit. And increasingly looks like a lot of the EV community is down with that too.....

It was never my intent to suggest that we wait until 2040. Do you really believe that anyone thinks we need to wait until 100% of all new vehicle sales are zero emission? That is ridiculous. We are still in early the early adopter phase, but once we have cost parody, most people will want their next car to be a BEV and will want charging infrastructure where they live to facilitate that purchase.

[CanadaGoose]

Can someone simplify the cost figures for this EV station installations?

I see 250k USD for a Tesla Supercharger station (which is typically 8 stations, but on this forum its 6 stations)

I see 100k - 150K for one that is Electric Circuit style (one chademo, one CCS)

I read 45k for a Level 2 station?!?!
- which confuses me because it definitely 110% costs less than 2K (usually around 1k, but 2k is a conservative estimate) to install an electric charger at 30 amps and 240V (which is the standard figure I gave 50km/h) at home

I do know if there isn’t existing cables or hookup from Hydro Ottawa or let’s say, the cost increases.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by CyrusKafaiwu

Can someone simplify the cost figures for this EV station installations?

I see 250k USD for a Tesla Supercharger station (which is typically 8 stations, but on this forum its 6 stations)

I see 100k - 150K for one that is Electric Circuit style (one chademo, one CCS)

There's a paper here from the Rocky Mountain Institute the details the costs. This 11 page paper from the International Council on Clean Transportation is even better. Has some nice summary charts that are easier to understand.

We need to distinguish between stations and chargers. I've found that when most publications use the word station it's analogous to "gas station", as in a location to charge. That location can have more than one charging unit, just like a gas station has more than one pump. And those units are often referred to as chargers, stalls or spots.

In the sources above you'll see that the fast chargers themselves are in the tens of thousands. The six figure costing for a station includes site overhead from the engineering, permitting and infrastructure to enable that location. There's probably a $50-100k base cost for any fast charging station location. And then a $30-70k cost per fast charging unit on top of that. So a location with 6 units might cost $230k to $520k, depending on location and capabilities of the units.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Park n Rides are actually dubious investments without some real policy controls. You leave your car at the PnR for 9+ hrs tying up a charging spot. Likelihood, the car is charging the whole time? Very low. Inefficient capital spending. Maybe if they create controlled lot areas with premium parking fees and charging included.

While I don't disagree with you, I will leave the debate about investment in Park n Rides to a more appropriate thread, but I am generally opposed to "free" (or included) public charging. Sure as an EV owner, I will use them (hypocritical of me I know, but who doesn't like to get something for free), but but unless you have enough charging stations for everyone who wants one (an expensive endeavour), someone who needs to charge may be blocked by someone who doesn't need the charge. It also encourages unnecessary daytime charging, when (as I previously discussed) electricity demand is highest. Even a modest fee (be it a one time connection or hourly) that doesn't fully recover costs will discourage unnecessary use.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Or install 110V outlets at every spot and let people trickle charge. Much cheaper.

It is debatable if it is cheaper. The problems with providing NEMA 5-15 (standard 120V/15A) outlets are that you have no ability to control or limit power distribution and 120V is an inefficient way of delivering power.

Since most portable EVSEs will allow the maximum 12A continuous permitted on a 15A circuit to be drawn, you would need 1 circuit per parking spot since two cars charging on the same circuit would trip the breaker. Assuming every two parking spots share a split duplex (you could also use 3 phase, but it doesn't divide very well and doesn't provide much if any advantage in this scenario) on a 240V circuit, every 2 parking spots would require a twin breaker and a run of 14/3 wire. As a result a large PnR like Fallowfield with 1709 parking spaces would require 855 circuits. I don't know what size of service this would require for code. If they needed to power all circuits simultaneously (since they have no control), that would be 12,825A, though they could certainly derate that significantly based on the assumption that not everyone will be plugging in.

For large installs, smart charging stations with 3-phase power makes far more sense. If you still want to have people trickle charge, you can cut the current in half and only allow 6 amps. Because of this, and the magic of 3-phase power, you could power 6 parking spaces with a single 3-phase breaker and the same run of 14/3 wire (plus two short pig tails of 14/2 to adjacent charging stations). As a result, those 1709 parking spaces would only require 285 3-phase circuits (assuming you still deployed charging to every parking space, which likely isn't necessary). With smart charging stations, you control over the maximum load, scaling down or cycling charging sessions to ensure you don't exceed the maximum draw of the service.

Originally Posted by CyrusKafaiwu

The 110V outlet is nice but I would sit there worried that my $370 charger is sitting outside charging my car and can easily be unplugged then sold on Kijiji. Again, J1772 is the standard.

There is also the convenience factor. It is much easier to grab a cable hanging from a stand and plug it in than it is to get your EVSA from your trunk, uncoil it, plug it in at both ends, only to have to do the reverse when leaving. This might seem like a 1st world problem (and it is) but if we want to encourage EV adoption, we need to make it convenient.

Originally Posted by CyrusKafaiwu

It says in the article that it’s 0.8 times a day which sounds like:
- people were plugging in for a regular 9-5 day only and 20% of the chargers weren’t used.

Or most/all stations being used 5 days a week but only a few were used on the weekends.

A maintenance fee of $2000 per year per charging station does seem high IMHO. I wonder if that was a lease which included all of the initial installation costs.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by CyrusKafaiwu

I cant think of any EV owner who would pay for that (when there is free park and ride parking around).

That's a different debate entirely. Free parking is an absolutely ridiculously expensive subsidy provided to drivers. You can see the absurdity of that in the GTA where Metrolinx is now one of North America's largest parking providers and they spend tens of millions for each parking garage they build. GO is moving to charge (starting with reserved spots) and the TTC charges for all their lots. If Ottawa had any sense we'd do the same.

Originally Posted by CyrusKafaiwu

The 110V outlet is nice but I would sit there worried that my $370 charger is sitting outside charging my car and can easily be unplugged then sold on Kijiji. Again, J1772 is the standard.

This is a good point. All the more sense in charging for parking. The revenue can be used to fund infrastructure like providing a standard charger at a spot instead of just an outlet.

Originally Posted by CyrusKafaiwu

It says in the article that it’s 0.8 times a day which sounds like:
- people were plugging in for a regular 9-5 day only and 20% of the chargers weren’t used.

From an infrastructure investment point of view that is a very poor return though. Not only is the car occupying a parking spot worth tens of thousands of dollars, they are charging so little that the cost of the charging unit can't be recovered in any reasonable timeframe. Solution? Charge for parking. Tack on a surcharge for an EV spot. Use that to pay for the charging unit and juice supplied. Imagine regular parking cost $5. And the EV spots cost $8 and provide you a J1772 or Chademo handle that provides 2-3 kW.

Ultimately though you can't have better infrastructure without somebody paying for it. And most of that should be on the driver. Especially in cases like this.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by CyrusKafaiwu

I read 45k for a Level 2 station?!?!

I am curious where you read that? Commercial installs do often cost more as they involve longer runs and often require digging trenches in the parking lot (and repaving them). They also use industrial grade charging stations, which are more expensive. Regardless, it does seem excessive.

- which confuses me because it definitely 110% costs less than 2K (usually around 1k, but 2k is a conservative estimate) to install an electric charger at 30 amps and 240V (which is the standard figure I gave 50km/h) at home

$1k is the starting point for a simple install of a "dumb" charging station (about $500 for the station and $500 installation). In my case it cost about $2k as I got a smart charging station (FLO X5) and wanted it installed on the far side of the garage from where the wall closest to where the breaker panel is in the basement. If you need to upgrade your electrical service, it would be significantly more expensive again.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Ontario does have the 400 and 401 well covered. It is now time to move to the secondary corridors.

This is entirely an opinion. Not fact. As EV adoption grows more charging infrastructure will be needed. It's smart to put that where it's convenient. It's amazing how you argue against this over here, but have no issues recognizing that even minor inconveniences can cause friction with EV adoption:

Originally Posted by roger1818

There is also the convenience factor. It is much easier to grab a cable hanging from a stand and plug it in than it is to get your EVSA from your trunk, uncoil it, plug it in at both ends, only to have to do the reverse when leaving. This might seem like a 1st world problem (and it is) but if we want to encourage EV adoption, we need to make it convenient.

I would think not having charging stations at the OnRoutes is a much bigger deterrent than having to uncoil a cable at a Park and Ride.

Originally Posted by roger1818

Previously said you always stop twice. If you ever want to only stop once, highway 7 is the better route, especially in winter.

Again, I think you're projecting here. Ever tried finding a diaper changing station on a roadtrip? There's a reason the government invested in the 400-series of highways and built service centres along them. That is where they want the bulk of traffic going. And infrastructure investment should align with that intent.

Pushing wider coverage when most of our existing population in urban areas can't even properly access a charger or travel conveniently between major cities is a bit nonsensical.

Originally Posted by roger1818

Who is saying they should be given them (as in for free)?

Nobody. I suggested they would participate in any program supporting charger installation. If you want to be pedantic, let's call it a subsidy.

Originally Posted by roger1818

That is my point. We shouldn't be restricting them to grocery stores though.

Not saying they should be exclusive to grocery stores. But I'd like to see more of a focus on getting chargers in places that are highly frequented by most of the population. The percentage of people going to theatres and malls every week is small and getting smaller.

Our current policy of subsidizing infrastructure with zero regard to traffic or access, means that it's very likely that Electrify Canada, Sun Country, Electric Circuit, Petro Canada are probably getting some subsidies to build chargers at gas stations, Canadian Tires and Home Depots. The last one has some merit, but does this sound like a strategy that promotes broad adoption?

Originally Posted by roger1818

I tend to agree, but you didn't answer my question. What is reasonable in your opinion? 1 year? 2 years? 5 years? 10 years? Then the corollary to that question is, is it reasonable?

I've said elsewhere, I want coverage to be such that 100% of urban and suburban residents should be able to have their charging needs met conveniently by 2030.

If we can't put chargers in every condo and apartment building by 2030, let's think of strategies that can enable those residents to charge during some regular concurrent activity.

Originally Posted by roger1818

You are taking things way too personally!

The dismissiveness from already heavily subsidized suburbanites gets tiresome.

Originally Posted by roger1818

Charging at home also has the societal benefit of helping the electrical grid and making electricity cheaper for everyone. The grid is built to meet peak demand (some of the capacity is only needed for a few hours a year) and is under utilized at night (so much so that electricity rates often go negative). Having people charge during the day will further increase that disparity, but by having most EVs chargie at night, we flatten out the curve and raise the baseline load without significantly increasing the peak. By selling more electricity with the same infrastructure, the average cost will go down.

Nobody is disputing that charging at home is beneficial. What this discussion is about is whether that is scalable in a reasonable timeframe. There is absolutely no way to ensure the bulk of multi-unit residents can charge overnight by 2030. Even charging stalls at every single condo and apartment won't achieve this because they will have to be shared. With that in mind, the smartest way then is to build fast charging locations that can cover thousands of residents and can be easily scaled as required.

Originally Posted by roger1818

My reference was this interview in January with Louie Tremblay, CEO, FLO Canada, in which he says, a DCFC costs between $100k and $150k and can cost over $200k. Part of the confusion may come with what constitutes a "station." Is it the entire location (analogous to a gas station) or is it a single box (analogous to a computer workstation)?

Looking at the the article you linked to, they say:
Some quick math 30,000 x $250,000 = $7,500,000,000, which rounds up too $8 billion, so it seems like they are referring to a station as a charger, not a location. Having said that, I am never put much confidence in the media getting their facts straight.

Kinda obvious that chargers and station is not the same thing no? Even in your linked interview, he talks about "sites". Not chargers. Nobody conflates "gas pump" and "gas station". It is unfortunate though that a lot of charging networks will often push the number is chargers they have to hype up their size. I'd say the number of stations/locations is more of an indicator of coverage provided.

Originally Posted by roger1818

It is a balancing act. With less than 1% of vehicles on the road being plugable, a condos with 100 vehicles would statistically have only 1 plugable vehicle (on average). It is unfortunate, but given the higher cost of installing charging stations at condos combined with the potential for better economies of scale when installing multiple stations at once, it makes sense to wait until utilization has the potential to be higher. Admittedly this is a chicken and egg scenario, but there is wisdom in not buying chickens until there is a reasonable demand for eggs.

What is frustrating here is that the government has zero issues cutting cheques to suburbanites for both their car purchase and charger installation, but then tells apartment and condo dwellers to go fight it out with their board. It's especially crazy given that apartment and condo dwellers tend to actually practice more sustainable behaviour. Literally subsidizing the worst set and penalizing the best. This is why I find the current system so offensive.

Originally Posted by roger1818

It was never my intent to suggest that we wait until 2040. Do you really believe that anyone thinks we need to wait until 100% of all new vehicle sales are zero emission?

If they are only tracking "30 by 30" and you account for the lag from the sales mix to the fleet mix, then my previous point stands. No apartment or condo truly "needs" to install a charger before 2030 at least. And I would bet under such guidance, most wouldn't do it by 2040 either. I wish the ban on new gas and diesel sales would be moved up to 2035, like the UK. Might actually force some sincere efforts.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by roger1818

It also encourages unnecessary daytime charging, when (as I previously discussed) electricity demand is highest. Even a modest fee (be it a one time connection or hourly) that doesn't fully recover costs will discourage unnecessary use.

You've brought this up a few times now. I think you are vastly overestimating the impact. Even if every vehicle on the road was an EV tomorrow, the vast majority of charging would be done at home, overnight. The exceptions would be trickle charging at work, in park and rides or in apartment and condos where EVSE has to be shared. The fleets would all charge overnight and their power draw would be far higher than the average commuter sucking up a few kW for their commute. Think of how much a transit bus or mail van will need compared to the average commuter. Add in some demand management and you could arguably do all work and lot charging in the shoulder hours of the daytime peaks.

Originally Posted by roger1818

It is debatable if it is cheaper. The problems with providing NEMA 5-15 (standard 120V/15A) outlets are that you have no ability to control or limit power distribution and 120V is an inefficient way of delivering power.

Since most portable EVSEs will allow the maximum 12A continuous permitted on a 15A circuit to be drawn, you would need 1 circuit per parking spot since two cars charging on the same circuit would trip the breaker. Assuming every two parking spots share a split duplex (you could also use 3 phase, but it doesn't divide very well and doesn't provide much if any advantage in this scenario) on a 240V circuit, every 2 parking spots would require a twin breaker and a run of 14/3 wire. As a result a large PnR like Fallowfield with 1709 parking spaces would require 855 circuits. I don't know what size of service this would require for code. If they needed to power all circuits simultaneously (since they have no control), that would be 12,825A, though they could certainly derate that significantly based on the assumption that not everyone will be plugging in.

For large installs, smart charging stations with 3-phase power makes far more sense. If you still want to have people trickle charge, you can cut the current in half and only allow 6 amps. Because of this, and the magic of 3-phase power, you could power 6 parking spaces with a single 3-phase breaker and the same run of 14/3 wire (plus two short pig tails of 14/2 to adjacent charging stations). As a result, those 1709 parking spaces would only require 285 3-phase circuits (assuming you still deployed charging to every parking space, which likely isn't necessary). With smart charging stations, you control over the maximum load, scaling down or cycling charging sessions to ensure you don't exceed the maximum draw of the service.

I appreciate the math and analysis. I was thinking along the lines of providing outlets for block heaters today. We do that in a lot of the country with little issue. And cost doesn't seem to a major factor. Hence, my assumption that doing so would be fairly cheap. Aside from just service though, the cost calculus changes when you include installation of EVSE. If that is going to be done, I agree with you. Might as well install it. And hopefully charge for it.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

This is entirely an opinion. Not fact. As EV adoption grows more charging infrastructure will be needed. It's smart to put that where it's convenient.

I have said all along that we should build it when it is needed. Do you have any evidence that the existing infrastructure is approaching capacity?

It's amazing how you argue against this over here, but have no issues recognizing that even minor inconveniences can cause friction with EV adoption:

I would think not having charging stations at the OnRoutes is a much bigger deterrent than having to uncoil a cable at a Park and Ride.

There are couple differentiators:

• It is easier to drive an extra minute in a climate controlled vehicle than it is to stand in the heat/cold/rain coiling and uncoiling your cable.
• DCFC are used on road trips which most people only do a couple times a year, where as PnRs are used as part of a person's daily commute.

Regardless, your are nitpicking on a minor detail when I listed several more important factors. I'm not terribly stressed about the PnR situation, as it is better to charge at home anyway.

Again, I think you're projecting here. Ever tried finding a diaper changing station on a roadtrip? There's a reason the government invested in the 400-series of highways and built service centres along them. That is where they want the bulk of traffic going. And infrastructure investment should align with that intent.

That's a fair analysis. They should have been the first place to receive DCFCs, but that is water under the bridge now.

Pushing wider coverage when most of our existing population in urban areas can't even properly access a charger or travel conveniently between major cities is a bit nonsensical.

My priority is to fill in those holes in infrastructure. That doesn't describe the 400 and 401.

Nobody. I suggested they would participate in any program supporting charger installation. If you want to be pedantic, let's call it a subsidy.

tomayto, tomahto. So you think malls should be specifically excluded from all EV charger subsidies?

Not saying they should be exclusive to grocery stores. But I'd like to see more of a focus on getting chargers in places that are highly frequented by most of the population. The percentage of people going to theatres and malls every week is small and getting smaller.

Our current policy of subsidizing infrastructure with zero regard to traffic or access, means that it's very likely that Electrify Canada, Sun Country, Electric Circuit, Petro Canada are probably getting some subsidies to build chargers at gas stations, Canadian Tires and Home Depots. The last one has some merit, but does this sound like a strategy that promotes broad adoption?

The problem is the people in charge don't know anything about where charging stations should be located. This is shown by how the city is installing DCFC stations at PnR and rec centres.

I've said elsewhere, I want coverage to be such that 100% of urban and suburban residents should be able to have their charging needs met conveniently by 2030.

Sorry. I missed that steak in the sand. If you reword that to "100% of urban and suburban residents [who own a plug in vehicle] should be able to have their charging needs met conveniently by 2030." I would agree

If we can't put chargers in every condo and apartment building by 2030, let's think of strategies that can enable those residents to charge during some regular concurrent activity.

I think we can. Will it be easy? No. But I believe it can be done.

Nobody is disputing that charging at home is beneficial. What this discussion is about is whether that is scalable in a reasonable timeframe. There is absolutely no way to ensure the bulk of multi-unit residents can charge overnight by 2030. Even charging stalls at every single condo and apartment won't achieve this because they will have to be shared. With that in mind, the smartest way then is to build fast charging locations that can cover thousands of residents and can be easily scaled as required.

I dispute the notion that every parking space needs charging by 2030. If 30% of new vehicles sold will be ZEVs, I would guess that under 10% of all vehicles on the road will need charging, so if 10% of the spots have charging, that would be enough for that deadline. With appropriate planning, that percentage can grow.

Kinda obvious that chargers and station is not the same thing no? Even in your linked interview, he talks about "sites". Not chargers. Nobody conflates "gas pump" and "gas station".

I don't know if any gasoline vendor uses anything other than a pump so there was no need for a generic term. The problem comes from having DC Fast Chargers and Level 2 EVSAs (the charger is in your car) so a general term was needed since people who call them Level 2 chargers often get their hand slapped. EVSA doesn't roll off the tongue and it doesn't apply to DC Fast Chargers.

It is true that in the interview I linked he talks about "sites" but that isn't really any clearer. You will also notice the interviewer (Ken) calls them Level 3 but the interviewee uses DCFC. If you look at the article you linked to, they use chargers and stations synonymously.

It is unfortunate though that a lot of charging networks will often push the number is chargers they have to hype up their size. I'd say the number of stations/locations is more of an indicator of coverage provided.

Yes and no. The number of chargers is important as locations with only 1 can be problematic. It is important to have redundancy.

What is frustrating here is that the government has zero issues cutting cheques to suburbanites for both their car purchase and charger installation, but then tells apartment and condo dwellers to go fight it out with their board.

The federal government has subsidies for condos to install charging infrastructure but not for single family homes

It is the province who changed the condo regulations to allow charging infrastructure. They also had many subsidies, but they were all cancelled by Ford, but he didn't revoke the change in condo rules.

It's especially crazy given that apartment and condo dwellers tend to actually practice more sustainable behaviour. Literally subsidizing the worst set and penalizing the best. This is why I find the current system so offensive.

There currently are more EV subsidies for condo owners than there are for single family home owners in Ontario.

If they are only tracking "30 by 30" and you account for the lag from the sales mix to the fleet mix, then my previous point stands. No apartment or condo truly "needs" to install a charger before 2030 at least.

Yet you say your target is 2030?

And I would bet under such guidance, most wouldn't do it by 2040 either.

I am not so sure. Condo boards respond to what the bulk of the owners want. I expect that by 2030 attitudes will have changed substantially. Even if the majority don't own a BEV by then, most will want one and thus want the infrastructure in preparation. There is also lots of time for changes in legislation.

I wish the ban on new gas and diesel sales would be moved up to 2035, like the UK. Might actually force some sincere efforts.

While I tend to agree, we are substantially behind the UK. That is in part because of the longer distances. Until last December, there was no way to easily drive from coast to coast in a BEV (Tesla or otherwise).

Even more important IMHO would be accelerating the electrification of short-medium distance commercial vehicles combined with a cash for clunkers programme on the most heavily polluting trucks. There are still lots of old trucks that spew out tonnes of back smoke.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

You've brought this up a few times now. I think you are vastly overestimating the impact. Even if every vehicle on the road was an EV tomorrow, the vast majority of charging would be done at home, overnight.

According to Statistics Canada, 53.6% of dwellings in Canada are single family homes. If we don't push to have convenient charging in apartments and condos, a bare majority might be charging overnight, but a large percentage won't be able to.

The exceptions would be trickle charging at work, in park and rides or in apartment and condos where EVSE has to be shared.

My point is we need to get them to charge overnight as well.

The fleets would all charge overnight and their power draw would be far higher than the average commuter sucking up a few kW for their commute. Think of how much a transit bus or mail van will need compared to the average commuter.

That is a valid point, but I was referring to LDVs. Sorry if I wasn't being clear.

Add in some demand management and you could arguably do all work and lot charging in the shoulder hours of the daytime peaks.

I fully support demand management. Most of that will come overnight but there will be opportunities during the day as well (short drops in demand that needs to go somewhere, or short peeks in demand that could be levelled off).

I appreciate the math and analysis. I was thinking along the lines of providing outlets for block heaters today. We do that in a lot of the country with little issue. And cost doesn't seem to a major factor. Hence, my assumption that doing so would be fairly cheap.

Block heaters use about 300 W, where as a small EVSE uses 1.44 kW (almost 5 times as much) so where one circuit can power multiple block heaters, it can only charge 1 car. As a result, significant upgrades would be needed. Even if someone plugs in a vacuum cleaner into the same circuit as your car, the breaker will trip. I even once had a fuse blow at a cottage that had about 300 W of incandescent bulbs on the same circuit as my car.

Aside from just service though, the cost calculus changes when you include installation of EVSE. If that is going to be done, I agree with you. Might as well install it. And hopefully charge for it.

I agree that the EVSE will cost money, but they are coming down in price, and they do let you have people pay for charging, which I still maintain is a good thing.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by roger1818

There are couple differentiators:

• It is easier to drive an extra minute in a climate controlled vehicle than it is to stand in the heat/cold/rain coiling and uncoiling your cable.
• DCFC are used on road trips which most people only do a couple times a year, where as PnRs are used as part of a person's daily commute.

Regardless, your are nitpicking on a minor detail when I listed several more important factors. I'm not terribly stressed about the PnR situation, as it is better to charge at home anyway.

Exactly because it is easier to charge at home, is why it is less of an issue than where fast chargers are located. I would go so far as to say that there is no marginal buyer for whom charging at the Park n Ride is the deciding factor on EV adoption. Let alone having to uncoil the cable in the rain. On the other hand, not having chargers at the OnRoutes definitely impacts awareness of EVs and EV infrastructure.

Originally Posted by roger1818

That's a fair analysis. They should have been the first place to receive DCFCs, but that is water under the bridge now.

How is it water under the bridge when they don't have fast chargers?

Originally Posted by roger1818

My priority is to fill in those holes in infrastructure. That doesn't describe the 400 and 401.

And my priority is to promote EV adoption. The marginal return on that metric is far higher putting chargers on the 400 series service centres, than putting chargers up where a fraction of the province lives and even fewer people travel. And I'd go so far as to say that not having fast charging at service centres is an infrastructure gap.

Originally Posted by roger1818

So you think malls should be specifically excluded from all EV charger subsidies?

I never said they should be. I do think locations that see more traffic should be prioritized for subsidies.

Originally Posted by roger1818

The problem is the people in charge don't know anything about where charging stations should be located. This is shown by how the city is installing DCFC stations at PnR and rec centres.

Which is exactly part of my frustration and complaint. Except that, you as a suburban home dweller have options to get around that incompetence. I don't.

Originally Posted by roger1818

I think we can. Will it be easy? No. But I believe it can be done.

At our current pace of investment and development? Absolutely not. I would be the percentage of apartments and condos equipped with charging stations to be lower than the percentage of BEV sales in 2030.

Originally Posted by roger1818

I dispute the notion that every parking space needs charging by 2030. If 30% of new vehicles sold will be ZEVs, I would guess that under 10% of all vehicles on the road will need charging, so if 10% of the spots have charging, that would be enough for that deadline. With appropriate planning, that percentage can grow.

I've not suggested that every spot should be wired. Just sufficient to meet needs. That said, the ideal here would be for each resident to be able to charge at their own spot. But if that can't happen, you have to start reserving spots. Here's the problem. Existing buildings have a finite amount of parking spots. Most buildings built in the last 15 years usually have ~1.2 spots for every unit and 0.1-0.2 spots for visitors. Newer buildings have even less. The more spots you dedicate to EV charging, the more spots you take away from other purposes. Usually Visitor Parking. This might be fine when you need a handful of stalls. Any scenario where you start getting to say 20% of the building have EVs and you will have issues on having a sufficient number of chargers. You now have an issue where you might have insufficient visitor parking, while residents who are charging have free spots (usually in the controlled access lot/garage).

Originally Posted by roger1818

The federal government has subsidies for condos to install charging infrastructure but not for single family homes

It is the province who changed the condo regulations to allow charging infrastructure. They also had many subsidies, but they were all cancelled by Ford, but he didn't revoke the change in condo rules.

There currently are more EV subsidies for condo owners than there are for single family home owners in Ontario.

Subsidies are pointless without an effective method to access them. That's my point. It's great that there are subsidies for buildings. But that is entirely irrelevant if the vast, vast, vast majority of apartment building managers and condo boards perceive the installation of EV charging as a hassle.

Originally Posted by roger1818

Yet you say your target is 2030?

Yes. Hence, my frustration. If the government is guiding on "30 by 30", it's my fear that most apartments and condos won't bother. On that kind of a timeline most EV sales will still be to suburban home dwellers and fleets. It's not a target where you truly need broad accessibility.

Originally Posted by roger1818

I am not so sure. Condo boards respond to what the bulk of the owners want. I expect that by 2030 attitudes will have changed substantially. Even if the majority don't own a BEV by then, most will want one and thus want the infrastructure in preparation. There is also lots of time for changes in legislation.

Have you ever lived in a condo? Serious question. They'll get the condo management company to study it. That company will report its findings a year hence. And maybe they go through with the plan. Or it gets deferred another year. In the meantime, anybody who is considering an EV just gets something else. You can pull the legal card. But then you get the ill will of your neighbours and the whole bill for an industrial charging stand.

Originally Posted by roger1818

While I tend to agree, we are substantially behind the UK. That is in part because of the longer distances. Until last December, there was no way to easily drive from coast to coast in a BEV (Tesla or otherwise).

Cross-country travel is all but irrelevant to a decision ban ICEV. Nor is range really, really an issue. The current crop of BEV models all have enough range for a long road-trip. It's pretty easy to project out a decade and see that there will be sufficiently ranged models available in every vehicle category. What putting a firm date would do, is force some investment decisions on the infrastructure.

Originally Posted by roger1818

Even more important IMHO would be accelerating the electrification of short-medium distance commercial vehicles combined with a cash for clunkers programme on the most heavily polluting trucks. There are still lots of old trucks that spew out tonnes of back smoke.

At this point, I would bet money that plenty of fleets will get a replacement plan going without any subsidies at all. Look at Amazon and all the courier companies going to electric delivery vehicles. Or all the transit authorities in the country. A lot of this is happening without much government intervention at all. The bigger issue is infrastructure. Can the grid adequately service their depots? How would an electric semi charge en route? Or should semis go to hydrogen? Should hydrogen fill stations be built for that? Etc.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Exactly because it is easier to charge at home, is why it is less of an issue than where fast chargers are located. I would go so far as to say that there is no marginal buyer for whom charging at the Park n Ride is the deciding factor on EV adoption. Let alone having to uncoil the cable in the rain. On the other hand, not having chargers at the OnRoutes definitely impacts awareness of EVs and EV infrastructure.

I tend to agree that the presence of EV charging at PnRs is unlikely to be a significant factor in anyone's decision to buy an EV. I do find it totally ridiculous having DCFCs at several of the PnRs. That money could have been so much better invested.

How is it water under the bridge when they don't have fast chargers?

It is water under the bridge that they got put in other nearby locations instead. I challenge you to find an OnRoute that doesn't have within 10 km at least 2 DCFCs (possibly at the same location) that are less than a minute off of the highway.

And my priority is to promote EV adoption. The marginal return on that metric is far higher putting chargers on the 400 series service centres, than putting chargers up where a fraction of the province lives and even fewer people travel. And I'd go so far as to say that not having fast charging at service centres is an infrastructure gap.

Maybe it is because I live in the west end, but I have talked to many people who are interested in an EV but their parents/cottage/in-laws/whatever live in xyz and there are no DCFC along their route. Would they use it regularly? No, but most people don't use DCFCs daily. Did it stop them from buying an EV? Yes.

I never said they should be. I do think locations that see more traffic should be prioritized for subsidies.

To be honest, I don't know what rules they use to decide which applicants get subsidies. Maybe they do look at their business case. I don't know.

Which is exactly part of my frustration and complaint. Except that, you as a suburban home dweller have options to get around that incompetence. I don't.

I admit that being able to more easily install a charging adapter at home is a huge advantage. Your situation is worse, but there are solutions and they will come. What we haven't talked about is those who don't have off street parking. Fortunately that isn't very common in Canada and we have Europe to look to for advice, where that is even more common.

At our current pace of investment and development? Absolutely not. I would be the percentage of apartments and condos equipped with charging stations to be lower than the percentage of BEV sales in 2030.

I'm trying to figure out what you are trying to say. Are you saying 30% of the charging spots need to have charging by 2030? If so, I disagree. Not everyone drives a new car.

I've not suggested that every spot should be wired. Just sufficient to meet needs. That said, the ideal here would be for each resident to be able to charge at their own spot.

I agree!

But if that can't happen, you have to start reserving spots. Here's the problem. Existing buildings have a finite amount of parking spots. Most buildings built in the last 15 years usually have ~1.2 spots for every unit and 0.1-0.2 spots for visitors. Newer buildings have even less. The more spots you dedicate to EV charging, the more spots you take away from other purposes. Usually Visitor Parking. This might be fine when you need a handful of stalls. Any scenario where you start getting to say 20% of the building have EVs and you will have issues on having a sufficient number of chargers. You now have an issue where you might have insufficient visitor parking, while residents who are charging have free spots (usually in the controlled access lot/garage).

I never suggested having common reserved EV spots is an option. It might be a very temporary solution for 1 or 2 spots during the early adopter period, but once we get past that, you need owners to have charging at their own parking space.

One option, which admittedly would pose some legal challenges but could be done with the right legislation, would be to re-arrange the parking so that those who have/want EVs all park in the same area of the garage/lot.

The legislation we have now is a start, but much more will be needed in the coming years.

Have you ever lived in a condo? Serious question.

No, I have not. I have only owned the one house I live in now and have lived here for over 20 years. We chose the area because both my wife and I worked in the west end (and for the most part still do (long story)) so was close to work, and back then is was a quaint little town and not full of the soccer moms and Lindas (are they the same thing?) that it is today.

Having said that, I have talked to people who live in condos. One said the board was installing EV charging stations (I never heard if it happened though) and the other was on the board and said many owners were wanting EV Charging, so had questions for me as an EV owner.

Can I ask you serious question (actually a few). How long ago did you buy your current condo? Did you consider how easy the board was to work with? Were you considering an EV at the time to think to make it part of your condo buying process?

Subsidies are pointless without an effective method to access them. That's my point. It's great that there are subsidies for buildings. But that is entirely irrelevant if the vast, vast, vast majority of apartment building managers and condo boards perceive the installation of EV charging as a hassle.

Change is always difficult. With enough pressure and support from the owners, they will make it happen.

Yes. Hence, my frustration. If the government is guiding on "30 by 30", it's my fear that most apartments and condos won't bother. On that kind of a timeline most EV sales will still be to suburban home dwellers and fleets. It's not a target where you truly need broad accessibility.

The "30 by 30" is for Light Duty Vehicles (LDVs) only, so fleets won't have any significant effect (most use larger vehicles, though taxi's are the big exception). To get to that target using only single family home owners, we would need well over 50% of them buying ZEVs, which could be tough. We need to get condo owners onboard as well.

They'll get the condo management company to study it. That company will report its findings a year hence. And maybe they go through with the plan. Or it gets deferred another year. In the meantime, anybody who is considering an EV just gets something else.

Though there will be more people buying new cars. Also, it may not apply to you (it certainly doesn't apply to me), but thought I read somewhere the average new car buyer replaces it within 3 years, so even if they bought something else last year, they will be getting something new in a couple years.

Also PHEVs can be useful in this case. It can be driven like a conventional hybrid (plugging it in when you can) and then, once you get charging at home, you can plug in every night to drive mostly on electrons.

You can pull the legal card. But then you get the ill will of your neighbours and the whole bill for an industrial charging stand.

Some might bear you ill will, but some might thank you for paving the way for them to do the same. Also, if you are installing it yourself, there is no requirement for it to be an industrial unit. As long as the unit you are installing is CSA approved and it is properly installed, there are no safety concerns with it and while they can "propose an alternative installation plan," it can't "result in unreasonable costs to the owner."

If you are really serious about getting an EV, my suggestion is to talk to the Electric Vehicle Council of Ottawa. I am sure one (or more) of their members has experience dealing with condo boards and can give you some advice.

Cross-country travel is all but irrelevant to a decision ban ICEV. Nor is range really, really an issue. The current crop of BEV models all have enough range for a long road-trip.

A range of 2000 km? That was the distance between the DCFC in Thunder Bay and Calgary. That was the distance you would need to travel prior to both Tesla and Petro Canada opening their Trans-Canada charging networks (within days of each other) last December. Things are better now, admittedly, but there is still lots of room for improvement.

At this point, I would bet money that plenty of fleets will get a replacement plan going without any subsidies at all. Look at Amazon and all the courier companies going to electric delivery vehicles. Or all the transit authorities in the country. A lot of this is happening without much government intervention at all.

Most of the big fleets drive relatively modern, cleaner burning vehicles and wouldn't be eligible for a cash for clunkers programme. It is the smaller operations that drive around some of the worst pouters. Maybe they would pick up some of the cast offs from Amazon et.al. but in many cases they have optimizations that make them more expensive to replace and modifying a heavily used vehicle may not make sense.

The bigger issue is infrastructure. Can the grid adequately service their depots?

If they are charging at night, when the rest of their operations are shut down, they most likely. As an example, look at Gnewt Cargo, who are able to charge about 50 delivery Vans overnight. Fully Charged has an interesting podcast of an interview with Gnewt's founder Sam Clarke

How would an electric semi charge en route? Or should semis go to hydrogen?

That is why I specified short to medium range as one of the Battery Electric semis that are available or soon to be available will work nicely there. For long haul semis, I expect hydrogen may end up being the better option, but we will have to see how far battery technology advances.

Should hydrogen fill stations be built for that? Etc.

Canada's Zero Emission Vehicle Infrastructure Program does also talk about subsidizing hydrogen infrastructure. We aren't quite ready for it yet though.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by roger1818

It is water under the bridge that they got put in other nearby locations instead. I challenge you to find an OnRoute that doesn't have within 10 km at least 2 DCFCs (possibly at the same location) that are less than a minute off of the highway.

Could be a km away and it'd be kinda pointless. No fast charger station is going to have the same amenities as an OnRoute. There's a lot to be said for a facility that is right off the highway, has everything you need and is publicly accessible.

Originally Posted by roger1818

Maybe it is because I live in the west end, but I have talked to many people who are interested in an EV but their parents/cottage/in-laws/whatever live in xyz and there are no DCFC along their route. Would they use it regularly? No, but most people don't use DCFCs daily. Did it stop them from buying an EV? Yes.

If you are going up to the cottage, why would you need a fast charger? You park the car when you get there and plug in. You could also give them the same advice you give those who live in condos:

Originally Posted by roger1818

PHEVs can be useful in this case. It can be driven like a conventional hybrid (plugging it in when you can) and then, once you get charging at home, you can plug in every night to drive mostly on electrons.

One could argue that PHEVs are perfect for such cases. As opposed to prioritizing infrastructure dollars on marginal cases.

Originally Posted by roger1818

I admit that being able to more easily install a charging adapter at home is a huge advantage. Your situation is worse, but there are solutions and they will come. What we haven't talked about is those who don't have off street parking. Fortunately that isn't very common in Canada and we have Europe to look to for advice, where that is even more common.

Effectively, this is about where a ton of apartment and condo dwellers are in Canada.

Originally Posted by roger1818

I'm trying to figure out what you are trying to say. Are you saying 30% of the charging spots need to have charging by 2030? If so, I disagree. Not everyone drives a new car.

I am saying that we won't see 30% of apartments and condos having a charging capability on site by 2030.

Originally Posted by roger1818

One option, which admittedly would pose some legal challenges but could be done with the right legislation, would be to re-arrange the parking so that those who have/want EVs all park in the same area of the garage/lot.

The parking spot is deeded when you buy a condo. It's not a pooled asset. So it would be very difficult for most condos to do something like this. Also, keep in mind that most buildings have residents park in an underground garage while visitors park in an outside lot.

Originally Posted by roger1818

No, I have not. I have only owned the one house I live in now and have lived here for over 20 years.

I would suggest this is part of why you don't really understand the obstacles that condo and apartment dwellers face. And why it's easy to be dismissive of them. This is not a small matter either. Nearly a quarter of the country stays in some kind of multi-unit dwelling. No substantive solution means that your effective market for EVs is 75% of the population. The condo boom could make these numbers worse.

Originally Posted by roger1818

Can I ask you serious question (actually a few). How long ago did you buy your current condo? Did you consider how easy the board was to work with? Were you considering an EV at the time to think to make it part of your condo buying process?

Bought the condo 13 years ago. At the time, plugins of any kind weren't anything more than an exotic fascination. I bought a new car in 2013. At the time, again plug-ins were still expensive. And there was no real guidance on installing chargers at condos. I inquired and even had some preliminary discussions with several board members. Nobody was really opposed. They just didn't want to have the board incur costs for something that would benefit one resident. At last year's board meeting, it was brought up again. And the condo management company mentioned that they are drawing up a plan with options and costs. That won't be presented till this Fall. And who knows what will be supported.

Originally Posted by roger1818

Though there will be more people buying new cars. Also, it may not apply to you (it certainly doesn't apply to me), but thought I read somewhere the average new car buyer replaces it within 3 years, so even if they bought something else last year, they will be getting something new in a couple years.

That stat is pretty misleading. I think a lot of that includes fleets and company sponsored vehicles. But more to the point, the average length of new car ownership being 3 years has no bearing on what the fleet mix in a condo would be.

Originally Posted by roger1818

A range of 2000 km? That was the distance between the DCFC in Thunder Bay and Calgary. That was the distance you would need to travel prior to both Tesla and Petro Canada opening their Trans-Canada charging networks (within days of each other) last December.

Exactly. This is history. And irrelevant at this point. But let's say you weren't able to travel cross-country, would this really be relevant to EV adoption at all? Is not being able to drive cross-country really going to be barrier to buying an EV for most people?

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by roger1818

If they are charging at night, when the rest of their operations are shut down, they most likely. As an example, look at Gnewt Cargo, who are able to charge about 50 delivery Vans overnight. Fully Charged has an interesting podcast of an interview with Gnewt's founder Sam Clarke.

This is why I'm not really worried about the grid being overloaded by a handful of drivers charging during the day. During an exchange in the US a few years back, I completed an energy studies program. As part of the program they had grid operators from California present and discuss the challenges they project. Daytime EV charging wasn't a huge deal. In fact, they were somewhat worried that the emphasis on night time charging for everything might result in complete negation of off-peak. And that was something they were now studying and modeling. They were also looking at vehicle-to-grid. That extra peak demand could be met by other vehicles. Etc.

Originally Posted by roger1818

That is why I specified short to medium range as one of the Battery Electric semis that are available or soon to be available will work nicely there. For long haul semis, I expect hydrogen may end up being the better option, but we will have to see how far battery technology advances.

The battery semis have the potential to be major challenges. Operators aren't necessarily going to want overnight charging. Some operators just turn trucks today and would want to do the same. They'll want to charge the truck in the time it takes to load/unload or swap drivers.

[zzptichka]

New Supercharger on Robertson.

[Truenorth00]

Where exactly is that?