Electric Vehicle Charging Stations in Ottawa-Gatineau

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Which communities along Hwy 7 would be horrified by this theoretical 10% increase in traffic? There aren't that many along the route and it bypasses the core of most if not all of them. In fact, most depend on the "tourism" (for lack of a better word) from those driving through since a certain percentage will stop to buy things.

There's a large difference between a few stopping through and say a doubling or tripling of traffic.

Originally Posted by roger1818

I am curious how you got the 10% number anyway? The majority of vehicles on the 401 are going to/from Montreal, not to mention cities along the 401 and places east of Montreal. If you consider that maybe 20% (at most) of its traffic is going to/from Ottawa and by 2030, less than 10% of Ottawa's vehicles on the road will be electric, we are looking at maybe 2% of the 401's traffic switching (assuming all EVs switch to using Hwy 7 instead). Maybe by 2040 you will get to that 10% number, but that is 20 years from now and a lot can happen between now and then.

Your estimate is based on numerous assumptions:

1) That EVs will only have 10% fleet share.
2) That only EVs will move to Hwy 7.
3) The majority of traffic on the 401 is bound to/from Montreal.

I'd say that if EVs are only 10% fleet share by 2030, we've done poorly as a society. Even the "30 by 30" goal should result in a higher share. Next, why would you assume that only EVs move to Hwy 7? If the route is as fantastic as you suggest, there should be more traffic moving there. After all, gas is more expensive to waste than electrons. Lastly, the majority of 401 traffic, is mos definitely not Montreal bound. The majority of 401 traffic is still short or medium haul.

Originally Posted by roger1818

Are they enough? Probably not, but you have to start somewhere.

I think it's fair game to be frustrated when I think they are taking the lazy way out on policy.

Originally Posted by roger1818

But I thought you said that due to a lack of parking, it wouldn't be feasible to reserve common spaces for owners to charge? While you could maybe do it for 1 or 2 visitor parking spots (could be useful for some visitors in the long run), it doesn't scale well. You are also delaying the inevitable of having to install charging in the underground parking.

This is simply reality. It's far more sellable to suggest $10k - 20k to install a handful of Level 2 chargers on a few spots that a handful of residents will use, than to argue for a project that would cost $5k a spot, that most residents won't see themselves using for a decade. You can see how that vote would go at the AGM. This is an example of where government funding could help. Maybe enable the infrastructure work to be done and the individual buyer only has to pay to wire up their spot to the breaker box.

Originally Posted by roger1818

Yet a large number of people in Europe still own cars.

Not at the rates we do. They also drive substantially fewer kms than we do annually.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by roger1818

I happened to be in Perth on the weekend and noticed the Tesla Superchargers are now open. There only seemed to be one car using it though (not me, I don't have a Tesla). Truenorth00 would be happy as it is at a grocery store.

It has 8 chargers, 5 backing onto the highway and 3 backing onto the driveway.

That is indeed fantastic. If I lived in Perth and had a Tesla, I'd shop at that grocery store all the time.

Originally Posted by roger1818

That’s a good start, but it’s too bad they are only buying 4. Sound like green-washing more than anything. Hopefully once they realize how much money they are saving (and how much staff love driving them), they will buy a lot more.

Given how much the Kona costs, I sincerely hope the plan is to keep these things for a decade. The business case for BEVs at these prices is debatable. Even with the rebate. Especially since they don't need anything but a box with wheels for that job. That will change as more models come online. If only the Bolt was cheaper....

Originally Posted by roger1818

If the plan is to charge them overnight (like the article says), they will only buy 4 charge points, and they will likely be reserved for city use.

Yep. I am guessing they will be parked in a city garage or lot. Not some place where the public can normally access those chargers.

Originally Posted by Catenary

I'm guessing bylaw has the "greenest" fleet in the city already. They've been buying hybrids for years; Ford Escapes and Fusions, Hyundai Ionics, Toyota Rav4s and Prius Cs. They tend to have small cars in general, so this fits for them.

Their fleet does seem very mixed though, so they probably only get a handful of cars at a time. 4 new cars is likely all they get each year.

They need smaller and substantially cheaper BEVs. The tech just isn't there yet and the automakers are sort of shafting North America. I am really skeptical that the business case for these really works at the moment.

[CanadaGoose]

Originally Posted by roger1818

I happened to be in Perth on the weekend and noticed the Tesla Superchargers are now open. There only seemed to be one car using it though (not me, I don't have a Tesla). Truenorth00 would be happy as it is at a grocery store.

It has 8 chargers, 5 backing onto the highway and 3 backing onto the driveway.

I mean, these ones charge your car faster than the time it takes to even complete a grocery trip. And, will charge you a 1.00/min idle fee if you’re done charging but still parked there.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by CyrusKafaiwu

I mean, these ones charge your car faster than the time it takes to even complete a grocery trip. And, will charge you a 1.00/min idle fee if you’re done charging but still parked there.

Is there a grace time before the idle fees start?

Or could you pick a lower charge rate, such that you could shop longer?

[CanadaGoose]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Is there a grace time before the idle fees start?

Or could you pick a lower charge rate, such that you could shop longer?

Rates:
$ 0.44 per minute above 60 kW
$ 0.22 per minute at or below 60 kW

Idle fees:
$ 0.65 per minute (when half of the stalls are filled or more)
$ 1.30 per minute (when all stalls are filled)
All idle fees waived if you return to vehicle within 5 minutes

No method of slowing down the charge speed.

The superchargers are designed for road trips. Tesla expects people to use Level 2 charging at home / work (since fast charging degrades the battery a bit faster).

You also need to note Tesla Superchargers go up to 250KW. While a majority of Electric Circuit / Flo L3 stations go up to only 50KW.

[Truenorth00]

That kind of punitive pricing really is proving my point on why they need to build them at service centres where lots of people will flow through and leave. No competing with locals.

[CanadaGoose]

https://electrek.co/2020/08/07/tesla-urges-owners-push-charging-payment-kwh/

Tesla urges owners to push for allowing charging payment by kWh
Fred Lambert

Tesla is turning to owners in Canada to help push the government to allow the automaker to charge their vehicles by the kWh.

The automaker is expected to make similar pushes in other markets where the authorities only allow charging per minute instead of for the total energy.

In some markets, charging station operators are not allowed to charge electric car drivers by the kWh — like an electric utility.

Instead, they charge by the minute, which is less than ideal.

Tesla uses a two-tier system and charges a certain amount per minute when charging under 60kW (tier 1) and over 60kW (tier 2). Tier 1 is half the cost of tier 2, but the price changes based on electricity rates in specific markets.

While this system reduces the impact of time-based billing, it’s still not representative of the actual electricity that the consumer is getting.

Tesla explained in an email to owners:

With time-based billing, consumers run the risk of paying more to charge their EV one day compared to the next. Battery state of charge and temperature are just two of the factors that can affect charging speeds and thus cost — regardless of the amount of electricity delivered. For example, as an EV driver, you pay certain amount to charge your vehicle for 30 minutes on a fast (Level-3) chargers. If that 30-minute charging session is in the winter, you’ll be paying the same amount, but you’ll likely get less electricity for your money, since cold temperatures affect charging speeds. This is just one of the many scenarios in which the $/minute billing hurts you as a customer.

In Canada, they can actually charge by the kWh, but they have to use expensive utility-grade electricity meter, which Tesla claims will result in higher costs.

Tesla explained in the same email:

Current Federal standards, established by Measurement Canada require that anyone providing EV charging services must charge customers on a time-only basis. The only other option available is to use a pre-approved and inspected utility-grade electricity meter, but that would increase charging infrastructure costs, reduce charging availability, and increase charging infrastructure costs, reduce charging availability, and increase charging costs for consumers. These Federal standards were designed well before EVs became popular and public EV charging became common, and the unintended effect of these rules is less price transparency for consumers and unfair billing for EV charging.

That’s why Tesla is urging Canadian owners to contact Measurement Canada and ask them to allow charging station operators to charge by the kWh using their own connected charger.

Here’s the email in full:

Hello,

Have you ever noticed or wondered why EV drivers are billed by the minute for charging sessions, rather than by the amount of electricity received?

Current Federal standards, established by Measurement Canada require that anyone providing EV charging services must charge customers on a time-only basis. The only other option available is to use a pre-approved and inspected utility-grade electricity meter, but that would increase charging infrastructure costs, reduce charging availability, and increase charging infrastructure costs, reduce charging availability, and increase charging costs for consumers. These Federal standards were designed well before EVs became popular and public EV charging became common, and the unintended effect of these rules is less price transparency for consumers and unfair billing for EV charging.

With time-based billing, consumers run the risk of paying more to charge their EV one day compared to the next. Battery state of charge and temperature are just two of the factors that can affect charging speeds and thus cost — regardless of the amount of electricity delivered. For example, as an EV driver, you pay certain amount to charge your vehicle for 30 minutes on a fast (Level-3) chargers. If that 30-minute charging session is in the winter, you’ll be paying the same amount, but you’ll likely get less electricity for your money, since cold temperatures affect charging speeds. This is just one of the many scenarios in which the $/minute billing hurts you as a customer.

While Tesla’s tier billing system takes charging speed into account and diminishes the impact on the consumer, this isn’t the case for most public charging networks. To enable more transparent and fair billing for all consumers, all the time, Measurement Canada should allow network-connected EV charging connectors to count energy use, while they establish rules for accuracy.

Join us in urging Measurement Canada to temporarily pause the current rules while they work toward developing new long term EV charging metering standards. Help accelerate Canada’s transition to sustainable energy by clicking below to learn more and have your voice heard.

We appreciate your support

Best Regards,
Tesla Policy Team

Electrek’s Take

It seems like a sensitive request.

Connected chargers should be able to accurately calculate and keep track of how much power they deliver.

With this being an issue in several markets for Tesla and now the company’s policy team is on it, I expect to see similar efforts popping up in other markets.

Let us know in the comment section below if you are getting similar emails in other markets.

Very important to have per KWH billing instead of per minute.

[milomilo]

Why on earth is it illegal to charge by KWh in the first place? That's ridiculous.

Oh, I see, they can but it has to be a regulated meter. That sounds fair then, every house must have one, so they can't be that expensive.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Why on earth is it illegal to charge by KWh in the first place? That's ridiculous.

Only registered electric utilities are allowed to sell electricity. This isn't unique to Canada, but is also true in most states.

Oh, I see, they can but it has to be a regulated meter. That sounds fair then, every house must have one, so they can't be that expensive.

First of all, I wouldn't count on household meters being cheap. Secondly, the meter you have at your house wouldn't be sufficient. Residential meters are typically 240V 200A single phase meters. Simple math shows that limits it to 48 kW.

DCFC deliver 400 VDC (or sometimes 800 VDC) and typically deliver significantly more power than a residential meter can provide. That means they would need an industrial grade meter on each charger.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Only registered electric utilities are allowed to sell electricity. This isn't unique to Canada, but is also true in most states.



First of all, I wouldn't count on household meters being cheap. Secondly, the meter you have at your house wouldn't be sufficient. Residential meters are typically 240V 200A single phase meters. Simple math shows that limits it to 48 kW.

DCFC deliver 400 VDC (or sometimes 800 VDC) and typically deliver significantly more power than a residential meter can provide. That means they would need an industrial grade meter on each charger.

Fair points. The rules don't seem that unreasonable though, they are selling electricity after all. Hopefully a reasonable compromise can be found. I'm quite sure that gas sellers have to have some very accurate volume measurements on their equipment too.

[Tesladom]

Originally Posted by CyrusKafaiwu

You also need to note Tesla Superchargers go up to 250KW. While a majority of Electric Circuit / Flo L3 stations go up to only 50KW.

Yup, this is a significant barrier to another EV hopeful out there, only Telsa offers you the ability to effectively travel longer distances, 50kw wont cut it

Years ago all the traditional car manufacturers should have got together to develop and build a real fast DC Charging network with everyone using the same standards, they never did in spite of all these splashy presentations. Sadly we are still around 3-4 years away from having any serious competition to Tesla, their Supercharger network is the linchpin. Without this competition, EV adoption will plateau at no more than 10%.

Having owned one for 2.5 years, and using it to travel Toronto, Montreal etc for work and commuting to my cottage, I can clearly say that a 400km+ EV is perfectly good for any home owner with private driveway, the days of excuses are over.
Government and Hydro need to come up with strategy & incentives for Condos to all offer EV charging

[CanadaGoose]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Fair points. The rules don't seem that unreasonable though, they are selling electricity after all. Hopefully a reasonable compromise can be found. I'm quite sure that gas sellers have to have some very accurate volume measurements on their equipment too.

The problem is a charger has a max capacity.
But when a car charges, the charge speed changes throughout the duration of the charge.

For example on a Tesla, you may get the fastest charging speed between 20% and 40%, but that simmers down.

You end up with situations where 0.44 cents per a minute can give you 20km, while someone else’s minute gets 2km because of their battery.

The situation gets worst in the winter, the equipment will not be able to give its full speed because the battery will be cold or the charging equipment is not at optimal temperature. Meaning it will stay a 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 of how much battery charge you got for that 44 cents per minute.

It can be so bad, that you’ll get two times your value in the summer versus the winter for the same price.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Fair points. The rules don't seem that unreasonable though, they are selling electricity after all. Hopefully a reasonable compromise can be found. I'm quite sure that gas sellers have to have some very accurate volume measurements on their equipment too.

I would think that if they can show the chargers can record flowc rates and power delivered accurately, within a certain statistically relevant confidence, they might be able to get a waiver. People may not like these policies, but they do exist to protect consumers. And generally, Industry Canada has to consider impacts on more than one sector.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

There's a large difference between a few stopping through and say a doubling or tripling of traffic.

Do you really think that if 10% of the 401's traffic (between the 416 and Kingston, not the Toronto part) moved to Hwy 7, its traffic would double or triple? In other words, Hwy 7 has between 6.7% and 10% the traffic as the 401? Don't forget that the 401 is only a 4 lane highway between the 416 and beyond Belleville, so it only has double the capacity of Hwy 7 (which has 2 lanes). The only way that would happen is if Hwy 7 is severely underutilized, in which case, the increase in traffic wouldn’t be a problem.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Your estimate is based on numerous assumptions:

1) That EVs will only have 10% fleet share.
2) That only EVs will move to Hwy 7.
3) The majority of traffic on the 401 is bound to/from Montreal.

Close enough, though a better way to put number 3 is that a minority (i.e. less than half) of the traffic on the 401 is to/from Ottawa. I expect it is significantly less than half. Just look at how little traffic there is on the 416 south of Kemptville, and some of that traffic is bound for the US (or was before COVID). I would argue that the 416 is a better measure of traffic using the 401 from Ottawa to Toronto.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I'd say that if EVs are only 10% fleet share by 2030, we've done poorly as a society. Even the "30 by 30" goal should result in a higher share.

I did the math and if ZEV's comprise about 3% of new car sales today, and are projected to reach 10% by 2025 and 30% by 2030, that is a projection that sales will tipple every 5 years (for the time being at least), which is a growth rate of about 24.57%/year (the fifth root of 3 as a percent). If you assume that cars in Ontario last only last about 10 years (I suspect it is a bit higher than that), you can average the percentage of ZEVs sold over 10 years to figure out how many will be on the road. Doing the math, I came to a total of 13.5% of cars on the road being ZEVs in 2030, which is pretty close to my guesstimated 10%, though I will admit it is a bit off.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Next, why would you assume that only EVs move to Hwy 7? If the route is as fantastic as you suggest, there should be more traffic moving there.

It's mostly because people in ICE cars don't really pay much attention to fuel economy while driving. They just drive until the tank is close to empty and fill it up again and just consider the cost of gas a fixed expense without thinking about how they can save money by changing their behaviour.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

After all, gas is more expensive to waste than electrons.

That is very true when charging at home or using a public Level 2 charging. When using a DCFC, the cost to charge is much higher, so you want to minimize the number of times you use them, and take a slower, cheaper charge at your destination.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Lastly, the majority of 401 traffic, is mos definitely not Montreal bound. The majority of 401 traffic is still short or medium haul.

Be they short, medium or long haul, the point remains, a small percentage are going to/from Ottawa, so Hwy 7 isn't an option for them as it would be a detour.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I think it's fair game to be frustrated when I think they are taking the lazy way out on policy.

It is fair to be frustrated. If you consider grabbing low hanging fruit first lazy, then so be it.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

This is simply reality. It's far more sellable to suggest $10k - 20k to install a handful of Level 2 chargers on a few spots that a handful of residents will use, than to argue for a project that would cost $5k a spot, that most residents won't see themselves using for a decade. You can see how that vote would go at the AGM. This is an example of where government funding could help. Maybe enable the infrastructure work to be done and the individual buyer only has to pay to wire up their spot to the breaker box.

There are no easy solutions. While it may not seem fair, there is some logic in grabbing the low hanging fruit first. As interest and demand for EVs grows, more condo owners will want to buy them, and install home charging, making the per unit cost cheaper.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_vehicles_per_capita"]Not at the rates we do[/URL]. They also drive substantially fewer kms than we do annually.

I never said that they did. The shorter distances is, in part, because their big cities are closer together.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Given how much the Kona costs, I sincerely hope the plan is to keep these things for a decade. The business case for BEVs at these prices is debatable. Even with the rebate. Especially since they don't need anything but a box with wheels for that job. That will change as more models come online. If only the Bolt was cheaper....

Yet you seem to argue that the rebate isn't helpful?

Given the mileage they likely put on them in a year, I expect the cost savings in maintenance and fuel will be much higher than it is for an average person. Assuming they drive 100km a day (a low estimate IMHO), using BC Hydro’s EV Calculator, they would save over $4500 a year in fuel costs alone (ignoring the reduced maintenance costs).

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

They need smaller and substantially cheaper BEVs. The tech just isn't there yet and the automakers are sort of shafting North America. I am really skeptical that the business case for these really works at the moment.

Actually the tech is there. Just have a look at the 2019 (and newer) Renault Zoe. It is a five-door subcompact electric car with a 395km WLTP range (WLTP is a bit more optimistic than EPA, so for comparison, the Kona has a 470km WLTP range). Unfortunately the car manufacturers tend to think that North Americans don’t want small cars, so they often aren’t sold here.

It will be interesting to see how the Kandi K23 and K27 will do when they come to the US later this year (not sure if they are coming to Canada as well).

[Tesladom]

When evaluating EV options, you must also take into consideration EV-Platform-based vehicles (Tesla, iPace, Mustang MachE & VW ID series later this year) vs ICE Conversions platforms (Bolt, Kona, LEAF etc..). The ICE conversions are only stop gaps, and they are pretty terrible ICE platforms to begin with, and make even worse EV platforms.
Unless it is really dirt cheap, I wouldn't consider any one of these.I'd just get a $15k Hyundai Accent instead

Need to engineer and build an EV from he ground up. Check out Sandy Monroe's tear down videos on YouTube comparing Bolt, i3 and Model 3 for an example

Polestar2 is 600 pounds heavier than Model 3, but shares almost same dimensions and capacities. They made the critical mistake of using a Volvo XC ICE platform, thus travels much less on a single charge due to inefficient engineering borrowed from ICE (including the center hump!!)

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by CyrusKafaiwu

You also need to note Tesla Superchargers go up to 250KW. While a majority of Electric Circuit / Flo L3 stations go up to only 50KW.

What you are conveniently forgetting is the majority of PetroCanada chargers go up to 175kW and Electrify Canada has 350kW chargers at most locations.

That said, as you mentioned in a later post, current batteries won't charge for very long at those rates, so in the real world, a 50kW charger isn't as bad as it seems on paper.

[YOWetal]

Apologies in advance but...

Just drove about 3000 km over the past week. Just noticed how amazing the ICE is. In about 60 seconds you can add another 700km of range.
After taxes it cost me about $40. Since these taxes pay for our roads the Electric free riders will eventually have to pony up further destroying the economics of an already dubious mathematics. Personally I drive less than 10000km a year including usually a long trip or two so the cost is mostly irrelevant to me.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Tesladom

When evaluating EV options, you must also take into consideration EV-Platform-based vehicles (Tesla, iPace, Mustang MachE & VW ID series later this year) vs ICE Conversions platforms (Bolt, Kona, LEAF etc..).

Got to love the FUD Tesla fan boys spread. The Nissan LEAF and Chevy Bolt were not ICE conversions. Both were designed and built as BEVs. In the case of the LEAF, given that it was the first, mass market, ground up BEV (it predated the Model S by several years). As a result, it is an early BEV design from a company accustomed to building ICE vehicles. Despite its early design, it has done very well.

As for the Bolt, according to this article:

the Bolt, although it does have its own platform that’s not shared with GM’s legacy vehicles, has some design aspects that are clearly vestiges of the fossil fuel era.

In both cases, the use of components common to their ICE vehicles were likely an attempt to keep costs down. Keep in mind that Tesla has been unwilling or unable to make an affordable BEV, likely because their volumes still aren't high enough to make it financially viable.

The Kona is a bit different in that it was designed from the ground up to be either an ICEV or a BEV. While not as good as a vehicle designed to only be a BEV, it is better than the vehicles where they shoehorned batteries and an electric motor into an existing ICV design.

Better examples of ICE conversions are the VW e-Golf , the Ford Focus Electric and the Mitsubishi i-MiEV.

Need to engineer and build an EV from he ground up. Check out Sandy Monroe's tear down videos on YouTube comparing Bolt, i3 and Model 3 for an example

I assume you mean the the following video where Jalopnik‘s Jason Torchinsky and David Tracy got to visit Munro’s headquarters:

• Video Link

My takeaway from the video is (as I had heard many times before) that Tesla's has better ideas and technology. Given that all they build is BEVs they should have the best BEV technology. If they didn't, they would be in big trouble.

However, if you have watched any of Sandy Monroe's tear down videos you would see that where Tesla lags is in design for manufacturing (DFM). It is one thing to build one thing that is great, it is something totally different to be able to mass produce it, keeping your costs down and your quality up. That is where the incumbents have the upper hand is they know how to design things that can be mass produced. Now Tesla is getting better, and the Model Y is their best attempt so far, but it still isn't perfect.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Just drove about 3000 km over the past week. Just noticed how amazing the ICE is. In about 60 seconds you can add another 700km of range.

I am curious if you did all of that driving in one day or did you sleep in the middle? Also, did you ever stop without getting gas and have your car sit there doing nothing?

After taxes it cost me about $40.

I call BS! At about $1.20 per litre, $40 will buy you 33.3l of gas. Divide that by 30 (3000 km / 100) and you get 1.1 l/100km. I can't think of any ICE that gets anywhere close to that fuel economy. If we change it an an incredibly low 5 l/100km, that would work out to about $180 in gas.

Even if it weren't true, you aren't taking into account the maintenance costs resulting from your trip (for example, how much sooner will you need to change your oil).

Since these taxes pay for our roads the Electric free riders will eventually have to pony up further destroying the economics of an already dubious mathematics.

Tax revenue from the sale of gas does help pay for roads, so in the long run, we will have to find an alternate way of collecting that revenue. From my experience, for daily use, you tend to spend about 1/4 for electricity compared to what you would have paid for gas. Since fuel taxes in Ontario are 14.3¢ per litre, very little of what you are spending on gas is going to fix the roads.

Personally I drive less than 10000km a year including usually a long trip or two so the cost is mostly irrelevant to me.

That's valid. In your case, the biggest portion of your vehicle expense is the purchase of the vehicle itself, so you are probably best to wait until BEVs cost less to buy than ICEVs (should be sometime around 2025 for new vehicles at least, though I expect there will be a huge glut of used ICEVs people are trying to sell for some time to come).

[CanadaGoose]

Incentives and lack of charging tax for EVs exist to encourage people to reduce CO2, it’s more of a temporary triple bottom line measure.

Once, they manage to get EVs to their targets. They will probably find a way to tax us.

And also note: we do pay sales tax too.

——-
For a 3000km trip, I agree take the ICE or an PHEV.