Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/12/2019 Item 10, Rands Wilbanks, Megan From:Barry Rands <barry@carbonfreeslo.org> Sent:Wednesday, To:E-mail Council Website Cc:Bochum, Tim Subject:EV Charging at Palm-Nipomo facility Mayor and City Council, I am pleased that the new parking structure has been approved. As I stated in my public comment last night, I look forward to the expansion of the City's electric vehicle charging network that will be part of the new facility. During my comments, I suggested that the chargers include a variety of charging speeds and the accommodation of overnight parking/charging. I would like to expand on those comments here, providing background information and the rationale for those suggestions, and also offer my support to the design team delegated to plan the EV charging infrastructure. Electric Vehicles (EV) are evolving in terms of the capacity of their batteries and the rate at which those batteries can be charged. In general, newer EVs have larger batteries and can accept a high rate of charge. My 2019 Kia Niro, for example, has a battery that provides a driving range of 250 miles and will accept a charge rate of up to 75 kW. One the other hand, the very popular Chevy Volt and Prius Prime plug-in hybrids (unless upgraded) will only accept a maximum charge rate of 3.3 kW. But their smaller batteries don't need anything faster than that. It is also important to note that used EVs, whose affordable prices may be attractive for hourly wage earners and commuters, will generally have small to medium-sized batteries that accept charge rates somewhere in between. So it makes sense, then, that the new facility offers a variety of charging speeds and associated fees to accommodate not only the wide variety of EVs that will use the facility, but also the diverse customer base anticipated. Shoppers and those in town to attend an event may only want to charge for as little as 30 minutes or up to a few hours. Commuters and local residents, however, will want to park and charge for the entire work day or overnight without having to unplug or move their cars. Nor do they want to pay for being plugged into a charger after their battery is fully charged. To accommodate the diverse EV charging demands, then, the 40 EV chargers that are currently planned could be apportioned as follows: 1. Fast (Level 3): The facility should have at least two fast chargers with maximum charge rate of 100 to 150 kW with the ability to add similar chargers. These fast chargers should be located at the lower level for drivers who want a quick charge (less than an hour) and just want to get a cup of coffee or run an errand. These chargers would also attract long distance travelers on Hwy 101 who want to take a quick break downtown (the facility is about a quarter mile from the NB Broad Street off-ramp and a half-mile from the SB off-ramp). 2. Medium (Level 2): 20 to 25 chargers should be Level 2, which charge at a maximum rate of 7.2 kW. These are similar to what the City has currently installed in the Marsh Street parking garage. Most, if not all Level 2 chargers should have a 4 hour time limit similar to those at Marsh Street. 1 3. Slow (Level 2): 10 to 15 should be 3.3 kW chargers, suitable for charging plug-in hybrids, older model EVs, and long term parking (commuters and residents parking overnight). Some of these chargers should be limited to 4 hours, but others available for unlimited charging. I would suggest the long term chargers be located on the upper levels of the facility. 4. Trickle (Level 1): The City should consider installing lockable 110 volt outlets at dozen or so parking spaces in addition to the 40 chargers. These spaces could be rented to or reserved for commuters or residents during certain hours (i.e. 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM for commuters, 6:00 PM to 7:00 AM for overnight). The driver would provide their own charger to plug into the outlet. Most vehicles provide anti-theft devices on these chargers, so theft should not be a problem. The advantage to the City of this type of charging system is the low installation cost. The advantage to the user is knowing they have a guaranteed place to park and charge. Trickle chargers are often suitable for plug-in hybrids and battery vehicles if the round-trip commute is less than 40 miles. Fees for the various charge rates would also vary. The City could also consider kW based charging fees, time of use based fees, and charge scheduling. One of the problems with flat-rate hourly fees, such as is currently in place in the Marsh Street parking facility, is that the price of electricity can fluctuate during the day and season. Electricity rates during certain hours are higher than the fee paid, thereby causing the City to operate at a loss. The above mentioned options could help with that problem. The above are general suggestions. Having owned an EV for 6 years and been active in the EV community at both the local and national levels, I would be more than happy to provide further input into the final design of the EV charging infrastructure and its plan of operation. Call or write if I can be of further assistance. P.S FYI, most EVs can get about 4 miles per kW. So a charger with a charge rate of 3.3 kW will provide about 13 miles of range for every hour of charge. More info on the various levels of EV chargers can be found at https://calevip.org/electric-vehicle-charging-101 -- Barry Rands EV Specialist SLO Climate Coalition (805) 704-1549 barry@carbonfreeslo.org To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. 2