Drop or change the EV Charger subsidies

Energy & Infrastructure
1

With the Biden/Harris IRA bill, they gave a lot of subsidies, but these were poorly done. One of these was the EV charging subsidy where they gave Billions to companies to put in level 3 chargers. In fact, with President Obama’s earlier spending on Chargers, and with IRA and others, we have over $8B into CCS/Chademo chargers which have proven to be a total disaster. As it is, all of the EV makers are switching to NACS (or Tesla’s) connector and software. These companies have been massive failures. Worse, there are other companies coming. Will we subsidize their failures as well? Now, we have cities with CCS/Chademo, and very little around the state.

We need to drop these subsidies and then decided if we will invest into these companies, OR change direction to make adaption happen quickly. Assuming the later, than the following is the direction change.

The real problem is a rendezvous issue (the same type as we solved in Networking). While local drivers can/will charge at home cheaply, long distance drives MUST be assured of getting to EV charging stations and having charging stations that work. Likewise, EV charging companies want EVs to come to them. The solution is localized competition in the needed areas.

We need our federal and states to allocate/buy land next to Interstates and state Highways. Ideally, it would be between the roads so as to make it easily available from both sides. For interstates/busy highways, it should support 60-100 EVs/6-10 Semis, while Highways with less traffic, 20-50 EVs/2-5 Semis would likely work. Initially space these sites at 150 miles and later, if needed, drop to say 75 miles apart. The REAL problem is bringing in electrical lines to support that level, which is where the real expense is. Current EVs should get 250 KW lines, while Semis will need 1MW. This means that a small site with 20EVs and 2 Semis would need 7+MW. That is a small shopping mall. The large site with 100 EVs/10 Semis would need 25+ MW. That is a Mall of America quantity. Some will say that this is a bad idea, but the EVs are needing 120-300 KW with 10-60 minute charging times. Down the road, the EVs will use 1MW (just 3-5 of the parking spots grouped together) and charge an EV in 2-10 minutes. This is why so much electricity / parking is needed at this time. Ideally, these would also have access to rest facilities such as bathrooms and even restaurants. Florida turnpike’s rest stops design is ideal.

Once built, EV charging companies will lease in blocks of 10 EV/1 Semi. Initially, they do not need to have the Semi, but WILL need it within a year. Ideally, each block has a different company, though on the large sites, it might require letting a company do several blocks for the first year to get it filled up. However, this requires multiple EV charging companies there so as to make sure that chargers are maintained and the pricing is competitive. For the first couple of years, I would not charge EV charging companies a fixed amount, but instead add variable pricing to the charging ( Time of Day, with .01-.05/kWh ). This gets companies going, without having to incur the leasing costs, except as a variable costs.

2

I would not scrap the NEVI program for chargers altogether, but would instead reform it. The CCS requirement should be dropped due to NACS becoming the new “gold standard” of EV charging. With CCS and Chademo in decline, it should be on the owners of vehicles using those standards to ensure they have the appropriate adapter (or to acquire a NACS-compatible vehicle). There is still a long way to go to ensure there is sufficient infrastructure for everyone to “go electric”, and we cannot be held back by having to accommodate a now-antiquated standard.

Also, more emphasis needs to be placed on “plugging black holes in the map” to ensure that EVs truly can go anywhere equivalent Fossil Fuel Vehicles can. Places like Woodward, OK and Guymon, OK (decent sized towns on significant routes where there are currently no NACS chargers for some distance) should be given priority for NEVI (and Tesla should do likewise internally) over locations where there are plenty of NACS chargers nearby and already spaced such as to provide proper coverage of important routes.

3

Read what I said:
I said drop or reform.

Quit paying $ to the companies and instead, allocate/buy land 150 miles apart along interstates and rural highways. Then use $ to bring in enough electricity to supply the EVs, and Ideally rest areas (look at Florida turnpike rest areas:
https://floridasturnpike.com/traveler-resources/service-plazas/

).

By separating them 125-150 miles apart, it is close enough for nearly all EVs to make that distance, but far enough apart for multiple private EV service companies/areas to popup between.

The other key is to have MULTIPLE EV charging companies there. It provides competition, and will stop the theft/destruction that happens at site with just 4 chargers and few vehicles.

4

Yes, and I would prefer reform over drop. The spacing and competition ideas you included in your counter-reply look good as well.

1 Like
5

Actually, if you read the original, it is the same as the reply.
Hopefully, you help push this.
one thing ppl miss is that by doing 10 EVs with 250KW each, at some point, like now with Tesla, they will move up to .5MW and then 1MW. These can be combined and the space allocated for driving through with trailer, etc. So those 10 spaces can be combined into 2 1MW, along with the 1MW Semi, and perhaps 1 .5MW. Same electricity, but fast fillup for EVs. Semi will still take time, but this was not meant to be all, but provide a place that EVs and Semis EVs KNEW that they could get a charge until more sites open up.