Zan and Paul test the Mitsubishi iMiEV

Last Friday, Chelsea Sexton dropped off the cute little Mitsubishi iMiEV (pronounced I-meev) test car. She and her husband, Bob, had been driving it for a week, and now it was our turn.

This version is a right-hand drive built for the Japanese market. Driving from the right side of a car isn't that hard to get used to, but remembering the turn signal vs. windshield wiper switch took concentration.

According to Mitsubishi, this Smart-sized EV will be aimed at the commuter market which, given the sub-80 mile range, is a perfect fit. The 16 kWh LiIon pack, located under the passenger compartment, keeps the center of gravity low. One of the benefits of having a smaller battery pack is that the overall weight of the car is just a bit north of 2300 lbs.

The driving experience was very good. Acceleration was comparable to our RAV, which is to say, it's not going to beat a Tesla Roadster, but it had no problem accelerating up to speed on the freeway. I particularly liked its cornering ability, and the small size makes it very easy to park just about anywhere. Their engineers must have been listening to us since they incorporated a creep mode into the software. This mimics how a gas car will roll forward when you take your foot off the brake. It's helpful when you're on a hill so you don't roll backward, and it's something you expect, so the experience is very close to what you're used to. The iMiEV is also very quiet, much like the RAV.

There are two modes of regenerative braking, accomplished by shifting into "eco mode". There is no "freewheeling" which will disappoint RAV drivers who like to use this coasting method for hypermiling. When you are in full power mode and lift your foot off the accelerator, the regen is always there at about the same level as that found in a Prius. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but I prefer the option to freewheel since I can get better efficiency when driving in heavy traffic.

The instrumentation in this near-production prototype was spare. I want to see a digital readout of my state of charge (SOC), not some approximation from an analog bar. One of the great things about electric vehicles is their ability to travel a predictable distance per kWh. Zan and I don't hesitate to drive the RAV all the way down to the bottom if we need to, because we know precisely how far we can go given we have RAV Info, an after market Palm Pilot program that taps into the RAV's main CPU where all the car's info is. We can see to a tenth of a percent how much SOC we have. All of the EV companies need to adopt something similar, but make it part of the standard instrumentation, not an after market thing.

Charging the iMiEV was simple, we just plugged it into one of our standard 120V outlets in the garage. It's a slow way to charge, but we had the whole night, so that's plenty of time. The Level 2 charging cord set wasn't available, so that's all we could use. Once the car is ready to sell to the general public, we'll see 240V Level 2 charging which is plenty fast for a commuter car.

The iMiEV is a lot roomier on the inside than you would expect from looking at it. Seeing it parked here behind our gas-guzzling Honda Insight, you can see that it's a bit larger than that tiny two-seater. Sitting inside the car, I got the feeling it was even roomier than our RAV.

Pricing is unknown, but rumor has it that they'll be well under $30K. I think it'll sell fast if they can price it about $4K-$5K under the Nissan Leaf. There are millions of people who commute to and from work in huge, inefficient vehicles that are grossly over sized for the task at hand. I think Mitsubishi will get a good share of these people to switch once they get this to market some time in the fall of 2011.
************

One very sad note, as I was completing this blog, word comes over the net that a small plane piloted by one of Tesla's chief engineers, and carrying two others, crashed just after takeoff from a Palo Alto airport. From what I hear, all the engineers were working on the Model S program. They were on their way to meet with Elon Musk here in LA. The EV community mourns this terrible loss.

Give Till It Feels Good!

Happy EV Owner
Seven years and 77,700 miles - all on sunlight.

Hey Everybody,

When I started writing this blog, some three years ago, it was an email list sent to our Electric Vehicle Association of Southern California members, and to many of my Plug In America friends. We were all trying to spread the word about these new era plug-in electric cars that were coming soon, and how great they were going to be. Back then, there were few stories to report on, but now, it's a torrent of news. The momentum of money, and the growing understanding of the technology, is evident.

There are now over 1200 of you on this list with new ones added every day. Friends tell friends to start paying attention since buying a car is not something you do every year. The next purchase needs to be the right one. Buying a dirty oil burner just as the electrics are coming on line would be a huge mistake. The next time the oil companies, and those wonderful sheiks of Saudi Arabia, decide to charge $4.50 a gallon, what are you going to do? The trick is, do you wait till 300 million other Americans want an EV, or do you get one now?

We're witnessing history in fast forward. In a few short years, maybe 2014 or 2015, it'll be obvious to everybody that batteries will take over. As the early adapters drive their shiny new EVs home, show them to the neighbors and describe the benefits - and the incredible feeling of driving a quiet, powerful, non-polluting car - word will spread fast. I know Nissan and GM are nervous about how many will sell, but trust me, this is going to be fun.

Having said all that, there is still work to be done. Plug In America has been THE leading organization providing the education of legislators, regulators and the general public on the idea of using cleaner, cheaper, domestic electricity instead of dirty, expensive, foreign oil as the energy that drives our cars.

I've never made an ask like this with my blog, but now's as good a time as any.

We are sending two of our best speakers to the Austin Climate Protection Conference & Expo. We'll have our booth and be speaking on at least one panel, maybe two. We are cutting costs as much as possible, but there are expenses totaling one thousand dollars.

If you feel that having the choice to drive a car that never pollutes is worth anything, if you feel that never giving the oil companies another dime has value to you, then please send what you can to Plug In America (we're a 501 c-3) and help us with this gig. I promise, Marc Geller and I will spread the word to a lot of good Texans!

To contribute, go to http://www.pluginamerica.org/.


Just for fun: This is our friend and neighbor, Russell, an artist with flair (who also has EV & PV). He painted this mural at our house as a gift to us for our efforts to the cause (can you spot the kitties?). After completing the job, he was so happy he levitated. Never saw that before, but was happy to have a camera at the ready. Thanks Russell!

Thanks everybody, and have a great New Year!

Paul
******

Confessions of An Economic Hitman - Interview with the Author

Many of you have no doubt heard of the book, "Confessions of An Economic Hitman" by John Perkins. Essentially, Mr. Perkins was recruited to work for the World Bank and organizations like USAID to convince certain developing nations to become indebted to the World Bank in order to develop infrastructure (roads, utilities and the like) that mostly benefited the wealthy of those countries and ultimately neutralized them politically while enabling extractive industries, mostly oil, to take all they wanted.

Over the years, Perkins had a change of heart as he saw the results of his work. He is a brave man to have written the book given the stakes involved. His detailing of the inner workings in this two-part interview is riveting.

What does this have to do with EVs and energy? Knowing how the world economy is manipulated by these truly evil people, and that much of their wealth stems from oil that you buy, will give you that much more of a reason to make the switch to domestic renewable energy when given the chance next year.

Part I:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTbdnNgqfs8&feature=player_embedded

Part II:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29GhXsx7-Rs&feature=player_embedded

Paul
******

GM Insider Admits Company Knew Consumers Demanded Efficient Vehicles Decades Ago

I try to only talk about the future of EVs here, but this story from the past got my attention.

It's from a blog called All Cars Electric and is titled "GM Insider Admits Company Knew Consumers Demanded Efficient Vehicles Decades Ago."

This is a pretty astounding admission.

"As McManus said, "The survey would estimate that people would estimate fuel economy fairly highly. Being a good economist, I said, 'No, they don't,' and I changed the results. [...] Our job was not to seek the truth, but to justify decisions that had already been made."

So, as we go forward toward this new electric future, keep in mind that when big dollars are involved, you can expect that not everything the car makers, the utilities and even the regulators tell us is going to be true.

Paul

Electric vehicles are charging up the automotive industry: Mainstream Media takes heed

Now that we're in the last year prior to the release of several EVs and plug-in hybrids, the mainstream media is beginning to cover the story. The LA Times' Ken Bensinger wrote in Sunday's business section a fair and thorough account of the trials and tribulations we'll encounter as the cars begin to roll out this time next year.

I'd take issue with the comment about replacement batteries costing so much they'll "wipe out the entire cost savings of having a hybrid in the first place," according to a hybrid owner having to replace a battery after 9 years. All one needs to do is consider how much gas will cost in 9 years, or how much battery costs will go down in the same period.

SCE's Ed Kjaer makes a good point saying, "Plug-in cars are not for everybody at this point." He went on to explain that not everyone currently has access to electricity where they park their cars at night. It's also true that the number of EVs and PHEVs will only be in the tens of thousands the first two years, so we're not talking about a lot of cars for some time to come, plenty of time to get the public charging going.

We're used to having minimal public charging for our RAV since it can only use a proprietary inductive charger. We can't even use the ubiquitous 120V plugs that are everywhere. For us, this has not been a big problem. The thousands of charge stations planned for installation over the next couple of years will be more than enough for the early adopters. My wife, Zan, says "people ought to take Prozac to get rid of their range anxiety. It's just not a big deal." She's right.

The print edition had great photos of a dozen cars coming within the next two years, some of them, like the Coda, starting next summer. You can access them on line here. For a more thorough compendium of the coming plug-ins of all types, see Plug In America's vehicle tracker.

Paul
*****

Terry Tamminen is "mythtaken"

Terry Tamminen, an environmentalist best known for convincing Gov. Schwarzenegger to build the "Hydrogen Highway" to provide a refueling infrastructure for fuel cell vehicles (FCVs), has been discounting EVs for years. For a time, Tamminen was head of the California EPA where he had the power to push technological solutions to our energy and pollution problems. During his tenure, he pushed hard for FCVs while claiming to be technologically neutral, however he gave nothing more than lip service to battery EVs.

In this essay, he makes many allegations that just don't stand up to scrutiny. Please see my comments below.

Paul
*****

The Myth of Battery Cars
Terry Tamminen -
September 8, 2009

"As the world beats a path to Copenhagen for the December 2009 UN meeting to craft a new deal on climate change solutions, one of the biggest challenges remains our addiction to oil. About 40% of global greenhouse gases come from oil, when you include exploration, development, refining, transportation, and combusting it. A few years ago, the US government hailed corn-based ethanol as the alternative/savior, but when food prices skyrocketed because of a misguided policy to subsidize farmers (and when science showed the greenhouse gas benefits were small or non-existent), the rush was on to find another magic bullet.

Now the US government, led by Energy Secretary Steve Chu, has put on their Don Quixote armor again and is pouring lots of taxpayer dollars into batteries for cars. While I am the first to say there will be no silver bullet, only silver buckshot - - we need ALL alternatives to oil - - it's time to dump the battery-powered car in the same policy landfill as corn-based ethanol."

** Here is Tamminen's first "mythtruth". George Bush poured hundreds of millions of federal dollars into FCVs and Tamminen convinced Gov. Schwarzenegger to spend tens of millions of CA tax dollars on top of that. Fuel cells were clearly the chosen technology. Virtually nothing was given to EVs at the state or federal level. If Tamminen truly believed we needed "ALL alternatives" he would have supported battery EVs with the same gusto he reserved for his favored fuel cells. **


"First, Chu admitted to Congress that it would take billions of R&D funding and many years to develop batteries that are practical for cars in everyday use. He was being optimistic, given the laws of physics - - there's only so much you can reduce the weight and charging times for batteries, not to mention the scarce and toxic materials needed to produce them. And car engineers spend lifetimes taking a few pounds out of a car to make it more fuel efficient, regardless of how it is powered. Why would we want a fleet of inefficient cars that carry around half a ton of excess luggage?"

** Tamminen likes to portray BEVs in the same light as FCVs, that they aren't ready yet and need lots of R&D to make them so. What he fails to understand is that BEVs are viable now. The batteries do not need R&D to make them practical in everyday use. As thousands of drivers will attest, the production EVs made by GM, Ford, Chrysler, Toyota, Honda and Nissan over a decade ago were quite practical, and in the case of the Toyota RAV4 EV and Ford Ranger, very long lived. We don't know how long the other cars would have lasted since they were destroyed after only a few year's service. BTW, Tamminen did nothing to stop the destruction of those EVs.

As for "scarce and toxic materials" Tamminen is employing scare tactics worthy of the birthers since he knows that there are plentiful supplies of lithium and nickel. The toxic notation is laughable since lithium can be ingested and nickel is considered at worst, mildly toxic. Most importantly, the batteries will have a long life after their use in cars as a storage medium for off-peak energy that can be used for on-peak loads. This is a valuable aspect of batteries that Tamminen should know, but for some reason, he refuses to admit. **

"Second, this notion that battery cars require no new infrastructure is nonsense. A recent article in Science magazine highlighted the need for more powerplants, transmission lines, and home/office chargers to serve even a small % of the transportation fleet, if it was dependent on battery recharging. As an example, the Tesla battery sports car takes 37 hours to recharge with normal household current and 8 hours if you install a special high-voltage charger that costs thousands of dollars. Moreover, on a hot July day in California, if even a few hundred thousand of the state's 30 million vehicles were attached to the grid, the overloaded system would routinely blackout unless it was upgraded at the cost of billions. Battery car enthusiast Shai Agassi announced he intends to bring his battery cars to San Francisco and would build 250,000 charging stations around the Bay Area alone - - does that sound like new infrastructure to you?"

** Tamminen is way off base with his conclusion that we'll need new power plants to handle the additional load from EVs. The Department of Energy studied this issue a few years ago and concluded that 73% of the American fleet can charge during off peak hours at night without the need to add any new generating capacity. This is over 180 million vehicles!

The charging infrastructure will certainly need to be built out, but this is trivial compared to establishing a network of hydrogen stations. Well over half of all vehicles in the U.S. are parked at night proximate to electric wiring. Federal tax credits are available to offset some of the cost of hiring an electrician to install a plug. There will need to be some replacement of transformers in neighborhoods, but this is no different from when houses are expanded, pools are installed and millions of plasma TVs using triple the energy of a regular TV are bought. Swimming pool pumps use enough energy to drive an EV a good 30-50 miles per day. As a former pool boy, Tamminen should know this.

The comment about charging times for the Tesla is just plain wrong. Tesla's high power charger operates at 240V 70A, which means it can charge the 53 kWh battery pack in 3.5 hours. That's 68 miles of range per hour of charge. This, by the way, is how you look at charging times. I always see articles about EVs saying they take 8 hours to charge. We never consider how long it takes to charge empty to full, we only consider how far we have to go and how long we need to charge for. But since we can start every day with a full battery, it's rare that we ever need to charge during the day. **


"Third, range matters. Yes the average commuter may only need 30 or 40 miles a day, something they can get from batteries today, but many people live in multi-family apartments and have no access to a charger on a daily basis. Many more can only afford one car and want one that can go longer distances when needed. I recently drove 150 miles to Palm Springs from Los Angeles in my hydrogen powered electric car (the hydrogen is converted to electricity by the fuel cell, which powers the same electric motor as a Tesla or any other electric car). I refueled in 7 minutes and was ready to return that afternoon. The Tesla or any other battery car available today would still be at the recharging station 30 miles short of Palm Springs, not to mention the problem of getting back in the same day."

** Here is where Tamminen really stretches credulity. He knows EVs are not for long distance driving, yet he tries to create a straw man to show they are inadequate for such a trip. Even worse, he's showing his ignorance of current level three charging from the likes of Aerovironment. They have been making chargers that can pump a 30 kWh pack full in less than 20 minutes. All it would take is for these chargers to be purchased and distributed along our freeways. In town, most of the charging will be done at the thousands of convenience chargers that are soon to be installed.

Taminnen also fails to mention his hydrogen car used a full 3-4 times the energy a battery EV would use to make the same trip. This is the ugly secret hydrogen supporters never want to discuss.

Folks who need to drive long distances on a regular basis will opt for the plug-in hybrid. The Chevy Volt is such a car. With a 40 mile range in EV mode, and a 300 mile range in gas mode, this type of vehicle can serve as an only car for any purpose. **


"Battery enthusiasts say we will have swapping stations, so in a few minutes you can drop off discharged batteries and pick up full charged ones. Maybe, but then every car will essentially have to have multiple sets of batteries made for it, so there are enough to go around at swapping stations awaiting the need. What does that take in terms of resources and greenhouse gas pollution in the manufacture (and ultimate disposal) of all of those batteries?"

** Here, Tamminen is correct. Battery swapping, as Better Place envisioned, is a non-starter. His comment about battery disposal is wrong, however. See my previous post about that. **


"Fourth, size matters. There's a reason that battery cars so far are all small. Tesla chose the sports car because it was cool and would brand their company, but also because it is small and light which helps with range (even so, the range is far less than 200 miles). Other car companies toying with battery cars are focused on very small sedans for the same reason. Anyone who needs a larger car or truck will have a very long wait to get one powered by batteries."

** Professor Andy Frank of UC Davis has converted several large SUVs, like the Chevy Suburban, to plug-in hybrids, and they not only get amazing mileage, but they perform better than the original vehicles. When we held our EV parade in January in Santa Monica, we had a Hummer H2 that was converted to be fully electric. We also had a fully electric Balqon truck capable of hauling 60,000 lbs.!

But Terry is right that EVs will mostly be small. Gas cars will be small, too, when the costs of gas are fully internalized in the price. Smaller, lighter cars use less energy no matter its source. This is basic physics. If Terry, or anyone else, wants to waste energy, there will be plenty of car companies willing to build them a wasteful car to drive.

And Terry, the range of the Tesla Roadster is 244 miles. **


"Finally, how the electricity is produced will determine how clean battery power is, which is also true of hydrogen production. The need to build all of the new infrastructure, batteries (maybe multiple sets), and charging stations has to be added into that lifecycle analysis, otherwise we're making the same mistakes we made with ethanol - - a mirage of sustainability by looking only at the end use."

** This is a key paragraph. Fuel cell proponents like Tamminen always use the national grid statistics (50% coal) for the energy used to charge an EV's battery, but then say that the hydrogen for their FCVs will come from renewable sources of electricity. This is the big lie they have been perpetuating for years. The truth is that a well made battery EV will use 3-4 times LESS energy than a FCV to do the same job. If you charge the battery from coal fired electricity, then you have to compare that to getting the hydrogen from the same electricity source.

The reason George Bush promoted FCVs was because the hydrogen will be controlled by the oil companies. They will sell you the hydrogen for your car just like they sell gas and diesel now. If the oil companies truly believe this is a practical technology, then they should be spending their billions in profits to build the hydrogen infrastructure. They shouldn't be asking taxpayers to build it for them.

People with EVs can generate kWh from the sunlight falling on their roof. It's simple, clean and cost effective.

Terry Tamminen is a respected environmentalist. Why he has chosen to taint his legacy by pushing the oil companies' agenda is a mystery. The fact that he chose to write this outrageous essay so full of myths about electric vehicles, just as they are gaining traction throughout the world, is suspicious. Maybe he'll write a response and tell us why. **

BYD to come early to U.S. EV party

My good friend, Bill Moore of EV World, reports that China's BYD (Build Your Dreams) is planning on bringing their E6 EV to the U.S. market a full year ahead of time to compete with the roll out of Nissan's Leaf and GM's Volt. As reported earlier, BYD is the Chinese battery company that decided to build cars around it's Lithium Iron Phosphate batteries. They were the first in the world to begin selling a plug-in hybrid version (only in China so far), and now this pure electric version is expected to hit showrooms in the U.S. some time next year.

Warren Buffet's purchase of 9.9% of BYD last year catapulted the company to global prominence in the car world, especially after BYD stated that it intended to become a world leader in electric vehicles.

The specs on this crossover are pretty remarkable: 0-60 in less than 8 seconds, top speed of 100 mph, and get this, a range of 250 miles. I want to see this for myself, of course, but if it's even close, this is going to be a nice car. Let's hope the fit & finish is decent.

"According to the Wall Street Journal, the price of the car will be $40,000, which seems to be the current "sweet spot" for the first generation of consumer-available electric cars. This is right around the range Coda has been hinting at for their Chinese-made electric sedan."

This figure will be diminished by the $7,500 federal tax credit as well as some state tax credits (check your local listings). Additionally, the low cost of operation allows for even greater savings since electricity is generally sold for the equivalent of less than a dollar a gallon.

I think it's noteworthy that not only are more carmakers getting into the game, but now we're seeing timetables for bringing them to market accelerate. This can only be a good thing.

Paul
*****

Toyota's Gamble

The New York Times reported today that Toyota could be falling behind its rivals in the race to go electric. They specifically mentioned rivals Mitsubishi, Nissan, Tesla and GM, but could have listed a dozen others (see Plug In America's EV Tracker for a complete list).

“The time is not here,” Masatami Takimoto, Toyota’s executive vice president, said during a factory tour this year. Electric cars “face many challenges,” he said, adding that “to commercialize pure E.V.’s, we need a battery that far exceeds the current technology.”

Coming from a VP of Toyota, this is an absurd comment. I'm still driving a Toyota-made EV that was designed over a decade ago. Hundreds of these RAV4 EVs continue running perfectly, and I can assure you these are not secondary vehicles but the primary vehicle for the families that own them. To make a comment like this doesn't show ignorance, there's something else behind it.

“In a world where vehicles run on electrons rather than hydrocarbons, the automakers will have to reinvent their businesses,” Russell Hensley, an analyst at the consulting company McKinsey, told clients in a recent report.

True statement.

"Toyota executives rattle off reasons to be skeptical of electric cars: They do not travel far enough on a charge; their batteries are expensive and not reliable; the electrical infrastructure is not in place to recharge them."

How far is far enough? Over 80% of American drivers don't exceed 40 miles a day. Tens of millions never drive long distances, and of those who do, a plug-in hybrid would suffice.

The batteries are costly, I'll give him that, but the prices are getting lower every day. As for not reliable, of all the RAVs Toyota has put on the road, virtually none have had battery failures. The batteries are exceptionally reliable.

This last bit about the infrastructure is laughable. The electric grid is everywhere. The cost and effort to install a charge station in a garage or driveway is minimal. The public charging will be built out as the cars are delivered. I recently attended a stakeholder's meeting at Plug In 2009 in Long Beach, CA where utilities, automakers and city planners were all discussing how they were going to build out home, workplace and public charge stations over the coming years. Toyota wasn't in the room. Maybe they should attend these conferences. They'd learn a lot and maybe stop making such boneheaded statements.

"Even when electric cars are sold widely, the company says, they will be suitable only for short trips and serve a decidedly niche market."

Short trips constitute the vast majority of all trips. A car suited for short trips of less than 100-200 miles per day does not serve a niche market, it serves the majority market.

"Meanwhile, Toyota’s new president, Akio Toyoda, has become a big promoter of the company’s fuel cells, which he calls the “ultimate” technology."

A huge mistake!

“You don’t see many competing technologies survive in a key market for very long,” said Mr. Shimizu, the Keio University professor.

And more often than not in the history of innovation, a change in the dominant technology means a change in the market leader.

“Electric cars are a disruptive technology, and Toyota knows that,” Mr. Shimizu said. “I wouldn’t say Toyota is killing the electric vehicle. Perhaps Toyota is scared.”

Here's what I think. Toyota is working feverishly on an EV to compete with Nissan's Leaf. They are going to release the plug-in Prius late next year to compete with the Volt. In the meantime, they'll make public statements about how the batteries and the infrastructure aren't ready to try and damp enthusiasm for plug-ins so they can continue to sell their hybrid models to the very demographic who are likely plug-in buyers. Then watch what they say when they hit the market with their own EVs.

Paul
*****

Nissan LEAF charging and price concerns

As many of you have already heard, the new Nissan EV is called the "Leaf". Nice green name and the car itself is attractive in a Prius sort of way. I don't have any pictures myself, but Wired's Autopia site has a few good ones and a lot of good info on the car as well. A couple of items not discussed, but important to know have to do with the final price and how fast the cars will be allowed to charge.

First, the price. Some speculation centered around whether Nissan would sell the car and lease the battery in order to keep the cost down. When we were first told of the price range being between $25K and $34K, leasing the battery was not mentioned. Some mention of battery leasing has been made, however, mostly centered around the deal Renault/Nissan has with Shai Agassi's Better Place. When I posed this question to my Nissan contacts, the answer was "... at this point, we can't offer the level of precision on that topic that many people would like...it just is too early."

I wish they could be more specific, but I do understand the need to be circumspect this far in advance of delivery. The people I know who drive EVs are mostly in favor of owning the batteries as long as we can get a good 7-10 years out of them. We see the downward trend in costs and fully expect a replacement pack 7 years from now will be quite affordable.

My biggest worry is the speed at which Nissan will allow charging. The car will come with a cord allowing charge from a regular 120 volt outlet, but this will be painfully slow. Households that buy the car will have a charge station installed on their 240 Volt circuit, but the charge will be limited to 3.3 kW. This is marginally faster than charging from a 120V circuit, but half the speed of our RAVs that charge at 6.6 kW. We've gotten used charging at this speed, but even 6.6 kW is slow compared to Teslas which can charge as high as 16 kW.

Now, to Nissan's credit, they are going to be deploying lots of very fast level three chargers in the communities that receive the initial several thousand cars. These are 480V systems that charge at 50 kW, very fast indeed! So, to the extent customers have access to these chargers, they may find home charging at 3.3 kW to be acceptable, but I think that's a big risk.

The reason given for starting the first year with the slow charging had to do with cost and availability of cord sets. This may be something we have to accept, but I'm afraid it'll give the wrong message. With a range of 100 miles, the speed of charging becomes more important.

This link will take you to a story on Renault's Frankfurt Auto show all-electric line up. The first time a major automaker is showing nothing but EVs. This is great news from this EV powerhouse, Renault/Nissan.


Paul