Wrong electric vehicle chargers backed in Budget, report claims  

Posted: March 21, 2020 by oldbrew in Energy, government, Travel

Typical electric car set-up

The battle of the chargers is underway. Too much home charging could overload the local electricity network, but nobody wants to sit around in public areas every day or two waiting for a more expensive power-up. At present this is of little interest to much of the population anyway, judging by the very low sales of EVs.

“Less-than-ideal” electric vehicle (EV) chargers were backed in last week’s Budget, which ring fenced £500M over five years to implement rapid charging hubs in public places, says New Civil Engineer.

Instead, policymakers should shift their focus away from costly public rapid chargers to investing in the scaled deployment of smaller, slower chargers on residential streets, says the report.

‘Electric Vehicles: Moving from early adopters to mainstream buyers’, by EV infrastructure company Connected Kerb, says that many potential EV buyers have no access to the convenience of chargers at home or nearby, and this is hindering EV take-up.

The report found that 67% of current EV drivers would not have bought an EV if they did not have access to overnight charging.

Connected Kerb chief executive Chris Pateman-Jones said: “That is a massive red flag when you look at the existing infrastructure deployment strategies.

“Rapid chargers are more expensive and less convenient – inconvenience deters uptake. Focus must be redirected to on-street residential and workplace charging that reflects existing charging behaviours and incentivises more people to transition to EVs.”

Existing charging behaviours indicate that 80% of charging is done at home, with 64% of this being overnight.

“This is where drivers want to charge,” Pateman Jones said. “They use costly public chargers only when their preferred option is not available. They do not think like petrol vehicle owners, going to a fixed location to ‘fill it up’.”

Full article here.

  1. Chaswarnertoo says:

    Coal powered cars are just wrong. And gas powered ones are best with a gas tank. ‘ Electric’ isn’t a power source.

  2. oldbrew says:

    Researchers find commercial fast-charging damages EV batteries
    Posted: March 13, 2020


    No wonder EV owners want to charge up at home whenever possible.

  3. Gamecock says:

    Policymakers: People who miss massive red flags, making decisions for other people.

  4. ivan says:

    I don’t think there is an MP that has a technical background in parliament and I doubt that there is anyone in the civil service either.

    That has to be the reason we get such stupid regulations foisted on us and there is nothing we can do about it.

  5. Phoenix44 says:

    Government policy is for everyone to be 30 miles from a fast charger. So a 60 mile round trip. For a reasonably old, not well cared for battery in winter, the range might be 120 miles. So I set off when I’ve 30 miles left, charge, get back and I’ve got 90 miles left, which gives me a whole 60 miles before I’m off again. So each full recharge gives me an effective range of only sixty miles. So the cost of that sixty miles is huge, the time taken is massive (three hours at least to fill up), and the energy wasted dreadful.

    And they wonder why nobody wants an EV? Has nobody pointed this out to them?

  6. tom0mason says:

    Yet more expensive environmental catastrophe initiated by over-bureaucratic government decree.

    How many homes have wiring to the standard required to facilitate vehicle charging — who will foot the bill if an upgrade is required?
    Who pays for the electrical infrastructure changes required to allow large suburban neighborhoods to charge the (potentially) thousands of eV’s each day?

    Where will old batteries go when they fail?

    “Rapid chargers are more expensive and less convenient – inconvenience deters uptake. Focus must be redirected to on-street residential and workplace charging that reflects existing charging behaviours and incentivises more people to transition to EVs.”
    This is a statement of failure!
    ICE vehicles already do what most of the public wish from their personal transport vehicles, to get people to change to eVs requires extra expensive incentives for no overall benefit to the owners.

    Aladdin would understand this sales technique “New lamps for old!”

  7. Gamecock says:

    “This is a statement of failure!”


    But as is common in politics, there is no admission. Rather, adjustments, tweaking around the edges, to save a bad idea. Bad ideas become outlandish bad ideas.

  8. cognog2 says:

    The sheep need to be corralled into these rapid charging stations for fleecing. Subsidies, bans and smart meters are the dogs, snapping a the heels.

  9. E.M.Smith says:

    And what happens when those folks are plugged in to charge, and the wind stops? Not going to like being 100 miles from home and told to just wait half a day for some wind. Not going to like waking up after a windless night to find you can’t get to work.

    For the USA, our total consumtion of petroluem in quads is roughly the same as present electricity production in quads. By definition, this means conversion to electricity requires building out a doubling of the electric grid. Arguing over home vs not just changes where you build it. In all cases, the rate payers pay for it.

  10. Gamecock says:

    And what if someone else gets to the charger before you do?

    Queue analysis might be in order.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s