In a watershed breakthrough for the solar photovoltaic (PV) industry, SoloPower, Inc., a California-based manufacturer of flexible, thin-film solar PV cells and modules, today announced UL certification for its flexible, CIGS modules, a first-ever achievement for the PV solar industry.
"As governor, I have made it a point to make California an environmental leader with a global footprint. SoloPower's advancement demonstrates that California is leading the way in technology innovation for the green economy," said Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. "We welcome this type of innovation that creates jobs, strengthens the economy, and helps protect the environment."
This is the first UL-certified product in a line of high-power flexible modules being introduced initially to European and North American markets. The flexibility and high-power rating of these products will allow SoloPower's customers to reduce balance-of-system and installation costs, while their low weight and application features will facilitate solar installations where they are otherwise impossible.
"The certification of SoloPower's flexible CIGS module is an important step toward the realization of lightweight, high-power, flexible solar modules with potential to expand the roof-top solar market and reduce balance of system costs. It is an important milestone for the industry. I feel very gratified to see, after a 30-year career in Thin Film CIGS PV at NREL, the technology become mature," says Dr. Rommel Noufi, Principal Scientist of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory.
UL certification was granted following rigorous testing at an independent laboratory. SoloPower's thin-film modules were tested to UL 1703, the standard for safety for PV module manufacturing. In addition to this confirmation, SoloPower itself has conducted extensive internal testing that well exceeds the safety, quality, and reliability standards established by these tests. SoloPower was also the first manufacturer to receive UL certification for rigid modules based on flexible CIGS PV cells in June of 2009.
SoloPower's line of high-power, lightweight, flexible photovoltaic module products include multiple form factors: the SFX1 module (80Wp, 0.3m x 2.9m, 2.3kg / 5lbs.), the SFX2 module (170Wp, 0.3m x 5.8m, 3.6kg / 8 lbs.), and the SFX3 module (260Wp, 0.9m x 2.9m, 6kg / 13lbs.).
Plans for Scale-up to Address Demand
"With low-cost and low-capital expenditure requirements, SoloPower's core manufacturing process will enable rapid scale-up during our next phase of expansion," said Tim Harris, CEO, SoloPower. "The Company is in the process of adding a second manufacturing line that will significantly increase capacity to meet expected demand."
Simultaneously, SoloPower is in discussions with the Department of Energy to potentially obtain a loan guarantee under EPACT 2005 Section 1703 to support the construction of an additional multiple-line production facility.
SoloPower at European PV Conference in Valencia
SoloPower modules will be on display at the European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference, September 6 - 9, 2010 in Valencia, Spain at the jura-plast GmbH booth (Level 2 / Hall 4 / A-29). Also at the conference, SoloPower's CTO, Dr. Mustafa Pinarbasi, will speak on Wednesday, September 8 about "Roll-to-Roll Manufacturing of Flexible CIGS Cells and Panels."
About SoloPower
SoloPower, Inc. produces low-cost, high-power, flexible thin-film photovoltaic modules that offer a viable alternative to electricity produced using traditional fossil fuels. SoloPower's modules employ its solar cell devices fabricated with copper indium gallium di-selenide (CIGS) materials using a proprietary roll-to-roll electrodeposition process. The company is headquartered in Silicon Valley at 5981 Optical Court, San Jose, California 95138. For more information on SoloPower, please visit the company on the Internet at www.solopower.com.
SOURCE SoloPower, Inc.
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
3 GW of PV Installed in Germany in First Half of 2010
Photovoltaic system installations in Germany in the first half of this year are estimated at 3 GW, reaffirming Germany's leadership position in the solar market, according to Germany Trade and Invest, a foreign trade and inward investment agency of the Federal Republic of Germany.
In 2009, Germany accounted for approximately one of every two newly installed modules worldwide, with total installations totaling 3.8 GW for the year.
Amendments to the PV feed-in tariffs (FITs) in Germany's Renewable Energies Act (EEG) were passed in early July and a further adjustment to the FITs will take effect Oct. 1. The changes mark a further shift toward the rooftop segment by abandoning field installations on cropland and increasing the attractiveness of the self-consumption bonus for small- and medium-scale rooftop installations.
The FIT rates were reduced by 13% for rooftop installations and eliminated for cropland field installations beginning July 1. At the same time, conversion areas saw a reduction of 8%, and all other areas were decreased by 12%. Beginning Oct. 1, these rates will be reduced by a further 3%. Still, the new tariffs remain highly attractive, with rates ranging from 25.02 eurocents/kWh to 34.05 eurocents/kWh for installations connected before Oct. 1 and 24.26 eurocents/kWh to 33.03 eurocents/kWh for those connected during the remainder of the year.
The changes to the EEG are a reaction to the increased price competitiveness of photovoltaic systems, including the recent price drop for solar panels and components. By 2013, energy from PV sources is expected to be competitive with conventional energy sources in the electricity market for private consumers.
SOURCE: Germany Trade and Invest
In 2009, Germany accounted for approximately one of every two newly installed modules worldwide, with total installations totaling 3.8 GW for the year.
Amendments to the PV feed-in tariffs (FITs) in Germany's Renewable Energies Act (EEG) were passed in early July and a further adjustment to the FITs will take effect Oct. 1. The changes mark a further shift toward the rooftop segment by abandoning field installations on cropland and increasing the attractiveness of the self-consumption bonus for small- and medium-scale rooftop installations.
The FIT rates were reduced by 13% for rooftop installations and eliminated for cropland field installations beginning July 1. At the same time, conversion areas saw a reduction of 8%, and all other areas were decreased by 12%. Beginning Oct. 1, these rates will be reduced by a further 3%. Still, the new tariffs remain highly attractive, with rates ranging from 25.02 eurocents/kWh to 34.05 eurocents/kWh for installations connected before Oct. 1 and 24.26 eurocents/kWh to 33.03 eurocents/kWh for those connected during the remainder of the year.
The changes to the EEG are a reaction to the increased price competitiveness of photovoltaic systems, including the recent price drop for solar panels and components. By 2013, energy from PV sources is expected to be competitive with conventional energy sources in the electricity market for private consumers.
SOURCE: Germany Trade and Invest
Italy Reduces Solar Incentives
The Italian Conferenza Stato e Regioni - the country's committee of representatives and the central government - plans to adjust national feed-in-tariff (FIT) levels. The new levels will take effect Dec. 31.
The FIT - known as the Conto Energia III - "still offers a high degree of investment security, despite the moderate reductions made in line with current market conditions," says EuPD Research in a research note announcing the reduction.
Funds allocated to solar electricity generated by open-space systems with a capacity up to 5 MW will be cut by 9.3% - on average - during the first four months of 2011, according to EuPD Research. Incentives for systems with a capacity of 5 MW and greater will be decreased by 14.2%. Adjustments for rooftop systems are between 4.75% and 13.28%, depending on the size of the system. Tariffs will be reduced every four months in 2011.
"The new Conto Energia III clearly shows that an adjustment with a sense of proportion can also work in growth markets such as the Italian market," commented Markus A.W. Hoehner, CEO of EuPD Research. "The fact that a sweeping cut of all tariffs is no longer under discussion and that the adjustments have been tailored to the individual market segments should be [welcomed]."
SOURCE: EuPD Research
The FIT - known as the Conto Energia III - "still offers a high degree of investment security, despite the moderate reductions made in line with current market conditions," says EuPD Research in a research note announcing the reduction.
Funds allocated to solar electricity generated by open-space systems with a capacity up to 5 MW will be cut by 9.3% - on average - during the first four months of 2011, according to EuPD Research. Incentives for systems with a capacity of 5 MW and greater will be decreased by 14.2%. Adjustments for rooftop systems are between 4.75% and 13.28%, depending on the size of the system. Tariffs will be reduced every four months in 2011.
"The new Conto Energia III clearly shows that an adjustment with a sense of proportion can also work in growth markets such as the Italian market," commented Markus A.W. Hoehner, CEO of EuPD Research. "The fact that a sweeping cut of all tariffs is no longer under discussion and that the adjustments have been tailored to the individual market segments should be [welcomed]."
SOURCE: EuPD Research
New FIT Program Could Blow California's Solar Market Wide Open
On Aug. 24, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) released a proposal that would establish a 1 GW pilot program requiring Pacific Gas and Electric Co., Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric Co. to procure electricity from renewable energy systems up to 20 MW in size. Industry observers say the plan could unleash a frenzy of solar power development in California.
"We have a hard mandate for a gigawatt pilot," Adam Browning, executive director of the Vote Solar Initiative, tells Solar Industry. "This will be intensely competitive, with developers clamoring to get these deals done."
The proposal, submitted by Administrative Law Judge Burton Mattson, would be backed by a feed-in tariff (FIT) based on market prices. These prices would be negotiated during biannual auctions - a procurement method the CPUC has dubbed the Renewable Auction Mechanism (RAM).
California's current FIT applies to projects up to 1.5 MW in size, and the procurement target is capped at 500 MW. Also, the standard contracts under the existing FIT program are priced against a market-price referent (MPR), which is determined by the cost of energy produced at combined-cycle natural-gas plants. California S.B.32, signed into law last October, would expand the FIT program to a 750 MW cap and a project size up to 3 MW, but the CPUC has not implemented it.
Although all renewable energy generation assets would be eligible for the new program, it seems likely that solar would be the key beneficiary. By increasing the eligible system size to 20 MW, the CPUC has hit a sweet spot for large-scale photovoltaic (PV) plants.
PV system costs have dropped precipitously over the past year, making the development of big installations economically viable for all stakeholders. And with those lower system costs have come lower solar energy prices - so low, in fact, that the lofty goal of reaching grid parity is in sight in California.
"This is a sea change in the solar industry," Browning says.
He notes that the wholesale clearing price of solar is currently below retail rates, enticing utilities to scoop up solar power not only to help meet the state's renewable portfolio standard (RPS) mandate, but to simply procure energy at competitive prices.
The RAM appears to be a useful mechanism for doing that. Experience with the existing FIT suggests that utilities would resist the fixed-price contracts that would accompany the implementation of S.B.32. The RAM provides an option to avoid that unpleasantness. In essence, the CPUC has determined that renewable energy should be priced on its own merits - not against the price of fossil-fuel generation.
"The key thing is they have shown their hand, as far as what they think the value of solar is above the MPR table," comments Dr. John Barnes, founder and principal partner of Solar Power Development Partners, based in Saratoga, Calif.
The CPUC has also expressed its desire to expedite RPS fulfillment, which is much easier to accomplish with midsized projects that can come online in a fraction of the time it takes a massive concentrating solar power (CSP) plant to be commissioned. While the output of a CSP facility can register in the hundreds of megawatts, large PV plants - while certainly complicated and expensive - are more nimble, the commission has reasoned.
The new proposal also helps stakeholders skirt thorny issues related to transmission. In most cases, the transmission infrastructure needed to move power from remote CSP plants to demand centers is not available. Building new high-voltage lines requires not only huge capital investments, but also Federal Energy Regulatory Commission involvement, which presents challenges related to jurisdiction and project timelines.
Midsized PV projects can integrate with the grid via existing electric-distribution networks. To one degree or another, all of the investor-owned utilities that would participate in the new program are currently engaged in upgrading distribution equipment. In turn, it is presumed that these systems will be able to handle the integration of distributed solar resources.
"The real way to get solar installed in California is through distributed generation," Barnes says. "It allows you to connect these systems and get them done in a reasonable time frame without transmission upgrades."
For its part, the CPUC has fortified the proposal with language that seeks to cut away the fat and ensure that only projects that are shovel-ready enter the RAM pipeline. For instance, the proposal recommends a RAM deposit of $20/kW for selected projects. Developments that are selected for the program would have 18 months from the date of contract execution to begin commercial operation - if not, the project deposit would be lost.
Although the proposal is not a final rule, Browning is confident that the major provisions of the plan will sail through the comment period and be adopted by the CPUC. In fact, he says the commission could vote on the proposal within a few weeks, potentially leading to "tremendous growth" in California's solar market.
"It's a very positive step toward higher levels of distributed solar generation," Barnes adds.
Source: Solar Industry
"We have a hard mandate for a gigawatt pilot," Adam Browning, executive director of the Vote Solar Initiative, tells Solar Industry. "This will be intensely competitive, with developers clamoring to get these deals done."
The proposal, submitted by Administrative Law Judge Burton Mattson, would be backed by a feed-in tariff (FIT) based on market prices. These prices would be negotiated during biannual auctions - a procurement method the CPUC has dubbed the Renewable Auction Mechanism (RAM).
California's current FIT applies to projects up to 1.5 MW in size, and the procurement target is capped at 500 MW. Also, the standard contracts under the existing FIT program are priced against a market-price referent (MPR), which is determined by the cost of energy produced at combined-cycle natural-gas plants. California S.B.32, signed into law last October, would expand the FIT program to a 750 MW cap and a project size up to 3 MW, but the CPUC has not implemented it.
Although all renewable energy generation assets would be eligible for the new program, it seems likely that solar would be the key beneficiary. By increasing the eligible system size to 20 MW, the CPUC has hit a sweet spot for large-scale photovoltaic (PV) plants.
PV system costs have dropped precipitously over the past year, making the development of big installations economically viable for all stakeholders. And with those lower system costs have come lower solar energy prices - so low, in fact, that the lofty goal of reaching grid parity is in sight in California.
"This is a sea change in the solar industry," Browning says.
He notes that the wholesale clearing price of solar is currently below retail rates, enticing utilities to scoop up solar power not only to help meet the state's renewable portfolio standard (RPS) mandate, but to simply procure energy at competitive prices.
The RAM appears to be a useful mechanism for doing that. Experience with the existing FIT suggests that utilities would resist the fixed-price contracts that would accompany the implementation of S.B.32. The RAM provides an option to avoid that unpleasantness. In essence, the CPUC has determined that renewable energy should be priced on its own merits - not against the price of fossil-fuel generation.
"The key thing is they have shown their hand, as far as what they think the value of solar is above the MPR table," comments Dr. John Barnes, founder and principal partner of Solar Power Development Partners, based in Saratoga, Calif.
The CPUC has also expressed its desire to expedite RPS fulfillment, which is much easier to accomplish with midsized projects that can come online in a fraction of the time it takes a massive concentrating solar power (CSP) plant to be commissioned. While the output of a CSP facility can register in the hundreds of megawatts, large PV plants - while certainly complicated and expensive - are more nimble, the commission has reasoned.
The new proposal also helps stakeholders skirt thorny issues related to transmission. In most cases, the transmission infrastructure needed to move power from remote CSP plants to demand centers is not available. Building new high-voltage lines requires not only huge capital investments, but also Federal Energy Regulatory Commission involvement, which presents challenges related to jurisdiction and project timelines.
Midsized PV projects can integrate with the grid via existing electric-distribution networks. To one degree or another, all of the investor-owned utilities that would participate in the new program are currently engaged in upgrading distribution equipment. In turn, it is presumed that these systems will be able to handle the integration of distributed solar resources.
"The real way to get solar installed in California is through distributed generation," Barnes says. "It allows you to connect these systems and get them done in a reasonable time frame without transmission upgrades."
For its part, the CPUC has fortified the proposal with language that seeks to cut away the fat and ensure that only projects that are shovel-ready enter the RAM pipeline. For instance, the proposal recommends a RAM deposit of $20/kW for selected projects. Developments that are selected for the program would have 18 months from the date of contract execution to begin commercial operation - if not, the project deposit would be lost.
Although the proposal is not a final rule, Browning is confident that the major provisions of the plan will sail through the comment period and be adopted by the CPUC. In fact, he says the commission could vote on the proposal within a few weeks, potentially leading to "tremendous growth" in California's solar market.
"It's a very positive step toward higher levels of distributed solar generation," Barnes adds.
Source: Solar Industry
Producing Solar Below 70 Cents a Watt - The New Target
The race to produce solar PV for less than a dollar per watt is over. The new cost race is now based on cents, not dollars.
Remember back in the good 'ol days of 2008 when manufacturing solar PV below a dollar a watt was a big deal? How quaint that vision seems today.
kay, so the sub-one dollar production cost is still a major milestone. But as more companies approach or cross the threshold, the solar industry is starting to compete at a much different level.
In 2009, industry leader First Solar was the first company to produce cadmium-telluride thin-film modules for below a dollar a watt. Today, the company is producing panels at 76 cents a watt – a benchmark by which all other solar manufacturers are compared. If a company can't provide a clear path to that cost range quickly, it probably doesn't have a good chance of competing in today's market. But First Solar certainly can't rest on its laurels.
In a big announcement this week, the equipment manufacturer Oerlikon says that its new fab line is able to pump out 10 percent-efficient amorphous-silicon (a-Si) thin-film modules for under 70 cents a watt.
“This certainly gives us a lot of confidence. We were able to meet the target we set for the end of 2010 earlier than expected,” says Chris O'Brien, head of market development at Oerlikon.
efinitely be producing solar below 70 cents a watt. Oerlikon is assuming that its customers can integrate the new line and reach those cost targets by 2011. So while the company has achieved this ground-breaking cost structure in a controlled setting, actually getting customers to that target will be harder.
"It's more of a calculation. Oerlikon doesn't produce the panels. At this point, it's more theory than practice," says Shyam Mehta, a senior solar analyst with GTM Research. "It's up to Oerlikon working with its vendors...to scale up and hit these targets."
Mehta cautions that this sort of cost target takes longer to reach than people expect. So for the time being, First Solar can still solidly call itself the leader in production cost and efficiency.
"First Solar is already there. It's definitely not an apples-to-apples comparison," says Mehta.
Even with all the "ifs," the news is good for the struggling sector. For the last two years industry analysts have been predicting the death of a-Si thin film, a technology plagued by high costs. In many ways, they have been right: A number of a-Si companies have gone belly up, and the most high-profile equipment producer, Applied Materials, got out of the business earlier this summer. The technology couldn't compete with conventional PV when prices for silicon dropped so dramatically.
“We ran into some enormous headwinds,” says O'Brien. “The advantages of thin film disappeared quickly. But we feel that's changing.”
O'Brien says the company has been constantly making changes to the fab line over the years. Those changes include a focus on tandem-junction (i.e. higher efficiency) cells, thinner silicon layers, higher reflective backsheets, eliminating “dead zones” around the perimeter of the module, and reducing material needs. He says the effort has increased cell efficiencies and reduced the capital expenditure for its customers by 25%.
Oerlikon also announced the development of a new tandem-junction "micromorph" cell that is 11.9 percent efficient in the lab. The efficiency was verified by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory.
This announcement illustrates the new paradigm for solar manufacturers. Two years ago, producing solar at $1.50 a watt was pretty good. Today, that just won't cut it. If Oerlikon continues on a path toward steady cost reductions and efficiency improvements in line with that trend, the company could prove to be a major success story in an a-Si sector filled with bad news.
To hear the podcast - click here.
Also, in the video interview below, Oerlikon's Chris O'Brien talks more about why the company has continued to improve while other a-Si players have struggled so badly.
Source: Renewable Energy World
Note: While cost per watt is a good target ... the more important measurement is cost / kWh of electricity produced. Cheap cost per watt isn't necessarily the best choice.
Remember back in the good 'ol days of 2008 when manufacturing solar PV below a dollar a watt was a big deal? How quaint that vision seems today.
kay, so the sub-one dollar production cost is still a major milestone. But as more companies approach or cross the threshold, the solar industry is starting to compete at a much different level.
In 2009, industry leader First Solar was the first company to produce cadmium-telluride thin-film modules for below a dollar a watt. Today, the company is producing panels at 76 cents a watt – a benchmark by which all other solar manufacturers are compared. If a company can't provide a clear path to that cost range quickly, it probably doesn't have a good chance of competing in today's market. But First Solar certainly can't rest on its laurels.
In a big announcement this week, the equipment manufacturer Oerlikon says that its new fab line is able to pump out 10 percent-efficient amorphous-silicon (a-Si) thin-film modules for under 70 cents a watt.
“This certainly gives us a lot of confidence. We were able to meet the target we set for the end of 2010 earlier than expected,” says Chris O'Brien, head of market development at Oerlikon.
efinitely be producing solar below 70 cents a watt. Oerlikon is assuming that its customers can integrate the new line and reach those cost targets by 2011. So while the company has achieved this ground-breaking cost structure in a controlled setting, actually getting customers to that target will be harder.
"It's more of a calculation. Oerlikon doesn't produce the panels. At this point, it's more theory than practice," says Shyam Mehta, a senior solar analyst with GTM Research. "It's up to Oerlikon working with its vendors...to scale up and hit these targets."
Mehta cautions that this sort of cost target takes longer to reach than people expect. So for the time being, First Solar can still solidly call itself the leader in production cost and efficiency.
"First Solar is already there. It's definitely not an apples-to-apples comparison," says Mehta.
Even with all the "ifs," the news is good for the struggling sector. For the last two years industry analysts have been predicting the death of a-Si thin film, a technology plagued by high costs. In many ways, they have been right: A number of a-Si companies have gone belly up, and the most high-profile equipment producer, Applied Materials, got out of the business earlier this summer. The technology couldn't compete with conventional PV when prices for silicon dropped so dramatically.
“We ran into some enormous headwinds,” says O'Brien. “The advantages of thin film disappeared quickly. But we feel that's changing.”
O'Brien says the company has been constantly making changes to the fab line over the years. Those changes include a focus on tandem-junction (i.e. higher efficiency) cells, thinner silicon layers, higher reflective backsheets, eliminating “dead zones” around the perimeter of the module, and reducing material needs. He says the effort has increased cell efficiencies and reduced the capital expenditure for its customers by 25%.
Oerlikon also announced the development of a new tandem-junction "micromorph" cell that is 11.9 percent efficient in the lab. The efficiency was verified by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory.
This announcement illustrates the new paradigm for solar manufacturers. Two years ago, producing solar at $1.50 a watt was pretty good. Today, that just won't cut it. If Oerlikon continues on a path toward steady cost reductions and efficiency improvements in line with that trend, the company could prove to be a major success story in an a-Si sector filled with bad news.
To hear the podcast - click here.
Also, in the video interview below, Oerlikon's Chris O'Brien talks more about why the company has continued to improve while other a-Si players have struggled so badly.
Source: Renewable Energy World
Note: While cost per watt is a good target ... the more important measurement is cost / kWh of electricity produced. Cheap cost per watt isn't necessarily the best choice.
Grid Energy Storage a $35B Market by 2020?
Coming on the heels of yesterday's announcement that California is moving closer to setting grid energy storage mandates for utilities in the state, today Pike Research released a new report that says the grid energy storage market could reach as much as $35 billion by 2020.
According to the research company, demand is being driven by several key trends including the proliferation of renewable energy from variable sources such as wind and solar, the expansion of utility smart grid initiatives, and the introduction of plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles. The new report, “Energy Storage on the Grid,” indicates that the market will increase from $1.5 billion in 2010 to $35.3 billion annually by 2020.
Pike Research analyst David Link said that today utilities use grid energy storage to mitigate wind and solar energy variability, for load following and for renewable energy time shifting. “In the coming years,” said Link, “the number of applications for energy storage on the grid will expand to include the opportunity for utilities to defer transmission and distribution (T&D) capital upgrades, time of use energy cost management for the commercial and industrial (C&I) segments, and conventional energy time shifting.”
Of storage technologies Pike research sees major growth in the areas of the compressed air energy storage (CAES), Li-ion batteries, and flow batteries. Other storage technologies in use today include pumped hydro and sodium sulfur (NAS) batteries.
Source: Renewable Energy World
According to the research company, demand is being driven by several key trends including the proliferation of renewable energy from variable sources such as wind and solar, the expansion of utility smart grid initiatives, and the introduction of plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles. The new report, “Energy Storage on the Grid,” indicates that the market will increase from $1.5 billion in 2010 to $35.3 billion annually by 2020.
Pike Research analyst David Link said that today utilities use grid energy storage to mitigate wind and solar energy variability, for load following and for renewable energy time shifting. “In the coming years,” said Link, “the number of applications for energy storage on the grid will expand to include the opportunity for utilities to defer transmission and distribution (T&D) capital upgrades, time of use energy cost management for the commercial and industrial (C&I) segments, and conventional energy time shifting.”
Of storage technologies Pike research sees major growth in the areas of the compressed air energy storage (CAES), Li-ion batteries, and flow batteries. Other storage technologies in use today include pumped hydro and sodium sulfur (NAS) batteries.
Source: Renewable Energy World
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
How Fast Can You Really Recharge Your Plug-In Car?
We are quickly approaching the launch dates of the Nissan LEAF and Chevrolet Volt-the first two globally-distributed and mass-market plug-in cars the world has ever seen. Beyond those two groundbreaking vehicles, every major automaker has now committed to delivering some sort of plug-in vehicle within the next five years. As the public's attention shifts to the battery-powered drivetrain and its perceived shortcomings, the question of how long it will take to charge the battery has rightly taken center stage.
To this point, much of the conversation regarding plug-in car charging times has revolved around what kind of charging station you use. In the US, as many of us know, there are essentially three types of charging:
A standard 3-prong household outlet, also known as "Level 1 charging"
A specialized home charging station, also known as "Level 2 charging"
A commercial quick charging station, known alternately as both "DC fast charging" and "Level 3 charging."
Listening to radio and TV shows, and reading through internet threads devoted to the topic of "How long will it take me to charge my electric car," it is apparent that there is a very big information gap out there when it come to charging times and what you might reasonably expect for your Nissan LEAF or Chevy Volt or Coda Sedan or whatever other electric car come down the pipe.
A battery is just a storage device for energy. Any given battery's potential energy storage is rated in terms of kilowatt-hours (kWh). For instance, the Nissan LEAF effectively has a 22 kWh battery, and the Chevy Volt effectively has an 8 kWh battery. In the US, your standard household outlet (Level 1 charging) can deliver about 1.6 kW (after accounting for losses and other items). To figure out how long it will take you to fully charge a given battery, simply divide the battery's size by the outlet's output. For instance, a 16 kWh battery will take 10 hours to fully charge from a standard outlet (16 kWh/1.6 kW).
So, if you install a Level 2 home charging station in your garage, how much shorter will the recharge times be? In the US, Level 2 stations are rated up to 14.4 kW (240 Volt / 60 Amp) outputs, but most of them will probably be installed on standard dryer circuits (240Volt / 30 Amp) and be able to output about 6.5 kW (after accounting for losses and other items). Of course, you can go higher if you buy a station that is rated higher and you pay for the upgraded wiring and circuitry to get you to 60 Amps, but for the sake of discussion, let's assume an output of 6.5 kW for a Level 2 station.
Using the same logic as for your standard household outlet above, you'd think a Level 2 station could charge that 16 kWh battery in about 2.5 hours, but this is where things get a little tricky. As it turns out, the station is just the energy supplier in the charging world-the actual device that regulates charging speed is on-board the car. And, as it also turns out, this on-board charger is the absolute critical piece to understanding how fast you can charge your brand spanking new electric car.
If you wanted to take maximum advantage of your typical Level 2 station, you'd want an on-board charger that could handle at least 6.5 kW. In fact, looking back at previous electric cars that were released back in the California mandate days, the original Toyota RAV4 EV was equipped with a 6.6 kW charger. Today, things are quite a bit different though. The first gen LEAF is shipping with a 3.3 kW charger, same as the first gen Volt. The Coda Sedan, however, is shipping with a 6.6 kW charger.
So even if your Level 2 station is rated at 6.5 or 6.6 kW, if you have a LEAF or Volt, you'll never be able to push more than 3.3 kW to the battery at any given time-resulting in charging speeds that are half that of what you might expect based on the charging station's stats. However, if you have a Coda, you'll be able to take full advantage of it. Even more confusing, the on-board charger doesn't affect how fast you can charge your plug-in at a DC fast charging station. In that case, the DC station is just dumping energy very quickly into the battery and kind of bypasses the on-board charger. You could get a Nissan LEAF battery from 0-80% full in about 25 minutes at a DC fast charging station. The Volt and Coda don't have DC fast charging capability.
In their defense, Nissan has said that the inclusion of the 3.3 kW charger was a choice they wouldn't make again in retrospect, and they plan on upgrading to a 6.6 kW charger for the next generation LEAF. At that point they also plan on making the 6.6 kW charger available for installation in the first gen LEAF, likely for some additional cost. My guess is that the Japanese Nissan LEAF engineers, working in a secretive Japanese world when first designing the LEAF, based their assumptions on Japanese outlets. A standard Japanese outlet is rated at 200 V and 15 Amps, or about 3 kW. In Japan there won't be any Level 1, Level 2, or Level 3 charging-just standard household outlets and DC fast charging while on the road-so there's no need for a charger rated higher than 3.3 kW. Whoops...
Yet, in the end, all of this talk of charging speeds and times from empty to full really doesn't make much sense because we're rarely going to be filling our plug-in cars from empty to full. More likely you'll drive the thing 40 miles in a day and then come home at night and plug it in. When you wake up in the AM it will be fully charged no matter how long it took. But if you only have to drive 40 miles a day, even a charge on a 3-prong outlet is a reasonable 6 hours, so focusing the charging speed becomes less important.
Reprinted with permission from PluginCars.com
To this point, much of the conversation regarding plug-in car charging times has revolved around what kind of charging station you use. In the US, as many of us know, there are essentially three types of charging:
A standard 3-prong household outlet, also known as "Level 1 charging"
A specialized home charging station, also known as "Level 2 charging"
A commercial quick charging station, known alternately as both "DC fast charging" and "Level 3 charging."
Listening to radio and TV shows, and reading through internet threads devoted to the topic of "How long will it take me to charge my electric car," it is apparent that there is a very big information gap out there when it come to charging times and what you might reasonably expect for your Nissan LEAF or Chevy Volt or Coda Sedan or whatever other electric car come down the pipe.
A battery is just a storage device for energy. Any given battery's potential energy storage is rated in terms of kilowatt-hours (kWh). For instance, the Nissan LEAF effectively has a 22 kWh battery, and the Chevy Volt effectively has an 8 kWh battery. In the US, your standard household outlet (Level 1 charging) can deliver about 1.6 kW (after accounting for losses and other items). To figure out how long it will take you to fully charge a given battery, simply divide the battery's size by the outlet's output. For instance, a 16 kWh battery will take 10 hours to fully charge from a standard outlet (16 kWh/1.6 kW).
So, if you install a Level 2 home charging station in your garage, how much shorter will the recharge times be? In the US, Level 2 stations are rated up to 14.4 kW (240 Volt / 60 Amp) outputs, but most of them will probably be installed on standard dryer circuits (240Volt / 30 Amp) and be able to output about 6.5 kW (after accounting for losses and other items). Of course, you can go higher if you buy a station that is rated higher and you pay for the upgraded wiring and circuitry to get you to 60 Amps, but for the sake of discussion, let's assume an output of 6.5 kW for a Level 2 station.
Using the same logic as for your standard household outlet above, you'd think a Level 2 station could charge that 16 kWh battery in about 2.5 hours, but this is where things get a little tricky. As it turns out, the station is just the energy supplier in the charging world-the actual device that regulates charging speed is on-board the car. And, as it also turns out, this on-board charger is the absolute critical piece to understanding how fast you can charge your brand spanking new electric car.
If you wanted to take maximum advantage of your typical Level 2 station, you'd want an on-board charger that could handle at least 6.5 kW. In fact, looking back at previous electric cars that were released back in the California mandate days, the original Toyota RAV4 EV was equipped with a 6.6 kW charger. Today, things are quite a bit different though. The first gen LEAF is shipping with a 3.3 kW charger, same as the first gen Volt. The Coda Sedan, however, is shipping with a 6.6 kW charger.
So even if your Level 2 station is rated at 6.5 or 6.6 kW, if you have a LEAF or Volt, you'll never be able to push more than 3.3 kW to the battery at any given time-resulting in charging speeds that are half that of what you might expect based on the charging station's stats. However, if you have a Coda, you'll be able to take full advantage of it. Even more confusing, the on-board charger doesn't affect how fast you can charge your plug-in at a DC fast charging station. In that case, the DC station is just dumping energy very quickly into the battery and kind of bypasses the on-board charger. You could get a Nissan LEAF battery from 0-80% full in about 25 minutes at a DC fast charging station. The Volt and Coda don't have DC fast charging capability.
In their defense, Nissan has said that the inclusion of the 3.3 kW charger was a choice they wouldn't make again in retrospect, and they plan on upgrading to a 6.6 kW charger for the next generation LEAF. At that point they also plan on making the 6.6 kW charger available for installation in the first gen LEAF, likely for some additional cost. My guess is that the Japanese Nissan LEAF engineers, working in a secretive Japanese world when first designing the LEAF, based their assumptions on Japanese outlets. A standard Japanese outlet is rated at 200 V and 15 Amps, or about 3 kW. In Japan there won't be any Level 1, Level 2, or Level 3 charging-just standard household outlets and DC fast charging while on the road-so there's no need for a charger rated higher than 3.3 kW. Whoops...
Yet, in the end, all of this talk of charging speeds and times from empty to full really doesn't make much sense because we're rarely going to be filling our plug-in cars from empty to full. More likely you'll drive the thing 40 miles in a day and then come home at night and plug it in. When you wake up in the AM it will be fully charged no matter how long it took. But if you only have to drive 40 miles a day, even a charge on a 3-prong outlet is a reasonable 6 hours, so focusing the charging speed becomes less important.
Reprinted with permission from PluginCars.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)