If only we could set up subsidies for this infrastructure in the same way we subsidize ag and oil…
We passed legislation spending a few billion on charging stations and totally failed to get any built.
We're Charging Our Cars Wrong
11–20 of 213 posts
Re: We're Charging Our Cars Wrong
#12You don’t really need two ground wires, CP has a diode with series resistance 2.74K to PE (ground) so it’s trivially possible for the EVSE to just send a push/pull waveform over CP and if it reads push but not pull (remember diode) then it knows it’s connected properly.
The return path for the pilot current will be over the PE contact, so it can also be detect and doubly verify that PE is low resistance, although ideally you’d want a much smaller series resistance.
Re: We're Charging Our Cars Wrong
#13It would be nice if instead of the fast charging problem the focus would be shifted to standardized battery packs, that can be field replaced. I don't really want to own 50-100kwh battery. I just want to use the charge in it and happy to pay for that.
Right, like propane tanks for my bbq
Re: We're Charging Our Cars Wrong
#14The argument sounds kind of persuasive to a layman (even one that did a little bit of EE a while back), but my gut says there would be no need to write this article if there weren't regulations or other engineering traditions that decided galvanic isolation is necessary for safety. I guess the difference is galvanic isolation is physically (i.e. passively) fail safe, while ground detection is an active safety measure…
The system proposed in this piece could probably be safely implemented, but it would much more challenging to do than the author seems to indicate. There are a variety of failure modes that they ignore.
The author also glosses over a 20% power loss (to heating), which would cost money and bulk to dissipate.
Re: We're Charging Our Cars Wrong
#15If only we could set up subsidies for this infrastructure in the same way we subsidize ag and oil…
We passed legislation spending a few billion on charging stations and totally failed to get any built.
We passed legislation authorizing spending a few billion ($7.5B, 2021 Infrastructure and Jobs Act), and have deployed a portion of it. Most of the authorized $$$ has not yet been spent; it unlocks over the decade from 2021-2030. One fault of the bill is it depends on states actually doing the work to build these stations; the feds aren't doing it directly. If states drag their feet, stations don't get built.
Re: We're Charging Our Cars Wrong
#16Re: We're Charging Our Cars Wrong
#17Require a coin-operated 120V outlet with gfci and accessible way to reset the breaker for every two parking spots, everywhere. Many benefits:
1. Everywhere you go, you know there'll be somewhere to charge overnight.
2. It's the cheapest per installed spot, by far, allowing way more locations.
3. Renters can safely by an electric car and have home charging.
4. Coin-op 120V are far more robust than cables with valuable copper.
5. It de-incentivizes excessive parking.
Re: We're Charging Our Cars Wrong
#18If only we could set up subsidies for this infrastructure in the same way we subsidize ag and oil…
For context, US agriculture subsidies come principally in the form of Price Loss Coverage (PLC) and Agriculture Risk Coverage (ARC). These programs pay subsidies to farmers based on price or revenue losses for covered commodities like corn, soybeans, wheat, and cotton. Farmers choose between PLC, which pays based on national average prices, and ARC, which pays based on county or individual farm revenue.
ARC and PLC are projected to cost approximately $1.6 billion in 2025, which is more than triple their 2024 levels, but The American Relief Act of 2025 allocated $31 billion in ad hoc disaster aid to farmers. So maybe I was wrong about ARC/PLC being the principal method of subsidy?
> Under current law, USDA’s total outlays for 2025 are estimated at $231 billion. Outlays for mandatory programs are $189.6 billion, 82.1 percent of total outlays.[0]
0. https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2025-usda...
Re: We're Charging Our Cars Wrong
#19It would be nice if instead of the fast charging problem the focus would be shifted to standardized battery packs, that can be field replaced. I don't really want to own 50-100kwh battery. I just want to use the charge in it and happy to pay for that.
Like Henry Ford tried on the Model T: The Model T was offered in three fuels: Gasoline, Electric, and Alcohol. It only took I think less than a year to make it Gasoline only.
Re: We're Charging Our Cars Wrong
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
We passed legislation spending a few billion on charging stations and totally failed to get any built.
We passed legislation authorizing spending a few billion ($7.5B, 2021 Infrastructure and Jobs Act), and have deployed a portion of it. Most of the authorized $$$ has not yet been spent; it unlocks over the decade from 2021-2030. One fault of the bill is it depends on states actually doing the work to build these stations; the feds aren't doing it directly. If states drag their feet, stations don't get built.
Ok. It's the failure to build that's the issue more than the spending.