Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Transportation

Tesla To Blanket US With Superchargers In Two Years 311

Posted by samzenpus
from the across-the-country dept.
dublin writes "Electric car manufacturer Tesla is planning to triple its construction of "supercharger" rapid charging stations, with a trail of stations in place for L.A. to New York trips by the end of this year. In addition to the east & west coasts, islands in Colorado, Illinois, and Texas will grow together to cover nearly the entire continental US by 2015. The two biggest obstacles for electric cars are high cost and range problems. Cost is still a problem, but this move to blanket the US with supercharger stations could fix the range half of the e-car equation."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Tesla To Blanket US With Superchargers In Two Years

Comments Filter:
  • by The_Wilschon (782534) on Thursday May 30, 2013 @07:40PM (#43867419) Homepage
    Tesla has made a map of where they intend to put the stations and how far you can drive from them. http://www.teslamotors.com/supercharger [teslamotors.com]
    • Thank you. This was just what I was looking for
    • by kat_skan (5219)

      Interesting that they're free. Just curious: is that distance round-trip or if you drive to Vegas will you be walking back to LA?

      • The range bubbles are one way distance. To verify this look at the one surrounding Denver. Colorado is about 380 miles across, and the diameter of that bubble is slightly larger, so they have about a 200 mile radius. The advertized range for the two Tesla S models are 230 & 300 miles, so neither can drive from a charging station to the edge of a bubble and back.

        • by NFN_NLN (633283)

          The range bubbles are one way distance. To verify this look at the one surrounding Denver. Colorado is about 380 miles across, and the diameter of that bubble is slightly larger, so they have about a 200 mile radius. The advertized range for the two Tesla S models are 230 & 300 miles, so neither can drive from a charging station to the edge of a bubble and back.

          I though this issue was solved years ago with... and I'm not joking... towing a gas/diesel generator.

          Put a hitch on the Telsa and tow a gas generator with fuel to extend your range. When you're using the car locally or once you reach your destination you unhitch and park the generator. There was even a prototype that looked like a tiny trailer.

          Is this not an option anymore?

      • I think the idea is that you're supposed to charge overnight at 115V or 230V in Vegas.

        That's fine when the edge of the circle is your destination. But the fact that these are one way circles makes the map very deceptive. For example, take a look at the Fall 2013 map. It would seem that Toronto to NYC is a feasible trip, but it isn't, at least not by supercharger.

        • by NFN_NLN (633283) on Thursday May 30, 2013 @10:42PM (#43868711)

          I think the idea is that you're supposed to charge overnight at 115V or 230V in Vegas.

          That's fine when the edge of the circle is your destination. But the fact that these are one way circles makes the map very deceptive. For example, take a look at the Fall 2013 map. It would seem that Toronto to NYC is a feasible trip, but it isn't, at least not by supercharger.

          According to marketing, if you leave Toronto in the Fall of 2013 and drive slow enough that you hit new stations coming online in early 2014... then you're OK. :)

    • by icebike (68054)

      Very interesting, but most people would still have to charge at home, and plan routes very carefully, even at the end of the timeline.

      This is really an around town roadster, maybe a daily driver, but not something most people will want to set off on a road trip in.
      By the time Tesla gets these built, the industry will have moved on to Fuel Cell technology [washingtontimes.com]. Tesla is a stopgap measure at best.

      • The Toyota fuel cell has reduced the platinum needed. From http://www.greenoptimistic.com/2013/05/07/toyota-fcv-r-hydrogen-fuel-cell-concept-set-for-production-in-2015/#.Uafv79gzVc0 [greenoptimistic.com]

        Toyota has managed to reduce the amount of platinum in the fuel cell to about 30g, just over $1,600 worth and is looking to reduce this even further.

        I wonder what makes the cars cost $50k-$100k then. Is it just the low volume production? Are there things about fuel cells other than the platinum that make them expensive?

        • You're talking lithium cell rechargeable batteries, which aren't exactly cheap. Just look at 6-cell laptop batteries, now multiply by a couple hundred, that's pretty pricey. That combined with production costs is a pretty penny, why the premium is usually $20-30K over a comparible petro-fueled car.
        • by Cyberax (705495)
          Note, that they've just _reduced_ the amount of catalyst, not eliminated it completely. Fuel cell cars are not possible in any large quantity - there's not enough platinum for that. Also, they STILL have the problem with catalyst poisoning - it's happening even faster than Li-Ion battery degradation (good news is that you can reuse platinum cheaply).

          And on top of it, hydrogen is mostly produced from methane. And it's more energetically favorable to simply burn methane in a regular combustion engine.
    • Interesting. It seems like they're solving the range problem, but not necessarily the convenience problem. There's about 20 gas stations within 5 miles of where I live, but there won't even be 1 of these supercharger stations. That's not really a problem being at home, but I think it's probably going to be a problem for some people. Not to mention, with 4 to 10 stalls and the charge time, there's a good chance that people are going to be stuck waiting once they get a lot more of these on the road like I hop

      • by PopeRatzo (965947)

        with 4 to 10 stalls and the charge time, there's a good chance that people are going to be stuck waiting once they get a lot more of these on the road like I hope they do.

        When they get a lot more of them on the road, there will be more charging stations.

        That's how this stuff works. When there's a need, somebody will step up.

        • My point is that I don't know if Tesla will be stepping it up quickly enough. They're expecting to build 20k Model S's in the next yer - even assuming they don't ramp up production further at all, which is highly unlikely given their track record, that's about 60k of them on the road by the end of that map's timeline, and most of those will be concentrated in the major metro areas instead of spread across the country fairly evenly like these stations. I have no doubt that the stations in Montana are likely

    • by istartedi (132515)

      Very useful link. It isn't obvious at first glance, but you can click at the bottom of the map to see the build-out timeline. I wonder what they're thinking targeting that route across the northern plains for Winter. I don't imagine there being too many road-trippers through there when it's brutally cold and subject to blizzards.

      I wonder if their long-term plan includes franchising the stations. A lot of travel centers would kill to have the Tesla demographic hanging around with nothing to do for half a

      • by AaronW (33736)

        That's what I've been thinking. I've heard that Harris Ranch is quite pleased with the Superchargers there. It's one of the busiest ones and they've had to expand it, probably in part due to people staying longer than their charging time to get a good steak.

        The ones I have been to in Gilroy and Folsom are at malls, though a lot of shops are closed in the Gilroy outlet mall there are still a number of places to eat within easy walking distance.

  • First, 100 fast chargers does not a nationwide blanket make.
    Second, these things are extremely expensive to install (especially if they're not immediately next to major power lines). We're talking hundreds of thousands of dollars.
    Third, fast charges are very inefficient by comparison to level 2 chargers-- there's a lot of waste energy.
    Fourth, fast chargers are most likely to be used midday when electricity is at its costliest.

    So, they're expensive to install, wastes electricity, and are most likely to be us

    • by nebbian (564148) on Thursday May 30, 2013 @07:53PM (#43867547) Homepage Journal

      Third, fast charges are very inefficient by comparison to level 2 chargers-- there's a lot of waste energy.

      As much waste energy as carting around an inefficient internal combustion engine, that gets at best 30% efficiency? I think not.

      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by eepok (545733)

        You're right that they're more efficient than combustion engines, but so are bicycles. The point is that fast charges are not the future-- they're a dead end to a technology.

        Battery swapping, on the other hand, is the most cost efficient, environmentally friendly, and quickest form of refueling an battery EV.

        • by ebno-10db (1459097) on Thursday May 30, 2013 @08:13PM (#43867713)

          Battery swapping, on the other hand, is the most cost efficient, environmentally friendly, and quickest form of refueling an battery EV.

          That would seem more credible if the company that tried it hadn't recently gone out of business.

          • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

            by haruchai (17472)

            It would be more credible to claim that the ONLY company that tried is bankrupt. You can almost always find a pioneering company that failed.
            Perhaps fuel cells are the future or maybe someone will invent the Shipstone or Mr Fusion, but battery swap, I believe, can be viable and profitable.
            Better Place was too far ahead of the curve or was focusing on the wrong niche.

        • by kwerle (39371)

          You're right that they're more efficient than combustion engines, but so are bicycles. The point is that fast charges are not the future-- they're a dead end to a technology.

          Battery swapping, on the other hand, is the most cost efficient, environmentally friendly, and quickest form of refueling an battery EV.

          I think chargers are a pretty reasonable solution to a relatively rare problem: how to recharge your car when you want to drive more than a couple of hundred miles at a stretch.

          What's more, the batteries weigh quite a bit (http://www.roperld.com/science/TeslaModelS.htm) 1200lbs for the S. Anyone can plug a car in. 1200lbs of battery would be a bit rough to handle. Even 1/10th that would be too much to deal with.

      • by Eskarel (565631)

        Well, when you consider that the Tesla engine isn't 100% efficient, that the charging process isn't 100% efficient, and the charging station is probably being powered by a 40 year old coal powered power station which is actually less efficient than an internal combustion engine in the first place, not to mention substantially dirtier(yes even coal power can be more efficient than your car, but only if you have a new plant and most places don't).

        • by haruchai (17472) on Thursday May 30, 2013 @09:08PM (#43868125)

          If you improve one inefficient plant, that automatically improves 10000 EVs.

        • by PopeRatzo (965947)

          and the charging station is probably being powered by a 40 year old coal powered power station which is actually less efficient than an internal combustion engine in the first place,

          Funny, I was just reading this a little while ago:

          "âoeAt the time of the latest record, wind generation accounted for 22 percent of the power demand of 34,318 MWâ¦Wind farms expanded rapidly in Texas until 2009 when production began to overwhelm the existing transmission capacityâ¦Texas is building more

        • by bentcd (690786)

          and the charging station is probably being powered by a 40 year old coal powered power station

          Tesla's superchargers are powered by solar cell farms operated by SolarCity.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Actually, you are a bit off, Cost of install depends on size of install. 4 station charger will cost more than a 1 or 2 station. The power draw is easy enough to get around as they are installed in commercial districts with more than enough power available. Most of them are being installed in conjunction with Solar panels anyways. Eventually these will be refueling stations at a cost to all electric cars so the costs to build them will be fully recouped.

      • Interesting idea with solar powered recharge stations... you could put automated recharge stations in the middle of nowhere where it's inconvenient to ship gas to, like long stretches of empty highway in the American Southwest. Of course, it will be a while before solar can keep up with the demand of anything more than a very low volume station but the potential is there.

    • Second, these things are extremely expensive to install (especially if they're not immediately next to major power lines). We're talking hundreds of thousands of dollars.

      I'm guessing that you've never had to build a gasoline station. Environmental assessments. Underground excavation. Costly double-walled tanks and plumbing. Inspections. Insurance in case you contaminate the local soil or water with spilled fuel. And it's not like you get a pipeline direct to the station--every gallon you sell has to be trucked in.

    • by Rockoon (1252108)

      Second, these things are extremely expensive to install (especially if they're not immediately next to major power lines). We're talking hundreds of thousands of dollars.

      If it only cost hundreds of thousands, great!

      However, it seems to me that you don't even have a basic understanding of construction costs.

    • by Ksevio (865461)
      The goal is to put a solar canopy over them to help power the station. Probably once the onsite batteries are charged, they'd even be able to make money on some of the lesser used routes. It's not so bad when you're wasting solar panel since it's going to waste anyways.

      Battery swapping may seem like a common sense idea, but the technology in batteries isn't there that we can have a small enough batter package that can be robust enough to be swapped.
    • by AaronW (33736)

      Actually the fast chargers should be more efficient. They're basically pumping DC directly into the battery, bypassing the car's built-in charging circuit. They're fed directly with 480V 3-phase power from a high voltage source. The two that I have seen are right next to a big HV power transformer. The Supercharger units themselves are about half the size of a refrigerator witha large fan on the side.for cooling. Lithium Ion batteries are typically quite efficient when charging as well.

      Each Supercharger co

  • by Hadlock (143607) on Thursday May 30, 2013 @07:47PM (#43867495) Homepage Journal

    Electric cars have long been a chicken or egg problem. We would have gladly rented a Tesla model S for our trip to New Orleans from Dallas last weekend (Elon, lend me a car when we can do this and we'll document the trip), but A) you can't readily rent a Tesla and b) there are no charging stations yet.
     
    I think it's interesting that they're building out a "free forever" stations, and carpeting the nation with them. They probably represent a fixed cost, as you can only charge so many cars per day, and eventually competing stations will pop up along the most popular routes. Electricity really isn't that expensive.
     
    I was thinking about how US automakers might try and sue Tesla in federal court over providing "fuel" for the cars, but I wonder if the "free forever" is due in part to the fact that it's much more difficult to sue a company for anti-competitive practices if there's no money changing hands in the fueling process.

    • by Cyberax (705495)
      They are NOT going to continue the "free forever" model indefinitely. Right now it's a promotion and at some point in future new Teslas (and other car makes if they license Tesla technology) are going to pay for charging.
    • by ShakaUVM (157947)

      >Electricity really isn't that expensive.

      Maybe where you live. I live in California, where peak energy rates hit .49 $/kWh, filliing up a 60 kWh or 85 kWh battery will cost up to $30 or $42.50, respectively. About the same as a tank of gas.

      This will become very, very expensive. They can halve the costs installing large scale solar, but you're still going to get into a very expensive obligation that will probably result in the company going bankrupt over the long run.

      • by Hadlock (143607)

        Commercial and residential rates are billed wildly different. Second, energy rates vary wildly. Depending on the region, like Texas or Tennessee, energy rates are closer to $0.06/kwh if you shop around. Obviously the more you buy, the more you save.

        • by ShakaUVM (157947)

          >Commercial and residential rates are billed wildly different. Second, energy rates vary wildly. Depending on the region, like Texas or Tennessee, energy rates are closer to $0.06/kwh if you shop around. Obviously the more you buy, the more you save.

          Peak power costs (Tier 5) for residential is also about 55c/kWh (http://www.pge.com/tariffs/ResTOUCurrent.xls). That's why I put solar on my house. The LEC of solar is about half peak power rates - so you install just enough solar capacity to drop you back do

  • While 30 minutes is great compared to waiting several hours, they need to really bring that recharge time down by a factor of 5 or more. Being able to stop for a recharge in many places is good, but for longer trips (which mentioning coast-to-coast travel seems to be pointing towards) waiting for half an hour every charging cycle will start to add up on your travel time.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 30, 2013 @08:10PM (#43867691)

    I feel like this is trying to force the current gas station paradigm (refuel, adding 300-500 miles of range in 5-10 minutes) onto EVs, when that paradigm doesn't really fit well.

    Based on a little Googling, Tesla's Superchargers can apparently charge 50% of an 85 kwh battery in about 30 minutes. Not bad (a bit over twice the charge rate of DC fast charging on a Leaf), but based on the EPA estimated range of 265 miles, that gives you about 130 miles of range. So every 130 miles, you stop for 30 minutes - more if all Superchargers at a station are in use. While I'm all for taking frequent breaks on long trips, this is a lot more than the usual 10 minutes every few hundred miles.

    To match gas station refuel times, the power requirements get ridiculous pretty fast. Superchargers put out 120 kw according to Tesla. Let's say we have a hypothetical battery that can take a full 85-kwh charge (265 miles) in 5 minutes like a gas pump. That's 12 times faster than the Supercharger rate of half-capacity in 30 minutes, or 1.44 MW per car! By way of comparison, most (many?) homes in the US have 240-volt, 100-amp service, or 24 kw maximum available power. 1.44 MW is equivalent to 60 homes all maxed out and about to trip breakers! If a typical charging station will service a similar number of cars as a gas station, multiply that by maybe 10 - or 600 maxed out homes. For one refueling station. Insanity. It gets even worse if you want more than 265 miles of range in 5 minutes.

    The bottom line is that even if battery technology gets there, how will the grid handle such quick charging? I see that being the bigger obstacle to EV road trips as convenient as gas-powered trips are now.

    The easier solution is to shift the paradigm - how we think about and use our vehicles. Everyone could have an EV for commuting and regular driving within its nominal range. You charge at night or any other time when you're not using the car anyway - NOT when you are on a trip and just want to keep going (but can't, until you wait to recharge). If/when you need to take a long road trip, you take a gas-powered car. Either an extra car in your household, a rental, borrowed from someone you know. Whatever. Or if you're not hauling a bunch of stuff, maybe it makes more sense to fly.

    As a current EV owner (Nissan Leaf), I've already made the switch in paradigm - and I love it. I'm saving tons of money on fuel costs, driving my Leaf over 16k miles per year. Pretty much every trip within its range will use that car, because it's cheaper and fun to drive. Going to Vegas (from SoCal)? We use the other car. Or any longer trip. Most multi-driver households have multiple cars, so road trips shouldn't really be an issue. I think this kind of strategy makes way more sense than seriously increasing travel time (waiting to charge) or the failed battery swap idea.

    • by Nemyst (1383049) on Thursday May 30, 2013 @11:48PM (#43869097) Homepage
      One of the biggest criticisms that surfaces with EVs is that long road trip "problem". I find it amusing because most Americans drive way under even the base model's maximum range. Yes, we'll need a paradigm change - use an EV for 99% of your commuting and take a gas vehicle for the 1% remaining. Those that need long range (work, distance from city, whatever) can keep their gas vehicles, they're not a significant proportion of the population.
    • by Cyberax (705495)
      You're forgetting that unlike regular cars most EVs are charged at home at leisurely speeds. You only need to use superchargers when you do long road trips. Besides, your calculations are a bit off. If we assume that 85kW*h give you 200 miles of range (somewhat lower than Tesla's specs) then you need 340kW to charge battery in 15 minutes. Driving 200 miles takes about 3.5 hours at typical highway conditions, so you're looking for a break of about 20 minutes every 4 hours - that's not terribly different from
    • by khchung (462899) on Friday May 31, 2013 @07:29AM (#43870723) Journal

      The easier solution is to shift the paradigm - how we think about and use our vehicles.

      This part is right.

      If/when you need to take a long road trip, you take a gas-powered car. Either an extra car in your household, a rental, borrowed from someone you know. Whatever.

      And this part is totally wrong. The clean solution is to take a page from Europe, make your train network actually useful, and let trains haul you AND your car from one city to another. You drive the station, park your car ONTO the train (as well as charge it if you like), then go sit comfortably in the passenger cart of the same train, let it take you to the destination city, and then get on your car and drive away.

      The train ticket may sound expensive, but if you account for the fact you saved fuel/electricity cost for the car, and you can comfortably rest or sleep overnight for the entire trip, it is a bargain.

      You have such a big problem with long road trips in the US because your train network sucks.

  • If so they'd better include a pair of sneakers with the purchase of each car.

  • If other car makers could license the charging connector and rate from Tesla through them or through a standards body the EV market could take off once all of these charging stations are built. Only issue then is waiting half an hour for 66% charge and waiting for others to finish charging.
  • by jtownatpunk.net (245670) on Thursday May 30, 2013 @08:54PM (#43868017)

    If they only charge Tesla vehicles, that would be like building gas stations that only sell proprietary fuel for Ford vehicles. Maybe sell the juice cheaper to Tesla owners but they need to provide high current plugs for all of the major electric vehicles.

    Cross-country travel is still gong to be a hard sell, tho. They're talking about 30 minutes to 50% charge. So call it an hour to 90% and 1.5 hours to 100%. And I assume they're talking about the small Tesla pack to get the best numbers. And non-Tesla vehicles will have to be charged at a more conservative rate so they're going to have people hanging around for an hour or two charging their vehicles. That's a lot of time to kill.

    • by ikaruga (2725453)

      If they only charge Tesla vehicles, that would be like building gas stations that only sell proprietary fuel for Ford vehicles.

      That is something I'm not understanding either. Are those Superchargers Tesla only?
      If the answer is yes, it really doesn't make any sense to me for two reasons:

      1)Although the media is focus exclusively on them, Tesla is not the only EV manufacturer. Making a charger that ignores the most of the market sounds like lost business opportunity. There are already sub 30k EVs (Nissan LEAF being my favorite). They are not as good as the Model S, but they also cost half. There are also hybrids, which in my opinio

      • by adolf (21054)

        It is even more confusing than you think:

        Yes, they're just for Tesla Model S cars.

        And they're free (both in terms of libre and beer) to use, forever, for Tesla Model S cars.

        AFAICT, there is no provision in place to allow a user to attempt to pay for this energy, and the Supercharge stations are unattended.

        So, yeah: The crazy runs deep. And you ain't gonna plug another EV into one of these, ever.

    • by Cyberax (705495)
      Real-live Teslas charge to 80% within 40 minutes. It makes no real sense to charge them to 100% as it takes disproportionate amount of time.
    • by tlhIngan (30335)

      If they only charge Tesla vehicles, that would be like building gas stations that only sell proprietary fuel for Ford vehicles. Maybe sell the juice cheaper to Tesla owners but they need to provide high current plugs for all of the major electric vehicles.

      Cross-country travel is still gong to be a hard sell, tho. They're talking about 30 minutes to 50% charge. So call it an hour to 90% and 1.5 hours to 100%. And I assume they're talking about the small Tesla pack to get the best numbers. And non-Tesla vehic

  • With a gas-powered car, you can drive to the next town or next state and fill up. Maybe even the next street if the gas station has backup generators. If the "gas" station relies on the same grid, you're up the creek in a really bad way that you aren't right now.
  • Big Oil has long gone out of its way to stifle any advances in automotive technologies which would depends on other sources of fuel than petrol. More than likely by now electric cars should be a defacto standard for urban driving. We are at least 20 yrs behind because of Big Oil. I wish it was a conspiracy theory, but its true and many people got either paid off and/or were silence all in the name of gasoline.
  • by crow (16139) on Thursday May 30, 2013 @10:04PM (#43868489) Homepage Journal

    Every restaurant along a major highway should be looking at installing an electric vehicle charger. If I'm taking a trip in an electric car and getting hungry, you can bet I'll choose the stop that lets me charge the car at the same time.

    Sure, the Tesla supercharger may be expensive to install due to the power requirements, but even a standard 220V charger would be enough to make me decide to eat there instead of somewhere else. Even if my trip doesn't require extra charging, having extra power in case I encounter something unexpected is a good thing.

  • Regarding automobiles, the word supercharger already has a specific meaning, Find another word.

    The other day I saw an advertisement for a wireless music receiver. Back in the day, we had something like that. We called it a radio.

  • by AaronW (33736) on Thursday May 30, 2013 @11:09PM (#43868891) Homepage

    I'm really looking forward to this. Last weekend I took my model S down to Big Sur to do some camping and used a bit more power than I anticipated while driving over dirt roads and due to a headwind driving back north. On my way back I had to stop for a bit in Monterey at a level 2 charger to add a few miles before I could reach the Gilroy supercharger. I ended up having to unplug a Volt who was taking up an EV only spot (and was apparently there for many hours according to a Leaf owner parked across from me).

    Of course their announcement shows that this summer a supercharger will be installed in or near Monterey, which would have solved that problem, and there are more on the way along Highway 1.

    In fact, it looks like they'll be building some near some of the other out-of-the-way places I like to travel around the state. It looks like at least one is going in along Highway 395 along the Eastern Sierra.

    The fact that they are reducing charging time is another bonus. 200 miles in 30 minutes for "free" is awesome. I enjoy the superchargers. It's often nice to chat with other Tesla owners there. When I stopped in Gilroy to charge I had 8 miles left. The fellow who pulled in next to me was down to 2 miles, and like me he had taken his car over a bunch of dirt roads. A standard level 2 charger gives me around 15-20 miles of range per hour. At a Supercharger I can get 15-20 miles of charge in 3 minutes!

    While charging I can go stretch my legs, get a meal, check email, surf the web or whatever so I don't consider the delay that big of an issue.

    Out of all the times I've used a supercharger I have never had to wait and there are usually plenty of places nearby to eat or shop while charging, even during Memorial Day weekend.

    The superchargers really make road trips possible with electric vehicles. Sure, it's not as fast as filling a gasoline car, but 30 minutes for 200 miles is not bad! I suspect that when Tesla comes out with their 3rd generation coupe it will charge even faster since it will be a smaller and lighter vehicle.

    Tesla seems to be well ahead of anybody else out there in terms of EV technology. Their batteries have the highest energy density for the lowest cost as well as a very compact electric motor. They spent a lot of effort on battery safety as well. I don't think synchronous motors can compete with induction motors when it comes to power density and I'm sure the cost of induction motors is also lower since there are no rare-earth magnets involved. The 420HP/445ft-lb induction motor in my Tesla is the size of a watermelon.

    The Tesla power connector design is also much better than the J1772 Frankenplug or the huge CHaDeMo connector. Both the J1772 frankenplug and the CHaDeMo connectors are the size of a softball vs the much smaller Tesla connector. They have a small J1772 adapter and I'm sure they'll come out with additional adapters in the future for the frankenplug if it becomes popular.

"Just think of a computer as hardware you can program." -- Nigel de la Tierre

Working...