Our first Supercharger stop worked out in our favor

[richard5933]

Originally Posted by jcl

If you are building new apartment buildings, it isn't so much an issue of any applicable right to charge legislation, it is an issue of whatever local building code you must meet. Imagine how much additional profit you could make if you ignored other aspects of the building code.

But if you are covered by the right to charge legislation, and you build a new apartment building without charging infrastructure, in a quest for higher profits, you will get to find out how much more it costs to install it post construction.

I've just read through a bunch of these 'right to charge' legislation pieces you're referencing. All that I've seen are talking about properties where a residential unit in a condo or other association type development have a deeded parking spot. This is not intended for what I'd consider a typical traditional rental apartment.

There is also language in the bills which talk about the installation of the charging stations must be able to be reasonably accommodated, which means that older buildings with infrastructure incapable of absorbing the added load of all the chargers would likely not be required to retrofit.

These bills have language which will allow the associations to pass the cost of the installation to the units' owners.

What this all seems like to me is a way to prevent some Luddite on a condo board from stopping people from installing charging stations on their own privately owned parking spots, not a way to force businesses to install charging stations.

How does any of this help the millions of people living in traditional apartment buildings parking either in open lots or on the street?

[jcl]

Originally Posted by richard5933

I've just read through a bunch of these 'right to charge' legislation pieces you're referencing. All that I've seen are talking about properties where a residential unit in a condo or other association type development have a deeded parking spot. This is not intended for what I'd consider a typical traditional rental apartment.

There is also language in the bills which talk about the installation of the charging stations must be able to be reasonably accommodated, which means that older buildings with infrastructure incapable of absorbing the added load of all the chargers would likely not be required to retrofit.

These bills have language which will allow the associations to pass the cost of the installation to the units' owners.

What this all seems like to me is a way to prevent some Luddite on a condo board from stopping people from installing charging stations on their own privately owned parking spots, not a way to force businesses to install charging stations.

How does any of this help the millions of people living in traditional apartment buildings parking either in open lots or on the street?

California and Colorado cover renter occupied units.

California and Florida cover commercial buildings as well as residential.

It is not generally a requirement that the parking space be deeded, it can be assigned. It isn't intended for shared parking, although some may decide that is a better way to accommodate the demand.

The laws grant a conditional right, not an unconditional one. Requests must be reasonably accommodated.

All of the laws are based on the beneficiary paying, they don't require that a building manager pay for the installation or the power consumed.

That said, in my case, with a number of us requesting connections to our assigned parking spaces, it made more sense for the strata council to accommodate it (we used a 3/4 vote) because they didn't want 10 or 20 of us doing our own connections in the electrical vault. We all collectively paid for the electrical distribution, and the owners paid individually for any charge point at the end of that distribution. We pay for our own power consumed.

If we are going to base all of this on accommodating users parked on the street we could also discuss how we are going to allow those same users to park their Airstreams on the street. We don't permit that here. YMMV

[mikeinca]

Originally Posted by LLninja

But where’s the Cybertruck? It’s been years since the reveal… yet no firm production date yet….makes me wonder if there’s some engineering problem with the exoskeleton design vs. crash testing vs. battery range.

The short answer to "where's the Cybertruck" is that it's Tesla. One could ask the same question about the "Roadster" or "Full Self Driving" which has been shamelessly and misleadingly advertised for years and still hasn't been delivered. Elon Musk has done important things to further the shift to BEV's and I commend him for that, but he is also a relentless self-promoter and frequently makes promises that he doesn't deliver.

BTW, I congratulate the OP for taking on the challenge of towing with an EV.

[richard5933]

Originally Posted by jcl

California and Colorado cover renter occupied units.

California and Florida cover commercial buildings as well as residential.

It is not generally a requirement that the parking space be deeded, it can be assigned. It isn't intended for shared parking, although some may decide that is a better way to accommodate the demand.

The laws grant a conditional right, not an unconditional one. Requests must be reasonably accommodated.

All of the laws are based on the beneficiary paying, they don't require that a building manager pay for the installation or the power consumed.

That said, in my case, with a number of us requesting connections to our assigned parking spaces, it made more sense for the strata council to accommodate it (we used a 3/4 vote) because they didn't want 10 or 20 of us doing our own connections in the electrical vault. We all collectively paid for the electrical distribution, and the owners paid individually for any charge point at the end of that distribution. We pay for our own power consumed.

If we are going to base all of this on accommodating users parked on the street we could also discuss how we are going to allow those same users to park their Airstreams on the street. We don't permit that here. YMMV

Back to a more relevant side of this as it relates to those of us pulling a travel trailer, something which has been brought up here before...whether campgrounds would be required to install charging stations. From what you're describing and what I saw in the various bills being considered/passed, it would only seem to apply when there are ownership stakes in the individual camp sites. Obviously for campgrounds where people own an individual site these 'right to charge' rules might apply (if there is adequate infrastructure to install them), and maybe even perhaps on seasonal sites but this seems dicier.

Street parking - the reason I keep bringing this up is because of how many comments there have been suggesting that a lack of charging stations won't be a problem since 'most' people will charge at home. My point is that if BEVs become the only new vehicles available there will be many people who will rely public charging stations, and if this change happens before public charging stations are available BEVs will fail to meet the need of many.

Don't get me wrong - I'm all in favor of making the switch to something beyond ICE vehicles. But I'm totally against doing it in a way which leaves many high and dry.

[cazual6]

I recently took a long road trip with my M3 Long Range as well. I had snowboards and four bodies. The range was significantly reduced. However, with proper planning, every 100 miles or so, I reached a SuperCharger.

Admins, I apologize if posting this link is a no-no. I will gladly remove it. However, this has the full story. https://www.facebook.com/groups/Airs...2746781614395/

I had to install a hitch on my model 3, did you have to modify your rig to carry the AS? My tongue weight on my FC25 is close to 1000lbs (I weigh it).

[jcl]

Originally Posted by richard5933

Back to a more relevant side of this as it relates to those of us pulling a travel trailer, something which has been brought up here before...whether campgrounds would be required to install charging stations. From what you're describing and what I saw in the various bills being considered/passed, it would only seem to apply when there are ownership stakes in the individual camp sites. Obviously for campgrounds where people own an individual site these 'right to charge' rules might apply (if there is adequate infrastructure to install them), and maybe even perhaps on seasonal sites but this seems dicier.

So, back to the original question that prompted this diversion:

This was posted in response to a photo of a sign that said this outlet may not be used for vehicle charging.

Originally Posted by jcl

Several states have enacted right to charge legislation requiring property owners and managers to install vehicle charging on request. These are aimed at residential properties such as condos, but some states are including commercial properties and rentals. It will be interesting to see if these laws get extended to places such as campgrounds.

The laws don’t require that charging be free, but they do block the passage of regulations that prohibit vehicle charging.

That was it. It was always clear that the current right to charge regulations don't apply to campgrounds. But the question is, will they in future?

PS: It's rhetorical.

[jcl]

Originally Posted by mikeinca

The short answer to "where's the Cybertruck" is that it's Tesla. One could ask the same question about the "Roadster" or "Full Self Driving" which has been shamelessly and misleadingly advertised for years and still hasn't been delivered. Elon Musk has done important things to further the shift to BEV's and I commend him for that, but he is also a relentless self-promoter and frequently makes promises that he doesn't deliver.

BTW, I congratulate the OP for taking on the challenge of towing with an EV.

Generally agree.

I may be more polite with my comments, but only because I am not one of those waiting for a Cybertruck.

I think the real reason for the delays is that there are a finite amount of batteries available, and they are selling every vehicle that they can make (especially Model 3 and Model Y). Pushing ahead now with the Semi (which I would like to see sooner) and the Cybertruck (which some other people would like to see sooner) represents a conscious decision to reduce production of other vehicles. Tesla has explained this.

It is also why they didn't put a 600 mile range version of the Model S out, according to Tesla/Musk.

[LLninja]

Originally Posted by richard5933

I wasn't talking about the learning curve for people driving EVs. I was talking about the learning curve of building out the necessary infrastructure. Everything from how many charging stations, in what locations, in what layout, etc.

No matter how good the EVs are, no matter how much better they are from an environmental point of view, and no matter how many mandates exist...if people don't feel that there is a viable infrastructure they won't gain acceptance.

Same reason I held off buying a 5G phone until this year - there simply was no point since there wasn't an adequate infrastructure where I planned to use the phone.

As for 5g, I’m shocked that in rural Illinois in a town of less than 6000 people T-mobile has 5g home internet that runs circles around my previous internet provider who setup wifi directional antennas on a grain tower and receivers on each home.

[LLninja]

Originally Posted by jcl

Generally agree.

I may be more polite with my comments, but only because I am not one of those waiting for a Cybertruck.

I think the real reason for the delays is that there are a finite amount of batteries available, and they are selling every vehicle that they can make (especially Model 3 and Model Y). Pushing ahead now with the Semi (which I would like to see sooner) and the Cybertruck (which some other people would like to see sooner) represents a conscious decision to reduce production of other vehicles. Tesla has explained this.

It is also why they didn't put a 600 mile range version of the Model S out, according to Tesla/Musk.

I too am not waiting for the Cybertruck purely because of its polarizing looks, some love it, some hate it. On the other hand I’d love to get a Roadster, but really for the sleek looks, I don’t need the 1.9 second 0 to 60 time… give me one with grandpa mode and I’ll be happy.

I am willing to try towing my airstream with say a 400 mile range Silverado EV even if the range drops to to half while towing. It just means we have to stop to recharge more often and cannot get a ton of miles in a given day. But today, it also means if you need a level 3 charger, according to PlugShare, there’s a huge chasm in the dakotas, Montana, and Wyoming. To drive to Seattle, we’d need to take a more southern route through Kansas City to use fast level 3 chargers, or be stuck for a few days waiting for a level 2 charger to fill the massive tow vehicle’s batteries. Hopefully in time that issue will be solved. The next challenge would be to be able to drive to Alaska in an EV towing an airstream.

[215Airhaus]

It is going to take a lot for me to really consider an EV as my TV. However, I really appreciate those of us that are forging ahead and giving it a go and pushing the conversation. Cheers!