State regulators this morning gave Duke Energy the go-ahead to offer customers free home charging stations for plug-in electric cars.
Charlotte-based Duke plans to distribute about 150 of the pods to customers who buy or the Chevy Volt, Nissan Leaf and other electric cars soon to be released to the mass market. The charging stations have a retail value of $1,500 to $2,000.
The electric company told the N.C. Utilities Commission it needs to analyze the demands the 240-volt chargers put on the electric grid to determine what upgrades will be required to prevent system overload in Charlotte and other areas where electric car owners tend to concentrate.
Progress Energy plans to offer a similar program but details have not been finalized. Raleigh-based Progress projects that electric car buyers in the company's service territory will be concentrated in Raleigh, Cary and Asheville.
Both utilities will offer the free charging stations through the auto dealers that sell or lease electric cars. To participate customers have to buy or lease the cars for 2 years and agree to share their recharging usage data with the utility.
Recharing a plug-in electric car from a wall outlet can drain as much power as a central air conditioning system.
As part of the $1.2 million program to assess rechargers, Duke will pay up to $1,000 toward having the devices installed at customers' homes.
Duke has also asked the IRS whether the free equipment will be counted as taxable income for the customers. If the IRS says it's a tax liability, Duke will pay the participating customers a gross-up to cover their tax bill.
Consistent with all utility strategies to meet electricity demand -- whether building new power plants or devising energy-conservation programs -- the cost of the EV charging study will ultimately be paid by all customers through their monthly bills.
John Murawski has been a full-time newspaper reporter since 1991, with stints at Legal Times and The Chronicle of Philanthropy (both in Washington, DC), The Philadelphia Inquirer and The Palm Beach Post (in South Florida) before arriving at the N&O in December 2004. At the N&O he covers energy (nuclear, coal, renewable, efficiency), hydralic fracturing (or "fracking"), public utilities (both electric and natural gas) and health care. His beat includes Progress Energy, PSNC Energy, Piedmont Natural Gas, PowerSecure International, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Biogen Idec and others. You can reach him at 919-829-8932 or
Comments
Why are we subsidizing this?
Tue, 03/22/2011 - 12:46 — apexn94I am fine with consumers choosing to "go green" and buy the expensive hybrids and electric cars. What I am not ok with is the mandatory subsidizing that is occurring in the local, state, and federal governments and power companies that puts the burden on everyone else. Why are these car owners getting subsidies? Why should we pay for someone else's car? If someone wants to purchase an electric car, let them foot the bill for a charging station in their home. After all, aren't they going to save thousands of dollars a year in gas? Plus get a tax rebate? I also read a while back that Raleigh has installed or will install FREE charging stations around Raleigh. So who exactly is paying for the hours and hours of charging that will occur with these vehicles? Why shouldn't an owner of an electric car pay for their charge? It isn't free to charge these vehicles. Power is used. We have to pay for gas for our cars. Why aren't we being subsidized?
This is another example of
Tue, 03/22/2011 - 15:25 — grantncsuThis is another example of the overreach of government. Our electric utilities are regulated with the goal of furthering the political agenda of those who appointed the commissioners. I wonder how the idea of a utilities commission was promoted?
-Many decades from now, this commission will have such a stranglehold on electric power providers that we can force them to spend huge sums of money on ad campaigns and incentives to encourage their captive customers to buy less of their product. However, when our efforts to discourage the use of gasoline fail, we will provide unconstitutionally discriminatory tax incentives for folks to burn coal and uranium (or corn) to power their cars.