EVSE - ISO 15118 compliance

Hello Mike,

We have found a vehicle charger that meets the ISO 15118 requirement. check out Coritech.

Dave

Hi Mike,  

Were you able to achieve this credit? We are also having the same issue, IE only the Coritech units comply. 

Thanks!

Hi Mike et al.,

We seem to be running into similar issues...Monitoring this discussion for any updates. 

Thanks all,

Joe

I'm also curious about the language "Be vehicle to grid connected (e.g. ISO 15118 compliant)." Does that "e.g." mean ISO 15118 compliant is just one example of how to show that chargers are grid connected, and other means of connectivity would meet the credit as well? Or is it meant to read that ISO 15118 is the only option?

We're also accustomed to specifying chargers that have grid connectivity but not to that standard. The v4.1 reference guide draft doesn't add any context for why this standard or clarify if that "e.g." in the credit language literally means "for example."

Hi Emily - Where are you seeing the language with the "e.g ISO 151118"?  The language I have in the 4.1 PDF I have says:  "Be vehicle-to-grid (V2G) connected and comply with ISO 15118 and be capable of responding to time-of-use market signals (e.g. price). Projects pursuing EA credit Grid Harmonization should incorporate EVSE into any demand response program or load flexibility and management strategies."  That seems little room for interpretation on the ISO 15118.  Thanks!
 

I was looking at the credit library: https://www.usgbc.org/node/11963222?return=/credits/new-construction/v4.1 I'll just paste here so we can compare versions...you're right, the PDF I downloaded a while back says exactly what you quoted here!

Install electrical vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) in 2% of all parking spaces used by the project or at least two spaces, whichever is greater. Clearly identify and reserve these spaces for the sole use by plug-in electric vehicles.

The EVSE must:

• Provide a Level 2 charging capacity (208 – 240 volts) or greater.
• Comply with the relevant regional or local standard for electrical connectors, such as SAE Surface Vehicle Recommended Practice J1772, SAE Electric Vehicle Conductive Charge Coupler or IEC 62196 of the International Electrotechnical Commission for projects outside the U.S.
• Be vehicle to grid connected (e.g. ISO 15118 compliant) and capable of responding to time-of-use market signals (e.g. price). Projects pursuing EA credit Grid Harmonization should incorporate EVSE into any demand response program or load flexibility and management strategies.

In fact, there is an addenda: https://www.usgbc.org/node/12174817 

So I guess I read that as walking back the ISO 15118 requirement because the charger market was not adopting it?

Hi Emily - Wow.  Thanks for digging on that.  That is interesting.  Yes, sure seems like that is a bit of a walk back on the requirement...interesting.  Well now we shall see what else we find out there...We did look at the Coritech, but it was like $32K per dual station vs. around $1K for Clipper Creek and others.  Current looking at this one also:  https://nuvve.com/

OK, so quick update...there appear to be 40 other addenda to v4.1 from that same 7/25 date.  I can't find a summary addenda PDF at USGBC site. There appear to be 77 total items listed in the addenda database for v4.1. I called GBCI support, and he couldn't find any summary documents released either.  Our office is going to sift through those now I guess one by one.  We have sent a support request in to GBCI to try to get some clarification if a summary addenda document exists or not yet, and if so, where it is...

If anybody on the Forum knows, let us know! Thanks!

Hi All - Quick update if anyone interested.  There is a summary PDF of the v4.1 addenda from July 2019.  However it isn't coming up in the addenda database just yet for some reason. But GBCI sent me the direct link which is currently active:  https://www.usgbc.org/resources/leed-v41-bdc-addenda-tables-72519-only

Our firm has had some extensive discussions with USGBC about the "vehicle-to-grid" connection and "capable of responding to time of use" requirements, and the outcome was not encouraging.  The short version: USGBC recognizes that there is confusion around these requirements and is working to clarify.  We could not identify many chargers that they considered compliant.  It's too bad that an update didn't make it into the recent quarterly update.

The longer version: What the credit wants is for EVs to act as grid-connected batteries that accept signals from the utility provider to either charge or discharge in response to grid load.  This is not a practical reality for 99% of the US -- Our local utility confirmed that they don't support that at all, and we could only find one available program in (surprise!) California. 

Uniformly, EV charging manufacturers told us that they could not comply with the credit requirements as written.  Chargepoint thought they would comply, but no one can point us to specifications that confirm any of that.  When we asked USGBC to point to ANY compliant equipment that they would accept, they indicated that Chargpoint model CPH50 worked -- that's a small residential charger that's inappropriate for commercial applications.  And reading the technical capabilities for that product, it doesn't seem to do what the credit asks for.

Ultimately, there seems to be a significant amount of internal confusion at USGBC about what they want. To anyone considering using v4.1 for this credit, I would STRONGLY suggest vetting your charging equipment in advance with USGBC.

Hi Nick - Thank you for your note.  We ran into the same thing. Manufacturers saying this isn't possible etc. I finally had a manufacturer type it up to me, and I forwarded it to USGBC.  We got a response back saying basically what you said...they know there is an issue now, they have gotten similar feedback, and they are trying to sort it out.  We are moving ahead with a Clipper Creek system that includes pretty heavy duty control system and hoping for the best.  We also talked to nuuve and they were very helpful and seemed to have systems that were pretty networkable and close to the V2G...

Hi everyone. Interesting thread. Thanks for the information. 

Update on a discussions with Chargpoint today: none of their equipment currently meets LEEDv4.1 definition of V2G and they do not foresee that capability being available in the North American market in the near future.  

The good news is that USGBC seems aware of the situation.  We'd all probably love an Electric Vehicles credit that's achievable, meaningful, and free of signage.  Hopefully input on forums like LEED User helps to inform the credit before it moves out of beta.

Hi all. I'm working on a brand new medical office project.  We are in DD Phase and hunkering down on LEED credits.  I have read through all the EV posts and what I am getting out of all posts is that the EV credit is not achievable right now in terms of vehicle to grid connection.  Is that correct?

Good news - a LEED interpretation has updated the credit language to remove this altogether: https://www.usgbc.org/leedaddenda/100002331 

If you look at the credit in the online credit library the bullet point about demand response now reads "Be capable of responding to time-of-use market signals (e.g. price). Projects pursuing EA credit Grid Harmonization should incorporate EVSE into any demand response program or load flexibility and management strategies."

Hi All - Following up here.  We just had a review come back that we submitted under v4.1.  It was approved.  We are using a clipper creek HCS-40 charger, in conjunction with the HYRDA-R EVSE Control System which adds all kinds of controllability for the stations.  We got these specs from Clipper Creek.

Emily Purcell - I went straight into the LEED Credit Library from the USGBC site, as well as tried clicking through the hyperlink you provided. In both cases I am still seeing "be vehicle to grid connected" in the credit library online today. Thoughts about why I am seeing something different than you are? Am hoping as much as everyone else here that they've rectified this situation for V4.1 in writing!

Huh. I'm seeing the old language too now. I wonder if that's due to the redesign of the credit library. I guess we'll have to ask...