1. Interesting article for several reasons. As communications students and professionals we all are taught to learn from a good “critique.” With that said, let’s have at it.

    This article is vague at best, with it’s ambiguous commentary and loosely-cited minimalistic stats. (sources/citations/etc??) There is no mention as to the voltage output of these stations, an important consideration. Using a 120v station, Chevy Volt recharges (from a depleted state) in 10 hours, Nissan Leaf in 20 hours. 240v stations produce better rates, Chevy @ 4 hrs, Nissan @ 8 hrs. With 120v station rates the approximate 4-8 E-cars on S.C. campus just might find themselves waiting in line for a plug, although it’s rare to see more than one car at the 2-plug station, if at all one vehicle.

    This article would do well to mention the construction costs of installing a single station, as a reference point to consider. And just how much (percentage or monetarily otherwise) has SLCC spent on this particular green initiative? Can we compare that to DAQ’s efforts, including the 2 Nissans. What about the percentage of student/faculty that can and do benefit, 1-2-3 percent? Less? And, at what point does sustainability occur at $222.52 per…”to date,” monthly, weekly? Can we compare the cost of kilowatt hours used to garner $222.52, or just how long the stations have been in use? Can we realize a better frequency of use and/or need before spending even more of an already very tight budget on optimistic hopefulness?

    I appreciate the efforts and concerns. Yes, we can change global perspectives, one mind at a time, but offer some food for thought. “Critical thinking” is part of every class and program as “student learning outcomes.” E-car costs range dramatically but the average is 25-40 thousand dollars.(I won’t mention Tesla, Porsche, etc.) Perhaps more realistic “sustainability” efforts can be emphasized. One could buy many transit passes, bicycles, etc. for that amount. Personally, I enjoy my $1200 motorcycle for the riding benefits; free-up parking, approx 60 MPG, very low emissions, easy to find a parking spot and cheaper parking fees. Now that’s good clean fun!

    Additionally, I must say that the images used in this article do not support the article’s seeming intentions of flaunting these stations. Empty charging stalls at a 2-station site is not congruent to the article.(Redwood) Nor is the South City image with an obvious service van parked in the dedicated stall (other stall empty) that is within the faculty parking lot. If there is not an opportunity to photograph a vehicle plugged in then perhaps a close-up of the metering system and signage? The “Redwood” photo has so many tangents that without the narrow shadow and vibrant sign, shot at a distance, it simply flattens into the building behind it and is barely recognizable. And, I find it curious that the author’s name has a larger point size and is emboldened over the photo captions that should be of emphasis.

    Just saying, with constraint.

Comments are closed.