Openstreetmap-carto: amenity=charging_station to use similar render to fuel station

[Stalfur]

Issue #108 says to render names of amenities. Charging station is high on the list there but I believe it should be treated similarly to fuel_station, you still hook your car up to a pump like thing only it is electricity and not liquid that flows.

[sb12]

I also think charging stations should be rendered. But as you can't fill up a non-electric car at a charging station I suggest to use a similar but different icon for charging stations (maybe an adaption of this icon to the current fuel station icon).

BTW, most charging stations do not have names, just a ref number and an operator, so rendering just the name will not show charging stations and leads to tagging for the renderer. (Already found charging stations tagged as amenity=fuel and name=Charging Station)

[matthijsmelissen]

They are not major landmarks, and only targeted at a (at the moment) small well-defined group. In my opinion, that makes them a good candidate for an overlay or dedicated mapping service, rather than inclusion on the main map. Opinions?

[matkoniecz]

Personally I would add to this map everything what can be reasonably displayed. What IMHO is possible in this case.

It is already used more than 3700 times - http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/amenity=charging_station

Also, everything indicates that this kind of thing is going to be more popular in the future.

And "render as fuel station" is rather a poor idea. Nice icon is available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Free_EV_charge_station_sign_evinfra.svg - this power cord is probably a good way to design icon.

[Stalfur]

Agree with @mkoniecz that the power cord and stand in the icon linked would be good to use instead of current fuel station icon.

[daganzdaanda]

+1 for rendering charging stations.

[Rovastar]

The question I have is what zoom level should be display these on?

They seem physical small objects.

Are you proposing rendering at the same zoom level as fuel?
Also are they often placed in close proximity to each other (e.g. 6 in a row) do we render them all on the same zoom level?

[daganzdaanda]

I think z19 would be enough.
I've seen the "capacity" tag used, so it might be 6 nodes or one with "capacity=6". Both are probably valid. Z19 is large enough to show 6 icons in a row. Also, anything that is rendered at all will be used more often. So we will see more charging stations added to OSM, which is a good thing.

[Stalfur]

In Iceland we use the number of sockets, for example socket:type2=2 where there are two Mennekes type sockets on the same post.

[nebulon42]

I have added a charging station icon to Osmic:

[kocio-pl]

Great!

[brycenesbitt]

@math1985 there are already dedicated mapping sites for this type of feature such as http://www.plugshare.com/ . 50,000 sites. This is a case where OSM probably won't be the "go to" site for mappers or users. But showing the feature if mapped is fine.

[Barthwo]

Times have changed. Electrical powered cars are coming in numbers. So I would like to see this point with a higher priority.
The rendering could even use different icons for fast chargers (more than 32 amp) like a filling station and destination chargers (parking lots with a possibility of charging) up to 32 amp with a smaller (?) icon.

[matthijsmelissen]

Times have changed.

Agree.

The new problem: won't there be too many of them? In my city, the government has decided to install 1000 additional charging stations this year alone.

[nebulon42]

As always this depends on the region. In my region charging stations are present but scarce. I guess choosing a suitable zoom level high enough would work. More detailed and earlier display should be left to specialised maps.

[dieterdreist]

sent from a phone

Il giorno 08 mag 2016, alle ore 10:31, math1985 [email protected] ha scritto:

The new problem: won't there be too many of them? In my city, the government has decided to install 1000 additional charging stations this year alone.

are these isolated / distinct locations, because if you have e.g. 5 in a row they will likely render as one.

[matthijsmelissen]

I think these are isolated locations. See http://www.oplaadpalen.nl/. I only expect the number to grow over the next few years.

[Barthwo]

amenity=charging_station is defined with a NUMBER of charging points, so it can be rendered as ONE point even if more than one car can use it simultanuously.
There is a growing number of "fast charging" stations (amperage>32, more than 22 kW), which could be handled similar to fuel stations.
And there will be an even much bigger number of "destination charging" stations, which, in fact, are parking lots with the possibility to charge with 16 or max 32 ampere (3.7 - 22 kW) while being in a restaurant, theme park, shopping mall ... These could be rendered differently and at higher zoom levels.

[nebulon42]

The only realistic possibility I see to get this rendered anytime soon is with some icon (e.g. see above) and with a name or operator. Then the best starting zoom level has to be found. More detailed rendering is rather not feasible for this general purpose map.

[Barthwo]

Fuel stations are rendered starting with zoom level 17 and it would be fine to do the same with charging_stations. The name is not very important, but the operator is, because very often the usage is dependent on the operator.
If an icon like a "fuel station with a plug" like proposed in the wiki is used, this may be not good enough distinguishable from a gas station, so I would propose to use at least an icon with a bigger plug, like OSMAND does that https://github.com/osmandapp/OsmAnd-resources/blob/master/icons/svg/transport/charging_station.svg or of a car with plug like: http://publicdomainvectors.org/photos/eco_green_car_plug_icon.png or http://ivo.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/e-car.png or a plug without car like: http://www.freepik.com/free-icon/plug-silhouette_782498.htm or https://pixabay.com/de/netzstecker-symbol-icon-stecker-309142/

[dieterdreist]

2016-05-08 19:19 GMT+02:00 Barthwo [email protected]:

amenity=charging_station is defined with a NUMBER of charging points, so
it can be rendered as ONE point even if more than one car can use it
simultanuously.

if you are to use the tag for more than one charging point it would be
better to use an area for this, as there will be significant spatial
extension (especially if we are talking about many charging points). Still,
tagging singular charging points does make sense to convey information
about the layout.

Cheers,
Martin

[Barthwo]

See it comparable to gas stations. Your are not mapping each pump.
Same here.
There was a proposal for something which is containing severals charging_stations. In my eyes this is not a good idea.
But I think if really needed a charging station could be mapped as an area with several "charging_points" under it, which would be the equivalant to a gas pump.

[brycenesbitt]

I own and drive an EV. Some of the discussion above seems insensitive to some important points about EV charger mapping.

• If the connector does not match your car, the station is useless. The amperage is important, but second to the connector type.
• Brand matters. If I pull up to a Blink station, my Chargepoint card won't work. The connector must match, the network must match, and the station must be available which leads me to:
• A huge fraction of paid charging stations are online.
• There are well established crowdsourced mapping efforts for charging stations.
• Bad mapping of charging stations hurts a lot. Any real EV owner who really needs a charge is going to choose a data source that's better suited to updates and community comments, compared to OSM.

There's a tussle between open mapping of charging stations (brand neutral) and brand specific efforts (like single apps dedicated to a given paid charging network).

One of the open mapping efforts is http://www.plugshare.com/ . Displaying plugshare locations on OSM would be great. Duplicating plugshare seems unlikely to gain the momentum it would need in order to serve actual EV drivers.

[Stalfur]

@brycenesbitt
We already have connector types mapped, operator as well as voltage - adding other values is as easy as we know it is.
Example: http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2944174209#map=19/64.10113/-21.87295

I don't see why OSM should stay away from mapping these - we can make easy tools for people to update values - example of two approaches are Wheelmap.org and Coffeedex - perhaps plugshare might want to migrate to OSM - lots of tools they would gain.

[pnorman]

This issue tracker is for discussing rendering, not tagging. Proposing new tags does not belong here.

[Barthwo]

I also do own and drive an electric car, the VW Golf. In Germany we have quite good maps showing charging stations like: http://www.goingelectric.de/stromtankstellen/ but these are based on google, not OSM. What a pity.
Europe has decided on Type 2 (1 or 3 phases, which means 240 or 380 Volt with 16 or sometimes 32 Amp, giving 3.7, 11 or 22 kW AC) for use at home, work and destination chargers and fast chargers using CCS DC with as of today mostly 50 kW as standard but most cases combined with Chademo at the charging point. So normally all cars are carrying the equipment to be technically able to connect to nearly all of the charging points. Remember: In Europe we have a 240 Volt 3-phase systems in nearly all houses, which can deliver 11 kW at 16 amp with ease everywhere. All this can be tagged with the existing scheme!

I think all these charging stations should be mapped, because gas stations are mapped too. I would prefer to distinguish between fast chargers (more than 32 amp) and the others (up to 32 amp), but thats not obligatory.
But its a very good idea to give the name of the operator, because then you have an idea if your "charging card" is working there. But in future we will see that most of these stations will operate with normal credit or debit cards.
What does all this mean for mapping: Please map charging stations with an icon like this which osmand is using, which I posted here, beginning with zoom level 17 and the operator as text. The means of payment can change but the operator will stay constant.

[pnorman]

I've removed some of the pure tagging discussion - like I said, it does not belong in this issue tracker.

---

I think all these charging stations should be mapped, because gas stations are mapped too.

Do you mean rendered on OpenStreetMap Carto or mapped? What is mapped is not something we have direct control over here, only what is rendered.

[Barthwo]

Excuse me, I mean this should be RENDERED.
This is a language problem of mine. Im my mother tongue german the word "kartiert = mapped" is normally used for what you "see on the map", not what is known or in a database.

[brycenesbitt]

In the USA things are moving away from credit card payment, toward payment plans and network membership cards. Thus the USA centric mapping renders icons based on a combination of network and charging plug. Tesla has it's own network, so that's often separate also. There's also a whole subculture of home chargers that people invite others to use for emergency top ups (network of "personal charger").

Thus a charger specific map needs fairly rich rendering and filtering.

I'd put the utility of rendering charging stations in carto quite low, and well below that of various other currently non-rendered features.

[Barthwo]

We do not speak of US centric mapping but worldwide. As I wrote before, each region does have maps, often for special chains or even show if a charging point is occupied.

Of course there are payment plans and network membership cards here in Europe also. Often, but not always, they have "roaming agreements" with other chains. This situation is very bad for e-car users on long distance trips. A multi purpose map cannot and must not show all this.

And if someone wants to show his "personal charger" in the map, because its open to the public, he can do this also here. And Tesla chargers will be shown with operator=Tesla and everybody will know if he can use this or not.

But I think the charging stations should be rendered on the detailed map (zoom 17 and more) because it is a valueable information not only for people with e-cars.

[pnorman]

Information like number of outlets, capacity, connectors and similar specialized information belongs on a specialized map and won't be something we add.

[Barthwo]

In a specialized german POI map they are now rendering the charging_station now with icons based on the type of vehicle: http://www.flosm.de/html/POI-Karte.html#740000.00/51.3600000/10.4800000/1/chargingbike/chargingcar/chargingscooter/chargingstation/chargingtruck/chargingwheelchair

But I am not 100% happy with the icons, so I proposed the following icons:

• CAR=yes - socket undefined, Icon pump with plug: grey on white
• CAR=yes - "fast charger" socket ..._combo, tesla..., chademo, Icon pump with plug: white on green
• CAR= yes - "destination charger" socket Typ 1,2,3, Icon P (parking) white on green
• e-Bike or Scooter or wheelchair =yes (all LEV = light electric vehicles, no car or truck), icon only plug white on green
• vehicle undefined, icon only plug grey on white

[daganzdaanda]

Information like number of outlets, capacity, connectors and similar specialized information belongs on a specialized map and won't be something we add.

agree, but I still think a simple icon like the one proposed on #2239 would be nice to have. The bigger decision would be at what zoom it should first be shown. z17 should be OK now, maybe it would need to be tweaked later.

[kocio-pl]

This issue has gone wild somehow - judging by the original entry it should be closed, as #2239 resolves it. I also believe that universal style is not intended for showing subtypes.