DrewE wrote:
pianotuna wrote:
The current electrical code has 7 50 amp, on ONE measly 200 amp breaker. Since 50 amp is "rv speak" each one of the 7 is actually 100 amps. The code relies on not all air conditioners starting at once.
So just two pedestals in heavy use may "max out" the 200 amp circuit, even if it is "looped".
The 200A breaker is a two-pole, 240V breaker, so it's 200A per leg--just as the 50A electric supply is 50A, 120/240V split phase, with 50A per leg. Two fully-utilized 50A connections would not max out the 200A circuit, but rather load it to half capacity. Whether the pedestals are installed in a ring or a spur topology is immaterial here.
The general point that the minimum requirements for RV park electrical installations are somewhat outdated and undersized is entirely valid. Adding EV charging to any great extent will exacerbate that in many parks unless significant infrastructure upgrades are also performed.
DrewE makes a valid point . I know when our electrical engineer designed the spur expansion wiring in our park, it was to nec code, a maximum of x units / 200a breaker. The 400a main to feed 3 200a mains for the expansion and a 200a sub( that used to be the main) were served by a 50kw ( is that the right term? ) transformer. 3 years ago, our power co. came to upgrade the transformer to a 75 because peak loads on it had been detected to 83 kv,
In the process, we discovered the 400a meter had burned into its contacts so it was necessary to step up to 600a ct metering, trench and place more cabling to reduce load on the original service panel. It iwas solely attribututed to the greater demand for larger rigs. Even that upgrape may be overwhelmed with a couple of EVs recharging.
Under SD law we could not pass those costs on for infrastructure, a landlord can only pass the actual cost /kw paid to utility, therefore infrastructure costs to site can only be recouped by raising site fee. Not fair to non users of high utility.
