Content deleted Content added
→OCPP in the United States: rewording section heading |
→In the United States: rewording section heading |
||
Line 8:
OCPP also makes it easier to create a large-scale, visible network that uses a range of different charging stations since there is a requirement for only one operating system. Proponents of OCPP also cite a reduction in development costs since software designed to provide additional functionality would only need to be developed once and not several times to fit with each individual operating system. Finally, OCPP will ease interoperability across the United States, and elsewhere, and minimize remedial work on systems.<ref name="switchev1"/>
==
To date, OCPP is not as highly adopted in the U.S. among other vendors because the U.S. market came into being largely through a number of large [[United States Department of Energy|U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)]] grants that let the network provider choose their protocol. Since most of the network providers were also charge station manufacturers, this served as motivation for an EV infrastructure land grab through proprietary communication protocols, not OCPP.
| |||