Are they done installing new urban 72kw locations?

[LoudMusic]

It looks like they've only added one new 72kw site this year, and only a handful last year. Are they done installing those? They make a lot of sense to me for locations like grocery stores and even interstate sit-down restaurants. You need faster than L2 (6kw+) but you don't need crazy fast 250kw, because you're likely going to be there 45 minutes or more.

Though I guess if the idea is to eventually have vehicles with 200kwh+ of storage, then super fast charging is the only answer.

 

[JulienW]

Yea, Supercharging 150/250kW creates a conundrum. It is too slow to wait on BUT it is too fast to go and do anything. In the future I would like to see parking lots full of 25kW to 50kW DC charges so you could go and watch a move or whatever, get a charge but not be rushed.

 

[LoudMusic]

It will be nice when there are so many chargers that leaving a fully charged car on a charger won't offend anyone.

 

[RTPEV]

In a sense the V3 architecture eliminated the need for urban superchargers (which eliminated the shared aspect of V2, albeit at a lower power level for each stall). If you wanted to replicate the urban supercharger experience with a V3 supercharger, you'd simply "under power" the site such that, for example, you had 16 V3 stalls, but only enough power coming into the site to max it out at 72kW * 16 (like with a 1250 kVA transformer), and possibly tweak the software to deliver at least a minimum of 72kW to any car that called for it.

As for grocery stores & interstate restaurants, good point, but both of those situations still do have a need for high power charging. In the grocery store case, for apartment dwellers that use their weekly grocery trip as their sole charging opportunity; and in the interstate case, waiting for 45 minutes is fine as long as you are there during a regular meal time, but what if you need a charge at 3pm? Seems like a mix of low and high power stations at each site would be beneficial. And they don't even need to be "different". If we get to a point where there are many stations at a given site, have a way for the user to select whether they want fast or slow(er) charging (with a financial incentive for selecting slower charging) and the system simply directs less power to the slower charging car(s) if the site is busy.

I've had a proposal for a similar system for L2 charging whereby you have a plethora of connectors available, but limited power on site. Upon plugging in, the user (hopefully mostly transparently/automatically) directs the station with the following parameters: desired departure SOC; desired departure time; maximum amount to to pay to achieve those goals. The system would then allocate its limited power to each connector such that it met (to the best of its ability) each user's goals at a minimum cost to them. For example, at an apartment complex where you have maybe 32 connectors but effectively only enough power to fully power 8, people show up in the evening and start plugging in, at which point it's delivering full power to the first 8 to plug in. After that point, it starts to throttle (or completely cut off) power according to who has the later departure times, who has the least amount of charge to go to their target, and who has "bid" the least amount (i.e. there may be people that just want to take whatever leftover power there is). Most of the time this would result in everyone receiving their charge at some point over the night, but those that needed to run out again at 9pm could get priority.

Something along those lines could be done at fast chargers that don't have power to deliver max power to all cars simultaneously (technically we already have that situation with V3), but there is some way for drivers to lower their priority (again, for savings on the cost) rather than default to whatever allocation scheme is currently used (which probably tries to equally distribute power). But it would still be nice to be able to tell the system: it's okay to lower my priority, but in an hour I need to be at 80% SOC.

 

[houstonian]

It looks like they've only added one new 72kw site this year, and only a handful last year. Are they done installing those?

With the NACS announcements from other manufacturers I’d think the writings on the wall not only for new installs of urban SCers but existing sites as well.

I’m a fan of them - especially when I want to do something else like grab lunch - but struggle to articulate a compelling reason for Tesla to favor them over V3/4/n going forward.

Moreover, I’d also guess ‘urban’ locations are where, for now at least, there’s the greatest congestion on SCers as Tesla struggles to meet surging charging demand from those who don’t have east access to at-home L2 charging.

The takeaway is quicker charging increases throughput and adds capacity in the sense cars spend less - not more - time charging…just one more mail in the coffin for 72kWh vs 250kWh+.

In any event, the adoption of NACS and opening up of the V3 SCers to 3rd parties + the prefab SC (again V3) installs + congestion in existing SCers seem to suggest urban, and V1/V2 as well, days are numbered.

 

[Earl]

If we get to a point where there are many stations at a given site, have a way for the user to select whether they want fast or slow(er) charging (with a financial incentive for selecting slower charging) and the system simply directs less power to the slower charging car(s) if the site is busy.

I can see subsidy from the commercial folks in the area helping to cover the slower charging, similar to validating parking charges.
One possibility would be that the receipt from store or theater purchases has a QR code on it that can be scanned by the Tesla app to save $3 or negate idle fees.

 

[RTPEV]

I can see subsidy from the commercial folks in the area helping to cover the slower charging, similar to validating parking charges.
One possibility would be that the receipt from store or theater purchases has a QR code on it that can be scanned by the Tesla app to save $3 or negate idle fees.

I'm not sure how I feel about subsidizing idle fees. Idle fees are charged because a given site is busy and cars need to be moved. If that is the scenario at a given site, then the site is either undersized, or cars need to move immediately to get people waiting in and out.

The scheme that I was talking about would only be appropriate for sites with "extra" stations that rarely if ever fill up.

 

[LoudMusic]

I think "long stay" locations just need to be prepared for more vehicles staying longer.

What about using V3 cabinets that usually supply 4 stalls each, and just attach like 20 stalls to them? Maybe you get 250kw, maybe you get 50kw. Either way there are enough that you don't need to move your vehicle while you're trying to eat a meal or watch a movie or shop for your groceries.

Tesla doesn't share the details, but I bet it's exceedingly rare that V3 cabinets get maxed out. I bet they rarely even go over 50% even with four vehicles plugged in.

Think about Target or Kroger or Safeway having 60 charging stalls sharing maybe 3 1mw charging cabinets. After the first ten minutes of charging the speed is going to drop regardless of how many other cars are plugged in, so any new cars will get have access to more power.

Then change the rule for idle fees. Instead of 50% occupancy or whatever it is now, change it to a whole number of available stalls. Idle fees kick in when there are only 4 stalls available. And instead of a 5 minute grace period make it 15 minutes.

More importantly, apartment complexes need to provide overnight charging. It's beyond me why so many of them are resistant to providing another revenue source.

 

[RTPEV]

I'm 100% with you on most of these points, at least until we get to the apartment complex statement. I think for many, even if the layout is conducive to putting in the infrastructure, ripping up pavement and upgrading electrical equipment is a significant cost that would take years to recoup at what they could feasibly charge for charging, so they are far more likely to have the work done at the tenant's expense if possible. Other than putting in a token couple of charging stations to say they have EV charging on their brochure, I don't see them making any huge investments any time soon. Hopefully some of the IRA funding will make its way into subsidizing these kinds of infrastructure improvements.

And then you have people like my aunt who lives in a single family home, but she only has on-street parking. That's going to be a tough one to crack.

 

[houstonian]

I think "long stay" locations just need to be prepared for more vehicles staying longer.

Airports strike me as a prime candidate for this. Quantity of plugs over quickness of charge...i.e. multiple L1 options over fewer L2 ones.

Think about Target or Kroger or Safeway having 60 charging stalls sharing maybe 3 1mw charging cabinets. After the first ten minutes of charging the speed is going to drop regardless of how many other cars are plugged in, so any new cars will get have access to more power.

Why would a low margin business like a grocer opt to put in an extra expense?

To drive business to their stores? Their already full stores?

You can kinda build an argument for a commercial area with dining and shopping where margins are higher and you want to keep customers onsite for an hour or so...but grocers? Hard sell.

I think the secret here will be wireless charging on newbuilds over the next decade or so. No need to plug in, no need to maintain plugs, and can mass install them.

Until then I think the second best is a plethora of L2 options and L1 options for long-term parking situations (airports, cruise ports, etc.)

More importantly, apartment complexes need to provide overnight charging. It's beyond me why so many of them are resistant to providing another revenue source.

Short answer: apartment owners already make bank. Long answer: Why go through the hassle to add cost and complexity if you're already full?

I'm 100% with you on most of these points, at least until we get to the apartment complex statement. I think for many, even if the layout is conducive to putting in the infrastructure, ripping up pavement and upgrading electrical equipment is a significant cost that would take years to recoup at what they could feasibly charge for charging, so they are far more likely to have the work done at the tenant's expense if possible.

This guy gets it.

And again: apartments are already full.

 

[MP3Mike]

I've had a proposal for a similar system for L2 charging whereby you have a plethora of connectors available, but limited power on site. Upon plugging in, the user (hopefully mostly transparently/automatically) directs the station with the following parameters: desired departure SOC; desired departure time; maximum amount to to pay to achieve those goals.

I think that PowerFlex already has a system that essentially does that. (I'm not sure about the maximum cost part.)

 

[LoudMusic]

Airports strike me as a prime candidate for this. Quantity of plugs over quickness of charge...i.e. multiple L1 options over fewer L2 ones.


Why would a low margin business like a grocer opt to put in an extra expense?

To drive business to their stores? Their already full stores?

You can kinda build an argument for a commercial area with dining and shopping where margins are higher and you want to keep customers onsite for an hour or so...but grocers? Hard sell.

I think the secret here will be wireless charging on newbuilds over the next decade or so. No need to plug in, no need to maintain plugs, and can mass install them.

Until then I think the second best is a plethora of L2 options and L1 options for long-term parking situations (airports, cruise ports, etc.)



Short answer: apartment owners already make bank. Long answer: Why go through the hassle to add cost and complexity if you're already full?


This guy gets it.

And again: apartments are already full.

Because it's something else they can sell.

 

[houstonian]

Because it's something else they can sell.

…and at what cost / added complexity?

It’s one thing to add to a new build project. It’s quite another to retrofit.

And that’s just the physical side to say nothing of the servicing side.