Free supercharger or pay per use?

[StapleGun]

• First 90 minutes, free. Keep normal use free. Send text warning at 15 min or so before free ends, and cost begins.
• Next 60 minutes, $0.10 per minute cost. $6/hr is annoying, and gets attention, but is not burdensome. Send a text reminder half way through this phase, warning about current costs and upcoming costs.
• After 2.5 hours total, $1 per minute cost. $60/hr will get most people to move their cars before this phase.

This could also only kick in when all (or nearly all) the chargers at a location are being used. It's very annoying when you arrive at a charger and see cars which are already charged sitting there taking up space, but it would be just as annoying being forced to go move your car when there's 7 other empty stalls.

 

[MP3Mike]

While I certainly agree, unless even faster charging becomes common place (as fast as or faster than a gas tank fill) then these charging stations will have to have many more stalls than existing gas stations have pumps. Let's say at a busy gas station it takes 5 minutes to pump a tank of gas, and 30 minutes to charge an EV, on average. That station would need six times as many "pumps" to keep up, so 6 times as many places to park and charge vs park and pump, etc.

I don't think it is that simple. I suspect a good portion of people with EVs will be able to charge at home and will only use the "pumps" for longer trips, so you might actually need fewer "pumps" per station than you go with ICEs. (And even fewer stations.)

Holiday travel weekends would be an exception to the norm, but I think it can be dealt with reasonably without charging per use.

- - - Updated - - -

I personally do not believe the included/free/one-time fee charging model should extend beyond the S/X. It should definitely be pay per kWh and/or pay per minute with some minimum cost per minute so people get out of the stalls when they're done. For example, if you're using 120 kW, your cost per kWh per minute will be higher than the per minute cost and you'll be charged that... once you get down to 15 kW or so (like 95% SoC), your cost per kWh per minute would be lower than the minimum per minute and you'd pay the time-based cost instead.

The problem with that is unless Tesla wants to become a utility, and be subject to those rules, some states don't allow charging per kWh. So you would have to have different rate structures in different states.

It is just easier to charge an average usage up front like they are currently doing.

 

[AlanSqB]

Perhaps the rule should actually be based on % charge of the vehicle since the value of supercharging drops closer to the top of the charge. Also, I may be mistaken here, but I think it takes more "power" to charge that last bit than the first.

Charge to 80% = Free
Charge 81%-100% = $1/minute
Connection after 100% + 5 (maybe 10) minutes = $100

- - - Updated - - -

Also, if they stick with the charging up front model, perhaps a penalty for camping on a SuperCharger.

Charge to 100% + 10 minutes = 1 week loss of SC privilege

Subsequent offenses = longer loss

Of course all this is based on the need for them to begin controlling this from the SuperCharger side as I don't personally believe they have the right to use the car I purchase to limit supercharging under their current agreements.

 

[aviators99]

I don't think it is that simple. I suspect a good portion of people with EVs will be able to charge at home and will only use the "pumps" for longer trips, so you might actually need fewer "pumps" per station than you go with ICEs. (And even fewer stations.)

Holiday travel weekends would be an exception to the norm, but I think it can be dealt with reasonably without charging per use.

By the way, as an anecdote, the "Miami" Supercharger is very very busy, I suspect because of the fact that there is a much larger population of people who cannot charge at home. There are a remarkable number of condos here. I've chatted with many people there who were performing their daily charge because they have no other choice.

The problem with that is unless Tesla wants to become a utility, and be subject to those rules, some states don't allow charging per kWh. So you would have to have different rate structures in different states.


It is just easier to charge an average usage up front like they are currently doing.

This is a very good point, which I had not considered. I'll bet they went through this exercise before deciding to make it prepaid.

 

[nh-srt8]

Perhaps the rule should actually be based on % charge of the vehicle since the value of supercharging drops closer to the top of the charge. Also, I may be mistaken here, but I think it takes more "power" to charge that last bit than the first.

Charge to 80% = Free
Charge 81%-100% = $1/minute
Connection after 100% + 5 (maybe 10) minutes = $100

Not until they build out the network. If I am going from Phoenix to Western Colorado you cannot make Flagstaff to Blanding Spc without close to 100%. If they build out the network then no problem but since this is for long distance travel you shouldn't be penalized because the infrastructure doesn't yet allow whether measured by SOC or minutes.

 

[Skotty]

It's back! Lets go over this topic again! lol

To restate my view, I just don't see free being viable long term, and think it will switch to a paid model. However, they might keep free for legacy S, X, and maybe some 3 owners (depending on what they are saying when the 3 comes out) in order to keep the original promise for them. Or maybe it's free for the first X number of years or something, then goes to paid. It just makes more sense to pay for what you use as you are using it.

The problem will become apparent when 15 year old Model S's are still making regular visits to the Superchargers to freeload on Tesla's dime.

 

[Laserbrain]

I am am curious about other people's thoughts.

I am 100% for pay per use because I don't like to pay for other people's or business' electricity.

Also, free charging results in zero awareness for the ressource "energy". Result: it would get wasted big time. And as long as part of this energy is still coming from filthy nuclear or coal power plants, wasting energy is a bad thing for the planet.

My suggestion would be a supercharger budget every Tesla owner can use for free per year. Once you draw more energy, you get an invioce from Tesla. Tesla is already monitoring who is drawing how much energy from the superchargers. The administrative costs for an invoice are tiny and Elon surely knows how to handle internet payments... And the charging would not change. You drive to the supercharger, you plug in and thats it.

 

[MP3Mike]

It's back! Lets go over this topic again! lol

To restate my view, I just don't see free being viable long term, and think it will switch to a paid model. However, they might keep free for legacy S, X, and maybe some 3 owners (depending on what they are saying when the 3 comes out) in order to keep the original promise for them. Or maybe it's free for the first X number of years or something, then goes to paid. It just makes more sense to pay for what you use as you are using it.

Back again, and Supercharging currently isn't free. The price is baked in to the Model S/X. (Or you have to pay on the older Model S60s.)

My back of the napkin calculations shows that Tesla is charging ~$600 for electricity.

I would be really surprised if they didn't keep this model. The base Model 3 will probably not come with Supercharging, but it can be added for $2,000. ($1,400 for hardware and $600 for electricity.) If you opt for the larger battery the price of Supercharging will probably be baked in.

But since the price of hardware is coming down maybe it will still cost $2,000 but only $1,000 for the hardware and $1,000 for electricity.

- - - Updated - - -

The administrative costs for an invoice are tiny and Elon surely knows how to handle internet payments... And the charging would not change. You drive to the supercharger, you plug in and thats it.

No the administrative costs for setting up and managing an A/R system are not tiny. The city I live in recently enacted a small "flat" tax of $35/person and they found out that it is costing them way more than they planned to collect it. And on top of that a good portion of people are refusing to pay it, and the costs to try to collect are far greater than what they would collect, so they aren't even trying to get the people to pay.

It would be a nightmare for Tesla to try to collect nickles and dimes from random Supercharger usage.

 

[S'toon]

OK. How about this? The Model 3 defaults to a pay to a pay per use option, unless someone explicitly chooses the $2000 unlimited Supercharger access option.

 

[MP3Mike]

OK. How about this? The Model 3 defaults to a pay to a pay per use option, unless someone explicitly chooses the $2000 unlimited Supercharger access option.

But they would still have to pay the $1,000-$1,400 to enable the DC fast charging hardware to even have the ability to use the pay per use option... If the hardware came enabled then the Supercharger access option would only cost $600-$1,000. (And remember you need that hardware to use a CHAdeMO charger, or a CCS one down the road once there is an adapter for it.)

It really makes no sense for Tesla to setup a pay per use system unless they charge a ridiculous amount for the charging.

 

[Bimbels]

OK. How about this? The Model 3 defaults to a pay to a pay per use option, unless someone explicitly chooses the $2000 unlimited Supercharger access option.

Elon has said on many occasions they don't want to get into the business of charging for SC use. While that could certainly change down the road, I expect it would be way down the road (Like, many years) If they change anything from the current plan I would expect the choice will be to have SC enabled, or not.

 

[ChadFeldheimer]

Tesla has pretty good leverage with collections. If your account is past due, they can simply deny you the capability to supercharge. Actually collecting on the account is not important, as the dollar amounts are small.

There's two main sources of congestion: heavy travel days and "local" freeloaders (defined as local users who could charge elsewhere, but choose to supercharge to pinch pennies/dollars).

To address local freeloaders, I'd like to see a system where long distance supercharging is free but local use is billed. Tesla knows where its cars travel and can readily distinguish between long distance travel and local use. Billing for local use would eliminate the local freeloaders, opening up supercharger capacity to those in greater need: long distance travelers and locals who have no other option (e.g. some apartment dwellers).

Even with a billing system, the problem with heavy travel days will persist, pushing demand for additional build-out. But the additional build-out needed will be reduced if local use is billed.

 

[Bimbels]

Tesla has pretty good leverage with collections. If your account is past due, they can simply deny you the capability to supercharge. Actually collecting on the account is not important, as the dollar amounts are small.

There's two main sources of congestion: heavy travel days and "local" freeloaders (defined as local users who could charge elsewhere, but choose to supercharge to pinch pennies/dollars).

To address local freeloaders, I'd like to see a system where long distance supercharging is free but local use is billed. Tesla knows where its cars travel and can readily distinguish between long distance travel and local use. Billing for local use would eliminate the local freeloaders, opening up supercharger capacity to those in greater need: long distance travelers and locals who have no other option (e.g. some apartment dwellers).

Even with a billing system, the problem with heavy travel days will persist, pushing demand for additional build-out. But the additional build-out needed will be reduced if local use is billed.

Except all this talk of billing, timing our charging, caring where we charge, etc. is completely antithetical to what Elon has said he wants - which is to make it EASY and uncomplicated. Even when speaking about letting other car manufacturers use the SCs, there was no talk of billing the users - Elon wants the money to come from the manufacturers. Tesla does NOT want to get into this and have said so many, many times before. Yet people still want to speculate.

If someone wants to get into all that then they can start their own company and build a network of fast charging and have us pay for it. I do not believe it's going to come from Tesla. Not any time in the near future.

 

[ChadFeldheimer]

is completely antithetical to what Elon has said he wants - which is to make it EASY and uncomplicated.

Supercharging makes long distance travel feasible in an EV, but it's still not as flexible (read, EASY and uncomplicated) as in a gasoline vehicle. Impeding access to superchargers due to congestion moves us in the wrong direction on the EASY and uncomplicated curve.

Sadly, there is no free lunch.

 

[Bimbels]

Supercharging makes long distance travel feasible in an EV, but it's still not as flexible (read, EASY and uncomplicated) as in a gasoline vehicle. Impeding access to superchargers due to congestion moves us in the wrong direction on the EASY and uncomplicated curve.

Sadly, there is no free lunch.

Yes, but much of the speculation is assuming the status quo. I hope no one here believes the current ratio of SCs to Teslas on the road is going to stay the same once the M3 is rolled out. Tesla has just under 2 years before the launch. In the meantime they will have a good gauge of interest and what the SC network will need to be based on reservations. They have several years before M3 is fully ramped. There is plenty of time for them to adjust the SC network to meet the needs of the fleet while still being convenient. (both in terms of wait time and location.)

Yes, SCs make long distance travel feasible, but they are also necessary for people who have no option for at home charging. (Apartment/condo dwellers, people who park on street, etc.) Elon is aware of these cases and recognizes they need to be addressed, because not doing so will not further his mission of transitioning everyone, not just those with garages or plugs in their parking space, to EVs.

Tesla is not stupid. They will expand the network in relation to the cars they sell. The more cars they sell, the more revenue for SCs.

 

[Gen3]

I think the number of people in model S or X who want to supercharge to save money is small, but that more people who buy the model 3 will want to maximize savings by using the supercharger as much as possible. I see it regularly when people take advantage of free/unlimited things be it public services or an all you can eat, restaurant. I think there needs to be a disincentive to be in a stall when there is a line up. On long weekends and heavy travel days I think it's worth paying extra to guarantee a spot.

It it would be nice if a new software update would show how many stalls are currently available and forecast to be available at your eta. I think it's coming.

I bet it's only a few years away when auto pilot will pull into the stall for you when it becomes available, then move when done, and hopefully less than 10 years away when the car drops you off, goes and charges itself, then comes to get you.

 

[gregincal]

I think the number of people in model S or X who want to supercharge to save money is small, but that more people who buy the model 3 will want to maximize savings by using the supercharger as much as possible.

I think you would be wrong. The amount of money is small enough that it doesn't really make financial sense in either case, but the percentage of people who are just cheap or who think it's cool to supercharge their car is the same regardless of income.

I submit the people who want it to be "easy" have never had to wait in line for a supercharger, which isn't fun or easy but rather a royal pain. I haven't used the superchargers much, but about 50% of the time I have I've needed to wait to get a stall. It hasn't made we want to use them more.

 

[ChadFeldheimer]

Everything that Gen3 said, plus livery services.

I once ordered an Uber and got picked up in a Tesla. The driver drove fulltime for Uber, putting about 50k miles/year on his S. All of it supercharged (no charging capability at home).

Not too many people buy a $70k car to drive around as a taxi. But for a $35k 3 (minus federal tax credit) with all fuel costs prepaid? It's a no brainer. Every taxi would be a Model 3! And autonomy just makes it even worse.

Obviously unsustainable. It's just a matter of when.

 

[roblab]

I think the number of people in model S or X who want to supercharge to save money is small, but that more people who buy the model 3 will want to maximize savings by using the supercharger as much as possible. I see it regularly when people take advantage of free/unlimited things be it public services or an all you can eat, restaurant. I think there needs to be a disincentive to be in a stall when there is a line up. On long weekends and heavy travel days I think it's worth paying extra to guarantee a spot.

It it would be nice if a new software update would show how many stalls are currently available and forecast to be available at your eta. I think it's coming.

I bet it's only a few years away when auto pilot will pull into the stall for you when it becomes available, then move when done, and hopefully less than 10 years away when the car drops you off, goes and charges itself, then comes to get you.

First off, people, charge at home. With such a huge range, you do NOT need to charge, you car does NOT need to charge while you are out shopping. That is Leaf, Bolt, Spark thinking.

Superchargers are put there for long distance travel. The price of electricity is so small, like less than $10 for a fill up (how much did you used to pay for gas, pray tell??) that it is petty, small, thoughtless to think of running down to the local (what, ten miles away?) to sit for 20 minutes to charge. This computes even worse when you get more cars and they are waiting for stalls. I can't begin to get my mind around the thought processes involved.

Also, as you know, Tesla can tell if some "local" owner starts to charge routinely at a "nearby" charger to "save money", and they have been known to notify them and suggest they leave them for long distance travelers.

I can see Tesla thinking that these large numbers of penny pinched Model 3 owners need to pay by the charge and not have it "free forever". Way to go. Ruin it for everybody. It costs more to bill and collect than it does to supply the service.

My $9 worth. (cost of fill up)

I've already commented on the idea that we need to know how many stalls are occupied. It is worthless information. Cars come and go on average of every 3 minutes. You check the situation 20 miles out. Total change. Doesn't help. Guaranteeing a spot? Right. Who's going to sit there waiting for you to drive in (from 20 miles out). Fat chance.

 

[Tesloid]

Everything that Gen3 said, plus livery services.

I once ordered an Uber and got picked up in a Tesla. The driver drove fulltime for Uber, putting about 50k miles/year on his S. All of it supercharged (no charging capability at home).

Not too many people buy a $70k car to drive around as a taxi. But for a $35k 3 (minus federal tax credit) with all fuel costs prepaid? It's a no brainer. Every taxi would be a Model 3! And autonomy just makes it even worse.

Obviously unsustainable. It's just a matter of when.

A commercial taxi service would rather have their own solar powered Tesla charges at home base, than to deal with the probability of their cars having to wait in line to charge up at a local supercharger station.


As for uber drivers, Tesla can easily keep track of each car's usage statistics, and start charging people who use more than a certain monthly (or annual) quota of energy.

- - - Updated - - -

My recommendation:

First 3MWh worth of free charging per annum, per car. That translates to roughly around 10,000 real world miles.

Anything beyond that, you pay the national average $/kWh charge.


Of course, the clock resets every year.