Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Improving Supercharger Availability $0.40 idle fee

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
While I support the idea, I think it could be implemented with more flexibility. For instance, the fee should only be invoked if a SC site is at least, say, 50% occupied. This will be frustrating in SC's where there are currently very rarely more than one Tesla and you're having dinner far from the chargers and have to get up half way through to move the car.

EDIT: @RK9090 - Was typing as you posted similar thoughts. :)
 
While I support the idea, I think it could be implemented with more flexibility. For instance, the fee should only be invoked if a SC site is at least, say, 50% occupied. This will be frustrating in SC's where there are currently very rarely more than one Tesla and you're having dinner far from the chargers and have to get up half way through to move the car.

EDIT: @RK9090 - Was typing as you posted similar thoughts. :)

One option is that Tesla advertise the idle fees everywhere (as they have), but only apply them at the crowded sites? After all, what happens if someone parks at an empty site, leaves their car there, and five minutes later all the stalls fill up?
 
You already get plenty of warning as you approach your preset charge limit. If you think you are not going to make it you could always up charge limit to 100%.

Understood. But in this example, I've got to walk ten minutes to a restaurant, then walk back to the car mid-meal when the charging is finished. I'd be 100% on board with this if there were other vehicles waiting (or if even *some* of the stalls were occupiedand and I'd run the risk of inconveniencing another driver) and I'd never even think of leaving my car at a spot for hours.

I also want Tesla sales and service centers that are co-located with superchargers (Cincinnati for example) to be held to this same standard. They often leave demo vehicles sitting at the chargers for hours idle.
 
I agree with this policy for congested superchargers in SoCal, but it should correlate to demand in a particular area. For example, I've used the Tridelphia WV supercharger a number of times and never seen another Tesla vehicle. It's located in the parking lot of a hotel, up a hill from a handful of fast food and sit-down chain restaurants. If I want to grab a bite to eat it's a 10+ minute walk each way. If the service is slow I'm now penalized for it at the rate of $24/hr when I'm having no impact on the availability of charging spots. I realize a dynamic price structure for sitting idle at a charger would be very complex to achieve, but when my car is the only Tesla vehicle within 50 miles of a supercharger its impact on other drivers is zero.

I'd be satisfied with this change if they also stepped up enforcement of ICE vehicles in charging spots, which can have a much greater impact than an owner coming back to his vehicle fifteen minutes after charging completed. Tesla should sign contracts with local towing companies allowing them to remove any non-Tesla vehicle that's occupying a stall.

It makes sense to punish abusers if there are other vehicles may be waiting. I mean if all superchargers are occupied. Indeed I don't think WV is anything like SC right now. Probably current policy should be revised taking into account variance between demand in different locations.
 
Understood. But in this example, I've got to walk ten minutes to a restaurant, then walk back to the car mid-meal when the charging is finished. I'd be 100% on board with this if there were other vehicles waiting (or if even *some* of the stalls were occupiedand and I'd run the risk of inconveniencing another driver) and I'd never even think of leaving my car at a spot for hours.

I also want Tesla sales and service centers that are co-located with superchargers (Cincinnati for example) to be held to this same standard. They often leave demo vehicles sitting at the chargers for hours idle.

Totally agree. All these locations shall stick to the same standard.
 
Can you use Power heating/etc faster than the trickle charge as you get to 100%?

Good question.

I do wonder if it's possible to never reach 100% state of charge if you use enough energy in heating, and powering a laptop.

My bet would be that the charger itself could provide enough power for this on top of the trickle charge to 100%. So it wouldn't be possible to use this trick to avoid the fee. But, of course it needs to be tested.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MP3Mike
Good question.

I do wonder if it's possible to never reach 100% state of charge if you use enough energy in heating, and powering a laptop.

My bet would be that the charger itself could provide enough power for this on top of the trickle charge to 100%. So it wouldn't be possible to use this trick to avoid the fee. But, of course it needs to be tested.

A Supercharger would provide way, way more power than the car's HVAC system could ever possibly use. Maybe if you were charging at 120V and 16A or less, the HVAC system could draw more power than the UMC could provide.
 
  • Like
Reactions: S4WRXTTCS
I'm really surprised they implemented this so quickly.

It doesn't impact me either way since I never leave my car sitting there after a charge is finished (that's just plain rude). But, it also doesn't impact me in freeing up charging availability. I don't really see that very often in WA, OR. Maybe a little bit in Woodburn because of the huge outlet mall.

So I'm not strongly for or against it. I just wonder about the can of worms it opens up. Not just in the potential for someone not to know. Like if I let my brother or sister borrow my Tesla while forgetting to tell them. Or the people in the immediate future that charge without hearing about this.

But, also in the fact that anytime you accept money for something there are a bunch of people with their hands open. Is the company that owns the outlet mall or hotel parking not going to want in? Or the city? There is nothing simple about parking fees, but I'm no lawyer.
 
A Supercharger would provide way, way more power than the car's HVAC system could ever possibly use. Maybe if you were charging at 120V and 16A or less, the HVAC system could draw more power than the UMC could provide.

That's what the math says, but I'd still want to test it just to make sure there wasn't some design aspect that impacted it. I can't think of anything, but you never know without verifying.
 
It's not quickly. It's been talked about for months.

I meant quickly in terms of doing it before they have a proper billing system in place for it. That was the primary reason I didn't expect it so soon. I didn't expect it before the supercharging fee system was in place. Where it would be integrated into that.

I also thought that it would come AFTER they exhausted a warning type system.