Improving Supercharger Availability $0.40 idle fee

[AnxietyRanger]

I do not condone ICEing of EV chargers, nor do I condone blocking parking spaces as that truck is doing. Equally I am not sure putting the onus on fixing the situation on Tesla owners is right when they are not really the problem, but the ethics conversation would probably get little traction so I'll leave that be.

I do agree with this: If at some Supercharger ICEing is the main issue or for any reason it is more rarely full than empty at all, I would support altering this policy there. It could be labelled a Busy Supercharger, for example, and have strict idle charges at all hours. A sign/label could encourage people to sit in the car at such locations and keep it short. Tesla shoud also strive to fix the ICEing/blocking issue there as a separate thing. These could have shorter grace periods than other locations too, for example.

Perspectives differ. I have never seen a full Supercharger, nor have I ever seen an ICEd Supercharger stall personally. I do frequent Superchargers, one of them is halfway to a regular destination - mostly empty, sometimes one car besides me, no ICEing so far ever (when I've been there), because the nature of the location is such. I'm sure it can be full on rare occasion, but really, it is not at all like you guys describe e.g. in California.

I would find it silly to enforce this rule in such places, just to keep things the same as in California where the situation is completely different. That would be the bureucratic solution and, really, Tesla is better than that. If people in some other areas have bad manners and there are too many of them, maybe they need something different, fine... This is why I appreciate Elon/Tesla making the amendment and hope they make some more amendments down the road regarding e.g the grace period length. I like it that they listened and that they are not trying to fit the same solution to every situation.

Anyway, perhaps the time really has come to stop trying to apply the same rule everywhere and just go with some regional rules. Tesla will already be doing that for kW pricing next year. The terms of a particular Supercharger could be shown there (like they already have those parking signs for ICEs on some SpCs) and reflect the nature of that location. Tesla could invent a couple of very simple labels/badges that spell out different Supercharger location rules: regular Supercharger, Busy Supercharger etc. It could still be kept simple if they just planned it nice and right. Maybe some places could have extended grace periods for local 5 star restaurant patrons to get Tesla a deal.

I even think Express Superchargers (e.g. max 15 min charge or max 75% charge or something) might be an interesting experiment, for regions that have many Superchargers and a mature charging network. That would really solve a lot more than forcing people to move fast after a long 100% charge, where the bulk of the time is still taken by the long charge. If you'd need more range, you'd go to another Supercharger...

Please don't get stuck on the details of the examples or their names, they are just off the top of my head. But overall I'm starting to think a more granular approach as an idea might have something to it.

All that said, personally I think the charge by minute rule would be the simplest and could be fairly universal. It could include a kW-based component as well (@4SUPER9), if need be, if it can be kept simple. But if that is not possible or sufficient, why not also consider having a few categories of Superchargers with different ground rules based on local ground reality... Maybe they could have like a color coding or something too, to distinguish them. People understand tiers quite well in general, if they are well defined...

Because really, no amount of fiddling with idle charges is likely to help if the real problem is something fundamentally different, like a capacity issue or a massive ICEing problem. The charge will still be long and getting people to move a little faster on completion will only help so much.

 

[AudubonB]

Audubon,
I'll bet you paid that truck driver $0.41 per minute just to stage that photo...

RT

Hee hee! Busted!

 

[somnambule]

I do agree with this: If at some Supercharger ICEing is the main issue or for any reason it is more rarely full than empty at all, I would support altering this policy there. It could be labelled a Busy Supercharger, for example, and have strict idle charges at all hours. A sign/label could encourage people to sit in the car at such locations and keep it short. Tesla shoud also strive to fix the ICEing/blocking issue there as a separate thing. These could have shorter grace periods than other locations too, for example.

It should be possible for Tesla to detect congestion due to ICEing/blocking. For example, it shouldn't be that hard to have cars notify Tesla when they arrive at an SC station, and a glut of mostly low-charge cars sitting around near an SC but not charging would suggest congestion due to ICEing/obstruction/inoperative stalls etc. In other words, it should be possible for Tesla to detect congestion even if they can't tell the cause of the congestion, and a more stringent policy could go into effect when that is detected. Of course, this would need implementation effort, but no new hardware or infrastructure.

Still, this is inferior to simply disallowing or strongly deterring ICEing. For example, why not just put the SC stalls in the farthest corner of the parking lot so that no one else parks there unless the lot is absolutely full. Several SCs I've visited have the stalls in some of the most desirable parking spots. That seems counter-productive from the perspective of this discussion.

I even think Express Superchargers (e.g. max 15 min charge or max 75% charge or something) might be an interesting experiment, for regions that have many Superchargers and a mature charging network. That would really solve a lot more than forcing people to move fast after a long 100% charge, where the bulk of the time is still taken by the long charge. If you'd need more range, you'd go to another Supercharger...

That's a very interesting proposal. Perhaps even designate a couple of stalls at SC as "Express" and cap the charge or time as you suggested.

Because really, no amount of fiddling with idle charges is likely to help if the real problem is something fundamentally different, like a capacity issue or a massive ICEing problem. The charge will still be long and getting people to move a little faster will only help so much.

Yup.

 

[Shock-On-T]

Good idea. I don't think you need to have dedicated stalls though. They already have the ability to allocate between A/B pairs (and actually between A/B/C/D/...) and to some extent between all of them though the latter is switchable rather than variable. Drivers can have an option of charging ASAP or providing a time to be done by and the charger allocates accordingly. If the restaurant it taking longer than expected they can change the time.

This solves the cost of the charger itself and allows for many more stalls for very little extra cost. There's still an issue of needing to get the spaces from whomever is hosting.

I think it's g

The car would know through your plotted course, so it could make the exception.
The car (OK, Tesla data center) would even know about wet roads, head winds, low temperatures, etc. But at the same time offer alternative charging along the way so you'd not need a 100% charge all day.

I maintain that by default, SC should not charge to 100% just to let the owner enjoy a nice meal or nap before kindly being ushered off by a $0.40/min parking fee. Similar 90-100% charging speed (except for 60kWh perhaps) can be reached at proper destination and home chargers, I suppose?

But you could just plot any course to game the system.

 

[Cyclone]

It should be possible for Tesla to detect congestion due to ICEing/blocking. For example, it shouldn't be that hard to have cars notify Tesla when they arrive at an SC station, and a glut of mostly low-charge cars sitting around near an SC but not charging would suggest congestion due to ICEing/obstruction/inoperative stalls etc. In other words, it should be possible for Tesla to detect congestion even if they can't tell the cause of the congestion, and a more stringent policy could go into effect when that is detected. Of course, this would need implementation effort, but no new hardware or infrastructure.

Still, this is inferior to simply disallowing or strongly deterring ICEing. For example, why not just put the SC stalls in the farthest corner of the parking lot so that no one else parks there unless the lot is absolutely full. Several SCs I've visited have the stalls in some of the most desirable parking spots. That seems counter-productive from the perspective of this discussion.

Maybe the AutoPilot 2.0 cars will phone home from the Supercharger about whether they "see" cars next to them in other Supercharger stalls and Tesla can then see if that stall is "in use". If not (and if also prearranged with the lot owner), dispatch a tow!

 

[4SUPER9]

I do not condone ICEing of EV chargers, nor do I condone blocking parking spaces as that truck is doing. Equally I am not sure putting the onus on fixing the situation on Tesla owners is right when they are not really the problem, but the ethics conversation would probably get little traction so I'll leave that be.

I do agree with this: If at some Supercharger ICEing is the main issue or for any reason it is more rarely full than empty at all, I would support altering this policy there. It could be labelled a Busy Supercharger, for example, and have strict idle charges at all hours. A sign/label could encourage people to sit in the car at such locations and keep it short. Tesla shoud also strive to fix the ICEing/blocking issue there as a separate thing. These could have shorter grace periods than other locations too, for example.

Perspective differ. I have never seen a full Supercharger, nor have I ever seen an ICEd Supercharger stall personally. I do frequent Superchargers, one of them is halfway to a regular destination - mostly empty, sometimes one car besides me, no ICEing so far ever (when I've been there), because the nature of the location is such. I'm sure it can be full on rare occasion, but really, it is not at all like you guys describe e.g. in California.

I would find it silly to enforce this rule in such places, just to keep things the same as in California where the situation is completely different. That would be the bureucratic solution and, really, Tesla is better than that. If people in some other areas have bad manners and there are too many of them, maybe they need something different, fine... This is why I appreciate Elon/Tesla making the amendment and hope they make some more amendments down the road regarding e.g the grace period length. I like it that they listened and that they are not trying to fit the same solution to every situation.

Anyway, perhaps the time really has come to stop trying to apply the same rule everywhere and just go with some regional rules. Tesla will already be doing that for kW pricing next year. The terms of a particular Supercharger could be shown there (like they already have those parking signs for ICEs on some SpCs) and reflect the nature of that location. Tesla could invent a couple of very simple labels/badges that spell out different Supercharger location rules: regular Supercharger, Busy Supercharger etc. It could still be kept simple if they just planned it nice and right. Maybe some places could have extended grace periods for local 5 star restaurant patrons to get Tesla a deal.

I even think Express Superchargers (e.g. max 15 min charge or max 75% charge or something) might be an interesting experiment, for regions that have many Superchargers and a mature charging network. That would really solve a lot more than forcing people to move fast after a long 100% charge, where the bulk of the time is still taken by the long charge. If you'd need more range, you'd go to another Supercharger...

Please don't get stuck on the details of the examples or their names, they are just off the top of my head. But overall I'm starting to think a more granular approach as an idea might have something to it.

All that said, personally I think the charge by minute rule would be the simplest and could be fairly universal. It could include a kW-based component as well (@4SUPER9), if need be, if it can be kept simple. But if that is not possible or sufficient, why not also consider having a few categories of Superchargers with different ground rules based on local ground reality... Maybe they could have like a color coding or something too, to distinguish them. People understand tiers quite well in general, if they are well defined...

Because really, no amount of fiddling with idle charges is likely to help if the real problem is something fundamentally different, like a capacity issue or a massive ICEing problem. The charge will still be long and getting people to move a little faster on completion will only help so much.

This is all reasonable. It is just not as easily implemented. The route they took was, as you indicated, more of a scorched-earth policy. I get it though. This, for all its flaws, was easy. There are issues right now that need solving and to implement this selectively at certain Superchargers, via signage, software changes, etc., while possibly better, would have been too difficult to accomplish quickly. It also does not leave room for rapid changes (except for maybe software). Say that suddenly they find another SC is getting abused and too busy. Does someone have to run out and install new signs? If they built it into the software coding, no one will know which SCs get the idle fee and which ones don't until they show up and plug in. I kind of like that idea, but I am sure we would get an earful from people who don't.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

This is all reasonable. It is just not as easily implemented. The route they took was, as you indicated, more of a scorched-earth policy. I get it though. This, for all its flaws, was easy. There are issues right now that need solving and to implement this selectively at certain Superchargers, via signage, software changes, etc., while possibly better, would have been too difficult to accomplish quickly. It also does not leave room for rapid changes (except for maybe software). Say that suddenly they find another SC is getting abused and too busy. Does someone have to run out and install new signs? If they built it into the software coding, no one will know which SCs get the idle fee and which ones don't until they show up and plug in. I kind of like that idea, but I am sure we would get an earful from people who don't.

I agree some of this is Tesla picking the low hanging fruit. AudubonB's comment on attacking ICEing through Tesla owner idle charges is a similar proposition - it is easier to do than attacking the actual problem: ICEing. Doesn't mean this is necessarily right, but it is perhaps more practical in the short term.

I think in conversation/debate such as this, separating the easy from the goal would hopefully be possible and I have been trying to do that. We can discuss the theoretical and the pragmatic as two separate issues and hopefully contribute to both short-term and long-term solutions...

 

[smartypnz]

Strikes me funny.... no there is a better word....(but unsaid)....

People who balk at a "too short" 5 minute grace time probably have never wound up at the other end. Would you be willing upon pulling into a SC 'parking lot' in the midst of a long trip to wait knowing that if finally any of these cars 'finish' charging you only need 5 minutes?? But let's give them more grace period. Now you will have to wait maybe 10 or let's say 15 minutes for that grace period of the first car fully charged. Awww let's make it an hour because if you are championing for a longer grace period - you must be more than willing to wait that period.

And, as previously stated the possibility of having to walk to a restroom 15 minutes uphill each way - I think I would drive there and then come back to the SC.

Restaurant visiting? Drop your guests off with your preferred order - take car to charge - walk back to restaurant - that should give you 10 minutes extra before the grace period begins.

5 minutes is plenty and you should be paying close attention to that APP because some glitch may stop the charging and you may not otherwise know. Or basically ignoring the reason you are there.

 

[thecloud]

People who balk at a "too short" 5 minute grace time probably have never wound up at the other end.

I've been on both ends and can empathize with both situations.

Restaurant visiting? Drop your guests off with your preferred order - take car to charge - walk back to restaurant - that should give you 10 minutes extra before the grace period begins.

Some people travel alone. What should they do then, if they want to eat at the restaurant? It's especially hard to jump up and run outside if the bill hasn't come yet and your server is nowhere in sight, but maybe you can leave a jacket or a note or something to make it look as if you're coming back.

I had this happen at Harris Ranch once, when I was driving alone and stopped for brunch. It was fairly busy and I didn't get seated right away, then didn't get my food right away. By the time I finished eating, the car had finished charging and it probably took at least 5 minutes after the notification for me to get to the car. Nobody was waiting and a couple of spots were available, so I didn't feel too badly about it. Had there been idle fees at the time, I would certainly have appreciated the 5 minute grace period.

I've also been in lines waiting to charge, with 5-6 cars ahead of me, never more than 40 minutes' wait, but obviously 5 minutes makes a difference in that situation. However, as long as owners show up in some reasonable amount of time and don't leave their car parked for hours, I'm fine with giving them a grace period.

 

[sorka]

5 minutes is plenty and you should be paying close attention to that APP because some glitch may stop the charging and you may not otherwise know. Or basically ignoring the reason you are there.

So I was talking to my wife about this. She thinks the policy is nuts. I disagree and think it's way over due. She's already vetoed future Tesla purchases due to the nasty experience she had in Manteca where she could only charge 14KW on the stall 1 and 30KW on stall 3 (nobody else there at all).
See: Wife just said she's never driving the Tesla again......
for that fiasco.


She's totally not the type to watch the app. She's not the type to even run the app!!!!! Not even once. She'll plugin and go about her business and return when she's good and ready.

The bottom line is, she shouldn't be let lose on the supercharger network. She would clog it up in high use areas.

Then it hit me. She's the majority. She's the mainstream. Most of america is like her. I'm the odd one one. She thinks I have aspergers. I'm OCD about everything and micro manage everything. It drives her nuts that I look at the app every 5 minutes. She's like "it's just a car. Put the phone down already".

 

[AnxietyRanger]

I agree. The initial idle fee announcement was clear, simple, and straightforward. I do not agree with the approach of treating Supercharger sites differently based on usage because then we cannot predict if an idle fee is going to be applied or not. It becomes a judgement call on Teslas part and the Tesla owner has no insight into how that judgement is made and cannot know what charges they might be subject to.

Same can be said of the idle charge in the first place - it is not predictable because we can not know when it ends. But unlike an upredictable charge length, any other terms could be easily made clear with signage at the Supercharger.

Treating EVERY Supercharger in the world the same with the same limitations based on a worst case scenario somewhere in the world sounds like a very bureucratic idea. Places are vastly different, that's why we have signs and rules in general that differ from place to place.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

So I was talking to my wife about this. She thinks the policy is nuts. I disagree and think it's way over due. She's already vetoed future Tesla purchases due to the nasty experience she had in Manteca where she could only charge 14KW on the stall 1 and 30KW on stall 3 (nobody else there at all).
See: Wife just said she's never driving the Tesla again......
for that fiasco.


She's totally not the type to watch the app. She's not the type to even run the app!!!!! Not even once. She'll plugin and go about her business and return when she's good and ready.

The bottom line is, she shouldn't be let lose on the supercharger network. She would clog it up in high use areas.

Then it hit me. She's the majority. She's the mainstream. Most of america is like her. I'm the odd one one. She thinks I have aspergers. I'm OCD about everything and micro manage everything. It drives her nuts that I look at the app every 5 minutes. She's like "it's just a car. Put the phone down already".

Yeah.

Well.

Kind of my whole point about the problem with this rule. I *too* can deal with it, but I am no where near the target market of taking this mainstream. I would argue neither are you, sorka, as I guess you imply as well.

You want to increase EV adoption? Cater to sorka's wife.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

Strikes me funny.... no there is a better word....(but unsaid)....

People who balk at a "too short" 5 minute grace time probably have never wound up at the other end. Would you be willing upon pulling into a SC 'parking lot' in the midst of a long trip to wait knowing that if finally any of these cars 'finish' charging you only need 5 minutes?? But let's give them more grace period. Now you will have to wait maybe 10 or let's say 15 minutes for that grace period of the first car fully charged. Awww let's make it an hour because if you are championing for a longer grace period - you must be more than willing to wait that period.

I am actually advocating a 0 minute grace period.

0 minutes.

After a predictable charging time.

All I would ask to make this layperson friendly. Predictable. The car can tell you upon arrival that prediction on the screen and you must return at that time - like you would at prepaid parking. (Instead Tesla asks you to return at a wildly varying actual charging completion that is based on e.g. the charger condition, neighboring stall usage and other stuff that takes a smartphone app loving engineer to figure out.)

The app could extend that estimate for idle charges as need be for technical reasons, but would never make it shorter for idle charges. It would still let you know of completion, of course. This is just about making the idle cost predictable. You might on occasion arrive at the car too soon if the prediction was wrong, but never too late cost-wise.

If that can't be done, then a longer grace period would be a reasonable compensation for the unpredictability. Or moving entirely to a minute-based charging for the entire charge process that is 100% predictable by looking at your watch.

As for queues, talk to Tesla about adding capacity or introducing e.g. Express Superchargers where the charge is limited to 15 minutes. That too would be predictable. Making everyone move their car within 5 minutes of actual completion will not fix congestion caused by lack of sufficient capacity, because often the actual charge (as well as things like ICEing) is so much more longer and bigger issue.

 

[msnow]

So I was talking to my wife about this. She thinks the policy is nuts. I disagree and think it's way over due. She's already vetoed future Tesla purchases due to the nasty experience she had in Manteca where she could only charge 14KW on the stall 1 and 30KW on stall 3 (nobody else there at all).
See: Wife just said she's never driving the Tesla again......
for that fiasco.


She's totally not the type to watch the app. She's not the type to even run the app!!!!! Not even once. She'll plugin and go about her business and return when she's good and ready.

The bottom line is, she shouldn't be let lose on the supercharger network. She would clog it up in high use areas.

Then it hit me. She's the majority. She's the mainstream. Most of america is like her. I'm the odd one one. She thinks I have aspergers. I'm OCD about everything and micro manage everything. It drives her nuts that I look at the app every 5 minutes. She's like "it's just a car. Put the phone down already".

You're right, she's absolutely the mainstream majority and the target market for Tesla specifically the Model 3. I just saw a post upthread about a guy who had to wait 40 minutes in a 4-5 car line just to start chargjng. Add in 30-40 more minutes to charge and your close to an hour and a half experience. My wife (also in the target market) would never go through that.

 

[JRMW]

Interesting

So you would rather have the car tell you to be back at 5pm only to find out that you have at least 15-30 minutes to wait in your car until your desired charge, as opposed to simply looking at your phone while at your restaurant which will give you at least 10 minutes to get back to your car, or paying maybe $6 parking fee for being 15 minutes late

We will never agree because you seem to value your time far less than your money.

It's like paying $6 to park in a parking lot, vs driving in circles looking for free parking.

Yes, it's free on the street, but may take you 15 minutes to find that spot and walk.

Or like paying for the Toll Lane vs going the long way around

Nothing wrong with either view

People who value their time pay the $6 parking and $2 Toll

People who don't, don't

The only thing odd about your post is you seem to prefer to ALWAYS pay for charging instead if just paying for a rare fine.

I agree with you on one point. NO solution will solve any problem 100%.

Thus you break the problem into discrete solutions

You start with this.

If this fails, you add solution #2, #3, and so on

 

[JRMW]

Nothing wrong with either view

To expand on this point.

I swim at YMCA
Parking is $4 per visit.

I could go to a Y with free parking. But my $4 parking Ymca has great lanes that are always open.

The free parking Y often has multiple people in each lane.

Thus I pay $4.

Sometimes I meet family at y. Me from work, them from home.
Its then $8. Yikes. Oh well... saves me 30 minutes of driving.

However. At other times its event parking. Pretty random based in events. That bumps it to $20

If so, I drive around and look for parking

But on Sunday I was late and busy and thus paid the stupid $20

So sometimes I pay. Sometimes not.

Depends on the situation

In other words. It's OK to be a penny pincher who values $6 more than sitting 15 minutes in charging car.

It's also ok to be a spendthrift who values 15 minutes in a restaurant more than $6

 

[muleferg]

Burlington, NC 2 stalls available for gen public. Located in a mall.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

Interesting

So you would rather have the car tell you to be back at 5pm only to find out that you have at least 15-30 minutes to wait in your car until your desired charge, as opposed to simply looking at your phone while at your restaurant which will give you at least 10 minutes to get back to your car, or paying maybe $6 parking fee for being 15 minutes late

We will never agree because you seem to value your time far less than your money.

No, that is not what I said. I specifically said the car announced time would only affect the earliest possible start of idle charges. Other than that, the app would still be available to provide you with real-time information about the state of the charge (to the extent the app can do that, we all know there can be and are surprises even with the app).

It is also not about me, I can handle the app. I outlined what I speculate I would expect the average person to find more reasonable and acceptable than following an app with seemingly random (for a non-engineer type anyway) charge times to avoid an extra charge. With a guarantee that charges will not start any earlier than estimated beforehand, that would be avoidable. People can just look at their watch and plan for that. "Okay, we have at least 45 minutes, let's eat."

People can handle e.g. pre-paid parking. What they are not accustomed to handling is their phone (hopefully) alerting them of some random time when their e.g. parking would suddenly end. That would be crazy. With the change I outlined, Supercharging idle charges would become more familiar in that sense that the car tells you when to be back beforehand. App can add to that, but if you at the very least follow the car's advice, you would not pay a penalty.

Now you will pay a penalty if you don't follow the app or sit in your car. As is, I fear that can meet genuine mainstream resistance and customer dissatisfaction and could hurt SpCs mission to remove EV adoption obstancles.

And if Tesla's Supercharger capacity can not handle the average charging time their own car algorithms estimate, without creating massive queues, then they have a capacity problem and need to build more.

But we shall see. sorka already outlined his wife's reaction. I am not surprised.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

The only thing odd about your post is you seem to prefer to ALWAYS pay for charging instead if just paying for a rare fine.

You have to look at this in the bigger context: Supercharging is already becoming a cost event January 1st. I have repeatedly said my comments about the future exclude grandfathering.

I would simply add all the different and difficult pricing mechanisms together and average out a single price: price per minute at Supercharger. It would be less than the idle charge perhaps, it could take into consideration the free miles included in some manner etc.

Supercharging will not remain free anyway. But it can remain simple and predictable - and I don't feel the current system is that at all, as it seems to be becoming a layer after layer of odd rules and regulations (idle charges to be paid at service center after unpredictable length of charging, some kWhs gotten with the car but others purchased in some other manner, verbal limitations and non-limitations of Supercharger use in various different ways etc).

A single price per minute (charged to a credit card on file), no other limitations at all, would be super-simple and it would encourage not staying more than needed. And it would be predictable and fair.

p.s. I am not against tying the kWh amount into the minute pricing idea somehow, as discussed before as well. Perhaps it could be made fairly simple combo of kWh/minutes that would make it more predictable from an energy-gaining perspective as well.

 

[somnambule]

Some people travel alone. What should they do then, if they want to eat at the restaurant? It's especially hard to jump up and run outside if the bill hasn't come yet and your server is nowhere in sight, but maybe you can leave a jacket or a note or something to make it look as if you're coming back.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, traveling alone is by no means the worst-case scenario (that case is manageable easily enough). A single adult traveling with small children is much worse. Do you grab your kids mid-meal and run out to move the car? Do you leave your kids unattended for 10-15min at the restaurant to go move the car? Do you not eat until charging completes? None of these seem particularly practical. My guess is that people in this situation will simply pay the fee and let the car sit at the stall. I'm not advocating that behavior (I'm sure someone will read it that way) but simply surmising what will happen.