Model 3 Supercharging Capable Discussion

[Jeff N]

Tesla will simply programmatically enforce no local supercharging for model 3 users who violate the terms of service.

Bad answer.

Blanket policies enforced inflexibly are the result of following non-market systems.

The better path is to allocate non-zero prices for specific actions and then allow individuals to self-select whether they are willing to pay that price given their own specific circumstances.

 

[electracity]

Introducing some form of per-use payment would discourage the behavior that Musk was criticizing.

Tesla would rather just have the $2K up front. Once they get production up, that's an extra billion dollars per year to build superchargers.

The $35K base car isn't likely profitable until later years. They need the money.

 

[llngoc]

I put this up over on the Model 3 Owners Site in response to a post about pay-per-use being what he felt Elon had for sure said in the shareholders meeting. I guess it fits here too. Might as well get abuse from this bunch as well.

A couple of things...

First, by "decoupling" Supercharging from the price of the car, I read that as no longer embedding the price of Supercharging into the price the consumer pays for the car. Make it an option, as he said could be purchased with a "package".

Second, and this is definitely not going to be popular, here is why I think pay-per-use is a bad idea. I think it would be too convenient.
Hear me out before you start throwing things at me through your computer screen. Both Elon and JB said in the meeting that a priority for them is to break the habit that we have of seeing the gas station model as the best model. We drive until we need more gas then we stop at one of a billion gas stations and get what we need. They put it as Tesla owners not valuing their own time. Trying to use Superchargers as we currently use gas stations. Their argument is that we need to start viewing our homes as the best, most efficient method of charging our cars. By implementing a pay-per-use model, we are just encouraging a thought process that Elon and JB are trying to break. If you are going to need it...buy it. If not, then plan on limiting your use of the vehicle to that which you can charge at home. It breaks the mindless thought process of how we have done things for years and encourages people to think much more in depth about how they intend to use their vehicle and what its use is worth in the way of cost.

Now, don't break your screen trying to jump through it to wrap your hands around my throat! Those damn things are expensive!

Just my 2 cents.

Dan

I am a Model S owner and in the early days, the S60 owners was basically asked to pay $2000 compared to the higher end models for SC usage. And as a S85 owner, I am aware that this cost is embedded in the higher cost of the car itself.

And in the early days, most if not all of the SCs are located in "rural" area along major highways here. (For instance, along I5 corridor) With fewer numbers of Model S on the road, SC availability was never an issue.

Fast forward to today, there are more SCs opening up in the city area. I have one close by home at Dublin (CA) and one interesting thing I observed now is that most cars which are charging there are now locals and not long distance travelers anymore. You can tell by the school stickers and the "preparedness" of the driver. (Single driver, no luggage in tow, knowing right-a-way which way is the local stores which are quite far from the SCs) And if you go on a Sunday evening, all the SCs will be occupied; every Sundays. I have even observed a family dropped off their Tesla and drove off in another car.

With 100s of thousands of Model 3 expected in the next 3-4 years, if Tesla adopt the same package-based model, all of us Tesla owners will be in deep trouble unless the $2000-$3000 Tesla may charge will allow them to expand the number of SCs by the same proportion of the rate Model 3 are being put out. If you charge someone $3000 for SC, some of them will have the mindset that they are entitled to unlimited free use even if they don't really need it. (Think buffet and how often people gouge themselves just because it is all you can eat) If Tesla can instead charge a nominal annual membership fee (so the money can be used to expand SC network) plus a time-based charging fee (time base is important as we need to discourage people to leave the car there until full charge) which should end up be much cheaper than gas but maybe 2x of home charging, this will allow everyone to use the SCs sensibly.

I wish I have the same option when I purchased my Model S (and the next Model X). I don't mind paying $200-300/year and about 25 cents/kwh when I am traveling long distance.

 

[ModelNforNerd]

Tesla would rather just have the $2K up front. Once they get production up, that's an extra billion dollars per year to build superchargers.

The $35K base car isn't likely profitable until later years. They need the money.

They will get many who pay the $2,000 up front, whether as an add-on, or lumped-in with a battery upgrade.

I do think they are beginning to try and wrap their heads around potential SC abuse by local users.

 

[electracity]

Bad answer.

Blanket policies enforced inflexibly are the result of following non-market systems.

The better path is to allocate non-zero prices for specific actions and then allow individuals to self-select whether they are willing to pay that price given their own specific circumstances.

Explain how the market forces Tesla to use pay per use? When there are many public charging stations, buyers have the option of not paying for superchargers and using non-Tesla stations.

 

[AZ Desert Driver]

Bad answer.

Blanket policies enforced inflexibly are the result of following non-market systems.

The better path is to allocate non-zero prices for specific actions and then allow individuals to self-select whether they are willing to pay that price given their own specific circumstances.

This sound a bit like.....Gas station A has gas at $2.00/gal and a long line. Gas station B has gas at $2.10 and no line. I get to decide, right then and there which corner to get my fill. No rules/laws/entitlement...just economics and how I value my time.
So, SC fill with package = zero, SC for non-member= $0.15/kw plus $1.00 connect fee

 

[ModelNforNerd]

This sound a bit like.....Gas station A has gas at $2.00/gal and a long line. Gas station B has gas at $2.10 and no line. I get to decide, right then and there which corner to get my fill. No rules/laws/entitlement...just economics and how I value my time.
So, SC fill with package = zero, SC for non-member= $0.15/kw plus $1.00 connect fee

We've covered this.

Tesla can't charge per kWh, because in many states, provinces, etc, that would qualify them as a public utility, and subject them to heavy regulation.

If they're going to charge per use, it will be time-based, and your electrons will shut off after XX minutes.

 

[Jeff N]

Tesla would rather just have the $2K up front. Once they get production up, that's an extra billion dollars per year to build superchargers.

The $35K base car isn't likely profitable until later years. They need the money.

Sure, that's presumably one of the major reasons that motivated the original Supercharging access policy. It served a useful purpose but it also created unwanted side-effects. Over time I expect Tesla to transition to one or more forms of pay per-use pricing for most owners.

 

[electracity]

Pay per use means Tesla has to front the capital to build more superchargers. A one time fee replaces a capital raise.

I prefer pay per use. I don't think Tesla wants to do pay per use. If I was Musk I would do the $2K fee. Allow users to "buy in" at any time after the car purchase.

 

[ModelNforNerd]

Sure, that's presumably one of the major reasons that motivated the original Supercharging access policy. It served a useful purpose but it also created unwanted side-effects. Over time I expect Tesla to transition to one or more forms of pay per-use pricing for most owners.

I think, and maybe within the next 3-5 years, gas stations are going to reach a tipping point.

I expect someone to sign on with Tesla, and supplement the SC network, and try to bring EV drivers back "into the fold".

We'll get rewards programs (car washes and convenience store discounts when we plug in), and they will have access to the demographic they are about to lose in droves:

People who can afford $35,000+ vehicles who travel on road trips.

I see it as a win-win-win.

We win, because SC coverage would expand exponentially, depending on who the partner is.

We'd all win again, because this would help alleviate congestion and local abuse.

Tesla would win, because they'd have a partner to shoulder some of the costs, as well as maintenance of the build-out.

And the partner would win, because on long road trips, I'd have somewhere to use the restroom, buy an iced coffee for myself and some iced tea for my wife.

Prime Example: Greenwich, CT SC's on Rt 15. If they could build out based on that model on a grand scale, this entire conversation thread could be shut down.

 

[Jeff N]

This sound a bit like.....Gas station A has gas at $2.00/gal and a long line. Gas station B has gas at $2.10 and no line. I get to decide, right then and there which corner to get my fill. No rules/laws/entitlement...just economics and how I value my time.
So, SC fill with package = zero, SC for non-member= $0.15/kw plus $1.00 connect fee

Yes, I won't be surprised if Tesla ends up installing at some troublesome locations a few stalls that won't work with pre-paid plans and always require "per-use" pricing in order to simulate your two-gas-station example.

 

[Red Sage]

Nonexistent problem? They're already having issues now during peak travel times. It was enough of an issue that Elon felt he had to not only walk back his language about super charger access being free for all to being "mainly for long distance travel with the occasional local charge maybe" and start sending emails asking people abusing local charging to please stop. His recent comments also seem to strongly point to a pay per use model or something similar.

The 'nonexistent problem' I speak of is the Supercharger Apocalypse that so many seem to be predicting. One where no traveler will ever be able to find a charging space, because 'ABUSERS' will 'hog' every charging space in urban or metropolitan areas all day and all night. The grand majority of owners will charge at home or at work.

Peak travel times will always be an issue. You can only expand existing sites, and add new ones over time. Two things that Tesla Motors is already doing. There is absolutely no way to ensure that no one anywhere will ever be inconvenienced by having to wait to charge, just as there is no way to prevent there being a line at any of the 120,000 or so gas stations in the US.

 

[ohmman]

Pay per use means Tesla has to front the capital to build more superchargers. A one time fee replaces a capital raise.

I prefer pay per use. I don't think Tesla wants to do pay per use. If I was Musk I would do the $2K fee. Allow users to "buy in" at any time after the car purchase.

Correct. This is what I've been waiting to read. If pay per use exists, then the flat fee-payers (and S/X buyers) pay to build out the network while the others just pay to use it. This makes little sense for Tesla unless the pay per use fee is quite high, say something like $50 per hour.

 

[ModelNforNerd]

The 'nonexistent problem' I speak of is the Supercharger Apocalypse that so many seem to be predicting. One where no traveler will ever be able to find a charging space, because 'ABUSERS' will 'hog' every charging space in urban or metropolitan areas all day and all night. The grand majority of owners will charge at home or at work.

Peak travel times will always be an issue. You can only expand existing sites, and add new ones over time. Two things that Tesla Motors is already doing. There is absolutely no way to ensure that no one anywhere will ever be inconvenienced by having to wait to charge, just as there is no way to prevent there being a line at any of the 120,000 or so gas stations in the US.

as an ICE driver who has traveled the NJ Turnpike during peak times, think Memorial Day, 4th of July, Christmas, Thanksgiving....


this is a CAR problem, not just an EV problem.

At least in a Tesla, you're not at the mercy of the state-mandated "pump jockeys" in NJ, where you're not legally allowed to pump your own gas.

 

[Jeff N]

Explain how the market forces Tesla to use pay per use? When there are many public charging stations, buyers have the option of not paying for superchargers and using non-Tesla stations.

I didn't say the market forces Tesla to do anything. I said Tesla should take advantage of a market-based system to encourage better overall behavior rather than being forced into dictating blanket policies.

 

[llngoc]

Correct. This is what I've been waiting to read. If pay per use exists, then the flat fee-payers (and S/X buyers) pay to build out the network while the others just pay to use it. This makes little sense for Tesla unless the pay per use fee is quite high, say something like $50 per hour.

When Tesla first started, they should have used a pay-per-use model but still make SC capability as an upgrade. IMO, SC should have never been "free". The cost of the electricity is low and they could have always charged a nominal $6/20 minutes charge. (I picked $6 since it works out to about 10 cents/kwh for charging a 85/90kwh pack to 80%) I think it is only fair that we "contribute" to the SC network build out as I view it as an enabling capability and not the cost of electricity. Just like in most cars, I would pay $500 to get an XM radio installed but I do not expect to get free radio program for free forever, I bet you that some of the local SC frequent users is trying to get their $2000 worth of electricity since in their mind, they already paid for it (and not the SC network..)

 

[K5ING]

We've covered this.

Tesla can't charge per kWh, because in many states, provinces, etc, that would qualify them as a public utility, and subject them to heavy regulation.

If they're going to charge per use, it will be time-based, and your electrons will shut off after XX minutes.

This, only keep the time based fee running until you disconnect, not just until the electrons stop flowing. You would be paying for a parking spot, not the electricity itself. It will also give owners an extra incentive to move their cars as soon as they are done charging instead of tying up supercharger spots for longer than necessary.

 

[Red Sage]

Although I agree that it won't stop charger camping - It is the perfect response to those who keep using the "free" word. SC isn't free. The camping issue is another separate issue altogether.

One answer to the camping issue would be for more people to purchase the SC option which allows for more SC's to be installed. Maybe folks don't know that there are a lot more options than SC'ing. It is quite possible that folks would use other options if they knew they were out there...such as EV Trip Planner. If there were one SC for every car...then a lot fewer people would be complaining about camping because there would be more room for the campers. What if there were 500 SC's at each site...then would there be campers? Why not accommodate them and install more? Like gas stations in the US. There are millions upon millions of pumps. What's wrong with that? Everybody wins.

I'm ready for the chastisement.

Hence why I use the statement, enhanced by parenthetical phrases, as 'FREE (of additional fees) for LIFE (the life of the car)!'

There may be millions upon millions of pumps worldwide, but I don't think that is the case in the US. There are roughly 120,000 gas stations in the US. A large facility is perhaps 24 pumps. I believe that most are less than 12. And some are 4 or less. So, at most, maybe 3,000,000 pumps here? Probably just barely over 1,000,000. And those service 250,000,000 ICE vehicles.

Tesla Motors has already begun to install larger sites, or expand existing ones to around 12-to-20 Supercharger stalls. At least a third of the existing and planned Supercharger sites are 8-stall locations. Some have suggested having huge parking lots, filled with at least 100 Superchargers before. They made those suggestions particularly when Barstow was regularly crowded. Tesla Motors added a few more stalls there, then opened Primm and Rancho Cucamonga... ~*poof*~ The lines disappeared like magic. Those three locations combined don't even have thirty Supercharger stalls. So, the idea of a 'Megacharger' location may seem appealing at first, but it may not be necessary at all.

If you presume that everyone who goes to a Supercharger stays there for at least an hour... Thus, twelve times as long as the mythical 'five minutes' it takes to fill up with gasoline... When you compare the 120,000 gas stations to the 250,000,000 population of ICE vehicles, that works out to ~2,083 cars per gas station. OK. One twelfth of that is ~174 electric vehicles per Supercharger. Well, if there are perhaps 120,000 Supercharger enabled vehicles in the world today, and you divide that by the 638 locations that are open now, that comes to 188 cars per Supercharger. Not at all bad. Once you add in the 28 locations under construction and the 30 that are permitted, for a total of 696 sites? You get 172 cars per Supercharger.

And, when you scale back to the reality that most don't have to stop for more than thirty minutes, or 'only' six times as long as an ICE... With 266 open Superchargers, 18 under construction, and 17 permitted in the US... And maybe 80,000 of Supercharger enabled cars on US soil... That is only 266 cars per Supercharger site in the US. Or, 1/8 as many as there are ICE for gas stations.

Tesla Motors has this covered. Don't worry about it.

 

[Red Sage]

Bugatti's pay the same amount per gallon than Chevys.

Wait... Doesn't the Bugatti Veyron SS run on some type of specially formulated kerosene or sumphin'?

 

[electracity]

One problem with supercharger "gas stations" is that the current batteries are not designed to tolerate supercharging as the primary charging method.