New Supercharger Fair Use Policy

[Sasmania]

Quite frankly, I am surprised the ban took this long.

It is freeloading and overloading the system.

As an investor you are sucking up my profit.

As an owner, I appreciate finding a stall right away especially since while on a road trip it requires an hour to charge and hit the wc.

Now, if we can start punishing ICE car drivers.

I've been a Part Time Uber Driver in Phoenix for over 3 years. We just got our very first SC 2 weeks ago. I'm also an investor in TSLA.

As an Investor, I please ask those bashing Commercial Drivers to consider the bigger picture: We are helping grow Tesla much more so than any normal owner. I can't tell you how many people have been positively influenced to buy or at least consider a Tesla after riding in mine. At least 50% of the riders ask questions about the car the entire trip. It's a 1 on 1 sales pitch for everything Tesla. We are also replacing an ICE vehicle every time we give someone a ride. We are LITERALLY helping "advance the transition to sustainable transport", Telsa's own self-proclaimed mission.

I have no problem with a FEE for SC usage for commercial (it helps everyone, and grows the network) but a BAN is cutting off a huge marketing arm of Tesla so that a few owners can have the SCs all to themselves. I guess some people are really more concerned about themselves than Tesla growing faster and EV's taking over the world. I'd imagine these same people will also hate the low-rent Model 3 owners who will also clog the SC, simply because it doesn't benefit them directly?

 

[Sasmania]

This is great, we have some ExecuTesla/Uber in Austin that hog all of our stations and abuse the rules.

You only see a car in a stall.

What you don't see are the thousands of emission-free rides these cars are giving.

You also don't see the many smiles of customers that walk away swearing they will own a Tesla (or at least some EV) someday ONLY because they were picked up by someone using their 100K Tesla to earn what usually works out to a less than minimum wage fare.

 

[NeverFollow]

...using their 100K Tesla to earn what usually works out to a less than minimum wage fare.

This is very noble from you, but unless you are a philanthrope, how do you survive?
Beside, I imagine that a very large majority of Uber customers are certainly well-off.
In my personal case, I have only be using public transportation or airport shuttle van.
So I don't see the point to use a luxury car if you don't cover your costs.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

How a renter using a (Turo) Tesla rental car for any cross country trip,
will be able to recharge if using a supercharger is not allowed?

Nobody here seems to be willing to ponder that. How is commerical long-distance driving enabled?

I guess the answer is CHAdeMO and Level/Type 2. Tesla does not (yet) support CCS.

Is there any alternative provided, like using any future commercial supercharger?

There is talk of using potentially a Semi charger network or private Supercharger build-out, but those would require a secondary network to work for long-distance. We all know Superchargers are spotty as they are depening on where one lives, so waiting for a secondary network from Tesla does not sound very realistic for long-distance driving anytime soon.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

I have no problem with a FEE for SC usage for commercial (it helps everyone, and grows the network) but a BAN is cutting off a huge marketing arm of Tesla so that a few owners can have the SCs all to themselves.

Personally I don't mind the marketing ban angle. That's for Tesla to decide (for new car sales). What I do wonder, though, what is their solution for long-distance charging for "any commercial venture" - something I would expect more likely needed with commercial driving than with local commuting that I'd expect most private BEV drivers do. Is their answer CHAdeMO and Level/Type 2?

This haphazard-looking move does not address the concept of long-distance commercial driving at all, suggesting all long-distance commercial driving being against fair use, yet offering no solution how it might (e.g. fee) become fair use. Same with commenters here. People want to ban commercial cars from the Superchargers to help themselves, but don't consider at all the scenario of how long-distance commercial driving would be affected.

Somehow it makes it sound like long-distance driving is something that only private people do and commerical driving is not long-distance driving. Which is silly. Plenty of commercial driving is long-distance driving in the world.

 

[shokunin]

IMO, this is a preemptive move to put policy in place before the onslaught of Model 3's that are about to hit the road. An nuisance problem today is going to get exponentially worse.

If I were an Uber/Lyft driver, I'd would get a LR model 3 and even with the $.20/kwh supercharging fee in California a full charge would only be $15 or so. You also have the benefit of running the A/C and heater without having to idle the car waiting for a passenger.

The wording needs to be harsh because they know people will ignore it and do it anyways. When the punishment is eventually hammered down, the worst case punishment (ban) is described in the policy.

I wonder if new deliveries have to sign off on this policy or if they are given notice about the policy in the delivery papers?

 

[AnxietyRanger]

I wonder if new deliveries have to sign off on this policy or if they are given notice about the policy in the delivery papers?

The policy is extremely vague.

How is one supposed to handle long-distance driving for a commercial venture with any confidence? The only safe move would be to not use Superchargers for long-distance driving for "any commercial venture" (a business meeting?) or risk a ban.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

I think this ratchets up the need for CCS support to a whole new level.

Since commercial long-distance driving is not allowed to use Supercharging, CCS is going to be the only alternative before long.

 

[EfficientWatts]

The policy is extremely vague.

How is one supposed to handle long-distance driving for a commercial venture with any confidence? The only safe move would be to not use Superchargers for long-distance driving for "any commercial venture" (a business meeting?) or risk a ban.

It's not just commercial driving as well. People have cited people with crazy commutes, and some of the routes could mirror Tesloop or other "commercial ventures". Or it could be someone driving back and forth long distances for personal reasons. What is Tesla going to do, send you a cease-and-desist demanding proof that you aren't doing this for commercial gain? I would be pissed off if I had to drive long distance for personal reasons, and then to have my supercharger access cut off just because they thought I was abusing the system.

It's easy to catch this if like all the cars are going under Tesloop's name for example. It becomes much harder when we talk about individual people with longer driving profiles. I can understand the concern about an Uber/Lyft tsunami taking over superchargers but this is not a one size fits all situation (maybe this is more needed in Cali, but Texas?). I hope that after launch and build out of the supercharger network in 2018 they can dial it back a little bit.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

^ The above apparently already happened with the "local supercharging" notes, Tesla signling out "abuse" that was not abuse at all.

IMO Tesla should just put a price on Supercharging, per minute, and no nother shenanigans. Old cars grandfathered in for free (and forgotten about as an anomaly).

That would be fair and simple. And address the separate and much more important issue of parking at Superchargers separately...

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

^ The above apparently already happened with the "local supercharging" notes, Tesla signling out "abuse" that was not abuse at all.

IMO Tesla should just put a price on Supercharging, per minute, and no nother shenanigans. Old cars grandfathered in for free (and forgotten about as an anomaly).

That would be fair and simple. And address the separate and much more important issue of parking at Superchargers separately...

The catch-all for the policy is to contact Tesla. They can figure it out.

Home-base Level 2 will take care of a whole bunch of miles, and then they can agree on whether to have pay-per-use Supercharging. They could also have an additional infrastructure fee.

Tesla wants to sell cars and have it be profitable. Supercharger is a breakage model that works off an average. Anomalous usage just needs to pay for itself.

 

[LCR1]

The m3 is irrelevant to this discussion as they already pay for supercharging.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

The catch-all for the policy is to contact Tesla. They can figure it out.

Home-base Level 2 will take care of a whole bunch of miles, and then they can agree on whether to have pay-per-use Supercharging. They could also have an additional infrastructure fee.

Tesla wants to sell cars and have it be profitable. Supercharger is a breakage model that works off an average. Anomalous usage just needs to pay for itself.

Sure. But IMO Tesla would be wise to offer a clear, public model for commercial long-distance use. This one is way too vague and indeed says commercial long-distance use is banned.

That it has a cost for new cars is obviously perfectly OK. Just make the cost and the policy clear.

Or offer CCS.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

The m3 is irrelevant to this discussion as they already pay for supercharging.

Nope. Even paid Supercharging on Model 3 is considered banned if related to "any commercial venture" according to this.

 

[smac]

IMO Tesla should just put a price on Supercharging, per minute, and no nother shenanigans. Old cars grandfathered in for free (and forgotten about as an anomaly).

100% Agree.

Here in the UK we had the Ecotricity network that too was offered free. People were royally taking the p!ss out of it.

They introduced a pricing structure, and the problem with people plugging in PHEVs and BYD taxis to nickel and dime the system miraculously fixed themselves overnight. Of course UK Leaf drivers were up in arms over the nerve of Ecotricity to make them pay for something they had based their purchase on, but in that case it was somewhat on the owners to expect a third party to subsidise their fuel. (Didn't stop Nissan UK receiving a load of abuse over the matter even though they had 4/5ths of f' all to do with it )

The Supercharger problem is somewhat more intractable as there is a contract between buyers of the car and the charging network supplier, but the way Tesla have gone about addressing it seems ill thought out and evasive.

Until Tesla grow up, I'm out.

Even if it means I have to drive an inferior car, I'd rather that than deal with an inferior company who couldn't organise a p!ss up in a brewery.

 

[LCR1]

Nope. Even paid Supercharging on Model 3 is considered banned if related to "any commercial venture" according to this.

And how are they going to know it's a commerical venture vs someone doing a lot of driving? With the 3 not getting free supercharging it's less of an incentive to pay for home install. With the s/x it's easy to see that someone is abusing the free system vs paid home charging. Not so easy to figure out abuse of paid charging vs paid charging with the 3

 

[arnis]

As far as I understood, Tesla won't just block everybody doing commercial stuff without finding a solution.
It's not their interest to avoid customers. I bet the idea is to restrict public SC usage if it can be avoided
and it is sensible.
For example, let's have a taxi company. Activity happens in city A, B and C. There are 10 vehicles in each city.
Cities are 400 miles apart from each other. 1% of all trips are between cities. 99% of all trips are within
a 50 mile radius to city center. Each city has a public SC location. Taxi fleet runs 24/7.
As of right now, it's easy to believe all 30 cars are charging at SC's in all 3 cities by default, all the time they need to charge.

At some point we will have 200-300 Tesla vehicles in city A, B or C, which means local SC will be filled (as 5-15 will be charging).
This is exactly what happened here where I live, few dozens of Leafs occupy majority of DC-stations, 24/7.
And there are only 38 in mine (yes I know that for some, 38 ChaDeMo DC chargers is more than enough).

What Tesla is supposed to do soon is to find a solution for those customers. For example, step 1 is to sell HPWCs.
So that if taxi driver (or pizza delivery, whatever) is having a 2-3h break, car can be charged. Or, step 2, taxi company
has a fleet of 30 vehicles and calculations say that company needs to have 2 charging bays per 10 vehicles in each city center.
So Tesla sells DC charging equipment (private SC). So our imaginary company buys 6 stalls, 3 chargers.
And places them in ideal location. This allows 8 cars in each city to do their job while 2 are at refill.
If City-SC hardware is cheaper, likely that will be a better choice for companies.
If commercial fleet of any specific company does majority of charging sessions on their private charging locations, then there
is no reason for Tesla to block public SC usage. Remember, 1% of trips happen between cities, 400 miles apart. Up until taxi
company has 1000 vehicles in each city and 1% of trips between cities cumulate into crowded SC in the middle of nothing
between AB, AC, BC. Then it's time for our imaginary company to get their private chargers in the middle of nothing.

Remember, new policy is called "FAIR USE" for a reason.
Half of world's wealth now in hands of 1% of population
Half of world's SuperChargers are used by 1% of Teslas.
Notice similarity in fairness-index

I think MegaChargers will have similar fate. Tesla will build some to get things going, but it's not reasonable to expect
worldwide 7c/kWh coverage for few logistic companies like DHL. Tesla's "public" Megacharger network will likely be
primarily for one person companies and other smaller ones that want to grow. At some point, they will be forced to either
invest into Megacharger network or have their own equipment, at least for majority of charging sessions (like end points).

 

[AnxietyRanger]

And how are they going to know it's a commerical venture vs someone doing a lot of driving? With the 3 not getting free supercharging it's less of an incentive to pay for home install. With the s/x it's easy to see that someone is abusing the free system vs paid home charging. Not so easy to figure out abuse of paid charging vs paid charging with the 3

Well, who knows. Who knows if this policy will be there tomorrow. With Tesla predictability isn't exactly the name of the game...

 

[AnxietyRanger]

As far as I understood, Tesla won't just block everybody doing commercial stuff without finding a solution.
It's not their interest to avoid customers. I bet the idea is to restrict public SC usage if it can be avoided
and it is sensible.
For example, let's have a taxi company. Activity happens in city A, B and C. There are 10 vehicles in each city.
Cities are 400 miles apart from each other. 1% of all trips are between cities. 99% of all trips are within
a 50 mile radius to city center. Each city has a public SC location. Taxi fleet runs 24/7.
As of right now, it's easy to believe all 30 cars are charging at SC's in all 3 cities by default, all the time they need to charge.

At some point we will have 200-300 Tesla vehicles in city A, B or C, which means local SC will be filled (as 5-15 will be charging).
This is exactly what happened here where I live, few dozens of Leafs occupy majority of DC-stations, 24/7.
And there are only 38 in mine (yes I know that for some, 38 ChaDeMo DC chargers is more than enough).

What Tesla is supposed to do soon is to find a solution for those customers. For example, step 1 is to sell HPWCs.
So that if taxi driver (or pizza delivery, whatever) is having a 2-3h break, car can be charged. Or, step 2, taxi company
has a fleet of 30 vehicles and calculations say that company needs to have 2 charging bays per 10 vehicles in each city center.
So Tesla sells DC charging equipment (private SC). So our imaginary company buys 6 stalls, 3 chargers.
And places them in ideal location. This allows 8 cars in each city to do their job while 2 are at refill.
If City-SC hardware is cheaper, likely that will be a better choice for companies.
If commercial fleet of any specific company does majority of charging sessions on their private charging locations, then there
is no reason for Tesla to block public SC usage. Remember, 1% of trips happen between cities, 400 miles apart. Up until taxi
company has 1000 vehicles in each city and 1% of trips between cities cumulate into crowded SC in the middle of nothing
between AB, AC, BC. Then it's time for our imaginary company to get their private chargers in the middle of nothing.

Remember, new policy is called "FAIR USE" for a reason.
Half of world's wealth now in hands of 1% of population
Half of world's SuperChargers are used by 1% of Teslas.
Notice similarity in fairness-index

I think MegaChargers will have similar fate. Tesla will build some to get things going, but it's not reasonable to expect
worldwide 7c/kWh coverage for few logistic companies like DHL. Tesla's "public" Megacharger network will likely be
primarily for one person companies and other smaller ones that want to grow. At some point, they will be forced to either
invest into Megacharger network or have their own equipment, at least for majority of charging sessions (like end points).

Then why doesn't the policy state that?

No, the policy clearly states that fair use does not include "any commercial" use. Tesla can choose to make an exception, but commercial use is not fair use, not even when genuine long-distance driving.

You are right that Tesla is trying to walk a rope here. They don't want to alienate too many customers, that is obvious. But also the policy as it stands does not offer any allowances for commerical Supercharging, not even for a price, except the occasional exception. Tesla offers help for alternative charging solutions, they don't state for example a price for commercial long-distance charging.

Nobody can rely on exceptions as vague as that.

Tesla needs a better policy - or perhaps they indeed mean to say Superchargers are off limits for all commercial ventures. In which case long-distance driving for commercial use relies on CHAdeMO and Level 2/Type 2 - and whatever private buildout they can manage.

CCS support can't come soon enough.

 

[smac]

Half of world's SuperChargers are used by 1% of Teslas.

If it's anything like the mess O2 got in to with their unlimited data plans, it could be even worse than that!

At one point 0.1% of users were contributing to 38% of the networks total data consumption

O2 signals end of unlimited data tariffs for iPhone customers