I believe Tesla plans to have 100 sites deployed by end of 2014. If that is the case that leaves ~93 sites to be deployed over 24 months. They would need to have 4-5 sites each month if they were to do a somewhat linear deployment. Has anyone seen/heard of what the overall goals by quarter or something more granular that 100 sites in two years?
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Pace of Super Charger Location Announcements
- Thread starter DaveVa
- Start date
Citizen-T
Active Member
Dave - This is a very good question. From the original presentation which showed the overall deployment of SCs I always assumed that they were going to concentrate on the coasts (east and west) then connect them through the middle of the country. With that being said there is a LOT of work for Tesla to do to make this happen.
As for an S-curve deployment, that would require a significant investment on Tesla's part to do a large ramp of deployments. I agree with the S-curve theory based upon the fact that we will continue to see a spattering of SCs in major corridoors then, once more cars are delivered, an influx in those areas.
As for an S-curve deployment, that would require a significant investment on Tesla's part to do a large ramp of deployments. I agree with the S-curve theory based upon the fact that we will continue to see a spattering of SCs in major corridoors then, once more cars are delivered, an influx in those areas.
I fully expect 3 to go in in the Austin/San Antonio, Houston, Dallas/FtWorth triangle in Texas. As well as continuing the East coast southward on I95 towards Miami. And obviously going north from SanFrancisco towards Seattle/Vancouver. Are the next steps.
I am hoping they branch off on I85 to Atlanta Then start going up and down I75 (This has so much car traffic on it) pretty soon. As well as connecting Phoenix to LA/Vegas and possible going along the great lakes to Chicago. I think this might happen towards the end of next year.
I live in Atlanta though. I want a supercharge to make me feel safe (and so I can drive 85+) going to Charlotte. I want one just East of Augusta, and probably Florence, SC, so I can get to I95. And driving to Tampa or Orlando on I75 would be nice as well. I am not too needy of being able to drive to Nashville, or Alabama though. So my predictions match my desires, so take with a grain of salt.
I am hoping they branch off on I85 to Atlanta Then start going up and down I75 (This has so much car traffic on it) pretty soon. As well as connecting Phoenix to LA/Vegas and possible going along the great lakes to Chicago. I think this might happen towards the end of next year.
I live in Atlanta though. I want a supercharge to make me feel safe (and so I can drive 85+) going to Charlotte. I want one just East of Augusta, and probably Florence, SC, so I can get to I95. And driving to Tampa or Orlando on I75 would be nice as well. I am not too needy of being able to drive to Nashville, or Alabama though. So my predictions match my desires, so take with a grain of salt.
Well at least the eastern half where at least about 15-20 million people live. And only needing 3 locations should make Texas a no-brainer. The only thing I see holding up superchargers in general are uncooperative governments, and uncooperative power companies.
And I highly doubt that power companies would object to selling more electricity.
Texas is number two in sales I believe but the east coast is a higher population in a smaller region. I'm guessing they will do both in short order and work on west and east coast, Texas and work in. I would also build out from certain cities with high Model S sales at same time like Atlanta, Chicago, Denver, St. Louis...etc and try to connect them to other major cities nearby.
Last edited:
PattyChuck
Model S P100D, Model X P90D
I've got some empty, prime real estate zoned commercial right around where I-80, I-94, and I-65 come together. Tesla can have it if they build a supercharger there. Although, I'd imagine that South Bend or Lafayette would be better locations to get people from Chicago to the major cities in Ohio. Thru South Bend, you could connect to Cleveland and Columbus, and thru Lafayette on to Indianapolis/Cincinnati. Going from either South Bend or Lafayette north, you could make it all the way up to Milwaukee.
It makes me wonder if major metropolitan areas (Chicago, Indianapolis, etc) are their targets, or if the regional urban centers (Lafayette, South Bend, etc) are more up their alley.
It makes me wonder if major metropolitan areas (Chicago, Indianapolis, etc) are their targets, or if the regional urban centers (Lafayette, South Bend, etc) are more up their alley.
I think the plan is to have superchargerss between urban centers, but not to be in them. The thinking being that inter-city driving is supported by home charging and intra-city by the supercharger network.
sublimaze1
8Dec2012 / Leeroy Jenkins
In official discussions (okay, when my wife and I chat over drinks) it is clear that the triangle of DFW/HOU/SAT can be connected in a three step sweep and that the yield is great for a relatively small initial initial ca$h outlay. The east coast is denser, yes. And California is easy to justify for many reasons. But, the cross country "connect the dots" approach was mentioned specifically (along with packed lunches and friends to crash with along the way) - so I am cautiously optimistic.
Will also be interested to see which supercharging locations include Solar? Seems like Solar will lag behind perhaps due to the high capital expenditure and local permitting.
Sure would be interesting to see how much it costs Tesla in electricity costs per location with and without Solar.
Todd Burch
14-Year Member
PattyChuck
Model S P100D, Model X P90D
Todd Burch
14-Year Member
Agreed, though I expect it has more to do with permitting and construction schedules than with cost. Tesla has the cash.
The answer depends entirely on the retail tariff that Tesla is paying. Typically, for an installation with this fat an interconnection, the charges are weighted to the peak usage and the rated capability of the facility; the marginal cost of using extra kWhs used is fairly close to the wholesale price of power, plus some markups. Thus, having "behind the meter" generation probably doesn't save Tesla a great deal versus buying directly from the grid.
Note that the economics of a solar installation for a homeowner are very different -- residential tariffs are almost entirely linked to kWh usage, so all sorts of fixed costs are bundled into the kWh rate. For a commercial installation, these fixed costs are mostly unlinked from the kWh usage, but instead based on peak kW usage.
Caveat: retail tariffs differ sharply from utility to utility.
I'm not sure Tesla will provide any kind of details on superchargers during calls with the street. Solar City owns that business now, so Tesla can maintain arms length relationship. And I seriously doubt SC will be interested in vacant real estate for locations. Besides the promise to put them in places where you want to spend an hour, my guess is they are getting something back for promising to deliver (for 30-90 mins!) people who can afford a $100K car. That's a pretty valuable thing to a business or group of businesses.
PattyChuck
Model S P100D, Model X P90D
Vacant real estate might just mean an empty lot surrounded by other development. I agree that Tesla/Solar City is not going be building SuperChargers in the middle of a corn field, but unless they're repurposing old gas stations, I'm pretty sure they'll have to tear down any structures that might exist wherever they're putting the charger. A shovel-ready empty lot surrounded by existing businesses is about as ideal as you can get.
Similar threads
