Solution to charge your Model 3 if you don't have any garage?

[stopcrazypp]

We also need to factor in the Supercharger infrastructure cost. I'd prefer if every Model 3 had an additional $2,500 added on to the price and those funds went to build and service more Superchargers. That would be ideal. But I think the price is already being squeezed too much and I don't see it happening. I think the pay-per-use model makes the most sense when it comes to costs and avoiding abuse.

Only time will tell and my posts will be here for all the naysayers to say: "I told you so" if I am wrong. The only thing certain is uncertainty since no one really knows -- or at least no one posting here knows. I also wonder if the insiders at Tesla have even determined this issue yet.

I've mentioned in another thread, but I hope if they make pay-per-use, it won't be only exclusive to the Model 3. If it is, then it won't really address the issues (whether it be cost or congestion). The S/X is still projected to make up a large proportion of the fleet (at least 20%) even with Model 3 in full production.

I initially dismissed the suggestions by others in the supercharging threads that charging an upfront cost (like $2000-2500) could actually have the negative effect of causing people to want to "get their money's worth", but after the conversation in this thread so far, that kind of thinking does clearly happen (at least with Tesla owners, it doesn't seem to happen with other manufacturers). So while previously I was 100% advocating for an upfront option (with my idea of paid "urban chargers" to handle local congestion), now I'm not so sure.

 

[JeffK]

The inverter is already included in the onboard charger in the car.

I'm completely aware of how DC charging works.

So you think using the onboard charger means you're using DC Charging....

You keep mentioning commercial products with included margins but are neglecting true manufacturing costs. How much money do these components actually require to build them? The answer is not much, especially at large volume.

 

[stopcrazypp]

So you think using the onboard charger means you're using DC Charging....

No. Read my comment more thoroughly. I separated it into two sections for a reason. The first half discusses the JESLA (AC charging). To make it clear, the JESLA (and the Tesla mobile connector it is based on) is a EVSE used for AC charging. I only bring it up to serve as comparison for the margins quickchargepower charges ($500 max).
JESLA™ is THE 40 amp J1772 portable charging solution!
Tesla — Mobile Connector Bundle

The second half addresses DC charging.

Long story short. If DC charging costs only $50 to implement, I would expect quickchargepower to charge $550 for their DC retrofit ($50 for the costs, $500 for the margin). Yet they charge $3000.

 

[callmesam]

Agreed. The question is how Tesla can implement this to avoid abuse. I suggest a "pay-per-use" system for the Model 3 that is equal to the costs of home charging, which I know varies, but based on a national average or something like that.



Those of us here opposing locals charging at Superchargers, who have access to home charging, are not engaged in a "poorly-thought-through movement to dissuade those of less means from buying EVs". I find that extremely condescending to those who you claim to be trying to help out. To draw an analogy to voter id laws is ridiculous. Please don't turn this thread into class warfare. I bet there's a lot of very wealth people, in high end condos, who can't charge at home. I also bet that with a mass market car many more people will be charging at Superchargers when they have home charging, just to save a buck. But unlike you, I don't attribute that to income levels. Some of the cheapest people I know are also the wealthiest. That's how many got to be that way. This has nothing to do with income levels. When's something is "free", many people take advantage of it, regardless of how much money they have in the bank.



You're not being honest since Tesla made it very clear to you that you paid $2,500 for Supercharging for long distant travel. Admitting to that would be honest but something tells me you will again fail to hear me.

Now, there are posts here about people without home charging, but with a close Supercharger, having told that to their Sales Advisor before purchasing, and Tesla agreed that they were exempt from the rule. If you were exempted, because you truly do not have the option to home charge, then I would agree with your statement and call you honest.



We also need to factor in the Supercharger infrastructure cost. I'd prefer if every Model 3 had an additional $2,500 added on to the price and those funds went to build and service more Superchargers. That would be ideal. But I think the price is already being squeezed too much and I don't see it happening. I think the pay-per-use model makes the most sense when it comes to costs and avoiding abuse.

Only time will tell and my posts will be here for all the naysayers to say: "I told you so" if I am wrong. The only thing certain is uncertainty since no one really knows -- or at least no one posting here knows. I also wonder if the insiders at Tesla have even determined this issue yet.

When I bought my car, I was a renter without home charging. Many friends that I've convinced to buy the car are in the same position. In addition, I am one of the few who paid $2000 for "Supercharging." My local use wasn't an "exception" to the rule but a benefit of the bargain. In fact, soon after my purchase, Elon made that "local" use explicit as I've quoted above.

I've helped people to buy cars, learn to charge and helped expand the mission of Tesla Motors.

WTF are you doing except making the present more difficult and unpleasant for prospective owners in ANTICIPATION of some future harm.

You set up a strawman and yourself as police. It's truly shameful.

 

[JeffK]

Policing is something that makes me worry. What's to stop them from disabling the supercharging ability via update for someone who abuses the system (or if done by a disgruntled employee).

 

[Canuck]

WTF are you doing except making the present more difficult and unpleasant for prospective owners in ANTICIPATION of some future harm.

You set up a strawman and yourself as police. It's truly shameful.

Give it a break. I'm discussing issues with locals charging at Superchargers who have access to home charging. Stop calling me names and stick to the issues. You should know that ad hominem arguments are the lowest form of argument. You must be better than that.

I've helped people to buy cars, learn to charge and helped expand the mission of Tesla Motors. WTF are you doing

I bet I've got far more people into EV's than you have. Not only with my Tesla but also with my Nissan Leaf. There's no bigger promoter of EV's than me. But I want it work out when the masses get into driving EV's and drive to Disneyland or the Grand Canyon for a holiday. I want fast, efficient and unclogged Supercharging. This is about that mission, and name calling does nothing to advance it.

Policing is something that makes me worry. What's to stop them from disabling the supercharging ability via update for someone who abuses the system (or if done by a disgruntled employee).

There's already a thread here (a while back) about people who thought they were slowed by Tesla while Supercharging at local chargers. Some went into their Tesla account and changed their address to deal with that issue. Whether Tesla actually did it was up for debate though.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Policing is something that makes me worry. What's to stop them from disabling the supercharging ability via update for someone who abuses the system (or if done by a disgruntled employee).

All of this had been discussed when the supercharger letters came out. Some suggest Tesla implement this, but Tesla first needs to weed out false positives (which they failed to so with the letters).

 

[JeffK]

Just want to make sure if a person were to get too many speeding tickets that Tesla isn't going to be petitioned by local govts to limit top speed on a certain user's car. Think: the Apple iPhone issue.

 

[callmesam]

Give it a break. I'm discussing issues with locals charging at Superchargers who have access to home charging. Stop calling me names and stick to the issues. You should know that ad hominem arguments are the lowest form of argument. You must be better than that.



I bet I've got far more people into EV's than you have. Not only with my Tesla but also with my Nissan Leaf. There's no bigger promoter of EV's than me. But I want it work out when the masses get into driving EV's and drive to Disneyland or the Grand Canyon for a holiday. I want fast, efficient and unclogged Supercharging. This is about that mission, and name calling does nothing to advance it.



There's already a thread here (a while back) about people who thought they were slowed by Tesla while Supercharging at local chargers. Some went into their Tesla account and changed their address to deal with that issue. Whether Tesla actually did it was up for debate though.

1. Your actions of trying to police owners is shameful and harmful to ownership. Please stop. I am making a value judgement about the helpfulness of your actions. This is not ad hominem attack, whereas calling you an idiot for acting so shamefully, is.

2. Your claim to "got far more people than me" is stupid. Notice this isn't an ad hominem attack, since only your idea is being attacked. You have no idea how many people I've guided to EV ownership. On the other hand, you've potentially turned a whole generation of future EV owners off with such a half assed car. Again, not an ad hominem attack.

3. You are in a thread asking about what to do if you don't have a garage. Even though you KNEW that Tesla encourages owners without fixed parking or charging to use the Superchargers, you didn't mention that in any of your previous dozen posts on this thread, instead opting for your narrative of famine and Supercharger clogging.

4. What you personally want is not material. Tesla has made a number of statements, not all of which appear to be consistent, but you've chosen to perpetuate certain statements to the exclusion of others. That's cognitive dissonance. Again, not ad hominem attack.

Focus all of your worrying on things that are actually a problem: namely people overstaying their charge. No nuance, no room for misunderstanding. Leave the amorphous definitions of ABUSE, OCCASIONAL and LOCAL to Tesla Motors.

 

[Canuck]

Please point out any ad hominem attack. I'll wait.

1.

WTF are you doing

2.

You set up a strawman and yourself as police. It's truly shameful.

Definition:

ad ho·mi·nem ˌad ˈhämənəm/ adverb & adjective

1. (of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.
   "vicious ad hominem attacks"
2. relating to or associated with a particular person.

1. You directed your argument against me not helping people transition to EV's ("WTF are you doing") rather than deal with my argument of locals charging at superchargers who can charger at home. That's a shot directed against me personally (not helping others like you do) rather than responding to the position I am maintaining.

2. You called me the "police", which is name calling, and directed at me personally, rather than dealing with the issue of locals charging at superchargers who can charge at home.

Got it?

 

[Garlan Garner]

I think most of the people "warning" you are trying to prevent overcrowding, as if 100% of owners would suddenly Supercharge instead of charging at home. This is a misplaced fear. But fear makes people do strange things.

There is no possibility of overcrowding as far as I am concerned. I've said it many times. If a Long Distance person shows up then I'm moving out of the way.
I have NEVER seen anyone else at the Super Charger that I us....let alone a long distance person. I'm always there by myself.

 

[Garlan Garner]

Agreed. The question is how Tesla can implement this to avoid abuse. I suggest a "pay-per-use" system for the Model 3 that is equal to the costs of home charging, which I know varies, but based on a national average or something like that.



Those of us here opposing locals charging at Superchargers, who have access to home charging, are not engaged in a "poorly-thought-through movement to dissuade those of less means from buying EVs". I find that extremely condescending to those who you claim to be trying to help out. To draw an analogy to voter id laws is ridiculous. Please don't turn this thread into class warfare. I bet there's a lot of very wealth people, in high end condos, who can't charge at home. I also bet that with a mass market car many more people will be charging at Superchargers when they have home charging, just to save a buck. But unlike you, I don't attribute that to income levels. Some of the cheapest people I know are also the wealthiest. That's how many got to be that way. This has nothing to do with income levels. When's something is "free", many people take advantage of it, regardless of how much money they have in the bank.



You're not being honest since Tesla made it very clear to you that you paid $2,500 for Supercharging for long distant travel. Admitting to that would be honest but something tells me you will again fail to hear me.

Now, there are posts here about people without home charging, but with a close Supercharger, having told that to their Sales Advisor before purchasing, and Tesla agreed that they were exempt from the rule. If you were exempted, because you truly do not have the option to home charge, then I would agree with your statement and call you honest.



We also need to factor in the Supercharger infrastructure cost. I'd prefer if every Model 3 had an additional $2,500 added on to the price and those funds went to build and service more Superchargers. That would be ideal. But I think the price is already being squeezed too much and I don't see it happening. I think the pay-per-use model makes the most sense when it comes to costs and avoiding abuse.

Only time will tell and my posts will be here for all the naysayers to say: "I told you so" if I am wrong. The only thing certain is uncertainty since no one really knows -- or at least no one posting here knows. I also wonder if the insiders at Tesla have even determined this issue yet.

Please CALL Tesla. The sales people told me this past Friday to use it as much as I like. That's evidently clear to me. Out of courtesy...I would gladly give up my spot if a long distance person comes through.....however I have NEVER EVER seen anyone at the charger that I use. I'm only there about 15-18 minutes per day. Abuse? Really?

That's about $.42 of charging at $.06/KWH. 42 penny's.....LOL.

 

[callmesam]

1.

2.

Definition:

1. You directed your argument against me not helping people transition to EV's ("WTF are you doing") rather than deal with my argument of locals charging at superchargers who can charger at home. That's a shot directed against me personally (not helping others like you do) rather than responding to the position I am maintaining.

2. You called me the "police", which is name calling, and directed at me personally, rather than dealing with the issue of locals charging at superchargers who can charge at home.

Got it?

It's clear you don't understand what an ad hominem attack is. This, in itself, is not an ad hominem attack.

WTF is not an ad hominem attack.

To police: to control (something) by making sure that rules and regulations are being followed. By definition, this is what you are trying to do. Tesla didn't ask you to do this. You made this choice. Again, not an ad hominem attack but a precise definition of your conduct.

That you have taken this on yourself, selectively presented what Tesla has said to further your own personal preference is IMO shameful.

But again, not an ad hominem attack.

 

[Canuck]

It's clear you don't understand what an ad hominem attack is. This, in itself, is not an ad hominem attack.

WTF is not an ad hominem attack.

Nice try. WTF is not an ad hominem attack. (It's childish language but not ad hominem.) You left out the ad hominem part. You went on to ask "WTF are you doing" to promote EV's and then you congratulated yourself for all you do. What I do, or do not do, to promote EV's is not relevant to the conversation. It was an attack against me personally. It was the classic example of an ad hominem attack.

Also, you told me that I set myself up "as police" and called that shameful. Nice try again to change that personal attack to me "policing" things but even if you warp it to that, I'm not policing. I'm providing my opinion on what Tesla may or may not do. I have no control to police this issue. I'm some anonymous person on the internet. Do you think Tesla or anyone else is going to do something because of what I post here. Your form of argument is to attack me personally. That's fine. I just pointed out it was a low form of argument. For you to turn that around and then say they were not personal attacks but dealing with the issues is absurd.

Stick to the issues. You have some good arguments to make. Personal attacks on your opponents takes away from the merits of your arguments.

Please CALL Tesla. The sales people told me this past Friday to use it as much as I like.

Why would I call Tesla? As I said just a few posts back, you can use it to your heart's content, assuming you don't have home charging.

This is about when Tesla becomes a mass market car if people with home charging are allowed to charge for free at superchargers, will that clog them up for the long distance travellers? I say it will and to solve that problem there needs to a pay-per-use fee. The fee should be similar to the costs to home charging which is very small, as you point out. Then there's no incentive for locals to charge at superchargers.

Again, there's no use arguing with me. It's only my opinion and who really cares what I think? The outrage at me for stating this opinion is funny, as are all the dislikes given to me by the same people over and over, to practically all my posts. I look at earning a dislike (without posting rude content) as a badge of honour. It says I got people thinking and out of their comfort zones, while calmly making my points known.

Also, as I've said before, if everyone is so certain of themselves, we'll know in under two years and you can bring this post back to the top and gloat. I've been wrong lots before (my prediction for AP 2.0 hardware was by the end of 2015!) so this won't be my first time.

 

[SmartElectric]

I think most of the people "warning" you are trying to prevent overcrowding

No, I was expressly outlining to him that using $2500 of the money HE PAID (he used capitals when responding to me, and I thought it was funny) of electricity wasn't actually true, and that a large portion of that was to fund infrastructure. He doesn't care about the infrastructure, and figures everyone else can pay for that, because he claims he doesn't need it, but he will be using it while consuming his full ration of $2500 in electricity. I responded because I felt (and continue to feel) it is a misplaced illogical position that feels like a greedy reaction rather than reasonable thought.

 

[callmesam]

Nice try. WTF is not an ad hominem attack. (It's childish language but not ad hominem.) You left out the ad hominem part. You went on to ask "WTF are you doing" to promote EV's and then you congratulated yourself for all you do. What I do, or do not do, to promote EV's is not relevant to the conversation. It was an attack against me personally. It was the classic example of an ad hominem attack.

Also, you told me that I set myself up "as police" and called that shameful. Nice try again to change that personal attack to me "policing" things but even if you warp it to that, I'm not policing. I'm providing my opinion on what Tesla may or may not do. I have no control to police this issue. I'm some anonymous person on the internet. Do you think Tesla or anyone else is going to do something because of what I post here. Your form of argument is to attack me personally. That's fine. I just pointed out it was a low form of argument. For you to turn that around and then say they were not personal attacks but dealing with the issues is absurd.

Stick to the issues. You have some good arguments to make. Personal attacks on your opponents takes away from the merits of your arguments.

@Canuck

Let me tell you why I'm frustrated.

@Drivin suggested Supercharging where you don't have a garage and your response was "uh, no."

Elon was clear that owners without fixed parking or garage can use Superchargers. So you were promulgating incorrect information. This selective policing of rules and bias toward people not Supercharging is, IMO, harmful to new potential owners.

When my friends fly into LAX, I'll pick them up and take them to Hawthorne for a Supercharge. Let them plug/unplug. Show them the app, have a drink, buy a t-shirt and see the SpaceX rockets. They can't believe Superchargers are free, forever. It sounds too good to be true.

Uh, no...

"Superchargers are used for long distance travel, conveniently located along the most popular routes in North America, Europe and Asia."

Supercharging

With regard to locals charging, Tesla frowns upon it, although Elon Musk did say "it's cool to do occasionally" but he also said he doesn't want it become a regular habit and those who do use local ones got letters to that effect. Tesla knows when each car uses a supercharger so to expect to be able charge locally on a regular basis with the Model 3 doesn't seem like something that Tesla will allow, or that will work, since it will clog them up for those travelling through, unless Tesla changes the entire purpose of the SC network, which seems highly unlikely to me.

• Some customers are "aggressively" using Superchargers for local travel, even though the stations are only intended for long trip usage. Tesla will be sending them reminder notes that "it's cool to do so occasionally," but the company doesn't want this to become a regular habit. Tesla still intends to put a solar installation at every Supercharger, where it's practical.

If someone says that they want to charge only at a Supercharger, I'm happy with telling them why this is an inconvenient and largely wasted time for hardly any money. Unless absolutely necessary. On the other hand, as long as they don't "abuse" the Supercharger by overstaying a charge I'm confident Tesla will be able to scale Supercharger density.

On aggregate, people will prefer convenience of charging from home to keep the system sustainable OR Tesla will grow the system.

 

[callmesam]

No, I was expressly outlining to him that using $2500 of the money HE PAID (he used capitals when responding to me, and I thought it was funny) of electricity wasn't actually true, and that a large portion of that was to fund infrastructure. He doesn't care about the infrastructure, and figures everyone else can pay for that, because he claims he doesn't need it, but he will be using it while consuming his full ration of $2500 in electricity. I responded because I felt (and continue to feel) it is a misplaced illogical position that feels like a greedy reaction rather than reasonable thought.

You guys can argue about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin or when you should feel "greedy" for using the Superchargers, but I'm not interested. It's a network of chargers, not a religion.

Tesla has stated, in no uncertain terms, that operation costs (i.e. electricity for Supercharging) is de minimis.

My question to you is: how should I feel if I drive hundreds of thousands of miles FOR DISTANCE TRAVEL on the Supercharger network. Tesla may not "make" any money off me. Was I "greedy"?

What if I live in a condo, but I hardly drive anywhere in town?

What if he spends money at each Supercharger thereby making it cheaper and easier for Tesla Motors to enroll additional Supercharger partners?

What if he uses just the Destination Charging network? Still greedy?

 

[Canuck]

@Canuck

Let me tell you why I'm frustrated.

@Drivin suggested Supercharging where you don't have a garage and your response was "uh, no."

Please don't misquote me. The context of my remark is important. This thread started with someone who showed a "Solution to charge your Model 3 if you don't have any garage?" being a conduit ran under the sidewalk to the car. It looks like a good solution for that person but others posted possible dangers and code violations. Then Driven posted this:

just use a supercharger. that is what they are there for.

This assumes that the person who ran that cable, and looks to be charging fine at home without a garage, should just be using a Supercharger, since "that is what they are there for."

I said "uh no" then quoted Tesla's own words on what Superchargers "are there for." What I posted are facts -- not my own opinion.

I don't think it is particularly helpful for people to come here and think Superchargers are there for local charging if other options are available. That's clearly not what "they are there for". If the OP can't make the conduit idea work then the Superchargers are a potential solution but they are not there for this purpose.

One of the greatest stumbling blocks to the adoption of EV's has been long distant travel. Tesla came up with Superchargers specifically in response to this issue. The majority of people have a garage or other ways to charge. I was simply correcting Driven's statement as to "that is what they are there for."

It's a network of chargers, not a religion.

You lost me there since you assume religion is something deserving of respect. I'd rather focus my attention on Superchagers than an imaginary friend in the sky.

You guys can argue about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin or when you should feel "greedy" for using the Superchargers, but I'm not interested.

Why post if you're not interested in the subject?

 

[callmesam]

Please don't misquote me. The context of my remark is important. This thread started with someone who showed a "Solution to charge your Model 3 if you don't have any garage?" being a conduit ran under the sidewalk to the car. It looks like a good solution for that person but others posted possible dangers and code violations. Then Driven posted this:

This assumes that the person who ran that cable, and looks to be charging fine at home without a garage, should just being a Supercharger, since "that is what they are there for."

I said "uh no" then quoted Tesla's own words on what Superchargers "are there for." What I posted are facts -- not my own opinion.

I don't think it is particularly helpful for people to come here and think Superchargers are there for local charging if other options are available. That's clearly not what "they are there for". If the OP can't make the conduit idea work then the Superchargers are a potential solution but they are not there for this purpose.

One of the greatest stumbling blocks to the adoption of EV's has been long distant travel. Tesla came up with Superchargers specifically in response to this issue. The majority of people have a garage or other ways to charge. I was simply correcting Driven's statement as to "that is what they are there for."

You lost me there since you assume religion is something deserving of respect. I'd rather focus my attention on Superchagers than an imaginary friend in the sky.

Why post if you're not interested in the subject?

1. I didn't "misquote" you. You wrote what you wrote in response to @Drivin. You intentionally omitted information that was directly on point about people without fixed parking.

2. OP doesn't need to run illegal conduit or illegally block his driveway before he can use a Supercharger. Superchargers are there for people "without fixed parking." OP is clearly in this category of owner.

3. "If the OP can't make the conduit idea work then the Superchargers are a potential solution but they are not there for this purpose. "

Why do you keep denying that Elon Musk stated that Superchargers are there for people without fixed parking. Yes they are.

4. Whether the "majority has a garage" is a red herring. OP does not. We were not discussing some other hypothetical. In this case, Superchargers are an valid option.

5. I don't assume religion deserves respect. The exact opposite. It should be questioned. Just like your erroneous assumptions and selective rule analysis.

6. When I say I'm not interested, I'm not interested in the moral handwringing and worrying that some on this thread seem to embrace. I'm interested in people buying the car and transitioning to sustainable transportation, not wondering what constitutes greedy mooching.

#DriveFree

 

[FirstSea]

....

Anyway, since I rent I'll have to use the SC when possible, but I'll do my best to have an alternative near my parking space.