I am looking at Supercharge.info and in North America, and 7 of the 11 sites currently being built are in what I would call warm climates. 6 of the 11 seems to be making the network denser, rather than expanding it. If I were building the network, and I am not, I would be looking for cold climate sites for summer builds and to expand the network. I am sure there are factors I am not aware of, so please contribute what you know. Examples: 1)Texas. Before southern CA or the NY metro gets yet another SC, get Texas off of its SC island. To me it makes sense at face value, and there are probably a bunch of customers who won't buy in those populations centers because they are stuck. 2)Montana/Wyoming. It would take about 4/5 SC's to connect Rapid City, SD to Ritzville, WA. Tough climate, do it in the summer. This route would be like the Panama Canal for the NW USA. 3) Chicago/Kansas. Three SC's here would be very effective. Look at the SC going in between Stamford and Philly. That is about 135 miles and there will soon be 3 or 5 SC in between, depending which ones you count as in between. Finally, I am being picky. Tesla is putting huge resources and balls into this network and I really appreciate it. I am just wondering what you all think of their prioritization? The SCs are meant to open long distance travel, but in many cases they are getting dense in areas that don't seem to be so much about long distance travel. That is fine, but I feel the long distance routes should get priority, all things being equal.