Supercharger Price Increase

[SMAlset]

I think the increase is fine and still reasonable compared to commercial electric costs.

For Supercharger locations for the Model 3 (and S & X), Tesla has to pay for the land (or lease), property taxes (if applicable), hardware, operation and maintenance, and the energy cost at retail rates. Solar and batteries may help offset some of the retail costs, but likely not enough to offset actual use. For example, using a Northern California (PG&E) rate schedule for a commercial customer for high electric use and a primary feed (A10 TOU):

Summer Peak = $0.21 / kWh
Summer Part-Peak = $0.16 / kWh
Summer Off-Peak = $0.13 / kWh

Winter Part-Peak = $0.14 / kWh
Winter Off-Peak = $0.12 / kWh​

The above rates do not take in to account Peak Day Pricing, Demand Charges, and fixed costs. The "Average Total Rate" is $0.20 / kWh take those into account. Tesla charges $0.26 / kWh in California. Only a $0.06 / kWh markup to cover everything else.

From the local Supercharger agreements I've seen (city permit documents), Tesla doesn't own the land or lease it so no $ expenditures there or property tax involved. The land owner enters into an agreement with Tesla for a multi-year use of the land (and usually an extension period) with the understanding Tesla provides the equipment and maintenance on it, installation charges and covers the electricty charges. I believe the agreements I've seen have the parking lot still being maintained by the landowner with a notification provision to Tesla of when parking lot resurfacing etc will be needed.

The exception to this would be the limited, dedicated Supercharger oasis locations like Kettleman City and any Superchargers stations located at Tesla Service Center/Store locations where they own the land and buildings. Those however aren't by far as numerous as the thousands of Supercharger locations around the country located on others' property.

 

[Eclectic]

Really??? Parrot??? The supercharging network was built for traveling. PERIOD. Go back and do your research and either listen to or read what Elon said about the topic. Then come back with another cut about people speaking truth.

As an early Model S purchaser, I am 100% positive that the pitch we heard when considering the first Tesla we bought in 2013 was that superchargers allowed for fast, free charging anytime, not just when traveling. Only after Model S sales started to pick up, and then the Model X was introduced, was the qualifier of long distance travel added.

 

[bro1999]

Another way to interpret the chart is that the business could provide a slow charge for a free Supercharge holder, and a fast charging rate for a paying one. I want my charge neutrality!

I'm curious if Tesla will eventually introduce Time of Use Supercharging pricing. Higher fees for peak (say 1-7PM or whatever) times, and lower fees for off peak. Give incentive for people to charge during periods of lower demand charges.

 

[Moderatefan]

Tesla should be unsurprised that States will consider taxation on electricity as an an automotive fuel source in a similar manner when they realize this’s the new expectation..

For Megachargers maybe, since that will be their only way to charge. For regular cars, that's not effective. They need to collect taxes to maintain roads. If you charge 95% at home, then taxing you for 5% is not enough. Most likely these fees will be part of your annual registration.

 

[SMAlset]

No question Tesla started the Supercharger routes to enable people to travel across the country and be able to conveniently charge at a rapid rate. I think it changed it's focus though not because it was unpopular, but because it needed to be more inclusive to all owners at this point in time in order to expand its fleet. In the beginning people who owned Teslas (Roadsters, early Model S) had the ability to charge at home (expensive car...likely garaged or could add charging at their home or business). Reaching more buyers however necessitated urban charging if they wanted to be able to sell to these potential owners. The advent of the Model 3 no doubt was a precipitating factor. At this point in time I think saying that Superchargers are intended for long distance travel and implying that any other use is unintended by Tesla is a moot point. The landscape has changed. Superchargers are becoming more like gas stations for Tesla vehicles where you fill up where/when needed. The Model S and Xs with unlimited charging have likely prepaid thousands of dollars in advance in charging fees that helped also establish the Supercharger route. Other S/X/and 3s without unlimited are more on a Pay-As-You-Go plan, ie. analogy to pull-in and pump gas stations, where as unlimited S and Xs have already paid at "the pump".

 

[Foxhound199]

I think the increase is fine and still reasonable compared to commercial electric costs.

For Supercharger locations for the Model 3 (and S & X), Tesla has to pay for the land (or lease), property taxes (if applicable), hardware, operation and maintenance, and the energy cost at retail rates. Solar and batteries may help offset some of the retail costs, but likely not enough to offset actual use. For example, using a Northern California (PG&E) rate schedule for a commercial customer for high electric use and a primary feed (A10 TOU):

Summer Peak = $0.21 / kWh
Summer Part-Peak = $0.16 / kWh
Summer Off-Peak = $0.13 / kWh

Winter Part-Peak = $0.14 / kWh
Winter Off-Peak = $0.12 / kWh​

The above rates do not take in to account Peak Day Pricing, Demand Charges, and fixed costs. The "Average Total Rate" is $0.20 / kWh take those into account. Tesla charges $0.26 / kWh in California. Only a $0.06 / kWh markup to cover everything else.

Yeah, the increase is fine where you live. There's no rational explanation for WA or OR increasing so much, though. We don't even bother with peak or seasonal pricing here because our electricity is cheap and abundant all the time.

 

[SMAlset]

Yeah, the increase is fine where you live. There's no rational explanation for WA or OR increasing so much, though. We don't even bother with peak or seasonal pricing here because our electricity is cheap and abundant all the time.

My guess is that in your area it's more about helping to defray the cost of adding additional Supercharger locations for the general Tesla owners. If you charge at home, great. You get a deal on your charging. If you need to publicly Supercharge (owner looking for a fast charge or traveling through the area), then well the cost helps pay for those locations which are more of a convenience for you.

 

[Lloyd]

Regardless of what we remember or what Elon said, free daily supercharging is not sustainable for the company. Do the math!! I would like to see all Teslas on the pay per use model. It just makes more sense for users and Tesla. And,,,, I agree that the cost of supercharging should be more than what you could charge for at home.

 

[Foxhound199]

My guess is that in your area it's more about helping to defray the cost of adding additional Supercharger locations for the general Tesla owners. If you charge at home, great. You get a deal on your charging. If you need to publicly Supercharge (owner looking for a fast charge or traveling through the area), then well the cost helps pay for those locations which are more of a convenience for you.

For a long time, WA was getting short changed in the supercharger department, so I don't think it has anything to do with regional costs. The best explanation I've seen is that it's somehow tied to the price of gasoline. That is, because WA has expensive gas, Tesla feels it can charge a lot more for supercharging and still come out favorably. I think it's disappointing to still be using gas as the measuring stick.

 

[Saghost]

This slide from a presentation I found shows how much demand charges can have an effect on the utility bill.

Looks like a great incentive to install PowerPack pallets at the Supercharger...

 

[TexasEV]

As an early Model S purchaser, I am 100% positive that the pitch we heard when considering the first Tesla we bought in 2013 was that superchargers allowed for fast, free charging anytime, not just when traveling. Only after Model S sales started to pick up, and then the Model X was introduced, was the qualifier of long distance travel added.

No, I also bought in 2013 and the website, etc. said it was “to enable long distance travel”. Also I watched the livestream of Elons’s announcement of supercharging and that’s what he said it was for. You can’t get any earlier than that.

 

[voip-ninja]

Amazing how some people still parrot the completely discredited notion that supercharging is for long distance travel only.

Meanwhile, my interest just went way up to configure a Tesla Semi (upgraded pack) and accompanying 53' trailer as an RV. Guaranteed $0.07/kW charging on the road or when at destinations just got significantly more valuable.

I don't know how many people have driven by Dockweiler Beach in the Los Angeles area recently, but the adjacent parking is wall to wall bus-sized RVs - and more than a few of those RVs sold for $500,000 and up.

Now, even matching that $500K figure with the aforementioned Semi and 53' trailer is sensible given the fuel savings over time alone.

The irony here is that also at $500K, said customized Tesla RV based solely upon square footage (400 sf in round numbers) is also a bargain in Los Angeles' superheated real estate market. Try getting an ocean view for $500K for anything with a roof and a bathroom in Los Angeles County. G'head - try.

One does wonder at what point Semi SC stations will be funded by the large trucking companies - they won't be available to we mere mortals probably - see today's cardpass commercial fuel stops for over the road truckers. Nonetheless, it's an exciting time and the rates for charging commercially are *already* attractive.

Do you live alone? There's only one seat in the Tesla Semi.

 

[Eclectic]

No, I also bought in 2013 and the website, etc. said it was “to enable long distance travel”. Also I watched the livestream of Elons’s announcement of supercharging and that’s what he said it was for. You can’t get any earlier than that.

You have any documentation on this? And this was part of the problem, as it was sold as being both things...it was free, fast charging for any purpose and it was also sold as being the solution to the problem of being able to use the car for longer trips. They were not positioned as mutually exclusive. Today, they are.

 

[jsmay311]

There's no rational explanation for WA or OR increasing so much, though.

Except for this rational explanation.

Here are the plots I mentioned in the previous post. The correlation isn't perfect, but it's quite strong. Look at the R^2 values for the trendlines. The old SC prices had almost zero correlation with gas prices, whereas the new SC prices have a strong correlation. And compared to electricity prices, it goes in the other direction, although not as dramatically. (I used residential electricity prices, but I figure commercial prices would show a similar trend.)

 

[MP3Mike]

Do you live alone? There's only one seat in the Tesla Semi.

There is another fold down seat behind the driver.

 

[ChrisH]

Yeah, the increase is fine where you live. There's no rational explanation for WA or OR increasing so much, though. We don't even bother with peak or seasonal pricing here because our electricity is cheap and abundant all the time.

I too believe it is likely they didn’t want supercharging to be as cheap as charging at home. A 120% increase is steep, but again, supercharging shouldn’t be the main way anyone is charging. 11 cents at home, 25 on road trips. Still less than half the cost of gas for a road trip right?

 

[Foxhound199]

Except for this rational explanation.

Yes, I believe that is the correct answer. We're getting gouged relative to the rest of the country because they can do so and still be cheaper than gas. I don't think it's a good look for Tesla.

 

[MXWing]

Just because they lost money in one business unit doesn't mean they didn't profit in the other. Tesla could charge $10.00/kwh and still lose money overall as a company. Their charging business unit however will be a cash cow in relation to expenditures. If you spend $5mil/yr on SC network then you should bring in no more than $5mil in revenue from the spending network. If we look at it your way then they can make a killing in charging department but as long as the make sure to spend more money somewhere else, then they aren't breaking their promise.

A bankrupt automotive division and a richly profitable charging division = bankrupt company.

Do you think restaurants care about whether the money to keep the lights on comes from burgers or drinks? (hint: its the drinks).

It's pretty clear to me whom has a 9-6 and who operates their own enterprises (or at least knows what is needed to create their 9-6) based on the reactions here.

Charging is not a cash cow. If anything, it's the opposite with locals abusing the system.

Companies need to amend policies to adjust with growing conditions.

You can charge unlimited anytime, anyplace with no restrictions until the company that provides that infrastructure is no longer in existence.

Tragedy of the commons - Wikipedia

 

[NerdUno]

Elon pushed for locals to use superchargers... until he didn't. Many folks buying Model 3's probably don't have a house. They have an apartment with no ability to charge their cars at night.

 

[MXWing]

Elon pushed for locals to use superchargers... until he didn't. Many folks buying Model 3's probably don't have a house. They have an apartment with no ability to charge their cars at night.

Elon can say whatever he wants. Like encouraging locals to use superchargers, or we ARE GOING TO LAUNCH AN ORBITAL CONSTRUCTION PLATFORM FOR THE MODEL Y AND WE WONT REUSE MODEL 3 PLATFORM. IT WILL BE BRAND NEW, REQUIRING ITS OWN FACTORY SOURCED FROM MARTIAN ARTIFACTS THAT WE WILL ASPIRATIONALLY SOURCE IN AUGUST OF 2018.

...

until an engineer and accountant slaps him upside the head in private.

One reacts to changing battlefield conditions. Otherwise you get caught in a double envelopment and got annihilated.