Superchargers — change in charging practice?

[anarchi]

There is a known difference between the number of KwHs a charge point pushes and the number that the car accepts. When charging at most (non-Tesla) chargers you typically pay for the former. When charging at a supercharger the two figures have always been the same and you only paid for what the car took. However, yesterday I charged twice at superchargers in France (Niorte and the new one at Le Mans). The car said I had taken 44 and 50KwHs but Tesla have charged for 46 and 53KwHs.

Is this a change in policy or me simply misreading the charging screen in the car?

 

[Burley]

Maybe worth taking a photo of the charge screen when you’ve finished so you can query it with them..

 

[GRiLLA]

Looking back at my trip to Normandy a couple of weeks ago I can see the same, in France I seem to be paying for what TeslaFi calculates as used and not what's added.

 

[init6]

There is a known difference between the number of KwHs a charge point pushes and the number that the car accepts. When charging at most (non-Tesla) chargers you typically pay for the former. When charging at a supercharger the two figures have always been the same and you only paid for what the car took. However, yesterday I charged twice at superchargers in France (Niorte and the new one at Le Mans). The car said I had taken 44 and 50KwHs but Tesla have charged for 46 and 53KwHs.

Is this a change in policy or me simply misreading the charging screen in the car?

How are you measuring what the car is taking? Are you just going by what is added to the battery?
Tesla charge for what goes in the car, not what goes in the battery. This change was made a couple of years ago.
So in addition to what goes into the battery you'll also pay for heating/cooling the car and battery, netflix etc. If you have something like Teslamate, you can see this difference.
In another thread I noted that for Superchargers the meter is at the plug end of the cable and for other providers its at the mains supply to the charger.

 

[Jason71]

How are you measuring what the car is taking? Are you just going by what is added to the battery?
Tesla charge for what goes in the car, not what goes in the battery. This change was made a couple of years ago.
So in addition to what goes into the battery you'll also pay for heating/cooling the car and battery, netflix etc. If you have something like Teslamate, you can see this difference.
In another thread I noted that for Superchargers the meter is at the plug end of the cable and for other providers its at the mains supply to the charger.

you beat me to it. I have been mentioning this for a while.
having said that 2-3kwh is quite a lot to use while charging unless it was a very long session and it was very hot /cold.
but on the other hand if Tesla had started charging for the AC its not enough so I think it must be as per your explaination

 

[init6]

you beat me to it. I have been mentioning this for a while.
having said that 2-3kwh is quite a lot to use while charging unless it was a very long session and it was very hot /cold.
but on the other hand if Tesla had started charging for the AC its not enough so I think it must be as per your explaination

We had this conversation a while ago. I had some figures from Teslamate and we agreed that the overheads from Tesla were much lower than other providers. The article linked above shows that they do charge for energy used for A/C etc. Which is fair enough. The only thing I haven't checked is if rounding is a factor. Will add that to my to-do list

As for the OP's excess use:

 

[anarchi]

We had this conversation a while ago. I had some figures from Teslamate and we agreed that the overheads from Tesla were much lower than other providers. The article linked above shows that they do charge for energy used for A/C etc. Which is fair enough. The only thing I haven't checked is if rounding is a factor. Will add that to my to-do list

As for the OP's excess use:
View attachment 844433

Thanks for this. I'm sure you're right and I am aware that there are overheads within the Tesla supercharger system, but in the past the figures for the car and the cost of supercharging have been pretty close. This is the first time I've noticed a difference of 2-3 KwH in the figures. This is much more like the difference you see on an IONITY charger, or on my home Hypervolt (44KwH in car vs 47.49KwH on the Hypervolt overnight). Maybe its a weather thing as you are suggesting (it was actually pretty cloudy for most of the drive back).

 

[init6]

Thanks for this. I'm sure you're right and I am aware that there are overheads within the Tesla supercharger system, but in the past the figures for the car and the cost of supercharging have been pretty close. This is the first time I've noticed a difference of 2-3 KwH in the figures. This is much more like the difference you see on an IONITY charger, or on my home Hypervolt (44KwH in car vs 47.49KwH on the Hypervolt overnight). Maybe its a weather thing as you are suggesting (it was actually pretty cloudy for most of the drive back).

Without additional data such as battery temp, length of charge, outside temp, inside temp, etc then it's hard to say if these are typical overheads or not. If you really want to delve deeper, look at something like Teslamate or Teslafi as they will capture most of that data.

 

[Jason71]

We had this conversation a while ago. I had some figures from Teslamate and we agreed that the overheads from Tesla were much lower than other providers. The article linked above shows that they do charge for energy used for A/C etc. Which is fair enough. The only thing I haven't checked is if rounding is a factor. Will add that to my to-do list

As for the OP's excess use:
View attachment 844433

you say charging for AC like the others do is fair enough. I disagree.
We should pay for what we actually get. When I buy a tank of petrol I don't get charged for a couple of extra litres to cover wastage. same with my water meter.
Sure if we pay for DC the cost per KWH would have to go up to cover the losses but then the operators would have an incentive to keep the losses low to keep their prices competitive. As it stands the more inefficient the transformers the more money they make and most people don't even notice so there is no penalty.

 

[bobbychariot]

I noticed on my charge screen the cost remained at £0.00 but Tesla charged me £23.00
Is this a bug?

 

[init6]

you say charging for AC like the others do is fair enough. I disagree.
We should pay for what we actually get. When I buy a tank of petrol I don't get charged for a couple of extra litres to cover wastage. same with my water meter.
Sure if we pay for DC the cost per KWH would have to go up to cover the losses but then the operators would have an incentive to keep the losses low to keep their prices competitive. As it stands the more inefficient the transformers the more money they make and most people don't even notice so there is no penalty.

A/C = air conditioning

 

[init6]

I noticed on my charge screen the cost remained at £0.00 but Tesla charged me £23.00
Is this a bug?

A well known problem:

Supercharger price not shown.

Ever since my most recent referral miles ran out, when I charge the cost still shows as zero. It still turns up in my account so Tesla are still taking the money. I have two questions. Is anyone else having this, and is it legal to take the money when you've shown a zero price?

teslamotorsclub.com

The T&Cs of using the supercharger make it clear you still have to pay for the use.

 

[Jason71]

A/C = air conditioning

OK. my mistake
I stand by my point though on all suppliers who DO think its OK to charge for the AC power consumed.

 

[Jason71]

I noticed on my charge screen the cost remained at £0.00 but Tesla charged me £23.00
Is this a bug?

Its a feature

 

[init6]

OK. my mistake
I stand by my point though on all suppliers who DO think its OK to charge for the AC power consumed.

Yes as we agreed previously, no incentive to be more efficient.

 

[init6]

Thanks for this. I'm sure you're right and I am aware that there are overheads within the Tesla supercharger system, but in the past the figures for the car and the cost of supercharging have been pretty close. This is the first time I've noticed a difference of 2-3 KwH in the figures. This is much more like the difference you see on an IONITY charger, or on my home Hypervolt (44KwH in car vs 47.49KwH on the Hypervolt overnight). Maybe its a weather thing as you are suggesting (it was actually pretty cloudy for most of the drive back).

I've had a look at all my Supercharging stats for the last 20 months and the 'efficiency' of the chargers is between 93% and 102%, so your 94/5% isn't too much of an outlier. I've only had one charge where the outside temp was > 30C and that gave me an efficiency figure of 94%, pretty much what you got. I suspect high temps will have an impact on the cooling of the battery and the cabin if you were in the car while charging.