Supercharging - Elon's statement that Daily Supercharging Users are Receiving Notes

[AnxietyRanger]

In answer to your query, NO!

In fact the opposite is true. There are only two explicit mentions of local charging:

1. Elon Musk 2014 stated that locals were encouraged to charge in cities where they didn't have fixed parking.

2. Elon Musk 2015 stated that "occasional local charging" was cool.

Does occasional mean once a year, month or week? :wink:

The people commenting that they understand Elon Musk and Tesla Motors intent about "not cool" have taken his call for courtesy from local owners to mean something more.

FTC fines of $100M+ for ATT show why "free forever" still mean just that.

Tesla is not changing that for current owners and would be smart NEVER to change the model even for Model 3.

Spend $100M on free HPWCs for everyone would be a better use of money than to charge for charging.

Better off investing in infrastructure that will reduce your long term energy costs i.e. batteries and solar panels.

Increase the price to account for "freeloaders" and continue to assume that 90%+ will continue to charge at home because it's simpler, easier and faster. This would allow TSLA becoming the largest and most profitable automaker of all time and the perhaps the most valuable company in the world.

I'm OK with this.

I have no idea what Tesla will/would do with Model 3, but overall seems plausible.

 

[stopcrazypp]

I don't think voluntary behaviors regarding frequent local charging would likely make much of a difference. Nor do I think frequent local chargers are a big enough group or a problem anyway. Enforcement could make a difference if it cuts out occasional chargers too (thus really lessening the local burden in volume), but to do that, in my view the contract needs to clearly change (and it can't for existing cars, but can for future) - and, true, that would take away from Tesla Awesomeness. But fear of taking away from Tesla Awesomeness can't allow the contract to change in silence, that wouldn't be right either.

I'm OK for changing the contract for future purchases, e.g. my future Model X included.

I also admit none of us are privy to numbers that would be needed to determine these things accurately - and Tesla is unlikely to tell us, because they have an interest in controlling such information (beyond fiscal responsibilities). We all estimate, of course.

Whatever Tesla does, I think they better tread carefully. I'm not sure if somebody linked to this already but AT&T just got hit by a $100M fine for not informing users they would "throttle" their data speeds after hitting a certain data volume within a period. This means that some of the ideas that were offered earlier in this thread may not fly if implemented on the entire population. For example the idea for Tesla to slow down the charging speed to a trickle, in case somebody reaches a certain amount of kWh charged within a certain period.

I'm going to put it out there again, AT&T's situation is not applicable to Tesla, and there is no contract that Tesla provided on superchargers.

First of all, with AT&T people have a service contract that specified "unlimited data" which you pay monthly for and didn't specify and limits (throttling or otherwise). With Tesla there is no service contract that states Tesla must provide *unlimited* supercharging access to you. Owners can look at their purchase contract, I'm fairly certain that whatever supercharger mention there is only references supercharging activation (akin to phone activation), nothing about network access or any guarantees or terms and conditions.

Where they specify supercharger details is in their advertising. And even when they do, *unlimited* was never a headlining feature (while it was for AT&T). Correct me if I'm wrong, but so far the only place people have found that even hinted about "unlimited" usage was a section buried in the FAQ talking about battery degradation and warranty concerns. In the main advertisement, it was always free long distance travel in the headline, it does not say free *unlimited* travel (I challenge people to find a quote where it says that). Throttling would not contradict with the "free forever" message.

So all you can pin on Tesla is false advertisement, and the chances are very slim on that given it appears 90+% got the message that superchargers are mainly for long distance travel, whereas if you poll AT&T users of the unlimited plan, I suspect the opposite impression would be there (because AT&T advertises unlimited in big bold letters). And I'll put it out there again: the FCC allows throttling because of congestion. If Tesla throttles local users during congested hours to get them to leave the station (or what makes more sense is to assign the lowest priority to them so the supercharger splits to favor a long distance driver), even under FCC's provisions it would be allowed regardless of "unlimited" advertising. I should put it out there FCC does not have the jurisdiction to regulate the supercharger network though (so someone would still have to sue Tesla).

I'll throw out an example of the contract vs advertisement difference: the $100 ranger service. Tesla mentions in their blog and in service pages (some of which can still be reached by google, although not if you navigate normally within the site) about $100 ranger service. Tesla reps also provided clear verbal verification that this would be available. So some people bought their car with the expectation this would be provided for their car. In some areas, Tesla have suddenly stopped honoring that $100 ranger service. And guess what, there is no recourse under contract law, because nowhere in Tesla's purchase contract with the owner did it specify that service (it only did if you have a service contract). So the best you can do is sue Tesla for false advertising.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

I'm going to put it out there again, AT&T's situation is not applicable to Tesla, and there is no contract that Tesla provided on superchargers.

First of all, with AT&T people have a service contract that specified "unlimited data" which you pay monthly for and didn't specify and limits (throttling or otherwise). With Tesla there is no contract that states Tesla must provide *unlimited* supercharging access to you. Owners can look at their purchase contract, I'm fairly certain that whatever supercharger mention there is only references supercharging activation, nothing about network access or any guarantees or terms and conditions.

Where they specify supercharger details is in their advertising. And even when they do, *unlimited* was never a headlining feature (while it was for AT&T). Correct me if I'm wrong, but so far the only place people have found that even hinted about "unlimited" usage was talking about battery degradation and warranty concerns. In the main advertisement, it was always free long distance travel, it does not say free *unlimited* travel (I challenge people to fine a quote where it says). Throttling would not contradict with the "free forever" message.

So all you can pin on Tesla is false advertisement, and the chances are very slim on that given it appears 90+% go the message that superchargers are mainly for long distance travel, whereas if you poll AT&T users of the unlimited plan, I suspect the opposite impression would be there (because AT&T advertises unlimited in big bold letters). And I'll put it out there again: the FCC allows throttling because of congestion.

I'll throw out an example of the contract vs advertisement difference: the $100 ranger service. Tesla mentions in their blog and in service pages (some of which can still be reached by google, although not if you navigate normally within the site) about $100 ranger service. Tesla reps also provided clear verbal verification that this would be available. So some people bought their car with the expectation this would be provided for their car. In some areas, Tesla have suddenly stopped honoring that $100 ranger service. And guess what, there is no recourse under contract law, because nowhere in Tesla's purchase contract with the owner did it specify that service (it only did if you have a service contract). So the best you can do is sue Tesla for false advertising.

For some reason it seems to me, I'm not quite as comfortable as you are with this suggestion that Tesla is OK to skirt their advertising on Supercharging and ranger service like that. It seems fairly suspect to me, the way you portray Tesla here.

I make no assertion on the legal ramifications, just the moral perspective I have.

 

[stopcrazypp]

For some reason it seems to me, I'm not quite as comfortable as you are with this suggestion that Tesla is OK to skirt their advertising on Supercharging and ranger service like that. It seems fairly suspect to me, the way you portray Tesla here.

I make no assertion on the legal ramifications, just the moral perspective I have.

My main point was:
1) There is no contract for supercharging, since you use that term multiple times in this thread.
2) The AT&T situation does not apply to Tesla for multiple reasons (which I pointed out).
3) I know you (and some others) disagree strongly, but a vast majority seem to agree with me that even if they decide to throttle in the future (or some other similar measure towards local users), it would not be skirting their advertising on superchargers thus far.
4) I'm not commenting directly on the appropriateness of Tesla's actions on the $100 ranger service. That was mainly used as an example to illustrate the difference between a contract and advertisement.

You are in multiple statements alluding to that Tesla had signed a contract with existing owners that do not allow them to make any changes to their supercharger policy (without legal ramifications) and I strongly dispute that (I also dispute that they are making a change rather than a clarification, but that is a separate subject from the contract thing). And you use some pretty absolute terms, for example: "it can't for existing cars, but can for future".

 

[dsm363]

For some reason it seems to me, I'm not quite as comfortable as you are with this suggestion that Tesla is OK to skirt their advertising on Supercharging and ranger service like that. It seems fairly suspect to me, the way you portray Tesla here.

I make no assertion on the legal ramifications, just the moral perspective I have.

But no moral issues with hogging a limited resource when you can charge at home but refuse to?

 

[FlasherZ]

 

[AlMc]

View attachment 84811

I applaud your effort but you are fighting a losing battle

 

[cpa]

This will be standard equipment for all Superchargers

First offense: 8 hours
Second offense: 24 hours

 

[AnxietyRanger]

But no moral issues with hogging a limited resource when you can charge at home but refuse to?

As a Euro socialist I place corporate responsibility above that of the consumer.

Seriously though, I don't like the daily supercharger any more than I like a bait and switch company.

 

[Chipper]

But no moral issues with hogging a limited resource when you can charge at home but refuse to?

For a Moderator you sure do make some inflammatory posts. Care to indicate how I am "hogging" anything when there are so few in attendance at the local supercharger here in Chattanooga? Care to indicate how you define a "limited resource"? If electricity is a limited resource wouldn't it also be "limited" if I am charging at home? Self-appointed morality police in my opinion probably ought to get complete clarification from Tesla Corporate before judging others.

 

[dsm363]

For a Moderator you sure do make some inflammatory posts. Care to indicate how I am "hogging" anything when there are so few in attendance at the local supercharger here in Chattanooga? Care to indicate how you define a "limited resource"? If electricity is a limited resource wouldn't it also be "limited" if I am charging at home? Self-appointed morality police in my opinion probably ought to get complete clarification from Tesla Corporate before judging others.

That was inflammatory? Ok. The spots are limited, not the electricity. If there is no one there and it makes you feel better to exclusively charge at the Supercharges even though you have a 14-50 at home go ahead. It is within your rights. If you have no charging at home of course use the Superchargers as much as you need. And for travel it's a no brainer. Not complicated.

 

[deonb]

Seriously though, I don't like the daily supercharger any more than I like a bait and switch company.

I think Tesla should just offer to buy back all of the Model S's from all customers who felt that they subject to bait and switch, and who wouldn't have bought the car if they didn't know they can't get $10'000 worth electricity for free.

To prevent people from just using the offer to get a free upgrade to the latest model - also have you sign an agreement of not buying another Tesla for 5 years.


It will be you and 3 others who take them up on that. Much cheaper doing that, than having to pay for the electricity to accommodate you.

 

[Chipper]

I think Tesla should just offer to buy back all of the Model S's from all customers who felt that they subject to bait and switch, and who wouldn't have bought the car if they didn't know they can't get $10'000 worth electricity for free.

To prevent people from just using the offer to get a free upgrade to the latest model - also have you sign an agreement of not buying another Tesla for 5 years.

It will be you and 3 others who take them up on that. Much cheaper doing that, than having to pay for the electricity to accommodate you.

Do you have ANY idea how far one could travel on $10,000 of electricity in a Tesla? in my opinion, using exaggeration to try to make your point is an indication your point cannot stand on its own merit. Charging exclusively on a supercharger for 100,000 miles would not use even half of that.

- - - Updated - - -

That was inflammatory? Ok. The spots are limited, not the electricity. If there is no one there and it makes you feel better to exclusively charge at the Supercharges even though you have a 14-50 at home go ahead. It is within your rights. If you have no charging at home of course use the Superchargers as much as you need. And for travel it's a no brainer. Not complicated.

A spot is a resource? Hmm...OK. And yes, I would call "hogging" inflammatory if there are 6 "spots" and absolutely no one else is there. What is it exactly I am "hogging"?? Oh, that's right...it's the spot.

 

[jerry33]

Do you have ANY idea how far one could travel on $10,000 of electricity in a Tesla? in my opinion, using exaggeration to try to make your point is an indication your point cannot stand on its own merit. Charging exclusively on a supercharger for 100,000 miles would not use even half of that.

Well, if you're expecting your Model S to last 500,000 miles...

(BTW. I believe that's not a totally unreasonable expectation. I even recall Elon saying that they had driven 500,000 miles on one battery in a Model S on their test track. Note: That was some time ago, and driving 500,000 miles more-or-less nonstop on their track isn't the same as 500,000 miles of daily driving.)

 

[bonnie]

in my opinion, using exaggeration to try to make your point is an indication your point cannot stand on its own merit.

Exaggeration is well-recognized as a technique to clarify a point or focus a discussion. Even if it was (and I'm not saying either way) completely irrelevant to the discussion, that has nothing to do with if the point is valid or not. Throwing out statements like that is a great way to ignore the actual point.

A spot is a resource? Hmm...OK. And yes, I would call "hogging" inflammatory if there are 6 "spots" and absolutely no one else is there. What is it exactly I am "hogging"?? Oh, that's right...it's the spot.

Oh, c'mon. You understood exactly what was meant. If you can't get to the electricity because someone is in a spot & doesn't need the spot, then they're blocking someone from getting to the resource. His original statement was directed at another situation & had nothing to do with you pulling up at a supercharger with six available spots. His original statement had to do with a hypothetical situation of someone being blocked from charging.

 

[deonb]

Do you have ANY idea how far one could travel on $10,000 of electricity in a Tesla? in my opinion, using exaggeration to try to make your point is an indication your point cannot stand on its own merit.

Mmm. You really think I of all people wouldn't have done the napkin math before posting? I must not be posting enough...


I took 10 years (commonly used for math on here), x avg travel = 134'760 miles.

134760 miles x 333wh/m @ 90% charge efficiency (at best) = 49861kWh required to charge

47360kWh x 20c* / kWh = ~$10'000 ($9972 to be exact)


* The 20c / kWh I got by taking an guestimated average of electrical rates for the various countries in which Tesla sells. They vary between the 12c kW/h U.S average to the 30c+ kW/h rates in Germany and Australia. UK/France/Finland are all at 20c. This excludes demand charges and taxes in all cases. So I think 20c is not an unreasonable average across all markets.

 

[wk057]

I think people tend to forget that the supercharger network is a marketing expense... and as long as the result of it is positive, it will continue to be a marketing expense.

 

[Cottonwood]

Mmm. You really think I of all people wouldn't have done the napkin math before posting? I must not be posting enough...


I took 10 years (commonly used for math on here), x avg travel = 134'760 miles.

134760 miles x 333wh/m @ 90% charge efficiency (at best) = 49861kWh required to charge

47360kWh x 20c* / kWh = ~$10'000 ($9972 to be exact)


* The 20c / kWh I got by taking an guestimated average of electrical rates for the various countries in which Tesla sells. They vary between the 12c kW/h U.S average to the 30c+ kW/h rates in Germany and Australia. UK/France/Finland are all at 20c. This excludes demand charges and taxes in all cases. So I think 20c is not an unreasonable average across all markets.

I believe that you numbers may be off by a factor of 2 on the high side. Most places that have Superchargers have demand chargers (peak kW) and energy charges (total kWh). If you assume that the split is even, and that the average energy charge is $0.10 per kWh, then the marginal cost for each additional kWh is half of your number.

Even if we take your $0.20 per kWh, a 100% user will cost $10k over the life of the car, but if you use 5-10% Supercharging, then that goes down to $500 to $1,000 for the life of the car, and a Net Present Value (NPV) calculation will reduce that. There may be a few apartment dwellers in big cities and a few "free at any cost" folks that like to hang out at Superchargers, but those will be a small fraction of total users that will not affect the overall average.

I predict that Tesla's 5-10% estimate for fraction of Supercharging will be correct, implying a 10 year electrical cost of $500 to $1,000. That is an easy 0.5-1% marketing expense for Tesla to absorb.

 

[deonb]

I believe that you numbers may be off by a factor of 2 on the high side. Most places that have Superchargers have demand chargers (peak kW) and energy charges (total kWh). If you assume that the split is even, and that the average energy charge is $0.10 per kWh, then the marginal cost for each additional kWh is half of your number.

10c average is very low even for the U.S. if you include any kind of demand charges. Average is 12c excluding demand. I know I know - U.S. average is not terribly usable. But if you actually break it down to where cars are being sold (e.g. lopsided in California), it makes things worse, not better. And 10c is unrealistically low for the E.U. - the cheapest is Norway at 15c.

But we can use 15c if you want, which makes it $7500, assuming Superchargers can operate at 90% efficiency, which I highly doubt. Either way, it's not a whole lot better.

Even if we take your $0.20 per kWh, a 100% user will cost $10k over the life of the car, but if you use 5-10% Supercharging, then that goes down to $500 to $1,000 for the life of the car, and a Net Present Value (NPV) calculation will reduce that. There may be a few apartment dwellers in big cities and a few "free at any cost" folks that like to hang out at Superchargers, but those will be a small fraction of total users that will not affect the overall average.

I predict that Tesla's 5-10% estimate for fraction of Supercharging will be correct, implying a 10 year electrical cost of $500 to $1,000. That is an easy 0.5-1% marketing expense for Tesla to absorb.

Different point-of-view. I agree with the Tesla 5% to 10% estimate even with some users charging at 100%, in the current state of Superchargers (they better not improve).

I was more commenting on people "who wouldn't have bought the car if they didn't know they can't get $10'000 worth electricity for free", and more to the point, those in that boat who also want to retroactively influence Tesla's policy on using Supercharging for TCO reduction. (They say it was there all along, but beside the point for the purpose of this discussion).

Even if you just grandfather this in, it will disincentive Tesla from doing 2 things:

* Provide more Superchargers in cities
* Make Superchargers any more convenient / faster

So rather it be best at this point for Tesla to formalize their policy against TCO charging, and distance themselves from those who feel entitled to it.

 

[dsm363]

Supercharging - Elon's statement that Daily Supercharging Users are Receiving...

A spot is a resource? Hmm...OK. And yes, I would call "hogging" inflammatory if there are 6 "spots" and absolutely no one else is there. What is it exactly I am "hogging"?? Oh, that's right...it's the spot.

Well the "spots" as you call them aren't unlimited are they? If there is a Supercharger with unlimited spots that would be amazing.
Did I say you specifically were hogging anything? Please quote the post I made where I said someone pulling up to a Supercharger that was empty was hogging anything. I did say that if you can charge at home and refuse to in order to save a few bucks I thought that's not the way to go and could in the future lead to problems if everyone decided to do that. You said you don't use it as your sole charging source and use it occasionally and for travel. I thought that's what the network was for. You also said you were pulling up to a Supercharger with 6 empty spots. Go for it and charge until your car is full and enjoy.

I seem to have directly offended you by using the word hogging when I never referred to you directly. Can't figure that one out but that wasn't my intention.