Supercharging Hypothetical #1 -- Abusive or not?

[LetsGoFast]

In my hypothetical I'm going presume that a driver charges to 90% and is unwilling to discharge below 10%. If that affects your answer, just change the numbers in your head so that they charge to 100% and discharge to 0%. I don't intend for that to affect your analysis.

Bert is a model S owner who has a commute to work that consumes 40% of his range. He has 50 amp charging at home and a supercharger conveniently located to his office. On a typical day, it is possible for him to charge to 90% at home and make it home at exactly 10%. Some days he needs to run errands immediately upon his return and he does not have time to charge his car at home and still make it to his destination on time. Which of the following scenarios do you think are abusive and which do you think are acceptable usage of the supercharger. Feel free to explain your position.

A> Bert charges every morning to 90% and only supercharges at work on days he knows for certain he will need to run errands when he gets home. This sometimes leaves him in a bind because these errands sometimes crop up at the last minute.

B> Bert charges every morning to 90% and adds 10% to 60% charge every day at lunch so that he can always be prepared if he needs to run any errands at home.

C> Bert charges every morning to 90% and also supercharges to 90% every day on his lunch break.

D> Bert carges to 90% at the supercharger every day on his lunch break and on the days he has errands he charges the minimum needed to make it to the supercharger the next day.

 

[tomas]

Nothing like a scenario vs just arguing. Of course, I'm sure some members will find a way to argue anyway

I voted C & D... and at this time unanimous!

 

[LetsGoFast]

Significantly fewer voters on this poll. I wonder if that means this one is a more difficult thought problem?

 

[jaguar36]

This is a bit of a crazy situation. Thats a 100+ mile commute each way. And he's going to be spending 20 minutes a day moving his car to and from the supercharger.

I'd say its fine as long as he's not leaving the car there when its done charging.

In my opinion, and I know other disagree, as long as you are charging at home whenever possible, and as long as you aren't leaving the car at the charger when its finished then its fine. If Tesla feels otherwise, they should put it in writing. As it is now, he's not charging at a local supercharger, so it seems to be ok by their policies.

Also keep in mind that this guy would be putting 50k+ miles a year on his car, and would probably be giving Tesla a big ole pile of cash every few years for a new car, not to mention a ton of money for the ridiculous service fees.

 

[mikeash]

I voted D. My rationale comes down to the "no compromises" idea of the Model S. Having to think about whether you're going to drive in the evening, and being screwed if you guessed wrong, is contrary to the idea of "no compromises." That eliminates A and B as abusive. Once you're supercharging I don't think you should be limited to just extracting precisely the energy you need, so I see no problem with charging to 90% as in C. I think D is abusive because at this point he's going out of his way to use the supercharger more than he needs to, and is actually making things less convenient for himself just to save some money.

All that said, Bert should petition his employer to install an L2 charger he can use during the day so he doesn't have to worry about it anymore, and should consider finding a new house closer to work, or a new job closer to home!

 

[SmartElectric]

Also keep in mind that this guy would be putting 50k+ miles a year on his car, and would probably be giving Tesla a big ole pile of cash every few years for a new car

I love this guy, he's the same kind of guy who traded a Tesla in last month, and it's now in my driveway. Love that he burnt through his depreciation and I benefited with a sweet CPO Tesla Model S.

Seriously, I really like owners who drive lots of km on electricity, these are the perfect candidates for a Tesla, save more CO2 than some who only drive 1000 miles per year (see the CPO stock, unreal how many low miles cars are available).

 

[LetsGoFast]

One of my employees has an 91 mile commute every day, so I guess it is remotely possible for someone to be in this situation. I assume he only does it because I am such awesome boss, however. Maybe Bert has a 70?

 

[sorka]

I can't vote. There are too many factors that could make any of these scenarios inappropriate or not depending on those factors.

 

[BoerumHill]

Bert & Ernie seem like good guys overall, but prone to Supercharger abuse at times. I presume Big Bird has a Zero bike?

 

[LetsGoFast]

Bert & Ernie seem like good guys overall, but prone to Supercharger abuse at times. I presume Big Bird has a Zero bike?

Big Bird just flies! I have an imaginary hypothetical I was planning use Oscar for, but I'm not sure it is different enough to warrant posting.

 

[BoerumHill]

Big Bird just flies! I have an imaginary hypothetical I was planning use Oscar for, but I'm not sure it is different enough to warrant posting.

Oscar the grouch hates Supercharger abusers. Been know to key ICE vehicles as well. Yeah, I would avoid the inherent bias of using him in your hypotheticals.

 

[mspohr]

Tesla is sold with "free unlimited" supercharger use so none of these are "abusive". (Which part of "free unlimited" don't you understand?)
However, Bert is wasting a lot of time at the supercharger when he could be out playing with Elmo.

 

[mknox]

One of my employees has an 91 mile commute every day, so I guess it is remotely possible for someone to be in this situation. I assume he only does it because I am such awesome boss, however. Maybe Bert has a 70?

I actually have a +/- 90 mile round trip commute myself. My 2.5 year old S85's battery has degraded to about that of a new 70. Unfortunately no Supercharger nearby, but I do have workplace charging. If I charge at work, am I abusing that privileged? Kind of like Tesla, we've said our charging stations are available for free to employees, visitors and the public.

 

[Scotty]

Tesla is sold with "free unlimited" supercharger use so none of these are "abusive". (Which part of "free unlimited" don't you understand?)
However, Bert is wasting a lot of time at the supercharger when he could be out playing with Elmo.

I concur. The words about SC abuse only originated with the Tesla letter, not previous to that.

Scotty

 

[jaguar36]

I actually have a +/- 90 mile round trip commute myself. My 2.5 year old S85's battery has degraded to about that of a new 70.

Are you worried about being able to make that distance this winter?

 

[scaesare]

(I echo the comments not being fond of the "abusive" phrasing...)

My stance is: You should provide for your own charging needs to the extent you reasonably can.

Therefore it's hard to make a call here without knowing what the circumstances regarding the errand are. Are the once a month? Once a week? Are they matters of life & death, or convenience? How much range do they require? How much charging power does he have at home, and what's the timing of things?

"D" seems obviously to violate my stance. "C" would seem excessive unless the errands were the norm and required something like 100+ miles of range. "B" also would depend on the frequency/criticality of the errands.

I'd probably aim for "A" if I could at all make it work.

I didn't vote.

 

[tomas]

I concur. The words about SC abuse only originated with the Tesla letter, not previous to that.

Scotty

Incorrect. Advertised as unlimited to enable long distance travel, not to replace home charging... This has been an issue discussed on this forum and by tesla for over a year. I say bravo to letter, but boo to lousy algorithm that sent it to non-abusers.

 

[mknox]

Are you worried about being able to make that distance this winter?

Nope. But not unlike the OP's original scenario, I might not be left with much (or enough) for some extracurricular activities. I only have 20 amps (16 amps delivered) charging at home.

 

[Lloyd]

I concur. The words about SC abuse only originated with the Tesla letter, not previous to that.

Scotty

There was a lengthy discussion years ago when the SC's were just coming on line. I predicted that it would be an issue and suggested that a minor fee for use would be a better model. Tesla's response at that time was "If there is a shortage because of use, then we will just build more" !

 

[mknox]

Incorrect. Advertised as unlimited to enable long distance travel, not to replace home charging...

I honestly think the jury is still out on that. There are lots of examples of Superchargers in areas like the center of London that are in no way conducive to long distance travel. Even the Toronto location (at a Store/Service Center) is used for charging customer's cars. Toronto is full of condos who's boards won't necessarily allow on-site charging facilities to be installed (regardless of who pays) and Tesla representatives themselves have been saying here that the Supercharger could be an option for those customers.

I do agree the original intent was long distance travel, but it seems to have morphed a bit from that. Maybe one way to look at it is by where the Supercharger is installed. Out at a highway rest stop in the middle of nowhere: clearly a travel stop. In an underground parking lot in the center of a large city: ???