Tesla forced to open superchargers to unlock billions

[millerwb]

Whatever the technicalities. There are not enough charging stations. For my selfish reasons I have a 2200 mile trip I take around the holidays. Tesla charging stations are over-subscribed. In 2018 I was usually the only vehicle at the Supercharger. Now I am usually waiting for a charging slot. I will most likely use an ICE vehicle for long trips.

If the end result is a win-win for all of us I am all for it. Short term--long trips in an electric vehicle at a busy time is a *sugar* show.

 

[nativewolf]

The Silverado EV that doesn’t exist? No customer deliveries? Can’t order one.

How about the hummer, you can have anything as long as it’s white.

Or how about my CT that is 2 years late? I get you can buy the Silverado before a ct

 

[pb2000]

The 150kW rule seems pretty dumb with existing battery chemistry. Tesla undoubtably has data on which sites regularly max out the DC shared bus, but the better solution always seems to be adding a new location.

 

[STS-134]

The 150kW rule seems pretty dumb with existing battery chemistry. Tesla undoubtably has data on which sites regularly max out the DC shared bus, but the better solution always seems to be adding a new location.

Unless they're future proofing the sites for future battery chemistries that can hold > 150 kW for much longer and at higher SoCs. Which does make some sense to do.

 

[STS-134]

Whatever the technicalities. There are not enough charging stations. For my selfish reasons I have a 2200 mile trip I take around the holidays. Tesla charging stations are over-subscribed. In 2018 I was usually the only vehicle at the Supercharger. Now I am usually waiting for a charging slot. I will most likely use an ICE vehicle for long trips.

If the end result is a win-win for all of us I am all for it. Short term--long trips in an electric vehicle at a busy time is a *sugar* show.

What is your route? Tesla does typically set off peak rates to free along major travel routes close to major holidays to try to alleviate congestion.

 

[CyberGus]

It's got to be permanently connected because if it isn't, it's going to get stolen.

The adapter won't be stolen if they chain it up like gas stations do with the bathroom key

 

[pb2000]

Unless they're future proofing the sites for future battery chemistries that can hold > 150 kW for much longer and at higher SoCs. Which does make some sense to do.

Maybe add the conduit, but right now the big problems are supply chains and rural availability. I'd rather have DCFC in more places (I'm good with even 25kW if it means I don't have to L2), rather than guaranteed 150kW in just a few places. Go back and overlay the higher power stuff later.

 

[texas_star_TM3]

The Silverado EV that doesn’t exist? No customer deliveries? Can’t order one.

How about the hummer, you can have anything as long as it’s white.

fact is.... we don't know the pricing or the specs or the delivery start date for the Cybertruck. I cant' find what range it will offer, vehicle dimensions and what payload and what it will cost. All I know is that Elon promised production sometime in late 2023 and "volume production" in early 2024. Take that for what it's worth. The Cybertruck was unveiled in late 2019 and the prices have since been fully removed from the site... that was over 3 yrs ago and if they hit the timeline and start small deliveries in late 2023... that will be 4yrs after unveiling... imagine the cr*p RAM would get for unveiling an EV truck now / taking pre-orders and then delivering on it by 2027 (...)

meanwhile the Lightning / Rivian very much exist and you can see prices/ specs for the Hummer.

 

[texas_star_TM3]

Whatever the technicalities. There are not enough charging stations. For my selfish reasons I have a 2200 mile trip I take around the holidays. Tesla charging stations are over-subscribed. In 2018 I was usually the only vehicle at the Supercharger. Now I am usually waiting for a charging slot. I will most likely use an ICE vehicle for long trips.

If the end result is a win-win for all of us I am all for it. Short term--long trips in an electric vehicle at a busy time is a *sugar* show.

I'm ok if Tesla opens up some of those massive 24 / 48 stall locations which have been popping up along interstates in busy corridors. Or if they add CCS stalls to existing locations. What I would hate to see is a CCS adapter dangling on already busy 4-8 stall location with no alternative for 100+ miles to charge... think about Clayton NM , into Wyoming off I-90 etc.

 

[texas_star_TM3]

What is your route? Tesla does typically set off peak rates to free along major travel routes close to major holidays to try to alleviate congestion.

I recommend stops like Ardmore / Oklahoma SC on the busy Oklahoma City - Dallas/ Ft Worth corridor or charging at the Oklahoma City SC during major Holidays... or not. Total S**t show

 

[jboy210]

The 150kW rule seems pretty dumb with existing battery chemistry. Tesla undoubtably has data on which sites regularly max out the DC shared bus, but the better solution always seems to be adding a new location.

Or expand the location (check out Harris Ranch's 80 stall expansion)

 

[MP3Mike]

Maybe add the conduit, but right now the big problems are supply chains and rural availability. I'd rather have DCFC in more places (I'm good with even 25kW if it means I don't have to L2), rather than guaranteed 150kW in just a few places. Go back and overlay the higher power stuff later.

Companies are welcome to do that, but they won't get NEVI AFC money for that. There does appear to be some funding for those types of installs:

Additional flexibility is provided for projects that are not located along AFCs, including the flexibility to install AC Level 2 chargers and DCFCs at lower power levels.

But that majority of the NEVI funding is for AFCs, which will be sites every ~50 miles on main highways.

 

[buckets0fun]

fact is.... we don't know the pricing or the specs or the delivery start date for the Cybertruck. I cant' find what range it will offer, vehicle dimensions and what payload and what it will cost. All I know is that Elon promised production sometime in late 2023 and "volume production" in early 2024. Take that for what it's worth. The Cybertruck was unveiled in late 2019 and the prices have since been fully removed from the site... that was over 3 yrs ago and if they hit the timeline and start small deliveries in late 2023... that will be 4yrs after unveiling... imagine the cr*p RAM would get for unveiling an EV truck now / taking pre-orders and then delivering on it by 2027 (...)

meanwhile the Lightning / Rivian very much exist and you can see prices/ specs for the Hummer.

a few things to dissect here...

1. ellipsis are difficult, I get it.
II. you must be new to the Tesla timeframes, no one thought they were getting that truck before the factory was built, tooled up, production of batteries, and production of semis, were all figured out.
C. (estimated) specs for the CT were posted for over a year, with pricing. it was only removed when the 'tease' of a quad motor was "announced"
d. substitute Silverado EV for cybertruck and you'll see how funny this post of yours is.
VI. People seem to forget the dodge(and others) ev concepts that've come out for the last decade without any real product (other than clay models).

7. New vehicles, new production procedures and processes take time to work out. We're not talking about the 202X roadster, plenty of CT are out there being tested prior to production.

 

[Mardak]

They clarified that every DCFC port funded by NEVI has to be able to provide 150kW of power anytime a vehicle asks for it

A V3 Supercharger cabinet supports 4 charge posts, so one "DCFC port funded by NEVI" in that set could still "provide 150kW of power anytime a vehicle asks for it." This behavior is probably similar to existing Supercharger usage when subsequent vehicles plug in where the first vehicle can keep its higher power charging until dropping down on the charge curve. Except presumably to meet funding requirements, "first" can be given priority to a non-Tesla with potentially an additional caveat that Tesla will "only" give 150kW instead of "for Teslas" 250kW.

For example, if there's 350kW available to a cabinet's set of 4, a non-Tesla charging first could maybe get the full 350kW if it could accept that rate, and when a Tesla plugs in to another stall, the non-Tesla gets 150kW and Tesla 200kW. So not as great as a single Tesla getting 250kW, but similar experience to 2 Teslas charging at the same time. But also practically, there probably won't even be a non-Tesla charging or even able to accept the full 150kW or there could be a Tesla occupying the spot anyway. Does the funding have requirements around "busy" locations where people need to wait for a DCFC port to become available?

 

[MP3Mike]

A V3 Supercharger cabinet supports 4 charge posts, so one "DCFC port funded by NEVI" in that set could still "provide 150kW of power anytime a vehicle asks for it." This behavior is probably similar to existing Supercharger usage when subsequent vehicles plug in where the first vehicle can keep its higher power charging until dropping down on the charge curve. Except presumably to meet funding requirements, "first" can be given priority to a non-Tesla with potentially an additional caveat that Tesla will "only" give 150kW instead of "for Teslas" 250kW.

You can't have just one NEVI port, NEVI funding requires a minimum of 4 ports, all 4 of which have to have a minimum output of 150kW.

For example, if there's 350kW available to a cabinet's set of 4, a non-Tesla charging first could maybe get the full 350kW if it could accept that rate, and when a Tesla plugs in to another stall, the non-Tesla gets 150kW and Tesla 200kW. So not as great as a single Tesla getting 250kW, but similar experience to 2 Teslas charging at the same time. But also practically, there probably won't even be a non-Tesla charging or even able to accept the full 150kW or there could be a Tesla occupying the spot anyway. Does the funding have requirements around "busy" locations where people need to wait for a DCFC port to become available?

There are plenty of vehicles that can take more than 150kW: Rivian R1T/R1S, Ford F-150 Lightning, Lucid Air, Kia EV6, Hyundai Ionic5, Gensis GV60, etc. And as time passes there will be even more.

You have to have a minimum of 600kW available, shared among 4 ports/stalls to get NEVI AFC funding.

Using Tesla V3 cabinets you could only have 2 ports/stalls per cabinet. (Double the number of cabinets that Tesla uses for their current installs.)

 

[STS-134]

You can't have just one NEVI port, NEVI funding requires a minimum of 4 ports, all 4 of which have to have a minimum output of 150kW.

16 stalls, 4 cabinets, 1 NEVI port per cabinet, configured for 150 kW guaranteed but also 150 kW maximum.

 

[MP3Mike]

16 stalls, 4 cabinets, 1 NEVI port per cabinet, configured for 150 kW guaranteed but also 150 kW maximum.

Yes, that would work. Tesla would use a 1500kW transformer, bigger wouldn't help as 4 cabinets can't even utilize the full 1500kW, meaning you get four 150kW NEVI stalls, and twelve ~72kW Supercharger stalls. (Assuming full utilization, during lower utilization the 900kW of non-NEVI capacity could be shared across the site.)

I just don't see Tesla doing that.

 

[Mardak]

You can't have just one NEVI port, NEVI funding requires a minimum of 4 ports, all 4 of which have to have a minimum output of 150kW

Yes, and Tesla usually installs at least 8 stalls at V3 Superchargers. For those with 16+ stalls, then 1 NEVI port for each 4 stalls per cabinet is what I described earlier. The "worst case" scenario for an 8-stall location with 4 NEVI ports if Tesla decides to convert these smaller locations would be pretty bad for Tesla vehicles if non-Teslas are each using 150kW, but how likely will all 4 spots have non-Teslas needing to maintain 150kW each?

I suppose technically, even a Tesla vehicle needs to be guaranteed a minimum of 150kW in these NEVI spots, so will Tesla owners prioritize picking those spots blocking out non-Teslas?

 

[pb2000]

Companies are welcome to do that, but they won't get NEVI AFC money for that. There does appear to be some funding for those types of installs:



But that majority of the NEVI funding is for AFCs, which will be sites every ~50 miles on main highways.

Ah. Even still, I feel like 4 stalls is better if for no other reason than stalls get damaged, so the more the better.

Is there a funding limit for non AFC sites or is it just a first come first serve for the whole program?

AFC map from Alternative Fuel Corridors attached for anyone interested. Not sure if it's the most up to date.

 

[MP3Mike]

The "worst case" scenario for an 8-stall location with 4 NEVI ports if Tesla decides to convert these smaller locations would be pretty bad for Tesla vehicles

Yes, that would be horrible, and there is no way Tesla would do it. 4) 150kW NEVI stalls and 4) ~32kW Tesla "Supercharger" stalls.

I suppose technically, even a Tesla vehicle needs to be guaranteed a minimum of 150kW in these NEVI spots, so will Tesla owners prioritize picking those spots blocking out non-Teslas?

I know I certainly would. No way would I risk getting only 32 kW on a "Supercharger".

But we have seen nothing saying that Tesla is even going to submit any RFPs for NEVI funding. Which for Oregon is supposed to start taking them sometime this Spring, with funding allocated sometime this Fall. So essentially nothing NEVI funded is going to be built until next year.

I don't see Tesla waiting a year to get started. It is obvious they are still installing standard V3 installs at a fairly brisk pace.