Tesla Supercharger network

[Cottonwood]

200 Supercharger Sites in North America! :biggrin:

With Syracuse and Mobile open today, there are now 200 Supercharger Sites in North America, 185 in the U.S. and 15 in Canada! It took 607 days to install the first 100 chargers in North America and 276 days to open the second 100.

To double the number of Supercharger Sites in North America from 152 to 304, Tesla only needs to pick up the pace a little to do the next 100 in 254 days. It looks like Tesla is on pace to double in 2015, only 104 to go this year!

I used Supercharge.Info for all the data.

 

[Robert.Boston]

Good analysis, Cottonwood. The importance of the Mobile SC shouldn't be overlooked. Although it's a stretch (195 miles) to Baton Rouge, Texas is now part of the eastern side of the Supercharger Highway.

 

[cpa]

I think that by the end of the year, the total Superchargers available for use, under construction and in the permitting stage will undoubtedly surpass the targeted 304. However, I am not as sanguine as the esteemed Cottonwood that there will be 304 operating Superchargers in North America by that date.

Blueshift's page indicates three new permits in April to date. (And Crescent City is a bit premature, I believe. The City Council approved the lease, but the way I read the notes, a permit has not even been applied for--but I could be wrong.) There are five currently under construction, one of which is San Diego--and that could be many, many months before completion. Napa has a permit but I understand that this location will be part of a sweeping construction project that may not complete until 2016, but again, I could misunderstand. In any event, Tesla will likely have to have about 100 new permits issued and enough contractors available over the ensuing 7 months in order to reach the target. Moreover, most construction grinds to a halt around December 20-21 for the holidays, and does not resume until January, unless the construction crew is local. Many of them travel long distances. I also understand that permitting in many rural locations takes a much longer period of time than usual because these rural cities and counties do not possess the necessary knowledge for high voltage electrical work. They have to find competent consultants and engineers to review the plans and make their recommendations, and I submit that these consultants would have to travel to sign off on the work as needed.

If we assume that the average construction period is 3-4 weeks, then we should be looking at the first week in November to see a more precise number of Superchargers for the end of the year. Could we have 300+ Superchargers active at December 31? Sure! But undoubtedly we will need to have a flurry of permitting activity by September 15 in order to attain this projection. I think it is more realistic to project around 275 completions by the end of the year, which is still a worthy achievement!

 

[Cottonwood]

@cpa:

You may well be correct, my calculations are just observations and extrapolations without insider Tesla info.

Here is another way to look at it:

• So far this year, Tesla has opened 48 Supercharger Sites in 107 days, for an average rate of 0.447 openings per day.
• There are 258 days left in 2015.
• If Tesla continues openings at the same rate, that would be 115 more this year, for a total of 315 Supercharger Sites in North America by the end of 2015.

This is a simple extrapolation, but gives hope that North America will have over 300 Supercharger Sites by the end of 2015. Tesla continuing the current pace seems plausible. Here is a snippet of the number of North American Supercharger Sites open this year from Supercharge.Info:

As to the current number of "Construction" and "Permit" sites, we are seeing a trend of more and more new openings being surprises. As much as we all enjoy sleuthing and watching the progress of Superchargers being permitted and built, it is nice to be surprised once in a while. I think we will see more of these surprises in the future.

 

[Zextraterrestrial]

I'd guess Willits and Eureka should be pretty similar to Crescent city time wise. Tesla has spoken with the cityof Eureka but I haven't seen any thing go to council and plan on talking with permits next week to see if I can get any insight. I will be showing my car next weekend and being able to talk about the local SCs is awesome

 

[jvonbokel]

Fun with Charts!

Data current as of today (4/17) from Supercharge.info

 

[CHG-ON]

Sorry to be a complete moron, but that third chart makes no sense to me whatsoever. The others are fine.

 

[PV_Dave]

Sorry to be a complete moron, but that third chart makes no sense to me whatsoever.

What the third chart means is that while my griping about PA needing more Superchargers is totally justified, Michigan and Tennessee are even worse.

Red line is estimated vehicle miles traveled within each state divided by active Superchargers. This might not have direct use, but allows us to see which states have more or fewer Superchargers relative to the traffic volume in the state. In theory a state with a 2x the average vehicle miles driven, if they had the same % of their vehicles as Teslas relative to other states, should have 2x as many Superchargers in order to meet the same % of the miles being driven. Of course Teslas are not evenly distributed, but since much Supercharger traffic is non-local, it's not so crazy to ignore that. And % Teslas on a route is influenced by whether Superchargers are present or not, which is another reason to ignore that.

So what the graph is saying, for example, is that Montana has the same number of Superchargers as Texas, even though drivers collectively put on many times more vehicle miles in Texas than in Montana.

 

[neroden]

Erie PA being dropped from Coming Soon is pretty disappointing as it is a key link.

I still see Erie marked as "Opening Soon" on the big map, though. And on the 2015 and 2016 maps.

 

[JakeP]

Yes it returned as.Opening Soon after Syracuse was updated as Currently Open. Hoping this was intentional.

 

[dhanson865]

What the third chart means is that while my griping about PA needing more Superchargers is totally justified, Michigan and Tennessee are even worse.

I looked at the 2016 map and it looks like PA will have more superchargers than TN by sometime in 2016.

TN isn't as unloved as some states but considering I-40 and I-75 bring a lot of traffic through here and the long distance between major cities east/west I'm surprised how little they plan to put superchargers in TN.

 

[Cottonwood]

For those sleuthing for new sites, here are the direct links to the highest res versions of the North American Supercharger Maps:


Today - http://www.teslamotors.com/.../today-northamerica.jpg
2015 - http://www.teslamotors.com/.../2015-northamerica.jpg
2016 - http://www.teslamotors.com/.../2016-northamerica.jpg

 

[ecarfan]

Thanks, but in some regions the projected number of chargers has become so high (like California) that even after zooming in on those maps the SC icons are so densely packed that it is impossible to get much of a sense of where the new locations are going to be.
Not that I'm complaining.

 

[jvonbokel]

What the third chart means is that while my griping about PA needing more Superchargers is totally justified, Michigan and Tennessee are even worse.

So what the graph is saying, for example, is that Montana has the same number of Superchargers as Texas, even though drivers collectively put on many times more vehicle miles in Texas than in Montana.

Wow, thanks Dave, I couldn't have explained it better myself! If there were any data on Tesla sales by state, I'd love to adjust for that somehow, but I don't see that info becoming available anytime soon.

For what it's worth, this chart started out using simply interstate miles per state, but then I was tipped off (thanks dirkhh!) to what I consider a better comparative dataset - vehicle miles driven per state (in billions). I feel like without detailed sales data, this is the best way to approximate how Superchargers should theoretically be distributed on a state-by-state basis. I'm always open to plotting other types of data though, if anybody has suggestions.

 

[Cottonwood]

For what it's worth, this chart started out using simply interstate miles per state, but then I was tipped off (thanks dirkhh!) to what I consider a better comparative dataset - vehicle miles driven per state (in billions). I feel like without detailed sales data, this is the best way to approximate how Superchargers should theoretically be distributed on a state-by-state basis. I'm always open to plotting other types of data though, if anybody has suggestions.

Thanks for the "vehicle miles" / "supercharger sites" chart. I have been looking at "population"/"supercharger sites", but I think yours is a better metric. Big differences are more miles per person in Wyoming and few miles per person in New York, as expected.

A significant state on your chart is California. It has about 6 billion vehicle miles per Supercharger vs the national average of about 8 billion. That is a 25% lower ratio for California than the national average, or 33% more Superchargers for California than the national average when normalized by vehicle miles. Given the probable and perceived higher market penetration of Teslas in California, that is reasonable. For all those who complain about so many Superchargers in California, this chart shows that Californians are getting roughly average treatment.

 

[mspohr]

Thanks, but in some regions the projected number of chargers has become so high (like California) that even after zooming in on those maps the SC icons are so densely packed that it is impossible to get much of a sense of where the new locations are going to be.
Not that I'm complaining. 

I find the low resolution of these maps frustrating.
I am particularly interested in US 395 between Reno and Lone Pine since this is an incredibly beautiful drive to superb recreation opportunities. There are currently no SC between these cities and it is a bit of a stretch (although I have done it). The 2015 map shows several new SC along this route but it is difficult to tell where. I think (hope) they are in Garnerville, NV, Lee Vining, CA and Bishop/Mammoth, CA but I really can't tell.
I guess I should be happy that this route is getting some attention. I will look forward to new SC on this route.

- - - Updated - - -

A significant state on your chart is California. It has about 6 billion vehicle miles per Supercharger vs the national average of about 8 billion. That is a 25% lower ratio for California than the national average, or 33% more Superchargers for California than the national average when normalized by vehicle miles. Given the probable and perceived higher market penetration of Teslas in California, that is reasonable. For all those who complain about so many Superchargers in California, this chart shows that Californians are getting roughly average treatment.

Since California is the home of about 25% of all Teslas, it deserves more SCs... and since I live in California, I think I deserve more SCs

 

[Cottonwood]

I find the low resolution of these maps frustrating.
I am particularly interested in US 395 between Reno and Lone Pine since this is an incredibly beautiful drive to superb recreation opportunities. There are currently no SC between these cities and it is a bit of a stretch (although I have done it). The 2015 map shows several new SC along this route but it is difficult to tell where. I think (hope) they are in Garnerville, NV, Lee Vining, CA and Bishop/Mammoth, CA but I really can't tell.
I guess I should be happy that this route is getting some attention. I will look forward to new SC on this route.

Take a look at the overlay that I did for I-84: I-84 — Pacific NW to SLC

If you do a PhotoShop overlay with about 50% opacity onto a Google Map screenshot, you can at least identify towns.

 

[TexasEV]

I find the low resolution of these maps frustrating.
I am particularly interested in US 395 between Reno and Lone Pine since this is an incredibly beautiful drive to superb recreation opportunities. There are currently no SC between these cities and it is a bit of a stretch (although I have done it). The 2015 map shows several new SC along this route but it is difficult to tell where. I think (hope) they are in Garnerville, NV, Lee Vining, CA and Bishop/Mammoth, CA but I really can't tell.
I guess I should be happy that this route is getting some attention. I will look forward to new SC on this route.

- - - Updated - - -


Since California is the home of about 25% of all Teslas, it deserves more SCs... and since I live in California, I think I deserve more SCs

1. Although the icons are usually placed accurately, Tesla has said the maps of future superchargers are meant to show routes and not exact locations, so higher resolution may not be more useful as potential sites change before they're built.
2. The density of Teslas in a state may impact the number of stalls per location, but it shouldn't affect the number of supercharger sites. That's based on geography.

 

[emupilot]

1. Although the icons are usually placed accurately, Tesla has said the maps of future superchargers are meant to show routes and not exact locations, so higher resolution may not be more useful as potential sites change before they're built.

Right - 2016 in particular is probably not very accurate at all.

2. The density of Teslas in a state may impact the number of stalls per location, but it shouldn't affect the number of supercharger sites. That's based on geography.

Tesla is relieving congestion in California by not only increasing the number of stalls per site (Gilroy, Fremont) but also by adding additional sites nearby (Redondo Beach, Culver City). This has the advantage in giving people choices of where they want to eat etc. and gets us closer to the day when (like with an ICE now) superchargers will be dense enough so people will just find a supercharger to stop at when low on electrons instead of stopping at every one regardless of whether they otherwise wanted to stop.

 

[jvonbokel]

Thanks for the "vehicle miles" / "supercharger sites" chart. I have been looking at "population"/"supercharger sites", but I think yours is a better metric. Big differences are more miles per person in Wyoming and few miles per person in New York, as expected.

A significant state on your chart is California. It has about 6 billion vehicle miles per Supercharger vs the national average of about 8 billion. That is a 25% lower ratio for California than the national average, or 33% more Superchargers for California than the national average when normalized by vehicle miles. Given the probable and perceived higher market penetration of Teslas in California, that is reasonable. For all those who complain about so many Superchargers in California, this chart shows that Californians are getting roughly average treatment.

You're welcome! Feel free to give me some rep points if you think the charts are worthy of it.

Speaking of California, bxr140 originally asked to see the same chart based on stalls rather than stations, and I never got around to plotting that (until now). Here they are side-by-side (or rather top-to-bottom). I didn't re-sort for the Stall version, because I thought it would make it easier to compare the two datasets. There's obviously a pretty close correlation, but a few states do stand out more (or less) using the stall data.