Tesla Supercharger network

[nwdiver]

I still find it a little odd or strange that the Applebees (for example) is paying for the electricity while Tesla is collecting for electricity consumed by the car owner.

Every Supercharger I've seen is fed from a separate transformer and meter... it's likely that the host site rarely if ever pays for the electricity. A destination charger might bring in enough business to justify the added electrical expense but it's unlikely a Supercharger could. The peak draw for an 8 bay SC would be >500kW. In most places that's ~$5k/mo in demand fees alone.... pretty sure the list of volunteers for that would be very short.

 

[ohmman]

I still find it a little odd or strange that the Applebees (for example) is paying for the electricity while Tesla is collecting for electricity consumed by the car owner.

They're likely to be OK with that since the Tesla owner is choking down their food and paying for it. In more ways than one.

 

[NOLA_Mike]

Every Supercharger I've seen is fed from a separate transformer and meter... it's likely that the host site rarely if ever pays for the electricity. A destination charger might bring in enough business to justify the added electrical expense but it's unlikely a Supercharger could. The peak draw for an 8 bay SC would be >500kW. In most places that's ~$5k/mo in demand fees alone.... pretty sure the list of volunteers for that would be very short.

Tesla is increasingly able to make businesses pay for the electricity delivered by its Superchargers

 

[AudubonB]

I haven't asked Fred this directly, but I am extremely skeptical that Hy-Vee is paying for the electricity. Happy to be proved wrong, but neither the Des Moines Gazette article referenced in Electrek's article, nor the sign in Electrek's photograph, indicates that any entity other than Tesla pays the utility bill. So, in the interest of keeping unsubstantiated rumor down, I'd like to say that NOLA Mike's posts, and any similar ones, appear to be misleading. I'll edit this post if credible evidence shows otherwise. "Power supported by Hy-Vee" indicates nothing.

 

[arg]

Additionally, I assumed about an 85% Supercharging delivery efficiency - dialing down the 90% for individual chargers in assuming that there is a reduction in efficiency when wiring the stack. Any data on that is appreciated

I have here a spec sheet for the Gen 2 supercharger cabinet (marked confidential, but it was disclosed publicly as part of a planning application ('permit') for a UK supercharger site).

It quotes input and output powers at various voltages - 380V (Europe lowest), 400V (Europe nominal) and 480V (USA nominal).

If you calculate the effiiciency from the figures given, it comes out over 90% in each of those cases - the lower voltage gives marginally better efficiency (91.2% vs 90.6%).

 

[ohmman]

I have here a spec sheet for the Gen 2 supercharger cabinet (marked confidential, but it was disclosed publicly as part of a planning application ('permit') for a UK supercharger site).

It quotes input and output powers at various voltages - 380V (Europe lowest), 400V (Europe nominal) and 480V (USA nominal).

If you calculate the effiiciency from the figures given, it comes out over 90% in each of those cases - the lower voltage gives marginally better efficiency (91.2% vs 90.6%).

Sounds very much in line with what @wk057 posted about the efficiency of the Gen1 onboard chargers. I guess there's less loss in the stack than I'd assumed.. as in, close to zero.

Thanks.

 

[wk057]

I have here a spec sheet for the Gen 2 supercharger cabinet (marked confidential, but it was disclosed publicly as part of a planning application ('permit') for a UK supercharger site).

It quotes input and output powers at various voltages - 380V (Europe lowest), 400V (Europe nominal) and 480V (USA nominal).

If you calculate the effiiciency from the figures given, it comes out over 90% in each of those cases - the lower voltage gives marginally better efficiency (91.2% vs 90.6%).

Sounds very much in line with what @wk057 posted about the efficiency of the Gen1 onboard chargers. I guess there's less loss in the stack than I'd assumed.. as in, close to zero.

Thanks.

Quick correction, my post was about the Gen2 chargers.

However the point is still valid. These are what are used in the Gen2 supercharger cabinets. So they will have an efficiency similar to the in-car gen2 units. I'm not sure what the methodology is for Tesla's spec sheet, but the efficiency varies greatly depending on voltage and current. It's pretty likely that during a full supercharge the efficiency swings +/-10%. But, with a whole stack of chargers being able to better target the most efficient point for the needed power it's likely to tend to be more efficient overall than an in-car scenario on an input vs output power basis. Unfortunately that gain is probably offset by the higher losses in cabling and cell internal resistance at higher currents combined with the need for more active cooling during charging.

 

[Johann Koeber]

I was wondering about price of a kWh - depending on the charge rate.
Here in Germany the charge will be 0.17 per minute or 0.34 per minute above 60 kW.

Result:
The price stays nicely below 0.25 per kWh most of the time - except when the car is almost full and the tapering gives you less than 40 kW. For residential electricity I am paying 0.29 per kWh.

Recommendation:
Charging to full will cost you real money; don't charge more than you need at the SC.

It has been suggested that to avoid the idle fee (0.35 here in Germany), let the car charge to full (which can take an extra hour). This will buy you some rather expensive electricity, but still better than paying and getting no electricity. Bottom line: move the car as soon as you have enough juice to reach your destination or the next SC.

 

[viperboy]

So, hang on, maybe I misunderstood the pricing.

If you have a P100D let's assume you have 90kwh usable. Let's assume you have used all of your "free" supercharging. If you show up with 0 rated miles, you have about 10kwh in reserve. you can only "add" about 80kwh. (pricing for this assumption is .10 dollars per kwh under 60 and .20 dollars over 60.

If you add 10 kwh, you pay $1, correct?
if you add 60 kwh, you pay $6, correct?
if you add 80 kwh (the max), you pay $10 ($6 for first 60, and $4 for next 20)?

What if (same car) you pull in with 80kwh in the tank? Are you at the 10 cent or 20 cent rate?

 

[Saghost]

So, hang on, maybe I misunderstood the pricing.

If you have a P100D let's assume you have 90kwh usable. Let's assume you have used all of your "free" supercharging. If you show up with 0 rated miles, you have about 10kwh in reserve. you can only "add" about 80kwh. (pricing for this assumption is .10 dollars per kwh under 60 and .20 dollars over 60.

If you add 10 kwh, you pay $1, correct?
if you add 60 kwh, you pay $6, correct?
if you add 80 kwh (the max), you pay $10 ($6 for first 60, and $4 for next 20)?

What if (same car) you pull in with 80kwh in the tank? Are you at the 10 cent or 20 cent rate?

I don't think there's anywhere that has tiers in kWh - everywhere I've seen is either a single price in kWh *or* a tiered set of dollars per minute because the state laws make charging per kWh difficult.

The point of the tiers in per minute is so that charging at ~50 kW or at ~100 kW costs about the same per kWh - you're receiving/consuming power twice as fast in the high tier, and they charge you twice as much.

 

[Model 3]

maybe I misunderstood the pricing.

You did...

(pricing for this assumption is .10 dollars per kwh under 60 and .20 dollars over 60.

... here. It is (to use your numbers) .10 dollars per minute under 60kW charging effect and .20 dollars per minute for charging effect over 60kW. How many kWh you have on your battery, or how many kWh you have charged has no effect on the pricing per minute you charge. Only the speed you are charging at.

Edit: to late... Saghost got it first
(and corrected my minute/kW error)

 

[viperboy]

@Saghost & Model 3 - thanks, that makes more sense. Now to extrapolate that, charging slows down once you're nearly done. So if you charge all the way, the first X minutes (likely 30-40) will be full price, and the last Y minutes will be the lower rate. interesting...

 

[Saghost]

@Saghost & Model 3 - thanks, that makes more sense. Now to extrapolate that, charging slows down once you're nearly done. So if you charge all the way, the first X minutes (likely 30-40) will be full price, and the last Y minutes will be the lower rate. interesting...

Right. Charging to 100% (on anything except a recent 60) becomes incrementally more expensive in time billed states, because you pay the same rate for a minute at 50 kW as you do for one at 5 (and yes, over 99%, you'll literally be drawing 5.)

One more good reason to get one with your trip once you reach 80-90% (or really, once you reach 10-15% over what you need for the next hop.)

 

[ohmman]

One more good reason to get one with your trip once you reach 80-90% (or really, once you reach 10-15% over what you need for the next hop.)

Just a reminder that there are now occasions where at least a few of us with travel trailers will need to charge to 100% to make it to the next Supercharger. This is a consideration for vehicles without unlimited Supercharging who will be frequently towing in by-the-minute states, I suppose. At least until pack capacity and/or Supercharger density increases.

I was looking to make a trip down to Santa Barbara with our trailer. The 138 miles between Gilroy and Atascadero Superchargers is a serious stretch, especially when considering terrain. It'll require either an RV camp stop or a range charge and some conservative driving. And that's in Supercharger-rich California.

 

[miimura]

Just a reminder that there are now occasions where at least a few of us with travel trailers will need to charge to 100% to make it to the next Supercharger. This is a consideration for vehicles without unlimited Supercharging who will be frequently towing in by-the-minute states, I suppose. At least until pack capacity and/or Supercharger density increases.

I was looking to make a trip down to Santa Barbara with our trailer. The 138 miles between Gilroy and Atascadero Superchargers is a serious stretch, especially when considering terrain. It'll require either an RV camp stop or a range charge and some conservative driving. And that's in Supercharger-rich California.

A top up at an EVgo fast charger in Salinas will cut that leg down to 109 miles. Later this year there should be CHAdeMO fast chargers in Gonzales, Greenfield, and King City installed by Recargo under their CEC grant.

 

[tinm]

We have visual confirmation of the Supercharger construction being underway in Santa Fe, NM.

More details here: Supercharger - Santa Fe, NM

 

[cpa]

Just a reminder that there are now occasions where at least a few of us with travel trailers will need to charge to 100% to make it to the next Supercharger. This is a consideration for vehicles without unlimited Supercharging who will be frequently towing in by-the-minute states, I suppose. At least until pack capacity and/or Supercharger density increases.

I was looking to make a trip down to Santa Barbara with our trailer. The 138 miles between Gilroy and Atascadero Superchargers is a serious stretch, especially when considering terrain. It'll require either an RV camp stop or a range charge and some conservative driving. And that's in Supercharger-rich California.

Not to be contrary, Ohmman: The elevation gain from Salinas to Atascadero is less than one thousand feet over 110 miles as you traverse the Salinas River Valley. The jaunt from Gilroy to Salinas is mostly level, perhaps dropping a few feet over the 30 miles. I admit my ignorance, but does it really use 650+ wh/mile while towing a trailer over mostly level ground?

I would be more concerned with the return trip from Buellton to Atascadero. The wind can really blow between Buellton and Pismo Beach, and it is not a tail wind, either. Two years ago I used 420 wh/mile heading north on 101 in the fall. Then you have the long Cuesta Grade north of San Luis and a very short descent into the Salinas Valley.

Good luck, my friend!

 

[WannabeOwner]

does it really use 650+ wh/mile while towing a trailer over mostly level ground?

In case of interest: Bjørn has a handy video, with spreadsheet, about his various trailer, boat and caravan pulling experiences

 

[ohmman]

I admit my ignorance, but does it really use 650+ wh/mile while towing a trailer over mostly level ground?

575Wh/mi under ideal conditions. With about 80kWh still available in my 90kWh battery (based on range charge estimates), that gives me about 139 miles to completely empty. 138 miles is tight.

 

[cpa]

575Wh/mi under ideal conditions. With about 80kWh still available in my 90kWh battery (based on range charge estimates), that gives me about 139 miles to completely empty. 138 miles is tight.

I'll say, Ohmman. That makes your return trip even dicier between Buellton and Atascadero. There are several HPWC installations in Pismo, and Lloyd has one at his dental office in downtown San Luis. My dim memory recalls that most are 80A.