Tesla Supercharger network

[dandelot]

What kind of panels do you have?!?

The industry standard 60 cell panels are ~39 inches by ~65 inches and one panel that size certainly won't cover most of a Tesla - or a parking stall, which is probably more relevant.

.

Ok. I never went out and measured panel size till just now. Smaller than I thought. Saghost's sizes and calculation of the panels-per-space (about 8-9) is about right. And I was full of...never mind.

 

[Mkorpal]

Am I the only one alarmed that, after Elon stated the number of superchargers would double prior to the M3 launch, that we are nowhere even close to that? Last I looked there were only one or two pending superchargers in the entire western US. And there's going to be hundreds of thousands of new Teslas supercharging soon? Scratching my head. Either they are hopelessly behind in supercharger construction or they know something we don't about the number of M3s coming online in the next year.

At the time of the reveal, there were 608 stations active around the world. Today we are at 835. So, we are looking for 1200 or so stations for double. They are only about 380 behind, which isn't too bad. If they start ramping up for the summer soon, they might be able to knock most of that out this year.

 

[Cosmacelf]

I've always thought that SC build out waxed and waned depending on how much cash the company had. With the new cash infusion, maybe we'll see more construction.

 

[Bet TSLA]

At the time of the reveal, there were 608 stations active around the world. Today we are at 835. So, we are looking for 1200 or so stations for double. They are only about 380 behind, which isn't too bad. If they start ramping up for the summer soon, they might be able to knock most of that out this year.

This is completely irrelevant. Elon said that they would double the number of supercharging locations in North America in 2017. At the end of 2016 there were 361 open (might be off by one), so the expectation is that by then end of 2017 they'll have 722 locations open. Nothing about how big the new ones will be though.

 

[MP3Mike]

This is completely irrelevant. Elon said that they would double the number of supercharging locations in North America in 2017. At the end of 2016 there were 361 open (might be off by one), so the expectation is that by then end of 2017 they'll have 722 locations open. Nothing about how big the new ones will be though.

But didn't he say that in March of 2016.. So you would need to look at how many stations there were then not at the end of the year.

 

[Mkorpal]

This is completely irrelevant. Elon said that they would double the number of supercharging locations in North America in 2017. At the end of 2016 there were 361 open (might be off by one), so the expectation is that by then end of 2017 they'll have 722 locations open. Nothing about how big the new ones will be though.

I just watched the video, he said nothing about North America. It was world wide. And he specifically said by the end of next year (aka 2017). Not just in 2017. When they announced doubling, they were also specifically showing the number of individual chargers, not locations. Since Tesla is building a lot of 8, 10, and 12 bay locations rather than 4 bay locations, they may actually be on pace for that. Unfortunately, spuercharger.info doesn't have an aggregate stall count from what I can tell.

 

[ohmman]

I just watched the video, he said nothing about North America. It was world wide. And he specifically said by the end of next year (aka 2017). Not just in 2017. When they announced doubling, they were also specifically showing the number of individual chargers, not locations. Since Tesla is building a lot of 8, 10, and 12 bay locations rather than 4 bay locations, they may actually be on pace for that. Unfortunately, spuercharger.info doesn't have an aggregate stall count from what I can tell.

I believe it was the earnings call where it was said they'd double the NA locations. From upthread,

“We plan to accelerate expansion of the Supercharger network this year, starting with doubling our number of North American Supercharger locations in 2017.”

 

[eye.surgeon]

Notice it was specified locations and not chargers.

I trust Tesla knows what they're doing...but it's going to be interesting seeing them pull this rabbit out of the hat. I just don't want to see an internet sh** storm when a bunch of new Tesla owners pull up for their first S/C experience and hit a line.

 

[callmesam]

It would require more building permits and in many locations where the chargers are at a shopping center parking lot, there is very little chance it will happen. Honestly I think it's fine. Solar panels don't have to be exactly where the power is used. That's often not very practical. To the environment it makes no difference where the energy is produced and used.

Covered parking. Not quite as cheap as green fields but getting close to rooftop solar.

As an example, in Barstow, Tesla has covered 4 Superchargers, but there are plenty of stalls uncovered. And there are plenty of other parts of the parking lot that could be covered, even if there were no Superchargers underneath.

Now, I've heard the argument that batteries and solar panels aren't cost effective, but with Tesla's energy use in Superchargers, it isn't simply a constant cost. High use during very hot weather can cause demand charges to be many multiple times the effective cost of a kWh. Thus batteries and offset during peak demand are very cost effective. Even where they don't provide 100% of the energy for the Supercharger. Solar get even more cost effective as the efficiency of panels increases, thereby decreasing other hard costs, for quicker energy payback.

"The Kauai Island Cooperative Utility does not own the storage facility and the 55,000 solar panels, Tesla does. It has entered into a contract with the utility to supply it with power for 20 years at 13.9 cents per kilowatt-hour. That compares to the 15.5 cents per kilowatt-hour cost of electricity prior to the Tesla contract. It makes Tesla a power provider, not merely a battery storage company."

But even Elon agreed that the solar and Supercharger weren't necessarily going to being co-located for every locations. As long as TSLA produces more solar than Tesla the business and customers use, then they are fulfilling their promise. I just think that with the success of the Model 3 and the continued growth of Tesla, they'd be smart to put the solar + battery as close to where they consumer and are using electricity and being charged these demand charges, as possible.

 

[David99]

It took them several years to get to this number of locations. Hard to double that by the end of the year.

 

[Mkorpal]

I believe it was the earnings call where it was said they'd double the NA locations. From upthread,

Ah, my mistake. I thought we were talking about the "doubling" mentioned at the Model 3 reveal.

 

[AudubonB]

A New Way of Assessing SpC Density & Determining Needed Build-out

No April Fool's here. The only thing foolish is my thinking I could learn a non-Excel spreadsheet's quirks on an otherwise nice sunny day.

Preamble: Most comments along the lines of "Here is Why Tesla Needs Concentrate SpC Construction in (_____fill in the blank____), where, curiously enough, that blank almost invariably happens to be the poster's locale. Someone in SoCal may argue that SpC crowding demonstrates the need for more chargers to accommodate existing vehicles. Someone in Alaska, usually me, may argue that one reason we have so few Teslas is because the company hasn't given us any love....one can't even get to...or out of... Alaska in any reasonable fashion.

This work ===>confined solely to the US: sorry, RestOfWorld!<=== approaches the exercise differently. In the accompanying spreadsheet, I have provided on a state-by-state basis

• the number of non-local miles of roadways
• the number of vehicle-miles traveled annually
• the number of vehicle-miles traveled per capita

and then applied the density of Superchargers in each state against those data. Finally, I compared each state's numbers against the benchmark of California.

• All data is from USDOT 2013 information
• I excised all roads defined by DOT as "local non-arterial" to best approximate longer-distance travel. There is no known way, however, to similarly delete such miles traveled. I believe this to be immaterial when making a state-to-state comparison.
• SpC numbers are from supercharge.info, and the numbers given agglomerate all open, under construction and permitted sites as of 1 April 2017 as of this post's creation. Data may be updated as future SpCs open.
• I tried to work in the V-MT per cap information, but somewhere bogged down and the results became non-sensical, so I've omitted showing them

In the accompanying spreadsheet, California's data is emboldened and partially shaded. Where another state's data approaches or exceeds California's - at spreadsheet's creation, that limit is at 80% - those figures also are shaded.

Comments welcome. Now I need to go out and do some real work. And all I've been able to do is embed a snapshot - don't see how to upload the spreadsheet itself. Makes for small print!

 

[BerTX]

Most of the states approaching CA numbers are states bordering CA so that they can go somewhere. I'd consider those CA Superchargers, too.

 

[KJD]

From the chart I can see that Utah is way above average, so yes I think the allocation is just fine as is.

Seriously if Tesla wants to make the Model 3 a mainstream car I think that they will need a 50 state approach to Superchargers. World domination is the long term goal right ?

Hey Tesla, how about showing Canada and Alaska some love on locations of Superchargers ?

 

[Saghost]

From the chart I can see that Utah is way above average, so yes I think the allocation is just fine as is.

Seriously if Tesla wants to make the Model 3 a mainstream car I think that they will need a 50 state approach to Superchargers. World domination is the long term goal right ?

Hey Tesla, how about showing Canada and Alaska some love on locations of Superchargers ?

49 State, I'd agree with. I'm not sure there's much need for Superchargers on the islands, as long as there are enough destination chargers and public chargers all over.

I think Elon tweeted a while ago that he was planning to electrify the Alaska highway at some point.

 

[Fiver]

From the chart I can see that Utah is way above average, so yes I think the allocation is just fine as is.

Nope, Park City needs a supercharger.

/edit I mean Truckee has 2 locations! We deserve at least one...

 

[djdimsum]

This is not looking good for Tesla owners in California, what more when the Model 3 ramps up. Long distance travel is gonna be a headache. 48% of teslas are in California with only 17% of Superchargers, when are they gonna start building more of these?

 

[BerTX]

This is not looking good for Tesla owners in California, what more when the Model 3 ramps up. Long distance travel is gonna be a headache. 48% of teslas are in California with only 17% of Superchargers, when are they gonna start building more of these?

Just curious -- where did those stats come from? I didn't think Tesla gave out those numbers.

 

[wdolson]

The first year or two of the Model S about half of Teslas sold were in California, but now less than half of all Teslas sold are in the US. Last year Tesla sold just shy of 80,000 cars and around 49,000 were registered new in the US. Tesla just reached car #200,000 and according to Inside Evs, 119,924 were sold in the US up to the end of March of this year.

The US is still Tesla's biggest single market and I'm sure sales in California are higher than any other US state, but the total share of Teslas in California is maybe around 25% of all those on the road.

A lot of superchargers are in places where there is virtually no Tesla ownership to allow people to travel through those places. If you look at the map there are a fair number of supercharger locations on interstates in the middle of the US where there aren't even that many people. Those superchargers don't get as much use as ones in places where there is a denser population of Teslas, but they are critical for the coast to coast infrastructure.

In a lot of the US superchargers are spaced about 150 miles apart with none in between. In the last year Tesla has put in a lot of redundant superchargers in California. For example Buttonwillow, Bakersfield, and Tejon Ranch are all much closer together than any superchargers in the Northwest. They have also expanded some superchargers in some locations.

I expect more of this before the end of the year. I suspect there will be a supercharger building boom in the second half of the year and California won't be ignored.

 

[techmaven]

This is not looking good for Tesla owners in California, what more when the Model 3 ramps up. Long distance travel is gonna be a headache. 48% of teslas are in California with only 17% of Superchargers, when are they gonna start building more of these?

Getting people to charge at home instead of at Superchargers is one of the big efforts for all of us collectively. It means making it easier for that want to have home charging to get it, whether it be in an apartment or condo parking garage or lowering the cost of L2 charging installation. Tesla has done a great job of lowering the HPWC cost. A more robust L2 charging infrastructure should help take the load off of L3 charging, especially in CA where it seems a lot of L3 charging use is not for long distance travel.

Now, Model 3 really starts to ramp in Q4. And I suspect the Supercharging plans have been on hold as of late as Tesla has been spending cash on the factory upgrades. As that spend winds down a little, I suspect the Supercharging capex will ramp aggressively in Q3 and Q4.