Jdcleary
Member
That is exactly the type of data I wanted and the type of format. Thank you!
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla Supercharger network
- Thread starter dsm363
- Start date
I was going to post this in the Harris Ranch 80 stall expansion thread, but this is more of a general question so posting here. I'll use the 80 stall site as an example though. I was wondering if the utilization rate of any given site would increase linearly with the number of Tesla's in use. You would think yes, but I believe the answer is actually no, as Tesla has some control over it...
The number of people traveling from LA to SF on any given day or holiday would certainly scale linearly based on number of Tesla's out in the wild. A site with 80 stalls will probably, at least for now, only be 100% utilized on several days a year. But I don't think that Tesla will need to expand that specific site another 80 stalls when their number of vehicles doubles. Why not?
Two reasons come to mind: 1) Much greater density of Superchargers on the route, 2) I think Tesla will further roll out dynamic pricing.
The greater density allows users to choose from a number of different sites, and they are provided quasi real time data concerning current usage, and possibly soon even estimated usage upon arrival. If you let your car navigation system pick the Supercharging site, it could take that into account. Software is cheaper than hardware.
For the rare days when any given site starts filling up, Tesla will know based on historical data and current traffic routing when any given site will hit 100%. Not necessarily exactly, but close enough. An 80 stall site is easier to predict than an 8 stall site, because a few random actions won't have as great an affect. I think that Tesla will use this knowledge to further implement dynamic pricing.
They already do this to some extent by offering discounted or free charging on Holiday weekends during off-peak hours to avoid congestion. Dynamically adjusting pricing on an hourly basis could smooth the traffic out even more. Discounted rates or elevated rates are a very good incentive to avoid peak times. Another case of software being cleverly used to avoid having to expand an already large site. This coupled with greater site density in any given travel corridor gives Tesla all the knobs they need to dial down traffic at sites that they know will get congested.
Limiting charging to 80% at busy sites is another way to increase vehicle turnover at any given site. I sometimes get the 80% message in Baker at 6am when I'm the only one there. So some fine tuning on Tesla's part is certainly in the cards.
It still has me wondering what the "end state" will be in say 5 years if 10% of the total vehicles on the road in California are Tesla's. I think by then there will be many more L2 destination chargers and home chargers that will reduce Supercharger demand. I charge in Vegas at a casino that offers free L2 charging, so I typically plan on arriving with about 15% charge.
There is evidence that Tesla can build Supercharger stations much cheaper than other providers. Given they are flush with cash there is every reason to build as much as required, taking into account the above. Even allowing other EVs to use the system at added cost.
Anything I missed?
RT
The number of people traveling from LA to SF on any given day or holiday would certainly scale linearly based on number of Tesla's out in the wild. A site with 80 stalls will probably, at least for now, only be 100% utilized on several days a year. But I don't think that Tesla will need to expand that specific site another 80 stalls when their number of vehicles doubles. Why not?
Two reasons come to mind: 1) Much greater density of Superchargers on the route, 2) I think Tesla will further roll out dynamic pricing.
The greater density allows users to choose from a number of different sites, and they are provided quasi real time data concerning current usage, and possibly soon even estimated usage upon arrival. If you let your car navigation system pick the Supercharging site, it could take that into account. Software is cheaper than hardware.
For the rare days when any given site starts filling up, Tesla will know based on historical data and current traffic routing when any given site will hit 100%. Not necessarily exactly, but close enough. An 80 stall site is easier to predict than an 8 stall site, because a few random actions won't have as great an affect. I think that Tesla will use this knowledge to further implement dynamic pricing.
They already do this to some extent by offering discounted or free charging on Holiday weekends during off-peak hours to avoid congestion. Dynamically adjusting pricing on an hourly basis could smooth the traffic out even more. Discounted rates or elevated rates are a very good incentive to avoid peak times. Another case of software being cleverly used to avoid having to expand an already large site. This coupled with greater site density in any given travel corridor gives Tesla all the knobs they need to dial down traffic at sites that they know will get congested.
Limiting charging to 80% at busy sites is another way to increase vehicle turnover at any given site. I sometimes get the 80% message in Baker at 6am when I'm the only one there. So some fine tuning on Tesla's part is certainly in the cards.
It still has me wondering what the "end state" will be in say 5 years if 10% of the total vehicles on the road in California are Tesla's. I think by then there will be many more L2 destination chargers and home chargers that will reduce Supercharger demand. I charge in Vegas at a casino that offers free L2 charging, so I typically plan on arriving with about 15% charge.
There is evidence that Tesla can build Supercharger stations much cheaper than other providers. Given they are flush with cash there is every reason to build as much as required, taking into account the above. Even allowing other EVs to use the system at added cost.
Anything I missed?
RT
Hard to guesstimate when cars will be leaving. I admit that some fill up to 100%. But I have mostly done the 'destination plus a buffer' method which , on a trip, is much quicker. Other drivers have their own method. If Tesla starts recommending which location is 'better', they may wind up with chargers not being utilized because 'those cars' left before full charge - while incoming cars were diverted. Not an exact science.
I would like to see...
"Based on your final destination, Instead of charging at Charger A for 30 minutes, you could stop at Charger 'A' for 10 minutes and then Charger 'B' for ten minutes for the same amount of energy to get you to your destination." Giving you an option.
I think Tesla's approach is to just build out more chargers.
These games, like demand pricing and clever prediction, may help to deal with a zero-sum-game and will keep MBAs, MPAs, and other middle-men busy. However, the sum doesn't have to be zero - more can be built.
The good thing about relatively cheap installation costs and charging a nominal fee to charge is that Superchargers, especially in high-usage areas, are likely to be a completely sustainable business. Therefore, as demand increases, more money becomes available to grow to meet it. With economies of scale, linear growth can even lead to better-than-linear cost reduction.
This, of course, is also why I'm not concerned about Tesla opening up superchargers to other manufacturers since they can just scale accordingly, maybe even faster.
In dense urban areas, I see more challenge since land price will undoubtedly dominate the costs. Level 2 charging wherever one parks, seems like the sustainable urban option.
cpa
Active Member
My two cents:
We human beings are a very unpredictable lot. Some of us follow directions assiduously, while others are more insouciant. In addition, we humans frequently consider the variables at the suggested stopping places because we drank too much coffee in the morning, we are traveling with small children, we have other travel companions who want to take some time to stretch and walk about, and perhaps the most likely: What can we do when we stop?
Clearly, Harris Ranch with its restaurant and deli is a more attractive charging spot than Kettleman City with the lounge if you want to stop for lunch or dinner. This is especially true if you do not want fast food or Subway sandwiches and would prefer a nice dining experience.
Tesla can use external factors to spread out usage by having different pricing at different times. But the larger picture tells me that to save two bits per kWh is not going to be much incentive. When people are on vacation, they generally don't worry about $10 in fuel costs. Or if they did, it is more likely than not that a travel companion will be angry over saving a few bucks instead of going to a site that has better amenities.
In closing, I have seen twice now that Tesla has also installed their HPWC at sites that have Superchargers. This enables people to charge while they spend more time doing other things, thereby avoiding idle fees or having to interrupt their session to move their vehicle. It would not surprise me in the least that the new construction might adopt this strategy and have a dozen or so 48A L2 charging stations to let people have a 60-75 minute lunch or dinner.
We human beings are a very unpredictable lot. Some of us follow directions assiduously, while others are more insouciant. In addition, we humans frequently consider the variables at the suggested stopping places because we drank too much coffee in the morning, we are traveling with small children, we have other travel companions who want to take some time to stretch and walk about, and perhaps the most likely: What can we do when we stop?
Clearly, Harris Ranch with its restaurant and deli is a more attractive charging spot than Kettleman City with the lounge if you want to stop for lunch or dinner. This is especially true if you do not want fast food or Subway sandwiches and would prefer a nice dining experience.
Tesla can use external factors to spread out usage by having different pricing at different times. But the larger picture tells me that to save two bits per kWh is not going to be much incentive. When people are on vacation, they generally don't worry about $10 in fuel costs. Or if they did, it is more likely than not that a travel companion will be angry over saving a few bucks instead of going to a site that has better amenities.
In closing, I have seen twice now that Tesla has also installed their HPWC at sites that have Superchargers. This enables people to charge while they spend more time doing other things, thereby avoiding idle fees or having to interrupt their session to move their vehicle. It would not surprise me in the least that the new construction might adopt this strategy and have a dozen or so 48A L2 charging stations to let people have a 60-75 minute lunch or dinner.
There is no real solution other than building out more and more SCs. No amount of fidgeting with algorithms and pricing and stuff will help. Just keep building more locations and adding more stalls and converting all to 250 KW and above.
I don't believe even any number of L2 as destination chargers at malls, shops and hotels is of much value. Maybe some value in having them in hotels, but you need to have them in large numbers. Just one or two parking spots with chargers doesn't cut it, as it is likely to be occupied the whole night you stay there.
I don't believe even any number of L2 as destination chargers at malls, shops and hotels is of much value. Maybe some value in having them in hotels, but you need to have them in large numbers. Just one or two parking spots with chargers doesn't cut it, as it is likely to be occupied the whole night you stay there.
I disagree, but this thread is about Superchargers, so I will be very brief. There should be L2 charging stations anywhere and everywhere that people regularly park their car for more than an hour. The only question is how many are needed at a given location.
Is that the reason why I have never seen EVEN ONCE any EV charging at the two Blink chargers in the Kroger parking lot. For the 30 minutes you are in there, you will get 10 miles.
2 comments:
1) the suggestion was:
Therefore it does not suggest them to be particularly viable for a 30 minute stop at a store.
2) Many Blink chargers max out at 16 amps because of poor design. This would only get you about 6 miles in your half hour :-(
I do think that L2 is on topic since their proper use can reduce the demand for the more expensive L3 Superchargers.
Blink has its own issues with reliability, cost, and melting peoples' charge ports.
L2 is useful (in large number of stalls) for overnight stay. In other locations it is not of much value. Gives a false impression by providing an inflated count.
Fortunably, as more people actually live with EVs, they begin to understand these things. Up until now, EVs were some abstract green concept for most. Thanks to all of the EVangelism by owners, reality is becoming understood by more. I still remember the rest area on I-64 in Virginia where VDOT put in a charging station which was a custom-built box with 2 120v outlets in it. Clearly someone thought they were doing something useful but they never realized how useless it was as it would take about 3 hours to get enough charge to get to the next exit and about 7 hours to get to the next charging station.
FlatSix911
Porsche 918 Hybrid
There is a Level-2 charger at the Tahoe City Supercharger... the tech I spoke with said it has never been used.
dgpcolorado
high altitude member
I routinely use L2 public charge stations in the city where I go grocery shopping or to see a movie. I plug-in and walk to the store or theater. The 7 kW L2 stations there are well used. The public L2 stations in the small town (Ridgway) nearest me get well used; helps that they are 8 kW. They are ideally located for tourist visits.
So, I'm not as dismissive about public L2 stations as some here. An hour or two can be a useful amount of charge. Perhaps not as helpful for apartment dwellers or road trips as reliable DCFC but still useful, at least in rural areas such as mine.
FlatSix911
Porsche 918 Hybrid
Elon has now confirmed the addition of CCS connectors to US Supercharger stations. 
electrek.co
"t hasn’t been clear how Tesla plans to implement its plan to open the Supercharger network in the United States, but CEO Elon Musk previously talked about having an adapter at the stations for non-Tesla EV owners to use. Now at the FT Future of Cars Conference, Musk hinted that Tesla will be adding the CCS connectors directly at the stations:
Tesla will add CCS connectors to Supercharger stations in the US, says Elon Musk
Tesla will add CCS connectors to its Supercharger stations in the United States to let non-Tesla EV owners access the...
electrek.co
"t hasn’t been clear how Tesla plans to implement its plan to open the Supercharger network in the United States, but CEO Elon Musk previously talked about having an adapter at the stations for non-Tesla EV owners to use. Now at the FT Future of Cars Conference, Musk hinted that Tesla will be adding the CCS connectors directly at the stations:
This comes after Tesla filed for incentives to deploy Supercharger stations in Texas with both CCS and Tesla connectors. It’s also an approach similar to the one that Tesla took in Europe when first switching to the CCS standard with the Model 3. New Supercharger stations would get both Tesla and CCS connectors, and the automaker started to retrofit some existing stations as well. The CEO didn’t offer a timeline on when Tesla plans to start adding CCS connectors to stations in the United States."
^^^ Exactly! I travel quite a bit, and when the wife tags along, we always stop at the same supercharger stop, because it's very brightly lit, and has onsite restrooms/food that is 24/7. However, it is also 37 cents/kwh. There are two other superchargers that I like to go to, that are much cheaper if I go at the right time... One of them you have to hike like 1/2 a mile to get to any ameneties. The other one, the ameneties close early... So as a result, we always stop at the more expensive one, becuase it's more convenient.
There was a pair of L2 chargers at the hotel I stayed at in Canada... At first I thought it was free, but then I saw you had to pay... I was fine with that, but when I looked closer at it, it was much more expensive that just going to a supercharger.. I booked that hotel becuase the SC was down the street, the L2 was something I discovered later... I paid $15/CA to charge my car at the SC... When I looked at the rate the L2 charger cost, it would've cost me $21 for the same charge.
Since L2 at the hotel will save me well more than an hour (more in cold weather) on my trip, I'll generally prefer to pay for L2 at my hotel rather than free or cheap Supercharger.
Supercharger: Drive to and sit there, then do nothing useful but charge.
L2 at hotel: Charge while sleeping, battery and cabin warming in winter, close to my room, 100% charge, just pack up and go.
An exception might be if there is something I want to do near the Supercharger (like eat or shop).
My main concern was that this L2 charger was like $5/hr, and I wasn't sure if it would stop billing me $5/hr once it reaches the cutoff, or if it would just charge me $5/hr until I disconnect in the morning.
Similar threads
- Poll
