US Supercharges 20% done ?!?!

[bonnie]

I find it interesting that the number of sites is considered by many here to be a definable number.

As number of vehicles supercharging increases, the number of places to charge will increase. I doubt building out the network will ever be 'done'. Maybe not all will be done by Tesla - I could easily see a licensing play in the future, designed to bring Tesla-technology owners to a specific location (shopping malls, hotels, etc.).

Done, no. Ever-evolving, yes.

 

[Zarwin]

I'm hoping there will be significant capacity expansion where needed as a priority over location expansion. The main corridors will need to be increased at some locations soon. One point in particular on the east coast is Newark, DE, a 4 stall that is at max capacity often, and a major link on the 95 corridor. Bring that one up to a 8 or even 10 before it becomes so congested that it starts making corridor travel unappealing. I went through there in July and it was at max capacity for both my northbound and southbound travel. I got a spot both times, but 4/4 stalls were in use while I was charging so if another Tesla arrived, they would have to queue. On the main corridors it would be nice to have very large SC stations instead of more and more spread out smaller stations.

 

[mknox]

Perhaps in theory, but since their network only services their cars, it doesn't really promote sales of EVs so much as it promotes sales of Tesla EVs. And how can Tesla EV charging become financially viable when Tesla is giving away charging? I suppose there could be paid charging stations in locations that Tesla has neglected, but is it worth the capital investment if you can't be sure Tesla won't later put a free Supercharger just up the road?

There is the distinct possibility that the Tesla connector could become the "standard" in the future, especially with Tesla opening up their patents. And as far as we know, Tesla is providing free charging to (early adopter) Model S owners, and presumably Model X owners, but I think all bets are off when it comes to the Model 3.

 

[TexasEV]

On the main corridors it would be nice to have very large SC stations instead of more and more spread out smaller stations.

Why? Not everyone has the same origin or the same destination. More places to charge means more flexibility, especially for people whose travels involve roads off the main interstate for part of the trip.

 

[macpacheco]

There is the distinct possibility that the Tesla connector could become the "standard" in the future, especially with Tesla opening up their patents. And as far as we know, Tesla is providing free charging to (early adopter) Model S owners, and presumably Model X owners, but I think all bets are off when it comes to the Model 3.

How about Tesla delivers Gen III vehicles with limited Super Charger capability, enough for the owner to do say, 100 0-80% charges, then he needs to purchase an unlimited supercharging optional ? In the long run most owners will eventually buy it. Would be an interesting promotional feature.

 

[svp6]

How about Tesla delivers Gen III vehicles with limited Super Charger capability, enough for the owner to do say, 100 0-80% charges, then he needs to purchase an unlimited supercharging optional ? In the long run most owners will eventually buy it. Would be an interesting promotional feature.

I suspect Supercharging will be an option for Gen 3, similar to S60..... The only "free" SC is for 85 KWh Model S - of course, price for SC is included in the cost of the car.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

I find it interesting that the number of sites is considered by many here to be a definable number.

As number of vehicles supercharging increases, the number of places to charge will increase. I doubt building out the network will ever be 'done'. Maybe not all will be done by Tesla - I could easily see a licensing play in the future, designed to bring Tesla-technology owners to a specific location (shopping malls, hotels, etc.).

Done, no. Ever-evolving, yes.

I think one needs to separate coverage and capacity.
- Coverage is geographical: that can stop increasing once all reasonable routes are covered.
- Capacity is numerical: that can stop once the volume of Supercharger-capable cars can be handled.

But for the destination charging program, it should be noted (2013 Lodging Industry Profile - AH&LA
) that there are more than 50,000 hotels in the USA.

 

[Zarwin]

Why? Not everyone has the same origin or the same destination. More places to charge means more flexibility, especially for people whose travels involve roads off the main interstate for part of the trip.

As congestion begins, larger, clustered superchargers increase the efficiency of utilization. I unfortunately worked with call center routing for a spell years ago and this can be looked at in the same way. This is an extreme example... Say you have a 100 mile stretch of I-95 that has a 2 stall supercharger every 10 miles instead of a 20 stall supercharger every 100 miles. Sure it sounds great since you have all that flexibility, but it will have issues with congestion long before the 20 station central model. It would be like a call center that has 10 phone numbers, each with two people that can answer the phone. You pick at random what number to call and will be much more likely to hit a queue while agents on other numbers sit idle. Much more efficient to have one number that distributes calls to all 20 agents. Of course when you hit a queue with superchargers, then you have to go drive to the next one or wait, can't just pick a new number to dial instantly.

That is an extreme example, and having anything less than a 4 stall is a terrible idea, but its just an example of efficiency. Now if there were intelligence available to reserve a slot while on the road, then sure, throw small groups of stalls all over the place, it wouldn't matter.

 

[bxr140]

There is the distinct possibility that the Tesla connector could become the "standard" in the future, especially with Tesla opening up their patents.

And, as I understand, Tesla has no problem with other manufacturers using the existing SC network as long as there's an equivalent pre-pay/buy-in for those vehicles.

And as far as we know, Tesla is providing free charging to (early adopter) Model S owners, and presumably Model X owners, but I think all bets are off when it comes to the Model 3.

I dont think so. The SC network is a major reason Tesla is set apart from the rest. They're never going to bail on it. It may be a paid option for model 3 owners instead of rolled into the cost (like the 85s, anyway), but supercharging will absolutely be available on every Tesla of the future. Or at least until megacharging comes out...but those cars will be backward compatible with the SC network.:biggrin:

Based on cost estimates per SC station and annual electricity useage estimates it sounds like the SC network is self sustaining. So...as long as there are cars buying into the network there will be a network to build out.

 

[bluenation]

i understand that tesla cant build all high capacity chargers by itself, esp. it being free...but to stop by 2017 or whenever would be immensily foolish of tesla. you should never stop building infrastructure, unless you want to stop selling more and more EVs.

 

[TexasEV]

As congestion begins, larger, clustered superchargers increase the efficiency of utilization. I unfortunately worked with call center routing for a spell years ago and this can be looked at in the same way. This is an extreme example... Say you have a 100 mile stretch of I-95 that has a 2 stall supercharger every 10 miles instead of a 20 stall supercharger every 100 miles. Sure it sounds great since you have all that flexibility, but it will have issues with congestion long before the 20 station central model. It would be like a call center that has 10 phone numbers, each with two people that can answer the phone. You pick at random what number to call and will be much more likely to hit a queue while agents on other numbers sit idle. Much more efficient to have one number that distributes calls to all 20 agents. Of course when you hit a queue with superchargers, then you have to go drive to the next one or wait, can't just pick a new number to dial instantly.

That is an extreme example, and having anything less than a 4 stall is a terrible idea, but its just an example of efficiency. Now if there were intelligence available to reserve a slot while on the road, then sure, throw small groups of stalls all over the place, it wouldn't matter.

I understand the analogy, but I'd rather take the chance of having to "wait on hold" at a nearby supercharger for 15 minutes than have the nearest supercharger 50 miles away even if I had enough charge to get there. I would also rather be given that choice than have the only option being the one 50 miles away.

 

[PoweredByRain]

Most of this discussion has been for long distance travel assuming connectivity and range are the driving issues. As more and more Teslas are sold, dense areas will need more Superchargers for charging capacity. Below is an approximate set of calculations that show Tesla needs another Supercharger for about every 300-400 cars sold, just for charging capacity.

Supercharger installs to support charging capacity are already starting to happen in the LA basin and San Francisco Bay areas.

View attachment 66943

By my estimation, many car companies spend on the order of $500 per car in advertising. So spending $548 per car for Superchargers means that Tesla is making nearly the same profit on the car, but instead of giving some of the money to advertising agencies and media companies, it's going to construction contractors. Tesla is still ahead because some of that money spent remains as an asset.

(e.g. GM's global advertising budget is apparently $4.7 billion, and they delivered 9.7 million cars worldwide - that's an advertising expense of $484 per car sold.)

As for the $128/year per car for electricity - which I think is probably a high estimate - charging $2000 per car covers quite a few years of that expense! (This is explicitly charged to 60 kWh Model S owners, presumably it's a similar amount embedded in the price of an 85 kWh Model S).

Also: 16 cents per kWh? That's a pretty high cost to assume! It's 7 cents per kWh here.

I think Supercharging ability for the Model 3 will be an extra cost option.

 

[RobStark]

i understand that tesla cant build all high capacity chargers by itself, esp. it being free...but to stop by 2017 or whenever would be immensily foolish of tesla. you should never stop building infrastructure, unless you want to stop selling more and more EVs.

Supercharging is not free. It is pre-paid. Some will use more than "their fair share" but many more will use far less than "their fair share."


The average retail price for electricity in the USA is $0.12 kWh. My guess is that Tesla does better than retail. And at some point will be rolling out efficient solar to charge SpC directly or indirectly which brings the price down as well

- - - Updated - - -

 

[bonnie]

Supercharging is not free. It is pre-paid. Some will use more than "their fair share" but many more will use far less than "their fair share."

Another way to look at this is that supercharging IS free - cars were sold months before supercharging was announced & owners were ecstatic to find out there was no charge for it. (And yes, I understand that cars with 60kWh batteries do pay for hardware.) So either the cost was built in to begin with and owners were charged for something they didn't know about, or it was free.

How can any manufacturer give things away *free* and still make money? Sounds ridiculous. But if you shift thinking just a bit, and consider that each supercharging location is, in fact, physical advertising for Tesla, and couple that with the word of mouth advertising that every owner does ("Nope, I just drove cross-country and didn't pay a dime!"), it's a LOT of advertising. If you shift "supercharging" out from under car cost and over into "advertising budget", it's easy to argue that it IS free to owners.

( ... Personally I'd rather that Tesla spend their advertising dollars on supplying supercharging than on a bunch of print ads and television commercials. Wouldn't you?)

In a less fanciful vein, studies support that when infrastructure is in place, EV sales increase. Business development cost, advertising cost ... they're squeezing out a lot of value here.

 

[bxr140]

And yes, I understand that cars with 60kWh batteries do pay for hardware.

Its not hardware, or even a software update. Every 60 that rolls off the line is supercharger ready. Its just a simple activation.

 

[TexasEV]

Its not hardware, or even a software update. Every 60 that rolls off the line is supercharger ready. Its just a simple activation.

Yes it is supercharger ready. But that takes hardware and software. Where do you think the money for that comes from?

Soon after supercharging was announced Elon described the $2000 fee for 60's as $1000 for hardware and $1000 for software. This was before it was made public that all 60's had it already installed. That made production simpler and maintained the value of the 60's so owners could turn it on when supercharging came to their area, or a second owner could turn it on. It's hard to imagine anyone buying a 60 now without supercharging activated, or that many early 60's still don't have supercharging activated. Tesla will get its money out of almost all of those eventually.

Further to what Bonnie said, when Steve Jurvetson spoke at TMC Connect he described the supercharger network as a marketing expense.

 

[jerry33]

( ... Personally I'd rather that Tesla spend their advertising dollars on supplying supercharging than on a bunch of print ads and television commercials. Wouldn't you?)

In a less fanciful vein, studies support that when infrastructure is in place, EV sales increase. Business development cost, advertising cost ... they're squeezing out a lot of value here.

^^^^ This. I'd never see a TV ad, popup ad, or print ad. I might notice a billboard ad. Using Superchargers as marketing just makes a lot of sense and is also good for the car owners. Spending money on traditional advertising just increases the price of the vehicle without adding any value for the purchasers.

 

[Cottonwood]

Supercharging is not free. It is pre-paid. Some will use more than "their fair share" but many more will use far less than "their fair share."


The average retail price for electricity in the USA is $0.12 kWh. My guess is that Tesla does better than retail. And at some point will be rolling out efficient solar to charge SpC directly or indirectly which brings the price down as well

My numbers were only meant to be rough estimates to see approximately where Tesla stands in terms of costs for Superchargers to support capacity limited situations and cost of electricity. I used $0.16/kWh as a reasonable upper bound. Use $0.12/kWh and the annual cost drops to $96 per year per Tesla.

Make your own assumptions. Are Superchargers prepaid, are they advertising expense, some blend, etc? Whatever you choose, the costs are tractable. Also, having the marginal cost (cost per use) be zero is great press and encourages people to use their Tesla's; brilliant.

In my opinion, Solar is a red herring in the Supercharger discussions. Solar canopies can produce a charge or 2 a day per stall. To support busy Supercharger sites, you would need 10x the parking area or more and huge energy storage. What we do see Tesla developing is energy storage to avoid demand charges (peak kW averaged in 15 min periods). For many Supercharger locations, demand charges can equal or exceed energy (kWh) charges. To clip the low-probability tails (peaks) from monthly usage is the low hanging fruit in Supercharger electricity bills, and we see that hardware or room for it appearing in Barstow, Hawthorne, Culver City, and Gilroy. Those are the busy, close-to-home sites with big California demand rates. Demand-clipping, energy-storage hardware will start appearing at most busy sites to tame demand charges.

It is interesting to consider the choice of many small vs a few large Supercharger sites. Larger sites have better efficiency statically (Erlang efficiency); there is a huge win going from 4 to 8 or 12 stalls (4->8 is 3.5x; 4->12 is 5x capacity), but the percentage gain starts falling off after that. Also, site acquisition is a bear, and big sites are harder. My prediction is that Tesla will continue with the 12 stalls or so size in busy areas, and gain from there with smart tools in the car. Tesla could easily monitor Supercharger usage and make recommendations to the driver on busy and lightly used sites ahead. One step further and Tesla could add a feature to the Nav function that offers alternatives for Supercharging based on how busy sites are, just like there are alternatives offered in navigation based on traffic; Supercharger usage is just another form of traffic. Offering such info to the driver combines the number of stalls in a region to gain better queueing (Erlang) efficiency.

I predict many 8-12 stall sites with real time usage info given to the user in some form to help users find open stalls.

 

[jerry33]

n my opinion, Solar is a red herring in the Supercharger discussions. Solar canopies can produce a charge or 2 a day per stall.

While true, as the build up of Superchargers continues in the less populated sections of the country the ratio of solar power to cars being charged increases. Also solar panels improve in efficiency over time. I suspect one of the reasons they aren't being put up now is that Tesla is waiting for efficiency to increase (from the solar panel factory recently purchased).

I recently toured a brewery where 170 m[SUP]2[/SUP] supplied almost all the power required with biodiesel as a fallback during the most energy intensive usage periods. Although they are grid tied, they haven't drawn any power from the grid in the three years the system has been running. They do sell power back to the grid, so they are energy cost neutral. (The amount they spend for biodiesel service is offset by the electricity they sell back to the grid.)

 

[bxr140]

Yes it is supercharger ready. But that takes hardware and software. Where do you think the money for that comes from?

Easy for me to say now, but I don't think there was ever any real plans to deliver a model S without the hardware or even software to SC as two options would ultimately be more expensive for Tesla. Ergo, the money didn't come from anywhere as it was already built in to the NRE budgets and the common model S components. I'd contest that S40s can likely supercharge as well, but because they cant feasilby use the network its easier to tell a little white lie...

I believe the $1000 each for hardware and software was Elon misdirection away from the true "pre paid" nature of the SC network. Its a bit of a rabbit hole to advertise (or at least, strongly imply) free SC for life but then charge S60s for their piece of that timeshare. Again its convenient dismissal on my part, but IMHO its much easier for TM to tell another LWL and call that the cost of necessary HW/SW upgrades while preserving the free-for-life aspect.

It's hard to imagine anyone buying a 60 now without supercharging activated, or that many early 60's still don't have supercharging activated.

Bit tangent on my part, but I understand prospective 60 owners passing up the SC option. For someone educated in range and SC rates its hard to see how one arrives at a 60+SC as opposed to an 85. The only reason one considers a 60 is financial, and thus one needs to seriously consider each and every option. An S60 isn't going to be an only car so the other family ICE vehicles can pickup the road trip slack, therefore that $2k cold be better spent elsewhere. If one truly understands the way SC works, the $8k delta should be palatable.

For the record, I took delivery of my 60 in Jan and paid the $2k+$500 stupid tax to activate supercharging last month because we thought it would be fun to take her on a road trip. If the model X deliveries were emminent (the 60 was a gateway drug for my wife) I wouldnt have upgraded and we would have just taken one of our two ICEs on that trip.