Western Canada Superchargers

[Canuck]

Says nothing about being 'consistent between markets' or equal opportunities/locations to access, but at least this implies that the current Model S and X have the cost of Supercharging built into the price of the car

Agreed. I was just taking issue as to whether you had the option to opt out of supercharging. That was only on the 60. Now you pay for it no matter what.

But the issue is whether Tesla represented that superchargers will be built consistent between markets. In other words, if Canada buys 100,000 cars we get the same amount of superchargers as another country that buys the same amount. If I owned a private company, and a government gave a rebate for my product, and I had a certain amount of cash to build chargers, I'm building more in the country that promotes, encourages, and gives rebates to my product. That only makes sense to me. But that's not even the issue, the issue is that people here think that Tesla promised something they are not delivering (to build chargers consistent between markets) and I don't believe they ever did -- unless someone can direct me to a source for this argument.

Edit: Sorry, I'm misrepresenting what Porfiry said - he didn't say Tesla promised it but that we deserve it based on market share. So I'm back to my argument that we don't deserve it since we don't promote EV's but are one of the biggest, if not the biggest, subsidisers of fossil fuels in the world.

 

[doubeld]

Canuck - I think the issue is that there are getting to be enough Model S owners in non-Super Charger markets to make it obvious that there SHOULD be Super Chargers built here, whether or not the Government supports EVs or offers incentives.
A SC station might only cost $400,000 - which works out to about two hundred car sales. As far as I am concerned, if you can sell 200 cars in a market, that market deserves a SC station. The fact that Canada and Central US has larger distances between markets makes it that much more crucial.
It seems like you're saying that Albertans shouldn't buy Tesla cars because our government subsidizes big oil and we don't have any incentives? Clearly Albertans are buying loads of Tesla cars in spite of the lack of incentives federally or provincially, which still means that we should have fairly equal access to the car's features as someone in Kamloops or Winnipeg.

Personally, I feel that Super Charging is one of only two or three main features that sets it apart from other EVs or PHEVs on the road. If the SC network doesn't get built out (unlikely), I would have a more difficult time buying that over a Volt/Bolt/i3 or whatever EV comes out from Honda or BMW or whoever in the next few years. Obviously, the SC network will expand, but just not at the rate that us in lower-populated areas would like. In short, In 5 years time, I'll be able to drive to Winnipeg on the SC network in my Model 3. I won't be able to do that in any other EV however.

 

[Porfiry]

However, there was never any representation to build superchargers based on the price of the vehicles being consistent between markets, so that superchargers would be built "consistent between markets". You need to provide me with a citation for this allegation since I've been following Tesla a long time and I have never read anything remotely stating this. You buy the vehicle knowing where the stations are, and where they are planned to built, and nothing else is represented or implied at all.

I didn't say supercharger buildout was promised to be "consistent between markets", I said that car pricing was ostensibly "consistent between markets". Tesla says as much, that they try to set their price purely on exchange rate plus additional costs. So, if they earmark X dollars from each car sold to go towards superchargers, that amount will be consistent whether you buy your car in California or Canada. Ideally, the ratio of supercharger stalls to owners should be the same everywhere, otherwise that's not fair and Tesla should be giving us Canadians a discount.

 

[Canuck]

I didn't say supercharger buildout was promised to be "consistent between markets", I said that car pricing was ostensibly "consistent between markets". Tesla says as much, that they try to set their price purely on exchange rate plus additional costs. So, if they earmark X dollars from each car sold to go towards superchargers, that amount will be consistent whether you buy your car in California or Canada. Ideally, the ratio of supercharger stalls to owners should be the same everywhere, otherwise that's not fair and Tesla should be giving us Canadians a discount.

Yes, sorry for misquoting you. But I think the end result is the same and we will have to agree to disagree. In my opinion, we are not deserving of Superchargers for the reasons I have given but I am appreciative for the ones we have. (Now, I am being a little "tongue-in-cheek" since I want to light a fire under our polite Canadian arses so we become just a little outraged at the lack of federal action when it comes to the failure to promote EV's -- and so we direct our annoyance at the right place.) There's no doubt that if our federal government followed Norway's incentive policies we'd be swimming in Superchargers.

It seems like you're saying that Albertans shouldn't buy Tesla cars because our government subsidizes big oil and we don't have any incentives?

No. Never would I say that. I'm just saying that Albertans should be appreciative that an American company has come into your back yard, where you extract oil from tar sands, and has built you superchargers when you're clearly not as deserving as most other places. Be appreciative. That's all I'm saying. Oh, and I've been bugging my buddies from law school in Alberta to buy Teslas. I even had one over and let him drive mine around Stanley Park recently.

 

[doubeld]

That's a pretty shitty attitude to say that just because we happen to be sitting on top of a bunch of old carbon matter and people need that matter for their various purposes, that we don't deserve the graces of some foreign national to sell us their product.

I'm surprised that Tesla would come and sell their product to British Columbia where they have flooded millions of acres of farmland and destroyed fish habitat in order to build dams. And ruined natural landscapes by mining raw materials and spilling tailings into rivers.

I mean come on, everyone loves hating on Alberta - I get it, it's easy, find a new hobby. It's not like the world will never need oil. We're using our money, however we received it to buy Tesla cars in order to replace our gas-burning cars. That's the point. That's why we're all here.

Tesla doesn't care that Alberta generates oil. They just want to sell their cars to as many people as they can. And those people want to drive through Saskatchewan, our brothers in oil-pumping, to visit our friends in Winnipeg who receive their power by more land-destroying hydro-power

 

[Canuck]

That's a pretty shitty attitude to say that just because we happen to be sitting on top of a bunch of old carbon matter and people need that matter for their various purposes, that we don't deserve the graces of some foreign national to sell us their product.

I'm surprised that Tesla would come and sell their product to British Columbia where they have flooded millions of acres of farmland and destroyed fish habitat in order to build dams. And ruined natural landscapes by mining raw materials and spilling tailings into rivers.

I mean come on, everyone loves hating on Alberta - I get it, it's easy, find a new hobby. It's not like the world will never need oil. We're using our money, however we received it to buy Tesla cars in order to replace our gas-burning cars. That's the point. That's why we're all here.

Tesla doesn't care that Alberta generates oil. They just want to sell their cars to as many people as they can. And those people want to drive through Saskatchewan, our brothers in oil-pumping, to visit our friends in Winnipeg who receive their power by more land-destroying hydro-power

You missed the point entirely. This isn't about Alberta or BC, or Tesla selling their product. It's about Superchargers in Canada. Tesla is more than happy to sell their product to us in Canada. But they're stingy when it comes to building superchargers here.

If you don't think Tesla builds more Superchargers where they're treated better by EV friendly federal governments, then you haven't taken a look at Norway.

Oh, and I don't hate Alberta at all. I love Alberta. That's why I oppose tar sands extraction. Alberta needs to diversify, and fast, for their own good....

Fossil fuel decline could be 'faster than expected,' government think-tank warns

I have no issue with the use of oil and oil extraction. Keep the oil wells pumping in Alberta. But extracting oil from tar sands, when we have more oil from wells than is good for us, is not something we as Canadians should be doing. It's far too energy intensive and scarring of the land.

Hydro-electric? Like pumping oil from wells in Alberta, we do need energy. But don't even get me started on fish farming in BC's pristine waters...

 

[doubeld]

Natural resources and politics aside (I continued your argument out of sarcasm, just to show you that that's a moot point), it's a chicken and egg problem, not a treatment issue. People won't buy electric cars if there's no infrastructure, but the infrastructure won't come if there's no demand for the product.
At minimum, there needs to be a Super Charger every 100 miles on main highway corridors, and that's all we're asking. If there's not even that, there will be VERY little adoption of EVs. Once the bare minimum are installed for interstate/interprovince travel, then install additional where the demand is.
I'm not sure about exact timelines, but I think Norway had their policies and incentives in place before Tesla was selling their cars. Therefore, the prices were artificially lower than else and that's why Norwegians bought a lot of Teslas. In which case Tesla responds by installing a schwack of Super Chargers.

 

[beeeerock]

Natural resources and politics aside (I continued your argument out of sarcasm, just to show you that that's a moot point), it's a chicken and egg problem, not a treatment issue. People won't buy electric cars if there's no infrastructure, but the infrastructure won't come if there's no demand for the product.
At minimum, there needs to be a Super Charger every 100 miles on main highway corridors, and that's all we're asking. If there's not even that, there will be VERY little adoption of EVs. Once the bare minimum are installed for interstate/interprovince travel, then install additional where the demand is.
I'm not sure about exact timelines, but I think Norway had their policies and incentives in place before Tesla was selling their cars. Therefore, the prices were artificially lower than else and that's why Norwegians bought a lot of Teslas. In which case Tesla responds by installing a schwack of Super Chargers.

Exactly. It would be like a cellular company refusing to build towers where they're selling phones... because Industry Canada was allowing the cable guys to offer VoIP. Not the best example, but you get my point. The more phones activated, the more cell towers built. We paid our supercharger 'taxes' in the purchase price, so we deserve an equivalent portion back in 'services'.

 

[Canuck]

At minimum, there needs to be a Super Charger every 100 miles on main highway corridors, and that's all we're asking.

That's all you're asking? Every 100 miles at a minimum? Hope to Kelowna is 150 miles, over a significant mountain pass, and it's doable. Every 100 miles seems like overkill to me. On straight stretches through the prairies you don't need them every 100 miles at a minimum.

Exactly. It would be like a cellular company refusing to build towers where they're selling phones...

They do. Where my cabin is located in Tulameen there's no cell phone coverage yet everyone has a cell phone and you can buy them in Princeton, only 25 minutes away. But really, it's not about "refusing" to sell. It's all about allocating resources. Tesla is wise to build them where they are supported. It's not like we are not getting any. I just don't think people should complain about not getting enough and should be appreciative of what we have. But we'll agree to disagree and move one. I'm outnumbered anyway...

 

[doubeld]

100 miles (if I was to change my mind, I'd say 90) is a good minimum, because that's a there & back with a 60kWh battery with a tiny bit of tolerance.

 

[Canuck]

100 miles (if I was to change my mind, I'd say 90) is a good minimum, because that's a there & back with a 60kWh battery with a tiny bit of tolerance.

You've lost me. The 60 gets 210 EPA miles or 338 km. If you space them every 100 miles that overkill no matter how you look at it and I've driven a lot on Canada's highways. It would be a waste of Tesla's resources. It's not happening now and you'll never see that happening in Canada, especially since battery capacity is increasing and every 60 sold today is actually a 75. If someone needs more range for highway driving in a 60, it's a simple phone call to upgrade the car.

 

[doubeld]

At 90 miles apart, you can skip every other SC station, or at least get to the next one if you're on a trip and one happens to be too busy or out of order.
a Model S 60 (Or a base model 3) in the winter will not get you 210 miles. A Model X 90 towing something big and/or heavy will also see reduced mileage, and having them spaced about that much at least gives you options if unforeseen circumstances happen (Terrain, extreme winds, construction/accident detours).

if you think 100 mile spacing between high speed chargers is overkill, I'd like to direct you to the Supercharger map for Massachusetts, Germany, Florida or California.

I disagree that it's a waste of resources. The stated goal of the Supercharger network is to enable Tesla (Model S, then X, and soon 3) drivers to travel long distances. If they do not provide additional SC stations in EV deserts, then their car has less value and sales will not take as well.

 

[Canuck]

At 90 miles apart, you can skip every other SC station, or at least get to the next one if you're on a trip and one happens to be too busy or out of order.

They don't need to build them so you can skip them. If congestion is an issue, then I agree more are needed. Out of service? That's not an issue because I've never seen it when all chargers are out. Maybe the odd one but there's usually 4 at a minimum, and often more.

if you think 100 mile spacing between high speed chargers is overkill, I'd like to direct you to the Supercharger map for Massachusetts, Germany, Florida or California.

That's because of volume, not distance.

I disagree that it's a waste of resources. The stated goal of the Supercharger network is to enable Tesla (Model S, then X, and soon 3) drivers to travel long distances. If they do not provide additional SC stations in EV deserts, then their car has less value and sales will not take as well.

I agree to provide them in EV deserts - Tesla is doing that - just not every 100 miles. They will be empty and that's a waste of resources.

 

[green1]

So if Canada "doesn't deserve" superchargers because we don't actively subsidize EVs, how do you explain all the superchargers in US states that actually prohibit Tesla from selling cars?
Texas has more superchargers than the 4 western provinces combined, and Tesla isn't even allowed to sell there!

 

[Canuck]

So if Canada "doesn't deserve" superchargers because we don't actively subsidize EVs, how do you explain all the superchargers in US states that actually prohibit Tesla from selling cars?
Texas has more superchargers than the 4 western provinces combined, and Tesla isn't even allowed to sell there!

Simple answer: It's the USA. Of course they're going to build out the network across the US.

Again, look at Norway then look at us. That's a better comparison.

 

[green1]

Hardly. Your argument was that they build out where governments are friendly. I just proved they build out where governments are the most hostile they possibly can be. We fall part way between in government "friendliness" neither subsidizing nor prohibiting, yet we don't fall half way between on charger build out.

 

[emupilot]

Tesla has updated their supercharger map, and there is a new gray pin in the vicinity of Lethbridge, Alberta. Lately, new gray pins on the map have been for sites which are already well under construction.

 

[emupilot]

Tesla has updated their supercharger map, and there is a new gray pin in the vicinity of Lethbridge, Alberta. Lately, new gray pins on the map have been for sites which are already well under construction.

I did a quick scan through Lethbridge's interactive map of permits and found one near the intersection of 30th Ave N and 34th St N described as "Construction of an 8 bay commercial structure". It might just be a loading dock, but it's curious nonetheless.

 

[doubeld]

Good find. The location you found is very industrial (I know the area) so that is unlikely to be it, but very close.

I've said it before, but I really think putting it in Lethbridge is a mistake. Geographically, it needs to be in Fort Macleod. That provides way better options for travelers going west, south or east if you're from Calgary, Red Deer or Edmonton.
Lethbridge is a destination for Alberta and Montana Travelers, but a passthrough for a lot as well, so putting a SuC there would be nice, but it doesn't help the long distance travelers as much as it would in Fort Macleod. Could you imagine trying to do a day or weekend trip to Glacier/Waterton/Castle/Fernie areas and having to detour all the way to Lethbridge just to charge? Even making it from Fernie to Calgary would be impossible in the winter for anyone in a 60kWh model S/X/3. Fort Macleod would fix the Calgary <--> Hwy3 Westbound leg.

At any rate, they'll probably choose Lethbridge since it has more amenities and it will probably be at the Best Western on 43rd St (Hwy4) & Hwy3 area as there are a lot of new hotels and restaurants in that new development and that's the chain they've been using in BC lately.

 

[green1]

Everyone's told them to put it in Fort Macleod, the store people in Calgary all agree, but I never expected Tesla to listen. Unfortunately that adds basically an hour to any trip south if they do put it in Lethbridge, and it also makes it a pain for access to the crowsnest pass.

Really the only people who benefit by having it in Lethbridge instead of Fort Macleod are local owners looking for free electricity... you know, the exact ones Tesla says shouldn't use the Superchargers.