Where is the California Supercharger build out?

[EV-lutioin]

If only there as a graphic symbol that conveyed sarcasm, a meaning that is often not conveyed by plain text messages being read on a screen...

Couple places we absolutely need superchargers are in South Lake Tahoe and Yosemite. Both are heavily traveled tourist destinations and one has to rely on destination chargers quite a bit. I am always a bit uncomfortable relying solely on a destination charger in a popular destination. They can ICEd (happened in Tahoe couple months back) or it may not be working or may be occupied by another Tesla.

Tesla just opened two Superchargers near Yosemite: Groveland and Fish Camp.... so that is now well covered. Agreed on the need for one near S. Lake Tahoe.

 

[Cosmacelf]

@SFOTurtle im glad you are finding it easier now to do cross CA trips, but I stand by what I said. When I bought my Model S at the factory and drove down to San Diego (yes it was mid week) 4 years ago, I didn't have to wait at any SC, even the single one at Harris Ranch. When I did the same trip on December 30 2016 at night with my Model X, it was a comparative disaster. While I didn't have to wait, I did have slow paired Superchargers. It made a big difference in how fast I was able to do the journey (of course it didn't help that Tesla gave me a Model X at the factory with 50 miles of charge in it. Talk about poor customer service!).

 

[David99]

@SFOTurtle You are right, it was very hard to impossible to make certain road trips. I don't think anyone argues that. I had to go 60 mph from LA all the way to Quartzsite. There was nothing. Now there are 3 more Superchargers just on that route. Going between LA an Vegas has been improved so much with 2 SC in LV and adding Primm and expanding Barstow.

Tesla has done a lot, but they have also sold a lot of car since then. They have sold more cars than they have added Superchargers in the areas where they sold those car. Tesla has done an amazing job covering most major freeways across the US with Superchargers. Coverage is awesome. Unfortunately, very little cars have been sold in the vast majority of areas that are not connected through Superchargers. A year ago I was driving on a very busy freeway through Los Angeles. I counted Teslas for 20 min and saw one about every three minutes. I just did the same the other day. I counted 12 in 10 min. While this is very unscientific, it kind of gives one an idea how many more Teslas are driving around here these days.

I totally agree with you, the Supercharger network is absolutely amazing and the fact that no one else has even attempted to build anything that comes even close make it stand out even more. But that should not be the goal or set the bar. The Superchargers are a marketing and selling tool for Tesla. If they can't keep up with demand, this can quickly backfire. We have seen what happened when more than 20 cars where lines up in Barstow.

 

[EV-lutioin]

@SFOTurtle You are right, it was very hard to impossible to make certain road trips. I don't think anyone argues that. I had to go 60 mph from LA all the way to Quartzsite. There was nothing. Now there are 3 more Superchargers just on that route. Going between LA an Vegas has been improved so much with 2 SC in LV and adding Primm and expanding Barstow.

Tesla has done a lot, but they have also sold a lot of car since then. They have sold more cars than they have added Superchargers in the areas where they sold those car. Tesla has done an amazing job covering most major freeways across the US with Superchargers. Coverage is awesome. Unfortunately, very little cars have been sold in the vast majority of areas that are not connected through Superchargers. A year ago I was driving on a very busy freeway through Los Angeles. I counted Teslas for 20 min and saw one about every three minutes. I just did the same the other day. I counted 12 in 10 min. While this is very unscientific, it kind of gives one an idea how many more Teslas are driving around here these days.

I totally agree with you, the Supercharger network is absolutely amazing and the fact that no one else has even attempted to build anything that comes even close make it stand out even more. But that should not be the goal or set the bar. The Superchargers are a marketing and selling tool for Tesla. If they can't keep up with demand, this can quickly backfire. We have seen what happened when more than 20 cars where lines up in Barstow.

And, I would argue, that eventually Superchargers could become a revenue stream for Tesla... depending on how they play it. Building more stations as quickly as possible seems like a win-win for Tesla.... which begs the question first proposed in this thread. Why is it taking them so long to get permits filed for 2017 Superchargers? When you look at the 2017 expansion map, Tesla claims that they will double the number of Superchargers. Given that it is already April and very few permits have been filed.... it kinda makes you wonder.

 

[CSFTN]

You make the mistake of thinking we know how many permits have been filed .. we only know of the permits which have been filed and reported to this crowd-sourced web site. Not the same thing. (And Q1 always lags the rest of the year)

But your point certain seems correct. It doesn't look like Tesla is on track to even come close to doubling capacity pf the Supercharger network.

 

[ApauloThirteen]

I strongly believe that we need a lot of L2 chargers to solve the crowding of Superchargers. We need L2 chargers at every workplace, mall, public parking, street parking, shopping areas, amusement parking, ... And we need lots of them. We need the ability to plug in wherever we go and we need a lot of them so everyone gets a spot. There is nothing more convenient to plug in where you go anyways. Going to Superchargers to top off is inconvenient, but right now there are few alternatives.

L2 quantity would help but also the charging rate ...wish other auto companies would step up on the rates.

Other EVs/plug ins, still have 3.3 / 3.6 kwh chargers so we end up occupying L2 spots a lot longer than we should/would like to.

 

[CuriousG]

California accounts for almost half of all Tesla's sold in the US. Many are registered in other states to have cheaper registration and insurance but end up driving around California. So yes, California needs to have plenty of chargers.

What evidence do you have this is happening?

 

[CuriousG]

Tesla stated they would double the number of supercharger locations in the US prior to the model 3 launch.It's likely impossible at this point that they will achieve anything close to that. They would need to open a new site every few days at this point. Same with service centers, which actually concerns me more.

Don't forget they also said they were to have more authorized body repair shops.

 

[David99]

What evidence do you have this is happening?

I don't have them right here, but I saw several charts showing the sales/registration numbers of Teslas per state. It was around 43% California, the rest in all other states. The problem of cars driving in California while registered in other sates is big. So big that the sate created a program to fight it and get the lost money back. Vehicle registration is very expensive in California compared to most other states. It's a common problem that people register their cars in other states when possible. If I'd register my car in Wisconsin for example, I'd save $500 a year.

 

[McRat]

Yes, anybody with an AZ vacation home or rental, is running AZ plates in California.

 

[CuriousG]

I don't have them right here, but I saw several charts showing the sales/registration numbers of Teslas per state. It was around 43% California, the rest in all other states. The problem of cars driving in California while registered in other sates is big. So big that the sate created a program to fight it and get the lost money back. Vehicle registration is very expensive in California compared to most other states. It's a common problem that people register their cars in other states when possible. If I'd register my car in Wisconsin for example, I'd save $500 a year.

That's not proof other than you have some numbers saying there are X amount of cars registered in CA and Y in other states. Can you cite articles that mention this state program? I don't remember what I paid for registration this year but I'm pretty sure it was under $600 for a 1 year old car. So you're saying it only costs ~$100 to register in Wisconsin?

I guess I'll have to pay more attention next time I see another Tesla whether they have CA plates. Based on what you're saying (60% CA), 3 out of every 10 cars are out of state. That seems improbable to me.

 

[thefortunes]

That's not proof other than you have some numbers saying there are X amount of cars registered in CA and Y in other states. Can you cite articles that mention this state program? I don't remember what I paid for registration this year but I'm pretty sure it was under $600 for a 1 year old car. So you're saying it only costs ~$100 to register in Wisconsin?

I guess I'll have to pay more attention next time I see another Tesla whether they have CA plates. Based on what you're saying (60% CA), 3 out of every 10 cars are out of state. That seems improbable to me.

I can't answer for David99, but being in WI I can definitively state that we pay $75 annually for auto registration (and Google confirms that ).

 

[Uncle Paul]

In addition to adding additional supercharger locations, Tesla is also adding additonal charging stations to the existing locations. Many areas that used to have 4 chargers, now have 8 charging stations or more.
This will not show up so much on a map, but when you get there they will have more open slots than before.

 

[miimura]

California has a Vehicle License Fee which is proportional to the value of the car. It's basically a personal property tax on vehicles. That is why people attempt to operate cars in California with out-of-state registration. As mentioned above, the State really wants to limit this revenue leakage. The CHP even has a web page to report violators:
Cheaters: Out-of-State (Out of State Registration Violators)

 

[cpa]

California has a Vehicle License Fee which is proportional to the value of the car. It's basically a personal property tax on vehicles. That is why people attempt to operate cars in California with out-of-state registration. As mentioned above, the State really wants to limit this revenue leakage. The CHP even has a web page to report violators:
Cheaters: Out-of-State (Out of State Registration Violators)

Ha! You beat me to the punch! Well done! I believe that the State also shares in the additional loot that they collect from the scofflaws with the whistleblower too.

 

[David99]

Can we just please once and for all accept the fact that California's Superchargers are not overloaded because of locals, but because there are just that many cars and that many miles driven.

That's not proof ...

2 seconds of google
California Leads Nation In Tesla Model S Sales, But Which Other States Are In Top 10?

45% of all Teslas are in California.

Supercharger in the US: 352
Superchargers in CA: 41

While 45% of all Teslas drive in California, only 11% of the Superchargers are in California. Yes we do need more Superchargers in California.

 

[thefortunes]

Can we just please once and for all accept the fact that California's Superchargers are not overloaded because of locals, but because there are just that many cars and that many miles driven.



2 seconds of google
California Leads Nation In Tesla Model S Sales, But Which Other States Are In Top 10?

45% of all Teslas are in California.

Supercharger in the US: 352
Superchargers in CA: 41

While 45% of all Teslas drive in California, only 11% of the Superchargers are in California. Yes we do need more Superchargers in California.

Should probably reference the number of stalls, not locations, to better support your argument.

In addition, the fact that the ratio of cars to supercharger stalls is most likely also out of alignment between CA and the rest of the US does not support or deny any theory that the problem is being caused by locals. How many of the people charging at the 7 locations (66 stalls) around Los Angeles at any given time are locals with other options? As an example, I regularly drive about 100 miles round-trip to Madison, WI for Badger football or basketball games. I almost never Supercharge because there are only 3 stalls (I don't want to tie one up unnecessarily) and because I don't need to - I charge at home.

What would need to be done is a scientific study (or a use of the data that Tesla obviously has) that would show whether locals are charging out of need (traveling or due to a lack of home/office charging facilities) or otherwise, and how that compares to the behavior in the rest of the country.

The problem is that much of the Supercharger buildout in the rest of the country was necessary for long-distance travel, which was (at least initially) the goal of the network.

What hopefully will happen going forward (especially for those of you in CA) is that the much of the continued buildout will focus on the areas of high use, since most of the country is now accessible.

 

[abasile]

Maybe they need to change the idle fee to a 'local' fee. If you are within 50 miles of your home (defined as where the car is usually parked at night to prevent faking a home address), you pay to charge. Supercharger is completely free when traveling outside of your home area.

This has been suggested before, and I think Tesla came to recognize that it's very difficult to differentiate between "legitimate" and non-legitimate use of "local" Superchargers. The reason for such differentiation would be to charge fees to people with older cars who are abusing the Superchargers. With newer cars, the solution is already in place, as everyone has to pay for all but minimal usage.

For a case in point, if there's a Supercharger close to one's home and it's needed to complete a long trip, then charging there would be pretty legitimate. In my case, the closest Superchargers are only 40 - 70 miles away, yet they are essential to returning home from some trips, particularly as we live on a high mountain range. But I would not expect Tesla to be the arbiter of this, and Tesla can't just lightly revoke someone's "free Supercharging for life".

The bottom line is, as others have clearly stated, California needs more Superchargers. Undoubtedly, Tesla is well aware of this.

 

[David99]

Should probably reference the number of stalls, not locations, to better support your argument.

Total number of stalls in the US: 2506
Total number of stalls in the CA: 440 = 17%

That is still much less than the 45% of Teslas in CA. So my argument stands just as much.

In addition, the fact that the ratio of cars to supercharger stalls is most likely also out of alignment between CA and the rest of the US does not support or deny any theory that the problem is being caused by locals.

Now that I have provided all data proving the point that CA is underserved in terms of Superchargers, I would ask you to do the same. Please provide data supporting the speculation that locals are causing the problem. I hear it here a lot, but other than anecdotal stories, I have yet to see any data supporting it. The data clearly shows the disproportionate cars vs Supercharer ratio which directly explains why Superchargers here are crowded on busy days. People take their cars out on the weekend and drive somewhere. Just because they live 30 miles from the next Supercharger doesn't mean they are abusing the system. They need to get home again. Just last weekend I drove 280 miles in one day. I had to charge 45 miles from home. I'm not going to charge at a L2 station for 3 hours with my kids in the car and then still limb home.

I have 10 Superchargers within 100 miles of my home and rarely use them even though I drive more than 100 miles average every day. I think the majority of Tesla owners are like me.
Each time I waited at a Supercharger the people I talked to had 100% legit reasons to charge at a Supercharger. Just because I have Superchargers within 40 miles of my home doesn't mean every time I use one I'm violating the Supercharger purpose/code. There are many situations where I needed a top off quick. You don't want to run your car low and risk not being able to do another errand that comes up. You also don't want to charge to 100% every night just because. Also, you never want to run your car down to 10% and render it 'useless'. It's fair to always want to have at least 25-30% minimum in the battery for those unexpected errands. So starting with 90% and keeping a reasonable level as a safety in the battery at all times, you quickly end up needing to top off here and there. That's not locals abusing the system.

Anyways I rest my case. I think the data shows where the root of the problem is.

 

[aronth5]

What surprises me is how long its been since there has been a new California permit.
I looked at the supercharge.info site change log and it appears there hasn't been a new permit since last March. (Groveland).
Is that even possible? Sometimes sites go beneath the radar scope but it is very surprising that except for one site under construction now, California supercharger activity has basically stopped except for expansion of existing sites.