Tesla DC charging network

[richkae]

I said basically this in another thread, but nobody wants to debate, so here goes again.
I think Tesla is doing the right thing.
It should probably fall to each EV manufacturer to make sure there is charging infrastructure to support their customers.

By the end of 2013 Tesla will probably have at least 5000 customers in California between SF and LA.
One supercharger supports about a dozen cars per day without obnoxious scheduling and long wait times.
To support 1% of those 5000 cars wanting to make that drive on any given day they need 4 superchargers.
To support 10% of those they need 42 of them.
The average case is not important, only the worst case, like a big holiday weekend.

Why spend that money to support other manufacturers EVs?
By the end of 2013 there could easily be 50,000 other EVs along that corridor, most of them won't be capable of such a long highway trip, but if they try at 1/10th the rate of Teslas, they block Teslas from the resource.

[Larry Chanin]

Not a word that EVs with standard (non-DC) J1772 won't be able to use DC chargers anyway, that the only EV (actual or announced) which could theoretically use it would be the Leaf, and the Leaf doesn't use J1772 for DC either. Not a word that J1772-DC-combo doesn't even exist in real life, and why Tesla would have a reason not to use it.

Hi Norbert,

Isn't it also true that not all Leafs have the DC charging port, since its a $700 option?

Larry

[Norbert]

Hi Norbert,

Isn't it also true that not all Leafs have the DC charging port, since its a $700 option?

Larry

Yes, a while ago the number given by Nissan was that 85% (at least in CA) have the port (for members of the EVProject, which are about half, I think, it comes for free). So 15% don't.

BTW, the Mitsubishi "i" also uses CHAdeMO, I didn't think of it since somehow it doesn't make a lot of headlines. And GM's "city car" EV might, according to some drawing, use a fast charge port, but that isn't announced (AFAIK) so who knows, and GM apparently doesn't intend to sell it in volume, supposedly only couple thousand to satisfy CARB regulations, or so. So that does't really count so far.

[jkirkebo]

Hi Norbert,

Isn't it also true that not all Leafs have the DC charging port, since its a $700 option?

Larry

Only in the US. It is standard equipment in Europe and Japan.

[tomsax]

Isn't it also true that not all Leafs have the DC charging port, since its a $700 option?

I believe it will be standard on the 2012 LEAF, so just a small number of 2011 models will not have the CHAdeMO port.

[tomsax]

I said basically this in another thread, but nobody wants to debate, so here goes again.
I think Tesla is doing the right thing.
It should probably fall to each EV manufacturer to make sure there is charging infrastructure to support their customers.

OK, I'll play...

The picture you paint makes some sense in areas of high demand, although it's seems like it would be wacky to have GM, Nissan, Ford, etc., each maintaining their own network of gas stations.

The problem is much worse in areas where there is less initial demand. Why have a CHAdeMO and a Tesla Supercharger both sitting unused 99.8% of the time in Ritzville, WA? It seems like a huge waste of capital to require independent, incompatible charging infrastructure during the period of time when we're trying to bootstrap EV adoption.

We can argue about whether or not Tesla's strategy is the right thing for Tesla and its customers, but the sentiment expressed in the article that reignited this thread is likely to be pretty common among potential charging station hosts, and that's going to be a big barrier to Tesla fulfilling their promise of comprehensive, nationwide charging infrastructure.

[Larry Chanin]

I believe it will be standard on the 2012 LEAF, so just a small number of 2011 models will not have the CHAdeMO port.

Hi Tom,

The 2012 Nissan LEAF™ SV does not come with the fast charger port.

The 2012 Nissan LEAF™ SL, which costs more than $2,000 more than the SV, does have the fast charger included.

Larry

[qwk]

OK, I'll play...

The picture you paint makes some sense in areas of high demand, although it's seems like it would be wacky to have GM, Nissan, Ford, etc., each maintaining their own network of gas stations.

The problem is much worse in areas where there is less initial demand. Why have a CHAdeMO and a Tesla Supercharger both sitting unused 99.8% of the time in Ritzville, WA? It seems like a huge waste of capital to require independent, incompatible charging infrastructure during the period of time when we're trying to bootstrap EV adoption.

We can argue about whether or not Tesla's strategy is the right thing for Tesla and its customers, but the sentiment expressed in the article that reignited this thread is likely to be pretty common among potential charging station hosts, and that's going to be a big barrier to Tesla fulfilling their promise of comprehensive, nationwide charging infrastructure.

I agree, but if Tesla somehow makes a CHAdeMO adapter, then it will be a win-win for Tesla. Faster charging for the Model S/X using the supercharger with no risk of the spot being occupied by another brand of EV, while still being able to use CHAdeMO chargers.

[richkae]

OK, I'll play...

Thanks Tom! As an EV enthusiast who sees the greater good of EV adoption, I totally see your point.

But putting on my consumer hat, what I want is a car that is as convenient as an ICE car. I want:
1) charging everywhere I want to go
2) no waiting for someone else when I want to charge

I'm not concerned about the waste of chargers sitting idle, I'll buy the car that delivers that for me.
Consumer hat off.

I think we have been ignoring the problem of charger contention and it needs a solution.

[Norbert]

I think we have been ignoring the problem of charger contention and it needs a solution.

Since Nissan plans to produce 150,000 to 200,000 Leafs per year, once they open their Tennessee plant in late 2012, this would be a serious problem if Tesla wanted to supply 90 kW chargers in a quantity that is appropriate for the numbers of Model S planned, 20,000 per year.

If both sell as planned, Leafs will outnumber Model S by a factor of 10x.
Furthermore, Leafs will be occupying them for more than twice the time, due to their slower charging time, and the fact that home-charging won't allow them to make the same percentage of long trips as a Model S can do with home charging only. The percentage of long trips not covered by home charging goes down quickly with increased range.

So the time-demand of Leafs may easily be 30x. How could Tesla possibly install 90 kW SuperChargers cost-effectively, if they were occupied by Leafs 30x of the time?

In the initial phase, Leafs may not yet fully use the available chargers, but the initial phase does't seem to be a big problem in itself.

Tesla may need to install only 1/30th of the number of chargers that Nissan may need to install, even though in the initial phase where relative usage is small, it may need to install a minimum as required by the maximum distance between chargers, but this will still be only 1/2 or 1/3 of what Leafs require, and it will be much easier to find locations at those greater distances.

So Leafs will get a different kind of network: small distances, larger quantities.
Whereas the Tesla network will require fewer chargers yet provide faster charging.
Both may be happy.

Having a compatible network might be a disaster for Tesla (until perhaps Bluestar will provide them with much larger resources to handle this situation).