An Update to our Supercharging Program

[jgs]

Nice straw man you built there. Right, I don't think one more supercharger will be built. Good way to debate the issue.

The essence of my argument is that a fixed demand is not important in the context of a rapidly-growing resource. I don't think I illustrated that unfairly or incorrectly.

Really? After I battled all those people who said the Model 3 will have free supercharging like the Models S/X, before it was cut off from the Model S/X, you now claim I was wrong and you need evidence?

This may shock you, but I don't stalk you or read all your posts. There is kind of a lot of traffic on TMC, I don't feel obliged to come up to date on all of it before posting.

If you think supercharger credits will only apply to the Models S/X then you are living in dreamland. And if you think 1000 miles per year is free long distance travel then you don't travel long distance. And if you think the Model 3 will have free long distance travel when the Model S/X does not, and you need "evidence" then I agree: we have no common ground at all.

Not a single one of the positions you've imputed to me is one I hold, speaking of straw men. However, I do see how sloppy writing on my part (and some goalpost-moving on yours) contributed to the misunderstanding. It goes like:

You: I can't see how Tesla can allow [unlimited Supercharging for people who aren't the original buyer].
Me: [Here's how: as the SC network grows the pre-2017 fleet will represent a small portion of the demand even in the worst case.]
You: [Model 3 won't have SC enabled for free nor will it have free SC] (this was the goalpost-moving part. I don't really care about this vaguely-related debate, but I made the mistake of commenting on it instead of simply ignoring it.)

Then I did a poor job of connecting, or not, the bits of my quote-interspersed post. To clarify what I meant (instead of what I wrote, which was wrong in one important particular): I continue to be skeptical about "The Model 3 will cost to enable Supercharging", I'm not aware of evidence to support this and given a usage billing model it seems not only unnecessary but bad for business to also require upfront payment to even enable the SC hardware. However I agree Model 3 won't have unlimited Supercharging. Asking for evidence of that was my mistake, it should have been restricted to the previous point. Sorry for my error.

 

[David99]

I bet Tesla hasn't made a final decision on how to bill for Supercharger use. There are different option that all make sense. And sometimes what seems like a good idea turns out not to work so well in reality. So there will probably some adjustments after the Model 3 comes out.

 

[JeffK]

I bet Tesla hasn't made a final decision on how to bill for Supercharger use. There are different option that all make sense. And sometimes what seems like a good idea turns out not to work so well in reality. So there will probably some adjustments after the Model 3 comes out.

I don't know... Tesla is planning to take credit cards for purchase of supercharger credits and then you use those supercharger credits at superchargers. I'm pretty sure this idea will work out just fine. Tesla is an adaptable company and will do whatever makes the most sense (eventually).

I distinctly remember Chuck E Cheese's having a similar model. Pay for credits, use credits [tokens]... although you could win tickets to get crappy prizes like pencil erasers.

 

[roblab]

Superchargers are needed in areas with lots of traffic not just between cities. Not having Superchargers isn't a solution. Just having to pay for Supercharger is a perfect locution.

Really? Why? Don't you have enough range to drive in traffic? You know that Tesla does not use fuel when sitting in traffic, unlike gas cars, so you do NOT need to have superchargers in towns. They need to be on the WAY to towns. As soon as a supercharger appears in towns, everyone thinks they now have the right to go suck off of Tesla's teat for free instead of charging at home. So hundreds of locals feel that Tesla should go to the time and expense of figuring out how to identify, check charge status, clock in and out, and bill them. The problem would never have been there if people would charge at home, and use SCs for long distance travel. And Tesla can fix it easier, by not building local superchargers, instead of billing people.

To be clear, I'm talking California, not Wyoming or Texas, but it can easily be the same there in a few years. I don't suppose anyone at Tesla understood the self serving greed that exists in some.

Now, let's all make sure to "dislike" this post because you think I might be talking about YOU.

 

[Saghost]

Really? Why? Don't you have enough range to drive in traffic? You know that Tesla does not use fuel when sitting in traffic, unlike gas cars, so you do NOT need to have superchargers in towns. They need to be on the WAY to towns. As soon as a supercharger appears in towns, everyone thinks they now have the right to go suck off of Tesla's teat for free instead of charging at home. So hundreds of locals feel that Tesla should go to the time and expense of figuring out how to identify, check charge status, clock in and out, and bill them. The problem would never have been there if people would charge at home, and use SCs for long distance travel. And Tesla can fix it easier, by not building local superchargers, instead of billing people.

To be clear, I'm talking California, not Wyoming or Texas, but it can easily be the same there in a few years. I don't suppose anyone at Tesla understood the self serving greed that exists in some.

Now, let's all make sure to "dislike" this post because you think I might be talking about YOU.

I tend to think Tesloop and others like them have more to do with the change than the locals who could charge at home and don't.

Financially, Tesla can't afford to have businesses building their business model off of Tesla buying all their electricity for them at thousands of dollars per car per year.

If you have the ability to charge at home, you won't need a local supercharger 98% of the time, true.

However, there's a substantial group of people who can't charge at home or who are staying in hotels without charging.

I'm sure street parking with charging will come along eventually, but in the mean time Tesla can create a competitive advantage and sell a bunch more cars if they can give a viable solution to those people.

 

[Galve2000]

You know that Tesla does not use fuel when sitting in traffic

This is actually not true. Traffic can kill EV range b/c of the constant starting and stopping. in a perfect world without traffic or traffic lights you could probably get 600 miles out of an 85D battery if u cept tac at 35 miles per hour.(you could simulate these conditions on a race track, for example) but real world traffic is not like that. you expend a lot more energy to move the car from a standstill than any regen recaptured slowing down. so again, traffic is terrible for range. even at slow speeds. so range drops drastically.

 

[whttiger25]

Really? Why? Don't you have enough range to drive in traffic? You know that Tesla does not use fuel when sitting in traffic, unlike gas cars, so you do NOT need to have superchargers in towns. They need to be on the WAY to towns. As soon as a supercharger appears in towns, everyone thinks they now have the right to go suck off of Tesla's teat for free instead of charging at home. So hundreds of locals feel that Tesla should go to the time and expense of figuring out how to identify, check charge status, clock in and out, and bill them. The problem would never have been there if people would charge at home, and use SCs for long distance travel. And Tesla can fix it easier, by not building local superchargers, instead of billing people.

To be clear, I'm talking California, not Wyoming or Texas, but it can easily be the same there in a few years. I don't suppose anyone at Tesla understood the self serving greed that exists in some.

Now, let's all make sure to "dislike" this post because you think I might be talking about YOU.

I won't dislike it because I understand the sentiment, but what I disagree with is the notion that by supercharging locally you are somehow "sucking off Tesla's teat".

First - I think supercharging etiquette is critical and something worth complaining and pointing fingers about. Locals who clog up superchargers for long periods of time, especially when there are lines, need to be made to feel bad about themselves.

However, there are plenty of Tesla drivers who do not have the best possible home charging situation. Some have none. Personally, living in a condo, the best I can do is pay an exorbitant rate of $0.27/kwh because our condo contracts through Evercharge which takes an additional cut before HOA reimbursement, on top of the higher than normal A6 rate our condo pays because it's advantageous with the solar panels the community has. I get the cost-equivalent of 30mpg at current gas prices when charging from home, so if I can find opportunities to get free charge, including plugging into the 120V at work and occasional local supercharging, I'm going to take it. I will charge at home when convenient and necessary. I won't, however, contribute to long lines at super chargers.

We all remember that Tesla baked in a $2000 price increase for adding "unlimited" supercharging, and that price increase has been baked in since. So when I get my $2000 worth of electricity from Tesla, you can complain about me some more. But even then, we were told free supercharging for life. Tesla has to take responsibility for their promises, and they are, buy charging future owners for supercharging.

 

[Saghost]

I won't dislike it because I understand the sentiment, but what I disagree with is the notion that by supercharging locally you are somehow "sucking off Tesla's teat".

First - I think supercharging etiquette is critical and something worth complaining and pointing fingers about. Locals who clog up superchargers for long periods of time, especially when there are lines, need to be made to feel bad about themselves.

However, there are plenty of Tesla drivers who do not have the best possible home charging situation. Some have none. Personally, living in a condo, the best I can do is pay an exorbitant rate of $0.27/kwh because our condo contracts through Evercharge which takes an additional cut before HOA reimbursement, on top of the higher than normal A6 rate our condo pays because it's advantageous with the solar panels the community has. I get the cost-equivalent of 30mpg at current gas prices when charging from home, so if I can find opportunities to get free charge, including plugging into the 120V at work and occasional local supercharging, I'm going to take it. I will charge at home when convenient and necessary. I won't, however, contribute to long lines at super chargers.

We all remember that Tesla baked in a $2000 price increase for adding "unlimited" supercharging, and that price increase has been baked in since. So when I get my $2000 worth of electricity from Tesla, you can complain about me some more. But even then, we were told free supercharging for life. Tesla has to take responsibility for their promises, and they are, buy charging future owners for supercharging.

Even if you assume the $2000 is Tesla's per car investment in the Supercharger system (which would make me wonder why they charged $1500 to people with S60s that wanted to enable DCFC for CHAdeMO but not Supercharging,) remember that had to cover the hardware, installation, and any site maintenance Tesla pays, not just retail electricity.

 

[tga]

As soon as a supercharger appears in towns, everyone thinks they now have the right to go suck off of Tesla's teat for free instead of charging at home. So hundreds of locals feel that Tesla should go to the time and expense of figuring out how to identify, check charge status, clock in and out, and bill them.

So I assume that you believe that the hoi polloi who live in condos or apartments and have no ability to charge at home are not worthy of Tesla ownership?

 

[brkaus]

So I assume that you believe that the hoi polloi who live in condos or apartments and have no ability to charge at home are not worthy of Tesla ownership?

I think they are worthy. Lots of city dwellers and lots of polluted cities. I also think they should be charged a fair rate for charging.

 

[Oil4AsphaultOnly]

This is actually not true. Traffic can kill EV range b/c of the constant starting and stopping. in a perfect world without traffic or traffic lights you could probably get 600 miles out of an 85D battery if u cept tac at 35 miles per hour.(you could simulate these conditions on a race track, for example) but real world traffic is not like that. you expend a lot more energy to move the car from a standstill than any regen recaptured slowing down. so again, traffic is terrible for range. even at slow speeds. so range drops drastically.

That's not completely true either. You aren't going to jack-rabbit in traffic either, so the gentler acceleration/deceleration profile should offset the start/stop losses. Couple that with the reduced aerodynamic drag losses, and increased HVAC power draw (more time spent with AC/heat on), and your range should still be within EPA estimates. The only exception to this is in below freezing conditions where there's traction losses and extra heat required to keep battery pack warm.

 

[Ender345]

Also worth noting that Tesla was actively pitching free supercharging when I was thinking about buying my Tesla - when I expressed concern openly about not having a reasonable charging situation at home ($2 an hour where I live - insane), they said that I could just use Superchargers. Granted at the time the lines weren't an issue - but that's why I bought the car, and I baked the savings into my cost of ownership. It was part of my decision making process, and it was encouraged by Tesla sales team, who understandably wanted to sell me a car.

Now there's a Tesla employee working the line telling me I can only charge for 45 minutes after I drive to the nearest Supercharger 15 miles away - it's actually been a little unpleasant. I try to politely let him know that I'm going to stay until I have a reasonably full charge, even if it takes a little longer... but it just wasn't quite the experience I was sold. And to be clear, I love the car and the company (although really hoping for some improved media software or CarPlay, please!) - but it hasn't been quite what was promised.

 

[jgs]

This is actually not true. Traffic can kill EV range b/c of the constant starting and stopping. in a perfect world without traffic or traffic lights you could probably get 600 miles out of an 85D battery if u cept tac at 35 miles per hour.(you could simulate these conditions on a race track, for example) but real world traffic is not like that. you expend a lot more energy to move the car from a standstill than any regen recaptured slowing down. so again, traffic is terrible for range. even at slow speeds. so range drops drastically.

You get pretty much the EPA city rating in city traffic, in my experience. It's entirely true that EVs use a lot less "fuel" than gas-burners do in really bad stop-and-go, though, because at least when they're stationary they aren't idling. (This may be mitigated somewhat by more modern ICEs that stop their engines when at a standstill, but how widely deployed and used is that feature? I've never driven a car in the U.S. with the feature, and when driven abroad it tends to get disabled pretty quickly because the A/C cuts out.) The other "terrible for range" things you note are common to any kind of vehicle regardless of powertrain.

 

[FlatSix911]

Tesla introduces $0.40/minute idle fee for Superchargers to incentivise owners to move when charging is over

That was quick. Last week, CEO Elon Musk warned that Tesla will “take action” against Tesla owners leaving their vehicles at Supercharger stations after charging is over. He said: “Supercharger spots are meant for charging, not parking”. Today the company took action and introduced a new $0.40 per minute idle fee for the entire Supercharger network.

The fee will start as soon as the charging session is over, but it will be waived if the vehicle is moved within 5 minutes – basically giving owners 5 minutes of free parking after charging is over at a Supercharger. In a press release (read below), Tesla made it clear that it doesn’t plan (hope) to make money off the new scheme and that it’s only a way to “increase Supercharger availability”. In other words, it’s a way to make sure the Superchargers are used for what they were meant to be used: charging.

Due to all its vehicles being connected virtually at all time, it’s not difficult for Tesla to keep track of the fees and it plans to charge people during their next Service Center visit. The Tesla mobile app will notify you if you incurred idle fees after your charging sessions at Superchargers.

Earlier this year, Tesla already started implementing a new message text-based alert system to deter owners from leaving their cars at Superchargers after reaching their preset charging requirements. Tesla would send a message text alerting the owner that charging is over and then again every 5 minutes until the vehicle is unplugged. It was apparently the first step leading to the announcement made today.

Here’s Tesla’s press release in full: Improving Supercharger Availability

We designed the Supercharger network to enable a seamless, enjoyable road trip experience. Therefore, we understand that it can be frustrating to arrive at a station only to discover fully charged Teslas occupying all the spots. To create a better experience for all owners, we’re introducing a fleet-wide idle fee that aims to increase Supercharger availability. We envision a future where cars move themselves once fully charged, enhancing network efficiency and the customer experience even further. Until then, we ask that vehicles be moved from the Supercharger once fully charged. One would never leave a car parked at a gas station right at the pump and the same rule applies with Superchargers.

The Tesla app allows owners to remotely monitor their vehicle, alerting them when their charge is nearly complete and again once fully charged. For every additional minute a car remains connected to the Supercharger, it will incur a $0.40 idle fee. If the car is moved within 5 minutes, the fee is waived. To be clear, this change is purely about increasing customer happiness and we hope to never make any money from it. We’re excited to increase availability during long distance travel and think this change will make the Supercharging experience far better for everyone.

 

[jgs]

That's interesting. It will be enlightening to see how they implement it. Do they plan to send people bills and just hope they pay them, or what?

Time will tell.

 

[MP3Mike]

That's interesting. It will be enlightening to see how they implement it. Do they plan to send people bills and just hope they pay them, or what?

Time will tell.

the FAQ says you will be charged at your next service center visit.

What happens if you never visit a Service Center again? Do you not ever have to pay? What if you sell your car with thousands of idle fees owing? Does the new owner have to pay them, or is that a way to clear them off without paying?

 

[TexasEV]

Yea!

 

[MP3Mike]

I wonder if this is a hint of how much they will charge once you are past your 400 free kWhs.

 

[brianman]

Tesla introduces $0.40/minute idle fee for Superchargers to incentivise owners to move when charging is over

link to release?

 

[Troy]

Excellent move by Tesla. Details are here on Tesla website:
Supercharger Idle Fee