Superchargers in Australia

[Power Hungry]

I wonder... As part of his sacking the supercharger team Musk reckons he's going to continue the expansion of the supercharger network. To me it makes good sense to be increasing the number of chargers at existing sites at this stage rather than expanding into new sites. There's little to no further investment in real estate to house them and expansion of existing sites achieves the same end by increasing capacity.

There's little point in having supercharger sites it they're always full and you can't get on. Secondly, Tesla is charging a premium for other makes of vehicles so he manages to increase revenue (profits) through existing outlets.

As EV's continue to increase in number, profits from 'EV charging companies' will be immense so I cannot believe that Musk is stupid enough to completely turn his back on that opportunity. I reckon if we sit tight his reasoning will become evident. I think there will be method behind this madness.

 

[SPadival]

For anyone actually interested in a balanced and level headed take on the situation

@farzyness was a member on this forum.

 

[Jules22]

@farzyness was a member on this forum.

Ahh cool, wasn't aware, he always gives a very sensible and balanced take which is well informed based on his time in the company and access to accurate information.

 

[advertisingfre]

Nope. The law only comes into play in court. How often an ordinary employee get to sue his/her employer?

 

[e-enthusiast30]

This is not ideal
TESLA SUPERCHARGER ROLL-OUT IN AUSTRALIA STOPPED AS JOB LOSSES AT TESLA END NEW DEVELOPMENT

Wonder if they're referring to the Mansfield site that was earmarked for opening this year.

 

[Quickst]

Mansfield

I reckon Mildura

 

[rowdy]

I just did a drive by of the location for the Perth supercharger in Kings Park. TOCWA announced at the end of March that it was being constructed in April.

I went past there a few weeks ago and there was scaffolding up behind the car spots where the chargers were to be installed. It looked like they were getting ready to move them in place.

Now the scaffolding is gone and there's no sign of anything. It's as if they were never there.

 

[karlos22]

I wonder... As part of his sacking the supercharger team Musk reckons he's going to continue the expansion of the supercharger network. To me it makes good sense to be increasing the number of chargers at existing sites at this stage rather than expanding into new sites. There's little to no further investment in real estate to house them and expansion of existing sites achieves the same end by increasing capacity.

There's little point in having supercharger sites it they're always full and you can't get on. Secondly, Tesla is charging a premium for other makes of vehicles so he manages to increase revenue (profits) through existing outlets.

As EV's continue to increase in number, profits from 'EV charging companies' will be immense so I cannot believe that Musk is stupid enough to completely turn his back on that opportunity. I reckon if we sit tight his reasoning will become evident. I think there will be method behind this madness.

Likewise, I'd rather existing sites are expanded rather than new sites added (where possible, of course). For example, Heatherbrae instead of Raymond Terrance.

 

[moa999]

Likewise, I'd rather existing sites are expanded rather than new sites added

Which would be fine if Tesla owned the site and there was unlimited power.
Unfortunately reality often gets in the way.

In the US at the larger sites Tesla has been buying sites, but suspect expanding power is still a crapshoot at existing sites (and still requires employees to negotiate)

 

[BlakPhoenix]

Likewise, I'd rather existing sites are expanded rather than new sites added (where possible, of course). For example, Heatherbrae instead of Raymond Terrance.

IMO both are needed.

Along the inter-capital-city highways, yes add more to existing stations. However there are vast reaches of AU that are inaccessible using the SC network and we must rely on less reliable, and slower charging networks (if any at all). Now I'm not saying we need to get SC's in all country towns, but you can't say that you don't have to make concessions in your travel plans if you're trying to go farther off the beaten path. Places like Condobolin would be much more accessible if Parkes was online. Jindabyne will be sorely missed this winter season as range shrinks in the cold temps and more EV's than ever head into the mountains.

Of course, there's the argument that other's should to more (and they should), but that doesn't mean that we should stoop to match the worst offending brands out there. Charging infrastructure is currently one of the 2 largest issues with EV's (the other bring purchase price) when I speak to people about them. So it would be sad to see any slow down of charging rollout (especially as they are some of the most reliable) which will only cause more people to think twice about getting an EV of their own.

 

[Midnight Man]

Going to throw in a curly into this discussion. I just counted the number of announced new superchargers (not counting wall connector sites) on the @TeslaCharging feed on X for the period 01-04-2024 to 25-04-2024 worldwide.

In that 25 day period, 46 new sites were opened, nearly 2 per day (including weekends).

Many of these were in the USA, and one wonders if Elon's thoughts here are that opening that many sites is actually too many (I know folks in the USA are still suggesting there aren't enough sites, but comparative to the rest of the world, I think they're relatively well catered for). Do Elon's comments about slowing the build and consolidating to expanding existing sites apply more to the USA than "rest of world"?

Time will tell.

 

[Quickst]

Generally, I think it is reasonable to pause and slow down from time to time to do a "stocktake" and make some adjustments.

@Midnight Man i suspect we can get a better answer if we wait till year end

 

[Jules22]

There is no such obligation to do that… “the standards you walk past are the standards you accept”.

Somehow this reply didn't show up for me as "new" until now, so while I did agree to move on from this topic, I feel I need to address this as it's a fairly gross misrepresentation and misses the point.

I'm not suggesting in the slightest that you dismiss any behaviour at all, particularly the types of behaviour this quote actually was made in reference to. My point is that NOBODY is perfect and we all make mistakes.

In particular many of the highest performing developers and engineers I have managed in private enterprise suffered from Aspergers, in this example "bad" is not the correct word, however they have tendancies, similar to Musk, which are unique, and I'm sure nobody would suggest that the answer is to never hire anyone with any sort of condition?

Similarly if we were all put to a fraction of the level of scrutiny (even without everything being then mis-reported and blown out of proportion) and held to the standards you are trying to suggest, there would not be a single one of us deemed 'suitable', particularly when the standard that Musk seems to be held to is that if he does not conform 100% to certain individual political motivations then everything he does is wrong.

Anyhow, will leave this discussion here.

 

[Vostok]

I've reviewed the Round 1 and Round 2 NSW Drive Electric Grants to quantify the effect this Tesla decision will have. And it's pretty ugly.

Round 1 (2022):

• Tesla won 32 of the 86 sites (37%) and 260 of the 518 charging bays (50%)
  • 9 are completed (Albury, Campbelltown, Figtree, Blaxland, Raymond Terrace, Orange, Tenterfield, Wagga Wagga, Yass)
  • 2 are under construction (Hay, Taree) - let's see if either of these actually get finished any time soon
  • 21 (the remainder) are not started. 163 bays or 63% of the Tesla bid that might never see the light of day.
• It should be noted that BP has "pulled the plug" on its sites too. BP won 16 sites with 64 bays, but has built only 1 of them (Seven Hills) the remainder not started. Most of them were Sydney metro. Non-Sydney ones were Kelso, Wyoming, Jerilderie and Gumly Gumly.

Round 2 (2023):

• Tesla won 7 of the 104 sites (7%) and 77 of the 531 charging bays (15%)
  • 0 are completed
  • 0 are under construction
• BP won 17 sites - none will proceed. Regional sites included Boambee, Tweed Heads, Young, Lismore.
• Viva Energy (Shell) won a whopping 30 sites and were posting as recently as 3 April that it's full steam ahead - but we'll see.

(noting that some DCFC sites are built by the network providers under different grant programmes, or totally self-funded).

If Tesla are not going to build new sites, this is seriously going to impact regional travel in EVs in NSW, since apart from NRMA, Tesla was the only network operator proposing to build a substantial number of non-metro sites.

Evie seems to be pretty much metro focussed now. Few Ampol sites were non-metro. BP has packed up shop.

This is not good, despite the sugar-coating the Elon kool-ade drinkers are providing.

 

[Jules22]

This is not good, despite the sugar-coating the Elon kool-ade drinkers are providing.

If the last quote is aimed partially at myself, you must have missed the multiple times I've said that I'll reserve judgement until the facts are known.

All we know is that they are holding on breaking new ground and slowing the growth of new locations, until the extent of that is known, nobody knows what the effect is going to be.

Also has many have pointed out, growing the charging infrastructure in Australia is not something that Tesla are responsible for. Yes they've done 50x what everyone else has done to date, but that doesn't mean that they have any requirement to continue at that pace forever.

The other aspect of the decision which was highlighted in the video I linked is that similar decisions in the past have had a short term slowdown effect but medium to long term have resulted in a significant increase in development speed, resulting in an overall significant benefit over just continuing as things were. Speculation but, since that seems to be the flavour of the day, there are indications that Elon was not happy with the pace of supercharger deployments, so this could easily be the reason and eventual outcome after an initial slow down.

 

[BlueStreak2020]

Long time lurker, first time commenter.

Firstly I'd like to offer my sympathies to all those who recently lost their jobs at Tesla, and to thank them for all their hard work over the years.
I certainly wouldn't have be able to cover so many Tesla road trips over the past 4 years of ownership, without their hard work and problem solving skills.

However in this discussion, there seem to be a bit of crucial information missing, regarding Tesla's abrupt decision on Supercharger rollout.

And that is the worldwide (especially in the USA) shortage of Electrical Transformers.

In the USA -
"Transformer lead times have been increasing for the last 2 years - from around 50 weeks in 2021, to 120 weeks on average in 2024.

Large transformers, both substation power, and generator step-up (GSU) transformers, have lead times ranging from 80 to 210 weeks, and some manufacturers have already announced plans to expand capacity to meet growing demand."

So Tesla's rollout of new Superchargers sites would need to slow down, regardless of Elon's decision.

And Tesla would be best to focus on trying to expand capacity using existing Transformers, and limit new sites (and new Transformers) to only crucial locations.

Which is effectively what Elon announced.

Though it is quite sudden & shocking, it's not surprising given his previous comments.....

Electricity, Transformer Supplies May Strain By 2025 – Musk
"In one of the Q&A sessions so as to close the Bosch Connected World conference, Elon Musk stressed the urgent requirement for the industry so as to prioritize clean energy generation and at the same time also increase production when it comes to electrical transformers so as to suppress the supply crisis, which according to him could as well happen next year, reported New Atlas."

Electricity, Transformer Supplies May Strain By 2025 – Musk

 

[Jules22]

Long time lurker, first time commenter.

Firstly I'd like to offer my sympathies to all those who recently lost their jobs at Tesla, and to thank them for all their hard work over the years.
I certainly wouldn't have be able to cover so many Tesla road trips over the past 4 years of ownership, without their hard work and problem solving skills.

However in this discussion, there seem to be a bit of crucial information missing, regarding Tesla's abrupt decision on Supercharger rollout.

And that is the worldwide (especially in the USA) shortage of Electrical Transformers.

In the USA -
"Transformer lead times have been increasing for the last 2 years - from around 50 weeks in 2021, to 120 weeks on average in 2024.

Large transformers, both substation power, and generator step-up (GSU) transformers, have lead times ranging from 80 to 210 weeks, and some manufacturers have already announced plans to expand capacity to meet growing demand."

So Tesla's rollout of new Superchargers sites would need to slow down, regardless of Elon's decision.

And Tesla would be best to focus on trying to expand capacity using existing Transformers, and limit new sites (and new Transformers) to only crucial locations.

Which is effectively what Elon announced.

Though it is quite sudden & shocking, it's not surprising given his previous comments.....

Electricity, Transformer Supplies May Strain By 2025 – Musk
"In one of the Q&A sessions so as to close the Bosch Connected World conference, Elon Musk stressed the urgent requirement for the industry so as to prioritize clean energy generation and at the same time also increase production when it comes to electrical transformers so as to suppress the supply crisis, which according to him could as well happen next year, reported New Atlas."

Electricity, Transformer Supplies May Strain By 2025 – Musk

Thanks for the contribution and unique perspective! Definitely something to consider

 

[B3AU]

Which is effectively what Elon announced.

Though it is quite sudden & shocking, it's not surprising given his previous comments.....

Pun intended?

Email from Tesla to their suppliers that Kyle was referring:
View attachment 1044190

Thanks - lines up with the existing coverage (eg EFTM and the regional business in Victoria, and the SA Council staffer talking about the Glenelg site being scrapped) reported earlier in this thread.

 

[Quickst]

Tesla was the only network operator proposing to build a substantial number of non-metro sites.

growing the charging infrastructure in Australia is not something that Tesla are responsible for

And there should never be a dominant player in any infrastructure space.

We can see what dominant market power does AKA your favourite dominant market player. Also we can see what competition brings AKA EV price discounting

Of course there is no suggestion that Tesla SC is exhibiting the hallmarks of a monopoly, actually to the contrary (not yet)

 

[Zoltrix77]

BP has packed up shop.

This is not good, despite the sugar-coating the Elon kool-ade drinkers are providing.

Where is the information on BP packing up come from? I am really not up on the news.

https://www.reuters.com/business/au...uts-jobs-reduces-global-ambitions-2024-04-15/

This Reuters article indicates that BP is still doing Ev charging in "growth" markets; which is according to the article, the US, Britain, German and China. It also mentions that Australia, New Zealand and France were growth countries?

The whole thing seems like a sad mess TBH. I can't see how this isn't going to hurt the EV industry somewhat in at least the short to medium term.