no extra cost - because all electronics is in the external charger - on the car side, only connection to the DC + access to the can-bus its required. If the development is done for one car - no extra cost or equipment is needed. It even does not matter what battery size you have, the speed of charging will be always the same. it will always take max 45min to charge to 80% SOC, even less if you start with > 10% SOC. ok, the pack will be charged with max. 40kW if you have the 40kWh pack or max 60kW with the 60kWh.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
what i am going to pay at the supercharger-station is the time i save compared with charging at 20kW. this timesaving can be huge 45min compared with 3-4h at 20kW or 6-8h at 10kW.
Therefore i am ready to pay a premium of 10-20€/$ + regular cost of electricity.
Therefore i am ready to pay a premium of 10-20€/$ + regular cost of electricity.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Actually you need a high power contactor in the car (connected to the DC sockets and able to switch between the onboard charger), and if we are talking about CHAdeMO you also have to have the extra socket (which costs quite a bit more than a J1772 socket from what I heard). The Quick charge port was a $700 option on the Leaf, and they only included it when they raised the price.
Realistically though, it's probably more efficient for the assembly line if the DC charging hardware was included in every car (which is probably why Nissan made it a standard option).
The Leaf and iMIEV uses different cells that can handle quick charging easily (they can charge at a charging rate of multiple C; the 18650 cells Tesla is using can handle ~1C at most).
Another thing is the battery warranty. Tesla might actually warranty the capacity (at the very least they have put out the written statement of ~70% capacity at 7 years / 100k miles). No other EV maker will warranty capacity. I think their 8 year, 100k mile warranty for the 40kWh pack is already pushing it (160 miles * typical 500 cycle life of 18650 cells = 80k mile life), adding quick charging for the 40kWh pack will probably push the battery to under 100k mile life, which will become a warranty issue. Unless the customer is okay with the warranty being voided or shortened or explicit limits on the number of quick charges, I don't think Tesla will add quick charging (and legally/competitively, I don't think they can shorten the warranty, because California requires that 8 year/100k mile at minimum for hybrids, which pushes EVs to match them).
I'm not worried about that actually. Most mainstream journalists don't even mention quick charging or mention it only in passing. For example, when they compare to the Focus EV they don't really ding it for not having a quick charging port. Right now the infrastructure is low enough that it probably doesn't make that big a difference.
The LEAF SV does not come with the QC port - but it is standard on the SL model.
Is the maximum amount of regen going to be different between pack sizes? Either way, as Eberhard says a couple posts up - ~1C supercharge rate is fine for all packs - you just get less energy in the same amount of time with a smaller pack.
EVs don't have any warranty requirements in CARB states - CARB warranties only affect plug-in hybrids or regular hybrid batteries where a battery failure means more tailpipe emissions. For these cars a 10-year / 150k mile warranty is required.
bonnie
I play a nice person on twitter.
I'm confused. After reading through three pages, it sounds like everyone is assuming Tesla will own all the supercharger sites. The conversation is focused on 'what will be charged', not 'who will own'.
I could be wrong, but it would seem insane for Tesla to install and maintain all these sites. I'm betting they'll be announcing partnerships with different hotel/restaurant chains and it will be up to the individual partners if charging is free or not.
I could be wrong, but it would seem insane for Tesla to install and maintain all these sites. I'm betting they'll be announcing partnerships with different hotel/restaurant chains and it will be up to the individual partners if charging is free or not.
I agree with you, Bonnie. I would be very surprised if Supercharger usage is free for anybody. The price "TBD" is almost certainly the price of adding the wiring to enable Supercharging on the 60kWh model.
Realistically, I don't think I would use the super charger network. If people want it, I would say either free or a few hundred dollars. It's a nice to have. I think the poll should be "if the option for the 60 battery pack would you pay for the fast charge network and how much". I really don't see much use for it even on the 85 battery pack
gg_got_a_tesla
Model S: VIN 65513, Model 3: VIN 1913
If I end up getting the 60 pack, I'd be okay with paying upto $500 for the Supercharger hardware onboard. Not more for something that, yes, I'd probably never ever use.
btw, the new Design Studio has a line item called "Supercharger Hardware" which is priced as "Included" on the 85kWh pack. I think this wording resolves that the "TBD" cost for Supercharging on the 60kWh is about hardware, and that nothing already announced tells us what the cost of using the Supercharger network will be.
I agree with @joefee that Tesla shouldn't be using the Supercharger network as a separate profit center. "Break even on the power used" is trickier than it sounds, though. In many locations, these Superchargers are going to be metered for energy and demand. The "demand" portion is based on the peak usage (or peak usage during certain hours, depending on the jurisdiction) and can be a big number, as large or larger than the energy portion of the bill for an installation like these Superchargers that will have low utilization. For the Superchargers to be break-even for Tesla on an operating cost basis, they'll have to include a markup on the energy charge to contribute to the demand charge. But this is an approximate calculation that depends critically on the number of users (and, possibly, timing of their usage). As I said, break-even is actually a bit tricky.
I agree with @joefee that Tesla shouldn't be using the Supercharger network as a separate profit center. "Break even on the power used" is trickier than it sounds, though. In many locations, these Superchargers are going to be metered for energy and demand. The "demand" portion is based on the peak usage (or peak usage during certain hours, depending on the jurisdiction) and can be a big number, as large or larger than the energy portion of the bill for an installation like these Superchargers that will have low utilization. For the Superchargers to be break-even for Tesla on an operating cost basis, they'll have to include a markup on the energy charge to contribute to the demand charge. But this is an approximate calculation that depends critically on the number of users (and, possibly, timing of their usage). As I said, break-even is actually a bit tricky.
bonnie
I play a nice person on twitter.
My bet is that Tesla will only find partners to install the Supercharger network locations & won't be involved at all beyond that. The entity who owns the real estate where the charger sits will be the one to decide fees, if any. I don't know how it could work any other way.
Robert.Boston is right... by my calculations in Ontario a single use of a Supercharger could potentially increase your power bill by nearly $1000 if it pushed you into demand charge levels. Of course every use afterwards is "free" from that perspective.
DC quick charge stations for the Leaf and iMiev are 50kWh max. Tesla Superchargers are 90kWh! They would bring a Leaf to 80% in about 12 minutes (not healthy), compared to the 30 minutes Nissan quotes. I'm certain that Tesla has limited the SC access to the 60 and 85 kWh packs for this very reason.
In theory, they could reduce the wattage for smaller batteries. It would stand to reason that you could safely get 80% charge on the 40kWh pack in the same amount of time that you could safely get 80% charge on the 85kWh pack, because it would take less wattage to do it.
That's pretty cheap. Demand chargers in the summer here in California can easily double that if not more.
Yes, exactly. 90 kW Supercharge for 85 kWh packs (1.06C), 64 kW Supercharge for 60 kWh packs and 42 kW Supercharge for 40 kWh packs.
Because of the demand charges, to make each incremental charge is much cheaper than the first one each billing period. Say your demand charge is $10/kW and energy charge is $0.10 / kWh. The first 90kW supercharge that lasts 30 minutes will cost $1000 + 45 * $0.10 = $1004.50. But each subsequent charge will only cost another $4.50, cutting the cost to $504.50 / charge. If you want to get the cost for a 30 minute 90 kW Supercharge session down to $10, without losing money, you need to get at least 182 sessions in per month ($1000 + $4.50 * 182 = $10 per 90 kW 30 minute charge session). And that's just to break even on the utility charges - never mind the $100k it can cost to install such a station, maintenance and insurance.
That's 6 sessions / day - with most charging likely to happen in a few hours per day, it's clear that you need volume to make this cost effective. That means you need to include the 60/40 kWh cars since these cars are actually more likely to need a Supercharge (even at a slower rate). That means a "smart" charging station with multiple nozzles which manages total demand to say 100 kW so that the next car can start charging as soon as possible. Or if 40/60 kWh cars are charging, multiples of those cars can charge at the same time since their max rate will be much lower. Not to mention that as cars reach full, the charge rate will slow down to avoid overheating the batteries.
The headline is already written: "Tesla supercharger is a scam, it charges at the same rate as the dryer outlet on my car."
There's also the "driving 10 mph in the left lane of a 70mph freeway" problem. (But charging rate, not driving speed.)
This would be difficult/expensive to do using DC fast chargers, which track the battery voltage of the car while charging.
Not hard to do at all for someone who can build a DC QC station. Each DC charging station is capable of running standalone so tracks voltage/current based on what the car is asking for and what the charging station is able to provide.
Each DC charging station knows how much power is being pushed to each car. The group knows the maximum power that can be pulled from the grid. From there it's just a matter of adjusting maximum allowable power output of each charging station as desired.
We touched this topic in another thread so I think it's time to draw a result on this poll. I averaged the money interval boundaries, where I assigned $0 to the "no cost" option and $3,000 to the ">$2,000" option. The average of the votes of 79 participants is $429.
Similar threads
- Article
