Chargers coming soon?

[GDN]

Tesla has already opened the SC network to non-Tesla vehicles in a small pilot in the Netherlands:

https://insideevs.com/news/567601/all-superchargers-netherlands-non-tesla/

I'm no Tesla fanboy (heck, I'm leaving the brand) or even a stock holder, but the charging experience has been very good. 3rd party DCFC companies don't really seem to care. I wonder what incentives it would take for non-Tesla supercharging to happen elsewhere? Tesla would be losing a valuable distinguishing feature of their cars, and they would want a return on the risk they took on the billions they've invested by installing so many stations. I certainly think it's possible to see non-Tesla supercharging in the US in the next few years though. Musk has always said mass EV adoption is his goal, whether it's his company that sells all the cars or not. I think he's waiting to see how 3rd party DCFC companies start to get a bit of momentum before throwing down an option. With most of them apparently sitting on their hands, the gap will just continue to widen and make the SC network more valuable.

I said I would pay extra to have access to more DCFCs. I wonder how much I'd be willing to pay, and via what mechanism? Though I eschew toll roads, the idea of pay-per-use supercharging is nice, even if I were paying 3x of what I pay now as a Tesla owner. Or would manufacturers pay a one-time license fee for the use of the supercharger network on each vehicle they make? This fee would largely be passed on to the consumer, but how much would people be willing to pay? $1k? $3k? More?

I know the SC is open as trials, and I think it possible it might open in the next year or two in the US. However I think most other manufactures have made it clear they aren't going pay any vehicle fee to get access to a network. I think the SC's will just have multiple rates - one for Tesla, one for others. The key is that the other manufactures will have to likely make changes to support them. The SC'er have no screens - you plug in and charge. Very user friendly. Tesla handles everything behind the scenes and you get all of your charge information in the car. I know Ford can supply VIN or some sort of identifier as they do with EA, so it isn't far fetched, just need some reasonably priced adapters or Tesla to start to retrofit the chargers with multiple cables which they've done previously.

Sponsored

 

[VTbuckeye]

Tesla has already opened the SC network to non-Tesla vehicles in a small pilot in the Netherlands:

https://insideevs.com/news/567601/all-superchargers-netherlands-non-tesla/

I'm no Tesla fanboy (heck, I'm leaving the brand) or even a stock holder, but the charging experience has been very good. 3rd party DCFC companies don't really seem to care. I wonder what incentives it would take for non-Tesla supercharging to happen elsewhere? Tesla would be losing a valuable distinguishing feature of their cars, and they would want a return on the risk they took on the billions they've invested by installing so many stations. I certainly think it's possible to see non-Tesla supercharging in the US in the next few years though. Musk has always said mass EV adoption is his goal, whether it's his company that sells all the cars or not. I think he's waiting to see how 3rd party DCFC companies start to get a bit of momentum before throwing down an option. With most of them apparently sitting on their hands, the gap will just continue to widen and make the SC network more valuable.

I said I would pay extra to have access to more DCFCs. I wonder how much I'd be willing to pay, and via what mechanism? Though I eschew toll roads, the idea of pay-per-use supercharging is nice, even if I were paying 3x of what I pay now as a Tesla owner. Or would manufacturers pay a one-time license fee for the use of the supercharger network on each vehicle they make? This fee would largely be passed on to the consumer, but how much would people be willing to pay? $1k? $3k? More?

I think that a two tiered rate system would be good for them. Tesla owners pay one rate and others pay a higher price. The problem in the US for super chargers is that Tesla cars use their own plug that is unique to Tesla. In Europe Tesla uses ccs on their cars, so their super chargers are physically compatible with other cars. It could be done, but is certainly another obstacle to opening the super charge network to non-tesla cars.

 

[williams]

Electric vehicle chargers were included in the infrastructure bill that passed. But as Texas has shown, they aren't going with the best option. Tesla offered to build universal superchargers, which cost 1/5 of what Texas picked. So unless you live in an EV friendly state, expect the worse option to be chosen in terms of chargers.

Texas went against the smarter cheaper option? You dont say. I wonder how much money got pocketed from that transaction. Its ok elections have a way of steering things. The good news is most that buy electric are cross country drivers yet.

 

[beatle]

I think that a two tiered rate system would be good for them. Tesla owners pay one rate and others pay a higher price. The problem in the US for super chargers is that Tesla cars use their own plug that is unique to Tesla. In Europe Tesla uses ccs on their cars, so their super chargers are physically compatible with other cars. It could be done, but is certainly another obstacle to opening the super charge network to non-tesla cars.

Tesla's SC network relies on the car's VIN to appropriately bill the owner via their Tesla account. A semi-smart adapter with a unique ID could be purchased and registered to a person to allow them to use it to charge vehicles. It would also physically adapt the Tesla connector to CCS much in the way a TeslaTap does for Tesla destination chargers.

 

[RickLightning]

Tesla has already opened the SC network to non-Tesla vehicles in a small pilot in the Netherlands:

https://insideevs.com/news/567601/all-superchargers-netherlands-non-tesla/

I'm no Tesla fanboy (heck, I'm leaving the brand) or even a stock holder, but the charging experience has been very good. 3rd party DCFC companies don't really seem to care. I wonder what incentives it would take for non-Tesla supercharging to happen elsewhere? Tesla would be losing a valuable distinguishing feature of their cars, and they would want a return on the risk they took on the billions they've invested by installing so many stations. I certainly think it's possible to see non-Tesla supercharging in the US in the next few years though. Musk has always said mass EV adoption is his goal, whether it's his company that sells all the cars or not. I think he's waiting to see how 3rd party DCFC companies start to get a bit of momentum before throwing down an option. With most of them apparently sitting on their hands, the gap will just continue to widen and make the SC network more valuable.

I said I would pay extra to have access to more DCFCs. I wonder how much I'd be willing to pay, and via what mechanism? Though I eschew toll roads, the idea of pay-per-use supercharging is nice, even if I were paying 3x of what I pay now as a Tesla owner. Or would manufacturers pay a one-time license fee for the use of the supercharger network on each vehicle they make? This fee would largely be passed on to the consumer, but how much would people be willing to pay? $1k? $3k? More?

I just have to respond to this.

- "3rd party DCFC companies don't really seem to care" - what do you base this on? Electrify America spent $2B building out their network (Volkswagen settlement) and announced a long range plan months ago.

- "what incentives it will take" - how about $7.5B in government money to start? You do know there's a bill with guidelines and that some money has already been given to the states, right?

- You apparently don't understand that some of the companies, like ChargePoint, don't own the chargers, or the real estate. They sell chargers, and software, to people or companies that put in the chargers and can charge anything they want (assuming it's legal). Electrify America is a national network with standardized prices. I have no understanding of EVGo or others, EA may be the only non-Tesla company like that.

- you don't seem to get that the ONLY reason that Musk will open his super charger network is MONEY. Specifically $7.5B. He gets none of it if he doesn't open his network. Watch it happen by early 2023 at the latest.

 

[beatle]

I just have to respond to this.

- "3rd party DCFC companies don't really seem to care" - what do you base this on? Electrify America spent $2B building out their network (Volkswagen settlement) and announced a long range plan months ago.

Chargers are often reported as broken. This problem is so bad that Ford is sending out their own staff to assist with the charging experience. With 8+ pedestals an outage is not very significant, but with only 2-4, a single outage can mean a 25-50% degradation in availability.

- "what incentives it will take" - how about $7.5B in government money to start? You do know there's a bill with guidelines and that some money has already been given to the states, right?

You should include my entire sentence. "I wonder what incentives it would take for non-Tesla supercharging to happen elsewhere?" Currently I'm not aware of a proposal going to Tesla to open the SC network in the US. I'm not referring to 3rd party expansion so your response is out of place.

- You apparently don't understand that some of the companies, like ChargePoint, don't own the chargers, or the real estate. They sell chargers, and software, to people or companies that put in the chargers and can charge anything they want (assuming it's legal). Electrify America is a national network with standardized prices. I have no understanding of EVGo or others, EA may be the only non-Tesla company like that.

So what's your point in attempting to attack my understanding of the relationship between charging companies and land owners?

- you don't seem to get that the ONLY reason that Musk will open his super charger network is MONEY. Specifically $7.5B. He gets none of it if he doesn't open his network. Watch it happen by early 2023 at the latest.

I don't think you really read my post. I'll paste this again for the 3rd time. "I wonder what incentives it would take for non-Tesla supercharging to happen elsewhere? " Hint, incentives = money. What other chips do you think are in play here? I'll be interested to see if a bid is made using that money to open the SC network. It sure would speed things up for non-Tesla EV manufacturers, but overall station growth is still needed.

 

[RickLightning]

I'll be clearer.

Elon Musk is all about government handouts. He will open the Supercharger network to non-Tesla vehicles in the US when he gets enough MONEY.

That probably won't happen, because he will try and screw over the non-Tesla cars via rates, and there is no way that the government is going to give him huge dollars to then screw over their constituents.

So, the Tesla supercharger network will be opened to non-Tesla vehicles in the US probably never. He won't make the investment (adding CCS cords) until he locks the money, and he won't lock the money until the government has signed ironclad agreements to not screw their constituents over, because they know he is less than stable. No government official, in any state or on a federal level, would want to give him money and then associate with things like his 4/22 boner tweet.

Yes, the current non-Tesla network has issues. Much of it is owned privately, for example a college may have 2 ChargePoint stations for which they are responsible for all maintenance and fee setting. Not unusual to be broken and stay that way.

EA has broken stations for sure. In early Fall 2021 we had big issues. Those same stations 6 months later worked much better. That's in multiple states - Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee, Florida.

 

[F-150 Prius]

You had such an incredible post, couldn't agree more, until you want to diss on Musk. Why? He put every penny and bit of energy into supporting his cars. Why would he be as concerned about supporting Ford or GM or Polestar? Until about 2 years ago he wasn't sure he was going to make it and not go bankrupt, what do you think he had left to put into the slug chargers the other manufactures were going to build (Ford).

There is a chance now I can see him doing it, he is becoming profitable, he is getting more SC'er out there for Tesla's. He and his team might now have the time and energy and staff to consider expanding and opening the infrastructure for the brands that care to put nothing into their own infrastructure to support the cars they are building.

I'm glad we're in partial agreement. I'm not disrespecting or even criticizing Musk in this case with the dozen syllables used to reference him. : ) Tesla has chosen their priorities and Q1 earnings show they've got a solid handle on profit. Hopefully those billions can do more than buy Musk's marketing outlet.

I was not suggesting Tesla have anything to do with supporting other networks and I'm not a fan of opening up Superchargers to non-Tesla vehicles – a corporation with a strategic asset cannot (should not) be compelled to give up that asset or to dilute their service to their customers. If Tesla decides to build out the Supercharger network and take revenue from non-Tesla vehicles, maybe that's a win-win if they get govt dollars and access to sites Tesla cannot presently afford.

Musk said Superchargers would never be for profit, now they are a service for fee and "free lifetime" is no longer offered (so I might be keeping my FSD free-lifetime X longer than expected.) My point being Tesla has not made it a priority to solve the overcrowding problems that have been growing worse since the Model 3. That's not to say Tesla isn't building Supercharger sites, it's just not enough and not fast enough. The problem being the Tesla charging curve is too slow and people don't understand how to charge efficiently. Usage and idle fees are just revenue, not a deterrent to poor charging behavior. One solution is to price kW by the state of the charge to encourage arriving at a low state of charge and discourage charging slowly or above 70%. e.g.
0% to 10%: free
11% to 50%: $0.25
50% to 70%: $0.50
>70% $1.00/kWh

Additional fee for slow charging:
while charging over 120kW: +$0
while charging under 100kW: +$0.50/kWh (+ $0.10/min if 50% occupancy, +$0.50/min if 100%)

This would have to be adapted to specific vehicles so that older Teslas incurred a fair rate. Vehicles parked locally to a Supercharger would incur higher fees, vehicles arriving from another Supercharger with a road trip route in the Nav would incur lower cost per kWh.

That "solution" might look complex, but it would become very clear and simple to people who misuse and overstay at Superchargers once they get a few charges on their credit card (Tesla could waive a few transgressions per month as a matter of allowing for contingencies.)

As for Musk's tales of bankwuptcy, who knows what's real. Musk certainly had Tesla in shallow water. Since Tesla turned a profitable quarter in 2018, it has had no problem with cash, but that's not the point of my comment.

The government won't – and it would be for the first time in history – actually spend money to good purpose and get something done, especially with the auto industry and the oil industry obstructing and forestalling EVs at every opportunity. So the solution I see is someone like Bezos (or any other interested billionaire just make it their legacy to have implemented a nationwide EV charging network. I'd be overjoyed to hear Musk say "f**k it, I just allocated $5B to rapid Supercharger expansion to be completed in two years. I challenge VW / Toyota / GM / Ford to each allocate $5B and let's have a solid gigawatt infrastructure coast to coast." I'd prefer to see a free network of free electricity for vehicles, but free social services is a concept the US govt just does not allow – even when it's the less expensive solution.

 

[jefro]

It seems that Texas denied Tesla the grants for VW settlement based on the merit of the application and nothing more.
I do have a wish that Tesla can open to CCS at least in one spot in Texas. Otherwise I can currently drive clean across Texas on the available CCS stations.

" give their money to Elon and have him update his chargers to add CCS "
Tesla did a good job in my opinion placing chargers in places where their cars required them. Those locations may or may not be useful in future cars and trucks if technology increases range. However there are millions of gas pumps all over the world so maybe getting gas stations to change is the key. Beer bait and ammo along with gas and electricity.

 

[vandy1981]

It seems that Texas denied Tesla the grants for VW settlement based on the merit of the application and nothing more.

The grant program was first-come-first-serve. The Tesla application was later than the other ones that were submitted so they missed out. I don't think it had anything to do with merit.

 

[jefro]

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/merit

2a.

 

[beatle]

Those locations may or may not be useful in future cars and trucks if technology increases range. However there are millions of gas pumps all over the world so maybe getting gas stations to change is the key. Beer bait and ammo along with gas and electricity.

Lucid blew past the 400 mile mark and has a car with 500 miles of range, but Tesla views 400 as a soft ceiling for maximum range. Increasing battery density will allow for lighter cars and better efficiency:

https://electrek.co/2022/03/02/elon-musk-tesla-could-have-made-600-mile-range-electric-car/

I agree with his assessment for passenger vehicles. A truck that may tow has a different use case though, and range may continue to increase to 500 or even 600 miles. I chose the ER truck because it offered ~300 miles of range. I'll find that useful on occasion, but I actually manage just fine right now with a car that only gets 243. (I don't plan to tow anything - at least not regularly.) I think if given a choice of a 300 or 400 mile range truck, I might pick the 300 to save a few bucks and enjoy better handling and braking, though the extra power offered by larger batteries is always a temptation, even with a truck.

 

[jefro]

Maybe some day we will buy a pre-charged truck that will last the life of the truck. Like the lifetime bearing you never need to do anything to it.

Sponsored