Musk Will Open Up Tesla Supercharger Patents To Spur Development

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Musk Will Open Up Tesla Supercharger Patents To Spur Development

Posted by samzenpus on Monday June 9, 2014 @06:10AM from the here-you-go dept.

redletterdave (2493036) writes "Elon Musk has said repeatedly he wants to 'do something controversial' with Tesla's collection of electric car patents, but he finally offered specifics at the UK launch of his Tesla Model S on Sunday. The Tesla Motors CEO said he would like to open up the designs for his Supercharger systems — the free fast-charging stations designed to quickly refuel Tesla's electric cars — to create a standard for other car makers to use. Musk previously said he didn't want Superchargers to become a 'walled garden.'"

182 of 230 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

He continues to show himself to be ... by c0d3g33k · 2014-06-09 06:13 · Score: 5, Informative

... a very smart man.
1. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by Andrio · 2014-06-09 06:18 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  I want to be like Elon Musk when I grow up.
  
  --
  The Internet King? I wonder if he could provide faster nudity.
2. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by amiga3D · 2014-06-09 06:21 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  It may be smart in other ways. If it becomes the standard then it means that he doesn't eventually get stuck using someone else's standards (maybe one of the big automakers) and have to pay fee's to use their patented design. Once electric cars catch on these stations will be everywhere.
3. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by OldHawk777 · 2014-06-09 06:22 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  I am a small Tesla stock holder. This is good business from this stock holder's perspective. Make the market move and be the market leader.
  
  --
  Unaccountable leaders are masters, and unrepresented people are slaves. How do US and EU fare?
4. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by gbjbaanb · 2014-06-09 06:23 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  not necessarily - its like Microsoft giving away IE ... it makes sense because it encourages other manufacturers to use your charging kit, and so your cars have access to other's chargers - and so they become more convenient to own, and that lets you be more mainstream and that lets you sell more of them.
  Generally protectionism just hurts everyone.
5. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by mwvdlee · 2014-06-09 06:24 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Are the superchargers a unique selling point of their products or are they an enabling infrastructure?
  Tesla is not just fighting other car makers, they are fighting public perception of electric cars.
  Growing the entire entire electric car market is more profitable than merely taking a larger chunk of a small electric car market.
  
  --
  Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
6. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by jodycwilliams · 2014-06-09 06:24 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Pro society? Not really. This is a brilliant move in terms of getting his infrastructure built for him. The stations he's been putting up all over the country will drive him bankrupt pretty fast at the pace he's trying to keep. Spreading the load around to other potential electric vehicle manufacturers just means he's getting free gas stations. It is brilliant, I won't deny that.
7. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by alphaminus · 2014-06-09 06:26 · Score: 2
  
  I'd say it's pretty smart for shareholders if the tech takes off and he sees compatible fast charging stations nationwide. Imagine is one of the early car manufacturers had held on to the patent for the gasoline nozzle, we might all be riding trains for cross country trips.
8. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by bluefoxlucid · 2014-06-09 06:27 · Score: 2
  
  That's called risk management. A good CRO would see this and bring it up to the board.
  
  --
  Support my political activism on Patreon.
9. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by MindStalker · 2014-06-09 06:28 · Score: 1
  
  Why? He will make licensing fees from each car sold. AND he can charge per KW for other cars to plug into their quick charging ports.
  Little known fact, for the baseline Tesla S (the one that cost 69k), it doesn't come with free supercharging capability, but its available as an option as purchase for $2000 (its also available as a after purchase option, but probably cost more). The higher models come with supercharging standard.
  Weither they sell access to their stations are $2,000 up-front of if they meter it, I don't know. I'd guess they would meter it.
10. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by gstoddart · 2014-06-09 06:44 · Score: 1
  
  This shows him to be pro society.
  From a stock holder perspective. it's a very dumb move.
  Or, alternatively, he will make more money in the long run if other people invest in the infrastructure needed to charge the cars he sells.
  Maybe this is like crowdsourcing, where you convince a bunch of people to help develop your product and keep all of the money for yourself -- kinda like Gracenote did with CDDB.
  Sorry, but his past association with PayPal means I don't trust he has purely "pro society" motives.
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
11. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by jellomizer · 2014-06-09 06:45 · Score: 1
  
  "From a stock holder perspective. it's a very dumb move."
  Not necessarily. The biggest impediment to people buying electric cars is the lack of on road recharging. Otherwise people will need 2 cars, an electric one for the daily commute, and a gas/hybrid car for those long trips.
  By Opening the charger, this does allow other electric cars to be made using the charger... However it will overall increase demand for electric cars.
  Yes they will need to compete against other electric car makers, but being that there is more demand he will be able to sell more units.
  More units sold more profit. Shareholders like profit and company growth.
  Yes some bean counters will see this a lowering of the overall market share, but that metric is only useful in a mature peaked market, not so much for starting markets.
  
  --
  If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
12. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by Lumpy · 2014-06-09 06:45 · Score: 1
  
  Only to the very dumb stock holders.
  Honestly if anyone can not see the huge profits in setting a standard, they need to be beaten with a sack of door knobs.
  
  --
  Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
13. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by Githaron · 2014-06-09 06:47 · Score: 1
  
  well, smart is relative. This shows him to be pro society. From a stock holder perspective. it's a very dumb move.
  Not sure you second statement is true. By opening the patents of his super charging systems, it encourages other parties to put up more stations. This would make Teslas more enticing to prospective buyers. Sometimes, pro-society and pro-profit are not mutally exclusive.
14. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-06-09 06:52 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  From a stock holder perspective. it's a very dumb move.
  Yeah, and the boards of Blackberry, Nokia, and HP all said, "Google is giving away their mobile OS? What idiots!"
15. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by beltsbear · 2014-06-09 06:53 · Score: 2
  
  Not true. The cost has been low enough it is not much of a blip on their balance sheet.
16. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by jxander · 2014-06-09 06:58 · Score: 2
  
  Why? The Super-chargers are currently free to use. Allegedly they will always be free.
  So Musk isn't loosing any money "at the pump." Anyone who makes their own super-charger stations can't really undercut his price.
  On the flip side, the more super-charger stations that spring up, the more comfortable people are in buying his car, which is where he's actually making money.
  Sure, eventually another electric car company might spring up and make use of his Super-chargers ... but balance that potential loss against the gain above, and he's probably still coming out in the black.
  
  --
  This signature is false.
17. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by desdinova+216 · 2014-06-09 06:59 · Score: 1
  
  not if you're looking longer (than the next quarter) term
18. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by Brama · 2014-06-09 07:00 · Score: 1
  
  'gas' stations? That will go the way of 'dialing a number', 'hanging up the phone', 'taping' a program, or even that weird non-rectangular red blob in Youtube's logo.
19. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by Starport · 2014-06-09 07:01 · Score: 2
  
  What if he considers others making charging stations, compatible with Tesla, not having to build all networks himself, paving way for Tesla cars on a broader scale? That may very well turn out to be a very smart move, even for the shareholders...
20. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by Brama · 2014-06-09 07:01 · Score: 1
  
  YouFlat?
21. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by gstoddart · 2014-06-09 07:07 · Score: 1
  
  'gas' stations? That will go the way of 'dialing a number', 'hanging up the phone', 'taping' a program
  So, basically nowhere?
  Once those become the standard word to describe something, people are very reluctant to take on the new names for it.
  And I'm betting they won't for some time, because they're very entrenched in the language.
  I'm not even aware of an alternate to "dialing a number", even if I haven't used a phone with a dial in years. Clicking the number sounds silly. And, let's face it, butt-clicking doesn't have the same, er, ring to it.
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
22. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by Registered+Coward+v2 · 2014-06-09 07:07 · Score: 1
  
  well, smart is relative. This shows him to be pro society. From a stock holder perspective. it's a very dumb move.
  Hardly. Having a standard recharging platform would help spur adoption of electric vehicles since the buyer of a vehicle would no longer be tied to a specific manufacturer's design and recharging stations would become more viable since they can supply variety of manufacturers; much like gasoline stations today. In short, a standard would spur adoption of electric vehicles which would help Tesla.
  
  --
  I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
23. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by BradMajors · 2014-06-09 07:12 · Score: 1
  
  No it is not. It is a smart move from a stock holder's perspective.
  Tesla is in the business of selling cars, not charging stations. Telsa would make more money if someone else started building Tesla compatible charging stations.
24. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by Freedom+Bug · 2014-06-09 07:13 · Score: 1
  
  It's not a dumb move at all. Electric cars are still a very immature market, there are a lot more sales to be made from expanding the market than there are by stealing them from competitors. This is an "expand the market" type move.
25. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by rogoshen1 · 2014-06-09 07:20 · Score: 1
  
  With a standard for quickly charging an electric car, the cars go from "rich man's novelty" to mainstream much sooner than if it was just Tesla pushing the technology.
  I'd wager that if Ford, GM, Toyota, et al started making *competitive* plug-in hybrids that also used these supercharging stations, Tesla would also sell more cars as a result. (the marketing drones would call this synergy)
  Multiple car makers making semi-compatible electric cars makes the notion of the plug-in electric car far more legitimate in the eyes of consumers (IE, it's not just Tesla, and it's not a fad).
  And what's to stop the Texaco's and BP's from setting up their own supercharging stations at existing gas stations? It's a win for them since they now have people with proven disposable income loitering around their convenience store for 10+ minutes.
26. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by Firethorn · 2014-06-09 07:22 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Are the superchargers a unique selling point of their products or are they an enabling infrastructure?
  At this point the former, but he's made statements in the past he'd like it to be the latter. Of course, of the common-build EVs*, his has the largest battery packs capable of taking the fastest charge. At 120 kW, a supercharger station blows most other EV stations out of the water.
  For example, J1772 maxes out at 19.2kW at AC level 2, and 90kW for DC level 2., with the DC lvl 2 standard not even being finalized yet, and DC level 3 still in the initial planning stages.
  CHAdeMO's wiki is less useful, but it's connector is limited to 62kW. It's homepage lists chargers that max out at 60kW.
  I'll also say that compared to Tesla's chargers, the alternatives are indeed clunky. I think that Tesla compatibility might be a compelling choice if I'm making a moderate(150+ miles) or longer ranged EV if it enables me to sell access to the supercharger network as a feature point.
  *Disclaimer because I'm sure there's one-offs that can do just the same.
  
  --
  I don't read AC A human right
27. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by gstoddart · 2014-06-09 07:22 · Score: 1
  
  Tesla is in the business of selling cars, not charging stations.
  Indeed they're not.
  It sounds like he's hoping to spread around the cost of charging:
  
  If Musk does go through with this plan, he wants the competitors to go along with Tesla's "free power for life" clause. All the electricity used to charge up a Tesla at the Superchargers is included in the (hefty) purchase price of the car.
  
  So if other companies are making a free charging station which is also compatible with the Tesla, then Tesla makes even more money by not having to pay for the charging.
  It sounds like there's some magic going on in here where the owner doesn't pay the cost of charging their car, but it gets foisted off onto everybody else (ie taxpayers) because having electric cars is such a good idea the rest of the world should pay for it.
  And I'm not sure why the owners of electric cars should have their consumption subsidized, other than it helps Tesla sell more cars. If it's such a great idea, why aren't the owners getting charged? Someone is going to have to pay for that, and it will likely get applied to other products.
  So you could pay more for milk in order that someone who owns a Tesla gets free charging. Which is great if you can afford to buy a Tesla, but not so great if you need to buy milk.
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
28. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by Drethon · 2014-06-09 07:25 · Score: 1
  
  And what stock holders like tends to screw over the company in 5-10 years...
29. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by gstoddart · 2014-06-09 07:30 · Score: 1
  
  And what stock holders like tends to screw over the company in 5-10 years...
  That long?
  Stock holders are very shortsighted, and typically have little or no interest in the medium/long term outcomes for the company -- they just want the stock to go up by 25% so they can sell it to some other sucker before the bottom falls out.
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
30. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by Charliemopps · 2014-06-09 07:39 · Score: 1
  
  ... a very smart man.
  It doesn't take a smart man to realize preventing others from building the only devices capable of charging your car is dumb. Imagine if GM held the patent to the gasoline pump and tried to charge people for building alternative pumps.
31. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by symbolset · 2014-06-09 07:40 · Score: 1
  
  Oh sure. This self-made South African billionaire with his own rocket fleet and car company just has no head for business. You managed to spot the obvious flaw in his plan in only seconds. Good job!
  
  --
  Help stamp out iliturcy.
32. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by lupine · 2014-06-09 07:49 · Score: 2
  
  As a fellow TSLA stock holder, I absolutely agree.
  The growing electric vehicle market has plenty of room for multiple manufacturers. Tesla by itself cannot grow faster without introducing quality issues and cannot make vehicles fast enough to transition the entire vehicle market. Other automakers are unwilling to invest in their own supercharger network and without access to high power fast charging they will be forced to produce plug-in hybrids for the foreseeable future. Opening the standard would help bring in more capital to build the supercharger network and hasten the transition to zero emission vehicles.
  
  --
  We have the best government that money can buy.
33. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by BitZtream · 2014-06-09 07:54 · Score: 1
  
  You act as though that wasn't tried ... or using 'special formulas' of fuel to tie them into your fuel supply ... or even today, car makers still try to use 'special oil blends' that are required for their car ... even though they aren't, by law.
  
  --
  Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
34. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by ericloewe · 2014-06-09 07:55 · Score: 1
  
  Not necessarily. It's good if it means that his customers will be able to find any charging station and plug in (like they can find any gas station and fill their tanks).
35. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by arisvega · 2014-06-09 07:56 · Score: 1
  
  From a stock holder perspective. it's a very dumb move.
  .. unless it works, which will make it a very brilliant move.
  
  --
  The three laws of thermodynamics:(1) You can't win. (2) You can't break even. (3) You can't even quit.
36. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by Nocturna81 · 2014-06-09 08:08 · Score: 1
  
  You do realise that thats a fairly standard thing in the rest of the world outside of the USA right?
37. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-06-09 08:08 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  You're supposed to make car analogies for technology topics, not the other way around. Now I have no idea what you are talking about.
38. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by mcrbids · 2014-06-09 08:09 · Score: 1
  
  How is this a dumb move? By making charging stations ubiquitous, Elon is paving the way for even more sales of their already popular electric cars.
  Sometimes, it's really important to know what your *core competence* is, and what is not. With this move, it would seem that Tesla motors sees that it is in the business of selling cars, not fueling stations.
  
  --
  I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
39. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by Seranfall · 2014-06-09 08:11 · Score: 1
  
  Agreed. While there are many that may not agree with some of his vision he has shown to be an impressive businessman. He currently controls two of the most advanced companies in emerging technologies in the world. Tesla is moderately successful and shows lot's of promise. Space X is the top private space company and may be soon flying astronauts to the ISS. None of their competitors are even close to that. We need more people in business that are not all about the almighty buck. There needs to be risk for there to be innovation. Maybe he can show others that being open and working towards a competitive environment will be better for all involved. I won't discount though that there is plenty of self-serving interest with this announcement. That isn't a bad thing. Tesla gets help while making it easier for others to compete and the electric car market gets a huge boost.
40. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by Hognoxious · 2014-06-09 08:11 · Score: 1
  
  For the benefit of the non-MBAs among us, could you explain all that by means of a car analogy?
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
41. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by DerekLyons · 2014-06-09 08:12 · Score: 1
  
  Let's wait until he stops saying he'd "like" to open up his designs and "may" do something revolutionary with his patents and actually opens them up and/or does something revolutionary. Then we can judge how smart he is, because as it is all he's good at (on this topic, and so many others) is making provocative click-bait statements and watching the free publicity come rolling in.
  Seriously, the Musk personality cult (three article devoid of substantive content in as many days) here on Slashdot is reaching ridiculous levels.
42. Re: He continues to show himself to be ... by Redbehrend · 2014-06-09 08:17 · Score: 1
  
  I think it's a very smart move in many ways.. This gets more people to use the same design which helps move towards universal charging. More production could lead to not only more stations but cheaper stations. They might find ways to improve on it or make it more effective.
43. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by Richy_T · 2014-06-09 08:18 · Score: 1
  
  Not necessarily. The biggest problem with the Tesla currently is lack of charging stations. So anything that can be done to improve that is good for Tesla in a "rising tide lifts all boats" kind of way.
44. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by Hognoxious · 2014-06-09 08:20 · Score: 1
  
  Other than charging a fee to anyone who wants to make things complying with it (which the story suggests isn't the case) then where exactly is the profit in setting the standard?
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
45. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by drinkypoo · 2014-06-09 08:21 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not even aware of an alternate to "dialing a number",
  
  You just say you called whoever. I thought English was your first language.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
46. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by khallow · 2014-06-09 08:39 · Score: 1
  
  From a stock holder perspective. it's a very dumb move.
  Why? The advantages are pretty obvious due to network effects and the fact that Tesla's business model is selling cars not selling proprietary recharging stations that almost no one uses.
47. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by dnavid · 2014-06-09 08:55 · Score: 1
  
  well, smart is relative. This shows him to be pro society. From a stock holder perspective. it's a very dumb move.
  Not really. Every supercharger station anyone else builds to Tesla's specifications is in effect a "gas station" for Tesla cars. At the moment Tesla is spending tons of money building a supercharger network. Every station someone else decides to build, assuming they remain compatible, is a station Tesla gets for free. Technically speaking, Musk is making it easier for competitors to compete with him building electric cars because they will get an easier way to build out a charging network but just like the ATM networks, there's a huge advantage to make them compatible because it validates the concept for consumers. Right now the biggest hurdle facing electric car manufacturers including Tesla is not competition from other electric car manufacturers, its the lack of infrastructure to support electric cars. Supercharger stations would be a tide that lifts all boats in that market, just like when the banks decided to cooperate with their ATM networks.
48. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by mythosaz · 2014-06-09 08:56 · Score: 1
  
  For us non-Tesla electric drivers using the "bad" chargers...
  The thing is though, that we're not generally charging the car to full. We don't need superchargers, except at the edges of town and between towns. In the city, we're just topping off a tiny bit as we go about our normal day, extending our range by 20-30 miles a day while we get groceries or watch a movie.
  The existing 6v non-Tesla chargers take about 45 minutes to charge to full for us. The "common" chargers take 4-5 hours.
49. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by AaronW · 2014-06-09 08:57 · Score: 2
  
  As the owner of a model S the other standards, including the J1772, are indeed clunky. Tesla has managed to create a connector that is smaller than J1772 yet handles more power than any other DC charging solution out there. The same connector is electrically compatible with both J1772 and the J1772 combo plug.. Tesla has a patent on the connector as well since its design also makes it really easy to insert the connector since it basically funnels it into place. Having RGB LEDs on the outside funnel part of the connector is also rather cool. It indicates how fast it's charging (based on how fast it throbs green) or if there's a fault (if it lights up red) or if charging is delayed (blue). The connector that plugs in also has a button on it that pops open the charge port door. The connector also locks inside unless the owner has their key fob so somebody can't just pull out the connector or steal the portable charging cable.
  
  --
  This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
50. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · 2014-06-09 08:59 · Score: 1
  
  This. However much he may invest in fast-charge, there may be little value in keeping it to his own company. While "we charge much faster" is a great selling point, the industry is new and not old. He needs his version of gas stations up the wazoo and ofloading construction on other manufacturers or third parties (thinking to support a larger multimarket) is in his interests.
  Patents are to protect investments from interlopers. Nothing says you can't give it out for cheap or free for reasons good or stupid.
  
  --
  (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
51. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by AaronW · 2014-06-09 09:01 · Score: 1
  
  It's $2000 and you can buy it at any point through their web site. Most people are buying the 85Kwh battery which includes access to the supercharger network. The $2000 is also there to help offset the cost of the extra hardware that is installed in the cars. Originally you would have to pay $2000 when you got the car to have the extra hardware installed. I think Tesla found that most people want this and that it's simpler to just always install the extra hardware.
  
  --
  This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
52. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by AaronW · 2014-06-09 09:05 · Score: 1
  
  There is no cost to the taxpayers. The cost of charging is built into the price of the car. As it is, electricity is dirt cheap for supercharging. It probably cost them $5 for a full charge or less and most owners don't charge at the superchargers all that often since they are located such that it's more convenient to just charge at home.
  In my case there's one a few miles from my house but I rarely use it. It's just more convenient to charge at home rather than wait to charge at the factory.
  
  --
  This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
53. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by Mysticalfruit · 2014-06-09 09:19 · Score: 1
  
  As a driver of a range extended electric vehicle, I'd be perfectly happy to pay to quick charge my car at one of his charging stations. If anything it could encourage me to switch to a Tesla. Ultimately, what I want is for the battery technology to really take off. I'd rather have fewer charging stations and more robust battery technology...
  
  --
  Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
54. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by Firethorn · 2014-06-09 09:25 · Score: 1
  
  For us non-Tesla electric drivers using the "bad" chargers...
  I wouldn't call them 'bad', they're just lower power and the plug isn't as 'nice' as the Tesla's. Somehow Tesla managed to get away with only having 2 power wires, vs separate AC and DC power lines on the other interfaces. Makes Tesla's sleeker, less clunky.
  The lower power, as I mention, doesn't really matter until you have a vehicle with a big enough battery to take that charge, and as you mention, the higher power isn't really going to be required in town anyways.
  You'd have to have a Tesla pretty low on charge in order for even a lvl2 charger to not fully charge it over the course of a movie.
  
  --
  I don't read AC A human right
55. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by Firethorn · 2014-06-09 09:31 · Score: 1
  
  I'd wager that if Ford, GM, Toyota, et al started making *competitive* plug-in hybrids that also used these supercharging stations, Tesla would also sell more cars as a result. (the marketing drones would call this synergy)
  I'll add that I've heard that his licensing terms are such that any companies using his tech can't lock out Tesla. Logically speaking, if an auto company starts using his charge technology that means they'll also be putting charging stations in. More charging stations equals more reason to buy a Tesla due to lowered range anxiety.
  The more EVs out there, the more reason to put in charge stations to attract their business.
  
  --
  I don't read AC A human right
56. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by Pascoea · 2014-06-09 09:32 · Score: 1
  
  I was reading a similar article that came through yahoo news today. I got down to the comments (which are the best part about Yahoo news) and the first one was from an investor bitching about Tesla "giving away" their technology. It was basically a "won't somebody please think about the shareholder" comment. Just dumbfounded that someone can be that shortsighted...
57. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by Qzukk · 2014-06-09 10:11 · Score: 1
  
  You just say you called whoever
  "call 1 for sales"?
  
  --
  If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
58. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by Firethorn · 2014-06-09 10:50 · Score: 1
  
  Make the chargers open source. Charge for the car side of the connection. Have some sort of cost-sharing system for the network, much like ATMs.
  IE the more chargers you own, the more you're paid. The more cars you sell, the more you pay.
  Sell a lot of cars but have no chargers? Pay a lot of money for access to the network. Have a lot of chargers but no cars? Get paid wheelbarrels of money to keep them going.
  
  --
  I don't read AC A human right
59. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by sturle · 2014-06-09 10:54 · Score: 1
  
  well, smart is relative. This shows him to be pro society.
  From a stock holder perspective. it's a very dumb move.
  Not at all. Tesla Motors owns a large supercharger network that Tesla owners (the 85 kWh version) can use for free. If other car makers support charging from Tesla superchargers, the owners of other car models would have to pay for use. Subsidizing free power for Tesla owners. And I'm sure no Tesla owner would complain if there are more superchargers availble for them to use, even if they would have to pay to use the non-Tesla superchargers.
60. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by Jeremi · 2014-06-09 11:02 · Score: 1
  
  Pro society? Not really. This is a brilliant move in terms of getting his infrastructure built for him.
  
  I don't see anything above that precludes the move from being pro-society, Not everything is a zero-sum game -- this can benefit both Tesla and society at large.
  
  --
  
  I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
61. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by Jeremi · 2014-06-09 11:34 · Score: 1
  
  Other than charging a fee to anyone who wants to make things complying with it (which the story suggests isn't the case) then where exactly is the profit in setting the standard?
  1. Teslas are a lot easier to sell if there are recharging locations everywhere as opposed to just in a few places. To the extent that this promotes more Tesla-friendly charging locations, it helps sell more Teslas.
  2. If it's your design becomes the standard, then the standard is going to be a very good fit with your other products. Other companies might have to make compromises to work with the standard, but you (presumably) won't, because you designed the standard to fit your products. That makes it easier to sell better products.
  3. If you're seen as the de-facto technology leader, it becomes much easier to get the market to accept your next design (SuperCharger 2.0 or whatever) as a standard as well.
  
  --
  
  I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
62. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by mythosaz · 2014-06-09 12:03 · Score: 1
  
  You'd have to have a Tesla pretty low on charge in order for even a lvl2 charger to not fully charge it over the course of a movie.
  This is pretty much my point.
  You don't need super chargers in any concentration except along highways.
63. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by Hognoxious · 2014-06-09 12:14 · Score: 1
  
  Teslas are a lot easier to sell if there are recharging locations everywhere as opposed to just in a few places. To the extent that this promotes more Tesla-friendly charging locations, it helps sell more Teslas.
  
  I knew somebody would say that.
  However it's wrong. That comes out of the fact that a standard exists; who owns/defines it is irrelevant.
  You don't need to own the patent for sliced bread to sell toasters.
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
64. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by Firethorn · 2014-06-09 12:30 · Score: 1
  
  This is pretty much my point.
  Yeah, but you implied that I thought that any other charger was 'bad'. I don't really. I think the connector isn't as good, but that's minor.
  I didn't state it well, but without a battery pack as large as Tesla's you can't even charge at those wattage levels without roasting your battery. Thus the comment about needing at least a 'medium range' EV before using it's connector and the supercharger network becomes a selling feature.
  Even the 'blows out of the water' is a statement of power - a race engine will blow most street engines 'out of the water', but it doesn't mean that the street engines are bad. They'll get you somewhere eventually far beyond where the race engine is a mess on the side of the road.
  Really, it just goes to show how different a market Tesla is currently playing in compared to other EV makers.
  
  --
  I don't read AC A human right
65. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by drinkypoo · 2014-06-09 12:35 · Score: 1
  
  "call 1 for sales"?
  "Say or (press|push) one for sales."
  What year is it, anyway?
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
66. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by David+Gould · 2014-06-09 13:07 · Score: 1
  
  For the benefit of the non-MBAs among us, could you explain all that by means of a car analogy?
  No problem: It's like if Musk were to Open Up the Tesla Supercharger Patents, To Spur Development.
  
  --
  David Gould
  main(i){putchar(340056100>>(i-1)*5&31|!!(i<6)<< 6)&&main(++i);}
67. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by aliquis · 2014-06-09 13:29 · Score: 1
  
  He continues to show himself to be a very smart man.
  Clearly he's working with real products and not in the media industry.
68. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by Jeremi · 2014-06-09 18:29 · Score: 1
  
  However it's wrong. That comes out of the fact that a standard exists; who owns/defines it is irrelevant.
  That would only be true if all the standards performed equally well, which is not the case here.
  The relevant comparison: At a SuperCharger you can recharge your Model S in less than an hour -- typically within 20-30 minutes. If you plug your Model S into a standard J1722 charger, OTOH, it will take about five times longer, because J1722 has a much lower maximum charge rate.
  So ask yourself: if you were considering buying a Tesla, would you be more likely to buy one if you knew that recharging it would take 30 minutes at most locations, or 3 hours?
  
  --
  
  I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
69. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by mythosaz · 2014-06-09 19:24 · Score: 1
  
  '"bad" chargers' was only to save myself some typing, rehashing the differences between chademo, blah blah.
70. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by arcHex · 2014-06-09 20:03 · Score: 1
  
  No, it'd be similar if MS were to open up IE code for use in other browsers.
71. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by Alioth · 2014-06-09 22:39 · Score: 1
  
  My landline phone still is rotary dial, you insensitive clod.
  
  --
  Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
72. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by drinkypoo · 2014-06-09 23:28 · Score: 1
  
  My landline phone still is rotary dial, you insensitive clod.
  And your mouth, too? In that case you probably have TDD.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
73. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by Neil+Boekend · 2014-06-10 02:12 · Score: 1
  
  Really???? His hyperloop idea is just bolloks. It would work, if that highway didn't make any turns. However, it does so the passengers would get really damaged at those proposed speeds.
  
  --
  Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
74. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by L4t3r4lu5 · 2014-06-10 02:24 · Score: 1
  
  Tesla need to make a vehicle which costs less than Â£50k.
  
  The current popular "regular Joe" electric vehicle in the EU is the Nissan Leaf, costing around Â£25k in its base spec. My Hyundai i20 cost me Â£7000 brand new, with reasonable mod-cons (Air conditioning, heated mirrors, iPod connectivity etc) and similar performance. If I add up my running costs per year, I get to approximately Â£1800 PA in fuel, tax, servicing, MOT, and replaceables (tyres, brake pads etc). That means that if the Nissan Leaf had no running costs at all, I'd have to own it for 10 years to break even. That doesn't say anything about the inconvenience of 1/3 range at best, scarcity of recharging stations, and the 8 hour charge time when you find one.
  
  --
  Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
75. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by WindBourne · 2014-06-10 20:23 · Score: 1
  
  Keep in mind that many many car makers and their investors are shorting Tesla in a BIG way. The last thing that they want is for Tesla's tech to catch on. You will note that BMW, Toyota, Dahmler, Honda, VW, etc have pretty much signed on for methane based fuel-cells, and more diesel. All of these companies oppose pure electric cars. The reasoning is simple. Far too easy for others to break into the market.
  
  --
  I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
76. Re:He continues to show himself to be ... by WindBourne · 2014-06-10 20:28 · Score: 1
  
  And note that Tesla's SC's are supposed to go to 160 kW.
  As such, it will only take about 30-40 minutes to recharge a 300 mile tesla in the coming year. And that means that for the first 15 minutes, it will deliver more than a half charge, but will then slow way down.
  
  --
  I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
chargers by gbjbaanb · 2014-06-09 06:16 · Score: 1

Sooner the better, last thing we need is every car manufacturer making their own version of a charger like has happened with phones and portable gadgets.
Perhaps legislation would be the best option - one type of charger technology that is unencumbered by patents or copyrights or anything, so everyone can use it and you can find a charging station that will work with your car, even if it was built by Apple.
1. Re:chargers by BasilBrush · 2014-06-09 06:44 · Score: 1
  
  This is one place where legislated standards would be a really bad idea. The charging process is one that benefits from every innovation that makes it a quicker or cheaper process. Companies should be allowed to change as they see fit.
  Save legislated standards for situations where there is no innovation, only protectionism going on.
2. Re:chargers by jellomizer · 2014-06-09 06:55 · Score: 1
  
  Car charging vs your little cell phone isn't really an apt analogy.
  Your cell phone charger almost always has an option where you can plug it into the standard wall socket, most have an option to plug in a standard USB port. What you are bitching about is the other end of the plug that goes into the cell phone. Now the phone may have different features that will need a special plug, (Unless you really want a data plug(s) (Digital and Analog mix?) and a power plug)
  The automotive charger is like standardizing the wall socket or the usb port. So you don't need to bring around a 2-3 meter cable with a set of adapters, with power standards that could either charge your car, charge your car slowly, or cause your car to explode.
  
  --
  If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
3. Re:chargers by Firethorn · 2014-06-09 07:36 · Score: 1
  
  Perhaps legislation would be the best option"
  That would most likely end up with an ugly solution being pushed on us. For example, mandating the USB standard does reduce the number of cables, up to the point Apple wants to release it's iPad sized iPhone.
  Current open standards for EV charging stations max out at 60kW, half of what Tesla's superchargers put out. Less than half given that Tesla is actually looking to increase power even more. Even the 'next update' standards only up that to 90kW for J1772.
  Tesla is being a bit like apple here, but it's pushing a truly superior standard by what I'm reading. Both higher power and more convenient to the user.
  BTW, the supercharging stations Tesla have been building feature an equal number of non-propriatory charging stations - for every supercharger there's a J1772 connection, at least at some sites.
  
  --
  I don't read AC A human right
Makes prescient business sense for Tesla. by OldHawk777 · 2014-06-09 06:17 · Score: 4, Insightful

Elon Musk wants more quick refuel infrastructure on the interstates and local roads/cities, which will advance Tesla's and others electric cars. This is not controversial but does provide probable wider support for Tesla's collection of electric car products, patents, and parts. Open up the designs for Tesla Supercharger systems — the free fast-charging stations designed to quickly refuel electric cars — creating an ISO/OASIS standard for other car makers to use makes prescient business sense.

--
Unaccountable leaders are masters, and unrepresented people are slaves. How do US and EU fare?
1. Re:Makes prescient business sense for Tesla. by amiga3D · 2014-06-09 06:24 · Score: 1
  
  He could most likely see the danger of Ford/Chevy/Nissan/Toyota and all the other big boys getting together to design their own and then charging fees to the small companies like Tesla to use it too. I'm surprised no one has jumped to lock out the small fry yet.
2. Re:Makes prescient business sense for Tesla. by ganjadude · 2014-06-09 07:11 · Score: 1
  
  look at all the states where the dealer network is doing everything they can to kill tesla off by not allowing them to even sell their cars in those states. They did the same thing to Studebaker and a lesser extent delorean.
  
  they dont want any more competition simple as that
  
  --
  have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
3. Re:Makes prescient business sense for Tesla. by Firethorn · 2014-06-09 07:38 · Score: 1
  
  I'm surprised no one has jumped to lock out the small fry yet.
  Chademo and J1772 are apparently in quite the fight right now, while Tesla forges ahead with it's superior propriatory solution.
  The problem with 'locking out the small fry' is that:
  1. There's effectively no small fry around yet
  2. The base is too fragile as of yet to seriously try it. Right now it's more profitable to share stations.
  
  --
  I don't read AC A human right
4. Re:Makes prescient business sense for Tesla. by AaronW · 2014-06-09 09:09 · Score: 1
  
  Most other automakers don't really want to sell EVs, plus they tend to have a big NIH syndrome. Just look how well they're implementing support for the combo plug. As far as I know, the only companies that make money selling EVs are Tesla and Nissan (which pushes ChaDeMo).
  
  --
  This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
Re:A cynical PR ploy by drinkypoo · 2014-06-09 06:18 · Score: 1

There is little to no interesting technology in the batteries themselves either; they have a specially-shaped cathode IIRC, but are otherwise manufactured from COTS cells which are already commonly produced.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
What a great idea! by bennomatic · 2014-06-09 06:20 · Score: 5, Insightful

1. Build an electric car that's heads and shoulders above the competition.
2. Build an innovative charging infrastructure to allow for long distance driving.
3. Open up the technology for that charging infrastructure so that gas stations and the like can start getting in on the action and making some profit.
4. With charging infrastructure becoming ubiquitous, that takes away many people's concerns about buying your car.
5. Also, with charging infrastructure becoming ubiquitous, that may encourage other auto manufacturers to move past compliance cars and actually start selling quality vehicles.
6. Tout competition's success as your own success, as it's built on your platform. Competition isn't only good PR in this context, but it carries with it the subtext that electric cars are a product category that is here to stay.

To some degree, I still like the idea of plug-in hybrids for the time being. But if this "open supercharger" thing is as successful as I think it's going to be, there could be a sea change in the consumer automotive market.

--
The CB App. What's your 20?
1. Re:What a great idea! by bluefoxlucid · 2014-06-09 06:48 · Score: 2
  
  Plug-in diesel hybrids would probably be better, especially with an all-electric drive train.
  An all-electric drive train allows a light diesel engine to run in its most efficient operating range continuously, under variable load. The engine could be a single-piston diesel pegged to 200RPM, getting more fuel when the battery charge is below 85% and when there is current draw by the motor.. The increased load (by charging or supplying power) would require more torque output for the engine to maintain 200RPM, hence more fuel. When the motor is drawing power, the engine supplements the battery; when the motor draws less power (or none), the engine charges the battery.
  This setup allows for plug-in charging, as well as high density fuel usage. We can use excess capacity at hydroelectric dams, solar plants, and wind farms to generate diesel fuel, both direct from air and by fermented waste, e.g, grease fryer oil, corn stalks, or wood pulp. This provides a zero-emission hydrocarbon fuel source which we can pipeline across the country. Combustible waste can go straight into a Fischer-Tropsch process used for gas-to-liquid or coal-to-liquid in modern applications.
  These conversions have high amounts of loss, but are suitable for reclamation. Hydro plants dump millions of gallons of water without power generation when under-utilized; wind farms and solar plants ground their production. Even at 50% efficiency, conversion into fuel provides a valuable commodity.
  
  --
  Support my political activism on Patreon.
2. Re:What a great idea! by Maury+Markowitz · 2014-06-09 06:52 · Score: 1
  
  > To some degree, I still like the idea of plug-in hybrids for the time being
  Especially when the hybrid is this:
  http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/electric-car-with-massive-range-in-demo-by-phinergy-alcoa-1.2664653
  Take a Tesla S. Remove 2/3rds of the li-ion. Add one of these. Car loses 500 lbs. One-way range increases to ~1600 km. Refuelling for short trips is about 5 minutes. Longer ones takes a swap, just like now.
3. Re:What a great idea! by dkf · 2014-06-09 07:36 · Score: 1
  
  This setup allows for plug-in charging, as well as high density fuel usage.
  At a cost of quite a lot of complexity and weight. That might be justifiable, but it sure isn't free.
  
  --
  "Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
4. Re: What a great idea! by technosaurus · 2014-06-09 07:48 · Score: 1
  
  Stirling engine would work just as well but more efficiently... Warm-up times prevented their use in the past but that was before hybrids. They are more efficient than getting it from an outlet and can burn nearly any fuel. The future research is mostly in battery but a Stirling engine with a better drive train would be worth looking into. Think of a maglev train wrapped around a circular track except the train is the tire (actually probably more like a "twheel") and the rail is the "motor". http://contest.techbriefs.com/2013/entries/transportation-and-automotive/3911 This would make for an incredibly smooth ride, extremely high speeds, independent traction control and many other benefits. It doesn't even need to be maglev, a simple AC motor where the rotor and stator are swapped and controlled by DC powered SCRs (or whatever) would be fine for non-luxury models.
5. Re:What a great idea! by amorsen · 2014-06-09 09:05 · Score: 1
  
  Small diesel engines are not inherently more efficient than petrol engines. They just perform a lot better in practice because they do not suffer so much from partial load. Making a petrol hybrid makes sense because petrol engines hate to run at anything but full load and you solve the lack of torque at the low end. Making a diesel hybrid does not make nearly as much sense since diesel is reasonably efficient at partial load and provides a more acceptable amount of low-end torque.
  Diesel engines are large, heavy, and expensive which means less room, mass, and money for batteries.
  
  --
  Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
6. Re:What a great idea! by Firethorn · 2014-06-09 09:43 · Score: 1
  
  Refuelling for short trips is about 5 minutes. Longer ones takes a swap, just like now.
  This ignores that charging capacity scales with battery size. IE it doesn't matter if your battery pack is 1 cell or 3 thousand of them, the charge time from empty to full is going to take about the same amount of time, assuming you have enough power to meet the limit.
  Chop the battery of a Tesla by 2/3rds and you chop it's charging capability(watts) by 2/3rds. Roughly.
  It is an interesting idea though.
  
  --
  I don't read AC A human right
7. Re:What a great idea! by LoRdTAW · 2014-06-09 12:06 · Score: 1
  
  Eh, a single piston at 200 RPM would be a bit shaky unless perfectly balanced. Most high speed diesel engines (every road going diesel) typically idle at around 600 RPM. Perhaps a small flat or boxer type 2-4 cylinder with an alternator bolted right to the flywheel.
  A better idea would be to have a variable speed engine paired with a DC generator that has a wide operating range. So as you put your foot on the accelerator, the engines speed regulator would increase the RPM's to match the needed current output. As you get up to speed, the computer can slow the engine down to the minimum needed to sustain the vehicle's speed. The benefit would be that the engine only has to work as hard as it needs to and does not need to run at a constant speed.
  The only reason generators (we are talking alternators producing mains power) are constant speed is because the frequency is directly proportional to the shaft speed. A 4 pole 60Hz alternator needs to spin at a constant 1800RPM. To avoid this newer small portable generators use inverters connected to an alternator. As the current demand increases, the voltage sags and the computer speeds the engine up. It works great for really small generators (4kW) but becomes more costly after that as you need more/bigger MOSFETS/IGBT's in the inverter. BUT if your target output is DC like an electric car would need, then you don't need the inverter, just the speed regulator.
8. Re:What a great idea! by amorsen · 2014-06-09 19:23 · Score: 1
  
  Locomotives are diesel electric because you cannot make a mechanical power train which get a freight train rolling. You need something with near-infinite torque like an electric motor or a steam engine. And yes, diesel has more energy, partially because it is heavier and partially because C turns into CO2 whereas you need two H per O. More carbon atoms mean higher CO2 emissions of course.
  
  --
  Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
9. Re:What a great idea! by bluefoxlucid · 2014-06-10 01:09 · Score: 1
  
  A lot of complexity and weight? It's an alternator, a 200 pound single-piston diesel, and a fuel tank and pump. The car already has batteries and a computer; you would make the batteries smaller, since diesel and kerosene have higher energy density. The battery powers the electrical system with or without the engine; the engine could run only under 25% battery capacity or so, mainly running on plug-in.
  It's actually a simple design. It's not a Prius; the engine doesn't drive the wheels. The engine supplies electricity, charging the battery and powering the electrical system directly. In effect, you're plugging the charge port into an on-board generator, and running that when battery gets low.
  
  --
  Support my political activism on Patreon.
10. Re:What a great idea! by bluefoxlucid · 2014-06-10 01:41 · Score: 1
  
  Gasoline engines provide 25%-30% of the energy released by burning the fuel as useful work.
  Diesel engines provide 40% of the energy released by burning the fuel as useful work. Turbocharged diesel engines can improve this to around 50%.
  That means a diesel engine with, say, a therm of diesel fuel (100,000 BTU) will produce nearly twice as much useful output power as a petrol engine with a therm of gasoline. There will be less diesel fuel (by both mass and volume) than gasoline to provide that 1 therm of input fuel, so storage density is also higher. You're going to get more than twice as much work out of the same volume and weight of diesel.
  
  --
  Support my political activism on Patreon.
11. Re:What a great idea! by bluefoxlucid · 2014-06-10 01:45 · Score: 1
  
  Diesel generators run at either 200RPM or 1800RPM in most applications. I know 200RPM is common for aviation with electrical drive train, didn't know it was tied to the AC frequency.
  
  --
  Support my political activism on Patreon.
12. Re:What a great idea! by amorsen · 2014-06-10 03:18 · Score: 1
  
  That is great when you are building a ship engine for Emma Mærsk. Now build a 30kW diesel range extender and get 40% efficiency out of that. Good luck.
  
  --
  Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
13. Re:What a great idea! by bluefoxlucid · 2014-06-10 03:33 · Score: 1
  
  The 50% number comes specifically from automobiles using turbodiesels, like the Volkswagen Jetta TDi.
  
  --
  Support my political activism on Patreon.
14. Re:What a great idea! by amorsen · 2014-06-10 07:59 · Score: 1
  
  Fair enough. Wikipedia provides no citations for that number, and I have had zero luck finding actual published studies, which is actually a bit weird.
  However, conventional diesel cars are nowhere near twice as efficient as petrol cars. I do not understand why that changes with the addition of a hybrid drive system -- the hybrid drive system should improve the efficiency of a petrol car comparatively more. E.g. look at spritmonitor.de, top diesel performer (after the special models VW Lupo 3L and Audi A2 3L which do not have equivalent petrol cars) is the Citroen C1: 4.2 l/100km on diesel, 5.2 l/100km on petrol. Less than 25% improvement, and half of that is just because diesel is heavier.
  Anyway, I will be convinced when someone builds a small diesel range extender. I won't be holding my breath.
  
  --
  Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
15. Re:What a great idea! by bluefoxlucid · 2014-06-11 01:06 · Score: 1
  
  Efficiency of a car isn't engine efficiency. Car efficiency involves driving habits, aerodynamics, mechanical systems, weight, and so on. Engine efficiency involves engine speed and fuel.
  The efficiency of a diesel engine isn't going to be affected by the weight of anything but the pistons and crank shaft. The car's efficiency will be affected by the total weight. In this case, we're talking about turning a pile of fuel into rotational output power, cranking a generator to supply electricity to power an electrical system for battery charging and motor operation. This is more efficient than direct-drive because the efficiency of an electric motor is not strongly affected by its operating speed, while the efficiency of any internal combustion engine is.
  In other words: an electric drive train eliminates the complex inefficiencies of the internal combustion engine. If your engine is twice as efficient, your car is twice as efficient. A mechanical drive train will run a diesel engine outside its efficient operating range often (diesel has narrow efficiency and power bands), so much of the theoretical efficiency is unrealized.
  I'm not talking about a Prius-style hybrid drive, where you attach both an electric and combustion motor onto the same drive shaft and apply power from both. I'm talking about taking a Tesla, hooking an alternator to an ICE, and running wires from the alternator to the charge port.
  
  --
  Support my political activism on Patreon.
16. Re:What a great idea! by amorsen · 2014-06-11 07:45 · Score: 1
  
  You are still trying to talk around the fact that diesel engines in traditional cars are not even 50% more efficient than petrol engines, combined with the fact that diesel engines benefit less from hybrid drive than petrol engines. Therefore diesel hybrids will not be 50% more efficient than petrol hybrids.
  Serial hybrids look decidedly pitiful so far, the BMW i3 does something like 7l/100km on petrol.
  
  --
  Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
17. Re:What a great idea! by LoRdTAW · 2014-06-11 12:36 · Score: 1
  
  200 rpm is in the slow speed category (300RPM). Those speeds are typically reserved for very large ship diesel engines (search for Wartsila). Even medium speed diesels are not very fast, in the 300-1000 RPM range. Most Diesel gensets for backup, or portable power tend to be high speed units running at 1500 RPM for 50 Hz and 1800 RPM for 60 Hz. I doubt there are any 200 RPM generators unless they are one of those old Listeroid type engines. And those are belt driven to increase the speed to 1500 or 1800 RPM at the generator shaft.
  The frequency of a generator is determined by the speed of the shaft and the number of poles in the alternator. The formula is f = (p*RPM)/120, f is the frequency, p is the number of poles, and RPM is the shaft speed of the armature. Also, the number of poles is always even. So a 4 pole alternator spinning at 1800 RPM will yield 60Hz. The same 4 pole spinning at 1500 RPM will yield 50Hz.
  At 200 rpm, the alternator would need 36 poles to produce 60Hz or 30 poles for 50Hz. That is a lot of poles and makes construction a bit more complex.
18. Re:What a great idea! by bluefoxlucid · 2014-06-12 02:12 · Score: 1
  
  You are still talking about "Hybrid Drive". I'm not talking about driving the wheels with the diesel. The diesel does not attach to the drive.
  Diesel has a narrow efficient operating band. That means while a petrol may run at peak efficiency between 2500 and 5500RPM, a typical automobile diesel will run at peak efficiency between 1500 and 2000RPM. Keeping that diesel in the 1500-2000RPM range requires a dozen or so gears if you're on the drive train; or you can hook it up to a dynamo and generate electricity, running it at peak efficiency all the time. A petrol with 6 gears will do just fine.
  You're talking about car engines applying crankshaft output to the wheels. I'm talking about car engines that have no mechanical connection to the wheels AT ALL.
  
  --
  Support my political activism on Patreon.
19. Re:What a great idea! by amorsen · 2014-06-12 03:17 · Score: 1
  
  Right, so your assumption is that petrol engines are more efficient at partial load than diesel engines. This assumption is wrong, diesel suffers less from partial load.
  Gearing for 1500-2000RPM means that each gear is 4/3 as high as the previous, which means that a 6-speed box with a first-gear speed of 10km/h at 750RPM will hit 110km/h at 2000RPM. Add an seventh and you are golden; once you hit 150km/h you will need to go beyond 2000RPM to have enough power anyway.
  Typical parallel hybrids have continuously variable transmissions. They always run at the most efficient RPM for the needed power, just like serial hybrids.
  
  --
  Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
Interesting, but... by necro81 · 2014-06-09 06:22 · Score: 3, Insightful

This should be interesting, and should spur some development,

but...

I doubt that you could use a Tesla-like Supercharger to charge a battery other than one made by Tesla. I'm not talking about DRM, I'm talking about the architecture of the battery pack itself - its charging characteristics, its safety features, its cooling system, and so on down to the level of the individual 18650 cells. Those aspects are still heavily protected - licensing and manufacturing the packs and powertrain is a side business for Tesla. So what looks like a move to open up the world could, like other standards, become a way to lock in a particular proprietary design.

I still think it's pretty cool, though. If it sheds more light on how Tesla has designed and constructed their pack, which is a fine technology, as well as directly showing ways to charge Li-Ion packs quickly, then I think this is a benefit to anyone interested in how electricity is used and stored (i.e., everyone). But I also like to keep in mind that Musk, for all his altruism, is still a capitalist and wants his vision of the future to be the one to succeed.
1. Re:Interesting, but... by bluefoxlucid · 2014-06-09 06:30 · Score: 1
  
  You supply voltage and heavy-gauge wire. The car decides what to do with that.
  Electricity isn't a networking standard; it's part of the laws of physics.
  
  --
  Support my political activism on Patreon.
2. Re:Interesting, but... by Aighearach · 2014-06-09 07:11 · Score: 1
  
  The idea is to open it up to engineers at other companies, not to have people who can't read the manual trying to build public charging stations out of lego.
3. Re:Interesting, but... by ehud42 · 2014-06-09 07:47 · Score: 2
  
  I doubt that you could use a Tesla-like Supercharger to charge a battery other than one made by Tesla. I'm not talking about DRM, I'm talking about the architecture of the battery pack itself - its charging characteristics, its safety features, its cooling system, and so on down to the level of the individual 18650 cells.
  Disclaimer: I know nothing about the Tesla Supercharger.
  But I do know generally how chargers work - specifically multi-cell lithium chargers. Each cell requires a charge management circuit. I don't think the Supercharger actively manages the cell level charging. It is highly unlikely that given 10s or 100s of cells in a Tesla pack that there is going to be anything other than voltage, current and maybe a serial data line for that can be used for metering and financial charging.
  As long as my car can handle the voltage, draws an appropriate amount of current and (possibly) provides some identification for payment or statistics, I can take that power and charge 18650's, NiCds, SLAs, caps or just run a big stereo for a block party. At some point there may be a $/kWh bill in the mail, but otherwise, the charging station is most likely battery tech agnostic.
  
  --
  I'm in my right mind and I have the answer to everything!
4. Re:Interesting, but... by ericloewe · 2014-06-09 08:05 · Score: 1
  
  All you have to do on the charging side is supply power in a certain standard way (AC vs. DC, high voltage vs. high current) and let the car decide how much current to pull. A standard interface between charger and battery controller is also important, otherwise there's a need to drop down to lowest common denominator charging (kinda like incompatible USB charging standards).
5. Re:Interesting, but... by necro81 · 2014-06-09 08:15 · Score: 1
  
  Electricity isn't a networking standard; it's part of the laws of physics.
  Actually, battery chargers are kinda like networking standards. Yes, you have voltage and heavy gauge wire, but you also have two-way communication between the pack and the charger. Most of that is contained within the car itself, but it extends to external charge sources, too. Have a look at the SAE charging standard for EVs. Tesla does not adhere to this standard, either for its connector or communications, which I will guess is the bulk of what they will be releasing. Still, standards like these make explicit or implicit assumptions about the underlying hardware and software, which is what makes this more interesting.
6. Re:Interesting, but... by AaronW · 2014-06-09 09:13 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Tesla's superchargers use the same signalling standard as the J1772 combo plug. The car tells the charger what voltage and current to put into the battery so the charger is not tied to any one type of battery.
  
  --
  This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
7. Re:Interesting, but... by AaronW · 2014-06-09 09:14 · Score: 1
  
  Actually Tesla does adhere to the standard for communications though their connector is different.
  
  --
  This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
nice gesture by afidel · 2014-06-09 06:24 · Score: 1

It's a nice gesture but AFAIK none of the other currently available designs can handle the amount of current that supercharger provides. Perhaps in 3-5 years when the other auto companies revamp their existing lineup with new designs they might decide to design around the supercharger 'standard' but I'm not holding my breath.

--
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
1. Re:nice gesture by BasilBrush · 2014-06-09 06:51 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  There's two sides to it. Other cars that can recharge from Tesla supercharger, and third party charging stations that can supercharge Tesla cars. Both are good for Musk's company.
2. Re:nice gesture by afidel · 2014-06-09 07:52 · Score: 1
  
  Actually there's Automotive Engineers (SAE) standard J1772. In Europe, the standard is IEC 61851. The big deal is that the Tesla supercharger is a Type 3 device under the SAE standard and that allows up to 600V DC at up to 400A with a serial connection to setup the options (IEC 61851-4 mode 4 will probably be similar but 1000V DC at 400A) and AFAIK there's no other type 3/mode 4 devices out there right now and none of the other EV's would be able to handle the massive currents needed to take that kind of charging.
  
  --
  There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
3. Re:nice gesture by AaronW · 2014-06-09 09:17 · Score: 1
  
  The problem is that the amount of equipment needed to control the current takes a significant amount of space. Each supercharger is basically 12 charging modules hooked up in parallel. The car comes with one and a second one is optional. For example I have two in my car to handle 20KW of charging. The superchargers are fairly large, maybe half the size of a large home refrigerator with a big loud fan on it for cooling. They basically bypass everything in the car and go straight into the battery.
  
  --
  This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
Phrasing by killhour · 2014-06-09 06:24 · Score: 1

I like to imagine that Musk invented the world's best supercharger and is staring at it like "How the hell am I going to put this in an electric car?"
Re:A cynical PR ploy by c0d3g33k · 2014-06-09 06:34 · Score: 2

No, cynicism is what YOU are experiencing. This seems like a profoundly optimistic act on his part.
Beating the Chicken-or-Egg Problem by Irate+Engineer · 2014-06-09 06:38 · Score: 3, Insightful

Electric cars are not ubiquitous because range and ability to charge is a concern. Charging stations are not ubiquitous because electric cars are not ubiquitous.
Gasoline automobiles were able to take off when they were invented because the liquid fuel infrastructure was in largely in place prior to their invention. Kerosene for lamps was distributed by metered pumps that were easily converted to dispense gasoline.
Establishing a standard charging station would allow companies to make the investment in charging infrastructure, confident that it would be widely applicable to different vehicles and would not disappear overnight. When you can pull into the CircleK and purchase a few kWh of juice while grabbing a burrito, that's when electric cars will really take off.

--
Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!
Vote for Bernie in 2016!
1. Re:Beating the Chicken-or-Egg Problem by Lumpy · 2014-06-09 06:42 · Score: 1
  
  Incorrect. the Model S has the range that will satisfy 99% of drivers. The problem is that it's ungodly expensive.
  
  --
  Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
2. Re:Beating the Chicken-or-Egg Problem by dbc · 2014-06-09 06:54 · Score: 1
  
  Well, range is still a concern. I drove to a convention where two Tesla-owning friends also went. I lisented to their discussion about how to manage the range issue of driving to a place that is just beyond a single charge, how they had to plan their recharging stop, how it limited their choices for a lunch break. None of us gasoliine vehicle drivers had that discussion. So it is still not only a concern, they find range interesting dinner conversation. Range is getting better, surely, but stll is above the "have to think about it" threshold.
3. Re:Beating the Chicken-or-Egg Problem by BasilBrush · 2014-06-09 06:55 · Score: 1
  
  So were ICE cars to start with. It took 50 years or so before they become affordable by average people. It's not going to take as long this time.
4. Re:Beating the Chicken-or-Egg Problem by Aighearach · 2014-06-09 07:18 · Score: 1
  
  Lots of people with ICE cars talk about where to buy gas, and which place is least out of the way, and which place is close to somewhere good for lunch.
  At conventions probably a lot of people are expensing their gas though, so they wouldn't talk about it even if they normally do, because they'd just stop at the place that is convenient to the freeway and 50 cents higher.
  If you look at a map of charging stations, cities that have both charging stations and are big enough to have a convention center usually have numerous charging stations. Even small-town Oregon has lots of charging stations, and most of them are near lunch spots. And since charging is free that switches the main topic from the price/convenience tradeoff, over to who is next to the best lunch spot.
5. Re:Beating the Chicken-or-Egg Problem by ganjadude · 2014-06-09 07:23 · Score: 1
  
  interesting, so we could see new towns/ infrastructure built around electric car range?
  
  --
  have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
6. Re:Beating the Chicken-or-Egg Problem by Firethorn · 2014-06-09 07:45 · Score: 1
  
  When you can pull into the CircleK and purchase a few kWh of juice while grabbing a burrito, that's when electric cars will really take off.
  Given the ability to charge at home, without even needing to visit the CircleK, as well as the large numbers of absolutely free charging stations, I'd say that EVs will take off when the average price drops enough to avoid sticker shock* while and battery capacity(buffered by high speed charging/battery swaps) climbs enough to overcome range anxiety. The Nissan Leaf isn't high enough ranged to avoid range anxiety, and the Model S still gives sticker shock.
  That being said, visits to 'convenience' stores are typically too short to really benefit from charging. I see sit down restaurants, malls, and superstores benefitting more.
  *Batteries costing 1/4-1/3rd of what they do now will help; I've read that Tesla probably already has the cheapest batteries per kWh by a considerable margin, and the Gigafactory is an attempt to cut even that in half.
  
  --
  I don't read AC A human right
7. Re:Beating the Chicken-or-Egg Problem by dbc · 2014-06-09 07:55 · Score: 1
  
  The issue was not charging stations at either end, it was the dearth in between. You can go ahead and pretend that charging stations are as ubiquitous as gas stations, but they are not. In some places, like my neighborhood, they are more than sufficient. Out of town, not so much. Anyway, go ahead and believe what you want -- I gave you two data points. You gave me zero, and some arm waving. I am *not* anti electric car, we're shopping for a Leaf, and two neighbors have Leafs. This is a great town in which to own a Leaf. But I stand by my assertion -- road trips with an electric car require advanced planning with respect to recharging, where as a road trip in an ICE vehicle largely does not require advanced planning with respect to refueling.
  And is charging really free in small-town Oregon? Here, many of the charge stations, including those in employer parking lots, are debit-card activiated.
8. Re:Beating the Chicken-or-Egg Problem by CaptainLard · 2014-06-09 07:59 · Score: 1
  
  Gasoline automobiles were able to take off when they were invented because the liquid fuel infrastructure was in largely in place prior to their invention. Kerosene for lamps was distributed by metered pumps that were easily converted to dispense gasoline.
  Electricity for lamps is distributed by metered circuits that can easily be converted to dispense the correct voltage and amperage that a supercharger needs. The problem here is the inertia and lethargy from 100 years worth of gasoline powered cars. Both the chicken and the egg already exist.
9. Re:Beating the Chicken-or-Egg Problem by AaronW · 2014-06-09 09:59 · Score: 1
  
  For 95% of my driving it takes me 10 seconds per day to charge. It takes 5 seconds to plug in at night and 5 seconds to unplug in the morning to a full battery (in my case I usually charge it to around 60-70% for my daily needs). At home it takes 5 1/2 hours to charge from empty to 265 miles of range but that time is almost always irrelivant since it occurs while I'm sleeping or doing other things. The only time I go into a gas station is to buy a snack and use the restroom. I have found generally on road trips the amount of time it takes to charge at a supercharger hasn't been a big deal. The money I would spend on gas easily pays for a nice meal or two and by the time I'm done eating the car is ready to go. My only complaint is that they need more supercharging stations.
  
  --
  This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
10. Re:Beating the Chicken-or-Egg Problem by sturle · 2014-06-09 12:56 · Score: 1
  
  A Tesla Model S refuels from empty to 80% in 30 minutes from a Supercharger, and they rarely need one because the car is fully charged every morning. I am not very picky about where I charge, as long as the kids and I can stretch our legs a bit after six hours of driving. For a while I used to ask hotels before I booked if they had a power outlet available for my car, but I don't bother any more. They do. They only differ in how fast charge they can provide, but that's usually not an issue when the car is plugged in all night. There is plenty of public parking spaces with fast-ish chargers as well now, and shopping malls with outlets outside to attract customers with modern cars. Tesla owners probably spend less time at charging stations than fossil car owners spend at gas stations. Charging is something which happens when you are doing something else, like shopping. I know, you can shop at many gas stations as well, but not while filling the tank for free.
11. Re:Beating the Chicken-or-Egg Problem by WindBourne · 2014-06-10 20:48 · Score: 1
  
  Not even close to true. When I was a kid in the 60's, there were damn few gas stations in the rural area. Drivers had to plan. And driving on holidays for when you needed multiple fill ups? FORGET ABOUT IT. And according to my dad, the situation was far far worse when he was in college back in the 40s/50s. As IKE's highways went up, so did the gas stations.
  
  And as to the BS about grabbing kW of electricity from CircleK, forget about that as well.
  The fact is, that most electric cars MUST charge at night time, or prices will go WAY UP FOR ALL ELECTRICITY. If that happens, then you have ppl screaming about the impact that electric cars have made (rightly). Instead, the 30-40 minute wait for fill-up after driving for 4-5 hours is more than fair. All of that is being set-up by Tesla's supercharger network. By end of 2015, electric cars will be able to go across the nation cheaply.
  
  The REAL issue is how soon a decent small car that costs an average price with top performance will come? When Tesla introduces Blue Star in 2016/7, at that moment, it is over for the major car makers that have not begun a major move to electric cars. The fact is, that when you can buy a car that is far better, safer, and cheaper to run than a BMW 3**/MB Model Cs/Caddi CTS/Lexus/etc, well, it becomes game over.
  
  --
  I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
12. Re:Beating the Chicken-or-Egg Problem by WindBourne · 2014-06-10 20:51 · Score: 1
  
  That is the SAME conversation that gas owners had in the 40-60s, and diesel had in the 70-80s. They are now gone.
  By the end of 2015, that will disappear for tesla owners. Instead, tesla owners will be listening to ppl constantly grip about how they pay $100/tank fill up and that the $10 tax on it is not fair because electric cars do not have that (yet).
  
  --
  I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
13. Re:Beating the Chicken-or-Egg Problem by WindBourne · 2014-06-10 20:57 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, the leaf, along with most hybrids, are HORRIBLE cars. The reason is that they force the owners to do loads of daytime charging. That is a HUGE mistake. It will drive up the demand, and then costs of daytime electricity. THat is also why I continue to say that we need to stop or lower greatly the subsidies on cars like the leaf and all hybrids. For example, 2.5K for all cars that have less than 100 MPC. $5K for all cars that have less than 150 MPC. $10K for all cars that have less than 200 MPC. and 15K for all cars with more than $250 MPC.
  This will encourage car makers to build batteries out that will encourage nighttime charging. This is important.
  
  --
  I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Re:A cynical PR ploy by BasilBrush · 2014-06-09 06:39 · Score: 1

A cynical PR ploy
Oh fuck off. It's a good thing for everybody. Save the snide comments for people that are doing bad things.
Tesla == ARM by tekrat · 2014-06-09 06:40 · Score: 2, Interesting

Tesla isn't just a car company, they are a technology firm. The *real* value of Tesla (hence the stock price) is in the technology they own and control.
If Teslas chargers become "the standard", then the rest of the world will likely have to license Tesla's other technology to be compatible. This is akin to; anyone can build an ARM-based chip, but you have to license that right from the ARM group, which makes their stock (currently) more valuable then Intels.
Tesla running gear may also become the defacto standard for electric cars, and once the price drops, near unbiquitous -- which will make Musk extremely wealthy. Tesla won't have to make cars anymore, simply license the tech to everyone else to build.
They then can pour that money into more R&D and build even better and better running gear which in turn, all other manufacturers will need to license to keep up with the competition.... Which of course, will keep them very wealthy.

--
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
1. Re:Tesla == ARM by Anonymous Coward · 2014-06-09 07:38 · Score: 1
  
  Intel's(NASDAQ:INTC) market capitalisation is currently:$139 Billion
  ARM's(LON:ARM) market capitalisation is currently:$14 Billion+(NASDAQ:ARMH):$21 Total:$35 Billion
  So ARM is currently worth about 25% as much as Intel and as such ARM's stock is NOT more valuable than Intel's.
  Note:The above is only correct if Intel and ARM are not listed on any more exchanges.
2. Re:Tesla == ARM by ericloewe · 2014-06-09 08:15 · Score: 2
  
  It's not that I don't agree with your general point, but the ARM vs. Intel example is absurd.
  The price of an individual share is meaningless (unless it's 0). ARM's stock price might be more than 30 times higher than Intel's, but Intel is still worth more than 10 times more than ARM.
Holy cow! by Lumpy · 2014-06-09 06:41 · Score: 3, Funny

"It was also the only car to ever receive a 99 out of 10 from Consumer Reports"
The Mode S is so good that it broke the scale by a factor of 10!

--
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
1. Re:Holy cow! by jlb.think · 2014-06-09 08:15 · Score: 1
  
  "It was also the only car to ever receive a 99 out of 10 from Consumer Reports"
  The Mode S is so good that it broke the scale by a factor of 10!
  Assuming you're using base10 it is almost a factor of 1.
2. Re:Holy cow! by jlb.think · 2014-06-09 08:16 · Score: 1
  
  oops, MAGNITUDE.
3. Re:Holy cow! by Lehk228 · 2014-06-09 14:15 · Score: 1
  
  it broke the NTSB crush test machine.
  
  --
  Snowden and Manning are heroes.
Not really by bussdriver · 2014-06-09 06:59 · Score: 2

Supercharging sites they can afford to slowly build out. They do not lose money with these charging stations; the one I've seen was clearly a smart move. They bought the land around the charging station as well --- now something is being built upon it! The SMART move is to buy the space put in the chargers; make them free-- then RENT the commercial space around the charger! You make $$ either way.
Fast charging still can hold the customer long enough to buy some junk while waiting. Slower charging means the customer has to wait 10s of minutes... and buy more or eat a meal...
It is not pro-business to allow others to lure customers in with their charging stations when your proprietary ones make you money. Sure, long term being open helps; but that isn't modern business thinking.

--
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
Stations will be everywhere? by swb · 2014-06-09 07:01 · Score: 1

Will they?
Assuming a large transformation of the auto fleet to electric, will supercharging stations show up everywhere?
Will recharging, especially high-current recharging, be free everywhere?
I would assume that someone has to pay for bringing in the half-megawatt of power required to charge 20-some cars at the same time. I don't know, but I assume this might be non-trivial in a lot of places or require the power company to upgrade service to make this happen.
And I also assume that the electricity wouldn't be free, someone will be paying for that somehow, too.
1. Re:Stations will be everywhere? by Agent0013 · 2014-06-09 07:10 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Just because the recharging stations will be everywhere and be compatible, does not mean they will all be free to use.
  
  --
  
  -- ssoorrrryy,, dduupplleexx sswwiittcchh oonn.. -Quote found on actual fortune cookie.
2. Re:Stations will be everywhere? by mythosaz · 2014-06-09 08:51 · Score: 1
  
  There are more and more free charging locations in my city.
  Malls and theaters, especially, seem to offer them, because they get those customers, and and the other mall and theater doesn't.
3. Re:Stations will be everywhere? by haruchai · 2014-06-10 00:27 · Score: 1
  
  Supercharging is NOT free now - you have to buy the 85 kWh model to get it or pay ~$2500 as an option on the 60 kWh models.
  As for what will happen when EVs are more prevalent, I suspect that battery swap will become an option and that is something that the Model S is capable of today.
  
  --
  Pain is merely failure leaving the body
4. Re:Stations will be everywhere? by WindBourne · 2014-06-10 20:17 · Score: 1
  
  True. In fact, I hope that Tesla has a way to charge taxes on this. At some point, we need to charge DOT taxes esp. on the daytime use of the electricity.
  
  However, even in the most expensive states/nation, electricity is far below the costs of gas/diesel, except where gas/diesel are heavily subsidized.
  
  --
  I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Keep it up, Elon. by Dega704 · 2014-06-09 07:02 · Score: 2

This general attitude is why Tesla is such a disruptive force, and why the rest of the automotive market and their ilk hate them. I for one am happy to see the status quo get genuinely threatened for a change.
refuel? by fahrbot-bot · 2014-06-09 07:11 · Score: 1

the free fast-charging stations designed to quickly refuel Tesla's electric cars
Sure, if electrons are "fuel".

--
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Re:Really Not really by Anonymous Coward · 2014-06-09 07:14 · Score: 2, Informative

In most, not sure if all, cases Tesla didn't buy the land for the charging station. The land owner agrees to let Tesla locate the charger for free for 5 to 10 years. Tesla pays to install and maintain the charger and pay for electricity usage. The land owner theoretically gets extra business from Tesla owners.
http://insideevs.com/tech-crunch-what-it-takes-to-be-a-tesla-supercharger-partner/
So even better than buying the land, Tesla gets to use it for free.
hmmmm, seems familiar.... by Thud457 · 2014-06-09 07:24 · Score: 1

A cynical PR ploy would be GM doing live demonstrations electrocuting stray dogs and rogue elephants to warn the public to the dangers of Tesla superchargers.

--
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
1. Re:hmmmm, seems familiar.... by leonardluen · 2014-06-09 08:05 · Score: 2
  
  The irony being that Tesla's system (AC) is now powering everyone's home, but Edison's system (DC) is powering the car named after him.
So Gingrich is wrong by blue+trane · 2014-06-09 07:59 · Score: 1

So Gingrich is wrong when he asserts that patents fuel innovation, in drugs for example.
Electricity is cheap by DrYak · 2014-06-09 08:06 · Score: 2

Electricity is dead cheap.
A full charge cost a lot less than the equivalent range in gaz.
Tesla will probably center around a different model to attract customers.
One very possible model would be for Telsa to keep the charging either free or with only a small monthly/yearly fee, and earn most of the money through the services next to the station. (The charging is going to last up to 30 minutes any way. The driver and passenger are very likely going to take some time eating or drinking something).

--
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
1. Re:Electricity is cheap by drinkypoo · 2014-06-09 08:19 · Score: 1
  
  One very possible model would be for Telsa to keep the charging either free or with only a small monthly/yearly fee, and earn most of the money through the services next to the station.
  They could also offer the power at cost to Tesla owners, and at a reasonable but more profitable rate to other drivers. Either way, making the design open is just a good way to promote a sizable market.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
2. Re:Electricity is cheap by AaronW · 2014-06-09 08:47 · Score: 1
  
  Tesla has promised that the supercharger network is free for the life of the car. Considering that a full charge is probably under $5 it's not hard to build that into the price of the car. Access to the supercharger network cost $2000 for the 60KWh model and is included with the 85Kwh models. Typically owners don't use it all that frequently since it's just more convenient to plug in at home.
  
  --
  This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
3. Re:Electricity is cheap by turp182 · 2014-06-09 09:41 · Score: 1
  
  The full gas station concept makes sense even with free charging . Gas stations don't clear much on gas sales, most profit comes from ancillary sales of other products and services.
  Private many stations charge for the electricity. I could see gas stations replacing a pump station with a super charger (in spots on the peripheries of his implemented and planned build out, and affluent - could probably have a nice gas station with a small upscale grocery - change the entire experience of the gas station).
  As for Tesla/Elon Musk, it's incredible what he has done so far in his life. He is destroying boundaries and making markets.
  
  --
  BlameBillCosby.com
4. Re:Electricity is cheap by viperidaenz · 2014-06-09 10:21 · Score: 1
  
  That's a pretty good point, they could offer malls/retailers/fast food shops/etc a "free" charging station to attract customers if they provide free power.
5. Re:Electricity is cheap by L4t3r4lu5 · 2014-06-09 21:41 · Score: 1
  
  The Tesla S needs a smaller brother for the UK market; We don't care as much about sports cars and fuel-hungry monsters as the US; We love the compact. They could reduce the battery pack size and motor output, get the same performance for the smaller car, and reduce charging times to boot.
  
  Give us a Nissan Leaf competitor with the quick-charge opportunities of Tesla supercharging stations; Europe will go insane.
  
  --
  Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
Shops by DrYak · 2014-06-09 08:34 · Score: 3, Interesting

Well after reading a bit on-line, it seems that they have a business model running a bit differently:
- they "almost give-out" the charging station to terrain owner (owner of highway shop/gaz-station, etc.)
- the owner only has to supply electricity (and as said electricity is cheap)
- in exchange, the owner gets an increased traffic in the shop/restraurant
(people, who have 10 to 30 minute to kill until full charge and buy food/drinks).
In that context, it's in the land owner's best interest to have a open technology in the charging stations:
- the more open the standard, the more different drivers can stop to charge, and thus the more customers.
And Tesla in turn has a small advantage too:
- the more shop/restaurant along the highway are likely to rent such stations, the more charging spots there are going to be overall, and the less potential customer will be afraid by range problems.
- thus market for eletrical vehicle increase (of which Tesla has a substantial mind-share, and produce the longest-range vehicle)
- thus market for car lithium batteries increase (a field where Tesla is leading, to the point that some people want to persuade them to drop the Model S and concentrate entirely on batteries for other companies).
Or to put it differently: all this charger will need batteries to charge, and Tesla is apparently the best game in town for batteries.
(It would be as if Sanyo started to provide "free charging station" around in a country where Enloop have the strongest market penetrance)

--
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Good idea by Karl+Cocknozzle · 2014-06-09 08:48 · Score: 1

While you're working on it, how about a new name? "Supercharger" is already a "thing" in automobile-lingo. And yes, I know most Slashdotters may not be gear-heads, using a name of a thing that already exists is glaring to those of us who are.

--
Who did what now?
1. Re:Good idea by viperidaenz · 2014-06-09 10:25 · Score: 1
  
  I vote for "Megacharger"
  Sounds more like something Megatron would use.
2. Re:Good idea by Areyoukiddingme · 2014-06-09 11:24 · Score: 1
  
  I vote for "Megacharger"
  Gigacharger. Goes well with gigafactory. Even if it has nothing at all to do with what the "giga" in gigafactory means. It's marketing. It doesn't have to make sense.
3. Re:Good idea by Areyoukiddingme · 2014-06-09 11:28 · Score: 1
  
  While you're working on it, how about a new name? "Supercharger" is already a "thing" in automobile-lingo.
  There's a possibility that the device currently called a supercharger will become so rare that only the geariest of gearheads will remember the old definition, let alone have one.
  I'm inclined to believe overloading the term was an accident on Tesla's part, at least initially. The decision to keep the name is probably quite calculated. When the new order subsumes the jargon of the old order, it wins.
  It remains to be seen whether or not the new "Supercharger" wins anything.
4. Re:Good idea by viperidaenz · 2014-06-09 12:16 · Score: 1
  
  What are the Decepticons going to use recharge then?
5. Re:Good idea by Areyoukiddingme · 2014-06-09 13:48 · Score: 1
  
  What are the Decepticons going to use recharge then?
  Anywhere they want?
Big Auto and Big Oil by OldHawk777 · 2014-06-09 09:40 · Score: 1

Both big Auto and Oil will do their best to kill innovation for US, EU .... Prior history of AC by Tesla being taken by Westinghouse, TV by Farnsworth taken by RCA many others. Just like music artist and the recording industry, innovation is corporately controlled by US/EU/WTO/... laws

--
Unaccountable leaders are masters, and unrepresented people are slaves. How do US and EU fare?
Shit happens ... then things change IMO. by OldHawk777 · 2014-06-09 09:52 · Score: 1

Other industries, if they fail in killing innovation (by law or tricks) and fail to change quick enough, then they are out of business. Global economic complexities would side (IMO) with an eventual (though gradual) chaos cascade of industry and power away from US, EU, CN ... to places, cultures, and laws willing to nurture innovation.

--
Unaccountable leaders are masters, and unrepresented people are slaves. How do US and EU fare?
Re:The most sense he has made ever by Hognoxious · 2014-06-09 10:06 · Score: 1

Electricity needs to be electricity.

What? Are you saying this is a scam?

--
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Re:The most sense he has made ever by AaronW · 2014-06-09 10:09 · Score: 1

Not at all. As a Tesla owner I can charge using any J1772 charger with a small adapter in my glove box. I can charge at just about any RV site and can use most 220v outlets and 110v in a pinch. Tesla's grid has been wildly successful so far among Tesla owners.
The Tesla charging grid has done quite well. Tesla's supercharger network is currently the only way to drive from San Diego to Vancouver or from LA to New York or along the eastern seaboard. Neither ChaDeMo nor SAE have anyting even close. The Tesla charging network is also expanding at a very rapid pace. By the end of the year most major routes will be covered. Where it needs to expand is along the not so major routes.
I had no problem driving from the Bay Area to Reno and am planning a trip up to Seattle in a few months which shouldn't be a problem.
Tesla can also easily make an adapter for the SAE combo plug since their signalling is compatible, the problem is that there are very few SAE charging stations, far fewer than Tesla superchargers. ChaDeMo is also extremely spotty in terms of where it is located. You might find it at Nissan dealerships, but it's in no way a network with stations placed along major routes.

--
This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
Standard eh? by viperidaenz · 2014-06-09 10:24 · Score: 1

What's to stop other automakers using the technology in the patents and deploying their stations with a different connector or proprietary signalling between the charger and car, while allowing their cars to be used at Tesla stations as well?
"Buy a Tesla and you get access to 10,000 charging stations, buy our car and you've got access to 20,000"
Re:The most sense he has made ever by Hognoxious · 2014-06-09 12:03 · Score: 1

Bollocks, ate the link.
http://www.nucleostop.de/Techn...

--
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Daily Elon Musk Blowjob by Gothmolly · 2014-06-09 12:39 · Score: 1

Seriously, can we not have a single Musk-free day on Memedot?

--
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
Re:Really Not really by M8e · 2014-06-09 18:28 · Score: 1

Tesla gets to use the land for free.
Installation, maintenance, and electricity cost them money. But none of that money goes to the land owner. It's simply the costs they have when making the hardware, getting the hardware to the 'land', installing the hardware, maintaining the hardware, paying the power company and so on.
More like Adobe PDF? by protoporos · 2014-06-09 22:43 · Score: 1

I would say it is even more similar to Adobe giving away PDF. Sure, the standard is out there and not capitalizable per se... but what is the majority using to view PDFs? And what is the platform of preference to author PDFs? Very smart move instead.
DC charging standards by raxx7 · 2014-06-09 23:42 · Score: 1

There are three competing DC charging standards in North America:
- The widely deployed Chademo (= 62.5 kW), backed by Japanese automakers mostly
- The upcoming, not yet deployed, CCS (= 90 kW), backed by SAE, a large number of western automakers and, increasingly, by
- Tesla's Supercharger ( = 120 kW?), which is used only by Tesla.
This is, of course, a f**king mess, which could undermine the efforts to build comprehensive charging networks.
However, it's a manageable mess.
While high power DC charging stations are expensive, having them support multiple standards adds little to the cost (5% per standard or less).
The competition between Chademo and SAE CCS looks like it will be resolved this way: AFAIK, pretty much any new DC charging station deployments looks to be dual standard.
Tesla was basically being left out. While they have built a very interesting network and they have a superior specification, they can't expect to cover all of North America with their own charging stations, while the rest of the world is using combined Chademo/CCS station.
Opening up their specification is a necessary step for them to play along with the rest of the world.
1. Re:DC charging standards by WindBourne · 2014-06-10 21:12 · Score: 1
  
  By the end of 2015, they will have pretty much all of America covered (not Alaska). In addition, southern Canada will have a small network. At that point, mid Canada along with Mexico, will be filled out within 2 more years.
  
  --
  I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Actually, I think that you are wrong by WindBourne · 2014-06-10 20:15 · Score: 1

By pushing this tech, he is ensuring that not only will his approach be adopted, but it will be difficult for other car makers to go with fuel cells. And as to staying with gas/diesel, I think that once blue star is out at 35K, that will stop the sales for gas/diesel. The reason is that if you can get a decent car/X-over at 35-40K, and have next to no costs in driving, well, most buyers are not fools.

--
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Re:The most sense he has made ever by WindBourne · 2014-06-10 20:35 · Score: 1

Actually, with Tesla giving out the goodies and providing access, I hope that others will convert to his and provider adapters for their old cars.

--
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
LOL by WindBourne · 2014-06-10 21:02 · Score: 1

wow. Tesla is the only car maker with months of back logs on cars, and you think that he is desperate? Really?

--
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.