Elon Musk Suggests Tesla Model 3 Won't Get Free Supercharger Use (theverge.com)

An anonymous reader writes from a report via The Verge: In response to a question about how the company would handle an influx of Model 3s to its Supercharging stations, which are currently offered as a free service to Tesla customers, Elon Musk said at Tesla's annual shareholder's conference in Mountain View, California, "it will not be free long distance for life unless you purchase that package." He did not specify what the "package" contained, nor did he say how much it would cost as an add-on with the purchase of a Model 3. His full quote reads: "Obviously, [free Supercharging] fundamentally has a cost. [...] The obvious thing to do is decouple that from the cost of the Model 3. So it will still be very cheap, and far cheaper than gasoline, to drive long-distance with the Model 3, but it will not be free long distance for life unless you purchase that package. I wish we could, but in order to achieve the economics, it has to be something like that." Tesla did recently announce their Gigafactory Grand Opening will be held on July 29, even if it isn't scheduled to begin production on lithium ion cells until next year.

Comments

tanstafl

[Anonymous Coward]

Nothing is free

Re:tanstafl

[Anonymous Coward]

except for this lunch I just got for free.

Re:tanstafl

[Anonymous Coward]

It reminds me of the drive to use open source. All motivated by cutting costs. Yet, it results in higher costs..

Re:tanstafl

[Anonymous Coward]

It reminds me of the drive to use open source. All motivated by cutting costs. Yet, it results in higher costs..

Or the cost that is cut is you, the expensive developer.

Re:tanstafl

[Anonymous Coward]

CHOMP!

Re:tanstafl

[ShanghaiBill]

Or the cost that is cut is you, the expensive developer.

My company provides free sandwiches because we have found that people that eat at their desk are back to coding within 20 minutes, while those that go out to eat are unproductive for an hour or more. The cost of the sandwich is far less than the value of those extra 40 minutes. So if anyone is going to be cut, it is going to be the slackers that paid for their lunch, not the people that got the free lunch.

Re:tanstafl

[Lumpy]

Unless your sandwiches are made by a 5 star chef to my dietary requirements and liking, I'll go out to eat. that 40 minutes is $40 of my time and if you don't provide me a $30 sandwich, the CEO can stuff it.

Companies that do this provide garbage sandwiches. I've been at those places, the catering sounds great to the new kiddies, but those of us that value our health will not touch the 60grams of carbohydrate and 600 grams of sodium $0.90 sandwich.

Anyone worth their salt uses that lunch hour to reset and be far more productive in the afternoon. monkeys that band out garbage? they eat at their desk and stay "productive"... which is why their code is usually crap.

Re:tanstafl

[Anonymous Coward]

My company tried that. I ate while typing filling the keyboard with crumbs, and then took an hour long lunch to run errands. Next time get me something better then a dry sandwich with one slice of lunch meat, one slice of fake cheese, and two pieces of two day old bread with a packet of mayonnaise.

Re:tanstafl

[Anonymous Coward]

At the company that I worked at which provided the food, it was darn good stuff, and cycled through various cuisine. Indian was very popular though oddly enough there were not that many Indians working there. We usually ate together and a lot of friendly banter went on, and the occasional work related discussion.

I'd go for it again.

Re:tanstafl

[sxpert]

eating at your desk is forbidden by the labor code here in France

Re:tanstafl

[Askmum]

Of course.
And in the olden days of the beginnings of the Model S, the S60 did not have free supercharging either. It was a (I believe) € 5.000 option in Europe. For which you could drive at least 125.000 km. But economics of scale say it is better to bundle it with the first cars you sell. I'm sure the free use of the supercharger is somewhere in the cost of a Model S of a Model X you buy now.
I hope they also make an option that buys you the use of the supercharger and charges you for every kWh you use.

Re:tanstafl

[Anonymous Coward]

Or the cost that is cut is you, the expensive developer.

My company provides free sandwiches because we have found that people that eat at their desk are back to coding within 20 minutes, while those that go out to eat are unproductive for an hour or more. The cost of the sandwich is far less than the value of those extra 40 minutes. So if anyone is going to be cut, it is going to be the slackers that paid for their lunch, not the people that got the free lunch.

That kind of attitude to staff *really* sucks.

Re:tanstafl

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah we can't have someone taking a 30 minute home-made-lunch-break at his desk, while the rest stays out 2 hours :p

Re:tanstafl

[Sique]

Here, the lunch break does not count to your work time. So take whatever time you want, but bill it accordingly. Only restriction: You have to have at least 30 min of a break after 6 hours of work. A coding slave with a 9-5 job thus clocks up 7.5 hrs per work day. If you want that two hour lunch break, that's fine. But you have to come in at 8.30 am and leave at 6.00 pm to get the 7.5 hrs scheduled worktime.

Re:tanstafl

[Shirley Marquez]

I suspect they're more likely to do it as a flat fee per charge for simplicity. But they could do metered charging, either by time or by KWh. Once they are offering charge-for-pay they could also open up the charging network to non-Tesla cars, perhaps with a discounted rate for Teslas to offer an incentive to buy them.

Re:tanstafl

[jeremyp]

You don't find that they go home a bit earlier because they only had a 20 minute lunch break? Or are a bit more jaded in the afternoon because they only had a 20 minute lunch break?

More context

[93 Escort Wagon]

From the article:

"Elon Musk addressed a question from a young Model S P85D owner about how the company would handle an influx of Model 3s to its Supercharging stations"

So basically some rich guy wanted to know if he had to share his charging station with the unwashed lower classes.

Re:More context

[ichthus]

unwashed lower classes

Sheesh, that's a bit harsh. Don't you think? I mean, it's not like they're driving '93 Escort wagons.

Re:More context

[93 Escort Wagon]

unwashed lower classes

Sheesh, that's a bit harsh. Don't you think? I mean, it's not like they're driving '93 Escort wagons.

Are you my daughter in disguise? She's been bugging me to get the Escort washed for quite some time now...

Re:More context

[bobbied]

And the answer was, sure, but THEY (the unwashed poor masses who buy the Model 3) will have to pay for it, while you (the rich washed) will still get yours for free. But it's going to be hard to unset the precedent set by Tesla and getting access to free super charging. It's expected now, buy a Tesla and get instant access to all this infrastructure so you can actually go someplace in that expensive set of wheels. (Not that you can actually GO anyplace really interesting on this infrastructure last time I checked.)

Face it, the charging stations where build only to answer the basic objection to how far can you go on a charge in that neat electric car of yours. Why have a car that only goes at most 200 miles or so before you have to park it for a couple of hours to do it again....No thank you anyway. Where I currently live about 15 miles from work and could easily do a 30 mile daily commute in an all electric, I'm not interested because I cannot afford a car that's only good for the daily trips to the office. I need one that can go over the river and through the woods to grandma's house with the wife and kiddies in one setting and return on occasion and I cannot afford two vehicles where one will do, so hello gas powered Mini-Van with a DVD player.

Re:More context

[vux984]

So basically some rich guy wanted to know if he had to share his charging station with the unwashed lower classes.

To be fair, it is a genuine concern. It takes me about 4 minutes to fill my car.

In the last decade, I've had to wait for a pump only a couple times, and the longest wait was only a couple cars. (Maybe 10 minutes).

If the new model is cheaper and a hit, demand for charging will rapidly outstrip supply.

It takes an hour to charge a Tesla at a superstation. Its only going to take a small surge in electric vehicle to overwhelm a stations capacity. Get just 2-3 cars in front of you, and there goes half a DAY.

Re:More context

[AmiMoJo]

It's a reasonable concern though. As fast as they are building them they can't keep up with current sales. People are asshats when something is free.

A lot of EV owners support reasonable charging for charging because it discourages people just wanting a couple of quid's worth of electricity for nowt, and blocking people who need it to get home.

Re:More context

[fyngyrz]

"for free" meaning, you paid a hell of a lot more for your vehicle and part of that went for supercharger use.

Funny use of "for free", but okay.

Me, I'm looking forward to my "not for 'free'" electricity consuming Tesla, if they can just get them built. Breath-holding does not seem to be called for here.

Re:More context

[Anonymous Coward]

And the answer was, sure, but THEY (the unwashed poor masses who buy the Model 3) will have to pay for it, while you (the rich washed) will still get yours for free.

Superchargers are not really free, there is a fixed supercharger fee (I think it was 2000$?) included in the price of a model S that you can't opt out of (except on the 60kWh model, that was opt in).
So actually this is better, model 3 owners will now be able to choose whether they want to pay up front for supercharger use or not.
I wonder if they will introduce a pay per use model as well.

Re:More context

[Anonymous Coward]

Yep, and the answer was yes, but we're gonna make 'em pay! Wait until the Model 3 owners find out they don't really have a bunch of LIDAR sensors either, and that whole "car drives itself" hype starts to fade into reality... will be fun to watch!

Re:More context

[fluffernutter]

Whah?? I've been told by other Tesla owners that a charge takes 1/2 hour tops... you can do it while you step into a mcdonalds!

Re:More context

[FatdogHaiku]

So basically some rich guy wanted to know if he had to share his charging station with the unwashed lower classes.

To be fair, it is a genuine concern. It takes me about 4 minutes to fill my car.

In the last decade, I've had to wait for a pump only a couple times, and the longest wait was only a couple cars. (Maybe 10 minutes).

If the new model is cheaper and a hit, demand for charging will rapidly outstrip supply.

It takes an hour to charge a Tesla at a superstation. Its only going to take a small surge in electric vehicle to overwhelm a stations capacity. Get just 2-3 cars in front of you, and there goes half a DAY.

They just need to monitor the batteries (# of charges, ser. #, etc.) and then have a station that swaps the discharged battery with a charged one of similar age and condition. Then they could be charging whole racks of batteries all day. Most likely have a proprietary mount from below the car so you drive in like an oil change station and sit while they do the swap. Premium members would always get the youngest batteries, a latte, windshield washed, etc..

Re:More context

[imgod2u]

If you're going for long-distance, the optimal strategy is to charge for 30 min to get to ~70% then drive to the next charging station. The charging rate for Li-Ion gets significantly slower as you approach 100%. You'll start out at around 120-130 KW and fall down to about 50 KW at 80%.

It wasn't the case ~2 years ago but nowadays, the maximum distance between any 2 charging stations is about ~150 miles. So you should have plenty of charge after 30 min to get to the next station even if you drive like a maniac.

Re:More context

[bobbied]

Glad the useful range of less than 180 miles works for you. It doesn't for me.

I know a guy who owns a Leaf that sits in his garage because the 50 mile round trip to work is a bit too risky even though the EPA says it goes 75 miles/charge.

Re:More context

[FlyHelicopters]

If no one is in front of you, perhaps... what if 3 people are in front of you?

Sell 500,000 of these things and suddenly you'll need 20 times the locations to charge.

Re:More context

[vux984]

"Like other rapid charging technologies, the Tesla Supercharger starts to ramp down its power delivery when the car reaches sixty percent full or so, achieving an 80 per cent charge in around 45 minutes. The rate of charge then dramatically slows down for the final 20 percent, which occurs some 115 minutes after plugging in. It's worth noting however, that after 60 minutes of being plugged in, the car was more than 90 per cent full, highlighting dramatically why it's not worth waiting around for that final ten percent when rapid charging."

https://transportevolved.com/2...

So 45 minutes to 80% or nearly 2 hours for 100%.

I guess you can get a decent enough charge in 30 minutes to move along?

Re:More context

[thegarbz]

It takes an hour to charge a Tesla at a superstation

What's a supercharger? Owners of electric vehicles all over the world who get into their fully charged cars every morning wish to know!

There's a fundamental difference in economics. While you're right that demand will increase it should also be noted how that demand compares to a regular car. I live in a country with 15000 Model S Teslas and only 2 superchargers. I've yet to see a car "filling up" at either of them. That said I have seen hundreds of Teslas plugged into walls all over the country, at the airport, in shopping malls, in the street, in the Surburbs, even my local sports hall has a power outlet and a preferred parking spot for EVs.

The only real scenario that requires Superchargers is long interstate (international in Europe) trips, which incidentally is also the kind of trip that turns owners off buying them in the first place.

Re:More context

[Anonymous Coward]

"Elon Musk addressed a question from a young Model S P85D owner about how the company would handle an influx of Model 3s to its Supercharging stations"

So basically some rich guy wanted to know if he had to share his charging station with the unwashed lower classes.

Strawman. You found classism in that question because you wanted it to be there.

Re:More context

[I75BJC]

Oh, are all the Telsa Superchargers next to a McDonalds? Maybe that's why all the "unwashed multitude" comments. Now, it they are next to a Starbucks, one could wait, sit and sip amongst one's peers. Still quite snobbish, eh?

Re:More context

[smooth wombat]

Why have a car that only goes at most 200 miles or so before you have to park it for a couple of hours to do it again...

According to the guy at the Tesla store in Colorado, their current model goes 310 miles before needing recharged.

Re:More context

[imgod2u]

At 45 mph on a calm day with no wind and flat roads and 50-80F ambient temperature, sure.

Re: More context

[Anonymous Coward]

Instead of need for speed it's need for greed

Re:More context

[ShanghaiBill]

I know a guy who owns a Leaf that sits in his garage because the 50 mile round trip to work is a bit too risky

Many employers offer recharging outlets at work, so maybe he should look into that. In fact, maybe he should have looked into that before he bought the car.

Re:More context

[Anonymous Coward]

According to the liar at the Tesla store in Colorado, their current model goes 310 miles before needing recharged.

Fixed that for you.

Re:More context

[Anonymous Coward]

Many employers offer recharging outlets at work

And that vast majority don't and never will.

Re:More context

[bobbied]

When he purchased the vehicle, he worked about 5 miles from home but was recently forced to change jobs. When he changed employers he asked that question and the new employer indicated they intended to provide chargers at the new facility. They didn't, even though they where shown on the plans. So, he's kind of stuck, not having much luck in his attempts to sell it, not being able to afford to trade and not interested in making too much of an issue out of it because he likes the new job.

But my point is that range issues are real and a significant problem for some. All what you are used to I suppose. We used to be limited to about 40 miles in a stage coach on a good day. Now folks routinely do that much distance while drinking their morning cup of Joe fussing about how bad the traffic is because the speed is under 50 MPH..

Re:More context

[Lumpy]

What I will look forward to is the influx of "make your 3 look like an S to the charging station" adapters that will flood ebay. Fuck you rich asshole, you can wait for that unwashed poor person to use the charger.

Re:More context

[Lumpy]

Most of those have some moron in a Giant SUV parked in front of it. I just wish more businesses would tow and impound those stupid giant wastes of space that park where they dont belong.

Re:More context

[Anonymous Coward]

> If the new model is cheaper and a hit, demand for charging will rapidly outstrip supply. ...
> Its only going to take a small surge in electric vehicle to overwhelm a stations capacity.

I've seen this argument a couple of times in this discussion. Are the people saying this shills, or are they so foolish that they believe that Tesla wouldn't build out Tesla charging facilities to meet Tesla sales?

Re:More context

[Anonymous Coward]

The vast majority of the time, people will charge at home overnight in their garage and there will be no wait for a high speed charger because you only need them for long trips (and thus they are incredibly underutilized because everyone starts at home with a full battery). If you happen to be on a long trip on an average day, plug in and go buy a burger. However, unless Tesla ridiculously overbuilds their network and sizes it for 99th percentile demand, using a Supercharger will suck on peak days, e.g. the day before Thanksgiving, because there will be 5 cars in front of you, all of whom just need a 30 minute charge.

Re:More context

[Pontiac]

The only time you should need the supercharger is on a road trip.. the rest of the time top it off at home while you sleep. You know.. that thing you can't do with a gas powered car. Holiday weekends may get ugly but your average road top shouldn't be an issue.

Re:More context

[ShanghaiBill]

If no one is in front of you, perhaps... what if 3 people are in front of you?

I have only once needed to wait at a supercharger, and then only for a few minutes. Waiting will be less of a problem as more people drive Teslas, because the demand will be more predictable over a larger number of cars, and Tesla will be installing a lot more superchargers.

Re:More context

[Pontiac]

Just like the 60kw S models it will probably be a $2500 extra cost option.
http://shop.teslamotors.com/products/enable-supercharging

Re:More context

[bobbied]

What I will look forward to is the influx of "make your 3 look like an S to the charging station" adapters that will flood ebay. Fuck you rich asshole, you can wait for that unwashed poor person to use the charger.

Yea, you know it won't take long to break that DRM code.... Can we say a quick flash upgrade to your Model 3's firmware and vola, free motion forever.

Re:More context

[vux984]

at the airport, in shopping malls, in the street, in the Surburbs, even my local sports hall has a power outlet and a preferred parking spot for EVs.

And all of these are going to be woefully inadequate unless we see some major rollouts made within the next few years.

And while this model has been a lot of fun for the early adopters, the shopping malls, airports, sports bars etc aren't going to be keen on supplying the entire urban vehicle fleet free electricity either. My shopping local shopping mall has upwards of 5,000 parking spots. And maybe 10 of those are powered for EVs. Right now it amounts to running a few space heaters for good PR.

What happens when the EV wave hits, and it goes mainstream, and there is real demand for electrical spots, and real money is needed to charge them? The mall ... which is free parking... if it electrifies... its going to go paid; it has too. And most of the money isn't going to the electricity itself, but to the electrification upgrades, and the billing and support infrastructure to charge for it. And that's best case. Worst case, the mall says its not worth it, and you'll have to charge your car somewhere else.

Re:More context

[fahrbot-bot]

unwashed lower classes

Sheesh, that's a bit harsh. Don't you think? I mean, it's not like they're driving '93 Escort wagons.

There are many levels of class and states of cleanliness and, as recent US politics has shown, many more combinations.

Re:More context

[Chuq]

Face it, the charging stations where build only to answer the basic objection to how far can you go on a charge in that neat electric car of yours.

Well.. yes? Same as a petrol station? You sound like it is controversial or a bad thing, for some reason?

The difference is that an electric car can also refuel (overnight) anywhere there is a power outlet, such as your own house. The "public refuelling stations" only need to cater for the 5% of refuelling that happens on long distance road trips.

Re:More context

[denzacar]

That only makes sense if Tesla doesn't invest in further charging locations.
Which, from everything seen so far and from where it is all going is not gonna happen.

When your business revolves around selling batteries on wheels and plunking down chargers for those batteries everywhere in order to (pre)sell electricity - you're not in the car business, you're in electricity distribution business.

They are already franchising "destination charging" and the car's system already informs you of nearest charging spots.
Monitored charging spots. For monitored cars.
Where the company knows where is who charging what and for how much longer - and who is coming down the road to charge there.

It's a distribution system which can be micromanaged at no additional cost to create substantial additional profit - either through presold electricity or through charging for charging.

Re:More context

[CmdrPorno]

"...the maximum distance between any 2 charging stations is about ~150 miles."

Uh, no. Take a look at North and South Dakota, Montana, or a lot of other states out West. Also, a lot of interstate routes lack nearby Supercharger stations, and you'd have to take a significant detour to be able to quickly charge a Tesla. The Supercharger network still needs more stations. It's a lot better than Mary Barra (of GM)'s recent commentary to the effect that they wouldn't support infrastructure unless it helped everybody. Um, hello, you're trying to entice people to buy your Chevrolet Bolt with an iffy refueling network. The least you can do is support improving that iffy refueling network.

Re:More context

[Chuq]

using a Supercharger will suck on peak days, e.g. the day before Thanksgiving, because there will be 5 cars in front of you, all of whom just need a 30 minute charge.

This is why I'm happy with them making it a fixed cost to enable, like the Model S 60 was, but not too keen on pay per use. Many people will only want to use them a few times a year, and that will be times such as you described - peak travelling periods. If they are paying per use then they are contributing less than $100/year to the construction of new supercharger stations. If it is a fixed higher upfront charge, then that provides Tesla will an influx of capital to build out the network of charging locations - either more stalls at existing locations, additional stops on existing routes, or building out new routes.

Re:More context

[Chuq]

They did:

https://www.teslamotors.com/en...

http://www.roadandtrack.com/ne...

Re:More context

[Anonymous Coward]

>So basically some rich guy wanted to know if he had to share his charging station with the unwashed lower classes.

Well if the plugs/cables/connectors link some sort of billing ID, it's only a matter of time until someone finds a way to spoof another ID.

Re:More context

[AaronW]

Most superchargers are next to restaurants and other amenities. Out of all of the superchargers I've visited I think I only went to a McDonalds once. One was next to a nice brew pub, several at shopping malls, a couple at Black Bear diners. Where possible they seem to try to locate them where there is a variety of places to eat and/or shop. I find it's often nice to stop at places other than McDonalds. For example, I went across the street from the one in Folsom, CA to City Burger where they have awesome burgers, much better than anything you'd get at McDonalds/Burger King, etc. The one in Rockland, CA is right near a combination bar/restaraunt/theater where you can eat your dinner while watching a movie. There's also a mall nearby as well. The one in Truckee, CA is near some restaurants and a 24/hour Safeway. I've stopped there a couple of times to make a pit stop and pick up a couple six packs on my way to Reno and pick up over 50 miles of range even though I don't need the charge.

I think it makes sense to charge for their use with the model 3. The Superchargers are designed for long distance travel, not so much for people wanting to get a free charge. It's been a problem at some chargers where the locals charge there rather than charging at home or work and they clog them up. I read about one where there's a person who frequently parks their car at a supercharger and leaves it hooked up overnight (which is considered extremely rude).

I think the best thing Tesla could do would be to require an account to use them and charge a bit more than it would cost to charge at home to encourage people to do most charging at home or work. Even though it's free for me since I have a P85 (over 41K miles on it), I wouldn't mind all that much if it wasn't free since that would help encourage people not to clog it up instead of charging at home.

There's a Supercharger just off the freeway along the route between my house and where I work but I only use it rarely, only if I'm low and need to travel a long distance. It's just not worth my time to stop there (and that's one of the few where there's not much around it since it's at the Tesla factory). It's just more convenient and cost effective to charge at home since it takes me 5 seconds to plug in at night and 5 seconds to unplug in the morning with no waiting. If I need a full charge at home it takes roughly 5 1/2 hours at 80 amps, something that's easily done overnight. Since my typical charge is a fraction of that I usually lower the current to 40A so there's less loss and let it charge a couple hours overnight when the rates are the lowest.

Charging at home is pretty cheap, even though the area I live in has some of the most expensive electricity in the nation. I have a separate meter for my car and I pay around $50/month and drive around 1000 miles/month. $50/1000 miles is quite cheap considering the size of the car.

Re:More context

[tsotha]

They have trip planning software that figures out how long you need to charge. One of the car magazines had a guy drive his Model S down the East Coast, and he chronicled the trip. He got directions like "Go to this charging station and charge for 23 minutes, then drive to that charge station and charge for 31 minutes." Presumably for shorter trips you just add enough electrons to get you home, where you can plug it in for the night.

Re:More context

[AaronW]

It has nothing to do with being rich. The problem is that the Superchargers are not really designed to handle everybody's daily charging. They're designed to facilitate long distance travel. There's a limited number of charging spaces and they're not cheap to build. As it is, there's already a problem at some charging locations with people doing their charging at the supercharger rather than at home. There's one supercharger I read about where one of the locals parks his car there every night and leaves it plugged in overnight rather than charge at home.

As far as I'm concerned, if you don't have a convenient way to charge at home or at work then this isn't really the car for you at this time. Hell, even public charging is often a limited resource where I live since they're always clogged up with Leafs and Volts. Fortunately I rarely need to use public charging since I have plenty of range. In many places the demand exceeds the supply, so until there's an adequate supply it makes sense to charge money for charging. As the supply grows then the price can drop.

I also think it depends on where the chargers are.

I could also see Tesla charging money to use superchargers with a certain range of your house, say 50 miles to encourage people to charge elsewhere. I think they should also do what Blink does and charge a premium for people who keep their cars hooked up after they've finished charging, say 30 minutes after charging is complete start charging $0.05/minute then increase it to $0.10/minute after an hour, etc. After all, the car tells you how long it will take you to charge and your cell phone notifies you when it's done.

Re:More context

[geoskd]

And most of the money isn't going to the electricity itself, but to the electrification upgrades, and the billing and support infrastructure to charge for it.

It is a common misconception that EVs require lots of power. Even the least efficient of the lot use far less electricity than you would expect. It is largely because people have been accustomed to home electrical equipment that seems underpowered compared to gasoline equivalents. It gives people the impression that it takes a huge amount of power to move a car. In reality, it doesn't take nearly that much. A typical EV traveling 10 miles each way for a daily commute uses the same amount of power as leaving a mid sized window air conditioner running 24/7.

Compare that to the normal power consumption of a typical shopping mall (around 1MW), or approximately 1000 mid sized window air conditioners, and you can see that installing a hundred or so slow charging outlets (not superchargers), will not require a significant change to the infrastructure at all. The misconception comes from the "filling station" mentality where people need to recharge their car in a few minutes, and that is the primary way the cars get charged. This has turned out to be ridiculous in practice, and as such the instantaneous load EVs place on the power grid is vastly lower than anyone ever expected. In fact, until workplace charging becomes more ubiquitous, EVs draw most of their power at night when the power grid is far more than adequate to meet the demand.

Re:More context

[Bing Tsher E]

Hey, if you live in the right climate for it, that Giant SUV might need a headbolt heater plugged in there in the winter.

Re:More context

[Bing Tsher E]

The range is 310 miles, or fourty "zero-to-60-in-7-seconds" events.

Re:More context

[GreatDrok]

He doesn't think he can do 50 miles on a single charge in a LEAF? The battery must be desperately sick for that to be the case. My 2015 doesn't even have the 30kWh battery and it can easily do 84 miles at highway speeds even with hills and stuff. 50 miles is no trouble at all even if I turn off all the energy saving stuff. Even if I only charge to 80% rather than all the way to 100% it will still easily do 67 miles. The EPA 75 miles a charge is pretty pessimistic in reality and is based on the average between a 100% and 80% charge and is for high speed driving. At lower speeds my car will do 100 miles without issue.

Re:More context

[vux984]

uses the same amount of power as leaving a mid sized window air conditioner running 24/7.

aka the most power hungry appliance in the entire house?

"For level 1 charging when plugged into regular 120VAC outlet, a lot of cars (like the Chevy Volt) will limit to 12A which is 1.4 kW"

https://m.reddit.com/r/askscie...

I realize the cite is reddit... feel free to correct me if its wrong.

1.4kW x 5000 parking spots = 7MW
vs 1MW baseline to run a mall, per your claim

Unless my math is wrong? That appears to be a pretty substantial increase... even if half the spots were empty. It would still be a major increase and expense for the electricity. Nevermind the significant electrical upgrades that would surely be required, not to mention the parking lot electrification infrastructure itself.

and you can see that installing a hundred or so slow charging outlets

100? In a mall with 5000 spots? we're projecting mainstream electric vehicles here. 100 is sufficient for 2015-2020... but what about when half of all new cars are electric? or 2/3rds? that's potentially not THAT far away.

Re:More context

[slashgordo.]

As a Model S owner, should I be upset that Tesla is making more Model S and Model X vehicles today that will be competing with me for Superchargers? Or should I be happy that a portion of the purchase price of every Model S and Model X is for Supercharger access? Tesla is adding new Supercharger locations and is expanding the number stalls at some existing locations. 100 years ago, were there multiple gas stations at every interstate exit like there are today? It took a long time for that infrastructure to build out, and this is the early stages of rolling out a new infrastructure. Each Supercharger costs Tesla a decent chunk of money to install. Supercharging is not free; it is prepaid in the purchase price of the vehicle. If it were pay-as-you-charge, the money coming in to Tesla would be a lot less, and therefore they couldn't afford to install as many Superchargers, and therefore fewer people would be interested in buying a large range electric car that couldn't go anywhere without incredibly long charging stops. There are and will be growing pains, especially on busy travel days in areas with a high Tesla concentration. But getting more Supercharged Teslas on the road is a good thing, and I welcome the large number of Model 3s knowing that this will help Tesla survive and grow and that it is paying for Supercharger network expansions. But Tesla has to ramp up its Supercharger rollout to be successful.

Re:More context

[runningduck]

And the answer was, sure, but THEY (the unwashed poor masses who buy the Model 3) will have to pay for it, while you (the rich washed) will still get yours for free.

Another way of looking at it would be:

Sure, but THEY (the unwashed poor masses who buy the Model 3) will have the option of not paying for Supercharger access, while you (the rich washed) will still have to pay for access regardless if you ever intend on using it.

I think this is a much more accurate statement.

Re:More context

[fluffernutter]

This all just sounds so freaking complicated. EV owners insist it is simple, but it almost seems like sea travel by compass and sextant.

Re:More context

[Gojira Shipi-Taro]

I have zero problems with slashing tires and putting acid on paint if I see that.

Re:More context

[Anonymous Coward]

Which makes this look like a product that can't scale.

Re:More context

[Gojira Shipi-Taro]

Well (and I say this as someone who lives within walking distance of his office and actually sold his car a year ago...) My parents live on the opposite coast of South Florida from me. Just long enough for a 200 mile charge to not be good for a round trip. Charging overnight isn't an option, because I have ZERO intention of staying overnight there. That pretty much eliminates the Tesla from my options when I eventually buy a new vehicle.

As a commuter vehicle, it could work, even if I lived much farther from the office than I do. As the sole reason I miss owning a car? Not so much.

Re:More context

[Gojira Shipi-Taro]

Not to a fast charger. Headbolt heater isn't going to have that connection, and given the DRM apparently present, it's not going to get juice anyhow.I figure people with SUVs are like the asshole rednecks with pickups set up to "roll coal" and they deserve as much property damage as random passerby can inflict when they intentionally block chargers like that

And a solid punch to the jaw with a wrench, if they happen to be present.

Re:More context

[CanadianMacFan]

Actually Tesla should start getting the local businesses to start subsidizing the superchargers. The businesses would get advertising at the supercharger, limited to one or two businesses, and then could offer a promotion to the driver if they are currently getting a charge. It would drive traffic to the businesses throughout the day and help pay for the superchargers (or maybe the electricity for them at least).

Re:More context

[geoskd]

100? In a mall with 5000 spots? we're projecting mainstream electric vehicles here. 100 is sufficient for 2015-2020... but what about when half of all new cars are electric? or 2/3rds? that's potentially not THAT far away.

Yes, that would be relatively acceptable. People will typically *NOT* be charging at places like the mall, or Taco Bell, or whatever in the new transportation economy. The reason is necessity. Charging during the day is likely to remain more expensive than at night, and once people have to pay to charge at these locations, they will mostly not bother. The amount of charge you get by a half an hour on a 15Amp circuit is not enough to make or break a trip to the mall, so no one will care. The places that will have to have a very high percentage of charging locations are places of employment. The two places people spend a lot of time are work and home, and these are the places to charge. The only other major use case is travel, which is where the superchargers come in. New York has been installing charging stations left and right. There is one every square mile in and around everything bigger than a village in New York now thanks to the states energy initiative, but as an EV driver, they simply don't factor into the equation. I either have enough charge to make it to the mall or I don't take the electric car, because in the hour that I am there, the charge will only give me an extra 3 miles of range. It's pointless to even care. Where I work is another matter. I live 46 miles from where I work. The EV has a range of 60 miles (wife drives it to her job). If there were charging stations at work, I would drive the car to work, charge at work and drive it home and charge at home. With a 200 mile range this would be far less of an issue, but with current EVs, it matters. The only really limiting factor in EV adoption is the lack of charging stations at places of employment. My wifes company has four stations and they are always occupied. Some days she gets a spot, some days not. The local mall by contrast has 5 spots, and I have never seen more than one occupied. The only reason I ever consider using them is because A: they are free, and B: they are right behind the handicapped spots, so convenient parking.

If the goal is to increase EV adoption, make a requirement (like handicapped parking) that a certain number of charging stations are available per 100 employees. That alone will drive a huge number of people to get an EV as their commuter car. You can even charge $0.20 per kWh, and they will still be hugely popular.

So, yes, 100 spots is plenty for a typical mall with 5000 parking spaces, and almost every house in this country can support the extra electrical load that one or two EVs will place on their electrical service. Some places might need some upgraded electrical infrastructure, but not very many, and that work mostly needs to be done with or without EVs on the road.

Re:More context

[Anonymous Coward]

Passive-Aggressive Internet Tough Guy is on the prowl!

Re:More context

[ShanghaiBill]

Not to a fast charger.

Employers don't offer fast chargers. Just regular slow chargers. The employee is going to be there all day, so it doesn't matter if it takes a few hours to charge up for the ride home.

Re:More context

[Anonymous Coward]

I saw a video with Elon showing off swap out batteries which could be done faster (apparently) than filling up your tank with petrol. Replace you dead one with a pre-charged fresh one. Did that ever become a thing?

Re:More context

[vux984]

So we come to an agreement in a round about way... "charging at airports, shopping malls, and sports bars" ISN'T going to be a solution. These places aren't going to do it at scale.

So, yes, 100 spots is plenty for a typical mall

vs

The only really limiting factor in EV adoption is the lack of charging stations at places of employment.

You do realize of course that the average mall employs plenty more than 100 people?

Those 5 spots next to the handicapped spots are PR fluff and pocket change. Will the mall even spring for electrified parking for the people who work there? Doubtful, they'll do even that on their dime... that's going to be a half a MW or so.

Employers will need to provided charging... but its clearly a big enough investment that they'll be looking to recoup on it. It'll probably end up in the hands of the usual suspects...Impark et al; and that won't be cheap.

Re:More context

[vux984]

Maybe. To charge an 85kW Tesla battery is going to run you $10 to $20 in electricity depending where you live. The EV owners I've encountered seem to maximize their use of "free" charging stations around town rather than pay for there own (already very inexpensive) "fuel", and frankly they seem pretty entitled about the whole thing too.

They don't pay for gas (which is fine of course). They don't pay fuel taxes to support infrastructure -- which is not fine. And it seems a lot of them don't think they should have even pay for their electricity either.

Holiday weekends may get ugly

Disastrously ugly, perhaps. I am rarely in gas lineups... but I was once last year... leaving Whistler BC on a Sunday evening after an afternoon mountain biking. Their was probably a 10-15 minute wait for gas. (which amounted to all the pumps having a 4-5 car lineup. That is precisely the situation a superstation would be needed... and a 30 minute charge cycle isn't nearly fast enough. (And you probably want more than 30 minutes worth...)

Re: More context

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually fast acceleration is surprisingly efficient. \humor {Probably because it doesn't waste all that energy needed to make the cool roaring sound that signals a gas guzzler.}

Re:More context

[fyngyrz]

You forgot to subtract the EV-hate constant from all your numbers. Fail.

Re: More context

[Jeremi]

I can't say for sure, but I'd be very surprised if each tesla doesn't provide its serial number to the supercharger when it is plugged in, for logging purposes. If they were smart, they'd add in some cryptographic authentication as well, specifically to prevent any shenanigans.

So Model 3 owners will likely be able to roll up to any supercharger and plug in as usual, and their credit card and will be charged accordingly. What they won't be able to do is pretend they are model S owners.

Re:More context

[Anonymous Coward]

The only time you should need the supercharger is on a road trip.. the rest of the time top it off at home while you sleep. You know.. that thing you can't do with a gas powered car. ....

I wonder how many people here had a gas pump on their farm while growing up. We did. We didn't use it all the time, but I remember dad using it to fill the tractor (it took regular gasoline, not diesel), and to fill the car or pickup as needed.

Although, you are right. We never used it while sleeping. That would be difficult.

Re: More context

[thsths]

Indeed. I wish we could drop the term "range anxiety" from our vocabulary - it sounds too much like blaming the user. Often (not always) the problem is range rather than anxiety.

That being said, 50 miles round trip should be perfectly possible in good conditions, but you if things go wrong, you would need a charging point along the way.

Re:More context

[thegarbz]

I know a guy who owns a Leaf that sits in his garage because the 50 mile round trip to work is a bit too risky even though the EPA says it goes 75 miles/charge.

I know a guy who doesn't fly in a plane because he's scared of crashing.
I also know a guy who on a daily bases has to tow huge loads and he bought a tiny little Twingo.

So yes stupid people are everywhere. On a related note, the current model leaf gets 180 miles/charge. Maybe he should trade up if he's not using his car because he bought the wrong one.

Re:More context

[thegarbz]

But my point is that range issues are real and a significant problem for some.

Were.

You're talking about an old model of car with a range less than half of the current model, and that's not even talking about Telsas which across the board have a higher range than the Leaf.

Re:More context

[thegarbz]

And all of these are going to be woefully inadequate unless we see some major rollouts made within the next few years.

Funny you should say that. It's almost like not every country in the world is resting on their laurels.

Re:More context

[thegarbz]

People will typically *NOT* be charging at places like the mall

That's new to both me and my local mall which has a note saying they are putting in an additional 20 charging stations by the end of the year due to "popular demand".

And it's not a big American style mall either.

Re:More context

[AmiMoJo]

I own a Leaf and I do 50 mile round trips in the winter with the heater on quite regularly, no problem at all. In fact mine is normally 62 miles, most of it motorway. I typically arrive with 15-25% remaining, depending on conditions.

Re:More context

[Khyber]

It's simply traveling using the electric equivalent of a gas station as a landmark. Nothing difficult about this, at all.

Re:More context

[Hognoxious]

I don't have a car, but when I did the conversation used to go like this.

"How long is it since your car was washed?"

"Dunno. When did it last rain?"

Re:More context

[michelcolman]

The supercharger knows exactly what car is plugged in. Not just the type, but the VIN and everything. It talks to the car's computer to negotiate the correct currents and voltages. Will be kind of hard to fake that.

Re:More context

[Anonymous Coward]

he's saying he can't to the rondtrip of 2x50miles on 1 charge
your assertion that yours does 84 miles on a charge seems to confirm that

Re:More context

[Anonymous Coward]

When he purchased the vehicle, he worked about 5 miles from home but was recently forced to change jobs. When he changed employers he asked that question and the new employer indicated they intended to provide chargers at the new facility. They didn't, even though they where shown on the plans.

So offer to pay for the electricity (i.e. have some of the wage paid out through a charger). Cheap compared to gasoline anyway. Company could even have a small profit on that electricity, which would eventually pay for the extra wiring. Charging at work is usually cheap to implement anyway, with 8 hour or so a standard outlet tend to be sufficient. No real need for the more expensive fast chargers, especially if they guy can (barely) drive home without charging anyway.

Re:More context

[Anonymous Coward]

Round trip = there and back. It's only 25 miles each way.

Re: More context

[Anonymous Coward]

The model S has frighteningly fast acceleration. My employer makes a certain component of the Model S and as a perk we have a loaner that we also use for testing. They raffled off use of the car for a day (several people each won a day) and I was one of the lucky ones. With the acceleration set to "insane" (yes, that is a setting on the acceleration) it really pins you to the seat.

Re: More context

[fluffernutter]

..and a free hour. Oh your kids were waiting at home to eat the food you were bringing them? Too bad.

Re: More context

[Anonymous Coward]

You must not have heard that you can rent cars for those occasional road trips

Re: More context

[Anonymous Coward]

I have an EV, it's usually daily drive is 35 miles up a 1500' climb into a string wind in 100+F temps then back. It does so with an average economy that exceeds the EPA rating

Re:More context

[AmiMoJo]

Chargers have to be next to places with amenities, because they need strong grid ties to deliver that much power. Commercial and industrial complexes are the only places that have them.

Re:More context

[Anonymous Coward]

And then, a quick re-flash of the Model S cars and superchargers to break the hack. In the long run, their charging authentication protocol is unbreakable because Tesla can change it any time they want.

Re:More context

[Anonymous Coward]

I maximize my use of easy charging, which usually means I charge at home. Also, I pay $150 a year in extra property tax on the car, to make up for the lack of road tax.

Re:More context

[JackieBrown]

I get 550 miles to my tank for my Camry hybrid. And when I need to refuel, I don't have to wait 23 minutes (or whatever) to fill up.

I agree that it's not very complicated - other than making sure where you go on vacation has the infrastructure - but it's pretty inconvenient for a car you are already paying more for.

Re:More context

[JackieBrown]

Then the Telsa drivers would be complaining about how much of their life is wasted viewing advertising.

Like free wifi.

Re:More context

[soapdude]

Let's all weep for the guy who can't stomach spending the night at his parents' house.

Re:More context

[b0bby]

A neighbor bought one of those i3 electric BMWs recently; not sure if this is a usual thing, but she can drive it to the dealer a certain number of times a year and take a gas vehicle for a longer trip, no extra charge. She didn't get the range extender, so it's convenient for her every once in a while.

Re:More context

[Lumpy]

Not one headbolt heater made on this planet plugs into an electric car charging station.

https://www.google.com/search?...

Re:More context

[Lumpy]

Every place around here where employers offer it do offer the proper charging stations. it keeps the crackheads from standing around in the parking lot charging their phones if you dont use a standard 110V outlet. plus they get a govt credit for installing the proper device.

Re:More context

[Stuarticus]

How often do you drive those 550 miles all at once without a single bathroom, coffee or snack break?

Re:More context

[LWATCDR]

The Model 3 still costs about as much as a BMW 3 series.
Frankly the Tesla fans are just too much. Consumer reports went from giving the Tesla it's highest rating ever to removing it recommended tag on the S because of reliability issues. Let's face it Consumer reports is your classic bunch of dirty hippies that should love the tesla. They are not in the car companies back pockets.
The Model X is also having problems.
Building cars is hard. Building inexpensive cars is really hard.

Re:More context

[naughtynaughty]

Someone who has a 50 miles R/T commute in a vehicle with a 75 mile range doesn't have a range issue that is real or significant.

Re: More context

[naughtynaughty]

When someone is anxious about being able to drive 50 miles with 75 miles of range they are the problem, not the range of the vehicle.

Range anxiety is something that can be overcome with education and experience. I routinely drive 70 miles R/T in a vehicle rated for 83 miles of range in conditions that are not ideal (up substantial hills, heavy winds, high temperatures) but experience has taught me that the drive is never a problem and if there really was some issue there are a dozen places along the way where I could (but never have) stop for 5-30 minutes to get enough charge to get the rest of the way home.

Going to PlugShare and learning that there are multiple locations where a charge could be gotten along the way if something "goes wrong" is a start. Most roadside assistance services have the ability to deal with an EV with a dead battery as well. There are a lot of things that can go wrong on a drive, usually it involves something other than running out of juice, somehow people manage to overcome their fears of those things that could go wrong and are able to hop in a gas car and go places.

Re:More context

[Immerman]

Even if they pre-sold the electricity - what would be the incentive to build out infrastructure to the most extreme situations? That just means they've got a whole lot of chargers sitting around useless most of the time, but still needing maintenance. Meanwhile every car buyer has to pay up front for the average expected usage of the superchargers, which likely increases that average since "hey, I paid for this already, I should be getting my money's worth"

What does make sense is to build out increasingly distributed charging centers as demand increases, so that there's both more overall capacity, and a better chance of a nearby charger. Combined with having everyone on road trips inform the car of their planned route (encouraged with highway autopilot) so that they can inform headquarters and all the chargers can be scheduled to minimize average delays. Come Thanksgiving there'll still be a line at the food-court superchargers, but if you're in a hurry you could always stop a few miles away at the Podunkville sandwich shop instead.

Re:More context

[Immerman]

Easy solution to climbing demand - stop providing free electricity. Think parking meters with a switchable power outlet. Make charging pay for itself, or even become a profit center. At the US average of $0.12/kWh you're talking less than $0.25/hour to charge a vehicle - it'd be the cheapest parking meter around, and you'd actually be getting something for your money. Charge twice that to pay for the infrastructure as well and it's still cheap.

And that's assuming you don't think having EVs parked near you instead of your competition with free outlets isn't worth $0.25/hour.

Re:More context

[Comboman]

Many malls don't let their employees park in the customer parking areas (and most mall employees can't afford cars anyway, much less electric cars).

Re:More context

[Immerman]

And shifting toward making drivers pay for that charge is going to eliminate most of that "entitlement" demand. Which isn't necessarily even "entitlement" so much as getting what they paid for - the fact is that they pre-paid for their electricity when they bought their car, and in doing so helped subsidize putting those charging stations in place.

You're numbers are also a little deceptive - the largest battery available on a Tesla seems to be 90kWh, so at the US average of $0.12/kWh that's ~$11 for a full charge from "I had to push my car to the charger" (though yeah, some places will be more expensive, and some cheaper). And even then, I think someone above mentioned above that the EU model comes with a separate E5,000 ($5,600) "free charging" package. If that's the case, even factoring in the higher electricity costs (call it $15/charge), you're talking ~370 full charges before you get your money's worth. (yes, I did neglect charging inefficiencies)

Obviously the more exploitative early adopters are probably getting their money's worth by now, but they paid up front to jump-start the infrastructure, and now they're receiving dividends. And I suspect the average Model S/X owner prefers the convenience of charging at home, and will never recoup the "free" supercharging premium they paid up front.

Re:More context

[fyngyrz]

Depends on where you live. Here in Montana, we have 120v AC plugs at most parking spaces where employees park. These have been used to run our engine block and battery heaters -- otherwise, on our -40 days, you go back out after your 8 hours of wage-slavery and your vehicle is not very likely to start unless you've come out several times and warmed it back up (and on windy days, even that doesn't work.)

So here, slow-charging, at least, should be available to some extent. I do wonder what the combined load of block/battery heaters + battery charge will be; related, if you can tell the vehicle to limit the charge rate to, say, 10 amps; and how employers will feel about providing same... but they'll figure something out. They'll have to.

A lot of people here have garages (same reason... parking outdoors can be rough in winter) and it seems to me that the sensible time to charge regular-use short-to-medium distance use EVs is at night anyway.

Looking forward to it, however it goes. I'll keep my 4WD pickup for the really nasty weather and transport of heavy stuff, but EVs are my target for most driving and the Tesla looks like what I want at the moment. Assuming, again, that they can produce enough so I can actually buy one.

Re:More context

[Immerman]

Or make it simple and just charge everyone who's using them, sans that handful that helped subsidize the initial deployment in exchange for free charging for... life? X years? I don't know the contract.

And charge per hour rather than per Watt, presumably at "maximum charging speed" rates. That'd gently discourage people from using the superchargers for "topping off", when charging speed is slower and so $/Wh higher, and encourage them to disconnect their car as soon as it's got enough charge for their purposes. Kind of like an expensive parking meter that has direct access to your credit card, but is actually delivering something for the money, provided you're conscientious about using it.

Re:More context

[Anonymous Coward]

"It's free after you pay for it."

Re:More context

[Anonymous Coward]

No one is counting red neck states.

Re:More context

[Shirley Marquez]

The range of the Model S with the largest battery option is 294 miles according to the EPA. The projected range of the Model 3 is 200 miles; there will be no official EPA estimates until the car is ready for sale.

The actual range of an electric car varies with speed, outside temperature, terrain, battery condition, and whether the heat or AC is on. Tesla has a range estimator on their web site that lets you see the effect of some of the variables: https://www.teslamotors.com/mo... - scroll down a while to get to it. Slowing down can extend your range by a LOT - one car has a range of 275 miles at 70 mph (temperature 70F, no AC) but it increases to 443 miles at 45 mph.

Re: More context

[Shirley Marquez]

Insane isn't even the fastest setting. That would be ludicrous. But your car may not have the ludicrous option, which includes all wheel drive and a larger battery.

Re:More context

[Anonymous Coward]

Zoom Zoom

Get a (mazda) 3.

Re:More context

[Rakarra]

When he says "slow chargers," he's probably talking about the 6.6kW charger that is standard at charging spots in parking lots, at work, etc, as opposed to the much more rare "DC Fast Charging" connection that the Nissan Leafs support, or Tesla's "Superchargers," both which promise a 0 -> 80% change in about 15 minutes.

I bought the 6.6kW charger to use at my house (similar to the ones we have at work) for $600, and it was a higher-end model. I asked the facilities guys at work what it might take to install one of those super-fast chargers as well, and he told me that the base install model would cost around $50,000. No joke, they are fucking expensive, so few people have them.

Re:More context

[Rakarra]

Were

Still are. 185 miles (ish) is certainly a big step up, but if you're traveling in your car, it's still nowhere where it needs to be, mostly because of the "slow recharge" problem.

Re:More context

[Rakarra]

But it's going to be hard to unset the precedent set by Tesla and getting access to free super charging

I don't think most people who knew about the superchargers realized that they were free.

Re: More context

[Rakarra]

When someone is anxious about being able to drive 50 miles with 75 miles of range they are the problem, not the range of the vehicle.

Unless that 50 miles has a lot of hills (or is just a slow, steady uphill), at which point that 75 can quickly turn into 60. Or 50. Or 45. And make sure to turn off the heating/air conditioning as well, because that will shave about 10 miles off of a full charge too.

Range anxiety is something that can be overcome with education and experience. I routinely drive 70 miles R/T in a vehicle rated for 83 miles of range in conditions that are not ideal (up substantial hills, heavy winds, high temperatures) but experience has taught me that the drive is never a problem and if there really was some issue there are a dozen places along the way where I could (but never have) stop for 5-30 minutes to get enough charge to get the rest of the way home.

That's assuming they exist where you live. City driving, there are probably spots to recharge all over the place. The grocery store I go to almost every day has four such spots. The national park I went to the other weekend... no such luck. I had to rent a car, a process that probably ate a 4 hour chunk out of the weekend.

Re:More context

[Rakarra]

He doesn't think he can do 50 miles on a single charge in a LEAF? The battery must be desperately sick for that to be the case

Maybe he uses DC fast charging too much. Those chargers put a tremendous strain on the battery and regular use will quickly degrade its life. They're for occasional long-trip recharges.
Nissan had some problems with battery life in hot climates (southwest US) as well. I'm not talking about reduced range from air conditioning use, but where the heat shortened battery life itself.

Re:More context

[Rakarra]

Well.. yes? Same as a petrol station? You sound like it is controversial or a bad thing, for some reason?

The electric charging stations need to be a lot more ubiquitous for the situations to be similar.
And I could completely fill my old car's gas tank in five minutes as well. The fast-charging stations are exceedingly rare, even in California.

Re:More context

[vux984]

Many malls don't let their employees park in the customer parking areas (and most mall employees can't afford cars anyway, much less electric cars).

Depends how urban vs suburban you are. Go urban enough and the mall doesn't even have parking for customers nevermind employees. Most patrons don't drive in either, and those that do go to an impark lot.

Go suburban enough, and even the cashier at orange julius drives in for his 4 hour shift, and employees are allowed to park in the mall lot... just usually not "near the front".

Re:More context

[vux984]

Which isn't necessarily even "entitlement" so much as getting what they paid for - the fact is that they pre-paid for their electricity when they bought their car, and in doing so helped subsidize putting those charging stations in place.

In the case of the Tesla superstations, yes. But I'm talking about the entitlement to the free electricity at the mall, the office, the sports bar, the park, the library, etc.

90kWh, so at the US average of $0.12/kWh that's

The typical US household uses about 1MWh/month.

But many residential plans are tiered based on that... your first 1MWh is at X beyond that you are at Y. An EV typically shifts you into Y territory because your baseline household consumption uses all your X.

Where I live for example, after the first 1.2MWh @ 12.5 cents; I pay 20 cents a kWh.

Other places have peak vs off peak - so night charging works well for them. And some places are just more expensive -- usually the most populous places. (California, New York...) So yeah its hard to generalize too much -- and then Europe, Canada, Mexico, Australia etc ... are all different too.

And yes, we both ignored charging inefficiencies.

Obviously the more exploitative early adopters are probably getting their money's worth by now, but they paid up front to jump-start the infrastructure, and now they're receiving dividends

They "paid up front" by getting a car with $5000, ... $8000... $10000 in taxpayer subsidies? And the taxpayer paid for a lot of free charging stations around town and the electricity coming out of them. And the taxpayer subsidizes tesla in other ways from the gigafactory to the solar power panels on their super charging stations... And to top it off the EV drivers are dodging fuel taxes which help cover road maintenance... etc.

Beleive it or not, I am for EVs, but lets not go nuts putting the early adopters on a pedestal.

Re:More context

[Anonymous Coward]

Then get a model with a larger range. You didn't say which Tesla you were interested in, but the S starts at a 240 mile range and the X starts at 237, both with options that have a longer range. The Model 3 does only have a listed range of 215 mile, but that could improve by the time they hit production, and I expect they will offer versions with a longer range. But if the if a round trip to your parents is just a bit more than 200 miles, then plug it in at your parents house. Surely you'll at least be there a couple of hours, and the mobile charger that plugs into wall outlets adds 29 miles of range per hour of charge, so you can plug it in when you are there.

Re:More context

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you really find following directions complicated?

Re:More context

[Rakarra]

I saw a video with Elon showing off swap out batteries which could be done faster (apparently) than filling up your tank with petrol. Replace you dead one with a pre-charged fresh one. Did that ever become a thing?

I don't think so. Among other things, it would mean you don't own (and thus aren't responsible for) your batteries.

Re:More context

[thegarbz]

but if you're traveling in your car

The vast majority of cars in the world do not travel.

We're already where we need to be. People are just holding EVs to a different standard than any other car, cars which have purposes and limitations such as the ~100million cars in Europe which can't tow a trailer, or the ~5million cars in Europe which don't fit in an inner-city / shopping centre car park, or the ~10million cars in Australia which can't drive across a beach.

We've always had vehicle limitations, and we've always bought vehicles to suit our use case. If you take big trips, don't buy one. If you don't then what's your excuse? and before you say you "may" need to do a big trip at somepoint just wonder if you "may" need to tow a 3T load, and park in a carpark no larger than a dustbin, or "may" need to drive on sand and then answer me which car does all of the above.

Also ask yourself if you drive more than a Taxi, ... because the last Taxi I caught was a Tesla.

Re:More context

[vux984]

At the US average of $0.12/kWh you're talking less than $0.25/hour to charge a vehicle - it'd be the cheapest parking meter around,

Heh. In theory it could be but that is not how capitalism works. The electricity is 20 cents an hour, the new meter is $800. The contract to install them everywhere is $2.3 million. Then there is the software updates, deployment, maintenance contract when the meters break down or get hit by trucks or water gets in or whatever else. Then their is the payment website and mobile app, and the merchant account siphoning a few percentage points, plus the call center for support, disputes, collections, plus management. Then the shareholders who put this all together want to see dividends.

So yeah... 20 cents an hour for the raw electricity from the utility. Probably charge you $5 / hour for it at the meter.

I mean, coca cola is under 1 cent an oz too... but a 12 oz can out of a vending machine in some tourist trap isn't going to be retailing for 12 cents.

Re:More context

[GreatDrok]

"Maybe he uses DC fast charging too much. Those chargers put a tremendous strain on the battery and regular use will quickly degrade its life. They're for occasional long-trip recharges."

Actually, that's not true. Fast charging every day may reduce the battery capacity by 1% per year at worst. There's an example of a LEAF used as a taxi which was fast charged multiple times a day and covered 130,000 miles before it lost the first battery bar. In fact, the observation seems to be that age is the killer so a car will lose capacity whether you use it or not, and in fact leaving the car charged to 100% or run flat (not that the car lets you do that) for long periods are what will damage the battery most. The early batteries also suffered in hot climates but the recent lizard batteries are much better. My own battery actually increased in capacity after a long hot run with three fast charges in a single day.

There's no reason to fear using the car regularly, or using fast charges. Also, replacement costs for the batteries are coming down considerably too and there's an opportunity for aftermarket upgrades with new technologies. The newer NMO battery cells which are planned for the next gen LEAF will allow a 60kWh battery to fit in the space of my 24kWh battery more than doubling range assuming someone is able to put them on the market for the older cars which would be a potentially large market anyway. Meanwhile, I'm enjoying my car, doing long trips and using the fast charger network happily without producing any emissions (my country is largely run on non-fossil produced power.)

Re:More context

[Rakarra]

We're already where we need to be. People are just holding EVs to a different standard than any other car

I don't hold my EV to a different standard, I hold it to the same standard as my '97 Toyota. The EV doesn't quite measure up... yet.
It works fine when I take it on a trip to my mom's house (about an hour away). It didn't work for the weekend trip I took to the national park. For that I had to get a rental car, which meant an additional 2 hours delay on Friday picking it up, and another 2 hours on Sunday dropping it off. Having to pick up a rental car sucks, but not as much as getting stranded halfway into the park would have.

Re:More context

[thegarbz]

I don't hold my EV to a different standard

You replied to a conversation with specific context of a person who has an EV but doesn't use it because it's 50 miles too and from work. 180 miles range solves this use case.

It's not going to work for everyone, but in the context of this thread the EV problem has already been solved for the person who came up with the original scenario. Comparing it to a car with a bigger tank because it has less range is like comparing a car to another car which doesn't have a feature to get somewhere ... like your national park.

EVs have broken the range barrier for most people already, we're just waiting for attrition and combating fear and misinformation.

Re:More context

[Chuq]

The electric charging stations need to be a lot more ubiquitous for the situations to be similar.

Well, not really. Assume equal numbers of electric and petrol/diesel vehicles, you are only going to need 1/20th as many EV charging locations. The distribution will differ - you will need more on long distance routes (highways) and fewer in the suburbs.

Not to mention EV charging facility are not dedicated buildings themselves - they are simply additional facilities in a car park, so you don't need to build new dedicated stations.

And I could completely fill my old car's gas tank in five minutes as well. The fast-charging stations are exceedingly rare, even in California.

Last time I did a highway stop on a road trip, I was stopped for 40 minutes. Ten to queue up at the station, refuel, go in and pay. Then move the car to a general car park, get coffee, food, take the kids to the toilet, let the kids have a quick run in the playground. Had I been driving a Tesla and used a supercharger the car would have been charging for the entire time. I would have been no worse off. It's an example I love to use, of course not all stops are like this, but I bet this sounds familiar to many parents. Certainly more familiar that those people who claim they drive for five hours, stop for five minutes and then drive for another five hours.

Solar panels?

[U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M]

Just put solar panels all over the car body. Problem solved, once and for all.

Re:Solar panels?

[drinkypoo]

Just put solar panels all over the car body. Problem solved, once and for all.

Sure, for trips to the mailbox and back.

Re:Solar panels?

[vadim_t]

Do some math.

Insolation at the surface is about 1 kw / m^2 in perfect conditions. A good solar panel might be 20% efficient, so 200W/m^2 = 0.2 kW/m^2. Tesla battery = 60 kWh. 60 / 0.2 = 300 hours to charge the battery, per square meter of solar panel in absolutely optimal, cloudless conditions.

Also, for comparison, 1 HP = 745W.

Re:Solar panels?

[bobbied]

Yea, those Mars rovers are *really* speedy using that approach. Took one of them more than a decade to drive about 26 miles...

I'm sure you realize this, but there simply isn't enough energy from the sun hitting your car to do much traveling with. You might be able to keep the battery topped off or a bit more using the energy hitting the car, but you certainly are NOT going to be driving around town on a sunny day on the energy you collect.

Re:Solar panels?

[U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M]

http://i.imgur.com/gHcGr.jpg

Re:Solar panels?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Just put solar panels all over the car body. Problem solved, once and for all."

Nope. Typical efficiencies are around 0.75KWh a day per square meter. (~5 hours a day of full exposure.) If we can mount 4 square meters of solar cells on the roof and hood, it would take ~two weeks to get a full charge on the smaller 40KWh battery packs.

Note that I'm _not_ dismissing the somewhat naive belief in Solar-Powered vehicles. It's a matter of square meters and power draw. For instance, there are various techniques that exploit wind energy for actual motive power; these are commonly known as "Sails", and are most often seen on "Windmills" and "Sailboats". With that out of the way, it's a matter of powering various entertainment devices, lighting, and an ice maker. I spent a week taking measurements and figuring energy budgets, and about a square meter is sufficient space to allocate for a typical nine meter boat with a decent battery bank and some common sense.

But anybody who believes in a strictly Solar-Powered automobile is either a fool, or failed third grade math, or both.

Re:Solar panels?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yea, those Mars rovers are *really* speedy using that approach. Took one of them more than a decade to drive about 26 miles...

I'm sure you realize this, but there simply isn't enough energy from the sun hitting your car to do much traveling with. You might be able to keep the battery topped off or a bit more using the energy hitting the car, but you certainly are NOT going to be driving around town on a sunny day on the energy you collect.

I'm sure you realize this, but the Mars rovers are a bad example, not the least because they are on Mars, which receives far less sunlight than the Earth, but also because their power budget is not dedicated to transportation, and their movement, well, it's offroad, because where they went, there were no roads. Not to mention the operating temperatures.

No, whatever point you want to make about the silliness of solar panels on cars, referring to the Mars Rovers is not a good idea.

Personally, though, I'd prefer to use them to keep the interior cooler.

Besides, you know the above was being silly.

Re:Solar panels?

[FatdogHaiku]

Just put solar panels all over the car body. Problem solved, once and for all.

Dude! Make a WINDMILL out of solar panels and mount it on the roof!

Re:Solar panels?

[Anonymous Coward]

I see someone has zero clue as to how solar power works.

Re:Solar panels?

[lgw]

You can actually power a car with a windmill (well, very lightweight test equipment) given a brisk headwind. Fun with physics.

Re:Solar panels?

[AaronW]

I've argued with a number of people on the Tesla forums on how stupid this is.

Covering every horizontal surface other than the windows on a car would be frightfully expensive and it would add more weight. The body under the cells would need to be more rigid to prevent the cells from cracking, plus since cars are rarely perfectly flat there would have to be an expensive cover over the cells. It would have to stand up to rocks and other things as well as the flexing a car normally has while driving. If you think denting a normal hood is expensive, imagine how expensive it would be if it were covered with solar?

It's far better to instead install solar on your roof rather than the very limited return one would get with solar added to a car.

I know someone with a Fisker Karma which does have solar on the roof. From what I have read it costs around $5000 to add the solar to the roof of the Karma for a very limited rate of return. It's not going to be as efficient as a normal solar panel since it will not be aimed towards the sun, plus it needs a much thicker coating over the panels in order to protect them. Additionally, it adds weight to the car as well as the extra support for those panels to prevent cracking or damage from various things encountered while driving. Someone ran the numbers and figured out the rate of return is around 500 years until the panel pays for itself. It barely adds anything to the range of the car and is mostly used to keep the 12v battery topped off and to help cool the interior. It's also going to be expensive since you want to try and keep the solar panels from getting too hot. The solar panels on my house are quite light with plenty of air circulation under them. They're also perfectly flat and aimed at the sun so they're a lot more efficient and a lot cheaper.

  For my Tesla I much prefer having the panoramic roof where I can just open it a bit to help keep the car cool. On top of that, the panoramic roof adds additional head room and it's nice to open when the weather is nice. The glass used is amazing in that it does not let much heat into or out of the car.

Solar on the roof of a car might generate 100 watts. It would take around 3 hours of sun to add one mile of range since my car (with my driving and sticky tires) typically takes almost 300Wh/mile.

Re:Solar panels?

[Anonymous Coward]

I see someone is not a Futurama fan.

Re:Solar panels?

[Khyber]

Typical panels are about 25% efficient, and there is about 12 square meters of exposed body area on a decent mid-sized sedan. Assuming a decent angle to the sun, you can get almost 3kWh but are at best likely to get ~2.3kWh (remember, one side is most likely not going to be facing the sun directly at all and parts of others at extreme angles, though incidental light from surrounding terrain might be enough for it to get some usable energy, otherwise we're looking at a rough total of 4kWh if all sides were exposed.)

Drop your calculation by an order of magnitude and then some. ~26 hours at 2.3kWh

Re:Solar panels?

[Anonymous Coward]

check this out http://inhabitat.com/solar-powered-stella-lux-family-car-generates-more-energy-than-it-uses/
it's technologically possible, as it's been done in prototypes

now bringing the cost down and then making and selling a mass produced car that does that ... is a different kettle of fish

Re:Solar panels?

[Kielistic]

Mars also has next to no atmosphere. According to Wikipedia: "Sunlight on the surface of Mars would be much like a moderately cloudy day on Earth". (source)

Re:Solar panels?

[Anonymous Coward]

Mars also has next to no atmosphere. According to Wikipedia: "Sunlight on the surface of Mars would be much like a moderately cloudy day on Earth". (source)

You should read your own source better: "Because Mars is approximately 52% farther from the Sun, the amount of solar energy entering its upper atmosphere per unit area (the solar constant) is only around 43.3% of what reaches the Earth's upper atmosphere.[12] However, due to the much thinner atmosphere, a higher fraction of the solar energy reaches the surface.[13][14][not in citation given] The maximum solar irradiance on Mars is about 590 W/m compared to about 1000 W/m at the Earth's surface. Also, year-round dust storms on Mars may block sunlight for weeks at a time"

Indeed, one of the things concerned the planners of the Rovers was the dust storms on Mars, which were expected to occlude the solar panels, but fortunately, they were off in their estimates of the clearing events, which meant they got more power than expected. Enough to keep the rovers operational for a considerable period beyond the anticipated.

Of course, if you look at the rovers, their solar panels are not as much of their surface area as you might expect, and we haven't even discussed the plutonium component.

Elon Musk can't make any deals with Libyans.

Re:Solar panels?

[Anonymous Coward]

"it's technologically possible, as it's been done in prototypes"
Technologically possible covers a lot of speculation.

The Stella Lux is a prototype that _still_ requires a Mains recharge when the 5KWh Battery is depleted, or leave it parked in bright sunlight for a day or two.
Note that I'm quite aware of the Solar Challenge races. But they butt up against the same factors that I mentioned with Sailboats- lack of collection area and an absolute limit to Solar collection efficiency. So all that's left is reducing weight, minimizing drag, and maximizing operating efficiency. A few percent gain, here or there.
But back to the original question- running a Tesla Model 3 solely off of Solar energy. It just _can't_ be done, without maybe dragging a flatbed trailer covered in Solar cells behind. Assuming a 15KW draw to sustain highway speeds, (_Very_ efficient...), that means about 100 square meters of Solar cells. Since trailers are limited in most areas to ~2.5 meters in width, the trailer would have to be ~40 meters long. Maybe in Australia...

Re:Solar panels?

[scatbomb]

But anybody who believes in a strictly Solar-Powered automobile is either a fool, or failed third grade math, or both.

That's not very fair or nice. Plus, you're wrong.

First of all, I believe that the proposed idea was not for a strictly solar powered vehicle but rather a battery-powered vehicle with solar for range extension and powering things like AC.

Secondly, quick google search showed some solar options that deliver much more power than you are saying. There are solar modules out there with efficiency around 25%, which means somewhere around 250W/m2. Multiply by 4m2 and 5 hours and that yields 5kWh for 5 hours in the sun. That's about 7x higher than your claim. Care to explain yourself? Are you manipulating numbers intentionally to make a point?

Re:Solar panels?

[scatbomb]

Solar on the roof of a car might generate 100 watts.

What kind of tiny solar panel are you talking about here??? 1 square meter should generate 250W at 25% efficiency. The top surface of a car is MULTIPLE square meters.

Why is this modded "insightful"??

Re:Solar panels?

[AaronW]

You don't get that sort of efficiency for multiple reasons. First of all, the solar panel is not pointed towards the sun. In fact, given how the roofs of most cars are curved, at least half of the cells will be angled away from the sun at any one time. You don't want a perfectly flat roof for aerodynamic reasons, plus on most cars it would look quite ugly. In the northern hemisphere the panels would be pointed south but on a vehicle this would not be the case. Second of all, due to the coatings required to have a smooth curved surface you are going to lose a lot more light. You want a smooth surface as well which will reflect a lot more light. A fair amount will also likely be lost to reflections. Also, most solar panels are not 25% efficient.

Flat panels like one might normally see are pointed towards the sun. They have a thin flat layer above the solar cells and a lot of ventilation under the cells to help keep them cool since the cells lose efficiency when hot.

This is not the case on a car. Take the Fisker Karma, for example. On the roof it has a smooth curved clear cover with the cells underneath. That top layer needs to be a lot thicker than the layer on a flat panel for a number of reasons. Next, the roof needs to be kept quite rigid to prevent cracking which means that a more substantial structure is needed to support the cells. This adds a lot of weight. Then you either need to build a cooling system or some other method to keep the cells from getting too hot since not only does it reduce efficiency, but it also reduces the lifetime of the cells. All of this also adds weight to the vehicle where you don't want it (for handling purposes you want the weight to be as low as possible) and makes the roof thicker, so other compromises are required to prevent the reduction of headroom (which the Fisker Karma lacks).

Solar panels on the roof don't need to be designed to handle all the vibration and whatnot that cells on a car would have to handle. They don't need to be as rigid either. They need to be able to stand up to wind and hail, but that's not as bad as what the panels on a car would have to handle. Cars tend to flex and bend as they drive, going over bumps in the road, etc. The panels don't need to be nearly as strong as those in a car. Besides, if they break, they're not that expensive to replace.

I'm familiar with both since I have solar on my roof and I have a close relative with a Fisker Karma which has the entire roof of the car covered with solar.

Curved thin-film cells could be used instead. The drawback is that they are a lot less efficient but it would also be cheaper.

"Gas" = Electrons

[HumanWiki]

You'll be stopping a filling stations, getting gas, etc. just like everyone else.. the only real difference will be the type of energy being pumped in.. And, if you think for one second that your per unit rates won't go up like gasoline, you're naive.

Re:"Gas" = Electrons

[markdavis]

>"You'll be stopping a[t] filling stations, getting gas, etc. just like everyone else.. the only real difference will be the type of energy being pumped in.."

Well, no, not really. With my current car, a fillup takes about 4 minutes and then I have another 380 mile range. Electrically, I would have to wait potentially an hour or more and then have something like a 200 mile range.

Sure, it will get faster and more range, but that could take many years and it might never be as convenient as gas for trips.

Re:"Gas" = Electrons

[Anonymous Coward]

Posting as AC cause I've modded in this thread, but this is the problem with public charging stations in general.

If filling up a car with gas took even 20 minutes, the entire refueling infrastructure would grind to a halt with ridiculous and unacceptable lineups.

To be useful electric cars REQUIRE home charging. There would never be enough public charging stations to satisfy demand if they become more than a niche item.

Re:"Gas" = Electrons

[Anonymous Coward]

When EVs become a significant number of passenger vehicles, battery swap or non-ICE range-extenders (something along the lines of Phinergy's aluminium-water-air prototype) will become feasible

Re:"Gas" = Electrons

[bobbied]

There is ONE significant difference, no TWO..

1. You are going to stop more often to recharge than refuel. Your average gasoline car goes in excess of 300 miles between stops, an electric is lucky to get you 200 on a full charge and you can count on just over 100 miles on 75% charge when you need to run the environmental controls to stay comfortable. I figure you will have to stop between 2 and 3 times more often to recharge than my minivan on that road trip.

2. You will stop longer. I can fill up my minivan, hit the bathroom and the soda fountain in about 10 min, or eat a meal in 30 and be back on the road for 300 miles. IF you can find a "super charger" your electric will need about 45 min or more to get you to 75% charge and another 125 miles or so and if you don't mind waiting 1.5 hours or so you might get nearly 200 miles out of that charge. A full 250 mile 100% charge will usually take a couple of hours or more. If you do not have access to a super charger, you can figure on 4 to 10 hours to charge from a 15A extension cord.

Please don't undersell the difference here. They are significant.

Re: "Gas" = Electrons

[HumanWiki]

I think many of you missed my point entirely. I was pointing out all the non free energy that Pro Tesla people were making a thing of. It's not going to happen. They'll have to stop and pay to fill up, just like us ICE people do. It will just be a different form of gas.

Of course I know it'll take them longer and more stops, but that wasn't my point.

Re:"Gas" = Electrons

[CaptainLard]

To be useful electric cars REQUIRE home charging.

Or work charging. Or anywhere you can run a 2cm cable to. If every car took 20 min to "refuel" but a refueling station had the footprint of the head-on space between 2 parking spaces instead of massive underground storage tanks I'm sure someone could figure out how to avoid grinding to a halt.

Re:"Gas" = Electrons

[imgod2u]

Those numbers are somewhat exaggerated. My 85kWH battery takes roughly 1 hour, 10 min to get from 5% to 100% (I've measured). To get to 80% takes about 40 minutes.

The cabin conditioning is a tiny fraction of electricity used. Realistically, a 100% charge will net ~240 miles at 75mph (say, highway 5 in CA). The AC has relatively little impact on that range (maybe 5%). The biggest impact is if you live in a really cold area. That can get you down to 200 miles on 100% charge if you're at, say, 30F ambient temp or lower. I've driven in parts of Oregon during the winter and haven't really noticed more than a ~10% hit in range at 70mph cruising speed.

It's definitely less convenient than a gas car by far. But not insurmountable as you make it out to be. On my route from SF to LA, it adds about 1 hour of drive time for a 7 hour drive. That was when there was ~150-200 miles between chargers. Now, on highway 5, there's a charger every ~100 miles. Some even less (Harris Ranch -> Buttonwillow -> Tijon -> Burbank is about ~50 miles each hop).

Trying to drive long distance without Supercharger access is a terrible idea (though I've done it for the lawls).

If the OP undersold the difference, you're definitely overselling it.

Re:"Gas" = Electrons

[AK Marc]

Home charging or battery swap charging stations. It's not hard.

Re:"Gas" = Electrons

[markdavis]

>"Home charging or battery swap charging stations. It's not hard."

Yes it is.

Home charging is *SLOW*. Very, very, very slow. For a high-range EV at 110V/20A takes many days, 220V/60A takes probably a full day from 0% to full. Besides, this won't help with long trips because the assumption is that for a long trips you leave fully charged.

Swapping batteries is nowhere near "not hard". There is no standard for that. Battery technology changes often. Batteries are often inaccessible or complex to remove or make swappable. Swapping something that weights many, many hundreds of pounds requires some very specialized infrastructure and machines. The space needed to store all these huge, heavy batteries isn't small. And last but not least, there are ownership issues. I am sure I missed other issues, but that is a good start.

I believe that supercharge stations will get better and better, and that will be the answer for trips- when you can get an 80% charge in something like 5 or 10 minutes..... but we are a long way from that technology right now.

Trust me, I am just an anxious for electric vehicles as anyone, and hope that my next car will be one... but the technology is still lacking for many uses and the prices are still quite high.

Re: "Gas" = Electrons

[AaronW]

Actually it usually takes a lot less time and is far more convenient since it only takes me 5 seconds to plug in at home at night and 5 seconds to unplug in the morning in the comfort of my garage. I don't have to periodically pull into a gas station, get out my credit card and wait for my car to fill up. The only time I need to wait to charge is if I'm traveling a long distance. Also, there are usually things to do within easy walking distance while the car is charging. Even on long trips I can often charge at the hotel. At my recent stay in Reno the hotel had a couple Tesla charging spaces where I could charge and the hotel I happened to pick out in the middle of nowhere happens to have a Tesla charger (I didn't realize this when I selected the hotel). I asked if they had a 220v outlet I could use and they said they just installed a Tesla charger there... the person on the phone thought the owner was crazy at first. The nearby town has a population of only around 500 people. Tesla is being quite smart about charging, offering establishments deep discounts or even free installation of destination chargers as well as listings on their maps.

Re:"Gas" = Electrons

[Chuq]

You are going to stop more often to recharge than refuel.

You very rarely "stop to recharge" in an EV. You just charge at the same time as you are doing other things, such as sleeping or shopping.

You will stop longer.

The same applies. You are stopped there *anyway* so you aren't stopping longer.

Yes, if you try to drive 1000 km in a Leaf, it's not going to be fun. But that aren't designed for that. If you do it in a Tesla, their range and charging speed are well aligned to the typical human comfort requirements (drive 2.5 hrs -> stop 20 mins -> drive 2.5 hrs -> stop 60 minutes -> drive 2.5 hrs -> stop 20 minutes -> drive 2.5 hours). Sure, there are a minority of people who are like this but most people aren't.

Re:"Gas" = Electrons

[Anonymous Coward]

220V/60A charging would fully charge a tesla S in 6 hours or a LEAF in 1.5. For me, home charging is fast, a few seconds to plug in and a few seconds to unplug. The rest happens while I'm sleeping, eating dinner, etc, it's not like I'm waiting for it.

Re:"Gas" = Electrons

[naughtynaughty]

Yes, home charging is slow.

I have no idea how we'll manage to find the 8 hours to charge a car at home.

As for road trips, maybe someone should invent a company that rents gas vehicles.

I'm waiting on buying a gas vehicle until it can travel across the ocean.

How is this news?

[Zandamesh]

Isn't this specified in the options when you pre-order a model 3? Why is this news?

Re:How is this news?

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

Because Slashdot spins the ad-counter while we debate whether or not Musk is an asshole.

Re:How is Elon Musk not considered a con artist?

[BarbaraHudson]

And just how is this a con? Name me any other car manufacturer that gives you free energy for life.

Re:How is Elon Musk not considered a con artist?

[mbkennel]

His company's cars work as advertised, and aren't secretly powered by a coal turbine.

Re:How is Elon Musk not considered a con artist?

[Anonymous Coward]

have you considered getting your eyes checked?

I got a great idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Just like there were small towns for coaches to stop, Elon Musk should build a nice charging station right between SF and LA along Highway 5. The stop would have a saloon (0.5% alcohol for drivers but the others can get blasted), a casino, a brothel, and a Starbucks.

Charging is free if you buy one drink.

I think he would make a lot of money and people would look forward to owning Teslas that need to stop at the charging station.

Re:I got a great idea

[Anonymous Coward]

It already exists. It is called Harris Ranch, has a nice restaurant, and 15+ SuperChargers. The number of model S cars parked is pretty amazing. I always stop there for lunch. Really good beef. And I drive a Prius which will easily make the trip non-stop.

How Is This a Surprise?

[EndlessNameless]

Lower margins on a mass-market vehicle means there isn't enough money to pay the electrical bill for the lifetime of the vehicle.

Are people really getting worked up over basic and obvious economic decisions?

I know two people who own Teslas, and both of them bought the in-home charger regardless of the availability of "free" charging. Topping up costs way less than a tank of gas, and they don't feel like wasting time at the station.

The only reason Tesla could offer free charging in the first place is because the electricity costs so much less than gasoline. Their "free" fillup simply was not a large value to begin with---except for the convenience it offered on long trips.

Re:How Is This a Surprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

Tesla & Musk have done a poor job initially of clarifying how the SuperChargers were supposed to be used, which is as fillup station on long trips, not as you would your local gas station, which was supposed to be your home.
At the initial reveal, Elon simply said "free forever" or that's all most everyone remembers. But last year, Tesla was e-mailing frequent SC users who were using it as a daily charging station to stop doing that.

Re:How Is This a Surprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

I know two people who own Teslas, and both of them bought the in-home charger regardless of the availability of "free" charging. Topping up costs way less than a tank of gas, and they don't feel like wasting time at the station.

Presumably, this means that they have a garage or some other assigned parking area that can be outfitted for charging. Not everyone has this option. I would guess that the lower the cost of the car, the more likely it is to be purchased by someone who can not charge at home (or work).

I think this raises some concern about the viability of chargeable personal vehicles. Its easy to accommodate them, even for "free", in their current numbers. However, there will be a point where accommodating them at any price will be a logistical challenge. It seems like this may result in higher and higher premiums for charging -- not just to recoup the cost of the energy/infrastructure, but to accommodate "market forces". Thus, owning this type of car will remain a luxury.

I suppose the hope is that technology will solve this problem in due time. Maybe so, but hope is not a plan.

Re:How Is This a Surprise?

[Registered Coward v2]

Lower margins on a mass-market vehicle means there isn't enough money to pay the electrical bill for the lifetime of the vehicle.

Are people really getting worked up over basic and obvious economic decisions?

I know two people who own Teslas, and both of them bought the in-home charger regardless of the availability of "free" charging. Topping up costs way less than a tank of gas, and they don't feel like wasting time at the station.

The only reason Tesla could offer free charging in the first place is because the electricity costs so much less than gasoline. Their "free" fillup simply was not a large value to begin with---except for the convenience it offered on long trips.

It was meant primarily to be free charging for trips when yo can't charge at home; although some Tesla owners use it as a regular charging station. That works while the concentration of Teslas is low so charging stations tend to be available. Put a significant number of Model 3's on the road and all of a sudden the free charging becomes "feee if space is available" and if Model 3 owners buy the package they no doubt will feel they are entitled to use them on a regal basis; the end result will be a lot of angry owners until tesla builds out a significant number of chargers which can get expensive.

Re:How Is This a Surprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not everyone has a garage or dedicated parking space at home. Not everyone works for someone who provides parking at all, much less charging stations. Charging at a communal station appears to be too slow to be practical beyond a small user base.

Tesla Motors likely can not scale even to meet the current demand for Model 3.

Re:How Is This a Surprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

Apparently you're either:
1) completely unfamiliar with the Tesla site, where you can see their build-out plans several years into the future, or
2) under the impression that gas stations existed on every street corner from the beginning of time, just waiting for someone to figure out what to do with them.

Re:How Is This a Surprise?

[EndlessNameless]

I think this raises some concern about the viability of chargeable personal vehicles.

I expect the parking garages in most cities will have "premium" spots that include charger access. Or maybe the garage markets itself as premium and simply puts them everywhere.

The monthly cost of electricity compared to the rental price is negligible. As long as the maintenance on the chargers is reasonable, the operational cost won't be that high.

not just to recoup the cost of the energy/infrastructure, but to accommodate "market forces".

As electric vehicles become more common, the market for charger-accessible lots becomes larger and more profitable. At that point, the primary market force will be competition, and the effect on prices will be downward.

Still, there will be at least a decade of charger-equipped spaces being premium. Most people don't replace their cars very often, and most new vehicles are still powered by combustion engines.

Re:How Is This a Surprise?

[Mysticalfruit]

Do understand that a while ago Telsa said publically that they were opening all the Telsa patents for the super charging stuff and that they wouldn't be defending those patents.

Sounds like a business opportunity to me! In the next ~5 years, tens of thousands of cars that need charging infrastructure are going to be hitting the road. I couldn't sell infinite space heaters to Eskimos and even I see this as obvious. Which means either I suck at stuff like this and there's something really obvious about the economics I'm missing or there's plans for this.

Either way though, supply and demand dictates someone will see a need and fill it, with electrons.

Re:How Is This a Surprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

The expense scales with user base, though, and if the user base is paying a fee for the privilege, all they need to do is make sure that the fee is bigger than the capital cost + expected lifetime power use.

Re:How is Elon Musk not considered a con artist?

[Anonymous Coward]

How are you so stupid and yet able to use oxygen?

Facepalm

[Solandri]

The Tesla S is approx 2 meters wide by 5 meters long, about half of which is windows. If you covered the rest with solar panels (only projected area matters), that's 5 m^2 of panels.

Figure you use the commercial 150 Watt/m^2 panels, and that's a peak generating capacity of 750 Watts. Capacity factor for solar in the U.S. is about 0.145 (this accounts for angle of the sun, weather, etc.). So (0.75 kW) * (0.145) * (24 hours) = 2.61 kWh. In other words, if you left your solar panel-covered Tesla S parked outside for a typical continental U.S. day, it would generate 2.61 kWh.

Charging efficiency of the Tesla battery is about 80%. So only about 2.09 kWh actually makes it into the battery (the rest heats up the battery and charger).

The best EPA-rated Tesla S uses 33 kWh/100 miles. So leaving your PV-encrusted Tesla parked out in the sun all day will charge the battery enough to move you 6.3 miles.

Re:Facepalm

[YesIAmAScript]

EPA fuel economy already includes charging losses. It is "wall to wheels".

So 7.9 miles/ Per day. If you leave the car in the sun all day. Less in the winter.

Re:Facepalm

[swillden]

So leaving your PV-encrusted Tesla parked out in the sun all day will charge the battery enough to move you 6.3 miles.

And who wants to leave their $100K car out in the sun all day? Even if you could get 30-40 miles worth of charge out of it, it would clearly not be worth the weathering. Better to park the car in a garage and cover the roof with solar panels.

Re:Facepalm

[Anonymous Coward]

An idle tesla model S will self-discharge (running the computer, even in standby, takes some power) at about 3 miles-worth-of-charge per day. So those theoretical solar panels will just barely be able to keep ahead of this.

Re:Facepalm

[Lumpy]

Cut your charging rate in 1/2 because they are not pointing at the sun. off axis loses on solar panels are 50% on average for a surface like a car where a good 20% will be pointing away from the sun and 50% will be pointing straight up and not at the sun. and god help you if there is ANY shadow, even a single 1cm wide line will drop charging rates DRAMATICALLY as any shadow causes massive loss to power for all the panels to one side of it even if they are in the sun.

Re:Facepalm

[scatbomb]

and god help you if there is ANY shadow, even a single 1cm wide line will drop charging rates DRAMATICALLY as any shadow causes massive loss to power for all the panels to one side of it even if they are in the sun.

ever hear of bypass diodes? With a properly engineered PV matrix this is not a big deal.

Re:Facepalm

[scatbomb]

Figure you use the commercial 150 Watt/m^2 panels, and that's a peak generating capacity of 750 Watts. Capacity factor for solar in the U.S. is about 0.145 (this accounts for angle of the sun, weather, etc.). So (0.75 kW) * (0.145) * (24 hours) = 2.61 kWh. In other words, if you left your solar panel-covered Tesla S parked outside for a typical continental U.S. day, it would generate 2.61 kWh.

Why on earth would you use 150W/m2 panels? That's 15% efficiency, terrible by today's standards. Good modules are closer to 25% efficient.

Capacity factor is not 0.145 everywhere, don't pretend it is. Some places make more sense for solar, others make less sense. In California the capacity factor is 0.25 averaged over a year. That's not the highest capacity factor you'll find in the US either. Obviously it makes less sense to do this in, say, Alaska. Don't play dumb.

Charging efficiency of the Tesla battery is about 80%. So only about 2.09 kWh actually makes it into the battery (the rest heats up the battery and charger).

as somebody else pointed out, the EPA fuel economy already includes this loss, so you are double-counting here.

The best EPA-rated Tesla S uses 33 kWh/100 miles. So leaving your PV-encrusted Tesla parked out in the sun all day will charge the battery enough to move you 6.3 miles.

Adding up the efficiency increase, capacity factor increase, and removing your extra charging subtraction, I came up with 22.6 miles charged for the solar-encrusted Tesla. Not so bad when you actually use realistic numbers.

Re:Facepalm

[ShooterNeo]

20% efficient commercial panels are readily available and only a little bit more expensive. So maybe 10.5 miles per day if it's an "average" day. Though you better not have too much shading from the house the car is parked next to, or fences, or high rise buildings, etc.

I personally think this is a good idea simply because it can at a minimum negate losses from leaving it parked and let you run the climate control if you're sitting in it. Though yeah they can't encrust the card, you'd have to embed them into the hood and roof and trunk. Maybe just a panel embedded in the roof so you can run the A/C and charge your laptop if you are stuck somewhere waiting in your car for someone.

Re:Facepalm

[samwichse]

I have a job I have to drive to during the day, you insensitive clod!

Re:How is Elon Musk not considered a con artist?

[bobbied]

How is Elon Musk any less of a con artist than Elizabeth Holmes? I fail to see a difference.

Oh come on. The problem here is that Tesla set up the expectation that if you buy one of their cars, you got free access to these charging stations. Now everybody expects this from Tesla because it was baked into the price of the car and Tesla wasn't really out to make a profit anyway. Well, now Tesla wants to become profitable so things will have to change and their cars will have to be competitively priced so some of their cost drivers need to be addressed.

It's obvious that Tesla *cannot* continue such arrangements unless they roll a significant cost into the cost of the cars they sell. The problem is Tesla needs to market this better, reset the customer's expatiations. If Musk has any issue it's that he didn't think though the PR of this before offering an answer to the question, not that it wasn't painfully obvious what the answer needed to be.

Energy transfer

[ameline]

A super charger is somewhere north of 400 volts at around 400 amps. That's 4x what a typical house service can draw (for the *entire* house) and it still takes an hour.

The amount of energy you transfer in 4 minutes at a gas pump is staggering. If you could charge an electric vehicle that fast, I wouldn't want to be anywhere that charging system. You'd be at around 5kv at 400A. (Or the conductors would be as big as your leg to get the voltage down) If anything goes wrong, Think flesh vaporizing arcing explosions -- not my idea of fun.

Re:Energy transfer

[CaptainLard]

Think flesh vaporizing arcing explosions -- not my idea of fun.

Yeah, that sounds way worse that flesh vaporizing gasoline explosions...

https://www.google.com/#q=gas+...

Re:Energy transfer

[imgod2u]

The supercharger charges at a maximum rate of ~400V and 300A (~120KW). The reason it takes an hour is because that rate slows down significantly as you approach 100%. Limitations on the Li-Ion battery and all.

At full 120KW, it'd take exactly 30 min to fill up a 60KWh battery. And 45 min to fill up a 90KWh battery.

Lying on the internet about EVs

[Brannon]

Running the AC does not cut your range in half, that's just made up. At most there's a 10% effect on range (heat or AC), and that's under pretty extreme conditions.

On a Tesla Model S you get an 80% charge in 40 minues, not a 75% charge in 45 minutes.

Why even bother with talking about the time to charge to 100%? Noone would do that on a long trip, you charge to 80% and then go.

Why even bother talking about a 15A extension cord? That's the EV equivalent of walking down the highway with a gallon jug of gasoline--something that would happen only under extreme emergent conditions (or charging at night or something).

Seriously, does the existence of EVs challenge your lifestyle sooo much that you feel the need to unleash FUD as a defense mechanism?

Re:Lying on the internet about EVs

[bobbied]

Running the AC does not cut your range in half, that's just made up. At most there's a 10% effect on range (heat or AC), and that's under pretty extreme conditions.

On a Tesla Model S you get an 80% charge in 40 minues, not a 75% charge in 45 minutes.

My point really is that range is limited and where I don't know the numbers exactly, there are things to consider. Your numbers clearly show this. Charging takes longer than pumping in gasoline and you get a whole lot less range for your trouble and time. So, instead of being stopped at the gas station for 5 min like me, you have to hang about for 40 and still get 3/4ths of a charge, which if you could get 200 miles on 100% charge (which only a *few* EV's can manage), you are going to get just over 150 miles, or say another 2 hours down the road. That's 2 hours and 40 min to get 150 miles (if you drive fast) over my 2 hours and 3 min for the same distance.

So... My 4 hour drive will take you nearly 6, roughly and assuming you end up with the same range in you battery that you started with. You can improve this by stopping more often and not sitting around for the whole 80%, but rarely are there chargers often enough to make that work. But nobody really drives EV's for distance except on well known routes between major cities. If you happen to be going someplace else, forget it or plan on pushing a lot. Which is the net effect of the necessary charging infrastructure not existing to put EV's on equal footing with gasoline powered conveyances. Nope, I don't want an EV due to convenience and I really don't see the benefit of them overall, even to lower carbon emissions they are largely ineffective.

Of course your mileage may (and apparently does) vary.

Re: Lying on the internet about EVs

[Anonymous Coward]

You are complaining about the range of Teslas so you should use the range of a Tesla not the range of a generic average electric car. Your 4 hour drive will take 4 hours in a Tesla as long as you start with a full charge because they have a 300+ mile range.

An electric car is less convient on long trips than a gas powered car. So if you regularly drive hundreds of miles in a sitting, don't get an electric car. On a day to day basis an electric car like a leaf has enough range for most people and a Tesla has more than enough. On a day to day basis electric is more convient than gas because you don't stop to fill up once a week you just spend a few seconds per day plugging it in at home. So depending on your particular driving needs an electric car may be a really good or really bad idea for you.

I go on long trips once or twice per year so something like a Tesla would on average be great for me.

Musk has a lot to prove yet

[Anonymous Coward]

I think so far Musk has only produced rather limited production of cars. The model 3 will sink or float the company. Growing pains might hurt company if it has issues with the three and can't handle the service and it remains to be scene if the infrastructure such as charging stations keeps up with the cars.

Re:How is Elon Musk not considered a con artist?

[Anonymous Coward]

His company's cars work as advertised

No they don't.

Phrasing

[PopeRatzo]

Can we stop calling these things superchargers? In the realm of the automotive arts, "supercharger" has a very specific meaning. What's next, is Elon Musk going to brand the electric motor in his next car a "351 Cleveland"?

I'm starting to hate that precious little fucker with his so-called electric cars and his so-called reusable rocket boosters.

Re:Phrasing

[Chuq]

automotive arts

I'm picturing a hillbilly sipping a latte.

Re:Phrasing

[PopeRatzo]

I'm picturing a hillbilly sipping a latte.

You know me!

Supercharging Access Feature

[Anonymous Coward]

In the early days of the Tesla Model S, the now-discontinued 60kwh model did not come with Supercharger access for free. T Supercharger access for them was a add-on feature priced at $2500. hey did this as a way to lower the base sticker price of the Tesla Model S 60.
      Because of this current model S owners consider $2500 of tesla's profit-margin associated with their car purchase goes to funding the Supercharger network.

Tesla is going to want to shoot for much margins on the Model 3, to make it a more accessible model. Most likely they'll do something like this supercharger access feature again, or perhaps alter it to be access only to superchargers away from the owner's home.

As a Tesla model S owner who lives about 15 minutes from a supercharger, I only rarely use it, in the rare occasion where I need the car charged in under an hour. The convenience of just plugging in at home and charging at 10kw rate far outweighs the hassle of going to the supercharger to just sit and wait just to save 1-2 dollars worth of electricity.

works for me

[Anonymous Coward]

I commute 0.9 miles each way, for a total of 1.8 miles, in Florida.

The grocery store is 3 miles away, for a total of 6 miles. I can do that on the weekend when I don't commute.

So... can I have solar cells?

Supercharger doesn't really mean anything

[zerofoo]

Turbochargers, superchargers - all made up terms anyway.

Turbocharger uses exhaust gas to compress an intake charge. Supercharger uses a belt driven compressor to compress intake charge.

"Turbo" and "Super" don't really mean anything and are simply marketing terms.

Just like the really big electric charger called "supercharger" - it's marketing - it means nothing. Would you have been happier if Musk called them "ultra-super-duper-chargers"?

Re:Supercharger doesn't really mean anything

[PopeRatzo]

"Turbo" and "Super" don't really mean anything and are simply marketing terms.

They are terms of art.

If Elon Musk said he was going to put a "turbocharger" on his new Tesla model, people would say, "What the fuck, nerd?" Well, for those of us who are into the automotive arts, "supercharger" is the same thing. When I tell someone that I have owned a 1969 Nova with a supercharger, I don't want them thinking that I had some kind of glorified wall plug installed on some of the greatest Detroit iron that ever trod the roads.

Would you have been happier if Musk called them "ultra-super-duper-chargers"?

Yes, because "ultra-super-duper-chargers" doesn't already mean something very specific having to do with cars. I understand we're supposed to be all up on Elon's dick around here because he's totally gonna take us to Mars and give us financing for that bitchin' idea we have for creating Uber, except for toothbrushes, but enough is enough.

Re:Supercharger doesn't really mean anything

[ThosLives]

"Turbo" might be made up sometimes, but not always: "turbocharged" means "charged by a turbine". You know, as in, "turbomachinery."

I'll give you "supercharger" though - I've not looked into the history of it, but as it isn't powered by a turbine it rightly doesn't have the "turbo-" prefix. I guess they just wanted something to put in front of "charged," and "super" makes sense because it gets a charge greater than it would get without the machine, and "super" is a prefix that means "higher" or "greater". So you could say a turbocharger is a type of supercharger and be correct (but not all superchargers are turbochargers).

But other things that have "turbo" settings - yes, that is pure marketing; computers don't usually have turbines that make them go faster.

Re:Supercharger doesn't really mean anything

[Richard_at_work]

They are named differently because the way they take off power to compress the air is different - turbochargers use a turbine driven by the exhaust gasses from the engine, while superchargers are driven by the drive train. Turbochargers are preferred in motor sports because they don't use energy intended for driving the wheels.

They are not, as suggested by a grand parent post, just a marketing term - they are very specific terms used to describe different ways of compressing air in engines.

Re:Supercharger doesn't really mean anything

[ThosLives]

Fun fact: what we today call 'turbochargers' were once/are still alternatively called 'turbosuperchargers,' highlighting the etymology.

Re:Supercharger doesn't really mean anything

[Anonymous Coward]

When I tell someone that I have owned a 1969 Nova with a supercharger, I don't want them thinking that I had some kind of glorified wall plug installed on some of the greatest Detroit iron that ever trod the roads.

People can deal with context. Lots of words have overloaded meanings and most of the time people can work out which meaning is appropriate from the context. If someone thinks you have a high powered electric charger of the variety that use so much electricity that no-one would have one at home, for a car that runs on gas, then they are an idiot. Do you really want to argue that we need to cater to idiots in this instance?

Re:Supercharger doesn't really mean anything

[PopeRatzo]

People can deal with context.

You must be new here.

Gosh, golly!

[bistromath007]

Didn't see this coming at all! Nope! Huge surprise!

Did people really expect free charging?

[zerofoo]

In the Model 3 launch video Musk clearly says the Model 3 will be supercharger "capable". Anyone paying attention will have noticed that Musk did not promise free supercharging. Why some Model 3 reservation holders expect this is a mystery.

In other news, none of the manufacturers of any of my ICE powered cars have given me free fuel either.

When I get my Model 3, I will be perfectly content to pay for all the electricity I use to charge my car.

Short Distance IS the Killer of Model 3

[Anonymous Coward]

Even if Model 3 users drive "Long-Distance" there is a price. What is "Long-Distance"? How about Denver, Colorado to L.A., California. How many people commute from Denver to L.A. in a FUCKING CAR?

Suggesting that Short-Distance users will go broke feeding Elon Musk's life style.

Ha ha THBBFT

I suggest

[Hognoxious]

I suggest Elon Musk shuts the fuck up. Sick of hearing about every time he farts.

Obvious solution

[AlanObject]

I don't' know if Model 3 customers will have to pay for charges or not but then again I never bought into this "electricity for free forever" business model to begin with.

But it isn't too hard to predict that eventually you will have a charging station reservation system that can be accessed from within the car. I can already order food that way at many restaurants even with a complicated order -- there is no reason a charging station couldn't deliver the same predictable service. For pay or for free.

If the market gets big enough you will have 3rd parties installing paid-for charging stations and contracting to Tesla, Nissan, Chev, BMW to get listed on their reservation systems.

Re:How is Elon Musk not considered a con artist?

[Anonymous Coward]

That case is still pending, and is using an example of extreme user incompetence, which the car documented, as evidence...