Mar 16, 2015
Obsoletion Anyone willing to call their local service center contact and ask?�
Mar 16, 2015
sorka If they are intentionally throttling, then this is the best theory I've heard and makes the most sense.
- - - Updated - - -
I contacted both my DS and sales rep. I've asked them to provide me some sort of written statement, even through email, that Tesla is not throttling charge rates due to policy. If they can't provide me an answer even as simple as "Tesla does not have a policy to throttle Tesla charging", then I will be canceling my order which is scheduled to be picked up on Monday 3/30, two weeks from today.
In fact, because of this, I'm delaying the installation of the HWPC until I can get confirmation of this.
If Tesla was actually doing this, it would be a deal killer for me.
I have a 260 mile round trip commute to work and would be hitting a particular Super Charger up several times a week on my way to and from work.�
Mar 16, 2015
dirkhh Done already. The local lead tells me "I have not heard of this" (contradicting the statement that this was rolled out to service centers today) and promised to follow up with the factory and find out.�
Mar 16, 2015
Archer I needed to schedule my annual service today so instead of calling, I actually drove to my service center (Van Nuys) and spoke with 2 reps. They looked dumbfounded - this was the first they've heard about throttling. They both confirmed that there has been absolutely no communication from corporate today about throttling/limiting of local SCs. One rep said that such a change would be huge and very disruptive. Other rep said "stop reading the forums". Until there's an official announcement from TM or Elon don't believe everything you read on the forums.
Since you have your car back, head out to Culver City, Redondo or Hawthorne and test your theory there. I'll be charging up at Oxnard again this afternoon.�
Mar 16, 2015
dirkhh Wow, that's a gruesome commute. 20+h a week in the car, on top of the hours spent at work. Yikes.�
Mar 16, 2015
cpa It could easily be directly related to the spike charges imposed by the utilities. Demand charges (here in California) are determined each monthly billing cycle. I seem to recall that PG&E is around $25 per kilowatt, but do not quote me. Anyway, it is possible that Tesla has determined that each supercharger location will have a monthly cap in order to reduce costs. As the demand charges each month approach that cap, charging rate slows, not just for locals but for everybody. Tesla has mountains of data on its supercharger usage sitting at the Hawthorne lobby. Tesla knows peak charging times and rates and quantities delivered among other things. I know nothing about composing computer programs, but it would seem to me that it would be fairly easy to develop a program to scale down Supercharger rates based upon their historical data and attainment of X kilowatts delivered during the monthly billing period. Using Rancho Cucamonga as an example, if Tesla can reduce the spike charge each month by 200kW, those savings could add up across 170+ locations and twelve months.
What would be interesting to see if those who have been throttled at these locations if they were to charge at 0400 or some other hour where usage is non-existent. And at different times of month to see if it has to do with each billing cycle.�
Mar 16, 2015
sorka I drive it once a week, but it still it's still over 15K miles a year when you add up the driving I do while I'm at work as well. That plus multiple trips a year to Phoenix to visit my dad, you can see we plan to do most of our charging from Super Chargers and only a little bit at home.�
Mar 16, 2015
Zarwin This is probably NOT the reason, but, looking at just NC, there are three data points I see. SarahsDad (Charlotte supercharger local) posted twice and I (Burlington supercharger local) posted once. Of the three attempts, two were full rate and one was throttled (SarahsDad's first post). The demand peak/window for commercial use from Duke Energy is between 6AM and 10AM this month. Only the throttled attempt was within this window.
Attempts:
SarahsDad 9:40AM throttled
SarahsDad 12:52PM not throttled
Zarwin 2:39PM not throttled
This is pure correlation with a tiny sample size that likely has nothing to do with causation, but just wanted to note it.�
Mar 16, 2015
sorka Someone who's physically going in should bring a printout of Oboletion's invoice and ask them what does this mean. I emailed a copy to my DS and Sales advisor and asked them to get clarification on what it means.�
Mar 16, 2015
Obsoletion They could call my advisor too. His info is on there�
Mar 16, 2015
sorka I was going to suggest that but I didn't want to get you in hot water or something with your local Tesla service by having a bunch of people calling and saying so and so said.�
Mar 16, 2015
ecarfan Best advice so far.�
Mar 16, 2015
FlasherZ Same here. Called a buddy of mine at a remote (from me), unnamed service center somewhere in the US. "We would know of this months in advance. Nothing like this has come our way."�
Mar 16, 2015
eye.surgeon I wouldn't be sad if Tesla did institute some type of throttling for locals using a supercharger near their home to be honest. They're not designed for that and the system requires some degree of self-regulation which a small minority are not demonstrating. It hurts people in actual need of a charge rather than just saving a buck. Having said that I think it's very unlikely to happen, Tesla is too customer-service oriented to take the PR hit.�
Mar 16, 2015
sorka Well, either Obsoletion is just flat out lying, which I doubt, or this Hector Reynoso is totally wrong and Tesla Corporate needs to be notified. The actual way the repair diagnosis is worded doesn't prove intentional throttling, but that guy should be throttled if you bungled the communication so badly, along with a cryptic written diagnosis as to make a customer believe it's intentional.
It could also be that this guy has gotten a heads up sooner than others.
- - - Updated - - -
Except that it will just increase congestion and piss people off. If someone is charging at a local SC just so they can avoid paying a higher electric bill, throttling is not going to make them go away. It will just make them stay there longer.
In my case, the SC I'd most often use is 60 miles from my.�
Mar 16, 2015
Depeche Mode It's NOT OUR problem... it's theirs when we bought our car it was a BIG thing that:
1) Free charge for life
2) Half a charge in 20 minutes
3) 170 miles in 30 minutes
Very clear also on their internet site...
If they want to do a change on their current policy, well, they can do it but it would only apply WHEN the policy will be change (probably thursday) and THEN it will affect new owners POST-thursday...
Other than that they expose themselves for unwanted lawsuits... not good for them, not good for the image...�
Mar 16, 2015
jerry33 Good luck on that one. Many people have been rejected even after offering to pay for installation. Just trying to get the HVAC fixed in an apartment is a major undertaking--and it's supposed to work as part of your rent.�
Mar 16, 2015
Archer Wrong, they are designed to be used to charge up the battery. Nothing more, nothing less. "Why" someone uses it is not for us to impose our own lifestyle on theirs. Are there people who only supercharge to save a buck? Sure. Is it hurting others? Nothing more than anecdotal speculation at the SJC SC. Even though Tesla initially came up with the network to enable long distance travel, real world experience has demonstrated that it now goes beyond that. Otherwise, they would not be building a dense network of SC's in the SoCal area. There will be at least 7-8 SC all within 100 miles or so each other by 2016.�
Mar 16, 2015
apacheguy Huh, I would've thought demand peaks would correspond to those on my TOU plan. Meaning afternoon instead of morning. What happens between 6-10 AM? Factories starting up?
Has anyone experienced throttling on weekends?�
Mar 16, 2015
redi The "non-lowering-suspension"-gate had language about "lowering at speed"on the web site and it did not stop Tesla unilaterally changing every air car in the fleet permanently (even though the placebo button came back eventually). The air cars still do not lower as they used to.�
Mar 16, 2015
Zarwin
I actually missed a little info, but it doesn't change my previous post. We are still in "winter" rates until the end of this month. Here are the windows:
On-Peak Periods for Time-of-Use Rates:
Monday through Friday as follows:
November through March . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 to 10 a.m. / 6 to 10 p.m.
April through October . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Noon to 9 p.m.
This info is from here:
https://www.duke-energy.com/pdfs/pe-rates-PEFcommercialrateinsert.pdf
I'll also say I have no idea if the Superchargers are being billed with TOU demand plans or not. I did see a TOU meter on the Supercharger in Santee, SC, but have no idea about any others.�
Mar 16, 2015
Depeche Mode No TOU in Montr�al (whole Province of Qu�bec where Hydro-Qu�bec is the only electric company)
Though in Ontario we have TOU (mainly Hydro-One)
The funny thing is that I'm not throttled at Cornwall SC (Ontario) and I'm throttled at Montr�al SC (Qu�bec)...�
Mar 16, 2015
tga Can we please stop theorizing that this is demand charge related? It's not. Throttling individual users does nothing to help demand charges. This thread has gone completely into the weeds.
On most US-based commercial electric rate plans I am aware of, commercial/industrial users are charged demand charges based on the peak usage anytime in that month. To limit demand charges at one supercharger site would mean you would need to cap the entire draw, for the entire month. This is simply not what is happening!
Individual users are being limited at a particular SC. Throttling cars A, B, and C to 60kW (or even 6kW) does nothing to limit demand charges, if the next car charges at 120kW. It's all about the peak usage (typ in a 15 min window) over the entire month.
The idea behind demand charges is that you need to build out the grid (and a user's connection to it) to handle their peak loads, even if they rarely hit it. If you use 100 kW for 15 min a month (25kWh), you still need a connection capable of delivering that level of power, which costs way more to provision than a connection delivering a constant 1 kW over the entire month (720kWh).
- - - Updated - - -
Also, please don't harass the service centers until after Elon's press conference. If this behavior has anything to do with Thursday's announcement (I bet it does), the service centers won't steal his thunder and tell you anything beforehand. And that assumes they know anything about it in advance, which I highly doubt.�
Mar 16, 2015
Larry Chanin Not exactly. Demand throttling would only have to be invoked if demand over the current demand interval was approaching the monthly peak. Only then would it be necessary to throttle demand. Yes, you would have to monitor demand for the entire month, but you would only have to invoke throttling at selected busy periods.
Larry�
Mar 16, 2015
JRP3 I'd also add to that: "Don't believe everything that someone at Tesla tells you". In between the "noise" the right answer has often been presented on the forums before anywhere else.�
Mar 16, 2015
apacheguy This is absolutely right. I've been given incorrect info from the SvC folks before. Found out what I had read on TMC was actually correct. Granted there's a lot of speculation because that's what forums are for, but the right answer is usually there. You just have to look for it.�
Mar 16, 2015
AmpedRealtor That's exactly why I'm advocating against instituting a penalty for those who charge locally. Doing so makes no sense for those who live in apartments and condos where they are not allowed to install chargers. The number of such owners is probably in the minority and doesn't make a meaningful impact to Tesla's financials.
- - - Updated - - -
While I generally agree that charging at home is a big part of the EV advantage for me, I find it difficult to impose my lifestyle on others. I have some understanding for those who cannot charge at home, but still want the EV experience and want to drive a Model S. I think they still deserve to buy this car even though they may live in an apartment. Such owners would not charging every day, but likely every few days, and would represent very little added burden on the Supercharger network because they are a tiny minority of customers.�
Mar 16, 2015
brianman Just to complete the data set...
In the future it would be useful to include the SOC% at the beginning of the charge session.
As an example, in the absence of other information I could hypothesize that the car was 70+% SOC when charging at the "near" ones in Ob's list but likely 60-% SOC for the "far" ones.�
Mar 16, 2015
Obsoletion Every charge i tested that came in at 59kW was at a SoC of 25-35%�
Mar 16, 2015
MikeC I can see no reason that Tesla would ever slow down Superchargers intentionally. For anyone that thinks it's related to Tesla trying to save money, this is from the 2014 10K released last month:
"As of December 31, 2014 and 2013 the net book value of our Supercharger network was $107.8 million and $25.6 million and currently includes 380 locations globally. We plan to continue investing in our Supercharger network for the foreseeable future, including in North America, Europe and Asia and expect such spending to be approximately 5% of total capital spending over the next 12 months. We allocate Supercharger related expenses to cost of revenues automotive sales and selling, general, and administrative expenses. These costs were immaterial for all periods presented. "
If there's one thing I know, TM is not pinching pennies, they have zero problems spending staggering amounts of money to build up the brand. I think it's either a bug or related to the announcement Thursday. I just can't conceive why it would ever be desirable to slow down a Supercharger, though.�
Mar 16, 2015
brianman Thanks for the data, Ob!�
Mar 16, 2015
apacheguy Right, Elon will have to give a damn good reason why slower SpC = less range anxiety. I do think the answer to this seemingly random 60 kW limit will become clear after the press conference.�
Mar 16, 2015
jotarou1 Folsom/Roseville, CA Superchargers limited to 58kW, anyone else see this before?
Hello All,
I wanted to know if anybody recently Supercharged at the Folsom or Roseville (Sacramento, CA area) stations. For this past month whenever we stop in and do a quick Supercharge, our Model S has been limited to 58kW max charging. This is regardless of the State of Charge, temperature outside, charging station, shared charging A/B, time of day, total cars at station. It hasn't been freezing and it hasn't been over 100 degrees in Sacramento this past month. I do know about not sharing the 1A/1B, 2A/2B ports, I know that the closer you are to full it tapers. I have tried charging it starting from a low of 8 miles and other times starting at 70+ miles, and it still goes up to 58kW and stays there until it begins to taper down after 150+ rated miles of charge.
The service center took a look at it and they could find no issues. Also on the same afternoon that I tried in Roseville and was limited to 58kW, I took it to Rocklin and it charged at the max 120kW without issues... Service center is stumped and just wondering if anybody else has seen a similar issue.
Let me know,
Thanks!
2013 85kW Model S�
Mar 16, 2015
FlasherZ Enjoy:
My car won't charge faster than 60kW
...all 40 pages of speculation.
Seriously, some people are seeing it with specific cars at specific SC's. No pattern has been established yet but there is a bunch of wild speculation that doesn't line up with the data, yet.
Your data points at the end of the other thread would probably help.�
Mar 16, 2015
jotarou1 Thanks Flasher, just saw that right after I posted...!! I did a search for 58kW and found a thread from last year.�
Mar 16, 2015
SFOTurtle How far does the OP live from the Folsom and Roseville Superchargers? I assume not far if they are routinely popping in to get a charge.�
Mar 16, 2015
hiroshiy Agree on demand charges not causing this situation. In the US it seems they need to keep the demand lower than the threshold for one month, but in Japan for one year. 15 minutes of two Osaka drivers charging at a Supercharger in Tokyo, you get highest demand charge for one year. To reduce demand charges Tesla needs to implement smart power control, which basically caps the total power draw of all SC units, not individual unit.�
Mar 16, 2015
SteveS0353 85kWh P85+ supercharged at Rancho Cucamonga today, 88 miles from home in San Diego, started charge at 49% SoC, and quickly hit 100kW peak power. It subsided over time, but certainly was not limited to 60kW peak power.�
Mar 17, 2015
yobigd20 2013 P85 charged at hamilton NJ SC and got 100kW at 36% SOC so doesn't seem like I'm rated limited here. Anyone get higher than 100kW anywhere or is that the new rate limit? lol
�
Mar 17, 2015
yobigd20 You know, to add fuel to the fire, the supercharger page was just updated (per change detection) to add the words "during long distance travel" to the first paragraph description.�
Mar 17, 2015
Zarwin And removed the wording "where home charging is difficult"
http://www.changedetection.com/log/teslamotors/supercharger_log.html
EDIT
Specifically the following highlighted text was added:
Superchargers are free connectors that charge Model S in minutes instead of hours. Stations are strategically placed to minimize stops during long distance travel and are conveniently located near restaurants, shopping centers, and WiFi hot spots. Each station contains multiple Superchargers to help you get back on the road quickly.
And the following highlighted text was deleted:
We strategically place Superchargers along well-traveled highways and in congested city centers where home charging is difficult. In addition to Superchargers, we have a growing network of charging partners with dedicated Tesla Wall Connectors at their properties. These are primarily destinations where you�d stay for several hours at a time, such as ski resorts, restaurants, hotels and others, so that you return to your car with ample range for your return trip.�
Mar 17, 2015
yobigd20 Ouch. Perhaps this rate limiting is legitimate.�
Mar 17, 2015
Matias Smoking gun.�
Mar 17, 2015
Dennis87 Maybe Tesla has found out that charging over 60 kW does harm the battery if charged to often? So they limit the speed on the SC charger nearby that is used frequently.�
Mar 17, 2015
Matias That would be even worse explanation.�
Mar 17, 2015
SW2Fiddler Yes. That is promised. BIG deal if that changes.
No. Let's pull the actual quote: "Superchargers are capable of delivering up to 50% battery capacity in about 20 minutes" And they certainly are. That hasn't changed.
No. No more than a Destination Charging HPWC description "providing up to 80 Amps" means that you are promised 80A current at that partner's HPWC. I have certainly had 32A destination charge sessions.
The full quote is: "Tesla Superchargers provide 170 miles of range in as little as 30 minutes" - and they do.
Yes. Very clear. But as the SpaceX landing barge advises, "Just Read..."
I am not a lawyer, so please see one instead of taking my word for anything. I agree that it is clear, but it may not be what some are remembering. My mind works like that sometimes, too. When you want to step into legalities and contracts, you have to pull out the actual black and white verbiage. Sorry.�
Mar 17, 2015
scaesare Interesting... I was arguing this point HERE over a year ago...�
Mar 17, 2015
trils0n Nope, they removed "where home charging is difficult" because of China. They don't want anything to say or imply charging is difficult.�
Mar 17, 2015
apacheguy Hmm. 100 kW at 49% SOC? The only cars known to sustain that charge rate are the D models. Every other S85 P85 or P85+ crosses the 90 kW threshold slightly above 40% SOC. I'd love to see a taper curve from your car.�
Mar 17, 2015
Zarwin That would be interesting if the taper curve has changed for some. Yesterday I took a pic of the moment mine crossed the 100kw line and that was at 37% SOC, which falls perfectly in line with taper curves I've seen. Also I have a D pack.�
Mar 17, 2015
Obsoletion I also believe this is the case. And I am ok with it if that is what it really is. Just thinking it would have been good to announce in advance�
Mar 17, 2015
AmpedRealtor Why do you believe that supercharging above 60 kW rate is harmful to your battery?�
Mar 17, 2015
davewill I thought of that too, but this would be a silly way to go about it. Much better to have the car keep track of how often it's been supercharged and do the limiting on it's own. Even better to tell the owner so he can decide which supercharges he really needs. For that matter this is also a stupid way to address demand charges. The way to address the demand charges is to lower the rate for everyone when and only when the total draw of all the stations would go over the targeted threshold. It's the LOCATION that has to be kept below a certain usage rate, it does no good to limit a smattering of cars.�
Mar 17, 2015
sorka That makes no sense. The Chinese don't see the us based english written marketing pages.
I thin this is a smoking gun pushing very strongly in the direction that the charge reduction is not a conspiracy theory but rather an actual policy change.�
Mar 17, 2015
Larry Chanin Agreed, yes this would require smart power control to minimize customer inconvenience.
Tesla would have to monitor the demand during the current demand interval for the combined Supercharger Station and determine whether the current demand is approaching the previous recorded peak demand. In Japan that would be a yearly value, in the US that would be a monthly value. Then they could apply throttling to one or more individual Superchargers, or charging terminals to ensure that the current combined demand doesn't exceed the monthly or yearly peak billing demand. To minimize customer inconvenience this should be done only at busy times where the current peak demand was approaching the previous recorded peak demand. It is not necessary to impose constant throttling all the time at all charging terminals to limit demand charges at a Supercharger Station.
Again, I am not advocating any sort of throttling for whatever reason. I'm merely observing that throttling could reduce peak demand and therefore save Tesla money at the expense of customer convenience. How much customer inconvenience would depend on the method of thottling. Obviously throttling all Superchargers all the time would be a brute force method that would reduce demand charges, but as others have pointed out this would be just the opposite of what Tesla has previously been trying to do, maximize throughput through a Supercharger Station.
However, as Mike points out Tesla in their last earnings report pretty much said that Supercharger costs were de minimus in comparison to the bigger picture, so that seems to debunk the theory that Tesla is trying to save money on demand charges.
Regardless, this does return to the basic issue of Tesla communications. If it is a change in policy there is no excuse for not getting out in front of this situation by making an announcement. If it is a bug, Tesla can't be faulted for not informing us in advance, but an announcement after the fact would go a long way to shed light on the situation.
Larry�
Mar 17, 2015
gregincal But they didn't get limited at the Rocklin supercharger, which is practically next door to the Roseville supercharger.�
Mar 17, 2015
omarsultan Still not seeing any throttling - was at Fremont yesterday, afternoon, 3 stalls empty, about 70F ambient temp, 60% SoC, home address plugged into nav with about 100 miles to go, changing started at about 75kW, which is about right - this is on an S85 with a B Series pack.
I am still chalking this up to some SW bug in the SCs or the cars, because if its a policy change, its an awfully obtuse one.�
Mar 17, 2015
strider SC charges are minor *today* but as Tesla sells more and more cars and installs more and more SCs that can/will change. It's better to implement something like this now when there are only tens of thousands of cars on the road and most MS owners are early adopters/fans and more open to helping Tesla than when there are hundreds of thousands of cars being bought by non-fanatics. This is especially true since Tesla seems to have abandoned their original plan of having solar at every SC to feed back into the grid and try to reach net-zero for the SC. They are paying for every kWh that goes through an SC.�
Mar 17, 2015
JRP3 Except that Tesla has started installing solar panels on SC's and the fact that Tesla has talked about speeding up supercharging in the future. Slowing it down would be a drastic move in the opposite direction, and would force Tesla to build more superchargers to avoid longer lines.�
Mar 17, 2015
Larry Chanin
From a customer perspective the prefered manner to reduce demand charges is to install battery storage with solar panels. This could cut demand charges without inconveniencing Tesla owners. Obviously, this is a more expensive approach. I agree with JRP and the current plan to quickly install Supercharger and then retrofit them with battery storage and solar panels.
Clipping demand through the use of battery storage makes sense to me. Throttling charging rate does not because it is counter to the purpose of a Supercharger Station.
Larry�
Mar 17, 2015
yobigd20 I seriously doubt that tesla would move backwards, especially given Elon's tweet today that "supercharging is the future"
�
Mar 17, 2015
smac Phew just got to the end of this thread... certainly a biggy!
The demand charges definitely seem to makes some sense. Sure more and more Superchargers is a great thing and investment will no doubt go there.
The key thing often overlooked by many in these sorts of debate is the operational losses, rather than cash burn into fixed asset capital. If the market gets spooked by much bigger operational losses, to a point where it will have a impact on TSLA stock, it will also in turn increases their borrowing rates for further capital investment.
One thing Tesla always seem to be hot on is minimizing OPEX, by limiting marketing, not employing staff until absolutely necessary etc.. Great as they can spend more on big CAPEX projects.
It's very likely there were some original financial models about usage of SpCs, and their running costs. If these were out and Tesla are spending far more money than had been expecting, this is obviously bad news, as it's pure OPEX.
If I understand correctly (Tesla's per car profitability is pretty hard to exactly get to from their filings) is based on deferral accounting of future SpC use against each vehicle, so if the electricity OPEX is way over, it would mean a new accounting model with a larger deferral required per vehicle, and effectively a worse GP per car... that would be very bad news for the markets.
Some how they need to get the projected FUTURE cost under control, so they can build a new financial models that please the markets and maintain high % margin per vehicle.
Elon has to juggle not just the customers view, but also the investors position. It's a big complicated set of plates that are being spun!
Finally adding a data point my car is throttled to 0kWh at every SpC
�
Mar 17, 2015
omarsultan So, lets introduce a bit of math into all this. Recently, Tesla released an infographic that showed superchargers had delivered 25GWh of power
So, at $0.1013/kWh (average for the US per EIA--yes, I know Europe is probably higher, but you will see its not high enough to make a difference) that works out to to about $2.5M in electricity. For a company with $1.9B in the bank, not a huge expense, but look a it another way, they have delivered ~58,000 cars to date. If half of those cars have supercharging, that is a $58M reserve they have to support the build-out and operation of the SC network.
The take-rate for supercharging is an estimate, but I think they indicate whatever else might or might not be happening, I don't think its related to cost-cutting.
�
Mar 17, 2015
apacheguy It definitely costs them more than 10 cents/kWh at a SpC. 240 V residential is not equivalent to 480 V commercial.�
Mar 17, 2015
deonb Is there any way that virtually each one of the SuperChargers are NOT hit up for demand charges every month?
Let's say 3 simultaneous cars peak once per month per location, hit up for 300kW of demand charges will add another $3000 per month (PSE rates).
x400 SuperChargers, that's another $1.2M per year.
It's still not the end of the world, but it does bring it up by about 50%. Then add commercial instead of residential rates, and the overall cost is probably closer to $6M per year. Still, for 30'000 vehicles having paid $60M for the service in the first place, it will last a while.�
Mar 17, 2015
Lloyd I did a rough calculation that if every car delivered charged once per week at a supercharger for 80%, that the electricity would cost 12 million per year, not including demand charges. If you add the demand charges, thats 13.2 million per year.�
Mar 17, 2015
TurboFroggy Commercial power is typically less then residential in many areas. Here in Washington state for example, residential in the Seattle area is $0.089/kwh where commercial is $0.065/kwh.�
Mar 17, 2015
omarsultan Yup, per the EIA, average cost by industry segment:
- Commercial: $0.1034
- Industrial: $0.0665
- Transportation: $0.1025
Residential is actually the most expensive at $0.1215/kWh.
Source: EIA - Electricity Data�
Mar 17, 2015
mdemetri
I apologize in advance for the naive question, but why should residential rates be higher than commercial/industrial/transportation rates?�
Mar 17, 2015
omarsultan Always open to my math being wrong, but $12M/yr @ $0.10/kWh translates to 118GWh which is almost 5X what Tesla said they have dispensed over the lifetime of the SCs. Also, do we know Tesla is paying demand charges or is that a "forum fact"?�
Mar 17, 2015
apacheguy +1. I'd like to know too. Seems to me that commercial users are the ones that really stress the power grid (case in point, SpC) and should therefore pay more.�
Mar 17, 2015
FlasherZ Less sprawl in infrastructure; much higher density (kW / cable mile) in commercial power.�
Mar 17, 2015
omarsultan Perhaps part of it is also volume. I would also guess commercial use is pretty flat across most of the day (think a factory or an Starbucks, their usage is pretty consistent across their operational day), which is easier to plan for than lumpy residential usage.�
Mar 18, 2015
deonb I cannot imagine that people SuperCharge 52 times per year on average. It's probably a quarter of that at most.
However, my demand charge rate calculation was wrong. It's $1.2m per month, not per year. So it's more like $14.4m per year in demand charges.�
Mar 18, 2015
smac Bear in mind that $60M has to last those 30,000 cars at least 8 years, and I'm pretty certain it's not ring-fenced.
If the fee we paid for SpC USAGE was really $2000, GAAP would require that income to be pushed out overtime (as despite having the revenue Tesla haven't yet delivered the service)
So queue some clever words: SpC is "free" on 85kWh, great all that revenue can be put on the car and taken immediately. And as for the 60kWh cars you are paying an "Enablement Fee", not a "lifetime access fee" VERY important distinction, and for the same reasons.
So revenue side sorted let's turn to the cost side, and unfortunately facts get in the way, and no amount of weasel-words can obfuscate, the fact Tesla are on the hook for future electricity costs...
However it's a provisional cost not an actual, so you have to model it: Here is my simplistic model:
predicted avg. cost per charge X predicted total number of charges
I have a strong suspicion the prediction about number of charges was wrong. After all "All you can eat" restaurants never seem to be full of slim people�
Mar 18, 2015
Larry Chanin Here are the results of our second club member.
He lives 14 miles from the Ocala Supercharger.
As you can see we are zero for two. Despite living near two different Superchargers there was no throttling in either case.
He hadn't been to the Supercharger in about a month.
Temp was 85F and he�d driven about 25 miles in about 40 minutes just before charging.
He is on v6.1(2.2.115) of the firmware.
Larry�
Mar 18, 2015
scaesare So, I'm pretty sure that Superchargers also have firmware that is capable of being remotely upgraded. We know there's a link back to the mother ship for telemetry data gathering, troubleshooting, etc...
I'm beginning to suspect that there may be a subtle bug that's exposed by some combination of:
- Car H/W configuration (60 vs 85, B pack vs. D pack, etc...)
- Car firmware version
- Supercharger H/W configuration (120 vs 135KW, internal charger revision, etc...)
- Supercharger firmware version (perhaps some superchargers have recently gotten newer versions)
- Charge session conditions (outside temp, battery temp, SOC, etc...)
There are a number of permutations of the above, and depending on what the conditions when a person charges this may be a corner-case bug that's rarely manifested.
I'm hoping this is just an anomaly...�
Mar 18, 2015
SteveS0353 That is my thinking too. It's certainly true that Superchargers have a link to the mothership. There is a software component to supercharging; the charger handshakes with the car, communicates with the mother ship to see if that car is "allowed" to Supercharge, then turns on the juice. There are any number of points along that communication chain a corner case bug could manifest. At least I hope that's all this is and Tesla will identify it and correct it.�
Mar 18, 2015
wk057 I'll throw out there that on my latest trip and in the last week I've used 5 superchargers and saw between 115kW and 121kW peak each time. Closest was 45 miles from home. Another was 30-ish miles from my old address. 3 out of the 5 I used were recent installs. 2 of those recents were the new pedestals.�
Mar 18, 2015
apacheguy Pretty sure the setting is stored locally. Just like if you have an S or a P, dual chargers or not, etc. FWIW, I have SpC successfully at a location that had no 3G connection displayed on the MS touchscreen. I verified this by attempting to connect to the car via the app and wasn't able to get through.�
Mar 18, 2015
SteveS0353 Apologies, I believe you are correct. I just interrogated my car with VisibleTesla and found this entry...
�
Mar 18, 2015
wk057 The superchargers definitely have network connections of their own. The ones in South Hill VA actually have the smaller 3G antennas replaced with larger whip antennas.
The car also definitely authenticates with the charger over the CAN data link it makes before allowing supercharging. (See the thread where the protocol was being disected). The VIN is one of the things sent over that line. I won't get into further details that were not discussed publicly, but I assure you there is more authentication involved than just the car-side enabling.
Edit: I remembered to snap a pic of the antennas at South Hill.
�
Mar 18, 2015
sorka I have a 260 mile round trip commute I do once a week. I'd be doing a partial charge twice a week both there and back. I drive from Merced to Phoenix 6 times a year. That's almost 50 charges right there alone. My delivery date for my P85D is on 3/30. Both my sales rep and DS don't seem to think this will be an issue.�
Mar 18, 2015
Lloyd I said if every car delivered charged weekly. IIRC, I used .10 for electrons�
Mar 18, 2015
FlasherZ And I charge about 6 times a year or so, some of you are using up my other 46 times.�
Mar 18, 2015
Depeche Mode What do you not understand to be more precise?�
Mar 18, 2015
Lloyd I think we should be concentrating with Firmware 2.2.176 or greater.�
Mar 18, 2015
islandbayy Agreed. On a single 24hour round trip from Milwaukee to Detroit and back, I supercharged 11 times alone. Thats in a single 24hr stretch. I supercharge to get to a destination and back every weekend during the winter as with the cold, my 60 pack comes up about 25 miles short, during the summer, my 60 has about 100 mile surplus... (I refuse to freeze. 80k car, I'm driving comfortable and will spend the extra 15 minutes to charge up). So thats 2x/weekend for about 20 weeks out of the year. so 40 more times. (I Don't know how the heck I did it before we got the superchargers! I know that a certain chargepoint's meter was spinning like heck with me haha). Then the assorted other drives and trip I do. I have 49,000 miles on my 60kW, 1 and 1/2 years ownership.
I'd say, I'm up to about ~120 Supercharges/year (Granted, not every charge is to full or 90%. Most are adding enough to get to destination, unless no higher speed destination charging is available, as in 6kW chargepoint etc... and then add a bit extra buffer that varies depending on temps and road conditions). I'm also up to about 150x100% charges/year. My new pack has finally leveled off and is staying at 201 rated/100% charge with 15,000 on it. My original pack at 34,000 miles was wareing even better then my new pack! So supercharging doesnt appear to be causing any issues. And no, I don't leave my car sit at 100% either.�
Mar 18, 2015
Larry Chanin Good point.
Would all those who have reported charging reductions with low states of charge please report their complete firmware version number.
Thanks.
Larry�
Mar 18, 2015
scaesare While the VIN was definitely seen passing over the data link to the supercharger, and the car is "authenticated" to the charger, was there ever validation that said VIN was was then passed back to the mother ship for authorization to charge?
I've not followed all of that stiff since it went non-public. However for at least one poster here sometime back, it appeared that it was the in-car metadata that had to be toggled to enable supercharging... not anything back at the mothership.�
Mar 18, 2015
deonb Did you reply to the wrong post?�
Mar 18, 2015
wk057 Keep in mind that the tool that is used to do the toggling on the car can not do so without a link to Tesla. (I ask a lot of questions... lol)�
Mar 18, 2015
dirkhh Yes! I actually had supercharging enabled on my 60 after buying it (stupid me, wasted 500 bucks) and when I talked to Tesla while trying to figure out if I wanted to do that they explicitly told me NOT to do it while I'm on the road trip as there are a few superchargers with bad / no reception and that they can't enable it unless my car has signal. And they pointed out that it can take up to 30 minutes for the change to "take".�
Mar 19, 2015
rpo I live in Seattle, but have been to both the Folsom and Roseville superchargers (most recently in December). I did not note exactly what the charge rates peaked at, but I can confirm it was really slow at both. I'm talking 1.5 hours got me from 15% to 90%. It was really pathetic.�
Mar 19, 2015
mhan00 I wonder if it might have something to do with Musk's announcement tomorrow? Maybe, in addition to the range prediction navigation software that makes the most sense to me, Tesla will be partnering with a store/restaurant with a large number of locations nation/worldwide to install lower capacity superchargers? Unlike the higher capacity superchargers which are placed to enable long distance travel, these lower capacity types would be to ease consumer fears of being stranded?�
Mar 19, 2015
deonb Tesla's biggest obstacle with SuperChargers so far seems to be getting available real estate (for free) from local businesses in order to install the SuperChargers. If they have to go through all of that negotiations anyway to do that, why not just install a full SuperCharger?
It would be nice for Tesla to be able to get blanket space to be able to just install SuperChargers, without having to negotiate with local businesses all the time. But I don't think there is any restaurant corp or franchise out there that have the power to give access to each of their parking lots without negotiation with individual local establishments.
What you need is something like a Sears. They own a large percentage of their real estate, and NOBODY uses their parking lots...�
Mar 19, 2015
dirkhh There aren't enough Sears in the world for that to make sense. No one ever thought that someone would say THAT, right?
But I think this is why people (including me) are speculating that if it is an agreement with another company it's going to be an energy company like Exxon or BP. They have an amazing number of locations, usually in places where people would like to extend the "range" of their cars. And they have the ability to monetize it since even if the charge ends up free, they have their mini-marts where they make money of the people waiting to charge. Win-win�
Mar 19, 2015
scaesare This I know. There's also a rolling access code...
But folks here are suggesting that the supercharger authenticates the VIN at the mothership before allowing charging. I've not seen evidence that's the case.�
Mar 19, 2015
apacheguy Any mention of this issue in the press release?�
Mar 19, 2015
deonb No, the closest is this:
"Also figures out how long to charge in each location, messages you when it's time to go"
It seems that Tesla want you to leave the Supercharger as soon as you can get to the next destination.�
Mar 19, 2015
ecarfan No, that's not it, this new software will simply inform you automatically when the car has charged enough to reach the next charging destination. That is very convenient. It is not forcing you to disconnect from the charger. But it is a good thing to notify people when they can unplug as that will increase the likelihood that someone waiting for charging will get to start charging sooner.�
Mar 19, 2015
rlang59 Remember it is only going to inform you if you have the iPhone app.
Trip Planner will notify you via the iPhone app when you�ve charged enough to continue on your trip. Android app users can monitor charging needed for the trip via the Charging screen.�
Mar 19, 2015
FlasherZ ...or that Tesla would like to enable you to leave the Supercharger as soon as you can... I think the value is more with the consumer than Tesla.
Perhaps I'm the glass-half-full guy, but I know of many people who sit at the Superchargers far longer than they should, only because they don't know how much they need -- are there hills? is there crazy wind? what's the average Wh/m needed to achieve the distance? etc...
Now, it's going to be interesting to see how Tesla handles it. When I go to the Wisconsin Dells, I normally stop in Normal, IL, then charge all the way while having dinner, which enables me to skip Rockford, IL and charge in Madison, WI. My question is whether the software takes into account that use case, or whether it will want me to maintain a lower SOC for quicker stops at EVERY SpC. I'm guessing it will start with the latter (although I'll happily ignore its wishes...�
Mar 19, 2015
yobigd20 i need a full 260 miles to go 160 actual miles though. it better not rate limit on the upper end.�
Mar 19, 2015
scaesare I tend to agree this is the more likely reason.
As you say, the "lower" you are on the SOC/charge taper, the more power the pack can accept, thus more "bang for the buck" the driver gets for his time spent at a charger.
If you watch the cross-country EV record trip the Tesla team did, you'll notice that's what they did: ride the bottom of the SOC curve as much as they could (albeit with hopefully less margin for error than the new FW will provide...) when going from charger to charger...�
Mar 19, 2015
smac I wonder if it will alter the stall sharing algorithm
Instead of it being the first car to arrive get's priority up until taper, the first car get's priority up until taper or sufficient journey range.. Whichever is the sooner.�
Mar 19, 2015
Benjamin Brooks Time for Tesla to build in the car auto-eject feature from the SC stalls when they get enough charge to make it to the next SC location�
Mar 19, 2015
JohnQ Yeah, there are locations that I definitely want to skip depending on time of day. Cranberry, PA, for example, where traffic around the mall can be horrible. Or Macedonia, OH where it's a jaunt off the turnpike. Unfortunately, usually can't skip both!�
Mar 19, 2015
apacheguy Right, the trouble I'm having though is that SpC throttling appears to have nothing to do with 6.2. And yet we have reports of confirmed, intentional throttling. And a statement was expected on this issue. So what's the deal here?�
Mar 19, 2015
spentan Until an official announcement is made, I'd recommend reporting every instance of this to Tesla supercharger support.
I've done some charging in the last few days, ~40 miles away from home and haven't had an issue charging solid over 110kW.
Also my service advisor yesterday advised that they may be singling out abusers of the supercharger network but he hasn't heard of it happening before.�
Mar 19, 2015
Depeche Mode Abusers? OK guys, actually let me be clear: I (and so did you) paid my car 127 820$ + taxes (CDN$) while being said that it would include lifetime charging and blah blah blah/other things...
Excuse me but this is FREAKING good money for them... yep I know that the hardware and technology cost them a lot but I'm in finance and I can tell you that they're in money right now (except for the China problem...)... I calculated it recently and even if I go SC once a week for a total average of 50 kW, the equivalent is 221$ of electricity for them annually... worst case scenario twice a week, 442$ even if that would last 6 years (which I would be surprised...) it would only comes back to a meagre total of 2500$ for the whole ownership time (2% of the total car selling price tag)...
My girlfriend is working at 100 meters of the Tesla Service Center and likes to sometime be picked up (and I like to ride my Tesla!) so why not combining business with pleasure?!?
As I said earlier, I always glad and ready to give my place if someone is coming and no stall is available... I did it twice (one for iKhalid which is on this Forum, even helped him because one of the stall was broken...) it's all just common sense...
But throttling just doesn't have its place in this new reality that is the EV world (we all know that some tried in the past and failed but Tesla won't, Tesla has to demonstrate that EV is an easy going thing)... I know also Musk is cheap (a way of thinking I like as a shareholder BUT not as an owner... :S) by paying his peoples lower than they are really worth but I really think that working for Tesla is really exciting and challenging... I think it's part of a �always� lower the cost in every ways...
Although, I really think that Tesla should concentrate on bigger issues like the ICE'ing problem at SC which is more a problem than the �local chargers�
If throttling is done on a regular basis, well I'll be a STRONG opposition of that...
Hope for them it was just an experiment period and nothing more...�
Mar 19, 2015
Archer No, it's the algorithm letting you know that you "can" leave if your only intent is to have enough charge to get your destination. Not every destination is an end point with charging access.�
Mar 19, 2015
FlasherZ I don't believe we can say "intentional" at this point. No one has confirmed it is intentional; we have merely an uncorroborated service center employee who said there would be an announcement this week. Other service centers immediately denied that they were notified of anything of the sort. No pattern has emerged yet as to the specific versions and supercharger setups.
It's all still speculation.�
Mar 19, 2015
dirkhh Sounds like you may be a bit sensitive on this issue...
But let's take a deep breath. No one defined what is an abuser. No one said that your behavior (or what you describe here) would be considered abusing the system.
What about (hypothetical case) the guy who figures out how to transfer electricity between battery packs (there's a portable CHAdeMO thingy that can do that). And who drives to the supercharger N times a day, charges from 0-100%, drives to his office around the corner, transfers the electricity and drives back, repeat.
Realistic? No. Abusive? Definitely. I'd call that theft.�
Mar 19, 2015
LetsGoFast Can someone explain in small words how throttling the transfer rate helps Tesla in some way. It seems like it would lead to more congestion at the chargers. Is the theory that a throttled rate would drive people to stop using the local superchargers? I don't see that. There is a guy in my town who does all his charging at the supercharger because he lives in a condo and can't install his own. Even at 60kW, the supercharger is still going to be better for him than a L2 charger.�
Mar 19, 2015
Depeche Mode Not sensitive at all... just someone that thinks that too much people are taking this issue too lightly when we paid the big bucks for our toy...
You know, corporates starts with this kind of thing and if we just shut our mouth and do nothing over THEIR corporate decisions, well, it will give them more power in the future to lower what was promised to us from the beginning...
At the end of the day, we, Tesla owners, are on the same boat...�
Mar 19, 2015
FlasherZ I keep seeing people claim this is a definitive policy decision made by Tesla. And that's simply not known (yet).
As far as we know right now, it's a bug that doesn't have a discernible pattern. So when you see 60 kW charging, call the Supercharger number and file a ticket with your service center.�
Mar 19, 2015
sorka You mean person. Who except Obsoletion is saying that this is a formal new policy?
So far all other Tesla SCs, DSs, and sales reps have denied hearing anything about this. Why would one lone service writer come out and say this is the truth and we'll all hear about it shortly if all other Tesla employees are denying it.
Furthermore, the invoice doesn't actually hint that this is a policy decision even if the diagnosis was lousy.
Still waiting clarification from Obsoletion who was going to contact his service writer and have this issue clarified and rephrased.�
Mar 19, 2015
redi I reported my 60kW problem this weekend on Sunday then called the supercharger number, contacted service by email, and from the web site asking help in pulling the logs, etc. I have still not received a call back from Tesla or contacted in any way.
As noted earlier in this thread: running 2.2.115, rarely supercharge (probably 5 times in 1.5 years, kW rate normal), 100 miles from home, new 135kW charger (#3), 30% battery [insufficient to get home without charging], alone on the charger, two others during a similar period had normal (high) kW rates. Moved to chagnge chargers (to #1) mid charge (50%) and saw no improvment. As a fluke I happened to have vt on on my office - normally never run it.
Had no idea about this issue until one of the other drivers I was talking to noted my issue and mentioned it.
�
Mar 19, 2015
Larry Chanin What version of the firmware are you on?
Larry�
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét