Tesla to open ~20% of its U.S. Supercharger network to other EV by end of 2024

[scottf200]

Don’t consider this a complaint, Supercharger network is rad and a huge accomplishment.

That said, I’m not sure Tesla has ever really hit their projections on growth during any short period of time. So don’t be surprised if growth ends up “only” 75%.

No worries. I was just reporting numbers.

Keep in mind they are being incentivized ($) and tracked as part of it. IMO, this changes the dynamics of their motivation.

The past couple of years have been very impressive to me at least.

The 'changes' page here at supercharge.info (crowdsourced and donation supported)...
... is amazing to bounce into every once in a while. Below is just ONE week.

 

[slomo]

I'm confused by your comment as the text (link below) explicitly says "7,500 chargers" and "at least 3,500" superchargers. I think chargers=plugs and superchargers=locations.


https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing...ational-network-of-electric-vehicle-chargers/

I meant to type "1 to 3500 locations".

The 7000 is half superchargers and half converting Tesla destination chargers (hotels and such). "Supercharger" refers to either a single charger or location. The announcement refers to single chargers.

Tesla has about 4500 Supercharger locations worldwide. Electrify America has about 800 stations in the U.S.

 

[ÆCIII]

I'm glad it's only ~20 percent, but it should be none.

Tesla doesn't need any government help, nor should it engage in helping competition which uses corrupt MSM outlets to falsely smear Tesla.

Tesla did all the work planning and building up their supercharger network over the last decade while the other manufacturers and MSM arrogantly laughed at them. Those who helped to bring Tesla where it is today, do not deserve the burden of the incompetence and thoughtlessness of those of those who were not able to plan or make their own charging networks for themselves.

There is also the danger of "brand baiting" where some anti-Tesla owners would take the opportunity to knowingly connect to a Tesla Supercharger, and then act like it was having major problems when it's not, or act like they're stranded at the supercharger, and then act like Tesla gave them poor support or service, just so they could make a Youtube video or article to smear Tesla. For these scenarios of course Dan O'Dowd and Gordon Johnson would be the first in line, but there are many others too.

I mean, look at how they're already trying to smear Tesla's FSD Beta software with a subverted definition of "Recall"! They will try to find any crack to anchor a false narrative into.

In my opinion Tesla shouldn't engage in risky exposure situations they don't absolutely need to be in. I think this is one of those situations that Tesla should stay away from.

- ÆCIII

 

[Crissa]

EV Go has talked about getting a Tesla connector in the past, but it’s never panned out.

They do exist! But yeah, when Tesla has so many more sites...

3500 chargers, which will include between 1 and 3500 locations. Only 250kw chargers, so the older 150kw superchargers will not include CCS.

Or they don't count.

-Crissa

 

[charliemagpie]

So much hype .. for what ?

Tesla growing at 30%, will double within 3 years.

You did it Mary !!!!

 

[HAL GALLUS]

This could be bad new for Tesla congested areas where chargers are used frequently. This could be great news for small companies like Aptera that don't have resources to build their own network. Now if only we can convince other manufacturers to use the NACS connector. I think ultimately everyone would benefit from using NACS but I don't see auto makers holding hands and singing kumbaya around a campfire anytime soon.

Tesla has complete control over this. They can open and close the chargers as needed.
plus Tesla can charge the inferior EVs more.
check out the magic dock.

 

[WHIZZARD OF OZ]

I wouldn't look at this as a negative thing. It's actually incredible they're even doing this much. Tesla has the better connector, largest charging network, and way more vehicles on the road than all other manufacturers combined. If anything, it should be the other way around, imo. Tesla's been pumping these out without being forced to (VW) for over a decade. I view this as great news, since it means that Tesla isn't going to convert all of them to CCS. Last thing superchargering needs is more congestion.

'MAGIC DOCK' is part of the 'SOLUTION'
I don't have a problem with 'WATT'_EVer happens.

 

[WHIZZARD OF OZ]

I meant to type "1 to 3500 locations".

The 7000 is half superchargers and half converting Tesla destination chargers (hotels and such). "Supercharger" refers to either a single charger or location. The announcement refers to single chargers.

Tesla has about 4500 Supercharger locations worldwide. Electrify America has about 800 stations in the U.S.

Around 4000 destination chargers are part of that equation. Exactly how they worded it is NOT critical.
Everybody WINS. imo

 

[kbolt]

Here are a couple of my thoughts on why this is a really good move.

First, you get federal money to help you double the size of your network and you only have to allow access to 20%.

Second, 30% of EVs are non-Tesla so 30% of cars will share 20% of the superchargers. However, that 20% can also be occupied by Teslas so in reality the practical piece of the pie is smaller for non-Teslas.

Third, you can charge non-Teslas more so you make more money when they use the network.

Fourth, the experience is so much better with the supercharger network that non-Teslas will prefer the supercharge network.

All of this means more purchases of Tesla vehicles and more money to Tesla in the long term.

 

[Dawgfan]

If I was Tesla I would allow 20% at every site to be used by other EVs. Imagine you pull up with your F150 Lightening to see a line waiting to use the superchargers available to all vehicles, while right next to you is all of us in our Cybertrucks pulling up, charging and going while they wait. They will get out and talk to the Cybertruck owners and find out how awesome they are and decide their next vehicle is going to be a Tesla.

 

[slomo]

Around 4000 destination chargers are part of that equation. Exactly how they worded it is NOT critical.
Everybody WINS. imo

All destination chargers are available to CCS vehicles now. My understanding is that not many are being put in anymore. Proprietors now understand that all vehicles can charge on J1772.

 

[Ogre]

All destination chargers are available to CCS vehicles now. My understanding is that not many are being put in anymore. Proprietors now understand that all vehicles can charge on J1772.

The Tesla charger is the most affordable type of destination charger and there are adaptors that cars which only support J1772 can use. Additionally, since most EVs that are road-tripping are Teslas, it's likely that many Tesla destination chargers are being utilized. This is further supported by Tesla's load-sharing feature which allows hotels to allocate less total power to the chargers.

 

[cvalue13]

Spent some time learning on this today, and a few key takeaways:

Most of the >$7B in funding is directed towards the states, through the NEVI program, which to receive money to dole out at the state level to builds within the state have to meet several criteria:

• Gaps of no more than 50 miles between chargers.
• Chargers within a mile of the interstate.
• At least four with 150 kW simultaneous or higher-rate chargers, with CCS connectors.
• Ability to simultaneously charge four vehicles at that rate or greater.
• Exceptions are available for any of these on a case-by-case basis (unavailability of electricity, etc.), but funding can be used to prepare a site for stations by adding power-generating capability, etc

Accordingly, this suggests several things regarding Tesla’s participation in these programs as relates to the news from the White House:

• for Tesla to receive funding for a given installation, the subject supercharge station will need:

• at least 4 CCS stalls
• each with at least 150kw simul.
• along major state highways

Where states have charging deserts >50mi between other providers’ stalls, but Tesla stations are within in the gaps, those gap-filling supercharger stations will be of particular focus to state negotiations with Tesla to provide 4X stalls to receive funds.

Pausing here to remember we’re talking about 3,500 such CCS supercharger stalls by end of 2024, it suggests 3,500/4 = 875 such stations

Those 875 CCS capable supercharger stations *should* be disproportionately located along >50mi gaps in current infra of other providers’ offerings. That could mean existing stations being retrofitted, or newly planned supercharger stations within the gaps.

Regarding the gap-filling, this article predates the White House announcement and digs into some public Arizona DOT meeting notes and NEVI planning docs to deduce that indeed existing Tesla stations play a critical role in Arizona qualifying for its share of funds.

And, since funds can be available to build out infra to accommodate a station, these

This article today in Forbes is thorough and generally argues the whole regulatory framework is “misguided,” and will misalign incentives to properly deploy the chargers. While the article’s thrust focuses on its view of issues with Tesla’s participation, it along the way also highlights some likely reasons incentivizing Tesla’s participation including:

•Tesla would presumably find it hard to compete with billions of subsidy going to the smaller CCS system

• a passing (but indirect and underemphasized) mention that Musk has previously said Tesla will participate in opening its network for altruistic reasons “"We are trying as best as possible to do the right thing for the advancement of electrification, even if that diminishes our competitive advantage"

At the end of the day, on my read the impact on Tesla drivers would seem to be minimal. By end of 2024 these CCS enabled supercharger stalls will represent only 10% of Teslas supercharger stalls. Those stalls should be disproportionately located in current charge deserts along major highways, which means that few of the regular charging haunts of current Tesla drivers will be effected. And, these few, somewhat ‘remote,’ stalls will surely be magicdock configurations, meaning they’ll still be available to current Tesla users. And if these few, remote, CCS enabled stalls are in nonetheless located in a desirable location for Tesla drivers, the “crowds” of Teslas drivers may somewhat deter CCS vehicles from over-prioritizing those stations. In all, the impact on Tesla drivers would seem to be minimal.

Meanwhile, the correlate benefits to overall charge infrastructure may be material. By the subsidies disproportionately favoring the build out of new locations within >50mi gaps in major highway thoroughfares, it should hopefully begin to widen the bottleneck of BEV adoption by those who have (justifiable) range anxiety use cases. That reduction in range anxiety means uptake of BEVs not only for those who will regularly use the infra, but even just for those for whom the idea of range anxiety causes unnecessary friction in their buying choices. (Some buyers may include range anxiety among their reasons to not go BEV, despite the reality being their use case will rarely ever be impacted by a lack of infra.)
Setting aside broader skepticism of “misguided” regulatory incentives at the margins, the theory of the incentives could be meaningful.

And, since funds can be available to build out infra to accommodate a station, these funds could mean that Tesla finds it economically viable to build supercharger stations in locations they otherwise would not have. That’s a potential win for Tesla drivers.

Comparing the relatively low practical negative impact on current Tesla driver’s against the possibly meaningful improvement to not just charge infra generally but also BEV uptake generally (and possibly Tesla stations where they wouldn’t have been otherwise), I find it hard to hand-wring too much about Tesla’s plan to open up a small fraction of its supercharger stalls to CCS charging.

Plus, as it relates to the CT, by the end of 2024 I personally will probably not have taken delivery and still be a CCS charger. In which case, if anything, my personal takeaway is that this “news” is a nothingburger. Only 10% of stalls, located in only 875 stations, disproportionally concentrated out in currently desolate stretches on major highways, doesn’t do much of anything for me or others like me (who largely charge at home, and rarely road trip).

The converse effect seems true for Tesla as a business: these few CCS enabled stations will disproportionately initiate the subset of drivers who regularly drive long distances, and should probably be trading in for a Tesla anytime over the next few years.

 

[slomo]

In the U.S., does Tesla have any "charging deserts" along interstates? The Supercharger problem I have is off interstate.

If Tesla was altruistic they would do more than 3500. What Tesla is doing is good PR.

 

[cvalue13]

In the U.S., does Tesla have any "charging deserts" along interstates? The Supercharger problem I have is off interstate.

If Tesla was altruistic they would do more than 3500. What Tesla is doing is good PR.

As far as the regs/incentives are concerned, the relevant “charge deserts” are those areas without vehicle-agnostic chargers. PLENTY of those in large swaths of the country.

And, the regs/incentives are further looking to accomplish vehicle-agnostic chargers no less than every 50 miles (where infra makes it possible). From that more stringent 50mi perspective, I’d guess there are few parts of the country that aren’t a ‘charge desert.’

I agree the value to Tesla here is one part PR/government relations (Federal and State).

But I’m also dying to know if the availability of these incentives means that Tesla’s station-building location models allow for new station locations. I can imagine that Tesla’s models mean that, absent the incentives, the numbers simply don’t sum up sufficiently to justify a given station location. But add in the CapEx lift of the incentives, and the model gives a location a green light.

You know, like the location justification for ever single CCS charger that exists…. (Thank you dieselgate!)