Chevy Bolt EV Forum banner

161 - 177 of 177 Posts

·
Registered
2018 Bolt EV Premier Nightfall Gray
Joined
·
469 Posts
No, the EA sites are clearly for all EV's and a pay as you go type service. It's not the same as the pricing model in the SC's. Night and day difference. Just my opinion.
If Tesla owners greatest concern is slower charging EVs delaying their use of SC plugs, doesn't the same hold true for EVs that can charge at 150kW being blocked from using EA plugs while waiting for a Tesla to charge at 50kW on a CHAdeMO plug? Forget all the business model stuff, that is a totally different subject to those in line waiting for a charge.

In many ways, time based charging fees iron things out a little. Slower charging cars pay more /kWh that the faster charging cars on time based plugs, so they contribute more to the ROI and make it possible for faster charging EV to get a boost subsidized in part by the higher relative fees a slower charging car pays.

I am actually surprised EA doesn't charge more for the higher powered chargers, regardless of the vehicles take rate. If/when /lWh rates take hold, a concurrent time based charge that varies by EVSE capability would encourage slower charging cars to use the slower plugs. We actually see quite a few kWh + time Chargepoint units in CO, a trend maybe?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,393 Posts
***
My understanding, from both my reading and from viewing local sites, is that it's possible to get one 40A Clipper Creek for each 2 Tesla Destination chargers installed. That Clipper Creek has a standard J1772 handle.
***

ga2500ev
After talking to a couple of destination charger site hosts, the "deal" that was described to me is that Tesla would provide the destination charger hardware for free and pay for all the permitting and installation expenses. If the site host also wanted an additional J1772 unit, the host could pay for that unit, but Tesla would package it with their units for permitting and installation (i.e., the J1772 Clipper Creek unit would be installed for free). Essentially, any time you see a J1772 Clipper Creek at a destination charger site, the site host (not Tesla) paid for that unit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,393 Posts
I see Tesla's in J1772 spots quite frequently. It's just my opinion that the Tesla user base will not be happy to wait to use a charging station that they feel entitled to and in some cases paid for either in packages or within the purchase price of their car. I don't think you understand the pricing model and how SC access is both charged for and bundled into the Tesla car.
It really doesn't matter whether they're J1772 units or DC fast chargers. The primary concern is whether an EV is parked, blocking access while not using the charger. That actually happens quite often with Tesla owners at public charging sites for whatever reason. It seems the most likely reason is that they don't have an adapter or it's too much of a bother to hook up the adapter. These are the same Tesla owners who plug in at Superchargers when they already have a full battery or park in Supercharger stalls without plugging in. They're just looking for a convenient parking spot that announces to the world that they are driving an electric vehicle.

And as for your comment about Tesla owners not being happy sharing Superchargers with people who didn't pay for those chargers: That already happened with the Tesla Model 3. I saw (and still do see) a number of complaints from Tesla Model S/X owners about Model 3s hogging the Superchargers and showing little to no respect for the chargers, the site, or other owners (e.g., garbage on the ground). There's definitely a classist, entitled nature to the complaints, but frankly, I see those same Model S/X owners blocking public chargers far more often than I see Model 3 owners blocking public chargers.

Essentially, those people are going to find something to complain about regardless, and those who complain the hardest are most likely the ones who are abusing their access in the first place. If you come from a perspective of need, you understand that the person ahead of you in line at a charger needs to charge to get where they are going (just like you). If you come from a perspective of privilege, you don't care about other people's needs and are operating purely off of self interest. I don't think any charging network (Supercharger or otherwise) should be catering to the latter.
 

·
Registered
2018 Bolt EV Premier Nightfall Gray
Joined
·
469 Posts
After talking to a couple of destination charger site hosts, the "deal" that was described to me is that Tesla would provide the destination charger hardware for free and pay for all the permitting and installation expenses. If the site host also wanted an additional J1772 unit, the host could pay for that unit, but Tesla would package it with their units for permitting and installation (i.e., the J1772 Clipper Creek unit would be installed for free). Essentially, any time you see a J1772 Clipper Creek at a destination charger site, the site host (not Tesla) paid for that unit.
Ran into exactly tis in Steamboat Springs recently. Thanks Tesla!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
528 Posts
After talking to a couple of destination charger site hosts, the "deal" that was described to me is that Tesla would provide the destination charger hardware for free and pay for all the permitting and installation expenses. If the site host also wanted an additional J1772 unit, the host could pay for that unit, but Tesla would package it with their units for permitting and installation (i.e., the J1772 Clipper Creek unit would be installed for free). Essentially, any time you see a J1772 Clipper Creek at a destination charger site, the site host (not Tesla) paid for that unit.
That is new information. I did not know that.

ga2500ev
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,415 Posts
If Tesla owners greatest concern is slower charging EVs delaying their use of SC plugs, doesn't the same hold true for EVs that can charge at 150kW being blocked from using EA plugs while waiting for a Tesla to charge at 50kW on a CHAdeMO plug? Forget all the business model stuff, that is a totally different subject to those in line waiting for a charge.

In many ways, time based charging fees iron things out a little. Slower charging cars pay more /kWh that the faster charging cars on time based plugs, so they contribute more to the ROI and make it possible for faster charging EV to get a boost subsidized in part by the higher relative fees a slower charging car pays.

I am actually surprised EA doesn't charge more for the higher powered chargers, regardless of the vehicles take rate. If/when /lWh rates take hold, a concurrent time based charge that varies by EVSE capability would encourage slower charging cars to use the slower plugs. We actually see quite a few kWh + time Chargepoint units in CO, a trend maybe?
I think you make some good points but I wasn’t commenting at all about rate of charge. My participation in this thread started with me voicing an opinion which I still believe that a Tesla owner would not be happy if they pulled up to an SC and found a Bolt, Leaf or the Hummer EV in a spot and taking a charge (specifically they had to wait because of it). The super tiny sampling of Tesla owners I know have a sense of ownership and entitlement to that network and Tesla coming in with an adapter to allow a Bolt to charge would break that ideology. I already triggered a Karen by using the term ‘Postal’ which wasn’t meant literally but I for one, would not be happy either. Just an opinion, not shared by anyone else it appears. I’m waiting on VW to wow me with their upcoming EV’s and in the absence of a huge wow I’m going to be buying a Tesla. I 100% admit this is also in part due to the fact that the Midwest where I live sucks in terms of non Tesla fast charging.
 

·
Registered
2018 Bolt EV Premier Nightfall Gray
Joined
·
469 Posts
I think you make some good points but I wasn’t commenting at all about rate of charge. My participation in this thread started with me voicing an opinion which I still believe that a Tesla owner would not be happy if they pulled up to an SC and found a Bolt, Leaf or the Hummer EV in a spot and taking a charge (specifically they had to wait because of it). The super tiny sampling of Tesla owners I know have a sense of ownership and entitlement to that network and Tesla coming in with an adapter to allow a Bolt to charge would break that ideology. I already triggered a Karen by using the term ‘Postal’ which wasn’t meant literally but I for one, would not be happy either. Just an opinion, not shared by anyone else it appears. I’m waiting on VW to wow me with their upcoming EV’s and in the absence of a huge wow I’m going to be buying a Tesla. I 100% admit this is also in part due to the fact that the Midwest where I live sucks in terms of non Tesla fast charging.
I understand Tesla owners sense of entitlement, I know many. I can honestly say, CCS sites > Tesla sites in Colorado. SC = 21, CCS = 61 with Chargepoint in the middle of installing 120 or so on scenic roads. I bet Tesla owners in CO would be open to trade CCS access @ SC for access to CCS sites. I suspect CO isn't alone in having more CCS sites than Tesla.

There is a SC site near my office, it has 6 plugs and I rarely see Teslas there, never more than 2, rarely more than 1. And that site is a stone's throw from I25. I also hear stories of CA SC sites where the lines are long on Holiday weekends, in large part because Tesla owners have few options aside from SC sites. CHAdeMO plugs will likely start disappearing in the not so distant future, and Model 3 still doesn't support CHAdeMO as I understand.

Tesla owners would benefit greatly from a CCS adapter, or native CCS ports on their cars. But, the CCS owners would suffer greatly if it were a one way street, we would be waiting for plugs being used by Teslas, and have no other options. To my thinking, the best outcome would be a universal plug type, with open access to all networks. The Tesla benefit could remain better pricing at SC sites, exclusive lounges, etc. With more "universal" options, each plug would be utilized more efficiently (law of large numbers), and travel would be far simpler for all. The argument about waiting for slow charging cars would be far less relevant, in fact faster charging cars are catching up already.

If CO is foretelling, CCS will have better coverage than Tesla in more places soon. At some point, SC will be a bit of liability to Tesla, it will no longer be a key selling point the way it has been. And, Tesla may just find that their interest in maintaining it wanes, leading them to sell the charging operations to someone.
 

·
Registered
2018 Bolt EV Premier Nightfall Gray
Joined
·
469 Posts
I don't think you understand the pricing model and how SC access is both charged for and bundled into the Tesla car.
Probably true in S and X days, but M3 hasn't offered free SC charging for most (or all) of it's time in the marketplace. Those that did pay a "bundled" price have gotten their money's worth by now, particularly those who have free lifetime charging, and they will continue to get that benefit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,415 Posts
I understand Tesla owners sense of entitlement, I know many. I can honestly say, CCS sites > Tesla sites in Colorado. SC = 21, CCS 61 with Chargepoint in the middle of installing 120 or so on scenic roads. I bet Tesla owners in CO would be open to trade CCS access @ SC for access to CCS sites. I suspect CO isn't alone in having more CCS sites than Tesla.

There is a SC site near my office, it has 6 plugs and I rarely see Teslas there, never more than 2, rarely more than 1. And that site is a stone's throw from I25. I also hear stories of CA SC sites where the lines are long on Holiday weekends, in large part because Tesla owners have few options aside from SC sites. CHAdeMO plugs will likely start disappearing in the not so distant future, and Model 3 still doesn't support CHAdeMO as I understand.

Tesla owners would benefit greatly from a CCS adapter, or native CCS ports on their cars. But, the CCS owners would suffer greatly if it were a one way street, we would be waiting for plugs being used by Teslas, and have no other options. To my thinking, the best outcome would be a universal plug type, with open access to all networks. The Tesla benefit could remain better pricing at SC sites, exclusive lounges, etc. With more "universal" options, each plug would be utilized more efficiently (law of large numbers), and travel would be far simpler for all. The argument about waiting for slow charging cars would be far less relevant, in fact faster charging cars are catching up already.

If CO is foretelling, CCS will have better coverage than Tesla in more places soon. At some point, SC will be a bit of liability to Tesla, it will no longer be a key selling point the way it has been. And, Tesla may just find that their interest in maintaining it wanes, leading them to sell the charging operations to someone.
Yes, what you are seeing there is what I had hoped would happen in my state. I'm not a DC charging guy and only commute with my Bolt but I'm trying my hardest to have the mindset of going EV for the future so I pay attention. In my state, since I took delivery of my 2019 Bolt in Oct 2018, one Walmart in my area installed those DCFC chargers. We did, on paper, double the number of DCFC chargers in a 5 county area because Harley Davidson installed chargers. The problem with counting them, again, in my opinion, is that charging stations that are single node do not get full points for credit. Again, in my opinion. Adding to that, that they are 25kW stations that charge $25/hour puts a damper on them. So, if you take Harley out of the mix, you have WalMart (1) and a grocery store chain (4) that have a single station DCFC that is truly the poster child for ICE'd over. I know I am coming across as bitching about it, and truly I'm not. I am the one off consumer who only commutes with the Bolt and loves it. But I see a future in it, and for me, and want to continue being an EV consumer with the hopes that I can truly drive from the suburbs of Milwaukee to Green Bay and actually pull it off with a robust commercially supported charging infrastructure like your state has, and farther west the Republic of California. 2 years ago, on this forum, there are countless posts telling me about a great infrastructure build outs. They exist, but not here .... YET. I've had many post PlugShare maps of Milwaukee, covering 6 total counties of all the pretty orange pindrops of charging stations and proceed to tell me how wrong I am. But they didn't look at them. Widening to 10 counties north and going south all the way to the Illinois border there are 12 pin drops. Only 1 of them, the Walmart is a multi station DCFC charger 150-350kw (reported on PlugShare). 5 are HD Dealerships at 25kW and expensive. 4 are the single station grocery store at 50kW. One is inside a paid parking ramp at the University and one is a 25kW at the Jaguar dealership. In the 23 months since I've owned my Bolt, the Walmart and the 5 HD stations are the only additions. I just wanted to share where things are at in this area, which may or may not be typical.
 

·
Registered
2018 Bolt EV Premier Nightfall Gray
Joined
·
469 Posts
Yes, what you are seeing there is what I had hoped would happen in my state. I'm not a DC charging guy and only commute with my Bolt but I'm trying my hardest to have the mindset of going EV for the future so I pay attention. In my state, since I took delivery of my 2019 Bolt in Oct 2018, one Walmart in my area installed those DCFC chargers. We did, on paper, double the number of DCFC chargers in a 5 county area because Harley Davidson installed chargers. The problem with counting them, again, in my opinion, is that charging stations that are single node do not get full points for credit. Again, in my opinion. Adding to that, that they are 25kW stations that charge $25/hour puts a damper on them. So, if you take Harley out of the mix, you have WalMart (1) and a grocery store chain (4) that have a single station DCFC that is truly the poster child for ICE'd over. I know I am coming across as bitching about it, and truly I'm not. I am the one off consumer who only commutes with the Bolt and loves it. But I see a future in it, and for me, and want to continue being an EV consumer with the hopes that I can truly drive from the suburbs of Milwaukee to Green Bay and actually pull it off with a robust commercially supported charging infrastructure like your state has, and farther west the Republic of California. 2 years ago, on this forum, there are countless posts telling me about a great infrastructure build outs. They exist, but not here .... YET. I've had many post PlugShare maps of Milwaukee, covering 6 total counties of all the pretty orange pindrops of charging stations and proceed to tell me how wrong I am. But they didn't look at them. Widening to 10 counties north and going south all the way to the Illinois border there are 12 pin drops. Only 1 of them, the Walmart is a multi station DCFC charger 150-350kw (reported on PlugShare). 5 are HD Dealerships at 25kW and expensive. 4 are the single station grocery store at 50kW. One is inside a paid parking ramp at the University and one is a 25kW at the Jaguar dealership. In the 23 months since I've owned my Bolt, the Walmart and the 5 HD stations are the only additions. I just wanted to share where things are at in this area, which may or may not be typical.
Clearly, some states are making more progress on infrastructure. Sad to hear others are dragging their feet.

NY and FL for example are just getting around to spending VW money, but why did they wait so long?

In part, it has to do with how many EV are on the road. But, it also has to do with state politics. CO has a pretty bad air quality situation, we often get temp inversions that trap pollution along the front range. So like CA, the state has been working on measures to clean things up. CO envisions becoming a ZEV state, and has enlisted a number of initiatives, including requiring utilities to come up with plans to support the state's goal of 800K EV (about 20-25%) on the road by the end of the decade. They wisely anticipated VW money for infrastructure, but (in my opinion) unwisely elected to use some of it to help government fleets convert to EV. I say unwisely because fleet operators probably don't need the financial push, the longer life, as well as maintenance and fuel savings should offset higher prices in most cases. They setup a grant program that reimburses employers, MultiFamily complexes, businesses, government agencies up to 80% of the install cost for L2 or L3 charging, and fund it with VW and $50 registration fees on EVs. Those grants are filling charging gaps at a breathtaking pace.

CO is also fortunate to be smack dab in the middle of the country, and important routes pass through the state. So, EA in particular has put a fair amount of focus on the state.

If your state isn't doing things like this, maybe they need some pressure. If you have EV clubs, join them and discuss the topic. Our CO Springs club is making contacts with utilities, the state clean air board, and partners with Denver EV clubs as well. We make our needs known, and government responds. They honestly value relationships with the EV community, but you can't do these things alone, it takes some clout that numbers offer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,415 Posts
If your state isn't doing things like this, maybe they need some pressure. If you have EV clubs, join them and discuss the topic. Our CO Springs club is making contacts with utilities, the state clean air board, and partners with Denver EV clubs as well. We make our needs known, and government responds. They honestly value relationships with the EV community, but you can't do these things alone, it takes some clout that numbers offer.
My state offers nothing in terms of incentives for the purchase of EV's and last year tacked on an additional $100 for registration. I understand fully why the registration is higher, but don't agree with it. We get no perks like HOV access and my utility provider does not give any rebates/credits/support for EVSE's. Now, our public utilities commission tried to pressure them into offering rebates for EVSE's and to get involved with that side of it, but they refused. I attended that hearing to voice my opinion, but also to participate in a different discussion about solar incentives (also shot down). I just completed a solar and Tesla Powerwall install at my house.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,572 Posts
I understand Tesla owners sense of entitlement, I know many. I can honestly say, CCS sites > Tesla sites in Colorado. SC = 21, CCS = 61 with Chargepoint in the middle of installing 120 or so on scenic roads. I bet Tesla owners in CO would be open to trade CCS access @ SC for access to CCS sites. I suspect CO isn't alone in having more CCS sites than Tesla.

There is a SC site near my office, it has 6 plugs and I rarely see Teslas there, never more than 2, rarely more than 1. And that site is a stone's throw from I25. I also hear stories of CA SC sites where the lines are long on Holiday weekends, in large part because Tesla owners have few options aside from SC sites. CHAdeMO plugs will likely start disappearing in the not so distant future, and Model 3 still doesn't support CHAdeMO as I understand.

Tesla owners would benefit greatly from a CCS adapter, or native CCS ports on their cars. But, the CCS owners would suffer greatly if it were a one way street, we would be waiting for plugs being used by Teslas, and have no other options. To my thinking, the best outcome would be a universal plug type, with open access to all networks. The Tesla benefit could remain better pricing at SC sites, exclusive lounges, etc. With more "universal" options, each plug would be utilized more efficiently (law of large numbers), and travel would be far simpler for all. The argument about waiting for slow charging cars would be far less relevant, in fact faster charging cars are catching up already.

If CO is foretelling, CCS will have better coverage than Tesla in more places soon. At some point, SC will be a bit of liability to Tesla, it will no longer be a key selling point the way it has been. And, Tesla may just find that their interest in maintaining it wanes, leading them to sell the charging operations to someone.
The recent build-out of the public infrastructure has made a huge impact to the viability of road trips in non-Tesla's, especially the infusion of the EA network. That's only going to get better and maybe MB's penance will be similar.


"Separately, lawyers representing plaintiffs in a class action lawsuit against Daimler for allegedly cheating on diesel emissions test announced details of a $700 million settlement with the automaker. "

The density of the Supercharger Network currently for the lower 48 already allows access to 99% of the population last I read. Everything from here on out adds convenience and efficiency but from experience, If it stopped growing today, I would have 0 restrictions and concerns traveling cross country.
The biggest issue that most comparing portal figures ignore isn't the number of plugs, it's:
  • Locations
  • Charge rate
  • Reliability
  • ICE'd
  • Amenities
  • Safety
  • Dependability(different that reliability as in app shows available and working and it is)
As we will soon see, when there are more public fast charging portals (there may already be) than Supercharger portals, the current functionality and features that come with the Supercharger Network and Tesla Ecosystem will continue to deliver a better traveling experience. This continues to be the Achilles Heel of the public network as noted in countless posts on this forum.

The same reason that the public infrastructure is so unreliable and stressful may also be a concern if Tesla's Supercharger Network was open to non-Tesla's too. A lot of the problems that are not hardware related such as short cables and unreadable, leaking screens may still become problematic for Tesla. This could be another reason others have chosen to not join. Allowing or open sourcing their code to ensure compatibility may be a breach of security they are not willing to risk.

All of the reasons we've come up with as to why no OEM's have taken up the offer have done nothing though to tarnish the intent of the offer. Somebody like a Joe Rogan or Marques Brownlee (sp?) should ask Musk specifically what are the reasons he feels it's not happened. It's been brought up a few years back and the response from Straubel was that they were in discussions with a few OEM's and the talks were ongoing but nothing ever came from it. Only then can we stop speculating and really know why.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,393 Posts
The same reason that the public infrastructure is so unreliable and stressful may also be a concern if Tesla's Supercharger Network was open to non-Tesla's too. A lot of the problems that are not hardware related such as short cables and unreadable, leaking screens may still become problematic for Tesla. This could be another reason others have chosen to not join. Allowing or open sourcing their code to ensure compatibility may be a breach of security they are not willing to risk.
As this incident has proven, the coding was never the issue. It has long been surmised that the Model 3 actually shipped with native CCS compatibility, and a physical adapter was all that was required for the Model 3 to charge directly off of CCS. And this makes sense, because the Model S/X in Europe can't use the CCS Superchargers with just an adapter; those models must also have a Powerline communication module installed.

Essentially, Tesla is actively blocking access to an otherwise open standard.

All of the reasons we've come up with as to why no OEM's have taken up the offer have done nothing though to tarnish the intent of the offer. Somebody like a Joe Rogan or Marques Brownlee (sp?) should ask Musk specifically what are the reasons he feels it's not happened. It's been brought up a few years back and the response from Straubel was that they were in discussions with a few OEM's and the talks were ongoing but nothing ever came from it. Only then can we stop speculating and really know why.
As a number of people have already mentioned, nobody cares why. The fact is, Tesla could have supported EV owners, but they have chosen not to. When someone finally directly answers the question of "why," they are more than likely going to be lying. That even goes for Saint Elon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,572 Posts
And to my earlier comment of charging stations should be evaluated like sex, Quality over Quantity, maybe we can have both.


"It did not take long before fellow Tesla enthusiast @MontrealTesla, who tracks updates to the Supercharger Network, was able to retrieve filings for the Firebaugh site. As it turned out, the site will host 56 Tesla Superchargers, and it will be in the same vicinity as a full-fledged restaurant and convenience store. These were outlined in filings submitted for the site, one of which was filed with the County of Fresno’s Department of Public Works and Planning. “A total of 56 Tesla EV charging spaces will be provided, 2 of which will be ADA accessible (under a separate permit),” the filing noted."

Could this be the 50's themed drive-in restaurant mentioned a few years back? Why does California get all the best stuff?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,572 Posts
Another interesting item on the application to the above mentioned mega-station, is the inclusion of 9 non-Tesla charging stalls. I wonder who's paying for those? My guess is they possibly partnered with EVgo or EA to handle the permitting, utility calcs, etc and they would hook up their cabinets. Would be nice if they could both share on the battery storage to avoid demand charges. I would think it would need a few megapacks though. Cool that they would both have access to the food plaza and not a private facility like Harris Ranch.
It also mentions gas pumps too which seems odd but I imagine they are part of the convenience store which has nothing to do with Tesla/EA/EVgo.
And just to clarify, I am only guessing the 9 non-Tesla EV spaces are being subcontracted to a third party and not comped by Tesla.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,393 Posts
That's the site of an abandoned restaurant called the Apricot Inn, though it appears that Best Western carried over the name for their nearby motel. There are quite a few of those sites that need to be brought back to life as longer range ICE vehicles left many businesses along the I-5 route shuttered due to lack of customers.

It's off the same exit as the Electrify America charging site at the Shell station, so if the site is gong to include 9 public chargers as well, that brings the total to 13 public DC fast chargers at the same location.


In terms of who might be partnering with Tesla, that's a good guess. I doubt it would be Electrify America because they already have a site at that location. The only network I know that has openly discussed partnering with Tesla on sites is Recargo, and that would definitely be within their range. Nine is a very odd number though, so I wonder if they might be referencing the Electrify America site that's already in place (people seem to have a hard time counting EA locations based on plugs versus dispensers).
 
161 - 177 of 177 Posts
Top