Massive SC subsidizing by new owners?

Massive SC subsidizing by new owners?

So I noticed that the local super charger (Coeur d'Alene Idaho) has a rate of 0.27 cents/kWh.

I thought to myself, wait; there is a hydroelectric plant a few miles away and my utility bill is only 0.086 cents/kWh.

This means Telsa is charging 320% more for their electricity?

So basically; I am subsidizing everyone that got lifetime free supercharging with their cars? That's pretty lame.

TommyT | 19 November 2019

Actually you have it backwards. It was the early adopters who paid $2000 for FUSC that subsidized the build out of the supercharger network. Many of those early adopters will never recoup that. Without those early adopters there would be no super charger in Idaho for you to complain about.


Frank99 | 19 November 2019

Generally, there's a big difference between the cost of power for residential and commercial customers. Call up your electric utility and ask them about the tariffs for commercial power. $0.27/kwh still seems high for an area with hydro power.
Are you sure that the Supercharger isn't charging by the minute? Out here in Phoenix, Tesla isn't allowed to charge by the kwh (because that would be in competition with the local electric monopoly), so the cost is $0.24 or something per minute of 120kW charging, and roughly half that if the charge rate is below 60 kW. That works out to roughly $0.12 / kw if I'm getting full power from the SC.

zybane | 19 November 2019

It's charged at kWh.

Also, in this area commercial and industrial electric rates are lower than residential. Which makes the math even worse against the high supercharger electricity rate.

FISHEV | 19 November 2019

"I thought to myself, wait; there is a hydroelectric plant a few miles away and my utility bill is only 0.086 cents/kWh."@zybane

My nominal rate is $0.09 kWh but actual rate paid is $0.31kWh after taxes, fees, etc. etc. Hopefully Tesla does what I do and subscribe to renewable power, the Blue Sky option, so that our EV power is clean for coal generated.

Tesla is likely just covering costs with the $0.28 kWh as the for profits like EVgo and Electrify America change about $0.40 kWh. Be better if Tesla did make a profit on the SC's and eliminate the free supercharging to encourage people to charge at home and free up the SC's for travelers and those who have no home charging. It would also help the growth of the for profit charging infrastructure. | 19 November 2019

@zybane - At a cost of $250,000 or so to build a smaller Supercharger location along with maintenance costs, it does require additional costs to recover those costs. Lightly used stations take far longer to recover those costs.

There is no requirement that you use a Supercharger, and perhaps there are some CHAdeMO stations (with the adapter) or J1772 L2 charge points you can use instead that are cheaper in your area, although I sort of doubt it.

Yodrak. | 19 November 2019

"there is a hydroelectric plant a few miles away and my utility bill is only 0.086 cents/kWh.

This means Telsa is charging 320% more for their electricity?"

You are making some invalid comparisons. Your residential electric rate is based on all of the sources of electricity that your supplier has available to it, and the cost of its infrastructure to bring all of the sources to all of its customers. Tesla, like you, is a customer of the supplier, and has the added costs of building, operating, and maintaining the supercharger facilities.

I think you will find that Tesla's prices for Super Charger charging are less than the charges by the other suppliers of DC fast charging.

jordanrichard | 19 November 2019

OP, those of us that have free unlimited supercharging made it possible for you to have your car...... How about some respect for those who bought their cars when you could count the number of superchargers in the country, on two hands.

vswendsen | 20 November 2019

I realize everyone wants charging to be cheap or free. But nothing is really free and the money has to come from somewhere when it comes time for repairs or servicing of charging equipment. I have an electric motorcycle in addition to my Model 3P and have charged at many different charging stations in North Carolina. No doubt that Greenlots is one of the cheapest. But right now Greenlots is also turning off most of their DCFC in North Carolina. At a time when others are trying to expand their charging networks Greenlots is shrinking theirs. On the other side Evgo is one of the most expensive places to charge but they are also very good at repairing their chargers when they go down. I still think the SC rates that Tesla charges are among the cheapest. But charging isn't their only business so they can pull money from other places when money for repairs is needed. If you don't like what Tesla charges for their SC then go find a free L2 station and charge there for 10 hours.

FISHEV | 20 November 2019

"those of us that have free unlimited supercharging made it possible for you to have your car...... @jordanrichard

That is certainly the attitude of many of the S/X owners at full SC's. We even had one S owner state he should get to go to head of a the line because he had free super charging. I think I'll cash in my taxpayer contribution card of $500M loan to Tesla and $1.5B in tax subsidies and that doesn't count the state government tax subsidies.

jordanrichard | 20 November 2019

FISHEV, I have never heard of anyone feeling that they should go ahead of the line because they were early adapters. My remarks stem from the frustration of new owners not realizing how Tesla got to where it is now. I and I am sure other early MS owners are not looking for people kiss our rings/feet. However, these type of remarks show a complete lack of respect/acknowledgement of the risks the earlier customers took. Hell, if there is any group of customers that should be heralded for what they did and they can't even use the SC network.

SamO | 20 November 2019

I paid $2,000 for Supercharging when there were only a few stations. I was glad to invest in the best fast-charging (only) network that would connect the entire United States. I have not been disappointed.

#DriveFree | 20 November 2019

I also paid extra for the Supercharging option back in Jan-2013 with my Model S60. Only 6 locations existed in the world at the time. It's unlikely I used the cost of the option in Supercharger power, but it was still worth it. I made long-distance EV travel possible and eliminated the need for us to have ICE.

At the time the larger 85 models cost $8,000 more + $2,000 for Supercharging being included. Never really free.

NKYTA | 20 November 2019

$2k was a line item in my 2012 Dec delivery as well. We figured if all there would ever be would get us to LA from the Bay, it wouldn't likely have been worth it, but it seemed like a pretty good bet that they would build more.

In 2014 we use the SC network to get to Wi and back.
In 2016 we went to Key West and back.

Good bet, I guess. :-)

reed_lewis | 20 November 2019

@FISHEV - The loans to Tesla were paid back with interest. The subsidy goes to consumers, not Tesla. Plus subsidy goes to every EV purchaser.

jordanrichard | 20 November 2019

I forgot to point which group of owners it was I referred as being the one’s that should be heralded and this the Roadster. There was no SC network and when there was one, they can’t use it. | 20 November 2019

@jordanrichard - I got it, but worth explaining to others who may not have been around in the early days. I still see a few roadsters around here every rare month! True heroes of Tesla's start.

I considered a Roadster myself as they look great but expensive and so low to the ground. My days of getting in and out of low slung cars may be over. Roadster 2020 should be higher if the pack is under the car instead of the rear. I haven't sat in one yet.

TranzNDance | 20 November 2019

I couldn't afford a Roadster when they were first available, and just as I could afford the original Roadster price, the Roadster 2020 price went up. Now, I'm hoping for one of my kids to buy me one.

milesbb | 21 November 2019

I agree with zybane that Tesla is significantly marking up Kwh in cheep power hydro electric areas. What Tesla is doing is trying to be competitive with gasoline across the US. In locations that have high electric rates the mark up is low to stay competitive with gasoline. The high electric rate areas are subsidized by the low electric rate areas. The good news is if you live in a low electric rate area you save big time charging at home. This was not always the case, the original Tesla price structure more closely followed local electric rates. When Tesla changed their price structure to gasoline competitive, folks in Washington and Oregon were complaining big time.

FISHEV | 21 November 2019

"I have never heard of anyone feeling that they should go ahead of the line because they were early adapters."@jordanrichard

And now we've heard it TWICE in this thread where you claim special status and we have another entitled who felt his early adoption and free supercharging gave him jump the line status at SC's.

carlk | 22 November 2019

You came to the Tesla-land and immediately able to use thousands of superchargers built with previous owners' money and you're complaining?