Forums

Tesla just raised Supercharging Fees across the board above market prices in most markets! RIPOFF! I pay .06 cents per kWh pk.

Tesla just raised Supercharging Fees across the board above market prices in most markets! RIPOFF! I pay .06 cents per kWh pk.

I think this is a bunch of crap, the average market price of a Kilowatt of electricity in Arizona is somewhere around 11 cents and the USA is 12 cents per according to the EIA and Department of Energy yet Tesla just raised it's pricing across the board as stated on its website to .31 cents per kWh! Sure there are infrastructure costs and other but the whole reason IVE NEVER USED CHARGEPOINT OR OTHERS or one reason I sold my other brand plug in hybrid was that changepoint and other networks actually cost more to use electricity than gasoline. After this most recent change the price to supercharge a Tesla just tripled in a lot of markets! And I'd be naïve to think Tesla is never going to raise prices again, and unlike utilities customers have no public utilities commission or way to protest price increases. I think this is Bullxhit!

epikula | January 20, 2019
epikula | January 20, 2019

We shouldn't have to pay for Tesla's messed up referral program via jacked up superhcharging which has led to 80 free next gen roadsters https://electrek.co/2019/01/17/tesla-roadster-free-killed-referral-program/

Would we(customers) be okay if gasoline or our electricity bills just suddenly tripled overnight without some explanation????? NOOOOO

SO | January 20, 2019

Seeing as how most owners charge at home and should only be using the supercharger network for long distance travel only, this means very little.

As far as the roadsters go, probably the cost to Tesla is half of what the MSRP is. And they ended the program. It was nice that Tesla offered what they did for so long. They didn’t have to do it. And you didn’t have to buy a Tesla.

Only if you can’t charge at home, should you be using the supercharger network for daily travel.

carlk | January 20, 2019

Where do you live? I'm going to skip the supercharger and to charge at your house.

SO | January 20, 2019

@epikula - and FYI - your home electric rate doesn’t go up. The monthly cost of course goes up but you are not spending that on gas.

epikula | January 20, 2019

carlk i live at E. Redwood Place, Chandler Arizona, SRP is my utility and i have EV rate plan at .06 cents per kWh from 11PM-5AM. Here's SRP's price sheet https://www.srpnet.com/prices/home/electricvehicle.aspx

epikula | January 20, 2019

I charge at home but one of the many reasons I bought a Tesla is that I drive around the country. If I didn't I'd buy a Leaf and never leave town. That's how I view all other EV's there goes a car that never leaves town. How can it? No charge network and if you use third party they charge more than gasoline for kWh. Now Tesla is approaching costing more than gasoline when you think about gas costing about 1.93 average nationwide and cars that get 55MPG. I have a 3 year old cars that have 70,000 miles because I drive. My Model 3 is six months old and has 12,000 miles on it. It's been to Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, California, Nevada. The 2nd day we had it took it north to North Rim of Grand Canyon, Zion NP and other places in the Grand Circle as it's called. Shouldn't have to pay 3X the average rate according to DOE or EIA for electricity.

epikula | January 20, 2019

Again, are we to believe this is the last time rates go up? When do we as owners speak up? When the cost is twice the cost of gasoline?

epikula | January 20, 2019

Solar City/Tesla sued and has sued Electric Utilities for unfair practices and unfair prices paid for net metering in states like Nevada and Arizona(came to a out of court settlement with SRP here in Arizona). How can they turn around and then punish EV users/their own customers by jacking up rates arbitrarily across the board to .31 cents per kWh? Two faced. It was .11 cents per kWh just days ago!!! Surprise It will now cost 3X!! Did EXXON Mobil or BP just buy Tesla, acting like Big Oil.

Mike83 | January 20, 2019

I have had Solar PV panels for about 15 years on two homes. The last home paid for capX in 5.5 years. I now pay ZERO for electricity and charge two Teslas. The fact that I don't need gas stations or oil changes saves me tons of time and money. I would never consider driving an ICE on trips either since with the Superchargers everywhere and destination chargers at hotels and campsites there is no problem.
If your paying your utility for electricity you are throwing money away. In some places gas stations are closing so people will need to drive further for fill ups while I fill up at home or have breakfast next to the Supercharger.
The change is a comin and sooner than people realize.

GHammer | January 20, 2019

You qre ignoring the fact Tesla has to recoup utility demand charges which are hefty as well as infrastructure and ongoing maintenance.

Tesla-David | January 20, 2019

As I understand it Tesla plans on using some of the charging money collected to help further build out the SC grid to better accommodate the huge influx of M3's, so maybe that is part of the reason for the price increase. On our last three trips we used our UMC and charged our MS at various hotels we stayed at in Portland, OR, Vancouver, BC, utilizing 12A 120V outlets, and were never charged for that by the Hotels we stayed at. Worked perfectly for us.

I am with @Mike83 and charge at home off our solar + PW2 powered roof, which covered 252 percent of our electric needs for our all electric house + 2 Telsa's (MS + M3), and we actually exported 60 percent of our excess solar energy generated back to grid.

TeslaTap.com | January 20, 2019

@epikula - Perhaps it's more fair to compare Supercharging costs with your local peak rate, which can be as high as $0.22, rather than the special 11pm to 5am rate, which are times Superchargers are rarely used.

Then compare Tesla's rates with other EV options like Chargepoint. I suspect you'll still find Tesla's rates very competitive. In addition to the base electric costs, Tesla has to cover design costs, manufacturing costs, installation costs, maintenance costs and may even have to pay to lease the land.

stevenmaifert | January 20, 2019

What we should be discussing is what was the economic necessity that caused Tesla to raise the Supercharging rates so dramatically. That fact that some of us can charge at HOME on a bargain night rate or have solar to offset the cost of charging at HOME is not real relevant to the discussion.

By the way, in most cases, the rates to charge on a ChargePoint station are set by the owner of the site with the charger. In 6 years of frequent use, I've paid anywhere from free to .20/kWh. Never came close to .31/kWh.

Mike83 | January 20, 2019

Some people think Tesla should give them cheap electricity? Cheapskates. They should charge $.50 like other charging places.

jordanrichard | January 20, 2019

OP, get a grip!!!

Your are comparing your residential rates tot hat of commercial rates. For all you know, Tesla was losing money on a number of superchargers. Not everyone/town in every state pays the same rate for electricity. So thus not every supercharger location cost Tesla the same rate.

Look at the price of gas, hell, they varies based on what part of town you are in. So Tesla is adjusting the price of electricity they charge you based on location.

rxlawdude | January 20, 2019

I look at this from a different perspective: my 2015 S70D with free Supercharging just became more valuable. :-)

Tesla-David | January 20, 2019

@rxlawdude, me too with our 2015 S85D ;0)

rxlawdude | January 20, 2019

@Tesla-David, the paranoids/FUDsters will accuse Tesla of slow-walking older MS repairs to encourage them to be retired. ;-)

jimglas | January 20, 2019

Maybe my decision to keep FUSC and not take the $5k refund on my P3D was a good idea after all?

rxlawdude | January 20, 2019

@jim, perhaps so if you plan on road trips. :-)

carlk | January 20, 2019

jordab
"Your are comparing your residential rates tot hat of commercial rates."

Very true. The $7 I paid for a glass of Fat Tires beer at restaurant yesterday could have bought me a six pack at Total Wine. Op's home charging rate would have been much higher if he figured overhead of what he has paid for the house and its maintenance into it. That's why I joked if he will let people to charge at his home at $0.06/kWh. He'd go bankrupt very soon if he does that.

Darthamerica | January 20, 2019

Sad to see this and that free Supercharging is gone but I'm glad I still have it. Energy and infrastructure are not cheap so this doesn't at all surprise me. It's best to charge at home with a TOU plan and save the Superchargers for the rare times when you're on a road trip or emergencies.

jimglas | January 20, 2019

@rxl: I work out of town one day per week that requires a SC to get home, but really just felt I should honor the deal I made

SO | January 20, 2019

@epikula - feel free to use any other charging network available.

If you are that disappointed in Tesla, sell it now before you lose any more depreciation. Then you can put that toward a leaf.

SO | January 20, 2019

You can also buy a used Tesla that still has free supercharging as well.

kcheng | January 20, 2019

"Tesla-David | January 20, 2019
As I understand it Tesla plans on using some of the charging money collected to help further build out the SC grid to better accommodate the huge influx of M3's"

Do you have a source or link?

"jordanrichard | January 20, 2019
OP, get a grip!!!

Your are comparing your residential rates tot hat of commercial rates."

In my state, Maine, commercial rates are lower than residential rates.

"Mike83 | January 20, 2019
Some people think Tesla should give them cheap electricity? Cheapskates. They should charge $.50 like other charging places."

How dare all those Model S and X owners think that! ;)

carlk | January 20, 2019

@kcheng

It's very simple. There is no reason for Tesla not to build as many superchargers as needed if it can recover the cost or even better makes some profit. There is less incentive, to say the least, if it loses money building one.

lilbean | January 20, 2019

Good. Hope this discourages people from freeloading at the superchargers.

carlk | January 20, 2019

Yes it's all that better if it makes people to try charge at home as much as possible and free up superchargers for people who really have the need.

lilbean | January 20, 2019

Yes.

blue adept | January 20, 2019

@epikula

As @stevenmaifert mentioned,

"What we should be discussing is what was the economic necessity that caused Tesla to raise the Supercharging rates so dramatically."

Maybe it has something to do with the various ways Arizona's car manufacturers, dealerships, the Arizona DOT, and even the state's governance, collectively conspired to prevent Tesla sales for any number of reasons, for example:

https://www.azcentral.com/story/money/business/tech/2017/06/22/tesla-sel...

https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/laurieroberts/2017/06/19/t...

(All of this is something that someone who CLAIMS to live in Arizona SHOULD be well aware of)

Be that as it may, perhaps Tesla is being forced to pay for easements or service connections or other such nuanced particulars/allowances (like the recently phased out EV tax credit) and are having to pass those arbitrarily incurred additional fees onto the consumer through increased kWh charges at the Superchargers (again, because the state is forcing them to) in order to maintain their cost comparative market pricing?

And all of it's because certain embedded third party actors weren't able to figure a way to get a slice of the pie for themselves through the various exploitative pay-to-play mechanisms that had become so entrenched in the industry which amount to little more than exploitative, predatory, mafiosa-type shenanigans, albeit a legislated form of racketeering (if you really wanted to get technical) given the business model under which dealerships operate.

Daniel Gatti, a policy analyst for the clean vehicles program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, wrote a pretty conclusive review of the situation in as plain of English as you can get while still remaining politically correct/safe for public consumption:

https://www.ecowatch.com/states-cant-buy-tesla-2278638949.html

So while you're focusing your efforts on dumping on Tesla (because you've been manipulated [or are trying to manipulate us] to redirect your [our] frustrations towards them instead of the actual culprits of your reason for discontent, or is it that you're just trying to manipulate us) perhaps you should, instead, shift your focus to the actual culprits...Your state's legislature and businesses association, not to mention the so-called "Big 3" who're at the root of it all.

Bottom line, water runs down hill, so if you're wanting to bitch or complain about a petty, few extra pennies charge at a local Supercharger, I'd suggest you write to your city/state's representatives because they're the ones actually responsible for your discontentment, NOT Tesla who're doing all that they can to bring us all a clean, sustainable, affordable alternative to fossil fuel-based transportation.

bp | January 21, 2019

When Tesla installed the first superchargers, new vehicles had "Free Long Distance Charging on the Supercharger Network". Supercharging didn't come with the smaller battery models and was an additional cost upgrade. Based on the wording on their website, they evidently believed the supercharger network would be used only for road trips, and planned to install the superchargers only between the major cities. The typical Tesla driver would likely use less than 400 KWh per year - or about $100 of electricity per year.

What they evidently didn't take into account was the need for supercharging in the cities - to support road trips, those owners without access to overnight charging, and a small number of high mileage vehicles that need faster recharging during the day. Combined, urban charging would use considerably more than 400 KWh per year - and significantly increase the cost to support supercharging.

And now that Tesla has to maintain profitability, we shouldn't be surprised for them to look at every (reasonable) opportunity to generate some additional income per vehicle. Charging for supercharging shouldn't be surprising, especially for owners who haven't planned to pay for overnight charging.

Installing and maintaining superchargers is expensive - it's more than just the electricity, it's acquiring the land (which may be leased parking spaces), building the supercharging stations, connecting to the grid, potentially adding solar power, and then maintaining the stations. Plus Tesla will likely be deployed V3 superchargers this year, which could involve upgrades to some or all of the current superchargers.

Providing some form of free supercharging with vehicle sales is still a great marketing strategy - and something Tesla could still go back to, at least for the higher end S/X/Roadster models - if the supercharging was restricted to long distance travel only (outside of a 100 mile radius from "home"), especially because other manufacturers will be relying on 3rd party charging, making it more difficult for them to match Tesla's "free long distance charging" offer.

bp | January 21, 2019

When Tesla installed the first superchargers, new vehicles had "Free Long Distance Charging on the Supercharger Network". Supercharging didn't come with the smaller battery models and was an additional cost upgrade. Based on the wording on their website, they evidently believed the supercharger network would be used only for road trips, and planned to install the superchargers only between the major cities. The typical Tesla driver would likely use less than 400 KWh per year - or about $100 of electricity per year.

What they evidently didn't take into account was the need for supercharging in the cities - to support road trips, those owners without access to overnight charging, and a small number of high mileage vehicles that need faster recharging during the day. Combined, urban charging would use considerably more than 400 KWh per year - and significantly increase the cost to support supercharging.

And now that Tesla has to maintain profitability, we shouldn't be surprised for them to look at every (reasonable) opportunity to generate some additional income per vehicle. Charging for supercharging shouldn't be surprising, especially for owners who haven't planned to pay for overnight charging.

Installing and maintaining superchargers is expensive - it's more than just the electricity, it's acquiring the land (which may be leased parking spaces), building the supercharging stations, connecting to the grid, potentially adding solar power, and then maintaining the stations. Plus Tesla will likely be deployed V3 superchargers this year, which could involve upgrades to some or all of the current superchargers.

Providing some form of free supercharging with vehicle sales is still a great marketing strategy - and something Tesla could still go back to, at least for the higher end S/X/Roadster models - if the supercharging was restricted to long distance travel only (outside of a 100 mile radius from "home"), especially because other manufacturers will be relying on 3rd party charging, making it more difficult for them to match Tesla's "free long distance charging" offer.

TeslaTap.com | January 21, 2019

@epikula - No one is required to use Superchargers. If you prefer to wait 10+ hours for a full charge, there are plenty of L2 chargers. In our area L2 charging is more expensive than Superchargers. CHAdeMO is even more expensive than L2 charging, but is another option if you don't mind waiting 3 hours or so for a charge.

You can also buy your own charging stations and price it anyway you want. If you think you can make a pile of dough charging 6 cents kW/h, go for it. I'm sure you'll get lots of people who will frequent your charging locations. My guess is you'll be lose a lot of money doing this, but you are convinced that the equipment and maintenance cost nothing why not? You can also restrict your public charging station to 11pm to 5am to get that great 6 cent rate, although the number of users will go down quite a bit.

DTsea | January 21, 2019

I do not like the OPs accusatory tone or his weak math skills in comparing night time special rates to daytime.

However.....

$.31/kWh is about $.10/mile. That is about the fuel cost per mile of a BMW at 25 mpg with gas at $2.50/gallon. So the point that supercharging is now the same or even more expensive than an ICE is valid.... and for apartment dwellers without at home charging, greatly reduces the economic viability of a Tesla.

kcheng | January 21, 2019

So, since Tesla has to reach and maintain profitability, Model 3 owners and future S and X and Y and truck owners are subsidizing those owners with free unlimited supercharging? Aren't there about 125,000 of those?

SO | January 21, 2019

The “free” supercharging for S, X and 3 was baked into the cost of the vehicle.

The 3 that didn’t come with free supercharging, was 5k less.

HummerMan3 | January 21, 2019

While I am a huge Tesla fanboy and a big singer of its praises, I think the OP brings up several valid points. Tesla has a virtual monopoly on long-distance travel charging options for these cars, and they can raise the rates as often as they like for any reason. Competition would help keep Tesla honest in their Supercharger rates.
Although very few kWh of my car's electricity have come from Superchargers, it's all about perception. When I talk about all of the benefits of this car over all the other cars out there, Supercharging always comes up. It used to be that I could say that Supercharging was 1/4 the cost of gas per mile (at least in my region). Then it effectively doubled, but still 1/2 the cost of gas, and again, easy to market as superior to ICE over long distances. Now at 3/4 the cost of gas per mile of travel, it definitely loses its luster.
Why did they increase the price? I have a hard time believing that its due to increased costs to install and maintain the Superchargers. That was the excuse for the last price raise a year ago, and it was understandable because cost per kWh at the Chargers was the same as at home. Since this announcement came along alongside those of Tesla decreasing its workforce 7% and ending the referral program, I think that the bean counters are getting into Elon's head and trying to figure out where costs can be contained further, or as I suspect in this case, small profits can be made.
I guess what frustrates me the most is that we have a ~300% increase in electricity prices in ~15 months' time (again, only at the Superchargers, but stay with me). One of the main reasons I was excited to switch from gas to electricity was the apparent non-volatility of electricity prices. Yet if gas had a similar price increase, it would go from $2.00 per gallon to $6.00 in the same time frame, and everyone would be flipping out and not at all sympathetic to the oil company. I'm certainly scared that in another 1-2 years profitability will be down at Tesla and another increase to $0.44 per kWh happens, putting it right on par with ICE at a cost-per-mile basis.

TeslaTap.com | January 21, 2019

@Hummer - What's not to like at getting long distance travel at 3/4 the cost of gas. Actually the savings are greater as there are no oil and filter changes every 3000 miles or so. For most owners 90-100% of charging is done at home at your overnight cheap home rates. So only a small part of your yearly costs are at Superchargers. You can always use other providers, such as Chargepoint if you don't like Superchargers or the prices Tesla charges. For most, the costs of Superchargers is a trivial amount of their annual fueling costs.

Also consider most Supercharging is done during the periods where electricity rates are at the peak. It is different than gas, where the rates remain mostly the same all day long.

You may be in a pocket with cheap gas and high electric rates. Here in California (where more than 1/2 of all US Tesla's reside) the average gas price is $3.30 for regular and $3.60 for premium (as most competitive gas cars would require). So Tesla's may make better economic sense in some areas over others, if your sole reason for buying the car is saving on fueling costs.

jordanrichard | January 21, 2019

DTsea, premium gas only cost $2.50 a gallon where you live? It’s $3.18 where I live in CT.

nwfan | January 21, 2019

@jordanrichard, $1.59 a gal in Ft Worth TX as I went pass during morning commute.

jordanrichard | January 21, 2019

$1.59 for premium gas?

DTsea | January 21, 2019

Jordan, i have never owned a car that needed premium, but usually it is ten cents more than regular. Last ti.e i checke AZ was about $2.50. I just checked and it is now $2.86 there.

jordanrichard | January 21, 2019

My remarks are about the costs you cited with a BMW, which requires premium gas.

DTsea | January 21, 2019

Jordan

Go it thanks, didnt know that, i dont have a bmw.

So assum $3/gallon the SC is still nearly 100% of that. For people who cannot charge at home, depend on superchargers, and drive 15000 miles a year (like most people do) thats $4000-$5000 per year for supercharging. That would reduce the perceived value of a model 3 to an apartment dweller by a LOT.

nwfan | January 21, 2019

Dam forum. Network error on my response to jordanrichard.
Assume cheapest grade. Stopped at red light an noticed the price.
Haven’t purchase gas in a while since last rental.

Was more interested in watching the warmer vapor coming out of all the tail pipes. I was thinking my model S was the only vehicle not polluting.

Yodrak. | January 21, 2019

Regular gas in Fort Worth seems to be funning between $1.74 (Gas Buddy) and $2.19 (Texaco). gasbudy.com

Don't know how Texas ranks on fuel tax, but the transportation cost to get the gas from refinery to gas station is probably about the lowest in the country.

Darthamerica | January 21, 2019

Supercharging has never been and could never be "free" in a public company. The car where always baked into the price of the cars. Now people will pay per use. Energy cost money and we haven't figured out a way to provide it for free in a market economy. It's best to think of the previous Supercharging for free as a promotional offer. Now Tesla has to grow up and generate revenue to fund itself and meet the demands of shareholders.

It also should not be a surprise that the cost is about what a typical gas car cost. Fossil fuels are still the least expensive way to power the mass market.

SCCRENDO | January 21, 2019

@darth. Again you come with your BS. Electricity is far cheaper than gasoline as judged by home electricity costs. Also solar panels will significantly reduce the cost. It is likely that Elon is amortizing the cost of building the superchargers into the costs. These do not get built for free and Elon initially may have subsidized the infrastructure cost to a certain degree

Pages