For those of you who also occasionally use the Fastchargers of Ionity in Europe, be aware that a massive price increase has just been announced per 31.01.2020.
From formerly 8€ per charge, you know have to cough up 0,79€ per KWh.https://ionity.eu/_Resources/Persistent/a7c7cece094e15da7bfc2864a74e62b5...
Holy Cow. That is insane.
They are like gas stations right beside rental car returns. Nobody who has a choice would ever buy from them.
One just had to look at who owns them and realize this is just the owners keeping the thumb on scale to preserve sales of new ICE vehicles.
Geee... Look, it costs more than gas. Nothing to see here, see how comfortable this coal roller is with all the latest 1950's technology.
Yes the owners certainly have had a brain freeze here. It is also much more expensive to use them compared to a High Performance BMW M5 for a longer road trip! Where is the sense in that? And European prices for petrol are much higher than the US prices for gas!
OP missed the story. Ionity is switching from time based charging to per kWh charging. The end rates are setup to cost about the same. Also keep in mind that Ionity contracts are with other EV public charging companies and most customers will have those contracts not be paying Ionity directly.
The $1kWh price is the highest retail price with no contract. It is setup to provide charging but to encourage EV owner to get a contract with one of the EV charging companies. You have to look at the subscriber prices for those EV charging companies to see what final price per kWh is for most users.
Perhaps our EU folks with contracts can tell us what they pay. Bjorn Nyland has used them in a lot of his videos and high price doesn't seem to be an issue he mentions.
EU is also more consumer oriented with regulations which is why EV's are much bigger seller in EU than US so there will be regulatory input on the public charging network. EU is requiring EV adoption at an aggressive rate so it will also look at the support infrastructure.
Well I am in EU and up to now Ionity charged a flat rate of 8 Euros per charge. Independent of time or kWh used. But it is correct that this is for a non-contract. And I am not so sure the EU in general is more consumer oriented. Norway and Netherlands are exceptions just now.
I only have seen the Swedish pricing and that is a proposed subscription USD 250 per annum plus USD 0.38 per kWh. So it seems adjusted for subscribers alright but still very expensive. We are lucky to have the Supercharger prices at about USD 0.26 per kWh. While my home charging is about half of that.
I must say I just find all of these subscription models so outdated! And hope they will not survive.
Sounds more expensive than Teslahttps://www.teslarati.com/tesla-superchargers-3x-cheaper-vs-ionity/
I think the owners of Ionity must have had magic mushrooms for breakfast before their Bored Meeting!
Tesla Björn has looked at this
Bjorn Nyland has used them in a lot of his videos and high price doesn't seem to be an issue he mentions.-fish
Tesla Björn has looked at this - Peter
Jack, by using lack of information as evidence to support your view, your view collapses when the information is actually found.
I have to ask. Why do you call MurkyWaterTroll Jack?
maybe because he doesnt know jack?
Got ya. Thanks
It’s the driver’s name on his screen when he shows us pictures of the energy graph. He tries to make sure the door is open so it says “easy entry” instead of his name, but he forgot to do it on a recent picture.
conveniently its also because he doesnt know jack. Im sticking with that
FISHEV | January 16, 2020
Found the gray line that shows on the old 2015 Model S example linked above but it has no number attached to it, just the green "Rated Range" line has the battery per cent number. Hit the Plus/Minus icon on the upper right to toggle from Green Line to Green/Gray Line.
"The green line represents the actual usage whereas the gray line represents predicted usage."
But as we see from these pics, the green line does not represent Predicted Range as the 28% of battery should be 86 miles but Projected Range is just 56 miles. The gray line is saying under ideal conditions I'd get slightly more than Rated Range but Projected Range says both are wrong and just 56 miles.
"try not to make any jackfish remarks"
ionity is a jointventure of many german manufacturers. they are not aware her position in the ev-world... hint: read mercedes-benz´ top-shot manager interview in last „handelsblatt“-issue. a very funny man ;)
Hah I like the Jackfish thing. I tried to label it with a nickname of tinyhorn but it didn't stick.
Jesus...Jallred with the win as always....
I liked tinyhorn. Don't give up!
It was subject to misinterpretation I noticed:)
Yeah. Seemed pretty obvious to me but Eye of the Beholder and other mixed idioms always apply.
"I only have seen the Swedish pricing and that is a proposed subscription USD 250 per annum plus USD 0.38 per kWh."
About 30% cheaper than gasoline.
310 miles/32 miles per gallon X $3.75 gallon - $36 to fuel Subaru.
310 miles = 75kW x $0.38 - $28 to fuel Tesla.
As for Tesla's profits on the SC.
Assuming each SC has 50% utilization rate and chargers 24 cars with 50kW charge. A single charger could handle 48 x 30 minute charges a day but we'll figure just 50% of the time.
So each charger would be selling 50kW x 24 cars x $0.28 per kWh = $336 per charger per day.
12000 US chargers x $336 = $4M per day.
$4M x 365 days = $1.5B.
Assuming Tesla pays a commercial power rate that is 50% of retail, a nice $750M profit per year and growing fast with maximum revenue potential of $3B and $1.5B profit.
Fish is present.
Public Service Announcement:
FISHEV is a known troll of several years standing and several user
names who pushes an anti Tesla narrative. Please
take his opinions with a grain of salt, avoid any advice he may
suggest, and do not let him implant any Fear, Uncertainty, or Doubt
about Tesla or your car into your own opinion.
A real cost analysis needs to include maintenance, insurance, equipment depreciation, real estate leasing, network communication, payment processing facilities, credit card fees, technical support.
And then the network as a whole doesn’t make profit because it’s expansion costs exceed revenue.
"And then the network as a whole doesn’t make profit because it’s expansion costs exceed revenue."
You don't like Tesla's business plan?
FISHEV is evil
“310 miles = 75kW x $0.38 - $28 to fuel Tesla.”
Who the hell has ever paid $28 for a full tank ?
The early Prius's with the bladder only had a 10 gallon tank. So, yes when gas dipped below $2.50 a gallon.
That said, I've never put 75kwh in my LR AWD.
Btw. That tank would last 400-500 miles depending on driving habits as long as it wasn't winter.
You don't like Tesla's business plan? -Jack
What I like or don’t like doesn’t matter at all. You said it makes money for Tesla. I said it does not.
You created a cost/profit analysis that was very incomplete. When you support your theories with incomplete and inaccurate analysis, your theories lack support.
As for Tesla's network, the most I've ever been charged was $13.44 for 56kwh at $0.24 per kwh.
Apparently, in NY you also pay tax. $1 of that was tax. ::Shrug::
Their subscription plan only makes sense for people who do all of their charging at an IONITY charger. If you do 90% of your charging at home and you assume 12000 miles/year then that leaves 1200 miles which takes about 300 KWHs in a Model 3. $250/300 is 83 cents just for the plan. The break even point is 2500 miles, 625 KWH, which is 40 cents/KWh, add that to the38 cents and you are ahead by a penny. With that pricing you would want to keep an old 10MPG Hummer around for road trips, it would be cheaper.
VW doesn't control Ionity, they had to fund it but the agreement was that couldn't control it, it's a separate company. They must be apoplectic about this. VW is spending $60B Euros go electric, with this sort of pricing their investment is going to be flushed down the toilet. No one in their right mind will buy an EV that doesn't have a Tesla badge on it. My cost calculations were for a Model 3 which I pegged at 4 miles/KWh, an E-Tron gets half of that. To fuel an E-Tron is going to cost .39 Euros/mile. Even if you assume 8 Euro/Gallon gas that's equivalent to a 20MPG car, most ICE cars do better then that today, a hybrid can do 50MPG.
Fish demonstrates that he is ALWAYS wrong
"The gray line is saying under ideal conditions I'd get slightly more than Rated Range but Projected Range says both are wrong and just 56 miles."
So the Gray line can't be Projected Range as Tesla states. Gray line shows lower energy use than even Rated Range.
Hard to keep track of your nonsense if you spread it out around random topics.
"The break even point is 2500 miles, 625 KWH, which is 40 cents/KWh."
At what point is it same as Tesla's $0.28 in the US.
Germany's average residential cost is $0.31 kWh so $0.40 kWh sounds like a reasonable cost for chargers which have to pay for the electric and overhead of the SC's from construction to maintenance to customer support.
We spend $10-20k extra purchasing EV's. The "fuel savings" going EV is such a moving target depending on what ICE car you use for comparison to what the public chargers are billing.
FISHEV@ The 40 cents/KWh is the cost of the subscription, you still have to pay an additional 39 cents on top of that, which brings you back to 79 cents/KWh, that's nearly three times as much as Tesla charges. It also completely negates the cost/mile advantage of an EV. For someone like you, who has no access to home or work charging, it's not nearly as bad a deal. If you do 12000 miles of fast charging a year then the overhead of the subscription is only 8 cents/KWh making the cost/KWh about 47 cents, still much worse than Tesla, but not unreasonable if your basis of comparison is $6/gallon which is the price of a gallon of gas in Germany. But for most people who do 90% of their charging at home then the cost of fast charging is prohibitively expensive.
Tronguy | January 17, 2020
Fish is present.
Public Service Announcement:
FISHEV is a known troll of several years standing and several user names who pushes an anti Tesla narrative. Please take his opinions with a grain of salt, avoid any advice he may suggest, and do not let him implant any Fear, Uncertainty, or Doubt about Tesla or your car into your own opinion."
May I suggest you also add that FISHEV is a documented liar to your PSA?
The 40 cents/KWh is the cost of the subscription, you still have to pay an additional 39 cents on top of that, which brings you back to 79 cents/KWh, that's nearly three times as much as Tesla charges."
In my case, 25,000 miles a year, it would add $0.04 to the $0.38 per kWh, $0.42 kWh.
25,000/310 = 80 x 75kW charges = $2,540 in electric costs in EU.
Using current German price per gallon of gas at $1.4/liter for US $5.34 per gallon, the Subaru getting 32 miles per gallon would $5,172, just about twice as much as running an EV off of Ionity charger.
Just wish I had a CCS adapter so I could pay even less in US for Electrify America. A fast charging EA station just went in 2 miles from work. I could go get lunch and put 25kWh in during lunch and save money over having an ICE car.
I think that is the comparison that EU's are looking at on the Ionity EV pricing.
Dude you're a liar. Please go away.
It is amusing to see the Teslerati howl when EA charges by time instead of kW and then howl when Ionity changes from time to per kW.
Because Tesla ramps down charging much faster than other EV's on CCS chargers, per kWh billing is best for Teslas. I think CA just required all to charge per kWh.
It is amusing to see the Teslerati howl when EA charges by time instead of kW and then howl when Ionity changes from time to per kW. -fish
It’s kWh not kw.
Nobody is howling about them charging by kWh. They are howling about how much they charge per kWh.
Fun video of driving EV's until they die to see actual range vs. rated range. Winner was Kia Niro getting 90% of EU rated range. Tesla came in at 76% of rated range.
To this topic, the seemed to have a huge choice of fast charging stations to use. Also interesting being able to push the car when it runs out. Most required a driver sitting in the seat to allow it to be pushed so one person could not push it alone. Tesla was easiest to push using Tow Mode.
With EU prices for gasoline so high, the Ionity charging looks much more competitive, 50% less than gasoline for EU'ers.
The contest was which car could go the farthest, not how inaccurate is WLTP. Tesla won handily despite only using 69 kWh and got 78% of WLTP, not 76%—better than most. They said diesels average 75% of their WLTP rating. I think this is the third or fourth time we’ve discussed this video.
As usual, Fish is wrong