$450 bill from NRG / eVgo

[JeremyW]

While I don't really need a quick charger so close to my house, the key for me is, my current place can't handle more than 16 amps* of EV charging and this really makes up for it. I could see local, perhaps slightly slower, qc/supercharging to make an impact. I really like the idea of combining qc (using shared banks of chargers like tesla does) with grocery shopping for renters that couldn't charge at home.

*Since I'm renting, any sort of electrical upgrade makes zero sense for me to pay for. I'd need a new electrical panel and a new run to the garage, at the very least.

Anyway I haven't had an issue with EVgo lately. I'm certainly getting more mileage out of the monthly fee now. :roll:

Tony, do you have any update on your $450 bill??

 

[walterbays]

Exactly. Tesla just put in a Supercharger about ten miles from my house (LOL)... What good is that with a 250 mile range car (LOL)?)

When you get your Tesla will you drive 20 miles r/t to the free Supercharger to avoid paying $2 to charge overnight in your own garage?

Or looked at another way, having paid Tesla $2,000 for lifetime charging, can you stand to pay another $2 to not go out and collect your money's worth?

And on the road would you rather pay NRG $4 to charge en route, or would you rather detour 10 miles out of your way to recharge "free"?

(I don't think I could answer these questions myself

 

[TonyWilliams]

Exactly. Tesla just put in a Supercharger about ten miles from my house (LOL)... What good is that with a 250 mile range car (LOL)?)

When you get your Tesla will you drive 20 miles r/t to the free Supercharger to avoid paying $2 to charge overnight in your own garage?

Or looked at another way, having paid Tesla $2,000 for lifetime charging, can you stand to pay another $2 to not go out and collect your money's worth?

And on the road would you rather pay NRG $4 to charge en route, or would you rather detour 10 miles out of your way to recharge "free"?

(I don't think I could answer these questions myself

My comments were intended to be firmly "tongue in cheek".

I wouldn't waste a second of my life to get a freebie charge (or $2000 prepaid charge) if I can just plug in at home.

Sure, I'll likely use the nearby Supercharger, but likely for an impromptu trip when I start with a depleted battery. I'm saving time at the Supercharger, not (much) money.

I'd have to drive 30 miles in traffic just to get to the closest SC, lol.

With 250 miles of range, there's no need for Tesla owners to use superchargers for anything but long-distance roadtrips.

There only three logical ways to leave San Diego county;

1) Northwest, I-5, with a Supercharger 65 miles away from my house
2) North, I-15, with a Supercharger 95 miles away
3) East, I-8, with a Supercharger about 100 miles away

So, there will be times when I need a boost to "get outa town".

I will have the CHAdeMO adaptor, but with 125 amp maximum charge rate (60-115 typical) or 330 amps at a Supercharger, again, cost isn't the primary factor. The time difference is HUGE !!!

 

[lorenfb]

A very positive experience with NRG occurred yesterday in OC of SoCal.

Leaving the LAX area with 56 Ahr and traveling to Fullerton and back to Cerritos required a 10 min QC
at a NRG (no problem) for additional drive back to Santa Ana. On the way, routed by Stadium Nissan
to check their QC for a return QC as only 30 Ahr left. After poor driving instructions to reach my
final destination, the capacity was now down to 20 Ahr, i.e. not enough to return to Stadium Nissan.

Using the Leaf search function, I located charging stations near Bristol & Sunflower. These all (L2) required
ChargePoint access. Once connected, both the units tried immediately terminated charging indicating
that the vehicle had terminated the charging. So now I'm thinking I've got a Leaf problem and time for
a tow truck.

Again searching for charging locations again, the display indicated a NRG QC in the Bristol Shopping
Center. Dreading a LBW, luckily the location was just a short distance. One connected to the NRG QC,
the unit failed to accept my NRG card used successfully earlier in the day. This required a cell call to
NRG to report the problem. Once my ID was verified, the NRG support person was able to activate the QC.

So, given the recent NRG experience and my reliance on their availability of QCs, my Leaf usage in replacing
my ICEs (reduced ICEs' mileage by 50%) would have been very limited in the last 18 months.

 

[MichaelBornstein]

Exactly. Tesla just put in a Supercharger about ten miles from my house (LOL)... What good is that with a 250 mile range car (LOL)?

Clearly, I want them 100-200 miles away from my house (LOL).

While this may have been tongue-in-cheek, there is an element of truth in your statement.

My nearest Supercharger is 34 miles away. Too far for regular use, and too close for me to use as a charge on my way to LA. Perhaps on the return trip from LA I might charge there before returning home.

Now the one at Harris Range is also somewhat close at 94 miles but I can see stopping there to eat and charge.

What am I thinking??? I don't even own a Tesla!!! :lol:

Please Tony, negotiate with Elon to allow us RAV4 owners to access the SC stations via the Jdemo and an additional adaptor. :mrgreen:

 

[TonyWilliams]

Please Tony, negotiate with Elon to allow us RAV4 owners to access the SC stations via the Jdemo and an additional adaptor. :mrgreen:

Just not gunna happen :|

 

[user 10599]

Just not gunna happen :|

Hmm... How many of us EV aficionados are Tesla stockholders? Perhaps we can take Elon out of the equation through a stockholder submitted initiative for consideration at the annual stockholder meeting. If I understand correctly, Elon and the Board report to the stockholders and if enough Tesla stockholders favor broader EV adoption than just one brand, then we could force him to.

 

[linkim]

Just not gunna happen :|

Hmm... How many of us EV aficionados are Tesla stockholders? Perhaps we can take Elon out of the equation through a stockholder submitted initiative for consideration at the annual stockholder meeting. If I understand correctly, Elon and the Board report to the stockholders and if enough Tesla stockholders favor broader EV adoption than just one brand, then we could force him to.

I agree with Tony, it's not gonna happen. You should check how much of the stock Elon controls. I think it is about 25% of Tesla so very difficult to make a change if he is against it. The Tesla annual meeting is next week so any initiative will not be on the agenda until next year.

 

[walterbays]

Access to Tesla's superchargers is a benefit for which many owners feel it's worth paying thousands of dollars up front. Limited mostly to Model S drivers on road trips, I suppose you can drop in at a station any time anywhere 24x7 and get a charge with no waiting. If they were open to other cars, and especially to cars often recharging for in-city use, then drivers who had already paid for lifetime charging would find at certain times and places they could not charge. Range anxiety would haunt Tesla again.

Of course if they collected enough money from a larger pool of charging customers to build enough new supercharger stations to meet the demand, then availability could remain good. But that's the same business model question facing all charging providers like NRG. It's not clear that anyone has a satisfactory answer, nor is it clear that Tesla would like to get into that business. Especially since if they made a success of a charging business it would provide a compelling reason for customers to buy non-Tesla cars.

I wonder how Tesla will handle supercharger access for buyers of their new "low cost" car. Numbers there could also be far iln excess of Model S numbers, and drivers might be more likely to recharge for in-city driving - i.e. more frequently.

 

[user 10599]

You should check how much of the stock Elon controls. I think it is about 25% of Tesla so very difficult to make a change if he is against it. The Tesla annual meeting is next week so any initiative will not be on the agenda until next year.

You have a good point that it would have to wait until next year. But you don't actually have to get a majority to get the point across and prompt the change. Any shareholder submitted initiative that wins over 10% in favor can get the Board to pressure management into some sort of accommodation. Board members don't like to look like they are ignoring shareholders' interests, so it really doesn't take full control to win on something like this. Thus, a lot of investor activists get their way with a lot less than 50% on their side. And a compromise shift in position is really all that is needed.

I'm personally in favor of dedicated charging stations being supportive of any substantial EV standard. Most places that consider installing, should seriously consider supporting Tesla, Chademo, and SAE combo. Otherwise, it's kind of like Chevron saying they will only provide gas to Chevies. Electrons are basically a commodity product. Tesla is in effect trying to say that other brands aren't worthy of their electrons. This is not the way to convince the general public that EVs have a future and are supported by responsible companies that will be around 10 years from now.

 

[Slow1]

As a shareholder I would vote against initiatives that would not bring in significant revenue and could potentially provide more benefit to my competition. Getting another auto maker to give Tesla a cut of every sale so they can allow them the potential of SC network access is one thing, selling access on an individual basis is quite another.

While I can see the value for non Tesla folks, I see no real business case for Tesla in this proposal.

 

[linkim]

Electrons are basically a commodity product. Tesla is in effect trying to say that other brands aren't worthy of their electrons.

If you are not a Costco member, you can't buy gas there. Seems to me this is a very close parallel to Tesla's model. If you are a member of the club, you are entitled to the services, otherwise too bad. Since I drive a LEAF, I don't frequent the gas lines at Costco. Most of the time there is a strong demand for their gas at lower prices. I wonder how many members join Costco because of the lower price gas?

 

[Sondy132001]

Electrons are basically a commodity product. Tesla is in effect trying to say that other brands aren't worthy of their electrons.

If you are not a Costco member, you can't buy gas there. Seems to me this is a very close parallel to Tesla's model. If you are a member of the club, you are entitled to the services, otherwise too bad. Since I drive a LEAF, I don't frequent the gas lines at Costco. Most of the time there is a strong demand for their gas at lower prices. I wonder how many members join Costco because of the lower price gas?

At $50 a year I'd say quite a few, but they usually are the same price as AM/PM here in California, with no membership for Arco. Costco beats 76 and Chevron hands down.

 

[linkim]

At $50 a year I'd say quite a few, but they usually are the same price as AM/PM here in California, with no membership for Arco. Costco beats 76 and Chevron hands down.

AFAIK, the cost of a Costco Gold Star Membership is $55.00 per year, and is the lowest cost membership. It was $50 a few years ago. The point of my comment was that there are many types of restrictions that is based on money spent. Tesla has the Superchargers, Costco its gas for members, country club membership, swim club membership, etc. Even for public charging, there is a type of membership. For example, NRG/eVgo monthly subscription for lower charging rate/time. Then there are the NCTC cards used as incentive for some recent EV sales/leases. I just wish that there were more L2s and/or DCFCs at one location (like the Tesla supercharger sites) to reduce wait time or range anxiety (if charger not available). If Tesla can do it, why can't the major auto companies?

 

[Sondy132001]

At $50 a year I'd say quite a few, but they usually are the same price as AM/PM here in California, with no membership for Arco. Costco beats 76 and Chevron hands down.

AFAIK, the cost of a Costco Gold Star Membership is $55.00 per year, and is the lowest cost membership. It was $50 a few years ago. The point of my comment was that there are many types of restrictions that is based on money spent. Tesla has the Superchargers, Costco its gas for members, country club membership, swim club membership, etc. Even for public charging, there is a type of membership. For example, NRG/eVgo monthly subscription for lower charging rate/time. Then there are the NCTC cards used as incentive for some recent EV sales/leases. I just wish that there were more L2s and/or DCFCs at one location (like the Tesla supercharger sites) to reduce wait time or range anxiety (if charger not available). If Tesla can do it, why can't the major auto companies?

Boy you're a stickler, sorry I don't pay for mine and I was going off what I paid a couple years ago =) I guess when Nissan starts charging $70k for a Leaf you'll get your supercharger sites from Nissan !

 

[Slow1]

This discussion reminds me of an experience I had years ago when traveling for business.

We were going business class, as one of my co-workers started down the 'priority' lane to board he was accosted by a lady who said something along the lines of "So just because you paid more for your ticket you think you deserve special treatment?" - to which he paused and calmly responded "Why yes, I do" then went on his way.

The point being here that those who paid more for their Tesla Model S sedans are paying a premium and are paying for those superchargers. Nothing wrong with that at all. IF I paid that much I'd expect a bit more "special treatment"

 

[linkim]

Boy you're a stickler, sorry I don't pay for mine and I was going off what I paid a couple years ago =) I guess when Nissan starts charging $70k for a Leaf you'll get your supercharger sites from Nissan !

Actually, I want to buy a Tesla Model 3 so I can use the superchargers because i doubt that Nissan will have any comparable supercharger locations. I hope I'm wrong.

 

[Sondy132001]

Boy you're a stickler, sorry I don't pay for mine and I was going off what I paid a couple years ago =) I guess when Nissan starts charging $70k for a Leaf you'll get your supercharger sites from Nissan !

Actually, I want to buy a Tesla Model 3 so I can use the superchargers because i doubt that Nissan will have any comparable supercharger locations. I hope I'm wrong.

I found this interesting:

http://www.ibtimes.com/2017-tesla-m...ering-report-teslas-future-challenges-1690822

"Anderman says in his report that it’s unlikely Tesla will be able to bring down the cost of its EV battery packs, which are measured in dollars per kilowatt hour, enough to deliver a Model 3 with more than 200 miles per charge (mpc). Most industry analysts believe in order to offer less expensive electric vehicles powered by these high-energy cells, the price needs to drop below $200 per kWh. The extended-range Telsa Model S is powered by an 85 kWh battery pack, which gives it 265 mpc compared to the Nissan Leaf’s 24 kWh with 84 mpc.

Anderman, who correctly predicted years ago U.S. government efforts to stimulate a lithium-ion battery manufacturing industry in Michigan, says in his report that bringing the cost of electric car batteries below $200 per kWh is “unlikely before 2020.”

If this assessment is accurate, Tesla will have to sell a Model 3 with a range of less than 200 mpc, or raise the starting price to $50,000, roughly the cost of a BMW 5 Series luxury car. “I wish Tesla proves me wrong and their success is larger than what my study forecasts, but I have provided in the study the most realistic, unbiased, expert assessment I could,” Anderman told IBTimes."

 

[eloder]

You should check how much of the stock Elon controls. I think it is about 25% of Tesla so very difficult to make a change if he is against it. The Tesla annual meeting is next week so any initiative will not be on the agenda until next year.

You have a good point that it would have to wait until next year. But you don't actually have to get a majority to get the point across and prompt the change. Any shareholder submitted initiative that wins over 10% in favor can get the Board to pressure management into some sort of accommodation. Board members don't like to look like they are ignoring shareholders' interests, so it really doesn't take full control to win on something like this. Thus, a lot of investor activists get their way with a lot less than 50% on their side. And a compromise shift in position is really all that is needed.

I'm personally in favor of dedicated charging stations being supportive of any substantial EV standard. Most places that consider installing, should seriously consider supporting Tesla, Chademo, and SAE combo. Otherwise, it's kind of like Chevron saying they will only provide gas to Chevies. Electrons are basically a commodity product. Tesla is in effect trying to say that other brands aren't worthy of their electrons. This is not the way to convince the general public that EVs have a future and are supported by responsible companies that will be around 10 years from now.

Tesla's patents and supercharger access is open to everyone, who wishes to contribute to the network/cost and who do not charge their customers per-use.

Supercharging standards is vastly superior to Chademo, with a charging rate nearly 2.3x that of the fastest Chademos available in the US and far more widespread availability/numbers.

Non-Tesla cars not being able to Supercharge is not Tesla's fault. I'm pretty confident that the Supercharger will become the de-facto lvl3 charger in 3-5 years.

 

[user 10599]

My point is that Tesla is operating in at least 3 industries. One is automobile manufacturing. One is battery manufacturing. One is fueling stations.

Each industry is distinct. It does not make sense for Chevron to only sell gas to Chevies. Nor does it make sense for Tesla to do the same. If that is the model for the industry, then you have to overbuild infrastructure. If there are going to be 10 brands building EVs, this approach leads to 10 networks, each snubbing the other's products. This is generally recognized by governments as bad policy, hence why utilities are regulated.

If Tesla wants to take the approach that their service station division does not have to operate competitively in that industry because they make so much extra profit on the cars, they may find themselves on the wrong end of a dumping lawsuit. (Disclosure, I'm not a lawyer, so this might not be the correct terms a regulator would take in pursuing an anti-competitive practices case against them.) As a novelty car company and service station operator, they may get by for a while before attracting this regulatory ire. But remember, the dealer industry has powerful lobbyists and will pressure any tactic they can.

But if their intention is to operate in the service station industry, then they may want to pay attention to how service stations operate. Incurring lots of costs to set up the station and then saying to the majority of customers to go away, we don't want your revenue, is not how to operate in that industry. And to attempt to operate a division in an industry at hefty losses because it helps the profits of another industry will be problematic.

Another example of problems if they don't operate in this industry properly is transfer taxation. If the real purpose of the station is to support the profits of the car sales, then the state income tax authority where that station is located can disallow their operating losses and seek to tax the excess profit on the car sales, even though the profit was on sales in another state. Presumably some of that profit is derived from the service station locations. If you are a Tesla stakeholder, you might want to pay attention to that. If Tesla doesn't file their tax returns in each state allocating the profits from their car sales to the states where they have service stations, they can get hit with severe penalties for fraudulent tax filings. Of course, if they allocate, the states with more car sales then service station operations will assert that the car profits are taxable in their state. Elon is plotting a dangerous course.

BTW - Sorry, this subtopic probably belongs somewhere other than NRG's $450 bill. I didn't mean to hijack the thread.

And regarding Costco, their industry is to provide products and services on a wholesale basis to subscribing members. Fuel is just one of those products/services. That would only be a relevant comparison if they took the stance that you can't be a member if you own a Ford or if you ever shop at a Walmart. Anyone who wants to shop at Costco can for a small fee. If Tesla will make their service stations open to anyone who needs the electrons on a membership basis, similar to what Chargepoint, Blink or NRG do, then I'm fine with that. Otherwise, they are operating service stations in the service station industry but doing so in a fashion that either seems like dumping or shifting the profits to another operating division and thereby possibly engaging in state income tax evasion. I think that if shareholders think about these aspects, you might get enough votes to draw the attention of the Board.