In reply to frenchyd :
you just answered your own question. No one is doing due diligence on the people coming in. Your assumption is false.
In reply to frenchyd :
you just answered your own question. No one is doing due diligence on the people coming in. Your assumption is false.
In reply to frenchyd :
That's what I'm talking about. Just because something is not converted to human use does not make it "wasteland".
frenchyd said:In reply to racerfink :
The reason I seldom go on links is because too often when I did in the past, trash or viruses, etc were attached.
Well this argument is being used all too often by people that don't want to see information. If it's information you don't like, claim it's a virus. You can scan the links using your virus software. You make up stuff claiming "sources" which are never provided and then claim links you don't like are viruses. Are you really trying to have an honest discussion?
In reply to Toyman! :
Probably, but you can get 200 miles of range in 15 minutes with a Tesla at a supercharger. If you had your charger at a buc-ees style station, 15 minutes is nothing.
The buy in is definitely expensive right now but the tech just keeps getting cheaper and faster. I agree we'll be seeing it commonplace in 5-10 years. Definitely not going to happen tomorrow.
In reply to Qaaaaa :
Just having this group of seven get into charging will drive prices down.
Tesla is looking at $3B-$5B in profit per year from their charging stations now. That's nothing to sneeze at. What was originally looked to be a service to their customers so they could sell cars is turning into a cash cow. Others will notice this and want their piece of the pie.
Toyman! said:In reply to Qaaaaa :
Just having this group of seven get into charging will drive prices down.
Tesla is looking at $3B-#5B in profit per year from their charging stations now. That's nothing to sneeze at. What was originally looked to be a service to their customers so they could sell cars is turning into a cash cow. Others will notice this and want their piece of the pie.
I saw this number and it ran counter to my experience in the industry, I had to do some digging but that is an estimate by Piper Sandler for 2030-2032 revenues. Have you seen an actual profit number for their charging operations?
In reply to frenchyd :
It's a YouTube video... you may have heard of them.
In reply to dclafleur :
I have not. Tesla is surprisingly closed mouth about many things which is kind of surprising for a publicly traded company. Finding hard numbers is difficult at best. Any other company would have been crucified for not releasing hard numbers and the proof to back them up. Those numbers are estimates by investment businesses. I got the numbers from Forbes.
In reply to frenchyd :
Completely ignore reality once again and make up your own. Go the berkeley away you berkeleying troll.
im done with this moron. Apparently the US dept of agriculture is wrong and only berkeley stuck here is right.
The more I read these posts the more I feel like this is the company store; We'll build charging stations and then sell the thing that uses it.
Basically I'll build a car that gets 1-2 mpg less than it could because I'm selling the gasoline.
Yes it's a bit tinfoil hat on my part but this just feels that way to me.
With that said at the moment I still see more charging stations as something that needs to be done.
In reply to Tom1200 :
I agree, especially with the automakers involved. GM, Honda and Merc have always leaned this way and I see no reason they wouldn't use it to make a buck. The Koreans didn't used tobe that way but have been headed that way for a while.
Toyman! said:In reply to dclafleur :
I have not. Tesla is surprisingly closed mouth about many things which is kind of surprising for a publicly traded company. Finding hard numbers is difficult at best. Any other company would have been crucified for not releasing hard numbers and the proof to back them up. Those numbers are estimates by investment businesses. I got the numbers from Forbes.
I'll have to see if I can find some public numbers to use, I can say that from a capital cost side the recent NEVI Ohio grants were around $700,000 per site. I'll check to see the average number of chargers per site. While I'm inclined to believe revenue claims on charging locations, the costs are trickier because most states do not have car charging specific rate cases which means the electric costs for the high draw rates on a Level 3 charger are pretty high. As more sites become available the cost companies are able to charge are also going to approach the commodity cost just like at gas stations, squeezing margin from charging.
AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) said:frenchyd said:In reply to racerfink :
The reason I seldom go on links is because too often when I did in the past, trash or viruses, etc were attached.
Well this argument is being used all too often by people that don't want to see information. If it's information you don't like, claim it's a virus. You can scan the links using your virus software. You make up stuff claiming "sources" which are never provided and then claim links you don't like are viruses. Are you really trying to have an honest discussion?
Trusting many sources requires a lot of research into both the validity of the source and the bias of the source.
If someone like Kevin Anderson ( nivlac57 ) tells me that he gained X Amount of power with variable valve timing. I'm willing to accept that.
But if Holley tells me their carb adds X amount of power I need to see a lot more detail.
Early on I linked on everything Interesting. Suddenly I was getting survivalist advertising, guns, and extremist literature. Trying to remove that I got viruses that with my limited knowledge meant time for a new computer.
Even Today I get junk from people trying to steal my identity.
While my wife knows how to deal with that she gets really irritated when I bother her for things she finds second nature.
I even have taken courses from the University of Minnesota trying to figure things out.
So I limit my exposure especially with people I don't trust.
When people tell me we don't have room for more immigrants I question their thinking. I've spent many decades piling up millions of miles. Especially out west. Population density west of the Mississippi tells me that is wrong.
Tom1200 said:The more I read these posts the more I feel like this is the company store; We'll build charging stations and then sell the thing that uses it.
Basically I'll build a car that gets 1-2 mpg less than it could because I'm selling the gasoline.
Yes it's a bit tinfoil hat on my part but this just feels that way to me.
With that said at the moment I still see more charging stations as something that needs to be done.
I agree! There are enough gas stations that owners only average a nickle a gallon. The real profit comes from inside sales.
Not only more charging stations but the first company that puts good ones in Gas stations and truck stops. Will do very well
Let me ask a really stupid question. How much does a marginally profitable gas station cost?
In reply to frenchyd :
Again it's not about room for people. It's other issues you and many others are unwilling to discuss. Take some of the money you saved from solar or EVs and buy the anti-malware program if your choice. Your ever changing conditions of the topic make it impossible to discuss things with you. Here's an idea; focus on the truth. The truth is I'm not trying to steal your identity with links. I doubt anyone else here is doing that either.
In reply to AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) :
People can only be who they are; whether that's a plus or a minus is up to other people to decide for themselves, trying to change that tends to be rather pointless.
dclafleur said:Toyman! said:In reply to dclafleur :
I have not. Tesla is surprisingly closed mouth about many things which is kind of surprising for a publicly traded company. Finding hard numbers is difficult at best. Any other company would have been crucified for not releasing hard numbers and the proof to back them up. Those numbers are estimates by investment businesses. I got the numbers from Forbes.
I'll have to see if I can find some public numbers to use, I can say that from a capital cost side the recent NEVI Ohio grants were around $700,000 per site. I'll check to see the average number of chargers per site. While I'm inclined to believe revenue claims on charging locations, the costs are trickier because most states do not have car charging specific rate cases which means the electric costs for the high draw rates on a Level 3 charger are pretty high. As more sites become available the cost companies are able to charge are also going to approach the commodity cost just like at gas stations, squeezing margin from charging.
So the number of chargers per location for the NEVI grants were 4-6 so the per charger cost on these locations are around $140,000 dollars per charger. I don't actually expect this price to come down much because a lot of the costs are items such as transformers, site acquisition and interconnect costs.
In reply to Qaaaaa :
Boost_Crazy said:In reply to frenchyd :
racerfink said:Any word about improving the existing (or even building new) power plants to supply all the needed energy for all these superchargers?
Solar and wind in many locations backed up by batteries.
Since they would be stationary. Simple Sodium Aluma ion batteries would be a lot less expensiveAustralia and China both have seriously reduced the coal fired power plants and replaced them with renewables and batteries.
I was being generous when I said It would take a fair amount of solar. The truth is it would take an incredible amount of solar to power a level 3 charger. A real rough back of the napkin calc looks like a single level 3 charger would need around 30 modules on the low end to charge a Model 3 from 20-80%. If the sun shined 24 hours a day. Since it doesn't and you need to charge your battery storage, you need to at least double that. So 60 modules. Assuming good weather during the day. The standard for solar street lighting is 3 days worth of capacity for storms. Now, you won't have cars charging all day and night, so that helps a bunch, and they won't all charge from empty. So figure, what, 25% usage depending on location? Let's assume that we don't need to plan for weather, we have enough battery storage to get us through and enough dead time to keep them charged. 60 modules per charger then? That's around 1100 sq.ft. of modules per charger. Wow.
Looking at the gas station two minutes from my office on google maps, it sits on a plot about 200 x 150, so 30k sq ft. So if you covered the whole plot with elevated panels, you could conceivably have solar to support 27 level 3 chargers, right? Right now, it's got 16 pumps. I can't remember a time I've had to wait there to fill up. And there's like, eight stations within five minutes of where I'm sitting right now. I don't think the real estate will be a problem.
My point wasn't just the physical space. It was to illustrate the vast amount of solar needed to power just one station. Making each station "100% renewable" by making it off grid is not cost effective, especially when you consider that it would require a tremendous amount of on site battery storage. A better solution would be to offset the usage by building solar farms elsewhere to feeding the grid, and/or grid tied solar at the site. Saying 100% renewable puts you in an expensive hole if you really mean it.
frenchyd said:This post has received too many downvotes to be displayed.
Show/hide post
In reply to racerfink :
The reason I seldom go on links is because too often when I did in the past, trash or viruses, etc were attached.
So if you don't "go on links" where do you get your information?
There are a certain, I guess you'd call it class of websites, that are doing that and it's in the minority. With a Windows 10 or 11 machine, the built-in antivirus software is very good. As well as the protections in Chrome and Firefox. I've been using the internet for 25 years and have never had my "identity stolen," or downloaded a virus.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pathological_lying
dclafleur said:dclafleur said:Toyman! said:In reply to dclafleur :
I have not. Tesla is surprisingly closed mouth about many things which is kind of surprising for a publicly traded company. Finding hard numbers is difficult at best. Any other company would have been crucified for not releasing hard numbers and the proof to back them up. Those numbers are estimates by investment businesses. I got the numbers from Forbes.
I'll have to see if I can find some public numbers to use, I can say that from a capital cost side the recent NEVI Ohio grants were around $700,000 per site. I'll check to see the average number of chargers per site. While I'm inclined to believe revenue claims on charging locations, the costs are trickier because most states do not have car charging specific rate cases which means the electric costs for the high draw rates on a Level 3 charger are pretty high. As more sites become available the cost companies are able to charge are also going to approach the commodity cost just like at gas stations, squeezing margin from charging.
So the number of chargers per location for the NEVI grants were 4-6 so the per charger cost on these locations are around $140,000 dollars per charger. I don't actually expect this price to come down much because a lot of the costs are items such as transformers, site acquisition and interconnect costs.
Seems to depend on the company, and if the goal of the company is to build a charging network or to collect grant money.
https://electrek.co/2022/04/15/tesla-cost-deploy-superchargers-revealed-one-fifth-competition/
In reply to Keith Tanner :
Do you think Tesla is absorbing a portion of the cost to keep their chargers in the prime price range? They initially absorbed most of those costs in-house as a benefit to their customers and that has put them in a pretty good position moving forward.
I also read that Tesla has come out with a modular setup. 4 chargers per concrete skid, one skid per truck. Pre-wired, just drop it and tie it into the grid. That will cut their construction costs significantly.
Looking at the gas station two minutes from my office on google maps, it sits on a plot about 200 x 150, so 30k sq ft. So if you covered the whole plot with elevated panels, you could conceivably have solar to support 27 level 3 chargers, right?
Once again the math isn't there. 30k sq ft would support (with no gaps and perfect fitment) 1200 400W panels. Those panels would generate approximately 3600 kWh in a 12 hour day. A level 3 charger can use up to 288kWh per day, so at best you're looking at 12 level 3 chargers and then they are only available during daylight hours unless you have a battery supply to feed them.
Toyman! said:In reply to Keith Tanner :
Do you think Tesla is absorbing a portion of the cost to keep their chargers in the prime price range? They initially absorbed most of those costs in-house as a benefit to their customers and that has put them in a pretty good position moving forward.
I also read that Tesla has come out with a modular setup. 4 chargers per concrete skid, one skid per truck. Pre-wired, just drop it and tie it into the grid. That will cut their construction costs significantly.
that's a pretty smart design. Pre-built, drop and hookup.
In reply to Keith Tanner :
So I had to go down that rabbit hole a bit to see where those numbers came from because they don't match the numbers from the TxVEMP site. That's an article referencing a Forbes article that references the TxVEMP site. Just because I like to cite my primary sources it is the https://www.tceq.texas.gov/agency/trust/dcfch Projects Awarded link. It is a PDF file. This doesn't show the actual grant breakdown of what they ask for in their individual applications so the author of the Forbes article is making the assumption that Tesla asked for the maximum cost of their chargers. I agree Tesla likely has a lower cost per charger but again there are several factors not captured in that number. The TxVEMP program did not reimburse on site acquisition, and only offered I believe 20% of cost for interconnect upgrades. Once again, there are a lot of numbers being tossed around but they aren't actual costs or revenue figures.
In reply to bobzilla:
With some careful surveying and digging, you could prep a location, drop the skid, wire it, and have minimal to no paving to do after the fact. I think it's brilliant.
This topic is locked. No further posts are being accepted.
