30 minutes for 150 miles of range from a near-empty battery. Approx 60 minutes for a full charge from empty. It does slow down as it gets closer to full, but the timeframe is measured in minutes instead of hours.
So for a 1000 mile trip, that is going to be about 6 charging stops.
3 hours added to the trip - and probably more like 4 hours when you consider that the Supercharger stations are not going to be located right on the main roadways all the time.
A 1000 mile trip in a gas vehicle would require 3, maybe 4 fuel ups. I've timed my fill-ups many times, 7 minutes from off the road to back on (assuming an en-route gas station) is about the average. So, figure 28 minutes lost to fueling, vs. 4 hours. The Tesla will take at least 3.5 hours longer to make the same trip.
1000 miles at an average of 50 mph (seems low, but I've driven 720 mile trips from NH to MI many times) is 20 hours if you drive straight through. 20.5 hours with gas, 24 hours with Superchargers.
I love the Tesla cars, I've seriously considered the Model S, but I don't see how (for me) it is really a viable long-distance driver yet. Yes, you have a better chance of not getting stranded vs. maybe a Nissan Leaf, but it's a suboptimal alternative to gasoline still.
All of this going on the assumption that the charge station is not fully occupied at the time you want to recharge, which with 30 to 60 minute recharge times is going to get improbable pretty fast when electric cars become more popular. Imagine everyone at the local gas station leaving their car at the pump for 60 minutes...
I think we can safely conclude that unless there is going to be a huge breakthrough in battery technology really soon, EV's that run on batteries alone are not going to be a success for anything but short-distance commutes.
I'm still hoping for breakthroughs in other technologies that would make generating electricity so cheap that we can afford to waste a lot of it producing hydrogen. That would instantly obviate the need to lug around heavy batteries that take long to recharge, run out fast, require a lot of energy to produce, and are full of nasty chemicals that pollute the areas where they are mined.
Battery-powered EV's simply aren't all roses and sunshine, and I'm frankly quite amazed how easy the negatives are papered over.
The big thing that you're not accounting for is that the majority of charging is probably going to be done at home just letting it charge overnight. Also, you don't need a huge, expensive, and maintenance intensive gas pump at every station, you just need a power cord and some way for someone to swipe a credit card. No more having huge gas tanks buried beneath the pavement, just have an extremely beefy electrical hookup and you're good to go. Everything is all solid state with no moving parts, heck you could even disable the car while it's being charged to prevent idiots from taking off without unhooking first.
Superchargers are intended for on-the-road, long-haul recharge. While your local gas station is used by everyone in the neighborhood, most Tesla drivers, most of the time, will be charging overnight or during work hours at home, work, or a dedicated car park. Which should reduce demand somewhat.
From Google Maps, the Harris Ranch location is presently a single charging station. That is something which should be readily scalable as demand rises.
Your usage pattern at a given Supercharger station would be a factor of total traffic on nearby highways, Tesla ownership, and recharge needs. Present stations are at highway plazas -- not necessarily in high-ticket areas (hello, Harris Ranch and Barstow), but given the vehicle owner demographics and minimum 30 minute linger time, they'll likely offer typical captive-audience amenities, so the time won't be a total loss.
And charging is possible from other outlets, though at 5 miles/hour from 110AC, that's a good (or bad) 60 hours to recover full range. More likely you're getting sufficient charge to get to a higher-rated output.
Further though: so long as queuing depth is one vehicle (that is, you arrive, all chargers are filled, and there are no vehicles in front of you), the mean wait time assuming a 50% charge is 30/n, where n is the number of stations. So, 6 stations, queue depth of 1, you'll wait on average 5 minutes for someone to pull out, extending your total recharge time to 35 minutes. If Tesla strives for this as a 95%+ level of service, it should be tolerable, though high-travel periods (holiday weekends in particular) would tend to be worst-case scenarios.
Correcting myself: mean wait time would be 30/(2*n). As on average you'll arrive when another car is halfway through its charging period. So for a 6-charger station, 2.5 minutes wait time. On average.
> unless there is going to be a huge breakthrough in battery technology really soon, EV's that run on batteries alone are not going to be a success for anything but short-distance commutes
I don't think that's the only option, battery swapping springs to mind as an alternative to beat the problem.
Your math is all wrong because you assume you're some sort of anaerobic being that doesn't consume food or produce waste :)
All those Supercharging stations are going to be located right next to places to eat. With about 4-5 hours between stops, that's right around when my stomach is going to start rumbling and I'll want to take a longer stop anyways.
Actually my math is based on real world experience. I can easily drive for 12 hours straight without a major food break. Quick bio break at a gas station, sure. Turn a 7 minute fillip into a 12 minute fill up.
On a trip that long, my wife is generally along as we'll, so we can trade off shifts driving. We will usually bring some snacks to eat along the way as well.
So, my numbers are still pretty accurate. You can go farther between fill ups on gas, and you can refuel (you, and the car) in less than 30 minutes ( or 45-60 minutes of you need more than a top-off, based on accessories use in the vehicles).
That sounds like hell on wheels. If you're worried about your long-haul trip taking an extra 30 minutes every two hours, maybe you should be flying instead?
Just betting that you don't regularly travel with kids...
I just drove from San Francisco to San Jose yesterday with my family, had to stop twice along the way for near-emergency bathroom breaks. 45 minutes every 4 hours sounds like NO PROBLEM.
We stop every 1.5 hours, when possible, for stretch/potty breaks, and every 3 hours or so for food. I think that planning your meals around charging isn't such a bad idea.
They'd likely need more charging ports, though, in the long term.
True, but you may not want to leave your vehicle plugged in by itself for 30 ~ 60 minutes. I guess you could get food and eat it in/around the car while it charged...
I think that is partially the idea with supercharger stations--that there will be amenities nearby within eyeshot of the cars.
I think it'd be cool to have coffee shops or a lounge setting where you can use your computer in a relaxed environment while you make sure nobody messes with your car.
But honestly, when on a road trip with family, I am lucky to have a stop as short as 1 hour if we are eating a meal.
Rrriiiggght. People driving BMW's always stay in their cars or park them human attended parkinglots that take security seriously - if someone doesn't, then it usually results in keyed paint work, slashed tires or vomit in your car.
Everything you mentioned except the somewhat silly "attempt to hack the onboard systems [in a half hour]" is stuff that ICE luxury cars are just as subject to. Save for the possible novelty thrill of messing up an electric car vs. a combustion one, this risk isn't increased at all.
I said nothing about increased risk, I addressed the issue of the car being "safe" for the 30 minutes or longer that it takes to charge simply because "The charger cable locks into the charging port while the car is locked, so no one is going to mess with it while you're gone."
As for "novelty value and thrill" well, yes, it's stupid, pointless, and exactly the kind of dumb arse flash fad that has happened in the past and could well happen in the future - there's no logic to such things.
If there is no increased risk, then it is "safe" relative to the normal baseline for "safe" that most people would apply to a car. Pointing out that it is not safe in some unrealistic absolute sense is kind of pointless, don't you think?
It's like telling someone that a neighborhood he's thinking of moving into is unsafe without mentioning that your assessment based on the fact that the neighborhood is as likely as any other to get hit by a meteor. That doesn't qualify it as an "unsafe neighborhood" on the scale most people care about.
A 1000 mile trip in a gas vehicle would require 3, maybe 4 fuel ups. I've timed my fill-ups many times, 7 minutes from off the road to back on (assuming an en-route gas station) is about the average. So, figure 28 minutes lost to fueling, vs. 4 hours. The Tesla will take at least 3.5 hours longer to make the same trip.
On the other hand: you'll be shelling out about $60 for each gas station stop; and $0 for each Supercharger stop. That adds up too, you know.
> So for a 1000 mile trip, that is going to be about 6 charging stops.
> 3 hours added to the trip - and probably more like 4 hours when you consider that the Supercharger stations are not going to be located right on the main roadways all the time.
On the other hand, with normal commuting patterns you have to refuel your gasoline car about once every two weeks or month depending on the car and your driving habits. With an electric car, you just plug in every night and never stop at a smelly gross gas station again.
I don't know why people complain that when you use a product for what it's not designed for, it's bad at it. Electric cars are bad for road trips. If you're going 1,000 miles, use an airplane or at least a train.
All of what you said is true, but what people who buy these cars read is
"Only a four hour difference for not using gas? Sign me up!"
I see what you mean about convenience, but a lot of people will forgo that. Besides, if you're traveling 1000 miles, why does 4 hours matter unless you have a hard deadline and need to travel straight through?
I tend to measure long drives in terms of how long it will be until I don't have to get back in the car. That probably isn't the right mindset for a 1,000 mile trip, but there you go.
Anyway, the whole discussion is silly, no one buys a $45,000 car with a less than 200 mile range for the practicality of it.
When Zipcar gets a hold of Google's self-driving cars, then you won't even have to wait around at the recharging stations. You can just jump into the next available fully-charged car, and off you go. With a reservation, the entire route could be automatically planned ahead of time with railroad-esque precision. You heard it here first!
Depends on where you're going and what you're carrying.
Family of four with a baby or two, and a trunk / roof rack full of luggage? Transferring between cars would be a bit of a PITA. I'd opt for the swappable battery in that case (or a liquid-fueled vehicle).
Do you mean carry an extra battery, or do an exchange? While you "could" do an exchange, similar to how propane tank exchanges work, do you really want to be trading your pampered battery in for some random battery with an unknown history?
Battery swap almost necessitates leasing the battery. You cannot reasonably own a $10,000 thing you swap multiple times a week. But leasing it works extremely well.
I assume that such a lease approach would have to carry insurance to cover battery damage, similar to buying coverage for car rentals. At least with car rentals, the insurance isn't very affordable, and leads to some people being irresponsible with the property.
The insurance for a car lease is totally affordable. And that's what it would be -- a long-term lease.
You would lease a battery for 3 or 5 years from a company, and then swap at that company's swap stations. They would bill you on something like total miles put on the vehicle or total miles delta put on at swap stations. You would have exactly one entity with which you would interact in case of battery issues: the company.
That's a much more scalable approach. Supercharging stations, etc, seem like an insufficient band-aid. Imagine a gas station with each pump occupied for 30 minutes a piece.
That makes the most sense. Imagine a Jiffy Lube style setup: you drive on to a station, robotic arms automatically remove your battery and install a new one, and you're on your way. Total time: under 2 minutes. Boom!
They had the dumb idea of using renewable energy for the charging stations and, here's the dumb part, BUILDING THEIR OWN CARS instead of licensing out the battery tech to all the car companies for cheap. It was pretty clear for all the glowing profiles that came out when the company was forming that the guy running it was charismatic but a flaker.
Why don't they rent (instead of selling) the batteries, and have stations to swap your battery for a full one before recharging the empty one at their leisure? That could take the "refuel" time down to a minute!
"In early October 2012, Agassi resigned from his role as worldwide Better Place CEO, and was replaced by Evan Thornley, CEO of Better Place-Australia. Briefly, Agassi remained on the company board, but a week later he resigned from that position as well. A few days after Thornley's appointment, Better Place asked its investors for a round of emergency funding, totaling about $150 million.[8][9] On October 11, 2012, Haaretz reported that Better Place might lay off up to half its staff of several hundred employees.[10] On October 29, 2012, Ynet reported that Better Place would that week lay off 150 to 200 people out of its 400-person staff in Israel as it seeks financing to combat its cash-flow problems.[11]
In late January 2013, Thornley resigned, and Dan Cohen was named acting CEO by the board.[12]"
That's good, so it's basically "stop a bit, have a cup of coffee while your car charges"? Still not compared to gasoline, but, hey, viable electric cars!
More like a lunch time meal and dinner, considering I've got 17 hours of driving in front of me at that point. That's about 3 meals, so most of my stops will be for longer periods of time anyways.
So add on about 12% onto a time estimate to account for the extra charging time. I'm estimating about 2.5 hours for 150 miles which isn't unreasonable for freeway driving.
If you're going < 300 miles, then it's really a moot point anyways. At that range, you'll have enough in the battery before leaving to get you there without a charge along the way.
And that's awesome until yo need to go beyond that single charge range. Then charging might be a problem where ever you wind up still, though it is getting much better I admit.
