3 ms·

Was on my way to visit the family 180 miles away yesterday and so I pulled in to a supercharger with about 8% left, got it up to 65% when it told me I'm good to

Was on my way to visit the family 180 miles away yesterday and so I pulled in to a supercharger with about 8% left, got it up to 65% when it told me I'm good to continue the trip, and paid £32.55 for the pleasure. Jesus christ.

Symbiote 4y ago
For occasional use, that doesn't seem like it would be a problem? It's still a chunk less than a ~180 mile train ticket.
- throwawayapples 4y ago
  There are actually a lot of reasons why a train ticket won't work for many types of trips, but the biggest ones are that you need to carry more than one person which multiplies the price, the train doesn't go where you need to go, or that it's quite inconvenient in that it doesn't leave or arrive when you need to.
  - Symbiote 4y ago
    The price was just given as a comparison. A poorer person, who can't afford a car at all, has a £40 per-person advance-booked direct train as the optimum case. Their real cost is likely to be more with connections, or the time could be a lot more with a bus (£15-20) instead.
- pontilanda 4y ago
  Even cheaper than a flight and chump change compared to a private helicopter. Apples to oranges.
  - blitzar 4y ago
    Somewhat cheaper than a personal jetpack.
  - amalgamated_inc 4y ago
    You can fly in Europe for $20. Not all destinations, obviously.
- petre 4y ago
  > It's still a chunk less than a ~180 mile train ticket Yes, after you've paid a premium for the vehicle. By the same logic is cheaper to take the bicycle, but we are not comparing apples to oranges.
  - iso1631 4y ago
    I can go Manchester to London return tomorrow morning, 210 miles each way, change at Crewe, take about 3 hours each way, costs £36.30. £46.70 if I want to get there for 10am. Petrol alone would cost about £65 in my car, parking another £20 at least, and it would be an hour slower each way.
    - petre 4y ago
      In my country trains are very slow because the infrastructure wasn't properly maintained. So the train is only an option for very poor people and the homeless, with the latter not buying any tickets. Last time I used the train, it took 18 hours gfr a 700 km trip which we'd normally do in 11 hours by car. Nowadays it takes 20+ hours.
zbrozek 4y ago
Is that high? It sounds pretty similar to California.
- stronglikedan 4y ago
  If it's similar to California, it's high.
- mdasen 4y ago
  It looks like Tesla is charging $0.50 in California and 67p ($0.81) in the UK during peak times. That's a pretty big difference in charge (62% higher). Even the off-peak 54p is $0.66 and 32% higher. A 57% charge on a Model Y Long Range would be 188 miles of range (US EPA estimate). UK petrol prices are £1.54/litre or $7.03/US gallon. Assuming a 30-MPG car, 188 miles would be $44. They paid $39.59 for that distance of electricity. Hybrids and plug-in hybrids will do a lot better than 30-MPG so the Superchargers aren't cheap compared to other available options. The average UK petrol vehicle gets over 35-MPG (6.7l/100km) so that would come in at $37.76 for the 188 mile range and cheaper than the Supercharger for an average petrol car, though it can be slightly hard to compare since different countries have slightly different fuel economy evaluations. It is higher than California by a decent amount and home energy rates are high too. They're a lot cheaper than petrol, but at 22.8p ($0.277) per kWh, it's nearly double what I'm paying on the east coast, but it looks like California rates might be comparable. It's not outrageous, but it is definitely higher than California and can mean that the Superchargers are more expensive than petrol stations. Sources: https://electrek.co/2022/09/28/tesla-hikes-supercharger-prices-california/ https://electrek.co/2022/09/28/tesla-hikes-supercharger-pric..., https://www.carmagazine.co.uk/electric/tesla-supercharger/ https://www.carmagazine.co.uk/electric/tesla-supercharger/, https://www.iea.org/articles/fuel-economy-in-the-united-kingdom https://www.iea.org/articles/fuel-economy-in-the-united-king..., https://powercompare.co.uk/electricity-prices/ https://powercompare.co.uk/electricity-prices/

Symbiote 4y ago

For occasional use, that doesn't seem like it would be a problem? It's still a chunk less than a ~180 mile train ticket.

throwawayapples 4y ago
There are actually a lot of reasons why a train ticket won't work for many types of trips, but the biggest ones are that you need to carry more than one person which multiplies the price, the train doesn't go where you need to go, or that it's quite inconvenient in that it doesn't leave or arrive when you need to.
- Symbiote 4y ago
  The price was just given as a comparison. A poorer person, who can't afford a car at all, has a £40 per-person advance-booked direct train as the optimum case. Their real cost is likely to be more with connections, or the time could be a lot more with a bus (£15-20) instead.
pontilanda 4y ago
Even cheaper than a flight and chump change compared to a private helicopter. Apples to oranges.
- blitzar 4y ago
  Somewhat cheaper than a personal jetpack.
- amalgamated_inc 4y ago
  You can fly in Europe for $20. Not all destinations, obviously.
petre 4y ago
> It's still a chunk less than a ~180 mile train ticket Yes, after you've paid a premium for the vehicle. By the same logic is cheaper to take the bicycle, but we are not comparing apples to oranges.
- iso1631 4y ago
  I can go Manchester to London return tomorrow morning, 210 miles each way, change at Crewe, take about 3 hours each way, costs £36.30. £46.70 if I want to get there for 10am. Petrol alone would cost about £65 in my car, parking another £20 at least, and it would be an hour slower each way.
  - petre 4y ago
    In my country trains are very slow because the infrastructure wasn't properly maintained. So the train is only an option for very poor people and the homeless, with the latter not buying any tickets. Last time I used the train, it took 18 hours gfr a 700 km trip which we'd normally do in 11 hours by car. Nowadays it takes 20+ hours.

zbrozek 4y ago

Is that high? It sounds pretty similar to California.

stronglikedan 4y ago
If it's similar to California, it's high.
mdasen 4y ago
It looks like Tesla is charging $0.50 in California and 67p ($0.81) in the UK during peak times. That's a pretty big difference in charge (62% higher). Even the off-peak 54p is $0.66 and 32% higher. A 57% charge on a Model Y Long Range would be 188 miles of range (US EPA estimate). UK petrol prices are £1.54/litre or $7.03/US gallon. Assuming a 30-MPG car, 188 miles would be $44. They paid $39.59 for that distance of electricity. Hybrids and plug-in hybrids will do a lot better than 30-MPG so the Superchargers aren't cheap compared to other available options. The average UK petrol vehicle gets over 35-MPG (6.7l/100km) so that would come in at $37.76 for the 188 mile range and cheaper than the Supercharger for an average petrol car, though it can be slightly hard to compare since different countries have slightly different fuel economy evaluations. It is higher than California by a decent amount and home energy rates are high too. They're a lot cheaper than petrol, but at 22.8p ($0.277) per kWh, it's nearly double what I'm paying on the east coast, but it looks like California rates might be comparable. It's not outrageous, but it is definitely higher than California and can mean that the Superchargers are more expensive than petrol stations. Sources: https://electrek.co/2022/09/28/tesla-hikes-supercharger-prices-california/ https://electrek.co/2022/09/28/tesla-hikes-supercharger-pric..., https://www.carmagazine.co.uk/electric/tesla-supercharger/ https://www.carmagazine.co.uk/electric/tesla-supercharger/, https://www.iea.org/articles/fuel-economy-in-the-united-kingdom https://www.iea.org/articles/fuel-economy-in-the-united-king..., https://powercompare.co.uk/electricity-prices/ https://powercompare.co.uk/electricity-prices/