3 ms·

Companies tend not to publish their costs, but we can find some info about the economics of charging stations. A grant program in Texas subsidized up to 70% of

by ggreer 2y ago

Companies tend not to publish their costs, but we can find some info about the economics of charging stations. A grant program in Texas subsidized up to 70% of the cost of charging stations. Tesla bid $500k for a fast charging station with 17 plugs, and around $380k for a station with 9 plugs.[1] That's $29k per plug for the 17 charger station. Assuming they asked for the maximum subsidy, that means Tesla's costs are around $41k per plug. If Tesla bills customers 20 cents per kWh above market electricity rates, they'll make back the cost of the plug after 205,000kWh. A typical EV has a 70-100kWh battery, so that's 2,000-3,000 full charges. If it takes an hour to fully charge a car, then each plug will be profitable after 2-4 months assuming a 100% duty cycle. Actual duty cycles are much lower. If we assume the charger is active 15% of the time, then it will be profitable after 18-30 months. Again, these are all rather pessimistic estimates. Actual markups and duty cycles are higher, and actual charging times are shorter. If we assume a 20% duty cycle, 45 minute charging time, and a 30 cent per kWh markup, it only takes 8-10 months to become profitable. I didn't include maintenance costs, but those are much lower than gas stations because charging stations require no full time staff. 1. https://www.forbes.com/sites/bradtempleton/2022/04/14/teslas-texas-charger-grant-applications-fail-its-bad-for-texas-but-reveals-teslas-super-low-costs/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/bradtempleton/2022/04/14/teslas...

no_wizard 2y ago
EV manufacturers (re: most car manufactures) are going to do all they can to get the government to subsidize this as much as possible. I noticed an explosion of EV charging stations where I live after the state government put incentives in to subsidize their build out. Other states have done it already and are doing it now. They're going to see the pattern of "I can get the government to subsidize this" and will hold out for them going forward, is my best guess.
- ggreer 2y ago
  It's important to distinguish Tesla from other companies. The others haven't figured out how to make chargers cheaply yet, so they're forced to ask for subsidies. That's why Tesla's bids on that Texas contract were so much lower than the competition. Tesla mass produces their charging stations in factories. Entire stations are assembled from modular units, mounted on a concrete slab, and shipped to the installation site on a flatbed.[1] These optimizations have gotten installation times down to 4 days.[2] Sources inside of Tesla have claimed their charging network is profitable, which is impressive considering that until recently, their network got no subsidies because it only supported charging Teslas. 1. https://x.com/Tesla/status/1636085524694695939 https://x.com/Tesla/status/1636085524694695939 2. https://x.com/TeslaCharging/status/1777395990766432596 https://x.com/TeslaCharging/status/1777395990766432596
  - nimish 2y ago
    The others don't _want_ to make chargers. They don't or want to know how. Charging infrastructure is a public good so it ought to be the government's job to incentivize it, but Tesla's supercharger network works just as well.
    - vel0city 2y ago
      Personally, I don't want my car company to also be the company I buy the fuel from. I'd want a marketplace of people competing to sell me fuel. I don't want to only be able to fuel my Hyundai at Hyundai-affiliated gas stations. And it'd be bullshit if I couldn't get gas from the Ford station because I'm in a Hyundai. I get Tesla needed to jumpstart the industry, but if its going to actually work the charging industry needs to stand on its own and not rely on the automakers making their own networks.
  - borski 2y ago
    Tesla has yet to ever produce a 1000V charging cabinet. Their v4 chargers that claim to be 1000V aren’t, because they are still driven by 400V cabinets. Building 1000V cabinets is very very expensive, which is why Tesla is behind the curve and hasn’t done it yet. EA cabinets are all 1000V. You are comparing apples and oranges. And 400V is the past.
  - no_wizard 2y ago
    Is it? This makes no real difference to my entire point, which is companies are learning that they should wait for subsidies, and will either build out much slower or not at all until they do. State governments have now set precedent for it. It’s not even that I’m against subsidies, to be clear, but they’re becoming pro forma and they aren’t terribly well thought out on setting goals. So they get subsidized to be built where they were going to build the chargers anyway

by ggreer 2y ago

no_wizard 2y ago

EV manufacturers (re: most car manufactures) are going to do all they can to get the government to subsidize this as much as possible. I noticed an explosion of EV charging stations where I live after the state government put incentives in to subsidize their build out. Other states have done it already and are doing it now. They're going to see the pattern of "I can get the government to subsidize this" and will hold out for them going forward, is my best guess.

ggreer 2y ago
It's important to distinguish Tesla from other companies. The others haven't figured out how to make chargers cheaply yet, so they're forced to ask for subsidies. That's why Tesla's bids on that Texas contract were so much lower than the competition. Tesla mass produces their charging stations in factories. Entire stations are assembled from modular units, mounted on a concrete slab, and shipped to the installation site on a flatbed.[1] These optimizations have gotten installation times down to 4 days.[2] Sources inside of Tesla have claimed their charging network is profitable, which is impressive considering that until recently, their network got no subsidies because it only supported charging Teslas. 1. https://x.com/Tesla/status/1636085524694695939 https://x.com/Tesla/status/1636085524694695939 2. https://x.com/TeslaCharging/status/1777395990766432596 https://x.com/TeslaCharging/status/1777395990766432596
- nimish 2y ago
  The others don't _want_ to make chargers. They don't or want to know how. Charging infrastructure is a public good so it ought to be the government's job to incentivize it, but Tesla's supercharger network works just as well.
  - vel0city 2y ago
    Personally, I don't want my car company to also be the company I buy the fuel from. I'd want a marketplace of people competing to sell me fuel. I don't want to only be able to fuel my Hyundai at Hyundai-affiliated gas stations. And it'd be bullshit if I couldn't get gas from the Ford station because I'm in a Hyundai. I get Tesla needed to jumpstart the industry, but if its going to actually work the charging industry needs to stand on its own and not rely on the automakers making their own networks.
- borski 2y ago
  Tesla has yet to ever produce a 1000V charging cabinet. Their v4 chargers that claim to be 1000V aren’t, because they are still driven by 400V cabinets. Building 1000V cabinets is very very expensive, which is why Tesla is behind the curve and hasn’t done it yet. EA cabinets are all 1000V. You are comparing apples and oranges. And 400V is the past.
- no_wizard 2y ago
  Is it? This makes no real difference to my entire point, which is companies are learning that they should wait for subsidies, and will either build out much slower or not at all until they do. State governments have now set precedent for it. It’s not even that I’m against subsidies, to be clear, but they’re becoming pro forma and they aren’t terribly well thought out on setting goals. So they get subsidized to be built where they were going to build the chargers anyway