Congestion Fee

[AliRafiee]

@Mach1E
They heard you, and are working on addressing your concerns.

https://motorweek.org/auto-world/charging-101/

Sponsored

 

[Billyk24]

We have GTPE and 2023 Model Y AWD long range. Pulled in supercharger 15 minutes got 143 miles gone. Easy in and out. Eventually everyone will be thrilled to travel knowing superchargers are everywhere. Bidens green corridor plan on chargers ever fifty miles on major routes 1 mile from exit will make ev traveling faster and no range anxiety. We live 5 miles from PA turnpike off rt8 Gibsonia Pa and chargers already designated at Sheetzs. Future looks good.

I'm less than 20 miles up the road in Butler County. We know the Tesla vehicles charge faster but....Tesla is also known to "game" the system. Their range estimates via repeated reports from Tesla owners are overstated in the upper half of state of charge and the range drops faster than expected in the bottom of the battery charge. Your 143 miles in 15 minutes (572 miles of range per hour as reported by many Tesla owners) is like 40.8 kWh if you were getting 3.5 miles per kWh? That is like 1/2 of the estimated Model Y battery capacity? Assume you started charging from a low state of charge like 20%? As for Sheetz, many stations only have Tesla (NACS) port so until Ford owners obtain the needed adaptor, these Sheetz gas stations are of no use.

 

[AKgrampy]

You’re just describing the rationing.

And again, it’s not the solution.

In your example we don’t need to change the light times, we need more roads.

I don’t like the idea of punishing people for using a charger properly (charging their batteries).

I totally understand and agree with an idle fee if you’re fully charged and sitting more than a few minutes, but to penalize people for using them as intended is ridiculous.

How about a fine for the charging companies for how many chargers are broken or how long it takes them to fix them?

I have never DCFC’d but totally agree with your position. To me it just seems like why do they think their time is worth more than mine or their convince worth more than my inconvenience? If there is a line at Starbucks should people purchasing multiple coffees be charged extra for causing delays? When supermarkets have long lines should people with full carts be charged extra when there are not enough cashiers as they are taking longer to check out and they can just purchase some items today and come back for more later? I would only charge as long as needed but if I felt I needed to go to 90 or more percent then I should not have to pay more for the electrons I am consuming. Maybe if I ever start driving my EV on the 350 mile drive to Anchorage I may change my mind. Of course those setting the charge rates will bill as they see fit.

 

[kltye]

I have never DCFC’d but totally agree with your position. To me it just seems like why do they think their time is worth more than mine or their convince worth more than my inconvenience? If there is a line at Starbucks should people purchasing multiple coffees be charged extra for causing delays? When supermarkets have long lines should people with full carts be charged extra when there are not enough cashiers as they are taking longer to check out and they can just purchase some items today and come back for more later? I would only charge as long as needed but if I felt I needed to go to 90 or more percent then I should not have to pay more for the electrons I am consuming. Maybe if I ever start driving my EV on the 350 mile drive to Anchorage I may change my mind. Of course those setting the charge rates will bill as they see fit.

Charge operators have an incentive to get slow-charging users off their backs as well, because they're selling less energy per unit time compared to faster charging vehicles. For your Starbucks example, Starbucks will sell the same amount of coffee anyway. A better analogy would be customers getting charged extra if they hemmed and hawed at the front of the line while deciding on what to order.

 

[AKgrampy]

Charge operators have an incentive to get slow-charging users off their backs as well, because they're selling less energy per unit time compared to faster charging vehicles. For your Starbucks example, Starbucks will sell the same amount of coffee anyway. A better analogy would be customers getting charged extra if they hemmed and hawed at the front of the line while deciding on what to order.

Understood - they were happy taking money fast and they will just have to be satisfied with a bit of slow time. I guess it is kind of like the slot machines in Vegas - no cash anymore - it slows things down!

 

[Auto Motive]

I'm less than 20 miles up the road in Butler County. We know the Tesla vehicles charge faster but....Tesla is also known to "game" the system. Their range estimates via repeated reports from Tesla owners are overstated in the upper half of state of charge and the range drops faster than expected in the bottom of the battery charge. Your 143 miles in 15 minutes (572 miles of range per hour as reported by many Tesla owners) is like 40.8 kWh if you were getting 3.5 miles per kWh? That is like 1/2 of the estimated Model Y battery capacity? Assume you started charging from a low state of charge like 20%? As for Sheetz, many stations only have Tesla (NACS) port so until Ford owners obtain the needed adaptor, these Sheetz gas stations are of no use.

Last trip on turnpike 65mph heat on 65 fan set 2 ran at 266wh/mile. It does return good effieceny keeping speed below 70.

 

[Billyk24]

Last trip on turnpike 65mph heat on 65 fan set 2 ran at 266wh/mile. It does return good effieceny keeping speed below 70.

266wh/mile----you know Tesla has to use a metric that is unlike others to make things harder to compare. That figure is approximately 3.8 miles per kWh battery capacity. HOWEVER, as stated above, multiple Tesla owners have stated the top half of battery capacity presents better than expected efficacy, but the bottom half presents worse than expected efficacy.

 

[babgvant]

80% hard caps should be put in place once a location is showing 100% utilization. If you want to slow charge to 100%, go find an L2 charger, that's what they are there for.

When there are DCFC every 50 miles, that might make sense. We don't enjoy that version of reality everywhere yet. Personally, I think it would be better if we addressed this from a user education and encouragement perspective instead of via actual rationing .

But when I have to make the jump across IL from Davenport, IA (or Geneseo if taking 80) with bikes on the car, into a headwind, and the temps are under 40F charging above 80% is necessary. Totally fine paying extra to make that happen. It's kind of silly to suggest that someone should go find a L2 charger and spend an hour getting that extra 5-10%.

 

[babgvant]

Potato potato.

They’re talking about a significant punitive fine for charging from 80 to 100%.

It’s trying to limit people from using resources because there aren’t enough. Sounds like rationing to me.

Encouraging and limiting are not the same word because they mean different things. Making someone pay for the resources they are consuming is how the market should function.

When you are charging at 100+kW, the marginal cost of the time value you consume by occupying space is so far outweighed by the marginal cost of the electricity that you are consuming that it can make sense for the operator to hide that cost from you in the per kWh price. Both are rivalrous goods so it is safe to assume that the marginal cost is non-zero. During high congestion times, it is likely that the opportunity cost of the space consumed by the car rises exponentially as well.

When these values flip as the charge rate tanks, it doesn't make sense to price in pure kW anymore and the pricing model changes to accomedate the marginal cost of both rivalrous goods that you are consuming. This is an example of a functional pricing model, not rationing.

Rationing is a process where we don't allow prices to fluctuate freely to reflect marginal cost and limit demand; instead addressing the lack of equilibirum from the supply side.

It is obvious that kW + time based pricing is a demand side lever. Pricing is allowed to move to accurately reflect marginal cost, which allows the demand/supply equilibrium to be met without supply side controls.

That sounds nothing like rationing.

 

[Mach1E]

Encouraging and limiting are not the same word because they mean different things. Making someone pay for the resources they are consuming is how the market should function.

When you are charging at 100+kW, the marginal cost of the time value you consume by occupying space is so far outweighed by the marginal cost of the electricity that you are consuming that it can make sense for the operator to hide that cost from you in the per kWh price. Both are rivalrous goods so it is safe to assume that the marginal cost is non-zero. During high congestion times, it is likely that the opportunity cost of the space consumed by the car rises exponentially as well.

When these values flip as the charge rate tanks, it doesn't make sense to price in pure kW anymore and the pricing model changes to accomedate the marginal cost of both rivalrous goods that you are consuming. This is an example of a functional pricing model, not rationing.

Rationing is a process where we don't allow prices to fluctuate freely to reflect marginal cost and limit demand; instead addressing the lack of equilibirum from the supply side.

It is obvious that kW + time based pricing is a demand side lever. Pricing is allowed to move to accurately reflect marginal cost, which allows the demand/supply equilibrium to be met without supply side controls.

That sounds nothing like rationing.

The way you describe it from the business side it may not sound like rationing.

But from the consumer who is penalized for charging to 100%, it sure feels like rationing.

But call it something different, doesn’t matter to me, I still don’t like the idea of it.

If you started charging people extra at gas stations for filling all the way up, I don’t care how you rationalize it, I still wouldn’t like that either.

And that’s after having to wait a few minutes for a pump to open up for my wife’s car last night.

It just feels too “HOA” or big brother to me. Hand out a $50 fine for everyone whose grass is too tall.

 

[superdave80]

Maybe if you aren’t in a hurry. But if the goal is to get people to drive everywhere in an EV and ditch the gasoline, this also would be counterproductive.

Which would be quicker for a person in a hurry: Waiting an extra hour for a charger or NOT waiting an extra hour for a charger?

 

[JoeDimwit]

Analogy doesn’t apply.

That’s illegal and hurts disadvantaged people.

Charging your car to 100% is not and does not.

Legality depends on jurisdiction.

 

[AKgrampy]

Encouraging and limiting are not the same word because they mean different things. Making someone pay for the resources they are consuming is how the market should function.

When you are charging at 100+kW, the marginal cost of the time value you consume by occupying space is so far outweighed by the marginal cost of the electricity that you are consuming that it can make sense for the operator to hide that cost from you in the per kWh price. Both are rivalrous goods so it is safe to assume that the marginal cost is non-zero. During high congestion times, it is likely that the opportunity cost of the space consumed by the car rises exponentially as well.

When these values flip as the charge rate tanks, it doesn't make sense to price in pure kW anymore and the pricing model changes to accomedate the marginal cost of both rivalrous goods that you are consuming. This is an example of a functional pricing model, not rationing.

Rationing is a process where we don't allow prices to fluctuate freely to reflect marginal cost and limit demand; instead addressing the lack of equilibirum from the supply side.

It is obvious that kW + time based pricing is a demand side lever. Pricing is allowed to move to accurately reflect marginal cost, which allows the demand/supply equilibrium to be met without supply side controls.

That sounds nothing like rationing.

When stationed overseas we had ration cards. Basically limiting the amount of an high demand item you could purchase. The vendors in this scenario are in fact limiting use during high demand; therefore, rationing. If it were all demand supply then they would raise everyone’s prices to reduce demand during those periods.

 

[AKgrampy]

Which would be quicker for a person in a hurry: Waiting an extra hour for a charger or NOT waiting an extra hour for a charger?

Which would be quicker - adding a few more kW at a slow rate because I have already stopped and waited versus leaving and then perhaps having to wait again at another stop? Hopefully this dilemma is cleared up over the next couple of years with the addition of NEVI funded chargers and opening the Tesla network.

 

[superdave80]

Which would be quicker - adding a few more kW at a slow rate because I have already stopped and waited versus leaving and then perhaps having to wait again at another stop?

The 2nd one, because if everybody stops charging above 80% (or maybe 90% might be a better cutoff based on looking at some charge curves), there will be more DC charger time available for everybody, and it's less likely you will have to wait for the next charger.

Sponsored