GM Volt Forum banner

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Recently bought a 2012 volt, and i noticed a Tesla Super Charger in Glenwood Springs here in Colorado. Can a Volt be charged there? Thanks for the help. I tried searching for a clear answer, but couldn't seem to find one without a lot of digging. so i figured id just ask someone who knows.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
20,018 Posts
Square peg meet round hole. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,452 Posts
the residence inn/courtyard websites do not mention the 6 tesla superchargers, Plug share has these listed , but has no notes about other types of charging on site- so no, unless you have a Tesla, or some clever person has developed a dongle, you can't use these. Look at the plugshare website for other Public charging avaialable in that area.

6? Maybe Elon has a condo nearby.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,663 Posts
I read somewhere that while a Volt can't use the high power SC they did install auxiliary 240V outlets that (if you had a portable 240V EVSE) you could plug in and use that.

Hopefully someone will confirm.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
844 Posts
The lack of faster than 20 amp Level II charging on the Volt was another decision made in the Volts design to prolong battery life, similar to the decilion to limit acceleration (faster battery drain).
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,244 Posts
6? Maybe Elon has a condo nearby.....
I think there is a minimum the install. See 6/6b below. There is likely other things around there todo/place-to-eat.

Cool summary from many pages ago:
http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/17363-Supercharger-Announcement-2013-05-30/page22?p=351656&viewfull=1#post351656

Tesla Motors, Inc. Supercharger (SC) Announcement
May 30, 2013 at 10:30 AM PT
Rough Transcript

3. Do you have any cost figures you can provide? At the original introduction, you had a ballpark for each station. Has the timetable accelerated a little bit (vs. 100 ...)?
Yes, it has [accelerated]. Cost is approximately what we first estimated, roughly $150K per station in expenditures without solar. And another $150K with solar. We'll probably be at the 100 station mark next year. About twice as fast as originally planned.

5b. Explain how the solar works for the stations that do have solar?
The general principle is that we want to generate more energy from the sun over the course of the year than used by Model S at the SCs.
Most SCing on Friday afternoon and evening. Low usage during the week.
The solar panels are generating power throughout the course of the week. Cumulatively adds up to more than the cars consume.
We actually have grid storage going on at some of our supercharging stations. Stationary battery packs that take in energy through the week, through the solar panels. The solar panels charge the battery pack, and then that stationary battery pack charges the Model S battery pack. Capable of going completely off-grid.
These stations will operate even if the national grid goes down.
(Joking) Zombie apocalypse you'll still be able to charge with the SC system.

5c. Solar panel location?
Above the SC parking stalls. Examples at Tejon and Hawthorne. Over time we'll have that at all SC stations. Takes longer for panel installation.
Side benefit: carport, shielded from sun and rain while charging.

6. How much of an issue has reliability been on the SCs?
Need to make sure we have a lot of parking spaces available. SC has the ability to route power to multiple parking bays. Currently 2, but will be upgrading to 4. [some 8-10] Need to make sure there's always an excess of stations.

6b. Unmanned stations. Any issues with people showing up and it not working?
Multiple stations, redundancy. Minimum of 2 at each station. Thus, at least 4 parking bays. It's fairly unlikely that 2 or more would be down.
Superchargers...stacking a whole bunch of chargers designed for the cars. Twelve chargers inside. Redundancy. On failure power is reduced, rather than [offline].

10. Solar, superchargers, grid storage. Which percentage of SCs will have the solar component? Which percentage with have grid storage with that solar?
Long-term, all of them. Just a matter of time. In order to expand rapidly, install without them and backfill over time. Solar lag behind SC installation 12-18 months. Grid storage 6-12 months after that.

10b. Solar before storage?
Yes.

10c. How many grid storage so far? How big are they?
Two in operation now. Pretty sizeable. Half MWh. Capable of putting out a MW if need be.

10d. Where?
Rather not say so people don't futz with them. California.
Grid storage is a helpful thing because it offers a buffer to the grid. They like.

13. Clarification on number of SC plugs now vs. this year, EONY.
Don't have the number handy. One thing that's not obvious: in addition to new stations, we're increasing the number of ports at existing stations.
Example: Harris used to have just 1 port. Now it has 10. Not reflected in the map.

13b. [Followup question about impact of ports increasing]
Two to three thousand [charging] ports... (once 200 SCs rolled out ... at 10+ parking bays)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,452 Posts
I think there is a minimum the install. See 6/6b below. There is likely other things around there todo/place-to-eat.

Cool summary from many pages ago:
http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/17363-Supercharger-Announcement-2013-05-30/page22?p=351656&viewfull=1#post351656

Tesla Motors, Inc. Supercharger (SC) Announcement
May 30, 2013 at 10:30 AM PT
Rough Transcript
wow!, I love the Tesla, but that interview about the Superchargers set off all my BS alarms:

A tesla on a supercharger draws 120 kw, so 6 of them plugged in will draw 720 kw. Thats more power than is avaiable and not already committed at most highway rest areas. So the grid storage is not there for the solar panels as claimed, but just to allow the SC's to work at all without shutting down the AC systems for the buildings. That's completely reasonable to do, buy why the cover story?

the Super charger solar panel installatin shown on the Tesla website has approximately 120 [email protected] watts. so the nameplate generating capacity is 27 KW. most installations, with good site preparation, can expect to generate 700 KWh/year/KW, so the annual generating capacity is approximately 20,000 kwh. If 6 SC stations are each used for 8 hours/week, thats (400 hours/year*6) =2400 Supercharger use hours per year for a 6 station installation. At 120 KW that's 288,000 kwh /year. So the claim that the SCs will be using solar power is only 7% true. again, it's a good thing to do, but why the BS cover story?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,244 Posts
A tesla on a supercharger draws 120 kw, so 6 of them plugged in will draw 720 kw.
You are drawing all sorts of conclusions on one source and doing simple math using it. They are not necessarily at rest stops (but businesses) and based on the number of cars plugged in and the current SOC for a given car the total draw will be different.

You can scroll down here and click on the various sites to see how many stalls they have 4-12 at a given site (some are on both sides of the highway). They also show the amenities around the superchargers. http://www.teslamotors.com/supercharger
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,452 Posts
...They also show the amenities around the superchargers. http://www.teslamotors.com/supercharger
that's the web page and picture I used to do the simple math. You are right that they might get 6 cars charging at less than 720 kw, but they have to design a 6 bay installation so that the cars could all supercharge. If they throtte back, to limit the 6 bays to a lower total charge rate, the risk causing driver angst, better to put in the fixed "grid storage" and keep the drivers happy. I'm not complaining about thier design or system, just the nonsense in the interview.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,936 Posts
wow!, I love the Tesla, but that interview about the Superchargers set off all my BS alarms:

A tesla on a supercharger draws 120 kw, so 6 of them plugged in will draw 720 kw. ...
the Super charger solar panel installatin shown on the Tesla website has approximately 120 [email protected] watts. so the nameplate generating capacity is 27 KW. most installations, with good site preparation, can expect to generate 700 KWh/year/KW, so the annual generating capacity is approximately 20,000 kwh. If 6 SC stations are each used for 8 hours/week, thats (400 hours/year*6) =2400 Supercharger use hours per year for a 6 station installation. At 120 KW that's 288,000 kwh /year. So the claim that the SCs will be using solar power is only 7% true. again, it's a good thing to do, but why the BS cover story?
Your math and assumptions are off.
First, the SC stations are paired. If one of each pair is occupied it charges at 120 kW. If both are occupied they are ramped down, as I recall it is variable but around 90.
Second, I question your solar panel assumptions. We have a 9.6 kW array, which is not ideally situated in a good area of the country, but not as good as CA or AZ. It produces about 10,000 kWh annually.

Your assumptions of usage is also interesting. It could very well be exactly on the mark, or it could be off. Do you have anything to support those assumptions?
Hawthorne CA is one of the busiest stations, but there are many others that get much less use.

The basic plan is to build out the SC stations, then the Solar arrays, and then power storage.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
8,680 Posts
wow!, I love the Tesla, but that interview about the Superchargers set off all my BS alarms:

A tesla on a supercharger draws 120 kw, so 6 of them plugged in will draw 720 kw. Thats more power than is avaiable and not already committed at most highway rest areas. So the grid storage is not there for the solar panels as claimed, but just to allow the SC's to work at all without shutting down the AC systems for the buildings. That's completely reasonable to do, buy why the cover story?

the Super charger solar panel installatin shown on the Tesla website has approximately 120 [email protected] watts. so the nameplate generating capacity is 27 KW. most installations, with good site preparation, can expect to generate 700 KWh/year/KW, so the annual generating capacity is approximately 20,000 kwh. If 6 SC stations are each used for 8 hours/week, thats (400 hours/year*6) =2400 Supercharger use hours per year for a 6 station installation. At 120 KW that's 288,000 kwh /year. So the claim that the SCs will be using solar power is only 7% true. again, it's a good thing to do, but why the BS cover story?
Where did you get the 700 kWh/year/kW number? Delaware isn't exactly known as the sun capitol of the world, but last year I got 5.6MWh from 4.7 kW, with a not terribly optimal installation - incidentally exactly what the installer predicted for the installation. That's almost 1200 kWh/year/kW for my one data point.

My understanding from lurking in the Tesla forums is the superchargers are linked pairs, and if another car pulls into the other half of your Supercharger, the output is halved (so 6 plugs would have 360 kW between them - and that's if they are the newer 120 kW chargers - the original installations were 90 kW.)

Also very curious were the 8 hours per week comes from. I have no idea if that's high or low - I've never seen anyone present utilization data for superchargers.

As for the grid storage, who says it has to have only one reason? The one they stated is perfectly reasonable - and if they are billed on time of use, Tesla might make some money out of using the batteries that way when the demand is lower. The one you suggested is also a good reason, and the batteries might well be used for both reasons.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,452 Posts
Your math and assumptions are off...
First, the SC stations are paired. If one of each pair is occupied it charges at 120 kW. If both are occupied they are ramped down, as I recall it is variable but around 90.
,,,,.
Even at this rate it is 540KW that they have to plan for and engineer around. I'd need to get our power company to upsize our 13 KV lines to add that much power demand, that would be easy here, because we are pretty close to a substation, but not everywhere. The grid storage makes sense- just not the cover story.

Your math and assumptions are off....
...Second, I question your solar panel assumptions. We have a 9.6 kW array, which is not ideally situated in a good area of the country, but not as good as CA or AZ. It produces about 10,000 kWh annually.
....
MA uses 700 KWh/Year/KW as the cutoff for getting credits paid out. there were lots of installations going in at less than this, even if the number is double, say 1400 KWh/KW/Year, it doesn't change my logic: that solar charger over the superchargers is producing only a small fraction of the power consumed and is mostly being done for marketing purposes.

My basis for the usage, 8 hours/ week per plug, was based on the interviewee's claim that they see supercharging much more on weekends than any other time. It seems low to me, but it fits with the response. Again, pick a different number, for one stall to provide PV power for the Charger in that stall, it needs to have less than 1 hour's use per week.
It's not bad to put the PV systems in, just misleading the public and policy makers to claim that they are solar charging their cars. they are not.

I will put this another way: your PV installation is roughly 40 panels, twice the size of a each bay shown in the Photo on the Tesla website. All the power you generate (10,000 kwh/year) could run a supercharger for 15 minutes / day, good for your car maybe, but insignificant at the Tesla public charging stations. I stand by my initial premise: that the interview is a nonsense marketing spiel, masking the good real work that Tesla is doing with eco-fluff , without any good reason to do so. I'm not particularly interested in hearing the popular press pass on the message that The Tesla is superior to plug-in hybrids because it runs on the sun while we Volt owners use gas sometimes..... based on this interview, that message will go out, it apparently already has, based on the reaction this is getting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,486 Posts
A quick note about the 120KW supercharger. The two head unit is 120KW for two concurrent cars. One car can use 120KW but when a second car comes alone, the two will use a combined 120KW with the car nearest to full charging slower. So, you may see 30KW for one and 90 KW for the other. This can lead to people leaving early before getting a full charge. Tesla has a board in the HQ showing the average charge event being between 30-40 kWh. Perhaps due to people in CA getting about a half hour of SC for a quick 100 mile charge and then moving on.

Very few superchargers have solar arrays.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,244 Posts
A quick note about the 120KW supercharger. The two head unit is 120KW for two concurrent cars. One car can use 120KW but when a second car comes alone, the two will use a combined 120KW with the car nearest to full charging slower. So, you may see 30KW for one and 90 KW for the other. This can lead to people leaving early before getting a full charge. Tesla has a board in the HQ showing the average charge event being between 30-40 kWh. Perhaps due to people in CA getting about a half hour of SC for a quick 100 mile charge and then moving on.

Very few superchargers have solar arrays.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
310 Posts
I read somewhere that while a Volt can't use the high power SC they did install auxiliary 240V outlets that (if you had a portable 240V EVSE) you could plug in and use that.

Hopefully someone will confirm.
When you go to specific SuperCharger locations on the Tesla Website, it lists nearby public charging stations available; for example at Tejon Ranch, California, it lists the Shorepower stations at Flying J Travel Center, in Lebec, and one in Bakersfield.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
8,680 Posts
Interesting chart, Scott.

If I'm understanding what I'm reading right, as of the time of that photo (which is probably a month old - there are some sites active now that aren't even on the coming soon list there,) they were averaging between 5 and 10 MWh per day (with peaks of about 14 MWh) for all the sites combined, with Fremont and Hawthorne consuming twice as much as any other site, and likely more than the rest combined.

It sounds like the worst a single site (and it'd have to be either fremont or hawthorne) is consuming on a peak day is probably around 4,000 kWh - which if you assume 120 kW charging is about 33 charger-hours (6 chargers times 5.5 hours each, for instance.)

It'd be really nice if Tesla made that board available online. Prolly be good PR for them, too. :)
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top