Tesla Supercharger Network Output Now Exceeds 400 GWh

JUL 27 2018 BY MARK KANE 29

The total amount of energy dispensed by Tesla Superchargers since 2012 recently exceed 400 GWh, which could provide juice for nearly 1.4 billion miles (2.25 billion km).

The info about network usage comes from the dashboard at the Tesla HQ. The counter showed 405.6 GWh and the pace of increase suggests that power output exceeded 55 MW when recorded.

In June, Tesla put into service its 10,000th Supercharging stall and now there are 1,317 stations with 10,738 stalls.

Most of the electricity supplied by the Tesla’s proprietary network was free to Tesla customers (only a minority of the newest Model S/X and all Model 3 drivers are required to pay for electricity).

Tesla supercharger network is delivering about 55 000 000 Watts of energy. from r/teslamotors

Source: reddit, Electrek

Categories: Charging, Tesla

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

29 Comments on "Tesla Supercharger Network Output Now Exceeds 400 GWh"

newest oldest most voted

This is the biggest moat around Tesla so far. Long range cars are only half of the equation, the other half is turning the cars around in a timely fashion to facilitate unlimited long range travel. Of which, Tesla has no equal. Smart play, Tesla!

For context, this total (since 2012) is about one 10,000th of US annual electricity consumption.

Wow, Tesla vehicles are energy efficient!

But I guess we already knew that since the average home uses much more energy than the average electric vehicle.

Thank you for bringing balance to this site. You’ve changed my mind, thanks.

The point is that a “moat” is a sustainable barrier to entry, but there’s no scale here, so I don’t see what would keep a competitor out, other than a desire not to lose money initially.

Either your being intentionally obtuse, or you’ve clearly missed a rather obvious point. The point is the efort to build 10K superchargers, that just fit your cars. That makes long distance EV travel somewhat practical, and at this point, is pretty much a competitive advantage that only Tesla has at this point.

And it’s a “moat” for others to build a similiar capability (it takes time/effort to cross, or acquire this capability). A “moat” is NOT a sustainable barrier to entry, it can be crossed with effort. It just raises the bar & discourages potential new competitors

I really didn’t need to explain all that, did I?

GuyMan, no you didn’t, although you’re wasting your time. But I appreciate it!

VW will have 2,000 fast chargers with Electrify America by 2019 I think, which is their first phase. Plan to put 2 billion into it over the next 9 years

Thank you for bringing balance to this site. You’ve changed my mind, thanks.

Why the downvotes, this is certainly accurate factual data, and it does drive the context of what a small sliver of demand EV’s make – Seems like the argument that “the grid can’t take more EV’s” is less and less of an argument every day.

Good numbers. As a comparison, TeLaiDian (the biggest non-state-owned charging company in China) total historic output currently stands at just over 1 TWh. The daily rate stands at ~3.6GWh. But much of that is slow charging.

The Tesla network is probably close to that as well once you factor in Destination Chargers, which vastly outnumber Superchargers on the Tesla website.

Why does Tesla not include New Zealand on it’s world map?

Also, Russia is joined to Alaska. I guess Sarah Palin really can see Putin’s head from there!

I thought you’d be happy that Tesla has finally opened a store in Auckland!

https://www.stuff.co.nz/motoring/news/105040195/inside-teslas-firstever-new-zealand-store

400 GWh @ $0.15/kWh is 400,000,000 x0.15 or $60 million in electricity alone. That is probably on the low end of the estimate of the cost.

So, roughly twelve Super Bowl commercials. BMW alone spent $10M on i3 Super Bowl ads.

It really shows you how hard it is to have a profitable charging business. Tesla installed 10000 stalls and could have generated some 50-100mUSD turnover over the last couple of year (if they would have actually charged anyone). The investment costs must have been in the 100s of millions. So they would be years away from breaking even.

Of course for Tesla not a primary concern since it is not their business model, but most other independent providers and energy companies want to build a business out of it. It’s tough at the moment.

Now we need a listing of how the electricity was generated.

Mostly by burning natural gas.

That is probably right, most of electricity is generated using fossil fuels. My mentioning this attracts negative votes, people would rather believe than know.

Thank you for bringing balance to this site. You’ve changed my mind, thanks.

As long as it is not oil, it is still a win.

Amen. Regardless of the method of production (coal, solar, wind, hydro, etc), electricity is 100% domestically produced. A fact that’s conveniently dismissed by the Big Oil proponents that furiously wave their flags while quietly giving their money to the Middle East enemy(s) they speak so loudly against.

I agree, just saying the electricity has to come from somewhere.

400GWh, or 37MWh per stall, is a definitely extremely under utilized.
Each supercharger stall has 145kW peak power, so each stall has been used for 257 hours (peak power equivalent) on average during the past 6 years.
Assuming those stalls are on average 3 year old, the utilization rate is merely 1%.

The energy cost to build these stalls probably is much more than the electricity they provided.

400 GWh is equivalent to the energy in 110,000 gallon of gasoline. One fuel pump can easily dispense that much of gasoline in 1 years.

400 gwh is equal to 11,000,000 gallons of gasoline.
Also because Electric Vehicles are so much more energy efficient than ICE.
An ICE getting 25 mpg would use 56 million gallons of gasoline to go 1.4 billion miles.