Charging cost comparison - Ionity vs. Tesla Supercharging...
Discussion
People with cars made by the Ionity-funding manufacturers will likely pay considerably less though. It's a supercharger-style network for their cars, but open to all who are willing to pay. If Tesla decided to (or were forced to) open up superchargers to anyone with a CCS socket, what do you think they'd want per kWh?
There is a bigger conversation though about what rapid charging should cost. So far, in the UK at least, much of the rapid charging investment has been heavily grant-funded. Tesla are just building a mountain of debt to roll out superchargers everywhere and show their cars are viable. There's an assumption that at some point down the line there'll be enough cars and enough paid usage for this to all pay for itself, but it's probably not going to work at a few pence per kWh over the supplier rate. Fastned have said the "real" cost of rapid provision is more like €1/kWh.
We all want rapid charging to be reliable, with enough capacity to just turn up and charge when we want. Ecotricity have shown how not to do it - what's the real cost of doing it well, and making the operator enough to keep that level of service up?
There is a bigger conversation though about what rapid charging should cost. So far, in the UK at least, much of the rapid charging investment has been heavily grant-funded. Tesla are just building a mountain of debt to roll out superchargers everywhere and show their cars are viable. There's an assumption that at some point down the line there'll be enough cars and enough paid usage for this to all pay for itself, but it's probably not going to work at a few pence per kWh over the supplier rate. Fastned have said the "real" cost of rapid provision is more like €1/kWh.
We all want rapid charging to be reliable, with enough capacity to just turn up and charge when we want. Ecotricity have shown how not to do it - what's the real cost of doing it well, and making the operator enough to keep that level of service up?
sjg said:
People with cars made by the Ionity-funding manufacturers will likely pay considerably less though. It's a supercharger-style network for their cars, but open to all who are willing to pay. If Tesla decided to (or were forced to) open up superchargers to anyone with a CCS socket, what do you think they'd want per kWh?
This in a nutshell.Let's not forget they're not the only charging company in the market. Maybe others like BP/Shell will have a different market idea (i.e. make money whilst you wait in their facilities).
The thing is as well that most of the Ionity sites I've looked at have alternatives already. The MK site I'm most likely to stop at has the Ionity chargers right next to 8 Polars. The two sites in France that you'd hit on the other side of the ferry/tunnel have Corri-door rapids already.
Now my car, like most affordable EVs, won't pull more than 50kW (40 actually) so there's no premium on a faster charger. But if you're in a big-battery premium SUV though, is it worth twice the price to either halve your (long) charge time or get twice as many miles in the same time? Maybe it is.
If you got there and all the alternatives were full but an Ionity charger were available, would it be worth it? If I was on a deadline, probably.
Now my car, like most affordable EVs, won't pull more than 50kW (40 actually) so there's no premium on a faster charger. But if you're in a big-battery premium SUV though, is it worth twice the price to either halve your (long) charge time or get twice as many miles in the same time? Maybe it is.
If you got there and all the alternatives were full but an Ionity charger were available, would it be worth it? If I was on a deadline, probably.
sjg said:
People with cars made by the Ionity-funding manufacturers will likely pay considerably less though. It's a supercharger-style network for their cars, but open to all who are willing to pay....We all want rapid charging to be reliable, with enough capacity to just turn up and charge when we want.
I get that, but the question remains a big one for potential EV owners - where you gonna charge if you're not at home? Tesla's integrated approach (car automatically directs you to Superchargers and they can be counted on to be working and with no billing problems) is so far ahead of every other system that I couldn't see myself buying a different brand of EV.
Yes, in extreme-use scenarios even Tesla's network's limitations have been brought to light, but that happens so rarely as to be insignificant for most people. A far-more-expensive and yet less extensive network seems a double-fail, at least for now.
It's only relevant if you get a significant proportion of your charge from public charging stations. Most EV owners at the moment do not.
Personally, I wouldn't even be considering an EV if I couldn't do the vast majority of my charging at home.
Personally, I wouldn't even be considering an EV if I couldn't do the vast majority of my charging at home.
Edited by kambites on Tuesday 21st January 18:15
kambites said:
It's only relevant if you get a significant proportion of your charge from public charging stations. Most EV owners at the moment do not.
Personally, I wouldn't even be considering an EV if I couldn't do the vast majority of my charging at home.
I wouldn’t have ordered ours if I couldn’t do all our charging at home, right now. Personally, I wouldn't even be considering an EV if I couldn't do the vast majority of my charging at home.
Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 21st January 18:15
I have no intention of using the car outside of its range from home for the foreseeable.
kambites said:
It's only relevant if you get a significant proportion of your charge from public charging stations. Most EV owners at the moment do not.
It's relevant for any long-distance driving as well, plus round-trips from home where the total distance exceeds the range of your EV...sjg said:
People with cars made by the Ionity-funding manufacturers will likely pay considerably less though. It's a supercharger-style network for their cars, but open to all who are willing to pay. If Tesla decided to (or were forced to) open up superchargers to anyone with a CCS socket, what do you think they'd want per kWh?
I believe the difference is Ionity received a huge grant (€40m?) from the EU, whereas Tesla has to the best of my knowledge privately funded their Supercharger infrastructure. 
Zcd1 said:
kambites said:
It's only relevant if you get a significant proportion of your charge from public charging stations. Most EV owners at the moment do not.
It's relevant for any long-distance driving as well, plus round-trips from home where the total distance exceeds the range of your EV...From my calculations, when we switch our family car, we'll do somewhere between 2 and 4% of our charging from public chargers depending on the range of the EV we buy. That makes the cost of public charging some way down the list of concerns. For others this will obviously be different one way or the other.
Edited by kambites on Wednesday 22 January 11:44
Dave Hedgehog said:
jjwilde said:
It's almost as if they are trying to discourage people from buying EVs... Hmmm.
what possible reason would Ionity want do that, its not as if they are owned by the car industry thats spent billions lobbying against EVs It might work, it might not, in the end it is a private company with their own money it is up to them to live with the consequences.
From sitting inside the Tier 1 supplier side (who has plenty of vested interest/investment in EV technology), I think a lot of people under estimate the constraints of having to meet market expectations on disruptive technology. They are not pouring in billions just for PR, they need it to work and they need to sell EVs and make money (and soon). At the same time they have owners that clearly expect that losing money for a decade is not an option. Unless you are in Silicon Valley or have Chinese government backing, then there is no money tree for capital to rebuild the industry. Hence why some players are going into to harvest mode, get as much back from the current technology then close out the lights.
sjg said:
People with cars made by the Ionity-funding manufacturers will likely pay considerably less though. It's a supercharger-style network for their cars, but open to all who are willing to pay. If Tesla decided to (or were forced to) open up superchargers to anyone with a CCS socket, what do you think they'd want per kWh?
i was wondering about that, anyone know the deal here?As far as I got, and in line with Tesla's mission statement, is that Tesla wanted to "rent it out" but other manufacturers weren't biting.
Is there any good read on that? I could think of a couple of reasons but I'm curious if there's a reputable source why it isn't shared. As I remember, Tesla weren't opposed to it.
I think the price of supercharging, while nice being so low, isn't really of consequence to most EV owners. If you have to use SuC often, at this point it's still extra bother planning your journey. If you often do >450 km/ day, it's too much bother imho.
Edited by ZesPak on Wednesday 22 January 14:08
ZesPak said:
i was wondering about that, anyone know the deal here?
As far as I got, and in line with Tesla's mission statement, is that Tesla wanted to "rent it out" but other manufacturers weren't biting.
Is there any good read on that? I could think of a couple of reasons but I'm curious if there's a reputable source why it isn't shared. As I remember, Tesla weren't opposed to it.
I'd guess it's because Tesla don't want it to make any profit & they want it powered by green electricity. It's essentially part of the cost of the car. Imagine Tesla asking for £1000 from BMW for every car sold.As far as I got, and in line with Tesla's mission statement, is that Tesla wanted to "rent it out" but other manufacturers weren't biting.
Is there any good read on that? I could think of a couple of reasons but I'm curious if there's a reputable source why it isn't shared. As I remember, Tesla weren't opposed to it.
ZesPak said:
i was wondering about that, anyone know the deal here?
As far as I got, and in line with Tesla's mission statement, is that Tesla wanted to "rent it out" but other manufacturers weren't biting.
Is there any good read on that? I could think of a couple of reasons but I'm curious if there's a reputable source why it isn't shared. As I remember, Tesla weren't opposed to it.
Connector weirdness is probably the biggest hurdle, and I imagine no-one starting to make EVs wanted to commit to what Tesla used over one of the other standards - https://thedriven.io/2018/10/10/tesla/As far as I got, and in line with Tesla's mission statement, is that Tesla wanted to "rent it out" but other manufacturers weren't biting.
Is there any good read on that? I could think of a couple of reasons but I'm curious if there's a reputable source why it isn't shared. As I remember, Tesla weren't opposed to it.
It's only very recently with the Model 3 rollout in Europe that there's connectors on superchargers that other cars can use. I suspect the amount of money a car manufacturer would need to convince Tesla to let them use at this point it is more than any would be willing to pay. Tesla will have capacity headaches just with their cars if they keep selling thousands of cars a month. Hence Ionity existing for many of the key rivals.
Saw the Ionity pricing mentioned on the latest Fully Charged - comparing to the unit cost of home charging is nonsense IMO. I can make a coffee at home for about 20p in raw materials, it doesn't make it a rip off if a coffee shop charge £2 for the same.
Gassing Station | EV and Alternative Fuels | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff