Jump to content

Tesla Super Charger Stations


Kirk W
 Share

Recommended Posts

Not stated is the area needed for a 5-10 megawatt solar array (hint - about a megawatt per acre). That's what it takes to supply (40) 250kw V3 charge stations at an average 50% occupancy.  Having a handfull of solar panels shading each stall won't cut it.

Edited by Lou Schneider
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/16/2022 at 1:38 PM, Lou Schneider said:

Not stated is the area needed for a 5-10 megawatt solar array (hint - about a megawatt per acre). That's what it takes to supply (40) 250kw V3 charge stations at an average 50% occupancy.  Having a handfull of solar panels shading each stall won't cut it.

No they did no state it but the batteries are for preventing blackouts and damaging the grid for just enough time to bring up the backup stations/s. They are initially only interested in charging them enough to take over some or all during peak expensive hours. They are also using the grid as necessary in off peak hours to charge them. That is my understanding and future details will be forthcoming. But I am not arguing your point. Just clarifying the idea of the batteries is to store enough to power the chargers just during expensive peak hours so the solar is not the number one source for some locations. I am sure some will eventually be mostly or all solar. Although where possible I am sure they will sooner or later.

Edited by RV_
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most of the people I know speak poorly of electric vehicles but my son-in-law, a long time Exxon Chemical Engineer, and a Texas Aggie told me that electric vehicles are recharged at a rate which is the equivalent of 125 miles for the price a one gallon of gas! They can tow RVs and we will be going in that direction in the future. GM and Ford have indicated that the will stop production of gas powered vehicles in 2035.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, whj469 said:

Most of the people I know speak poorly of electric vehicles but my son-in-law, a long time Exxon Chemical Engineer, and a Texas Aggie told me 

Well, there you go.  The problem is apparent.  First, he is a Chemical Engineer and second, he is an Aggie Engineer.  Ha ha ha.😁

 

Ken

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/16/2022 at 3:38 PM, Lou Schneider said:

Not stated is the area needed for a 5-10 megawatt solar array (hint - about a megawatt per acre). That's what it takes to supply (40) 250kw V3 charge stations at an average 50% occupancy.  Having a handfull of solar panels shading each stall won't cut it.

Any idea how much solar you can get from the 9000 square feet of panels as mentioned on the Tweet?

"40 stalls, plus two 4500 square foot solar arrays and a Megapack..."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Dutch_12078 said:

Any idea how much solar you can get from the 9000 square feet of panels as mentioned on the Tweet?

"40 stalls, plus two 4500 square foot solar arrays and a Megapack..."

If 1 acre = 42560 sq ft, 1/20th of an acre (9000 sq ft) should produce about 1/20th of a megawatt, or about 50 Kw.   About 1/5th of the power consumed by a single 250Kw Supercharger.  The remaining power has to come from the grid.

Edited by Lou Schneider
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Lou Schneider said:

If 1 acre = 42560 sq ft, 1/20th of an acre (9000 sq ft) should produce about 1/20th of a megawatt, or about 50 Kw.   About 1/5th of the power consumed by a single 250Kw Supercharger.  The remaining power has to come from the grid.

Or the remaining power comes from the Megapack that's charged by the panels during slow periods. Each Megapack can store up to 3 megawatt-hours of electricity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9000 sf is more like 1/5 of an acre, so could produce around 200 Kw at full output (full sun).  But full output is only expected for around 6 hours per day, with significant tapering over the remaining daylight hours, and nothing at all at night. So while 200 Kw is nothing to sneeze at, it is a drop in the bucket compared to what these charging stations could potentially use. 

If these stations sit essentially empty for hours at a time there would be a chance for the panels to charge up the Megapack (It would take 15 hours of full output to fully charge a 3 Mw-hour pack), but if there is regular use the recharging from the solar panels will lag behind very quickly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Dutch_12078 said:

Or the remaining power comes from the Megapack that's charged by the panels during slow periods. Each Megapack can store up to 3 megawatt-hours of electricity.

You'll need an awful lot of slow periods under full sun (15 full solar hours or more than 2 solar days) to recharge a 3 megawatt-hour Megapack from a 1/5 acre, 200 Kw solar array (thanks Mark!).  That's assuming there aren't any cars also sucking power from the array.

The fact remains that amount of solar will only produce enough energy to support a single Supercharger. Or two assuming each only has a 50% duty cycle and is not used at night.  Certainly not 40 Superchargers having any reasonable percentage of utilization.

Thus the on-site solar is mostly a PR gimmick with the real power coming from the utility grid.  

Edited by Lou Schneider
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Lou Schneider said:

If 1 acre = 42560 sq ft, 1/20th of an acre (9000 sq ft) should produce about 1/20th of a megawatt, or about 50 Kw.   About 1/5th of the power consumed by a single 250Kw Supercharger.  The remaining power has to come from the grid.

I don't really speak this language but what I know from putting solar on my van is how much wattage I get per sq ft depends on the panels I choose.

Linda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Linda don't feel alone. Everyone knows solar fields for every Supercharger station in Manhatten NY is not happening. Not even carport sized.

Everyone knows whether they admit it or not that Musk always executes.

Look back over our history right here. When Starlink came out lots of RVrs here all but said they hate Musk and would never . . .Oh they are allowing it for RVs . . . I am mad that they are so backlogged and I have to wait.

I remember being told here when Musk bought into Tesla in 2003 that no one will buy an electric car. They were still seven years away from an IPO and one prominent member here who rarely posts anymore called it a pump and dump! 😂

As well batteries are about to get a lot cleaner and energy dense so working off old data, and today old can be a month old, may be premature.

For example this from the last two weeks I'll be posting in Investments: New “Gen6” BMW Battery Promises 620 Mile Range

 

Edited by RV_
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is the latest one planned for Arizona and perhaps some of the folks who say it can't be done might go visit and report back to us.

Excerpt:

Arizona is about to get a whole lot more EV chargers thanks to a partnership between Invisible Urban Charging and EV Charging of Arizona. Together, the two companies plan to install 13,980 EV chargers in Arizona — 7 times more than it has at present. According to a joint press release, the first installations will begin in the first quarter of 2023.

 

"Tesla V4 Superchargers Coming To Yuma County

Tesla is planning to build a 40 stall Supercharger facility near the Dateland Travel Center on Interstate 8, the main highway between San Diego and Tucson. According to Twitter user Marco-Supercharger, the new location will be one of the first to feature Tesla’s V4 350 kW chargers. It will get most of its electricity from a 4500 square foot solar array that will feed a 3 MWh Megapack battery storage system. That’s large enough to supply the needs of all 40 chargers."

Source with a whole lot more:

https://cleantechnica.com/2022/09/17/arizona-7-times-more-ev-chargers-tesla-v4-superchargers-coming/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Lou Schneider said:

You'll need an awful lot of slow periods under full sun (15 full solar hours or more than 2 solar days) to recharge a 3 megawatt-hour Megapack from a 1/5 acre, 200 Kw solar array (thanks Mark!).  That's assuming there aren't any cars also sucking power from the array.

The fact remains that amount of solar will only produce enough energy to support a single Supercharger. Or two assuming each only has a 50% duty cycle and is not used at night.  Certainly not 40 Superchargers having any reasonable percentage of utilization.

Thus the on-site solar is mostly a PR gimmick with the real power coming from the utility grid.  

So your take is that the solar panels and Megapack are just a gimmick that won't reduce the amount of grid power needed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Dutch_12078 said:

So your take is that the solar panels and Megapack are just a gimmick that won't reduce the amount of grid power needed?

Excerpts from the article linked in the original post:

Tesla CEO Elon Musk has been promising that Tesla will power all Supercharger stations from solar and batteries for a long time, but the rollout has been significantly delayed.

In 2017, Musk even added that Tesla planned to add solar and batteries to all Supercharger stations and eventually disconnect most of them from the grid.

A single Megapack can hold enough energy to charge 40 Tesla vehicles, and Tesla can use the battery system to cut peak demand at the station to avoid large demand charges, which are responsible for increasing the price of charging electric vehicles.

The numbers simply don't add up (and aren't even close) to "power all Supercharger stations from solar" or "eventually disconnect most of them from the grid".  

Do you disagree?

However, the use of the Megapack batteries will enable the stations to lower or perhaps eliminate grid demand during peak periods to avoid large demand charges that are present in some markets, and that is certainly a good thing. Using batteries to even out demand makes a lot of sense, but let's not pretend that the amount of solar panels referenced in the article is going to allow most of them to be disconnected from the grid. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, mptjelgin said:

Excerpts from the article linked in the original post:

Tesla CEO Elon Musk has been promising that Tesla will power all Supercharger stations from solar and batteries for a long time, but the rollout has been significantly delayed.

In 2017, Musk even added that Tesla planned to add solar and batteries to all Supercharger stations and eventually disconnect most of them from the grid.

A single Megapack can hold enough energy to charge 40 Tesla vehicles, and Tesla can use the battery system to cut peak demand at the station to avoid large demand charges, which are responsible for increasing the price of charging electric vehicles.

The numbers simply don't add up (and aren't even close) to "power all Supercharger stations from solar" or "eventually disconnect most of them from the grid".  

Do you disagree?

However, the use of the Megapack batteries will enable the stations to lower or perhaps eliminate grid demand during peak periods to avoid large demand charges that are present in some markets, and that is certainly a good thing. Using batteries to even out demand makes a lot of sense, but let's not pretend that the amount of solar panels referenced in the article is going to allow most of them to be disconnected from the grid. 

Yes, I've read the piece, and history tells us Elon Musk will deliver what he says he will. Eventually... ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Confirmation bias is often brought up in these discussions. 

The referenced article (assuming that is is accurate) provides enough usable information to actually run some calculations and look at some numbers. This is what I do day in and day out as a practicing Engineer, where I don't have the luxury of ignoring the math. 

In this case the numbers regarding solar providing most or all of the power for these Supercharger stations just don't work out. In fact, they are off by more than an order of magnitude. But presented with this analysis, some folk's response is to ignore the numbers and fall back on the idea that ol' Elon always comes through. 

This is pretty much the definition of Confirmation Bias. From Wikipedia, my emphasis added: People display this bias when they select information that supports their views, ignoring contrary information, or when they interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing attitudes.

Note that my analysis was of a 9000 sf solar array feeding 40 250 kW Superchargers and the numbers don't come close to working. 

RV later posts this article:

Tesla is planning to build a 40 stall Supercharger facility near the Dateland Travel Center on Interstate 8, the main highway between San Diego and Tucson. According to Twitter user Marco-Supercharger, the new location will be one of the first to feature Tesla’s V4 350 kW chargers. It will get most of its electricity from a 4500 square foot solar array that will feed a 3 MWh Megapack battery storage system. That’s large enough to supply the needs of all 40 chargers."

So now we have a solar array with only 4500 sf, feeding 40 350 kW chargers? How is this supposed to work? Musk Magic? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, mptjelgin said:

Confirmation bias is often brought up in these discussions. 

The referenced article (assuming that is is accurate) provides enough usable information to actually run some calculations and look at some numbers. This is what I do day in and day out as a practicing Engineer, where I don't have the luxury of ignoring the math. 

In this case the numbers regarding solar providing most or all of the power for these Supercharger stations just don't work out. In fact, they are off by more than an order of magnitude. But presented with this analysis, some folk's response is to ignore the numbers and fall back on the idea that ol' Elon always comes through. 

This is pretty much the definition of Confirmation Bias. From Wikipedia, my emphasis added: People display this bias when they select information that supports their views, ignoring contrary information, or when they interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing attitudes.

Note that my analysis was of a 9000 sf solar array feeding 40 250 kW Superchargers and the numbers don't come close to working. 

RV later posts this article:

Tesla is planning to build a 40 stall Supercharger facility near the Dateland Travel Center on Interstate 8, the main highway between San Diego and Tucson. According to Twitter user Marco-Supercharger, the new location will be one of the first to feature Tesla’s V4 350 kW chargers. It will get most of its electricity from a 4500 square foot solar array that will feed a 3 MWh Megapack battery storage system. That’s large enough to supply the needs of all 40 chargers."

So now we have a solar array with only 4500 sf, feeding 40 350 kW chargers? How is this supposed to work? Musk Magic? 

I'm not going to answer a vague I did the math and it did not work out. Show us your math, then we can check it and pass it along to the OP who wrote the article. If he made a mistake I'm sure he'd be big enough to thank you.  So let's ask the experts and I'll link this post over there and ask if they can explain who is right, but most importantly why. So since you've already done the math show us. If you missed something you'd want to know as an honest broker.

Yes, Musk always delivers. Late, maybe. Redesigned? Perhaps. Please show us how it can work, as an engineer, and I'll ask the source. 

Perhaps since you already did the math you could lay it out here since we have more than a few engineers here. And show us what about the hybrid battery/grid plans won't work to achieve the cost reductions he is saying he can achieve.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the article:

 

"A single Megapack can hold enough energy to charge 40 Tesla vehicles, and Tesla can use the battery system to cut peak demand at the station to avoid large demand charges, which are responsible for increasing the price of charging electric vehicles.

The company will be able to use the solar array to charge the battery pack and significantly reduce its need to use the grid."

That's the topic.

Saying eventually they hope to disconnect from the grid is not now. You have got to show me that math because all the article states is they will reduce the peak time charges and I saw not one word that this first battery and solar assisted charging station would charge all the 40 cars from solar and batteries alone. You could extrapolate into future hopes but no figures were given for future solar and battery Superchargers. Let's deal with the OP's topic and show us your already completed math. Not anywhere did I see that this charging station will charge 40 chargers without the grid totally by solar and batteries????

Please show where the OP, or anyone said thus would be disconnected from the grid.The real point was to keep charging prices from rising more for the customers like me.

Here's the original articles comment section: https://cleantechnica.com/2022/09/17/arizona-7-times-more-ev-chargers-tesla-v4-superchargers-coming/

Scroll down the Steve Hanley's name and click on comments.

I agree with this guy completely because the idea is to reduce peak hours usage and costs:

"I get similar numbers, say 15ft2 per panel, 9000 / 15 = 600 panels, and assuming high 300Wp per panel, say 370Wp, that's 222kWp. Assuming a kWh/kWp of 6 for the location, then that's about 1.3MWh per day, so for 50kWh charges, that's about 26 charges. Not bad at all.

Obviously 'most of the energy' from the PV arrays isn't true, though I think Tesla has a goal of achieving that longer term, so perhaps solar arrays (farms) will be built out too, or contracted for the leccy under some sort of PPA."

Source the comments section in the original article.

 

 

 

Edited by RV_
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, RV_ said:

You have got to show me that math because all the article states is they will reduce the peak time charges and I saw not one word that this first battery and solar assisted charging station would charge all the 40 cars from solar and batteries alone.

The math is very simple and is presented in my first post on this thread. To summarize:  At best, a 9000 sf array of solar panels will produce 200 Kw.  This is based on the most efficient solar panels today producing 22 watts/square foot in full sun. So 9000 x 22 = 198,000 watts, which I rounded up top 200 Kw for discussion purposes. 

Most experts state that a full summer days production is the equivalent of 5 - 6 hours of full output. So let's give the benefit of the doubt here and use six hours. Total output of this 9000 sf array in summer, in full sun, would be around 1200 Kw-hours. 

So this array, in summer, can supply the power used by one of the 250 Kw charging stations for 4.8 hours. 

So even the first station being discussed (9000 sf panels, 40 - 250Kw V3 Charge Stations) can get only a tiny fraction of the necessary power from the solar array. 

Not to mention the second article, quoted by you, with half of the solar array and chargers with 40% higher output. 

The 4500 sf solar array will provide approximately 600 Kw-hours production in a day, enough to run a single 350 Kw V4 Charge Station for less than two hours. 

Directly from the second article that you linked:

"...It will get most of its electricity from a 4500 square foot solar array that will feed a 3 MWh Megapack battery storage system. That’s large enough to supply the needs of all 40 chargers."

More than one word, but it clearly states (my emphasis added) "That's large enough to supply the needs of all of the 40 chargers".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How Much Energy Does A Solar Panel Produce Per Square Foot?

Quote

“The amount of energy that falls from the sun on the earth is around 126.4w per square foot. A solar panel can absorb around 92.94 watts per sq. ft at sea level. Assuming a solar panel with a 22.5% PV cell efficiency. Based on the watts produced per sq. ft and the efficiency. The panel can produce around 20.91w per square foot.”

New Quantum Well Solar Cell Just Set a World Record For Efficiency

Quote

Scientists keep on pushing the efficiency of solar panels higher and higher, and there's a new record to report: a new solar cell has hit 39.5 percent efficiency under the standard 1-sun global illumination conditions.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Kirk W said:

So take another look at Mark & Teri's excellent answer directly above yours and multiply the numbers by 1.75.  It's still a ridiculously small amount of the total power consumed by the 40 stall charging station, i.e. little more than an advertising gimmick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

RVers Online University

campgroundviews.com

Our program provides accurate individual wheel weights for your RV, toad, and tow vehicle, and will help you trim the pounds if you need to.

Dish For My RV.

RV Cable Grip

RV Cable Grip

All the water you need...No matter where you go

Country Thunder Iowa

Nomad Internet

Rv Share

RV Air.

Find out more or sign up for Escapees RV'ers Bootcamp.

Advertise your product or service here.

The Rvers- Now Streaming

RVTravel.com Logo



×
×
  • Create New...