Tesla to open some superchargers to other vehicles(wsj.com)
wsj.com
Tesla to open some superchargers to other vehicles
https://www.wsj.com/articles/tesla-to-open-some-superchargers-to-other-vehicles-white-house-says-2ed35fd5
19 comments
https://archive.ph/Htc1m
I've been a model 3 owner for 4+ years and have cross country road tripped multiple times. The charging infrastructure for Tesla is just consistently reliable and continually getting better. Sometimes we ran into a charger stall not working, but most stations had lots of stalls that we could retry at a different one.
The consistency of non-Tesla chargers is pretty poor and really puts a damper in the potential growth of the EV market. We went through an annoying charging fiasco at a chargepoint station that I'm not sure how non-technical people would get past. Additionally, the next day the EA station we needed to goto ended up being completely down!
The consistency of non-Tesla chargers is pretty poor and really puts a damper in the potential growth of the EV market. We went through an annoying charging fiasco at a chargepoint station that I'm not sure how non-technical people would get past. Additionally, the next day the EA station we needed to goto ended up being completely down!
Also, the Tesla connector is just so much better than the CCS connectors in North America. It feels so seamless to get it connected to the car and feel like you have a solid connection.
What does the connector have to do with it? All new Tesla chargers in Europe are CCS and I haven't heard of anyone having any problems with it.
There's a difference between "not having problems with it" and "good product" though.
I mean, in 2012 there were people claiming that there was nothing wrong with Micro-USB and that the Lightning connector was just silly and incompatible. They weren't "wrong" exactly, but... no, they were basically wrong. Apple provided a vastly better charging experience.
But in the USB case, the industry recognized that fact and cloned the important features into the still-not-perfect-but-really-very-much-improved C plug. With CCS, everyone is still sitting around with their heads in the same hole they dug a decade ago when they rejected Tesla[1].
It's just a bad product and a bad standard. It just is.
[1] And also CHAdeMO, itself superior to CCS. Really this was the real reason for CCS, it was an attempt by western auto manufacturers to preempt the threat they perceived from Nissan. As it happens the threat was more real than they knew, but they had the wrong villain in mind.
I mean, in 2012 there were people claiming that there was nothing wrong with Micro-USB and that the Lightning connector was just silly and incompatible. They weren't "wrong" exactly, but... no, they were basically wrong. Apple provided a vastly better charging experience.
But in the USB case, the industry recognized that fact and cloned the important features into the still-not-perfect-but-really-very-much-improved C plug. With CCS, everyone is still sitting around with their heads in the same hole they dug a decade ago when they rejected Tesla[1].
It's just a bad product and a bad standard. It just is.
[1] And also CHAdeMO, itself superior to CCS. Really this was the real reason for CCS, it was an attempt by western auto manufacturers to preempt the threat they perceived from Nissan. As it happens the threat was more real than they knew, but they had the wrong villain in mind.
CHAdeMO is not better to CCS in the slightest. Having two entirely different receptacles on a car is not better than having one with two extra pins at the bottom for the few times DCFC is necessary.
I don't see how that follows at all. In fact CCS is literally two unrelated connectors glued together. Plugging in a CCS car means that you have to manage to get both inserted simultaneously, which is worse than either in isolation, that seems true just by construction.
Seriously, just go to youtube and find videos of people plugging in their cars. Watch them fumble with a CCS connector for 5+ seconds, using two hands, almost every time. Plugging in a Tesla is instant, and one-handed. CHAdeMO is in between.
Obviously it would be better still if you could share the connectors for both purposes like Tesla does.
Seriously, just go to youtube and find videos of people plugging in their cars. Watch them fumble with a CCS connector for 5+ seconds, using two hands, almost every time. Plugging in a Tesla is instant, and one-handed. CHAdeMO is in between.
Obviously it would be better still if you could share the connectors for both purposes like Tesla does.
CHAdeMO does not handle AC charging, at all. So for a car with a CHAdeMO connector, I'll need some kind of AC charger for my home.
In ths US, this AC charging, Level 2, is handled by J1772. So for a car in the US with CHAdeMO, I'll have a J1772 plug, and then this whole other CHAdeMO connector which is again the same size as the J1772 connector.
Or, I just add two pins at the bottom of the J1772 plug, and call it CCS.
And yeah, maybe it would have been better for it to be like the Tesla connector and have the same pins used for HVDC and AC power. But in a large family of makers using the plug it seems pretty risky reusing pins for HVDC and high amperage AC systems. Tesla can manage it because for Tesla only Tesla makes Tesla, but in a much larger network who knows what might happen.
In ths US, this AC charging, Level 2, is handled by J1772. So for a car in the US with CHAdeMO, I'll have a J1772 plug, and then this whole other CHAdeMO connector which is again the same size as the J1772 connector.
Or, I just add two pins at the bottom of the J1772 plug, and call it CCS.
And yeah, maybe it would have been better for it to be like the Tesla connector and have the same pins used for HVDC and AC power. But in a large family of makers using the plug it seems pretty risky reusing pins for HVDC and high amperage AC systems. Tesla can manage it because for Tesla only Tesla makes Tesla, but in a much larger network who knows what might happen.
> So for a car in the US with CHAdeMO, I'll have a J1772 plug, and then this whole other CHAdeMO connector
And I repeat: for a CCS[1] car, you have a J-1772 connector, and a DC connector both on the car and both taking up space. And it's worse, because they're glued together! Going back to my USB example, imagine if USB-C worked by having a USB3 and USB2 connector side by side, and you couldn't charge your phone or connect your mouse without using both.
It's literally that bad, and I genuinely can't imagine why you think otherwise. Have you ever actually plugged a Tesla in?
[1] Strictly CCS Combo 1 as deployed in North America. Europeans get an IEC connector glued on instead. Which brings up the other bit of CCS madness: it's not even one standard, it's two completely incompatible plug designs with the same name!
And I repeat: for a CCS[1] car, you have a J-1772 connector, and a DC connector both on the car and both taking up space. And it's worse, because they're glued together! Going back to my USB example, imagine if USB-C worked by having a USB3 and USB2 connector side by side, and you couldn't charge your phone or connect your mouse without using both.
It's literally that bad, and I genuinely can't imagine why you think otherwise. Have you ever actually plugged a Tesla in?
[1] Strictly CCS Combo 1 as deployed in North America. Europeans get an IEC connector glued on instead. Which brings up the other bit of CCS madness: it's not even one standard, it's two completely incompatible plug designs with the same name!
It still takes up more space and creates more complications on the car. Look at how much space J1772 + CHAdeMO takes up on a car and compare that to CCS.
https://picolio.auto123.com/art-images/156317/chademo_connec...
vs
https://cdn.motor1.com/images/mgl/PYwkW/s3/european-ccs-type...
Which is a more compact solution to a whole charging system on the car?
For CCS vs CHAdeMO, I'd take CCS every time. I don't want to have two completely separate plugs, I'd prefer just one plug. If you can't look at these two pictures above and understand what I'm talking about, I don't know what to tell you.
I've plugged in Teslas. I've plugged in CCS. I've handled CHAdeMO cables, which were roughly the same size and flexibility as the CCS ones on the stalls. I do agree Tesla connectors were the easiest to work with, but Tesla continuing to put it behind their patent pledge means nobody else is going to really use it. I do wish they would have actually opened it up or licensed it under some normal kind of licensing terms, but they didn't, so we're left with the standard the rest of the market came up with.
As for CCS being different in the US vs Europe, I guess I'll have an issue if I drive my EV across the Atlantic Ocean. I'm not planning on making that road trip anytime soon, so I don't think that'll be an issue for me. If I move to Europe, I'd probably just sell my car and buy something over there rather than deal with import duties and getting it compliant to EU standards and what not, and vice-versa.
https://picolio.auto123.com/art-images/156317/chademo_connec...
vs
https://cdn.motor1.com/images/mgl/PYwkW/s3/european-ccs-type...
Which is a more compact solution to a whole charging system on the car?
For CCS vs CHAdeMO, I'd take CCS every time. I don't want to have two completely separate plugs, I'd prefer just one plug. If you can't look at these two pictures above and understand what I'm talking about, I don't know what to tell you.
I've plugged in Teslas. I've plugged in CCS. I've handled CHAdeMO cables, which were roughly the same size and flexibility as the CCS ones on the stalls. I do agree Tesla connectors were the easiest to work with, but Tesla continuing to put it behind their patent pledge means nobody else is going to really use it. I do wish they would have actually opened it up or licensed it under some normal kind of licensing terms, but they didn't, so we're left with the standard the rest of the market came up with.
As for CCS being different in the US vs Europe, I guess I'll have an issue if I drive my EV across the Atlantic Ocean. I'm not planning on making that road trip anytime soon, so I don't think that'll be an issue for me. If I move to Europe, I'd probably just sell my car and buy something over there rather than deal with import duties and getting it compliant to EU standards and what not, and vice-versa.
Theoretically, separated port for AC/DC is good to make plug smaller, isn't it? I don't care much about charge port implementation surface area on car.
The CHAdeMO connector overall isn't much smaller than the CCS connector. Handling a CHAdeMO connector is extremely similar to handling a CCS connector for the same rated capacity.
I do somewhat care about the space needed for two charging outlets versus one. It's a much larger door to open. It's a larger moving part susceptible to a larger area of impact potentially breaking it. Larger door means probably more complicated hinge management. Two connectors instead of just one means more wires, more communications, more pins to potentially break or get dirty, etc. Adding CCS to J1772 adds two pins, adding CHAdeMO adds like 10.
I do somewhat care about the space needed for two charging outlets versus one. It's a much larger door to open. It's a larger moving part susceptible to a larger area of impact potentially breaking it. Larger door means probably more complicated hinge management. Two connectors instead of just one means more wires, more communications, more pins to potentially break or get dirty, etc. Adding CCS to J1772 adds two pins, adding CHAdeMO adds like 10.
> it's not even one standard, it's two completely incompatible plug designs with the same name!
Tesla has had five different plug designs on its cars. It's apparently not the problem you think it is.
Tesla has had five different plug designs on its cars. It's apparently not the problem you think it is.
> And also CHAdeMO, itself superior to CCS.
CHAdeMO could never charge at the rates CCS can. CHAdeMO's old plug has also been dropped for CHAdeMO 3.0. CHAdeMO 3.0 is a new plug and port design.
CHAdeMO could never charge at the rates CCS can. CHAdeMO's old plug has also been dropped for CHAdeMO 3.0. CHAdeMO 3.0 is a new plug and port design.
Old Chademo is from 2010, back when CCS didn’t even exist.
CCS didn’t support higher power until around 2017/18
CCS didn’t support higher power until around 2017/18
So.. your point is CHAdeMO had a big head start and still lost out to CCS? That's a shame.
They probably should have brought CHAdeMO 3.0 forward sooner:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ChaoJi
Japan and China will probably standardise on CHAdeMO 3.0. Though it would be much better if Japan switched to CCS type 2 combo so all the right-hand drive countries are on the same charging standard.
They probably should have brought CHAdeMO 3.0 forward sooner:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ChaoJi
Japan and China will probably standardise on CHAdeMO 3.0. Though it would be much better if Japan switched to CCS type 2 combo so all the right-hand drive countries are on the same charging standard.
> So.. your point is CHAdeMO had a big head start and still lost out to CCS? That's a shame.
This is low-effort sniping. The upthread point was that at the moment the standardization process was happening, both CHAdeMO and Tesla presented superior technologies to what the committee ended up picking. And CCS is still suffering with those limitations in comparison with Tesla's much trimmer device (CHAdeMO hasn't kept up as well, it's true).
This is low-effort sniping. The upthread point was that at the moment the standardization process was happening, both CHAdeMO and Tesla presented superior technologies to what the committee ended up picking. And CCS is still suffering with those limitations in comparison with Tesla's much trimmer device (CHAdeMO hasn't kept up as well, it's true).
The "superior technologies" of CHAdeMO and the Tesla plug didn't deliver the practical outcome of your choice of charger with your choice of vehicle like CCS did and continues to do:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_WjeH3I8p8
It doesn't matter how "superior" you think they are. They didn't solve the business case and were dead on arrival because of that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_WjeH3I8p8
It doesn't matter how "superior" you think they are. They didn't solve the business case and were dead on arrival because of that.
It's like a format war. Better format won't help to make competitor to adopt rival's format. Europe and US automotive industry adopt CCS, then the war is ended on western world. I'm curious what's going on developing world where Chinese EV is expected to sold well.
CCS lacked V2H/V2G support for a long time while CHAdeMO supports.
CCS lacked V2H/V2G support for a long time while CHAdeMO supports.
[deleted]
The CCS connector is "fine", the Tesla one is just better. It is way smaller where the CCS is a big chungus and unwieldy, and the tesla one you just stick it in, where the CCS you kinda have to work to get it to "click" and you can think its connected when it isn't.
That's not actually CCS, but the Type 1 connector part. In Europe we have Type 2 + CCS combo and there is no such latch at the top: we just stick it in and it start charging. The latch is directly in the car.
Many people I've seen use a Type 1 CCS connector seems to feel the need to wiggle it in/out as I watch on in horror... and I've struggled to decouple the CCS connector on multiple occasions (imagine a gas pump nozzle getting stuck and how frustrating that would be with no staff around).
Though take this with a grain of salt, as I have no firsthand experience with other connector types.
Though take this with a grain of salt, as I have no firsthand experience with other connector types.
> (imagine a gas pump nozzle getting stuck and how frustrating that would be with no staff around)
I ran into this! Some recent MY's of Dodge Ram trucks had a weird angle with their filler neck and the pump nozzle[1] would get well and truly stuck. I had a 2018 Ram 1500 provided by work, and quickly learned what local gas stations were decent and which ones I had to avoid, lest I spend a few minutes really reefing on the nozzle to get it to come loose, worrying i'll break something the whole time.
[1]Vapor reclamation style pump nozzles, that is. Plain old straight nozzles were fine.
See:
https://www.classaction.org/media/kingston-v-fca-us-llc.pdf
"Specifically, Defendant’s defective fuel tank filler necks1 (the “Filler Neck Defect”) cause standard gas-station nozzles—which work perfectly well with other vehicles—to become lodged in the opening to Dodge Ram fuel tanks, forcing Dodge Ram owners to either physically wrench the gas nozzle free, contact their roadside assistance provider (if they have one) to have the nozzle dislodged, or even call their local fire department for help."
I ran into this! Some recent MY's of Dodge Ram trucks had a weird angle with their filler neck and the pump nozzle[1] would get well and truly stuck. I had a 2018 Ram 1500 provided by work, and quickly learned what local gas stations were decent and which ones I had to avoid, lest I spend a few minutes really reefing on the nozzle to get it to come loose, worrying i'll break something the whole time.
[1]Vapor reclamation style pump nozzles, that is. Plain old straight nozzles were fine.
See:
https://www.classaction.org/media/kingston-v-fca-us-llc.pdf
"Specifically, Defendant’s defective fuel tank filler necks1 (the “Filler Neck Defect”) cause standard gas-station nozzles—which work perfectly well with other vehicles—to become lodged in the opening to Dodge Ram fuel tanks, forcing Dodge Ram owners to either physically wrench the gas nozzle free, contact their roadside assistance provider (if they have one) to have the nozzle dislodged, or even call their local fire department for help."
We just went through this process of it not connecting just perfectly enough, and then not being able to easily disconnect it afterwards.
Actually a lot of people have problems with it. They break much easier, they are very hard to handle for old people or people with disabilities. They get stuck easier and so on. They are just badly designed.
Tesla should have made its solution open for adoption so a real competing standard could have existed.
Tesla should have made its solution open for adoption so a real competing standard could have existed.
Did Tesla keep their connector from becoming a standard or used by other manufactures and services?
I understand that they would want to initially restrict their charging network to just Teslas, but that could be enforced through the software/service.
Surely it would be in Tesla's interest to allow Tesla owners to have the greatest flexibility as well as potentially opening things up to others in the future? (I know there is an optional adapter for Tesla owners to use to connect to non-Tesla chargers, but it always nicer/better/more-convenient to not have to use adapters)
Perhaps they were worried about the quality and safety of others producing a subpar equivalent/variant that might have led to incidents that tarnish Tesla's name and reputation? Similar to a few years back when there was a lot of controversy around USB-C chargers and how some deviate from the standard and could potentially damage your phone/device.
I know a few years ago Tesla "opened" up a lot of patents other auto-manufactures could use for "free". I'd be surprised if there wasn't anything related to charging (including connectors) included in these "open" patents?
I understand that they would want to initially restrict their charging network to just Teslas, but that could be enforced through the software/service.
Surely it would be in Tesla's interest to allow Tesla owners to have the greatest flexibility as well as potentially opening things up to others in the future? (I know there is an optional adapter for Tesla owners to use to connect to non-Tesla chargers, but it always nicer/better/more-convenient to not have to use adapters)
Perhaps they were worried about the quality and safety of others producing a subpar equivalent/variant that might have led to incidents that tarnish Tesla's name and reputation? Similar to a few years back when there was a lot of controversy around USB-C chargers and how some deviate from the standard and could potentially damage your phone/device.
I know a few years ago Tesla "opened" up a lot of patents other auto-manufactures could use for "free". I'd be surprised if there wasn't anything related to charging (including connectors) included in these "open" patents?
Tesla as far as I know didn't publish a definition of the standard and the protocol. Without that I don't know how other manufactures would adopt it.
A comprehensive approach would have been to create a standard for the charger, plus open source implementation of both the car and the charger software, including the software for automated payment. Also libraries for phones abs to integrate (or for others to integrate with the Tesla app).
Establish a conference for charger testing, these exist for the CCS standard. Maybe even a certification program.
They could have made home charger and the destination charger just work with any cars. And then made deals with specific auto makers for access to Superchargers. Or have program where they allow access at extra cost.
> Perhaps they were worried about the quality and safety of others producing a subpar equivalent/variant that might have led to incidents that tarnish Tesla's name and reputation?
Maybe.
If you want my opinion. Its simply not how Musk thinks, thinking in terms of Open Standards and Open Source or even Partnerships just isn't an Musk thing Musk does. And everybody else is to busy doing what Musk wants to do. I think it one of the biggest weaknesses in Musk
Maintaining a standard, having open software and partners and so on, is management effort Tesla just isn't interested in it seems to me.
A comprehensive approach would have been to create a standard for the charger, plus open source implementation of both the car and the charger software, including the software for automated payment. Also libraries for phones abs to integrate (or for others to integrate with the Tesla app).
Establish a conference for charger testing, these exist for the CCS standard. Maybe even a certification program.
They could have made home charger and the destination charger just work with any cars. And then made deals with specific auto makers for access to Superchargers. Or have program where they allow access at extra cost.
> Perhaps they were worried about the quality and safety of others producing a subpar equivalent/variant that might have led to incidents that tarnish Tesla's name and reputation?
Maybe.
If you want my opinion. Its simply not how Musk thinks, thinking in terms of Open Standards and Open Source or even Partnerships just isn't an Musk thing Musk does. And everybody else is to busy doing what Musk wants to do. I think it one of the biggest weaknesses in Musk
Maintaining a standard, having open software and partners and so on, is management effort Tesla just isn't interested in it seems to me.
You only got access to Tesla's "free" patents if you also made all of your patents "free" to Tesla and all other companies using Tesla's patents.
Its kind of like the GPL, but imagine if the license was if you included GPL code in just one codebase you had to open source every bit of code your company had ever made.
Its kind of like the GPL, but imagine if the license was if you included GPL code in just one codebase you had to open source every bit of code your company had ever made.
Tesla made a big mistake by not making its charger open standard and open source. They could potentially have set the standard, that would have been good for everybody.
As a consumer, the Tesla charging network is a significant selling point over other electric vehicles. It's unclear to me that standardizing the charger would benefit their business position (although I agree it would benefit society!).
Just because you have the same charger, doesn't mean that you allow other vehicles to charge at Tesla Superchargers. Those are 2 different questions.
Yeah, the infrastructure in the UK is hilariously bad as well.
They just don't get UX. I want it to be like a petrol station - card reader, pre-authorise my card, plug in, walk off.
If the charger is literally located at a petrol station then I should be able to pay cash inside and have them authorise the amount I paid.
Instead it's like some endless web of bullshit apps and signing up and doing online payments or whatever.
There is no reason at all to require a smartphone for this shit.
I don't get the trend towards just making things less convenient for the end user. It feels like a gamble that people will just put up with it anyway, ignoring the fact that lots of us will just nope out. I would never buy a non-Tesla EV until this is fixed.
They just don't get UX. I want it to be like a petrol station - card reader, pre-authorise my card, plug in, walk off.
If the charger is literally located at a petrol station then I should be able to pay cash inside and have them authorise the amount I paid.
Instead it's like some endless web of bullshit apps and signing up and doing online payments or whatever.
There is no reason at all to require a smartphone for this shit.
I don't get the trend towards just making things less convenient for the end user. It feels like a gamble that people will just put up with it anyway, ignoring the fact that lots of us will just nope out. I would never buy a non-Tesla EV until this is fixed.
from a few years ago, I found:
- evgo is usually pretty reliable - chargepoint was ok too, but they seemed to be 99% level 2 chargers - Blink was the WORST. Everything was broken all the time.
This might have been the business model.
evgo had their own chargers.
I'm uncertain, but chargepoint seemed to be a mix of public and private.
blink seemed to manager private chargers, which might be why they were always broken - they might have had no agency in fixing the chargers.
This is all significantly magnified by small battery size/range.
Since then things have probably gotten a little better, but honestly telsa is SO much better - plentiful charger locations, seems to be a minimum of 8 chargers per locaion, well-integrated navigation, and very reliable.
- evgo is usually pretty reliable - chargepoint was ok too, but they seemed to be 99% level 2 chargers - Blink was the WORST. Everything was broken all the time.
This might have been the business model.
evgo had their own chargers.
I'm uncertain, but chargepoint seemed to be a mix of public and private.
blink seemed to manager private chargers, which might be why they were always broken - they might have had no agency in fixing the chargers.
This is all significantly magnified by small battery size/range.
Since then things have probably gotten a little better, but honestly telsa is SO much better - plentiful charger locations, seems to be a minimum of 8 chargers per locaion, well-integrated navigation, and very reliable.
Minimum compliance with this law is driving me nuts as a car owner.
Tesla isn’t the only villian. The credit card payment systems are routinely broken — tap to pay, chip and swipe all fail in different ways (especially with EVgo)
This should be all or nothing — 99.9% uptime on compatibility with standard cars and payment methods, fleet wide, or you get zero dollars.
Unreliable is worse than unsupported, and the interoperability clauses of the law apparently don’t mandate reliability.
Tesla isn’t the only villian. The credit card payment systems are routinely broken — tap to pay, chip and swipe all fail in different ways (especially with EVgo)
This should be all or nothing — 99.9% uptime on compatibility with standard cars and payment methods, fleet wide, or you get zero dollars.
Unreliable is worse than unsupported, and the interoperability clauses of the law apparently don’t mandate reliability.
I've had a Tesla model 3, since 2019. Every time I used the car to get to a Tesla charger it worked, zero to a few times a month. Success rate at 3rd party chargers has been about 50%.
Sure that's anecdotal, but I read a few (more than 1 each) reviews on the Harley Davidson Livewire, Ford Mach-E, and Ford f150 lightning. All had charging issues during their review.
After owning a EV for years, my only range anxiety is caused by having to use non-Tesla chargers.
Sure that's anecdotal, but I read a few (more than 1 each) reviews on the Harley Davidson Livewire, Ford Mach-E, and Ford f150 lightning. All had charging issues during their review.
After owning a EV for years, my only range anxiety is caused by having to use non-Tesla chargers.
I’ve definitely encountered some bad Tesla chargers. It used to be much worse before they added the data to the system about which stalls are encountering issues though. Now it’s much rarer to be directed to a broken charger.
Have had a model 3 for about 1.5 years now, supercharged maybe 50 times. One bad stall. Not bad!
In a cross-country trip, many EA stations had more or one charger not working in some way, but they all had a least one functional. Likewise, drive up to any random gas station, and it's not uncommon to see at least one with a plastic bag over the nozzle, and those card readers fail as well (to say nothing of the risk of skimmers)
Gas station pumps being out are acceptable when time to refill is sub 3 minutes.
A single stall being out can mean someone waiting 15+ minutes, but some stations are so busy that it could easily lead to a line of cars.
Additionally since level 3 chargers are pivotal to road trips, people aren't casually stopping by them 'to top up', they usually are down to <50 miles of range when they stop, meaning continuing on may actually be impossible depending location of next charging station.
A single stall being out can mean someone waiting 15+ minutes, but some stations are so busy that it could easily lead to a line of cars.
Additionally since level 3 chargers are pivotal to road trips, people aren't casually stopping by them 'to top up', they usually are down to <50 miles of range when they stop, meaning continuing on may actually be impossible depending location of next charging station.
Gas stations can handle a broken pump or two because even urban locations typically have 4-6 pumps and busy highways have more. Moreover, filling takes 3-4 minutes at max.
Having one working charger at a highway-adjacent station could mean literally hours of waiting on a busy day, especially if you're waiting for a 50kW vehicle. Even if you get lucky most of the time, just the possibility of a multi-hour wait time would make most drives impractical.
Having one working charger at a highway-adjacent station could mean literally hours of waiting on a busy day, especially if you're waiting for a 50kW vehicle. Even if you get lucky most of the time, just the possibility of a multi-hour wait time would make most drives impractical.
I’ve had zero issues with charging my i3. The problem is getting it to accept payment via my amex/master card/visa.
For example, the chip reader pins on the EVgo’s are corroded around here, so you need to wiggle the credit card in the reader and hope it manages to handshake with the embedded smart card. (If it is a Visa or Master Card.) If AMEX or Discover, they require you to swipe the mag strip, which would be useful if the mag strip reader didn’t spuriously decline payment.
There is also an rfid reader labeled “present phone”, but it doesn’t work with apple pay, the EVgo app (android or ios) or the rfid tags in any of my credit cards.
For example, the chip reader pins on the EVgo’s are corroded around here, so you need to wiggle the credit card in the reader and hope it manages to handshake with the embedded smart card. (If it is a Visa or Master Card.) If AMEX or Discover, they require you to swipe the mag strip, which would be useful if the mag strip reader didn’t spuriously decline payment.
There is also an rfid reader labeled “present phone”, but it doesn’t work with apple pay, the EVgo app (android or ios) or the rfid tags in any of my credit cards.
If you can't charge because the station won't accept payment, that's an issue charging.
It sounds like you've had a lot of issues with charging your i3.
It sounds like you've had a lot of issues with charging your i3.
[deleted]
Tesla doesn't have this problem though so how are they the villain? Tesla created the first global charger network that now other companies are pleading for government help to compete with.
They are moving to a model where they get billions of dollars in government hand outs to support third party cars, but are not going to actually reliably allow third party cars to change. (Just like other networks are taking money to support standard payments, but don’t in practice.)
I'm not following. Who is moving to such a model?
Yes Tesla should be paid if they're being forced to subsidize their competitors. The entire point of Tesla's charging system is that it's non-profit making. It's based on the idea that it's acts as a value-add to Tesla vehicles. If Tesla is going to allow access to competitors, then yes Tesla needs to be paid for that access, or charge differential rates between Tesla and non-Tesla vehicles.
Yes Tesla should be paid if they're being forced to subsidize their competitors. The entire point of Tesla's charging system is that it's non-profit making. It's based on the idea that it's acts as a value-add to Tesla vehicles. If Tesla is going to allow access to competitors, then yes Tesla needs to be paid for that access, or charge differential rates between Tesla and non-Tesla vehicles.
[deleted]
> Yes Tesla should be paid if they're being forced to subsidize their competitors
The way Tesla gets paid is by users paying for the charge. It isn't complicated.
The way Tesla gets paid is by users paying for the charge. It isn't complicated.
Tesla prices are usually cheaper than any other EV charging station (or free). From my understanding they charge a little bit above local electricity rates enough to cover maintenance costs.
Are you making the argument that non-Teslas should be charged more than Tesla users. I'm fine with that but I think that wouldn't be allowed under this new provision.
Are you making the argument that non-Teslas should be charged more than Tesla users. I'm fine with that but I think that wouldn't be allowed under this new provision.
I'm making the argument that all brands of EV charging network should charge all brands of EV. Anything less is backward, primitive, and simply dumb infrastructure.
In Europe, Tesla charges Tesla drivers less for charging and other drivers more. Tesla also has membership pricing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Y33AArvMUQ
Other charging networks also have brand specific deals and membership pricing.
In Europe, Tesla charges Tesla drivers less for charging and other drivers more. Tesla also has membership pricing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Y33AArvMUQ
Other charging networks also have brand specific deals and membership pricing.
> I'm making the argument that all brands of EV charging network should charge all brands of EV. Anything less is backward, primitive, and simply dumb infrastructure.
Okay but this is a theoretical statement and doesn't really jive with the current existing environment. This is a goal, not a method to achieve it.
Okay but this is a theoretical statement and doesn't really jive with the current existing environment. This is a goal, not a method to achieve it.
The method to achieve it is to put CCS on your car and charge on any charger.
There is no mystery here. This is not theoretical. It's the practical reality:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_WjeH3I8p8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPIhazPcY64
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gI5EnOo05BE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=theiiFWydmo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0G30iqWzEe8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BlUZfGMqv_g
There is no mystery here. This is not theoretical. It's the practical reality:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_WjeH3I8p8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPIhazPcY64
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gI5EnOo05BE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=theiiFWydmo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0G30iqWzEe8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BlUZfGMqv_g
Based on the OP I'm really not following this line of reasoning here.
The billions of dollars that are available aren't only to Tesla.
Tesla actually reliably accepts and processes credit card payments without issues, unlike the anecdotes provided by others here with other charging networks and there is no reason to think that Tesla would no longer reliably accept payments given that they intentionally accept payments from all major credit card processors.
Why would they not allow 3rd-party cars to charge? They may have some prioritization scheme for Tesla vehicles, but other than that I'm just not following what you are saying here.
The billions of dollars that are available aren't only to Tesla.
Tesla actually reliably accepts and processes credit card payments without issues, unlike the anecdotes provided by others here with other charging networks and there is no reason to think that Tesla would no longer reliably accept payments given that they intentionally accept payments from all major credit card processors.
Why would they not allow 3rd-party cars to charge? They may have some prioritization scheme for Tesla vehicles, but other than that I'm just not following what you are saying here.
If I were to go to a Tesla station in the US today with my non-Tesla car, it would not charge.
That’s a choice you made. I do hope they open it up though because they will make a ton of money and use that to expand the network even more.
And why is that relevant to the conversation at hand?
> Why would they not allow 3rd-party cars to charge?
Tesla isn't allowing my car to charge. They have a proprietary plug and a proprietary payment protocol. So if I drove my car to a Tesla stall in the US right now, it would not charge as it is not a Tesla. Why would they not, well, because for the past few years they've used their proprietary network as a marketing advantage.
Tesla isn't allowing my car to charge. They have a proprietary plug and a proprietary payment protocol. So if I drove my car to a Tesla stall in the US right now, it would not charge as it is not a Tesla. Why would they not, well, because for the past few years they've used their proprietary network as a marketing advantage.
Sorry the conversation was referencing a future state not current state.
Elon Musk said they'd support 3rd party cars by late 2022. 2023 is after 2022. We're already in this future state of "why wouldn't they support third party cars?"
So yeah, why wouldn't they? Why don't they today? It's the same question and it's the same answer.
So yeah, why wouldn't they? Why don't they today? It's the same question and it's the same answer.
In order to receive federal funding new chargers would have to be open to non-Tesla vehicles.
Ok, so why don't they do that today in preparation to receive those federal funds? Why wait until the end of 2023 or 2024?
Why would they not allow 3rd-party cars to charge, today, months after their original date they set to allow 3rd party cars to charge?
There's lots of state level grants available to apply for today, so we're already in the "billions available for public EV charging" future state.
Why would they not allow 3rd-party cars to charge, today, months after their original date they set to allow 3rd party cars to charge?
There's lots of state level grants available to apply for today, so we're already in the "billions available for public EV charging" future state.
It takes time. They are already very busy rolling out new chargers all the time. This is layering even more work on top of that.
I couldn't find that Tesla will receive "billions" anywhere. Only that the US Federal government is giving $5B to states and Tesla is applying for some of that money. Where do you see that Tesla won't reliably allow third party cars to charge?
It's in the title of the article. (The word "some")
Tesla chargers have been open to other cars in Norway since last year and I see many non-Teslas charging. They don't seem to have a problem doing it. You just need to install the Tesla app on your phone and register a credit card number with it.
Snark: millions of petrol stations and vending machines manage to accept contactless or card payment without having to install the vendor’s app.
Tesla cars don't need the app. Only non-Teslas because the makers are so useless.
There's an actually open (no patent pledge), non proprietary standard for signaling payment through charging infrastructure. Several non-Tesla manufacturers already sell cars with this standard, and there are a few non-Tesla charging networks which support it as well.
Once again Tesla continues to push its proprietary systems instead of adopting the standards everyone else uses.
Once again Tesla continues to push its proprietary systems instead of adopting the standards everyone else uses.
So which manufacturers and charging networks are they? All the owners of EVs that I know all bemoan the lack of any standardization. The only actual standard seems likely to be pushed through seems to be that in Germany (and I think Norway) all chargers will soon be required to accept card payments. Not sure how this will work with the low power AC chargers that already exist and that use NFC/RFID tags or a phone app, perhaps AC chargers will not have to follow that standard.
And it will, presumably, require Tesla to retrofit some kind of user interface to the charging stall. That seems a bit stupid when every car that can connect has a screen that could easily do the job.
And lastly, did this open system exist when Tesla started building their charging network?
And it will, presumably, require Tesla to retrofit some kind of user interface to the charging stall. That seems a bit stupid when every car that can connect has a screen that could easily do the job.
And lastly, did this open system exist when Tesla started building their charging network?
The standard is ISO 15118.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_15118
Volkswagon, Ford, Mercedes, Lucid, and Rivian have all standardized on this to negotiate payment. Electrify America and a few others have already implemented this standard in their chargers.
The vast majority of times I've had to charge at a public charger, plug and charge negotiated the payment without issue. I do not drive a Tesla.
> And it will, presumably, require Tesla to retrofit some kind of user interface to the charging stall. That seems a bit stupid when every car that can connect has a screen that could easily do the job.
If they supported the industry standard instead of only their proprietary standard, they wouldn't need to.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_15118
Volkswagon, Ford, Mercedes, Lucid, and Rivian have all standardized on this to negotiate payment. Electrify America and a few others have already implemented this standard in their chargers.
The vast majority of times I've had to charge at a public charger, plug and charge negotiated the payment without issue. I do not drive a Tesla.
> And it will, presumably, require Tesla to retrofit some kind of user interface to the charging stall. That seems a bit stupid when every car that can connect has a screen that could easily do the job.
If they supported the industry standard instead of only their proprietary standard, they wouldn't need to.
Electrify America's network is pretty bad, top to bottom. Payment processing is just the tip of the iceberg in how much it blows.
Yeah. My favorite part is that the payment processing state machine inevitably leads to the “not charging, locked in place” state, so I have to hang around for a few minutes until my car computer’s self defense logic kicks in, flips the bozo bit on the connector and releases the lock.
This could have been avoided if the charging port had a manual disconnect switch next to it, rated to handle the arcing at full power.
Auxiliary contacts can then release it and tell the computer that you manually killed the port. I dislike this "computer exclusively in the loop" design methodology.
> rated to handle the arcing at full power.
Sure… Except that that’s physically impossible. Search YouTube for “arc flash”.
Sure… Except that that’s physically impossible. Search YouTube for “arc flash”.
500 amp breakers don't exist?
I believe my Kia EV6 has an emergency release inside of the trunk area.
There is no law that requires compliance here, only incentives. Tesla has chosen to respond to incentives.
Yes, and they should not be paid because they are half assing the compliance (as are many of the other charging networks).
What are they non-compliant about? It was announced today
Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.
I haven’t used an electric charger but it’s weird there’s payment issues
There are established PoS vendors that have figured out payments completely. Did they roll their own?
There are established PoS vendors that have figured out payments completely. Did they roll their own?
> Did they roll their own?
For example, in the US, Francis Energy quickchargers require a Francis Energy RFID card or use of their app.
Some gas station pump terminals will allow you to pump your debit card’s available balance and no more. No charger I have come across can do this, billing some arbitrary amount like $40 that is eventually replaced with the correct expense, if not outright requiring credit. Forget paying with cash, even for quick chargers located at gas stations.
For example, in the US, Francis Energy quickchargers require a Francis Energy RFID card or use of their app.
Some gas station pump terminals will allow you to pump your debit card’s available balance and no more. No charger I have come across can do this, billing some arbitrary amount like $40 that is eventually replaced with the correct expense, if not outright requiring credit. Forget paying with cash, even for quick chargers located at gas stations.
Something I just realized, is that Tesla chargers are broken 100% of the time for some people.
Drivers with disabilities that prevent them from operating a gas pump by themselves can call an attendant at the station, but Tesla chargers has nobody on site.
Drivers with disabilities that prevent them from operating a gas pump by themselves can call an attendant at the station, but Tesla chargers has nobody on site.
The final NEVI charger rules are available here: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/nevi/resources/ev_charg...
Among other things, it requires 97% uptime, CCS connectors, 150 kW minimum for every plug (power sharing allowed for capacity above that), payment via contactless credit/debit payment and either toll free phone number or SMS short code, must have a customer service system to report charger outages.
Among other things, it requires 97% uptime, CCS connectors, 150 kW minimum for every plug (power sharing allowed for capacity above that), payment via contactless credit/debit payment and either toll free phone number or SMS short code, must have a customer service system to report charger outages.
150 kW minimum simultaneously across all DCFCs is likely to have an unintended side-effect of limiting the number of DCFCs offered.
Which would you rather have, 150kW max per port, 300kW max total and 6 DCFCs or the same power limit and only 2 DCFCs?
Which would you rather have, 150kW max per port, 300kW max total and 6 DCFCs or the same power limit and only 2 DCFCs?
That's surely a grandfather rule designed to permit older units to qualify. In point of fact all the Tesla stations under discussion are v3 250 kW chargers providing full power to every port.
Does the 97% uptime rule also apply to contactless payments? If so, that’s huge. (EVgo stations around here have 99% uptime on the charger, and under 50% on non-app payments.)
I believe the CCS connector rule will eventually be changed. The momentum Tesla has with their own connector is simply too great.
Keep in mind for European posters: this is not the European CCS. It's CCS type 1, which is quite a lot worse than CCS type 2 in Europe.
Keep in mind for European posters: this is not the European CCS. It's CCS type 1, which is quite a lot worse than CCS type 2 in Europe.
This will only change if Tesla changes their licensing on the connector.
https://www.tesla.com/blog/opening-north-american-charging-s...
> In pursuit of our mission to accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable energy, today we are opening our EV connector design to the world.
> In pursuit of our mission to accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable energy, today we are opening our EV connector design to the world.
Tesla’s market share is plummeting. They were at > 75% a year or so ago. Market consensus has them at 11% by end of 2024.
Also, dongles to plug Teslas into CCS exist, and come with new Teslas, so there is no reason to build any more Tesla-only charging station wires.
Also, dongles to plug Teslas into CCS exist, and come with new Teslas, so there is no reason to build any more Tesla-only charging station wires.
Tesla vehicle production continues to grow at a very high rate however. Being over 75% of a market is ridiculous. That's kind of expected. Tesla has said many times they're not competing with EV companies, they're competing with all vehicle production.
Also are you measuring vehicle sales or vehicle ownership? Anything over 50% production and Tesla vehicle ownership percentage continues to grow versus any other vehicle, EV or otherwise.
> Market consensus has them at 11% by end of 2024.
I laughed when I saw that number. Who is claiming that? Because that's certainly not consensus.
I can only find things from mid-2022 and that predates Tesla's price drop.
Also are you measuring vehicle sales or vehicle ownership? Anything over 50% production and Tesla vehicle ownership percentage continues to grow versus any other vehicle, EV or otherwise.
> Market consensus has them at 11% by end of 2024.
I laughed when I saw that number. Who is claiming that? Because that's certainly not consensus.
I can only find things from mid-2022 and that predates Tesla's price drop.
By sales. Merrill Lynch published the report I am thinking of.
They dropped from > 70 to 63 last year, and missed sales estimates for Q4.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/tesla-share-ev-market-droppin...
Also, their competition is ridiculously strong. Want a luxury EV with a nice interior? There are many options, and most have physical controls and a touch screen. Want a truck? Cybertruck will likely be fifth to market. Van or off road vehicle? You aren’t getting a tesla.
Want hands free self driving on the freeway? Wait 18 months for a GMC. (Cruise is getting 10,000x more miles per disengagement than Tesla).
Inexpensive long range vehicle? Chevy Bolt.
Ecobox? Leaf, used volt, or similar.
It doesn’t really matter if they are targeting the whole market if they can’t hold a big percentage of their niche. It is unclear if they can even dominate midrange or luxury sedans at this point.
They dropped from > 70 to 63 last year, and missed sales estimates for Q4.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/tesla-share-ev-market-droppin...
Also, their competition is ridiculously strong. Want a luxury EV with a nice interior? There are many options, and most have physical controls and a touch screen. Want a truck? Cybertruck will likely be fifth to market. Van or off road vehicle? You aren’t getting a tesla.
Want hands free self driving on the freeway? Wait 18 months for a GMC. (Cruise is getting 10,000x more miles per disengagement than Tesla).
Inexpensive long range vehicle? Chevy Bolt.
Ecobox? Leaf, used volt, or similar.
It doesn’t really matter if they are targeting the whole market if they can’t hold a big percentage of their niche. It is unclear if they can even dominate midrange or luxury sedans at this point.
> They dropped from > 70 to 63 last year, and missed sales estimates for Q4.
Yes they missed sales estimates, but it was still a substantial growth in sales Year over Year and Quarter over Quarter.
> Also, their competition is ridiculously strong. Want a luxury EV with a nice interior? There are many options, and most have physical controls and a touch screen. Want a truck? Cybertruck will likely be fifth to market. Van or off road vehicle? You aren’t getting a tesla.
That's your opinion and any vehicle with near insignificant sales can basically be ignored. There's very few other than Tesla.
> Want hands free self driving on the freeway? Wait 18 months for a GMC. (Cruise is getting 10,000x more miles per disengagement than Tesla).
Note: Not actually hands free given the extreme limitation in areas where it's allowed and it's disengagement without warning.
> Inexpensive long range vehicle? Chevy Bolt.
Chevy Bolt owners on EV subreddits constantly complain about slow charging speeds and it's incompatibility with real fast charging. This makes it not a long range vehicle.
> Ecobox? Leaf, used volt, or similar.
Leaf isn't an "ecobox". Volt isn't an EV unless you get the comparatively popular EV version. Not to mention the low production numbers of Volt.
Yes they missed sales estimates, but it was still a substantial growth in sales Year over Year and Quarter over Quarter.
> Also, their competition is ridiculously strong. Want a luxury EV with a nice interior? There are many options, and most have physical controls and a touch screen. Want a truck? Cybertruck will likely be fifth to market. Van or off road vehicle? You aren’t getting a tesla.
That's your opinion and any vehicle with near insignificant sales can basically be ignored. There's very few other than Tesla.
> Want hands free self driving on the freeway? Wait 18 months for a GMC. (Cruise is getting 10,000x more miles per disengagement than Tesla).
Note: Not actually hands free given the extreme limitation in areas where it's allowed and it's disengagement without warning.
> Inexpensive long range vehicle? Chevy Bolt.
Chevy Bolt owners on EV subreddits constantly complain about slow charging speeds and it's incompatibility with real fast charging. This makes it not a long range vehicle.
> Ecobox? Leaf, used volt, or similar.
Leaf isn't an "ecobox". Volt isn't an EV unless you get the comparatively popular EV version. Not to mention the low production numbers of Volt.
You don't even need to wait for the GMC, some trims of the Bolt have the same SuperCruise system.
>Also, dongles to plug Teslas into CCS exist, and come with new Teslas
These adapters do not come with new Teslas.
These adapters do not come with new Teslas.
My tesla built in 2020 has "CCS" support chip. So yes, I need a physical plug thing - but my car has the internals to support it. This is not true for all Teslas, but it generally true for new ones.
Kind of. New Teslas still need to buy a ~$200~ $250 physical CCS to Tesla adapter. They have the circuitry to work with CCS stalls, but don't have the right pinout.
https://shop.tesla.com/product/ccs-combo-1-adapter
https://shop.tesla.com/product/ccs-combo-1-adapter
That’s exactly what I said. No kind-of. Read before you reply.
wow! I hope Europe does something like this like... now, especially the enforced credit card contactless payment option.
It just sucks so hard right now that it's my biggesest complaint against EVs right now.
Seconding this.
Recently took a few long-ish trips in the EU, non-Tesla chargers are utter garbage. None of them just accept a credit/debit (EC) card, there are 20 different networks and you need to create an account with each of them, assuming of course their signup system isn't down today, or just the entire network. Having to randomly re-log because they kick you out of the app when they encounter any unexpected server reply or timeout, etc.
And this is just the app+payment garbage. The charger themselves.... 30% of them don't work, 10% don't exist at all, 10% are inaccessible (inside a private garage, inside private premises, etc), the rest are understandably crowded and you end up waiting a lot. The Aldi and Lidl (supermarket chains) chargers are actually the least bad, and once they stopped being free the crazy overcrowding also stopped. I just avoid all others at this point.
Recently took a few long-ish trips in the EU, non-Tesla chargers are utter garbage. None of them just accept a credit/debit (EC) card, there are 20 different networks and you need to create an account with each of them, assuming of course their signup system isn't down today, or just the entire network. Having to randomly re-log because they kick you out of the app when they encounter any unexpected server reply or timeout, etc.
And this is just the app+payment garbage. The charger themselves.... 30% of them don't work, 10% don't exist at all, 10% are inaccessible (inside a private garage, inside private premises, etc), the rest are understandably crowded and you end up waiting a lot. The Aldi and Lidl (supermarket chains) chargers are actually the least bad, and once they stopped being free the crazy overcrowding also stopped. I just avoid all others at this point.
Just used a bunch of non-tesla fast chargers in the Netherlands. Multiple fast chargers along all major routes, never had to wait for a charger (the Netherlands has incredibly high number of chargers per sq mile, and we drove past a bunch being built too), all the chargers we used were tap with credit/debit card to pay. They had solar canopies, 100% green energy and were clear and straightforward to use, with a cord system that could go over the car if you were parked on the wrong side. In fact, the only negative part of the experience was the fact that often the facilities around them were sparse, so it was a pleasant 20 minute walk in the woods rather than the fast food we'd been expecting to get.
It's definitely not like that everywhere in Europe, but there are countries that seem to be getting it right.
It's definitely not like that everywhere in Europe, but there are countries that seem to be getting it right.
> None of them just accept a credit/debit (EC) card
So, do Tesla chargers in Europe have a card reader on them? Or do they also not "just accept a credit/debit (EC) card"? Could someone just go to a Tesla charger without having any kind of Tesla account and start charging?
Sounds like Tesla is a lot like those other charging networks, huh.
So, do Tesla chargers in Europe have a card reader on them? Or do they also not "just accept a credit/debit (EC) card"? Could someone just go to a Tesla charger without having any kind of Tesla account and start charging?
Sounds like Tesla is a lot like those other charging networks, huh.
Just 20 networks? :D
And then you have the apps that let you use more networks at once that overcharge you an abusive surplus (Bonnet being the only exception I'm aware of)
Does this mean that non-Tesla drivers won't have to install the Tesla app to use the new Tesla chargers? If so, this is even bigger news.
There's nothing that says you won't also need a phone app just that you can't mandate payment through the phone app. It just says that there's no membership requirement and downloading an app is not a membership.
BTW, Tesla has already created the technology they'll use for charging. It's called "Magic Dock" which is believed to a system where through the phone app you either unlock a connector that has CCS on the end of it, or you unlock the inner Tesla connector. By default it's the Tesla connector and you use the Tesla app to tell it that a non-Tesla car has arrived. Here's some industry speculation: https://www.autoevolution.com/news/here-s-how-tesla-s-magic-...
BTW, Tesla has already created the technology they'll use for charging. It's called "Magic Dock" which is believed to a system where through the phone app you either unlock a connector that has CCS on the end of it, or you unlock the inner Tesla connector. By default it's the Tesla connector and you use the Tesla app to tell it that a non-Tesla car has arrived. Here's some industry speculation: https://www.autoevolution.com/news/here-s-how-tesla-s-magic-...
> Mr. Musk has criticized the new law, and said that federal funding for electric-vehicle charging is unnecessary.
and yet this law is going to incentivize you to actually open up your chargers so that I can charge my Hyundai there. Works for me
and yet this law is going to incentivize you to actually open up your chargers so that I can charge my Hyundai there. Works for me
One of Tesla‘s biggest market advantages is the quality and ubiquity of their charging network. There’s no other charging network that you can just drive up to, be 95% certain that it’s going to work, plug in, and start charging without having to download an app. Blink at least allows for contactless payments now, but their chargers are still all slow chargers, I believe.
It’s no surprise that he is resistant.
It needs to happen, though. Like you I’m glad and incentives are being provided.
It’s no surprise that he is resistant.
It needs to happen, though. Like you I’m glad and incentives are being provided.
> It’s no surprise that he is resistant.
For many years now Tesla offered other car makers to use Tesla's superchargers as long as they chip in some of the cost of building it.
It was a fair offer that no car maker took.
The Fed offers a fair deal: free money under the condition of chargers being open to all.
Tesla was always willing to open supercharging to others under fair terms so it's incorrect to label Musk as "resistant" to this. If he was "resistant", Tesla wouldn't take the deal.
For many years now Tesla offered other car makers to use Tesla's superchargers as long as they chip in some of the cost of building it.
It was a fair offer that no car maker took.
The Fed offers a fair deal: free money under the condition of chargers being open to all.
Tesla was always willing to open supercharging to others under fair terms so it's incorrect to label Musk as "resistant" to this. If he was "resistant", Tesla wouldn't take the deal.
Is this referring to Tesla's "patent pledge" or some other offer?
Because the patent pledge was a bit of a joke. It amounted to "You can use Tesla's patents, as long as you agree not to assert any patent or other IP against any company for making EVs or related equipment."
So you don't just have to let Tesla use your patents in exchange for you using theirs, you have to give them away to every competitor, whether or not those competitors are sharing their own patents. It's not surprising that no one has taken them up on this.
Because the patent pledge was a bit of a joke. It amounted to "You can use Tesla's patents, as long as you agree not to assert any patent or other IP against any company for making EVs or related equipment."
So you don't just have to let Tesla use your patents in exchange for you using theirs, you have to give them away to every competitor, whether or not those competitors are sharing their own patents. It's not surprising that no one has taken them up on this.
If you squint, that almost sounds like an AGPL license but for physical chargers.
If using one piece of AGPL software forced your company to release every other piece of software as AGPL too, and then people spent the next 10 years acting surprised that nobody else was willing to touch Tesla's software with a ten foot pole
im fairly certain I'll have to download an app to use a tesla charger with my car. tesla cars already have "the app" inside them because the car / charger / billing is all integrated and owned by a single company. I'd rather not buy into a monolithic arrangement like that.
Well, yes, but that’s going to be true regardless of the network. I meant after the initial download and account set up. I should’ve been more clear. Tesla is the only network I have used where I can just drive up, plug in, and start charging. I hope this is where everyone eventually goes.
I don't own a Tesla and have had many experiences of drive up, plug in, and start charging.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_15118
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_15118
What do you own and where are those magic EV chargers that don't require you to do SOMETHING other than plugging in, like swiping a credit card or some such?
I own a Ford Mustang Mach E. I've had plug and charge work successfully every time I've used an Electrify America station. I've also had it work at EVGo and Chargepoint locations.
If you have to download an app, it looks like Tesla won't get the incentive money: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34805587
Having an app == contactless payment according to the document.
Other car manufacturers could easily put the necessary apps in their entertainment systems.
Not to nitpick, but the law doesn't compel Tesla to open up their charging network. However, they need to open the network if they want access to the additional federal funding. Which, clearly they felt was a worthwhile trade.
compel is the wrong word, i was trying not to use "force". guess "motivate" is all that's left
Perhaps “incentivize” would be more accurate.
ooh that's it, why are online thesauruses so bad
"My thesaurus is terrible. It's also terrible."
— Siri's response when I asked her "Tell me a joke" last night.
— Siri's response when I asked her "Tell me a joke" last night.
It feels like all I talk about these days, but ChatGPT is the best thesaurus I've ever used.
Well yes it makes sense to criticize the government effectively subsidizing your competitors when they failed to innovate. This reduces the willingness of companies to innovate like Tesla did because they know they can sit on the haunches and wait for the government to bail them out with tax payer's money.
other car manufacturers aren't actually building charging stations. they rightfully see this as a separate endeavor. Tesla's hard-binding of their cars with their chargers is simply anticompetitive. I would like the government to help correct this.
You both absolved car makers of their strategic incompetence and stretched the idea of "anti-competitive" beyond breaking point.
I get why car makers don't want to do charging - it takes capital, it takes away focus and historically it's not what they do.
But customers do not car what's easy of convenient for the business.
Tesla saw the chicken and egg problem and solved. It was risky (especially for a company that, at the time, was loosing money) and costly but they saw the obvious truth: without wide spread, convenient network of chargers people will not buy EV cars.
They also publicly declared that if any other car makers wants access, all they have to do is to chip in some of the cost.
That was more than fair and consistent with their goal of accelerating transition to sustainable energy. They were not hoarding the superchargers, just looking for a fair deal.
No car maker took them up on the offer, despite that being the right thing to do for their customers and to grow EV market overall.
I don't see why competitors should now benefit from the hard work and billions of dollars that Tesla invested into their supercharger network.
The feds are giving companies free money so it's fair that they require open access and it's the deal Tesla always thought would be fair, which is why they took it.
I get why car makers don't want to do charging - it takes capital, it takes away focus and historically it's not what they do.
But customers do not car what's easy of convenient for the business.
Tesla saw the chicken and egg problem and solved. It was risky (especially for a company that, at the time, was loosing money) and costly but they saw the obvious truth: without wide spread, convenient network of chargers people will not buy EV cars.
They also publicly declared that if any other car makers wants access, all they have to do is to chip in some of the cost.
That was more than fair and consistent with their goal of accelerating transition to sustainable energy. They were not hoarding the superchargers, just looking for a fair deal.
No car maker took them up on the offer, despite that being the right thing to do for their customers and to grow EV market overall.
I don't see why competitors should now benefit from the hard work and billions of dollars that Tesla invested into their supercharger network.
The feds are giving companies free money so it's fair that they require open access and it's the deal Tesla always thought would be fair, which is why they took it.
> They also publicly declared that if any other car makers wants access, all they have to do is to chip in some of the cost.
No, Tesla continues their patent licensing deal. If you agree to never sue Tesla or any other company which uses Tesla's IP for infringing on your IP, they'll agree to never sue you for using their IP.
So say GM wants to use the Tesla connector on the Bolt. They have to agree to let Tesla use all of their IP. But not only that, they have to also agree to not sue any other company that also uses Tesla's IP if they infringe on GM's IP.
So say Ford also uses the Tesla connector, and then copies many of GM's designs. GM cannot enforce any of their IP against Ford without being in violation of Tesla's licensing deal, which opens them up to getting sued by Tesla for having the Tesla connector.
This isn't just the car makers though, this is anyone wanting to use Tesla's IP. So say Delta (a manufacturer of EV charging equipment) wants to offer Tesla connectors on their DC fast chargers. They have to follow the same thing, and allow Tesla to then copy any of their IP. But not just Tesla, they have to let Sema also copy any of their IP if Sema also starts to use Tesla connectors.
Tesla's licensing deal was a Trojan horse trying to nullify intellectual property rights in the automotive industry, and pretty much none of the bigger players wanted to give up all their IP.
No, Tesla continues their patent licensing deal. If you agree to never sue Tesla or any other company which uses Tesla's IP for infringing on your IP, they'll agree to never sue you for using their IP.
So say GM wants to use the Tesla connector on the Bolt. They have to agree to let Tesla use all of their IP. But not only that, they have to also agree to not sue any other company that also uses Tesla's IP if they infringe on GM's IP.
So say Ford also uses the Tesla connector, and then copies many of GM's designs. GM cannot enforce any of their IP against Ford without being in violation of Tesla's licensing deal, which opens them up to getting sued by Tesla for having the Tesla connector.
This isn't just the car makers though, this is anyone wanting to use Tesla's IP. So say Delta (a manufacturer of EV charging equipment) wants to offer Tesla connectors on their DC fast chargers. They have to follow the same thing, and allow Tesla to then copy any of their IP. But not just Tesla, they have to let Sema also copy any of their IP if Sema also starts to use Tesla connectors.
Tesla's licensing deal was a Trojan horse trying to nullify intellectual property rights in the automotive industry, and pretty much none of the bigger players wanted to give up all their IP.
> You both absolved car makers of their strategic incompetence and stretched the idea of "anti-competitive" beyond breaking point.
Both can simultaneously be true. The carmakers have sat on their hands, and Tesla is arguably anti-competitive with it's charging network.
Both can simultaneously be true. The carmakers have sat on their hands, and Tesla is arguably anti-competitive with it's charging network.
The CCS standard didn't exist when Tesla created their own charging connector, and there were many other connectors at the time. CCS is objectively worse than Tesla's standard in both form factor and ease of use.
What the government is doing is anti-competitive, not Tesla.
What the government is doing is anti-competitive, not Tesla.
If I've learned one thing in my life, it's that the friction caused by competing "standards" is always 1000% worse than any hypothetical pain you'll suffer from choosing the weaker one.
In this case it's the government mandating the weaker one, through the lobbying of competitors trying to wreck the market leader. It's the _way_ that this happened that puts such a sour taste in my mouth personally.
Tesla had several years to open-source the NACS standard if they wanted to: that is, really open source it without attaching patent grant conditions. Instead they waited to do so until the very late date of November 2022 [1], which is many years after both Europe and the US settled on CCS1/2.
The CCS standardization has been ongoing for over a decade. Even so: if Tesla had fully opened NACS even as late as five years ago there's some chance it could have become the dominant standard in North America. Tesla waiting until late 2022 to submit NACS as a standard isn't consistent with being "wrecked by competitors": it's more like a harmful troll. Now NACS is either going to be another dead legacy standard or (worse) North America will end up with two incompatible zombie standards for a long time, and many people (including Tesla owners like myself) will have to use annoying and unsafe adapters.
[1] https://www.tesla.com/blog/opening-north-american-charging-s...
The CCS standardization has been ongoing for over a decade. Even so: if Tesla had fully opened NACS even as late as five years ago there's some chance it could have become the dominant standard in North America. Tesla waiting until late 2022 to submit NACS as a standard isn't consistent with being "wrecked by competitors": it's more like a harmful troll. Now NACS is either going to be another dead legacy standard or (worse) North America will end up with two incompatible zombie standards for a long time, and many people (including Tesla owners like myself) will have to use annoying and unsafe adapters.
[1] https://www.tesla.com/blog/opening-north-american-charging-s...
Tesla submitted their charging standard as the standard for CCS. It was refused.
They've continued to push their patent pledge. If you want to use "NACS", you've got to turn over all your IP. This was true years ago, its true today.
While they published some schematics on their website for the connector, there's still patents and other proprietary bits to actually communicate and get the charging infrastructure to work. Without that associated IP, the schematics are effectively useless.
This isn't a huge deal for a company like Aptera, they're probably going to use a good bit of Tesla's IP in other situations for their EV and don't have large teams constantly cranking out IP. But companies like Ford, VW, Stallantis, etc., they've got like a combined billion dollars worth of IP they'd be turning over to all their competitors. A big win for Tesla and smaller companies like Aptera, but not necessarily a big win for the legacy companies to essentially write down all that IP value.
If they had just asked for normal kind of licensing, I imagine there probably could have been more support for the connector years ago. But they put it behind the patent pledge to try and eliminate intellectual property rights in the automotive industry assuming it would be a juicy enough carrot for everyone to chase. Turns out, it wasn't.
While they published some schematics on their website for the connector, there's still patents and other proprietary bits to actually communicate and get the charging infrastructure to work. Without that associated IP, the schematics are effectively useless.
This isn't a huge deal for a company like Aptera, they're probably going to use a good bit of Tesla's IP in other situations for their EV and don't have large teams constantly cranking out IP. But companies like Ford, VW, Stallantis, etc., they've got like a combined billion dollars worth of IP they'd be turning over to all their competitors. A big win for Tesla and smaller companies like Aptera, but not necessarily a big win for the legacy companies to essentially write down all that IP value.
If they had just asked for normal kind of licensing, I imagine there probably could have been more support for the connector years ago. But they put it behind the patent pledge to try and eliminate intellectual property rights in the automotive industry assuming it would be a juicy enough carrot for everyone to chase. Turns out, it wasn't.
Do you have a citation for this that gives the details and exact reasons for the refusal? I’ve searched pretty extensively and found nothing. I love my Tesla but I’ve learned to check primary sources when it comes to any claim made by Tesla or Elon Musk.
Who the heck was going to build chargers in 2011-2016 if not Tesla? They had to do it for their product to be usable. It’s not like they tried to corner the market, there just wasn’t a market at all.
Tesla doesn't have to take the offer though. They are doing it voluntarily, then complaining about it.
Tesla knows that if they don’t take it voluntarily, the govt (well, big auto lobbyists) will switch from carrot to stick. That’s just how it works when someone writes a law and you know they have you in mind specifically.
Just because you're compiling with something doesn't mean you like to comply with it... I'm not sure what argument you're trying to make. The alternative is competitors being subsidized.
Superchargers are convenient because Teslas are fast charging. When these slower charging cars get access, it'll be more convenient for the owners of other types of cars at the cost of Tesla owners waiting in long lines to charge.
Teslas aren't the fastest charging EVs anymore and haven't been for some time. Yes, there will be Leafs and Bolts and other slow charging cars, but there will be faster charging cars as well as long as Tesla's newer chargers support a faster standard.
asynchronous(5)
> Mr. Musk has criticized the new law, and said that federal funding for electric-vehicle charging is unnecessary.
He is free to repay all the government subsidies and funding he has received if they are unwanted.
He is free to repay all the government subsidies and funding he has received if they are unwanted.
As a Model Y owner I just rented a Polestar to do a 72 hrs, 800 mile trip -- just to evaluate the experience. I missed my Y for many reasons however the trip went well overall but the Electrify America charging infrastructure leaves much to be desired. HOWEVER, their rate pre kwh can be 30% cheaper at peak times so I just bought the CCS adapter so I can optionally use those chargers -- even when cross country driving in my Tesla.
How many times did you stop to charge? I avoided renting an EV because I didn't want a 30m+ stop during an otherwise uninterrupted road trip.
My longest trip in my Tesla was just west of Sacramento to just past Denver, 1150 miles. The car charges at between 600 and 1000 miles per hour when it's nearly empty.
Our stops were in the 15 minute range, often as the last person returned after a snack or bathroom break we had enough to drive enough 50-75% of range (180 to 270 miles). Not bad for driving since the stops were every 3 to 4.5 hours.
Charging often is most time efficient to charge fairly often since charging is much faster when the battery is in the bottom 50% than the top 50%.
Keep in mind charging is much nicer than filling. No pulling out a credit card, no typing in your zip code, no skipping the car wash, no selecting a fuel type, no "delays" while watching a loud ad, no trying to find the mute button, no getting sprayed with stinky gas tinged air (not all states reclaim the vapor), no hitting a mute button again because it timed out, etc.
Just grab charger, hit button to open the charge port, and plug in.
Our stops were in the 15 minute range, often as the last person returned after a snack or bathroom break we had enough to drive enough 50-75% of range (180 to 270 miles). Not bad for driving since the stops were every 3 to 4.5 hours.
Charging often is most time efficient to charge fairly often since charging is much faster when the battery is in the bottom 50% than the top 50%.
Keep in mind charging is much nicer than filling. No pulling out a credit card, no typing in your zip code, no skipping the car wash, no selecting a fuel type, no "delays" while watching a loud ad, no trying to find the mute button, no getting sprayed with stinky gas tinged air (not all states reclaim the vapor), no hitting a mute button again because it timed out, etc.
Just grab charger, hit button to open the charge port, and plug in.
> (not all states reclaim the vapor)
What?! That's just so primitive it's hard to understand.
What?! That's just so primitive it's hard to understand.
I first noticed it in Nevada, dramatically thinner nozzle. At first I thought I was using some diesel or something else not compatible. Then the smell hit as the gas started flowing.
I have noticed that driving an EV makes you much more aware of the smell of gas cars. Even in traffic I notice smelly cars much more often.
I have noticed that driving an EV makes you much more aware of the smell of gas cars. Even in traffic I notice smelly cars much more often.
Will be interesting to see how this rolls out.
Former Tesla, current CCS charging EV owner myself.
Most assume it will basically be accomplished by exclusively building out new locations with the new "magic dock" CCS adapter.
Even this is fine with me given that Tesla not only has far more stations than CCS competition in US, but they are also building out new stations more rapidly too.. so the lead only grows. Also note that every Tesla location is 8+ stalls, often up to 16 stalls, and I'd say the average location is now 12 stalls.. and they all work 99.9% of the time. EA/evGo/etc CCS networks tend to install pathetic 4 stall stations that have perpetually 1 or more stalls out of service.
3500 chargers / 12 charger average location = under 300 locations, vs total existing ~1700 current locations.
For those complaining about Tesla gaming this or something, I'd point more of a finger at the CCS networks who are installing the minimally compliant (4 stall) locations at an alarmingly slow rate. They are leaving money on the table, and giving customers a bad experience. Happy to see Tesla come in and give them a run for the money.
Most assume it will basically be accomplished by exclusively building out new locations with the new "magic dock" CCS adapter.
Even this is fine with me given that Tesla not only has far more stations than CCS competition in US, but they are also building out new stations more rapidly too.. so the lead only grows. Also note that every Tesla location is 8+ stalls, often up to 16 stalls, and I'd say the average location is now 12 stalls.. and they all work 99.9% of the time. EA/evGo/etc CCS networks tend to install pathetic 4 stall stations that have perpetually 1 or more stalls out of service.
3500 chargers / 12 charger average location = under 300 locations, vs total existing ~1700 current locations.
For those complaining about Tesla gaming this or something, I'd point more of a finger at the CCS networks who are installing the minimally compliant (4 stall) locations at an alarmingly slow rate. They are leaving money on the table, and giving customers a bad experience. Happy to see Tesla come in and give them a run for the money.
> given that Tesla not only has far more stations than CCS competition in US
Given you've said "stations" separately from "stalls", this is not true.
https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/electricity_locations.html#/fi...
6,134 results for DC Fast CCS chargers, 1,841 results for DC Fast Tesla.
There are more Tesla stalls, but there are fewer locations.
Given you've said "stations" separately from "stalls", this is not true.
https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/electricity_locations.html#/fi...
6,134 results for DC Fast CCS chargers, 1,841 results for DC Fast Tesla.
There are more Tesla stalls, but there are fewer locations.
OK I probably am putting on blinders and mixing some words up..
But the problem with CCS is a lot of these stats count BS unnetworked, poorly maintained, single-stalls 50kW stations sitting in car dealer parking lots only usable 9a-5p, and stuff like that.
Checking the ones on the map near me, and it includes a bunch of CCS stations I've never seen actually working, stuff in government parking lots not available to public, and lots and lots of dealer special chargers which are of limited access..
If you were able to filter on "150kW+ L3 charging" the 6k number would probably drop to 2-3k maybe best case. Which would result in something like 2.5k stations x 4 stalls => 10k CCS stalls, vs 1.8k Tesla stations x 12 stalls = 22k stalls.
Checking the ones on the map near me, and it includes a bunch of CCS stations I've never seen actually working, stuff in government parking lots not available to public, and lots and lots of dealer special chargers which are of limited access..
If you were able to filter on "150kW+ L3 charging" the 6k number would probably drop to 2-3k maybe best case. Which would result in something like 2.5k stations x 4 stalls => 10k CCS stalls, vs 1.8k Tesla stations x 12 stalls = 22k stalls.
Isn't 2.5-3.0 still a larger number than 1.8?
I'm definitely not arguing CCS has more stalls, as I do agree most CCS deployments are like 2-4 stalls while the average Tesla one is like 8 and its somewhat common to find stations with 10+.
In the end, you said there are more "stations", and made a clear delineation of "stations" vs "stalls". This is incorrect, there are more CCS stations than Tesla. There are probably way more Tesla stalls, I'm pretty sure.
I'm definitely not arguing CCS has more stalls, as I do agree most CCS deployments are like 2-4 stalls while the average Tesla one is like 8 and its somewhat common to find stations with 10+.
In the end, you said there are more "stations", and made a clear delineation of "stations" vs "stalls". This is incorrect, there are more CCS stations than Tesla. There are probably way more Tesla stalls, I'm pretty sure.
Better comparison via the websites-
http://fastcharger.info
https://supercharge.info
Or you can use a site with more advanced filters like https://www.plugshare.com
http://fastcharger.info
https://supercharge.info
Or you can use a site with more advanced filters like https://www.plugshare.com
So fastcharger.info states there are >4,000 open CCS locations in the US and Canada (their "global" data is just US+Canada).
http://fastcharger.info/charts
~1,200 of those listed were 150kW+. Another 300 or so are 100kW+. So 1,500 of those being in the same ballpark as average Tesla charging speeds.
The supercharge.info states there are ~1,900 open Tesla locations in North America.
https://supercharge.info/charts
Of that, some percentage of those are 120kW and 72kW. They're not all 250kW chargers. I can't sort by kW on that site's data and I'm not interested enough to skim/export it to find the exact number, but just eyeballing several pages makes me thing probably 5-10% of those as <250kW. Its not like all superchargers on the road are 250kW chargers.
So by your own data sets you've shared, for "open" chargers, there are more CCS locations than Tesla.
http://fastcharger.info/charts
~1,200 of those listed were 150kW+. Another 300 or so are 100kW+. So 1,500 of those being in the same ballpark as average Tesla charging speeds.
The supercharge.info states there are ~1,900 open Tesla locations in North America.
https://supercharge.info/charts
Of that, some percentage of those are 120kW and 72kW. They're not all 250kW chargers. I can't sort by kW on that site's data and I'm not interested enough to skim/export it to find the exact number, but just eyeballing several pages makes me thing probably 5-10% of those as <250kW. Its not like all superchargers on the road are 250kW chargers.
So by your own data sets you've shared, for "open" chargers, there are more CCS locations than Tesla.
For example, on an 85mi drive I frequently take, for a wide definition of "on the way", inclusive of 5-10mi detours off highway, there are:
Total 25 CCS stalls with 120kW+ charging vs 118 Tesla stalls on the same route
From experience I also know the Tesla stalls will be 99.9% up whereas the CCS ones will be 75-90% on any given date.
"25 stalls in 85mi" might to a non-EV owner sound like fine, quite a lot, but think about that as like.. only having 3 gas stations within a 2 hour drive, in the most congested, population dense area of the US.
Not great.
Total 25 CCS stalls with 120kW+ charging vs 118 Tesla stalls on the same route
From experience I also know the Tesla stalls will be 99.9% up whereas the CCS ones will be 75-90% on any given date.
"25 stalls in 85mi" might to a non-EV owner sound like fine, quite a lot, but think about that as like.. only having 3 gas stations within a 2 hour drive, in the most congested, population dense area of the US.
Not great.
I do agree CCS networks need to work on uptime, even 90% availability per stall is unacceptable to me.
However, there's probably more than 4x the number of Teslas versus CCS cars on the road today in the US. What's the ratio of Tesla cars/Tesla stalls vs CCS cars/CCS stalls on that route currently? If there's 118 Tesla stalls that are constantly in use versus 25 which are rarely used, which is going to be easier to find a place to charge right away?
So counting the stalls seems to be a bit of a misnomer to me at this point. Maybe if CCS cars was a similar number on the roads, but in the end as a CCS user I care more about there being more locations and uptime than having more stalls that sit empty all the time.
However, there's probably more than 4x the number of Teslas versus CCS cars on the road today in the US. What's the ratio of Tesla cars/Tesla stalls vs CCS cars/CCS stalls on that route currently? If there's 118 Tesla stalls that are constantly in use versus 25 which are rarely used, which is going to be easier to find a place to charge right away?
So counting the stalls seems to be a bit of a misnomer to me at this point. Maybe if CCS cars was a similar number on the roads, but in the end as a CCS user I care more about there being more locations and uptime than having more stalls that sit empty all the time.
I have a CCS car, and I love it, but this is despite the charging network not because of it.
The ratio of cars:chargers is probably pretty good, or maybe even better for CCS, in a perverse way because Tesla has such a sales lead.
Unfortunately CCS networks in the Northeast tend to install themselves well off the highway in back corners of giant shopping center or mall parking lots.
Route I used to take on my Tesla without leaving the highway, or only needing to leave the highway for 1 mile, instead require large detours for CCS.
NJTP for example has been a mess for CCS by compare, though it should be better, eventually, with the EvGo partnership. I95/Rt15 through CT is similarly very bad.
The ratio of cars:chargers is probably pretty good, or maybe even better for CCS, in a perverse way because Tesla has such a sales lead.
Unfortunately CCS networks in the Northeast tend to install themselves well off the highway in back corners of giant shopping center or mall parking lots.
Route I used to take on my Tesla without leaving the highway, or only needing to leave the highway for 1 mile, instead require large detours for CCS.
NJTP for example has been a mess for CCS by compare, though it should be better, eventually, with the EvGo partnership. I95/Rt15 through CT is similarly very bad.
I agree location choices could be better. I'm happy that my state's plans for charging infrastructure grants really push new charging developments immediately at the highway exits and other good locations. It will be nice to see that happen, as often times on road trips it did take me driving an extra mile or two into the town to the Walmart or other shopping center to plug in instead of being right on my planned route.
In the end though I do expect for CCS to just become pretty ubiquitous. You won't need many big 10+ stall stations, because there will be so many smaller 2-4 stall stations all over the place.There aren't yet the customers to support that amount of infrastructure today though, but as more EVs come to market and Teslas at least having CCS adapters it'll become more of a thing.
In the end though I do expect for CCS to just become pretty ubiquitous. You won't need many big 10+ stall stations, because there will be so many smaller 2-4 stall stations all over the place.There aren't yet the customers to support that amount of infrastructure today though, but as more EVs come to market and Teslas at least having CCS adapters it'll become more of a thing.
Imagine if Ford has their own gas pumps with a different shaped connector and you could only fill Fords at their gas stations. I applaud Tesla for building the network to support their cars, but just like gas stations are critical transportation infrastructure, so are vehicle chargers. They shouldn't be legal to be used as anticompetitive leverage.
European regulators forced Tesla to play nice. US regulators were asleep at the wheel.
I think Tesla shipped before regulators started waking up (to use your analogy)
Initially Tesla used different connectors in Germany as well.
Early Model S were not CCS if I recall correctly.
Early Model S were not CCS if I recall correctly.
Imagine if Ford paid billions of dollars to build their gas pump network. Why should Toyota get to use it?
Because there are finite resources on earth and we should strive for efficient uses of them, not for maximum Ford profit. Corporations only exist at society's pleasure, thanks the the support of society's government and the property law that government applies using it's monopoly on violence. There is no right to profit.
Okay, so Tesla has no or significantly more limited reason to build out a charging network. Good job, you made electric cars worse, thanks government.
Why not? The incentive for building the network was always to sell cars. They also make money by selling electricity. Neither of those would change. Gas stations fill any car, and they still exist.
Ok, but at least in such a case, Toyota should be forced to pay for the privilege.
Like is your position really that nobody that invests in infrastructure should be allowed to profit from its investment?
Like is your position really that nobody that invests in infrastructure should be allowed to profit from its investment?
Tesla is being paid for it... they get increased federal funding, so they are being compensated in a way for it. For Toyota this is a direct threat, why should I give my competitors free money.
Ultimately, Tesla is asking for even more federal funding in this space... and I can assume they will hopefully try to get even more of that money
Ultimately, Tesla is asking for even more federal funding in this space... and I can assume they will hopefully try to get even more of that money
Yes Tesla is being paid. And that good.
But your argument seems to be that Tesla shouldn't get anything or shouldn't even allowed to have private infrastructure.
> Ultimately, Tesla is asking for even more federal funding in this space
I think Tesla would prefer to be any federal funding in this space.
But your argument seems to be that Tesla shouldn't get anything or shouldn't even allowed to have private infrastructure.
> Ultimately, Tesla is asking for even more federal funding in this space
I think Tesla would prefer to be any federal funding in this space.
Superchargers aren't free. There's money to be made by actually charging the cars.
Yes but Tesla can decide what the prefer, money or competitive advantage. If government just forced them to be open, then they don't have that choice.
Would it have been an ideal world would have been where there were Ford gas stations, GM gas stations, Chrysler gas stations, Toyota gas stations, Honda gas stations, Suzuki gas stations, Nissan gas stations, AMC gas stations, Studebaker gas stations, Plymouth gas stations, Mercury gas stations, Pontiac gas stations, etc. and none of these would have been interchangeable? We'd just have a dozen different gas stations all right next to each other all over the place, because each one wants to have their own competitive edge against the others for "the best" fueling infrastructure. Every time an auto manufacturing company got merged or went defunct, we'd just close down all those old legacy gas stations and any drivers of those would just be SOL.
To me that sounds like a nightmare, but I guess to each their own.
To me that sounds like a nightmare, but I guess to each their own.
> etc.
You don't need to make 30 examples, your point is not hard to understand.
And you are arguing with a straw-men, I never argued that this is the best world.
Nor do I think an 'unregulated' market would lead to what you suggest, as we already see in the electric charging station market. Almost all non-Tesla stations are shared. And Tesla long term would likely do so eventually to, even without govenrment intensive.
> Every time an auto manufacturing company got merged or went defunct, we'd just close down all those old legacy gas stations
At this point you are just making idiotic argument. Like seriously? Have you ever heard of liquidation and reallocation of resources.
If a major network of industry exists that comes up for sale, like the other would bid on it and a modify it for their standard.
You don't need to make 30 examples, your point is not hard to understand.
And you are arguing with a straw-men, I never argued that this is the best world.
Nor do I think an 'unregulated' market would lead to what you suggest, as we already see in the electric charging station market. Almost all non-Tesla stations are shared. And Tesla long term would likely do so eventually to, even without govenrment intensive.
> Every time an auto manufacturing company got merged or went defunct, we'd just close down all those old legacy gas stations
At this point you are just making idiotic argument. Like seriously? Have you ever heard of liquidation and reallocation of resources.
If a major network of industry exists that comes up for sale, like the other would bid on it and a modify it for their standard.
So, do you agree its probably not in the consumer's best long term interest for charging networks to be tightly coupled with single manufacturers and we should probably disincentivize such structures from existing?
Do you think Tesla keeping their network proprietary for long ultimately increased or decreased overall EV sales in the past few years? Do you think more or fewer Bolts and Leafs would have been sold if they would have been able to use a true open standard of Tesla chargers?
Imagine how many consumers worries would be alleviated if Tesla allowed all cars to charge on their network today. Wouldn't that be great? Which is more harmful to consumers: a proprietary network or an open one?
Imagine if Ford bought out all the prime gas station locations along highway corridors and made them Ford only gas stations. A true win for consumers.
Maybe we shouldn't allow single corporations to control important infrastructure with proprietary standards?
Do you think Tesla keeping their network proprietary for long ultimately increased or decreased overall EV sales in the past few years? Do you think more or fewer Bolts and Leafs would have been sold if they would have been able to use a true open standard of Tesla chargers?
Imagine how many consumers worries would be alleviated if Tesla allowed all cars to charge on their network today. Wouldn't that be great? Which is more harmful to consumers: a proprietary network or an open one?
Imagine if Ford bought out all the prime gas station locations along highway corridors and made them Ford only gas stations. A true win for consumers.
Maybe we shouldn't allow single corporations to control important infrastructure with proprietary standards?
My point has always been that if government want's to create infrastructure for everybody, those companies that have done their own infrastructure and have done the initial investment should be rewarded and those that didn't and just want to profit from the government investment should be forced to pay large amounts of money.
Now the government is investing its own money and this simply rewards companies like Toyota who have done nothing and will profit the most. Specially because its of foreign company, that makes it even worse.
So by all means, create infrastructure for everybody, but take into account how the market got to the point it is.
Now the government is investing its own money and this simply rewards companies like Toyota who have done nothing and will profit the most. Specially because its of foreign company, that makes it even worse.
So by all means, create infrastructure for everybody, but take into account how the market got to the point it is.
“There is no right to profit” means “the incentive has been removed”.
Congratulations; you’ve just broken the system (even though it was well-meaning).
Congratulations; you’ve just broken the system (even though it was well-meaning).
Because abusing a market leading position to tie or bundle your products is illegal anticompetitive behavior.
They started with supercharging before they were in a market leading position. Their investment in charging and production at the same time is what made them market leading.
And in fact, the reality is bundling is not inherently illegal. If it was illegal 99% of all companies above 50 people would do something illegal.
And in fact, the reality is bundling is not inherently illegal. If it was illegal 99% of all companies above 50 people would do something illegal.
I wish more chargers would follow similar model to charging to how Superchargers work - high amperage, plug-and-go. I used a non-Tesla charger for my Model Y yesterday at a parking garage. Let me tell you the experience:
1. Came up, no directions on what app I should use to pay for charging, a couple feet away found that I should download PlugShare. Downloaded PlugShare, setup my info, allows for Apple Pay, nice. Says it needs to do a $30 pre-auth in order to get started. Fine.
2. Plugged my car in, I barely get 30A from the plug, whatever. Leave it plugged in for 4 hours. Come back, unplug. No way to stop the charging or my session in the app. I just leave it there thinking perhaps it'll reset session. A couple minutes later, someone else starts using my session...
3. 9 hours later, I get a notification that charging has finally stopped and I was charged for the amount. :(
1. Came up, no directions on what app I should use to pay for charging, a couple feet away found that I should download PlugShare. Downloaded PlugShare, setup my info, allows for Apple Pay, nice. Says it needs to do a $30 pre-auth in order to get started. Fine.
2. Plugged my car in, I barely get 30A from the plug, whatever. Leave it plugged in for 4 hours. Come back, unplug. No way to stop the charging or my session in the app. I just leave it there thinking perhaps it'll reset session. A couple minutes later, someone else starts using my session...
3. 9 hours later, I get a notification that charging has finally stopped and I was charged for the amount. :(
It depends on the network. For example, Fastned (in EU) has 300kW chargers and supports plug-n-charge, so it's a Tesla-like experience.
But most networks still require use of an app, which is so annoying.
But most networks still require use of an app, which is so annoying.
I don't think most electrical grids can spare that much high amperage all the time. You know they aren't getting priority on the grid.
Keep in mind that, at least currently, most EVs charge at home, off hours, when there's a surplus. It's not much power, on average it's less than a single 120v socket.
Sadly only Tesla knows the totals, but I'd be surprised if supercharging is (on average) 1/20th of the home charging.
Around 1/3rd of the Tesla owners I know have solar panels, although many of those are in California and they changed the rates to be 1/4th or less of what they were, so they no longer contribute to the grid, but instead time shift with batteries.
The power production folks are lobbying for lower rates, which lowers the amount of solar that enters the grid, which increases demand for electricity, which makes more profit for the power companies. Sad.
Sadly only Tesla knows the totals, but I'd be surprised if supercharging is (on average) 1/20th of the home charging.
Around 1/3rd of the Tesla owners I know have solar panels, although many of those are in California and they changed the rates to be 1/4th or less of what they were, so they no longer contribute to the grid, but instead time shift with batteries.
The power production folks are lobbying for lower rates, which lowers the amount of solar that enters the grid, which increases demand for electricity, which makes more profit for the power companies. Sad.
If we can't spare that much amperage, why force everyone into EVs?
Personally I don't think we should. Sorry if I implied that.
As long as coal is powering the electricity in the cars, what exactly is helping the environment?
As long as coal is powering the electricity in the cars, what exactly is helping the environment?
The share of Coal is plummeting.
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/images/2021.07.28/main.svg
The electric car you buy today will steadily get greener over it's lifetime. The gas car will not.
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/images/2021.07.28/main.svg
The electric car you buy today will steadily get greener over it's lifetime. The gas car will not.
Natural gas is NO better than coal. Don't let the current media blitz fool you
Any source for that? Quick google search seems to imply otherwise
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/natural-gas/natural-gas-...
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/natural-gas/natural-gas-...
Because that's not true everywhere. Washington state, for example, is 85% hydro, 5% wind, 5% nuclear - and much of that is wasted at night since rivers don't turn off. Switching everyone here to EVs would be a massive win.
Think about the Texas electrical grid. Do you think ERCOT could handle a massive influx of EVs when an ice storm disrupts half the state?
During that 2021 ice storm most gas pumps didn't work either.
As for the recent ice storm, my EV had no problems charging here in Texas.
As for the recent ice storm, my EV had no problems charging here in Texas.
But if EVERY person had an EV it would have had problems.
And what if you were one of the unfortunate people who lost power for 5 days and had an EV? If it wasn't charged enough to go to a charging station that might have power...what do you do?
I am honestly curious: how in the world did gas pumps freeze? Are gas pumps actually built differently in the north?
And what if you were one of the unfortunate people who lost power for 5 days and had an EV? If it wasn't charged enough to go to a charging station that might have power...what do you do?
I am honestly curious: how in the world did gas pumps freeze? Are gas pumps actually built differently in the north?
> I am honestly curious: how in the world did gas pumps freeze? Are gas pumps actually built differently in the north?
Pumps need power to, you know, pump. They don't just magically dispense gas and handle payments. Most gas stations around me could not operate and were closed as they did not have electricity to operate.
> And what if you were one of the unfortunate people who lost power for 5 days and had an EV? If it wasn't charged enough to go to a charging station that might have power...what do you do?
Lots of people didn't have gas in their cars, or they ran out, and, well, the gas pumps didn't have power, so they couldn't pump the gas, so their cars were dead. If they didn't have enough gas to drive far enough to a station that did have power, wouldn't they be in the same situation as that EV owner?
In the end my experience in that winter storm would have been the same if I had a gas car or an electric. I'd only have the range I had when the lights went out. I don't store a lot of gas at home, not any amount that would make an appreciable difference in range.
Pointing to things like that winter storm as some example of day to day life is extreme. It was a pretty big outlier, one that I agree Texas (and the rest of the US, see NY 2022) needs to be ready to happen more often. But acting like that's just normal day to day life is a bit absurd. What if the city gets flooded every day from massive hurricanes like with Katrina? EVs sure wouldn't be great then! What of the town has massive tornadoes ripping through like Joplin? EVs sure wouldn't be helpful in that environment!
If over the next 5 years every single family home in Texas swapped an ICE for an EV, the "grid" would probably absorb it without much issue. There's already so much spare capacity prices go negative most evenings.
Pumps need power to, you know, pump. They don't just magically dispense gas and handle payments. Most gas stations around me could not operate and were closed as they did not have electricity to operate.
> And what if you were one of the unfortunate people who lost power for 5 days and had an EV? If it wasn't charged enough to go to a charging station that might have power...what do you do?
Lots of people didn't have gas in their cars, or they ran out, and, well, the gas pumps didn't have power, so they couldn't pump the gas, so their cars were dead. If they didn't have enough gas to drive far enough to a station that did have power, wouldn't they be in the same situation as that EV owner?
In the end my experience in that winter storm would have been the same if I had a gas car or an electric. I'd only have the range I had when the lights went out. I don't store a lot of gas at home, not any amount that would make an appreciable difference in range.
Pointing to things like that winter storm as some example of day to day life is extreme. It was a pretty big outlier, one that I agree Texas (and the rest of the US, see NY 2022) needs to be ready to happen more often. But acting like that's just normal day to day life is a bit absurd. What if the city gets flooded every day from massive hurricanes like with Katrina? EVs sure wouldn't be great then! What of the town has massive tornadoes ripping through like Joplin? EVs sure wouldn't be helpful in that environment!
If over the next 5 years every single family home in Texas swapped an ICE for an EV, the "grid" would probably absorb it without much issue. There's already so much spare capacity prices go negative most evenings.
Holy crap the electricity for pumps didn't click with me.
About 30% of the energy that goes to power my car comes from renewable sources such as wind and solar. Another 10% comes from nuclear. A little over 40% comes from mostly combined cycle natural gas plants. Slightly less than 20% comes from coal.
On top of that, because of the efficiency of my car and the plants running, I get the equivalent energy usage of about 100MPG for an ICE.
The break even emissions on my car including manufacturing given this kind of mix is within a few years. If I drive the car for 5+ years (most likely), it'll be way lower emissions than my ICE driving for 5+ years. Meanwhile in the next 5+ years, chances are the mix of renewables will increase. Maybe even nuclear. Chances are the coal plants will close soon though.
On top of that, because of the efficiency of my car and the plants running, I get the equivalent energy usage of about 100MPG for an ICE.
The break even emissions on my car including manufacturing given this kind of mix is within a few years. If I drive the car for 5+ years (most likely), it'll be way lower emissions than my ICE driving for 5+ years. Meanwhile in the next 5+ years, chances are the mix of renewables will increase. Maybe even nuclear. Chances are the coal plants will close soon though.
So...couple things.
1) I am jealous you live somewhere where nuclear is an option. In most states in the US, nuclear power is decreasing.
2) Natural gas isn't any better than coal.
3) Coal won't go away as long as conservatives are in power in the house - they love coal.
4) I think ICE vs Electric greatly depends on how much you use your car. I drive maybe once or twice a week, only city - I am going to be constantly having to charge my car since the battery will go dead if you leave it unplugged in cold weather (Michigan). A tank of gas lasts me for like 3 months. There is no way EV would be better for the environment.
1) I am jealous you live somewhere where nuclear is an option. In most states in the US, nuclear power is decreasing.
2) Natural gas isn't any better than coal.
3) Coal won't go away as long as conservatives are in power in the house - they love coal.
4) I think ICE vs Electric greatly depends on how much you use your car. I drive maybe once or twice a week, only city - I am going to be constantly having to charge my car since the battery will go dead if you leave it unplugged in cold weather (Michigan). A tank of gas lasts me for like 3 months. There is no way EV would be better for the environment.
Coal will continue to decline if its unprofitable to run the coal plants, which it often is. If open to market forces, which in my state it probably is too open to market forces but that's another story, things like coal will die out compared to renewables and natural gas.
And, yes, natural gas while it has its issues is still better than coal. Even with the leakages, which theoretically could be fixed. Coal causes a bigger nuclear issue than nuclear power plants. There's so many ways in which natural gas is better than coal, but I do agree natural gas still has climate change impacts and is ultimately non-renewable and not sustainable for much longer timescales.
As for your car, you may not drive it many miles. But you're going to sell it eventually I'd imagine. And then that person is going to probably drive an average usage on it. So that car is probably still going to end up hitting its break even point unless you only end up driving it 10,000mi and then crush it after you're done with it.
And, yes, natural gas while it has its issues is still better than coal. Even with the leakages, which theoretically could be fixed. Coal causes a bigger nuclear issue than nuclear power plants. There's so many ways in which natural gas is better than coal, but I do agree natural gas still has climate change impacts and is ultimately non-renewable and not sustainable for much longer timescales.
As for your car, you may not drive it many miles. But you're going to sell it eventually I'd imagine. And then that person is going to probably drive an average usage on it. So that car is probably still going to end up hitting its break even point unless you only end up driving it 10,000mi and then crush it after you're done with it.
Just FYI I drive my EV that much in an urban area (with the occasional longer drive for outdoor activities, trips, or buying used things far away) and there's no way the battery will discharge in that time. My previous 25 year old ICE car was always in danger of the battery discharging because I didn't drive long enough to charge it from the engine.
> 3) Coal won't go away as long as conservatives are in power in the house - they love coal.
Doesn't matter what politicians think. As long as they don't start giving coal away or pure subsidies for it, if coal keeps being more expensive than natural gas, its share will keep going down. The force of the market decides.
Doesn't matter what politicians think. As long as they don't start giving coal away or pure subsidies for it, if coal keeps being more expensive than natural gas, its share will keep going down. The force of the market decides.
And the more natural gas, the more methane that is leaked into the atmosphere, which is a much stronger greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.
I think you could make an argument that it's still worth it just to get car emissions out of dense urban environments.
Even in San Francisco, which has pretty clean air (being right by the bay), it was really remarkable during the early, lock-down part of the pandemic how much nicer the air was without the car emissions. Especially noticable when biking.
Even in San Francisco, which has pretty clean air (being right by the bay), it was really remarkable during the early, lock-down part of the pandemic how much nicer the air was without the car emissions. Especially noticable when biking.
I'll admit I didn't take that into account. This assumes the power plants won't cause pollutants in dense urban areas though
Even if your entire grid was running on coal, it's much easier to reduce the emissions of a power plant, than to all the ice cars
Quite a few Tesla charging stations have been open to other brands since last year here in Norway and several other countries in Europe. The Wall Street Journal seems to be unaware that other countries exist.
> but in the U.S. they aren’t available to other types of vehicles.
They have a short note in the article, but I agree a better callout that this is about U.S. chargers would enhance clarity.
They have a short note in the article, but I agree a better callout that this is about U.S. chargers would enhance clarity.
This isn't the first time they are doing it. It's already happening in test markets in Europe, and in fact there are three Tesla chargers available today in the Bay Area for non-tesla cars. But they are all in private parking lots.
I can't wait till the open up, because right now when we go to our local target, there are four non-tesla chargers, always full (sometimes with Teslas!) and 20-30 Tesla chargers that are mostly empty.
I can't wait till the open up, because right now when we go to our local target, there are four non-tesla chargers, always full (sometimes with Teslas!) and 20-30 Tesla chargers that are mostly empty.
Feels unfortunate the less popular and larger CCS standard is the one mandated: https://www.theverge.com/2022/11/11/23453587/tesla-connector...
They should have mandated CCS2 like Europe.
What advantages over the Tesla plug does CCS2 present?
CCS2 Supports 3 phase AC as well as built-in automatic locking which the CCS1 does not.
https://i.imgur.com/6iC38UK.png
https://i.imgur.com/6iC38UK.png
Speaking as a non-tesla EV owner I've not been that unhappy with Electrify America. After several road trips and >16,000mi I've only had a few negative experiences.
That said, I'm an outlier - plenty of others have had many issues and it needs fixing. Tesla opening Superchargers is a good step, but EA and other networks need some serious pressure to improve, now.
That said, I'm an outlier - plenty of others have had many issues and it needs fixing. Tesla opening Superchargers is a good step, but EA and other networks need some serious pressure to improve, now.
The charging infrastructure they are building will become a big earner in the long run I think. It’s building and owning the gas stations.
Seems like many superchargers are already overcrowded with Teslas alone in my experience, so this will reduce the appeal of Teslas. The biggest advantage Tesla has and the main reason I chose it is due to its dedicated charging infrastructure which is way better than other systems.
You still get the way better integration between chargers and car. One of the big benefits I've seen on in the "we took a road trip in these N different electric cars" genre of videos is that Tesla's navigation knows how many cars are there and the status of the chargers where other cars can get nearly stranded if you try to stretch to reach a charging point only to find it's broken with no indication it wouldn't work before you get there.
Its OK, originally Tesla said they were going to open their chargers up by the end of 2022, then end of 2023, and now its end of 2024. It'll be a long time before any CCS cars are charging at Superchargers at this rate.
I agree with this point, though at least in theory this is a path for them to get more $ and therefore expand the network further/faster, also potentially increasing the size of the moat. We'll see if they actually do that, though, I guess.
Agreed. I would love to switch to another electric car but the lack of a public country wide charging network (in Canada) leaves me with no alternatives.
https://archive.ph/Htc1m
This is already happening in the UK and Europe. Using the Tesla app, you can see which superchargers are now public.
This is already happening in the UK and Europe. Using the Tesla app, you can see which superchargers are now public.
thank god, the charging network outside of tesla's supercharger network is terrible. But last time I went on a roadtrip on a popular route up and down i-5 there weren't enough chargers. I can't imagine these supercharger networks getting any better unless they build 100 mile lots for charging
It’s a trap
bragr(4)