Will Tesla Buildup Superchargers to Accommodate Anticipated Demand from Ford, GM, Rivian, and whoever else, Adopting NACS circa 2024/2025?

[vickh]

Just a small point, the IRA does not have incentives for installing chargers. That is the NEVI portion of the BIL, Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, that has plans to install 4 chargers every 50 miles on the highway.

any incentives for home chargers?

 

[EbS-P]

This is the big issue. The non-NACS companies are a bunch of grant writers who are professionals at begging for handouts but can't actually do anything.
Once, Chargepoint called me 4 months after I reported that I could not use some chargers and asked if I was happy that they had fixed then. I told them that its a good thing I didn't actually need to charge back then or I'd have been hurting very badly waiting 4 months for them to bother to fix it.
Tesla has qualified techs constantly checking Superchargers and they aren't too far so they can fix them within hours if necessary.
Tesla runs a class act. Sure, there are a few warts and scars but, overall, they know how to get the important things done.

Teslas charging network motivated sales. And it still does today. I don’t see that happening as much moving forward once other manufacturers roll out NACS. They will lose some motivation to keep the system in it top shape once competition is using their network. The Kia EV9 with access to the Tesla charging network can’t be good for model Y or used model X sales.

any incentives for home chargers?

30% tax credit up to $1000.

 

[cmy4x4]

OTOH, the previous attempt of forcing an automaker to spend billions of dollars on creating a charger network that most of their cars won't use provided almost no incentives for reliability.

As evidenced by (VW) Electrify America's HORRIBLE reliability.

 

[Earl]

They will lose some motivation to keep the system in it top shape once competition is using their network.

Why would that be if they're making money off of the network directly instead of just through car sales?

 

[stopcrazypp]

Why would that be if they're making money off of the network directly instead of just through car sales?

Note also, Tesla signed agreements behind the scenes with all the automakers for access, so most likely money is given to pay for expanding the network to cover the demand, it's not free access to all and paid only by pay per use (unlike magic dock).

 

[MP3Mike]

Note also, Tesla signed agreements behind the scenes with all the automakers for access, so most likely money is given to pay for expanding the network to cover the demand, it's not free access to all and paid only by pay per use (unlike magic dock).

I'm pretty sure that Ford and/or GM said that they paid Tesla nothing to join the NACS coalition. (And Elon said that Telsa would sell NACS partners hardware at cost.) The one thing I saw said that there were only about 40 technical conditions that they had to agree to in order to join.

 

[stopcrazypp]

I'm pretty sure that Ford and/or GM said that they paid Tesla nothing to join the NACS coalition. (And Elon said that Telsa would sell NACS partners hardware at cost.) The one thing I saw said that there were only about 40 technical conditions that they had to agree to in order to join.

It costs nothing to join NACS and use the standard, but that doesn't mean it costs nothing to access the supercharger network. Those are two different things and easy to mix up.

 

[MP3Mike]

It costs nothing to join NACS and use the standard, but that doesn't mean it costs nothing to access the supercharger network. Those are two different things and easy to mix up.

No, joining the NACS coalition means getting access to the Supercharger network.

 

[stopcrazypp]

No, joining the NACS coalition means getting access to the Supercharger network.

GM made comments that suggested the supercharger access and NACS switch would cost them around $350M (save $400M vs the $750M planned for their own network).

https://www.google.com/amp/s/gmauthority.com/blog/2023/06/gm-saving-400m-by-using-tesla-supercharger-network/amp/

I would need to see the direct quote (not journalist paraphrasing) where they said it cost them nothing to access the supercharger network. That would fly in the face of previous comments Elon made that manufacturers would need to chip in upfront for access to the network. Relying only on pay per use fees is unsustainable and part of the reason why other networks are so bad.

 

[E90alex]

That would fly in the face of previous comments Elon made

Most of Elons statements don’t hold water so can’t really use that as a reference or proof of anything.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Out of Spec says over and over again that while the NACS connector is far superior to the clunky CCS handle with a handle, it's not the reason for the higher reliability of the Tesla charging network. I heard recently that the Tesla chargers may not be inherently more robust but they have a great system for monitoring their chargers and fixing them quickly when they stop working.

However, Tesla's approach is modular, especially in V3+, with clear separation of charger and stall.
Also, Tesla overbuilds stalls as standard, with available site power being far less than 250kW x stall count.

So what for us on a trip in our Kona was a site with 1 of 4 EA chargers with being dead and a wait, at a similar Tesla Supercharger might have been 1 of 8 stalls dead and no wait.

Nonetheless, IMO the adoption of the NACS connector and federal funding will both drastically improve the reliability of the overall charging network. Federal funding is predicated on charger reliability. This is a strong incentive to get it right this time around. OTOH, the previous attempt of forcing an automaker to spend billions of dollars on creating a charger network that most of their cars won't use provided almost no incentives for reliability.

NEVI indeed addresses reliability, and the >97% still allows 10 days of downtime so it shouldn't be that onerous.

Each of the EA Cycles has had increased wording about maintenance, but sadly, having read the California Cycle 4 plan for Electrify America there is still a lot of hand waving and no firm minimum uptime requirement. Hopefully it's not final and it can be sent back to add the same requirement as NEVI.

Standardizing to the NACS connector will mean that 3rd party chargers will have to compete head to head with Tesla. This will be another strong incentive for them to get it right.

Worst case scenario, some charger networks will go into tires-up mode and then other networks, including Tesla, will be able to get the charging sites on the cheap.

The good news for those other networks should be more potential custom, and that Electrify America's slush fund is going to run out in the next few years.

 

[MP3Mike]

GM made comments that suggested the supercharger access and NACS switch would cost them around $350M (save $400M vs the $750M planned for their own network).
https://www.google.com/amp/s/gmauth...400m-by-using-tesla-supercharger-network/amp/

I think you interpreted that wrong. They are still building their own network but because of getting Supercharger access they need to build out significantly fewer sites, saving them $400M. At least that is how I read it.

 

[gsmith123]

In addition to the factors mentioned above, Tesla has a few other advantages in reliability:

Economies of scale for maintenance. Imagine if you operated, say, 5 charging stations in Colorado. There wouldn't be enough maintenance to warrant having 24/7 maintenance techs on-call, or even a couple full time employees. At Tesla scale they can.

Larger network = more predictable demand for replacement parts = easier to forecast and keep them in stock

Tesla SC cables are shorter = cheaper

 

[rlsd]

Will GM, Ford, and others sell enough cars to utilize the NACS chargers? Is it possible the NACS SCs will be underutilized?

 

[gsmith123]

Tesla is still churning out, what, a million of their own cars a year. Need more chargers regardless

 

[Earl]

NEVI indeed addresses reliability, and the >97% still allows 10 days of downtime so it shouldn't be that onerous.

Is 97% per site or per station?

 

[MP3Mike]

Is 97% per site or per station?

I think per stall/charger.

 

[Earl]

the >97% still allows 10 days of downtime

That sounds reasonable but I hope the definition of "downtime" includes something like:
"Beginning charging within 3 minutes of arrival and obtaining at least 70% of rated charger speed with 25% or less SoC upon start of session."
One of my biggest beefs about the non-Tesla charging providers is standing out in the cold for 30 minutes before charging starts while fussing with credit cards, apps, and calling customer service to deal with issues. With a Supercharger, I'm generally fully charged and on my way in less than that time.

 

[BitJam]

Teslas charging network motivated sales. And it still does today. I don’t see that happening as much moving forward once other manufacturers roll out NACS. They will lose some motivation to keep the system in it top shape once competition is using their network. The Kia EV9 with access to the Tesla charging network can’t be good for model Y or used model X sales.

Tesla opening up their charging network was in accord with its mission statement:

Accelerating the world's transition to sustainable energy.​

​

Keeping their charging network in top shape for all brands of EVs would also be in accord with their mission. I would be shocked if they dropped the ball after going to all the trouble of opening it up.

The harsh reality is that even with 50% annual growth, Tesla can't build EVs fast enough to meet the goal of transitioning the world to EVs in a reasonable time frame. This is why they sacrificed the competitive advantage the supercharger network gave them. The game they are playing is not EV vs EV, it is all EVs versus all ICE.

Following all the hullabaloo about the Tesla network being far more reliable than the 3rd party CCS chargers, it would be a catastrophic PR nightmare for Tesla to intentionally reduce the reliability of their network. In addition, IMO, providing a high quality charging experience for all EVs may be even better for their sales than keeping the network Tesla-only.

Yes, I'm saying keeping their network reliable could be a win-win-win for Tesla: a win for EVs in general; a win for other EV makers; and a win for Tesla compared to the others. This is possible because it's not a zero-sum game.

 

[MP3Mike]

I'm curious @Rocky_H why you disagree. Do you have an example of an OEM who has joined the NACS coalition that didn't get access to the Supercharger network? (You don't have to join the coalition to use the NACS connector.)

For example, Aptera has said that they will use the NACS connector, but they haven't joined the NACS coalition, so they won't have access to the Supercharger network.