-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla belatedly tries to make their connector a North American standard
- Thread starter Cosmacelf
- Start date
bradtem
Robocar consultant
Yes, the NACS has a button on it that changes the resistance on the proximity pin to trigger unlock and end-of-charge (not in that order!) However, when you are charging a Tesla from CCS using the adapter (or from J1772) it's annoying because there is no way to signal that on those plugs. Maybe I don't always do it right, but I often find the adapter locked to the car and need to hassle to remove it.
E90alex
Active Member
Pressing the release lever on the J1772 handle should signal the same thing. The trick is to press the release lever and then release it before pulling it out so the adapter stays clipped on and you pull the adapter out with the handle together in one piece.
Otherwise you need to quickly remove the adapter separately before the door tries to close on it.
beatle
Active Member
I am not a fan of CCS, and I'm certainly not a fan of making a choice based on the interests of an automaker (or automakers) but the numbers don't line up that way forever. Without other OEMs adopting NACS, it's not reasonable to think that NACS will continue to be the most popular connector indefinitely, at least on the car side. There are a lot of other cars coming to market, and their cumulative registrations are continuing to take larger slices of the annual EV registration pie.
CCS charging stations though, sheesh, it's like they don't even care so much about expansion. I haven't looked at the numbers lately, but CCS vs. NACS chargers were a joke last year. Maybe NEVI will change the tide on that.
Dieselgate has already had a large impact in Maine since most of the pairs of CCS/CHAdeMO across Maine came through that money in Phases 1 and 3.
Have also seen some dealers adding DCFCs. 2022 and 2023 have much improved coverage here. There are some other CCS locations as well, particularly in Southern Maine where there's a couple of ElectrifyAmerica locations. After Dieselgate Phase 3 is complete this year, Tesla still will have better coverage (although _much_ higher capacity and better speed), but it's much closer.
Tesla will have Medway, Baileyville and Bethel that CCS doesn't have.. CCS will have Belfast, ME on US-1 that Tesla doesn't have.
Phase 4 and 5 are NEVI-subsidized.
Phase 4 will help open up North and Downeast. Round 1 got 4 of 8 locations bid on. It's out for a 2nd time. Phase 4 will add CCS at Baileyville.
Phase 5 is I-95 Augusta, Bangor and to Houlton, and US-1 Portland to Ellsworth. It's out to bid. That would probably include or cover Medway and Freeport and well as additional areas.
If those come through CCS coverage will be _much_ better than Supercharger coverage, except still nothing in the Bethel area.
NEVI is $5B of funding for DCFC in the USA, compared to $2B for ElectrifyAmerica from Dieselgate, plus there's all the state-level Dieselgate funding. I noticed that even West Vriginia got some more chargers that connected Cincinnati to Charleston and west central WV that was a charging desert early last year.
So if there's similar action in other states to Maine, after the NEVI installs CCS would have truly excellent coverage.
Tesla wants in to compete against that, I think largely by getting their cables onto the NEVI chargers, although even better if the Ford deal helps start the ball rolling on a shift to NACS.
If the Chinese-name makes come into the USA, I'd not be surprised if they get a Ford-type deal and adopt NACS and I wouldn't be surprised if that came up in discussions with the Chinese government.
Last edited:
Is, or they hope it will be? My understanding is that no NEVI funding has been awarded yet, so it is possible that EA won't actually get any. (Or could get very little.)
No, it is actually only ~$3B. The other $2B is for a non-NEVI program to fund more community based chargers. (Likely to be mostly level 2 AC charging.)
Can you post a link for the $5B split to $3B and $2B? Everything I find just refers to the $5B being for DCFC.
Here's 2023 allocations by state: FHWA Notice N 4510.873 - Apportionment Of Fiscal Year (FY) 2023 Highway Infrastructure Program Funds for the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Formula Program Pursuant to the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act | Federal Highway Administration
There are also projections for future years somewhere.
The states will be allocated money that they will award to bidders.
Whether ElectrifyAmerica gets that money, doesn't really matter. We just need working chargers. Here Electrify America only has 2 locations in Southern Maine, south of Portland. The Dieselgate locations across the state are ChargePoints and have all been working when I've needed or wanted to use them.
Yes, the NEVI funds are sliced up by state/territory, but none of it has been awarded yet. In fact, I'm not sure any state has even started taking proposals yet. (One state had, but I think they had to cancel it and start over.) It is very likely that the first NEVI funded chargers won't go online until 2025 at the rate things are going. (I'm very disappointed with how slow this process is moving.)
srs5694
Active Member
I believe that @bradterm's point is that, if we want to standardize on a single plug type in North America, it makes more sense to standardize on the plug type that currently has the most users (cars on the road and/or installed plugs), since doing that will minimize the costs and inconvenience. If Tesla were somehow forced to standardize on CCS (now or in the near future), it would cause more Tesla owners to be inconvenienced than would be caused to CCS owners to switch to NACS; and although Tesla is just one company (vs. several CCS network operators), they'd have to upgrade or replace more stations than would those other operators, even in aggregate. What will happen in the future if we continue with a two-plug situation in North America isn't really relevant to this argument, unless the idea is that we'll stick with two plugs for another x years and then standardize; and of course waiting will just make it worse. Even if we wait, Tesla is likely to stay ahead in both the number of cars and the number of DC fast chargers for the next few years.
That said, in terms of political power (broadly defined, including not just government politics but also power at SAE, IEEE, and other standards organizations), it might be easier to force Tesla to switch to CCS than to force multiple major automakers to switch to NACS. That's probably why the former has seemed more likely (and actually happened in Europe). With Ford switching to NACS, though, this strengthens the Tesla/NACS position politically, as well as pushing out the date when CCS will outnumber NACS in North America if no standardization occurs.
All of this said, the longer the wait, the more painful any harmonization will be. It's better to settle on one standard now rather than wait until half of all North American car sales are EVs. At that time, the inconvenience to car owners will be great enough that any harmonization will be difficult. Remember that EVs are not cell phones; cars last for a decade or more, and the adapters cost ~$200, not ~$2. Not standardizing also carries costs, but those could be carried by charge network operators and hidden in the cost of the electricity they deliver, so they'll be less obvious to consumers. This isn't a good thing, of course, but it makes the costs less obvious and therefore is less likely to make people object. (This refers to direct monetary costs, of course; there's also consumer confusion and frustration at the existence of multiple plug types, which is real but harder to quantify.)
Prior to a week ago, I was kind of resigned to the likelihood of two standards continuing indefinitely, and I thought that if harmonization did occur, Tesla being forced into using CCS1 was more likely than NACS prevailing. With Ford switching to NACS, my estimates have changed; I now think that NACS becoming the standard is the most likely outcome (by a slim margin), followed closely by a dual-standard North America, with Tesla (and Ford) switching to CCS1 being a very unlikely third possibility.
Given that we have ~$4B of funds, from the NEVI program, that are required to be spent on expanding the CCS network over the next 5 years I don't see anything happening but a dual-standard in North America. (That NEVI funding does allow NACS to be installed along side CCS, but that will be up to the individual states/territories and the CPOs that get the funding.)
It is sort of like the Lightning/USB-C dual-standard. In Europe they are forcing Apple to switch to USB-C, but that would never happen in North America. (It is possible Apple will switch here as well to harmonize things, but the government would never force them.)
srs5694
Active Member
I don't see that as necessarily an impediment, for several reasons:
- As you say, the NEVI regulations don't forbid NACS plugs from being installed alongside CCS plugs, so if most or all EV manufacturers switch to NACS, then the funding will simply support delivering CCS plugs in addition to NACS plugs. This might be wasteful, but no more so than in a long-term dual-plug scenario, in which we're likely to see both CCS and NACS cables on fast chargers. (At least one DC fast charging equipment manufacturer, Freewire, has committed to adding NACS plugs to their units. Admittedly, Freewire is a minor player, but it is a start.)
- NEVI funds won't last forever. You note a 5-year period for NEVI, and even a fairly rapid transition to NACS would likely take close to that long, if not longer, so in a transition scenario, the final CCS vehicle might well roll off the assembly line more than 5 years from now. Remember, even Ford says that they will begin delivering NACS-equipped vehicles in 2025. There's nothing in the announcements I've seen to say that they'll transition all their EVs from CCS to NACS at the same time. Ford may stagger this transition as they update each model to their next-generation EV platform, so it could be 3 or 4 years before the last CCS-equipped Ford is built. If it takes a year or two for most or all other automakers to come on-board, their transitions are likely to take at least a couple years each, moving the end date for CCS production out to ~5 years from now, if not later.
- Even if production of CCS cars were to stop tomorrow, existing CCS vehicles will remain on the road for a long time, and will need to be serviced. Given that production of CCS cars will continue for at least two or three years in the most wildly optimistic transition scenario, continuing to build out CCS-capable equipment for five years isn't really unreasonable.
- If the industry moves mostly or entirely to NACS, then the automakers and/or fast charging networks may lobby for the law/regulations to be changed. (I don't recall offhand if the relevant CCS requirements are in the law passed by Congress or in the regulations created by the relevant government agencies. The latter could be changed more quickly and easily. Such a change is not certain, of course; partisanship and a dysfunctional Congress could make even a trivial change difficult. It is possible, though.) OTOH, they might not bother; the preceding points may well satisfy automakers, at least; and the need to provide CCS for years to come to meet the needs of older CCS-equipped cars may make the CCS requirement not too onerous to charging providers.
- NEVI funding applies to DC fast charging providers; AFAIK, the law says nothing about what automakers can do. If automakers perceive it to be in their best interests to transition from CCS to NACS, then they'll do so, even if it leaves charging providers with a CCS requirement as a white elephant.
bradtem
Robocar consultant
Do the NEVI regulations explicitly name CCS1? I thought they just required a non-proprietary standard, with NACS now is. I vaguely recall that most of the subsidies, possibly including NEVI, could be used for a CHAdeMO station, though you would be nuts to do that.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Someone quoted the latest official NEVI rules and they do explicitly call out CCS1. CHAdeMO can be paired with CCS1 only for FY2022.
Ford will add NACS to next gen EVs!
srs5694
Active Member
The post to which you link quotes a bit of the "rules" but doesn't cite them. I tracked it down easily enough in a Web search:
Notably, this reference to CCS1 appears to be an agency's rules, not the law that authorizes them. This could make it easier to change, should automakers flee CCS en masse. If the law itself also explicitly calls out CCS, then it would be harder to change.
As I noted above, though, given that the rules also permit non-CCS plugs, in the event of mass defection of automakers from CCS to NACS, the practical effect of this rule (even if left unchanged) is likely to be the need to support CCS for a year or two longer than it otherwise would be, not a serious roadblock in a transition.
bradtem
Robocar consultant
Ah. Well, yes, it seems that Tesla, Ford, Aptera and any other companies that adopt NACS could file a petition or even a lawsuit to ask for a change to the regulations, citing that NACS is currently on more cars.
However, a Tesla SC with magic dock seems to conform to these regulations already. Tesla does not need NEVI money for their existing chargers, and they can build new chargers with it. However, ideally they (and we drivers) would want the regulations changed so that:
- Instead of a requirement there be 4 ports capable of 150kW simultaneously, have a requirement there be at least 4 ports and at least 600kW, and if they really insist (they should not) that when 4 cars are present, each can get 150kW if it requests it.
- Remove the requirement for screens and credit card readers and replace it with a requirement that any driver with a mobile web browser can use the station without an account. (ie. there is wifi at the station for access to the billing interface, and you can pay that way, though in reality most people will elect to use an app or plug and charge.) Could go further and demand that the station EITHER have credit card/screen, or that there exists an open protocol which any company can easily support in an app, an in-car function, or over plug and charge. Tesla does not want to put screens on the stalls, and I don't blame them. Another option could be, as many gas stations have, a single payment stall which you punch in what charger you are using and provide credit card there.
No, I don't think it does.
- The CCS1 connector/adapter is not permanently attached. (I think I have seen people report that they can, forcibly, pull it off of the NACS cable.)
- The stalls aren't guaranteed a minimum of 150kW. (Most V3 Superchargers have a minimum per stall of about 90kW.)
- You sort of cover that, but are you saying that a site with 24 stalls and only 600kW would be acceptable? (Only 25kW per stall when full?)
- I don't think NEVI requires a screen or card reader. (However, California does.)
- There are lots of other NEVI requirements Tesla doesn't meet, like OCPI compliance, free API access to stall status, ability to activate via phone call, not requiring an account/app for usage, etc.
Last edited:
henderrj
Active Member
This is the whole problem with government money. It comes with so many strings attached that it almost never is worth it. My guess is Tesla will make more money simply by selling charging sessions to Ford, and other people's customers. I wouldn't chase it at all if I was them. Frankly, the government will come to them, if they do in fact pull this off.
I fully agree. And the government has already come to them, they are funding the ~3,500 MagicDock retrofits/installations. (Just a drop in the bucket.)
It will be interesting to see who gets how much of the NEVI funding. (Assuming the states ever get their acts together.)
Highly unlikely given how many states are anti-Tesla... Again assuming they even try.
Similar threads
