Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.

This bodes well for Tesla. I suspect the government funded EV chargers installed will suffer the same exact fate that the EA chargers suffered: non-functional overly priced equipment that is poorly maintained and obsolete the day it is installed. The program could even be gutted before it has a chance to roll out if it becomes (or becomes even more) of a political football.

RT
There is a lot in the IRA (edit: BIL) that is intended to avoid this poor outcome. They specifically brought in requirements about maintenance and required uptime for charging stations, in addition to a network-connected requirement (so uptime could be checked), in addition to details all the way down to things like minimum requirements for technician qualifications to operate, install, and maintain these chargers.
They had real people with real experience in the writing of that law, best we can tell from the outside. They may have even listened to some of us here (they famously followed The Limiting Factor on intelligently designing the battery subsidy portion of the IRA, which has benefited Tesla a lot with more to come).

The most interesting part to me was how the law intentionally targets places where the for-profit entities (Tesla, Chargepoint, etc.) won't likely go anytime soon: rural areas and areas with lower incomes (likely apartment complexes). We _really_ need that, preferably BEFORE Tesla releases the "Model 2" en masse. There can be great synergy there.
As expected, rollout has been slow, since when the Feds distribute money, they distribute it to the state governments, which spend the money. To get the money from the Feds, those states have to write plans that show they will spend the money the way the Feds said to (i.e. meeting all the IRA requirements, some of which I mentioned above).
The states, many of which have little clue about EVs, then put out bids to contractors to write their plans... which takes time ... then they hire a articular contractor to write their plans ... the writing of which takes time ... then they review those plans ... which takes time ... then the states submit those plans to the Feds for review ... which takes time ...
You get the idea. Slow process of planning.
However, my understanding from the articles I've seen is that many states are indeed active and far along in this process (some Tesla owners from those states have even posted to this forum about how their states are proposing charger maps for the public to comment on: yay!) and are far along in their planning.
If other folks have more detail about their state's status in the implementation of this law (a.k.a. NEVI : National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure) charging networks, I am curious...

Edit: The law for NEVI was the BIL (Bipartisan Infrastructure Law), not the IRA. My bad! The IRA did cover the battery subsidies IIRC, but not the charger network.
 
Last edited:
There is a lot in the IRA that is intended to avoid this poor outcome. They specifically brought in requirements about maintenance and required uptime for charging stations, in addition to a network-connected requirement (so uptime could be checked), in addition to details all the way down to things like minimum requirements for technician qualifications to operate, install, and maintain these chargers.
They had real people with real experience in the writing of that law, best we can tell from the outside. They may have even listened to some of us here (they famously followed The Limiting Factor on intelligently designing the battery subsidy portion of the IRA, which has benefited Tesla a lot with more to come).
I know it doesn't really matter, but the $7.5B for EV chargers is not from the IRA, it is from the BIL.

And while I would love for it to have resulted in chargers being installed faster than is happening, I think it is good that the states are taking their time to try to do it right, so that $7.5B isn't wasted. The delay might actually result in better chargers being installed, as better/faster chargers have come to market recently.
 
There is a lot in the IRA that is intended to avoid this poor outcome. They specifically brought in requirements about maintenance and required uptime for charging stations, in addition to a network-connected requirement (so uptime could be checked), in addition to details all the way down to things like minimum requirements for technician qualifications to operate, install, and maintain these chargers.
They had real people with real experience in the writing of that law, best we can tell from the outside. They may have even listened to some of us here (they famously followed The Limiting Factor on intelligently designing the battery subsidy portion of the IRA, which has benefited Tesla a lot with more to come).

The most interesting part to me was how the IRA intentionally targets places where the for-profit entities (Tesla, Chargepoint, etc.) won't likely go anytime soon: rural areas and areas with lower incomes (likely apartment complexes). We _really_ need that, preferably BEFORE Tesla releases the "Model 2" en masse. There can be great synergy there.
As expected, rollout has been slow, since when the Feds distribute money, they distribute it to the state governments, which spend the money. To get the money from the Feds, those states have to write plans that show they will spend the money the way the Feds said to (i.e. meeting all the IRA requirements, some of which I mentioned above).
The states, many of which have little clue about EVs, then put out bids to contractors to write their plans... which takes time ... then they hire a articular contractor to write their plans ... the writing of which takes time ... then they review those plans ... which takes time ... then the states submit those plans to the Feds for review ... which takes time ...
You get the idea. Slow process of planning.
However, my understanding from the articles I've seen is that many states are indeed active and far along in this process (some Tesla owners from those states have even posted to this forum about how their states are proposing charger maps for the public to comment on: yay!) and are far along in their planning.
If other folks have more detail about their state's status in the implementation of the IRA (a.k.a. NEVI : National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure) charging networks, I am curious...
The inspection will likely be similar to state car inspections. Costly and not much value. Example: If there are four chargers and only one is working, that's still counts as up.
 
The inspection will likely be similar to state car inspections. Costly and not much value. Example: If there are four chargers and only one is working, that's still counts as up.
For that one stall, yes. My understanding is that the uptime requirements for NEVI installs apply to each stall individually.
 

Agreed... and while the h8r's will no doubt say, "Elon only did it because it's in Tesla's best interests that suppliers have demand to make more 48v components!" , I say:

Certainly, it helps Tesla to have a thriving 48v automotive component supply base. But this is a case of "A rising tide raises all boats."... it's good for the industry as a whole.... for one company to win doesn't mean the other has to lose.

See also: All are Patent Are Blong to You. And NACS. And the Roadster V1 Design. And...
 
Agreed... and while the h8r's will no doubt say, "Elon only did it because it's in Tesla's best interests that suppliers have demand to make more 48v components!" , I say:

Certainly, it helps Tesla to have a thriving 48v automotive component supply base. But this is a case of "A rising tide raises all boats."... it's good for the industry as a whole.... for one company to win doesn't mean the other has to lose.

See also: All are Patent Are Blong to You. And NACS. And the Roadster V1 Design. And...
Hopefully, Farley doesn't follow Diess.
 
Agreed... and while the h8r's will no doubt say, "Elon only did it because it's in Tesla's best interests that suppliers have demand to make more 48v components!" , I say:

Certainly, it helps Tesla to have a thriving 48v automotive component supply base. But this is a case of "A rising tide raises all boats."... it's good for the industry as a whole.... for one company to win doesn't mean the other has to lose.

See also: All are Patent Are Blong to You. And NACS. And the Roadster V1 Design. And...
Massive copper savings industry-wide. Massive. 75% reduction in wiring for internal power buses.

I have seen one comment elsewhere to the downside: it is alleged that thinner wire will rust and therefore fail faster (I suppose oxidation happens even within insulators... curious what others predict on that front).
 
The inspection will likely be similar to state car inspections. Costly and not much value. Example: If there are four chargers and only one is working, that's still counts as up.
So, it has to do with regulatory capture.

On the one hand: Take gas stations' actual fuel pumps. There's pretty much always a weights-and-measures sticker on them saying that a Gallon is a Gallon.. and said sticker is usually up to date, too.

Every so often a gas station owner gets caught with their hands in the cookie jar and gets bitch-slapped by the courts, occasionally going out of business as a result.

And if it turned out that a weights-and-measures inspector was being paid to look the other way, people would get pissed, rightly.

An attempt by, say, oil companies to negate penalties and loosen the requirements would be met with derision.

On the other hand: Look at your telephone/cable/what-have-you bill, where all sorts of "fees" are slapped in there that are, simply, the cost of doing business for the company, are arbitrary in nature (as in, with no oversight whatsoever as to the truthfulness of the amounts of those fees), and are, effectively, cheating consumers. How the heck these companies even get away with any of this mystifies the heck out of me. But, normally, it's because government regulatory agencies who are charged with regulating this kind of behavior are clearly either on the take, beholden to political interests that are being bribed by donations (the same thing, really), or are crooked.

Heck, just look at the Shortsellers Enrichment Commission!

So, will the up-time requirements in the ERA be met? At least with the individual states regulating the up-time requirements, it'll give the charging companies fifty moving targets to hit. Not that sufficiently endowed companies don't try for that (see: Telephone/internet last-mile companies of every stripe), but it'll at least make the charging companies lives more difficult.

The biggest danger I see in all of this is if some cock-a-mamie company drags some state regulator into court, claiming that the ERA enforcement of the up-time standards is unconstitutional. (See: DMCA notices, where the people sending the notices pinky-swear that they have, indeed, checked for copyright infringement, where the courts have somehow ruled that if they get it wrong, they can be sued for perjury.) A Federal Court's ruling can then ruin it for everybody. Unfortunately, sometimes a crooked plaintiff can just claim, "But, Judge, It's Just Too Hard!" and get away with it.
 
I have seen one comment elsewhere to the downside: it is alleged that thinner wire will rust and therefore fail faster (I suppose oxidation happens even within insulators... curious what others predict on that front).

Feels like somebody wanting to protect their investment in existing products, or not wanting to spend the money needed to develop new ones.

12V Sacred Cows, anyone?
 
Massive copper savings industry-wide. Massive. 75% reduction in wiring for internal power buses.

I have seen one comment elsewhere to the downside: it is alleged that thinner wire will rust and therefore fail faster (I suppose oxidation happens even within insulators... curious what others predict on that front).

If they use steel wire it might rust. Seems unlikely.
 
Massive copper savings industry-wide. Massive. 75% reduction in wiring for internal power buses.

I have seen one comment elsewhere to the downside: it is alleged that thinner wire will rust and therefore fail faster (I suppose oxidation happens even within insulators... curious what others predict on that front).
If your copper oxides to the point of failure, you've got bigger problems.

There is a minimum wire size for durability though. Tesla CAN bus seems to be the smallest at 0.35mm² (.67mm diameter) which is about 22 AWG.
With 4x the voltage, they can downsize a wire to 1/4 the crossection which is equivalent to dropping it 6 AWG sizes yeilding 75% copper savings.

Or they can use the same gauge to carry 4x the power. When combined with remote control nodes, rather than sizing runs based on individual loads, they can aggregate the total load that module controls and feed it with one wire. Total reduction can then be >75% for the section replaced with the common feed. End load circuits still need to be separate.
 
Massive copper savings industry-wide. Massive. 75% reduction in wiring for internal power buses.

I have seen one comment elsewhere to the downside: it is alleged that thinner wire will rust and therefore fail faster (I suppose oxidation happens even within insulators... curious what others predict on that front).
Copper can corrode if subject to chemicals or pollution. Because the wire will be insulated, this shouldn't be an issue. I believe they are thinking of really thin copper wire, the wire in the CT will be thinner but not fine.
 
If your copper oxides to the point of failure, you've got bigger problems.

There is a minimum wire size for durability though. Tesla CAN bus seems to be the smallest at 0.35mm² (.67mm diameter) which is about 22 AWG.
With 4x the voltage, they can downsize a wire to 1/4 the crossection which is equivalent to dropping it 6 AWG sizes yeilding 75% copper savings.

Or they can use the same gauge to carry 4x the power. When combined with remote control nodes, rather than sizing runs based on individual loads, they can aggregate the total load that module controls and feed it with one wire. Total reduction can then be >75% for the section replaced with the common feed. End load circuits still need to be separate.
That should settle this 'argument'
 
There is a lot in the IRA (edit: BIL) that is intended to avoid this poor outcome. They specifically brought in requirements about maintenance and required uptime for charging stations, in addition to a network-connected requirement (so uptime could be checked), in addition to details all the way down to things like minimum requirements for technician qualifications to operate, install, and maintain these chargers.
They had real people with real experience in the writing of that law, best we can tell from the outside. They may have even listened to some of us here (they famously followed The Limiting Factor on intelligently designing the battery subsidy portion of the IRA, which has benefited Tesla a lot with more to come).

The most interesting part to me was how the law intentionally targets places where the for-profit entities (Tesla, Chargepoint, etc.) won't likely go anytime soon: rural areas and areas with lower incomes (likely apartment complexes). We _really_ need that, preferably BEFORE Tesla releases the "Model 2" en masse. There can be great synergy there.
As expected, rollout has been slow, since when the Feds distribute money, they distribute it to the state governments, which spend the money. To get the money from the Feds, those states have to write plans that show they will spend the money the way the Feds said to (i.e. meeting all the IRA requirements, some of which I mentioned above).
The states, many of which have little clue about EVs, then put out bids to contractors to write their plans... which takes time ... then they hire a articular contractor to write their plans ... the writing of which takes time ... then they review those plans ... which takes time ... then the states submit those plans to the Feds for review ... which takes time ...
You get the idea. Slow process of planning.
However, my understanding from the articles I've seen is that many states are indeed active and far along in this process (some Tesla owners from those states have even posted to this forum about how their states are proposing charger maps for the public to comment on: yay!) and are far along in their planning.
If other folks have more detail about their state's status in the implementation of this law (a.k.a. NEVI : National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure) charging networks, I am curious...

Edit: The law for NEVI was the BIL (Bipartisan Infrastructure Law), not the IRA. My bad! The IRA did cover the battery subsidies IIRC, but not the charger network.
Indeed, here in Idaho's charging desert, the state put out plans/received bids for their first 3-4 charging stations last summer. Hopefully they'll be built by the end of next year and it's just the first round of a more extensive buildout of stations in subsequent years. The problem with the initial small set is their locations are largely redundant with tesla supercharging locations along the interstates so none of them will extend worryfree electric driving into the large majority of the state where you often can't go. Hopefully that's addressed in subsequent years because it would only take ~10-15 strategically located chargers to open up the majority of the state's geography, which is also true of most Rocky Mountain & Great Plains states composing the great charging desert.