Did Tesla get Gov't money for opening NACS? Also NEVI is disappointingly slow

[RickLightning]

Tesla cut an agreement with the federal government to open up 3,500 chargers without requiring adapters, which is a standalone agreement. Deadline is 12/31/24. They will not come close.​

​

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing...chargers will be,in urban and rural locations.​

​

Tesla, as a company, has milked government subsidies in the billions of dollars. Other related companies have milked billions more.​

Sponsored

 

[luebri]

Tesla cut an agreement with the federal government to open up 3,500 chargers without requiring adapters, which is a standalone agreement. Deadline is 12/31/24. They will not come close.​

​

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/02/15/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-new-standards-and-major-progress-for-a-made-in-america-national-network-of-electric-vehicle-chargers/#:~:text=The open chargers will be,in urban and rural locations.​

​

Tesla, as a company, has milked government subsidies in the billions of dollars. Other related companies have milked billions more.​

My understanding this would be the Magic Dock and/or v4 with CCS chargers. The debate last night was someone was stating they got money for opening up NACS to 3rd party EV's via a users own adapter not a built in one.

 

[luebri]

This is a thread to nowhere. I, for one, am happy that this forum isn’t allowed to devolve into a political shit-show.
Call it censorship if you want - if you want a forum where anything goes, start your own, or buy one and cut it loose ala Twitter.

I have edited to try and highlight what I was hoping to discuss/highlight. Your point is valid.

 

[RickLightning]

My understanding this would be the Magic Dock and/or v4 with CCS chargers. The debate last night was someone was stating they got money for opening up NACS to 3rd party EV's via a users own adapter not a built in one.

I believe they did not. But, they clearly got money from Ford, GM, Volvo, ...

 

[luebri]

I believe they did not. But, they clearly got money from Ford, GM, Volvo, ...

Seems like they are serving their stockholders well. Making money is the idea for a publicly traded company.

 

[electricpig]

OP, you are showing a complete lack of understanding of what is required. Yet you somehow believe you are qualified to pass judgement. How are you supposed to change a 2 year wait for transformers, or that utilities doing things when they feel like it?

You claim your precious post was about discussion, and now people are trying to do just that, and explain why it takes time. Instead of that discussion, you just "NO! That's wrong! I don't believe it! It's waste!" Without a stread of evidence.

Like it or not, the world is far more complex than is obvious. The fact it appears simple shows just how well managed they are, so that you (all others) can be expert at other things

 

[luebri]

OP, you are showing a complete lack of understanding of what is required. Yet you somehow believe you are qualified to pass judgement. How are you supposed to change a 2 year wait for transformers, or that utilities doing things when they feel like it?

You claim your precious post was about discussion, and now people are trying to do just that, and explain why it takes time. Instead of that discussion, you just "NO! That's wrong! I don't believe it! It's waste!" Without a stread of evidence.

Like it or not, the world is far more complex than is obvious. The fact it appears simple shows just how well managed they are, so that you (all others) can be expert at other things

The impediments you bring up though valid are in many ways self induced, by other areas of government waste.

 

[Maineiac12]

Our program in Oregon has been great and methodical as they are naming specific corridors they are focusing on in each round.

Most government subsidies are less efficient as they could be as they have to have oversight, RFP/RFQ processes, most have to comply with Davis-Bacon, and so on.

At the end of the day, I am okay with the government waste as we have already seen what EA has done then never really maintained, Elon having a bad day and fires his whole team, and all the start ups that didn’t make it.

Regarless if EVs become the dominant “fuel”, we know we need infrastructure especially along the highway corridors and with parameters that mean we shouldn’t have deserts and reasonably fast speeds.

Not sure your intent, but NEVi will be a great thing in another year or two.

Yeah, if the incoming admin doesn’t kill it just because. Here’s hoping it survives.

 

[Maineiac12]

Since NEVI is administered by the state, you’d have to look at each individual state to see who got what.

Where I live, we just awarded phase one funding last month and yes, Tesla did get money from the program to open a couple sites.

Source: https://iowadot.gov/iowaevplan

One of these locations is already online so kudos to Tesla on their efficiency in getting the supercharger deployed.

 

[luebri]

Since NEVI is administered by the state, you’d have to look at each individual state to see who got what.

Where I live, we just awarded phase one funding last month and yes, Tesla did get money from the program to open a couple sites.

Source: https://iowadot.gov/iowaevplan/docs/2024-award-funding.pdf

One of these locations is already online so kudos to Tesla on their efficiency in getting the supercharger deployed.

Correct, but still nothing to do with opening existing V3 NACS

this does, however, play to my second point Tesla will be by far the most efficient use of those dollars for the sites they are awarded

 

[Maineiac12]

Correct, but still nothing to do with opening existing V3 NACS

this does, however, play to my second point Tesla will be by far the most efficient use of those dollars for the sites they are awarded

I work in the space so I can say with some confidence that Tesla did not get directly compensated for opening the supercharger network. However, to be eligible for future funds (NEVI, etc.) they needed to meet the requirements of serving all makes (plus uptime, kWh minimums, etc).

Essentially, they did it to be eligible for funding, but I also suspect someone at Tesla realized the financial benefits of getting into the “gas station” business and having more customers can finance that expansion.

 

[Grease Lightning]

This is a thread to nowhere. I, for one, am happy that this forum isn’t allowed to devolve into a political shit-show.
Call it censorship if you want - if you want a forum where anything goes, start your own, or buy one and cut it loose ala Twitter.

I believe the OP is an Elon fan and mad that the current administration opened up the NEVi funds to a fair and legal process instead of just funneling the money to a narcissistic man child that really hasn’t accomplished that much in the last few years either, unless you like a remote controlled robot or preprogrammed taxi routes to show off your “autonomous” features, just like DJI has done for years where my drone can be autonomous as long as I fly and record the flight path first.

While Tesla’s EVs are great and the tech was so far advanced, their software is the only thing that makes them successful currently and to that they still had bugs.

My M3 the other day was randomly doing lane changes on I-5 at 2:00 in the morning with no one around on FSD. Sure it is a beta, but it has been beta even longer then you all have been waiting on the next version of BlueCruise.

I am extremely grateful Elon and the team opened up the supercharger network to all ev’s, but I wonder if that is part of the reason why the team was let go?

At the end of the day we need chargers, we need operators that maintain their sites, and we need some type of regulation over the price per kilowatt they charge cause I have seen some insane “demand” pricing you guys have posted around your travels.

I personally hope that we as “the movement” doesn’t forget we still need LV 2 and even potential sub 100 kW charging in areas people will be for all day or for a few hours.

My daughter has an older Hyundai compliance EV and I was showing her how it’s 170 miles of range was okay for her as a light road tripper as she was starting to get frustrated, but guess what we struggled to find LV 2 in Portland. In Salem we have tons, but Portland has several old installations that were all “broken” on PlugShare so we had to DCFC when really the two hours we were parked would have been more then enough.

So we need to look at the holistic issue not just DCFC on the interstate system.

 

[luebri]

I work in the space so I can say with some confidence that Tesla did not get directly compensated for opening the supercharger network. However, to be eligible for future funds (NEVI, etc.) they needed to meet the requirements of serving all makes (plus uptime, kWh minimums, etc).

Essentially, they did it to be eligible for funding, but I also suspect someone at Tesla realized the financial benefits of getting into the “gas station” business and having more customers can finance that expansion.

Genuinely curious... Any sourcing on that theory? I have not seen any NEVI documentation written that would state qualifying for NEVI based chargers would require the alteration of access or any portion of how previously built chargers operate. Existing chargers that in no way have to do with future NEVI funded charge locations.

Unless you are under the belief its a "wink, wink, nod, nod" which I find hard to believe could be done when it would have to be coordinated with 50 individual states.

 

[Grease Lightning]

Existing chargers that in no way have to do with future NEVI funded charge locations.

Well you are partially wrong. Existing sites do matter as part of the program there is a mileage requirement.

So for an existing site to count it would either need to meet the requirements or if the proposal includes the site, it would need to be updated.

So while NEVI is not requiring an upgrade, if an existing site is planned to be counted in the corridor requirements, the contractor could propose it with an upgrade.

 

[Maineiac12]

Genuinely curious... Any sourcing on that theory? I have not seen any NEVI documentation written that would state qualifying for NEVI based chargers would require the alteration of access or any portion of how previously built chargers operate. Existing chargers that in no way have to do with future NEVI funded charge locations.

Unless you are under the belief its a "wink, wink, nod, nod" which I find hard to believe could be done when it would have to be coordinated with 50 individual states.

Yeah, it’s all spelled out in the NEVI program requirements which can be found here: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bipartisan-infrastructure-law/nevi_formula_program.cfm

Or here: https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...nfrastructure-standards-and-requirements#h-16

To get funding, chargers have to be “open to the public.” Tesla wouldn’t be eligible unless any chargers built with NEVI funds were open to everyone. Tesla made the smart PR call and figured if they had to open part of their network to the public, they should open the rest of it and make some money too.

Sponsored