Autolycus
Well-Known Member
Major point to keep in mind: Tesla’s blog post says absolutely nothing at all about licensing requirements and fees, IP sharing, etc. This offer to let other manufacturers use the Tesla connector has existed for years. None have taken Tesla up on the offer. Why? Tesla’s demands have been insane—both cost-wise (they required “investment in the supercharger network) and with respect to their absolutely IP demands. Beyond that, nobody has any interest in adopting a “standard” that is completely controlled by Tesla. There’s too much risk.
As I noted earlier, DOT will require all NEVI funds be spent such that there’s a CCS port on every pedestal. This announcement isn’t going to change DOT’s stance on that because CCS is a significantly more open standard.
oh, and we haven’t even touched on payment for a charging session. Tesla’s super chargers don’t have any way for a car to pull up, pay for a single use, charge, and be on their way. The car must handle all of that process, which means the car has to be known to Tesla in advance and payment method must be on file with Tesla. That’s completely unworkable for a broad-access network.
As I noted earlier, DOT will require all NEVI funds be spent such that there’s a CCS port on every pedestal. This announcement isn’t going to change DOT’s stance on that because CCS is a significantly more open standard.
oh, and we haven’t even touched on payment for a charging session. Tesla’s super chargers don’t have any way for a car to pull up, pay for a single use, charge, and be on their way. The car must handle all of that process, which means the car has to be known to Tesla in advance and payment method must be on file with Tesla. That’s completely unworkable for a broad-access network.
Sponsored