SAE says yes to making Tesla EV chargers an American standard
- Reference: 1687969752
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2023/06/28/sae_approves_standard_tesla_charger/
- Source link:
Keep in mind, this doesn't mean Tesla's chosen charger is the new US standard, it simply means the SAE is getting on board with the numerous automakers who've announced plans to ditch the Combined Charging System (CCS) that's been standard in all US EVs, sans Teslas, since 2013.
Far from being final, the SAE [1]said its move is one stage in a process toward standardizing Tesla's chargers across the industry.
[2]
"The standardization process is the next step to establish a consensus-based approach for maintaining NACS and validating its ability to meet performance and interoperability criteria," the SAE said in a statement.
[3]
[4]
Tesla arguably jumped the gun by naming its chargers the North American Charging Standard (NACS) in 2022 when it [5]announced it was opening the standard up to anyone who wanted to adopt it – that openness doesn't equate to standardization. Presumptiveness aside, the move has turned out to be a good one for Tesla.
[6]UK warned not to bother racing US, EU on EV subsidies
[7]Tesla batteries went from fully charged to fully disabled after botched patch, lawsuit claims
[8]EV truck maker Nikola stalls in 2023, pulls out of Europe, hits brakes on production
[9]Chinese company claims it's built batteries so dense they can power electric airplanes
Ford [10]announced in May that it would begin including an adapter for existing EVs to be able to use Tesla's Supercharger fast-charger network, and EVs beginning with model year 2025 would come equipped with a NACS charging port. General Motors announced an identical move [11]earlier this month, [12]as has EV maker Rivian. Swedish automaker Volvo [13]yesterday became the first foreign car company to adopt NACS, and will make a similar 2025 transition away from CCS. Like Ford and GM, Volvo will supply adapters for prior model year EVs.
Speaking of EVs …
Ohio electric truck maker Lordstown Motors has [14]filed for bankruptcy, and is pinning all the blame on Chinese tech firm Foxconn.
In a lawsuit filed along with its bankruptcy protection case, Lordstown alleged that Foxconn failed to abide by the terms of a deal to invest up to $170 million in the struggling EV startup, as well as not engaging with Lordstown on projects it had promised to support.
Foxconn, on the other hand, alleges Lordstown breached its end of the agreement when its stock fell below $1 a share. The Taiwan-based biz hasn't said whether it plans to make a bid for Lordstown, which currently has no one lined up to bail it out with a purchase.
Foxconn may not want Lordstown to continue operations, however: The iPhone assembler [15]acquired Lordstown's factory in the Ohio city of the same name in 2022. If Lordstown Motors were to suddenly close up shop, Foxconn would have its very own EV assembly plant in the US to potentially use as it sees fit.
SAE said its new NACS connector standard will be developed on an expedited time frame and will be done alongside development of public key infrastructure for securing the US's [16]poorly performing charging systems and work to improve charger reliability.
Reasons for supporting NACS over the bulkier CCS chargers vary. Most proponents of Tesla's design argue for its compactness and ease of use over CCS as well as its lack of a locking clip, which has been reported as a major point of failure at public charging stations that have rendered many unusable.
But that standard ain't a standard
The loudest voice of dissent against the adoption of NACS has been the Charging Interface Initiative, or CharIN, a global group of EV industry players dedicated to pushing international standards for EV chargers. Despite Tesla's opening of NACS last year, CharIN referred to the standard as "proprietary" in May, and [17]called Ford's decision to adopt it a move away from open standards that "will inevitably lead to further consumer confusion and delay EV adoption."
"We strongly encourage the EV industry to work with CharIN's membership base to create a fully interoperable EV charging network," CharIN said before following up with a blog post in early June that [18]supported the standardization of NACS.
"CharIN will work to convene an open task force to align requirements with the goal of submitting NACS to the standardization process," the group said. CharIN confirmed it will continue to support CCS and the Megawatt Charging System when its NACS task force convenes next month. ®
Get our [19]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.sae.org/news/press-room/2023/06/sae-international-announces-standard-for-nacs-connector
[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/personaltech&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2ZJytfjrihatoY9uoqYXLdwAAAtI&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/personaltech&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44ZJytfjrihatoY9uoqYXLdwAAAtI&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/personaltech&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33ZJytfjrihatoY9uoqYXLdwAAAtI&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://www.tesla.com/blog/opening-north-american-charging-standard
[6] https://www.theregister.com/2023/06/05/uk_ev_subsidies/
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2023/05/16/tesla_battery_patch_lawsuit/
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2023/05/09/nikola_results_europe/
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2023/04/20/catl_dense_batteries_for_planes/
[10] https://media.ford.com/content/fordmedia/fna/us/en/news/2023/05/25/ford-ev-customers-to-gain-access-to-12-000-tesla-superchargers--.html
[11] https://www.npr.org/2023/06/08/1181166015/gm-tesla-charging-network-evs
[12] https://rivian.com/newsroom/article/rivian-accelerates-electrification-through-adoption-of-north-american-charging-standard-and-access-to-teslas-supercharger-network
[13] https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a44350518/volvo-electric-vehicles-tesla-charging-2025/
[14] https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/lordstown-motors-files-bankruptcy-sues-foxconn-2023-06-27/
[15] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-05-11/lordstown-motors-rises-after-closing-sale-of-factory-to-foxconn
[16] https://www.theregister.com/2022/11/15/ev_charging_infrastructure_sandia/
[17] https://www.charin.global/news/charin-response-to-ford-announcement-to-use-the-nacs-proprietary-network/
[18] https://www.charin.global/news/charin-stands-behind-ccs-and-mcs-but-also-supports-the-standardization-of-tesla-nacs/
[19] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: CCS may be a standard, but not a good one
As a standard it is also very slow-moving - it still has nothing about VtH or VtG features and is not expected to include such features until 2025, which would mean CCS cars are unlikely to offer support until 2027. It is basically a standard for car manufacturers, by car manufacturers that only benefits car manufacturers.
Re: CCS may be a standard, but not a good one
"As a standard it is also very slow-moving - it still has nothing about VtH or VtG features"
Are you saying that CCS or rather J-1772 fitted cars don't have those features? Some of them do have "vehicle to load" using the onboard AC charger backwards to provide mains power. A Vehicle to Home scenario would need separate high power electronics to use the car's battery. A Vehicle to Grid function isn't really ready for primetime yet. I can see it as being a really good thing when the grid can transmit pricing for both directions and during heavy demand an EV owner would be able to sell power back at a nice profit. Until the rest of the system is ready for that, it's not going to be used by very many people and initially only with large fleet users. VtG is in the ChaDeMo spec, but that never really caught on. The external gear also made it only worthwhile for big fleets due to the cost.
Re: CCS may be a standard, but not a good one
Unless I’m massively wrong, a UK Model 3 has a CCS connector. It definitely fits; if it didn’t a model 3 wouldn’t be able to use a Tesla supercharger which might be considered a bit of a disadvantage.
Re: CCS may be a standard, but not a good one
"The adapter for CCS is enormous. I don't think it would physically fit anywhere convenient on a model 3."
In countries other than the US, regulations require that Tesla's use a true standard and not their proprietary plug/protocol. In China, Teslas have to use the Chinese national standard and I believe that CCS is required in Scandinavia.
Tesla has not sold more EV's than everybody else combined worldwide. It requires much more cherry picking than that. Perhaps in the US, but there's almost nothing but expensive and luxury EV's on offer. Europe has a much broader choice and China is awash in EV choice. Elon laughs at BYD, but if they choose to start making and selling passenger cars in the US, he won't be laughing anymore. They could also do some rebadging with somebody such as Geely owned Volvo or another Chinese firm that sells a brand that originated someplace else and has a presence in the US. The same goes for Ora who are also getting good press for selling cars that aren't coated in 'features'. There's very little press in the US about EV's that isn't focused on Tesla.
Re: CCS may be a standard, but not a good one
I also agree that it was a mistake to maintain backwards physical compatibility given the rarity of EVs in 2011 when CCS was published. They should have just done what Tesla did with their new Model S/X plug and designed something beefier that was compatible with the existing J1772 EVSEs using only a passive adapter. That's what owners of older EVs had to do when the J1772 standard switched from using Avcon connectors to Yazaki connectors. Or maybe the automakers should have just thrown more money and pressure at Tesla for them to have kicked their new plug standard over to a neutral licensing association.
The funny thing is, you can charge a 1999 Ford Ranger EV with a modern Tesla Destination Charger (EVSE) using only a passive adapter. If you do the majority of your charging at home or at your motorpool, it isn't much of a bother.
SAE Standard = Telsa relinquish patent rights + control of design
Ie. Learn the lesson of mobile FRAND patents and McLean’s intermodal container.
Nothing less should be accepted.
... the Combined Charging System (CCS) that's been standard in all US EVs, sans Teslas, since 2013.
I think you mean "sauf (except) Teslas", not "sans (without) Teslas".
Not sure about calling it a win
The SAE isn't going to certify a standard that's still proprietary to one company. If Tesla throws the doors open to other makers they'll have to do so without being able to collect a royalty on each plug fitted. It will allow Tesla to qualify for free government money in the US which they may have decided will be more lucrative in the short term over trying to license their charging scheme. Elon is well known for making enemies of government agencies and government officials so there was no way he'd be allowed to collect a portion of any government largesse for a charging network that is brand specific.
It's still going to be a big capital outlay for Tesla. Their cars all have the charging ports fitted at the left rear of the car and have installed rather short cables on their chargers. In places where they've allowed other brands to use their chargers, it often means those cars have to use 2 spaces to park in a way where the cable will reach. Superchargers, at least in the US, don't have anyway to pay at the charger so people will have to open an account with Tesla, register their car with the service and have a payment method attached. All of that is something I'm not pleased with. It's just too much information to hand out for a bucket of electrons.
Finally, the AC/DC switching so the connector uses the same pins for both scares me. I prefer the CCS/J-1772 connector's approach of keeping those separate. If you are DC fast charging and the contactor glitches, you don't want a path for 800vdc to get to the onboard AC charger. It shouldn't happen, but........
CCS may be a standard, but not a good one
The adapter for CCS is enormous. I don't think it would physically fit anywhere convenient on a model 3. It's loaded down by decisions that only make sense in the context of backwards compatibility with standards that were developed before anyone was actually buying electric cars. At this point, Tesla has sold many more vehicles (and installed many more charging stations) using their for-the-moment-priority adapter than the cumulative total sold with CCS. If we're going to ditch it, now's the time.