GM Adopting NACS Tesla Charge Ports on Its Vehicles Starting 2025!

[anionic1]

We need chargers at work. Anywhere someone can plug in for 4 hours. Work could be a benefit or some environmental offset. Or deducted from pay I suppose. I don't see the benefit for shopping centers etc.

Tesla charges $0.01/kWh as a fee to manage it. We pay the electricity bill monthly. Tesla cuts us a check quarterly and we pay them the $0.01/kWh at the end of the year.

Sponsored

 

[cvalue13]

A challenge is that few businesses own their real estate.

Which means charger installations falls to commercial RE owners. They’d be making a bet that the cost will attract lessees, or that lessees will cover the costs in their lease terms.

But BEVs are at max 1% of vehicles on the road in 2023.

Not much incentive.

 

[Tinker71]

Tesla charges $0.01/kWh as a fee to manage it. We pay the electricity bill monthly. Tesla cuts us a check quarterly and we pay them the $0.01/kWh at the end of the year.

Is this your proposal or an actual arrangement? It doesn't appear to be worth anyones time. Unless it is a loss leader or something.

 

[cvalue13]

Is this your proposal or an actual arrangement? It doesn't appear to be worth anyones time. Unless it is a loss leader or something.

maybe you missed:

We select what people pay.

 

[Deleted member 17810]

The big three are doing this to out pressure on Tesla from regulators.

Pretty crafty.

Weird.

 

[cvalue13]

To be fair, Ford and GM aren’t talking about producing NACS vehicles until 2025 - and that’s if things go as planned

Not like the White House is going to re-write funding regs for the next two years of grants, to exclude CCS chargers, because some day there’ll be be more NACS vehicles

 

[BayouCityBob]

One thing that is important to note is that a typical BEV costs an equivalent of about $2 to $2.5 per gallon, assuming about $0.25/kwh to charge, when compared to a car that gets about 30 mpg, which would be typical for a modern ICE with a size around the model 3 or Y. And, its much less convenient to charge. Many people I know really had to adjust for the inconvenient charging when they drive a lot and cant rely on charging over night at home. So Tesla needs to keep their charging cost very competitive as that really is the main selling point of an EV. In fact EV cost of ownership falls in and out the lead by the EPAs standards. Most people don't buy EVs because they care about the planet IMO.

Average US electricity rates are 13 cents. A small sedan like a model 3 costs 3-4 cents per mile. That is equivalent to $1.05 per gallon on a 30 mpg car. If you do not have a way to charge at home or work, you should not buy an EV, it won’t make sense for you.

 

[AlexD]

I believe that is the first 200,000 sold in the US PER MODEL.. not per maker... so for tesla that is what 800,000 cars for the 4 main brands times 7k each.. about 5 billion of funding.

and keep in mind he was responding to someone complaining about how them buying a tesla built out the tesla charging network and they shouldn't have to share with other makes. The point was.. no your Tesla purchase paid for minimum parts of it.. federal and state tax credits paid for most of it.

Wrong, not per model - total sales..

 

[anionic1]

Is this your proposal or an actual arrangement? It doesn't appear to be worth anyones time. Unless it is a loss leader or something.

This is actually how it works if you install more than 6 chargers and get on teslas business account.

 

[PilotPete]

My main question is this: If Tesla's network grows to become the dominant (but not the only) source of fast charging for ALL EV's, would it be illegal (antitrust? monopolistic practices?) for them to raise the per-kWh rate for non-tesla vehicles in a few years once everyone is dependent on them? Seems like an incredible amount of power to hold over the competition and drive people to buy Tesla EV's. No advertising needed!

Since EV's can always charge somewhere else (unlike gasoline which you can ONLY get from a gas station), it doesn't seem like a true monopoly, nor is supercharging a public utility that should be regulated, nor is it necessary for commerce. The Tesla network is just a perk that the other OEM's are paying to access. But Tesla controls the rate and has all the leverage.

I think it may be like using credit cards. In the US, they‘re not supposed to charge you MORE for using a credit card, but they can give a DISCOUNT for cash or debit. Of course, companies are getting around some of that with “processing fees” which are not a price hike on the product or service, but a “fee” that is passed through to the customer. Instead of a higher price for non-Teslas, they could easily give a “discount” to Tesla owners. If the price was .35/kw today, they could raise it to .45/kw and offer a discount to Teslas of -.10/kw. Non-Teslas aren’t penalized this way, they just don’t get the Teslas “reward”. I could be wrong, and often am.

 

[Crissa]

I believe that is the first 200,000 sold in the US PER MODEL.. not per maker... so for tesla that is what 800,000 cars for the 4 main brands times 7k each.. about 5 billion of funding.

No, it was 200k BEVs from a manufacturer.

And no, it wasn't supporting foreign-made vehicles over US ones - Ford hadn't run out yet, and the VW BEVs were made in the US.

No. Spot charges for peak consumption can be much higher than residential, which is an average of costs. If they could pay an industrial rate, it would be lower, but... That's not how quick chargers work. You need the power when you need it, so either you suck it up and pay spot prices or you massively invest in batteries. Either way, their costs are higher, and they pass them on to you.

Spot prices can be hundreds of times the residential rate.

The books say Superchargers basically pay for themselves right now, which is by design. They're also paying for the continued expansion of the network, too, instead of continuing as a loss-leader for Tesla.

If Tesla makes 5 cents on each kwh it is extortion. (Electricity only costs 10 - 12 cents on most of the the country.) But your point is fair, the fuel retailing business can be a profitable business to be sure.

via https://www.energysage.com/local-data/electricity-cost/ :

As of February 2023, the average residential electricity rate in the U.S. is about 23 cents per kilowatt-hour...

Top hit on Google, but Energy Sage is pretty well-known.

I don't see the benefit for shopping centers etc.

Well, a) they have workers, b) it's some place people drive to and spend an amount of time at and c) you need chargers when you're on the other side of town by your relatives, dentist, whatever; or when there's some disruption in power where you live or are parking (such as storms or construction).

Public infrastructure is important.

-Crissa

 

[Tinker71]

This is actually how it works if you install more than 6 chargers and get on teslas business account.

Thanks for the info. i guess $.01 is 10% of $.10 per kWhr So not too bad. Smart work place chargers are key to the next wave of EV adoption and grid stability.

 

[Art138]

I wonder how this impacts the Euro cars I.e Audi,MB,VW ect. Don’t they currently used NACS in Europe? They may be forced to migrate to the Tesla connector for US imports.

 

[Greshnab]

And no, it wasn't supporting foreign-made vehicles over US ones - Ford hadn't run out yet, and the VW BEVs were made in the US.


-Crissa

at what point in time did i EVER mention or imply that it was about who made any car?? i was responding to a post stating that Tesla no longer got tax credits for building ev's and that they hadn't for years.. this is patently untrue.... the entire thread started with someone ccmplaining about ford/gm users using tesla chargers when the tesla BUYERS paid for it someone then replied that the system was built mainly from tax credit not car buyers.. and it fell to they hadn't gotten tax credits for year etc.

So i have to ask Crissa do you always create an argument about a point from thin air? and if so how do you expect anyone to take you seriously?

Sponsored