WEBVTT Kind: captions Language: en 00:00:00.080 --> 00:00:02.729 Welp, a rabbit’s been pulled from a hat 00:00:02.729 --> 00:00:05.588 and now I’ve got egg on my face. 00:00:05.588 --> 00:00:09.252 In a move that very much surprised yours truly, 00:00:09.252 --> 00:00:17.757 many automakers have announced their commitment to adopting the formerly-proprietary Tesla charging connector for their North American Market vehicles - 00:00:17.757 --> 00:00:22.894 a connector which, assuming things keep going in the direction they appear to be going, 00:00:22.894 --> 00:00:28.910 is on its way to being an honest-to-goodness industry standard complete with its own SAE J number, 00:00:28.910 --> 00:00:30.499 J3400. 00:00:30.499 --> 00:00:33.111 And now it’s your turn to be surprised: 00:00:33.901 --> 00:00:35.347 I’m all for it! 00:00:35.347 --> 00:00:40.525 Yes, although I am personally quite annoyed by this outcome, 00:00:40.848 --> 00:00:43.828 that’s only because it’s a hit to my ego. 00:00:43.828 --> 00:00:49.799 I really didn’t think this was going to happen, which you can definitely tell by some of my past assertions, 00:00:49.799 --> 00:00:52.152 but now that we know more of the details - 00:00:52.152 --> 00:00:58.051 assuming they hold true, which is a monumentally important caveat to this entire video - 00:00:58.051 --> 00:00:59.950 this is welcome news. 00:00:59.950 --> 00:01:05.243 Ultimately I just want the industry to coalesce around a single charging plug. 00:01:05.243 --> 00:01:10.316 And, well, I was wrong about which one would win the plug wars. 00:01:10.316 --> 00:01:15.911 At least, probably - the dust hasn’t quite settled yet and things could change but… 00:01:15.911 --> 00:01:19.086 honestly, the Tesla connector is better. 00:01:19.086 --> 00:01:22.273 Take note, Tesla Stans, I said it. 00:01:22.273 --> 00:01:24.484 And with what has recently come to light, 00:01:24.484 --> 00:01:30.566 there really isn’t a downside to the rest of the industry adopting the connector standard hereafter known as the 00:01:30.566 --> 00:01:35.272 North American Charging Standard, or N.A.C.S. or NACS. 00:01:35.272 --> 00:01:38.789 I have four things I’d like to accomplish in this video: 00:01:38.789 --> 00:01:44.871 First, explain what makes the NACS connector uniquely suited to use here on this continent. 00:01:44.871 --> 00:01:49.545 And just to lay this out up front, this is only a North American development and standard - 00:01:49.545 --> 00:01:52.899 if you’re somewhere else, this video doesn’t really apply to you. 00:01:52.899 --> 00:01:58.618 Second, I want to talk about the change to the standard that’s making me pretty chill about all this. 00:01:58.618 --> 00:02:06.441 Third, I want to address why automakers are making the switch and why they probably shouldn’t count their chickens before they hatch. 00:02:06.441 --> 00:02:10.234 And fourthly, I will get a little bit on the spicy side 00:02:10.234 --> 00:02:15.437 and share my broader thoughts and opinions on the state of the third-party charging industry. 00:02:15.437 --> 00:02:20.952 I will freely admit that on the whole Tesla always had a better plug, 00:02:20.952 --> 00:02:25.321 but I really hope we don’t try and copy everything they do. 00:02:25.321 --> 00:02:27.825 First things first, what is NACS? 00:02:27.825 --> 00:02:31.190 Why is it different from the industry standard known as CCS? 00:02:31.190 --> 00:02:34.888 And why is North America uniquely suited to use it? 00:02:34.888 --> 00:02:42.381 To save time, I’m gonna keep this explanation pretty surface level - there are links to other videos of mine if you want to learn more. 00:02:42.381 --> 00:02:45.058 This is the charging port on my car. 00:02:45.058 --> 00:02:51.280 This connector is generally known as J1772, and it’s for AC charging. 00:02:51.280 --> 00:02:56.694 It has five pins: three big ones for handling power (line 1, line 2, and ground), 00:02:56.694 --> 00:03:00.515 plus two small ones for communication and control. 00:03:00.515 --> 00:03:07.221 This connector has been around since 2009, and it supports a maximum of 19.2 kilowatts of power, 00:03:07.221 --> 00:03:10.431 though few cars actually accept that much. 00:03:10.431 --> 00:03:14.938 Due to practical constraints, charging through this port just isn’t that fast, 00:03:14.938 --> 00:03:22.013 though it doesn’t need to be - the whole idea of AC charging is that it’s really simple to implement. 00:03:22.013 --> 00:03:33.020 What we call “car chargers” are really just smart power cords which deliver the same AC line voltage that runs through your walls to the port on your car. 00:03:33.020 --> 00:03:34.978 The actual charger module, 00:03:34.978 --> 00:03:41.776 meaning the thing with electronics that converts the AC power into the correct DC voltage for charging the battery pack, 00:03:41.776 --> 00:03:43.701 is part of the car. 00:03:43.701 --> 00:03:50.351 That makes wiring up a new AC charge point for an electric car very straightforward and inexpensive, 00:03:50.351 --> 00:03:57.861 and it will work with any car regardless of battery pack size, nominal pack voltage, cell chemistry, or manufacturer. 00:03:57.861 --> 00:04:02.839 The charge speeds you can get through this port are more than enough for charging at home or work 00:04:02.839 --> 00:04:05.508 where your car will sit for several hours at a time, 00:04:05.508 --> 00:04:09.697 but they aren’t anywhere near fast enough for taking a road trip. 00:04:09.697 --> 00:04:17.029 Battery packs of the size found in modern electric cars need something on the order of 150 kilowatts to charge quickly - 00:04:17.029 --> 00:04:21.740 and even more if we want charge times to get down to the 15 minute range. 00:04:21.740 --> 00:04:24.100 Luckily, we thought of a solution. 00:04:24.100 --> 00:04:28.513 Under this little flap lie two gigantic power pins. 00:04:28.513 --> 00:04:32.713 These are there to facilitate high-power direct-current charging, 00:04:32.713 --> 00:04:38.780 and to accomplish this, we in fact do hook the car up to an external battery charger. 00:04:38.780 --> 00:04:44.769 An offboard DC fast charger will connect through these pins directly to the car’s battery pack. 00:04:44.769 --> 00:04:48.580 That charger can be figuratively and literally huge, 00:04:48.580 --> 00:04:54.681 with a massive grid connection capable of delivering 350 kilowatts or more. 00:04:54.681 --> 00:04:59.449 Using a defined signaling protocol on the communication pins of the charge connector, 00:04:59.449 --> 00:05:06.050 the car’s battery management system will request a specific DC voltage and current from the external charger, 00:05:06.050 --> 00:05:09.723 and that charger does as it's told to juice up the pack. 00:05:09.723 --> 00:05:14.824 With this technology, the only meaningful limit to charge time is, well, 00:05:14.824 --> 00:05:17.264 the state of battery technology. 00:05:17.264 --> 00:05:25.430 The addition of these DC pins give this charge connector its name, CCS, which stands for Combined Charging System. 00:05:25.430 --> 00:05:31.710 It is a J1772 AC port combined with two DC pins below it. 00:05:31.710 --> 00:05:38.059 In Europe, this same exact augmentation was done to the IEC 62196 Type 2 connector, 00:05:38.059 --> 00:05:40.930 also known as the Mennekes connector. 00:05:40.930 --> 00:05:47.350 Although the North American CCS1 and the European CCS2 share a lot of the underlying technologies, 00:05:47.350 --> 00:05:50.015 the AC portion of the connectors are different 00:05:50.015 --> 00:05:54.914 thanks largely to the fact that European homes are often wired for three-phase power, 00:05:54.914 --> 00:05:58.646 which is just not a thing that happens here. 00:05:58.646 --> 00:06:04.327 Every consumer device, including large electrical appliances like kitchen ranges or, yes, 00:06:04.327 --> 00:06:08.428 electric vehicle charging equipment, is single-phase only, 00:06:08.428 --> 00:06:12.840 so our AC charging connector only supports single-phase power. 00:06:12.840 --> 00:06:18.989 And yes, I know about J3068, but I’m ignoring it for this video because for all practical purposes it just doesn’t matter. 00:06:18.989 --> 00:06:20.884 Look that up if you want to. 00:06:20.884 --> 00:06:24.009 But then… there’s Tesla. 00:06:24.009 --> 00:06:28.124 When the Model S was getting planned, CCS didn’t exist yet. 00:06:28.124 --> 00:06:33.110 In fact, in the very earliest days, neither did the J1772 connector. 00:06:33.110 --> 00:06:36.185 So Tesla came up with their own thing. 00:06:36.185 --> 00:06:38.645 And this is that. 00:06:38.645 --> 00:06:40.849 Or, at least, one side of it anyway. 00:06:40.849 --> 00:06:45.690 This is an adapter I have to switch between Tesla’s connector and J1772, 00:06:45.690 --> 00:06:50.540 and what you’re seeing here is the inlet side of the connector, normally found on a car. 00:06:50.540 --> 00:06:54.660 If I managed to make it to a Destination charger location to get footage of the plug side, 00:06:54.660 --> 00:06:56.589 you’re seeing that now. 00:06:56.589 --> 00:07:01.573 Now, you’ll notice it has the same five pins as the standard J1772 connector, 00:07:01.573 --> 00:07:04.200 they even have identical functions! 00:07:04.200 --> 00:07:07.194 But two of them are a heckuva lot larger than the rest. 00:07:07.194 --> 00:07:11.767 They’re not just girthy, they’re also quite long - about 30 millimeters. 00:07:11.767 --> 00:07:14.216 If you haven’t already guessed what’s going on, 00:07:14.216 --> 00:07:21.820 Tesla did a sneaky and uses the same two power pins for *both* AC and DC fast charging. 00:07:21.820 --> 00:07:27.686 These power pins are massively oversized for AC charging, as in that case 00:07:27.686 --> 00:07:33.840 line voltage is sent to the car’s onboard charger through these pins, which does the DC rectification and voltage boosting 00:07:33.840 --> 00:07:39.134 before sending it into the battery pack just like in a car equipped with J1772. 00:07:39.134 --> 00:07:41.314 But when DC fast charging, 00:07:41.314 --> 00:07:44.068 or as Tesla calls it, Supercharging, 00:07:44.068 --> 00:07:52.614 a contactor in the car closes which shunts these big pins to a set of beefy cables that go right to the car's battery pack, 00:07:52.614 --> 00:07:57.794 and the external Supercharger now shoves electrons in all on its own. 00:07:57.794 --> 00:08:00.739 It’s a very clever system, I must admit. 00:08:00.739 --> 00:08:06.922 And importantly it only really works because we only have single-phase AC charging here. 00:08:06.922 --> 00:08:13.299 The NACS connector is conceptually identical to the AC-only J1772 connector. 00:08:13.299 --> 00:08:19.669 In fact for AC charging it even uses the same signaling protocols on the two communication pins. 00:08:19.669 --> 00:08:27.285 The only difference between these two plugs is the hilariously large AC pins which do DC double-duty. 00:08:27.285 --> 00:08:32.216 This scheme couldn’t really be done while also supporting three-phase charging, 00:08:32.216 --> 00:08:35.640 at least not without redesigning the Type 2 connector. 00:08:35.640 --> 00:08:43.390 And that’s why the Type 2 connector would get the exact same DC-pin augmentation that we see here with CCS1. 00:08:43.390 --> 00:08:48.899 Now, as clever as Tesla’s idea is, it’s not entirely without downsides. 00:08:48.899 --> 00:08:55.860 With CCS, the AC and DC sides of the connector and thus car are completely isolated. 00:08:55.860 --> 00:09:00.548 The AC pins go to the onboard charger, and the DC pins go to the battery pack, 00:09:00.548 --> 00:09:04.842 so it’s impossible for the wrong voltage to go to the wrong place. 00:09:04.842 --> 00:09:13.160 Combining them as Tesla did requires a little more consideration on the car side to make sure wires don’t get crossed. 00:09:13.160 --> 00:09:16.800 But, in fairness, it’s not all that much. 00:09:16.800 --> 00:09:21.650 Adding a contactor to the onboard charger would allow you to isolate it when DC charging, 00:09:21.650 --> 00:09:29.168 or you could also design the onboard charger to tolerate having DC pack voltage on its input side when fast charging, 00:09:29.168 --> 00:09:32.909 which is what Tesla currently does if my understanding is correct. 00:09:32.909 --> 00:09:36.770 But combining the two functions also has a lot of upsides. 00:09:36.770 --> 00:09:39.664 The largest one being the smaller connector size 00:09:39.664 --> 00:09:44.776 which makes handling and inserting the plug much easier, especially on DC charging. 00:09:44.776 --> 00:09:50.165 Making things even easierer is the connector’s shape which is somewhat self-aligning, 00:09:50.165 --> 00:09:53.541 helped even further by chamfering on the inlet side. 00:09:53.541 --> 00:09:58.088 The latching mechanism here is also flat out much better. 00:09:58.088 --> 00:10:01.457 If there’s one thing I’ve never liked about J1772, 00:10:01.457 --> 00:10:08.096 it’s the external mechanical latch that floats above the actual mating surface of the connector. 00:10:08.096 --> 00:10:10.723 It wasn’t much of a problem in the early days, 00:10:10.723 --> 00:10:17.561 but when DC fast charging came along a means of locking the connector to the car became necessary. 00:10:17.561 --> 00:10:20.631 That was done by way of a simple bodge: 00:10:20.631 --> 00:10:25.610 often a pin will stick out just above the latch, preventing it from moving. 00:10:26.974 --> 00:10:30.626 I mean, it does work, but it’s never felt all that secure, 00:10:30.626 --> 00:10:35.141 and we have seen plenty of broken latches on public charging equipment 00:10:35.141 --> 00:10:41.630 which is annoying at best and a safety hazard at worst as it will prevent the connector from actually locking. 00:10:41.630 --> 00:10:45.035 The NACS connector uses a much more elegant system: 00:10:45.430 --> 00:10:51.445 there’s a recess (or hole) on the plug that a pin on the inlet side will catch. 00:10:51.445 --> 00:10:57.050 It’s a lot more mechanically robust, and eliminates moving parts from the plug side. 00:10:57.050 --> 00:11:02.477 The car still needs some sort of actuator to release that pin so you can remove the plug, 00:11:02.477 --> 00:11:05.727 but so does CCS so it’s no worse. 00:11:05.727 --> 00:11:09.724 The only thing that I find a bit unsettling about this latch design 00:11:09.724 --> 00:11:15.836 is that a dead car could potentially become stuck to a charger if it can’t release the handle. 00:11:15.836 --> 00:11:23.442 But there are ways around that, like the manual release lever you’ll find in my car behind this little cover in the cargo area. 00:11:23.442 --> 00:11:26.853 Note to every car designer and engineer ever: 00:11:26.853 --> 00:11:31.944 clearly marked manual overrides for electronic latches are a good thing! 00:11:31.944 --> 00:11:37.350 And for the love of all things holy please do not design them out to reduce Bill Of Materials. 00:11:37.350 --> 00:11:38.853 Thanks. 00:11:38.853 --> 00:11:45.325 Now, before I move on to the section where I talk about the change that’s making me pretty chill about the switch to NACS, 00:11:46.078 --> 00:11:50.407 I’m sorry but I do just need to refresh everybody on the timelines here. 00:11:50.407 --> 00:11:51.914 I can't help it. 00:11:51.914 --> 00:11:58.340 I didn’t think other automakers would be interested in Tesla’s little connector for two related reasons: 00:11:58.340 --> 00:12:04.414 first, this was proprietary and Tesla retained control over it until late last year - 00:12:04.414 --> 00:12:12.202 and yes, people are gonna argue with that in the comments and insist that Tesla offered the use of their connector and indeed charging network 00:12:12.202 --> 00:12:14.371 as far back as 2014, 00:12:14.371 --> 00:12:22.149 but that offer came with many strings attached which is demonstrated most clearly by the fact that nobody ever took them up on it. 00:12:22.149 --> 00:12:26.114 And second, because it was proprietary until last year, 00:12:26.114 --> 00:12:32.550 we didn’t really know anything about its capabilities other than what Tesla was kind enough to tell us. 00:12:32.550 --> 00:12:36.736 CCS, meanwhile, had published specifications. 00:12:36.736 --> 00:12:38.170 Wild, I know! 00:12:38.170 --> 00:12:39.500 And guess what? 00:12:39.500 --> 00:12:43.223 It was more powerful than Tesla’s connector had demonstrated. 00:12:43.223 --> 00:12:47.367 in fact, in terms of charging stations that are actually on the ground, 00:12:47.367 --> 00:12:49.474 it still is. 00:12:49.474 --> 00:12:53.235 The DC pins of CCS can handle 500 amps, 00:12:53.235 --> 00:13:02.552 and they was designed to support up to 1000 volt charging which was crucial for automakers considering 800V battery architectures. 00:13:02.552 --> 00:13:14.370 That high current and high voltage allowed for 350 kilowatt CCS charging stations, and they’ve been on the ground (albeit in small numbers) since 2017. 00:13:14.370 --> 00:13:21.519 Meanwhile, Tesla's V3 supercharger, which only supports a maximum of 250 kilowatts, 00:13:21.519 --> 00:13:24.280 didn’t come out until 2019. 00:13:24.280 --> 00:13:27.402 So for literally half a decade at this point, 00:13:27.402 --> 00:13:32.801 the choice for other automakers was between a connector controlled entirely by one of their competitors 00:13:32.801 --> 00:13:36.756 which had only ever demonstrated 250 kW charging, 00:13:36.756 --> 00:13:43.132 and a connector controlled by an industry standards body that is specced for 40% higher power output, 00:13:43.132 --> 00:13:45.836 supported 800V battery architectures, 00:13:45.836 --> 00:13:51.877 and all while retaining compatibility with the existing Level 2 AC charging equipment. 00:13:51.877 --> 00:13:59.920 It was perfectly rational, and I’d argue correct, for other automakers to just ignore Tesla’s connector. 00:13:59.920 --> 00:14:03.287 However, three significant barriers have now fallen: 00:14:03.287 --> 00:14:05.591 first, Tesla actually, 00:14:05.591 --> 00:14:06.775 for realsies, 00:14:06.775 --> 00:14:10.130 released details on their connector's design. 00:14:10.130 --> 00:14:15.986 Last November, they announced that “today we are opening our EV connector design to the world. 00:14:15.986 --> 00:14:22.399 We invite charging network operators and vehicle manufacturers to put the Tesla charging connector and charge port, 00:14:22.399 --> 00:14:27.410 now called the North American Charging Standard, on their equipment and vehicles.” 00:14:27.410 --> 00:14:32.681 I will add that whether they’ve actually released their patents on the connector is unclear - 00:14:32.681 --> 00:14:39.406 I am not a lawyer, and my search was inconclusive, but given that the SAE is taking on the connector as a standard, 00:14:39.406 --> 00:14:42.388 I will assume in good faith that they have. 00:14:42.388 --> 00:14:48.683 Second, and relatedly, we now know the connector can support 1,000V charging. 00:14:48.683 --> 00:14:57.440 This was a giant open question for years because to this day none of Tesla’s cars have 800V-class battery packs, 00:14:57.440 --> 00:15:02.730 and so we’ve never seen their connector pushed beyond about 500 volts. 00:15:02.730 --> 00:15:09.724 Through a small and backward-compatible revision to its design which insets the conductors a little further into the connector body, 00:15:09.724 --> 00:15:13.117 it now does indeed support 1,000V. 00:15:13.117 --> 00:15:15.938 Interesting that they had to redesign it, though, isn’t it? 00:15:15.938 --> 00:15:17.742 But at least they did. 00:15:17.742 --> 00:15:24.249 I am still very skeptical of Tesla’s claim that the connector can handle 900 amps, 00:15:24.249 --> 00:15:32.025 but it does seem capable of handling 500 just fine so it is at least on-par with what CCS can do. 00:15:32.025 --> 00:15:38.620 The third thing that’s changed is what’s making me most at peace with the push to standardize on NACS. 00:15:38.620 --> 00:15:44.000 Going forward, NACS will speak the same language that CCS does. 00:15:44.000 --> 00:15:51.654 Up 'til now, Tesla Superchargers communicated with Tesla cars in an entirely locked-down and proprietary fashion, 00:15:51.654 --> 00:15:55.995 but as they have made moves to turn their plug into a real standard, 00:15:55.995 --> 00:16:01.240 they’ve decided to add support for the same communication protocols that CCS uses. 00:16:01.240 --> 00:16:03.625 That means that, eventually, 00:16:03.625 --> 00:16:09.354 the only difference between a car with a CCS port and a NACS port will be… 00:16:09.354 --> 00:16:11.140 the port itself. 00:16:11.140 --> 00:16:16.496 And that means simple adapters can be used to switch between connector types. 00:16:16.496 --> 00:16:18.045 As of this writing, 00:16:18.045 --> 00:16:25.880 that’s what the companies that have announced their intention to switch charging ports will be providing to their customers with CCS-equipped cars; 00:16:25.880 --> 00:16:29.297 once a few things regarding billing and what not get sorted, 00:16:29.297 --> 00:16:34.404 they’ll be able to rock up to a Tesla Supercharger using the adapter and juice up. 00:16:34.404 --> 00:16:38.788 Now, as great as this is, there are some cans of worms here. 00:16:38.788 --> 00:16:43.010 Because CCS separates the AC and DC sides, 00:16:43.010 --> 00:16:50.273 drivers will need to carry two adapters: one for DC fast charging and the other for AC charging 00:16:50.273 --> 00:16:52.339 (like this one). 00:16:52.339 --> 00:16:59.809 That is a little confusing, and leads to some potential concerns regarding what would happen if you use the wrong adapter. 00:16:59.809 --> 00:17:06.681 However, there are a lot of checks that happen both on the car side and the charger side before contactors get closed, 00:17:06.681 --> 00:17:10.000 so this may not be a problem at all in practice. 00:17:10.000 --> 00:17:17.363 But it is something to be aware of and I hope a sensible means of detecting that the wrong adapter is being used is put in-place. 00:17:17.363 --> 00:17:23.369 The other can of worms has to do with how much current such an adapter can safely handle. 00:17:23.369 --> 00:17:31.158 They’re gonna have relatively short links inside of them and they could in theory simply be huge aluminum rods or something like that so 00:17:31.158 --> 00:17:36.281 I am pretty certain handling 500 amps won’t be too much of an ask, 00:17:36.281 --> 00:17:38.857 but that leads us to the other thing: 00:17:38.857 --> 00:17:44.098 Tesla has in the past and to this day sort of just... 00:17:44.098 --> 00:17:48.943 ignored the conventional current limitations of a given conductor. 00:17:48.943 --> 00:17:53.106 Now, I’ve actually come around to agreeing with that practice. 00:17:53.106 --> 00:18:01.478 A hard-and-fast current limit makes sense for the wiring in your home that runs within walls and may span dozens of meters. 00:18:01.478 --> 00:18:10.540 But you can safely exceed a current limit for short periods of time, and often by rather large margins when the conductors are relatively short. 00:18:10.540 --> 00:18:18.149 Tesla’s approach has been to put temperature sensors in strategic places and monitor how hot those conductors are getting. 00:18:18.149 --> 00:18:22.405 And so long as they’re not getting too hot, then they go ham. 00:18:22.405 --> 00:18:26.880 I used to think this was pretty haphazard but I’m no longer bothered by it. 00:18:26.880 --> 00:18:29.563 Again, Tesla stans, mark that down. 00:18:29.563 --> 00:18:35.945 But in a land of adapters, I can see that strategy becoming problematic. 00:18:35.945 --> 00:18:39.535 Maybe the thermal conductivity of the links within the adapter body 00:18:39.535 --> 00:18:43.957 will be sufficient for sensors in the handle and car to detect overheating, 00:18:43.957 --> 00:18:46.358 and thus I have no reason to worry. 00:18:46.358 --> 00:18:52.880 But maybe it would be smarter to know whether an adapter is in use and limit the current to some safe number. 00:18:53.383 --> 00:18:56.118 Won’t really matter to me since I have an 800V car 00:18:56.118 --> 00:19:00.962 which peaks at about 300 amps despite sucking down 240 kilowatts, 00:19:00.962 --> 00:19:04.119 but I figured I’d bring this up in case nobody’s thought of it. 00:19:04.119 --> 00:19:09.114 Anyway, with a reiteration of the monumentally important caveat from the beginning, 00:19:09.114 --> 00:19:15.880 so long as the communications remain the same and passive adapters will allow people to charge on either plug, 00:19:15.880 --> 00:19:18.993 there’s really not much of a reason to be upset, here. 00:19:18.993 --> 00:19:21.489 And I’m genuinely not! 00:19:21.489 --> 00:19:29.049 Eventually I’ll grab one of those adapters if I need to and having a CCS-equipped car will be nothing but a minor inconvenience. 00:19:29.049 --> 00:19:36.323 Assuming, that is, CCS is in fact going away which is likely but by no means certain quite yet. 00:19:36.323 --> 00:19:41.020 So now, why are automakers suddenly itching to make this switch? 00:19:41.487 --> 00:19:43.656 Well, there’s a pretty simple answer: 00:19:43.656 --> 00:19:48.820 the CCS charging networks available here in the US all kinda suck. 00:19:48.820 --> 00:19:52.770 There’s only one complete network which lets you travel anywhere in the country 00:19:52.770 --> 00:19:55.523 (which isn’t even that complete, sorry the Dakotas) 00:19:55.523 --> 00:19:59.702 and, uh, that network doesn’t have a great track record. 00:19:59.702 --> 00:20:02.712 I’ve personally never been stranded by it, 00:20:02.712 --> 00:20:11.276 but back in April I went on a trip in which, to start the chargers, I had to sign out of the Electrify America app and sign back in 00:20:11.276 --> 00:20:14.189 at Every Single Stop, 00:20:14.189 --> 00:20:21.010 and more than half of those stations had broken NFC readers so I couldn’t just activate the chargers by tapping my phone. 00:20:22.661 --> 00:20:28.309 It wasn’t great, and that experience is happening to far too many owners of new EVs. 00:20:28.668 --> 00:20:32.330 Meanwhile, the Tesla Supercharger network largely… 00:20:32.330 --> 00:20:33.791 just works! 00:20:33.791 --> 00:20:43.730 It’s not perfect, no, but most locations have far more redundancy than any EA station does, and the overall experience is excellent. 00:20:43.730 --> 00:20:48.995 However, I think automakers are in for a surprise if they’re not careful, here. 00:20:48.995 --> 00:20:57.790 The problems that the CCS networks have experienced have almost *nothing* to do with the connector itself. 00:20:57.790 --> 00:21:03.151 In my travels with my Hyundai, I have experienced almost no charging issues… 00:21:03.151 --> 00:21:06.169 once I manage to activate the charger, that is. 00:21:06.169 --> 00:21:10.434 So long as I can get to that point, which is often a lot harder than it needs to be, 00:21:10.434 --> 00:21:14.128 I simply plug it in and it has worked with only a few exceptions - 00:21:14.128 --> 00:21:22.371 and every one of those was due to the haphazard way that CCS stations are configured which led to a poorly-aligned plug which didn’t latch correctly. 00:21:22.371 --> 00:21:27.690 While that itself is a problem, it’s the least of issues we see. 00:21:27.690 --> 00:21:31.198 The main problems with the CCS networks are poor maintenance, 00:21:31.198 --> 00:21:32.460 horrible up-time, 00:21:32.460 --> 00:21:36.686 largely terrible apps which are often the only way to start charging, 00:21:36.686 --> 00:21:45.127 and last but definitely not least, a lack of interoperability testing and certification when new car models get released. 00:21:45.127 --> 00:21:47.031 Let me go through those one by one. 00:21:47.031 --> 00:21:48.702 Starting with maintenance. 00:21:48.702 --> 00:21:52.867 The fastest DC fast chargers have liquid-cooled cables. 00:21:52.867 --> 00:21:59.990 That allows those cables to have thinner-than-normal conductors which in turns allows them to be lighter and easier to handle. 00:21:59.990 --> 00:22:04.664 This is really neat, but loads and loads of chargers are out there 00:22:04.664 --> 00:22:08.780 in which the liquid cooling part is broken. 00:22:08.780 --> 00:22:14.386 When that happens, the charger will de-rate itself to stay within the safe limits of the conductors, 00:22:14.386 --> 00:22:18.594 which tends to result in abysmally slow charging speeds. 00:22:18.594 --> 00:22:27.245 Making this even worse, until quite recently some networks didn’t even warn you that the charger you were about to plug into had cable cooling issues, 00:22:27.245 --> 00:22:32.670 so it was a fun guessing game whether you would get the advertised charging speeds or not. 00:22:32.670 --> 00:22:38.360 Electrify America has finally begun indicating which chargers might be power-limited in the app, 00:22:38.360 --> 00:22:42.202 but I can attest to this not being entirely accurate. 00:22:42.202 --> 00:22:48.110 That’s certainly the most common maintenance issue that I’ve experienced, but it is by no means the only one. 00:22:48.110 --> 00:22:52.294 There’s a lot of equipment out there with power modules that are starting to fail, 00:22:52.294 --> 00:22:59.079 leading to reduced output, weird surging behavior, or entirely knocked off chargers. 00:22:59.079 --> 00:23:03.809 Cables will cut by vandals and the response can be far too slow. 00:23:03.809 --> 00:23:08.235 As mentioned before, latches on the connector can fail, which I’ve seen several times. 00:23:08.235 --> 00:23:16.719 And insulation breakdown can lead to failed isolation tests which takes individual cables or entire chargers offline. 00:23:16.719 --> 00:23:19.523 This sort of wear-and-tear is to be expected, 00:23:19.523 --> 00:23:27.680 but apparently most charging providers just don’t have the maintenance teams or infrastructure to actually take care of it in a timely fashion. 00:23:27.680 --> 00:23:31.230 Relatedly, there’s the whole uptime thing. 00:23:31.230 --> 00:23:32.778 As I write this, two - 00:23:32.778 --> 00:23:37.744 no, wait, three stations around Chicago are entirely offline. 00:23:37.744 --> 00:23:39.111 That’s not great! 00:23:39.111 --> 00:23:43.195 And plenty more locations have at least one charger that is dead. 00:23:43.195 --> 00:23:50.419 That’s not a big deal when your site has 8 or more chargers, but most of Electrify America’s locations have only 4. 00:23:50.419 --> 00:23:58.530 A single charger going down in one of those locations results in a 25% loss in capacity which is just not acceptable. 00:23:59.140 --> 00:24:01.211 Now, in fairness to EA, 00:24:01.211 --> 00:24:07.469 they started their infrastructure rollout back when charging equipment manufacturers were just getting started themselves, 00:24:07.469 --> 00:24:12.449 so they have a whole bunch of legacy hardware from various different companies out there, 00:24:12.449 --> 00:24:15.698 and that makes their operations uniquely challenging. 00:24:15.698 --> 00:24:19.976 But that by no means is reason to give them a pass. 00:24:19.976 --> 00:24:22.468 Then we have the apps. 00:24:22.468 --> 00:24:26.577 Whether they refuse to keep you signed in or just flat out don’t work, 00:24:26.577 --> 00:24:34.708 it’s not a great feeling to be relying on a Jenga-tower of an IT stack and working cell service to make it to your next location. 00:24:34.708 --> 00:24:40.000 Electrify America does at least include credit card readers on their fast chargers, 00:24:40.000 --> 00:24:42.508 but they didn’t pick the most robust of units 00:24:42.508 --> 00:24:47.140 which was brave considering the chargers are largely just out in the elements. 00:24:47.140 --> 00:24:52.098 App-activation might be a necessary evil for banks of level 2 chargers, 00:24:52.098 --> 00:24:57.109 but given how monumentally expensive DC fast charging equipment is, 00:24:57.109 --> 00:25:05.940 in my opinion a robust credit card reader (or at the very least an actually-working NFC reader for contactless payments or Apple pay or whatever) 00:25:05.940 --> 00:25:07.940 is a must. 00:25:07.940 --> 00:25:14.120 And if you’re thinking plug-and-charge is a great solution, well I have differing thoughts which I’ll get to later. 00:25:14.120 --> 00:25:16.823 And then we have the interoperability testing. 00:25:16.823 --> 00:25:18.785 Or lack of it. 00:25:18.785 --> 00:25:23.258 In part because the CCS protocol is a hodgepodge of weirdness, 00:25:23.258 --> 00:25:31.720 there are many opportunities for bugs to show up in the back-and-forth between car and charger which can lead to a failed charging session. 00:25:31.720 --> 00:25:38.855 And for whatever reason, automakers have largely just left third-party charging providers to find those bugs all on their own. 00:25:39.752 --> 00:25:42.016 Which is very dumb. And bad! 00:25:42.016 --> 00:25:49.066 Everybody should be loaning their latest models to the likes of Electrify America, EVgo, Chargepoint, etc. 00:25:49.066 --> 00:25:51.239 before they even make it to customers. 00:25:51.239 --> 00:25:56.982 But apparently this rarely happens, and those charging providers have to find somebody with the latest cars 00:25:56.982 --> 00:26:00.132 and hope they’ll be kind enough swing by for testing. 00:26:00.132 --> 00:26:03.633 So, great job, automakers, you did this to yourself! 00:26:03.920 --> 00:26:05.500 At least in part. 00:26:05.500 --> 00:26:12.951 I know I’m repeating myself here but the CCS connector itself had nothing to do with these issues. 00:26:12.951 --> 00:26:16.487 Simply putting a NACS plug on the end of the same cable 00:26:16.487 --> 00:26:21.580 won’t magically fix the charger on the other end or the company that runs it. 00:26:21.580 --> 00:26:26.909 The woes of CCS are almost entirely due to bad management on all sides 00:26:26.909 --> 00:26:33.740 that doesn’t seem to understand the importance of providing a reliable and good charging experience. 00:26:33.740 --> 00:26:35.895 That’s what Tesla gets right, 00:26:35.895 --> 00:26:43.028 and Tesla does indeed deserve massive kudos for sidestepping this problem and building out their own charging infrastructure. 00:26:43.028 --> 00:26:51.340 But that’s the reason I’m cautioning automakers and, well, really everyone hoping the NACS connector will be some sort of panacea. 00:26:51.340 --> 00:26:53.990 It will be nice to have a better connector, sure, 00:26:53.990 --> 00:26:58.442 but the connector is not what’s wrong with the third-party charging industry, 00:26:58.442 --> 00:27:00.460 not by a long shot. 00:27:00.819 --> 00:27:05.980 Still, I welcome the switch and think it presents a true best-of-both-worlds situation. 00:27:06.698 --> 00:27:11.038 My beef with the Tesla connector and their whole charging ecosystem 00:27:11.038 --> 00:27:14.411 was always that it was a proprietary connector which functioned — 00:27:14.411 --> 00:27:16.608 intentionally or not, doesn't matter 00:27:16.608 --> 00:27:21.168 — to lock-out any other vehicles from using their infrastructure. 00:27:21.168 --> 00:27:28.149 I also didn’t exactly like the idea of the same company that sells you the car being the one to sell you its fuel to use it 00:27:28.149 --> 00:27:36.440 and was super concerned that a landscape of Tesla-only, Ford-only, and Volkwagen-only charging spots would become the norm. 00:27:36.835 --> 00:27:43.196 I was honestly pretty disturbed by how few people seemed to realize what a dark place we’d be in if we allowed that to happen, 00:27:43.196 --> 00:27:50.402 and that’s why I was totally cool with letting charging networks grow organically and compete with one another. 00:27:50.402 --> 00:27:55.057 Regrettably, that just didn’t happen fast or well enough. 00:27:55.057 --> 00:28:00.909 When we get right down to it, the CCS rollout was botched and way too slow. 00:28:00.909 --> 00:28:09.116 And since there really aren’t that many CCS chargers in the wild yet, if there’s a time to abandon that connector it’s now. 00:28:09.116 --> 00:28:18.160 I mean, I was saying that about Tesla’s connector back in 2018 because I figured CCS station rollout would accelerate beyond the pace at which Tesla could go. 00:28:18.160 --> 00:28:20.620 But… it just didn’t happen. 00:28:20.620 --> 00:28:23.360 I was wrong, and here we are. 00:28:23.360 --> 00:28:28.522 Now that the SAE is taking NACS on and Tesla has apparently relinquished control of it, 00:28:28.522 --> 00:28:33.223 combined with the fact that they’re inviting other drivers to use the Supercharger network, 00:28:33.223 --> 00:28:35.559 well my beefs are gone. 00:28:35.559 --> 00:28:37.659 Mostly, anyway. 00:28:37.659 --> 00:28:40.735 [voiceover] I realize I’ve left a pretty big hole in the script 00:28:40.735 --> 00:28:44.700 when it comes to competition among third-party charging providers. 00:28:44.700 --> 00:28:45.652 To make up for that, 00:28:45.652 --> 00:28:47.953 here’s some footage of puppies! 00:28:47.953 --> 00:28:55.809 I might have made it sound as though switching connector types means other automakers are handing a charging monopoly to Tesla. 00:28:55.809 --> 00:28:59.580 However, that’s definitely not what’s happening. 00:28:59.580 --> 00:29:04.503 In the short term, I imagine Tesla’s gonna be a very popular charging network, 00:29:04.503 --> 00:29:09.750 but in the long-run, this is ultimately *good* for competition and consumers. 00:29:10.000 --> 00:29:17.159 CCS networks have been so terrible precisely because they don’t compete with Tesla. 00:29:17.159 --> 00:29:22.038 The drivers they provide charging to cannot access Tesla’s more reliable network, 00:29:22.038 --> 00:29:28.390 so up ‘til now CCS drivers just had to put up with how terrible the other networks are. 00:29:28.390 --> 00:29:31.110 They literally don’t have a choice. 00:29:31.110 --> 00:29:33.093 But soon they will. 00:29:33.093 --> 00:29:36.351 Once CCS drivers can choose Tesla’s network, 00:29:36.351 --> 00:29:42.949 every other charging provider will need to get their act together or no one will use them and they will die. 00:29:42.949 --> 00:29:45.367 To be clear, I don’t want them to die - 00:29:45.367 --> 00:29:53.356 and so long as they have half a brain somewhere in the C-suite, they’ll grab hold of the lifeline Tesla just threw them. 00:29:53.356 --> 00:29:58.577 Making NACS a real standard, and making it speak the same protocols as CCS, 00:29:58.577 --> 00:30:06.715 means a simple cable swap will allow Electrify America or whoever else to sell their services to Tesla drivers 00:30:06.715 --> 00:30:14.130 (at least most Tesla drivers… I won’t get into the fiasco that is the Tesla cars that can’t speak CCS). 00:30:14.130 --> 00:30:21.675 Honestly, releasing their connector to the wild is without a doubt the most altruistic thing Tesla has ever done, 00:30:21.675 --> 00:30:29.535 and I applaud them for following through on their stated goal of accelerating electrification and not just their own sales. 00:30:29.535 --> 00:30:32.543 But now, back to what I had already scripted. 00:30:32.543 --> 00:30:35.277 Let me tee up the next sentence. 00:30:35.277 --> 00:30:38.345 While the transition to NACS might be pretty seamless, 00:30:38.345 --> 00:30:43.710 there is still a pretty big wrinkle, though, and that’s cars like mine. 00:30:43.710 --> 00:30:50.429 Hyundai and Kia decided to develop an 800V battery architecture for the E-GMP platform. 00:30:50.429 --> 00:30:53.737 It’s an amazing battery pack, and 00:30:53.737 --> 00:31:01.927 (at least when I’m on the right charger) I have repeatedly experienced real-world charge times of less than 20 minutes. 00:31:01.927 --> 00:31:08.023 And while we now know that Tesla’s *connector* can support charging at that voltage, 00:31:08.023 --> 00:31:16.908 literally none of Tesla’s chargers in the US actually support battery pack voltages above 500 volts. 00:31:16.908 --> 00:31:19.641 This will slowly be changing, though - 00:31:19.641 --> 00:31:23.478 V4 superchargers are able to output that voltage. 00:31:23.478 --> 00:31:27.985 However, as of now, none have been deployed in the US. 00:31:27.985 --> 00:31:35.080 Accordingly, companies that have invested in 800V architectures, mainly Hyundai/Kia, Porsche, and Lucid, 00:31:35.080 --> 00:31:41.205 aren’t exactly in a rush to sign onto the NACS standard because even once adapters are available, 00:31:41.205 --> 00:31:48.973 trips to a Tesla Supercharger will be either painfully slow or just won’t work at all for those cars. 00:31:48.973 --> 00:31:55.225 Many 800V cars have some provision to charge on 400V-class DC fast chargers, 00:31:55.225 --> 00:31:57.821 but it’s usually only a trickle. 00:31:57.821 --> 00:32:03.129 Until Tesla actually rolls out 1000V capable charging sites in large numbers, 00:32:03.129 --> 00:32:09.675 having support for NACS charging just doesn’t matter for cars with 800V battery packs. 00:32:09.675 --> 00:32:12.841 That is, of course, only in the immediate term. 00:32:12.841 --> 00:32:15.210 And there’s been some interesting news! 00:32:15.210 --> 00:32:19.386 A new as-yet-unnamed joint venture was recently announced between 00:32:19.386 --> 00:32:24.879 BMW, General Motors, Honda, Hyundai/Kia, Mercedes-Benz and Stellantis 00:32:24.879 --> 00:32:29.253 which aims for a pretty ambitious charging network in the US. 00:32:29.253 --> 00:32:36.589 This network is going to support both CCS and NACS, presumably with each dispenser having two cables. 00:32:36.589 --> 00:32:39.909 And honestly, this is something that’s important to touch on. 00:32:39.909 --> 00:32:45.510 The cable and plug are a small fraction of the expense in building a charging station. 00:32:45.725 --> 00:32:51.839 Adding support for both standards, especially since the comms will be the same, is therefore trivial - 00:32:51.839 --> 00:32:57.762 and in fact, Electrify America has already announced their intention to add the NACS connector to their chargers 00:32:57.762 --> 00:33:00.737 since it is literally just a cable swap. 00:33:00.737 --> 00:33:07.355 The newly-announced charging joint venture may wish to continue supporting CCS for their members’ existing vehicles, 00:33:07.355 --> 00:33:13.299 or perhaps because it’s currently a requirement to obtain government funding under the NEVI program. 00:33:13.299 --> 00:33:18.579 Regardless, the reason for CCS support on this new network doesn’t really matter, 00:33:18.579 --> 00:33:23.861 but since supporting both plug types on the same charger is pretty easy, 00:33:23.861 --> 00:33:28.770 I’m not quite ready to say the death knell of CCS has rung. 00:33:28.770 --> 00:33:37.624 But again, NACS is certainly a nicer charging experience, so how long support for CCS continues is an open question. 00:33:37.624 --> 00:33:45.459 Once there truly is no downside to choosing to support NACS, then that’s probably where most automakers will go. 00:33:45.459 --> 00:33:48.605 The future, as ever, is TBD. 00:33:48.605 --> 00:33:52.542 And now, the final section where I get a little bit spicy. 00:33:53.045 --> 00:33:55.762 As if I successfully hid that before. 00:33:55.762 --> 00:34:00.957 So, Tesla definitely has the most reliable charging network right now, 00:34:00.957 --> 00:34:04.080 and for Tesla owners, it’s a great experience. 00:34:04.080 --> 00:34:09.770 Tesla wrote the software on both sides of the equation, which not only ensures reliability, 00:34:09.770 --> 00:34:16.208 but also allows them to do stuff like use the car’s infotainment screen for all charger-related needs. 00:34:16.208 --> 00:34:18.940 Like, for instance, paying for charging. 00:34:18.940 --> 00:34:23.384 You can put your credit or debit cards into your Tesla Wallet (or whatever they call it) 00:34:23.384 --> 00:34:28.990 and then pick which one you want to use for the charging session all from the comfort of the driver’s seat. 00:34:28.990 --> 00:34:31.940 Since that’s all handled by the hardware in the car, 00:34:31.940 --> 00:34:36.260 the chargers themselves don’t need any sort of user interface. 00:34:36.260 --> 00:34:38.867 They just have the plug, and when you stick it in your car, 00:34:38.867 --> 00:34:43.146 the charger knows which car it’s plugged into, whether and how billing gets sorted, 00:34:43.146 --> 00:34:45.750 and then starts the charging session automatically. 00:34:46.360 --> 00:34:50.000 That is… neat, I guess. 00:34:50.000 --> 00:34:53.713 But, and this might very well be an unpopular opinion, 00:34:53.713 --> 00:34:55.320 I don’t care about that! 00:34:55.320 --> 00:34:57.516 Like, at all. 00:34:57.516 --> 00:35:05.433 In fact, I’m kind of actively against that becoming the norm and vehemently disagree with people who think this sort of technology, 00:35:05.433 --> 00:35:07.886 more generically known as plug-and-charge, 00:35:07.886 --> 00:35:11.998 is something every car and charging provider needs to support and embrace. 00:35:11.998 --> 00:35:14.699 And ya wanna know why I feel that way? 00:35:14.699 --> 00:35:20.750 Because, perhaps it escaped your notice, but we’ve had payment solved for decades now. 00:35:20.750 --> 00:35:26.786 Call me a caveman if you will but I still carry around this thing and it has these little plastic rectangles in it, 00:35:26.786 --> 00:35:29.828 and when I have to pay for things, I insert - or sometimes, 00:35:29.828 --> 00:35:35.164 sometimes I even just tap - those little rectangles on a payment terminal and golly gee it works! 00:35:35.415 --> 00:35:36.804 Every time! 00:35:37.342 --> 00:35:40.909 A thing that seems to happen a lot in the electric car world, 00:35:40.909 --> 00:35:44.338 and specifically the Tesla world if I’m being honest, 00:35:44.338 --> 00:35:49.938 is the presumption that new and different always equals better. 00:35:49.938 --> 00:35:55.095 Meanwhile, outsiders are often more puzzled than they are enthused. 00:35:55.095 --> 00:36:01.743 To hopefully elucidate what I mean here, if I were to approach someone with a gas-powered car and say, 00:36:01.743 --> 00:36:04.968 “Hey there, I see you like fueling at Shell. 00:36:04.968 --> 00:36:08.325 Are you tired of having to use your payment card at every fill-up? 00:36:08.325 --> 00:36:13.436 Well, simply make an account with us and with this little chip next to your car’s fill hole, 00:36:13.436 --> 00:36:17.076 our pumps will automatically authorize payment and start filling!” 00:36:17.901 --> 00:36:20.366 … do you think they’d be all that excited? 00:36:20.366 --> 00:36:25.250 Actually, ExxonMobile tried that back in the late ‘90s with Speedpass - remember that? 00:36:25.250 --> 00:36:30.572 It was a fob thing you’d stick on your key ring, so not quite the same thing as plug-and-charge, 00:36:30.572 --> 00:36:35.405 but since it only worked at certain gas stations and didn’t really solve any problems, 00:36:35.405 --> 00:36:37.219 it wasn’t all that popular. 00:36:37.219 --> 00:36:41.000 Plus it ended up having some security vulnerabilities, imagine that. 00:36:41.000 --> 00:36:44.772 And that’s the key to my curmudgeonly take: 00:36:44.772 --> 00:36:48.552 does plug-and-charge actually solve any problems? 00:36:48.552 --> 00:36:53.264 To someone who is used to the Tesla ecosystem, it sure looks like it does. 00:36:53.264 --> 00:37:03.996 Everybody agrees, including me, that plug-and-charge is miles better than the kludgy app experience we are often forced to deal with on other charging networks. 00:37:03.996 --> 00:37:09.501 And to lay my cards out on the line, I’ve used EVgo’s Autocharge system 00:37:09.501 --> 00:37:14.414 (which is technically different in weedsy ways that aren’t worth getting into here but is basically the same) 00:37:14.414 --> 00:37:22.208 and, yeah, I’ll agree it’s pretty neat to experience just plugging the car in and having the charge session start automagically. 00:37:22.208 --> 00:37:24.626 I get why you like that. 00:37:24.626 --> 00:37:27.551 But is that something I actually need? 00:37:27.551 --> 00:37:30.578 No! At most it saves maybe 10 seconds. 00:37:30.578 --> 00:37:35.437 At least, not if normal payments were actually an option that worked. 00:37:35.437 --> 00:37:40.567 Today’s landscape, where Tesla’s deep integration between vehicle and charging network 00:37:40.567 --> 00:37:49.640 stands against third-party networks that often rely on annoying and broken apps and might have a flaky payment card reader if you’re lucky 00:37:49.640 --> 00:37:53.275 presents us with an obviously a false choice. 00:37:53.275 --> 00:37:56.373 But for some reason, a lot of folks don’t see it that way. 00:37:56.373 --> 00:38:00.868 For example, I’ve run across countless people both online and in person 00:38:00.868 --> 00:38:06.833 who strongly believe Tesla’s approach of removing as many points of failure as possible on their chargers, 00:38:06.833 --> 00:38:09.975 to the point of removing the user interface entirely, 00:38:09.975 --> 00:38:13.052 is the reason their network is so reliable. 00:38:13.052 --> 00:38:17.301 And thus, support for plug-and-charge is the way every other network has to go. 00:38:18.450 --> 00:38:21.115 I think this is a reasonable position in a vacuum, 00:38:21.115 --> 00:38:28.888 but consider, if you will, just how incredibly weird and bonkers the current charging landscape actually is. 00:38:28.888 --> 00:38:37.391 Pretty much every public charging location, Tesla or otherwise, exists in the outskirts of some parking lot somewhere. 00:38:37.391 --> 00:38:41.218 They rarely have canopies protecting the equipment from the elements. 00:38:41.218 --> 00:38:45.720 They’re almost always unattended which makes them susceptible to vandalism. 00:38:45.720 --> 00:38:49.183 And even when they’re co-located with another business, 00:38:49.183 --> 00:38:56.660 tending to the chargers is not something the employees of the Walmart are going to care about or even have the time for. 00:38:56.660 --> 00:38:58.200 Why is this important? 00:38:58.200 --> 00:39:07.039 Because I think we need to recognize that charging locations of today put the user-facing equipment in uniquely hostile environments. 00:39:07.039 --> 00:39:12.212 Tesla has done a good job of making charging reliable under such conditions. 00:39:12.212 --> 00:39:20.954 But in my opinion, those conditions are a result of the transitional period we are in and not something I would expect to remain the norm. 00:39:20.954 --> 00:39:23.790 In fact, I really hope it doesn’t. 00:39:24.436 --> 00:39:28.340 You know what I really miss when taking road trips in my electric car? 00:39:28.771 --> 00:39:31.080 Those little buckets with windshield squeegees. 00:39:31.080 --> 00:39:35.400 I still have to swing by gas stations just to clean my windows! 00:39:35.400 --> 00:39:39.274 And sure, having a Walmart near the chargers is often quite handy, 00:39:39.274 --> 00:39:47.113 but it’s usually a pretty long walk to the entrance to ensure shoppers don’t take charging spots for normal parking spots. 00:39:47.113 --> 00:39:52.611 And boy do I wish I could plug my car in while protected from rain and snow like, y’know, 00:39:52.611 --> 00:39:55.569 gas stations do almost as a rule. 00:39:55.569 --> 00:39:56.569 Canopies. 00:39:56.569 --> 00:39:59.149 It's like a roof over your head! 00:39:59.149 --> 00:40:06.560 And I also hope that drivers with disabilities will be able to expect an attendant to help them plug their car in when they need it, 00:40:06.560 --> 00:40:09.044 just like gas stations have today. 00:40:09.044 --> 00:40:12.220 Oh, and pull-through charging might be handy. 00:40:12.220 --> 00:40:15.963 Tesla wouldn’t be dealing with Cablegate if they thought that one through. 00:40:15.963 --> 00:40:24.066 While I know some EV drivers loathe the idea that charging locations might start resembling gas stations, 00:40:24.066 --> 00:40:29.352 I am certain that that is going to happen eventually - at least along major highways. 00:40:29.352 --> 00:40:34.793 They'll probably look a little different, maybe they’ll have lounges and restaurants rather than convenience stores 00:40:34.793 --> 00:40:37.878 (though what exactly is wrong with a convenience store I don’t know), 00:40:37.878 --> 00:40:44.637 but people (including me) want a dedicated, well-lit, and staffed placed to charge their cars, 00:40:44.637 --> 00:40:47.724 a place where they’re protected from the elements while they plug-in, 00:40:47.724 --> 00:40:50.694 a place where they can use the bathroom and grab a bite to eat, 00:40:50.694 --> 00:40:54.719 and a place where they can wash their dang windshields. 00:40:54.719 --> 00:40:59.012 If that sounds like a gas station but with chargers rather than pumps, 00:40:59.012 --> 00:41:01.304 that’s because that’s exactly what that is. 00:41:01.304 --> 00:41:04.432 Why do you think gas stations look like that? 00:41:04.432 --> 00:41:09.538 It’s because they have amenities that drivers need and want on-site. 00:41:09.538 --> 00:41:11.658 I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again, 00:41:11.658 --> 00:41:19.891 truck stop chains like Love’s, Pilot, and TravelCenters of America are uniquely well-positioned for cross-country EV charging. 00:41:19.891 --> 00:41:23.076 Luckily some of them are starting to take advantage of that. 00:41:23.076 --> 00:41:30.642 And funnily enough, gas stations have never needed to resort to weird ways to pay for the gas they sell. 00:41:30.642 --> 00:41:35.630 Self-service pumps have robust payment card readers that rarely fail. 00:41:35.630 --> 00:41:41.290 And even if they do, the attendant on duty can attempt basic troubleshooting or at least flag it for repair. 00:41:41.685 --> 00:41:45.967 Heck, you can even go inside and talk to that attendant and pay for your gas... 00:41:45.967 --> 00:41:47.516 with cash! 00:41:47.516 --> 00:41:49.318 Remember that stuff? 00:41:49.318 --> 00:41:54.561 Sure, if you’d like to sign up for whatever loyalty program that particular brand of fueling station offers, 00:41:54.561 --> 00:41:59.053 that’s by all means an option, but it's not necessary. 00:41:59.053 --> 00:42:03.691 If every car charger out there just accepted payments like a gas pump does, 00:42:03.691 --> 00:42:06.203 this whole discussion wouldn’t even be happening! 00:42:06.203 --> 00:42:14.539 And personally, I don’t want to sign up for yet another service that has my payment details and personal information. 00:42:14.539 --> 00:42:18.010 If you like the idea of plug-and-charge, cool. 00:42:18.010 --> 00:42:21.460 But I see it as a nice-to-have option, not a requirement. 00:42:21.460 --> 00:42:28.020 And I will actively avoid using charging networks which require me to sign up for something just to use it. 00:42:28.020 --> 00:42:30.264 Knowing that I'm repeating myself, 00:42:30.264 --> 00:42:38.417 a choice between chargers that support plug-and-charge and those which just accept normal payments is a false choice. 00:42:38.417 --> 00:42:41.628 If you’re really that worried about charger reliability, 00:42:41.628 --> 00:42:49.930 then I suppose you can limit it to contactless payments on the dispenser and use, like, one of those little payment island like you often find in parking lots 00:42:49.930 --> 00:42:51.559 for other payment methods. 00:42:51.559 --> 00:42:54.055 Or, y’know, have an attendant. 00:42:54.055 --> 00:42:56.359 Like a gas station. 00:42:56.359 --> 00:42:59.480 If you’re establishing a business which sells vehicle charging, 00:42:59.480 --> 00:43:01.119 don’t make it weird, 00:43:01.119 --> 00:43:02.867 don’t make people jump through hoops, 00:43:02.867 --> 00:43:05.984 just be a normal business, please. 00:43:05.984 --> 00:43:12.104 And I know there are costs to accepting card payments on-site, please don’t assume I’m ignorant of that. 00:43:12.104 --> 00:43:18.750 I just view that as a basic cost of doing business, and trying to get around that is hostile to your customers. 00:43:18.750 --> 00:43:22.369 I do not want to normalize that reality. 00:43:22.369 --> 00:43:28.265 Where I think plug-and-charge actually has more merit is for public AC charging. 00:43:28.265 --> 00:43:31.511 Solving the charging problem for those who can’t charge at home 00:43:31.511 --> 00:43:35.164 has always been the biggest barrier to EV adoption, 00:43:35.164 --> 00:43:41.441 and I’m personally pretty worried that we’re gonna view urban DC fast chargers as the solution. 00:43:42.087 --> 00:43:44.106 That is certainly an option, 00:43:44.106 --> 00:43:48.836 and there are a surprising number of people who are making that work, but... 00:43:48.836 --> 00:43:51.438 it’s not a smart use of resources. 00:43:51.438 --> 00:43:56.701 If people aren’t able to charge where they keep their cars, that’s the problem we need to solve 00:43:56.701 --> 00:44:00.989 because that infrastructure is much cheaper and easier to deploy. 00:44:01.240 --> 00:44:06.837 The issue has always been one of how to pay for that infrastructure and charging. 00:44:06.837 --> 00:44:12.027 Landlords are never that excited to spend money in service of making their tenant’s lives easier, 00:44:12.027 --> 00:44:15.892 so they’re not exactly champing at the bit to install chargers. 00:44:15.892 --> 00:44:20.536 And that problem is even harder in neighborhoods with on-street parking. 00:44:20.536 --> 00:44:27.495 Personally, I wish power utilities would just step-in and create their own low-power charging networks for these situations, 00:44:27.495 --> 00:44:31.221 and I think plug-and-charge is a great fit there. 00:44:31.221 --> 00:44:35.788 A bank of on-street level 2 chargers that know which vehicles are plugged into them 00:44:35.788 --> 00:44:41.917 could simply direct the cost of a vehicle’s charge session onto the electric bill of that vehicle owner. 00:44:41.917 --> 00:44:43.936 And with smart electric meters, 00:44:43.936 --> 00:44:51.264 those chargers could tap into the electrical supply of existing buildings without impacting the power bill of that building’s occupants. 00:44:51.264 --> 00:44:54.970 Governments and electric utilities, you are free to use this idea! 00:44:54.970 --> 00:44:57.104 In fact, please do. 00:44:57.104 --> 00:45:04.112 Of course there are other ways to make that scheme work - RFID tags on key fobs would be another way to start a charge session, 00:45:04.112 --> 00:45:08.325 and that might even be cheaper and easier to implement than plug-and-charge. 00:45:08.325 --> 00:45:09.146 I don’t know. 00:45:09.146 --> 00:45:15.816 All I’m hoping to get across here is that I actually think plug-and-charge makes more sense for slow, AC charging 00:45:15.816 --> 00:45:19.859 than it does DC fast charging locations along highways. 00:45:19.859 --> 00:45:25.822 I am all but certain DC fast charging locations are going to mimic gas stations before too long, 00:45:25.822 --> 00:45:30.893 and with the amenities and services they will likely provide in addition to charging cars, 00:45:30.893 --> 00:45:34.323 they’re gonna need to accept normal card payments anyway. 00:45:34.574 --> 00:45:37.017 But, that’s the end of that rant. 00:45:37.017 --> 00:45:41.392 Again, if you like plug-and-charge, by all means have at it. 00:45:41.392 --> 00:45:46.383 I just don’t want us careening to a place where that’s the only way to start a charge. 00:45:46.383 --> 00:45:48.337 I’d rather just do it on my own, please. 00:45:48.337 --> 00:45:50.131 No signing up for anything extra. 00:45:50.131 --> 00:45:55.359 No fiddling with my car’s infotainment screen when I want to use my work card for a work trip. 00:45:55.359 --> 00:45:57.391 Just normal payments. 00:45:57.391 --> 00:45:58.212 Figure it out! 00:45:58.212 --> 00:46:02.444 Literally every other industry has, and I do not buy your excuses. 00:46:03.054 --> 00:46:05.003 Uh, to summarize this video, 00:46:05.003 --> 00:46:10.000 it sure looks like NACS is the charging port of the future, and I think that’s perfectly fine. 00:46:10.000 --> 00:46:16.070 It has always been a nicer plug, and now that we know it does match the capabilities of CCS, 00:46:16.070 --> 00:46:18.890 there’s no reason not to use it here in North America. 00:46:18.890 --> 00:46:23.692 And nobody with a CCS-equipped car has reason to fear being left behind. 00:46:23.979 --> 00:46:26.800 Adapters will come one way or another. 00:46:26.800 --> 00:46:33.254 I really really, really hope we don’t continue down the road we’re on of weird charger activation methods - 00:46:33.254 --> 00:46:35.708 please just accept normal payments! 00:46:35.708 --> 00:46:40.210 Even vending machines now take cards almost as a rule. 00:46:40.210 --> 00:46:42.930 And in general, things are looking up! 00:46:42.930 --> 00:46:47.039 We still have plenty of problems to sort with electric vehicles, 00:46:47.039 --> 00:46:49.765 but the plug wars look to be at an end. 00:46:49.765 --> 00:46:51.075 Speaking of ends, 00:46:51.075 --> 00:46:52.258 this is the end. 00:46:53.514 --> 00:46:54.766 OK I lied. 00:46:54.766 --> 00:47:00.137 One footnote I want to throw in and almost forgot about is vehicle-to-X technology. 00:47:00.137 --> 00:47:04.278 A feature that has so far never been implemented on a Tesla vehicle, 00:47:04.278 --> 00:47:09.142 despite how amazingly high-tech and ahead-of-the-curve their vehicles purpotedly are, 00:47:09.142 --> 00:47:17.534 is a way to conveniently get the energy stored in their battery packs out of the car for purposes other than driving. 00:47:17.534 --> 00:47:20.941 For instance, my car offers vehicle-to-load, 00:47:20.941 --> 00:47:28.177 and this adapter will allow you to power anything that uses a standard household outlet through the vehicle's charge port. 00:47:28.177 --> 00:47:37.699 This is fantastic for emergencies, and I determined in a test that I could run my essentials for about a week from my car should I need to. 00:47:37.699 --> 00:47:43.150 We may never know why exactly Tesla hasn’t bothered to implement this feature in their vehicles. 00:47:43.150 --> 00:47:45.493 But at least they’ll sell you a Powerwall. 00:47:45.816 --> 00:47:47.985 [pregnant pause so you can chew on that] 00:47:48.344 --> 00:47:56.367 Anyway, there is no technical reason Vehicle to Load or Vehicle to Grid technologies couldn’t be implemented through the NACS connector. 00:47:56.367 --> 00:48:01.771 Which is pretty much why I didn’t talk about it, but I figure some folks would like me to speak to that. 00:48:02.130 --> 00:48:06.218 I have… mixed feelings on vehicle-to-grid, 00:48:06.218 --> 00:48:09.997 as I think it’s pretty tricky when it comes to battery wear and tear, 00:48:09.997 --> 00:48:14.720 but I certainly think vehicle-to-load is a must-have feature. 00:48:14.720 --> 00:48:18.904 Whether that’s AC power backfeeding through the charge port like my car does, 00:48:18.904 --> 00:48:26.910 or connecting an external inverter to the car’s battery pack through the DC pins like Ford does with their Intelligent Backup Power system, 00:48:26.910 --> 00:48:29.858 the NACS port is certainly capable. 00:48:29.858 --> 00:48:35.067 It just has to actually be put into practice by an automaker daring enough to do so. 00:48:36.036 --> 00:48:38.709 OK now this is the end.