3 ms·

Nobody “won” the charging standard war except for the consumer. Tesla had a great connector and a huge charging network, but it was closed and proprietary with

Nobody “won” the charging standard war except for the consumer. Tesla had a great connector and a huge charging network, but it was closed and proprietary with a non-interoperable digital protocol. Government and the rest of the industry demanded an open standard with an interoperable digital protocol that allowed for payments. Tesla thus faced the choice of having everyone adopt the inferior (open) CCS connector, making their current cars basically obsolete; or else releasing their excellent physical connector and opening their chargers to the whole world and adopting the existing CCS digital protocol. They rationally chose the latter and all of North America moved onto it. This is certainly “winning” in the sense that Tesla chose the option that wasn’t a total disaster for Tesla and their customers, and the world got to benefit from an excellent open standard. ETA: If believing that this is “winning” causes Tesla folks to encourage further positive-sum behavior, ignore everything I said: Tesla kicked everyone’s ass. Rah.

enslavedrobot 2y ago
Tesla tried to get their charging standard adopted years ago from the outset of their business. The incumbents rejected the standard. Now they are adopting it.
- GuB-42 2y ago
  As I understand it, it came with strings attached, and incumbents understandably rejected it. Now they really opened the system, that's what drove the adoption. Another thing: Not the whole world adopted the Tesla connector, only North America (that's why it is called NACS). Europe uses CCS-2, including for Tesla cars. CCS-2 is better than CCS, and arguably better than NACS in Europe as it supports 3-phase AC.
  - ethagknight 2y ago
    Why is 3 phase AC better? Doesn’t that just require additional components in the car to convert to DC?
    - HappMacDonald 2y ago
      Well they said "better in Europe". So I don't think they are endorsing 3 phase AC as much as endorsing doing as the Romans do when in Rome.
    - Dries007 2y ago
      3 Phase is (normally, in Europe) 3x400V+N. Single phase is 230V. AC chargers here (Belgium) are usually 11kW or 22kW capable (at least nominally). This is 16 or 32A. A normal household socket ciruict is 20A here, so this is not very abnormal wiring wise. Most homes are actually hooked up to three phase power, but just have a single phase meter, so an upgrade is usually affordable. If you want to offer 11kW or 22kW single phase, you'd need 47A or 95A service, with massive cables etc. Hence why most single phase chargers are 7.4kW limited here (32A). Also: Almost no cars would even take that in on 1 phase as far as I know. Higher amperage is what costs more in terms of losses and cables, so less amps is good. 3x230V also exists, but at least here, is being phased out.
      - pyrale 2y ago
        Is there still a N needed for 3phase? The big selling point of triphased power is that you don't need a neutral line, which is obviously a big benefit for transport. Is there a benefit to add a neutral line for battery loading?
        Dries007 2y ago
        Yes and no. No on the distribution network (aka up to the transformer in the street usually, but for sure not on the xxx kV lines) because there the lines are balanced. In your house, you do, because the voltage between 2 phases is 400V, but the voltage between 1 phase and N is 230V. So you have "low" voltage for "normal" appliances, but high-voltage (and thus high-power) available for high power applications. For example: EV charging, induction cooking, home heating / AC etc. For an EV usually the N wouldn't be needed, if you always charged at a balanced power on all phases. But from my experience, the full 3 phase power is only used when the battery is empty. At some point the charger switches back to single phase to better modulate the current I guess. Sidenote: On a 3x230V net, you don't have an N, but that means you also don't have a non-power conducting wire either! Meaning: double pole switches and breakers are required to prevent shocks. This is why these are generally required in Belgium btw. See also Y vs Δ distrubution nets: https://www.allaboutcircuits.com/textbook/alternating-current/chpt-10/three-phase-y-delta-configurations/ https://www.allaboutcircuits.com/textbook/alternating-curren...
  - ianburrell 2y ago
    North America uses CCS-1. CCS usually refers to the charging protocol. Important change is that NACS is the Tesla connector with the open CCS protocol. That means can use dumb adapters for CCS-1. And chargers can change to better connector without changing electronics.
silisili 2y ago
Yes consumers won but I don't understand how it's not a win for Tesla. Every other company on Earth had a chance to make a superior system and failed. Tesla said fine use this based on ours, and they rightly recognized it was superior. Win for Tesla, win for consumers. Nobody really lost there, either, which maybe why it doesn't feel like a typical win.
- plouffy 2y ago
  You make it sound like Tesla voluntarily made the decision to share. They probably thought they had a moat.
  - silisili 2y ago
    The decision was completely voluntary, not following your logic. If your argument is that they were afraid of a competitor, that may be valid, but doesn't make their actions any less voluntary.
    - yardstick 2y ago
      More like voluntarily pushed or strong-armed by the prospect of governments mandating Tesla support a different connector thus forcing more complexity in their cars and chargers.
      - KoolKat23 2y ago
        They offered their patent to others very early on, before it crossed regulators minds.
        matthewdgreen 2y ago
        They offered their patent conditioned on a reciprocal patent grant (or agreement not to enforce any patents against Tesla) from the takers, as far as I understand. The difference with NACS is that they genuinely opened the connector and removed that requirement.
burnished 2y ago
That still reads as a win?

enslavedrobot 2y ago

Tesla tried to get their charging standard adopted years ago from the outset of their business. The incumbents rejected the standard. Now they are adopting it.

GuB-42 2y ago
As I understand it, it came with strings attached, and incumbents understandably rejected it. Now they really opened the system, that's what drove the adoption. Another thing: Not the whole world adopted the Tesla connector, only North America (that's why it is called NACS). Europe uses CCS-2, including for Tesla cars. CCS-2 is better than CCS, and arguably better than NACS in Europe as it supports 3-phase AC.
- ethagknight 2y ago
  Why is 3 phase AC better? Doesn’t that just require additional components in the car to convert to DC?
  - HappMacDonald 2y ago
    Well they said "better in Europe". So I don't think they are endorsing 3 phase AC as much as endorsing doing as the Romans do when in Rome.
  - Dries007 2y ago
    3 Phase is (normally, in Europe) 3x400V+N. Single phase is 230V. AC chargers here (Belgium) are usually 11kW or 22kW capable (at least nominally). This is 16 or 32A. A normal household socket ciruict is 20A here, so this is not very abnormal wiring wise. Most homes are actually hooked up to three phase power, but just have a single phase meter, so an upgrade is usually affordable. If you want to offer 11kW or 22kW single phase, you'd need 47A or 95A service, with massive cables etc. Hence why most single phase chargers are 7.4kW limited here (32A). Also: Almost no cars would even take that in on 1 phase as far as I know. Higher amperage is what costs more in terms of losses and cables, so less amps is good. 3x230V also exists, but at least here, is being phased out.
    - pyrale 2y ago
      Is there still a N needed for 3phase? The big selling point of triphased power is that you don't need a neutral line, which is obviously a big benefit for transport. Is there a benefit to add a neutral line for battery loading?
      - Dries007 2y ago
        Yes and no. No on the distribution network (aka up to the transformer in the street usually, but for sure not on the xxx kV lines) because there the lines are balanced. In your house, you do, because the voltage between 2 phases is 400V, but the voltage between 1 phase and N is 230V. So you have "low" voltage for "normal" appliances, but high-voltage (and thus high-power) available for high power applications. For example: EV charging, induction cooking, home heating / AC etc. For an EV usually the N wouldn't be needed, if you always charged at a balanced power on all phases. But from my experience, the full 3 phase power is only used when the battery is empty. At some point the charger switches back to single phase to better modulate the current I guess. Sidenote: On a 3x230V net, you don't have an N, but that means you also don't have a non-power conducting wire either! Meaning: double pole switches and breakers are required to prevent shocks. This is why these are generally required in Belgium btw. See also Y vs Δ distrubution nets: https://www.allaboutcircuits.com/textbook/alternating-current/chpt-10/three-phase-y-delta-configurations/ https://www.allaboutcircuits.com/textbook/alternating-curren...
- ianburrell 2y ago
  North America uses CCS-1. CCS usually refers to the charging protocol. Important change is that NACS is the Tesla connector with the open CCS protocol. That means can use dumb adapters for CCS-1. And chargers can change to better connector without changing electronics.

silisili 2y ago

Yes consumers won but I don't understand how it's not a win for Tesla. Every other company on Earth had a chance to make a superior system and failed. Tesla said fine use this based on ours, and they rightly recognized it was superior. Win for Tesla, win for consumers. Nobody really lost there, either, which maybe why it doesn't feel like a typical win.

plouffy 2y ago
You make it sound like Tesla voluntarily made the decision to share. They probably thought they had a moat.
- silisili 2y ago
  The decision was completely voluntary, not following your logic. If your argument is that they were afraid of a competitor, that may be valid, but doesn't make their actions any less voluntary.
  - yardstick 2y ago
    More like voluntarily pushed or strong-armed by the prospect of governments mandating Tesla support a different connector thus forcing more complexity in their cars and chargers.
    - KoolKat23 2y ago
      They offered their patent to others very early on, before it crossed regulators minds.
      - matthewdgreen 2y ago
        They offered their patent conditioned on a reciprocal patent grant (or agreement not to enforce any patents against Tesla) from the takers, as far as I understand. The difference with NACS is that they genuinely opened the connector and removed that requirement.

burnished 2y ago

That still reads as a win?