[KeithMoon]

It would be a simple matter to authenticate that the attached vehicle is a GM model and not charge otherwise. Why should Tesla be able to restrict charging on their infrastructure to Teslas, while GM allows Teslas to charge on their infrastructure. That doesn't sound fair.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/28/business/gm-bechtel-electric-car-charging-stations/index.html

 

[The Other Tom]

Unless I missed it, the article doesn't say Tesla can use the chargers. As you know, they can't currently use EVgo or EA chargers (at least in the US), so I don't see where the new network will be any different.
Also, this concerns me:
Neither company plans to put money into this project, though. The two companies will create a separate corporation to build the charging network and other companies are being invited to invest in it.

 

[GJETSON]

As you know, they can't currently use EVgo or EA chargers (at least in the US)

That only applies to the Model 3.


https://s3.amazonaws.com/plugshare.production.photos/photos/205096.jpg

 

[GJETSON]

As to GM hooking up with a bloated corporation, with zero EV charging experience...this is a joke. Check back in a decade to see how they are doing.

 

[davioh2001]

As to GM hooking up with a bloated corporation, with zero EV charging experience...this is a joke. Check back in a decade to see how they are doing.

I don't care WHO builds them as long as they work well , placed where needed and are priced below gas equivalent.

 

[GJETSON]

I don't care WHO builds them as long as they work well , placed where needed and are priced below gas equivalent.

If you think anything Bechtel is connected with will be reasonable priced, think again.

 

[KeithMoon]

I don't care WHO builds them as long as they work well , placed where needed and are priced below gas equivalent.

If you think anything Bechtel is connected with will be reasonable priced, think again.

Well, I am not sure about Bechtel specifically, but from personal experience with Black&Veatch (similar company) while expensive, they definitely do design right.

 

[KeithMoon]

Unless I missed it, the article doesn't say Tesla can use the chargers. As you know, they can't currently use EVgo or EA chargers (at least in the US), so I don't see where the new network will be any different.
Also, this concerns me:
Neither company plans to put money into this project, though. The two companies will create a separate corporation to build the charging network and other companies are being invited to invest in it.

The article makes it pretty clear that the plan is to be the design and construction part of the corporation and the funding and retail side of the operation will be an energy company. I am pretty sure that no company wants Teslas on their network because charging networks are quickly becoming oversubscribed and by the time this is built they will be completely oversubscribed, so there will be no requirement to solicit more demand.

There is zero direct money in charging networks, so the energy companies will just be doing it for PR, although longer term there is the possibility to derive secondary revenue from colocated retail (a business model energy companies are acquainted with).

 

[The Other Tom]

That only applies to the Model 3.


https://s3.amazonaws.com/plugshare.production.photos/photos/205096.jpg

The model S in the picture you linked is using a ChaDeMo adapter. CCS adapters aren't available in the US....yet
https://electrek.co/2019/05/07/tesla-ccs-adapter-model-s-x-retrofits/

 

[The Other Tom]

The article makes it pretty clear that the plan is to be the design and construction part of the corporation and the funding and retail side of the operation will be an energy company. I am pretty sure that no company wants Teslas on their network because charging networks are quickly becoming oversubscribed and by the time this is built they will be completely oversubscribed, so there will be no requirement to solicit more demand.

There is zero direct money in charging networks, so the energy companies will just be doing it for PR, although longer term there is the possibility to derive secondary revenue from colocated retail (a business model energy companies are acquainted with).

The funding part is what scares me. Some energy companies are seeing the light and installing chargers, but in my experience it's few and far between. So we'll see.
It's still a good sign that GM is "trying" to get a charging network going. I hope they are successful.

 

[GJETSON]

The model S in the picture you linked is using a ChaDeMo adapter. CCS adapters aren't available in the US....yet
https://electrek.co/2019/05/07/tesla-ccs-adapter-model-s-x-retrofits/

Does it say somewhere that they will only be supporting CCS?

 

[bro1999]

As to GM hooking up with a bloated corporation, with zero EV charging experience...this is a joke. Check back in a decade to see how they are doing.

This is huge news. Is the rollout going to be flawless? Probably not. But GM's gone from "we are not in the business of building charging stations" to committing to build a national fast charging network, an about face from 3 years ago.

Let's not look a gift horse in the mouth. This is almost like a bum begging for money, then complaining when someone only gives him $5 instead of $20. Seriously.

 

[bro1999]

Does it say somewhere that they will only be supporting CCS?

GM vehicles are CCS only. GM is not under legal requirements to build a charging network that supports all public standards, like VW/EA is. So it's assured these stations will be CCS only. There is 0 business sense to support CHAdeMO.

 

[The Other Tom]

GM vehicles are CCS only. GM is not under legal requirements to build a charging network that supports all public standards, like VW/EA is. So it's assured these stations will be CCS only. There is 0 business sense to support CHAdeMO.

Correct. And since Tesla can't use CCS, we don't have to worry about Tesla using them---for now.

 

[redpoint5]

Charging infrastructure is unprofitable. It needs somewhere around a 30% utilization to break even.

Not wanting Tesla to use infrastructure will reduce utilization, make it unprofitable, and probably end in failure. That's not saying that Tesla traffic would make the chargers profitable, but it certainly doesn't help to exclude them.

I don't know why people get so butthurt about privately owned things having certain restrictions as the owner sees fit. I allow some people into my home, but not everyone. If you don't like it, go pound sand.

That said, I expect Tesla will open their charging infrastructure the moment that it would be a financially prudent thing to do. If people are buying Tesla's due to the exclusive charging network, why would they eliminate that advantage?

 

[GregBrew]

Well, I am not sure about Bechtel specifically, but from personal experience with Black&Veatch (similar company) while expensive, they definitely do design right.

I learned a truism in engineering program management:

In any project, there are Three Main Goals:

Get the product to market quickly;
Keep development costs low;
The resulting product is of high quality.

Pick two...

 

[raitchison]

GM & Bechtel partner on new DCFC network

https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/28/business/gm-bechtel-electric-car-charging-stations/index.html

Bechtel is a well established construction company.

Disappointing is that neither company plans on any direct investment into the new venture, instead they will seek outside investment to actually fund the build out, which means if there is no investment there will be no build-out.

But hey, now GM can claim they are actually doing something to support EV charging needs even if they really aren't.

 

[wonderbolt]

I learned a truism in engineering program management:

In any project, there are Three Main Goals:

Get the product to market quickly;
Keep development costs low;
The resulting product is of high quality.

Pick two...

And the short version I was taught was --> Good, Fast, or Cheep, pick any two.

 

[Dyefrog]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/28/business/gm-bechtel-electric-car-charging-stations/index.html

Bechtel is a well established construction company.

Disappointing is that neither company plans on any direct investment into the new venture, instead they will seek outside investment to actually fund the build out, which means if there is no investment there will be no build-out.

But hey, now GM can claim they are actually doing something to support EV charging needs even if they really aren't.

Yup, I'm unclear as to what GM's contribution actually is here. Are they just filing paperwork to incorporate a business venture? I can do that. Do they then assume a VC will pony up the coin?
As Redpoint mentioned and I completely agree, there's no money in charging for charging, yet. They need to be plugged in to make money and the numbers of non-Tesla EV's that road trip (face it, the vast majority of EV's only need to pay for charging when on a road trip, not urban charging) is a long way from making them profitable.
On the bright side, it's at least an admission by GM that EV's have their attention which is an about face from Mary Barra's comment a few years ago that GM wouldn't contribute a nickel towards a charging infrastructure. Wait, scratch that, they still aren't contributing a nickel.

 

[bro1999]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/28/business/gm-bechtel-electric-car-charging-stations/index.html

Bechtel is a well established construction company.

Disappointing is that neither company plans on any direct investment into the new venture, instead they will seek outside investment to actually fund the build out, which means if there is no investment there will be no build-out.

But hey, now GM can claim they are actually doing something to support EV charging needs even if they really aren't.

Yup, I'm unclear as to what GM's contribution actually is here. Are they just filing paperwork to incorporate a business venture? I can do that. Do they then assume a VC will pony up the coin?
As Redpoint mentioned and I completely agree, there's no money in charging for charging, yet. They need to be plugged in to make money and the numbers of non-Tesla EV's that road trip (face it, the vast majority of EV's only need to pay for charging when on a road trip, not urban charging) is a long way from making them profitable.
On the bright side, it's at least an admission by GM that EV's have their attention which is an about face from Mary Barra's comment a few years ago that GM wouldn't contribute a nickel towards a charging infrastructure. Wait, scratch that, they still aren't contributing a nickel.

Oh look, a Tesla apologist poo-pooing GM doing something to promote EVs and fast charging infrastructure. Imagine that. Shocked, I tell ya, shocked.
And GM has contributed more than a nickel. Once again, another blatant lie from TSLA zealot Dyefrog. What else is new.
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-rel...t-charging-hubs-in-los-angeles-300835832.html
Now we all wait for your all too predictable retcon of yet another one of your false statements. I still laugh at your feeble attempt at trying to convince people Bolt owners are the ones criticizing non-Tesla fast charging infrastructure and not Tesla owners.