Connect with us

Published

on

The Federal Highway Administration announced today that it will seek feedback on how government rules should be updated to account for the new NACS/J3400 charging standard, potentially unlocking $7.5 billion in federal subsidies for the Tesla-developed charging connector.

As part of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the US government has allocated $7.5 billion in subsidies to expand EV charging access. $5 billion of that is through the NEVI program, which is intended to install a nationwide backbone of fast chargers at least every 50 miles along America’s major roads in order to make EV road trips seamless.

But one requirement of that law was that the chargers installed must be accessible by multiple brands of electric car – standard, not proprietary. This requirement is obviously reasonable, but it also seemed targeted at Tesla, a company that had built its own Supercharger network only accessible by Tesla vehicles.

In response to this, Tesla released specifications of its charging connector which it called the “North American Charging Standard.” This was somewhat of an absurd name at the time, given that Tesla was the only company using it.

However, since Tesla is a majority of the US EV market, Tesla’s argument was that most of the cars and most of the DC charging stations in America already used Tesla’s connector, so it should be considered a de facto standard anyway.

For a few months, not many people took this seriously. However, Ford shook up the industry by announcing it would adopt the NACS plug on upcoming vehicles. Soon after, GM made the same move, and now basically everyone else has – including one of the last holdouts Volkswagen, as of today.

But even after momentum was apparent, the White House threw cold water on NACS’ victory, reminding everyone that there are still “minimum standards” within federal charger subsidy rules, and it would have to examine how NACS fulfills those standards, to ensure that the charging network stay accessible and interoperable. A standard isn’t a standard just because one company says it is – it has to be treated like a standard with independent control and verification.

As of today, any DC chargers installed with federal money can have NACS connectors, but must also include CCS connectors.

This led SAE, the professional engineering organization that develops industry standards, to take up the flag of creating a real, independent standard that is no longer in the hands of Tesla, and Tesla obliged by allowing SAE to have control over the process of standardization.

The government will examine how to take advantage of the new SAE NACS/J3400 standard

And today, now that SAE has officially published its report on the J3400 charging standard (J3400 is SAE’s name for NACS), the government has simultaneously announced that it wants to re-examine its minimum standards in light of the new certification.

We covered how the new SAE/NACS standard will solve (basically) every charging problem in one fell swoop last week (click through to learn more about that, I promise it’s more interesting than an article about competing charging standards seems like it would be).

Today’s press release from the Federal Highway Administration announces that it “will soon publish a Request for Information (RFI) to solicit feedback from stakeholders on updating FHWA’s minimum standards and requirements for electric vehicle (EV) charging stations to allow for new technology and continued innovation.”

It also specifically calls out the news of the day, name-dropping Tesla and NACS as the reason for this call to update the government’s minimum standards:

With the implementation of J3400 TM, a new standard for charging EVs published by the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), any supplier or manufacturer will now be able to use and deploy the Tesla-developed North America Charging Standard (NACS) connector, which a majority of automakers have announced they will adopt on vehicles beginning in 2025 with adaptors available for current owners as soon as next spring.

In addition to that, the Biden Administration and the Joint Office of Energy and Transportation (which worked with SAE to develop the J3400 standard) put out a press release today applauding the new standard, celebrating how quickly the process was finished, and pointing to its potential future inclusion in the FHWA’s requirements.

Electrek’s Take

Firstly, I’d like to make note of the issue that many Tesla fans had for a while about the White House not properly acknowledging Tesla. I always thought this was silly, more of a reflection of the massive chip on the shoulder of the egomaniac who is the titular head of the company in question than of actual reality.

When the Biden administration said “hold up, not so fast” early in the NACS process, it made many think that Biden was once again slighting Tesla, but today’s news I think shows that that was never the case. The government simply wanted it to be a proper standard, and now it is (and that process went really fast), and on the same day that it became a proper standard, the government announced that it’s ready to treat it like one. That all seems fair to me.

While we don’t yet know what the minimum standards will change to, it seems clear that this is an effort to update them to coalesce around NACS. Which is great news, because charging will only get better when everyone just rips the band-aid off and goes with one charging standard – and a more robust one than J1772 at that.

But this leads to the question: will the government fully embrace NACS, thus potentially leaving some of the installed base of CCS-enabled cars out of luck in the longer term? Or will it hamstring deployment to some extent, requiring CCS (which is effectively now a dead standard) and therefore not full taking advantage of the NACS standard’s myriad solutions to charging problems?

But as I stated in that last article, this decision point is also a little ironic, considering NACS’ existence seems to have been spurred on by NEVI in the first place. When the government offered billions of dollars to companies that installed chargers with the requirement that those chargers be useable with multiple vehicles, that’s what got Tesla to finally offer a “standard.”

At the time, it wasn’t really a standard because only Tesla was using it, and it was somewhat of a last-ditch effort to save the Tesla connector. Then, when Ford decided to use NACS, that’s what started all the other dominos falling.

Now, NACS is dominant, but it only happened because of NEVI in the first place – and NEVI now has the difficult decision over whether to embrace the (positive) situation it caused, even if it will give some of the installed base an effective “use-by” date as a shift to NACS will inevitably mean fewer CCS/J1772 chargers over time.

We wish that all of this would have been figured out long ago so we could be done with it by now, but it looks like the solution to all our charging problems is finally nearly at hand.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Is Elon Musk delusional or lying about Tesla ‘Full Self-Driving’?

Published

on

By

Is Elon Musk delusional or lying about Tesla 'Full Self-Driving'?

Tesla CEO Elon Musk threw shade at Waymo for having “rookie numbers” amid Tesla’s own disappointing autonomous-driving performance, raising the question: Is Elon Musk delusional or simply lying about Tesla’s Full Self-Driving?

Every year since 2018, Musk has alternately claimed that Tesla would solve self-driving “by the end of the year” or “next year.”

It never happened.

Tesla claimed a sort of victory this year with the launch of its “Robotaxi” service in Austin, Texas, but even that has been misleading since the service only operates a few vehicles in a geofenced area, something Musk has criticized Waymo for in the past, and unlike Waymo, Tesla has in-car supervisors with a finger on a killswitch to stop the vehicle in case of a potential accident.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

Even with in-car supervisors preventing an unknown number of accidents, we recently learned that Tesla’s robotaxi crash rate is almost twice that of Waymo’s, which operates its service without any employees inside its vehicles.

Now, Musk called Waymo’s 2,500 fully autonomous vehicles currently in operation “rookie numbers”:

To put the comment in perspective, Tesla is believed to have about ~30 “Robotaxis” in its Austin fleet. In addition, Tesla claims to be operating “robotaxis” in the Bay Area with just over 100 cars, but it is officially considered a ride-hailing service because drivers are in the driver’s seat, and Tesla hasn’t even applied for an autonomous driving permit in California.

Tesla has also been pushing increasingly more misleading claims about its “Full Self-Driving” system being safer than humans.”

In the last few weeks, Tesla has repeatedly shared this misleading data as “proof” that its system is safer than humans:

This dataset is based on Tesla’s quarterly “Autopilot safety” report, which is known to be misleading.

There are three major problems with these reports:

  • Methodology is self‑reported. Tesla counts only crashes that trigger an airbag or restraint; minor bumps are excluded, and raw crash counts or VMT are not disclosed.
  • Road type bias. Autopilot is mainly used on limited‑access highways—already the safest roads—while the federal baseline blends all road classes. Meaning there are more crashes per mile on city streets than highways.
  • Driver mix & fleet age. Tesla drivers skew newer‑vehicle, higher‑income, and tech‑enthusiast; these demographics typically crash less.

With the new chart on the right above, Tesla appears to have separated Autopilot and FSD mileage, which gives us a little more data, but it still has all the same problems listed above, except the road-type bias is less pronounced, since FSD is also used on city streets.

However, many FSD drivers choose not to engage FSD in potentially dangerous or more difficult situations, especially in inclement weather, which contributes to many crashes – crashes that are counted in the human driver data Tesla is comparing itself against.

Lastly, it is unfair to say that the data proves FSD is safer than human drivers, as even with the flawed data, Tesla should claim that FSD with human supervision is safer than human drivers. It’s not FSD versus humans, it’s FSD plus humans versus humans.

It leads us to this.

With Tesla and Musk being undoubtedly wrong and misleading about the performance and the very nature of its current autonomous driving offering, I wanted to know your opinion about the situation through this poll:

Electrek’s Take

Personally, I think it’s a little of both.

I think he sometimes really believes Tesla is on the verge of solving autonomy, but at the same time, he is perfectly willing to cross the line and mislead people into thinking Tesla is further ahead than it actually is.

For example, I believe I can explain this comment about Waymo having “rookie numbers” despite the Alphabet company having about 10x more “robotaxis” than Tesla – even with Tesla’s very loose definition of a robotaxi.

Based on job listings across the US and his recent ridiculous comment that Tesla will magically cover half of the US population with robotaxis by the end of the year, I think Tesla is hiring thousands of drivers. Soon, it will put them in Model Ys with ‘Robotaxi’ stickers on them and have them drive on FSD and give rides in the Robotaxi app in several US cities.

Musk will claim that Tesla’s Robotaxi is now bigger than Waymo, even though it will basically be the equivalent of Uber drivers in Tesla cars with FSD, which is already the case. Just this week, I took an Uber from the Montreal airport, and it was in a Model Y with FSD. Has Tesla launched ‘Robotaxi’ in Montreal?

It’s either that or he counts consumer vehicles with FSD, which is even dumber.

In short, he is delusional, and when he realizes that he was wrong, he is willing to lie to cover things up.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Solar and wind are covering all new power demand in 2025

Published

on

By

Solar and wind are covering all new power demand in 2025

Solar and wind are growing fast enough to meet all new electricity demand worldwide for the first three quarters of 2025, according to new data from energy think tank Ember. The group now expects fossil power to stay flat for the full year, marking the first time since the pandemic that fossil generation won’t increase.

Solar and wind aren’t just expanding; they’re outpacing global electricity demand itself. Solar generation jumped 498 TWh (+31%) compared to the same period last year, already topping all the solar power produced in 2024. Wind added another 137 TWh (+7.6%). Together, they supplied 635 TWh of new clean electricity, beating out the 603 TWh rise in global demand (+2.7%).

That lifted solar and wind to 17.6% of global electricity in the first three quarters of the year, up from 15.2% year-over-year. That brought the total share of renewables in global electricity – solar, wind, hydro, bioenergy, and geothermal – to 43%. Fossil fuels slid to 57.1%, down from 58.7%.

Renewables are beating coal

For the first time in 2025, renewables collectively generated more electricity than coal. And fossil generation as a whole has stalled. Fossil output slipped slightly by 0.1% (-17 TWh) through the end of Q3. Ember expects no fossil-fuel growth for the full year, driven by clean power growth outpacing demand.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

China and India are partly driving that shift. In China, fossil generation fell 52 TWh (-1.1%) as clean energy met all new demand, resulting from a structural change in its power system. India saw fossil generation drop 34 TWh (-3.3%), thanks to record solar and wind growth and milder weather.

Solar is leading the charge

Solar is doing the heavy lifting. It’s now the single biggest driver of change in the global power sector, with growth more than three times larger than any other electricity source in the first three quarters of the year.

“Record solar power growth and stagnating fossil fuels in 2025 show how clean power has become the driving force in the power sector,” said Nicolas Fulghum, senior data analyst at Ember. “Historically a growth segment, fossil power now appears to be entering a period of stagnation and managed decline. China, the largest source of fossil growth, has turned a corner, signaling that reliance on fossil fuels to meet growing power demand is no longer required.”

Electricity demand rose 2.7% in the first three quarters of 2025, far slower than the 4.9% jump seen last year when extreme heatwaves pushed up cooling demand in China, India, and the US. This year’s milder weather helped take some pressure off the grid, making it easier for clean energy to close the gap.

A turning point for the global power system

For the first time outside of major crises such as the pandemic or the global financial crash, clean energy growth has not only kept up with demand but surpassed it. The next big question: can solar, wind, and the rest of the clean power sector keep up this pace consistently? If they can, 2025 may be remembered as the year global fossil generation plateaued.

Read more: FERC: For two years straight, solar leads new US power capacity


If you’re looking to replace your old HVAC equipment, it’s always a good idea to get quotes from a few installers. To make sure you’re finding a trusted, reliable HVAC installer near you that offers competitive pricing on heat pumps, check out EnergySage. EnergySage is a free service that makes it easy for you to get a heat pump. They have pre-vetted heat pump installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high quality solutions. Plus, it’s free to use!

Your personalized heat pump quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here. – *ad

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

The Genesis GV90 really does have coach doors [Video]

Published

on

By

The Genesis GV90 really does have coach doors [Video]

Genesis is taking luxury to the next level with its new flagship SUV. The GV90 is shaping up to be the brand’s most lavish vehicle yet, offering ultra-premium features like coach doors.

Genesis GV90 caught with coach doors in real life

After unveiling the Neolun Concept at the New York Auto Show last March, Genesis said it was a preview of its first full-size SUV.

The “ultra-luxe, state-of-the-art SUV,” as Genesis describes it, will be the brand’s largest and most luxurious vehicle yet, slotted above the GV80.

It wasn’t the stunning design or the over-the-top interior that caught most people’s attention, but the B-pillarless coach doors.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

Although we were worried that some of the ultra-premium features, like the coach doors, wouldn’t make it to the production model, new spy photos reveal otherwise.

A GV90 prototype was spotted out in public with the coach doors wide open, giving us our closest look at the setup. The new spy photos, courtesy of SH Proshots (via TheKoreanCarBlog), show the hinged door system in action and offer a glimpse of the interior.

Earlier this year, Hyundai Motor filed several patent applications with the United States Patent and Trademark Office, detailing new door latching devices.

Two patents, titled “Cinching Device For Door Latches in Vehicle” and “Door Latch Device for Vehicles,” offer a better idea of how the Genesis GV90’s coach doors will work.

Genesis has previously said that B-pillarless coach doors are now a reality in production vehicles. It looks like the GV90 will be the first to debut it.

Yes, the Genesis GV90 will be available with coach doors, but it likely won’t be standard on all trims. It could be a premium feature reserved for higher-priced variants. The GV90 has been spotted out in public several times now with a traditional door design. We’ve also caught a glimpse of other premium features it will offer, like adaptive air suspension.

Genesis-GV90-coach-doors
The Genesis Neolun electric SUV concept (Source: Genesis)

Genesis has yet to reveal prices or final specs. We could see the GV90 debut by the end of the year, with sales expected to start in mid-2026.

One thing is for sure: The Genesis GV90 won’t be cheap. It’s expected to start around $100,000, but higher trims could cost upwards of $120,000.

Genesis-GV90-coach-doors
Genesis Neolun electric SUV concept interior (Source: Hyundai Motor)

Earlier this week, a production version of the GV90 was caught for the first time driving in South Korea. It was still covered in camouflage, but from what’s shown, it looks nearly identical to the Neolun concept.

Reports suggest the flagship SUV could debut on Hyundai’s new eM platform. Hyundai claims the platform will deliver a 50% improvement in driving range per charge compared to its current EVs. It’s also expected to offer Level 3 autonomous driving and other advanced driver assist capabilities.

The flagship electric SUV will serve as a tech beacon, showcasing Hyundai’s latest tech and software. It’s expected to feature a massive 24″ curved infotainment as part of a digital cockpit design.

Genesis is also launching its first hybrid, the GV80, next year, and an extended-range electric vehicle (EREV) in late 2026 or early 2027. The luxury brand will also introduce a new off-road SUV as it expands into new segments.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Trending