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.
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
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.
The Suncor Energy Refinery is seen during extreme cold weather in Edmonton, AB, Canada, on Feb. 3, 2025.
Artur Widak | Nurphoto | Getty Images
HOUSTON — The deeply integrated North American oil and gas market stands at crossroads, with Canada’s largest oil producer warning that it will diversify its exports away from the United States if President Donald Trump‘s tariff threats do not end.
Alberta Premier Danielle Smith on Wednesday presented two possible futures for the continent. In one, Canada and the U.S. reach an agreement to create “Fortress North America,” with new pipeline capacity built to support 2 million barrels per day in additional exports to the U.S. market, Smith said at the CERAWeek energy conference.
This will support Trump’s “energy dominance” agenda, Smith said, allowing the U.S. to increase its exports to the global market by backfilling those barrels with imported oil from a neighbor and close ally. It will maintain low consumer prices in the U.S., she said, which is also part of the agenda Trump campaigned on.
Alberta wants to supply the U.S. with the energy it needs to win the race against China to achieve dominance in artificial intelligence, Smith said. “I don’t think any of us want to see a communist, totalitarian regime become a world, global leader in AI,” the premier said.
In the other future, Trump continues to wage his trade war against Canada and Alberta starts looking for oil and gas customers beyond the U.S., Smith said.
Canada is the fourth largest oil producer in the world and Alberta is the country’s biggest producer. Some 97% of the country’s 4 million bpd of oil exports went to the U.S. in 2023 with several European nations and Hong Kong taking the remainder, according to Canada’s energy regulator. Alberta supplied 87% of the oil exported from Canada to the U.S. in 2023.
“There are at least six or seven projects that are emerging in Canada in the event we’re not able to come to a partnership agreement with the U.S.,” Smith said.
The uncertainty caused by Trump’s tariff threats has already forced Alberta to start “looking at more opportunities to get more barrels off our borders besides the United States,” provincial energy minister Brian Jean said Tuesday.
Alberta is in active discussions with South Korea, Japan and European nations about shipping oil exports to those countries, the energy minister said. “The truth is we’re looking in every direction right now except the United States in relation to our priorities,” Jean said.
Canada looks to Europe, Asia
Trump’s tariffs have roiled financial markets and caused confusion among investors over the past week. The president on Wednesday imposed 25% tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from Canada. He has paused until April 2 penalties on Canadian oil and gas as well as duties on other goods that are compliant with the trade agreement that governs North America.
The Trump administration has not provided clarity on how much of Canada’s energy exports to the U.S. conform to the trade agreement. Oil and gas that is not compliant would face a 10% tariff. U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright declined to provide details when asked Monday by CNBC.
Smith said Wednesday that Canadian oil producers are busy filling out paperwork to ensure that their exports to the U.S. are compliant.
“There was a bit of a paperwork issue that our companies had,” Smith said. “There was no reason to register, and so now there is. I would imagine that they’ve all called their lawyers and they’re in compliance. I wouldn’t expect very much of our oil and gas is tariffed at all.”
But it is unclear whether Trump will proceed with tariffs when his pause expires on April 2. Wright said Monday a deal with Canada that avoids tariffs on oil, gas and other energy is “certainly is possible” but “it’s too early to say.”
“We can get to no tariffs or very low tariffs but it’s got to be reciprocal,” Wright said in an interview with CNBC’s Brian Sullivan.
It will take time for Alberta to pivot to markets beyond the U.S. if the tariffs do go into effect. Nearly all the pipelines in Canada run south to the U.S. Canada only has one pipeline stretching from Alberta to the country’s West Coast in British Columbia, providing access to Asian markets. There are no pipelines that run from Alberta to the country’s East Coast.
Smith said Canada is looking at three different pipeline proposals to its West Coast, at least one pipeline into the Northwest Territories, one into Manitoba, one to the Hudson Bay, and one into Eastern Canada.
“Those are conversations we were not having three months ago,” Jean said of the pipelines. But it took 12 years for Canada to expand its Trans Mountain Pipeline that connects to the country’s West Coast.
Alberta is not interested in taking a page from Ontario’s playbook, Jean said Tuesday. Premier Doug Ford imposed a 25% surcharge on electricity exported to the U.S. in response to Trump’s tariffs. He later suspended the penalty after the U.S. agreed to resume talks.
“We don’t believe that that this is the right way to do it,” Jean said of Alberta’s position. “We want to deescalate the situation.”
Canada has presented the U.S. with several options, the Alberta energy minister said. Jean declined to provide specifics, but he said the Trump administration needs a strong strategic petroleum reserve to achieve its goal of energy dominance.
“It also means that they have to be able to continue to get a good steady supply of product from Canada,” he said.
If the tariffs go do into effect, they will hurt both Canadians and Americans, particularly people who cannot afford a price increase, he said. The price hike will be split “fairly evenly” between U.S. customers and producers in Canada, he said.
“It’s going to be felt by all parties and frankly there’s many people right now […] that can’t afford it,” he said. “We need to think about those people because they’re the less fortunate that truly have no other choice but to buy fuel.”
Jean took a swipe at Trump’s repeated calls for Canada to become the 51st state.
“As long as we’re in charge, we don’t mind,” Jean said. “But the truth is the Republicans would never be elected again.”
Toyota’s first electric SUV is getting a major overhaul. The new bZ4X now has a bigger battery for more range, faster charging, dedicated EV features, a stylish facelift, and much more. Here’s our first look at the new Toyota bZ4X.
Toyota unveils new bZ4X with significant improvements
The bZ4X launched in 2022 as Toyota’s first fully electric SUV. Although it was expected to rival the Tesla Model Y and other top-selling electric SUVs, the bZ4X failed to live up to the task.
“I think it’s fair to say that we experienced a few bumps in the road during the launch,” Toyota’s chief branding officer, Simon Humphries, said during the company’s premiere event in Brussels this week.
Toyota listened to feedback from drivers, retailers, and journalists who experienced the bZ4X and delivered with the upgraded model.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
The new electric SUV has more driving range, up to twice as fast charging, and double the towing capacity. But, that’s not all. The bZ4X has been updated inside and out. The interior is completely redesigned with a new 14″ infotainment and instrument display panel.
Toyota’s new bZ4X AWD model (Source: Toyota)
Toyota finally added a battery pre-conditioning feature as standard. For the first time, Toyota said the bZ4X can now fast charge in around 30 minutes in cold weather. Maximum DC charging power is still 150 kW.
A new route planning function that automatically selects the best charging station is also included. Toyota said the feature is available through an OTA update for current bZ4X drivers.
The new bZ4X has two battery options, 57.7kWh and 73.1 kWh. The smaller battery will be available exclusively in FWD while the larger battery has FWD and AWD configurations.
With up to 338 hp (252 kW), the upgraded AWD model is one of the most powerful Toyota vehicles in Europe. Its towing capacity has doubled to 1,500 kg.
Combined with an upgraded eAxle, the new long-range bZ4X has a WLTP driving range of up to 573 km (356 miles). That’s a significant improvement from the outgoing model’s range of up to 516 km (320 miles).
Although US specs have yet to be revealed, the 2025 bZ4X is rated with up to 252 miles on the EPA rating scale. When it arrives in the US, you can expect to see upwards of around 270 to 280 miles.
Toyota will launch the updated bZ4X in Europe later this year, one of three new EVs arriving by the end of 2025. The smaller Toyota C-HR+ and Urban Cruiser electric SUVs will join the updated model in Toyota’s growing European EV lineup.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
A man set fire to three Tesla chargers at a charging station in a South Carolina parking lot, but karma got him back quickly as he also set his clothes on fire.
Tesla has been under attack recently due to its CEO, Elon Musk, enraging a large part of the popular through his involvement with the Trump administration and his behavior on social media.
Those attacks are, for the most part, legal protests at Tesla stores and calls to boycott the brand, but we have also seen some illegal actions, like vandalizing cars, stores, and charging stations, from some more extremist individuals and groups.
In a new example, North Charleston Police is looking for a suspect who burned 3 Tesla Superchargers last Friday.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
They are looking for “a White man in a grey jacket/hoodie with a black face mask”. The suspect spray painted “F*** Trump, long live Ukraine” next to the charging station.
He reportedly used homemade Molotov cocktails out of beer bottles to burn the chargers.
The police report mentions that a witness saw that the suspect set himself on fire during the arson:
“Witnesses advised that the suspect had accidentally caught their own back on fire while throwing the devices.”
The firefighters quickly responded and extinguished the fire, but the three Supercharger stalls affected had to shut down.
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms is leading the investigation.
Yesterday, President Trump said that he wants to label Tesla vandals as “domestic terrorists.”
Electrek’s Take
As we have often mentioned in the last few weeks, we sympathize with the people peacefully protesting and boycotting Tesla, but we condemn any violence, including vandalism.
The protests and boycotts are much more efficient in affecting Tesla than setting yourself on fire to shut down a few charging stalls for a few days at worst.
Everyone getting involved in this is actually eroding the credibility of the “Tesla Takedown” movement.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.