Connect with us

Published

on

Frederic J. Brown | Afp | Getty Images

Ownership of electric vehicles continues to rise in the U.S., with nearly six million battery electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids currently on the road. Even though that’s still a fraction of the overall market and the growth rate of EV sales has slowed, automakers remain invested in the eventual transition away from gasoline, as 2024 sales of traditional internal combustion engine cars fell below 80% for the first time in modern automotive history.

Continued EV sales growth shows that at least for a significant portion of auto consumers, range anxiety is no longer an issue. But it is a persistent fear in the EV market that is getting a new test with the Trump administration looking to slash EV incentives from the federal government.

The majority of EV owners charge up at home, but from city streets and interstate highways to parking garages and airports, the EV industry is concentrated on installing enough chargers in public places to help end range anxiety, while building pure-play charging business models that can stand on their own and turn a profit.

According to the latest figures compiled by Paren AFDC+ Charger Database, there are 68,000 public and private Level 3 (fastest) and Level 2 EV charging stations across the country, each with one or more individual ports, for a total of around 266,000 ports. Installing, operating and servicing the chargers, it’s an industry that is a fundamental driver of widescale EV adoption — and right now, it’s an industry that is struggling to maintain traction in what has lately become an uncertain and politicized marketplace.

Despite a recent surprise Tesla’s sales event at the White House, Trump and his top administration officials — from Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Energy Secretary and former fossil fuels industry CEO Chris Wright — have made it clear that stripping away federal support for EVs is among changes being sought as they prioritize oil and gas in energy policy. Already impacted by the slowdown in EV sales, charging companies are battling a recent freeze on an important federal funding program, while also waiting to see how OEMs are affected by the Trump administration’s tariffs and resulting trade wars, particularly involving essential steel and aluminum.

Former President Joe Biden, as part of his signature agenda to combat climate change, set a goal that half of all new vehicles sold in the U.S. by 2030 would be electric, which also meant having an adequate, reliable nationwide charging infrastructure by then. To address the build out, the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) formula program was authorized by Congress under the 2021 bipartisan infrastructure law.

NEVI earmarked $5 billion in grants, apportioned annually over five years, to states’ departments of transportation to deploy a network of 500,000 high-speed EV chargers by 2030, primarily along interstate highways, but also rural roadways and low-income communities. Funding is available for up to 80% of eligible project costs. State DOTs are responsible for developing projects and coordinating with site owners and charging companies, which can be an arduous process, markedly different from planning routine infrastructure projects.

A national issue that the funding seeks to address is that while public chargers are relatively plentiful in big cities and suburbs where EV adoption is high — think San Francisco, Los Angeles, Denver, Houston, Chicago, Miami and New York — they’re lacking in rural and remote communities in places like Montana, Wyoming and upstate New York, where EVs sales are low. That geographic disparity contributes to charging anxiety. Drivers are worried that there aren’t enough charging stations outside of metro regions, which accentuates their fears of running out of juice, especially on long trips. And harrowing tales of broken, vandalized or otherwise non-working chargers feed into the trepidations.

According to Paren, four of the five years of NEVI funding, or $3.2 billion, has been approved for all 50 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. Yet only $616 million has been awarded by 33 states to 104 applicants for 1,000 charging stations. To date, 60 charging stations with a combined 268 ports have been built, using $33 million of NEVI funds. While the federal government has not released figures, Paren estimates that perhaps less than $25 million has actually been transferred to states to reimburse charging companies for incurred expenses.

‘Killing those evil EVs and EV chargers’

Stark evidence of the Trump administration’s plans to target EV charging came on Feb. 6, when the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Highway Administration issued a memo to state DOTs informing them that it was suspending NEVI. The memo stated that FHWA will publish revised NEVI guidelines this spring and solicit public comment before final rules are determined. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy subsequently told Fox Business News that any existing contracts that have been signed “are still going to be funded, but there will be no new funding priorities or projects as we go through a review process.”

The NEVI freeze created immediate confusion among state DOTs, especially as to whether the approved funds will indeed be allocated. “We need that to happen, because this program works on a reimbursable basis,” said Jim Tymon, executive director of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Many states, he said, “have essentially issued stop work orders, even for existing contracts, because they don’t want to be left holding the bag if the feds decide not to reimburse for any work.”

Historically, new administrations have set their transportation priorities and shifted them accordingly. Yet amending programs and funding that are authorized in law — including NEVI, for which funding has been delayed — would require an act of Congress. The Trump administration, nonetheless, sidestepped Congress and unilaterally suspended NEVI and its funding formula while it considers new guidelines.

In the interim, if those approved funds are not allocated to states, the courts may end up determining whether the freeze is legal. In a ruling on March 6, a federal judge blocked the president’s hold on congressionally approved funds obligated to state agencies and governments, which could conceivably apply to any attempts to renege on NEVI funding.

Loren McDonald, chief analyst at Paren, has a jaundiced view of the motivation behind the NEVI pause. “The administration’s plan is not to actually impact the deployment of charging infrastructure,” he said. “It’s to drive the narrative that we’re killing those evil EVs and EV chargers.”

For the small sector of EV charging companies, headlined by a trio of publicly owned pure-plays — ChargePoint Holdings, Blink Charging and EVgo — all of the EV uncertainty has been enough to keep shares under considerable pressure, with year-to-date declines of 35% to 50% and two of the three stocks currently trading below $1.

Stock Chart IconStock chart icon

hide content

Stock market performance of EV charging pure-plays in 2025.

ChargePoint provides infrastructure hardware, software and services to businesses and fleets that operate EV charging networks. Competitors Blink and EVgo own and operate their own chargers and networks, while also supporting third-party operators. All three experienced substantial stock falloffs starting in 2024, and investors are keeping a wary eye on their performance over the coming months.

The rest of the EV charging industry encompasses a diverse array of players, among them privately held startups, a joint venture between eight automotive OEMs known as IONNA, highway truck stop and travel centers like Love’s, Kwik Trip and Pilot Flying J, convenience store chains including Wawa, Sheetz and 7-Eleven, and big-box retailers such as Walmart, Target and Costco.  

Nearly half of the NEVI awardees are members of the National Association of Truck Stop Owners, the trade association for more than 250 highway truck stops and travel centers, and SIGMA, which represents fuel marketers. David Fialkov, executive vice president of government affairs for both groups, is critical of NEVI’s “incoherent patchwork, not only of grant requirements, but of regulatory and market backdrops in different states that are wholly untethered to one another.” So if the program’s pause “is a bona fide effort to turn it into something more market-oriented and consumer-oriented,” Fialkov said, “we think that’s ultimately better for the market.”

The future of EV charging station demand and deployment

McDonald says a look at the industry numbers shows that the reality is, “whatever they attempt to do is probably going to have little to no actual impact on deployment.”

In 2025, for example, about 10% of fast-charging ports may be funded through NEVI. McDonald estimated that a total of about 16,000 new fast-charging ports will be added this year. “From a macro perspective, the industry is not dependent on federal funding,” he said. At most, he added, “only about 1,500 of those will be NEVI-funded, and maybe even fewer,” depending on the breadth of changes to the program.

During an earnings call on March 4, Rick Wilmer, president and CEO of ChargePoint, told analysts that NEVI-related deals represented an “insignificant portion” of its revenue in 2024 and the company did not anticipate NEVI changes would have a material effect on its business.

According to Paren data, ChargePoint has received three NEVI awards totaling $1.75 million.

Separately, Wilmer told CNBC that in the context of NEVI, ChargePoint supports its customers that operate charging stations and sell electricity. “We’re very intentional about not doing that, because it would put us in direct competition with them,” he said. “We provide the technology and the solutions and help our customers apply for and win NEVI funding. So in the grand scheme of things, NEVI is a very small portion of our business.”

Pilot CEO Adam Wright on EV charging: We think demand is going to push through

ChargePoint reported positive results for the fourth quarter of its FY2025, ended in January, though full-year revenue declined more than 17%, and its stock has fallen roughly 60% over the past year.

The EV charging industry is going through an evolution right now, according to Craig Irwin, an industry analyst at Roth Capital Partners, and companies not dependent on subsidies have better prospects. “The focus on putting credible products out there without subsidy dollars is a winning strategy,” he said. “People want chargers in front of their libraries, real estate developments and other public places. The demand is still there.”

A spokesperson for EVgo, which sites its public chargers in just such high-use urban and metro areas, said that it has received minimal funding through NEVI. The company generates revenue from the utilization of its charging network and taps into other incentive programs offered by state governments and utility companies, whose programs do not include the same geographic constraints as NEVI.  

In December, EVgo announced the closing of a $1.25 billion guaranteed loan from the U.S. Department of Energy, a financing commitment it has pointed to as a sign of certainty. “This loan ensures we are fully funded to add at least 7,500 [ports at roughly 1,100 charging stations], more than tripling our installed base over the next five years,” CEO Badar Khan told analysts during its earnings call earlier this month.

Yet the Trump administration has threatened to find ways to retroactively pull DOE loan funding approved in the last days of the Biden administration, which sprinted to get deals finalized before Trump’s inauguration.

EVgo has been growing, reporting fourth-quarter 2024 revenue up 35% year-over-year, and up 60% for the full year. But despite those gains, the company continues to operate at a loss.

Blink says it does not depend much on NEVI to fund its charging infrastructure, relying instead on hardware sales, software subscriptions, charging revenue and corporate partnerships. “The majority of our other funding is within the largest utility companies,” said CEO Mike Battaglia. “There are some [state] grants out there, as well, that we take advantage of.”

Blink achieved record charging revenue last year, and significantly grew the Blink-owned network, according to its recent Q4 and full year report on March 13. Yet, revenue declined in the fourth quarter and for the full year in comparison to “exceptionally strong equipment sales in 2023,” Battaglia said. The company said it expects revenue will pick up in the second half of 2025 and to have a better idea as to when it will achieve adjusted EBITDA profitability later in the year.

Justin Sullivan | Getty Images News | Getty Images

Then there’s the elephant in the room — Tesla, whose sales and stock price have plunged lately following a post-election surge. Tesla is in a unique position, as a manufacturer of both branded EVs and charging stations — and whose CEO Elon Musk has emerged as a central character not just in the sector, but across the entire economic and political landscape.

It has heavily invested in building out its network of superchargers, which are compatible with a growing number of other OEMs’ EV models, including GM, Ford, Hyundai, Mercedes-Benz, BMW and Rivian. And its proprietary NACS charging connector and port is being adopted by other charging companies. Ironically, considering that Musk favors getting rid of EV subsidies, Tesla is the second-largest recipient of NEVI funds, granted more than $41 million for 99 sites. Elon Musk said in the lead-up to the election that any Trump policies that hurt EVs would hurt his competitors more than Tesla, but recently, Tesla and other Musk firms have been lobbying the government, at least on the issue of tariffs.

With so much uncertainty looming over the EV charging industry — plus the shakeout that typically occurs among nascent tech industries — there’s bound to be consolidation this year. Several companies have already declared bankruptcy or gone out of business, including the North American affiliates of European utility-owned charging companies, Enel X and EVBox, and Tritium, which runs an EV charging equipment plant in Tennessee and was acquired by an Indian conglomerate after declaring insolvency in 2024.

Depending on the outcome of the NEVI situation, companies that heavily rely on its funds and can’t access alternative capital sources may go belly up or partner with other entities. The fate of the public companies remains to be seen, while Tesla spins in its own topsy-turvy orbit. In the meantime, EV adoption does continue to increase, and more chargers will be installed in a growing number of places. It’s the pace, and the winners and losers, that are yet to be determined.

Continue Reading

Environment

Elon Musk is lying about Tesla’s self-driving and I have the DMs to prove it

Published

on

By

Elon Musk is lying about Tesla's self-driving and I have the DMs to prove it

Over the last few days, Elon Musk has been making several statements claiming that autonomous driving systems that use lidar and radar sensors are more dangerous than Tesla’s camera-only computer vision approach because the system gets confused when interpreting data from different sensors.

It’s not only false, Musk told me directly that he agreed that radar and vision could be safer than just vision, right after he had Tesla remove the radars from its vehicles.

Tesla has taken a controversial approach, using only cameras as sensors for driving inputs in its self-driving technology. In contrast, most other companies use cameras in conjunction with radar and lidar sensors.

When Tesla first announced that all its cars produced onward have the hardware capable of “full self-driving” up to level 5 autonomous capacity in 2016, it included a front-facing radar in its self-driving hardware suite.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

However, in 2021, after not having achieved anything more than a level 2 driver assist (ADAS) system with its self-driving effort, Elon Musk announced a move that he called “Tesla Vision”, which consists of moving Tesla’s self-driving effort only to use inputs from cameras.

Here’s what I wrote in 2021 about Musk sharing his plan for Tesla to only use cameras and neural nets:

CEO Elon Musk has been hyping the vision-only update as “mind-blowing.” He insists that it will lead to a true level 5 autonomous driving system by the end of the year, but he has gotten that timeline wrong before.

By May 2021, Tesla had begun removing the radar sensor from its lineup, starting with the Model 3 and Model Y, and later the Model S and Model X in 2022.

Tesla engineers reportedly attempted to convince Musk to retain the use of radar, but the CEO overruled them.

We are now in 2025, and unlike what Musk claimed, Tesla has yet to deliver on its self-driving promises, but the CEO is doubling down on his vision-only approach.

The controversial billionaire is making headlines this week for a series of new statements attacking Tesla’s self-driving rivals and their use of radar and lidar sensors.

Earlier this week, Musk took a jab at Waymo and claimed that “lidar and radar reduce safety”:

Lidar and radar reduce safety due to sensor contention. If lidars/radars disagree with cameras, which one wins? This sensor ambiguity causes increased, not decreased, risk. That’s why Waymos can’t drive on highways.We turned off radars in Teslas to increase safety. Cameras ftw.

The assertion that “Waymos can’t drive on highways” is simply false. Waymo has been conducting fully driverless employee testing on freeways in Phoenix, San Francisco, and Los Angeles for years, and it is expected to make this technology available to rider-only rides soon.

Tesla is in a similar situation with its Robotaxi: they don’t drive on freeways without an employee supervisor.

Musk later added:

LiDAR also does not work well in snow, rain or dust due to reflection scatter. That’s why Waymos stop working in any heavy precipitation. As I have said many times, there is a role for LiDAR in some circumstances and I personally oversaw the development of LiDAR for the SpaceX Dragon docking with Space Station. I am well aware of its strengths and weaknesses.

It’s not true that Waymos can’t work in “any heavy precipitation.”

Here’s a video of a Waymo vehicle driving by itself in heavy rain:

In comparison, Tesla’s own Robotaxi terms of service mention that it “may be limited or unavailable in inclement weather.”

Last month, Tesla Robotaxi riders had their rides cut short, and they were told it was due to the rain.

There’s plenty of evidence that Musk is wrong and misleading with these statements, but furthermore, he himself admitted that radar sensors can make Tesla’s vision system safer.

‘Vision with high-res radar would be better than pure vision’

In May 2021, as Tesla began removing radar sensors from its vehicle lineup and transitioning to a vision-only approach, I was direct messaging (DMing) Musk to learn more about the surprising move.

In the conversation, he was already making the claim that sensor contention is lowering safety as he did this week in new comments attacking Waymo.

He wrote at the time:

The probability of safety will be higher with pure vision than vision+radar, not lower. Vision has become so good that radar actually reduces signal/noise.

However, what was more interesting is what he said shortly after claiming that:

Musk admitted that “vision with high-resolution radar would be better than pure vision”. However, he claimed that such a radar didn’t exist.

In the same conversation, I pointed Musk to existing high-definition millimeter wave radars, but he didn’t respond.

It was still early for that technology in 2021, but high-definition millimeter wave radars are now commonly used by companies developing autonomous driving technologies, including Waymo.

Waymo uses six high-definition radars in its system:

In short, Musk was already concerned about sensor contention in 2021, but he admitted that the problem would be worth solving with higher-definition radars, which already existed then and are becoming more common now.

Yet, he criticizes companies using radar and lidar, which work similarly to high-resolution radars but on different wavelengths, for even attempting sensor fusion.

It’s not impossible because Tesla can’t do it

Part of the problem here appears to be that Musk thinks something doesn’t work because Tesla can’t make it work, and he doesn’t want to admit that others are solving the sensor fusion problem.

Tesla simply couldn’t solve sensor fusion, so it focused on achieving autonomy solely through camera vision. However, those who continued to work on the issue have made significant progress and are now reaping the rewards.

Waymo and Baidu, both of which have level 4 autonomous driving systems currently commercially operating without supervision, unlike Tesla, have heavily invested in sensor fusion.

Amir Husain, an AI entrepreneur who sits on the Boards of Advisors for IBM Watson and the Department of Computer Science at UT Austin, points to advancements in the use of Kalman filters and Bayesian techniques to solve sensor noise covariance.

He commented on Musk’s statement regarding the use of radar and lidar sensors:

The issue isn’t a binary disagreement between two sensors. It generates a better estimate than any individual sensor can produce on its own. They all have a margin of error. Fusion helps reduce this.

If Musk’s argument held, why would the human brain use eyes, ears, and touch to estimate object location? Why would aircraft combine radar, IRST, and other passive sensors to estimate object location? This is a fundamental misunderstanding of information theory. Every channel has noise. But redundancy reduces uncertainty.

Musk’s main argument to focus on cameras and neural nets has been that the roads are designed for humans to drive and humans drive using their eyes and brain, which are the hardware and software equivalent of cameras (eyes) and neural nets (brain).

Now, most other companies developing autonomous driving technologies are also focusing on this, but to surpass humans and achieve greater levels of safety through precision and redundancy, they are also adding radar and lidar sensors to their systems.

Electrek’s Take

Musk painted Tesla into a corner with its vision-only approach, and now he is trying to mislead people into thinking that it is the only one that can work, when there’s no substantial evidence to support this claim.

Now, let me be clear, Musk is partly correct. When poorly fused, multi-sensor data introduces noise, making it more challenging to operate an autonomous driving system.

However, who said that this is an unsolvable problem? Others appear to be solving it, and we are seeing the results in Waymo’s and Baidu’s commercially available rider-only taxi services.

If you can take advantage of radar’s ability to detect distance and speed as well as work through rain, fog, dust, and snow, why wouldn’t you use it?

As he admitted in the DMs with me in 2021, Musk is aware of this – hence why he acknowledged that high-resolution radar combined with vision would be safer than vision alone.

The problem is that Tesla hasn’t focused on improving sensor fusion and radar integration in the last 4 years because it has been all-in on vision.

Now, Tesla could potentially still solve self-driving with its vision system, but there’s no evidence that it is close to happening or any safer than other systems, such as Waymo’s, which use radar and lidar sensors.

In fact, Tesla is still only operating an autonomous driving system under the supervision of in-car employees with a few dozen cars, while Waymo has been doing rider-only rides for years and operates over 1,500 autonomous vehicles in the US.

Just like with his “Robotaxi” with supervisors, Musk is trying to create the illusion that Tesla is not only leading in autonomy, but it is the only one that can solve it.

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

Continue Reading

Environment

Trump’s latest offshore wind cancellation is a threat to the grid – ISO New England

Published

on

By

Trump's latest offshore wind cancellation is a threat to the grid – ISO New England

Trump’s Interior Department halted construction on 704 megawatt (MW) Revolution Wind, the US’s first multi-state offshore wind project that’s already 80% complete. Grid operator ISO New England says the decision is a threat to the grid.

ISO New England released a statement responding to the stop-work order, warning that “delaying the project will increase risks to reliability.”:

As demand for electricity grows, New England must maintain and add to its energy infrastructure. Unpredictable risks and threats to resources – regardless of technology – that have made significant capital investments, secured necessary permits, and are close to completion will stifle future investments, increase costs to consumers, and undermine the power grid’s reliability and the region’s economy now and in the future.

Revolution Wind, a joint development between Ørsted and BlackRock’s Global Infrastructure Partners, is a 65-turbine project capable of powering around 350,000 homes in Rhode Island and Connecticut once it’s complete. It was expected to come online next year. The project has created more than 1,200 jobs.

On August 22, the director of Bureau of Ocean Energy Management sent a vague letter to Ørsted commanding it to halt all activities on the fully permitted Revolution Wind, citing “national security interests,” yet providing no details.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

BOEM’s Record of Decision for Revolution Wind, reported in 2023 in Section 4.6, page 185, states that the national security effects of the project would be “negligible and avoidable.”

This latest move echoes Trump’s cancellation in April of New York’s $5 billion Empire Wind 1 project, which was already under construction off New York’s coast. No viable reasons were given for that stop-work order either, and the cancellation was reversed in May.

Kit Kennedy, managing director for power at Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), released the following statement in response to the Revolution Wind order:

The Trump administration’s war on the electricity needed to power the grid continues on all fronts. Halting Revolution Wind is a devastating attack on workers, on electricity customers, and on the investment climate in the US.

New England homeowners will feel this when they tear open their electricity bills and look at the surging costs of keeping the lights on.

This administration has it exactly backwards. It’s trying to prop up clunky, polluting coal plants while doing all it can to halt the fastest growing energy sources of the future – solar and wind power.

It makes no sense to say we have an energy emergency and then make decisions like this. Unfortunately, every American is paying the price for these misguided actions.

Read more: Trump reversal revives Empire Wind, NY’s offshore energy giant


The 30% federal solar tax credit is ending this year. If you’ve ever considered going solar, now’s the time to act. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. It has hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use, and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them. 

Your personalized solar 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.

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

Continue Reading

Environment

Tesla teases new product release on Friday

Published

on

By

Tesla teases new product release on Friday

Tesla is teasing a new product release on Friday, August 29th, coming to Europe and the Middle East. It’s likely going to be the Model Y Performance.

On X today, Tesla has teased an upcoming product release coming this friday.

The post is cryptic. It only mentions ‘spoiler alert’ and the date August 29 with what looks like a close up of a vehicle with what appears to be a spoil – hence the “spoiler alert” reference:

There are main suspect is the Model Y Performance due to the spoiler reference.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

Since the Model Y refresh in January, Tesla stopped selling the Model Y Performance. It is due to launch the top performance version under the new design.

When Tesla released the Model 3 refresh in 2024, it took about 4 months for Tesla to launch the new performance version.

Electrek’s Take

The only thing that I find strange with this likely being the Model Y Performance is the fact that they tweeted this from the Europe and Middle East account.

It would be strange for the Model Y Performance to launch there first, but who knows. Maybe Tesla started production at Gigafactory Berlin first.

I don’t think this will have a major impact on Tesla’s business. The Model Y Performance is the least popular version of the best-selling Model Y.

We don’t have the full mix of sales, but I wouldn’t be suprised if it represents less than 10% of Tesla’s Model Y deliveries.

The Model 3 Performance is probably a more popular option within the Model 3 lineup as it is a lot more fun to drive.

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

Continue Reading

Trending