The Texas Legislative Refusal of Tesla Funding: Understanding the Rules and Restrictions
Tesla recently failed to receive funding from the Texas government to install Superchargers with universal connectors. This has left many people puzzled and wondering why this happened.
The issue appears to be that Tesla applied for the funding based on its proprietary Tesla connector, instead of going all CCS. In which case, Texas made the right decision in refusing the application. It is also not clear whether Tesla was planning to allow access to all EVs or just their own. For Tesla to get the funding, they should resubmit with all CCS plugs and allowing public access as intended by the original Federal legislation that is funding the chargers.
It may be speculated that Texas refused the application because it is first and foremost an oil & gas state and the oil & gas industry has very deep pockets with which to “influence” all elected state officials. The fact that the approved EV chargers will be installed mainly at existing gasoline stations supports this theory.
The Texas legislature has been bought and paid for by both the oil and gas lobby and the auto dealer lobby. Their actions have been blatant and clear. They have been anti-Tesla because of the direct sales model. This raises questions about how other direct sales manufacturers (Rivian, Lucid, etc.) and to the EV community in general will be treated in future.
In addition, there is a $2500 "alternative fuel vehicle" rebate program in Texas; however, this is only available to those who purchased their vehicle at a "franchised dealership" in Texas. So buyers of Tesla, Rivian, etc cars do not qualify. While it would be possible for Rivian to sign someone up as their "franchise dealership" to qualify buyers for the $2,500, this would likely not be a show stopper for that customer demographic due to the cost of these vehicles.
To conclude, if Tesla wants taxpayer dollars for their proprietary equipment, they need to abide by rules such as making sure that their chargers are available to the public and having CCS1 plugs - something which currently does not happen in US but does in EU markets. Until then, they should not expect any financial support from Texas or any other state government.
Why did Tesla fail to receive funding to install Superchargers in Texas with universal connectors?
The application was for a universal station that supports both charging standards, but it was not clear that Tesla was abiding by the rules that the Tesla chargers would be available to public and have CCS1 plugs. Furthermore, this is likely due to the Texas legislature being bought and paid for by both the oil and gas lobby and the auto dealer lobby, who have been anti-Tesla because of the direct sales model.
How can Tesla reapply for funding?
Tesla should resubmit with all CCS plugs and allowing public access as intended by the original Federal legislation that is funding the chargers.
Will other direct sales manufacturers (Rivian, Lucid, etc.) be affected by this decision?
It is possible that this behavior will extend to other direct sales manufacturers (Rivian, Lucid, etc.) and to the EV community in general. However, Rivian could sign someone up as their "franchise dealership" to qualify buyers for the $2,500 rebate program in Texas.
What are the benefits of using CCS1 adapter?
Using CCS1 adapter would allow Tesla owners to access charging stations without needing an additional adapter. Additionally, Tesla could sell the CCS1 adapter as it does in EU and make 200% profit on that.
What are the potential risks of not using CCS1 adapter?
Not using CCS1 adapter could mean that Tesla owners would need to purchase an additional adapter in order to access charging stations. This could lead to a decrease in sales and customer satisfaction, as well as a loss of revenue for Tesla. Additionally, it could also lead to confusion among EV drivers who may not be aware of the different charging standards.