Rivian Announces Proprietary Charging Network (plus public charging)

[PrimeFuture]

So Rivian touts their chargers are all powered by renewable energy, ostensibly to show their commitment to protecting the environment. But then they're installing chargers that only work for their cars, because nothing says environmentally concsious like having 3 or more different chargers next to each other for different car manufacturers. Rivian is greenwashing here.

Sponsored

 

[DBC]

So Rivian touts their chargers are all powered by renewable energy, ostensibly to show their commitment to protecting the environment. But then they're installing chargers that only work for their cars, because nothing says environmentally concsious like having 3 or more different chargers next to each other for different car manufacturers. Rivian is greenwashing here.

Tesla touts its mission is to move transportation off fossil fuels and it runs the largest proprietary network in NA.

OMG. A company who claims one thing for marketing purposes and does another!

 

[ajmartineau]

The obvious point being missed is that if you require certain things of companies when they put in chargers you're likely not to get any chargers in circumstances like this. Would you be happier if you could charge at $10/kWh? Or should the government also regulate prices? Just curious how far you're willing to go here.

So the government should have set standards for computer ergonomics? You see a proprietary mess. I don't see any more of proprietary mess than the mess created when some parking garages are "monthly only" and I want to use it every once in a while.

First things first. You're not buying a Rivian regardless of the charger situation and you'll use EVgo if you need to.

The idea that Tesla made the "right choice" but Rivian made the "wrong choice" is interesting. The choice in both cases is EXACTLY the same: No one is willing to build the chargers you need so you step up, build it yourself, and make it proprietary to give yourself a competitive advantage.

I already canceled my EVGo account. I will not be moving forward to buy or promote an R1T. I will make a reservation for an electric F150 as soon as they open it up. You don't know me.

Tesla made the right choice THEN, because it was a different time. They were selling very expensive cars to the 1%. Do some research now when J1772 started compared to when the Supercharger network started. Or maybe it was the wrong choice then also. They might not make that same choice now. In 2019 Tesla introduced the Model 3 with the CCS Combo 2 plug in Europe.

Something else to think about. How many of these private chargers will be on public land?

 

[DaMeatMan]

The obvious point being missed is that if you require certain things of companies when they put in chargers you're likely not to get any chargers in circumstances like this. Would you be happier if you could charge at $10/kWh? Or should the government also regulate prices? Just curious how far you're willing to go here.

So the government should have set standards for computer ergonomics? You see a proprietary mess. I don't see any more of proprietary mess than the mess created when some parking garages are "monthly only" and I want to use it every once in a while.

First things first. You're not buying a Rivian regardless of the charger situation and you'll use EVgo if you need to.

The idea that Tesla made the "right choice" but Rivian made the "wrong choice" is interesting. The choice in both cases is EXACTLY the same: No one is willing to build the chargers you need so you step up, build it yourself, and make it proprietary to give yourself a competitive advantage.

Like I said I'm not a fan of regulation in general particularly in areas where the market is fully capable of offering up better solutions or user experiences. But I am supportive of regulation where needed. That being said I don't think we need to go to extremes here and I think it's fair to say that the current state of EV infrastructure is a bit if a sh!t show.

For contrast if gas stations were run the way the current charging infrastructure is run, then your wallet would be filled with 5 or 6 loyalty cards required to fill up your tank with gas at each vendors gas station. Or alternatively you would need 5 or 6 apps installed on your phone. Also each card or app is linked to a credit card which you already have in your wallet (but can't pay with directly), why?

That being said, if this is how gas stations were run, I'm fairly certain it would induce a significant level of aggravation and range anxiety for the customer based solely on the fact that an out of town trip likely requires you to create an account with the various gas stations on your route, despite having a gas station every few blocks. Bottom line the experience would hardly be one of hopping in your car and just driving wherever you want to go, and I don't think it's a stretch to say that such a user experience would be absolutely ridiculous. Which is why I have a hard time comprehending why anyone would suggest otherwise, and think it's OK to build out a future EV infrastructure in such a closed minded and fragmented way? I'm curious why you support such a thing, and I'm genuinely curious how you feel about the customer experience particularly when contrasting it to existing gas station infrastructure?

Having non Rivian vehicles charge at Rivian charging infrastructure takes absolutely nothing away from Rivian, and in reality adds an added revenue stream for maintenance and expansion particularly if those charging are not members of the network and pay a premium. $10 though.. let's be realistic shall we?

If a manufacturer is going to build out the infrastructure to make it easier to get more of the cars on the road, are a few regulations mandating some sort of uniformity in dispensing of energy (in this case electrons vs gas) going to dissuade a manufacturer from building out that infrastructure, particularly when it allows anyone with a CCS compliant charge port to be a paying customer? I really don't think so. No one is saying they can't brand how they want, or membership perks for their customers. I'm just saying this model of closed networks is ridiculous and creates a horrible user experience and makes the public infrastructure increasingly unreliable.

Lastly have you ever seen a Ford, or Porsche or BMW branded gas station that only sells gas to their brand vehicles? Wouldn't that sound ridiculous particularly when everyone vehicle driving by is fully capable of running on the very same gas they dispensed??

 

[DBC]

I already canceled my EVGo account. I will not be moving forward to buy or promote an R1T. I will make a reservation for an electric F150 as soon as they open it up. You don't know me.

Tesla made the right choice THEN, because it was a different time.

You weren't going to buy or promote at R1T before and you're not now. Is this a loss for Rivian? As for canceling your EVgo account, why does this matter? You don't have to have an Ego account. Just swipe your credit card.

Which brings up an interesting point. You are complaining about Rivian, which is building a network which is in large part non-proprietary and which will put chargers where they otherwise wouldn't be. You are also complaining about EVgo, which has an extensive non proprietary network, which has partnered with GM to open more public chargers, and which has connectors for CCS, CHAdeMO, and Tesla. Yet you think Ford, which hasn't done anything on the charging infrastrucuture front, is great.

Will be most interested in the explanation for why companies providing a charging network deserves to be criticised while a company which does nothing deserves to be be lauded.

 

[ajmartineau]

I know that you are trolling me. I have no need to prove to you that my word is true. EVGo is not allowing homemade vehicles to charge on their network. This means the M/C conversion I'm doing will not be allowed to charge there. That is why I canceled my account. We have to stand up against these kinds of uninclusive practices as they are slowing down the progress that you obviously care nothing about. Tesla does this same thing by not allowing their customers to fix their own cars and then DCFC. I'm done spending my time on this.

 

[SteelMach]

I know that you are trolling me. I have no need to prove to you that my word is true. EVGo is not allowing homemade vehicles to charge on their network. This means the M/C conversion I'm doing will not be allowed to charge there. That is why I canceled my account. We have to stand up against these kinds of uninclusive practices as they are slowing down the progress that you obviously care nothing about. Tesla does this same thing by not allowing their customers to fix their own cars and then DCFC. I'm done spending my time on this.

I don't think we can - or should - equate EVgo not wanting homemade EVs on their network with Tesla's proprietary network that is trying to slow down the spread of non-Tesla EVs. Unlike a gas pump which a "homemade" car really can't damage - if something does go wrong in charging it could cost EVgo a substantial amount of money to send a crew to the charger, diagnose it, repair it, and leave other EVs stranded in the meantime. That's a cost they'd bear - not you. I think they're well within their right to stop that sort of thing, not that I think it's a good image move for them to actually do so.

 

[bluestarct]

Having non Rivian vehicles charge at Rivian charging infrastructure takes absolutely nothing away from Rivian, and in reality adds an added revenue stream for maintenance and expansion particularly if those charging are not members of the network and pay a premium. $10 though.. let's be realistic shall we?

When Bobby is sitting there hogging the Rivian charger to charge up his 200kWh Hummer for an hour, it does take away from the Rivian experience.

Rivian is willing to spend the cost to put these chargers in for their customers who like to go to these areas. They have done lots of studies on their target audience. They are spending the money to deliver something to their customers that their customers want. The Rivian only chargers will be in more remote locations. I wouldn't take my Mach E on a desert goat trail but the Rivian owners are likely too do that.

 

[mixduptransistor]

So, back earlier in this thread, this is exactly the model I was talking about: Jeep is installing EV chargers at off-road trailheads throughout the US | Engadget

Jeep is partnering with (read: paying) Electrify America to install chargers at trailheads.

Jeep owners will get free charging but they will be operated by Electrify America and appear to be open to anyone who comes along (for a fee, of course). Jeep doesn't have to handle any of the actual operational issues behind it. This is a specific branded service EA offers to manufacturers. Absolutely nutty that Rivian didn't go in this direction

 

[DBC]

So, back earlier in this thread, this is exactly the model I was talking about:
...
Absolutely nutty that Rivian didn't go in this direction

The Jeep is a plug in hybrid with 25 miles of range and will charge using J1772. The Rivians are pure electrics with a 135 kW batteries that will DC charge at 300 kW. Other than the use cases being totally different they are the same.

Even if they were similar -- which they aren't -- different companies could make different calculations. As it stands, given the different use cases, both decisions make logical sense. I will say that if I were a Jeep owner who showed up and a Rivian was charging I'd be mightily unhappy for what might be a very long wait. My guess is that they will try to address that with time limits on the charging.

However, I don't understand why the Jeep would need charging. Just use a Hold mode (has to be one, right?) until you get to the trailhead. Use electric mode to off-road. Then drive back using the ICE.

 

[Timelessblur]

It is sad the US goverment needs to step in sadly and put an end to this BS.
I have no problem with hey if you own say a Rivian you can charge for free or a reduced rate at a Rivian charger. Other manufacturs should be allowed to use said charger at a reasonable rate. Also make it a requirement that Tesla needs to start converting their charging stations over to allow others to use it same processes.
This is going to hurt EV adaption and sure as hell is not going to help it.

 

[balthisar]

I'd like to be able to plug in everywhere and have a charge. On the other hand, I like having control over my own property, and making legal agreements with people that I want to have arrangements with. There's no reason for the government to violate our rights just so that you can find it a little bit more convenient to charge. Do you know what unintended consequences are? You do something stupid like tell someone that they have to invite everyone, so they don't do anything at all, for anyone.

 

[Aye Aye Ron]

I'll try one more time. Since EA is an open network, Rivian can already advertise that their vehicles can use the EA chargers. So the choice of doors is:

Door #1: Pay EA X dollars to put chargers at special outdoor on its schedule at locations which anyone can use.

Door #2: Pay X dollars plus a small premium to put chargers at special outdoor locations on your schedule that only owners of your adventure vehicles can use, a competitive advantage in the outdoor adventure vehicle space.

Just doesn't seem unreasonable to go through Door #2.

I understand what you are saying.
What I dont understand is if Rivian choose door #2 why would they not allow anyone else use their equipment? It leaves money on the table that they could otherwise put in their pocket and it would no doubt cost them a lot more to do it this way.
Also the economics of it are really bad.
Out of all the adventure BEVs in the future that will be out there one day, Rivian will only make up a (at best) small portion of them and all the others will drive right on by Rivian charger to the competitor next door.
At best its strange cooperate thinking to have an exclusive network in such limited locations with what will more than likely become a small market share.
Maybe Rivian will design their chargers so that they can open them up to all uses in the future??

 

[Aye Aye Ron]

I'd like to be able to plug in everywhere and have a charge. On the other hand, I like having control over my own property, and making legal agreements with people that I want to have arrangements with. There's no reason for the government to violate our rights just so that you can find it a little bit more convenient to charge. Do you know what unintended consequences are? You do something stupid like tell someone that they have to invite everyone, so they don't do anything at all, for anyone.

And this comes back to the argument that others have made on this thread.
Is it better to have a unified charging structure and be able to travel the country or let the cowboys loose and have 20 different types of charges out there in a fragmented set of networks and no real way to get most places.?
Imagine if each state decided they should each have their own style convenience receptacle and voltage?
This is the reason road signs are very similar around the world. It prevents confusion, and it is the price of doing business anywhere.

 

[DBC]

Maybe Rivian will design their chargers so that they can open them up to all uses in the future??

The connectors are standard so it would be easy to allow vehicles from other manufacturers to charge. In fact any vehicle from any manufacturer will be able to use the AC chargers so long as they pay for it.

FWIW I have no idea if this is a good decision or not. I'm assuming Rivian marketing has data that says it is.

Imagine if each state decided they should each have their own style convenience receptacle and voltage?

You're confusing the connector with the right to use a charging station. The charging stations will use standard SAE DC connectors. They just won't work unless you have a Rivian. Same as if you don't have an account or a credit card.

To use a not so great analogy, but one you mentioned, a hotel may use standard 120v outlets, but that doesn't mean anyone can use them. Use can be limited to guests. This is what happens now with chargers. Chargers at hotels are usually limited to guests. If this is OK then Rivian's decision to limit its DC chargers to Rivian vehicles also seems OK.

Sponsored