Sign In or Create an Account.

By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy

Electric Vehicles

Elon Musk Is Putting the EV Transition in Peril

Inside episode 15 of Shift Key.

Elon Musk.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Tesla is now facing its worst crisis in years. Last week, CEO Elon Musk laid off the automaker’s roughly 500-person Supercharger team and what remained of its policy and new vehicle teams. Before that, it reported its first-quarter financial results — and they were even worse than the lackluster performance that investors were expecting.

Already this year, Tesla has cut around 10% of its employees. Now Musk is promising that it will shift toward becoming an “AI” company. And on Wednesday — after we recorded this episode — Reuters reported that the Justice Department is investigating Tesla for lying about its so-called Full Self Driving software to investors.

Does Tesla, long a stalwart of America’s EV transition, now pose a danger to it? On this week’s episode of Shift Key, Rob and Jesse discuss the automaker’s turn away from EVs, and why Musk’s decision to lay off the Supercharger team could throw the entire country’s EV transition off track. Shift Key is hosted by Robinson Meyer, the founding executive editor of Heatmap, and Jesse Jenkins, a professor of energy systems engineering at Princeton University.

Subscribe to “Shift Key” and find this episode on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon, or wherever you get your podcasts.

You can also add the show’s RSS feed to your podcast app to follow us directly.

Here is an excerpt from our conversation:

Jesse Jenkins: I just want to note one thing you said there, which is the role of the [National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure] funding. So the government funding here required that any recipient of the federal infrastructure funding would be open to multiple automakers’ vehicles. So you could not, Tesla could not have kept its network closed and received any of the federal money.

And so it is interesting to think like, you know: If NEVI hadn’t existed, I’m not sure if Tesla would have made that pivot. So it’s interesting, this is an example of where government funding and requirements can really open up standards and, you know, kind of force change. So maybe it was they thought they had to do it in order to stay competitive, to get a chunk of that federal infrastructure funding. And maybe they would have been better off if they just kept a closed network and ignored the shiny pot of money that the federal government was out there … it’s hard to say, at this point.

Robinson Meyer: There’s a second aspect of this, though, that I think is also confusing, which is basically that if Tesla — over the next year, every American who drives an electric vehicle is going to encounter a Tesla Supercharger for the first time, whether or not they own a Tesla, right? Because they’re, the vehicle they own is going to be integrated into the Tesla network and they’re going to be able to charge.

That is such a sales opportunity for Tesla. Tesla needed to nail that integration, first of all, and execution, because these are not hard customers to convince to buy a Tesla. These are customers who already own an electric vehicle. And so if they’re coming to your Supercharger network, and they’re like, ‘This is an amazing network. This, like, works so much better than any other network. This works better than the chargers that my automaker wants to direct me to that aren’t Tesla, whether they be Electrify America or something else,’ that would have been an incredible marketing and sales opportunity for Tesla to convert drivers who already had chosen to go electric.

There’s not a better market out there. There’s not a more accessible market out there for them than people who already drive an EV and are thinking about their next EV purchase. And so it has now, if nothing else, guaranteed that the next year will feel chaotic. Maybe, through some miracle, the Supercharger network keeps working, and it keeps working pretty well. How they’re going to manage that with no remaining team, I don’t really understand — but let’s say it keeps working pretty well. They’ve really fumbled an opportunity to make Tesla seem like the easiest and most secure and most reliable, you know, value proposition out there for drivers.

And I think that’s just … that’s happened now. That’s water under the bridge. They’ve really screwed this up, no matter what else happens over the next year.

This episode of Shift Key is sponsored by…

Watershed’s climate data engine helps companies measure and reduce their emissions, turning the data they already have into an audit-ready carbon footprint backed by the latest climate science. Get the sustainability data you need in weeks, not months. Learn more at watershed.com.

Music for Shift Key is by Adam Kromelow.

You’re out of free articles.

Subscribe today to experience Heatmap’s expert analysis 
of climate change, clean energy, and sustainability.
To continue reading
Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
or
Please enter an email address
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Energy

Trump Wants to Prop Up Coal Plants. They Keep Breaking Down.

According to a new analysis shared exclusively with Heatmap, coal’s equipment-related outage rate is about twice as high as wind’s.

Donald Trump as Sisyphus.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

The Trump administration wants “beautiful clean coal” to return to its place of pride on the electric grid because, it says, wind and solar are just too unreliable. “If we want to keep the lights on and prevent blackouts from happening, then we need to keep our coal plants running. Affordable, reliable and secure energy sources are common sense,” Chris Wright said on X in July, in what has become a steady drumbeat from the administration that has sought to subsidize coal and put a regulatory straitjacket around solar and (especially) wind.

This has meant real money spent in support of existing coal plants. The administration’s emergency order to keep Michigan’s J.H. Campbell coal plant open (“to secure grid reliability”), for example, has cost ratepayers served by Michigan utility Consumers Energy some $80 million all on its own.

Keep reading...Show less
Blue
Spotlight

The New Transmission Line Pitting Trump’s Rural Fans Against His Big Tech Allies

Rural Marylanders have asked for the president’s help to oppose the data center-related development — but so far they haven’t gotten it.

Donald Trump, Maryland, and Virginia.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

A transmission line in Maryland is pitting rural conservatives against Big Tech in a way that highlights the growing political sensitivities of the data center backlash. Opponents of the project want President Trump to intervene, but they’re worried he’ll ignore them — or even side with the data center developers.

The Piedmont Reliability Project would connect the Peach Bottom nuclear plant in southern Pennsylvania to electricity customers in northern Virginia, i.e.data centers, most likely. To get from A to B, the power line would have to criss-cross agricultural lands between Baltimore, Maryland and the Washington D.C. area.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Hotspots

Trump Punished Wind Farms for Eagle Deaths During the Shutdown

Plus more of the week’s most important fights around renewable energy.

The United States.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

1. Wayne County, Nebraska – The Trump administration fined Orsted during the government shutdown for allegedly killing bald eagles at two of its wind projects, the first indications of financial penalties for energy companies under Trump’s wind industry crackdown.

  • On November 3, Fox News published a story claiming it had “reviewed” a notice from the Fish and Wildlife Service showing that it had proposed fining Orsted more than $32,000 for dead bald eagles that were discovered last year at two of its wind projects – the Plum Creek wind farm in Wayne County and the Lincoln Land Wind facility in Morgan County, Illinois.
  • Per Fox News, the Service claims Orsted did not have incidental take permits for the two projects but came forward to the agency with the bird carcasses once it became aware of the deaths.
  • In an email to me, Orsted confirmed that it received the letter on October 29 – weeks into what became the longest government shutdown in American history.
  • This is the first action we’ve seen to date on bird impacts tied to Trump’s wind industry crackdown. If you remember, the administration sent wind developers across the country requests for records on eagle deaths from their turbines. If companies don’t have their “take” permits – i.e. permission to harm birds incidentally through their operations – they may be vulnerable to fines like these.

2. Ocean County, New Jersey – Speaking of wind, I broke news earlier this week that one of the nation’s largest renewable energy projects is now deceased: the Leading Light offshore wind project.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow