You’re out of free articles.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Sign In or Create an Account.
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Welcome to Heatmap
Thank you for registering with Heatmap. Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our lives, a force reshaping our economy, our politics, and our culture. We hope to be your trusted, friendly, and insightful guide to that transformation. Please enjoy your free articles. You can check your profile here .
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Subscribe to get unlimited Access
Hey, you are out of free articles but you are only a few clicks away from full access. Subscribe below and take advantage of our introductory offer.
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Create Your Account
Please Enter Your Password
Forgot your password?
Please enter the email address you use for your account so we can send you a link to reset your password:
Bad news for Tesla drivers is great news for the energy transition.

It’s a strange sight: Ford F-150 Lightning trucks and Mustang Mach-E crossovers lined up at a Tesla Supercharger, plugged into the familiar red-and-white posts. After years of driving a Model 3, and greeting only other Teslas at our charging stops, I can’t quite get used to the visual. Yet I must, because a new phase of EV charging has arrived.
In the year-plus since Tesla transformed its proprietary plug into an open standard and invited the other automakers to adopt it, they did. Company after company pledged to adopt the renamed North American Charging Standard (which has since been given the technical name J3400) over the tech they’d been using, which would allow their EV customers to use Tesla’s bigger and more reliable network of fast chargers.
This week, Ford, the first company to go all-in with Tesla’s plug, gained access to the Supercharger network. Around 15,000 Tesla chargers will be compatible with Ford EVs and will show up as part of the BlueOval charging network that appears in the cars’ infotainment screens. The Detroit giant is helping out its early adopters by offering free adapters that would normally cost more than $200, at least for now. (Future Fords will be built with the NACS plug and require no dongle). With many more brands to follow Ford’s lead, we’re about to see Supercharger access change America’s charging dynamic in several ways.
For one thing, buying a non-Tesla EV just got more appealing. Loren McDonald, CEO of the analyst website EVAdoption, says horror stories about busted third-party chargers or the lack of sufficient plugs have dissuaded many on-the-fence drivers from going electric. When he asked his own brother-in-law, who wasn’t a total stranger to electrics, about switching to an EV, the reply was: So if I take that road trip across Idaho, I've heard there's no place to charge. And what if I run out of battery? “I think that was really eye-opening for me,” he says.
Tesla, meanwhile, has held a sales advantage thanks to the closed access of Superchargers. Lots of buyers, myself included, bought a Tesla over another EV because its network was vast, fast, and reliable, which made it possible to drive an electric vehicle as the primary or only car. Once Ford EVs (or Rivians, or Chevys, or Hyundais) can use the Tesla network, too, those cars suddenly become more viable options. Just look at Tesla’s updated website and check out all the Supercharger locations suddenly open to other cars with NACS plugs.
It might be annoying for Tesla drivers like me to give up our exclusivity; I’m sure I’ll mutter under my breath the first time I wait for an F-150 to finish charging. But it’s certainly good for electrification at large if expanded plug access gives more people the confidence to go electric.
Tesla, of course, isn’t opening its network out of the goodness of its heart. Even as the company loses its dominant market share in EVs, its triumph in the charging standard wars means that Elon Musk’s company gains new customers who’ll be paying Tesla for electricity. Ford sold more than 70,000 EVs in 2023, for example, all of whom became potential Supercharger users this week. With NACS having succeeded in becoming the industry standard, we’re talking about millions of vehicles around the world ready to buy Tesla’s power.
Those new customers might be paying extra, too. Electrek reports that Tesla is charging Ford drivers a 30% premium per kilowatt hour. Ford owners can get around that fee by purchasing a $12.99 per month Supercharger subscription that would see them pay the same kWh price as Tesla drivers. Of course, that model incentivizes those drivers to subscribe indefinitely and to maximize their investment by choosing Superchargers as often as possible.
Fortunately, the new charging paradigm could benefit those who don’t care to pay for yet another subscription. Ford’s electric drivers could get along just fine by doing nearly all their charging at home or at stations run by Electrify America or EVgo. Then, if they need a little juice somewhere with only a Tesla supercharger, they could pay a premium and be on their way.
On the other hand, Tesla’s new power in the charging market means it could go the other direction, too — say, by starting a price war like it did in the EV market, which kneecapped the profitability of EV efforts by traditional carmakers like Ford. Once again, it’s Tesla’s competitors who might be in trouble.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
There is a heat wave in Europe, the world’s fastest warming continent. And so, as you may have heard, a perennial topic of online climate discourse has returned: Why don’t more Europeans have air conditioning?
I’m partially convinced this is psy op, or at least a figment of how social media organizes attention. I have a hypothesis that various “For You” page algorithms, especially that of the social network X, began to reward content that performed unusually well across national borders a few years ago. Since then, the amount of America vs. Europe content has surged. (Of course, writers have been comparing American and European lifestyles for much longer than that.)
Suffice it to say, though: It’s a fraught topic. I’ve assumed that as extreme heat gets worse as the climate changes, Europeans will simply get on with it and install AC, much as Americans in the Pacific Northwest have done. Yet there are cultural and regulatory obstacles to AC’s growth in Europe.
I’m sure I’ll write about it in the future, but for now I want to get a grip on the facts themselves. And so as a Friday special, I present to you — the facts about European AC, as I understand it:
Thanks so much for reading, and talk soon.
The movement against data centers is raising up a raison d'etre of the anti-renewables movement: protecting would-be farmland.
Farm owners and operators across the U.S. are winning national headlines almost every week for rejecting big dollar offers from data center developers. In Hanover County, Virginia, protestors are chanting “Grow Tomatoes, Not Data Centers.” In Pennsylvania and elsewhere, Republican legislators are mulling proposals to block the sale of so-called “prime farmland” for data center development. In Texas, the fight over data center development has engulfed the race for the state’s ag commissioner seat. In the Midwest, where agriculture reigns supreme, statewide races and congressional campaigns are slowly but surely being defined by the issue. Like in Nebraska where Austin Ahlman, an independent candidate running for Congress in Nebraska’s first district, told me he believes the data center backlash is reflective of a populist politics that broadly criticize elites and top-down control of the economy: “I think sometimes people misunderstand the anxieties of rural Americans when it comes to these data centers because a lot of their fears are about control long term.”
Unlike the farmland backlash around renewable energy development, the loudest critics are on the anti-monopolist left. On Wednesday, the prominent opposition group Food and Water Watch signaled farmland could soon be a watchword in the national data center debate – in a fashion analogous to what we’ve seen with renewable energy. The organization’s blog post entitled “The AI Data Center Boom Is Coming for Farmers” declared data centers verboten because of the threat they posed to “small and midsized family farmers.” Mitch Jones, deputy director of the campaign outfit, said he believes the threat to farmland is “a compelling reason to oppose data center development” but that his organization’s fight is primarily focused on protecting small business owners and an anti-monopoly sentiment.
“If data centers are coming into their areas, this puts even more pressure on them. It drives up the cost of their electricity, just as it does anyone else. It competes with them for water for crops, and it affects the value of their land in a perverse way,” Jones told me.
None of this should be surprising. An agricultural workforce has always been a good barometer for figuring out if a community will accept new infrastructure of any kind. We’ve seen as much time and time again with renewable energy, carbon capture, fossil energy and mining, just to name a few industries.
This same rule is true with data centers. In April, county commissioners in Kosciusko County, Indiana, unanimously rejected a Prologis data center; nearly 90% of acreage in Kosciusko County is being actively farmed, according to the Heatmap Pro database. Linn County, Iowa, in February enacted a rule severely restricting data center development in unincorporated areas; almost three-fourths of the land is used by the ag sector. A potential Amazon facility is causing heartburn in Clinton County, Ohio; nearly all land in the county is used for farming and utility-scale solar development has a recent history of conflict with landowners.
To be candid, I’m struck by the similarity in the backlash over siting data centers on farmland – a resemblance so close that some counties are starting to restrict renewable energy and data center development on farmland at the same time. This week, Eau Claire County, Wisconsin created a new “farmland preservation plan” discouraging utility-scale solar energy and data centers on any potential farmland. (More than 40% of land in this county is currently being used for farmland, according to Heatmap Pro.)
Jones at Food and Water Watch said his organization taking on the “protect farmland” mantle had nothing to do with the success this argument has had against renewable energy. “That thought never entered my head,” he told me, adding that if communities respond to the data center backlash by taking steps that short-circuit solar and wind too, that’s “a coincidence.”
I kept pressing. What if the pivot to farmland protection leads to more communities restricting renewable energy along with the data centers? “If you’re looking for a reason to oppose solar and wind, you can come up with that without having to attach data centers to it,” Jones said. “We’ve seen rural communities oppose solar and wind before data centers blew up across the country. It’s nothing new.”
And more of the week’s top news around project fights.
1. Virginia Beach, Virginia – The right-wing interest group lawsuit against Dominion Energy’s Coastal Virginia offshore wind is now dead, concluding one of the wackier tales of the Trump 2.0 energy era.
2. Box Elder County, Utah – Call it the Box Elder County massacre.
3. Davidson County, Tennessee – We have the latest updates in the Nashville Zoo data center drama and they’re a doozy and a half.
4. Clark County, Ohio – Yet another utility-scale solar farm is in the Ohio state permitting graveyard.