The open EV charging network we need might finally be on the way

For years, electric vehicle charging has been a proprietary patchwork. But that could be about to change.

EV charging

Two big developments in the past year could finally shift the paradigm: the bipartisan infrastructure law’s passage, and legacy automakers doubling down on EVs.

Photo: dcbel /Unsplash

In the U.S., “the” electric vehicle charging network — analogous to that of the nation’s gas stations — does not exist. Instead, there is a series of networks that sometimes cooperate, sometimes compete. But if both market and political winds are to be trusted, a more harmonious network may be beginning to emerge.

At this time last year, it seemed like the country might be fated for a patchwork of multiple networks for the foreseeable future. The most noteworthy — Tesla’s Supercharger network, closed to anyone without a Tesla — was the largest fast-charging network, and Rivian announced in March 2021 that it would create two proprietary networks of its own (one fast and one slower). Third-party networks, like EVgo, were constructed like a club, offering members access to charging for a fee.

Meanwhile, Electrify America, which was established in 2017 as a result of a settlement agreement in the wake of Volkswagen’s Clean Air Act violations, was the nation’s largest public fast-charging network; it says it is on track to have more than 1,800 charging stations in the U.S. and Canada by 2026. (In 2019, EVgo and Electrify America announced an agreement to allow each other’s members to use any of the roughly 3,000 chargers from both companies.)

Until now, the benefits of adding chargers — a boon for potential EV owners, and in turn for the climate — have been complicated by the ad hoc way in which networks have been set up: Tesla started its own network before public options were really available, and Tesla owners consequently can use either Tesla chargers or any other open options that have since sprung up. While companies like Rivian have begun to build out their own networks, non-Tesla owners have far fewer options, and have relied on membership to third-party networks, or on Electrify America.

However, two big developments in the past year could finally shift the paradigm: the bipartisan infrastructure law’s passage, and legacy automakers doubling down on EVs.

The November passage of the infrastructure law includes $7.5 billion in federal funding toward the Biden administration’s goal of a nationwide network of 500,000 chargers. This pot of money is nowhere near enough to build out the entire network, but it will serve as seed funding and set the Biden administration on the path to meeting its goal of having zero-emissions vehicles make up 50% of all new vehicles sold in the U.S. by 2030.

Given that these funds will only be available for the construction of chargers that work for all EVs or ones made by at least more than one company, proprietary networks are ostensibly no longer de rigueur. According to one industry insider, there is active internal dialogue within EV companies about whether continued investment in proprietary networks makes sense, given the shifts in the market and growing public finance.

In February comments to the Federal Highway Administration, Tesla said it would be willing to partially open its Supercharger network to non-Tesla EVs in exchange for access to funds from the infrastructure bill. However, it also said it wants money to fund private chargers, according to the comments (which come in the wake of many hints over the years from CEO and founder Elon Musk that the company may open its network). Tesla didn't respond to requests for comment from Protocol.

Meanwhile, one of Rivian’s two networks known as “Waypoints” will be open to all, though its faster “Adventure Network” at national parks and other popular destinations will not be.

Anne Blair, director of policy for the Electrification Coalition, which advocates for policies that promote electrification, said that one of the main factors when it comes to getting people to purchase EVs is the reliability and visibility of charging infrastructure.

“So not only is [the infrastructure law] an impetus for some of these broader changes in how the charging stations operate, but also it’s a huge motivator in getting more vehicles on the road,” Blair said.

At the same time, the number of EVs on the road is also poised to jump significantly. The bipartisan infrastructure law came amid a flurry of announcements from most major automakers saying that they will produce only “electrified” cars by some specific date in the coming decades; for instance, GM plans to stop selling conventional gas-powered vehicles by 2035. And others announced electrified models of old standbys to be released in the coming years. Among them is Ford, which recently announced it will reorganize to prioritize its EV business; this includes an electric version of the F-150, the most popular vehicle in the country, among others.

This inexorable move toward EVs is a clear signal of coming demand for charging, and has catalyzed major investment in the last year, according to Dave Mullaney, a principal on RMI’s carbon-free mobility team.

“If the biggest automotive manufacturers in the country say ‘we’re building EVs’ and you are someone with a lot of capital, you immediately say ‘that’s an opportunity,’ and that’s exactly what happened,” said Mullaney.

The question of whether EV owners of the future will have a single, comprehensive public charging network depends on how this coming investment — both from the industry and from the government — is utilized.

Anne Smart, the vice president of Public Policy for ChargePoint, which operates a network of independently owned chargers but does not own the majority of the network’s stations, argued that investments that come as a result of the infrastructure law must prioritize the consistency of the charging experience if the network’s long-term sustainability is the goal.

“EV charging needs to be the same — with chargers of all different speeds, available everywhere Americans live, work, shop or play,” Smart said.

In Mullaney’s view, the infrastructure law will likely accelerate the investment in charging by investors who would otherwise be waiting around until EV ownership is high enough that demand is assured. If the government’s investment will allow investors to reduce the upfront costs of building charging infrastructure, it will mean more charging options, sooner, regardless of how quickly the coming EVs get on the road.

“The stations need to be there as the EVs arrive, not after, once you're sure the demand is there,” said Mullaney. “Otherwise, you end up with this chicken-and-egg problem.”


This carbon capture startup wants to clean up the worst polluters

The founder and CEO of point-source carbon capture company Carbon Clean discusses what the startup has learned, the future of carbon capture technology, as well as the role of companies like his in battling the climate crisis.

Carbon Clean CEO Aniruddha Sharma told Protocol that fossil fuels are necessary, at least in the near term, to lift the living standards of those who don’t have access to cars and electricity.

Photo: Carbon Clean

Carbon capture and storage has taken on increasing importance as companies with stubborn emissions look for new ways to meet their net zero goals. For hard-to-abate industries like cement and steel production, it’s one of the few options that exist to help them get there.

Yet it’s proven incredibly challenging to scale the technology, which captures carbon pollution at the source. U.K.-based company Carbon Clean is leading the charge to bring down costs. This year, it raised a $150 million series C round, which the startup said is the largest-ever funding round for a point-source carbon capture company.

Keep Reading Show less
Michelle Ma

Michelle Ma (@himichellema) is a reporter at Protocol covering climate. Previously, she was a news editor of live journalism and special coverage for The Wall Street Journal. Prior to that, she worked as a staff writer at Wirecutter. She can be reached at

Sponsored Content

Great products are built on strong patents

Experts say robust intellectual property protection is essential to ensure the long-term R&D required to innovate and maintain America's technology leadership.

Every great tech product that you rely on each day, from the smartphone in your pocket to your music streaming service and navigational system in the car, shares one important thing: part of its innovative design is protected by intellectual property (IP) laws.

From 5G to artificial intelligence, IP protection offers a powerful incentive for researchers to create ground-breaking products, and governmental leaders say its protection is an essential part of maintaining US technology leadership. To quote Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo: "intellectual property protection is vital for American innovation and entrepreneurship.”

Keep Reading Show less
James Daly
James Daly has a deep knowledge of creating brand voice identity, including understanding various audiences and targeting messaging accordingly. He enjoys commissioning, editing, writing, and business development, particularly in launching new ventures and building passionate audiences. Daly has led teams large and small to multiple awards and quantifiable success through a strategy built on teamwork, passion, fact-checking, intelligence, analytics, and audience growth while meeting budget goals and production deadlines in fast-paced environments. Daly is the Editorial Director of 2030 Media and a contributor at Wired.

Why companies cut staff after raising millions

Are tech firms blowing millions in funding just weeks after getting it? Experts say it's more complicated than that.

Bolt, Trade Republic, HomeLight, and Stord all drew attention from funding announcements that happened just weeks or days before layoffs.

Photo: Pulp Photography/Getty Images

Fintech startup Bolt was one of the first tech companies to slash jobs, cutting 250 employees, or a third of its staff, in May. For some workers, the pain of layoffs was a shock not only because they were the first, but also because the cuts came just four months after Bolt had announced a $355 million series E funding round and achieved a peak valuation of $11 billion.

“Bolt employees were blind sided because the CEO was saying just weeks ago how everything is fine,” an anonymous user wrote on the message board Blind. “It has been an extremely rough day for 1/3 of Bolt employees,” another user posted. “Sadly, I was one of them who was let go after getting a pay-raise just a couple of weeks ago.”

Keep Reading Show less
Nat Rubio-Licht

Nat Rubio-Licht is a Los Angeles-based news writer at Protocol. They graduated from Syracuse University with a degree in newspaper and online journalism in May 2020. Prior to joining the team, they worked at the Los Angeles Business Journal as a technology and aerospace reporter.


The fight to define the carbon offset market's future

The world’s largest carbon offset issuer is fighting a voluntary effort to standardize the industry. And the fate of the climate could hang in the balance.

It has become increasingly clear that scaling the credit market will first require clear standards and transparency.

Kevin Frayer/Getty Images

There’s a major fight brewing over what kind of standards will govern the carbon offset market.

A group of independent experts looking to clean up the market’s checkered record and the biggest carbon credit issuer on the voluntary market is trying to influence efforts to define what counts as a quality credit. The outcome could make or break an industry increasingly central to tech companies meeting their net zero goals.

Keep Reading Show less
Lisa Martine Jenkins

Lisa Martine Jenkins is a senior reporter at Protocol covering climate. Lisa previously wrote for Morning Consult, Chemical Watch and the Associated Press. Lisa is currently based in Brooklyn, and is originally from the Bay Area. Find her on Twitter ( @l_m_j_) or reach out via email (


White House AI Bill of Rights lacks specific guidance for AI rules

The document unveiled today by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy is long on tech guidance, but short on restrictions for AI.

While the document provides extensive suggestions for how to incorporate AI rights in technical design, it does not include any recommendations for restrictions on the use of controversial forms of AI.

Photo: Ana Lanza/Unsplash

It was a year in the making, but people eagerly anticipating the White House Bill of Rights for AI will have to continue waiting for concrete recommendations for future AI policy or restrictions.

Instead, the document unveiled today by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy is legally non-binding and intended to be used as a handbook and a “guide for society” that could someday inform government AI legislation or regulations.

Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights features a list of five guidelines for protecting people in relation to AI use:

Keep Reading Show less
Kate Kaye

Kate Kaye is an award-winning multimedia reporter digging deep and telling print, digital and audio stories. She covers AI and data for Protocol. Her reporting on AI and tech ethics issues has been published in OneZero, Fast Company, MIT Technology Review, CityLab, Ad Age and Digiday and heard on NPR. Kate is the creator of and is the author of "Campaign '08: A Turning Point for Digital Media," a book about how the 2008 presidential campaigns used digital media and data.

Latest Stories