Electric vehicle manufacturers announce game-changing update that could transform the industry: 'Many benefits'
Honda and Acura electric vehicles are gaining access to the Tesla Supercharger network this summer, Teslarati reported. This will give Honda and Acura drivers significantly more charging options, allowing them to use more than 20,000 Supercharger stations nationwide.
Starting in June, Honda Prologue and Acura ZDX drivers can acquire a Honda-approved fast-charging adapter at authorized U.S. dealerships.
Tesla has recently come under scrutiny amid CEO Elon Musk's political activities, which appear to have damaged brand trust among many consumers. While the automaker's EV sales are tanking, its Superchargers provide a robust network.
Having access to these Superchargers would significantly expand the fast-charging options available, addressing common concerns about charging infrastructure and range anxiety.
According to EVBox, 41% of potential EV drivers in 2022 expressed concern about not being able to charge their vehicle when needed.
Tesla Superchargers are already available to several other car companies' electric vehicles, including Rivian, Ford, and Mercedes-Benz. The network is renowned for its reliability, boasting a low failure rate compared with other public charging stations.
"By the end of this decade, we strive to provide Honda and Acura EV drivers with the most convenient and easy charging at more than 100,000 charge points nationwide, helping people choose to purchase an EV for the many benefits of driving one," said Ryan Harty, assistant vice president of sustainability and business development at American Honda Motor Co., Inc. in a press release.
Honda is aiming to have 100,000 charging stations for Honda and Acura EV drivers by 2030.
While the adapters are tested for safety and compatibility, one downside is that the introduction of third-party adapters can sometimes lead to unforeseen issues, such as reduced charging speeds or potential damage to charging ports. Ford previously advised some EV customers to stop using certain adapters due to such concerns. Rivian and General Motors hadn't noticed the same issue.
By facilitating better access to charging infrastructure, this partnership could encourage more consumers to adopt EVs. The increased demand for Supercharger stations may necessitate further expansion, which could raise concerns about the environmental impact of manufacturing and installing additional charging units nationwide.
If you were going to purchase an EV, which of these factors would be most important to you?
Cost
Battery range
Power and speed
The way it looks
Click your choice to see results and speak your mind.
Nonetheless, this is a big step for broader EV adoption — and the drivers who want to save money on fuel and maintenance. Ultimately, EVs are responsible for much less pollution over their lifetimes than gas-guzzlers, even when taking into account manufacturing, charging, and mining for battery materials.
Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bloomberg
43 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Trump's Auto Tariffs Strike at the Heart of Japan's Economy
US President Donald Trump's tariffs threaten to batter Japan's vital auto industry and derail the country's long-standing efforts to engineer a sustainable economic recovery. With the 25% US tariff now in place on cars and auto parts, Japan's major automakers — including Toyota Motor Corp., Honda Motor Co., Mazda Motor Corp. and Subaru Corp. — are bracing for a collective hit of more than $19 billion this fiscal year alone. And it's not just the household names feeling the pain.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Brazil's top court votes to hold social media platforms accountable for user posts
By Ricardo Brito BRASILIA (Reuters) -Brazil's Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that social media companies must be held accountable for some types of content published by users on their platforms in the country, but details on the decision have yet to be resolved. Six of the 11 Supreme Court judges voted to hold platforms responsible for third-party content seen as illegal, in a decision that could result in fines against social media companies for not removing some users' posts in the country. The decision could impact the business of platforms including Meta's Facebook and Instagram, as well as TikTok, Elon Musk's X and other internet giants, such as Alphabet's Google, in a market of more than 200 million people. Only one justice so far voted to not change the current law on the matter, which says that the companies can only be found responsible for third-party content on their platforms if the firms do not comply with a legal decision ordering the content removal. Writing for the majority, Justice Gilmar Mendes said current Brazilian law represents "a veil of irresponsibility for digital platforms." "Even if they are informed of the occurrence of crimes on their platforms, they (currently) cannot be held responsible for damages caused by keeping this content online, except in the case of a court order," he said. Asked to comment, Meta sent a 2024 statement where it had said that a decision holding platforms responsible could make them "liable for virtually all types of content even without having been notified." In a statement sent before the vote which gave the court a majority, Google said the current Brazilian law regarding social media can and should be improved, "as long as procedure guarantees and criteria are set to prevent legal uncertainty and the indiscriminate content removal." TikTok and a representative of X in Brazil did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The court did not agree on the scope of the decision, such as what types of content would be considered illegal. The court's head, Luis Roberto Barroso, said he will work with the court members to find a consensus. Four judges still need to vote in the trial, which has been rolling over for months. Votes previously cast can still be changed, although that is not common. The trial is set to resume on Thursday.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Wisconsin Democracy Campaign sues over Musk election payments
Tesla CEO Elon Musk listens as President Donald Trump speaks to reporters in the Oval Office of the White House on May 30, 2025 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by) The Wisconsin Democracy Campaign is suing billionaire Elon Musk over allegations that he violated multiple state laws, including the election bribery statute, when he offered voters a potential $1 million award for signing a petition as part of his effort to sway the result of Wisconsin's April Supreme Court election. Represented by Wisconsin's Law Forward, Democracy Defenders Fund and New York-based law firm Hecker Fink, the lawsuit accuses the world's richest man of implementing 'a brazen scheme to bribe Wisconsin citizens to vote.' Musk and his political action committee, America PAC, played a major role in this spring's election becoming the most expensive judicial campaign in American history. Musk's involvement in the race, which came as he was leading President Donald Trump's cost-cutting initiatives and firing thousands of federal employees through the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), was widely seen as causing a backlash and helping Dane County Judge Susan Crawford defeat Musk-backed Waukesha County Judge Brad Schimel. Musk and his PAC spent more than $20 million on the race. Prior to the election, America PAC offered voters $100 if they signed a petition 'in opposition to activist judges,' and another $100 if they referred another voter to sign the petition. Later, at a pre-election rally in Green Bay, Musk handed out two $1 million checks to voters, which had been advertised as awards 'in appreciation for you taking the time to vote.' The lawsuit, filed in Dane County court, notes it is against the law to offer anyone more than $1 to induce them to go to the polls, vote or vote for a particular candidate. 'By offering and paying Wisconsin citizens amounts far greater than $1 to vote, Defendants violated Wisconsin's election bribery law,' the lawsuit states. 'Defendants' payments and offers of payment to Wisconsin voters, made with the clear intent to aid one candidate and induce Wisconsinites to vote, threatened the integrity of the election and damaged public confidence in the electoral system.' Jeff Mandell, Law Forward's general counsel, said the lawsuit was meant to prevent efforts like Musk's from becoming a regular occurrence. 'We are fighting for free and fair elections,' Mandell said. 'We believe our democracy demands better than schemes like the one detailed in our complaint. So, we are working to hold Musk accountable and stop this from becoming the new normal.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
