Waymo’s robotaxis are supposed to be limited by software and regulation, not by how long they sit tethered to a plug. Yet the company’s next phase of growth is running into a very physical constraint: where, when, and how fast its electric fleets can charge. The result is a quiet but consequential bottleneck that is starting to shape where Waymo can operate, how dense its service can be, and how quickly it can scale.
Instead of a purely digital problem, the limiting factor is increasingly the messy world of real estate, neighborhood politics, and power infrastructure. As Waymo pushes into more cities and higher utilization, slow or restricted charging is turning into a hard ceiling on fleet size and availability, even as the underlying self‑driving software keeps improving.
Charging has become a frontline problem, not a background detail
The most visible sign that charging is no longer a back‑office concern came in Santa Monica, where local officials moved from grumbling to formal action. The Santa Monica City Council voted unanimously to order Waymo to halt overnight charging operations at two outdoor sites, a decision that instantly cut into the hours when vehicles could quietly refuel while passengers slept. That kind of direct intervention shows that charging is now a frontline political issue for autonomous fleets, not just a technical footnote.
Residents had complained that the overnight activity violated local regulations and created what they saw as a public nuisance, and the council’s order effectively told Waymo that its charging footprint has to fit within neighborhood expectations as much as grid capacity. The fact that The Santa Monica City Council was willing to shut down overnight operations at two outdoor locations underscores how fragile these hubs can be when they depend on contested urban real estate.
Local backlash turns charging depots into political flashpoints
What happened in Santa Monica was not just a zoning dispute, it was a preview of how community pushback can throttle fleet utilization. Neighbors living near the charging sites described the overnight operations as disruptive, and their complaints framed the facilities as incompatible with local rules, which in turn gave officials a clear path to act. When a city concludes that a charging hub constitutes a public nuisance, the company’s carefully modeled duty cycles and utilization curves can collapse overnight.
For a service that depends on high vehicle availability, losing the ability to charge quietly through the night forces a painful tradeoff between daytime charging, which takes cars off the road during peak demand, and reduced service coverage. The Santa Monica episode, where Neighbors pushed officials to treat the sites as a violation of local regulations, shows how quickly a charging depot can turn from an operational asset into a political liability.
Hardware, not algorithms, is setting the pace of expansion
Waymo’s software stack often dominates the conversation, but the company’s own observers have been blunt that the real constraints now lie elsewhere. The core driving system is mature enough to operate safely in multiple cities, yet the pace of expansion is dictated by how fast Waymo can deploy vehicles, secure depots, and plug into enough power. In other words, the bottleneck has shifted from code to concrete and copper.
One close watcher of the company has argued that Waymo’s main bottlenecks in the next few years will be non‑technical, specifically the challenge of building more vehicles, entering more markets, and scaling operations to a nationwide level. In that view, the limiting factor is not whether the car can handle an unprotected left turn, but whether the company can physically support a much larger fleet before the 2030s. That perspective, laid out in detail in an Apr analysis of Waymo’s trajectory, puts charging infrastructure squarely in the critical path.
Real estate and power constraints make fast charging a scarce resource
Even when a city is enthusiastic about robotaxis, the physical requirements of high‑power charging create their own friction. Waymo and Cruise currently rely on DC fast charging (DCFC) for their fleets, which concentrates a large amount of power into relatively small sites. That setup is ideal for quickly turning vehicles around, but it also magnifies the strain on local grids and makes every depot a complex real estate project that has to satisfy utilities, planners, and neighbors all at once.
Some experts have suggested that reducing charging power and shifting more of the load to Level 2 (L2) chargers could ease grid stress and spread energy demand more evenly, but that comes at the cost of longer dwell times and more vehicles sitting idle. A detailed breakdown of these tradeoffs notes that Reducing reliance on DCFC in favor of Level 2 equipment would change not just the power profile but the entire geometry of depots, since more space would be needed to park cars for slower sessions while still keeping enough chargers available to meet peak demand.
Slow charging multiplies downtime and shrinks effective fleet size
From a fleet‑management perspective, every extra minute spent plugged in is a minute a robotaxi is not generating revenue or building rider habits. Slow or interrupted charging multiplies downtime, which in turn forces operators to either buy more vehicles to cover the same service area or accept thinner coverage and longer wait times. For a company that has invested heavily in high‑utilization models, that is a direct hit to the business case.
Technical guidance on EV charging makes clear that Sometimes, even when everything seems perfect, charging still feels slow, and that a mix of battery management, ambient temperature, and charger behavior can drag out sessions in ways that are hard to predict. When those factors are scaled across hundreds of vehicles, the cumulative impact on availability is enormous, which is why fleet operators obsess over every kilowatt and minute. The operational reality described in resources on Sometimes slow charging translates directly into fewer rides per car and a harder path to profitability.
Methodical rollout meets physical limits on the ground
Waymo has long presented its expansion strategy as intentionally cautious, and many close followers of the company agree that the slow pace is partly by design. Enthusiasts and critics alike have pointed out that the company does not want to drop a bomb on a city or the people that live there, preferring a measured rollout that gives regulators and residents time to adjust. That philosophy has helped Waymo avoid some of the backlash that hit other mobility startups, but it also intersects awkwardly with the hard limits of charging infrastructure.
On one popular discussion thread, commenters summarized the company’s approach as an Intentional methodical slow rollout, arguing that They are prioritizing safety, regulatory comfort, and operational reliability over raw speed. When that deliberate pacing meets the reality of constrained depots and contested charging sites, the result is a double drag on growth: a company that is already cautious is further slowed by the need to negotiate every new plug and parking space. The Reddit debate over Intentional limits on scaling captures how much of Waymo’s trajectory is now shaped by factors outside the vehicle’s sensors and software.
Partnerships hint at one path around the charging bottleneck
If building bespoke depots in dense cities is politically and logistically painful, one obvious workaround is to piggyback on partners that already control large networks of real estate and chargers. That is where traditional fleet and rental players come in. With EV charging infrastructure built across its real estate and operations in 180 countries, Avis has positioned itself as a potential backbone for companies that need secure, well‑located sites without starting from scratch in every market.
Waymo’s move into Dallas highlighted how valuable those alliances can be, since tapping into an existing network of lots and chargers can dramatically shorten the timeline from regulatory approval to actual service. Instead of fighting for every new parcel of land, the company can slot its vehicles into facilities that already handle large volumes of cars and have experience managing power demand. The description of how With EV infrastructure and a footprint in 180 countries, Avis is preparing to support autonomous fleets across multiple cities and continents, shows how legacy players could become critical partners in solving the charging bottleneck.
Neighborhood expectations are reshaping what “24/7” really means
Robotaxis are often marketed as a 24/7 service, but the Santa Monica dispute revealed how fragile that promise can be when neighbors object to the supporting infrastructure. When residents complain that overnight operations violate local rules and create noise or traffic, officials are under pressure to curtail activity during precisely the hours when fleets most need to recharge. The result is a quiet redefinition of what round‑the‑clock service looks like in practice.
In the Santa Monica case, the city’s decision to halt overnight charging at two outdoor sites effectively forced Waymo to compress more of its charging into daytime windows or find alternative locations farther from the core service area. That shift not only adds deadhead miles and energy use, it also risks making the service less responsive during peak periods. The fact that Waymo ran into exactly these kinds of conflicts in a city that is otherwise friendly to electric mobility suggests that similar battles are likely in other dense, affluent neighborhoods.
The open problem: scaling fleets without overwhelming cities
Behind all of these skirmishes is a larger question that engineers and urban planners are still struggling to answer. Real estate is one of the hardest open problems in scaled self driving, because the land uses that make sense for a handful of vehicles often break down when fleets grow by an order of magnitude. Depots that were tolerated when they served a pilot program can become flashpoints once they host hundreds of cars cycling through high‑power chargers every night.
Analysts who have studied the issue argue that Waymo and Cruise will have to rethink not just where they place depots, but how they balance DCFC and Level 2 charging, how they share infrastructure with partners, and how they design operations to minimize neighborhood impact. The detailed discussion of how Waymo and Cruise use DCFC today, and what it would mean to shift more load to Level 2, underscores that there is no simple technical fix. The path to truly scaled robotaxis will run through zoning boards, utility planning meetings, and community hearings as much as through software updates.
More from MorningOverview