Recent developments in BMW’s ConnectedDrive ecosystem signal a major shake-up for third parties relying on unofficial access to vehicle data, particularly those using reverse-engineered APIs to integrate electric vehicles (EVs) into energy and flexibility markets.
BMW has begun notifying users through its Android app about upcoming changes to charge-control APIs. While these updates appear to target app functionality, the implications ripple far beyond the consumer interface. Many utilities, aggregators, and energy-service companies have quietly relied on the same underlying endpoints (without formal approval) to connect EVs into grid-interactive services.
The Hidden Backbone of EV-Utility Integrations
Today, numerous flexibility platforms aggregate EV charging load to participate in demand-response programs, frequency regulation, or local grid balancing. In many cases, these connections are not via official manufacturer APIs but through reverse-engineered interfaces originally designed for the OEM’s own app. This allows services to read battery state-of-charge, initiate or halt charging, and forecast availability. These are critical inputs for monetising EV flexibility.
The appeal is obvious: BMW, like many automakers, has not always offered an open, free, or sufficiently functional API for third-party energy use cases. Reverse engineering fills that gap. However, these methods are fragile: they depend on undocumented, unsupported endpoints that can change without notice.
When the Manufacturer Pulls the Rug
BMW’s planned API changes, combined with reports of recent authentication issues, illustrate the inherent risk. If reverse-engineered charge-control calls stop working, utilities depending on them could suddenly lose the ability to schedule or curtail charging. The knock-on effects include:
- Lost Flexibility Commitments: Aggregators may fail to meet contracted flexibility volumes, leading to financial penalties.
- Reduced Grid Stability: Programs counting on EV load-shaping could see sudden capacity gaps.
- Data Blind Spots: Without state-of-charge and availability data, forecasting and portfolio optimisation become guesswork.
For utilities, this isn’t just a technical nuisance, it’s a reliability and market-compliance issue. Flexibility commitments are often tied to regulatory or contractual obligations, meaning disruptions can have legal and financial consequences.
Impact on Flexibility Trading
Flexibility trading relies on accurate, timely control and telemetry. If the API pathway is unstable or blocked, several critical market functions are undermined:
- Dispatch Reliability: Inability to send a stop/start command at the agreed market interval undermines confidence in EVs as dispatchable assets.
- Settlement Accuracy: Market settlements require proof of delivery. Missing data from the EV erodes trust and may result in disputed payments.
- Portfolio Planning: Aggregators may need to over-contract other flexible assets to hedge against the unreliability of unapproved EV connections.
The financial consequences are clear here: less revenue with more risk and potential reputational damage as a market participant.
The Way Forward
The BMW case is a wake-up call. For EV-based flexibility services (or any OEM really batteries, heat pumps etc.) to be viable long-term, utilities need official, documented, and stable APIs or contractual partnerships with OEMs. While official interfaces may carry fees or usage limits, they come with the critical advantage of long-term support and SLAs.
Manufacturers, for their part, must recognise that EVs are increasingly energy-system participants, not just vehicles. Providing open, secure, standardised, and consent-driven access to charge-control functions could unlock significant grid value, while avoiding the shadow market of reverse-engineered access.
Until that alignment happens, utilities relying on unofficial connections face a precarious future, one API change away from losing their EV flexibility portfolio overnight.
Step into the power system of the future.
