The US charging network 2.0—The evolution of a revolution: Part 4
» Read part 1 here: How the biggest US EV charging networks got their starts
» Read part 2 here: How government helped build America’s EV charging market
» Read part 3 here: Why EV charging is still such a hard business
The next phase of EV charging deployment will not be defined simply by adding more pins on a map. It will be defined by whether the industry can add a lot more capacity, faster and more reliably, while giving investors, utilities and site hosts a better path to acceptable returns.
The scale of the buildout is getting harder to ignore
According to the International Energy Agency’s Stated Policies Scenario, US charging networks will need to install 58,000 public chargers per year to stay on a 2030 trajectory based on historical EV-sales trends. That equates to adding 70% more chargers each year than have ever been installed in the US in a single year. The same IEA analysis shows that the US charging market is not keeping pace with EV sales. The ratio of EVs to public chargers climbed from 15:1 in 2016 to 33:1 in 2024. By comparison, the EV-to-charger ratio across the European Union has never exceeded 15:1.
So how can charging networks expand to meet growing EV demand while staying afloat? The signs point in three directions: continued public support, more direct involvement from the companies that keep the lights on, and a rethink of how infrastructure incentives are structured.
Utilities have to matter more
Many utilities across the US already support EV charging through grant, incentive or reduced-rate programs. The Edison Electric Institute tracks hundreds of EV programs that reduce the cost of installation or the price of electricity delivered to vehicles. A few utilities have owned and operated charging stations themselves—Portland General Electric and Kansas City Power & Light are examples—but the broader opportunity is in using utility balance sheets and rate structures to lower deployment risk for private developers.
Several utilities offer make-ready incentives that cover the cost of bringing power to a station, one of the most expensive and unpredictable parts of the project. Others defray equipment costs or discount each kilowatt-hour delivered to an EV. These programs do not just benefit charging developers—they can also help utilities sell more power and fill in some of the valleys when demand is lower and generating assets are underutilized.
Expanding the utilities’ role is critical, according to a recent Transportation Energy Institute report on EV charging infrastructure funding. As the report notes, utilities can provide important relief from costly demand charges and can play a stabilizing role in the business case for charging.
Utilities are not just another group of stakeholders. In many cases they are the only players that can materially reduce interconnection risk, demand-charge pain and upfront power-delivery costs.
Speed matters almost as much as capital
Delays from utilities in getting stations operational once a site is selected can doom profitability. The permitting, equipment-procurement and power-delivery process can still take 6 to 24 months. Utilities are making strides in expediting those steps, but support from regulators to streamline the process and make it more of a partnership would greatly aid the industry.
Delays of months to years can significantly impact the profitability of a station because the payback period is extended. This makes project speed almost as important as project cost. A charger that is waiting on utility work is not just delayed infrastructure. It is stranded capital, delayed revenue and a longer road to investor confidence.
Rethinking incentives around the utilization gap
Pasquale Romano, formerly the President and CEO of Chargepoint, argues that incentives should focus less on simply buying hardware and more on the “utilization gap” that appears during the first years after a new charging site opens. New stations are often unknown to local EV drivers and need marketing, time and word of mouth to get on consumers’ radar.
His suggestion is that government or utility incentives cover the gap between what it costs to operate a station and the revenue it generates during this early period, giving investors more certainty because they “can’t take the utilization risk open-ended.” The incentives could decline over time and even include bonuses if stations exceed projected utilization.
That idea is notable because it treats underutilization as a predictable ramp-up problem rather than as proof that a site was a mistake. In a young market, that difference matters.
The charging industry may need to subsidize not only steel in the ground, but also the time it takes for a new site to become known, trusted and busy enough to pay for itself.
The virtuous cycle the industry is chasing
Interjecting funds that expand the charging network by reducing investor risk creates a virtuous cycle with vehicle sales, according to Electrification Coalition Executive Director Ben Prochazka. More visible and reliable charging gives consumers confidence that there are enough places to plug in, which helps grow EV sales, which then supports more investment in charging.
That is the real test for Charging Network 2.0. The industry has already proven it can build chargers. The next challenge is building a network that is faster to energize, easier to finance, more reliable in operation and better aligned with the pace of EV adoption.
About the author: John Gartner has been analyzing and writing about EV infrastructure since 2009. He is the Senior Director at the Center for Sustainable Energy.
from Charged EVs https://ift.tt/3MbwR8S
