Myth-busting evs & charging ecosystems: separating hype from reality

The global EV charging infrastructure market will reach $90.4 billion by 2032, yet only 16.1% of U.S. fast chargers saw utilization in Q2 2025. This paradox—massive investment alongside persistent underutilization—reveals where value truly accumulates in the charging ecosystem and who captures it. For sustainability leads developing transition plans, understanding these dynamics separates strategic investment from stranded assets.

Why It Matters

The UK's commitment to zero-emission vehicle sales by 2035 places charging infrastructure at the center of national decarbonization strategy. Yet the value chain from hardware manufacturing through network operation to energy delivery remains poorly understood by many corporate sustainability teams. Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) frameworks increasingly encompass vehicle batteries and charging equipment, adding regulatory complexity to already challenging economics.

Carbon intensity of charging varies dramatically based on grid mix, time of use, and geographic location. A vehicle charged on the UK grid at night produces roughly 60% less carbon than one charged during peak afternoon hours. These variations create both risk and opportunity for organizations tracking Scope 3 transport emissions and developing credible transition plans.

The interconnection between EV ecosystems and broader sustainability goals—recycling infrastructure, grid resilience, industrial electrification—demands integrated strategic thinking rather than siloed analysis.

Key Concepts

Value Chain Mapping

The EV charging value chain comprises distinct segments with varying margin profiles:

Hardware Manufacturing: Dominated by a handful of global players with scale advantages. Margins typically range 15-25% for DC fast charging equipment, lower for Level 2 residential units. Supply chain concentration in semiconductor components and power electronics creates vulnerability.

Network Operation: Software platforms connecting chargers, managing payments, and providing driver services. This layer captures recurring revenue through transaction fees (typically 15-30% of charging cost) and subscription models. Network effects create winner-take-most dynamics in regional markets.

Site Hosting: Property owners providing locations for charger installation. Revenue share models typically allocate 10-20% of charging revenue to hosts, with significant variation based on foot traffic and exclusivity terms.

Energy Supply: Utilities and energy retailers capturing the underlying commodity value. Demand charges often exceed energy costs for DC fast charging, creating complex optimization challenges.

Maintenance & Operations: Emerging as a distinct value pool as aging infrastructure requires professional service. ChargerHelp's 2025 report demonstrates that proper maintenance can extend FTCSR above 85%, while neglected equipment degrades below 70% within three years.

The Utilization Paradox

Infrastructure investment decisions typically assume 20-30% utilization within three years. Reality diverges sharply:

• Urban core locations: 25-40% peak utilization (viable without subsidy)
• Suburban retail: 12-18% average utilization (marginally viable)
• Rural corridor: <5% utilization (subsidy-dependent)
• Workplace charging: 8-15% utilization (justified by employee benefit value)

This stratification means public charging networks require portfolio approaches—high-margin urban stations subsidizing strategically important but unprofitable rural locations. Organizations investing in destination charging must understand whether they're pursuing margin or market access.

Carbon Intensity Dynamics

The UK grid carbon intensity averaged 162 gCO2/kWh in 2024, down from 233 gCO2/kWh in 2020 (National Grid ESO data). However, instantaneous intensity varies from under 50 gCO2/kWh during high wind periods to over 350 gCO2/kWh during winter peak demand.

Smart charging systems that shift load to low-carbon periods can reduce effective emissions by 40-60%. This creates value for organizations with Scope 3 reporting requirements—but only if charging data integrates with carbon accounting systems. The gap between potential and realized emissions reduction represents a significant market opportunity.

EPR Integration

Battery EPR regulations are expanding across European markets. The EU Battery Regulation (2023) requires collection and recycling infrastructure for EV batteries, with producer responsibility for end-of-life management. Charging equipment itself increasingly falls under WEEE (Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment) requirements.

Organizations deploying charging infrastructure must account for eventual decommissioning costs. A 350kW DC fast charger contains significant quantities of copper, aluminum, and electronic components subject to recycling mandates. Lifecycle cost models that ignore EPR obligations understate true total cost of ownership by 5-15%.

What's Working

What's Working

Integrated energy-charging businesses are capturing value across multiple chain segments. Shell Recharge, bp pulse, and utility-backed networks benefit from energy supply relationships that reduce demand charge exposure while providing cross-selling opportunities.

Workplace charging as employee benefit shows strong adoption. Organizations offering free or subsidized workplace charging report 15-25% EV adoption among eligible employees—significantly above market averages. The value extends beyond direct charging revenue to talent attraction and retention.

Tesla's vertically integrated model continues demonstrating superior economics. By controlling hardware, software, network operation, and (in some markets) energy retail, Tesla captures value that fragmented competitors distribute across multiple parties. The 91.2 reliability score and 15.1 average ports per station reflect operational advantages that translate to customer loyalty.

What Isn't Working

Pure-play hardware manufacturers face margin compression as the market matures. Without recurring revenue streams from network operation or energy services, hardware providers compete primarily on price—a challenging position as Chinese manufacturers scale production.

Subscriptionless public charging struggles with unit economics. Transaction fees alone rarely cover operating costs for DC fast charging sites, leading to unsustainable pricing that either alienates drivers or drives operators toward bankruptcy. The graveyard of failed charging startups demonstrates this pattern repeatedly.

Fragmented ownership models create maintenance gaps. Sites where hardware provider, network operator, and site host are three separate entities often suffer from unclear responsibility for reliability. The resulting finger-pointing delays repairs and degrades user experience.

Key Players

Established Leaders

• bp pulse – Integrated energy company approach with 350kW+ chargers expanding across UK motorway services
• Shell Recharge – Leveraging retail footprint for destination charging with energy services integration
• Pod Point (EDF subsidiary) – Strong UK market position with workplace and destination focus
• Tesla Supercharger – Benchmark reliability and opening to non-Tesla vehicles under NACS adoption
• Gridserve – UK-focused operator with electric forecourts combining solar generation and retail

Emerging Startups

• Connected Kerb – On-street residential charging addressing the "no driveway" challenge for 40% of UK households
• Osprey Charging – Rapid expansion of 150kW+ chargers at retail destinations
• InstaVolt – Contactless payment simplicity differentiation in DC fast charging
• GeniePoint – Flexible network approach with broad CPID compatibility
• Mer UK – Norwegian-backed operator with fleet and destination focus

Key Investors & Funders

• Ofgem – Regulating grid connections and capacity allocation critical to infrastructure deployment
• UK Infrastructure Bank – Financing large-scale charging networks aligned with net-zero goals
• Legal & General Capital – Institutional investment in charging infrastructure as alternative asset class
• Octopus Energy – Strategic investor combining energy retail with charging network investment
• Scottish National Investment Bank – Regional focus on Scotland's EV infrastructure buildout

Sector-Specific KPIs

KPI	Laggard	Median	Leader
Charger Utilization Rate	<10%	15-20%	>30%
Revenue per Port per Month	<£400	£600-900	>£1,500
Demand Charge Ratio (% of opex)	>45%	25-35%	<15%
FTCSR (First Time Charge Success)	<75%	82-87%	>92%
Carbon Intensity (gCO2/kWh delivered)	>200	120-160	<80
Customer NPS	<20	35-45	>60

Examples

1. Gridserve Electric Forecourts (UK): Opened dedicated electric vehicle service stations combining 350kW chargers with retail, food service, and on-site solar generation. The integrated model captures energy value through self-generation while creating dwell time monetization through retail. Their Braintree location demonstrates that purpose-built EV infrastructure can achieve utilization rates above 30%—well above market averages.

2. Octopus Energy Electroverse (UK): Launched a single-subscription roaming service providing access to 700,000+ chargers across Europe. By aggregating network access rather than deploying hardware, Octopus captures value at the software layer while avoiding infrastructure capex. Their integration with smart tariffs enables automated low-carbon charging, creating differentiation through sustainability features.

3. National Grid Electric Highway (UK): Upgraded from initial 50kW chargers to 150kW+ units at motorway services across the country. The evolution demonstrates both the longevity challenge of charging infrastructure—original equipment became obsolete within a decade—and the value of controlling strategic locations. National Grid's energy expertise provides natural integration with grid services.

Action Checklist

• Map your organization's role in the charging value chain and identify whether you're capturing recurring revenue or one-time margin
• Model carbon intensity of charging based on actual grid mix and time-of-use patterns rather than annual averages
• Incorporate EPR obligations for batteries and electronic equipment into lifecycle cost analysis
• Evaluate workplace charging business case including talent attraction value beyond direct revenue
• Assess portfolio approach to infrastructure investment balancing profitable urban sites with strategically necessary rural locations
• Develop maintenance SLAs that specify FTCSR targets rather than simple uptime metrics

FAQ

Q: Where does the most value accumulate in the EV charging ecosystem? A: Software platforms and network operation capture the highest-margin recurring revenue through transaction fees and subscriptions. Hardware manufacturing faces commoditization pressure, while energy supply margins depend heavily on demand charge management capabilities. Vertically integrated players like Tesla capture value across multiple segments.

Q: How should carbon intensity be measured for fleet EV charging? A: Use time-stamped charging data matched against grid carbon intensity signals (available from National Grid ESO API for UK). Annual average figures significantly understate potential carbon reduction from smart charging. Consider contractual arrangements like renewable energy certificates or corporate PPAs for reporting purposes, but recognize that physical grid impact depends on actual dispatch.

Q: What EPR obligations apply to charging infrastructure in the UK? A: Charging equipment falls under WEEE regulations requiring producer-funded collection and recycling. EV batteries are subject to the UK's battery producer responsibility system, with full requirements taking effect through 2025-2027. Organizations deploying infrastructure should budget 3-7% of capex for end-of-life compliance.

Q: Is workplace charging economically viable without charging employees? A: Free workplace charging is typically justified through indirect benefits: higher EV adoption among employees reduces Scope 3 commuting emissions, charging infrastructure demonstrates sustainability commitment to stakeholders, and the employee benefit value supports recruitment. Direct cost recovery requires 12-18% utilization with appropriate pricing.

Q: How do reliability metrics affect value capture? A: Poor reliability (FTCSR <80%) drives users to competitors, reducing utilization and revenue below sustainable levels. Maintenance costs approximately 8-12% of annual capex for DC fast chargers. Under-investing in maintenance degrades FTCSR from 85%+ to <70% within three years, creating a negative spiral of declining usage and revenue.

Sources

• Paren State of the Industry Report: U.S. EV Fast Charging Q2 2025
• National Grid ESO Carbon Intensity API and 2024 Annual Report
• ChargerHelp 2025 Annual Reliability Report
• J.D. Power 2025 U.S. Electric Vehicle Experience (EVX) Public Charging Study
• UK Office for Zero Emission Vehicles (OZEV) Statistics
• IEA Global EV Outlook 2025