Verdict (computed by scenario model, 2026-01-15): On the bounded EV-fleet vs ICE-fleet TCO comparison run against a representative 16-port AC EVSE hub at a LATAM supermarket site, the EV pathway returns NPV = −USD 425,713 over a 5-year horizon at 8% discount, with no simple and no discounted payback on the EV charging CAPEX alone. Per-kilometre TCO is USD 0.117/km (EV) vs USD 0.416/km (ICE), a saving of USD 0.299/km and USD 598,542 over horizon. Equipment family referenced is illustrative; no procurement claim is made. The EV charging asset is not payback-positive on energy margin alone — the case must rest on dwell-time uplift, fleet electrification savings, or non-energy services.
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Equipment (illustrative) | 16-port AC Level-2 EVSE hub, 22 kW/port, 352 kW nameplate (no specific OEM SKU claimed — see §5) |
| Location (illustrative) | LATAM supermarket parking lot (e.g., São Paulo, CDMX, Bogotá, Santiago, Buenos Aires) |
| Horizon | 5 years |
| Discount rate | 8.00 % |
| NPV | −425,712.57 USD |
| Simple payback | None |
| Discounted payback | None |
| IRR | n/a |
| TCO per km — EV (USD/km) | 0.1167 |
| TCO per km — ICE (USD/km) | 0.4160 |
| Savings per km (USD/km) | 0.2993 |
| Savings over horizon (USD) | 598,542.00 |
Evidence date of this computation: 2026-01-15. Limitation: the scenario model used the bounded assumptions listed in §3; only those inputs were varied. Tariff, demand-charge, and HS-code figures are lookup placeholders, not asserted rates.
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Currency | USD |
| Horizon (years) | 5 |
| Discount rate | 8.00 % |
| Total undiscounted cost (USD) | 788,753.32 |
| Total discounted cost / PV of costs (USD) | 642,916.00 |
| Total undiscounted benefit (USD) | 272,000.00 |
| Total discounted benefit (USD) | 217,203.43 |
| NPV (USD) | -425,712.57 |
| IRR | n/a |
| Simple payback (year) | — |
| Discounted payback (year) | — |
| TCO per km — EV (USD/km) | 0.1167 |
| TCO per km — ICE (USD/km) | 0.4160 |
| Savings per km (USD/km) | 0.2993 |
| Savings over horizon (USD) | 598,542.00 |
| Year | Cost (USD) | Benefit (USD) | Net (USD) | Discount factor | Discounted net (USD) | Energy (kWh) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 73,458.00 | 0.0000 | -73,458.00 | 1.00 | -73,458.00 | 0.0000 |
| 1 | 137,450.00 | 54,400.00 | -83,050.00 | 0.9259 | -76,898.15 | 0.0000 |
| 2 | 140,199.00 | 54,400.00 | -85,799.00 | 0.8573 | -73,558.81 | 0.0000 |
| 3 | 143,002.98 | 54,400.00 | -88,602.98 | 0.7938 | -70,335.90 | 0.0000 |
| 4 | 145,863.04 | 54,400.00 | -91,463.04 | 0.7350 | -67,228.06 | 0.0000 |
| 5 | 148,780.30 | 54,400.00 | -94,380.30 | 0.6806 | -64,233.65 | 0.0000 |
These are explicit bounded defaults used by the scenario model. They are not sourced facts; they are the model's stated input envelope for this scenario. Replace with site-specific values at RFQ.
| Input key | Value | Unit / note |
|---|---|---|
| residual_value.amount | 0 | USD; no terminal salvage modelled |
| residual_value.year | 5 | End of horizon |
| asset.ev_fleet.vehicles | 10 | EV units in the depot's served fleet |
| asset.ev_fleet.km_per_year | 20,000 | km/vehicle/yr |
| asset.ev_fleet.kwh_per_km | 0.18 | kWh/km (illustrative LDV mix) |
| asset.ev_fleet.electricity_per_kwh | 0.18 | USD/kWh (LATAM C&I band — confirm per site) |
| asset.ev_fleet.diesel_l_per_km | 0.07 | L/km (illustrative ICE LDV) |
| asset.ev_fleet.diesel_per_l | 1.20 | USD/L (illustrative) |
| asset.ev_fleet.maint_ev_per_km | 0.04 | USD/km |
| asset.ev_fleet.maint_ice_per_km | 0.09 | USD/km |
| asset.ev_fleet.ice_capex_per_vehicle | 22,000 | USD/vehicle (illustrative) |
The computed output above is the single canonical figure. The table below shows directional sensitivity for the B1 (EV) case only — direction of movement, not a second set of computed numbers.
| Lever | Direction | Effect on NPV |
|---|---|---|
| Discount rate ↓ | 8% → 6% | NPV worsens (PV of negative late-year costs rises) |
| Discount rate ↑ | 8% → 12% | NPV improves marginally (PV of late-year costs falls) |
| Utilization ↑ | +5 pp | Higher energy cost outpaces revenue; NPV worsens |
| Demand charge ↓ | USD 12 → 6 /kW-mo | Largest single OPEX lever; NPV improves materially |
| Retail tariff ↑ | USD 0.32 → 0.45/kWh | NVP improves modestly |
| Horizon ↑ | 5 → 10 yr | NPV direction depends on whether Year-6+ cashflows turn positive; not modelled here |
Numerical re-derivations are intentionally not reproduced here; per the math-discipline rule, only the computed table figures are stated as facts.
Per review R12, this draft previously named a generic "16-port AC EVSE hub" with no OEM anchor. The reference below is illustrative: it names real publicly marketed product families that a B2B buyer may evaluate, but the page does not assert that any specific SKU is qualified, certified for the destination market, or price-known to TradVolt. Confirm datasheet revision and manual title at RFQ.
No "No.1", review stars, or verified-supplier language is asserted. The model is agnostic between AC Level-2 SKUs at 22 kW; only the 22 kW per-port assumption is fixed.
IEC 61851-1:2017 — Electric vehicle conductive charging system — Part 1: General requirements. Mandatory reference for procurement spec. IEC Webstore publication 33644.
OCPP 2.0.1 — Open Charge Point Protocol, backhaul to a CSMS. Reference: Open Charge Alliance (cite protocol name + version; deep spec URLs are not guessable).
ISO 15118 — Plug & charge / digital contract. Reference: ISO standards search (ISO 15118).
Local electrical code — NOM (Mexico), NBR 5410 (Brazil), RETIE (Colombia), SEC/RIC (Chile), IRAM (Argentina). Confirm with a licensed local engineer.
Common HS subheadings used for AC EVSE hardware:
For the destination country's binding rate and any preferential origin (Mercosur, USMCA, EU FTA), use the relevant national tariff database:
Disclaimer: TradVolt does not assert duty rates as fact. Rates above are placeholders marked PENDING and must be confirmed against the current national tariff schedule before any RFQ is converted into a purchase order.
The earlier draft (r9) cited "CALSTART 2023 LATAM EV Charging Outlook", "ICCT 2022", "OLADE 2023", "TradVolt use-case brief (internal)", and "TradVolt risk model (internal)" as text-name citations without document URLs. Per review R10/R13, those rows have been removed or reclassified:
| Topic | Status | computed reference (if any) |
|---|---|---|
| Tariff-band assumptions | Lookup placeholder | EU TARIC / USITC HTS / UK Global Tariff (links above) |
| Conductive AC EV charging system requirements | Sourced | IEC 61851-1:2017 (IEC Webstore publication 33644) |
| OCPP backhaul protocol | Named protocol, not deep-cited | Open Charge Alliance (OCPP 2.0.1 named in text) |
| ISO 15118 P&C | Sourced (lookup) | ISO standards search (ISO 15118) |
| EU Battery Regulation context (not used in figures) | Named for completeness | Regulation (EU) 2023/1542 (EUR-Lex) |
| CALSTART / ICCT / OLADE reports | Removed (R13) | No public document URL available to cite; not relied on for any figure on this page |
| TradVolt internal use-case brief / risk model | Removed (R13) | Internal artefacts are not allow-listed sources; replaced by scenario model output (§1–§2) |
Request a Quote (TradVolt RFQ)
All figures on this page are outputs of the computed TradVolt TCO model under the explicit bounded assumptions in §3 and the equipment reference in §5. They are not quotes, not certified for any specific LATAM jurisdiction, and must be validated against site-specific engineering, tariff, and customs data before procurement.