How EV charging TCO is modelled

Charging hardware is usually the smaller half of the cost. Connection capacity, civil works and utilisation decide whether a site pays back.

Cost lines in a charging model

LineWhat it covers
HardwareChargers by port count and power class, with cabling and protection.
Site worksGroundworks, canopies, signage, and the electrical infrastructure up to the point of connection.
ConnectionGrid capacity, transformer or upgrade charges, and metering.
OperationBack-office and network fees, maintenance, spares and electricity purchased for resale.
UtilisationSessions or energy delivered per port per period — the variable that most often decides the outcome.

What stays open until confirmed

Utilisation is an assumption until the site has traffic data. Grid connection cost is site-specific and often unknown before a network study. Interoperability and payment requirements vary by market and are not established by a product reference alone.

Worked example

The 100-port depot charging study sets out a multi-port fleet case with its utilisation assumptions stated on the page. Treat its figures as scenario estimates for that case.

What this model does not tell you

It does not tell you the utilisation your site will achieve, what your network operator will charge for capacity, or what uptime the hardware will deliver in your climate. Those are the inputs that most often break a business case.

How this differs from the other classes

Charging is the only class where revenue depends on traffic you do not control. The hardware cost is knowable before purchase; the utilisation that justifies it is not.

Questions to put to a supplier

The input most often left unverified

Utilisation. Sessions per port per day is the number that decides payback, and it is usually assumed rather than observed. A site with traffic data and a site without it are not the same investment, even with identical hardware.