cost of ev charging infrastructure

ESCOConsulting SoftwareEngineering

EUE 67 – Cost of EV charging infrastructure

July 2017

2

List of abbreviations

AFI: Alternative Fuels Infrastructure•

BEV: Battery electric vehicle•

CAGR: Compound annual growth rate•

DE: Germany•

EAFO: European Alternative Fuels Observatory•

EC: European Commission•

EEA: European Environment Agency•

EPBD: Energy Performance of Buildings Directive•

ES: Spain•

EV: Electric vehicle•

FI: Full installation•

FR: France•

Source: CREARA

• IT: Italy

• NL: Netherlands

• UK: United Kingdom

3

A full installation requirement is the most attractive option for ECI, but

because of its initial bulk investment it will likely face opposition; pre-

cabling is the second option, although it has weak arguments in favor

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Starting point Step 2

Op

tio

ns

Via

bilit

y

• European regulation

sets requirements

for charging

infrastructure in

residential and non-

residential buildings

Step 1

Requirement of full •installation

• Requirement of pre-

installation

Pre• -tubing

• Pre-cabling

Most likely option based

on interview conclusions

• Full installations require

larger bulk investment

for building owners/

builders

- Although it is the most

efficient option in terms

of total costs

• It seems to be a viable

option for non-

residential buildings

- Demand is expected to

be higher and does not

depend on individual

owners and tenants

vehicle choices

• Full installation

requirements would be

the most attractive

option for copper

- It would imply higher

“assured” copper

demand in the

installations in the short

and medium term

- It would also push

transport electrification

by overcoming one of

its major barriers

(missing recharging

infrastructure)

• Pre-cabling is the

preferred option for pre-

installations, but

according to the

interviewees it is not a

sensible option

Pre• -cabling has few

arguments in favor

It presents higher -investment costs than

pre-tubing (i.e. cable)

According to most -interviewees pre-

cabling does not make

much sense because

it implies having idle

investment without

knowing if installation

adapts to later needs

Source: CREARA Analysis

Most attractive option for

copper

4

The ECI should use favoring arguments to push for FI in non-residential

sectors; pre-cabling and pre-tubing in both sectors are the 2nd and 3rd

option, which are less attractive but still a step in the right direction

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Note: 1 Cost is likely to be passed through to building owner


Arguments

Relative total

costs

Cost bearer

Probability of

success of

option

Option 1 - Full installation (FI) Option 2 - Pre-cabling Option 3 - Pre-tubing

• Most cost-efficient option from

total cost perspective

• Significant reduction of barrier for

EV market development

- Especially applicable in non-

residential buildings where usage

is not depending on buildings

owners/ tenants

• At least one country (France) is

known to have a FI requirements

for new non-residential buildings

with a certain number of parking

lots

• Most (total) cost-efficient option

• Highest initial investment

Building owner (operating build.)•Constructor (new building)• 1

Medium to low (efforts should be •focused on non-residential

buildings, as in Commission

proposal (see slide 18))

• Total cost is similar to pre-tubing,

but pre-cabling requirement moves

part of the investment to an earlier

moment (i.e. laying of cable),

which could reduce barriers

• Specifying the required capacity of

the cable could lead to

standardization of certain aspects

of the charging infrastructure

• Spain forces the feeding

installation for new non-residential

buildings with a certain number of

parking lots

Most expensive (total cost) option•Reduced initial investment•

• Build. owner/ Const. (pre-cabling)

• User (install. from pre-cabling)

Medium to high•

• Option of minimum requirement

to tackle the EV charging

infrastructure barrier

- Pre-tubing does not represent

significant costs and can be

directly integrated in construction

phase

• Spain requires new residential

buildings to include pre-tubing in

their installations

• Most expensive (total cost) option

• Lowest initial investment

Build owner/ Const. (pre• -tubing)

User (install. from pre• -tubing)

High•

5

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Strategy to

be adopted

by ECI

Non-residential Residential

Specifically, based on the conclusions presented in this presentation, the

ECI should support the EC proposal for the EPBD

New and existing buildings •undergoing major renovation

With more than ten parking -spaces

One of every ten parking space is -equipped with a recharging point

Obligation as of - 2025

EC proposal

for EPBD

(Nov 2016)

• New and existing buildings

undergoing major renovation

- With more than ten parking

spaces

- Pre-cabling in every parking

space


• Support the option presented by

the EC by lobbying for its

approval in the regulation

process

- The option presented by the EC

could lead to the implementation

of a significant number of publicly

accessible charging infrastructure

(which has direct positive

implications for copper usage)

and thereby pushing EV market

update (which again is positive

for copper)

Option presented by the EC for •the residential sector should be

supported as well

The arguments are less strong -than in the non-residential sector

(pre-installation requires upfront

investment without assured

demand)

• The ECI should push

for the

implementation of

the EC proposal for

the new EPBD

instead of the

proposal presented

by the European

parliament which

reduces

requirements

significantly (see

slide 18)

• Several arguments

prepared exist for

this strategy based

on the conclusions

of the interviews and

research, as detailed

on the following

slides

Outline of strategy to be adopted by ECI based on EC proposal for EPBD

6

The market (as concluded in the interviews) provides arguments for FI in

the non-residential sector, pre-cabling in residential buildings is not

supported though

• According to the interviewees, pre-installations generally do not make sense in operating buildings

- There is no cost advantage in pre-installing and owners and tenants would rather install a full installation once

there is a need

Note: ¹ Although data is homogeneous, it should be taken into account that the sample is a small sample of the total population


General

Operating

buildings

New

buildings

• Spain and France already have in place requirements for new buildings (FI in new non-residential in France,

and feeding installation in new non-residential and pre-tubing for new residential in Spain)

• In case of the pre-installations in new buildings (spaces for tubing and cabling), builders are including these

activities in their overall workplan and budget, they do not calculate separate costs

- Estimating the costs for pre-tubing and pre-cabling is therefore difficult

Completing the installation in several phases is less efficient than building from scratch•Installing a charging point from scratch is - 9.1% - 12.4% cheaper in total costs (depending on the type of building

and the type of pre-installation) than starting from a pre-installation

The largest cost element is the - wallbox

The difference between pre• -tubing and pre-cabling is mainly the cost of the cable; the process of cabling is

simple and cheap once tubing is done; it only takes some minutes and the main cost are the cables

There is no significant total cost difference between the two pre- -installation options, the question is rather when

which part of the investment is made

Generally few pre• -installations are being completed at the moment and many interviewees were not aware of

the proposed directive being discussed in Brussels

Pre- -cabling is not usual nowadays because it implies extra costs without knowing if the installation will be used at

some point and if the cabling matches future demand requirements (e.g. charging speed)

Spain is the only country known to require pre- -tubing (in new residential buildings)

Installations are generally connected to the electric meter which is placed on the ground or underground •floors in most of the cases

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Conclusions¹ from 33 interviews in 6 countries

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

New building Operatingbuilding


Pre-tubing Pre-cabling Full installation

7

Note: 1 Average for non-residential does not include Italy as only one set of data is available, which presented significantly higher costs than in any other

countries; 2 The charging power in Germany for non-residential buildings is 11 kW


RESIDENTIAL SECTOR (3,7 kW) NON RESIDENTIAL SECTOR (7,4 kW2)

Total costs of different cases in alternative types of buildings

(average of analyzed countries1)The most efficient option from total •cost perspective is to do the full

installation from scratch

This is true for both sectors and both -types of building

The major saving is on labour-Prices of pre• -tubing and pre-cabling

are similar

To install a wallbox in an operating •building is more expensive than to

install it in a new one

The• installation in the non-

residential sector is more expensive

than in the residential sector

This can be explained by the higher -price of the wallbox and the need for

more materials and more labour

The full installation is the most efficient way to install a wallbox (from total

cost perspective); there are no significant differences in price between

pre-tubing and pre-cabling, which weakens arguments for pre-cabling

EXECUTIVE SUMMARYE

UR 110 EUR

245 EUR

8

In the residential sector (new and operating) there is hardly any difference

between pre-cabling and pre-tubing in total costs, the upfront investment

is greater though in the first case

Note: 1 Installation from cabling and total include the cost of the wallbox; 2 Average does not include Italy; 3 Cabling covers costs of cables, cabling activity

would be included in “installation from cabling” activity


EU

R

EU

R

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Cost distribution1 for studied cases in new

residential buildings (average of anal. countries2)

Cost distribution1 for studied cases in operating


PRE-TUBING PRE-CABLING FI PRE-TUBING PRE-CABLING FI

Total cost starting from pre-installation

Cost element of pre-installation option

150 EUR

142 EUR

125

337

850 1,312

469

850 1,319 1,168

165

398

850 1,413

572

850 1,422 1,280

9

The same holds true for the non-residential sector (new and operating); FI

is also the most efficient total cost option and in this case the greater

upfront investment can be justified from a public demand perspective

EU

R

EU

R

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY


Cost distribution1 for studied cases in new non-


Cost distribution1 for studied cases in operating non-


245 EUR

215 EUR

Note: 1 Installation from cabling and total include the cost of the wallbox; 2 Average does not include Italy as only

one set of data is available, which presented significantly higher costs than in any other countries; 3 Cabling covers costs of cables, cabling activity would be included in “installation from cabling” activity




210

420

1,365 1,995

640

1,365 2,005 1,760

276

565

1,365 2,206

855

1,365 2,220 2,005

10

AGENDA

IntroductionLegal

framework

Interview results

and conclusions

Summary of •interviews

Results for Europe •and countries

covered

• Objectives

• EV in Europe

• Charging

infrastructure

Current European •regulation for EV

charging

infrastructures

Key features of the •proposal of

amendment for

Directive 2010/31

Agenda of presentation

Back-up

Interview results by •country

France-Germany-Italy-Netherlands -Spain -UK-

11

Agenda

Introduction•

Legal framework•

Interview results and conclusions•

Back• -up

12

The study analyses cost implications for the pre-installation and

installation of EV charging points in buildings, according to the proposal

of the new EPBD

Source: Proposal; CREARA Analysis

OBJECTIVES OF

STUDY

Cost implications of pre• -tubing, pre-cabling and full installation are studied

regarding article 8 of the proposal for the new Energy Performance Buildings

Directive (EPBD)

The results of the study show which are the costs of a charging installation, -depending on which pre-installation exists

The costs are recollected for several European countries-

The results include an analysis of the cost dispersion and average of each •component and total costs for each country

INTRODUCTIONOBJECTIVES

13

INTRODUCTION

The number of BEV has significantly increased in the last 3 years but they

still represent a limited share of vehicles sold; one of the main barriers is

the low availability of recharging infrastructure in European countries

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

Up to 2013 2014 2015 2016

Source: EAFO; EEA; CREARA Analysis

• Up to now, BEV implementation has

been held back by three main barriers:

- High costs of vehicles

- Low level of consumer acceptance

(e.g. because of range anxiety)

- Lack of recharging stations

• The limited range (km which can be

covered with a fully charged battery) of

current EV models leads to range

anxiety of the potential users

- A problem that is worsened by the fact

that until now only a reduced number

of recharging infrastructure has been

installed

• All of the countries assessed have

different incentives for the EV and for

the installation of charging

infrastructures which aim at increasing

EV market uptake

EV IN EUROPE

% of total passenger

vehicle market, 20161.1 15.71.1 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.4

New registers of BEV by country and year

Un

its

14

INTRODUCTION

0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000

EU¹

France

Germany

Italy

Netherlands

Norway

Spain

UK

Normal power charging ( ≤ 22 kW) High power charging ( > 22kW)

Note : ¹ EU as average of the selected countries; ²Italy and Spain; 3No standardization exists though

Source: EAFO, CREARA Analysis

76%

44%

21%

10%

85%

CAGR 12 - 16

43%

111%

58%

Even though significant growth rates have been seen in charging points

implementations, the overall number in many countries remains low

EAFO defines two types of •charging:

Normal power charging is -defined by a charging

capacity of up to 22 kW3

If the charging power is -higher than 22 kW, it is

considered high power

charging3

The evolution of the charging •market has been unequal in the

countries under analysis

France has doubled its -number of public charging

positions from 2012

Mediterranean countries- ²

maintain low levels of

publicly accessible charging

positions

Several initiatives to increase •the number of public charging

stations in major cities across

Europe have been launched

(Paris, London, Amsterdam)

CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE

Charging points

Publicly accessible charging positions by country, 2016

0.5

3.7

10.1

2.7

2.3

BEV/ charging point

2.7

4.2

2.9

15

Agenda

Introduction•

Legal framework•


Back• -up

16

LEGAL FRAMEWORK

The proposal for AFI Directive presented in January 2013 set an

obligation of recharging points for each Member State, although the final

AFI Directive did not include these concrete liabilities

AFI DIRECTIVE (extract)

Member States shall ensure, by means of their national •policy frameworks, that an appropriate number of

recharging points accessible to the public are put in place

by 31 December 2020, in order to ensure that electric

vehicles can circulate at least in urban/suburban

agglomerations and other densely populated areas […]

PROPOSAL FOR AFI DIRECTIVE (extract)

• Member States shall ensure that a minimum number of

recharging points for electric vehicles are put into place, at

least the number given in the table in Annex II, by 31

December 2020 at the latest

• At least 10% of the recharging points shall be publicly

accessible

CURRENT EUROPEAN REGULATION

The only reference to EV •charging infrastructures in

any European Directive

can be found in the AFI

Directive

No European obligation of •a minimum number of

recharging points for

Member States exists

No obligatory quota of •public recharging points

has finally been set

Note: AFI Directive: Alternative Fuels Infrastructures Directive 2014/94/EU


17

Objectives by 2020 of minimum number of EV

charging points by the Proposal for AFI Directive

Number of publicly

accessible recharging

points

France

Germany

Italy

Netherlands

Spain

UK

Total

Number of total

recharging points

824,000

Source: EAFO; European Commission; CREARA Analysis

1,221,000

If the initial proposal had been passed and a target had been set, most

likely there would be a higher number of charging points by now; only the

Netherlands shows a significant share of the target in 2016

122,100

969,000 96,900

82,400

1,503,000 150,300

1,255,000 125,500

321,000 32,100

6,093,000 609,300

Number of publicly

access recharging

points in 2016 by EAFO

European Alternative

Fuels Observatory

11,759

15,843

1,740

17,953

1,999

26,700

75,994

CURRENT EUROPEAN REGULATION LEGAL FRAMEWORK

% OF INITIAL

TARGET

ACHIEVED

9.6%

16.4%

2.1%

11.9%

1.6%

83.2%

12.5%

The new EPBD is expected to include specific obligations on EV charging

infrastructures for both residential and non residential buildings; the

initial FI proposal for non residential has been lightened

18

No mentioning of EV •charge infrastructures in

any type of building

• Non residential: new and

existing buildings

undergoing major

renovation

- With more than ten parking

spaces

- One of every ten parking

space is equipped with a

recharging point

- Obligation as of 2025

• Residential: new and

existing buildings

undergoing major

renovation

- With more than ten

parking spaces

- Pre-cabling in every

parking space

EPBDPROPOSAL OF

COMMISSION

PROPOSAL OF

PARLIAMENT

AMENDMENT OF

EPBD

• Approval of amendment of

the EPBD is still pending

Timing

?30 November 2016 24 April 2017

Completed phase

Pending phase

Key:

19 May 2010

LEGAL FRAMEWORKKEY FEATURES OF THE AMENDMENT FOR EPBD

Note: EPBD: Energy Performance Buildings Directive 2010/31/EU


Non residential: new and •existing buildings undergoing

major renovation related to

electrical infrastructure

One of every ten is equipped -with adequate pre-cabling or

pre-tubing

At least - 7 kW of power on

every parking space

Obligation as of - 2025

Residential: new and existing •buildings undergoing major

renovations related to

electrical infrastructure of

building or adjacent or built-in

parking lot

Include the adequate pre- -

cabling or pre-tubing

At least - 7 kW of power

• Spanish law already set specific obligations

- It is mandatory to do the pre-tubing in new residential buildings

- It obliges to do a feeding installation for a charging point in at least one parking

space for every 40 parking spaces in non residential buildings


Throughout the interviews, additional valuable information about national

obligations has been recollected, which should be completed and

extended to reinforce the arguments used by the ECI

19

France Full installation is mandatory• in at least one parking space for every 10 parking

spaces in new non-residential buildings

Germany

Italy (only 1

interviewee)

Netherlands

Spain

UK

German law does not allow charging infrastructures with a power between • 3.7

and 11 kW

• Italian law requires a minimum of 7.4 kW of charge in non-residential sector

• Wallboxes in public areas have to be equipped with monitors to control who is

receiving the service

- Charging boxes need to be more complex and, consequently, more expensive

• Some required authorization involve extra expenditures

- Any modification in the electric installation has to be documented and

certificated by an electrician with license

- Additionally, the fire department needs to grant permission

A specific law on EV infrastructure is currently being processed•It is expected to be passed at the end of - 2017 or beginning of 2018 with similar

terms as the proposal of the amendment for the EPBD

• No specific information on regulation has been extracted

In order to establish the •correct strategies, it is

recommended to

consider a follow-up

analysis of the national

regulation

The presented -information should

therefore be completed

The example of France -may be used to impose

the obligation of

charging infrastructures

in non residential

buildings

A • comprehensive

analysis is suggested of

the relation between the

deployment of new

specific laws and the

development of the EV

markets in countries

such as France or Spain

LEGAL FRAMEWORKNATIONAL OBLIGATIONS

Preliminary recollection of national obligations for EV infrastructure

(not exhaustive)

20

Agenda

Introduction•

Legal framework•


Back• -up

To obtain information about installation costs from market players in

several countries, the following steps have been completed throughout

the project

21

• Research of data

• Identification of

contacts of EV

specialists,

electrical installers,

builders,

researchers and

national

associations

• Collection of

general

information and

first data through

interviews with the

objective of

obtaining a better

understanding of

the topic

Characteristics of •standard case:

Underground -parking with 10

parking slots

- Two building types:

residential and

shopping center

Installation- cost for

parking slot closest

to existing electricity

meter on ground

floor (considered

distance: 20 m.

between wallbox

and meter)

Identification and

research

First round of calls

and mailing

Definition of

fictitious scenario

Second round of

calls and mailing

Timing

5 – 14 June 2017 15 – 18 June 20171 – 4 June 2017


• Calculation of

national averages

• Calculation of

average of selected

countries

• Preparation of the

presentation

Analysis of data

• More

homogeneous

data obtained

through

interviews

19 Jun – 13 Jul 2017 6 – 14 July 2017

INTERVIEW RESULTSD

ES

CR

IPT

ION

OF

PR

OC

ES

SR

ES

UL

T

• Mixed results from

interviews

- Difficulty of cost

estimation for

interview partners

- Particularity of cases

- Heterogeneous

results

Questions on •specific scenarios

• Final report

SUMMARY

• Contact database

The following building and charging installation characteristics have been

considered for the interviews

22


INTERVIEW RESULTSSUMMARY

Pre-tubing

Pre-cabling

Full installation

Full installation from cabling

Building features

Residential

Non Residential

New building

Operating building

Type of building

Cases

• Multi-family building with underground parking

Shopping center with underground parking•

Installation in new construction building•

• Installation in already existing building

Installation of conduits with no cabling •

• Installation of conduits plus cabling

Installation of wallbox in an existing conduit with cabling•

• Installation of conduits plus wiring plus wallbox

Materials

Labour

Wallbox

Elements

considered

Material costs used in installation (including cables) •

• Labour costs of work to be carried out

Hardware of charging station (excluding cabling)•

Characteristics of installations

23

Slow

Charging

Fast

Charging

Rapid AC

Charging

Rapid DC

Charging

Typical

power

Electric

current

Approximate

charging time¹Charger

3,7 kW

7,4 kW –

22 kW

43 kW

50 kW

13 A

32 A

63 A

125 A

6-16 hours

3-8 hours (for

7,4 kW power)

30-70 minutes

(80% charge)

20-60 minutes

(80% charge)

Standard 3-PIN

Type 1 (J1772)

Type 1

(J1772) ̶ Type

2 (Mennekes)

Non-

removable

Type 2

(Mennekes)

Non-

removable

JEVS

(CHAdeMO) ̶

CCS (Combo)

The study focuses on those charging types with residential or commercial

application

Note: ¹ A battery capacity of 22 kWh and 60 kWh was considered for the range

Source: Zap-Map; CREARA Analysis

SUMMARY

Application

Residential

Residential,

commercial,

on streets

chargers

Charging

stations in

highways

Charging

stations in

highways

INTERVIEW RESULTS

Since the •market is

relatively new,

charging types

are not

completely

standardized

This chart has •been elaborated

considering

hardware

features and

comments made

by respondents

Different types of charging process

24

ES

FR

UKDE

NL

NO

• Total

contacted: 52

• Successful

interviews: 12

Total •contacted: 28

Successful •interviews: 4

• Total

contacted: 35

• Successful

interviews: 3



• Total

contacted: 37

• Successful

interviews: 9



IT



• General information of interviews

- Interviews carried out between June

and July, 2017

- Contact via telephone and mail

- Number of contacts: 234

- Number of successful interviews: 33

• Profile of the respondents:

- EV charger installers

- Electrical installers

- Builders

- Researching institutions and

associations

• A large number of market actors

were contacted although only a

limited number was willing or able to

provide specific data:

- Idiomatic barriers

- Difficulty with cost estimation

- No interest

- No knowledge of Directive

• Because the interviewees in Norway

were not willing to reply to any

questions, no data for Norway was

obtained and the country has not

been included in the results

INTERVIEW RESULTS

Note: An interview is considered successful, if the interview partner was able to provide data for at least one of the installation types the study is covering


SUMMARY

A total of 234 interviews have been carried out, through which 21

complete and 12 partial data sets were obtained; no data was obtained for

Norway

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500




25

Note: 1 Average for non-residential does not include Italy as only one set of data is available, which presented significantly higher costs than in any other

countries; 2 The charging power in Germany for non-residential buildings is 11 kW


RESIDENTIAL SECTOR (3,7 kW) NON RESIDENTIAL SECTOR (7,4 kW2)

Total costs of different cases in alternative types of buildings

(average of analyzed countries1) • The most efficient option from total

cost perspective is to do the full

installation from scratch

- This is true for both sectors and both

types of building

- The major saving is on labour

• Prices of pre-tubing and pre-cabling

are similar

• To install a wallbox in an operating

building is more expensive than to

install it in a new one

• The installation in the non-

residential sector is more expensive

than in the residential sector

- This can be explained by the higher

price of the wallbox and the need for

more materials and more labour

The full installation is the most efficient way to install a wallbox (from total

cost perspective); there are no significant differences in price between

pre-tubing and pre-cabling, which weakens arguments for pre-cabling

EU

R 110 EUR

245 EUR


26

In the residential sector (new and operating) there is hardly any difference

between pre-cabling and pre-tubing in total costs, the upfront investment

is greater though in the first case

Note: 1 Installation from cabling and total include the cost of the wallbox; 2 Average does not include Italy; 3 Cabling covers costs of cables, cabling activity

would be included in “installation from cabling” activity


EU

R

EU

R

Cost distribution1 for studied cases in new


Cost distribution1 for studied cases in operating





150 EUR

142 EUR

125

337

850 1,312

469

850 1,319 1,168

165

398

850 1,413

572

850 1,422 1,280


27

The same holds true for the non-residential sector (new and operating); FI

is also the most efficient total cost option and in this case the greater

upfront investment can be justified from a public demand perspective

EU

R

EU

R


Cost distribution1 for studied cases in new non-


Cost distribution1 for studied cases in operating non-


245 EUR

215 EUR

Note: 1 Installation from cabling and total include the cost of the wallbox; 2 Average does not include Italy as only

one set of data is available, which presented significantly higher costs than in any other countries; 3 Cabling covers costs of cables, cabling activity would be included in “installation from cabling” activity




210

420

1,365 1,995

640

1,365 2,005 1,760

276

565

1,365 2,206

855

1,365 2,220 2,005


Cost dispersion and average for new building

(3,7 kW)

Pre-

cabling

Inst. from

pre-cabling¹

28

EUROPE INTERVIEW RESULTS

340470

1,170

Cost dispersion and average for operating building in

Europe (3,7 kW)

400

850

1,280

570EU

RE

UR

Pre-tubing Full inst.

The significant dispersion in the European average for residential prices

is explained by the relatively low prices in Southern countries and NL and

the high prices in FR, DE and UK

The most usual power for residential charging •in Europe is 3,7 kW (as indicated by interview

partners)

In Northern Europe, it is also possible to find -residential charging of up to 11 kW

An increase in the contracted power is not •necessary

The charging time is usually at night, when the -electric consumption is low

Differences between countries explain the •spread

Installation costs of a charging point are lower in -Southern countries and the Netherlands, where

labor is cheaper and the market is more mature

respectively

500€ 670€ 900€

Range of prices for a wallbox

Minimum Selected value Maximum

Note: Average is represented by the X; median is represented by the line; ¹ “install. from cabling” includes wallbox and has the same cost in new and operating



Pre-cabling

Pre-

cabling

Inst. from

pre-cabling¹

29

EUROPE INTERVIEW RESULTS

445

670

1,760

Cost dispersion and average for operating building in

Europe (7,4 kW)

630

1,315

2,025

960

EU

RE

UR

Cost dispersion and average for new building in

Europe (7,4 kW)

700€ 1,030€ 1,450€

The most usual power for non• -residential

charging in Europe is 7,4 kW

Commercial buildings usually have enough grid -connection capacity to face the additional

consumption from EV charging

There are countries such as Germany that do •not allow a charging power capacity below 11

kW

In these countries, the installation is significantly -more expensive due to the requirement of more

materials, more required labor hours and more

sophisticated wallboxes


Minimum Selected value Maximum

Pre-tubing Full inst.

Pre-tubing Full installation

In the shopping center segment the situation is similar; there is a strong

dispersion in wallbox prices even within countries, the cheapest quote is

less than half of the most expensive



0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

Pre-tubing Pre-cabling Installation from pre-cabling

Full installation

Costs for Non Residential Operating Buildings

France Germany Italy Netherlands Spain UK

30

In operating buildings, France, Germany and UK present the highest

prices (above the EU average) in the residential sector; in non-residential

Italy presents very high prices compared to other countries

INTERVIEW RESULTS

0

400

800

1,200

1,600

2,000

Pre-tubing Pre-cabling Installation from pre-cabling

Full installation

Costs for Residential Operating Buildings

France Germany Italy Netherlands Spain UK Europe¹

EU

RE

UR

Note: ¹Europe as average for selected countries


• The most common

installation by far in

operating buildings is

the full installation

- According to

respondents, pre-

installations does not

make sense in

operating buildings

• Prices for pre-

installations are based

on the professionals’

estimations, as they do

not usually carry out

this type of service yet

or it is included in the

general construction

budget of a building

EUROPE

Europe¹

In new buildings, the costs are less disperse, although generally the

Northern countries present higher prices

31

INTERVIEW RESULTS

0

400

800

1,200

1,600


Costs for Residential New Buildings


0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500


Costs for Non Residential New Buildings


EU

RE

UR

• Pre-tubing is more usual

than pre-cabling

- According to

respondents, pre-cabling

makes no sense in new

buildings since users do

not know yet how much

power will be necessary

for the charger

• In new buildings, it cannot

be predicted how many

neighbors will want to

install charging points in

the future

• Wiring from tubing is easy

and cheap: it only takes a

few minutes by an electric

installer

Note: N.A.= Not available; ¹Europe as average for selected countries excluding Italy as no data was obtained for new buildings in this country


EUROPE

Europe¹

Europe¹

N.A. N.A. N.A.

N.A N.A. N.A.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Materials Labour Wallbox

Full installation


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Materials Labour

Pre-cabling

France Germany Italy Netherlands Spain UK Europe¹

32

INTERVIEW RESULTS

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Materials Labour

Pre-tubing


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


Full installation from pre-cabling


In the residential sector the cost of materials and labour are fairly equally

shared; in full installations the wallbox represents the major cost



EUROPE

Europe¹

Europe¹ Europe¹

33

INTERVIEW RESULTS

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Materials Labour

Pre-tubing


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


Full installation from pre-cabling


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Materials Labour

Pre-cabling


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%


Full installation




EUROPE

In non residential buildings, the distribution of costs is very similar to the

one in the residential sector

Europe¹ Europe¹

Europe¹ Europe¹

Interviews:•Total contacted: - 28

Successful interviews: - 4

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500




34

FRANCE INTERVIEW RESULTS

RESIDENTIAL SECTOR NON RESIDENTIAL SECTOR

EU

R

• Two of the companies participating in the

survey complete about 50 installations of

charging points per year; a third respondent is

an association

• French law already obliges new non-

residential buildings to have one installation

per 10 parking spaces

• Some respondents commented that the

installation of a smart charging point would be

the best option for non-residential buildings

FR

500€ 700€ 900€


Min. Sel. value Max.

Cost of the total installation starting from different

pre-installations

Residential

Non residential 700€ 1,035€ 1,400€

In France, a legal obligation for FI in new non-residential buildings already

exists

Comments about results and interviews


35

GERMANY INTERVIEW RESULTS


Three of the companies interviewed •complete over 500 installations per year; the

others install around 30

• The most common charging power for the

residential sector is 3,7 kW and 11 kW in

non-residential applications

It is also possible to find residential charging -points with a power of 11 kW (according to

respondents, German law allows up to 3,7

kW and from 11 kW onwards)



DE


0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500




EU

R

700€ 750€ 800€


Residential

Non residential 1,200€ 1,270€ 1,400€

The need for a capacity of at least 11 kW in non-residential sectors makes

Germany one of the most expensive countries to install a charging point

RESIDENTIAL SECTOR

(3.7 kW)

NON RESIDENTIAL SECTOR

(11 kW)


pre-installations


36

ITALY INTERVIEW RESULTS

IT

There are specific obligations for any modification of the electric

installations which increase prices in non-residential sector substantially

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000




EU

R

700€ 700€ 700€


Residential

Non residential 3,000€ 3,000€ 3,000€

• Pre-installations in

new buildings are

irrelevant (included

in general

construction costs)




Only one interview has been successfully •carried out in Italy with the only company

specialized in EV charging points and

market leader, with about 100 installations

per year (according to interviewee)

This company- owns the 50% of the public

charging points in Italy

EV charging installation services are mainly •being carried out by general electric

installers




pre-installations


37

NETHERLANDS INTERVIEW RESULTS

• One of the companies interviewed completes

about 3,000 installations per year; the others

around 250

• The most common charging power for

residential sector is 3,7kW

- It is also possible to find residential charging

points with a power up to 11kW

NL

Despite being a Northern European country, prices in the Netherlands

stand below the average because of the maturity of its market

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800




EU

R

500€ 650€ 800€


Residential

Non residential 700€ 850€ 950€


• Interviews:

- Total contacted: 25

- Successful interviews: 4




pre-installations


38

SPAIN INTERVIEW RESULTS

SP

• One of the companies interviewed completes

about 300 installations per year; the others

below 100

• Spanish law already obliges to do pre-tubing

in new residential buildings and feeding

installation of one charging station per 40

parking spaces in non-residential buildings

- If the pre-cabling is done for all parking lots,

then the cost per charging point is

significantly reduced

Spain law obliges to carry out pre-tubing in new residential buildings, as

well as feeding installations in new non-residential buildings

500€ 600€ 700€


Residential

Non residential 600€ 880€ 1,200€

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

2,000




EU

R







pre-installations


39

UK INTERVIEW RESULTS

Note: ¹Average exchange rate 2016 used for conversion: € 1 = £ 0,81948


Two of the interviews were carried out with •companies; the third one was completed

with a research center

The Office for Low Emission Vehicles •(OLEV) funds

75- % of the total cost in the residential sector

(capped at £500, including VAT)

- £300 for each socket (up to a maximum of

20) for each application

UK

High installation costs in UK, specially in non-residential sector, are

explained by the range of prices for a wallbox and the exchange rate

610€ 710€ 915€


Residential

Non residential 730€ 1,340€ 1,650€

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000




EU

R¹






pre-installations


40

Conclusions of the interviews¹

CONCLUSIONS

Note: ¹ Although data is homogeneous, it should be taken into account that the sample is a small sample of the total population


• According to the interviewees, pre-installations generally do not make sense in operating buildings

- There is no cost advantage in pre-installing and owners and tenants would rather install a full installation once

there is a need

General

Operating

buildings

New

buildings

• Spain and France already have in place requirements for new buildings (FI in new non-residential in France,

and feeding installation in new non-residential and pre-tubing for new residential in Spain)

• In case of the pre-installations in new buildings (spaces for tubing and cabling), builders are including these

activities in their overall workplan and budget, they do not calculate separate costs

- Estimating the costs for pre-tubing and pre-cabling is therefore difficult

Completing the installation in several phases is less efficient than building from scratch•Installing a charging point from scratch is - 9.1% - 12.4% cheaper in total costs (depending on the type of building

and the type of pre-installation) than starting from a pre-installation

The largest cost element is the - wallbox

The difference between pre• -tubing and pre-cabling is mainly the cost of the cable; the process of cabling is

simple and cheap once tubing is done; it only takes some minutes and the main cost are the cables

There is no significant total cost difference between the two pre- -installation options, the question is rather when

which part of the investment is made

Generally few pre• -installations are being completed at the moment and many interviewees were not aware of

the proposed directive being discussed in Brussels

Pre- -cabling is not usual nowadays because it implies extra costs without knowing if the installation will be used at

some point and if the cabling matches future demand requirements (e.g. charging speed)

Spain is the only country known to require pre- -tubing (in new residential buildings)

Installations are generally connected to the electric meter which is placed on the ground or underground •floors in most of the cases

41

Agenda

• Introduction

• Legal framework

• Interview results and conclusions

• Back-up

Inst. from pre-

cabling¹

42

FRANCE INTERVIEW RESULTS

370

570

1,300

EU

R

Costs in new building

Pre-

tubingPre-

cabling

Full

Inst.

Costs in operating building

450

800

1,430

730

EU

R

Pre-

tubing

Pre-

cabling

Inst. from pre-

cabling¹

Full

Inst.

RE

SID

EN

TIA

L S

EC

TO

R (

3.7

kW

)



NO

N R

ES

IDE

NT

IAL

SE

CT

OR

(7.4

kW

)

Cost in operating building

530

1,150

2,000

950EU

R

Pre-

tubing

Pre-

cabling

Full

Inst.

420

630

1,565

EU

R

Cost in new building

Pre-

tubingPre-

cabling

Full

Inst.

Full

Inst.Inst. from

pre-cabling¹

43

GERMANY INTERVIEW RESULTS

421

569

1,274

EU

R

Costs in new buildingCosts in operating building

660

980

1,580

780

EU

R

Pre-

tubing

Pre-

cabling

Inst. from pre-

cabling¹

Full

Inst.

RE

SID

EN

TIA

L S

EC

TO

R (

3.7

kW

)



NO

N R

ES

IDE

NT

IAL

SE

CT

OR

(11

-22

kW

)


980

1,700

2,500

1,224

EU

R

Pre-

tubing

Pre-

cabling

675

850

2,090

EU

R


Pre-

tubingPre-

cabling

Full

Inst.

Pre-

tubingPre-

cabling

Full

Inst.

Full

Inst.Inst. from

pre-cabling¹

44

ITALY INTERVIEW RESULTS

EU

R


100

800900

200

EU

R

Pre-

tubing

Pre-

cabling

Inst. from pre-

cabling¹

Full

Inst.

RE

SID

EN

TIA

L S

EC

TO

R (

3.7

kW

)



NO

N R

ES

IDE

NT

IAL

SE

CT

OR

(7.4

kW

)


150

3,300

6,000

3,000

EU

R

Pre-

tubing

Pre-

cabling

EU

R


Pre-

tubingPre-

cabling

Full

Inst.

Pre-

tubingPre-

cabling

Full

Inst.

No data available

No data available

Full

Inst.Inst. from

pre-cabling¹

45

NETHERLANDS INTERVIEW RESULTS

210

355

1,025

EU

R


360

790

1,150

550

EU

R

Pre-

tubing

Pre-

cabling

Inst. from pre-

cabling¹

Full

Inst.

RE

SID

EN

TIA

L S

EC

TO

R (

3.7

kW

)



NO

N R

ES

IDE

NT

IAL

SE

CT

OR

(3.7

-11

kW

)


375

1,000

1,525

665EU

R

Pre-

tubing

Pre-

cabling

395

680

1,515

EU

R


Pre-

tubingPre-

cabling

Full

Inst.

Pre-

tubingPre-

cabling

Full

Inst.

Full

Inst.Inst. from

pre-cabling¹

46

SPAIN INTERVIEW RESULTS


280

780

1,050

430

EU

R

Pre-

tubing

Pre-

cabling

Inst. from pre-

cabling¹

Full

Inst.

RE

SID

EN

TIA

L S

EC

TO

R (

3.7

kW

)



NO

N R

ES

IDE

NT

IAL

SE

CT

OR

(7.4

kW

)


350

1,150

1,500

625

EU

R

Pre-

tubing

Pre-

cabling

225

358

975

EU

R


Pre-

tubingPre-

cabling

Full

Inst.

295

520

1,460

EU

R


Pre-

tubingPre-

cabling

Full

Inst.

Full

Inst.Inst. from

pre-cabling¹

47

UK INTERVIEW RESULTS


385

915

1,280

570

EU

R

Pre-

tubing

Pre-

cabling

Inst. from pre-

cabling¹

Full

Inst.

RE

SID

EN

TIA

L S

EC

TO

R (

3.7

kW

)



NO

N R

ES

IDE

NT

IAL

SE

CT

OR

(7.4

kW

)


460

1,565

2,075

690

EU

R

Pre-

tubing

Pre-

cabling

300

450

1,165

EU

R


Pre-

tubingPre-

cabling

Full

Inst.

345

590

1,940

EU

R


Pre-

tubingPre-

cabling

Full

Inst.

ESCOConsulting SoftwareEngineering

cost of ev charging infrastructure

Business