Despite growth in electric vehicle charging infrastructure over the past two years, a new report demonstrates by Field Dynamics, in partnership with Zap-Map, shows inconsistencies in approach and outcomes between local authorities, and highlights concerns for “On-Street” households, which account for 35% of all households in Great Britain.
The EV market has changed significantly since the first report which was released in Autumn 2020 with significant investment in infrastructure and an increase of EVs on the roads. The market has also matured, with new developments in thinking on how to manage and charge this new fleet of vehicles.
This changing landscape is evident in this variance report, which focussed on how EV charger coverage has changed for the 9,777,254 million On-Street Households in Great Britain. The latest data provided by Zap-Map was used to identify charger sites and subsequently analyse the number of “On-Street” households, within a reasonable 5-minute walk of the nearest site.
The report found that total charger coverage, the percentage of all On-Street households that are within five minutes’ walk of a public charger, has increased by 42% to 17%.
Coverage is still inconsistent with London Boroughs achieving an average of nearly 60% coverage while Metropolitan councils average less than 14%.
Increases in coverage are very inconsistent, with limited evidence of any contributing trends. As an example, for those 225 councils that provided 10% or less coverage in 2020, the increases range from 0% additional coverage to 24% additional coverage.
EV adoption is much more widespread than perceived with 293 councils seeing an average of 50% increase in residential chargers across the same period.
Commenting on the study, Field Dynamics Managing Director, Ben Allan says: “we recognise that there are a range of different types of public charging infrastructure from on street charging to hubs, and that there are arguments for and against these options but we are not taking a stance here. Instead, we are providing the objective observations to help drive the discussion”
Since the first study in 2020, EV charging infrastructure coverage has improved by 42%, which is significant, but as Ben Allan points out “this is not as significant as the 68% increase in ORCS chargers.
“In an ideal world, all residents would benefit equally from investments in On-Street chargers; so, as the number of chargers increased, the coverage would increase by the same amount. Yet this is not what’s demonstrated in the latest study.”
The siting and delivery of EV chargers is complex with many conflicting requirements all combining to create an impossible task. Ben Allan explains that “we therefore look at the differences between councils in our data as reference points not judgments on which council is right and which is wrong.
“We also recognize that the market is still very immature and without mainstream behaviours and data, the right approach can only be inferred. However, the clear summary of this report is that 1) there little consistency in approach and outcome, 2) little correlation between demand and investment and 3) little standardization between council types. This inherently means that while some are getting it right, many are getting it expensively wrong and will carry on doing so for some time.”
Keyword: Inconsistencies in local authority EV charging approach found