guest column

Column: Should companies pay for EV chargers for corporate fleets?

By taking a thoughtful approach to employees’ individual situations, fleet managers can design a take-home EV program that fits their drivers’ needs and benefits the company’s bottom line in the long run. Photo via Getty Images

As electric vehicles continue to rise in popularity among corporate fleets, the question of how to best accommodate charging needs for fleet drivers, especially those taking their vehicles home, is becoming increasingly important.

Charging EV fleet vehicles at home can be an excellent strategy to save employees time and cut operational costs. However, many companies hesitate in their take-home EV implementation, mistakenly believing that high-cost level 2 home chargers are a necessity. This misconception can stall the transition to an efficient, cost-effective fleet charging solution.

By taking a thoughtful approach to employees’ individual situations, fleet managers can design a take-home EV program that fits their drivers’ needs and benefits the company’s bottom line in the long run. Here are some essential points to consider:

The viability of level 1 charging for low-mileage drivers

For many fleet drivers, especially those covering less than 10,000 miles annually, the standard level 1 charger that plugs into a 120v (standard) wall outlet and comes with their EV is perfectly adequate. This solution involves no additional hardware costs, mitigates issues when employees leave the company, and reduces corporate liability concerns. The primary advantage of relying on level 1 charging is its simplicity and cost-effectiveness, as it requires no extra investment in charging infrastructure. By leveraging the charging cable provided with the vehicle, companies can minimize their financial outlay while still supporting their employees' charging needs effectively.

Opting for non-networked level 2 chargers for high-mileage drivers

For higher mileage drivers with faster charging needs, a non-networked level 2 charger represents a compelling option. In this scenario, the employee pays for the unit and the installation and is then reimbursed by the company. This approach has several benefits:

  • Tax Rebates and Incentives. Employees may qualify for various tax writeoffs and incentives that are not available to companies, making the installation of a level 2 charger more affordable.
  • Ownership and Choice. Employees select and own the charging port, choose the contractor and pay for installation, which limits corporate liability and cuts costs.
  • Home Value Enhancement. Installing a level 2 charger can increase the value of the employee's home, providing them with an additional benefit and easy access to charging.
  • Accurate Reimbursement Still Possible. Modern electric vehicles record charging data, eliminating the need to get this information from a smart charger. Software like ReimburseEV can connect the dots and calculate accurate usage, costs and reimbursement.

This approach offers a cost-effective, lower-liability solution that benefits both the company and the employee, making it an attractive option for higher-mileage drivers.

The drawbacks of company-owned and networked chargers

Installing company-owned chargers, especially networked ones, is arguably the least favorable option for several reasons:

  1. Increased costs and liability: The installation and maintenance of networked chargers significantly increases costs. Moreover, owning the charging infrastructure introduces liability concerns, especially regarding data security.
  2. Connectivity and compatibility Issues: Networked chargers can suffer from connectivity issues, leading to inaccurate charging data and other operating and compliance problems.
  3. Risk of fraud: Many smart chargers do not know which vehicle is plugged in. Thus, they also risk being used by non-fleet vehicles, further complicating cost and energy management.
  4. Brand lock-in: A number of networked chargers are tied to specific OEM brands, limiting the flexibility in vehicle selection and potentially locking the company into a less dynamic fleet vehicle mix.

The drawbacks associated with company-owned and networked chargers underline the importance of evaluating charging needs carefully and opting for solutions that offer flexibility, reduce liability, and control costs.

Decision tree for fleet managers

Fleet managers should consider a decision tree approach to determine the most suitable charging solution for their needs. This decision-making process involves assessing the annual mileage of fleet drivers, access to charging, the benefits of tax incentives, and considering the long-term implications of charger ownership and ongoing liabilities. By adopting a thoughtful, structured approach to at-home charging decision-making, fleet managers can identify the most cost-effective and efficient charging solutions that align with their company's operational goals, culture, and drivers' needs.

Transitioning to an EV fleet and providing robust at-home charging solutions for your EV fleet drivers need not be a big operational bottleneck requiring huge investments in home charging infrastructure and installation costs. By understanding the specific operational demands of your EV fleet vehicles and the unique circumstances of your EV fleet drivers, companies can implement effective, efficient at-home charging solutions that save time, reduce costs, and minimize liability, all while supporting employees' transition to electric mobility.

–––

David Lewis is the founder and CEO of MoveEV, an AI-powered EV transition company that helps organizations convert fleet and employee-owned gas vehicles to electric by accurately reimbursing for charging electric vehicles at home.

Trending News

A View From HETI

Texas outpaced the rest of the country in a new energy resilience report, despite grid challenges and rising AI demand. Photo courtesy of ERCOT

A new report by mineral group Texas Royalty Brokers ranks Texas as the No. 1 most energy-resilient state.

The study focused on four main sources of electricity in hydroelectric dams, natural gas plants, nuclear reactors and petroleum facilities. Each state was given an Energy Resilience Score based on size and diversity of its power infrastructure, energy production and affordability for residents.

Texas earned a score of 71.3 on the report, outpacing much of the rest of the country. Pennsylvania came in at No. 2 with a score of 55.8, followed by New York (49.1) and California (48.4).

According to the report, Texas produces 11.7 percent of the country’s total energy, made possible by the state’s 141,000-megawatt power infrastructure—the largest in America.

Other key stats in the report for Texas included:

  • Per-capita consumption: 165,300 kWh per year
  • Per-capita expenditures: $5,130 annually
  • Total summer capacity: 141,200 megawatts

Despite recent failures in the ERCOT grid, including the 2021 power grid failure during Winter Storm Uri and continued power outages with climate events like 2024’s Hurricane Beryl that left 2.7 million without power, Texas still was able to land No. 1 on an energy resilience list. Texas has had the most weather-related power outages in the country in recent years, with 210 events from 2000 to 2023, according to an analysis by the nonprofit Climate Central. It's also the only state in the lower 48 with no major connections to neighboring states' power grids.

Still, the report argues that “(Texas’ infrastructure) is enough to provide energy to 140 million homes. In total, Texas operates 732 power facilities with over 3,000 generators spread across the state, so a single failure can’t knock out the entire grid here.”

The report acknowledges that a potential problem for Texas will be meeting the demands of AI data centers. Eric Winegar, managing partner at Texas Royalty Brokers, warns that these projects consume large amounts of energy and water.

According to another Texas Royalty Brokers report, Texas has 17 GPU cluster sites across the state, which is more than any other region in the United States. GPUs are specialized chips that run AI models and perform calculations.

"Energy resilience is especially important in the age of AI. The data centers that these technologies use are popping up across America, and they consume huge amounts of electricity. Some estimates even suggest that AI could account for 8% of total U.S. power consumption by 2030,” Winegar commented in the report. “We see that Texas is attracting most of these new facilities because it already has the infrastructure to support them. But we think the state needs to keep expanding capacity to meet growing demand."

Trending News