Rethinking How We Track Charging Industry Growth

Have you ever wondered why certain charge-point operators never show up on US rankings of the largest DC fast charging networks?

The underlying reason is that almost all companies in the industry, analysts, bloggers, and the media use the Alternative Fuels Data Center (AFDC) database as their source.

The AFDC database has errors and omissions: networks submit every port as a station, dual connector chargers as two ports, bulk uploads with wrong dates, stations never submitted, duplicate entries, and outdated network attributions.

The database has long been biased toward charging networks (the software/EMSP companies) as opposed to the CPOs and brands associated with the on-site charging experience. We believe the public-facing primary charging brand should get the credit.

Using an analogy, it is akin to moving to Dell getting the credit for laptop sales instead of Intel. Currently in AFDC data, “Intel” would often get counted, not the “Dell.” Or like a Sheetz convenience store — Sheetz purchases gasoline from various refineries but the brand name on the pump is “Sheetz.”

Here is our criteria for when a charging network’s stations should be tracked as a customer-facing charging network even when using a third-party EMSP:

• The charging stations are clearly branded under the CPOs name, not the EMSP. Examples: Mercedes-Benz HPC, Pilot Flying J/GM Energy, Evolve NY (NYPA), and EVsmart (Exelon).
• The company has a dedicated section on its website promoting its charging station network, including a map and listing of stations.
• A strong consideration is given to those networks also included in PlugShare.

We welcome your input on this and the criteria that should be used in tracking charging networks/CPOs.

By Loren McDonald Chief Analyst, Paren with significant input from Paren CTO and co-founder, Bill Ferro.