Top 5 Favorite Intraoral Scanners by CustomersWhy Charging Infrastructure Growth Is Far From Over

---

IEA EVO 2026 recorded 1.8 million new public chargepoints installed in 2025. The number sounds large until you read the next line: to meet current policy projections, the global network needs to grow sixfold by 2035. For CPOs planning their next deployment cycle, that gap is not a distant abstraction. It is the operating environment you are about to enter.

There is a version of the charging infrastructure story that goes like this: the hard work is done, the network is built, and the remaining challenge is simply running it well. The highway corridors are covered. The major urban centres have density. The early-adopter EV owner who needed public charging most has it available.

The IEA's Global EV Outlook 2026 does not support that story. What EVO 2026 actually shows is a network that has grown impressively in absolute terms but remains structurally insufficient relative to the EV fleet it needs to serve, and that is growing in the wrong places to address the segments where the next decade of demand will come from.

This is the second article in our IEA EVO 2026 Decoded series. Where the first piece examined how EV adoption has crossed a tipping point in vehicle sales, this one focuses on infrastructure: what the IEA data actually says about the buildout that still lies ahead, which segments CPOs should be positioning for, and what the next phase of network expansion looks like compared to the last one.

The short answer is that it looks substantially different. The demand drivers are different, the deployment contexts are different, the hardware requirements are different, and the business models that will make it financially viable are different. CPOs who plan for the next phase as if it resembles the last one are planning for the wrong market.

The sixfold capacity requirement is the most important number in EVO 2026 for CPOs, and it is the number most often quoted without its context. It does not mean that six times as many chargepoints need to be installed. It means six times the total installed charging capacity, a distinction that matters enormously for deployment strategy.

Under the IEA's Current Policies Scenario, the average rated power per public chargepoint is projected to increase from approximately 50 kW today to nearly 65 kW by 2035. The network needs to grow in both unit count and power capability simultaneously. A deployment strategy that adds chargepoints at the current average power rating will underdeliver on the capacity requirement even if the unit numbers look right.

The second contextual point is the EV-to-chargepoint ratio. The IEA projects that the number of electric light-duty vehicles per public chargepoint will rise from approximately 11 in 2025 to 19 by 2035. More EVs will be competing for each chargepoint as the network grows. Available kilowatts per EV will fall from 4.5 to 3.5 over the same period. The network is not keeping pace with the fleet it serves, and the gap will widen before it narrows.

For CPOs, this means two things. First, the utilization case for public charging infrastructure is strengthening over time: the vehicles are coming, and the capacity to serve them is insufficient. Second, the infrastructure deployed today at current power ratings will be underspecified for the utilization levels it encounters in five to seven years. Power architecture decisions made in 2025 and 2026 have a decade of operational consequence.

The first phase of public charging deployment was shaped by a specific use case: the EV driver on a journey longer than their battery range, needing a fast top-up at a highway rest area or motorway service station. This use case is real and important, and it justified the highway corridor buildout that dominated the early years of network expansion. It is also, increasingly, not the primary demand driver for the next phase.

EVO 2026 is explicit about the diversification of charging demand. The growth segments that will drive the next decade of public and semi-public infrastructure deployment include logistics and last-mile delivery fleet charging, workplace and commercial property charging, destination charging at retail and hospitality venues, and residential charging in multi-dwelling environments where home charging is not available. Each of these segments has different characteristics from the highway fast-charging model, and each requires a different deployment approach.

The common thread across these segments is that they each require CPOs to move beyond the straightforward highway deployment model. They involve more complex site acquisition, more diverse stakeholder relationships, more varied hardware requirements, and more sophisticated software and billing infrastructure. They also offer, in aggregate, a substantially larger addressable market than the highway corridor alone.

Of the new demand segments identified in EVO 2026, fleet and logistics charging is the most immediately actionable for CPOs with the right capabilities. The policy environment is the clearest, the demand is the most predictable, and the procurement timelines, while long, are structured enough to plan against.

In Europe, the EU's Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Regulation is driving mandatory truck charging deployment along the TEN-T network. The second phase of the Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Facility has allocated EUR 1 billion across 19 projects in 11 member states, including approximately 2,000 new HDV charging points at 350 kW or above and nearly 600 at 1 MW or more. If fully deployed, these projects would increase Europe's public truck charging stock by 60% and multiply the number of megawatt chargers fourteen-fold from the current base.

Germany illustrates the pace of deployment. At the start of 2026, around 70 dedicated truck charging stations with approximately 270 charging points were operational. Under the Power to Road initiative, 350 heavy-duty charging stations totalling 2,400 ultra-fast and 1,800 megawatt charging points had been tendered, backed by EUR 1.6 billion in approved government funding. The procurement pipeline is open. The technical and operational requirements are defined. The CPOs who move now are securing the positions that will be contested later.

For commercial van and light goods vehicle fleets, the timeline is shorter and the deployment model is different. Fleet depot charging, managed AC or moderate-power DC installed at distribution centres, logistics hubs, or municipal vehicle yards, is already commercially viable without subsidy in markets with strong emissions mandates. The key requirements are load management that works within existing site electrical capacity, billing integration with fleet management systems, and hardware reliability that supports round-the-clock operational schedules. These are solvable requirements with the right hardware and software stack.

Workplace charging and destination charging at retail and hospitality venues represent the largest volume opportunity in the medium term, measured by chargepoint count rather than installed capacity. The IEA's projection that workplace chargers will account for 35% of all new additions through 2035 reflects a structural reality: most EV driving happens within daily commute range, and a significant share of daily charging will happen at the destination rather than on a journey.

For CPOs, the business model for workplace and destination charging is different from highway fast charging in ways that have significant operational implications. Revenue per session is lower because the power levels are lower and the dwell time is longer. But utilization patterns are more predictable, site relationships are more durable, and the competitive dynamics are less intense than in high-traffic highway locations where multiple networks compete for the same site.

The monetization model is also evolving. Destination charging operators are moving beyond simple per-kWh pricing toward arrangements that incorporate employer subsidies, loyalty programme integration, advertising and sponsorship revenue from dwell-time audiences, and dynamic pricing that captures peak demand value. CPOs who build the software infrastructure to support these models, or who partner with platforms that do, will extract significantly more revenue per chargepoint than those who treat workplace and destination as a simple commodity charging play.

What Site Selection Looks Like in the Next Phase

The site selection methodology that worked for highway corridor charging, high traffic volume, high average journey distance, limited competition, does not translate directly to workplace and destination deployment. The relevant variables are different: EV density in the employee or customer base, dwell time, grid connection costs at the specific site, and the competitive landscape of other nearby charging options.

EVO 2026's data on EV-to-chargepoint ratios provides a useful planning input. In markets where that ratio is already above 15 and rising, workplace and destination chargepoints installed today will achieve viable utilization within two to three years as the local EV fleet grows into the capacity. In markets where the ratio is still low, the same investment may take five years to reach economic viability. Location decisions made on the basis of current utilization alone will systematically underinvest in the highest-potential sites.

EVO 2026 is more direct than previous editions about grid capacity constraints. As EV deployment density increases and charging speeds rise, grid limitations are becoming a real constraint on deployment timelines in some regions, not a theoretical future concern. This is particularly acute for high-power sites: a 350 kW fast charger requires a grid connection that takes twelve to eighteen months to provision in many urban markets, and the cost of that connection can represent a larger share of total project cost than the charging hardware itself.

For CPOs, grid constraints manifest in three ways: sites that would be commercially viable are not deployable because the grid connection cost is prohibitive; deployment timelines stretch beyond the point where they capture the demand window the CPO was planning for; and operating costs are elevated by demand charges that make the economics of high-power charging marginal in all but the highest-utilization locations.

EVO 2026 identifies three technical strategies that are already proving effective in addressing these constraints, and all three have implications for how CPOs specify and procure charging hardware.

Battery Energy Storage Co-location

Pairing a battery energy storage system with a fast charger at a grid-constrained site allows the site to deliver high peak power to vehicles without requiring a grid connection sized for that peak. The BESS charges slowly from the grid during off-peak periods and discharges rapidly during charging sessions. For a site where the grid connection cost difference between a 100 kW and a 350 kW connection is substantial, BESS co-location can make the economics of ultra-fast charging viable at sites that would otherwise be locked out of the segment.

This is no longer a theoretical option. Multiple operators, including Fastned and BP Pulse, are deploying BESS-enabled fast-charging sites at scale. The hardware design implication for CPOs is that chargers selected for grid-constrained sites need to be architected for BESS integration from the outset, not retrofitted after installation.

Smart and Managed Charging

Dynamic load management, distributing available grid capacity across multiple chargers in real time, based on vehicle state of charge, dwell time, and user priority, allows CPOs to maximize the charging delivered from a given grid connection without overloading it. This is most valuable in high-density deployment scenarios: fleet depots with fifty vehicles arriving at shift change, workplace sites where peak demand coincides with grid stress periods, and urban destination charging sites operating under demand tariffs.

The precondition for effective managed charging is hardware that supports it: chargers with reliable OCPP connectivity, responsive power modulation, and accurate real-time telemetry. A network where 20-30% of chargepoints are intermittently offline, the current industry average in many markets, cannot implement effective load management. Reliability is a prerequisite for intelligence.

Vehicle-to-Grid Integration

V2G is the most forward-looking of the three strategies, and EVO 2026 flags it as a mechanism with genuine near-term revenue potential rather than a distant aspiration. Parked EVs with bidirectional charging capability represent a distributed battery asset that can participate in grid balancing markets, reducing net charging costs while generating ancillary service revenue. For fleet operators with predictable parking schedules and large battery assets, the economics of V2G are increasingly compelling.

The hardware implication for CPOs entering fleet and workplace charging today is that bidirectional charging capability, even if not immediately activated, should be a design consideration for hardware selected now. Retrofitting bidirectional capability is substantially more expensive than specifying it at procurement.

The infrastructure gaps EVO 2026 identifies are not primarily about chargepoint count. They are about the quality, capability, and future-readiness of the hardware being deployed. CPOs making procurement decisions today are making choices that will define the competitive position of their networks for the next seven to ten years.

Three hardware decisions deserve particular attention in the context of the next growth phase.

Power Architecture and Headroom

The IEA's projection that average rated power per chargepoint will increase from 50 kW to 65 kW between 2025 and 2035 understates the distribution within that average. The network is bifurcating: a significant portion of new public charging will be ultra-fast (150 kW+) in highway and premium destination contexts, while a larger portion in workplace and MDU contexts will be AC or moderate-power DC. The middle tier, 50-100 kW DC that was the workhouse of the first deployment phase, is under competitive pressure from both directions.

For CPOs building fast-charging capacity, the relevant question is not what power level the current fleet can use, but what power level the fleet in 2028 and 2030 will expect. Deploying 150 kW hardware on a site that will see 250 kW+ capable vehicles as its primary customers within three years is a capital allocation decision that will be visible in network utilization data and customer satisfaction scores.

Reliability as a Competitive Moat

The current industry average for DC fast charger uptime, estimated at 70-80% in many markets, against a user expectation closer to 95%+, represents an enormous opportunity for CPOs who can deliver meaningfully better performance. In a market where the top complaint about public charging is that chargers don't work when you arrive, an operator with a credible 95%+ uptime record has a product differentiation that is more durable than any single hardware feature or pricing advantage.

Reliability is partly a hardware question, build quality, thermal management, connector durability, and partly an operations question involving remote monitoring, predictive maintenance, and rapid fault resolution. But it starts with hardware: a charger that was not designed for the thermal cycling, connector wear rates, and vandalism exposure of a public deployment context will not achieve acceptable uptime regardless of how well it is maintained.

Software Integration as a Long-Term Asset

The OCPP protocol is the software foundation of CPO network management, and the transition from OCPP 1.6J to 2.0.1 is now a live procurement consideration rather than a future planning item. OCPP 2.0.1 enables the smart charging, V2G readiness, and advanced diagnostics that the next phase of network management requires. Hardware that ships only with OCPP 1.6J support is already limited in its long-term software capability.

Beyond protocol, the question of firmware openness has become commercially significant. Chargers with closed, proprietary firmware stacks constrain CPOs to the update and feature roadmap of a single supplier. Chargers with open, OCPP-compliant firmware that supports third-party backend integration give CPOs the ability to switch network management platforms, add analytics layers, and integrate with emerging energy management and V2G systems without replacing hardware. That flexibility compounds in value over the life of the asset.

The sixfold capacity requirement that EVO 2026 places on the charging industry between now and 2035 is, from a CPO perspective, an opportunity statement. It describes a market that is structurally undersupplied relative to the demand that is forming, across multiple segments that are each large enough to sustain significant network investment.

The segments at the leading edge of that demand, fleet and logistics, workplace, destination, and urban residential, are not the same as the highway corridor market that defined the first phase of deployment. They require different site relationships, different hardware specifications, different billing and software infrastructure, and different approaches to grid and energy management. CPOs who treat the next phase as a continuation of the last phase, deploying the same hardware in the same contexts with the same deployment model, will miss the majority of the growth opportunity that EVO 2026 describes.

The infrastructure buildout is far from over. The window for CPOs to establish strong positions in the highest-growth segments is open now, and the operators who are making the right hardware and site decisions today are building the network that will define the competitive landscape for the next decade.