Diving into the world of electric vehicle charging, I’m thrilled to sit down with Rohit Laila, a veteran in the logistics industry with decades of experience spanning supply chain and delivery. Rohit’s passion for technology and innovation has given him unique insights into the evolving landscape of EV infrastructure. Today, we’ll explore the reliability of EV charging networks, the real-world challenges drivers face, the importance of new metrics for measuring success, and the technological and regulatory hurdles that shape this critical industry.
How did you become interested in the reliability of EV charging infrastructure, and what stands out to you from recent studies on this topic?
My interest in EV charging reliability grew from years in logistics, where efficiency and dependability are everything. Seeing how charging issues can disrupt delivery schedules or fleet operations got me hooked on finding solutions. Recent studies, like the 2025 EV Charging Reliability Report, really highlight a disconnect—while charger uptime is near 99%, almost a third of charging attempts fail. That gap between availability and actual usability is a huge barrier to EV adoption, especially for businesses relying on consistent performance.
What do you think are the main reasons behind so many failed charging attempts despite high uptime rates?
Uptime just means the charger is powered on and technically available, but it doesn’t account for whether a driver can successfully start a charge. A lot of failures come down to software mismatches or communication breakdowns between the vehicle and the charger. Other times, it’s hardware issues or even payment system glitches. These problems aren’t always visible until a driver plugs in, so high uptime can mask a frustrating user experience.
Can you explain why focusing on first-time charge success rate, or FTCSR, offers a better picture of what drivers go through compared to traditional uptime metrics?
Absolutely. FTCSR measures whether a driver can plug in and get a charge on their first try. Uptime might tell you the charger isn’t offline, but it doesn’t capture if the session actually works. FTCSR reflects the real-world experience—did the driver leave with a charged vehicle or not? It’s a more human-centered metric that prioritizes usability over just technical availability.
How can emphasizing FTCSR help build confidence among EV drivers who might be skeptical about public charging networks?
When drivers know a metric like FTCSR is being used to improve charging stations, it signals that the industry cares about their experience, not just whether the equipment is turned on. If we can push success rates higher by addressing the root causes of failures, drivers will feel more confident that they won’t be stranded. It’s about trust—knowing that plugging in will actually work most of the time, especially for those new to EVs.
You’ve likened EV chargers and vehicles to computers. Can you unpack what you mean by software “handshakes” in this context?
Sure, think of EV charging as a conversation between two computers—the vehicle and the charger. A “handshake” is the process where these systems exchange data to confirm they’re compatible, authenticate the user, and start the charge. If the software on either end doesn’t speak the same language or misinterprets the signals, that conversation fails, and the charge doesn’t happen. It’s like trying to connect two devices with mismatched protocols.
What are the consequences when software updates lead to compatibility issues between a charger and a vehicle?
When updates happen, they can disrupt that handshake. For instance, a charger might get a firmware update that changes how it communicates, but an older vehicle’s system doesn’t recognize the new protocol. The result is a failed charge, even if everything looks fine on the surface. This can leave drivers stuck, especially if they’re in a rush or far from another station, turning a simple stop into a major headache.
Can you paint a picture of how these technical glitches impact EV drivers in their day-to-day lives?
Imagine a delivery driver on a tight schedule. They pull up to a charger that shows as available, plug in, and wait for the charge to start. But after a few minutes, nothing happens—the screen resets, or authentication fails. They’ve just lost valuable time, maybe delayed a delivery, and now they’re scrambling to find another station. It’s not just inconvenient; for some, it’s a hit to their livelihood. These scenarios play out daily and erode trust in the system.
How does the level of integration in charging systems, like Tesla’s compared to others, affect the experience for drivers using non-Tesla networks?
Tesla’s system is vertically integrated, meaning they control the vehicle, charger, and software end-to-end. This minimizes compatibility issues, so their drivers often have a smoother experience. Non-Tesla networks, though, rely on multiple companies for hardware, software, and payment systems. That fragmentation can lead to more errors—different components don’t always play nice together, leaving drivers with inconsistent results compared to a more unified ecosystem.
Why do charging success rates tend to drop over time at older stations, and what challenges does this pose?
Success rates often fall from around 85% in the first year to 70% after three years because older hardware struggles with new standards. As vehicles and protocols evolve, some stations can’t keep up without major upgrades or replacement. This creates a mismatch where newer EVs might not charge reliably at aging stations, frustrating drivers and putting pressure on site owners to invest in costly new equipment.
What are some of the barriers to simply updating older charging hardware instead of replacing it entirely?
A lot of older chargers weren’t designed with future-proofing in mind. Their internal architecture might not support new software protocols, or the hardware itself could be too outdated to handle modern demands. Updating often means replacing core components, which can be as expensive as installing a new unit. For many site owners, it’s a tough financial decision, especially if the station is still functional for some vehicles.
How does the lack of testing between new vehicles and older chargers contribute to reliability issues for drivers?
When new EVs roll out, manufacturers typically test them with current charging stations, not legacy ones. So, a brand-new vehicle might hit the road and encounter an older charger it’s never been tested with, leading to unexpected failures. This gap creates a roulette for drivers—they don’t know if their shiny new car will work at every station, especially in areas with dated infrastructure.
Can you shed light on how regulatory oversight for EV charging stations differs from something like gas pumps, and why reliability isn’t always the focus?
Unlike gas pumps, which get regular state inspections for accuracy and function, EV chargers have much lighter oversight. Regulatory bodies, like weights and measures departments, mainly check if drivers are getting the energy they pay for—think of it as verifying the meter isn’t cheating you. But whether the charger reliably starts a session or works at all isn’t their primary concern, so systemic reliability issues often fall through the cracks.
What’s your take on private fleet charging infrastructure being outside regulatory oversight—should there be more rules in place?
Private fleet charging, like setups for delivery companies or corporate use, doesn’t fall under public regulation because it’s not consumer-facing. I think there’s a case for some oversight, especially as fleets grow and play a bigger role in EV adoption. Basic standards could prevent corner-cutting on maintenance or safety, but it’s a balance—too much regulation might stifle innovation or burden smaller operators.
Looking ahead, how do you see adopting FTCSR as a central metric changing the way the industry tackles charging reliability?
Adopting FTCSR shifts the focus from just keeping chargers online to ensuring they actually work for drivers. It pushes manufacturers, operators, and software developers to prioritize compatibility and user experience. Over time, I believe it’ll drive better collaboration across the industry, standardize protocols, and lead to innovations that close the gap between availability and successful charging sessions.
What is your forecast for the future of EV charging reliability as the industry continues to grow and evolve?
I’m optimistic. We’re in a transition phase, much like the shift from horse-drawn carriages to gas cars a century ago. Challenges like software compatibility and aging hardware are solvable with the right focus—metrics like FTCSR, better testing, and industry collaboration will get us there. I predict that within the next decade, charging reliability will match or exceed what we expect from gas stations today, paving the way for EVs to become the norm rather than the exception.
