Project Spotlight · No. 02
A Logistics Depot Electrifying Ninety Vehicles
Where the constraint was not chargers but the service entrance and the dwell window
This project is illustrative. It is not a real project and no owner, operator, or site is identified. It is published to show how the variables interact.
GRIDSTROM did not participate in this project. Analysis is independent commentary.
The Intelligent Infrastructure Review · August 1, 2026 · 8 min read
Project overview
A regional logistics operator converts a leased distribution depot to a mixed electric fleet over three years. Ninety vehicles run two shifts with a narrow overnight dwell window. The naive design — one charger per vehicle at full rated power — implied a service upgrade several times the depot's existing capacity and a utility timeline longer than the vehicle delivery schedule. The delivered design used managed charging, a smaller service increase, and storage to cover the overnight peak.
- Asset type
- Leased distribution depot
- Fleet
- 90 vehicles, mixed duty, phased over three years
- Dwell window
- Approximately seven hours overnight
- Site tenure
- Leasehold, with landlord consent required
- Nature
- Illustrative composite
Business and infrastructure challenge
The vehicles arrive faster than the electrical service can grow
Vehicle procurement was already committed on a delivery schedule. Unmanaged charging at full rated power would have required a service upgrade the utility could not deliver within that window, and a capital cost that broke the operating case. The problem was not whether the depot could charge vehicles; it was how much power it needed at any single moment.
- Committed vehicle delivery dates ahead of any service upgrade
- Demand charges driven by a single overnight coincident peak
- Leasehold tenure shorter than the useful life of the infrastructure
- Route schedules that cannot flex to accommodate charging
Project map
Who holds what on this project
Project map
Direction · Delivery · Enablement · Outcome
01Direction
Sets the requirement and controls whether the project can proceed
Owner
Property landlord
Consent, permanent works, end-of-term treatment.
Developer
Charging infrastructure developer
Funds, owns, and operates the charging assets.
Utility
Distribution utility
Service upgrade, metering, fleet tariff.
02Delivery
Converts the requirement into a built, commissioned system
EPC
Installation contractor under a single scope
Civil, electrical, and commissioning as one accountable package.
Engineers
Electrical engineering firm
Load study, service design, protection.
Contractors
Civil and electrical trades
Trenching, conduit, switchgear, charger set.
03Enablement
Supplies the equipment, the capital, and the public authority
Technology providers
Charger, storage, and charge-management vendors
Software layer carries the load ceiling.
Capital providers
Developer equity, equipment lease, make-ready and incentive programs
Operator pays a service fee, not capital.
Public stakeholders
Municipal permitting and air-quality programs
Permits and incentive administration.
04Outcome
What the surrounding area actually receives
Community outcomes
Surrounding neighborhoods
Lower local emissions, off-peak charging, new technician roles.
Stakeholders
Each party and what it controls
Owner
Property landlord
Consents to permanent electrical works and defines end-of-lease treatment.
Operator
Logistics company
Runs the fleet, owns the operating requirement and the routes.
Developer
Charging infrastructure developer
Designs, funds, and operates the charging assets under an agreement with the operator.
Utility
Local distribution utility
Service upgrade, metering configuration, applicable fleet tariff.
Engineers
Electrical engineering firm
Load study, service design, protection coordination.
Contractors
Electrical and civil contractors
Trenching, conduit, switchgear, charger installation.
Technology providers
Charger, storage, and software vendors
Hardware plus the charge-management layer that enforces the load ceiling.
Capital
Infrastructure lessor and incentive programs
Funds equipment against a multi-year service agreement.
Energy and infrastructure requirements
Stated as obligations, not preferences
- Unmanaged peak
- Well beyond existing service
- The figure that made a naive design uneconomic.
- Managed peak
- A fraction of the unmanaged figure
- Achieved by sequencing charging across the dwell window.
- Service upgrade
- One moderate increase, once
- Sized for the full 90-vehicle build, not per phase.
- Storage
- Sized to the overnight peak shoulder
- Reduces demand charges and covers late-return vehicles.
- Charger mix
- Mostly lower-power, few high-power
- High-power units reserved for exception recovery, not routine charging.
- Redundancy
- N+1 on charging capacity, not per vehicle
- Route continuity, not device availability, is the operating requirement.
Delivery model
Charging-as-a-service with landlord consent and an operator service-level agreement
The infrastructure developer funded and owns the charging assets and contracts to deliver a defined level of service — vehicles ready by a specified time, not chargers online. That structure keeps the equipment off the operator's balance sheet, matches the term to the lease with defined end-of-term treatment, and puts performance risk on the party that designed the system.
- Step 01
Route and duty analysis
Telematics reviewed to establish real dwell windows and energy per vehicle per night.
- Step 02
Load modeling
Managed versus unmanaged peak compared, establishing the service upgrade actually required.
- Step 03
Landlord and utility agreements
Consent, end-of-term treatment, service application, and tariff selection in parallel.
- Step 04
Civil-first build
Trenching and conduit sized for the full build during phase one, when the yard can be disrupted once.
- Step 05
Phased energization
Chargers added as vehicles arrive, with the management layer enforcing the ceiling throughout.
- Step 06
Operations
Monthly review of peak, missed-readiness events, and exception charging.
Technology and systems architecture
Layer by layer, and how they interact
- 01
Service and switchgear
One upgrade sized for full build, with distribution designed for incremental charger addition.
- 02
Charge management
The controlling layer: enforces a site load ceiling, sequences vehicles by departure time and state of charge, and reports readiness.
- 03
Battery storage
Shaves the coincident peak and absorbs late-return vehicles without raising the site ceiling.
- 04
Chargers
Predominantly lower-power units matched to the dwell window; a small number of high-power units for recovery cases.
- 05
Telematics integration
Departure schedules and state of charge feed the management layer so sequencing reflects operations rather than plug order.
- 06
Metering and settlement
Sub-metering supports tariff verification, service-level measurement, and incentive reporting.
Capital structure
Where it comes from, and what each source does
Disclosure
Illustrative structure. Incentive availability varies by jurisdiction and program year; none is represented as committed.
Infrastructure developer equity
Funds chargers, storage, and installation under the service agreement.
Equipment lease
Matches asset life and lease term for depot-side hardware.
Utility make-ready program
Where offered, covers utility-side and sometimes customer-side infrastructure.
Public incentive programs
Vehicle and infrastructure incentives, applied for on a stated schedule.
Operator operating budget
Pays a service fee rather than a capital cost.
Community considerations
What the surrounding area experiences
Local air quality
Depot and route emissions decline in the immediate area, which is often the strongest public argument for the project.
Peak-hour discipline
Charging is deliberately shifted away from system peak, so the depot does not add to the hours when the network is most stressed.
Noise and traffic
Yard circulation changes with charging positions; neighboring streets are affected by queueing more than by the vehicles themselves.
Workforce
Technicians require new high-voltage qualifications — a training obligation that belongs in the project scope, not after it.
Risks and constraints
What can go wrong, and who holds it
- Vehicle deliveries arrive earlier or later than planned
- ResponseCivil works sized for full build up front; charger additions are modular.
- Real dwell windows shorter than assumed
- ResponseSequencing model rebuilt on telematics data, with storage covering exceptions.
- Lease ends before asset life
- ResponseEnd-of-term treatment — removal, transfer, or purchase — agreed with the landlord before installation.
- Demand charges exceed the model
- ResponseSite ceiling enforced in software; storage dispatch tuned monthly against the tariff.
- Incentive program closes or changes
- ResponseCase must stand without incentives; incentive value treated as upside, not the basis.
- Management layer fails
- ResponseHardware-level fallback limits protect the service entrance independent of software.
Lessons for future projects
What transfers to the next site
- 01
Fleet charging is a load-shaping problem before it is a hardware problem.
- 02
Do the civil works once, sized for the final fleet — the second trench costs more than the first.
- 03
Contract for vehicle readiness, not charger uptime; that is what the operation actually needs.
- 04
Telematics data beats assumed dwell windows and usually changes the design.
- 05
End-of-term treatment on leased sites should be settled before anything is installed.
GRIDSTROM perspective
Design to the departure schedule, not the nameplate
Most depot electrification cases that fail on cost were sized against simultaneous full-power charging, a condition the operation never actually requires. Working from real departure times and energy per vehicle usually produces a materially smaller service requirement — and a shorter utility timeline as a result.
GRIDSTROM did not participate in this project. Analysis is independent commentary.
- Establish the load ceiling first, then select hardware to fit inside it.
- Treat storage as a demand-charge and exception-handling asset, not as backup.
- Keep a hardware-level protection limit independent of the software layer.
- Align contract structure with who controls the risk: routes with the operator, performance with the developer.
Structure your project with GRIDSTROM
GRIDSTROM engineers and delivers integrated energy systems for data centers, AI and robotics facilities, fleets, commercial portfolios, and public infrastructure. Bring a site, a load, or a structure you are working through.
Follow Project Spotlight
Each spotlight is sent as it publishes — one project, fully structured.