Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Heavy-duty truck electrification and the impacts of depot charging on electricity distribution systems


Major technological advancements and recent policy support are improving the outlook for heavy-duty truck electrification in the United States. In particular, short-haul operations (≤200 miles (≤322 km)) are prevalent and early candidates for plug-in electric vehicles (EVs) given their short, predictable routes and return-to-base applications, which allows vehicles to recharge when off shift at their depots. Although previous studies investigated the impacts of added electrical loads on distribution systems, which included light-duty EVs, the implications for heavy-duty EV charging are underexplored. Here we summarize the causes, costs and lead times of distribution system upgrades anticipated for depot charging. We also developed synthetic depot charging load profiles for heavy-duty trucks from real-world operating schedules, and found that charging requirements are met at common light-duty EV charging rates (≤100 kW per vehicle). Finally, we applied depot charging load profiles to 36 distribution real-world substations, which showed that most can accommodate high levels of heavy-duty EV charging without upgrades.

This is a preview of subscription content

Access options

Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.

Fig. 1: US truck stock and energy consumption disaggregated by primary operating range.
Fig. 2: Typical secondary electricity distribution system with depot charging.
Fig. 3: Daily fleet driving mileage and off-shift dwell distributions.
Fig. 4: Depiction of EV load profiles for the modelled charging strategies.
Fig. 5: Average daily depot load profiles for multiple scenarios.
Fig. 6: Peak depot charging load normalized per vehicle.
Fig. 7: Likelihood of substation upgrades required for peak day fleet depot charging.

Data availability

The fleet depot charging load profiles and EV load integration results generated in this study are available through the NREL Data Catalog at The vehicle drive cycles used in this study contain business-sensitive geographical information and thus are not publicly available; however, anonymized data summaries and visualizations are available through the Fleet DNA website at

Code availability

Derived fleet-charging availability schedules, daily vehicle mileage and energy requirements, and the code developed to produce, study and visualize fleet load profiles, are open source and available at


  1. Global EV Outlook 2020 (International Energy Agency, 2020);

  2. Muratori, M. et al. The rise of electric vehicles—2020 status and future expectations. Prog. Energy 3, 022002 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Transportation Sector Energy Use by Mode and Type (US Energy Information Administration, 2020);

  4. Brown, A. L., Fleming, K. L. & Safford, H. R. Prospects for a highly electric road transportation sector in the USA. Curr. Sustain./Renew. Energy Rep. 7, 84–93 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Williams, N. & Murray, D. An Analysis of the Operational Costs of Trucking: 2020 Update (American Transportation Research Institute, 2020);

  6. Thomas, J. Drive cycle powertrain efficiencies and trends derived from EPA vehicle dynamometer results. SAE Int. J. Passeng. Cars Mech. Syst. 7, 1374–1384 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Borlaug, B., Salisbury, S., Gerdes, M. & Muratori, M. Levelized cost of charging electric vehicles in the United States. Joule 4, 1470–1485 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Phadke, A., McCall, M. & Rajagopal, D. Reforming electricity rates to enable economically competitive electric trucking. Environ. Res. Lett. 14, 124047 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Moore, J. & Bullard, N. BNEF Executive Factbook: Power, Transport, Buildings and Industry, Commodities, Food and Agriculture, Capital (BloombergNEF, 2020).

  10. Çabukoglu, E., Georges, G., Küng, L., Pareschi, G. & Boulouchos, K. Battery electric propulsion: an option for heavy-duty vehicles? Results from a Swiss case-study. Transport. Res. C 88, 107–123 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Freight Transportation Energy Use (US Energy Information Administration, 2020);

  12. Zhang, H., Chen, W. & Huang, W. TIMES modelling of transport sector in China and USA: comparisons from a decarbonization perspective. Appl. Energy 162, 1505–1514 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Muratori, M. et al. Role of the freight sector in future climate change mitigation scenarios. Environ. Sci. Technol. 51, 3526–3533 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kaack, L. H., Vaishnav, P., Morgan, M. G., Azevedo, I. L. & Rai, S. Decarbonizing intraregional freight systems with a focus on modal shift. Environ. Res. Lett. 13, 083001 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Yeh, S. et al. Detailed assessment of global transport-energy models’ structures and projections. Transport. Res. D 55, 294–309 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Moultak, M., Lutsey, N. & Hall, D. Transitioning to Zero-Emission Heavy-Duty Freight Vehicles (International Council on Clean Transportation, 2017);

  17. Mareev, I., Becker, J. & Sauer, D. U. Battery dimensioning and life cycle costs analysis for a heavy-duty truck considering the requirements of long-haul transportation. Energies 11, 55 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Sripad, S. & Viswanathan, V. Performance metrics required of next-generation batteries to make a practical electric Semi truck. ACS Energy Lett. 2, 1669–1673 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Davis, S. C. & Boundy, R. G. Transportation Energy Data Book Edition 38.1 (Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 2020);

  20. Knopp, M. The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2019, Truck Size and Weight Provisions (US Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration, 2019);

  21. 2002 Vehicle Inventory and Use Survey (United States Census Bureau, 2004);

  22. Hooper, A. & Murray, D. E-Commerce Impacts on the Trucking Industry (American Transportation Research Institute, 2019);

  23. Young, S. & Caesar, K. California Takes Bold Step to Reduce Truck Pollution (California Air Resources Board, 2020);

  24. Multi-State Medium- and Heavy-Duty Zero Emission Vehicle Memorandum of Understanding (E&E News, 2019);

  25. Drive to Zero’s Zero-Emission Technology Inventory (ZETI) Tool Version 5.5 (CALSTART, 2020);

  26. Tesla Semi (Tesla, 2021);

  27. Nikola Tre (Nikola Motor Company, 2021);

  28. eCascadia (Freightliner Trucks, 2021);

  29. Kenworth Trucks—The World’s Best (Kenworth, 2020);

  30. Volvo Trucks North America Announces Launch of VNR Electric Model in United States, Canada (Volvo, 2020);

  31. Mercedes-Benz eActros: Heavy-Duty Electric Truck (Mercedes-Benz, 2021);

  32. O’Dea, J. Ready for Work: Now is the Time for Heavy-Duty Electric Vehicles (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2019);

  33. Earl, T. et al. Analysis of Long Haul Battery Electric Trucks in EU: Marketplace and Technology, Economic, Environmental, and Policy Perspectives (European Federation for Transport and Environment, 2018).

  34. Sen, B., Ercan, T. & Tatari, O. Does a battery-electric truck make a difference?—Life cycle emissions, costs, and externality analysis of alternative fuel-powered class 8 heavy-duty trucks in the United States. J. Clean. Prod. 141, 110–121 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Electric Trucks’ Contribution to Freight Decarbonisation (Transport & Environment, 2017);

  36. A. Phadke et al. Why Regional and Long-Haul Trucks are Primed for Electrification Now (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 2021).

  37. McCall, M. & Phadke, A. California Semi Truck Electrification: Preliminary Assessment of Infrastructure Needs and Cost–Benefit Analysis (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 2019).

  38. Jadun, P. et al. Electrification Futures Study: A Technical Evaluation of the Impacts of an Electrified US Energy System (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2017).

  39. Tryggestad, C. et al. New Reality: Electric Trucks and Their Implications on Energy Demand (McKinsey Energy Insights, 2017);

  40. US Electric Truck Sales Set to Increase Exponentially by 2025 (Wood Mackenzie, 2020);

  41. Truck Fleet and Operations (Federal Highway Administration, 1997);

  42. Electric Trucks: Where They Make Sense (North American Council for Freight Efficiency, 2018);

  43. Comparison of Medium- and Heavy-Duty Technologies in California (California Electric Transportation Coalition, 2019).

  44. Fleet DNA Project Data (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, accessed 2 March 2020);

  45. Hallmark, S. & Lamptey, S. Evaluation of Different Methods to Calculate Heavy-Truck VMT (Midwest Transportation Consortium, 2004).

  46. Usman, M. et al. A coordinated framework for optimized charging of EV fleet in smart grid. Procedia Comput. Sci. 94, 332–339 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Frendo, O. et al. Data-driven smart charging for heterogeneous electric vehicle fleets. Energy AI 1, 100007 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Summary Report on EVs at Scale and the US Electric Power System (US Drive, 2019).

  49. Nelder, C. & Rogers, E. Reducing EV Charging Infrastructure Costs (Rocky Mountain Institute, 2019);

  50. Analysis & Information Online—Motor Carrier Analysis and Information Reviews by Fleet Size (US Department of Transportation Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, 2021);

  51. MarketInsight: Registrations and Vehicles-in-Operation (IHS Markit, 2013);

  52. Saleh, F. et al. Impact of electric vehicles on distribution substations: a Swiss case study. Appl. Energy 137, 88–96 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Gonzalez, F., Petit, M. & Perez, Y. Impact of non-systematic electric vehicle charging behaviour on a distribution substation. 2019 IEEE PES Smart Grid Technologies Europe (IEEE, 2019);

  54. Dubey, A. & Santoso, S. Electric vehicle charging on residential distribution systems: impacts and mitigations. IEEE Access 3, 1871–1893 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Bohn, T. Multi-port, 1+ MW Charging System for Medium- and Heavy-Duty EVs: What We Know and What Is on the Horizon? (Argonne National Laboratory, 2020).

  56. CharIN e.V. Perspective on Standardization Developments (International Transport Forum, 2020);

  57. Lingeman, J. Musk now says 621 miles of range for Tesla Semi. Autoweek (25 November 2020);

  58. Stith, P. NIA–NASA Urban Air Electric Infrastructure Study (Black & Veatch, 2020).

  59. Infrastructure Needs Assessment for 5M Light-Duty Vehicles in California by 2030 (California Electric Transportation Coalition, 2020).

  60. Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s Unit Cost Guide (Pacific Gas & Electric, 2019);

  61. Southern California Edison Unit Cost Guide (Southern California Edison, 2019);

  62. Horowitz, K. 2019 Distribution System Upgrade Unit Cost Database Current Version (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2019);

  63. Francfort, J., Garetson, T., Karner, D., Salisbury, S. D. & Smart, J. G. Considerations for Corridor and Community DC Fast Charging Complex System Design (Idaho National Laboratory, 2017);

  64. Transmission Cost Estimation Guide (Midcontinent Independent System Operator, 2019);

  65. Nicholas, M. Estimating Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Costs Across Major US Metropolitan Areas (The International Council on Clean Transportation, 2019);

  66. Drouglazet, K. Tesla Semi: ce qu’il faut savoir sur le camion électrique semi-autonome de Tesla. L’Usine Digitale (17 November 2017);

  67. A Guide to Understanding Battery Specifications (MIT Electric Vehicle Team, 2008);

  68. Efron, B., Rogosa, D. & Tibshirani, R. in International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (eds Smelser, N. J. & Baltes, P. B.) 13216–13220 (Elsevier, 2004).

Download references


This work was authored in part by the NREL, operated by Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC, for the US Department of Energy (DOE) under Contract no. DE-AC36-08GO28308. Funding provided by the US Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Vehicle Technologies Office. The views expressed in the article do not necessarily represent the views of the DOE or the US Government. The US Government and the publisher, by accepting the article for publication, acknowledges that the US Government retains a non-exclusive, paid-up, irrevocable, worldwide license to publish or reproduce the published form of this work, or allow others to do so, for US Government purposes. We are grateful to DOE programme managers J. Ward and H. Croteau for their guidance and support. We also acknowledge E. Miller (NREL) and NREL’s FleetDNA team for assistance with accessing and analysing fleet operating data. A. Fowler and R. Shipman (Oncor) both contributed to the execution of the case study. Finally, A. Meintz (NREL), A. Birky (NREL), P. Bean (Tesla) and M. Neumann (Tesla) provided helpful comments and insights that improved the study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations



M.M. and B.B. conceptualized the study. M.M., B.B., M.G., D.W. and T.C. provided the methodology. B.B. and D.W. created the software and carried out the formal analysis and visualization. All the authors performed data curation and took part in consultation. The original draft was written by B.B., M.M., M.G. and D.W., with review and editing by B.B. and M.M. Funding acquisition was by M.M., who supervised the study.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matteo Muratori.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

D.W. and W.M. are employees of Oncor Electric Delivery Co. and T.C., A.I., H.G. and C.M. are employees of Southern Company. The other authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Peer review information Nature Energy thanks Heikki Liimatainen, Moataz Mohamed and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Notes 1–3, Figs. 1–8, Tables 1 and 2, and references.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Borlaug, B., Muratori, M., Gilleran, M. et al. Heavy-duty truck electrification and the impacts of depot charging on electricity distribution systems. Nat Energy 6, 673–682 (2021).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:

Further reading


Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing