Motorway companies were singled out this summer because they allegedly receive generous commissions when recharging on their network. Some are contesting this.
If you took your electric car on holiday this summer, you will have noticed that it was always easy to stop at a motorway service area to recharge without waiting. The network has developed well.
It must be said that motorway companies had no choice. A law required them to have terminals at all service areas, those where there was already a conventional station, from 2023. But did they take advantage of this obligation to create a lucrative business?
While the companies that own the expressways are constantly accused of lining their pockets with tolls, sources of profits that are said to be much higher than normal, they were criticized this summer regarding recharging. This would be their “new jackpot”, to quote the headline in Le Parisien, which broke the story after studying a report from the Transport Regulatory Authority on the subject.
APRR steps up
According to the report, motorway companies receive very generous commissions on each recharge: “More than 18% of the price of the recharge is paid to the motorway concession company in exchange for the right, for the contract holder, to operate its installation on the motorway property”. If this is seen as a new windfall, it is because for other goods sold on the rest area, the commission is around 4%.
Enough to make you cough, especially since it was the law that imposed the installation of charging stations and that this would have delivered on a plate to motorway companies a new way to line their pockets. But some are contesting it. In a press release published this week and entitled “update on the issue of electric charging on motorways”, the company APRR, present in the area between Paris, Lyon and Mulhouse, underlines that the level of charge at its place is 5%, a far cry from the 18%.
APRR explains that the charge “remunerates the exercise of a commercial activity on public land. It applies without exception to all contracts and all commercial activities carried out on motorways. It is composed of a fixed part (a rent in compensation for the maintenance of the land made available) and a variable part linked to the economic performance of the activities delegated to the sub-concessionaires”.
A flaw in calls for tenders?
However, to install terminals, motorway companies have launched calls for tenders. Some have been attracted by operators' proposals including the payment of generous commissions, with the ART report highlighting this flaw in the call for tenders procedure.
The motorist would therefore be the loser. The report was an opportunity to highlight the high cost of recharging on motorways. But the companies point out that they do not decide the price of the kWh, it is the operators. If they pay a more generous commission, they would rather be the losers by cutting into their margins. It should also be noted that with the same operator, the prices are most often the same whether you are on the motorway or not. For example, at Fastned, which has started to offer stations outside the concession network, the kWh still costs €0.59 excluding subscription.
A rate linked to the speed of charging, an important aspect put forward to make the pill of high prices on the highway, where there are mostly fast, even ultra-fast charging stations, go down. But if some operators are ready to pay handsome royalties to have a market, this will not encourage lowering the price of charging.
No comments