The largest flexibility assets in the depot.
An eHGV pulls as much power as a small industrial site, and the connection, not the truck, is what decides how many you can run. TOGL exists to answer how many your depot will actually take, and to make the existing connection go further.
eHGV depot orchestration is in active development alongside a major truck OEM, a national fuel and energy retailer, and an infrastructure financier. In development
eHGV
£15,000–£34,000
modelled annual value, per vehicle per year
Modelled against unmanaged charging. Around 40% of the modelled value is charging cost savings available through smart charging today; the remainder depends on demand charge reduction (in development) and flexibility revenue (planned). Indicative ranges only, subject to TOGL modelling. Actual value depends on duty cycle, battery size, tariff structure, site constraints, charging windows, integration availability, and flexibility market access.
Why it matters
High-energy vehicles turn charging into a strategic energy problem.
eHGVs and buses use far more energy than passenger vehicles, often charge in concentrated depot windows, and can place significant demand on local grid infrastructure. That makes software-led charging control increasingly important.
Battery size comparison, to scale
Passenger EV
50–100 kWh
Manageable depot impact. Modest grid asset.
Electric bus
200–500 kWh
Depot turnaround windows constrain charging flexibility.
eHGV
300–600 kWh
The largest controllable battery in the depot, and the highest value flexibility asset.
The challenges
What makes heavy transport harder.
Depot peak demand
Grid connection delays
High charging power
Route readiness
Charging windows
Infrastructure cost
Operational risk
TOGL thesis
The control layer should follow the asset.
For heavy transport, charging control cannot be locked only to one charger or one site. The vehicle itself becomes the key asset to understand, schedule, and eventually connect into flexibility workflows.
Site-centric approaches
Optimise charging at a single depot. Lose the asset picture when vehicles rotate or operate elsewhere.
Vehicle-centric approach
Intelligence follows the asset. Scheduling, readiness, and flexibility logic travel with the vehicle across sites.
Roadmap
Where heavy transport fits in the TOGL roadmap.
Area
Status
Direction
Depot optimisation
H2 2026
Load management against the site capacity limit, built around vehicle readiness and charging windows.
eHGV support
H1 2027
Depot orchestration for heavy vehicles, in active development alongside a major truck OEM, a national fuel and energy retailer, and an infrastructure financier.
Grid connection assessment
H1 2027
Substation headroom and deferrable upgrade analysis. Matters most for heavy depots, where charging power per vehicle makes the connection the binding constraint.
Vehicle data access
Gated on OEM APIs
Dependent on heavy vehicle OEM API availability rather than on TOGL delivery, so deliberately undated.
Bus support
No committed date
High vehicle counts, tight turnaround windows, and fixed timetables as hard scheduling constraints.
Flexibility participation
H2 2027 at the earliest
Subject to asset eligibility, aggregator relationships, and market access.
What the status labels mean
- Live
- In production with customers or pilot users today.
- In development
- Actively being built, with a target window.
- Planned
- On the roadmap, dependency-gated, no committed date.
Potential value
High-energy vehicles are high-value flexibility assets.
Charging cost management
Peak demand reduction
Capacity planning
Operational readiness
Future flexibility participation
Business case modelling
£15,000–£34,000
eHGV, modelled annual value
£750k–£1.7m
50-truck eHGV depot, modelled annual value
Modelled against unmanaged charging. Around 40% of the modelled value is charging cost savings available through smart charging today; the remainder depends on demand charge reduction (in development) and flexibility revenue (planned). Indicative ranges only, subject to TOGL modelling. Actual value depends on duty cycle, battery size, tariff structure, site constraints, charging windows, integration availability, and flexibility market access.
Discuss the heavy transport roadmap.
The useful version of this conversation uses your duty cycles, charging windows and site connection capacity. Bring those and TOGL will walk through what the depot will actually take, and where eHGV support stands today.
Book a demoFAQ
Questions about electric HGVs
Why do electric HGVs matter more to a depot than electric vans?
An electric HGV carries the largest controllable battery in the depot, typically 300 to 600 kWh against 50 to 100 kWh for a passenger EV. That makes an eHGV both the biggest single load a depot has to plan around and its most valuable flexibility asset, because shifting one truck's charging moves as much energy as shifting several vans.
What is TOGL worth per electric HGV?
TOGL models £15,000–£34,000 per vehicle per year for an eHGV. Modelled against unmanaged charging. Around 40% of the modelled value is charging cost savings available through smart charging today; the remainder depends on demand charge reduction (in development) and flexibility revenue (planned). Indicative ranges only, subject to TOGL modelling. Actual value depends on duty cycle, battery size, tariff structure, site constraints, charging windows, integration availability, and flexibility market access.
Does TOGL support electric HGVs today?
Not yet. eHGV support is in active development for depot orchestration, and vehicle data access depends on manufacturers making an API available for those models. TOGL describes eHGV support as in development rather than live, and bus support as planned.
Can an eHGV depot run on its existing grid connection?
Sometimes, and it is the question that decides whether an eHGV depot is viable at all. Truck charging concentrates very large loads into short windows, so whether a site fits behind its existing connection depends on the depot peak rather than on total energy. TOGL is developing grid connection intelligence to answer that per site, using substation headroom, operator licence data and spatial analysis.