India’s commercial electric vehicle (EV) ecosystem is entering a decisive phase, where scaling adoption is becoming as much about financial innovation and operational intelligence as it is about technology. While electrification has gained strong momentum across two- and three-wheelers, the transition in heavy commercial vehicles—buses and trucks—remains complex, capital-intensive, and infrastructure-dependent. Addressing these challenges requires new business models that reduce risk, unlock capital, and enable fleet operators to adopt EVs at scale without being constrained by ownership burdens.
Drivn, a full-stack electric mobility platform focused on large commercial vehicles, is positioning itself at the centre of this transformation. Operating as a technology-first, asset-owning platform, Drivn purchases, owns, and leases electric buses and trucks under long-term contracts, enabling fleet operators to transition to electric mobility without significant upfront investment. Backed by an initial US$80 million investment commitment from Nomura and supported by strategic partnerships across the ecosystem, the company is now executing Phase 1 of its plan to deploy 1,000 EV buses and trucks across India’s industrial corridors.
In this exclusive conversation with Autoguide, Ms. Alpna Jain, Co-Founder and Chief Business Officer of Drivn, shares insights on the evolving economics of commercial EV adoption, the risks associated with direct ownership, the role of leasing and digital platforms, and the policy and infrastructure shifts required to accelerate electrification in India’s freight and intercity mobility sectors.
The “Ownership Trap” – Rethinking Commercial EV Economics
You’ve described direct ownership of electric trucks as a financial blunder. Could you elaborate on what you call the “Ownership Trap”?
Buying an electric truck outright appears rational, until lifecycle economics are fully considered. The upfront cost is significantly higher than diesel, and that capital remains locked in over long periods.
Battery performance adds another layer of complexity, with degradation influencing both range and long-term value. Resale is where uncertainty becomes more pronounced. Diesel trucks benefit from established benchmarks, whereas electric trucks do not yet have standardised resale frameworks, with value closely linked to battery condition.
This is the ownership trap. It concentrates capital, performance, and technology risk with the operator. Leasing offers a more flexible model, reducing exposure while allowing fleets to adapt as the ecosystem evolves.
How do capital expenditure, battery depreciation, utilization risk, and residual value uncertainty impact fleet operators?
EV economics for fleet operators are shaped by four closely linked risks. Capital expenditure is the first constraint. We are increasingly seeing long term EV trucking contracts typically in the range of $ 10–15 million, Achieving commercial closure often requires fleet operators to commit significant capital, that can create a heavy burden on their balance sheets, constraining the ability to scale efficiently.
Battery depreciation adds another layer, as performance over time directly affects both range and asset value, yet remains difficult to forecast with consistency. Utilisation is where execution risk becomes visible. Freight models depend on high daily run time, but charging cycles, infrastructure gaps, and downtime can impact productivity.
Residual value remains an area of uncertainty. Unlike diesel, there is no widely established resale benchmark yet, and valuation depends heavily on battery condition. Together, these factors make EV adoption as much a financial decision as an operational one.
In what ways does Drivn’s asset-owning and leasing model de-risk adoption for large commercial fleets?
At the core, Drivn’s leasing solution is designed to reduce the complexities and risks associated with EV adoption for fleet operators. Instead of requiring operators to invest heavily upfront, Drivn purchases and owns the electric trucks and buses and provides them through long-term operating leases. This allows operators to adopt EVs without taking on the large capital burden of buying the vehicles themselves. These upfront commitments create a heavy burden on the balance sheets, constraining both leverage capacity and the ability to scale efficiently. This is where our solution becomes critical. Our leasing solutions help growing fleet operators optimize their weighted average cost of capital (WACC) while freeing up balance sheet capacity to support scalable growth.The leases are typically structured over longer periods, around 7-8 years, which better aligns with the operating life, underlying use cases and economics of electric commercial vehicles.
The leasing is built on highly evolved tech analytics and insights on fleet monitoring, route planning, and real time asset data to enable more efficient deployment.
By combining asset ownership, structured financing, and operational support, the platform helps distribute financial and operational risks more evenly across the ecosystem rather than concentrating them with the operator.
Are traditional fleet financing models ill-suited for electric commercial vehicles?
In my view, traditional fleet financing models evolved around the economics of diesel vehicles where depreciation curves, maintenance costs, and resale values follow patterns, the industry has understood for decades.
Electric commercial vehicles do not fit naturally into that framework, as yet. A significant share of value sits in the battery, and its performance is influenced by usage patterns, charging behaviour, and operating conditions. These are dynamic variables that conventional lending structures were not designed to evaluate.
Add to that the dependence on charging infrastructure and ongoing technology evolution, and long-term residual value becomes harder to estimate with confidence.
Financing models will need to evolve accordingly. Leasing, usage-linked structures, and approaches that account for battery performance are better aligned with the underlying economics. The shift is underway, but not yet complete.
The Passenger Car Mirage – Policy Priorities Under FAME II
Do you believe that initiatives like FAME II have disproportionately focused on passenger vehicles over commercial electrification?
Honestly, the criticism is somewhat unfair. FAME II largely followed what was commercially viable at the time. Two- and three-wheelers had lower costs, simpler infrastructure needs, and scaled quickly. That was a pragmatic choice, not a bias.
The real gap is in freight. Heavy commercial vehicles carry a significant share of emissions, much of which sits outside the immediate visibility of urban air quality discussions.
At the same time, adoption of electric heavy commercial vehicles is as much about sound commercial economics as it is about decarbonization. Lower operating and logistics costs—whether for fleet operators or end industries—translate directly into tangible savings that ultimately benefit the end consumer.
As the ecosystem matures, the next phase of policy support needs to shift more deliberately towards freight. Electrifying this segment is more complex, but also far more impactful. There is broad alignment within the industry that this is where the next wave of focus needs to be.
From a carbon abatement perspective, should medium and heavy commercial vehicles receive greater policy emphasis?
Medium and heavy commercial vehicles account for a fraction of registered vehicles nationally, yet their contribution to total transport emissions is deeply outsized. That imbalance alone justifies placing this segment at the centre of any serious decarbonisation agenda. Electrifying freight is not straightforward. Payload requirements, long-haul operations, and limited corridor charging infrastructure create real constraints. These are precisely the areas where policy support becomes important, as market forces alone may not address them at the required pace.
Focusing only on more accessible segments will limit the overall impact of electrification. Freight needs to be a core part of the transition from both an emissions and system-efficiency standpoint.
How could policy recalibration accelerate electrification across industrial corridors and freight movement?
The starting point is economics. For many fleet operators today, the business case is still evolving and not consistently compelling across use cases. Targeted incentives for electric trucks can help bridge that gap, especially when combined with reliable, high-capacity charging infrastructure across key industrial corridors. Access to appropriate financing also plays a critical role, as capital availability often determines the pace of adoption.
Execution frictions matter more than they appear. Procurement and permitting processes can be slow and fragmented, delaying decisions on the ground. Simplifying these can unlock faster adoption. Grid readiness is equally important. Time-of-use tariffs and depot-level infrastructure can make charging more viable in line with logistics operations.
Finally, alignment across states will be critical. Without policy consistency, scaling beyond isolated deployments becomes difficult.
Infrastructure Strategy – Why Many EV Plans May Fail
A large number of EV infrastructure announcements have been made in recent years. Where do you see the biggest strategic gaps?
The PM e-Drive initiative’s push towards expanding charging infrastructure and developing dedicated electric priority corridors is a positive and encouraging step for the sector. While EV infrastructure announcements have been encouraging and rollouts have begun, on-ground coverage across key industrial corridors and Tier-2 markets—where most commercial demand sits—remains a work in progress. The current push has been largely focused on charger installation; however, infrastructure is far more than just hardware. Critical elements such as uptime reliability, preventive maintenance, grid stability, and a responsive service ecosystem are equally important—and these layers are still evolving.
Is public charging infrastructure enough for heavy commercial EV adoption, or is a corridor-based, contract-linked model more viable?
Public charging infrastructure, in its current form, is not optimised for heavy commercial operations. Fleet operators require predictable availability, consistent pricing, and charging speeds aligned with operational schedules.
A corridor-based, captive model is better suited to these requirements. Dedicated charging along key freight routes, combined with capacity agreements between operators and infrastructure providers, introduces reliability and cost visibility.
This approach aligns more closely with how commercial transport networks function, where predictability and utilisation drive economics. Adapting that model to electric mobility could support more scalable adoption.
How important is integrated planning between OEMs, fleet operators, DISCOMs, and financiers?
Integrated planning is foundational in this segment. Heavy commercial EV adoption does not move unless every part of the chain is aligned.
In practice, that means OEMs taking long-term responsibility for performance, financiers structuring capital around contracted usage rather than just the asset, and fleet operators committing to routes where utilisation is predictable. When these elements come together early, the economics start to work without subsidy dependence.
Power infrastructure planning also needs to be integrated early. Grid readiness across freight corridors is still evolving, and aligning power availability with vehicle deployment will be important for scale. The deployments that are progressing effectively tend to have one thing in common: early coordination across stakeholders.
Highway Management – Will Software Platforms Own India’s Highways?
You’ve suggested that software platforms will effectively “own” India’s highways. What does that mean in operational terms?
When we talk about software platforms “owning” highways, we are not referring to physical roads, we are talking about control over how freight actually moves across them. In practice, software will increasingly coordinate route planning, charging stops, fleet utilisation, and freight matching on a single digital layer.
For electric commercial vehicles, this becomes even more significant. Platforms will help fleets plan trips around charging availability, manage energy consumption, and tighten turnaround times. They bring together freight demand, vehicle availability, and infrastructure constraints in a way that simply was not possible before.
Over time, the companies running these digital networks, connecting fleets, cargo owners, charging infrastructure, and payments will effectively shape how highway logistics functions. The road stays public. But the operational intelligence that moves goods across it will belong to whoever builds and controls these platforms.
How will data, telematics, route optimization, predictive maintenance, and energy management reshape freight economics?
The shift is already visible on the ground. Telematics and real-time data have given operators visibility into vehicle location, driver behaviour, and energy consumption: things that directly shape costs and efficiency decisions daily. Route optimisation cuts unnecessary mileage. Predictive maintenance catches problems before they become expensive breakdowns. For an industry running on tight margins, both matter enormously.
As fleets electrify, energy management becomes the next frontier, aligning charging schedules with freight movement and battery usage intelligently. Freight is steadily moving from intuition-led decisions to data-driven operations. Those who adopt this shift early will see a structural advantage in cost, reliability, and scale.
Do you see digital platforms becoming more valuable than the physical vehicles themselves?
At its core, commercial mobility will always remain anchored in the underlying physical assets. Trucks and buses are what move goods and people—they are the foundation on which the entire ecosystem is built, and their quality, reliability, and lifecycle performance will continue to determine the baseline economics of the sector. Capital will still flow into well-structured, well-maintained assets, and asset ownership—especially in capital-intensive segments like heavy commercial vehicles—will remain central to value creation.
That said, the layer of data, intelligence, and digital platforms sitting on top of these assets is becoming increasingly powerful. Telematics, route analytics, driver behaviour monitoring, battery health tracking, and predictive maintenance are fundamentally reshaping how fleets are operated and financed. Over time, this intelligence layer will drive better asset utilisation, lower downtime, improved residual value visibility, and sharper credit underwriting. In many ways, while the asset is the foundation, it is the data layer that will increasingly determine how efficiently that asset performs—and therefore, how much value it ultimately creates.
The 23% Performance Gap – Ownership vs Managed Fleets
You’ve indicated that owning an electric commercial vehicle can lead to a 23% performance gap. Could you explain the variables contributing to this gap?
When we refer to a “performance gap,” we’re essentially talking about the difference in financial and operational outcomes between owning an electric commercial vehicle versus accessing it through a leasing model. While the total cost of ownership (TCO) advantage of EVs over ICE vehicles is now well established—especially in predictable, high-utilisation use cases like intercity buses—the way that asset is financed and managed makes a material difference to realised performance.
In an ownership model, debt financing is typically tenure-constrained, with high EMIs consuming a significant portion of operating cash flows and limiting an operator’s borrowing headroom for growth. It also leaves operators exposed to residual risks such as battery degradation and end-of-life value. Leasing structures, particularly long-term operating leases, are designed to address these constraints—aligning repayment tenures with asset life, embedding OEM-backed maintenance and uptime guarantees, and tailoring structures to underlying route cash flows. This creates greater predictability in operations, cash flows, and asset performance over an 8–10 year horizon. It is this combination of financial flexibility, risk allocation, and operational visibility that drives the observed performance gap in favour of leasing.
Does centralized fleet management significantly improve uptime, utilization, and battery health?
Managing a fleet from one central system makes a genuine difference on the ground. With a unified system, operators gain real-time visibility into vehicle performance, allowing issues to be identified and addressed before they lead to downtime. This directly improves uptime and keeps vehicles on the road where they generate value. It also enables better decisions on routing and deployment, which supports higher utilisation across the fleet.
Battery health benefits as well. Monitoring charging patterns, depth of discharge, and usage cycles helps avoid premature degradation and extends the effective life of the asset. In a business where margins depend on consistency and efficiency, this level of control is not incremental, it is foundational.
How critical is technology integration in narrowing operational inefficiencies?
Technology integration is central to addressing the operational inefficiencies that EV fleet operators deal with daily.. Electric trucks and buses require continuous monitoring of factors such as battery performance, route efficiency, charging patterns, and vehicle utilisation.
By integrating data platforms, real-time tracking systems, and AI-driven analytics, operators can optimise fleet deployment and maintenance decisions. This becomes particularly important for smaller fleet operators who may not have the capability to build such systems independently.
At scale, efficiency is no longer driven by individual assets, but by how well the entire system is connected and managed.
Aligning with India’s SDG and National EV Agenda
How is Drivn contributing toward India’s commitments under SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy) and SDG 13 (Climate Action)?
Drivn’s model—focused on enabling adoption of electric commercial vehicles through leasing—is directly aligned with both SDG 7 and SDG 13, because it addresses one of the biggest bottlenecks in the transition: access.
From an SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy) lens, the shift from diesel to electric mobility fundamentally moves transport energy demand from fossil fuels to electricity, which can increasingly be sourced from renewables. EVs are significantly more energy-efficient and reduce dependence on oil-based fuels . However, the high upfront cost of electric buses and trucks often limits adoption. By removing this capital barrier through leasing, Drivn effectively democratizes access to clean energy-powered mobility—allowing operators to benefit from lower operating costs and cleaner energy without owning the asset.
On SDG 13 (Climate Action), the contribution is even more direct. Road transport is a major source of emissions in India, and electrification is central to decarbonizing this sector . EV adoption reduces greenhouse gas emissions and supports climate mitigation goals by replacing fossil fuel-based transport . Drivn accelerates this transition by scaling deployment in high-impact segments like buses and freight—where emissions intensity is highest. By structuring long-term leases, aggregating demand, and enabling faster fleet turnover from ICE to electric, the platform helps translate climate intent into on-ground emission reduction at scale.
Put simply, while the vehicle is the unit of change, Drivn’s role is catalytic—it lowers adoption friction, scales clean mobility, and converts climate ambition into commercially viable, real-world deployment.
How does your business model complement national programs such as FAME II and PM-eBus Sewa?
Ans-Drivn’s model complements national programs such as FAME II and PM-eBus Sewa by addressing the operational and financing challenges associated with scaling electric mobility in heavy transport especially focussing on private fleets that have remained outside of ambit of these programs. By acquiring and leasing electric buses and trucks while integrating fleet operations, charging infrastructure planning, and data-led performance management, the platform helps translate policy incentives into real-world deployment.
This approach also supports emissions reduction across sectors like logistics, cement, and steel while contributing to India’s broader goal of increasing EV adoption and enabling zero-emission commercial transport.
What policy or regulatory support would most accelerate the transition of heavy commercial vehicles to electric?
Accelerating heavy EV adoption will require three focused levers. First, dedicated charging infrastructure—high-capacity, corridor-based and depot charging for trucks and buses—supported by faster approvals and grid readiness. Second, strong demand-side incentives, including policy nudges for large corporates and logistics players to transition their fleets, creating anchor demand. Finally, while several states offer early adopter subsidies, greater pan-India consistency is critical. A harmonised policy framework will reduce regulatory arbitrage and enable scale, especially when combined with models like leasing that lower adoption barriers.
Scope-3 Emissions – Decarbonizing Core Industries
Heavy industries like logistics, cement, and steel are under pressure to reduce Scope-3 emissions. How can electrified freight become a strategic lever for them?
Electrified freight can become a meaningful lever for industries looking to reduce Scope-3 emissions. Logistics is a significant contributor to indirect emissions, and shifting even part of that movement to electric can have a measurable impact.
The challenge has been execution, balancing cost, reliability, and infrastructure readiness. Models that combine financing, fleet access, and operational visibility make it easier for companies to begin that transition without large upfront commitments.
As reporting standards tighten and procurement frameworks evolve, electrified freight is likely to move from a sustainability initiative to a more embedded operational decision.
Are you seeing ESG-linked procurement influencing fleet decisions?
The shift has been very visible over the last couple of years. Large corporates are no longer evaluating logistics purely on cost and reliability. Emissions are now part of the decision framework, especially for companies with clear Scope-3 commitments. Logistics partners are being assessed on their ability to deliver lower-carbon movement, not just efficient movement.
This is beginning to influence fleet decisions in a meaningful way. Operators are recognising that electrification is not just a cost or technology choice, but a commercial one. The ability to offer cleaner transport is becoming a qualifier for certain contracts.
What started as a reporting requirement is moving into core procurement criteria. As that trend deepens, operators who transition early are likely to secure stronger, longer-term relationships with large enterprise clients.
Could asset-backed EV platforms become a measurable decarbonization tool for corporations?
Asset-backed EV platforms address one of the biggest barriers to fleet electrification, the burden of ownership. By removing the need for upfront capital investment, they allow corporations to move from intent to execution. Electrified freight becomes an operating decision rather than a long-term capital commitment.
What strengthens this model is the visibility it provides. With telematics embedded into the assets, companies can track utilisation, energy consumption, and emission reductions in a structured way. This makes reporting more credible and aligned with procurement and investor expectations.
At that point, the platform moves beyond financing. It becomes a measurable decarbonisation tool, one that allows corporations to link operational decisions directly to emissions outcomes with a higher degree of confidence.
Looking Ahead
With large-scale deployment across India’s industrial corridors underway, what does the next five years look like for electric heavy vehicles?
The next five years are likely to be an important phase for electric heavy vehicles in India. What we are seeing today, early deployments, corridor pilots, and evolving policy frameworks, is laying the groundwork for broader adoption.
Growth will likely be led by high-density freight corridors, where utilisation is predictable and infrastructure can be aligned with demand.
What is changing is the nature of the conversation. Operators are increasingly evaluating when and where EVs make sense, rather than whether they do at all. That shift in mindset suggests steady, though measured, progress ahead.
What structural shift do you believe will define India’s commercial EV ecosystem?
The defining shift will be the transition from adoption that depends on incentives toward demand that sustains itself commercially. Right now, a lot of what is happening is policy-driven. That is fine as a starting point, but it is not a foundation.
Fleet-first deployment in logistics and shared mobility builds real volume. Domestic battery manufacturing brings costs down organically. Financing structures like leasing open the market to operators who cannot write large cheques upfront. And a functioning secondary market removes the resale anxiety that still holds many buyers back.
When those pieces come together, India’s commercial EV ecosystem stops needing policy to survive. That is the shift I am watching for.
