EV chargers targeted by "copper thieves" - Lessons Japan should learn from Australia's experience

EV Chargers Become the "New Urban Mines"

A fast charger installed in a parking lot at night. The next morning, a driver visiting with an EV saw that the thick charging cable, which should always be there, had been cut from the base.

The charger itself remains there. The charging spot is displayed on the app. However, without a cable to connect to the car, it cannot receive electricity. Overnight, the charger turns into nothing more than an expensive box.

In Australia, theft targeting copper wires used in public EV chargers is troubling charging operators and municipalities. Copper theft is not a new crime. Equipment containing a lot of copper, such as railway signal equipment, communication cables, construction sites, solar power plants, and road lighting, has long been targeted.

However, as the number of fast chargers increases in cities and along highways with the spread of EVs, criminals have turned their attention to new infrastructure. Especially in high-output fast chargers, thick and heavy cables are used to safely handle large currents. It's easy to see from the outside that "there's metal inside," and there are many places where one can approach 24/7.

The Brisbane Times reported that with the rise in scrap metal prices, copper thieves are increasing, and their targets are expanding to public EV chargers. According to the article, in Victoria, southeastern Australia, the number of scrap metal thefts containing copper increased from 998 cases in 2016 to 2,592 cases in 2025.

This is not a simple case of individuals opposing EVs sabotaging the charging network. In many incidents, the direct purpose is believed to be extracting the copper inside the cables and converting it into cash as scrap.

In other words, EV chargers are targeted not only as a "backlash against environmental policies" but also as a result of long-standing metal theft shifting to new equipment.

The Incident of 17 Seized Charging Plugs

An arrest in New South Wales highlighted that the damage is not mere speculation.

In July 2026, local police arrested a 29-year-old man on suspicion of damaging multiple EV charging facilities around the Central Coast and Newcastle area and stealing copper cables.

According to reports, the police seized 17 EV charging plugs, a large amount of stripped cables, and cutting tools during a search. The defendant was charged with 26 offenses related to incidents that occurred from June 12 to 30 in Gosford, Erina, Tuggerah, Newcastle, Hamilton, Swansea, and Raymond Terrace.

In court, the prosecution argued that a distinctive vehicle was spotted near multiple sites, and cables were removed and taken away in a similar manner. The defendant denied involvement, but bail was not granted.

Of course, the charges should be determined in court. However, this incident demonstrated that public charger cables could be repeatedly targeted in multiple regions over a short period, not just as isolated pranks.

Disproportionate Gains for Criminals and Losses for Society

The most notable feature of EV charging cable theft is the extreme disparity between the profit criminals gain and the damage society incurs.

While cables do contain copper, it takes time to strip the insulation and extract the metal. If stolen goods are brought directly to legitimate scrap dealers, the unnatural shape and quantity might raise suspicions.

In similar incidents in the U.S., the Associated Press reported that criminals might earn an estimated $15 to $20 per cable, according to police estimates. Meanwhile, the cost for a municipality to replace a single cable could reach about $1,000.

Although the amounts vary by country, charger type, and construction conditions, the structure of "low value as stolen goods but exorbitantly high recovery costs" is common.

The losses are not just in parts costs. It requires dispatching specialized technicians, ensuring site safety, transporting replacement parts, configuring communications, and conducting operational tests. High-output chargers are not simple machines like household outlets.

According to information gathered by the international charging standards organization CharIN from industry stakeholders, cable replacement after theft can take 1 to 7 days, and some operators experience hundreds of incidents annually.

If parts are in short supply or damage extends to the interior of the charger, the downtime could be even longer. During this time, operators cannot collect charging fees, and commercial facilities hosting the chargers lose customer visits.

And the biggest victims are the users who drove to the site.

In areas where a gas station can be found a few kilometers away, fast chargers are limited. Especially in rural areas or during long-distance travel, if a charger is unusable with low battery, drivers face significant anxiety.

The "number of chargers on the map" and the "number actually usable" are not the same. Cable theft drastically widens this gap.

Harsh Scrutiny on Scrap Dealers on Social Media

In a Reddit community of Australian EV users, posts about charger thefts received diverse reactions.

Notable were opinions seeking accountability not only from the criminals but also from the distribution channels that allow stolen goods to be converted into cash.

Voices were raised suggesting, "We should crack down on dealers who buy copper without proof of origin" and "If receipts and identification are required from those bringing in large amounts of cable, it won't be easy to sell."

Metal theft cannot occur with just the thief. It is repeated because there are places where it can be converted into cash. No matter how sturdy the cable is made, as long as there are buyers for stolen goods, criminals may try different tools or methods.

On the other hand, there were posts appreciating the identification technology introduced by charging operators.

Some charging cables have fine identification markers that specify the owner or serial number, with warnings that "the police can verify the origin." Using microscopic identification particles or forensic marking can make it easier to prove which equipment the cut copper wire was taken from.

However, on social media, there were also voices questioning the effectiveness, such as "What if the copper is melted down and can't be identified?" and "If it's mixed finely and transported abroad, it might be hard to track."

Another point of contention was the expression used in reports.

Criticism arose against headlines stating "Chargers are being destroyed across Australia," suggesting that the scale of damage was being exaggerated, as the specific locations mentioned in the article were few. Additionally, it was pointed out that using "scrap metal theft for monetary gain" is more accurate than the term "sabotage."

Meanwhile, a user claiming to be involved in equipment maintenance posted about replacing multiple stolen cables in Queensland and noted that colleagues in Melbourne, Sydney, Adelaide, and Perth have also experienced damage.

This is an individual post not verified independently and not official statistics. However, it serves as an example of the anxiety at the site that may not be visible from reported incidents alone.

When reading social media reactions, two points need to be considered simultaneously. While damage should not be underestimated, delaying countermeasures is not advisable, nor is it appropriate to treat limited incidents as if the entire EV charging network is collapsing.

Social media is not a public opinion survey but a space where voices of those motivated to post are strongly expressed. Even so, it can serve as material to understand what users are angry about, what they are anxious about, and what measures they seek.

Charger Owner Turned Damage into Humor

On a Brisbane bulletin board, a user reported with humor the aftermath of having the cable stolen from their newly owned EV charger.

According to the poster, after reporting the damage to the police, officers came to the site to check for fingerprints. Subsequently, they received a replacement from an Australian charger manufacturer, and after electrical work, they were able to charge again.

A metal enclosure was also added to the new equipment to prevent further theft. The poster humorously noted the irony that many people moved to repair and support in exchange for the small amount of scrap money the thief likely gained.

This post is also a personal account and not officially verified details of the incident. However, the reality that victims have to add protective fences themselves indicates that not only charger manufacturers and operating companies but also installers face new burdens.

Australian Charging Operators Move Towards "Unbreakable" Measures

Australia's major charging operator Evie Networks has started countermeasures by installing protective mesh in response to cable theft and vandalism.

According to reports, as of January 2026, protective technology has been introduced at at least six charging sites. The outer part of the cable is covered with a special mesh material, making it difficult to cut with common tools in a short time.

The important thing here is not to aim for "absolutely unbreakable cables" but to increase the time, noise, and scale of tools required for cutting.

Criminals prefer targets that can be taken away quickly and unnoticed. If a cable that can be cut in seconds becomes one that takes minutes, the time captured by surveillance cameras increases, and the likelihood of being spotted by passersby or security guards also rises.

Abroad, cut-resistant cables with built-in steel materials have also been developed. U.S. ChargePoint has announced cables that are difficult to cut with bolt cutters or power tools and software that sounds an alarm and notifies administrators when abnormalities are detected.

Countermeasures can be broadly divided into five categories.

The first is physical protection such as cut-resistant cables and protective sleeves.

The second is sensors and remote monitoring that detect cable cuts, temperature changes, and communication interruptions.

The third is psychological deterrence through security cameras, lighting, alarm sounds, and warning displays.

The fourth is a system to prove the origin of stolen goods through fine identification markers or serial numbers.

The fifth is a system that makes it difficult to convert stolen goods into cash by requiring personal identification, transaction records, and stolen goods inquiries from scrap metal dealers.

It is difficult to completely prevent theft with just one of these measures. A "multi-layered defense" combining physical protection, monitoring, investigation, and distribution regulation is necessary.

Not Just a Distant Problem for Japan

In Japan, reports of large-scale and continuous theft of public EV charger cables are not as prominent as in Australia or the West at present.

However, there is no reason to believe the same problem won't occur in Japan.

In Japan, incidents of copper cable theft from solar power facilities and construction sites have become serious, and in June 2025, the "Metal Theft Countermeasures Act" was enacted. Regulations on the concealed carrying of cutting tools came into effect in September of the same year, and measures such as personal identification and transaction records for scrap metal dealers were implemented in June 2026.

In other words, the foundation for crimes involving stealing and cashing in on copper already exists in Japan, and the country is stepping towards countermeasures including the buy-back market.

As EV chargers increase and criminals become aware of the structure and cash value of the equipment, the target could shift from solar power plants to parking lot chargers.

The Japanese government has set a goal to increase charging infrastructure to 300,000 outlets, combining public and basic charging, by 2030. This is a doubling of the previous target of 150,000 outlets.

As installations progress, naturally, more chargers accessible during less busy hours will increase. Highway rest areas, roadside stations, municipal facilities, and outdoor parking lots of commercial facilities, which are highly convenient locations, are also easily accessible to criminals.

Policies to increase the number of installations and enhance security must be pursued simultaneously.

The Potential Heaviness of "One Stop" in Japan

The reason why charger theft could be particularly problematic in Japan is that user trust in the public charging network has not yet been fully established.

In Roland Berger's "EV Charging Index 2025," Japan was ranked 32nd out of 33 countries surveyed. Although the number of public charging points in Japan increased by 17% in 2024, it was below the global average growth rate of 33%, and 64% of users reported being "very satisfied" or "quite satisfied" with their charging experience.

This is a private company's survey, and attention should be paid to the evaluation method. However, it can be inferred that Japanese users feel there is room for improvement in the charging network.

In Japan, many households live in apartment complexes and cannot install chargers at home. If home charging is not possible, chargers at commercial facilities and public parking lots become important equipment supporting daily mobility.

In regions where there are not many chargers, the distance to another charger can become a bigger issue than in urban areas of Australia if one is stopped due to theft.

Moreover, aging is also a challenge for Japan's charging equipment. If theft is added to failures, communication disruptions, and authentication errors, users may strengthen the impression that "public chargers are unusable" without being able to distinguish the cause.

The most dangerous thing for EV proliferation is not the incident itself. It's the experience of not being able to charge being shared through word of mouth or social media, planting fears in those who do not yet own an EV that "you can't travel far" or "you'll be in trouble when needed."

Security Performance Should Be a Condition for Subsidies

The first point Japan should learn from Australia's example is not to treat security as an additional cost after charger installation.

When installing public chargers with national or municipal subsidies, it might be considered to set a certain level of security performance as a condition.

For example, cut-resistant cable structures, sensors that detect cuts or casing openings, communication functions that notify administrators within a certain time, and identification numbers linking devices and cables.

Not all chargers need expensive security systems. The risk differs between ordinary chargers installed in busy 24-hour stores and high-output chargers placed in suburban unmanned parking lots.

It is more realistic to assess risks based on installation location, output, copper amount in cables, surrounding lighting, and past metal theft cases, and to determine necessary measures step by step.

By providing more subsidies for high-security equipment, technological competition among manufacturers can also be promoted.

Design Not Only for "Unbreakable" but Also for "Quick Repair"

No matter how many measures are taken, it is difficult to completely