Upload
others
View
4
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Institute of Transportation Studies ◦ University of California, Davis
1605 Tilia Street ◦ Davis, California 95616
PHONE (530) 752-6548 ◦ FAX (530) 752-6572
www.its.ucdavis.edu
Working Paper – UCD-ITS-WP-16-04
City of Vancouver EV Infrastructure Strategy Report
December 2016
Dahlia Garas Gustavo O. Collantes Michael A. Nicholas
1
City of Vancouver EV Infrastructure Strategy Report
DahliaGarasGustavoCollantesMichaelNicholas
UniversityofCaliforniaatDavisPolicyInstituteforEnergy,EnvironmentandtheEconomy
UCD‐ITS‐WP‐16‐04
December31,2016
2
3
Acknowledgements ThisstudywasfundedbyagrantfromtheCityofVancouver.TheauthorswouldliketothankresearchcollaboratorsatthePlug‐InHybrid&ElectricVehicleResearchCenter,Dr.TomTurrentineandDr.GilTalfortheirinputandresearchexpertise,andIanNevilleofVancouverforhisinputandfeedbackondraftsofthisreport.Inaddition,wemustthankourstudentsKathrynCanepaandMaiaMoranfortheireditingandformattingexpertisetohelpcreateamorepolishedfinalproduct.
4
Table of Contents Abstract..........................................................................................................................................................6
Abbreviations...............................................................................................................................................7
Introduction.................................................................................................................................................8
TheRoleofChargingInfrastructureintheDevelopingPEVMarket..............................9
TechnologyBackground......................................................................................................................11
ChargingEquipment–TypeandDifference...........................................................................11
WirelessCharging..............................................................................................................................14
AvailableEVSE‐PowerandCost................................................................................................16
Plug‐InElectricVehicles–PowerandEnergyRequirements........................................18
EVSEInstallation–CostandSiting.............................................................................................21
EVChargingOptionsbyLocation.....................................................................................................24
HomeCharging....................................................................................................................................25
WorkplaceCharging..........................................................................................................................27
PublicCharging...................................................................................................................................30
FastCharging........................................................................................................................................32
TheImpactofDemandChargesonFastChargingCosts...................................................33
TheBusinessofCharging.....................................................................................................................34
InfrastructureOperationBusinessModels.............................................................................35
Revenueflowsvs.valueproposition.........................................................................................37
ITandData:AnimportantpartofthevalueunderlyingEVcharginginfrastructure.......................................................................................................................................42
GridIntegration..................................................................................................................................45
WorkplaceChargingInvestmentModels.................................................................................47
PublicPrivatePartnerships................................................................................................................50
Casestudy:OverviewofcharginginfrastructuredevelopmentinFrance................51
LegitimationoftheEVMarket...........................................................................................................54
ModelsBasedonEV‐BuildingIntegration..............................................................................57
ThePossibleRoleofElectricUtilities.............................................................................................59
ProposalsfromUtilitiesConductingPilotPrograms..........................................................62
PacificGas&Electric....................................................................................................................62
SouthernCaliforniaEdison.......................................................................................................63
SanDiegoGas&Electric.............................................................................................................64
Eversource(EastCoastUtility)...............................................................................................65
5
PossibleapproachesforBCHydro.............................................................................................65
Theintegrationoftheelectricvehiclewiththegrid................................................................69
Conclusion..................................................................................................................................................71
References..................................................................................................................................................75
6
Abstract
Theroleofthelocalgovernmentinsupportingthegrowthandmaintenanceofa
strongplug‐inelectricvehiclemarketinVancouverisevaluatedinthisreport.This
reportidentifiesareasofactioninwhichalocalgovernment,suchasVancouver,can
impacttheirregionbasedonathoroughunderstandingofthecurrentplug‐in
vehiclemarket,internationaldemonstrationprojects,andresearchefforts.
Specifically,workplaceandpublicchargingisneededtoreinforceandfulfillthegaps
fromhome‐basedchargingindenseurbanregions.Localgovernmentcan
encourageinvestmentsinworkplaceandpublicchargingbyprovidingclear
regionalguidelinesforinstallersandcustomers,providingappropriateincentivesto
businesses,allowingforaninnovativemarketplaceinthevehiclechargingindustry,
andcollaboratingwiththeregionalutilitytoidentifyspecificopportunitiesfor
optimizationandencouragementofutilityratesandvehicle‐gridinteractions.
7
Abbreviations
BEV BatteryElectricVehicleBMS BatteryManagementSystemCA CaliforniaCEC CaliforniaEnergyCommissionCPUC CaliforniaPublicUtilitiesCommissionDOE UnitedStatesDepartmentofEnergyDSM DemandSideManagementEPA EnvironmentalProtectionAgencyEPRI ElectricPowerResearchInstituteEVSE ElectricalVehicleSupplyEquipmentGHG GreenhouseGasEmissionsGVWR GrossVehicleWeightRatingHOV HighOccupancyVehicle(orcarpool)lanesICE InternalCombustionEngineMOU MemorandumofUnderstandingNHTSA NationalHighwayTransportationandSafetyAdministrationOEM OriginalEquipmentManufacturer(Automotivecompanies)PEV Plug‐inElectricVehicle,includingbothBEVsandPHEVsPHEV Plug‐inHybridElectricVehiclePPP PublicPrivatePartnershipSAE SocietyofAutomotiveEngineers(governingvehiclestandards)SCE SouthernCaliforniaEdisonSOC StateofChargeTOU TimeofUse(usedinelectricityrates)QC QuickCharging(alsosometimesreferredtoasFastCharging)
8
Introduction
Developingarobustmarketforplug‐inelectricvehicles(PEVs),includingbothplug‐
inhybridelectricvehicles(PHEVs)andbattery‐electricvehicles(BEVs)iscriticalto
transitioningourtransportationsystemstoacleaner,lowcarbonfuture.Lower
emissionsvehicleswillhavemeasurableimpactsonlocalairquality,global
emissionslevels,andcitizens’health.Whiletheroleofpublicinfrastructurein
aidingthedevelopmentofthePEVmarketisstillunknown,itisoneoftheareasin
whichthelocalandregionalgovernmentcanplayarole.Thegoalisnotjustgrowth
ofPEVsales,butmaximizingtheutilizationofthePEVsintheregion–thereby
decreasinguseoffossilfuelsandemissions,whichdependsonareliableand
functionalchargingnetwork.Throughoutthisreport,specificactionsand
recommendationsareitalicizedforclarity.
ArecentpollsuggeststhatthelargemajorityofCanadiansandBritishColumbians,
76and71percentrespectively,wouldliketoownacarthatisnotpoweredby
gasoline,includingelectricvehicles.Thesamepollfurthersuggeststhat81percent
ofCanadiansand80percentofBritishColumbiansthinkthatelectricvehiclesare
the“wayofthefuture”(Ipsos,2015).Withregardtotheenvironmentalimpactsof
displacingpetroleumwithelectricityfortransportation,91%ofBritishColumbians
believe,accordingtothepoll,thatelectricvehicleswouldbringaboutgreatbenefits.
ThesenumberswouldseemtosuggestthatCanadaingeneral,andBritishColumbia
inparticularofferpromisingconditionsforthemarketacceptanceofplug‐inelectric
vehicles.However,66percentofBritishColumbiansand67percentofCanadians
surveyedindicatedthatwhiletheywouldliketoownaneco‐friendlycar,electric
poweredcarsare“toomuchhassle”.Thislastfindingmaybeoneimportantreason
whythemarketuptakeofplug‐inelectricvehiclesinBritishColumbia(andCanada
ingeneral)isstillslow.In2015,therewerejust6,661plug‐invehiclessoldin
Canada,0.35%ofthenewvehiclemarket,thoughthatwasanincreaseoverthe
0.27%ofsalesin2014(EV‐Sales).
9
The Role of Charging Infrastructure in the Developing PEV Market
TherecentNationalAcademiesCouncilonelectricvehiclesreviewedconsumer
surveysthatsuggestthatpublicaccesschargingstations,sofarpredominantlylevel
2,havenothadastrongimpactonplug‐invehiclesales.Instead,someofthese
surveyssuggestthatcharginginfrastructuremayhaveastrongerimpactontheuse
ofplug‐invehicles(TransportationResearchBoardandNationalResearchCouncil,
2015).Inotherwords,consumerswhoalreadyownplug‐invehiclesbecomeaware
oftheexistenceandgeographicallocationsofchargingspots,whichleadstomore
publicchargingandmoreelectricmiles.Thesestudieshavenotevaluatedwhether
thosemilesreplacedwalking/bikingorpublictransituseorjustICEvehicleuse.UC
Davisiscurrentlyconductinganempiricalstudyoftheeffectivenessofvariousstate
strategiesonthemarketuptakeofplug‐invehicles,andpreliminaryresultssuggest
thattheimpactofpublicaccessinfrastructuremayhavenotbeenasstrongas
expected.SimonFraserUniversityarrivedatconsistentconclusionsinarecent
study,namelythatcharginginfrastructurehasnotshownaverysignificanteffecton
themarketuptakeofplug‐invehicles(Baileyetal,2015).
Allthesefindingsshouldbelookedatwithanunderstandingofthecontext.Plug‐in
vehiclesarestillinanearlymarketstage,andmarketsandrelatedconsumer
behaviorandlearningcontinuetoevolve.Muchoftheinvestmentincharging
infrastructurewasdoneduringtheveryearlyyearsofthemarketlaunchofthese
vehiclesinitiatedwiththeEVProject(launchedinselectcitiesintheUSin2010),
whenverylittlewasknownaboutbestpracticesforstrategicdeploymentofthis
infrastructure.Theearlystagecanbecharacterizedasoneofexperimentation,
whereideasaretestedtolearnaboutbestpractices.Itispossiblethatinvestments
ininfrastructurewereinefficientinitially,failingtoidentifythebestlocationsfor
installations,ornotbeingabletodeploystationsatdesiredlocations.Themost
commonfactorsthataffectedinstallingElectricVehicleSupplyEquipment(EVSE)
wasthewillingnessofthepropertyorbusinessownertohosttheEVSE,installation
costs,andparkinglocationrelativetoelectricitysourceratherthanthedesirability
10
ofthelocationorexpecteddemand.
Wealsohypothesizethattherelationshipbetweenavailabilityofpublicaccess
infrastructureandplug‐invehicleadoptionmaybemoreindirectandcomplex.Our
studiesconsistentlyshowthatpublicawarenessofelectricvehiclesislow(Kurani,
2016)andthatpeer‐to‐peercommunicationisakeydriverofawarenessandlikely
ofplug‐invehicleadoption(Axsen,2010).Innovationscholarsandpractitioners
haveknownaboutthesepeer‐to‐peerdynamicsfordecades,usuallywiththename
of“contagion”(asthemodelsusedtostudydiffusionofinnovationsborrowedfrom
thoseusedinthestudyofepidemics).Inthiscontext,theroleofpublicaccess
charginginfrastructuremaybefirsttohelpexistingownersofplug‐invehicleshave
agoodconsumerexperiencewiththeproduct.Oncethathappens,theseconsumers
willfeelmoreinclinedtorecommendplug‐invehiclesintheirsocialnetworks,
whichinturncaninducemoreplug‐invehicleadoption.Thisspeakstothepotential
valueofinvestingincharginginfrastructureinsettingswheresocialinteractionis
likely—forexample,theworkplace.Oneimportantmessageistointegrateeffective
planningaswellasprogramevaluationintoinfrastructureinvestments,toensure
thatearlierlearningisincorporatedandtodocumentlessonslearnedthatcan
informfutureinvestments.
Thevaluechainpossibilitiesforelectricvehiclecharginginfrastructurearemore
complexthanthosecurrentlyseenforconventionalpumpfuels.Itisfairtostate
earlyinthisreportthatthesearchforsustainablebusinessmodelsforthesupplyof
stand‐alonepublicaccesschargingequipmentisstillopen.Itishelpful,however,to
mentiontwoelementsthatwillinformourdiscussions.First,thefactthat
businessesandotherorganizationsareinstallingchargingstationsatacost,
suggeststhatabusinessmodelexists,oratleastthatitisbelievedtoexist.Second,
conventionalfuelstationsmakeasignificantportionoftheirprofitsfromthesales
ofconveniencestoreitemsratherthanpurelyliquidfuels(NationalAssociationfor
ConvenienceandFuelRetailing)duetothelowprofitmarginsonfuelsales.Itis
equallylikelythatEVinfrastructurewillalsobedependentonassociatedsales
11
ratherthanpurelyelectricitysalesforthesamereason,withtheaddedconstraintof
alowcost,home‐chargingoptionformostPEVdrivers.
Technology Background
Thissectionincludesadescriptionoftheelectricalrequirementsfortheinstallation
ofcharginginfrastructure,bothforlevel2andDCFastCharging,areviewofthe
retailpriceoftypicallevel2andDCfastchargeequipment,andadescriptionof
electricalvariablesduringcharging,includinghowcurrentandpowervaryduring
thechargingeventasafunctionoftimeandothervariables(e.g.stateofcharge).All
ofthesefactorswillaffecttheutilization,pricing,andbusinesscaseforinstallation.
Laterinthischapter,weincludesomepurchaseandinstallationcostinformation
fromtheearlyUSmarketasareference.Infrastructuretype,installationcosts,and
dwelltimewillhaveadirectimpactonthereturnoninvestmentthatanownerand
operatorcanexpect.
Charging Equipment – Type and Difference
TheElectricVehicleSupplyEquipment(EVSE)orElectricVehicleChargingStationis
adevicetotransferelectricityfromtheelectricgridanddistributeelectricityto
plug‐inelectricvehicles.ElectricvehiclechargingistheprocessofconvertingAC
electricityfromtheACelectricgridtoDCelectricityandstoringDCelectricityinDC
batteriesofelectricvehicles.ThepowerelectronicsusedtoconvertACtoDCandto
controlbatterychargingisa“charger”.Twobasictypesofchargingstations:AC
chargingandDCFastcharginghavebeendefinedaccordingtowherethechargeris
positioned.ThedifferenceiswheretheAC/DCconversionandthechargingcontrol
isdone.ThediagraminFigure1illustrateswherethechargerispositioned.
12
Figure1.ACandDCChargingPaths(modified,source:pluginamerica.org)
AllchargingsystemstakeACpowerfromthegridandconvertittoDCpowerata
suitablevoltageforchargingthebattery.ACLevel1andACLevel2chargingare
lowpowerchargingandareimplementedonthevehicleonboardcharger.ACLevel
1andLevel2chargingstationsmerelydelivertheACpowertothevehicle.DCFast
Level1andLevel2Chargingrequiresveryhighpowerandverylargeandvery
expensivepowerelectronics.TheAC/DCconversionandthepowerconditioning
andcontrolareexercisedinthechargerwithinthechargingstation.Table1
summarizesthechargingpower,supplypowerrequirement,andwherecharging
happensforeachcharginglevel.Foralltypesofchargingstations,theonboard
batterymanagementsystem(BMS)integratedwiththebatteryprovidesthecharger
therequiredconstantcurrent/constantvoltagechargingprofiles.
13
Table1.Powerboundarybetweendifferentchargingtypesandlevels[source:Bohn,2013]
ACLevel1chargingusesastandard120Vplug,shouldbeusedonadedicated
circuit,thoughthatisoftennotthecaseforstandardhomeusecaseandexisting
householdwiring.ThischargerisincludedwiththepurchaseofaPEV,andisoften
referredtoasthe“conveniencecharger”andcarriedon‐boardandcanbeusedin
thecaseofemergencies.ManyEVlesseesdonotinstallalevel2chargerathome,
especiallyiftheyhaveaccesstoworkplacecharging,andwillinsteadrelyontheir
conveniencechargerandexistingelectricalsystem.Whilethiscanleadtotripped
breakersifmultipledevicesareinuseonthesamecircuit,inupdatedhomeswith
20Arated,andnootherdevices,itcanbeaneconomicalsolutionforthosenot
dedicatedtoinstallingachargeranddrivinganEVinthelongterm.Anyproperty
withelectricitycanbeapotentialfuelingpointforthePEVswithaportablecharging
unit.Theportablechargingunitcomesstandardwiththevehicle,andcanonlyplug
intoconventional120Voutletsfoundathomeandbusinesses.Sincetheadoptionof
astandardconnector–SAEJ1772,everynewPEVcanbechargedusinganyAC
Level2chargingequipmentwiththestandardconnector.ForDCFastcharging,
14
therearethreefastchargingstandardsinvariousstagesofadoption,CHAdeMO,
TeslaSupercharger,andSAEJ1772ComboorCCS(combinedcouplerstandard).
CHAdeMO–JapanElectricVehicleStandard,isthemostestablishedafteramajor
pushbyNissanforinstallingchargers.TheCCSFastChargersarecurrentlybeing
installedbyABBandChargepoint,andservetheAmericanandGermanautomakers
whohaveagreedtoimplementthatstandard,butwerelatertomarketwith
vehicles,andchargers.AnotheravailableinthemarketistheTeslaSupercharger,
butfornowitisonlyaproprietarydevice,dedicatedtotheModelSandModelX.
ThesethreeDCFastcharginginterfacesarenotphysicallycompatible.SomeEVs
havetwoseparateconnectorstoaccommodatedifferentchargingstandards.Other
EVownersneedtofindtheDCFastchargingstationthat’scompatiblewiththeir
EVs.
Wireless Charging
Wirelesschargingisayoungtechnologythatcanbedeployedineitherdynamicor
staticchargingapplications,whereenergyistransferredwirelesslythougha
magneticfield,withacoilintheroadconnectedtothepowergrid,andareceiveron
thebottomofthevehicle.Currently,somecompaniessuchasPROOVaredeploying
staticwirelesschargingforquickrechargingatbusstops,wherethiscouldallowthe
bussestohavesmalleron‐boardbatterypacks.Inaddition,thischargingcouldbe
usedbymultiplebuses,onmultipleroutes,throughstrategicplacementattransfer
stops.Therearemanydemonstrationsofthistechnology,oneexampleisoperating
inDenBosch,Netherlandswith120kWwirelesschargingsince2012,shownin
Figure2.Itisstillarelativelyexpensiveinstallationcomparedtostandardcharging,
butmayremovesomeaspectsofoperatorerror,andallowforreducedvehiclecost
inthelongterm.Someanalysis,forexamplebyDr.MicahFullerwasconducted
evaluatingthepotentialfordynamic(in‐road)wirelesschargingforhigh‐traffic
freewaysfoundthatahighinvestmentcostisneeded,butthatinthelongterm
couldbeamorecosteffectiveapproachtoextendingrangethanincreasingbattery
capacity(Fuller,2016).
15
Figure2:120kWWirelessCharginginDenBosch,Netherlands.
Theotherapplicationforwirelesschargingthatmaybeviableinthenearer‐term
wouldbetoassisthandicappedusersinadoptingEVs,especiallyforhomecharging,
sincethemultiplesuppliersofwirelesschargingsystemsarenotnecessarily
compatibleyet.ThesesystemsaremoreexpensivethanstandardlevelIIhome
chargingsystems,sosubsidiesfortheirinstallationmayhelphandicappeddrivers
adoptEVs.
IfincreasingEVadoptionisthegoal,andsystemexpenseisasecondaryconcern
wirelesschargingcanovercomelackofchargingwhereusersareeither
unmotivatedoruncomfortablewiththechargingprocess,suchasfleet/assigned
vehicleapplications,andcar‐sharingapplications.
Wirelesschargingwillbemosttransformativewhenthereareautomatedvehicles
oratleastautomatedparking.Chargingefficiencycorrespondstoalignment,which
isachievablebyautomaticcontrol.Moreimportantlyself‐drivingcarscancharge
themselves,allowingforveryefficientuseofachargingspacesandforself‐driving
carstodrivethemselvestoachargerwhichmaybenear,butnotatone’s
destination,helpingtosolvethe“last‐mile”problem.
16
Available EVSE ‐ Power and Cost
EventhoughthePEVmarketgrowsslowly,thechargingstationmarketistakingon
rapidgrowth.Thecostsofachargingstationvarywidelydependingonpower
levels,numberofoutputs,andifit’snetworkedthroughoneofthecustomerfacing
systems.MostchargingstationsdonotsupportthefullrangeofACLevel2charging
orDCFastcharging.Table2listsmajorEVSEproductsavailableonthemarket,and
therangeoftheirpowerlevelandprices.
UsuallyACLevel1EVSEoperatesat15A/1.8kW.MostPEVscomewithanACLevel
1EVSEcordset,sonoadditionalchargingequipmentisrequired.Basedonthe
vehicleonboardchargerandcircuitcapacity,mostofACLevel2chargingstations
operateat30A–32A,delivering7.2kW–7.6kWofelectricpower,costing
anywherebetween$450‐$5000.ThemajorityofcurrentDCFastchargingoccurs
witheitheraCHAdeMoorSAECombointerfaceandcanprovide50kWchargingat
125Awiththepriceof$19,000–$40,000.Thenumbersmentionedaboveand
showninthetablebelowarepurchasepriceonlyfortheEVSE,anddonotinclude
electricalsupplyandinstallationcosts.
Table2.MajorEVSEMakeandPowerLevel(NewWestTechnologiesforUSDOE,2015)
Level Make/Model MaxAmps&
Power
Purchase
Price
Level1 ChargePointCT2100SeriesClipperCreekPCS‐15,ACSEaton120VACUniversalReceptacleEV‐ChargerAmericaEV2000EVExtendCommercialLevel1LevitonEvr‐Green120ShorepowerWU‐120,SC2‐120TelefonixL1PowerPost
10A– 20A1.2kW‐2.4kWMostoperateat12A–16A
$300‐$1,500
17
Level2 AerovironmentEVSE‐RSBoschPowerMaxChargePointCT2000,CT500,CT2100,CT4000SeriesClipperCreekLCSSeriesBDTGNS,BBRSeriesDeltaACandPedestalMountEatonPow‐R‐StationEcotalityBlinkEV‐ChargeAmericaEV2100,EV2200SeriesEvatranlevel2GeneralElectricWattStation,DuraStationGoSmartChargeSpotRFGreenGarageAssociatesJuiceBarGRIDbotUP‐100JLegrandLevel2LevitonEvr‐Green160,320,Level2Fleet,CTLevel2MilbankEVPedestalOpConnectEVCSParkPodPlug‐inElectricPower(PEP)Level2SchneiderElectricEVlinkOutdoor,SquareDIndoorSemaConnectChargePro620SiemensSmartGridEVSE,VersiChargeSPXPowerXpressTelefonixL2PowerPostEVSEVoltaChargingEVSE
16A‐ 75A3.6kW‐20kWMostprovide30A‐32A,7.2kW‐7.6kW
$400‐$6,500
DCFast ABBTerra51FastChargerAerovironmentFleetFastLine,DCFastChargeAkerWadeLevelIIIFastChargerAndromedaPowerORCA‐MobileDeltaEVDCQuickChargerEatonPow‐R‐StationDCQuickChargerEcotalityBlinkDCFastChargerEfacecQC50EpyonPowerTerra50.XSystem,50.1ChargeStationEVTECMobileFastCharger,PublicFastChargerFujiFRCH50B‐2‐01NichiconQuickChargerNissanNSQC‐44SeriesSchneiderElectricFastChargerTeslaMotorsSupercharger
60A‐550A20kW‐60kWMostare125A50kW
$10,000‐$40,000
18
Next‐Gen
Fast
ExpectedchargingforPorscheMission‐E(Fastned)
Upto300kW Unknown
Plug‐In Electric Vehicles – Power and Energy Requirements
Chargingspeedisnotonlygovernedbythepowerlevelofthechargingequipment,
butalsolimitedbythesizeoftheonboardchargerandthecapacityofthebattery
pack.The2011and2012model‐yearplug‐inelectricvehiclessuchasNissanLeaf
andChevyVolthavea3.3kWonboardACcharger;by2013,Leafhadofferedthe
6.6kWchargingasanoption.HondaFitandFordFocusEVssupportchargingat6.6
kW.TeslaModelScomesstandardwitha10kWonboardACchargeroranoptional
dualACchargerof20kW.Inthecurrentmarket,mostautomakersbringcompact
PEVswithEPA‐ratedrangesof120‐130km,whichhaveabatterycapacityof20‐24
kWh.TheTeslaModelShaseithera60kWhor85kWhbatterypack,which
providesanestimatedrangeof270kmand354km,respectively.
Thebatterypackincludesthebatterymanagementsystem(BMS)thatintegratesthe
batteryandbatterycoolingsystem.TheBMSmonitorsthekeybatteryoperating
parametersofvoltage,currentandtemperature,calculatesthebatterystateof
charge(SOC),andcontrolsthechargingrate.Usually,thebatteryisfirstchargedata
constantcurrentandthenaconstantvoltage.TheBMSprovidestherequired
currenttothecharger.Figures2through6showseveraldailychargingpower
profilesmeasuredfromaworkplace6.6kWACLevel2charger,withcharging
electricityconsumptionrangeof6‐60kWhperchargingevent.Thesedifferent
chargingprofilesarejust4examplesmeasuredatasinglechargeratUCDavis.
DifferentEVmanufacturersusevarioustypesofbatterychargersbasedonthe
batterychemistryandthemethodtocontrolthechargingrate.Allthecharging
startswithaconstantcurrentcharginguntilthevoltagereachesasetvalue.Then,
someonboardchargersstopchargingimmediately,whilesomechangetoaconstant
voltagecontrolandcontinuechargingattaperedpowertoensurethebatteryisfully
charged.Figure7Figure4illustratesthetypicalmonthlyusageofaworkplaceLevel
2chargingstation.Theseprofileshelpidentifythevariationofchargingpower
19
demandacrosshoursanddaysandmayhelphostorganizationsplanforthe
chargingdemandandutilizationrulesaheadofinstallation.
Figure3:DailychargingloadprofileofaGEchargeratWestVillage(Twovehiclechargingat3.5and6kW,eachwithdrawing12‐13kWh)
Figure4:DailychargingloadprofileofaGEchargeratWestVillage(Twochargingat6kW,eachwithdrawing12‐13kWh)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
6 8 10 12 14 16
ChargingPow
er(kW)
Time(Hour)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 10 12 14 16 18
ChargingPow
er(kW)
Time(Hour)
20
Figure5:DailychargingloadprofileofaGEchargeratWestVillage(OnepossibleTeslachargingat6.6kW,withdrawing50kWhelectricity)
Figure6:DailychargingloadprofileofaGEchargeratWestVillage(Twovehiclechargingat6kWand3.5kW,withdrawing5kWhand10kWh,respectively)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
6 8 10 12 14 16 18
ChargingPow
er(kW)
Time(Hour)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
6 8 10 12 14 16
ChargingPow
er(kW)
Time(Hour)
21
Figure7:ExampleofaWorkplaceChargingStationUtilizationoveraone‐monthperiod(February2015)
EVSE Installation – Cost and Siting
Ingeneral,installinganEVSEinvolvesfivesignificantsteps:
1. AssesstheinstallationsitefortheEVSE,
2. Obtainelectricalwiringpermits,
3. Coordinatewithlocalutilitycompanyforelectricitymetering,
4. InstallationoftheEVSEandtheelectricpanelupgrade,ifnecessary,bya
licensedelectricianorEVSEsupplycompany
5. OperatetheEVSE.
Thespecificsofeachofthesestepswillvarysignificantlybysite,andinstallation
type–whetherprivate,public(on‐road,orparkinglot)orsemi‐private(forexample
workplaces.Thecostsofinstallingchargingstationsincludeequipment,installation,
operatingandmaintenancecosts.Inthissection,EVSEinstallationdatagathered
overthepastfiveyearsispresentedasapointofreferencefortheVancouver
region.
‐1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
ChargingPow
er(kW)
Time(Day)
22
Installationcostsvarywidelyaccordingtocircumstancessuchastheavailability
andcapacityoftheutilitysupply.Theaveragelabor,materials,permit,trenching
andrepair,concreteworkcostsforinstallinganewchargingstationare
summarizedinTable3asof2013.Theparkingandelectricitypayment
managementcostsarenotincludedinTable3.Theexpectedlifetimeofthecharging
stationsis10yearsor10,000cycles,andincludemanufacturerwarrantiesof1‐3
years,thoughsomeanalysesuseEVSEsystemlifetimesofupto20years(Silver
SpringNetworks,2010).
Table3.InstallationCostsinUSdollarsforPubliclyAvailableEVSE/ChargeStationsasofSept.2013(EnergyStar,2013)
AnewreportfromtheUSDepartmentofEnergyinNov.2015,lookedataverage
installationcosts,aswellasprovidedtherangeofinstallationscostsperunit(Figure
8),andtheaverageinstallationcostbyregionsthatwerepartoftheEVProject
(Figure9).TheseshouldhelpprovidesomecontextfortheCityofVancouverto
considerwhenplanningforEVSEinstallations.
23
Figure8:InstallationcostsasofNov.2015(NewWestTechnologiesforUSDOE,2015)
Figure9:AverageInstallationcostsforSpecificRegionsfromtheEVProject(NewWestTechnologiesforUSDOE,2015)
PubliclyavailableEVchargingstationsareACLevel2andDCFastchargingstations.
SitingofACLevel2chargingstationsdiffersfromDCFastchargingbecauseof
substantialdifferenceinchargingduration.MostDCFastchargingeventslast
approximately10–30minutes,whileACLevel2chargingeventslastfor1‐3hours.
Therefore,publicchargingstationsshouldbeplannedneardestinationswhere
activitiesappropriatelyfitthewaitingperiod.DCFastchargingstationsshouldbe
24
locatedalongmajorhighwaysandalsoclosetoregionaldestinationswhere480V
electricgridsareavailable.Shoppingcenters,restaurants,workplaces,parks,and
theaters,etc.aregoodsitesforinstallingACLevel2chargingstations(Mayfield,
2012).
Commericalchargingstationsareoftennetworkedviatheinternet.Networked
chargingstationsallowPEVuserstomanagetheirchargingandreservestations
online,andalsogivechargingsystemoperatorsabilitytomultiplexdistribution
powertomultipleEVcharging.Thedegreeofintelligenceofthenetworkedcharging
stationscanhaveasignificantimpactonoperatingcost.
EV Charging Options by Location
ThePH&EVResearchCenteratUCDavishasinvestigatedfourprimarycharging
situationsandthreepricingscenarios(NicholasandTal,2013).Thecharging
situationsareprimarilyorganizedaccordingtotheirlocation‐home,work,public,
andfastcharging,andarefurtherdetailedbelow.Thepricingscenariosarefree,less
thanorequaltohomecharging,andmorethanhomecharging.
1. Homecharging–Primarilylevel1orlevel2,usedbytheresidentsofahome
ortheirguests.Insingle‐familyhomesthisisofteninthegarageorcovered
carport,andthereisnocompetitionfortheparkingspotoraccesstothe
EVSE.Inmulti‐unitdwellings(MUDs)theremaybeassignedspots,orthere
maybecompetitionforbothpriorityparkingandaccesstotheEVSE.
2. Workplacecharging–Level1orlevel2foremployeesofaspecificcompany.
Theavailabilityofchargingatworkmayenableemployeeswithlonger
commutestostilldriveusingonlyelectricitywhenchargingisavailableat
theworkplace.Freeworkplacechargingcanleadtoshiftingfromhometo
workplace,andcanleadtoagreaternumberofchargersneededtoprevent
congestionversusascenariothatispriced.
3. PublicCharging–Primarilylevel2chargingthatisplacedinshareduseor
25
singlebusinesspublicparkinglotsorgarages,forpurposesotherthan
workplace.ProvidingaccesstoanEVSEmayencouragevisitsorlongerstays
atspecificbusinesses.TheEVSEisownedandmaintainedbythegarageor
businessanddecidesonthefeestructure,ifany.Publiccharging,asinthe
caseofadowntownparkinggarage,mayserveasbothworkplacechargingto
employeesofnearbybusinesses,andpublicchargingforcustomersofnearby
businesses.
4. Fast(Quick)Charging–AlsocalledDCFastCharging(andmistakenly
referredtoasLevel3),FastChargingprovidessignificantrangetothevehicle
inashortamountoftime.Thiscanbeusedenroutetoadestination,butcan
beasubstituteatadestinationwhenlevel2isunavailable.Additionally,
someusewillresultfromthosewhonormallychargeathomebutforgetto
chargeorhaveunusuallyhightravelneedsonoccasion.Customersprefer
FastCharginglocationsthatalsoprovideotheramenities.Duetothehigh
current,thisrequireselectricalserviceupgradesatmostlocations,and
wouldbethehighestcostperkWhtothecustomer.
Home Charging
Earlyscenariomodelingoftheroleofcharginginmeetingcurrenttraveldemand
showsthathomechargingmeets~71%ofcurrentVMTforaBatteryElectric
Vehiclewith80miles(129km)ofelectricdrivingrange(BEV80)annuallyfor
Californiadrivers.WhilethedetailsofVancouvertravelersmayalterthisfinding
somewhat,theratioofmilesprovidedbyhomechargingvs.publicvs.DCfast
chargingislikelytobesimilar.InVancouver,dailytraveldemandmaybelower,for
example,butavailabilityofhomechargingmayalsobelower.
26
Figure10:Breakdownofmilesgainedversusfrequencyofpotentialchargingneed(Nicholasetal,DCFastChargingintheContextofBiggerBatteries,2013)
Inthisscenario,theassumptionisthateveryoneinthestateofCaliforniadrovea
BEV80foronedayandchargedateveryworkstopiftheyneededittocomplete
theirtravel,andincluded200QuickChargers(QC)distributedthroughout
California.Thisisapaidscenario.71%ofdrivingcouldbedonewithonlyhome
chargingassumingdriversarecomfortablewitharrivinghomewithatleast8km
left(changingthisto16kmreducesthe“home‐only”kilometrestolessthan71%).
Level1atworkenablesanadditional4.8%oftravelwhilefasterlevel2isneeded
foranadditional2.2%ofdriving.Forthosewhodidnotworkorneededadditional
chargingbeforeorafterworklevel2atstopslongerthan1.5hoursaddedan
additional4.2%ofkilometres.Fastcharging(orQuickCharging),whilelesslikelyto
beused,hasapotentialtoadd6%‐12%additionalkilometreswhenalllevel2has
beenexhausted.Although,thisgraphshowsthetechnicalpotentialofprovidingup
toanadditional29%ofkmforlowerrangeBEVs,thesechargingeventsonlyoccur
on5%oftoursperday.Atourisaroundtripfromhomebacktohome.This
27
scenariogivesasenseoftherelativeroleeachtypeofchargingcanplayforaBEV,
however,adiscussionofeachcategoryisusefultogivefurthercontext.
Forhomechargingweseeatrendtowardslevel1eveninsomehomeswiththe
popularNissanLeafasshowninfigureA.
Figure11:AUCDavis2015Californiasurveyof~5000households
Thevehiclesareorderedbyelectricvehiclerange(lowtohighfromlefttoright)
andweseeageneraltrendforPHEVstohavelevel1athomeandBEVstohave
morelevel2athome.However,weseeasignificantnumberofpeoplemanaging
initiallywithonlylevel1andonlylaterswitchingtolevel2withotherhousehold
upgrades.Leasedvehiclesarealsomorelikelytoonlyhavelevel1athomeperhaps
signalinglesscommitmenttothetechnology
Workplace Charging
AdditionalresearchatUCDavis’Plug‐InHybrid&ElectricVehicleResearch
(PH&EV)Centerinvestigatedtheroleofchargingatworkplaces,andspecifically,the
impactofpayingforchargingatwork.BasedonasurveyofabouttwothousandCA
PEVusers,wefoundthatofcurrentPEVdriverswithworkplacecharging,78%
reportedthatworkplacechargingwasfreetouse.Therearebenefitsoffree
workplacechargingforboththeemployerandemployees.Fortheemployers,this
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Home Charging Level 2015
Level 1 Level 2
28
includessimplifiedEVSEinstallationandoperations/administrationcosts(no
serviceproviderneeded,sincenorevenueiscollected),avoidingtheimpressionof
pettinessinchargingforelectricityused,andanimproved“greenimage”forthe
company,(somethingthatprovidesatangiblebenefittoemployees).
Thebiggestdetrimentmaybethatitswitcheshomechargingtoworkplacecharging
forthosewhodon’tneedit,thereforenotincreasingelectricvehiclekilometres
traveled(eVKT)comparedtoapricedchargingscenario.Thiscanleadto
congestionatthechargers,andparticularlyforBEVdriverswhomayrelyonaccess
toworkplacecharging,asubsequentdecreaseindependability.ForallPEVdrivers,
thedemanddropsasthepriceforcharginggoesupfromfreetothesameashome
todoublethepriceofhomecharging.However,BEVdrivers,comparedtoPHEV
driversaremuchmorewillingtopaydoublethecostofhomechargingonan
infrequentbasis–inotherwords,theyarewillingtopayahighpricewhenthey
reallyneedtheelectricity.
Figure12:PotentialDemandforWorkplaceChargingbyVehicleTypewhenthecostisdoublethatofhomeelectricity(NicholasandTal,2013,ChargingforChargingatWork)
0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
120.00%
Toyota Plug‐In Prius Chevy Volt Nissan Leaf
Workplace Double Price As Home Electricity
more than 5 times a week
4‐5 times a week
2‐3 times a week
1 time or less a week
Never
29
Amulti‐statesurveyconductedbyUCDresearchersattheendof2014ledtothe
conclusionsthat30%ofPEVdrivershavesomelevelofcongestionattheir
workplace,butthatpaidchargersare1.7timeslesslikelytoexperiencecongestion.
Oursurveyresultsshowedthatatleast53%ofpeoplewhodidnotneedworkplace
chargingchargedanywaywhentheyhadaccesstofree,uncongestedcharging
(Nicholas,SACOGSeminar2015).Thisledtotheconclusionthatmoderatefees
(slightlyhigherthanhomeelectricityprices,butlesspermilethanthecostof
gasoline)forworkplacechargingwillprovideaccesstochargersforthosewhoneed
it–eitherduetolongcommutesoralackofhomecharging–withminimal
congestioncausedbyunnecessaryuseoffreecharging.Figure13comparesthe
break‐evencostpermileofdifferentPHEVsandaNissanLeaf.
Figure13:Breakevencostofelectricityatvariousgasolineprices
Figure13showsthatworkplaceelectricitycanbenomoreexpensivethan$1.00
CAD/literor$0.25/kWhandshouldbeabovecurrenthomeelectricitypricesto
maximizetheuseofinfrastructure,withoutcausingunnecessarycongestionat
publiccharginglocations.
$0.00
$0.10
$0.20
$0.30
$0.40
$0.50
$0.60
$0.70
$0.70 $0.80 $0.90 $1.00 $1.10 $1.20 $1.30
Electricity Price in Dollars/kWh
Canadian Dollars/Liter of Gasoline
Break even Cost of Electricity at Various Gasoline Prices
Plug‐in Prius Ford C‐max Chevrolet Volt Leaf
30
Basedonthissurvey,andtheassumptionthatachargercanchargetwovehiclesper
day,weestimatethatbetween8and12chargersareneededper100plug‐in
vehiclesintheworkplace.20Chargersshouldbesufficientifchargersserveless
thantwovehiclesperdayduetotimingandparkingcoordinationconstraints.With
freechargingthatnumberclimbsto40chargersassumingtwovehiclespercharger
eachday.25‐30chargersareneededper100pluginvehiclewithapriceequalto
home.ThisassumesamixofPHEVsandBEVs.Astherangeclimbsto200milesfor
aBEV,youwouldneed27iffree,16ifequaltohome,and2chargersifmorethan
homeelectricityprice.Inthiscaserangeisasubstituteforcharginginfrastructure.
Public Charging
Level2publicchargingmayprovideanaddedbenefittohelpbringcustomers,who
mayhavegonetoacompetitor,ortoincentivizecustomerstoshopforlongerin
ordertomaximizetheiruseofretailcharging,thoughinmanyretaillocationsthe
distancefromhomeisnotveryfar.Publicchargingfor30minuteswouldprovide
about4milesofrangeat3.3kWor8milesofrangeat6.6kW.PH&EVCenter
analysisofCalifornia’sDepartmentofTransportation(Caltrans)dataconcludesthat
publicchargingatretaillocationsiscomplementarytoworkplacecharging,andhas
anadditiveeffectintermsofelectrickilometresenabled,butdoesnotsubtractfrom
theneedforeitherhomeorworkcharging(researchinprogresspresentedby
MichaelNicholasatEVRoadmap8,July29‐30,2015).
Allpublicchargingisnotequalandneedcanbeestimatedbydistancefromhome
anddwelltimeasshowninFigure14andFigure15.
31
Figure14:NeedforchargingforPHEV20s(20mior32kmofelectricdrivingrange)
Figure15:NeedforchargingforBEV80s(80milesof129kmrange)
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Need by Activity Type For PHEV 20
PHEV 20 Does Not Need PHEV 20 Needs and Gets PHEV 20 Dwell Time Too Short
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Need by Activity Type For BEV 80
BEV80 Does Not Need BEV80 Needs and Gets BEV 80 Needs Too Far/Short Dwell
32
Figure14showstheneedforPHEVchargingwherethedistanceismorethan16km
(10miles)fromhomeandthedwellorparkingtimeisenoughtoreturntheuser
homeonelectricityorthedwelltimeissufficienttogetatleast16kmofrange
additional.Manytripsdonotmeetthesecriteria.Allroundtripsinbluearetoo
shorttorequirecharging.Alltripsingreyarefarenoughaway,butdwelltimeistoo
short.Linkedtrips(aseriesoftripsthatlinkwithoutareturntohomebetween
them)willchangethisestimation,buttherelationshipsshouldberepresentative.
Forexample,sportingeventshavelongdistancestoreachthemandhavelongdwell
time.Thesearegoodplacesforchargers.
Thereareafewpotentialbusinessmodelsforoperatingpubliccharging.Parking
garagesownedbythecity/localgovernment,mayofferfreechargingwithpaid
parkingforPEVdriversasanincentivetoincreaseadoption.Insomecases,likethe
cityofSacramento,electricityisfree,andtheparkingspotisdiscountedforPEV
drivers.Inprivatelyownedparkinggaragesormulti‐tenantretaillocations,the
ownerpurchasestheEVSE,butoperationandbillingissubcontractedouttoa
networkoperator.Finally,insomecaseswithstandaloneretailers(oranchorstores
inmultitenantlocations),theretailersownthechargersandoffertheuseforfree,
someofferupto2hoursoffreeelectricity,afterwhichtheuserpaysasetrateper
hourorperkWh.Theoptionsforinfrastructureownersandoperatorsisdiscussed
furtherinthe“BasicModelsofInfrastructureOwnership”sectionbelow.
Fast Charging
DCfastchargingprovidesapproximately80%stateofcharge(SOC)toacurrent
electricvehicleinapproximately20minutes.Thismakesfastchargingbettersuited
toconnectingneighboringregionsbyprovidingchargingenrouteorateitherendof
alongerdrivingtour.Alessobvious,butequallyimportantfunctionoffastcharging
isactingasabackuptocongestedlevel1orlevel2chargers,andasacommunity
resourceforthosewithouthomeand/orworkcharging.Usingbothreal‐world
33
traveldataandsurveyanswers,UCDavisresearchershaveinvestigatedtheroleof
DCfastchargingextensively.
AsshowninFigure10above,fastcharging(oneortwoeventsperday)canallowfor
approximately10%moremilestraveledonelectricityinthecaseofan80mile(129
km)rangeBEVundercurrentCaliforniausagepatterns.Thereasonwelookatthe
roleoffastchargingunderthisrestrictionisbasedonsurveyresponsesfrom
currentBEVdrivers.100%arewillingtofastchargeonceperdayonoccasional
longtours,thisdripsto49%whowouldbewillingtostoptwiceonanoccasional
longtour,andevenmoresignificantly,only12.5%ofcurrentPEVdriverswouldbe
willingtostopthreetimesinasingletour.AstherangeofBEVsincreaseswith
comingvehiclemodels,homeandworkplacechargingwillstillbethemost
significantsourceofelectricityforthevehicles,butfastchargingwillallowforthe
rarelongrangetourstobeaccomplishedusinganelectricvehicleandreducesthe
numberofmilesthatareseenasunlikelytobeservedorunservedforshorterrange
vehicleswithamoderatechargingnetwork(Nicholasetal2013,CAStatewide
Charging).
The Impact of Demand Charges on Fast Charging Costs
Utilitiesmustmeetthedemandforbothpower(kW)andenergy(kWh)ontheir
grid.Whiletypicalresidentialandcommercialloadsrampupanddownslowlyover
thecourseofaday,intermsoftheirpowerdemand,fastcharginginsertsasudden
briefspikeindemand.Tomanagehighpeakpowerdemand,utilitiesemploy
demandchargesthatarebasedonthepeakmonthlydemandthatacustomer
requires.WhiletheloadprofileofFastChargersisnotlikelytobeaproblemfor
utilitiesintermsofload,theyarestillsubjecttodemandcharges,andtheirload
factorislowerthantypicalcommercialusers.Thus,whiletheenergy(kWh)costs
maybeslightlylower,thefixedpowerdemandchargewouldbethesamewhetherit
isdividedoveronechargingeventpermonthor300chargingeventspermonth.
34
TheElectricPowerResearchInstitute(EPRI)performedasimpleanalysisofthe
potentialelectricitycostpercharge,fora50kWchargerproviding20kWhper
charge,fromanexampleCAutilityusingtwosamplerates,oneofwhichincluded
demand‐basedcharges.Theirresultsshowedthatforwinterfastcharging,acostof
approximately$5perchargecouldbeachievedwith15‐25chargespermonthonan
energy‐onlyrate,butwouldrequire100‐150chargespermonthtoreachthesame
costduringthewinteronanelectricityratewithdemandcharges.Interestingly,on
anenergy‐onlyrateduringthesummer,evenwith300chargespermonth,the
expenseswouldstillnotdropto$5percharge.Onandenergy+demandrate,after
250chargespermonththecostswoulddropbelow$5permonth(EPRI,2014).
Thisanalysisdemonstratestheneedforadditionalcriticalthinkingonappropriate,
ortailoredelectricityratesfortheuniqueoperatingprofilesofFastChargers,which
canhelpleadtobotheconomicalcostsforconsumersandoperationsfortheowner
andutilities,especiallyearlyinthemarketwhenutilizationoffastchargersisstill
low.
The Business of Charging
Inthischapter,wewillpresentthevariousbusinessmodelsthathavebeen
successfullyandnot‐so‐successfullyimplementedinthenascentEVcharging
market,aswellaspotentialfutureopportunitiestobuildasuccessfulbusinesscase
aroundpubliccharging.Specifically,someearlyconcepts,suchasvideooraudio
advertisingattheEVSEmaynolongerbeviable,sincethesmartphonehasbecome
ubiquitousanddivertstheattentionofdriverswhiletheywaitfortheirvehicleto
charge.However,thereareotherpotentialrevenuesaroundthedatagatheredfrom
thedevices,andimprovedgridintegrationtoprovidesomedemand‐sideload
management,whichstillneedtobeexplored.Finally,wepresenttheworkplace
35
charginginvestmentmodel,whichisimplementedasacomponentofacomplete
humanresourcesbenefitspackagetoretainandrecruitemployees.
Infrastructure Operation Business Models
WediscussbrieflythreeEVSEoperatingmodels:EVSEnetworkoperators,EVSE
infrastructureowner&operator,andfinancialleaseconstruction.
EVSENetworkOperatorsincludingcurrentcompaniesChargePoint,Semaconnect,
andLibertyPlugins,generaterevenuebysellinghardware(inthecaseof
ChargePoint),aswellasthroughnetworkfeespaidbysitehoststomanagethe
billingandaccesstotheEVSE.Inthiscase,thehostpaysfortheelectricityuse,and
thenetworkoperatormanagesbillingofcustomers–the“back‐end”oftheEVSE
networksystem.Fornetworkoperators,thehostdecidesonthepricingterms,and
canhavefree,time‐limitedfree,orfee‐basedelectricity.Networkoperatorsmaybe
interestedinexpandingtheirnetworksinordertohavethemostcomprehensive
chargingcoveragetooffertheircustomers.Thisoffersthemacompetitive
advantageoverotherEVSEnetworkproviders,whichcanhelpthemrecruitnew
customers.Theyexpandtheirnetworksinoneoftwoways,andearnrevenuebased
onhostsitespayingthemtomanagetheaccessandbillingofcustomers.
Inthefirstcase,thenetworkcanpaysitestoplacetheircharger.Thisapproachmay
beusedwhenexternal(governmental)fundingisavailabletoinstallEVSEs,orfor
sitesthatmaybeseenas“critical”sitesforcustomersatisfaction.
Inthesecondcase,theEVSEhostpurchasestheEVSEandthenpaysthenetwork
operatoreitherasetmonthlyfeeorapercentageofrevenuegeneratedbyuseof
theircharger.
ChargePointnetworkoperatesexclusivelytheirownchargerswhichtheysellto
hostlocations.ChargePointmaybecontractedformaintenanceofthechargers,but
isnotresponsibleforkeepingthemoperationaloncetheyhavebeensold.In
36
contrasttoChargePoint,LibertyPlugInscanoperatethecustomer
billing/networkingformanydifferentEVSEmanufacturers.
Infrastructureowner/operatorcompanies(EVGo,CarChargingGroup(formerly
BlinknetworkownedbyEcotality),andTesla):Underthismodel,acompany
suppliesandownstheinfrastructureandtheback‐endnetworkingandbilling
capabilities,anddeterminesthefeesforuse.Thismodelhasbeencomparedtothat
ofmobiletelecommunicationscompanies,whichinvestininfrastructureandthen
chargeclientsfortheuseofthatinfrastructureviatheirmobiledevices.Obviously,
thesuccessofthetelecommunicationsindustrydoesnotimplythatthesamemodel
cansuccessfullybeusedforelectricvehiclecharginginfrastructure.Companies
adoptingthismodelinitsmostgeneralformtypicallyhaverelativelylargecapital
expenses,andfixedcostsdominatevariablecosts,andthusreturnoninvestment
(ROI)isstronglydependentonhigheruserthroughput(i.e.infrastructure
utilization).Theprimarysourceofincomeisthemonthlysubscriptionfeesthat
userspaytotheinfrastructurecompany,regardlessofwhethertheyuseelectricity
inagivenmonth.Theinfrastructurecompanythenchargesareducedratefor
chargingformonthlysubscriberscomparedtothegeneralpublic,oralltheir
chargingmaybeincludedinthe“premiumtiers”ofmembership.
InthecaseofTesla,theyrequestbidsfromprospectivehostlocationsina
competitiveprocess.Thehostsitethenhasthebenefitofthechargerattheirplace
ofbusinessatacosttheydeemacceptable,sinceTesladoesnotchargethe
customersforuseoftheelectricity.Inthiscase,thecostofinstallationand
operationwouldbepartofthecompetitivebidthatahostproposes.Thismay
includethehostsiteprovidingan“install‐ready”location,premierparkinglocation,
orfreeelectricity.
Inthefinancialleaseconstructionbusinessmodel(usedbyBlink),organizations
simplyenteraleaseagreementwithasupplierbywhichthechargingequipmentis
installedintheorganization’sfacilitiesandused(saybyemployeesorcustomers)
forafee(typicallymonthlyorannual).Thiswasnotapopularoptionforhostsites
37
duetothetermsbeingoffered,whichincludedthehostsitepreparingthesitefor
installation,payingfortheelectricity,andrentingtheuseofthechargeronanon‐
goingbasis.Thismayhavebeeneconomicallyfeasiblewithlargegovernment
supportforinstallinginfrastructure,butisunlikelytobeaviablebusinessplanin
thelongterm.
WhileLangezaalandBouman(2011)projecttheemergenceofcorporate
investmentoncharginginfrastructurebyofferingaccesstosuchinfrastructurefora
monthlyfee,similartothecaseofmobiletelecommunication,wedonotseethis
beingthecase,particularlyintheearlystageofEVmarketdevelopment.Forone,
celltowersandchargingstationsdifferintheuserthroughputtheycan
accommodate.EVSEoffer“physical”accesstooneuseratatime,whilecelltowers
offer“airwave”accesstomultipleuserssimultaneously.Whileonecelltoweris
sufficienttoprovideconnectivityforitsareaofcoverageintothebroadernetwork,
onesinglechargingstationcannotguaranteecoveragetoallprospectiveusersina
givenarea.Corporationspursuingamonthly‐feemodelwouldneedtoplanon
significantinvestmentstoensureadequateservicetoendusers,andacompetitive
scenarioinvolvingmultiplecorporationswillleadtooverlappinginvestments.
Subscription‐basedmodelsareattractiveforearlystagemarketsbecausetheyhelp
withrevenuebenchmarking,thoughforthisparticularmarketenduserswould
needtosubscribetomultiplesuppliersinordertoensureaccesstocharging
services.EVGohastriedthesubscriptionmodelwithvaryinglevelsofsuccess.
Revenue flows vs. value proposition
AstudypreparedfortheStateofWashingtonsaysthat“Ataminimum,apromising
EVchargingprojectmustshowthatthechargingstationowner‐operatorwill
receivedirectandindirectrevenuesthataresufficientlygreaterthanthetotal
projectcosttogenerateprofit”(C2ES,2015,p.36).Wewanttoexpandbeyondthis
argumentandofferthreebroadconsiderations:
38
a‐ Webelievethatastand‐aloneEVSEprojectwillnotbeabletopassthis
financialtestearlyinthePEVmarketdevelopment,furtherdevelopmentof
themarketwilleventuallyleadtoahighenoughnumberofpaying
customers.
b‐ Webelievethatdirect(netpresentvalue)revenuescannotoffsetthe(net
presentvalueofthe)projectcost,particularlywhenthefinancialprojections
accountforuncertaintyindemand;
c‐ WebelievethatwhentheEVSEindustrywillpassthistestnopublic
interventionwillbeneededsimilartothegasstationindustrytoday.
Forexample,ona$5,000installation,paidbackover10years,abusinesswould
needtorecover$1.37perday.Asaconsequence,weproposethatEVSEinvestments
oughtnottobeassessedonthebasisofconventionalrevenuesflows,butratheron
thebasisofvalueproposition.
Wedefinethechargingstationasthecombinationofthechargingequipment,
embedded/relatedinformationtechnology(asapplicable),andthespaceassigned
forthevehiclewhilecharging.Weconsiderdirectrevenuesastherevenuesarising
fromthedurationoftheuseofthechargingstation.Differentfromtheseareindirect
revenues,whichweheredefineasthoserevenuesarisingfromtheavailabilityofthe
station.
Chargingservicesasastand‐alonebusinesswillbeeconomicallychallenging.Like
liquidfuelsales,electricityfuelsaleswilllikelyhaveasmallprofitmargin,and
requirehighutilizationoftheinvestment.Unlikeliquidfuels,manyPEVdrivers,
especiallyintheearlymarket,willhaveahomerefuelingoption(Axsenand
Goldberg,2016)thatlargelysatisfiestheirdailydrivingneeds.Inamulti‐statestudy
ofcurrentPEVownersconductedinlate2014,57%ofrespondentsreportedonly
pluggingintheircarathomewithinthelast30dayspriortocompletingthestudy,
leavinglessthanhalfofthePEVbuyingpopulationthateitheroccasionallyusesor
reliesuponawayfromhomechargingtomeettheirtravelneeds(EPRI,2016).This
isaverydifferentutilizationratethanourcurrentliquidfuelingsystem.
39
Thecapitalandoperatingcostsoftheequipmentandinstallationexceedthe
possiblediscountedrevenuesfromtheuseoftheequipmentprojectedoverits
lifetime,evenatmaximumeconomicutilizationrate.Wedefineeconomicutilization
rateastheratiobetweentheactualutilizationoftheequipmenttothe(realistic)
revenue‐maximizingutilization.Thelatterisgenerallyrenderedwhenthe
equipmentiscontinuouslyused,althoughthemaximumfeasiblerealisticrevenue
underacontinuous‐operationscenariowilldependonthebillingsystem(e.g.it
wouldbedifferentforasystemthatchargesperkilowatt‐hourcomparedtoonethat
chargesfortheaccesstotheequipment).Asimplefinancialanalysisconfirmingthis
conclusionwasincludedin(C2ES,2015).
Ifthepriceofelectricityis,forexample,$0.15perkWh,thentheelectricitycostof
toppinganonboardbatterycouldwellbeintheorderof$1.5.Letusfirstrecognize
thatconsumersunderstandpricesdifferentlydependingonthecontext.For
example,consumersmayassessthe“goodness”ofa$1.5dealbycomparingtowhat
theywouldpaychargingathome,ortheycouldassessitcomparedtowhatthey
wouldhavespentonacomparableamountofliquidfuel.Theformerismorelikely
thecaseamongPEVusers,whilethelattermaybemorelikelyamongprospective
PEVowners.
Thedistinctionisimportantforbusinessandpolicydecisions.Iftheresidential
electricityrateisthementalreferenceforprospectiveusersofpublic‐access
charginginfrastructure,thenprogramsorpoliciesthataffectthedifferencebetween
ratesforpublicandresidentialchargingcanleaduserstowardoneofthe
alternatives.Forexample,apreferredelectricityrateforPEVresidentialcharging
woulddiminishthebusinesscaseforpublic‐accessinfrastructure.Similarly,policies
tosupportthewidespreaddeploymentofsolargenerationcapacitywilltendto
deflatepricesduringdaylighthoursthus,potentially,placepublicchargingratesata
competitiveadvantagevis‐à‐visresidentialcharging.WhileweexpectPEVowners
tobebettereducatedonelectricityratesandpricing,therecentEPRI‐UCDavis
multi‐statesurveyofPEVdriversshowedthattherewerestill16%ofrespondents
40
whodidnotknowwhatelectricalratestructuretheyhadfortheirhome.Onthe
otherhand,21%hadmovedtoaTime‐ofuseorspecificEVratefortheirvehicleor
vehicleandhomeelectricityuse,and8.1%ofrespondentshadchangedtheirratein
somewayafterpurchasingtheirPEV,indicatingthatsomeeducationandawareness
ofrateshadoccurred(EPRI,2016).
ConsideringtheframeofreferenceofprospectivePEVownersisalsoimportantto
understandbusinessmodelsforcharginginfrastructure.Totheextentthataccessto
charginginfrastructureatadvantageousrates(comparedtogasoline)helpswith
PEVmarketuptake,itmakesbusinessandpolicysensetothinkaboutthevalueof
infrastructureinconjunctionwiththevalueofnewplug‐invehiclesales.This,of
course,istheperspectivethatgovernmentshavetakenoverthelastfewyears—
financinginfrastructureasaninvestmenttoincentmarketadoptionofplug‐in
vehicles.Itisalsothestrategythatgovernmentsaretryingtotransitionfrom,into
modelsthatarenotdependentongovernmentsubsidies.Forcorporateentitieswith
avestedinterestinthemarketdevelopmentforplug‐invehicles,ontheotherhand,
investmentsininfrastructureareanaturalcomponentoftheirstrategy.This,it
shouldbehighlighted,ismorethecaseforcompaniescommittedtosellingbattery
electricvehicles.NissanandTeslahavedemonstratedthiswithinvestmentsin
chargingequipment,particularlyhigh‐powerequipment(50kWandhigher),to
supportlonger‐distancetravel.InthecaseofNissan,theyhaveinstalledDCcharging
atmanyoftheirNissandealershipsinareaswithsignificantLeafsales.Teslahas
installed602SuperchargerstationsthroughouttheUS,CanadaandEurope,
operating3,519Superchargers(www.teslamotors.com/superchargerFeb.2016).
Corporationswithastrongerfocusonplug‐inhybridelectricvehicleofferingswill
notfaceastrongincentivetoinvestininfrastructurebecausetheircustomersvalue,
butdonotactuallydependon,accesstocharging.
Fromapublic‐privatepartnershipperspective,understandingcorporate
motivationsisimportant.Governmentsinterestedinthedevelopmentofcharging
networksand/orcorridorswilltypicallyfindwillingpartnersinPEV‐oriented
41
companies.TheycouldalsothinkaboutcreativewaystoinvitePHEV‐oriented
companiestojoinsuchpartnerships.Forexample,stateandmunicipalincentives
forPEVs(e.g.salestaxexemptions)couldbetiedinsomeformtothelevelof
engagementbythecarcompaniesintheprocessofplanninganddeploymentof
charginginfrastructure.
IntheearlydaysofPEVmarketdeployment(2009‐2012),itwascommonlythought
thatbusinesseswouldbeinterestedinleveragingcharginginfrastructuretoa)
attractcustomersandb)marketthemselvesasgreenandinnovative.Afteran
investmentofafewthousanddollarstoinstalltheequipment,businesseswouldbe
inapositiontoofferfreecharging(possiblyalongwithparkingvalidation),
absorbingthesmalloperationscostsandpackagingthemas“complimentary”,on
hopesthatuserswouldspendmoretimeandmoneywiththem.Theneedtowaitfor
thebatterytorechargecouldactasanincentiveforcustomerstostayatthestore
longerthantheyotherwisewould.
Inthisearlymarkethowever,therewereafewhurdlesforhostbusinessesto
overcome.Thelargesthurdleisthatthehostsareunfamiliarwiththecosts,risks
andbenefitsofinstallingandoperatingachargingstationtheseinclude:
LiabilityassociatedwithEVSEoperation,
ReliabilityoftheEVSE,includingthepotentialforupsetcustomers
Maintenancecosts,partsandlaborforhardwarefailures,andongoing
networkfees
Electricitycosts,specificallythepotentialfortriggeringsteepdemand
charges,
Potential“imageboost”tothehostcompany
Additionalcustomerexpenditureswhilecharging,(ie.Increaseinaverage
transactionamountforcustomerswhochargewhiletheyshop)customers
maymakeadditionalunplannedvisitstoastore,spendadditionaltimeata
store,orchooseonestoreoveracompetitorwhodoesn’toffercharging)
42
Legalrequirementsgoverningdisabledpersons’accesstochargingin
parkingspots
Technologyturnover,ie.whethertheEVSEscurrentlyavailablewillmeetthe
needsofPEVsproducedin5‐10years
Forworkplacecharging,thebenefit,orperceivedvalueforemployeesof
havingworkplacechargingavailable.
Averagepaybacktimeforinvestmentcosts
Thislackofresourcesandexperienceisenoughtoscareoffmanybusinessowners.
ThesecondreasonisthattherearerelativelyfewPEVowners,toattractinthese
earlyyears.Onestrategythatcitiesorregionscouldemployintryingtoencourage
companiestoinstallandhostEVSEswouldbetocreateaninformationalresourcethat
addressestheseunknownsbasedonthepastfiveyearsofexperience.Thisresource
couldincludespecificlocalutilityinformation,localexperiencedelectricians,
informationonthelocalrequirementsforinstallationandinspection,andmore
generalinformationoncosts,reliabilityandnon‐financialbenefits.Specifically,
additionalresearchevaluatingthepotentialincreaseinrevenuesforstoresor
shoppingcentersbycustomerswhochargewhiletheyshop,andperceivedvalueof
workplacechargingasanemployeebenefit,couldbeinstrumentalinencouraging
retailandworkplacelocationstoinstallEVSEs.
IT and Data: An important part of the value underlying EV charging infrastructure.
InformationTechnology(IT)definestheintelligenceofthecharginginfrastructure
andhowitintegratesintoanetworkandintoabroadersystemofelectricitysupply
anddemand.ThelatentvalueofITinthecreationoffuturesuccessfulbusiness
modelsforinfrastructurecannotbeoveremphasized.Indeed,thehardwareinvolved
inprovidingchargingservicesis“offtheshelf”technologyandabusinessthatwas
predominantlybuiltaroundtheequipmentwouldhaveessentiallynobarriersto
entry.Unfortunately,whiletheEVSEtechnologyisavailable,thedemandfor
chargingisstilllimited.Consumersarealsounwillingtopayveryhighpricesfor
43
electricity,especiallycomparedtoeithergasolineorhomeelectricity,asdiscussed
previously.Inregionswithhighgasolinepricesandlowelectricityprices,like
Vancouver,chargeraccesscanbepricedtoallowforasmallnetrevenue.Inplaces
withlowgasprices,chargingcannotbepricedhighenoughtoallowforanear‐term
revenuestream,withoutturningawaycustomers.
↑ ↓
↓ ↑
↑
Thepotentialbusinesscase,andcompetitivefrontier,likelyliesonthedevelopment
oftechnologiesthatgoverntheoperationoftheinfrastructureandtheprocessingof
massiveamountofreal‐timedata.However,chargingoperationsanddata
processingcanbedoneeitherattheequipmentoratthevehicle.Infact,because
chargingcontrolis(orcanbe)ultimatelyundertheonboardcharger,anIT‐based
businesscaseforcharginginfrastructuremaybeunderminediftheautomakers
choosetoactonthis.
Controlofchargingoperationsisacomplexundertakingandcouldbedesignedand
implementedwithmultipleendgoals.Upstreamstakeholders,predominantly
electricutilities,willbeinterestedinchargingcontrolalgorithmsthatcontributeto
thevaluechainofthedeliveryofelectricity,deliveryofgridstabilityandhigher
margins.Astemptingasthisroutecanbe,itiscriticaltokeeptheenduseratthe
forefrontbecausethesocialgoalisultimatelytosupportPEVmarketuptakeand
utilization(i.e.electrickilometrestraveled).PEVuserswillwanttoknowthattheir
chargingandmobilityneedswillbemet.Onthedownstreamside,controlof
chargingoperationscanbeimplementedtomaximizemarginsonthecharging
serviceand/ortomaximizeendusersatisfaction(e.g.bycoordinatingcharging
throughputwithinstantaneouselectricityratesorbyintegratingelectricityfrom
cleangenerationsources).Fordownstreamcontrol,thefrontendoftheITsolution
44
takescenterstage,astheuserisprovidedwithinformation,interactivityand
controloptions.
Intheearlystageoftheindustry,ITapplicationsrelatedtocharginginfrastructure
werecenteredonbasicelementssuchasbilling,mapping,andnavigation.
ApplicationstoinformEVusersaboutthelocationofchargingpointsemerged
quicklyastheimmediateideacontributingtothevaluechain.Companiesadded
valuebyprovidinginformationabout,orbasedon,thelocationofchargingpoints
(e.g.PlugShare).Thereisapossibleinversevalueadded:Thechargingpoint
generatingrevenuefrommakinginformationavailabletotheITcompany.Tothe
extentofourknowledge,thisreversevaluedirectionhasnotbeentested.Oneform
thatthiscouldtakeischargingstationownerscouldcapitalizeondatageneratedby
equipmentattheirlocation.Salesofuserdwell‐timedatatocarmanufacturers,
businesses,oradvertiserscouldleadtoadditionalrevenuefortheEVSEowneror
operator.Sampletravel(origin‐destination)datahasbeenusedtomodelpotential
demandforchargingandassistwithchargestationplanninginresearch
applications,withexplicitpermissionfromparticipants.Theautomakersmayhave
moretraveldataavailable,thoughthisdataisheavilyguardedforprivacyreasons
withineachautomakerandisunlikelytobeshared.EVSEcompanieswouldhave
datafromeachlocationintheirnetwork,butnotthecompletepictureofusertravel
aroundchargingevents,thougheventheirlimitedinformationcouldprovide
valuableinsightstohostlocationsandresearchers.
Oneadditionalpotentialsourceofrevenue,thattoourknowledgehasnotyetbeen
implemented,ischarginganadditionalfeeforuserstowanttoreserveacharging
stationtobeavailableataspecifictimeandforasetchargingduration.A
“reservation”feewouldoffsetthecostofimplementingareservationsystemand
anypotentiallostrevenueforaspontaneouschargingevent,butareservation
wouldlikelybearelativelylow‐costsystemtoimplement.
45
Grid Integration
Inthecurrentstageofmarketdevelopment,theITfocushasexpandedonto
applicationsforgridintegration.Theapplicationstoryline,inthiscase,isaboutthe
valueofchargecontrolormodulationtoa)mitigateloadpeakingfromsimultaneous
chargingofplug‐invehiclesinlargenumberswithinagivendistributionlineor
morebroadlywithintheinterconnection,andb)absorbgenerationpeaks,suchas
thoseresultingfromlargescalenon‐dispatchablecapacity(e.g.windandsolar).
Weemphasizeagainthatitisnotclearthateconomicplayersupstreamfromthe
chargingconnectorcanassertjurisdictionoverthecontrolofcharging.Thisisa
spacethatcanbeclaimedbytheautomanufacturersandthird‐partySoftwareasa
Service(SaaScompanies).Chargecontrolfromsmartchargingequipmentcantake
theformoftellingtheonboardchargerhowmuchpowerisavailabletotakeata
givenmoment.Ontheotherhand,theonboardchargerultimatelydecideshow
muchofthatavailablepoweritwilltakeatanygiventime.Thus,smartcharging
equipmentcancontrolmaximumpowerdrawbutcannotcontrolactualpower
draw.Conversely,theonboardchargecancontrolactualpowerdrawuptothe
maximumspecifiedbythechargingstation.Fromavalueperspective,charging
equipmentoperatorscanhelpmitigateEVloadpeaking,whileonboardcharger
controller(third‐partyorautomaker)canhelpabsorbpowergenerationpeaks
throughchargingcontrolandschedulingwhichcanthenleadtolowerinstallation
orpanelupgradingcosts.
Table4:TableofGridSystemManagementTechniquesandpotentialbenefits.
SystemManagement
Technique
Function Benefits
LoadManagementor
Demand‐Side
Management(DSM)
Theprocessofcontrollingthedemandforpowerratherthantheproductionofelectricity.Canbeimplementedaspre‐scheduledorinterruptedchargingforPEVs.
Allowsforgridtomeetreduceddemandratherthanrequiringadditionalproductiontobebroughtonline.
46
LoadSharing Distributingpoweracrossmorethanonevehiclesimultaneouslythroughamicroprocessor‐controlledEVSE.CanbedistributedbasedonvehicleSOC,orderofconnectingtothegrid,andsystemcapacity.
Allowsformultiplevehiclestobepluggedinandchargedinparallelorseries.Usefulforapplicationswherevehicleswillbepluggedinforlongerperiodsoftime,suchasworkplacesorairports.
LoadShedding ThesystematicreductionofsystemDemandbytemporarilydecreasingtheSupplyofEnergytoLoadsinresponsetotransmissionsystemorareacapacityshortages,systeminstability,orvoltagecontrolconsiderations.(CalISO)
Real‐timesignalstocutloadcanresultinamorestablegrid,withtemporaryreductionsindemandwhennecessary.
SmartCharging Vehiclechargingcanbestartedandstoppedbasedontimeofuse,real‐timedemandandbatterystateofchargethroughanintelligentcontrolstrategyorwirelesssignals.
Smartchargingcanintegrateallorsomeoftheabovesystemmanagementtechniques,aswellasvehicleinput,andallowforeasierintegrationofvehiclesandrenewablestotheelectricitygrid.
Beyondthecurrentstageofthemarket,weexpectinnovativeITapplicationsto
enterthevaluechain.Thesecouldbegearedtowardenhancingtheoverall
economicsofEVownershiporintegratingtheindividualvehicleintonetworksof
transactiveenergy.Wewillnotspeculatehereaboutthefuture,butweventureto
saythatthepathwayofITapplicationswillinvolvesomeformofaggregation,or
integrationofthechargingpointsintoorganicnetworks.Thisisconsistentwithour
earlierassertionthatbusinessmodelsaroundastand‐alonecharginglocationare
notcompetitiveinthelongrun.
EarlyEVSEsuppliersconsideredprovidingvideo,audioandstaticadvertisingonthe
EVSEsthatuserswouldviewwhilecharging.Whiletherapidadoptionof
smartphoneshaslargelyeliminatedthe“captiveaudience”thatEVSEsmayhave
47
beenabletocapitalizeon,staticadvertisingor“EVSEsponsorship”maystillplaya
roleinfundingchargers.
Workplace Charging Investment Models
Theparticipationofemployersinthesupplyofcharginginfrastructuremayhave
significantimplicationsforthemarketuptakeofplug‐invehicles.Employersmaybe
motivatedtoinvestinchargingequipmentattheworkplaceforavarietyofreasons,
mostimportantlyemployeesatisfactionandretention.Inthisinstance,thebusiness
caseislinkedtotheoverallhumanresourcesstrategyofthehostorganization.The
decisiontoinstallchargingequipmentmaydependonavarietyoffactors,including
costofequipment,costofinstallation,sizeoftheorganization,financialsofthe
organization,characteristicsoftheemployeepool,supportfromcompany
leadership,etc.
Employersmayadoptdifferentmodelsfortheuseofchargingequipment,which
wouldbroadlyfallintotwocategories:freeofchargeorchargeforafee.Thepros
andconsofeachmodelwerediscussedbyNicholasandTal(2013),andmore
succinctlyinavideoat
http://zeroemissionmap.ucdavis.edu/category/multimedia/.Freechargingatwork
leadstomoreworkplacecharging,butnotnecessarilymoreelectricmilestraveled,
andrequiresfourtimesasmanychargerstobeinstalled.However,availabilityof
workplacechargingmayhelptogrowthePEVmarketbyprovidedthatasan
additionalperktopotentialPEVbuyersorallowingcustomerswithouteasyorlow‐
costaccesstohomechargingtohaveareliabledailycharginglocation.
ProgramsliketheoneinstitutedbytheStateofMassachusettscouldbeevenmore
effectiveinspurringPEVadoptioniftheexistenceoftheprogramwas
communicatedtoprospectivevehiclebuyersbeforetheymaketheirchoiceof
vehicle.Newvehicledealerscouldplayanimportantroleinsuchcommunication.
However,themarginalvalueofadvertisingtheprogramatthedealershipmaybe
smallbecause,asrecentresearchsuggests,mostPEVbuyersmaywalkinthe
48
dealershipalreadystronglyinclinedtobuyaPEV(Cahill,webinarJune4,2015)
(http://zeroemissionmap.ucdavis.edu/wp‐content/uploads/2015/06/EC‐
slides.pdf)Abetterstrategywouldbetoworkdirectlywithemployerswhomaybe
inclinedtoinvestincharginginfrastructure,andletthemadvertisetheprogram
amongemployees.
Oneexampleofaprogramencouraginginstallationofworkplacechargingisthe
MassachusettsElectricVehicleIncentiveProgram(MassEVIP),whichisanopen
grantprogramadministeredbytheMassachusettsDepartmentofEnvironmental
Protection,whichprovidesincentivestoemployersfortheacquisitionofLevel1
andLevel2electricvehiclechargingstations,andlaunchedinApril,2013(Mass
EVIPdocuments).Thisprogramwillprovideemployerswith15ormoreemployees
50%ofthefunding(upto$25,000)forhardwarecostsforemployersinstalling
Level1and2charging,andisofferedonafirst‐come,first‐servedbasis.
(http://www.mass.gov/eea/agencies/massdep/air/grants/workplace‐
charging.html)
Dependingonthemodelthattheemployeradoptsfortheuseofthecharging
stations,theeconomicbenefitstoend‐useremployeescanbesignificant.Areport
onworkplaceswithchargingpublishedbytheCaliforniaPlug‐inElectricVehicle
Collaborative(PEVC,2013)foundthatemployersthathaveinstalledcharging
stationstoserveemployeeshaveseenincreasednumbersofemployeeswithplug‐in
vehicles.ThestateofCaliforniahasadoptedanumberofprogramstoencourage
infrastructuredeploymentbybusinesses.Ontheeasierendofthescalethereisthe
CoolCaliforniaClimateLeaderandSmallBusinessAwardsprogram,whichgives
awardsto15businesseseveryyearinrecognitionfortheirinitiativestocutenergy
consumptionanddemonstratemeasurablegreenhousegasemissionsreductions,
EVchargingstationscounttowardtheseinitiatives.Theseawardwinnersdocument
theircostsavings,returnoninvestments,andotherbenefitsreceivedfromtaking
specificactions.Thisawardprovidesprestigeandvisibilityforsmallbusinesses,and
49
canbeagoodpromotionaltoolforthem(CoolCalifornia).Asimilarprogramof
recognizingforward‐thinkingcompaniescouldbeimplementedatlowcostand
couldleadtoalocalbusinesscultureofenergyconscientiouscompanies.
IncorporatingEVchargingintheevaluationcriteriacansimultaneouslyhelpbuilda
localchargingnetwork.
AmoreelaborateprogramistheElectricVehicleChargingStationFinancing
Program,institutedbytheCaliforniaPollutionControlFinancingAuthority(CPCFA).
Thisprogramisfundedbythestate,butinsteadofgivingfundingdirectlyto
businessowners,thefundingisusedtoreducetheburdenandriskofbusinessloans
forallcostsincludedintheinstallationofcharginginfrastructureattheworkplace.
Thestatepays20%(30%formulti‐unitdwellingsordisadvantagedcommunities)
oftheprincipalbalanceintoalossreserveaccountatthetimeofloanapproval.
Aftertheborrowerpaysbacktheloan(or48months,whicheveroccursfirst),they
areeligibleforarebateequaltohalfthedeposittothelossreserveaccount.This
programmitigatestherisktolendersandalsomitigatesthefinancialburdenon
non‐defaultingborrowers.TheEVCSFinancingProgramisapilotprojectwithinitial
fundingof$2,000,000,fromtheCaliforniaEnergyCommission,whichlaunchedin
mid‐2015,andisadministeredbytheCaliforniaPollutionControlFinancing
Authority(CPCFA).ItwillbeevaluatedbytheCaliforniaEnergyCommissionand
theCaliforniaPollutionControlFinancingAuthorityaftertheinitialfundingis
exhausted.AprogrambrochureisincludedinAppendix1.
ThevalueofworkplacechargingtosupportEVmarketsneedstobebetterstudied,
butthereismountinganecdotalevidencethatthisvaluemaybesignificant.Thereis
alsoatheoreticalrationalethatlendscredibilitytothisevidence,whichwediscuss
later.However,workplaceprogramsarenotalwayseasytoimplement.Employers
facechallenges,twoofwhichwehighlighthere:employeereticencetouseplug‐in
vehiclesinthefleet,andtheunknownsrelatedtoinstallingcharginginfrastructure.
TheStateofWashingtonhasdevelopedaguidancedocumentthatanswers
questionsfacingemployersandemployeesinregardtoplug‐invehiclesand
50
charginginfrastructure(Miller‐Crowley,MoultonandJensen,2014).Thedocument
isclearlywrittenandorganized,andbeginswithafocusonthekeydeterminantfor
fleetoperators,thetotalcostofownership:“Thebottomline,baseduponthetotal
costofownership,ispublicfleetmanagersshouldthinkofbatteryelectricvehicles
astheirdefaultchoiceforsedanreplacement,onlymovingontoplug‐inhybridor
hybridvehiclesafterthey’vedeterminedthatabatteryelectricvehicleisnot
practicalfortheirtypicaldailyuse”.Itprovidesinformation,guidelines,and
additionalresourcestodecisionmakersorganizedaroundtovehicle,charging
equipment,andoperationsoptions.
Public Private Partnerships
Thepotentialofpublic‐privatepartnership(PPP)approachestohelpthegrowthof
infrastructurethatsupportsnewtechnologieshasbeendemonstrated.TheStateof
Washington,havingawell‐establishedPPPofficeinthestateDepartmentof
Transportation,iswellpositionedtoexploretheseapproaches.Corporate‐
sponsoredinstallationsarethesimplestPPPmodelexploredtodate.InWashington,
theUS‐2EVcorridoroffersamoreadvancedexampleofaPPPapproach,where
publicfundingwascomplementedwithprivateinvestmentsinanintegrated
corridordevelopment.TheWestCoastElectricHighwayisanetworkofEVchargers
linkingWashington,Oregon,andCaliforniaonInterstate‐5.Itisledby
governmentalagenciesineachstate,butimplementationandoperationisby
privateEVSEcompanies(WestCoastGreenHighway).Similarstrategiescanbeused
toincentEVSEinstallationsalongothercorridors,includingcommutecorridors.In
urbanareas,publicfastchargersthatareco‐locatedatornearapartmentscan
provideservicetobothvisitorsandresidents.Thissolutionmayallowcharger
owner/operatorstomaximizetheirrevenuebyprovidingasteadystreamof
customersthroughoutthedayandnight.YetanotherPPPapproachinvolvesthe
adoptionofregulatoryincentivesinreturnforinfrastructureinvestments.For
example,aninfrastructureinstallermaybegivenabreakontaxes,orelectricity
ratesinordertoincentivizeinstallationwithoutprovidingacashincentive.This
51
requiresajustificationbasedonthebroadercarbonbenefitsandeventualreduction
inelectricityratesandforallratepayersorresidents.Inspecificinstancesearlyin
themarketthiscouldhelpjumpstartthePEVmarketwhichcouldleadtobenefits
forallratepayers.
OneexampleofPPPistheStateofMassachusetts’sMassEVIPprogramasdiscussed
above.Thisprogramoffersemployerswith15ormoreemployeestopartnerwith
thestateinsharingthecostofinstallingchargingequipment.Undertheprogram,
thestatecovershalfofthecostoflevel1orlevel2equipmentandthehost
organizationcoverstheotherhalfaswellasthecostofinstallation.Thehost
organizationretainsthefreedomtoselectthetypeandbrandofequipment.The
stateintegratedthisprogramwithitsvehiclerebateprogrambytellingaboutthe
existenceofthisprogramtoeverypersonwhoclaimstherebate.Thismotivates
PEVadopterstoapproachtheiremployersandrequestthattheyinstallcharging
equipmentinpartnershipwiththestate.
Case study: Overview of charging infrastructure development in France
TheEUParliamentestablishedinMarch2014agoalofinstalling800,000public
accesschargingstationsacrossEuropeby2020,withindividualtargetssetforeach
MemberState(Evolution,2014).
Someprojectssupportingelectricmobilityintheregionareinprogress.One
exampleistheEuropeanProjectLong‐distanceElectricCleanTransportRoad
InfrastructureCorridor(ELECTRIC)withprivatepublicinvestmentof8.4million
euro(effortispartofEuropeanUnion'sTrans‐EuropeanTransportNetworks)in
infrastructurepolicyaimedatconnectingEUmemberstatesbetweeneastandwest,
northandsouth(ABB).
Franceinvested60millionEurosbetween2009and2012toinstall1,250public
chargingpointsinabout20largeurbanareas(Leurent,Fabienetal.,2011).The
electricutilityElectricitédeFrance(EDF)establishedanextensivenetworkof
52
publicchargingstationsinFrance.Themostsignificantdevelopmentoccurredin
citieswithmoreintensiveEVadoptionlikeParisandLaRochelle.Thereare
currently9,400chargingpointsinstalledthroughoutFranceandgovernment
projectionsexpectthisnumbertoclimbto40,000by2020(Lesechos,2015).
Frenchdecisionmakersrecognizethatadensechargingstationnetworkalonedoes
notensurethatmotoristshaveaccesstochargingbecauseofthevarietyofsockets,
communicationsstandardsandpaymentmethods.InMarch2015,France
establishedtheAssociationforRoamingElectricVehicleCharging(Afirev),withthe
goaltoensurethatelectriccardriverscantravelandchargeseamlesslyacrossthe
territoryregardlessoftheoperatorofthechargingstation(e.g.EDF,Mallore,Vinci,
Bouygue,etc.)
Tosupportelectricmobility,thecityofPariscreatedtheAutolibcarsharingscheme
in2011,currentlyoperatingover2,000electriccars,andaround4,000charging
stationsaroundthecityandsurroundingregion.Thisisanannualsubscription
basedprogramallowingmemberstorentthevehiclesfromonerentalstationand
returnthemtoanyotherrentalstationforvarying30‐minuterentalrates
(dependingonthemembershiptype).Itisreportedthatonatypicalday,electric
carsintheAutolibsystemserveabout10,000trips.Autolibalsoofferscharging
servicestoprivatevehicleownerswithaspecialsubscription,andfreeuseofthe
AutolibchargingstationswasincludedinRenaultEVsalesasofearly2014.These
multiplerevenuestreamsappearlikelytocreateasuccessfulbusinesscase.The
FrenchgroupBolloreannouncedaninvestmentof150millioneurostodeploy
16,000publicaccesschargingstationsthroughoutFrance,tobuildacharging
network.Inthisplan,themaximumdistancebetweenachargingpointandthenext
willbe41kilometers(25miles).NowthegovernmentofFrance,ledbytheMinistry
ofFinanceandtheMinistryofEnvironment,isconsideringapackageoftax
incentivestosupportBollore’sinitiative,inadditiontoexpandingtherebateoffered
forelectricdrivevehiclepurchases,from6,000to10,000euros(Bollore.com).In
June,2013AutolibjoinedwithIndianapolis,IndianatoformBlueIndy,which
53
openedtothepublicinSeptember2015,andasimilarprogramwaslaunchedin
LondoninMarch2015usingtheexistingnetworkofchargersthere.
Theoretically,thisnetworkwillbeintegratedwithaseparateinfrastructureproject
co‐sponsoredbytheTrans‐EuropeanTransportNetworkExecutiveAgency(TEN‐T
EA,nowtheInnovationandNetworksExecutiveAgency,INEAundertheEuropean
Commission).ThisprogramwasestablishedbytheEuropeanCommissionto
supporttheconstructionandupgradingofvarioustransportationinfrastructuresin
theEUandincludesprojectsinalltransportmodes–air,rail,road,maritime,and
logisticsandintelligenttransportationsystems.Thisprojectwasdesignedas
consistingofthreephases.Inthefirstphase,5millioneurosareinvestedtoinstall
andtest200interoperableandmulti‐standardfastchargersonthehighwaysof
Francebytheendof2015.Thesecondphasewillbuildupontheexperienceofthe
firstone,todeveloprecommendationsregardinginteroperability,tosupportthe
integrationofchargingandhydrogenrefuelingnetworksacrossFranceandEurope.
Thethirdandfinalphasewillbeconcernedwiththediscoveryandvalidationof
innovativebusinessmodelsforsustainablechargingnetworks.Wehighlightthe
integrationoftheinvestmentforthisprojectintoabroaderframeworkthatis
orientedtowardexperimentationandlearning.Suchapproachesrepresentagreat
improvementrelativetoinvestmentsthatstopatthedeploymentoftheequipment.
Projectstoinstallfast‐chargingnetworksinFrance,IrelandandtheUK(2011‐
2012),Denmark,theNetherlands,SwedenandGermany(2013)aimtonotonlyhelp
developlocalinfrastructure,butalsoimprovedrivers’acceptanceofEVsand
improveconnectivityandcompatibilitythroughouttheEuropeanUnionmember
states.Intheseprojects,theEuropeanCommissionfundsapproximately50%of
totalprojectcostswhilethemembercountriesorprivatepartnersfundthe
remainingamount(EuropeanCommission).
SuccessfulEuropeanexperienceshaveintegratedthedeploymentoftheequipment
intobroaderlonger‐termplansthatincludethesustainedreliabilityofthe
equipmentaswellasexperimentationandopenlearning.Webelievetheseshould
54
bepillarsofanyinfrastructureinvestment,tosupportgooduserexperience,
productlegitimation,testingofnewideas,innovationandultimatelyfinancial
sustainability.
Therearetwocomplementaryprograms(“EcoCities”and“Villededemain”)and
fundsfortheimplementationofinfrastructureforEVsfromtheMinistryofEcology
andSustainableDevelopmentandEnergy,whichallocated50millioneurosto
supporttheinstallationofpublicchargersforEVsincitieswithover200,000
inhabitants(Ministère,2015).In2016,anewprogram“ProgrammeAdvenir”allows
forfinancingofprivatechargingpointsthroughenergysavingscertificates.This
programisfocusedonsharedchargingoncompanyproperty,privateareasthat
wouldbeaccessibletothepublic(suchasstoreparkinglots),andprivatecharging
oncollectivehousingproperties(http://www.developpement‐durable.gouv.fr/Le‐
renforcement‐de‐l.html).
Successfulprojectshavealsoincludedconsumereducationprograms:Such
programsincludedinformationinareaslikebenefitsofusingplug‐invehicles,best
practicesfortheuseofplug‐invehiclesandcharginginfrastructure(e.g.eco‐driving
tosaveenergyandusinglowerratestochargethebattery)andfamiliaritywiththe
technology.IntheUnitedStates,forexample,SanDiegoGas&Electriccreateda
websiteandhandoutsthatweredistributedtoregionalcardealershipswith
informationontheirlocalEVutilityrates,andlinkstoinformationonlocal,state,
andfederalincentives.Thisremovestheburdenofinformationfromthedealerfor
potentialbuyers(http://www.sdge.com/electric‐vehicles).
Legitimation of the EV Market
Consistentwithstudiesoftechnologyinnovation,therateofgrowthofplug‐in
vehiclemarketsincreasesthemoretheyareperceivedasamainstreamtechnology.
Ininnovationstudies,thisisoftenreferredtoaslegitimation.Onewayforthepublic
sectortoencouragelegitimationofplug‐invehiclesistoprovidecharging
55
infrastructureaninstitutionalframeworkcomparabletootherelementsofthe
electricgridandelectricalappliances.Theneededcomponentsofsuchinstitutional
frameworkarefamiliartomoststakeholdersworkingonvehicleelectrification,but
maybeunexpectedtothosewhoarenewtotheindustry.Theyincludecertification,
permitting,inspection,electricalcodes,buildingcodes,developmentregulations,
compliancewithrequirementsfordisabledpersonaccess,consistentandhighly
visiblesignage,andavarietyofrulesandnormsthatoftenvaryacrossgovernment
jurisdictions,suchasbuildingefficiencystandards,appropriatedemandcharges,
rightofwayinthepublicspace,andothers.Theroleofgovernmentisextendedfor
installationsinpublic‐sectorfacilities,includingprocurementguidelinesand
funding.Thedevelopment,implementationandenforcementofsuchinstitutional
framework,andthedevelopmentofaregionally‐specificguidetotheappropriate
regulations,wouldsendaclearlegitimationsignaltosectorsoftheeconomy,
equivalenttoreducingthecostandriskofdoingbusinessinvolvingcharging
infrastructure.
Toillustratethenotionofalegitimizinginstitutionalframework,considerthecase
ofbuildingcodes.Someinitiativestorevisestatebuildingcodestoincludebasic
requirementsforcharginginfrastructure,suchaslayingoutconduitinparking
spaces,havebeenmetwithconcernsabouttheimpactofsuchrequirementson
buildingcosts.Alegitimizinginstitutionalframeworkprovidesforbuildingcodes
thatgiveequitabletreatmenttoplug‐invehicles,treatingthemasotherloadsthat
meetbasicneedsoftheoccupantsofthebuilding.Muchlikepowergeneration
increasinglycomesfromdistributedsources,vehiclerefuelingwillincreasinglybea
distributedactivity.Intheworldofvehicleelectrification,parkingfacilitiesarethe
newfuelstation.Thisisaparadigmchangethatgovernmentsneedtoacceptand
reflectinlegitimizedrulesandnorms.Includingregulationsinbuildingcodes,
creatingstreamlinedpermittingprocessesforinstallationofEVSEs,establishing
consistentsignageandrulesforpubliclyaccessedchargingwillalsohelp,andcanbe
doneatalocallevel.
56
Wereferabovetopublicparkingfacilitiesinabroadsense,whichincludesallnon‐
residentialpublicallyavailablecharging.Thisincludeson‐streetparking,public‐
accessgarages,customerdedicatedparking,sharedpublic/workplaceparking,and
miscellaneousparking(e.g.recreationalspaces,restareas,andsuch).The
installationofequipmentinsomeofthesesettings,forexamplethoseinthepublic
rightofwayforon‐streetparking,maybefinanciallyimpracticalformostusers.The
Netherlandshasdealtwiththisissue,andthebiggesthurdlesarethatthecostsare
bornebyasingleowner/user,whoisthenrequiredtooffertheuseofthecharger
publically.Theyalsohaddelaysduetouncertaintiesaroundpermittingand
installationrequirements.Inthiscase,offeringpartialfundingforownerswhowant
toinstallon‐streetchargingthatwillbepublicallyavailable,aswellasclear
requirementsandprocessescanalleviatetheburdenontheinitialowner.Another
optionwouldbeiftheinitialownerfullyfundedinstallation,butthecitytookover
maintenance.Finally,thechargercouldbelockedsothatitisnotpublically
available,despitebeingon‐street.Howeverthechallengeisapproached,thesetof
rulesforinstallation,maintenance,anduseshouldbeclearforsuchcases.Arecent
studyexploresthequestionofcharginginfrastructureforgarageorphans(electric
vehicleownersorprospectiveownerswhodonothaveaccesstooff‐streetparking)
(NelsonNygaard,2014).ThecityofSanFranciscowillsoonbeembarkingonastudy
toevaluatethepotentialforaddinglevelonechargingatexistingstreetlamps,since
theyarestreet‐sideandalreadyhaveelectricityavailable,whichcouldhelpreduce
costsandaddchargingaccessforcitydwellers.Anothersolutionissupportforfast
charginglocationsthatcanserveasaback‐uptocongestedleveltwoandpublicand
multi‐unitdwellingparkinglocations.
Theintegrationoftheelectricvehiclewiththebuildingoffersopportunitiesfor
improvedeconomicsonthedeploymentofcharginginfrastructure.Incontrast,the
lackofintegrationmaypresentdeterrentsforinfrastructuredeploymentsand
ultimatelyforthegrowthoftheelectricvehiclemarket.
57
Models Based on EV‐Building Integration
IntheUnitedStates,aboutsixpercentofdirectcarbonemissionsin2013camefrom
commercialbuildings.Directemissionsincommercialbuildingsoriginateinthe
burningoffossilfuelsforheatingandcooking(55.3%),wastemanagement(34.5%),
andleaks(10.2%).Electricitygeneration,represented31.3%oftotaldirectcarbon
emissions.About20percentoftotalenergyconsumptionin2014wasattributable
tocommercialbuildings.WhileinBritishColumbiastationaryenergyloads(suchas
buildings)representasmallerfractionoftotalcarbonemissionsbecauseofthe
Province’sheavyrelianceonhydropower,energybenchmarkingofcommercial
buildingswithtransportationprovisionscouldofferopportunitiesforthissectorto
participateincarbonmitigationefforts.
OnespecificopportunitythatweidentifiedforEV‐buildingintegrationisincluding
theenergyandgreenhousegas(GHG)impactsfromtraveldemandgeneratedby
commercialbuildingsintobenchmarkingmethodologies.Studiessuggestthat
energybenchmarkingofcommercialbuildingisresultinginenergyusereductions
(PalmerandWalls,2012,U.S.EPA,2012).Partofthelogicisthatbenchmarking
providesinformationthatisotherwiseunavailabletobuildingownersandenergy
managersandenables/encouragesthemtoadopttargetedstrategiestoreduce
energyuse.Integratingbuildingwithvehiclewillencouragestrategiestoreduce
emissionsfromtransportation.ThecitiesofAustin,Boston,Chicago,theDistrictof
Columbia,Minneapolis,NewYorkCity,Philadelphia,SanFrancisco,andSeattlehave
enactedbuildingenergybenchmarkinglegislation.Asbuildingenergy
benchmarkingcontinuestoexpandthroughoutAmerica(andperhapstoBritish
Columbia)thereisneedtoensurethattheprogrampoliciesarestructuredto
supportcleantechnologies.Insomeregions,atechnology‐neutralsystemfor
evaluatingandscoringtransportationemissionsisused,thoughsomecountriesand
regionscanselectapreferredtechnologybasedonexistingnaturalresources,such
ascleanelectricityinBritishColumbia.Redefiningthebuildingenvelopetoinclude
relatedtravelbyPEVsorconventionalvehiclesmaybechallenging,butapotentially
58
powerfulapproach.
Wedonotpresenthereadetailedanalysisofthisopportunity,butbelievethatthere
areopportunitiesforfurtherexplorationandpilots,withtheparticipationof
stakeholdersintheregion.Thestartingpointcouldbeonaccountingpracticesthat
encouragebuildingenergymanagersandcommercialpropertyownerstoreduce
energyandcarbonemissionsfromthetraveldemandgeneratedbytheirbuildings,
suchasemployeecommuteandcustomers’visits.Suchaccountingsystemswould
inducebuildingenergymanagersandcommercialpropertyownerstodevelop
strategiestoreduceenergyuseandemissionsfromtransportation.Forthe
purposesofthisparticularreport,thefocuscouldbeonstrategiestoencourage
energysavingsandemissionsabatementbydisplacingfossilfuelswithelectricityfuel
fortransportation.Probablythemostobviouselementofsuchstrategiesisthe
installationofelectricvehiclesupplyequipment(EVSE),althoughitshouldbe
complementedwithotherelements.
Wewouldnote,arevisionofenergyandemissionsaccountingprotocolsthat
providepropertyownerswithincentivestoinvestinsuchinfrastructure,wouldalso
havelegitimationpositiveexternalities,helpingfamiliarizethepublicwithEV
technologyandinturnsupportmarketadoptionande‐milesdisplacementoffossil
miles.IntheUS,thesebuildingenergyuseandemissionsstandardsaresetona
federalandstatebuildingcodelevel,andforecastedpriortoconstruction.Buildings
thatgoabovetheminimummayqualifyforaLEEDcertification(Leadershipin
EnergyandEnvironmentalDesign,developedbytheUSGreenBuildingCouncil,
USGBC),WealsonotetheimportanceofbalancingstrategiesthatsupportEV
adoptionsothattheydon’tresultininadvertentconsequences(suchashigher
emissionsfromsubstitutingchargingofEVsforbicycletripsorcreatingnew
electricitypeaks).Theseaccountingprocessesandgreenbuildingcertificationsare
setatafederal,ratherthancityorprovincelevel,butshouldbeencouragedto
considerthechangingtransportationsystem,particularlyEVcharging.
Adeeperexplorationofthebuilding‐EVintegrationconceptsthatwelaidoutabove
59
couldaddressthefollowingareas:
o Cityandprovincialmotivationsforadoptinganenergybenchmarking
programandintegratingemissionsfromtransportationintothe
benchmarkingofcommercialbuilding
o Acomparativeassessmentofenergyconsumptionandcarbonemissions
arisingfromtravelattractiontocommercialbuildingsandothersourcesin
thebuilding
o Opportunitiestointegratesuchstrategiesintocity/provinceumbrella
strategies,suchastheCityofVancouver’sElectricVehicleStrategy(currently
underdevelopment),VancouverBuildingCodeupdatesandlongrange(2050)
emissionsreductionplanning
o ComparativeassessmentofthecapitalizationofEVSEinbuildingsand
alternativestrategiestoimproveenergyefficiencyandenvironmental
friendlinessofcommercialbuildings
o Fromtheperspectiveofthebuildingowner,investmentsincharging
infrastructureinthebuildingwillincreaseelectricitybills.Policyandbusiness
strategiesthatwouldlikelyneedtoprovidemeanstointernalizethese
additionalcosts.Quantifyingthebenefitthrougheitherincreasedrevenue
fromcustomers,orasapartofthebenefitspackageusedtorecruitandretain
employeescouldhelpjustifytheinvestment.
o EngagestakeholderstodiscussimplicationsofEV‐buildingintegration
programsfora)othertransportationprogramssuchcommutetripreduction,
b)regionalenergyplanning(e.g.gridreliability),c)regionaleconomy,andd)
environmentaljustice(e.g.mobileemissionsreductions).
The Possible Role of Electric Utilities
TheroleofelectricutilitiesinencouragingEVadoptionshouldbetokeepthefuel
costsforelectricitylowerthanthatofgasolinevehicles,whileallowingusersto
maintainthelifestyletowhichtheyareaccustomed.Therightcombinationofrates
60
andmeterswillallowthehouseholdtooperateasusual,whileeasilyswitchingfrom
agasolinefuelsourcetoelectricityasafuel.Tothisend,theroleofratestructures
withinutilitiesistocreateavariablerateinordertomanagethechargingdemand
byusers.Ratescreatethepricesignalthatcustomerscanreactto.
WhiletotalelectricityconsumptionintheUnitedStateshasbeenstabilizingoverthe
lastdecadeorso,thetrendinCanadashowsdecreasingenergyusepercapita.The
reasonsforthesetrendsarelikelysimilar,includingslowereconomicgrowthand
theimplementationofenergyefficiencyprograms.However,BCHydromaysoonbe
experiencinganincreaseindemandduetotheelectrificationoftransportationand
heatingsystems.
Figure16:ElectricityConsumptionpercapitaforCanada,2004‐2013
BCHydroismandatedtobe93%renewable,andin2015served98%renewable.A
possibleshiftinthemandateto100%renewablepowerisunderconsideration,and
theregioniscurrentlydebatingtheshortandlong‐termfeasibilityofamandatefor
100%.BCHydroisforecastingsignificant(10‐15%,evenwithmassiveefficiency
measures)loadgrowthduetoincreasingelectrificationforprivateandpublic
transportationandbuildingthermalmanagement.Thismeansagrowingrolefor
on‐siterenewables–likerooftopsolar–inordertomeettheexpectedincreasein
17.2717.05
16.5616.77
16.46
15.5415.34
15.74
15.3215.52
15
15.5
16
16.5
17
17.5
2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014
MWh/Capita
DataSource:http://www.iea.org/statistics/statisticssearch/
CanadianElectricityConsumption/populationMWh/capita
61
demandandincreasedrequirementforrenewables.
Forsomeutilities,thesetrendshaveresultedinasurplusofgenerationcapacity.As
manyutilitiesprofitscomefromhighersalesofelectricity,thereutilizationof
strandedassetsintheindustrywouldprovidenewrevenuestreams—inthis
respect,theloadgrowththatwouldresultfromthelarge‐scaledeploymentofplug‐
invehiclesisattractivetotheindustry.Informalconversationswithutility
representativessuggestthattheindustryseesapossibleopportunity,butthata
businesscaseisnotyetclearlyseenbyallutilities.Someofthemseeabusinesscase
forcharginginfrastructurethatfocusesaroundhomecharging,whereabout70‐80
percentofthevehiclechargingoccurs.Thisbusinesscasehoweverreliesona
criticalmassofplug‐invehiclesinthemarketthatissignificantlylargerthanthe
currentone.Wehavenotbeenabletoobtainutilityestimatesofthecriticalmassof
plug‐invehiclesthatwouldmakeinfrastructuredeploymentslucrativetoutilities.
Anecdotally,someutilitiesseeamarginalincreaseinloadevenata5percent
marketpenetrationofplug‐invehicles.Ourpreliminaryassessmentistwofold:a)
theindustryispayingattentiontopossibleopportunitiesthatcanresultfromthe
marketsuccessofplug‐invehiclesbutbettermodelingmaybeneeded;andb)
whetherandtheextenttowhichelectricutilitiescanjustifyinvestmentstosupport
plug‐invehiclemarketsmaydependonarangeoflocalvariables.
Toencouragehigherelectricvehiclemarketadoption,addressingconsumer
concernsaboutvehiclerangelimitationswillbecritical.Animportantquestionis
theextenttowhichdeploymentsofpublicaccessDCFastorlevel2chargingcanbe
aneffectivestrategytoaddressrangeconcerns.Ifthisinfrastructurecould
significantlyaugmentthemarketappealofplug‐invehiclesandultimatelyincrease
revenueforutilities,theninvestmentsininfrastructuremaybewarranted.Moving
fromtheconceptualleveltoquantificationsisacomplexexercise.Theindustryis
interestedinquantitativeestimatesofplug‐invehicleadoptionresultingfrom
additionalchargingspots.StudiescurrentlyunderwayatUCDavisestimate2‐8%
morePEVsalesduetoavailabilityofworkplacecharging,butfurtherresearchis
62
needed,especiallyontheimpactofawarenessofpublicchargingonfuturePEV
sales.
Intheremainderofthissection,wesummarizetheproposalsofthethreelarger
electricutilitiesinCaliforniatosupportdeploymentofcharginginfrastructure
financedwithincreasesinelectricityrates.Wealsoexplorepossiblewaysinwhich
electricutilitiescouldcreatefinancialmechanismstosupportinfrastructure
investments,withafocusonBCHydro,theelectricutilitythatservestheCityof
Vancouver.
Proposals from Utilities Conducting Pilot Programs
TheproposalsdevelopedbythethreelargerelectricutilitiesinCaliforniadonot
presentinnovativeideasrelatedtothefinancingofcharginginfrastructure,and
couldbegenerallycharacterizedassubsidies.Regardless,thefinancingofcharging
infrastructurethroughincreasedelectricityrateshasbeenreceivingincreasing
attention,andwebelieveitispertinenttoincludeasummaryoftheseproposalsas
onealternativefinancingpathway.TheCaliforniaPublicUtilityCommission,which
overseestheutilitiesgrantedapprovaltoSouthernCaliforniaEdisonandSanDiego
Gas&Electrictoproceedwiththephase1orpilotportionsoftheirproposalsin
early2016.Theseinvestmentsarepaidforwithrevenuefromutilityratesand
increasedutilityrates,justifiedbythefactthattheloweremissionsfromcleaner
electricdrivingprovidesabenefitintermsoflocalairqualityforallcustomers.
Pacific Gas & Electric
TheproposalsubmittedbyPacificGas&Electricincludesthefollowingelements:
Deploy,ownandmaintainapproximately25,000Level2(L2)EVcharging
stations;
Deploy,ownandmaintainapproximately100DCFastChargers(DCFC);
Targetpublicfacilities,workplacesandmulti‐unitdwellings;
OffereducationandoutreachmaterialstodriveEVadoption;
63
Targetapproximately10percentofthecharginginfrastructurefor
disadvantagedcommunities;and
Usetime‐variantpricing.
Includingcapitalinvestments,operationandmaintenance,educationandoutreach
andotherexpenses,theprogramwouldhaverevenuerequirementscappedat
$653,846,000,orabout$26,000perchargingstation.Bytheyear2020,about25%
oftheproposed25,000Level2chargingstationsand100DCFastChargerswould
havebeendeployed,primarilyinworkplaces.
Southern California Edison
OnJan14,2016,SouthernCaliforniaEdison(SCE)receivedapprovalfromthe
CaliforniaPublicUtilitiesCommission(CPUC)fortheir“ChargeReady”Pilot
program.SCE’sproposalwasbrokendownintoaPhase1pilotandPhase2.Atthe
conclusionofthepilot,theywillseekpermissionfromtheCPUCtoproceedwith
expandingtheprogramtoatotalofnearly30,000chargingstationsintheSouthern
CaliforniaterritoryservicedbySCE(EdisonInternationalNewsroom).Moredetails
oftheirtwo‐phaseplanisprovidedbelow.
Deployinfrastructuretosupportupto30,000EVchargingstationsintheir
servicearea;
Targetdeploymentinareaswithlong‐timedwellsitesaswellasinstallingat
least10%ofthechargersindisadvantagedcommunities;
Two‐phaseprogram;
o Phase1:12‐monthpilottoinitiateinfrastructuredeploymentswith
upto1,500chargingstationsto“testseveralkeyassumptions
underlyingitsapproach”andstartamarketeducationcampaign“that
willtargetpotentialcarbuyersinSCE’sserviceterritorytoexpand
theirawarenessaboutEVsandthebenefitsoffuelingfromtheelectric
grid,”
64
o Phase2:Completionoftheinstallationsof“upto30,000qualifiedEV
chargingstations”andbroadeningofeducationefforts.
Includingcapitalinvestments,operationandmaintenance,educationandoutreach
andotherexpenses,theprogramwouldhaverevenuerequirementscappedat
$653,846,000.Thepilotinphase1wouldrequire$18millionand$4millionin
capitalandO&Mexpenditures,respectively,whilephase2wouldrequire$324.5
millionand$8.25millionrespectivelyforcapitalandO&Mexpenditures.This
representsarevenuerequirementofabout$355million,orabout$12,000per
chargingstation(assumingthemaximumnumberof30,000stationsisdeployed).
SouthernCaliforniaEdisonproposestorecoverthesecoststhroughincreasesin
electricityrates.
San Diego Gas & Electric
OnJanuary28,2016,SanDiegoGas&ElectricreceivedapprovalfromtheCPUCfor
theirElectricVehicleGrid‐Integrationpilotproject,allowingthemtoownandinstall
thousandsofEVSEsintheirterritory(SDG&ENewsroom).Theirplanisoutlined
below:
Deploy3,500EVchargingstationsintheirservicearea
Targetdeploymentinworkplaceandmulti‐unitdwellings,theplanisto
install10chargersateachof350businessesandmulti‐familycommunities;
Atleast10%ofthechargerswillbeinstalledindisadvantagedcommunities
ImplementspecialEVratesthatencourageoff‐peakchargingandallowfor
maximizingrenewableenergyintegrationandminimizingtheneedfornew
fossil‐fuelpowerplants;
Thepilotprogramwouldhaverevenuerequirements$59millionand$44million
forcapitalandO&Minvestments,respectively,representingacostofabout$19,000
perstation.
65
Eversource (East Coast Utility)
Eversource,theutilityservingMassachusetts,ConnecticutandNewHampshire,is
launchinganelectricvehiclepilotprogram,whichmayallowPEVbuyersto
purchaseaLevel2chargingstationatareducedcost.Theresearchfromthispilot
programwillalsohelpEversourcedesignaneffectivetimeofuse(TOU)rateforPEV
customers(Eversource,2016).
Possible approaches for BC Hydro
WestartwithaninspectionofBCHydro’sratestructures.Theutilityhasadopteda
steppricingratestructureforelectricityconsumption,summarizedinTable5.
Table5.SummaryofBCHydro’selectricityconsumptionratestructure
Rategroup Step1 Step2
Threshold Rate Threshold Rate
Residential 1,350kWh/60days(22,1918kWh/dayaverage)
$0.0797 Morethan1,350kWh/60days(22,1918kWh/dayaverage)
$0.1195
SmallGeneralServicecustomers
$0.1073/kWh
MediumGeneralServicecustomers
First14,800kWhofbaseline
$0.0989/kWh Upto20%overbaseline
$0.0990/kWh
Remainingofbaseline
$0.0690/kWh Upto20%underbaseline
‐$0.0990/kWh
SincetheearlydaysofsystematicdeploymentsofDCFastcharginginfrastructure
(DepartmentofEnergy’sEVProjectandStateofWashingtonElectricHighway),
demandchargeswereviewedasanimportantobstacle.Demandchargesarean
importantcomponentofthepricingoftheserviceprovidedbyelectricutilitiesand
waivingitaltogetherforcharginginfrastructureseemedimpractical.Atthesame
time,demandchargesseemedtogreatlycurtailanyhopestofindsustainable
businessmodelsfortheprovisionofDCFastcharginginfrastructure.
InTable6wesummarizethedemandchargestructureintheBCHydroterritory.
66
Table6.SummaryofBCHydro’sdemandchargestructure
Maximumpowerbracket Demandcharge
0–35kW $035–150kW $5.50perkWOver150kW $10.55perkW
TotheextentthatBCHydrohascapacitysurplus,theincreaseinconsumptionfrom
vehicleelectrificationwouldgenerateadditionalrevenuestreamsfromthe
utilizationofexistingassetsandpotentiallyareductionintheper‐kilowattcostof
generation.ItisthenintheeconomicinterestofBCHydroandtheregiontosupport
marketuptakeofplug‐invehicles.Thismaybeincontrastwiththeconservation
goalsoftheregion,whichhaveresultedinthetieredpricingsystemforelectricity
consumptionanddemand.Onepossiblemodelthatsupportsbotheconomicand
conservationgoalsmightincludesmallchangestothedemandchargestructure.It
wouldfirstbebeneficialiftheCityofVancouverand/ortheProvinceofBritish
Columbiainstitutedrulesrecognizingandassessingtheconservationbenefitsfor
vehicleelectrification,arisingfromthedisplacementoffossilfuelconsumption.Such
ruleswouldlimitinstitutionalbarrierstocharginginfrastructuredeployment(andthe
supportofvehicleelectrificationmoregenerally).
Experiencefrompilotsconductedinthepastsuggeststhatcustomerconsumption
doesrespondtodemandcharges.Therangeofestimatesofthisresponseisvery
wide(Hledik,2014)andcertainlydependentonthestructureofthecharge.The
maintwoincentivesthatdemandchargescreateareloadshiftingandloweruse.A
reviewofexperimentsandstudiesontheimpactsofdemandchargesisbeyondthe
scopeofthisreport,butwepointoutthatdemandchargeshavereceivedattention
intheliteraturefordecades(seeforexample,BergandSavvides,1983andCaves,
ChristensenandHerriges,1984).Theviabilityandeffectsofdemandchargesis
betterassessedonacase‐by‐casebasis.Customerresponsetodemandchargesis
likelydependentonstructuralcharacteristicsofthelocaleconomyandotherlocal
factorsaffectingelectricityusepatterns.
Itisworthhighlightingthatresponsetodemandchargesarelikelydifferentfor
67
residentialchargingandpublicaccesscharging.Residentialcustomersmayhave
moreflexibilitytorespondwithloadshiftingbychargingovernight,whilepublic
accesschargingoftenrespondstoanimmediateneedfortheirserviceandload
shiftingmaybelesspracticable.Thelimitedflexibilityofrespondingtodemand
chargesbypublic‐accessinfrastructure,particularlyDCFaststations,shouldbe
takenintoaccountinthehypotheticaldevelopmentofratestosupportplug‐in
vehicles.Inmanyinstances,publicaccesschargingisasuitablemarketforload
shiftingviasmartcharging.Itiscriticaltoremaincognizantoftheopportunities,
currentorfuture,forinnovativetechnologiestohelpaddressthesequestions(e.g.
underthebroadumbrellaofsmartcharging).Strategiespursuedtoaddressthe
connectionofplug‐invehiclesandthegridshouldpreserveamarketplacethatincents
startupsandotherinnovatorstodiscovernewwaystoaddressissues.Webelievethis
isimportanttomaximizeenvironmentalandeconomicbenefitsfromvehicle
electrification,aswellasenablefurtherlegitimationofplug‐invehiclesand
integrationintoregionaleconomies.
Twopossibilitiesaresummarizedbelow:
68
Table7.IllustrativeexamplesofEVSEfinancingbasedoninnovationinratestructures
Model Concept Example structure Financing
Rampdemandcharge
Createademandchargescaleforthe0‐35kWbracket,therevenuesfromwhichcanbeusedinparttofinancecharginginfrastructure
$0.14perkWforfirst35kW
Greenconservationbank,withappropriationforEVSEdeploymentandresultingdemandcharges
AfterappropriationforEVSEbank,revenuesrecycledbacktocustomers(forexample,basedonincome,savingsbetweensuccessivebills,etc.)
Demandchargeexchange
Tradedemandchargesinabillingperiodfromcharginginfrastructuretoothercustomerbrackets.
$Xfromcharginginfrastructuredemandareabsorbedaccordingtoformulabycustomersinthefirstdemandchargebracket
Eliminatesdemandchargecostsfromcharginginfrastructure
Theexamplesinthetableareincludedforthepurposeofdiscussionandtoexpand
uponbyincludingotherpossibleconfigurations.Weemphasizethattheproposed
modelbuildsuponabalancebetweenconservationandeconomicbenefitsfrom
increaseduseofexistinggenerationcapacity.Themodelthusworksonlyifthe
resourcesallocatedtocharginginfrastructureultimatelyresultinincreased
kilowatt‐hourconsumption.Increasedconsumptioncanresultfirstfromgrowthin
theregionalplug‐invehiclemarketandalsofrommoree‐milesdrivenplug‐in
vehiclehouseholds.Thus,itisnotclearthatresourcesfromutilityfinancingoughtto
bededicatedtocharginginfrastructureexclusively.Ideally,thebestallocationof
resourceswouldresultfromanunderstandingoftherelativestrengthofvarious
instrumentsinspurringmoreplug‐invehicleelectricityuse.Suchinstrumentscould
includefinancingofcharginginfrastructureaswellasfinancingofplug‐invehicles.
Wearenotawareofexistingelectricutilitiesprogramsthatofferfinancial
69
incentivesfortheadoptionofplug‐invehicles.Wesuggest,contingenton
conservationrulesthatintegrateelectricitywithothertransportationfuels,thatsuch
incentivescouldbethoughtofasanextensionoftheappliancereplacementprograms
thatarecommoninmanyelectricutilities.
Itisimportanttoemphasizethatthevalueofcharginginfrastructureinsupporting
plug‐invehicleadoptionanduseisdependentoneffectivedeploymentplanning,
particularlylocationandreliability.
Noticethatintheprecedingdiscussions,institutionalframeworkdoesnotinclude
directfinancingofchargingequipmentorequipmentinstallation.Innovationis
generallynotsupportedbyexcessivemarketpower,andthismayoccasionallybe
theresultofwell‐intendedpolicydecisions.
The integration of the electric vehicle with the grid
The concept of the smart grid suggests developing IT based communication and
controlsolutionsonthegrid,allowinggridoperatorstobalanceelectricitysupplyand
demandinareliableandefficientmanner.ThegrowingloadofPEVshasthepotential
forbothcreatingchallenges,andifmanagedproperly,actingasahelpfulresourcefor
thegridoperations.PreviousscientificliteratureonPEV‐gridintegrationevaluated
thetechnicalandenvironmentalaspectsofthePEVcharging,aswellastheviability
ofusingPEVsasaresourcefortheenergyandancillaryservicesonthegrid.Thisis
researchareathathasalreadybeenextensivelyanalyzed,inparticularbythePacific
NorthwestNationalLab(Gerkensmeyeretal,2010,Kintner‐Meyeretal,2007)aswell
asresearchersattheElectricPowerResearchInstituteandUniversityofCalifornia,
Berkeley.Assuch,thisreportdoesnotincludeadiscussionofthegridcapacity,load
impacts, and upgrading necessary, but focuses conceptually on the potential new
developmentsthatcouldcomefromvehiclegridintegration.
GiventhepotentialforthenumberofPEVstogrowrapidlyinthenearterm,PEV
loadshavebecomeoneofthemajorfocusesforthesmartgriddevelopers.For
70
instance,Mogheetal(2011)illustratedthatadaptingcontrolledPEVchargingmay
increasethelifeexpectancyofanaverage50kVAneighborhoodtransformerbyup
tosixtimesdependingontherateofPEVadoptioninthatarea.Ontheotherhand,
PEVloadisalsoseenasausefulresourceforthegridoperationsinapplications
suchasfrequencyregulation,powergeneration,andrenewableelectricity
integration.Thus,utilizingDemand‐SideManagement(DSM)tomanagethegrowing
loadofPEVsmaycreateaneconomicbenefitforconsumersandutilitieswhile
reducingthenegativeimpactsongridcapacity.Earlydevelopmentofactive“PEV‐
gridintegration”shouldspecificallyfocusonthePEVdemandsidemanagement
strategiesandpotentialancillaryserviceopportunitiessuchasfrequencyregulation.
SomemajorissuessuchasconsumerPEVchargingbehavior,thecompetitivenessof
theDSMrelativetowholesaleelectricity,anddevelopmentsincommunication
technologieswillvarybasedonthemostrecentPEVandelectricitymarketdata.
Thesefactorsvarywidelybyregion,andneedtobethoroughlyevaluated,though
learningsfromearlypilotprogramsandcoordinationbetweenutilities,car
companies,andstandardizingorganizationswillbecriticaltothefuturesuccessof
PEV‐gridintegration.
OneearlyprojectthatwillprovidesomeinsightsistheBMW‐PG&Ecollaboration
calledtheiChargeForwardProgramlaunchedinAugust2015intheSanFrancisco
BayArea.Thissmall18‐monthpilotprogramincentivizesBMWi3driverswho
participateinamanagedchargingprogramwhichaimstomeetconsumerneeds
whilealsoallowingforgrid‐loadreductions.BMWwillmanagetheat‐home
chargingofenrolledconsumers,includinguptoaone‐hourchargingdelayattheir
homecharger.Consumerssetapreferenceforbatterystateofchargeanddeparture
time,butaregiventheoptionofopting‐outofeachmanaged‐chargingevent.Their
incentivewillvarybasedontheirparticipation.Thisprojectallowsforatest‐runof
earlynetworkingandremotechargingcontrolsoftware,andattheend,BMWand
PG&Ewillhaveabetterunderstandingofconsumercomplianceandgrid‐load
modification(BMWUSA,2015).Thisprojectison‐goingthroughDecember2016.
ProjectresultswhichwouldberelevanttoutilitiesandEVSEnetworkoperatorswill
71
follow.
Conclusion
Infrastructureinvestmentsinthecurrentmarketshouldbemadewithaneye
towardfuturePEVmarketdevelopments.Considerationsincludeexpandingvehicle
range,increasingadoption,fastercharging,andincreasinggrid‐connectionand
chargingcontrol.Expandingvehiclerangeswillleadtoaneedforageographically
expandingchargingnetwork.IncreasingPEVadoptionwillleadtomorecharger
demandovertime,andinlessprimelocations‐requiringhomeorworkplace
chargingtomeettheneedsofownerswholiveinmulti‐unitdwellingsandolder
homeswithouttheoptionfordedicatedhome‐basedcharging.Intheshortterm,
planningshouldbeforlimitedEVSEinstallations,butsitingandconduitwhichwill
allowforeasierexpansionofthenumberofchargersatexistinglocationswillallow
foreconomicexpansionwhenchargercongestionbecomesanissue.
Thevehiclesonthemarkethavealreadymovedfrom3.3kWchargingintheearly
modelsto6.6to10kWforcurrentmodelPEVs.TheTeslaSuperChargercancharge
upto120kWcurrently,buttherehavealreadybeenannouncementsfrom
automakersthattheAudiE‐TronQuattroandthePorscheMission‐Ewillbeableto
chargeatspeedsofupto300kW,andforward‐thinkingchargingcompaniesare
alreadypreparingforthis(InsideEVs,2015).Finally,whilesomelimitedabilityto
schedulecharging–forexampleatimeronthecharger,oradelayedchargingstart
timeinthevehiclecontrolarecurrentlyavailable,thenextwaveofdevelopment
willbeformorespecificdemandmanagementofthechargingload,eitheratan
aggregatednetworkoperatorlevel,orautility‐controlleddemandmanagement
system.Thiswillallowformoreefficientuseandintegrationofrenewableswiththe
electricalgrid.Beyonddemandmanagement,itcouldleadtotheuseofPEVsas
72
distributedstorageforahighlyvariable,renewable‐dependentelectricalgrid.
TheearlyEVSEsupplierandnetworkoperatormarketwasfloodedwithoptions,
thoughthathasnowcalmed.Ifgovernmentfundsforincentivizinginfrastructure
areused,fundingdistributionshouldconsiderthepastperformanceofEVSE
suppliersand/ornetworkoperatorsintermsoftheirreliability,maintenanceand
downtimes,plansforfutureexpansionandoperations,andtheirabilitytoadaptand
operatedemandmanagementstrategiesandeventuallyvehicle‐to‐grid(V2G)
capabilitieswithtwo‐wayelectricityflow.
InordertoincreasePEVsales,thereneedstobeanecosystemofsupporting
infrastructureandpoliciestosupportthedevelopingmarket.InsuccessfulPEV
marketsworldwide,thisincludesfinancialsubsidiesforprivatepurchaseofPEVS,
freeandpriorityparkinglocationsinbusycities,busorcarpool‐laneaccess,
governmentinvestmentincharginginfrastructure,vehicleemissionsregulations
andgovernmentsalesgoals,utilitysupportofteninthecaseofspecialtime‐of‐use
ratesforEVdrivers,educationandoutreachprograms.Thesuiteofsupporting
policiesvaries,butwhatiscommonisthatsuccessfulmarketsdonotrelyonjust
oneortwoincentivesforPEVbuyers,butcombinemanyincentivestohelpgrowthe
PEVmarket.BritishColombiaisalreadywell‐suitedcomparedtomanyother
provincesinCanadaincreatingasuiteofsupportivepoliciesandincentives.
Onewaytomakethefundingstretchfurtherwouldbebymotivatingcar
manufacturerstoengageinpartnershipswithstateandlocalgovernmentsforthe
planninganddeploymentofcharginginfrastructure,bytyinggovernment
incentivestothisengagement.
73
Figure17:CanadianPEVPolicyAssessment(MeltonandGoldberg,inprogress)
Asacity,Vancouvercantakeseveralactionsthatcanhelpcreatetheecosystemto
encouragebothPEVadoptionandEVSEinstallations.Adoptingclearbuildingcodes,
andimplementingastreamlinedEVSEinstallationandinspectionprocess,forboth
publicandhomechargerinstallationsissomethingthatcanhaveanimpactandbe
managedatthecitylevel.InstallingEVSEsatdesirablecitylocations,witheither
freeordiscountedparkingandcharging,isanothercityinitiativethatcanhavean
impactonPEVadoptionanduse.ThecityofVancouvercanprovidestrategic
investmentscontingentonprivatematchfundingforcharginginfrastructure
installation,whichshouldfocusonovernightandworkplacechargingwhichcan
satisfythebulkofPEVchargingneeds,similartotheMassachusettsworkplace
chargingprogram.
Finally,educatingalltheparticipantsinthedecisionchain–fromcityinspectors
andelectricians,todealersandendconsumersmaybethelargesthurdleto
overcome.Someofthemosteffectivemethodsarebyrequiring,versusjustoffering,
dealertrainingaboutnewtechnologiesandvehiclemodels,providingclearand
consistentregulationsandlocalpermittingprocesses,andhavingeasyto
understandinformationregardingchargingcostsandrateoptionsprovidedbythe
74
localutility.Usingsomeoftheavailableresourcesonaneducationalcampaigncan
helpincreasePEVadoption.
75
References
ABB(2011)TowardWinningBusinessModelsfortheEVChargingIndustry.
https://library.e.abb.com/public/472865366f28bfc9c1257990003fbda2/4EVC200
801‐AREN_TowardsWinningBusinessModels.pdf
Axsen,J.(2010).InterpersonalInfluencewithinCarBuyers'SocialNetworks:
ObservingConsumerAssessmentofPlug‐inHybridElectricVehicles(PHEVs)andthe
SpreadofPro‐SocietalValues.InstituteofTransportationStudies,Universityof
California,Davis,ResearchReportUCD‐ITS‐RR‐10‐15
Axsen,J.,S.Goldberg,J.Bailey,G.Kamiya,B.Langman,J.Cairns,M.Wolinetz,andA.
Miele(2015).ElectrifyingVehicles:InsightsfromtheCanadianPlug‐inElectric
VehicleStudy.SimonFraserUniversity,Vancouver,Canada
Axsen,J.,S.Goldberg(2016)HowFuturePlug‐InElectricVehicleBuyersDifferfrom
PresentOwners.TransportationResearchBoardAnnualMeeting2016Paper#16‐
5702.http://pubsindex.trb.org/view/2016/C/1394120
Bailey,J.,A.Miele,J.Axsen(2015)Isawarenessofpublicchargingassociatedwith
consumerinterestinplug‐inelectricvehicles?TransportationResearchPartD361‐9.
Berg,SanfordandAndreasSavvides(1983).ThetheoryofmaximumkWdemand
chargesforelectricity.EnergyEconomics.
Bohn,Theodore(2013)PEVChargingStandardsStatusIncludingAC,DCandWireless
Technologies,SAEGovernment&IndustryMeeting,January31.
http://www.sae.org/events/gim/presentations/2013/pev_charging_standards_stat
us.pdf
Bollore.com“ElectricVehicles–Solutions”http://www.bollore.com/en‐
us/activities/electricity‐storage‐and‐solutions/electric‐vehicles‐solutions
76
Caves,Douglas,LauritsChristensen,andJosephHerriges(1984)Modeling
alternativeresidentialpeak‐loadelectricityratestructures.JournalofEconometrics,
vol.26,pp.249‐268.
CoolCalifornia(2015)SmallBusinessAwardsProgram
http://www.coolcalifornia.org/article/small‐business‐awards‐programAccessed
June13,2016.
C2ES(2015)BusinessModelsforFinanciallySustainableEVChargingNetworks.
ReportfortheWashingtonStateLegislature’sJointTransportationCommittee.
EnergyStar(2013)EnergyStarMarketandIndustryScopingReport:ElectricVehicle
SupplyEquipment,September.
https://www.energystar.gov/sites/default/files/asset/document/Electric_Vehicle_
Scoping_Report.pdf
EPRI(2016)Plug‐InElectricVehicleMulti‐StateMarketandChargingSurvey.Electric
PowerResearchInstitute,February.
http://www.epri.com/abstracts/pages/productabstract.aspx?productId=00000000
3002002931
EuropeanCommissionTEN‐TProjectInformation.http://ec.europa.eu/inea/ten‐
t/ten‐t‐projects/ten‐t‐projects‐year/projects‐2007‐2013‐financial‐framework
EVCSFinancingProgramInformation
http://www.treasurer.ca.gov/cpcfa/calcap/evcs/index.asp
Evolution(2014)ElectricvehiclesinEurope:Gearingupforanewphase?Amsterdam
RoundTableincollaborationwithMcKinsey&Company
http://www.mckinsey.com/netherlands/our‐insights/electric‐vehicles‐in‐europe‐
gearing‐up‐for‐a‐new‐phase
77
Francfort,Jim(2010).ElectricVehicleChargingLevelsandRequirementsOverview,
IdahoNationalLaboratory,December10
https://avt.inl.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/presentations/CleanCitiesWedinarCharg
ing12‐15‐10.pdf
Fuller,Micah(2016).WirelesscharginginCalifornia:Range,recharge,andvehicle
electrification.TransportationResearchPartCEmergingTechnologies67:343‐
356·May2016
GerkensmeyerC,MCWKintner‐Meyer,andJGDeSteese(2010).Technical
ChallengesofPlug‐InHybridElectricVehiclesandImpactstotheUSPowerSystem:
DistributionSystemAnalysis .PNNL‐19165,PacificNorthwestNational
Laboratory,Richland,WA.
Hledik,Ryan(2014).Rediscoveringresidentialdemandcharges.TheElectricity
Journal27(7):82–96.
InsideEVs(2015).FastNEDReadiesfor150kW,300kWCharging.
http://insideevs.com/fastned‐readies‐for‐150‐kw‐300‐kw‐charging/(accessed
6/20/2016).
Ji,Wei,MichaelA.Nicholas,GilTal(2015).ElectricVehicleFastChargerPlanningfor
MetropolitanPlanningOrganizations:AdaptingtoChangingMarketsandVehicle
Technology.TransportationResearchRecord2502,134–143.
Kintner‐MeyerMCW,KPSchneider,andRGPratt(2007).ImpactsAssessmentof
Plug‐inHybridVehiclesonElectricUtilitiesandRegionalUSPowerGrids:Part1:
TechnicalAnalysis.OnlineJournalofEUEC1:paper#04.
Kurani,K.S.,N.Caperello,J.TyreeHageman(2016).NewCarBuyers’ValuationofZer‐
EmissionVehicles:California.March31,reportforCaliforniaAirResourcesBoard
Agreement12‐332.http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/apr/past/12‐332.pdf
78
Langezaal,MichielandCrijinBoumann(2011).TowardWinningBusinessModelsfor
theEVChargingIndustry,ABBAugust
https://library.e.abb.com/public/472865366f28bfc9c1257990003fbda2/4EVC200
801‐AREN_TowardsWinningBusinessModels.pdf
Leurent,FabienandElisabethWindisch(2011).Triggeringthedevelopmentof
electricmobility:areviewofpublicpolicies.EuropeanTransportResearchReview,
2011,3(4),pp.221‐235.<10.1007/s12544‐011‐0064‐3>https://hal‐enpc.archives‐
ouvertes.fr/hal‐00652472
Logios(2013).LessonsfromEarlyDeploymentsofElectricVehicleChargingStations:
CaseStudiesfromtheNortheastandMid‐AtlanticRegions.Reportforthe
TransportationandClimateInitiative.https://www.nyserda.ny.gov/Researchers‐
and‐Policymakers/Electric‐Vehicles/Resources/Best‐Practice‐Guides‐for‐Charging‐
Stations
Mayfield,David(2012).SitingElectricVehicleChargingStations,April.Sustainable
TransportationStrategiesReportforCleanFuelsOhio.http://vacleancities.org/wp‐
content/uploads/Siting‐EV‐Charging‐Stations‐FINAL‐11.pdf
Miller‐Crowley,MoultonandJensen(2014).ElectricVehiclesforWashington’sPublic
FleetsandFacilities:Addressingcommonquestionstohelppublicsectorfacilityand
fleetmanagersmakepurchasingandoperatingdecisions.
http://www.commerce.wa.gov/Documents/Agency%20EV‐
EVSE%20Guide%20%28Oct%202014%29.pdf
NationalAssociationforConvenienceandFuelRetailing.
http://www.nacsonline.com/Research/FactSheets/motor%20fuels/pages/motorfu
elsales.aspxAccessedJune20,2016.
TransportationResearchBoardandNationalResearchCouncil(2015).Overcoming
BarrierstoDeploymentofPlug‐inElectricVehicles.Washington,DC:TheNational
AcademiesPress.doi:10.17226/21725.
79
NelsonNygaardConsulting(2014).RemovingBarrierstoElectricVehicleAdoptionby
IncreasingAccesstoChargingInfrastructure.ReportfortheSeattleOfficeof
Sustainability&Environment.
http://www.seattle.gov/Documents/Departments/OSE/FINAL%20REPORT_Remov
ing%20Barriers%20to%20EV%20Adoption_TO%20POST.pdf
NewWestTechnologiesforUSDOEVehicleTechnologiesOffice(2015)Costs
AssociatedWithNon‐ResidentialElectricVehicleSupplyEquipment.
http://www.afdc.energy.gov/uploads/publication/evse_cost_report_2015.pdf
Nicholas,MichaelA.,GilTal,JustinWoodjack(2013)CaliforniaStatewideCharging
AssessmentModelforPlug‐inElectricVehicles:LearningfromStatewideTravel
Surveys.InstituteofTransportationStudies,UniversityofCalifornia,Davis,Working
PaperUCD‐ITS‐WP‐13‐01
Nicholas,MichaelandGilTal(2013)ChargingforCharging:TheParadoxofFree
ChargingandItsDetrimentalEffectontheUseofElectricVehicles.Instituteof
TransportationStudies,UniversityofCalifornia,Davis,WorkingPaperUCD‐ITS‐WP‐
13‐02.
Nicholas,MichaelA.,GilTal,MatthewKing(2013)DCFastChargingintheContextof
BiggerBatteries.InstituteofTransportationStudies,UniversityofCalifornia,Davis,
PresentationSeriesUCD‐ITS‐PS‐13‐03
Nicholas,MichaelA.andGilTal(2013)ChargingforChargingatWork:Increasing
theAvailabilityofChargingThroughPricing.InstituteofTransportationStudies,
UniversityofCalifornia,Davis,WorkingPaperUCD‐ITS‐WP‐13‐02
Nicholas,MichaelA.andGilTal(2013)ChargingforCharging:TheParadoxofFree
ChargingandItsDetrimentalEffectontheUseofElectricVehiclesWorkingPaper.
UCD‐ITS‐WP‐13‐02,October2013.
80
Palmer,KarenandMargaretWalls(2012)CanBenchmarkingandDisclosureLaws
ProvideIncentivesforEnergyEfficiencyImprovementsinCommercialBuildings?
WhitePaperpreparedfortheMITEnergyInitiativeSymposium,Large
Opportunities,ComplexChallenges:SeizingtheEnergyEfficiencyOpportunityinthe
CommercialBuildingsSector.May12.
PEVC(2013)AmpingupCaliforniaWorkplaces:20casestudiesonplug‐inelectric
vehiclechargingatwork.Plug‐inElectricVehicleCollaborative,November
http://www.pevcollaborative.org/sites/all/themes/pev/files/WPC_Report4web.pd
f
SilverSpringNetworks(2010)Whitepaper:TheDollars–andSense–ofEVSmart
Charging,ThinkingThroughtheOptionsforUtilityIntegrationofElectricVehicles.
http://www.silverspringnet.com/wp‐content/uploads/SilverSpring‐Whitepaper‐
EVSmartChargingBiz.pdf
U.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency(2012)BenchmarkingandEnergySavings.
Summaryreportavailableonlineat
http://www.energystar.gov/ia/business/downloads/datatrends/DataTrends_Savin
gs_20121002.pdf?3d9b‐91a5
WestCoastGreenHighway(2016)
http://www.westcoastgreenhighway.com/electrichighway.htmAccessedJuly22,
2016.
EV‐Sales.blogspot.com2015and2014CanadiansalesdataaccessedFebruary2016.
http://ev‐sales.blogspot.com/search/label/Canada
81
Appendix1:ElectricVehicleChargingStationFinancingProgram
http://www.treasurer.ca.gov/cpcfa/calcap/evcs/index.asp