DECEMBER 2-3, 2009 PHEVWG MEETING

Transcription

1 DECEMBER 2-3, 2009 PHEVWG MEETING AGENDA Topic 3:00pm 5:00pm: December 2nd Speaker/Leader 1) Welcome and Introductions Mark Duvall / Frank Lambert 2) Review and Approval of Past Minutes and Action Items Frank Lambert 3) NEC Changes for PHEVs Gery Kissel 4) NEC Code Cycle Planning EV Demand Greg Nieminski 8:00am 8:30am: December 3 rd Continental Breakfast 8:30am 3:00pm 5) Integration of Renewables and Controllable Loads to the Grid Pei Zhang (Bulk System) 6) SAE J1772 Connectors Update Gery Kissel 7) SAE J1772 DC Connector Gery Kissel 8) International Standards / J1772 Harmonization Greg Nieminski 9) SAE J2836 Communications Update Rich Scholer 10) Public Charging Stations - Open Standard for Authentication Harjinder Bhade and Access 11) Public Charging Stations - Open Standard for Authentication Dave Packard and Access 12) SAE J2894 Charger Grid Power Quality Jose Salazar 13) Discussion: Future direction, priorities, next steps, and All schedule 14) Summary of Action Items All Adjourn EPRI Palo Alto, CA Plug-In Hybrid and Electric Vehicle Working Group Meeting Minutes (#09-4) December 2-3, 2009 Palo Alto, CA Welcome and Introductions Frank Lambert, chair, and Mark Duvall, EPRI, welcomed the participants (see Attachment). Mr. Duvall described some structural changes in the IWC and reviewed the role of the committees. The Infrastructure Steering Committee (ISC) is the governing body of the IWC. In the past, the TEC dealt with non-road issues such as ports and the PHEVWG handled on- 1

2 road issues. With the new arrangements, the TEC will continue to cover non-road issues as well as infrastructure implementation, while the PHEVWG will deal with on-road issues and will focus on codes and standards. Review and Approval of Past Minutes and Action Items The minutes (#09-3) of the previous meeting (September 24, 2009) in Sacramento, CA were approved. The status of action items from the previous meeting is shown below. Action Items: September 24, 2009 (Sacramento) Meeting # ACTION ITEM STATUS 1 Efrain Ornelas will provide excerpts of California Title 24 Ongoing dealing with infrastructure requirements for single family dwellings. 2 Tom Odell, Greg Nieminski, David Packard, and Dave Baxter will look into UL and Canadian standards harmonization. Greg Nieminski contacted Tom Odell who reported that Canada agreed to establish a working group to harmonize US and Canadian standards. 3 Jose Salazar will invite Foothill Transit and/or Protera Bus Completed 4 Jim Bianco and Dan Shanahan to present at the next meeting. will invite Jim Hull of DTE Energy to present at the next meeting about the hybrid electric bus in the Ann Arbor school system. 5 Harjindar Bhade will send a copy of the public charging paper to Ralf Oestreicher. 6 John Halliwell will provide copies of his preliminary test protocols to Jose Salazar. Completed Ongoing Completed Mission Statement Review Because of the new structural changes in the IWC, the mission statements of the TEC and PHEVWG should be modified while retaining the same format. Mr. Lambert, Brian Sisco, and Jorge Emmanuel will revise the mission statements for review. NEC Changes for PHEVs/2014 Code Cycle Planning EV Demand Greg Nieminski, EPRI consultant, reported that several proposals submitted by the IWC were accepted or accepted in principle. The IWC also submitted comments to support actions by the code panel. One of the proposals expanded the definition to include electric motorcycles. Mr. Nieminski proposed collecting data to explore the possibility of developing a proposal for demand factors. He also raised the issue of ventilation requirements under the code and asked whether specific chemistries of batteries or PHEV battery sizes could be excluded. If so, tests would have to be conducted and the results presented to the code panel. During discussion, Mr. Nieminski provided the rationale for including electric motorcycles. With regards to demand factors, Kevin Morrow, ETEC, and Jim Francfort, INL, announced that the DOE project involving Nissan will collect a lot of data, which should be available around the second half of Mike Waters, Progress Energy, reported that North Carolina State University has been studying the demand factors at a parking deck using probabilistic 2

3 models. Joby Lafky, GridPoint, pointed out that parking spot utilization is not the same as charging utilization. He added that smart charging is voluntary and that the smart charging system will most likely be paid by someone else other than the driver. Mr. Lambert pointed out that if you have a large number of sites, de-rating allows you to reduce infrastructure costs. The code allows diversity factors but the question is if it can be used in this application. ACTION ITEMS: Mike Waters will ask North Carolina State University to give a presentation on their demand factor study at the next meeting. Participants with any data related to the possibility of using demand factors should send the information to Greg Nieminski. Integration of Renewables and Controllable Loads to the Grid (Bulk System) Pei Zhang, EPRI, gave a presentation on what system operators would need to integrate PHEVs (see Attachments). Mr. Zhang described the basic operation functions of a control center, namely, monitoring, analysis, and control. Monitoring requires defining what information is needed by the operators, how the information should be presented to the operators, and where the information will come from. Analysis entails static and dynamic modeling and simulation tools. Control requires designing a control architecture, control schemes for system operation, advanced unit commitment and dispatch algorithms for market operation, and testing these control algorithms and schemes. A new control architecture needs to be developed. EPRI s vision is to integrate central and distributed resources, transmission and distribution, market and system operations, and a communication infrastructure. During discussion, Mr. Zhang noted that PHEV charging will increase load uncertainty. PHEV batteries as energy storage can provide active power to balance load, but the question is how this can be controlled. Mr. Maitra s distribution impact study is helpful in understanding the potential impact on transmission. SAE J1772 TM Connectors Update/DC Connector/NEC Code Panel Review Gery Kissel, GM, gave a status update on SAE J1772 TM, the coupler, and NEC 625 (see Attachment). J1772 TM passed the hybrid committee ballot on 11/24/09. A 14-day affirmation ballot allows time to address comments received, after which the document will undergo a 28-day balloting by the SAE Motor Vehicle Council. With regards to the coupler, samples are now available from Amphenol, REMA, and Yazaki. The issue of a global DC charge standard was raised during an October meeting. Since many DOE projects are deploying the JARI/TEPCO system, the chargers could become a de facto standard without input from the EU. Mr. Kissel leads a vehicle OEM team and David Francis leads a charger equipment manufacturer team to review, comment, and propose requirements for the standard. The NFPA has approved Mike Hittel, GM, to be a principal member of Code Panel 12 representing the IWC and SAE, with Mr. Kissel as the alternate member. International Standards / J1772 TM Harmonization Greg Nieminski, EPRI consultant, reported that he is working on incorporating J1772 TM into the IEC. At least one hundred comments were received on IEC Part 1, which covers general requirements. There are three different configurations: JARI/J1772 TM, the German 1-3

4 phase and 3-phase configuration, and an Italian proposal for both single and three phase applications. The DC charging standard ( ) has never been published. Since the standard had not been completed or worked on for several years, it reverts back to a new work item. Five countries are needed to start work on this new work item. A standard may be two years away. The IEC TC69 WG4 and SC23H PT 62196/MT8 meetings dealing with IEC and take place in Palo Alto, CA from December 7-11, SAE J2836 Communications Update Rich Scholer, Ford, gave an update on the SAE J2836 TM and J2847 documents, next steps architecture, a new tool, and a summary of the Task Force s progress (see Attachments). J2836 TM /1 and J2847/1 undergo initial balloting in December In order to train others, participants have to answer questions such as what the variations between PHEVs and BEVs are, which EVSE is best for each customer, and how does one go about fast charging. Mr. Scholer presented the architecture as envisioned back in June 2009 and compared it to the architecture that has now been developed in more detail. He presented various PEV charging scenarios and level 1 and level 2 PEV and EVSE architecture that goes beyond J1772 TM. He also presented the level 2 or DC (<20 kw) architecture for a single connector, as well as the DC (>20 kw) architecture for dual connectors. He outlined four modes and three cases. Mr. Scholer explained the difference between usable energy (state of charge range) and total energy (what charge rates are based on), and expandable EVSE. Mr.Scholer then demonstrated his Energy Game, an interactive Excel tool he developed that looks at energy and different options while explaining more of the system. The tool includes DC energy transfer and fast charge. The Energy Game is helpful in making vehicle architecture decisions and could be used to determine, for example, if a 10-minute charge is worth it or if a 200A connector is needed. He applied the information to determine if transformers would be stressed given different scenarios and the role of energy management systems. Finally, he gave a summary of the work of the Task Force and related groups. During discussion, participants wondered if customers would prefer to know the state of charge, the number of miles remaining, or the number of minutes that they can still drive. Some OEMs will show the range and identify the nearest charging stations. With regards to a single transformer serving multiple homes, who gets priority and what must be considered for an energy management system to work was discussed. There was also discussion on what PLC to use, the standards work that NIST is undertaking, smart EVSEs, smart cars, and smart meters. Ultimately, reducing costs will be a major determining factor. Mr. Scholer reported that the next Task Force meeting will follow the IEEE/SAE meeting scheduled around January 26-29, Public Charging Stations - Open Standard for Authentication and Access Harjindar Bhade, Coulomb Technologies, began by stating that the problem involves three issues: the access method, the method of authentication and authorization, and the accounting method (see presentation in the Attachment). He listed various requirements for access, and proposed architectures for EVSE roaming, authorization, and messaging. He also highlighted the ISO and standards used for contactless smart cards and RFID tags. He recommended contactless cards based on ISO (A and B) for the type of application, usage, and security needed. Next steps include agreement on the type of access cards, 4

5 defining use cases, agreeing on the content of the access cards, and defining authorization and accounting methods to enable roaming. During discussion, Mr. Lambert asked where the standard would be housed if consensus is obtained. There is a NIST webinar to kick off the PEV TG activities on December 10, 2009 to discuss PEV roaming issues. Discussion can cover any V2G roaming issues. To receive the call-in information, pevtg@nist.gov with the Subject line: "Join PEVTG". Public Charging Stations - Open Standard for Authentication and Access David Packard, ClipperCreek, began by looking at the economics and stating that pay off is the bottom line for the driver. Non-home charging is necessary for market success, but transaction costs cannot exceed the benefits. Mr. Packard suggested that municipal charging should be free or very inexpensive and retail charging needs to be convenient. Utility controlled user validation systems for public infrastructure should be integrated as a Smart Grid application. During discussion, the issue of excise tax was raised. No consistent regulatory framework currently exists to deal with this. Public Charging Stations - Open Standard for Authentication and Access Kevin Morrow, ETEC, emphasized that the issue of level 2 and DC fast charging all comes down to the business model. Through the DOE project, different ideas could be tested to see how they work. During discussion, some participants suggested an E-ZPass model but others wondered if it would work. Others suggested a very simple kiosk payment system as found in many parking lots, which would have a minimal impact on communication. Public Charging Stations - Open Standard for Authentication and Access Watson Collins, Northeast Utilities, pointed out that public curbside parking comprises the smallest segment of charging stations, the majority being comprised of home, fleet, multifamily, and workplace charging (see his presentation in the Attachment). He pointed out that public charging transactions would be very small (around 10 to $4) and low volume, similar to metered parking. Open access can range from free service, cash meter, roaming charge to a home electric bill, smart card (stored value card), credit card, membership with credit card via telephone, to limited membership only. He showed the complexity of a simple credit card transaction and gave examples of existing smart card systems used for parking and public transit in major cities. Technology standards already exist for inexpensive smart cards, which provide options for multiple infrastructure providers, allow varying levels of communications infrastructure, and have the ability to integrate with utility prepaid meter programs. During discussion, some participants suggested using smart phones. The smart card technology has a huge base in Europe. Mr. Collins stated that there needs to be a regional or national clearing house that can integrate with community or transit agencies. Several prospective technologies were suggested by different participants: VISA credit card (Mike Waters), E-ZPass technology (Ralph Borroughs), and mobile telecom (Rich Housh). ACTION ITEMS: Participants will send to Frank Lambert their recommendations of contacts for different potential technologies relevant to open access. Frank Lambert will contact representatives of other potential technologies relevant to open access and invite them to the next meeting. 5

6 SAE J2894 Charger Grid Power Quality Jose Salazar, SAE, gave a background and status on the power quality requirements for EV chargers (see Attachment). In April 2009, the SAE hybrid committee approved the creation of SAE J2894, in which the IWC EV charging equipment operational recommendations for power quality could be housed. This activity is co-chaired by Mr. Kissel and Mr. Salazar. The document has three sections: charger PQ requirements, characteristics of AC service, and charging control. The team is working on verifying parameters, harmonizing with other standards, and revising various sections. A final draft is expected in January 2010 and voting is expected by the first quarter of Mr. Salazar gave examples of charger PQ requirements and AC service characteristics. The charging control section references J2847/1 and J2836/1 and recommends a staggered restart for cold load pickup and a ramp rate for soft starting. During discussion, Mr. Salazar noted that the 2% nominal frequency variation in AC service is broader because of the issue of portable home generators. Discussion: Future direction, priorities, next steps, and schedule In summary, Mr. Lambert concluded that the business case is the driving factor for public charging, not the technology. Who will pay for the infrastructure is a key issue. In parking decks, for example, the ownership and the operators are different entities. Municipalities could pay for the infrastructure but it is not clear who would bear the cost in remote areas. Next Meeting The next two meetings of the IWC are scheduled for March 3-4, 2010 in Lake Buena Vista, FL and June 9-10, 2010 in Detroit, MI. Summary of Action Items PREVIOUS ACTION ITEMS Efrain Ornelas will provide excerpts of California Title 24 dealing with infrastructure requirements for single family dwellings. Harjindar Bhade will send a copy of the public charging paper to Ralf Oestreicher. CURRENT ACTION ITEMS Mike Waters will ask North Carolina State University to give a presentation on their demand factor study at the next meeting. Participants with any data related to the possibility of using demand factors should send the information to Greg Nieminski. Participants will send to Frank Lambert their recommendations of contacts for different potential technologies relevant to open access. Frank Lambert will contact representatives of other potential technologies relevant to open access and invite them to the next meeting. Adjournment With no further business, the meeting was adjourned. 6

7 PHEVWG Attendance List First Name Last Name Company Hawk Asgeirsson (via webcast) DTE Lance Atkins Nissan Technical Center North America Dave Baxter Coulomb Technologies George Bellino GM Company Slav Berezin (via webcast) GM Harjinder Bhade Coulomb Technologies Ralph Boroughs Tennessee Valley Authority Mike Bourton GRID2HOME Inc. Craig Childers California Air Resources Board Watson Collins Northeast Utilities Matt DeDona (via webcast) Ford Motor Company Mike Dixon Eaton Corp Mark Duvall Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) Ben Echols Georgia Power Simon Ellwanger BMW Group Technology Office Jorge Emmanuel E&ER Group Stuart Evans Delta-Q Technologies Corp. James Francfort Idaho National Laboratory Josephine Garcia Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) Roberto Gonzalez Sainz-Maza Iberdrola Distribucion John Halliwell Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) Robert Hawkins Ultimate Business Solutions Julie He (via webcast) Toyota Stefan Heckmann BMW of North America LLC Rich Housh Plug Smart Manoj Karwa (via webcast) Leviton Manufacturing Co. Inc. Gery Kissel (via webcast) GM Global Technology Engineering Eck Konkel ITT Corp/BIW Mark Kosowski Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) Joby Lafky GridPoint, Inc. Frank Lambert Georgia Tech/NEETRAC John D Langston Duke Energy Terry Lin Eaton Corporation Dwight MacCurdy Sacramento Municipal Utility Dist. Arindam Maitra Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) Andrew Martinez-Fonts Silver Spring Networks Aaron Martlage Plug Smart Michael McCabe (via webcast) Reliant Energy Cassius McChesney Arizona Public Service Massoud Momeni (via webcast) Toyota Kevin Morrow ETEC 7

8 Sara Mullen Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) Ruben Nichols Jr. Gulf Power Co. Greg Nieminski DBA Greg Nieminski Efrain Ornelas Pacific Gas & Electric Co. David Packard ClipperCreek Inc. Joel Pointon San Diego Gas & Electric Tom Reddoch Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) Brandon Rogers Eaton Corporation Andra Rogers Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) Serge Roy Hydro-Quebec Jose Salazar (via webcast) Southern California Edison Will Schaefer New West Technologies Christopher Schafer American Electric Power Service Corp. Rich Scholer Ford Motor Co. Craig Schotzhauer (via webcast) General Motors Sally Scripps (via webcast) Consumers Energy Vikas Sharma General Electric Company Aaron Singer BMW Group Technology Office Brian Sisco Eaton Corporation John Smart Idaho National Laboratory Karen Smith Salt River Project Ron Stahlhut (via webcast) John Deere & Co. Ron Thompson Eaton Corporation Raymond Tison Dominion Resources, Inc. Jeanne Trombly Plug In America Robert Uyeki Honda R&D North America Ed Wagner SatCon Technology Corp. Mike Waters Progress Energy Ted Yeider Paceco Corp. 8

9 Discussion of Smart Card application for Open Access December 3, 2009 Watson Collins Manager, Business Development Enterprise Planning & Development 0

10 3 charging station segments Opportunity for Open Access Public Curbside Meter TBD Billing TBD Workplace, Retail & Parking Garages Behind a meter Host facility pays electric bill Multifamily Home & Fleet Behind a meter EV owner pays electric bill Courtesy EPRI & GM 1

11 What do we know about these transactions > Small value transactions Minimum around $0.10 (1 kwh) Maximum around $4.00 (20 kwh) > Low volume of transactions per charging location Not likely to have more than 2 or 3 high value transactions per day > Size and volume of transactions similar to metered parking > Critical to match infrastructure costs with transaction value > Many utilities are not looking to charge significantly higher energy prices (multiple of 2 to 5 times the home rate) at public charging locations to cover high infrastructure costs 2

12 What approaches accomplish open access > Provide service for free > Cash meter > Add additional fee to existing metered parking > Roaming charge to home electric bill Higher Levels Of Open Access > Smart card (stored value card) > Credit card (money or credit on remote database) > Membership approaches with credit card via telephone > Membership only approaches 3

13 4 Simplified Credit card payment transaction flow

14 Smart cards in parking and public transit > Parking NYC San Francisco > Public Transit Boston Chicago Washington D.C New York/ San Francisco San Diego New Jersey 5

15 Discussion of smart cards > Technology standards already exist ISO/IEC 7816 for contact based systems ISO/IEC14443 for contactless systems > Provides options for multiple infrastructure providers to utilize same technology > Allows for varying levels of communications infrastructure deployment by infrastructure providers (infrastructure provides with advanced communications capabilities will get paid faster) > Cards can be reloaded (vendor who reloads card doesn t have to also be the charging station infrastructure provider) > Inexpensive technology > Opportunity to integrate with utility prepaid meter programs > If common interest exists Verify that existing standards are usable Need to decide on clearing house for settlement Integrate with utility led programs Integrate with community transit and parking settlement Establish new regional settlement clearing houses Establish a new national settlement clearing house 6 Need to decide on contact or contactless approach

16 Public Charging Stations Open Standard for Authentication and Access Harjinder Bhade December 3rd, 2009

17 Problem Statement To enable the market for charging stations to grow, Driver should be able to carry one access card and use it to access an EVSE from any vendor to charge her vehicle. In order enable this requirement, the following problems must be solved: Access Method A driver must be able to access and charge her vehicle at any vendor s EVSE and in any given area using multiple mechanisms to provide drivers with wide geographical coverage of charging stations. Another way of saying this is that a driver must be able to roam from one vendor s EVSE to another vendor s EVSE using a variety of mechanisms. Authentication/Authorization Method In order to support EVSE roaming, there needs to be a common method for authenticating a driver accessing an EVSE. Accounting Method Once a driver from one EVSE network has charged on a second EVSE network, there needs to be a common mechanism for exchanging charging session accounting records between the EVSE network providers for billing and reporting purposes, as is done between cell phone carriers. 2

18 Access Method Requirements 1. Access Card must be contactless to avoid maintenance issues 2. Access Card must provide credit card level security 3. Access Card must be international standards based 4. Access Card must support ability to write proprietary data 5. Access Card must be consumer accepted and support wide usage

19 Proposed EVSE Roaming Architecture 4

20 Authorization Architecture Driver Home Network Operator Visited Network Operator EVSE Driver Vehicle 5

21 EVSE Messaging Architecture Messages EVSE Network Operator Internet RFID Packet RFID 6

22 RFID Frequency Ranges and Applications LF HF UHF Microwave Freq. Range KHz MHz MHz GHz Read Range 10 cm 1M 2-7 M 1M Market share (2004) 74% 17% 6% 3% Coupling Magnetic Magnetic Electro magnetic Electro magnetic Existing standards 11784/85, , 15693,14443 A, B, and C EPC C0, C1, C1G2, Application Smart Card, Ticketing, animal tagging, Access, Laundry Small item management, supply chain, Anti-theft, library, transportation Transportation vehicle ID, Access/Security, large item management, supply chain Transportation vehicle ID (road toll), Access/Security, large item management, supply chain

23 ISO Proximity Card : Typical Range: 4 Frequency ( HF ): MHz Data rate: 106 kbps 212 kbps Terminology o PICC (Proximity Integrated Circuit Card) i.e., the card, o PCD (Proximity Coupling Device) i.e., the reader Standard: o ISO : Physical Card Characteristics o o ISO : RF Power and Modulation (Physical Layer) ISO : Initialization and Anti-collision (MAC Layer) o ISO : Block transmission protocol (Transport Layer) Type A and Type B: o Differ in terms of magnetic field modulation, bit/byte coding, and anti-collision

24 ISO Vicinity Card : range 4 ~ 3 Frequency ( HF ): MHz Data rate: 26.6 kbps Standard: o ISO : Physical Card Characteristics o o ISO : RF Power and Modulation (Physical Layer) ISO : Anti-collision (MAC Layer) and Transport

25 Contactless Smart Card Taxonomy Taxonomy, courtesy of the Smart Card Alliance: RFID Tags o Generally used for low-security identification only o Typically ISO Contactless Smart Cards o Generally involve crypto for high-security applications: o Credit Cards, Stored Value Cards, etc. o Almost always ISO

26 Access Method Recommendation Based on security, applications and usage, ISO (A and B) based contact-less cards are recommended as the required form of access for an EVSE. EVSE may accept other forms of access, such as ISO based RFID cards. 11

27 Next Steps Agreement on required and optional forms of access cards Define use cases Define and agree on contents of the access card Define Authorization and Accounting methods to enable roaming 12

28 Possible RFID Card Data UID Unique Identifier Version EVSE Network Operator EVSE Proprietary data Security RFID Card Data RFID 13

29 Gery Kissel General Motors

30 J1772 passed Hybrid Committee level ballot on 11/24/09. A 14 day Affirmation ballot will be required to address comments received during ballot. Affirmation ballot may start as early as 12/3/09 Upon completion of the Affirmation ballot, the document then undergoes a 28 day ballot at the SAE Motor Vehicle Council (MVC). If approved by the SAE MVC, the document should be available for purchase no earlier than the week of January 11, 2010.

31 Coupler samples are available from the following suppliers: Amphenol: Terri Miller REMA: Tim Rose Yazaki: Mike Rockafellow Unfortunately many suppliers are charging a premium for samples (> 10x).

32 October face-to-face meeting began dialog on single global DC charge standard JARI/TEPCO system widely deployed in Japan Many US DOE projects are installing JARI/TEPCO system Will the deployment of JARI/TEPCO chargers through US DOE projects result in a de facto standard? Need to get EU input on their vision of DC charging

33 Two sub teams were formed, vehicle OEM and charger equipment manufactures. Each team will review, comment and propose necessary requirements for the standard. Each team will provide a status update during monthly Task Force meetings. Gery Kissel leads the OEM team and David Francis leads the charger equipment manufacture team. Timing for the standard development is now in work and should be available in January 2010.

34 Next IEC charging standard meetings will be in Palo Alto, California, December 7-11, 2009 at EPRI IEC December 7 & 8 IEC December 9-11

35 NFPA Article 625 ROP responses were submitted prior to the October 23 deadline. NFPA accepted our proposal for Code Panel 12 Membership: Mike Hittel (from GM) will now be Principle member representing IWC / SAE. Gery Kissel will now be Alternate to Mike NFPA Report on Comments (ROC) CP12 meeting is December 10-12, 2009, Redondo Beach, CA

36 The following are the ROC comments that were submitted on behalf of the IWC / SAE: Comment Comment Comment Comment 12-57

37 Click to edit Master text styles Second EV Infrastructure level Open Access and Authentication Third level Fourth level December 3, 2009 Fifth level 1

38 Why Drive and EV? Fun to drive? Click to edit Master text styles Makes you look cool? Second level Makes you look green? Third level $0.03/mile vs $0.15/mile? Fourth level Fifth level 2

39 Economics? Monthly fuel bill of $150 goes away $0.03/ mile at 12,000 is Click to edit Master text styles almost negligible on a monthly utility bill Second level Third level Electric Car Premium? Fourth $5,000level $10,000 Fifth $25,000 level ~$110 per month average savings Money needs to stay with driver or automaker 3

40 Non-Home Charging Necessary for success of market Click to edit Master text styles Second level Capability increases Third EV usage level Fourth level Increases range Fifth level Transaction costs can not exceed benefit 4

41 Municipal Click = to edit Master text styles Second level Third level Fourth level Fifth level Needs to be free or very inexpensive 5

42 Retail Click = to edit Master text styles Second level Third level Fourth level Fifth level Needs to be convenient 6

43 Utility Control Click = to edit Master text styles Second level Third level Fourth level Fifth level Utility controlled user validation systems for public infrastructure should to be integrated as a Smart Grid application. 7

44 What Do System Operators Need to Integrate PHEV? Pei Zhang Program Manager Power System Analysis, Planning and Operations

45 Operation Functions Monitoring Analysis Control 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved. 2

46 Monitoring Define information needed by operators and market participants Integration of data from substations and distributed resource controllers into system and market operation Wide-area GIS-based, resource-based, marketbased display platform with advanced visualization tools 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved. 3

47 Analysis Modeling Develop static and dynamic models for system operation Develop product models for market operation Simulation Enhance system and market simulation tools 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved. 4

48 Control Design control architecture Develop advanced frequency & voltage control schemes for system operation Develop advanced unit commitment and dispatch algorithms for market operation Test control algorithms and schemes using operator and market simulations DR Energy Market Control Center 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved. 5

49 EPRI s Vision Integrating Central and Distributed Resources into System and Market Operation that Enable Widespread Use of Carbon Reduction Technologies. Market Operations System Operations Communication Infrastructure T&D Central Resources Distributed Resources 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved. 6

50 Power Quality Requirements for Electric Vehicle Chargers SAE J2894 Update Jose A. Salazar, P.E. EPRI IWC Quarterly Meeting PHEV Working Group

51 Background The objective is to take the 1997 EPRI IWC EV Charging Equipment Operational Recommendation for Power Quality legacy document, update and publish under an SAE recommendation EPRI IWC Recommendation was done at the December 2008 Meeting April 2009 the SAE Hybrid Committee approved the recommendation to create an SAE document. The new document created was SAE J2894 The PQ taskforce is being co-chaired by Gery Kissel (GM) and Jose Salazar (SCE)

52 SAE J2894 Status Currently on the second revision of the document Document has three main sections: Charger PQ Requirements Characteristics of AC Service Charging Control What the team is working on: Verifying and debating specified parameters Harmonizing with other standards (IEC, IEEE, ANSI) Revising sections including portable generation / Distributed Energy Resources SAE Formatting Final draft is expected by Jan Voting and Publishing expected by 1 st. Quarter of 2010

53 Charger PQ Requirements Recommended Full Power Conversion Efficiency Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 90% 90% 90% Recommended Displacement Power Factor Values Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 95% 95% 95% Recommended Maximum Total Harmonic Current Distortion Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 20% 20% 20% *Suggested to align with IEEE519 at 10% Current THD Inrush Current (% above max. steady state current draw): Not sure how it was determined in the original document.

54 Characteristics of AC Service Portable Generation / DER: (Under Major Revision)

55 Charging Control Utility Messages: J2847/1 Referenced Communication: J2836/1 Referenced Staggered Restart recommendations for Cold Load Pickup. Outages of 12 or more cycles Ramp up randomly within a 10 min. window. Available manual override Clear indication on EVSE or External Charger Load Rate (Soft Start) Ramp rate is currently being discussed.

56 SAE J2293 Task Force Status (Communications 101) Identify the system & options, then communicate! SAE J-Documents & Status Next Steps 1. Focus on Awareness 2. Ballot initial documents (J2836 /1 & J2847/1) 3. Model/simulate (using results of the new tool ) 4. Build/test/validate/field deploy to insure optimization &simplicity 5. Feed back into updates to J-documents Architecture 1. EVSE 2. PEV 3. Home New tool to analyze the system How to apply the new tool Make PEV design decisions that lead to neighborhood energy predictions Summary of Task Force Progress 12/3/09 Rich Scholer - SAE J2293 Task Force Status

57 SAE Standards J2836 is a Technical Information Report w/general info and use cases. J2847 is a Recommended Practice w/messages and detail info. 1. J2836 /1 & J2847/1 Utility programs Initial ballot December, J2836 /2 & J2847/2 DC charging Initial ballot 1Q, J2836 /3 & J2847/3 Reverse energy Initial ballot mid, J2836 /4 & J2847/4 Diagnostics Initial ballot 4Q, J2836 /5 & J2847/5 VM specific Initial ballot 4Q, 2010 Modeling/simulation, test, validation and field deployment follows initial ballot and results are fed back into J-document updates. 12/3/09 Rich Scholer - SAE J2293 Task Force Status

58 Next Steps (continued focus on awareness) We need to train ourselves before we can train others PEVs What are the variations between PHEVs & BEVs? Are all PHEVs the same?? What is usable energy vs. total energy? Why does it matter? EVSEs How many questions What EVSE is best for each customer? can you answer?? Level 1, 2, DC, single phase, three phase? Are all Level 2 EVSE s the same? Charging (it s not all about the battery!!) What is Fast Charging? Definition #1 0 to 80% charge in 10 minutes. Definition #2 0 to 80% charge in 30 minutes. Definition #3 No faster than the vehicle discharge rate. Definition #4 Not all the time,. How do we (PEV, EVSE, Utility, Customers) do it (fast charge)? How many connectors do we have? How much energy is used? What is the cost? What is the charge time? 12/3/09 Rich Scholer - SAE J2293 Task Force Status

59 Architecture Architecture then (material from June IWC meeting) Generalized PEV & EVSE Statistics (slide 5) Vehicle charge time variations PHEV (slide 6) Vehicle charge time variations BEV (slide 7) EMS State Diagram & Formulas (for U5 optimized energy transfer) (slide 8) 12/3/09 Rich Scholer - SAE J2293 Task Force Status

60 Generalized Vehicle & EVSE Statistics Typical Vehicle Rechargeable Energy Storage System (RESS) Capacity size variations: HEV 1.5 kwh PHEV 8 kwh BEV 25 kwh Full Hybrid Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE) Connection architectures: Battery Electric Cordset (120V) 1.5 or 2 kwh (15 or 20A outlet) Premise unit (240V) up to 19.2 kw (80A) Premise unit that includes the charger Level 1 Level 2 DC Mode 1, 2, 3, 4 Case A, B & C ISO/IEC 12/3/09 Rich Scholer - SAE J2293 Task Force Status

61 Vehicle charge time variations - PHEV Case 1 (Level 1) limit is 120V cordset EVSE Note: This is also 11% less efficient than case 3 caused by the additional transfer time. Case 2 (Level 2) limit is PHEV On-board Charger Note: This is also 3.3% less efficient than case 3 caused by the additional transfer time. Total 10,728 kwh 0.10/kWh) RESS 1,074Wh Time = 7.45 hours Total 9,900 kwh 0.10/kWh) RESS 2,655Wh Time = 3 hours 1.44 kwh (120V 12A) PHEV 8 kwh 150Wh Other loads 3.3 kwh PHEV 8 kwh 150Wh Other loads 1.44 kwh * 0.85 = 1,224 Wh 3.3 kwh * 0.85 = 2,805 Wh Case 3 DC Using 40A home breaker Case 4 DC Using Level 2 limit for EVSE Total 9,600 kwh 0.10/kWh) 7.68 kwh RESS PHEV 8 kwh 6,328 Wh 150Wh Time = 1.25 hours Other loads Total 9,600 kwh 0.10/kWh) 19.2 kwh RESS PHEV 8 kwh 16,170 Wh 150Wh Time = 0.5 hours Other loads Not likely, too fast of a charge for the battery (for some) 7.68 kwh * 0.85 = Wh Note: All based on zero SOC & 8 kwh RESS Add vehicle and/or RESS preconditioning (150 Wh increases) 12/3/09 Rich Scholer - SAE J2293 Task Force Status kwh * 0.85 = 16,320 Wh 6

62 Vehicle charge time variations - BEV Case 1 (Level 1) limit is 120V cordset EVSE Note: This is also 13% less efficient than case 4 caused by the additional transfer time. Case 2 (Level 2) limit is PHEV On-board Charger Note: This is 5% less efficient than case 4, also caused by the additional transfer time. Total 33,408 kwh 0.10/kWh) RESS 1,074Wh Time = 23.3 hours Total 31,020 kwh 0.10/kWh) RESS 2,655Wh Time = 9.4 hours 1.44 kwh (120V 12A) BEV 25 kwh 150Wh Other loads 3.3 kwh BEV 25 kwh 150Wh Other loads 1.44 kwh * 0.85 = 1,224 Wh 3.3 kwh * 0.85 = 2,805 Wh Case 3 DC Using 40A home breaker Note: This is 1.8% less efficient than case 4 also due to the additional transfer time. Total 30,105 kwh 0.10/kWh) RESS 6,378 Wh Time = 3.92 hours Case 4 DC Using Level 2 limit (19.2 kw) for EVSE Note: This is the most efficient energy use due to the lower transfer time. Total 29,568 kwh 0.10/kWh) RESS 16,170 Wh Time = 1.54 hours 7.68 kwh BEV 25 kwh 150Wh Other loads 19.2 kwh BEV 25 kwh 150Wh Other loads 7.68 kwh * 0.85 = Wh Note: All based on zero SOC & 25 kwh RESS 12/3/09 Rich Scholer - SAE J2293 Task Force Status kwh * 0.85 = 16,320 Wh 7

63 RESS SOC Other Loads EMS State Diagram & Formulas (U5 this is where the PEV (mobile appliance) asks for energy) Charger size RESS Capacity Charger efficiency ALC Amount total Amount used RESS charge acceptance Amount request Rate request Amount available Least of the inputs Least amount Least of the inputs Time request 12/3/09 Rich Scholer - SAE J2293 Task Force Status Amount Request (from PEV) RESS _ Capacity (1 SOC) + PEV _ Other _ Loads Amount _ request = Ch arg er η 18 kwh (1 25%) + (500Wh for 3 hrs) = 17.6 kwh 85% Rate Request (from PEV) Rate _ request ( ACMAX ) = Lesser of ALC or Ch arg er _ Size Pr emise Vehicle (40A Brea ker = 32A@ 240V ) or (18kWh on board charg er) = 7.68 kwh Time Request (from PEV) Ch arg e time request = Least of these [ RESS Capacity ( 1 SOC) ] or [ Amount available] ( Rate Available Ch arg er η) Other Loads ( 1.44 kwh 0.85) 8 kwh = 7.45 Hours 150 Wh 8

64 Architecture (continued updates) Architecture now (not new, but in more detail) PEV Charging Scenarios PEV & EVSE Architecture & Added items (for additional communications) Level 1 & 2 Level 2 or DC (less than 20 kw) DC (more than 20 kw) ISO/IEC Attributes 12/3/09 Rich Scholer - SAE J2293 Task Force Status

65 Architecture (in more detail) PEV Charging Scenarios J1772 Control Pilot Charging only (additional communication required (J2847/2) for DC only & 5% PWM) 1. Level 1 (cordset EVSE) 120V charging 15A outlet (1.4 kw) or 20A outlet (1.9 kw) 2. Level 2 (premise EVSE) 240V charging Up to 80A (19.2 kw) 3. DC charging Low power (up to 80A - 20 kw) same connector as Level 1 / 2?? Medium power (up to 130A??) 2 nd connector required High power (up to 400A??) different 2 nd connector required 4. ISO/IEC 12/3/09 Rich Scholer - SAE J2293 Task Force Status

66 Level 1 & 2 (beyond J1772 ) PEV & EVSE Architecture 1) AC Charging Level 1 (120V) or 2 (240V) J1772 connector, on-board charger and Traction Battery. Vehicle EVSE S1 Traction Battery S2 AC Only Charger PLC J1772 Level 1 / 2 Connector PLC L 1 L 2 Gnd EVSE L1 L2 Gnd 12/3/09 Rich Scholer - SAE J2293 Task Force Status

67 PEV: Level 1 & 2 - Added items Add PLC module EVSE (beyond J1772 ) Add PLC module Add bridge device (e.g. PLC to Wireless) Add display Add Keypad Add EUMD (sub-meter) 12/3/09 Rich Scholer - SAE J2293 Task Force Status

68 Level 2 or DC (less then 20 kw) PEV & EVSE Architecture (single connector) 2) DC Charging (up to 19.2 kw to off-board charger - in EVSE) J1772 connector, S3 & 4 and Traction Battery. S1 PLC Vehicle EVSE Traction Battery S2 AC or DC (low power DC) Charger PLC S4 S3 J1772 Level 1 / 2 Connector L 1 L 2 Gnd EVSE PLC S1 S2 S3 L1 L2 Gnd Charger 12/3/09 Rich Scholer - SAE J2293 Task Force Status

69 Level 2 or DC (less then 20 kw) - Added items (single connector) PEV: Add DC switches Upgrade wiring size and existing switches accordingly Insure PLC works with AC & DC (filter variations, etc) EVSE Add charger Upgrade AC switches to AC or DC mode versions Insure PLC works with AC & DC (filter variations, etc) 12/3/09 Rich Scholer - SAE J2293 Task Force Status

70 DC (more than 20 kw) PEV & EVSE Architecture (dual connectors) 3) DC Charging (more than 19.2 kw to EVSE) Vehicle includes 2 nd Connector plus S5 & 6. Vehicle includes J1772 connector & on-board charger, S3 & 4 are included in case the EVSE also includes an off-board charger. S1 PLC S5 Vehicle EVSE Traction Battery S2 S6 DC + 2 nd Connector DC - AC or DC (low & high power DC) Charger PLC S4 S3 Gnd L 1 L 2 Gnd J1772 Level 1 / 2 Connector EVSE S1 S2 S3 Charger PLC L1 L2 Gnd 12/3/09 Rich Scholer - SAE J2293 Task Force Status

71 DC (more than 20 kw) - Added items (dual connectors) BEV & PHEV Vehicle: Add DC switches Add 2nd DC connector Upgrade wiring size & existing switches accordingly EVSE Add 2 nd port & including connector #2 Upgrade to larger charger 12/3/09 Rich Scholer - SAE J2293 Task Force Status

72 ISO/IEC Mode 1 AC no pilot Non dedicated outlet Mode 2 AC includes control pilot Non dedicated outlet with in-cable protection device Mode 3 AC includes control pilot Dedicated outlet Mode 4 - DC Case A cable fixed to vehicle Case B separate cable Case C cable fixed to charging post 12/3/09 Rich Scholer - SAE J2293 Task Force Status

73 How do we answer our questions?? Use a new tool to look at energy and options. We have the Rainbow chart (power levels), Bubble chart (use cases), now we have The Energy Game (new tool): Explains more of the system Answers more questions Interactive with immediate responses Includes DC energy transfer (& fast charge whatever that is) Is expandable (leads to applications for the computer, phone, etc) 12/3/09 Rich Scholer - SAE J2293 Task Force Status

74 Some Answers (prior to playing the game) 1. What is RESS usable energy vs. total? Usable is what is available to charge and discharge This is the SOC range (e.g. 20% means 20% usable) Total is what charge rates are based 1C (one hour charge based on total capacity) 2C (1/2 hour charge) 6C (10 minute charge C/2 (two hour charge), etc. 12/3/09 Rich Scholer - SAE J2293 Task Force Status

75 Another answer (prior to playing the game) 2. What EVSE is best? Expandable More than one port (multiple vehicles & types) Customer has BEV & PHEV to charge EVSE includes charger (fast charge) Larger charger is more cost effective off-board (thermal, packaging, vibration, shock, etc. is easier) Purchase once, not with every vehicle exchange Does not require premise wiring update Same wiring size for 32A (40A CBR) up to 72A (90A CBR) Note (or preview): the game shows Unused premise power. This is for expandable uses. 12/3/09 Rich Scholer - SAE J2293 Task Force Status

76 The Energy Game - Level 1 System Unused premise power Based on RESS Charge Time* Energy Used Watts charger 2820 Watts 4.43 Hours kw $ 1.46 Based on RESS Charge Time* Energy Used EVSE 1578 Watts 7.92 Hours kw lesser of ALC or $ 1.52 Charger size Circuit Breaker (CBR) EVSE PEV Charger Output Other Loads * Ideal values, no 20 Amps 1.92 kw 2.97 kw 150 Watts losses, balancing, Connector Current Connector Current etc. RESS Cordset EVSE - 120V AC Enter Values (e.g. ) CBR/outlet size (amps) ALC Power (kw) Vehicle Type Usable Capacity (kw) SOC Charger Size (kw) Charger Efficiency (%) Other Loads (Watts) BEV or or 1.92 BEV or PHEV 8 to 25 0 to to 7 85 to to Typical Values Wiring Size CBR/outlet rating Voltage Current (VAC) (amps) Available Line Current (ALC) = 80% CBR RESS Typical values (kw & %) Premise EVSE Power (kw) Current (amps) EVSE Vehicle Usable Total PWM Types Capacity Capacity % usable 14 AWG 16 AWG % BEV % 12 AWG 14 AWG % BEV % PHEV % PHEV % 12/3/09 Rich Scholer - SAE J2293 Task Force Status

77 Level 2 System Premise EVSE - 240V AC Circuit Breaker (CBR) Unused premise power Based on RESS Charge Time* Energy used Watts charger 2820 Watts 4.43 Hours kw $ 1.46 Based on RESS Charge Time* Energy Used EVSE lesser of ALC or Watts 1.05 Hours kw $ 1.41 Charger size EVSE PEV Charger Output 70 Amps kw 2.97 kw 150 Watts Connector current Connector current RESS CBR/outlet size (amps) ALC Power (kw) Vehicle Type Usable Capacity (kw) SOC Charger Size (kw) Charger Efficiency (%) Other Loads (Watts) Enter Values (e.g. ) BEV Other Loads 15 to to 19.2 BEV or PHEV 8 to 25 0 to to 7 85 to to * Ideal values, no losses, balancing, etc. Typical Values Wiring Size CBR/outlet Rating Available Line Current (ALC) = 80% CBR/outlet RESS Typical values (kw & %) Premise EVSE Voltage Current Current EVSE Vehicle Usable Total Power (kw) (VAC) (amps) (amps) PWM Types Capacity Capacity % usable 14 AWG 16 AWG % BEV % 12 AWG 14 AWG % BEV % 10 AWG % PHEV % 8 AWG % PHEV % 8 AWG % 8 AWG % 8 AWG % 8 AWG % 8 AWG % 6 AWG % 12/3/09 Rich Scholer - SAE J2293 Task Force Status

78 ISO/IEC System Unused premise power Based on RESS Charge Time* Energy Used 0.38 Watts charger 2820 Watts 8.87 Hours kw $ 2.93 Based on RESS Charge Time* Energy Used Mode 1-3 EVSE 3162 Watts 7.91 Hours kw lesser of ALC or $ 2.91 Charger size Circuit Breaker (CBR) EVSE PEV Charger Output Other Loads * Ideal values, no 16 Amps 3.68 kw 2.97 kw 150 Watts losses, balancing, Connector current 16, 32 or 64A Connector current 16, 32 or 64A etc. RESS Enter Values CBR/outlet size (amps) ALC Power (kw) Vehicle Type Usable Capacity (kw) SOC Charger Size (kw) Charger Efficiency (%) Other Loads (Watts) BEV (e.g. ) 15 to to BEV or PHEV 8 to 25 0 to to 7 85 to to Typical Values RESS Typical values (kw & %) Voltage Available Line Current (ALC) Vehicle Usable Total % = 80% CBR/outlet Types Capacity Capacity usable (1Ø) (3Ø) Current Power (kw) Power (kw) EVSE (amps) (1Ø) (3Ø) PWM BEV % % BEV % % PHEV % % PHEV % 12/3/09 Rich Scholer - SAE J2293 Task Force Status

79 DC Charging Unused premise power RESS Charge Time* Energy Used kw Watts 0.16 Hours 7.14 kw $ Amps 45 kw 40.5 kw 150 Watts CBR/outlet size (amps) ALC Power (kw) Vehicle Type Vehicle Voltage Usable Capacity (kw) Total Capacity (kw) SOC Charger Size (kw) Other Loads Charger Efficiency (%) Other Loads (Watts) Connector Current PHEV (e.g. ) 15 to to 19.2 BEV or PHEV 200 to to to to to to to * Ideal values, no Wiring Size CBR Rating losses, balancing, Available Line Current RESS Typical values (kw & %) etc. (ALC) = 80% CBR/outlet Premise EVSE Voltage Current Current EVSE Vehicle Charge Usable Total % Power (kw) (VAC) (amps) (amps) PWM Types Voltage Capacity Capacity usable 14 AWG 16 AWG % BEV % 12 AWG 14 AWG % BEV % 10 AWG % PHEV % 8 AWG % PHEV % 8 AWG % 8 AWG % Notes & Assumptions: 8 AWG % Unused premise power could be used for another port (another vehicle). 8 AWG % Connector current will assist in sizing the DC connector required. 8 AWG % Fast charge BEV 20%SOC, PHEV 0%SOC 6 AWG % Fast charge takes usable energy to 80% Fast charge is a 1C rate on total capacity instead of usable capacity Manulipation of entries: Real Fast charge is using charge time of 10 minutes. To get a 1C rate, get RESS Watts to = total capacity To get a 30 minute (Fast) charge, change charger size until Charge time = 30 minutes (0.50 minutes), set SOC to 20% (since the RESS only goes to 80%) To get a 10 minute (Fast) charge, change charger size until Charge time = 10 minutes (0.166 minutes), set SOC to 20% (since the RESS only goes to 80%) Typical Values Premise EVSE with offboard charger Circuit Breaker (CBR) Enter Values lesser of these EVSE Charger Size RESS PEV Input 12/3/09 Rich Scholer - SAE J2293 Task Force Status