Benchmarking electric vehicles. Prof. David Gray Dr. Bing Xu Amar Nayak

Transcription

1 Benchmarking electric vehicles Prof. Davi Gray Dr. Bing Xu Amar Nayak

2 Introuction Why are we oing this? (DG) Introucing the methoology (AN) Comparison criteria an variables (AN) Weighting the variables (DG,AN an you!) The moel (AN)

3 e-harbours The e-harbours project is intereste in smart energy solutions for harbour cities which can help promote renewables Looking at energy efficiency an management solutions that can help smooth out the intermittency an balancing problems between eman for energy in harbours an the unpreictable supply of renewable energy e-harbours partners are intereste in smart gris an virtual power plants

4 e-harbours an e-mobility But we are also intereste in Electric an hybri vehicles an vessels Not just as a means of transport or a way to reuce CO2 emissions but as mobile energy storage an buffering evices

5 Key questions for e-harbours: Can electric an hybri cars, vans buses, HGVs, cranes, forklifts, hybri ferries, LNG fuelle barges an even ships themselves become components in smart energy systems? Can the smart energy angle make expensive electric an hybri vehicles more competitive? Where are the business cases? Will there be better business cases associate with some types of vehicles an vessels an not others?

6 Key questions for Robert Goron University Can RGU evelop a moel to compare an evaluate ifferent electric vehicles an ientify those that are well suite to inclusion in a smart energy system an thus help vehicle an vessel manufactures an policy makers ientify an evelop business cases aroun smart energy? First a quick introuction to batteries an energy storage capacity

7 Types of Battery Lea Aci Nickel metal hybri battery Molten salt battery Lithium ion battery Lithium polymer battery

8 Battery terms Specific Energy: Energy per unit mass. Petrol tank has Sp. Energy of 12 Wh/Kg which is 100 times more than best battery. Range of vehicle is fn of Sp. Energy Specific power: Also known as power ensity or power per unit volume. Specific power of petrol an battery vehicle is comparable. Sp. Power is important in HEV Energy ensity: Amount of energy store in given system per unit mass. Electric cars nee to be as light weight as possible an batteries that are smaller an use less materials can also be lower in cost.

9 Battery capacity a comparison Vehicle Chevrolet Volt (Small car) Tesla Moel S (Mi car) BYD E6 (Van) BYD E9 (Bus) Electric Drayage Trucks (Massive truck) Battery capacity 16 kwh 40 kwh 48 kwh 100 kwh 235 kwh Current battery price $500 to $600 per kwh

10 RGU methoology Comparing ifferent types of electric (an hybri) harbour vehicles an vessels (cars, buses, HGVs, cranes, forklifts, Vehicles are usually compare on a,limite number of criteria - cost, emissions, etc. Poor business case for electric vehicles base on lifetime cost Are there better business cases aroun incluing electric vehicles in smart energy systems (Malmo s smart houses!) If so what wier criteria shoul we compare ifferent vehicles on?

11 RGU methoology Thinking about electric an hybri vehicles as part of smart energy systems: What wier criteria shoul we compare vehicles on? What variables shoul be inclue to represent that criteria? What weighting shoul be attache to these variables (this is where you come in)? Can we get ata for all the variables? Some ata is reaily available

12 Some Available Benchmarking Data Moel Price ($) Charge life Capacity Max Spee Tesla S m 40 KWh 110mph Nissan leaf 30, m 24 KWh 90mph For Focus 39,200 76m 23 KWh 85mph Chev. Volt m 16 KWh 99mph BMW Mega city 40, m 22 KWh 94mph Coa 38, m 31 KWh 85mph Blue Zero E cell NA 124m 35 KWh 94mph Toyota Prius $28, m 4.4 KWh 111mph BYD E6 $35, m 48 kwh 100mph

13 Some Available Benchmarking Data (Cont) Moel Price Charge life Capacity Max Spee Mitsubishi imiev 29,100 62m 16 KWh 81mph Bolloré Bluecar 30, m 30 kwh 81mph Renault Fluence Z.E. 27, m 22kWh 84mph Subaru R1e 17,500 50m DNA 65mph Mitshubishi Outlaner 30, m 12KwH 75mph Electric Drayage Trucks 208,500 50m 235kWh 40mph Forklift 6 hrs 10mph Siemens earth Movers 234,000 AC cont NA Ferries

14 Comparing vehicles important variables? Variables Price of vehicle Range of vehicle between recharges Energy Capacity (kwh) Recharge time (if applicable) Maximum Spee (comparative performance) Lifetime full cost of ownership ifferential vs. iesel or petrol equivalent Preictability of use (regular recharging winow) Cost of support infrastructure Market Potential (iniviual vehicles an clusters) Ease of up scaling an lea in time (legislative barriers, contracting, infrastructure funing) Data to han What have we misse?...? X X X X X

15 RGU methoology Thinking about electric an hybri vehicles as smart energy systems: What criteria? What variables shoul be inclue to represent that criteria? What weighting shoul be attache to these variables (this is where you come in)? We want you attach a weight to these variables We will use your aggregate weightings to weight the variables in our moel You are participating in the research!

16 Auience participation weighting variables We will provie a han out We want you to score the ten variables in terms of their importance so give the highest score to the variable which is most important for comparing vehicles (in terms of their ability to be part of a smart energy system) Score the variables however you like - you can give 0 to a variable if you like There is space at the bottom for you to ientify an score those variables that you believe are important but that we may have misse Your scores must a up to 100

17 Example - Weighting variables Variables Score Price of vehicle 5 Range of vehicle between recharges 10 Energy Capacity (kwh) 15 Recharge time (if applicable) 5 Maximum Spee (comparative performance) 5 Lifetime full cost of ownership ifferential 10 Preictability of use (regular recharging winow) 15 Cost of support infrastructure 10 Market Potential (iniviual vehicles an clusters) 10 Ease of up scaling 10 What have we misse?... 5 Must a up to

18 PROMETHEE II Step 1. Define the preference function P ( ) g j j ( a) g j ( b) q / p :a threshol of inifference/strict preference s :an intermeiatevalue between q & p Type of Criterion Formula 1. Usual Criterion P( ) 0, 0 1, 0 2. U-Shape Criterion P( 0, q ) 1, q 3. V-Shape Criterion P( 0, q ) / p, 0 1, q p

19 PROMETHEE II q p q p q q P 1, 0, 0, ) ( 5. Type of Criterion Formula 4. Level Criterion 5. V-Shape with inifference Criterion 6. Gaussian Criterion q, p,. q, ) P( q, p, q p q q, ) P( , e, ) P( S

20 PROMETHEE II Step 2. Choose weights or relative importance of coefficients of criteria, say w j s (Experts Opinions) Step 3. Compute the preference inices P m a,b w j Pj a,b w j ; Pb,a w j Pj b,a j1 where 0 P m j1 a,b Pb,a 1 Step 4. Compute Positive, negative & net outranking flows m j1 m j1 w j a Pa,b ba\ a ; a Pb,a ba\ a ; a a a Step 5. Define Binary Outranking Relation S: a S b a b

21 Questions for the panel (an the auience) We want some feeback: Is this a creible approach? Can it work? Are there problems that nee to be aresse? In what ways o we nee to refine the approach? What other factors nee to be consiere? Panel feeback Observations an questions from the auience on the methoology Reflections on the event as a whole