Smart Grids and Electric Vehicles Developing e-mobility at small scale. Giuseppe PACE Ghent University Netlipse Meeting Bruxelles, May 12 th, 2014

Similar documents
Findings from the Limassol SUMP study

Prof. Sidharta Gautama i-know Innovation Center. The role of EV consumer behavior in smart grid solutions

Technical Report on EV Field Tests

Bridging the E-Mobility information gap with E-Mobility Information Centres in the North Sea Region

Continental Mobility Study Klaus Sommer Hanover, December 15, 2011

COMPETT. Electromobility+ Mid-term event Copenhagen Erik Figenbaum, project coordinator

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AS THE

-Mobility Solutions. Electric Taxis

Bus The Case for the Bus

Development of the European Framework for Electromobility

London 2050 Infrastructure Plan

actsheet Car-Sharing

Reducing CO 2 emissions from vehicles by encouraging lower carbon car choices and fuel efficient driving techniques (eco-driving)

Electric vehicles in the craft sector

Prof. Sidharta Gautama. The role of EV consumer behavior in smart grid solutions

How a smarter grid enables smart mobility and how smart mobility enables smarter cities!

Implementing Transport Demand Management Measures

B3. Incorporating innovation - How to plan for Alternative Fuel Infrastructure

Visioning and Backcasting for UK Transport Policy

G u i d e l i n e S U S T A I N A B L E P A R K I N G M A N A G E M E N T Version: November 2015

Smart planning to unlock urban mobility innovation

Electric Vehicle Adoption in the South African Context

Draft Marrickville Car Share Policy 2014

Experiences in the field of electric mobility in Katowice

ELIPTIC results & recommendations

SEPTEMBER 2017 EVALUATION REPORT NEW MOBILITY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Urban Mobility Systems - Regulation Across Modes

Early adopters of EVs in Germany unveiled

DemoEV - Demonstration of the feasibility of electric vehicles towards climate change mitigation LIFE10 ENV/MT/000088

COMPETT. COMPETT - COMPetitive Electric Town Transport. Erik Figenbaum Project Coordinator Compett Institute of Transport Economics, Norway

E-mobility in The Netherlands

Helsinki Roadmap: Experiences with Performance Indicators in Kalasatama

Hamburg moving towards Electromobility. Dr. Sicco Rah Hanse-Office, Joint Representation of Hamburg and Schleswig-Holstein to the EU

Targeting TDM Policies Based on Individual Transport Emissions

E-Mobility in the City of Klagenfurt on Lake Wörthersee CEMOBIL project. Julia Zientek Austrian Mobility Research, FGM-AMOR Graz

Toward the Realization of Sustainable Mobility

ELMOS electric mobility in smaller cities International Expert Conference 8 October 2013, Växjö, SE. Miriam Lindenau, Rupprecht Consult

City of Montréal s strategies to move smarter

Akku4Future. (Acronym: Akku4Future Dis)

Economic, environmental, and social performance of electric two-wheelers

Fuel Cells and Hydrogen 2 Joint Undertaking (FCH 2 JU) Frequently Asked Questions

UITP PTx2 Strategy: What Role for Busses and Recommendations from UITP Istanbul Bus Declaration

Energy and Mobility Transition in Metropolitan Areas

Amman Green Policies Projects and Challenges. Prepared by: Eng. Sajeda Alnsour Project coordinator Sept. 20, 2017

Mysuru PBS Presentation on Prepared by: Directorate of Urban Land Transport

Evaluation and modelling of demand and generation at distribution level for Smart grid implementation

Electric Vehicle Charging Workshop Pride Park Stadium 7 March 2018

Urban vehicle access regulations. Brussels, 5 September, 2017 Karen Vancluysen, Polis Secretary General

Policy Options to Decarbonise Urban Passenger Transport

ERTRAC Vision Future Road Transport Prepared by the Executive Group in collaboration with the Working Group Leaders.

Doubling the Market Share of Public Transport Worldwide by 2025: A Smart Future for Cities

DG system integration in distribution networks. The transition from passive to active grids

Electric Mobility in Africa Opportunities and Challenges. African Clean Mobility Week, Nairobi/Kenya, March

How to enable Munich s Freedom (from private cars)? Impacts of the first Mobility Station on urban mobility

What We Heard Report - Metro Line NW LRT

Mississauga Moves: A City in Transformation icity Symposium Hamish Campbell

BACK TO OUR PEOPLE. From a classical fleet management approach to a modern mobility concept. International Fleet Meeting, Geneva

French National electro-mobility association Joseph Beretta Business opportunity and challenges

Sustainable Mobility Project 2.0 Project Overview. Sustainable Mobility Project 2.0 Mobilitätsbeirat Hamburg 01. July 2015

Electric Vehicles: Moving from trials to widespread adoption in the North East of England

The Century of Cities

Presentation: Mobihubs in Flanders

BMW GROUP DIALOGUE. HANGZHOU 2017 TAKE AWAYS.

TOMORROW S MOBILITY THE INNOVATIVE ROLE OF PUBLIC TRANSPORT. Caroline Cerfontaine Senior Manager Combined Mobility UITP

Consumers, Vehicles and Energy Integration (CVEI) project

Shared Transport experience from the UK

Written Exam Public Transport + Answers

STRATEGIC PRIORITIES AND POLICY COMMITTEE MAY 5, 2016

IKORODU- CMS BRT EXTENSION PROJECT

European Urban Transport Roadmaps to 2030

Sofia Urban Transport challenges and strategies

Energy Innovation Emporium. Transport. Chair: Prof. John Nelson, Centre for Transport Research University of Aberdeen

Networks of pedestrian's paths

Overview of Polis activities in electromobility. Gabriela Barrera, Polis

Vision of long-term transition to e- mobility

French automotive & mobility cluster. What s going on, on the other side of the Rhine?? Territory: Alsace Franche-Comté

FENEBUS POSITION PAPER ON REDUCING CO2 EMISSIONS FROM ROAD VEHICLES

Back ground Founded in 1887, and has expanded rapidly Altitude about 2500 meters above MSL Now among the ten largest cities in Sub Saharan Africa

Data Challenge Goethe University Frankfurt Mobility options in smart cities. DB Systel GmbH Norbert Schaffitzel T.IVP 21 Frankfurt 19/04/2018

Nordic Highlights - a brief overview of status and activities. Director Danish Partnership for Hydrogen and Fuel Cells

What s New in Shared. Mayor s Innovation Project Jan 24, 2015

Oslo The EV Capital. Agency for Urban Environment City of Oslo Sture Portvik

Electri-City Electri-Cité Elettri-Città. The challenge of deploying electromobility in European cities and regions

Share with the GHSEA. Smart Energy Initiatives. Collaboration and a partner eco-system to achieve results

The Motorcycle Industry in Europe. Powered Two-Wheelers the SMART Choice for Urban Mobility

Highlights of EU efforts for Smart Grids deployment and the way forward

Future of Mobility and Role of E-mobility for Future Sustainable Transport. Petr Dolejší Director Mobility and Sustainable Transport

Steady Progress Scenario

Ministry of Infrastructure and Watermanagement

Development of Business Cases for Fuel Cells and Hydrogen Applications for Regions and Cities. FCH Airport ground handling equip.

DRAFT Evaluation Scores. Transit

Planning for Sustainable Urban Transport Systems in India - Strengths and Weaknesses

Spatial planning and sustainable urban transport systems

The deployment of public transport innovation in European cities and regions. Nicolas Hauw, Polis

The ACT s Transition to Zero Emissions Vehicles Action Plan Anna McGuire Senior Policy Officer, Climate Change Policy

High Speed Rail Regional Impact

City Profile. Gdynia

Marketable solutions for climate-friendly electric mobility

CAN AFRICA LEAPFROG TO CLEAN AND SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY? Ms. Maletlabo Handel National Project Coordinator, UNIDO, South Africa

Managed Electric Vehicle Charging: New Opportunities for Demand Response.

Transcription:

Smart Grids and Electric Vehicles Developing e-mobility at small scale Giuseppe PACE Ghent University Netlipse Meeting Bruxelles, May 1 th, 1

Summary Introduction Towards a post-car system : a vision Increasing efficiency and reducing congestion: the EV sharing E-Mobility NSR project User cases and tests Some public policy considerations Seite 1

1. Introduction Transport sustainability is based on global challenges (e.g. curbing the negative impacts of transport GHG emissions) To limit some modes of transport in favour of others as well as the use of conventionally fuelled vehicles, and to make the overall system efficient Targets negotiated among governments, and public and private stakeholders, often at international level. Infrastructure planning and modelling is based on these perspectives No consumer insight, no lifestyles analysis, no real and continuous data

.Towards a post-car system : a vision Lowering the use of fossil fuels in urban mobility without reducing city accessibility and attractiveness, increasing renewable energy usage and make it smart Renewing our culture and consciousness in order to overcome the current car system, apparently stable and unchanging Important technical, economic, policy and social changes e.g. Shift from economies of ownership to economies of access, that is, paying for access to travel/mobility services rather than the outright ownership of vehicles Coevolution of interrelated elements, changes in both demand and supply sides, stakeholders involvement, long-term processes A single policy cannot bring alone to the change

3. Increasing efficiency and reducing congestion: the EV sharing De-privatising vehicles, reducing residential parking problems, and associated congestion and local air pollution Car sharing Reducing conventionally fuelled vehicles Electric Vehicles Mostly available in large and medium size cities, rarely in small towns and peripheral areas For customers: success is car availability, competitive pricing, parking facilities, and the possibility to use it door-to-door (close-to-the-house) For car-sharing companies: success is high number of subscribers and rate of daily usage per vehicle, and these conditions can be achieved only in central areas of large cities (close-to-the-market). IS THAT THE SOLUTION?

3. Increasing efficiency and reducing congestion: the EV sharing In terms of efficiency, balance between daily availability and usage, price rates, numbers of cars and subscribers. Car sharing dominating model: how to maximise the potential users basin for the service and locates vehicles where the potential car demand would be the highest (stations, commercial areas, public buildings, etc...). Does not cover peripheral communities, as well as commuters, and specific users group needs (tourists, students, business), which have two choices: public transportation (buses or trains, when available, or taxi) or private car. When communities are too dispersed, public transportation operational costs are too high and leave them un(der)-serviced with resulting problems of accessibility and social inclusion (e.g. peripheral urban areas, social housing).

3. Increasing efficiency and reducing congestion: the EV sharing For the EV sharing, the traditional car-sharing approach has difficulties to prove its efficiency. The need for battery charging infrastructure highly increases infrastructure costs and reduces parking availability. In absence of dedicated maintenance and proper charging, EV is still not easily implemented. A new way of thinking is needed to support EV sharing solutions: to satisfy the household need of mobility (close-to-the-house) to offer an economic, efficient, aesthetic, emotional, innovative, and sustainable zero-tailpipe-emission (if fully electric) passenger transport door-to-door.

. e-mobility NSR project In Europe and the North Sea Region a need for strategies and action plans to develop e-mobility. Actually incentives developed throughout Europe to seize the potential of e- mobility, especially in terms of local and regional traffic. Activities are not synchronized or aligned with one another, and realization is confined to only few places. Opportunities for further development and growth of this future key mobility sector unexploited. E-Mobility NSR aims at creating favorable conditions to promote the common development of e-mobility in the North Sea Region. Transnational support structures in the shape of a network and virtual routes are envisaged as part of the project, striving towards improving accessibility and the wider use of e-mobility in the NSR countries. The project is being undertaken in the framework of the Interreg IVB North Sea Region Programme and runs from October 11 to September 1

. e-mobility NSR project Specific project objectives are: To provide state of the art information which may help policy development in e-mobility in the NSR; To provide insight on gaps and needs in respect of infrastructure, logistics, and preliminary standards for multi charging techniques; To develop a NSR smart grid concept with charging points, hence increasing accessibility in the region; To provide a long-term basis upon which regional and local governments as well as other relevant stakeholders in the NSR may engage on e- mobility, among others by creating physical or virtual e-mobility information centres in each participating region or city. To integrate the urban freight logistics dimension into the e-mobility network, promoting better accessibility and cleaner cities by stimulating the use of electric vehicles as a more efficient solution

. e-mobility NSR project Main Partners: 1. Hamburg University of Applied Sciences (DE). FDT Association of Danish Transport and Logistics Centres (DK) 3. Lindholmen Science Park (SE). Delft University of Technology (NL) 5. Høje-Taastrup Municipality (DK) 6. Northumbria University (UK) 7. Province of North Holland (NL) 8. Zero Emission Resource Organisation - ZERO (NO) 9. Cities Institute, London Metropolitan University (UK) 1. WFB Wirtschaftsförderung Bremen GmbH (DE) 11. Flanders Region represented by Universiteit Gent (BE)

. e-mobility NSR project New Infrastructure for e-mobility UGENT coordinates the WP5 Smart grid solutions, with the aim to develop models of smart grid integrating all connected actors, producers and consumers needs, for distributing energy in efficient, sustainable, reliable and safe mode. Shifting from industry orientation (and lobbies) to market (customer behaviour) Tests about EVs performance (EVs storage capacities, their charging needs and their energy consumption) and uses behaviours and acceptance Three typologies of field tests: Service EVs (public and private) Private EVs (cohousing car-sharing) Public Transport (e-buses)

5. User cases and tests Field tests have to: represent cost and time effective alternatives to the main urban traffic producers to guarantee them a door-to-door mobility to increase their accessibility to urban centres, and to decrease direct and indirect costs for the community The alternative is represented by car sharing, which: reduces parking needs and urban traffic Provides a solution for de-privatizing cars Instead of developing an EV sharing system, the test is about a small car sharing in a type of collaborative housing where residents actively participate in the life of their own neighbourhood: THE COHOUSING

5. User cases and tests Test population Four co-housing communities in Flanders: two located near a city (Brussels for La Placette, and Gent for Vinderhoute), and two located in Ghent city centre (Papegaaistraat, Sint-Pietersaalststraat,). The communities sizes range from up to 3 people The first two cohousing received two EVs each, and a charging box The second received a bonus to share EVs from Cambio Number of inhabitants Participants in the survey Gender Male Female Age 18-5 6-35 35-5 51-65 Marital status Single Married Co-habiting N.of children 1 3 or more La Placette Papegaaistraat Sint- Pietersaalstst raat Vinderhoute Total 35 7 5 33 8 3 7 33 78 16 18 8 7 19 9 19 6 7 7 16 Table 1: Composition of the sample population per co-housing community 3 5 6 6 3 1 3 5 16 17 13 16 3 5 5 7 13 9 37 1 1 8 17 3 1 13 5 11 17 5

5. User cases and tests The different location of the cohousing, and more the different familiar composition and ages, separate clearly the suburban from the urban communities. The firsts at the research of a green and less dense housing for growing their family The seconds, without children, at the research of different social life Highest school diploma Secondary school or lower High school University Professional status Student Inactive Part-time job Full-time job Blank La Placette 15 15 6 9 15 Papegaa istraat Sint- Pietersaal ststraat 3 Vinderhoute 16 15 Total Table : Education level and professional situation of the sample population 1 3 1 3 1 8 19 6 35 37 6 7 5

5. User cases and tests A initial questionnaire was filled online by all test participants. Main questions 1. Motivations to participate in the project: To work To a shop To bring or get other persons For recreation daily 6 1 5 several times a week 6 8 13 37 weekly 1 35 7 monthly 1 11 1 9 1. belief in electric cars as the vehicles of the future. Contribution to the development of electric cars 3. Contribution to a better environment. never 8 Table 3: Frequency of trips for different purposes To work To a shop To bring or get other persons For recreation Car % 59 % 6 % 51 % Private car 9 % 9 % 51 % 38 % Company car 13 % 1 % 9 % 13 % Shared car 1 % 8 % 1 % 1 % Bicycle % % 13 % 31 % Train 13 % % 3 % % Tram or bus 8 % 6 % 3 % 5 % On foot 8 % 1 % 1 % 1 % Other % 1 % % 1 % Table : Most used transport mode for different purposes

5. User cases and tests When asked about the aspects determining their choice of a car, the participants tend towards: environmental impact (emissions, safety), and practical value of the car (reliability, price and fuel consumption). For expectations about the performances of the electric car, compared to a classic car, participants tend towards the electric car Most of the participants in the project expect a limited use of the shared car: out of the 78 respondents expect to use the car once a week, out of 78 expect to use it times a week When do you plan to use the car? How do you plan to use the car? Total On week days, during the daytime 5 On week days, during the evening 3 On weekend days, during the daytime 39 On weekend days, during the evening 3 Table 5: Expected use of the shared vehicle: when do you plan to use the shared vehicle? Total As an addition to my current car (as a second car). 3 I currently don't own a car. 17 To replace my current car. 13 (blank) 5 Grand Total 78 Table 6: Expected use of the shared vehicle: how do you plan to use the shared vehicle?

5. User cases and tests Trip distance analysis Official statistics for Flanders: average trip distance is 8,795 km. For Ghent urban area trip distance average is 11,96 km (Reports OVG Flanders, 13). For the test, average trip is 7 km, with a shortest trip less than 1 km long and a longest 17 km long. of all trips are less than 11 km long, and of them are longer than 37 km. Half of all trips made are in between of 11 and 37 km. of all trips are shorter than km and just % of trips are longer than 7 km No of obs 35 3 5 15 1 5 19% 1% 9% 3% 1% % 1% % 1% 1% % % % % 1 3 5 6 7 8 9 1 11 1 13 1 15 16 17 18 19 Kilometers Figure 1 Distribution of trip distances

5. User cases and tests Charging behaviour analysis Charging behaviour is analysed based on two observed values: battery State of Charge (SoC) the time of the day when vehicle is plugged in for recharging (and unplugged). Figure shows distribution of battery SoC value at the start of recharging event for Cambio service users Figure 3 shows the same distribution for cohousing community where vehicles were provided for research purposes. No of obs No of obs 18 16 1 1 1 9 8 7 6 5 3 1 8 6 1% % 1% 3% % 3% % 7% 6% 6% 9% % 11% 13% 18% 1 3 5 6 7 8 9 1 SoC Figure Distribution of battery SoC at the start of recharging event for cohousing at Papegaaistraat and Sint-Pietersaalststraat 3% % % 3% 3% 3% 7% 7% % 3% 7% 7% 7% 13%13% 1% 1% 1 3 5 6 7 8 9 1 SoC Figure 3 Distribution of battery SoC at the start of recharging event for Wezenbeek-Oppem cohousing

5. User cases and tests Charging behaviour analysis Figure and Figure 5 give an overview of the SoC value at the end of recharging process. For Cambio users batteries are charged to its maximum capacity and users unplug it in 89% of cases when it is full. Users prefer to share EV with highest SoC, and leave others to recharge. It can only happen if there is a sufficient number of EVs available. In Wezenbeek-Oppem cohousing community the distribution of SoC values was different because the reduced availability of the EVs. Only 3% of cases battery s SoC was recharged to its highest value No of obs No of obs 1 1 8 6 1% % % 1% % % % 1% % % % 1% 1% % Figure Distribution of battery SoC at the endof recharging event for cohousing at Papegaaistraat and Sint-Pietersaalststraat 6 18 16 1 1 1 8 6 Figure 5 Distribution of battery SoC at the end of recharging event for Wezenbeek-Oppem cohousing 89% 1 3 5 6 7 8 9 1 % SoC % % % % % % % % 6% 6% 17% 6% 1 3 5 6 7 8 9 1 SoC

5. User cases and tests Charging behaviour analysis Differences in the time of the day when users start (Figure 6) and stop (Figure 7) recharging process suggest that different SoC distributions can not only be explained by the availability of shared EVs, but with the previous analysed differences in cohousing s population characteristics. No of obs 1 1 8 6 Cambio 1% 1% 1% 9% 9% 9% 8% 8% 7% 7% % 1% 1% 1% %% % 6 8 1 1 1 16 18 StartHour No of obs 9 8 7 6 5 3 1 Wezenbeek-Oppem 13% 11% 1% 1% 8% 8% 7% 7%7% 3% % 6 8 1 1 1 16 18 StartHour That element provide a first interesting insight for a consumer behavior modelling The data collection will bring to a consumer segmentation, and then to the definition of different users profiles No of obs 1 1 1 8 6 Figure 6 Time of day when recharging is started (left Cambio users, right Wezenbeek-Oppem cohousing) 3% % %% % 3%3% Cambio 6%6% 6% 8% 11% 9% 8% 9% 11% %3% 6 8 1 1 1 16 18 No of obs 9 8 7 6 5 3 1 Wezenbeek-Oppem % 3% 8% 13% 1% 7%7% 11% 6 8 1 1 1 16 18 8% 7% 3% % StopHour StopHour Figure 7 Time of day when recharging is stopped (left Cambio users, right Wezenbeek-Oppem cohousing)

Thank you Seite