Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Plugin vehicle stakeholder vision September 2017

3,458 views

Published on

The electrification of transport has an extraordinary diversity of ingredients, interests, types of players and needs. This Innovate UK initiative is designed to help provide some collective long term focus and organisational connectivity across the many stakeholders and provide a central pot of value for innovation needs in this emerging domain.

We need your views.

Please see the new updated version - October 2017

Published in: Government & Nonprofit
  • Hey guys! Who wants to chat with me? More photos with me here 👉 http://www.bit.ly/katekoxx
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • If the system becomes truly 'smart' it might be possible to order your house battery to discharge into the grid so that you could recharge your car at a remote site. To facilitate that I would recommend subsidised battery and solar panel installations mandatory in new houses, expanding to older properties when possible.
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here

Plugin vehicle stakeholder vision September 2017

  1. 1. Plugin Vehicle 2025 Stakeholder Success Vision First draft for discussion and input - 6th September 2017 The electrification of transport has an extraordinary diversity of ingredients, interests, types of playersand needs. ThisInnovate UKinitiative isdesignedtohelpprovide some collectivelongterm focus and organisational connectivity across the many stakeholders and provide a central pot of value for innovation needs in this emerging domain. Although the sector is still in a relatively embryonic stage it is a sector that many believe will move extremelyquicklyandwherethe followingwillbe essentialtodrive sectorgrowth,deliverstakeholder needsand position the UK to be a commercial leader in this domain both in the UK and for export:  early identification of opportunities and the needs of other stakeholders  organisational efficiency across the sector  creativity in developing and quickly progressing opportunities Although there are manystakeholdersengagedinsupportingthisdomainwithdifferentinterestsand different time horizons there is no shared view of success across them. Innovate UK is therefore leading the development of this “2025 success vision” for the electrification of transport, as viewed from the perspectives of the main stakeholder types. It looks through each stakeholder lens, and is articulated in the form of potential desired outcomes for each stakeholder. It is:  Not something that is intended to represent formal or position policy for any party  Is not intended to define how those outcomes are achieved  Is notnecessarily “complete”orfullyinclusive –thisisafirstdraftpopulatedbyinputsfrom a small number of stakeholders  Althoughitiscurrentlybiasedtowards the passengerandlightvehicle domainsitisintended to be inclusive of all plugin vehicle types  It is not intendedto be cast in stone but will be a set of living perspectives that will develop over time  This is a first step - It does not consider driverless cars at this point in time The goals are:  To create alivingdocumentframeworkfordiscussionamongstandbetweenstakeholdersand cross pollinate knowledge of desirable and win-win outcomes  As a resource for innovators to better understand desired stakeholder outcomes and innovation opportunities  To enable gapanalysissothatstakeholders groupscancollectivelyorganise more effectively.  To give Innovate UK and the Catapult network use a framework to understand where innovation support resources are neededto maximise the pace and economic impact of the sector The vision is in a light touch format that is designed to be engaging, interesting, and solicit further creative contributions as an open source piece of work. We are publishing this first version for discussiontocoincide withLCV2017. Please contribute any thinkingor insightsyou have as this isa crowdsourcing process and we do need your input. Please contribute either on the LinkedIn page associated with this document, or if you would prefer, please email mark.thompson@innovateuk.gov.ukeitherwithyourcomments, questions,orif itsuitsyoubetter,a marked up version of the document itself would be welcome. Thank you
  2. 2. Vehicleuser lens Today’s perspective  The EV user populationismovingonfrom “innovator”earlyadoptersmany of whom have a goodunderstandingof the technologyandenergytousergroupsnow whohave notechnical background and no understanding of energy.  Motivations to buy are very varied: social/green responsibility, lifestyle, coolness, driving pleasure, cost  Range anxiety is experienced far less by actual EV users than non-EV users imagine  Tensions exist between pure Battery Electric Vehicles (BEV or EV), Plugin Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEV) and internal combustion engine car users in terms of use and misuse of charging spaces, including BEV users perceiving theyhave more right to charge point access than PHEVs  Residual market/ re-sale not a mature market, especially for early adopters  Confusion on connector and charger types for new EV users or users who aren’t the regular users of EVs  Charge point anxiety experiencedwith public charging (i.e. anxiety over availability,smart card recognition and charger state of health). Users are unable to guarantee charging point availability (not in use), serviceability, or that charging points are not obstructed such as by vehicles that aren’t plugin  Newdriversorinfrequentusersof publicchargingfinditconfusingastowhichtype of charger and lead they need to use, especially for rapid charging. Some don’t understand the difference between AC and DC  Physicallyfindingcharge pointscanbe very difficult,especiallyincomplexstreetscenes,multi- stories/car parks  Chargingsystems forpublicchargingare flatrate systemswithno “smart” gridsupportvalue  Public charging can be a transactional and clunky process for new or infrequent users, especially with differences from one manufacturer to another  Users tend to “take as much energy as they can” rather than “what they really need”  No “intelligent mobility” thinking currently, joining up between vehicle, lifestyle, infrastructure and energy providers, other transport modes  New/infrequent usersunsure whatissafe todo or notdo regardingcharginginwet weather  Users unaware or unsure of risks associated with ad hoc charging on extension leads or domestic3 pin plugcharging and some perceptionsthatitmay limitwhat theycan safelydo in the home when charging (am I safe to put the oven on?)  Confusionoverdifferentpowercharge optionsandhow longacharge eventwill takefortheir vehicle, whether that is a) how long to full battery, or b) how long to charge to achieve a desired mileage range increase for specific journey needs  There is currently no social code of conduct or accepted practice for EV charging, use of EV charge spaces.Asaresultbehavioral practicesvaryleadingtotensionsandfrustrationsamong EV usersfromtime to time.E.g. isit acceptable tounplugsomeone else’sEV if ithas finished charging? Most EV users believe it is but some do not. This is just one area of practice that can frustrate. Can you add any perspectives or insights to the above?
  3. 3. 2025 vision for Vehicle Users  A joined-up end to end experience for any driver, especially for new or infrequent users  A diverse range of chargingandgridservice optionsandinterfaces forfrombothlow capacity lowuse EVsthatmay onlyneedslow charge rateswithsignificantflexibilityonwhencharging is needed through to high capacity high usage EVs which will require faster more time and location specific charging. Business models and pricing to suit the type of service.  Maximized rewards for modifying charge behavior  Reliable journey and range information and management, presented in ways that suits differentusersi.e.some usersare comfortable workingin“milesrange”butotherswill need range information in “destination” or “journey” terms (i.e. you will make your trip)  Battery healthcan veryaccurately and robustly determinedtoenable aconfidentvehicle re- sale marketwhere the remaininglife/performance of the batterywillplayabig role in value  Solutions that tailor differently for EV vs PHEV drivers so that these two separate domains work in harmony with each other  Diverse optionsandoptinmethodsforsmartchargingand vehicle-to-grid(V2G) income(and potentiallyotherservices) tosupportthe grid withclearinformationonwhatthe rewardswill be and what safeguardsthere are to ensure a user’sEV has the necessaryenergywhenthey need it  Integrationwithcarparkingand car park space managementneeds andeasytoaccess travel option integration with other transport modes  Interoperability with ubiquitous payment solution across network operators e.g. Kwikpay  Diversityof chargingsolutionsforthose withoutoffstreetparking anddifferentchargingrate needs  Much easier ways of understanding which EV type is suited to a vehicle users needs  Much easierwaysfor a user to understandwhichchargercable/connectorisappropriate for their car and their journey needs  An EV user wide accepted code of conduct on use of public charging infrastructure and EV charging spaces Can you add any perspectives or insights to the above?
  4. 4. Distribution Network Operator lens Today’s perspective  No visibility (by network operators) of EV charge use or intended use, and no influence in managing demand or other network characteristics such as harmonics  Circumstance specific constraints on providing new EV charger grid connections (predominantly for rapids and large numbers of lower power chargers)  No visibility of clusters developing  No ability to harness V2G  No incentive or operating framework for customers to choose smart charge points  Patchy level of lowvoltage networkvisibility of installedchargerstoinformsmartcharging,or to improve the performance and management of the distribution network  No ability to adjust charging levels in localized areas to avoid network faults  Noabilitytoinfluence EV charginginrecoveryfromnetworkoutage/blackstartcircumstances  No mechanismsorbusinessmodelstoharnessEVsinprovidingniche technical contributions to the efficiency of the local energy system such as harmonics management or phase balancing  Other stakeholders at times not considering implications from a networks perspective of bigger/faster equipment, new solutions, new services Can you add any perspectives or insights to the above? 2025 vision for Distribution Network Operators  A rapid means of identifying emerging cluster issues of plugin ownership or use  Visibility of geo-specific time-specific intended EV charging events to enable network operational mitigation actions to be taken if necessary  A standardizedmethodfor networkoperators tocommunicatewithandinfluence chargersin very geo-specific ways  Maximum diversity of charging point capacity and use  A means of encouraging EV to EV charging at times of network stress  Visibility of new charge point connections (and removals!)  Ability to provide rapid assessment of new charge connection viability  A broad range of solutions to enable existing weak connections to support charging at low cost  The ability to use EV resources to support load management, phase balancing, harmonics management, power factor correction, and voltage support and black start etc.  LV networkvisibilityandcontrol.E.g.UKPN IRM(innovationroll outmechanism) submission  Means of EVs interactingwithentire propertyviasmart home/smartbuildingsetuptoallow customers to choose what load to flex in response to request for grid services or choose to provide powerfromEV tohome/in-homebatterytoEV duringpeakperiodstoavoidnetwork issues
  5. 5.  Consideration fromotherstakeholdersof wholesystemimplicationswhenlookingto introduce newequipment/services/solutions Can you add any perspectives or insights to the above? Local authority/urbanlens Today’s perspective  Concern that growth in public EV charging outstripping available infrastructure  Challenges in providing charging for users who only have street parking  Investment/business models for new infrastructure not clear/mature  Poor visibilityof powernetworklocalitysuitability(e.g.capacity/constraintandvoltage level to connect at)  Oftensubstantialportfoliosof carparkswithlittle ornochargingprovision,someof whichare owned and operated by local authorities, others operated by private operators  No workable means of using charging point availability information in a domain to either encourage use generally or to encourage economic generation through new visitors to a locality  Limitedunderstandingof currentpopulationsof EVsin a localityor theirtype,or future user vehicle choice types, or charging arrangement preferences  Only limitedoptions currently to physically build charging infrastructure into conventional infrastructure, especially retrofit  No abilitytobenefitfromV2Gto increase chargingcapabilitiesinalocality (i.e.touse energy from a vehicle in a locality that does not need the energyto transfer that energy to another EV in the locality)  LimitedmeansforLocal Authoritiestoeffectivelycommunicate toexistingorfuture EV users where new charge point deployments will be and when  Limited/novisibilityof likelyfuturemobilitytrends(e.g.trendstowardsmore use of carclubs or public transport)  Limitedunderstandingof housingstocktypes in a locality re potential for off street parking  Poor visibility of future charging technology options in the pipeline  Poor visibility of charge connector standards changes and their effect on compatibility of existingandfuture charge infrastructure choicesandassetstrandingorlossinavailabilityrisks  Unknown - how to future proof infrastructure/enhance future deployment of wireless charging if it becomes a dominant technology  Local authority processes traditionally very fragmented, planning, parking, energy, housing, authority owned transport and different from LA to LA Can you add any perspectives or insights to the above?
  6. 6. 2025 vision for Local Authorities  Ubiquitous charging with clear investment models and supply chain structures to deliver, maintain and run on commercial terms  A means of understanding desired charge use and trends for a given region/town/specific locality  A means of understanding actual use  Methods for encouraging EV/zero emission vehicle use over ICE use  Minimized trip hazards for pedestrians  Minimize the need for on-street parking, reallocating car parking space to other uses  Maximum use and flexibility of street side parking where it is absolutely necessary  Minimize car dominance inpublic/dense pedestrianspaces,toaddressair qualitychallenges ideally developing enforced zero emission zones  Minimization of accidentscaused by silence of EVs, which is of highest risk in environments that are still noisybecause where petrol/diesel vehiclesare still dominantandwhenhearing EVs is the hardest  A means of providing travelers withMobility As A Service (MAAS) informationto encourage use of public transport, walking, cycling or other alternatives over EV use  A means of encouraging electric only use of PHEVs in built up areas to reduce emissions  Seamless integration of charging infrastructure with street infrastructure in proximityto EV user demand. E.g. Amsterdam model  Ensuringstreetcharginginfrastructuremeetsthehighestaccessibilitystandards,anddoesnot impede goods vehicle loading/unloading  Facilitate charging points for special use cases such as disabled bays  Ensure local planning rules encourage and support the switch to EV amongst delivery and servicingvehicles (e.g.providingthemwithchargingcapabilityatloading/unloadinglocations)  Parking charges that encourage low emissions choices  Car park space enforcementsystemsthatrobustlypolice bothuse of spaces,use of chargers and enable policing of legitimate use (e.g. EVs plugged in but no longer on charge)  Working collaboratively and proactively with DNOs to deliver strategic infrastructure deployment Can you add any perspectives or insights to the above?
  7. 7. EnergySupplier lens Today’s perspective  Limited means of maintaining continuity of “energy charging relationship” between a domesticenergycustomerenvironmentandanEV charging environment(Ecotricitythe only example of success)  No means to use EV resources for balancing settlement  EV owners considered niche market, outside of core business, varied expectations as to uptake curve  Lack of coherent proposition to provide local optimization of energy resources such as local generation (e.g. solar), EVs and smart devices in the home  Generally low smart meter penetration  Undeveloped understanding of the role EVs can play in ancillary services  Lack of appreciation bycustomers of theirfuturepotentialtoengage inthe energyecosystem Can you add any perspectives or insights to the above? 2025 vision for EnergySuppliers  Integratedcustomerchargingpropositions intoasinglerelationship –charge athome,atwork and on the road with a single integrated tariff, payment and billing service  Universal smart meter adoption with innovations configured in such a way as to offer balancingservices thatconnectthroughto integrated building and EV energy management  EVs potentially forming a core customer segment  Creationof singlesmartofferingcoveringall energyconsumptionandmicro-generationtouch points  Consented visibility by energysuppliers of distributed controllable loads – capacity and load rate  Customer to be crucially important stakeholder and participant in optimal grid balancing system and in order to extract maximum value. Can you add any perspectives or insights to the above?
  8. 8. Charge Point Network Operator (CPNO) lens Today’s perspective  Startingto move away from‘free fuel’conceptonthe publicchargingside of things,through to cost and use representative charging arrangements  Moving from a government funded industry, through to a commercially viable market  There are policymeasuresinplaceto incentivizeuptake,howevernotenough(seeNorwayas an example)  Lack of collaboration,communicationandvisibilityonprojects/innovationscomingtomarket between CPNOs and other key stakeholders (such as DNO/DSOs)  Smart/managed chargers will in time provide a powerful tool for grid operators to manage gridconstraints - yetthe marketplaceandrequirementstoenableviable servicestobe traded is in its infancy  A large-scale viable on-streetchargingsolutiondoesn’texist,butsolvingthischallengeiskey to enabling full market adoption  There’sa lack of infrastructure for 24 hour fleetoperators(i.e.taxi or postal services).Rapid charging is key, yet it is costly and requires unsustainable amounts of power for large scale roll out.  Fragmented energysystem, user has little control over their source of electricity/when they want to charge/integration with solar, etc.  No joint up approach to e-mobility-as-a-service; car clubs/ride hailing/charge point operators/energy providers/landowners…  Charging infrastructure is exclusively “one-way”, there is currently no viable return from vehicle to grid  Differentapproachesare beingtakenfor interface to publiccharging points;membershipvs PAYG, RFID vs token vs App, creating a disjointed/confusing experience for the driver  No standardized tariffs or business models  Lack of standardized socketsonthe carside(particularlyforrapidcharging),createsconfusion amongst drivers Can you add any perspectives or insights to the above? 2025 vision for Charge Point Network Operators  A frictionless,integratedpublicchargingexperience where the driverparksinabayandwalks away, returning to a car charged as much as they need or have asked for. No substantial forethought, authentication or perhaps even plugging in required  A viable business model for all stakeholders across all types of charging  A marketplace in which grid operators utilize CPNOs to manage the load on the grid, at a national, regional and local level  Integrated approach between renewable energy (including micro-generation), battery storage and electric vehicle charging, with CPNOs offering fast response load balancing services without inconveniencing charger connected customers and potentially with widespread vehicle to grid technology providing additional benefits to grid operators
  9. 9.  Charge pointoperators know the state of charge of EV batteriesinthe vicinityof theircharge pointsforownerswhohave consentedthatinformation(whetherviaanapp youmighthave or via a third party source of data?) allowing charge point owners may want to “attract” drivers for example energy costs are suddenly low (e.g. when there is available renewable energy on the system that isn’t being used) or even negative  Charge pointoperatorsmayvalue knowingintendedchargingof auser/driver(i.e.before the event) sothey couldmanage charge point queuingorsuggestalternative locations, andalso knowinghowmuchenergyacar NEEDS for itsintendeduse andstate of charge wouldenable the developmentof strategiesforincentivizingeither“charge onlywhatisneeded”vs“charge as much as you can” which is typical of today  Operators likelytovaluedistinguishingif anintendedoractual chargingeventwasforanPHEV or BEV  A commonframeworkforhostingdataon charge pointsthatare experiencingfaultstomake boththe task of an EV usermore informedbutalsotoenable othercharge pointoperatorsin the locality to use that information to inform the strategy for managing their own charge points in the locality  Charge pointoperatorsmightvalueknowingthe distributiondensityof EVsatstreetbystreet level (aperspectivelocal authoritiesandnetworkoperatorsmightalsovalue) andthe trends in terms of the numbers and their use  Theywouldprobablyvalue simpler/bettersatisfaction/dissatisfactionregardinganindividual charging experience so that they can understand how to improve customer satisfaction  They would value having much more visibility/accessibility of grid capacity information for new connections and a better forward view of grid availability in order to consult on large scale roll outs (particularly for rapids or large fleet operations), minimize install costs and project management time  They would you value knowing trends in charging events (frequency/duration etc.) for different battery capacity cars  Fora domesticscenario,theymightvaluebeingable toknowahomeownerstariff(particularly if a dynamic time of use) to be able to develop charging strategies  It’sagiventhatcybersecurityneedstobe bestinclasstoprotectpersonaldata,infrastructure, vehicles and energy network systems Can you add any perspectives or insights to the above?
  10. 10. National Grid (views spanall NG roles) Today’s perspective  Targetednetworkreinforcementrequiredtofacilitate future capacityfromuptake of Electric Vehicles (EVs)  Lack of forwardvisibilityinbothcharging infrastructure requirements and network capacity  Regulatory and/or commercial frameworks may not unlock the necessary network investments required to support charging infrastructure  We are seeing an ever changing and divergent energy mix which requires more flexibility in our energy system. Electric vehicles offer a great opportunity for balancing the system  We have limited understanding of the impacts of electrification of transport  We have limitedunderstandingof the economicimpactsof electrification of transportonend consumers  There’s limited regulatory consideration for electrification of transport and how it interacts with energy systems  Level of clarity around scalable, commercial customer solutions and business models to enable future roll out of national solution Can you add any perspectives or insights to the above? 2025 vision for National Grid  Holisticandtransparentviewonnew andexistingEV charginginfrastructure providesvisibility to plan network reinforcements as required  Cross-sector coordination ensures economic and efficient network investments to facilitate future capacity requirements  Suitable regulatoryandcommercial frameworksexisttounlocknetworkinvestmentrequired to support charging infrastructure  Utilize smart charging and vehicle-to-gridas part of a wider range of solutions for balancing the system in a cost effective manner.  To understand the impacts of electrification of transport  Understand the future behaviors/needs for electrification of transport and how the system needs to be designed and operated accordingly in order to deliver the SO actions for electrification of transport at the lowest economic cost to end consumer  The regulatoryframeworkfullyconsiderselectrificationof transportandhow itinteractswith energy systems  Utilization is sufficient to enable cost recovery.  Location of infrastructure is based on both availability of sites and customers Can you add any perspectives or insights to the above?
  11. 11. AutomotiveOEM lens Today’s perspective  PHEV a confidence building ‘consumer choice’ although likely a stepping stone to full EV adoption  Mixed levels of understanding or visibility among OEM engineers of the energy supply/ network side challenges or the benefits EV to the energy system  Little availabilityto‘open’ownsystemsandproductstootherentities (e.g.onboardsystems)  Electric Vehicles seen as a niche market some quarters (this view is rapidly changing)  A tendency within OEMs quarters to assume EVs are owned by their drivers  Falling cost of batteries is driving design towards bigger batteries for extended range  Confusion inthe marketas to what is an electriccar, what isa hybrid,greaterdifferentiation between real Ultra Low Emission and Low Emission Vehicles  A perception thatcharginginfrastructure isn’tbeinginstalledwithafuture proofoutlook,such as increasing charge point power on its existing network connection, future bidirectional capability,provisionof atleastsuitable cabling(e.g.whenbuildingor refurbishing car parks)  Concernexistsoverthe difference betweenchargingpointtechnologiesandtheirrespective advantages/ disadvantages; can variety co-exist successfully?  The public(froman EnergyTechnologiesInstitute (ETI) survey)oftenperceive thattheydrive more miles and longer distances than they actually do  Approx 2/3 of UK homes have parking that is favorable for home/off street charging (ETI analysis)  Car buyers and the automotive press now seen as much more enthusiastic towards the potential of EVs  Fragmentedstandalone chargingnetworkoperatorsmake ithardforOEMs toact asan agent in helping EV users access available public charging  Buyers of vehicles (of any type) tend to be motivated and focused on purchase/lease cost ratherthan total cost of ownership becausethe runningcostdataisusuallylessvisible orless understood  A numberof perceptionsbysome ownersof conventionalvehiclesthatcreate barrierstosales for them: o the energy system won’t have the capacity to give them reliable charging o that EV use are more carbon intense than conventional cars o battery cycling will lead to unacceptably short vehicle life Can you add any perspectives or insights to the above? 2025 vision for Automotive OEMs  Broad range of electrified technologieswithBEVstakingsignificantlyincreasedshare ascosts fall and battery capacities rise while PHEV sales remain static  Wide range of vehicle sizes and body styles available as plug-in.
  12. 12.  Developing connectivity platforms allow a single user account with a single mobility service providertoaccess infrastructure providedbyawide range of networkoperatorswithoutuse of PAYG or multiple user accounts  Grid Demand Side Response (DSR) and V2G capability part of the value equation (esp. if vehicle financed) for ownership  Widespread societal confidence in battery durability,vehicle life, including in grid support scenarios such as DSR and V2G  OEMs may value knowinglocal weather/climate/trafficconditions onajourneyahead togive better range information to the driver and optimize charging strategies. For example, if it is cold, likelyto soon rain, with darknessapproaching, it would be possible to more accurately estimate the currentjourneyrange minimumcharge neededforthe intendedjourneyahead  Similar to the previous point, understanding the driving styles of individual drivers would enable more refined energy and charging needs calculations  Change in ownership models: mobility as a service trajectory  Vehicle deeplyintegratedwithinfrastructureandothervehicles:connectedcarscanexchange information with other road users, gather data from multiple sources (i.e. users calendars, traffic info, weather info, national and local grid)  Seamlesschargingexperience,without need for multiple accounts with charging providers  Multiple vehicle offering and mobility solutions to cover all customer’s needs, without need to resort to big vehicle batteries where not needed  Improvements in charging infrastructure allow to fast charge within minutes: experience becomes closer to current ICE vehicles,with public charging infrastructure at the heart of vehicle usage  Public transportation and logistics fleetscan resort to quick charge (‘energy bursts’) when stopping to pick up passengers/deliver goods  OEMs becomingmore active inor supportingchargingnetworkoperatorstofacilitate higher power charging into market as an enabler to long range EVs.  Consumers weighingfuel cost advantage much more objectively as part of vehicle selection and with much easier ways of informing them on which EV type/model suits their lifestyle/journey use patterns Can you add any perspectives or insights to the above?
  13. 13. Government lens Today’s perspective  2% of newcar salesare BEV and PHEV (able to drive 10 miles with zero tail pipe emissions)  100,000 vehicles on the road  Automotive and Electric Vehicles Bill going through parliament to: o Take powers to require all new charge points in the UK to be smart enabled o Powers to require fuel retailers to provide rapid charge points o Powers to require charge points to be interoperable Can you add any perspectives or insights to the above? 2025 vision for Government (and beyondin some instances)  Strong public awareness of the low running and maintenance costs of EVs  Range anxiety a term that is no longer used  A proactive smart energy system that is prepared for the ongoing growth of the sector  Maximum contribution of EVs to reducing the costs of energy for the UK and providing cost benefits to participating EV users  Nearly all cars and vans to be zero emission by 2050  An end to sales of pure ICE cars by 2040  Ensure compliance with EU and UK air quality limits  Support economic growth in this sector, and become market leaders  No net increase in road traffic accidents from plugin vehicles  A nationwide network of charging infrastructure at range of charging levels  Nevermore than20 milesawayfroma publiccharge pointon the UK strategicroad network (A roads and motorways) 95% of the time by 2021  Interoperable easy to use nationwide charging infrastructure, with a pay as you experience for ad hoc charging  Electric vehicles cheaper than conventional cars and EV range equivalent Can you add any perspectives or insights to the above?
  14. 14. Other stakeholder lenses Do you have anyinsights on the today vs 2025 lenses for anyof the following other stakeholder lenses? What might these value as successfuloutcomes 2025?  Car Park Operators?  Intelligent Transport Systems supply chain?  Smart grid equipment or innovation companies?  Street furniture supply chain?  Emergency services?  Energy DSR aggregators?  Fleet operators?  Petrol filling stations?  Owners of energy generation resources (e.g. local PV)?  Others….? Can you add any perspectives or insights to any of these? Thank you to the Contributors This documentwas contributedto both formally and informallyby the following:  POD Point  National Grid  The Renewable EnergyAssociation  EnergySystemsCatapult  Three Automotive OEMs  Two PowerDistributionNetworkOperators  One EnergySupplier  One Local Authority Mark.thompson@innovateuk.gov.uk Senior InnovationLead – Energy Systems 07867 462690

×