Successfully reported this slideshow.

UK - Norway plugin vehicle roundtable summary report



1 of 19
1 of 19

More Related Content

UK - Norway plugin vehicle roundtable summary report

  1. 1. UK-Norwegian Plugin Vehicle Power Grid Roundtable Summary Report June 21-22nd, 2017 Held at The Research Council of Norway, Oslo, Norway
  2. 2. Background The electrification of transportation will play a critical role for the UK’s ambitions to meet its legallybinding 2008 Climate Change Acttargetsof80% reduction in GHG emissionsby 2050. This transition to the electrification of personal transportation has commenced and is steadily securing its foothold of success, as an increasing number of countriesmove forward on their trajectory of plugin vehicle uptake in effort to support policy goals on CO2 reduction and/or air quality improvement. While still at the early stages of this development, countries around the world are likely to confront issues of grid in the near future, ranging from local distribution constraints due to ownership or charging point clustering in the near term, to broader constraints such as generation capacity in the long term. Strengthening the relationship between the automotive sector and the power grid will become be key to realise the potentials of transport electrification. The Roundtable International knowledge sharing, technology transfer and partnerships can help reduce investment risk and system costs, as well as help enable a seamless development of the EV market in the UK. As such, the Research Council of Norway hosted UK-Norwegian Plugin Vehicle Power Grid Roundtable – jointly organised by Innovate UK, the UK Science & Innovation Network and Enova on June 21-22nd 2016 in the Norwegian Capital of Oslo. This report This informal report is an digest of the observations made by participants at the round table, based on information and perspectives at the time of the event.
  3. 3. Participants UK participants Norwegian participants Jim Cardw ell Northern Pow ergrid Birger Bergesen David MacLeman Scottish and Southern Electricity Netw orks Christer Skotland Martin Queen Ofgem Johan Christian Hovland Hafslund (energy supplier) Adrian Vinsome Cenex Joakim Sveli Thomas Maidonis National Grid SO Tina Skagen Nick Brookes Office for Low Emission Vehicles Jonas Helmikstøl ZapTec (smart charger) Sally Fenton BEIS innovation delivery team Ole Henrik Hannisdahl Grøn Kontakt (charger operator) Liam Lidstone ETI & Energy Systems Catapult Jan Haugen Ihle Fortum - Charge & Drive Dan Hollingsw orth EA Technology Øystein Ihler Municipality of Oslo Tobi Babalola UK Pow er Netw orks Andreas Bratland Rosie McGlyn Energy UK Erland Eggen James Court Renew able Energy Association Patrick Agese Reading University Mark Thompson Innovate UK Mikael Allan Mikaelsson UK Science & Innovation Netw ork
  4. 4. The Electrification of Transportation in the Context of Norwegian Energy & Climate Policy The city of Oslo has set out clear climate targets of 50% CO2 reduction by 2020 and 95% reduction by 2030 as part of its Zero Emission City Strategy. The strategyis build on three key pillars around i) mobility, ii) energy and iii) city governance, and consists of 76 actions points over the next four years up to 2020. While Norway boasts an electricity system that is 100% renewablesfromhydropower,the cityof Oslo is currentlyon a journeyto reduce CO2 emission from transportation which currently makes up 61% of Oslo’s total carbon emissions. A recent assessment of the distribution of carbon emissions from transportation demonstrated 15% of CO2 emission coming from heavy duties vehicles (i.e. transportation of goods) with additional 10% fromlight freight.While the bulk ofemissions came frompersonaltransportation,or 39%, surprisingly high carbon emissions of 30% were identified coming from construction machineries. Assuch,Oslo is making inroadson the electrification ofconstruction machineries as well, as it’s establishing itself as a European test-bed in this area and is currently running six pilot projects. As part of its strategy, the city of Oslo is focusing on optimising the transportation system and mobility and aims to reduce traffic by 20% by 2020 and 33% by 2030. According to the city’s climate strategy, all new cars in Oslo will have to be fossil-fuel free by 2020 and there are being established automotive vehicle-free city centre and low emission zones. The city will promote the sharing of open specification data for smart city mobility. Toll stations have been installed to fund the metro system and charging station, with differential toll pricing to encourage less polluting vehicles.Oslo is working very closely with Copenhagen, Malmö and Hamburg on a major project (GREAT –Green REgions with Alternative Fuels for Transport) focusing on heavy trucks (national and international transport) and truck for city logistics, where these cities are delivering infrastructure (i.e. energy stations) for alternative fuels in the highway systems, including zero emissions vehicles (e.g. EVs and H2) and renewable energy (e.g. biogas and biofuels). Oslo is also currently electrifying its public bus fleet. The city of Oslo approaches the electrification of transport from whole systems perspective with a strong
  5. 5. emphasis on the local micro system to optimise energy use. The challenges in Norway regarding the electrification of transportation are largely regulatory and pragmatic in nature rather technical. The city of Oslo’s is also largely focusing on micro energy systems that will enable the optimisation ofenergyuse locallyand in the main grids.The main grid’sconnection to the micro energy systems will allow greater energyexchange between energy vectors, and to receive and deliver energylocallyto and fromthe main energygrids – both in terms of water based (i.e. for heating and cooling) and electric based systems. This work will strengthen the connectivitybetween energyand buildingson one hand,and energyand transportationon the other hand. Fortum Charge & Drive is currently the utility in the world with the highest share of EVs’ penetration amongstits customers (46,000 EVs in total) and therefore have a good insight of the every-day life of EV customers. Norway has a 95% hydropower-based electricity system (at 130TWh per annum), which coupled with a strong grid, is capable of catering to the increasing EV deployment that hasled to an increasing electricity demand over the last 10-20 years (0.5TWh per annum, at present). Nevertheless, there will still be a need to invest in additionalcapacity,particularly atlocallevels where the grid is relativelyweak.The investment in EV infrastructure initially began with the city of Oslo establishing charging stations in the city centre but the investment is now shifting into establishing charging stations in private homes and condominiums. Earlier,some condominium management companies were initially against the installation of EV charging but this has progressively changed and charge point installation has nowbecome driven by market demand since apartments currently without EV charging would demand significantly higher price less than apartments with EV charging. This in turn has driven the need to upgrade infrastructure and at present approximately 80% of condominiums in Oslo have charging infrastructure. The Electrification of Transportation in Context of UK Energy & Climate Policy The UK energy market which consists of over 50 different energy suppliers and separately regulated distribution networkoperatorsand systemoperators,islargelydriven bycompetition atthe energyretaillevel.In the UK there are binding climate commitmentsand carbon budgets which set obligations for the UK Government to move forward on the decarbonisation agenda up to 2050. Furthermore, much of the recent decarbonisation taking place in the UK is occurring in the power sector where most coal power stations are expected to come off line by 2025. Today however, the decarbonisation of the transport sector has made centre stage and is currently in motion, but although of the greatest challenges for the UK climate targets lie around the decarbonisation of the heating sector. Unfortunately, approximately 80% of UK households are using gasboilers and there is no effective roadmap available to drive forward
  6. 6. the decarbonisation of heating in the UK. The lack of CCS is also a major gap in the UK low carbon policy ecosystem following the shut down of the major CCS competition by the last Government administration in 2016. In contrast, the electrification of transportation is likely to move forward successfully at pace as this area as it lends itself to cross-party support. From an UK energyretailer/generator perspective,EVswill play a keyrole for of the decarbonisation of the energy system. Moreover, it will be critical that the policy and technical architecture for EVs and smart charging will enable a framework that puts the customer in control and enable them to extract real value from the EV asset in context of V2G (particularly since EVs are currently more expensive that ICE vehicles), as well as time of use-tariffs to help move the charging load to later in the evening. There also need for greater opportunitiesto be provided from EVs on a local community level to enable a local energy system. Another difficult challenge is to identify where taxrevenues will come from a transportation system defined by EVs. The electrification of transportation is taking place in a context of transportation culture thatis already in flux. The number of private vehicles in the UK is at an historical height with approximatelyone vehicle per householdalthough mileage usagehasreducedby1500km/per year over the last ten years. The ownership of vehicles has changed over the years with 80% of all new cars (90% for EVs) are purchased via lease deals (averaging at €250 per month), whereas only ten years ago this share of only 30%. The younger demography is increasingly moving into urban environments with decreasing interest in owning a car. The UK Government’s approach towards the electrification of transportation consists of four focal points, which are: I) inward investment in EV in the UK, ii) carbon impact (transport makes up 25% of carbon emissions), iii) air, and iv) energy security. The UK Government’s pledge of “almost every car/van to be zero emission by 2050) is being backed up by the Treasury with £600million investment from 2015-2020, together with an additional £500million for advanced propulsion centre and £100million in tax incentives. Furthermore, last autumn the UK committed further £250 million to invest in infrastructure development. The Office for Low- Emission Vehicles (OLEV) runs five different schemes to push forward EV. Two of those are grant schemes focus on encouraging the establishment of charging infrastructure for EVs at homes and workplaces. Another scheme aims to incentivise local councils to put in place charging infrastructures.There isa plugin car grantthatpartlysubsidisesthe purchase ofEVs. OLEV also runsa communication strategycalled Go-Ultra Lowto promote the EV deployment in the UK. OLEV’s strategy paper set out targets to meet 1.5% share of EV of all new cars. However, while the UK is currently on track, the trajectory will increase exponentially over the
  7. 7. next few years. At present, there are around 12.000 charging points across 3000 locationsin the UK (97% of motorway service stations have rapid charge points). The DNOs in the UK have placed a strong focus on the commercial customers who are likely to be more significant and pressing in terms of needs. For example, Europe’s largest EV bus fleet has come into effect at the Waterloo Garage in London that uses 43 electric buses that are all being charged at 40-80kW, needing 2.5MWA connection to achieve this. Furthermore, there are plans to electrify the entire London bus fleet in the next few years, which counts approximately70 garageswith around 100 EVbusesper garage..In termsof the smartenergy system required to enable the lift-off of the electrification of the transportation system, some DNOs anticipate that the key issues will revolve around the software needs rather than issues around hardware, standardisations or policies. In this context, the utility sector needs to prepare itself for a world where smart IT platforms will provide regionally-specified demand and require the DNOs to send the appropriate signals, but many utilities do not boast this capabilityatpresent.However,in the UK there are concernsofhowto ensure thatthe charging infrastructure will be smart to allow remote management and access to the flexibility market since it will be difficult for customers to select smart charging over to a future standard if they have to cover the additional cost. Grid Impact and Pinch Points It is of paramount importance to consider the impact of EVs on the Norwegian grid as the country is projected to have 1.5million EVs by 2030 (50% of all personal vehicles). Certainly the effect of EV penetration on the local network load will be proportionally smaller relative to the UK since electricity is also the primary source of heating in Norway. Nevertheless, in the last10-15 yearsthere have been significanteffortsto strengthen and reinforcethe grid to allow sufficient capacity for the electrification of the entire vehicle fleet as anticipated. While there is sentiment among some Norwegian stakeholders that the need for capacity is being exaggerated and that this challenge can easily be dealt with by using 3 phase to avoid load issues for the individual household as well as the neighbouring households, a recent study by NVE indicated that a number of transformers could be at risk of overload. According to the findings, there would be approximately 1% of transformers would overload under conditions of an additional 1kW per household, 8-9% of transformers under conditions of 2kW increase per household, and 30% of transformers under conditions of additional 5kW per household, but a scenario of 1-2kW increase per household is considered the most likely with EVs on the system. The average load on a cold winters’ dayin Oslo is approximately 4.5kW but the future deployment of controlled charging regime via smart metering should enable EV charging to take place without increasing the maximum power consumption of an average household.
  8. 8. In Norway, there has also been an increasing recognition that it is important to differentiate between challenges for the individual household customer and the grid when it comes to capacityfor EV charging asmany customers assume theywill need greater capacitythan they actually do. Therefore, it is important to get in place the right charging infrastructure to enable automated charging thatensuresthe rightchargingpattern since mostcustomerswillnot need that much charging capacity on a daily basis. While some customers do request for a 22kW home chargers, they do not need it in practice, fact that is made clear to them by the local network operator. If they do insist on charging capacity of this size they are charged for the network upgrade cost. If the household is using the largest EV on the market today, a 6kW chargers would enable full charging from 6pm to midnight for most users (nobody drives 400km per day every day of the week). As such, 3kW chargers would suffice for the average customers (usually with a 20A fuse installed – although with recommendations to use only 16A) with perhaps 6kW made available for long-distance/frequent drivers. Since EVs don’t require that much capacityfor smart charging and therefore instead of installing 150x20A per building it would be more sensible to install say 63A divided across all users, which will result in a lower return, lesser need to invest in the external grid system or induce cost to the grid that others will have to pay. However, one argument for a greater capacity (or at least cabling that enables greater capacity to the charger) in individual chargers is that it would provide greater flexibility – particularly in office and apartment buildings. This flexibility in the system would offer the possibilityto deliver demand side response efficientlyand load manage against the building (or for V2G), and therefore has real value. In Norway, it is commonly recommended to adopt a 3 phase system rather than 1 phase if there is interest in investing in greater capacity, although the key question remains who should be paying for the greater capacity installed in the infrastructure. Norwegian distribution network operators (DNOs) are quite progressive in experimenting with various “behind-the-metre” solutions to avoid connection costs, which will have important benefits for customers with power-sharing management systems such as in shared residential car parks in multi-storey serving apartments blocks. In addition, Norwegian DNOs are quite confident that the upcoming EV penetration can be accommodated due to both high capacity and strong infrastructure with 3 phase supplies. Managing Grid Load and Charging Behaviour: A Need for a Price Signal or Managed Charging? The DNO/DSO for Oslo and surrounding region currently operatesa smart grid supplying and managing electricity to 700,000 customers with a facility on their web site so homeowners can
  9. 9. see their home has power connection headroom for EV charging. They are rolling out smart meters currently with the capability of sampling meter throughput at 2 minute intervals to help manage the network in the future more effectively(UK smart metersin comparison reportdata at a 30-min granularity). Recently however, some Norwegian smart charge solution providers that are installing load management system for AC charging have become concerned that the most customer friendly load management programme for an AC setup will max out the main fuse due to the absence of a pricing signal. In the effort to balance EV charging against the building, the usage of whatever capacity remains under the main fuse for EV charging that would be beneficial for the customer, would create a disastrous situation for the service provider. Therefore, there is a growing consensus around the importance of time-of-use tariffs (ToU) in order to influence people’scharging behaviour and discourages people to engage in the homogenous charging behaviour that would lead to a reduced peak demand between 5- 10pm. While much of the needed technology setup to receive, process and act on this signal already exist, the market place for smart charging service providers to obtain a pricing signal does not exist since there is no spot-price for kWh. A market place that allows price signalling would enable the curbing of power charging and create the needed flexibility on a DSO level. While the Norwegian Government has some plans to introduce ToU tariffs within the next couple of years, these plans fall somewhat short of the demands from charge point operators who argue for a more sophisticated local energy/flexibility markets. This type of market mechanisms is by many considered essential so that business development and models can be designed to enable and incentivise peak shifting in charging behaviour to the less demanding periods during working hoursor overnight. While there is a growing consensus on the importance of ToU tariffs in order to influence peoples’charging behaviour,some challengescould arise fromthe factthattwo differentprice signals may emerge and diverge: there is the pricing signal from the wholesale spot-market (i.e. the MWh needed by the suppliers) and there is the price signal from the impact on the local DNO/DSO network. For instance, a government might react homogenously to a spot- marketsignal which could have a significantimpact on local networks.At the same time, there is no visibility of where the loads of the aggregating controls are at any given moment from the DNO to the TSO and therefore DNOs have no visibility of the impact on the distribution network when the TSO is balancing frequency and sends out a signal. Therefore, it will be crucial to find a solution to balance these two different signals (although a flexibility market could go some distance in addressing this predicament). However, there are a number of projects where DNOs and TSOs are working together to address this issue and to gain better understanding howactions on one system impacts the other system, via data exchange and use of software platforms to provide visibility (albeit no control).
  10. 10. Furthermore,there are some concerns that the construction of a pricing structure based on today’s load could become troublesome if it indeed successfully changes user-behaviour as it risks creating new congestion scenarios in the low-tariff timeframe. In addition, it would be problematic or perhaps impossible to constantly change the ToU tariff. In this kind of swing scenario, it might be required to change the time-of-use tariffs to every other year. At present, Norway is moving towards the adoption of charging tariffsthat will be based on peak demand rather than customer use. As the transition moves forward, another issue that needs to be considered is whether there is a need for a differential electricity system for EV charging and other household electricity use, or whether the two will be linked to the same demand profile and tariffs. Fortum has also launched a comprehensive education programme to inform customer case handlersand customers howto participate in the EV transition and to optimise their EV assets. For example, Fortum is operating a website where individual household can learn about the electricity capacity of its own building based on the cut-out rating. According to other industryactorshowever,these concernsaboutpeakdemand mayperhaps be somewhat inflated. Some argue that the Norwegian population is diversified enough in terms of characteristics and behavioural patterns. For instance, while Norway’s total population counts 5.1million only 2.6million are working, and of which only 1.7million have regular working hours. Further, out of the 1.7million who have normal working hours, only 1 million use cars to get to work. This means that perhaps only 1 in 3 cars will be charging at the close of the average working day at 5pm. In addition, the increasing number of charging stationsatthe workplace is considered likelyto mitigate thisproblemeven further and in larger cities (e.g. London) it unlikely that peak charging will coincide with peak electricity demand due the limited availability of domestic/residential car parking and thus greater reliance on charging points in public car parks, supermarkets and workplaces. It also remains to be clear whether customers would actually act rationally to a price signal as some work suggests that comfort may override cost-savings as a determining factor for peoples’ charging behaviour. The greatest challenge around the electrification of transportation from the UK DNO perspective is identify ways to alleviate the pressure on the low voltage network. While there are a number of options around the table around market mechanisms, pricing signals, market creations,and influencing customerbehaviour,itisdifficultfor DNOs to have confidence these solutions when there is a requirement for 100% reliability all of the time to prevent burning cables out on the street. Therefore, it is difficult for DNOs at present to envisage a market mechanism, a price signalling and customer behavioural result that will provide this kind of certainty, which leaves a technical solution asthe onlyoption on the table as it is more reliable
  11. 11. and better managesrisk. Therefore, the most attractive option to avoid the potential challenge around coinciding peakdemands(i.e.acrossEVand other domesticelectricityuse) isto adopt a managed charging regime where customers will not be actively responsible for the “smart” charging schedule.Fromthe perspective ofthe DNO’s,this kind a technicalintervention might be more reliable and better manages risk, as it would remove the decision away from the customers by using some smart IT system (e.g. e-Smart Systems) to avoid new peaks. Essentially, the DNOs require a facility that can be called upon to reduce the charging rate for EV at times when there is a problem in balancing supply and demand. However, the question is whether it is possible to forecast when such problems will occur through customer profiling, data mining, smart technology etc., or will it only be possible to learn about it when something happens. The UK DNOs currently have a very limited visibility of the distribution network and therefore need smart charging. However, there are a number of barriers to adoption. Firstly, customers can install EV chargers without a “new” connection agreement. Secondly, while smart charging representsthe most cost-effective solution for customers in the longer term, there is no minimum standard for eV chargers to be capable of managed charging nor a commercial or regulatory mechanism to implement managed charging. Finally, because existing chargers are not upgradeable to “smart”, early action is imperative to ensure technology is available at time of need, since delays in addressing this issue will require greater intervention that will be costly and perhaps against public acceptance. In order to enable the smart charging capability and remove these barriers, a wide range of stakeholders (automotive, energy supply, transmission, government, charge point manufacturers and customer groups) need to be consulted to work towards a technology standard/specification and to raise the awareness of the wider benefits provided by smart charging, such as lower energy bills (via ToU tariffs) and enable participation in flexibility markets that will provide revenue streams for customers. Furthermore, a regulated commercial flexibility market platform is required to load balance and maximise opportunities from smart charging and distributed energy resource (DER) optimisation. Maximising EVs and other DER Assets by Approaching Energy as a Service? Only few years ago, the idea of installing solar PVs in Norway was considered outlandish in context of the country’s weather climate and the amount of relatively cheap hydropower it had in its system. However, in recent years a Norwegian companies such as Otovo may be disrupting the country’s electricity market. Otovo utilises a software platform where households can register their home address, and via the use of satellite and smart algorithms, the company provides the registered household with a comprehensive summary on the solar PV potential and optimisation (e.g. the amount of solar energy available, optimal angles for
  12. 12. maximum PV performance, ideal location, size of installation etc.) for that household. This option has allowed households to save around NOK273(£27)/per month at the same time as the grid operators, electricity generators and state lose approximately three-fold that amount due to the reduced electricity demand from the “prosumption”. This has raised serious concerns among grid operators who risk seeing a decline in their revenues for grid cost as they rely on £1.1billion via households’ electricity bills (i.e. £500 per annum for household, accounting for a third of the bill, with state VAT and electricity cost account for the remaining two thirds). Since it would not play well to let industrial customers take on the additional cost to compensate or to defer grid upgrades, the grid operators would be forced to establish a new tariff to recoup the loss. However, this would make it even more economically attractive for households to disconnect from the grid as there could be up to £770 premium per year, although a major challenge remains around very lowPV-production and high energy demand during winter with seasonal darkness and cloud coverage, making it very difficult to go completely off grid. Therefore the future of the electricity market lies in approaching energy as a service and with some type of aggregators that can capitalise on the flexibility that exists across all of the distributed assets (i.e. solar PV, EVs and other storage options etc.), incorporate the utility of these assets with pricing signals from flexibility markets and/or spot-price electricity markets and could manage these assets (e.g. charging times of EVs, install smart water heaters etc.). In thiscontext,the service provider willfor instance decide one daythatthe EV charging would be best suited using the solar PV array in the workplace during the day, while next day the EV charging would be more beneficial to take place at home over night. In such scenario with an arbitrage established, the fixed pricing structure could be as low as two thirds of the current bill, which would be a far more attractive offer to customers rather than continuing the current marketwhere utilities and other wholesale marketactorsoffer onlya fewpercentage discounts on a third of customers’ electricity bill for switching to that commercial actor in a zero-sum market place. In this environment, the grid’s main purpose would evolve into addressing peak load since base load would be covered locally. Since this kind of transition would certainly disrupt the electricity system, the key question facing the industry is whether the utilities and other industry incumbents will be leading the destruction of the existing business models or whether they will resist and create barriers to change. Countries such as Norway which have ample amount of flexibility in the energy system (including DSR) are uniquely positioned to serve as a test bed for this kind of energy market system, although a flexibility market on at distribution level will be required. The risk that countries like Norway will otherwise face is a situation where they boast a very strong, reliable and cheap renewable electricity system, but suffer from a cost of transportation of this electricityfrom production point to end-user that will
  13. 13. become increasingly more expensive up to a point where it cannot compete with end-users own local solutions. The future viability of the grid is also being challenged by another trend that is being seen across Europe where there is a transition towards community ownership of energy, in terms of means of production, transportation and consumption. The Need for a Smart Grid for EV Integration Smart grid technology will play a paramount role in enabling an effective grid management as more and more EVs come online. A number of Norwegian companies have played an important part in grid management against constraints and overload. For instance, the company e-Smart Systems provides an analytically based IT platform that enables electrical load forecasting (e.g.transformer load,EVcharging demand and power demandafter outage), segmentation and profiling (e.g. customer behaviour and households with/without EVs/PVs), risk monitoring (e.g. data aggregation, power outage risk estimation and meter error estimation) and fault & anomaly detection (e.g. identification of components based on image recognition and detection/locationsoferrors),via IoT,big data and machine learning.Byusing real-time monitoring, this data platform enables better demand management and therefore reduced grid investment, by providing aggregators with data with up to 1-minute resolution from a range of inputs, such as past and present EV charging date, energy price information, weather info etc.). Although the smart meters only generate values on an hourly basis, the platform utilises instrumentation in the substation to acquire values on 1-minute basis or use aggregation of smart meter values from different sources. On a more granular level, the usage of data on EV charging and loads across individual household, building or area under a transformer, allows load forecasting to be calculated to produce input in an optimisation model that enables increased capacity for EV charging or more effective balancing use of DER. The e-Smart Systems platform enables integration of data from multiple hardware (e.g. smart chargers) and associated software systems, with information from local power intake, ToU tariffs, weather data and social media, to forecast and monitor the charging demand, peak load capacity issues on the grid and available flexibility, and eventually carry out optimisation calculations and subsequentlyproduce control plansthatcan be executed to switch phase on or off.At present,the algorithmhasbeen tested using customer from Norway, Denmark and the United States (as well as from demo sites in Germany and Malta). Where the real data is missing or unreliable, the platform algorithm uses simulated data from gaming platforms. Norwegian utilities have used this kind of smart platform to automate smart charging via machine learning that enable customers to capitalise on cheaper tariffs. Norway’s national TSO (Statnet) has also been experimenting with this
  14. 14. platform within its R&D programme to gain better control the DER (e.g. disconnect at any given moment if capacity is lacking) via load management, independent of whether it is a EV charging site, water heater or office building load. In the Northern parts of Norway where the grid is weaker, this platform is being used to supplement the hydropower capacity to increase up-time (as there is a lot of down-time due to overload) and reducing the buyback from industrial customers (e.g. gas generators). The e-Smart System is also currently running a pilot project (Zero Consumption Project) in the United States in partnership with the TEA - Energy Authority with the aim to predict transformer load. As part of this work, a recently completed pilot to predict broken water meter based on smart meter data from water and electrical metres, eliminated wasted truck rolls by 87% (i.e. maintenance call outs). As such, the market place is currently being developed and tested, via this power exchange platform. While the smart software will play a paramount role in enabling rapid increase in EV penetration, the hardware will equivalently play a key role for the relevant data collection. For instance, the Norwegian smart charging company ZapCharger has been developing smart charging technology that can help reduce the constraints imposed on electricity capacity by EV use, by providing technological solution that defers upgrading of transformer stations, support scalability in multi-unit dwellings and car parks, ensures safe and fair use of EV charging infrastructure. ZapCharger has developed an innovative smart charging technology helps optimise performance with multiple charging stations via integrated load balancing, phase balancing, power measurement and electronic ground fault detection, and is currently developing newfunctionalities including smart house integration and dynamic load balancing against the house. According findings by ZapCharger, a single 63A circuit (phase 3) can charge 5000kmworth ofelectricityper day and therefore 100 carsper day(average car drives approx. 50km/per day). This means there is significant capacity available even when charging on a regular circuit without smart solutions. In order to capture this flexibility one of the technological solution provided by ZapCharger has enabled up to 90% reduction of capacity required for EV charging compared to traditional solutions. In fact, whereas the capacity needed to avoid upgrading of the transformer station with 100 static (or “dumb”) charging stations would be equivalent of 25 households, the ZapCharger Pro would only require capacity equivalence of two households (based on a 400V grid and 63A fuse). In addition, the phase balancing technology embedded in the ZC Pro charger enables between 2-5 fold faster charging by optimising the use of the flexibility in the system. A wall-based flat cabling system allows for an increasing number of charger installation as demand increases which reduces infrastructure investment up to 90%. The ZC Pro charger also has an electronic RCD that enablesitto handle ground faultsseparately(i.e.local safetyshut-down under faultconditions) without the entire system going down and an automatic charger restart after power failure.
  15. 15. The need for such smart charging technology is highlighted by the fact that the company has already installed over 800 chargers and made preparations for more than additional 3000 since August 2016, with sales nearly doubling each month. While there are certainly some crucial contextual differences between Norway and the UK as to how successful the ZapCharger technology would be to address the capacity challenges on the local grid in the UK grid with its 1 phase 100A cut-fuse, as opposed to the Norwegian network with 3 phase LD supply with three 63A cut-out fuses, it could certainly provide some important benefits in the UK in terms of multi-occupancy buildings that do host 3 phase system and where there is a need to scale-up charge points and phase balancing is needed. The Impact on Customer Behaviour Back in 2011, concerns began to be raised by UK network operators about the electrification of transportation as there were unknowns regarding likely charging behaviours that may for example result in excessive evening peak demands.. At the same time, there was also a strong sense thatBritish customerswould absolutelynotaccepttheir charging to be controlled by a third party. However, a recent Ofgem-funded research project (My Electric Avenue) that was carried out by EA Technology in partnership with UK utilities, debunked both of those assumptions. One of key findings regarding the former assumption was that the peak demand was only observed for around 30% of the charging capacity installed, with diverse patterns of charging at other times of the day. The conclusion was that for every kW of charging capacity installed onto a distribution network, on a diversified level there is only need to design a network by a factor of 30%. This means that for every 7KW of charging capacityinstalled, the DNOs do not necessarily have to increase the availability/capacity of their network by additional 7KW. The reason for this resides in the increasing diversification that occurs with the scaling up on EV penetration and diversity of use. In terms of the latter assumption, the study also showed that most people were (anecdotally) unaware of the curtailment and there was broadly a large amount of flexibility within a large time window. For instance, in one of the studies where 100 EVs (Nissan LEAF) which were often curtailed quite aggressively, there was only a single case where this curtailment may have been found to have an impact resulting in insufficient charging (although it was uncertain whether this was directly due to the curtailment rather than mismatch in driving demand in relations to EV storage range). Another major finding of the study was that there were a number of commercialand regulatorybarriersidentified in waysthatdiffer from the Norwegian model.For instance,since EV chargersup to 7KWare classified asan appliance and therefore within the standard connection which the customers already have, they could install a 32amp charger and with no mandatory requirement notify the network operator. This results in a
  16. 16. passive role for the DNO where it cannot identify when people make their transition to EVs and therefore the network operator will not have the mechanisms to either spot this transition ahead of need (i.e. and therefore anticipate any increase in peak load due to EV adoption) or actually influence those customers by installing smart charging or upgrading their connection. One ofthe keyoutcomesfromthe study’smodelling exercise on what the distribution networks look like in terms of capacity available, was that at 50% penetration level on a household level 30% of low voltage circuits/feeders will be operating above their rating and therefore require reinforcing. However, the distribution networks differ substantially across regions regarding their capacity to accept EV penetration onto the grid. Another interesting result relates to flexibility markets and V2G potential, which indicated that for around 80% of EVs on 7KW charging for a 50-mile round trip only require approximately two hoursofcharging.Thismeans there issignificantpotentialfor flexibilityas it was observed that over 90% of vehicles are plugged in overnight for eight hours of more. The study also highlighted a very high share of charging taking place at home which puts the greatest pressure on DNOs. The daily and seasonal variability of electricity consumption at a time where there is steadily increasing penetration ofrenewable energyinto the system,meansthatthere is a critical need to better understand and forecast people’s electricity consumption as the transportation system becomes electrified (this balancing challenge will be exacerbated as the electrification of heating takes place in parallel). It’s important to understand how consumers interact with the energy system in the context of the low carbon transition - particularly individual’s responsivenessto differenttypesofmanaged charging proposition.The EnergyTechnologies Institute has recently been involved in a £5million collaborative research project called Consumers, Vehicles and Energy Integration (CVEI) which aims to gain better understanding of the changes to market structures and energy supply system needed to support high deploymentofplug-in vehicles,aswell as the technicalimplicationsofthese changesand how people might respond to them. The project consisted of two parts: a charging behaviour trial and a vehicle uptake trial.The behaviour trialassessed response to differenttariffpropositions (user-managed and ToU tariff versus supplier managed charging versus no-managed charging) among 240 consumersover two months with parallelBEV and PHEV trials. The trial used data on use and charging with additional questionnaires and choice experiments to survey peoples’ attitudes towards the three charging regimes based on their experience to help inform service providers on how to best manage their system. By providing 200 customerswith four days with one ofeach of three differenttypesofvehicles(BEV, PHEV and ICE), the vehicle uptake trial aimed to explore the preferences across different types of low emission vehicles and estimate the relative share of different vehicle types on the road in a
  17. 17. zero or very low emission transportation scenario in 10-20 years’ time, as well as gain better understanding of the wider macroeconomic issues around EV uptake. A combined set of modelling tools was developed to provide an integrated, holistic means of quantifying and qualitatively assessing the impacts on and from infrastructure, consumers, vehicle uptake and use, policy measures and commercial models across the system. According to the interim findings, one of the biggest challenge for EV as far as consumers are concerned is to narrow the gap around the cost of low emission vehicles as capital cost in seen as the major barrier to EV adoption in the near- to medium term. This is actually a misguided perspective given that most EVs are “purchased” on lease arrangements that are very similar in cost to ICE vehicles, with further savings on running cost. Low emission vehicle uptake can also result in a sizable drop in government revenues. Furthermore,while a moderate uptake of low emission vehicles can be expected even with limited Government intervention, the existing incentives do not encourage rapid enough uptake of EVs to meet decarbonisation targets. The interim results also indicated that the economic benefits of car sharing can have a significant impact on the cost of travel on per mile/km basis and is likely to have material benefits to consumers. Amongst adopters to date, there also seems to be a changes in the “main” and “second” car dynamic with EVs being driven comparable mileages to ICEs. According to the findings, consumers’ charging behaviour was found to be far more influenced by convenience rather than cost of charging and therefore the pricing differences need to be substantial in order to influence peoples charging behaviour. The consumer research also scoped the dynamics within multi-car families and whereas it was previously expected that EVs would become “the second car” within a family househo0ld for shorter journeys, the resultsshowed this not to be the case as the EV became more frequently used than expected with mileage comparable to ICEs. There was also a recognition that awareness of public charge points are perhaps more important than actual availability. The Potentialfor V2G At present, the five largest EV storage/battery technology developers are patenting around 13,000 patents per year, which target cost reduction, durability, weight and energy/volume density of storage. Needless to say, the world will look very differently in 5+ years as the technology rapidly advances forward. One of the biggest promise of the EV world is the potential of V2G but one of the key challenge is to bring together these two very different sectors which operate at very different timescales. For instance, while the automotive industry works in line with a 2-3 years in business model development with a 12 year, the charge point operators are lookingworking with technologywith a 5-year life cycle, and the benefits ofsmart
  18. 18. charging and V2G for system efficiency are numerous. This includes deferral of grid reinforcement and increased charger density on weak networks, via local response to voltage fluctuation or client site power restriction, as well as commercial electricity bill minimisation (e.g.triad period avoidance).Furthermore, an EValso hasthe potentialprovide grid balancing (via an aggregator) services, such as energy arbitrage and peak shaving/shifting, firm frequency response and shortterm operating reserve, as well as provides a commercial case for managed charging, which in turn can extend battery life by keeping the battery in a lower state of charge (since conventional method leaves batteries for the longest periods fully charged which is suboptimal for battery life). However, perhaps the strongest case for V2G is that it will support and optimise local renewable generation. Cenex has been engaged in a research programme that has developed a Matlab-based simulation model called EV Analysis Environment (EVA). The EVA simulation environment deploys a vehicle simulation tool-chain that consists of: a data summaries tool to filter and analyse both charging and vehicle usage data into summaries of journeys with charging and V2G events (with key characteristic summarised cycles extracted to create representative drive cycles); and a backward facing vehicle model to calculate fuel consumption (and hence CO2) from drive cycle input. The EVA programme also relies on EV modelling extensions, including i) an equivalent circuit model (i.e. a battery electrical model) to calculate electrical characteristics and SoC of EV battery based on power cycle input, using charge/discharge efficiency and temperature, ii) a battery degradation model that calculates capacity fade and increase in internal resistance of an EV battery due to age, temperature and power cycles (and hence SoC),and iii) a motor model thatassessesperformance and efficiencyfor traction motors to allow simulation of EV operation. Finally, the EVA simulation programme also utilises a V2G Energy Model that calculates energy profile possible with V2G operation using aggregated vehicle date for a number of V2G support scenarios, and a V2G Economic Model that calculates the economic viability of V2G for each scenario based on the energy profile and demand requirement profile. Both models integrate information on vehicle journey, building demand,renewable generation and marketdemand,and in turn outputscostanalysis summary relating to building, vehicle and market economics. Initially the EVA programme relied on historical data as input but moving forward it will use real-time data from a number of projects that Cenexis participating in. One of these, EFES is a 3-year academic-industry based R&D project that explores the technical, social, interoperabilityand market barriers of V2G in the UK by developing i) a cloud-based virtual power plant (VPP) that is capable of utilizing electricity storage assets (e.g. batteries or EV) through a software package, controlled by electricity providers, ii) a V2G unit which EVs can
  19. 19. plug into to provide both charging for the vehicle and enable it to act as a battery storage, either to provide electricity directly to a building or the National Grid using the VPP, and iii) a V2G Gateway that provides the control functionality for the V2G unit, enabling the unit to communicate with both a building and the VPP to determine the most appropriate charging or discharging option. Some of the interim analytical work suggests that through utilizing just 6% of their car park, the project partner Manchester Science Park could save over £14,000 per annum through V2G implementation, together with bidding into energy markets (e.g. wholesale electricity markets or short term operating reserve) potentially providing additional income equivalent to around £60 per month for each vehicle integrated into the scheme. The IntelligentTransport,Heating and ControlAgent(ITHECA) is another R&D demonstration project carried out by Cenex that showcases the collaboration of transport, frequency response services,energy storage and district heat solutions to establish the potential of V2G to maximize a combined heat and power (CHP) plant. This demonstration work is based around the European Bioenergy Research Institute at Aston University where the UK’s first V2G unit has been installed. Together with Aston University, Cenex has been working on maximizing outputs from the CHP unit through V2G management and intelligent control of vehicles with the aim to establish the businesscase for the operation of these technologies as a collaborative energysolution.The project has helped establish the technical requirement of installing and managing V2G to support CHP output and local electricity demand, helped setting out the economic case of increasing CHP output through increasing and decreasing electricaldemand in response to the needsofthe plantsand the operationalconditionsofV2G based on real-world testing and operation of a fully-functioning V2G in order to share and disseminate lessons learnt. Other projects which Cenex has been participated in includes Smart Mobile Energy, a feasibility study that explores the business case for integrating V2G technology at building, district and city scale across three pilot cities, Birmingham, Berlin and Valencia; and the Interreg North Sea Region funded SEEV4-City programme which is establishing long-term demonstration pilots on the integration of local renewable generation and energy storage by using ICT to manage energy supply and demand flow, in line with clean electric transport services and other mobility services. Compiled by Mikael Mikaelsson – UK Science & Innovation Network For further information please contact: Mark Thompson – Senior Innovation Lead – Energy Systems, Innovate UK -