Infrastructure Working
Council (IWC)
Presentations
Day One
SRP’s PERA Club, Tempe, AZ
March 25, 2015
© 2015 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
The Express Corridor
Dave Packard
Senior Director, Utility Solutions
March 25, 2015
© 2015 ChargePoint, Inc.
DC Fast Charging gaining ground
Source: US Dept of Energy Jan 2015
PART 1 V2G Technologies
© 2015 ChargePoint, Inc.
2
DC Fast Charging gaining ground
Source: US Dept of Energy Jan 2015
PART 1 V2G Technologies
© 2015 ChargePoint, Inc.
3
Express Corridor Announcement
CPEX for short
© 2015 ChargePoint, Inc.
4
CPEX Program Description
Key Program Attributes
+
+
+
+
+
Optimally spaced DC Fast public charging resources
Goal: Enable long range corridor transit up/down East and West coasts
Mix of 24kW (Medium Power) and 50kW (High Power) between recharging sites
Leverage state and community grant programs where there is strong overlap
Spacing considers existing/planned OEM dealership and 3rd Party charging facilities
IntraCity (24kW) Chargers
+ Single cord dispenser (SAE CCS)
+ Donated charger with installation stipend
+ Off highway locations (<5 miles)
© 2015 ChargePoint, Inc.
InterCity (50kW) Chargers
+ Multiple dual‐nozzle stations
+ Owned/operated as ChargePoint
service facility under host license
+ On highway travel plazas (<1mi.)
5
Level II Charging
DC Fast Charging
Where Does DC Fast Charging Make
Most Sense?
© 2015 ChargePoint, Inc.
Driver Activity
Parking Duration
Road Trip
10 to 30 minutes
Errands
20 to 30 minutes
Shop
30 minutes to 2
hours
Dine
Activity Examples
+
Planned stop en route to a long distance destination:
Weekend Travel, intercity or long haul
+
Short stops while out and about town to top-off battery:
Single shops, coffee shops, fast food
+
Replenish energy used to top-off batteries during longer
stops around the town :
Shopping malls, etc.
1-4 hours
+
Sit-in Restaurants
Play
2-6 hours
+
Sports grounds, golf clubs, theater
Work
4-8 hours
+
Commuting to workplace
Sleep
>8 hours
+
Overnight charging while at home or at a hotel
•
Need for DC is for road trips, opportunistic charging and short stops
•
Also a large initial market for auto dealerships (not identified here)
CPEX Program Goals
+ Rapid build out of DC Fast Charging
•
•
•
Get range extension activated for the key OEM launch markets
Expand the solution mix of Intra City built around each core Inter City node
High availability of charging ports, rapid expansion “Just In Time” as needed
+ Accelerate EV adoption and expand addressable market for public
charging.
•
•
•
Strong outreach and education effort tied to each regional deployment
Easy to use mobile and web applications to make location and access easy
Include OEM Partners in program engagement at the State and Federal level
+ Drive scale through a Managed Service solution
•
•
•
•
•
© 2015 ChargePoint, Inc.
Economic hardware deployment, standardized interface
Efficient operation and high reliability service metrics
Data mining and business analytics
Seamless payment transaction systems
Give outsourcing path to OEM
7
CPEX Site Selection Attributes
ELECTRIC POWER RELATED ISSUES
+ Utility of Record:
+ Primary Utility Contact:
+ Power Requirement (AC): For supplemental L2 stations
+ Power Requirement (DC): Total for proposed and future DCFC stations
+ Future Proof Capacity: Overhead available?
+ DC Hardware Proposed:
+ AC Hardware Proposed:
+ Total kWhrs currently available:
+ Total possible kWhrs :
+ Phases?
+ Proximity to highway
+ Site entertainment
+ Local attractions.
© 2015 ChargePoint, Inc.
8
CPEX Site Selection | Attribute Class Definition
(24kW)
•
Legacy – Existing customer currently providing public
access L2 charging on CP Network.
•
Utilization – Degree of current EV charging utilization
and trends exhibiting increasing facility utilization.
CUSTOMER STATUS
LEGACY CP CUSTOMER
CURRENT UTILIZATION
AMENITIES / HOURS
•
Amenities – operating times, visibility, retail services,
•
Target ZEV– Location is within a target state and in an
area that experiences good EV adoption.
COMMUNITY FIT/FILL
TARGET ZEV STATE
FILLS A GAP OR CAPACITY IMBALANCE
MULTIPLE USER TYPES
•
Gap Closure – potential site is located at 30-50 mile
distance on a “spoke” from a nearby 50kW hubs. Beefs up
DC fast available capacity in existing L2 deployments.
•
Multiple User Types– site supports diversity in driver
use profiles, including commuter, passing traveler, and
shopper. Leads to highest utilization rates.
MAKE READY / O&M
ELEC SVC SPARE CAPACITY
ONGOING HOST SUPPORT
•
Elec Svc Capacity – does not requre major utility
service upgrade to power 24kW DC fast units.
•
Host – Commitment from host/corporate to enable
access, promote utilization, support ongoing maintenance
and repair, expand customer services.
© 2015 ChargePoint, Inc.
9
CPEX Site Selection | Attribute Class Definition
(50kW)
•
Accessibility – Relative ease of navigating, length of
trip interruption, toll cost incurred, energy expended.
•
Amenity – Restroom availability and cleanliness,
Restaurant and Recreation establishments, .
CONVENIENCE
OFF HIGHWAY ACCESSIBILITY
AMENITIES
WiFi SERVICES
LOCATION BENEFITS
KEY CORRIDOR RANGE EXTENSION
VISIBILITY/EDUCATION CONNECTION
ELECTRIC POWER SUFFICIENCY
STRATEGIC HIGH PROFILE SPONSORSHIP
DEMOGRAPHIC / BRAND
ONGOING HOST SUPPORT
•
WiFi- availability of open access public WiFi /Cell signal
•
Corridor – Proximity to major highway transit path and
key intersections serving multiple central arteries.
•
Outreach – Visibility of CPEX facilities and strength of
public message sent, Formal education/learning facilities.
•
Electric – Distribution line capacity, proximity to service
drop point, additional EV charging use case (ie
workplace).
•
Profile – Connection to large Government initiatives,
potential pull through EVSP services, high utilization rates
•
Brand – Level of reinforcement of OEM brand affiliation.
•
Host – Commitment from host/corporate to enable
access, promote utilization, support financial viability,
expand customer services.
© 2015 ChargePoint, Inc.
10
Example: Potential IntraCity Site (24kW)
2‐3 miles
from GSP
© 2015 ChargePoint, Inc.
11
Utilization Assessment – Montclair NJ Legacy
© 2015 ChargePoint, Inc.
12
CPEX North East (Corridor Wide)
© 2015 ChargePoint, Inc.
13
CPEX NJ (State Specific)
© 2015 ChargePoint, Inc.
14
Efacec QC45
+ 50kW peak with 45kW continuous power delivery
+ Charges all vehicles equipped with DC fast charge ports
+ Efacec systems installed in US for 2+ years with outstanding
reliability reputation
Model:
Standard:
CHAdeMO and SAE Combo
Input:
480 VAC @ 64A 3Phase
Max Power:
50 kW, 45kW continuous
Curb Weight:
1,323 pounds
Dimensions:
5.9’ H x 2.0’ W x 2.0’ D (not including connectors)
Range Delivered:
20 minute charge delivers up to 80 miles of range
Suitability:
© 2015 ChargePoint, Inc.
Efacec QC45
Ideal for short stops and intercity travel
15
ChargePoint 50kW (Tritium Veefil)
+ Slim design and light weight simplify installation and minimizes costs
+ The only liquid cooled DC system on the market
•
Lowest maintenance, widest temperature operating range
+ Electronics are environmental sealed (no exposure through air cooling)
+ Charges all vehicles equipped with DC fast charge ports
Model:
ChargePoint 50kW (Tritium)
Vehicle Connectors:
CHAdeMO and SAE Combo
Input:
Max Power:
50 kW
Curb Weight:
364 pounds
Dimensions:
6.5’ H x 2.5’ W x 1.1’ D (with connectors)
Range Delivered:
Suitability:
© 2015 ChargePoint, Inc.
480 VAC @ 63A 3Phase
20 minute charge delivers up to 80 miles of
range
Ideal for short stops and intercity travel
16
Coming in April: 24kW Wall Mount
+ Lower cost wall unit is perfect for retail establishments
• Single connector only, initially available with SAE Combo
connector
+ Same technology as BMWi system
Model: TBD
+ Wall mount
with optional pedestal mount (Chris Slide)
Connector:
Input:
Max Power:
Weight:
Dimensions:
SAE Combo (CHAdeMO available 9-2015)
400-480 VAC @ 30A, 3Phase
24 kW
125 pounds
2.6’ H x 1.6’ W x 1.0’ D (not including connectors)
Range Delivered:
30 minutes of charging delivers up to 80 miles
of range
Suitability:
Ideal for intracity travel, retail locations, battery
top off
© 2015 ChargePoint, Inc.
17
Thank you
Dave Packard
Senior Director, Utility Solutions
Dave.Packard@ChargePoint.com
912-258-5665
© 2015 ChargePoint, Inc.
18
Electronic Loads
Friend or Foe? Dmitry Kosterev, Bonneville Power Administration
Joe Eto, DOE/CERTS Project
John Undrill
View of load behavior depends on the issue of interest Loads can respond to events or create events turn off to prevent overheating turn off to “aid the grid” turn off to respond to “price signals” turn on to respond to “price signals” Natural asymptotic behavior is important constant power constant current constant impedance ‘programmed operation’ 2
We are concerned about the collective behavior of the system load in normal operation of the power system We are concerned about stability of operation of the bulk electric system when -­‐ everything is operating normally -­‐ no lightning, fire, dig-­‐in, tree contact -­‐ no rapid or abrupt control actions
3
⎡
⎣
∆P
∆Q
⎤
⎡ δP
δP
δV
δQ
δf
δQ
δV
⎦=⎣
δf
⎤⎡
⎦⎣
∆f
∆V
⎤
⎦
We have to consider the whole matrix of sensitivity Our simulation programs can handle the mathematics but are only useful when we know enough engineering detail
4
Simple illustrative simulations
5
Simple illustrative simulations
1.005
Vterm
Vterm
1.005
1
0.995
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
1
0.995
50
1.9
Efd
Efd
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
1.9
1.85
1.8
1.75
0
1.92
1.88
1.86
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
1.84
50
100.5
101
Pg
Pg
100.5
100
100
99.5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
99.5
50
1
2
Qg
3
Qg
2
0
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
0
50
1.0002
1.0005
1
1
Speed
Speed
-1
1
0.9998
0.9996
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0.9995
0.999
v1ge.cha
v1pl.cha
High load and high real power import on transmission system Same load and transmission system import Favorable load characteristic predominantly resistive and direct connected motors Unfavorable load characteristic predominantly constant power 6
Simple illustrative simulations
1.005
Vterm
Vterm
1.005
1
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
0.995
50
1.95
2
1.9
1.95
Efd
Efd
0.995
1
1.85
1.8
1.75
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
1.9
1.85
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
1.8
50
100.5
100.5
Pg
101
Pg
101
100
99.5
100
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
99.5
50
4
8
6
Qg
Qg
2
0
-2
4
2
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
0
50
1.0002
1.001
1
1.0005
Speed
Speed
0
0.9998
0.9996
0.9994
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
v1ge.cha
50
1
0.9995
0.999
v1pl.cha
Very high load and high real power import on transmission system Same load transmission system import Favorable load characteristic predominantly resistive and direct connected motors Unfavorable load characteristic predominantly constant power 7
Load Characteristics
• Load characteristics, i.e. power sensitivity to voltage and frequency, can impact the power system stability – GOOD: Light dims (consumes less power) when the voltage is lowered – BAD: Computer consumes same amount of power when voltage is lowered • Trends in load characteristics:
End Use
Old Characteristics
New Characteristics
Fans
Lights
Direct-­‐drive motors, frequency sensitive
Resistive incandescent
Electronically commutated DC motors – constant power
LED electronic lighting -­‐ varies
Water Heating
Resistive
Heat pump
Cooling pumps
Direct-­‐drive motors, frequency sensitive
VFD-­‐connected – constant power
The Challenge
• Power electronic loads are programmed as constant power loads • As voltages / frequency decline, the same amount of power is consumed • How do the power electronic loads impact system stability • Voltage stability • Power oscillations • Frequency controls
Power
Voltage
Power
Current
Resistive
9
Power System Stability
• Power grid is subjected to various disturbances (lightning strikes, unexpected generator and line outages, etc) • Although infrequent, such disturbances can lead to large-­‐scale power outages (e.g. San Diego in September 2011)
COI Power, August 10 1996
5000
4800
Power (MW)
4600
4400
4200
4000
3800
Voltage Fault with Delayed Recovery
seconds
Loss of generation
3600
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Time (sec) from 15:47:30
Power Oscillations
seconds
70
80
90
100
seconds
Bulk Electric System Behavior
COI Power, August 10 1996
5000
4800
Power (MW)
4600
4400
4200
4000
3800
3600
Voltage Fault with Delayed Recovery
seconds
Loss of generation
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Time (sec) from 15:47:30
Power Oscillations
seconds
70
80
90
100
seconds
System Impact Studies
650
Voltage (kV)
600
550
500
Basline
Expected Increase in Power Electronics with Constant Power
50% Constant Current / 50% Constant Power
100% Constant Power
450
400
0
10
20
30
Time (sec)
40
50
Loss of transmission capacity
60
12
System Impact Studies
Basline
Expected Increase in Power Electronics with Constant Power
50% Constant Current / 50% Constant Power
100% Constant Power
60
Frequency (Hz)
59.9
59.8
59.7
59.6
59.5
59.4
0
10
20
30
Time (sec)
40
50
60
Loss of generation, need for additional frequency reserves
13
Electric Vehicle Chargers
• Could be significant part of house load – 4 kW • Here is what we would like to see:
Trip
No: Constant Power Power
kW
Yes: Constant Current
V
Voltage
Thankyou
15
Georgia Power ET Plan
Blair Farley
3/25/2015
Beliefs for On-Road ET
• ET has Potential to Significantly Impact
― Energy (Sales Growth, Security)
― Environmental
• Key Drivers for ET Adoption
―
―
―
―
Tax Credits
HOV Lane Access
Education & Awareness
Strategic Charging Infrastructure
• Georgia Power can Influence Speed & Acceptance by being a visible
leader in key Drivers
2
Georgia Power’s ET Objectives
• Program Objectives
― Heighten visibility
― Grow the market
― Establish and fortify ET leadership posture
― Ensure customer satisfaction
3
EV Market Growth vs. Conventional Vehicle Sales
Year
PEV SALES
All Vehicle Sales
% PEV Sales
2013
5,842
506,926
1.2%
2014
16,382
502,623
3.3%
2020
*25,000
503,973
5.0%
* Forecasted GPC annual sales by 2020
Note: Georgia’s Sales Forecast from EPRI
Note: 2013 Actuals, 2014 & 2020 Projections
4
The EV Market
•
•
•
•
•
Georgia is the fastest growing EV market in the US - Atlanta #2
Top Nissan Leaf market in the US
19,000 EVs and growing 1,000/month
Automakers introducing EVs - KIA, VW, Mercedes
What’s Driving EV Adoption?
―
―
―
―
―
Tax credits
Attractive lease programs
HOV/HOT lane access
Workplace and public charging access
PEV Rates
19.1%
5 Metro
Atlanta
Counties
80.9%
5
All Other
Education & Awareness
(Goal 25,000 Cars 2020)
GPC ET Programs • GPC Fleets
• Convert Regional Energy (32) to PEVs
• Acquire multiple PEVs for “ET Demo Days”
• Hybrid Bucket Trucks
• Marketing Campaign
• Increase exposure via multiple media channels
• “Get Current. Drive Electric”
• Social Media Campaign
6
Fleet Vehicles
7
Media Campaign
Residential Charger Rebate Program
GPC ET Programs
(Goal 1,000 Chargers)
Existing Customers • $250 for installation of Level 2 (L2) charger
New Customers
• Rebates for PEV‐Ready Homes • $100 to builder installing 240v garage circuit and outlet
• $250 to homeowner for installation of L2 charger
9
Business Charger Rebate Program
(Goal 1,690 Chargers)
GPC ET Programs
Existing Business Customers
• $500 rebate for installation of Level 2 (L2) chargers • Refer participating charger installers
Nissan Advantage Matching Rebate
• $500 matching rebate for workplaces of 100 employees
• Nissan “Ride and Drive” for employees
New Construction (program details being finalized)
• Encourage EV ready new construction
• Target new high rise buildings with parking facilities
10
The Georgia Power EV Story
• 300 employee EV owners
• 62 Workplace Chargers @ 20 sites
• Charger Utilization
– 3 ½ hours per session
– 10 kWh to charge each car
11
Community (Public) Charging
GPC ET Programs (Goal 61 Chargers)
• GPC to install, own, operate, and maintain
• 61 EV charging islands
Phase I – 11 at Georgia Power facilities in 2015
Phase II – 25 at Community Sites in 2015
Phase III – 25 at Community Sites in 2016
• DC fast charger and L2 chargers
• Customer provides four spaces on their premises
• Session fees will apply for charger services
12
Community Charging Island Mock-up
13
Charging Island Locations
GPC Locations
Duluth Operating Center
CRC - North Shallowford
Athens – Prince Avenue
Augusta – Walton Way
Wills Road
241 Corp. Headquarters
Savannah – Abercorn (Downtown)
Lilburn Business Office
Lawrenceville Office
Concord Rd
Savannah – So Abercorn
Columbus – Veteran’s Pkwy
Rome – Broad St
Flat Shoals
Valdosta – Norman Dr
Macon – Key St
Jonesboro – Smith St
Cartersville – Mansell
- First Eleven Sites
- Other Sites Considered
Community Charging
Design Considerations
• Interoperability/Open Standards
Separate hardware from software functionality
Interoperability for Customers—RFID cards and networks
• Customer‐side features
App/website functionality
Customer Service
• GPC‐side features
Branding/White Labeling
Customer/Charging session data ownership
Messaging to customers
• Reliability
15
Community Charging
• Fractured nature of the industry
OEMs, EVSE manufacturers, Network Operators
Challenges
Roaming
Customer Sharing
• Security and Lighting
• Tax collection and routing within the company
• Current status of standards
• Hardware availability
• Siting
In broad terms: Near MFD, travel patterns, etc.
Site Host agreements
16
Questions?
kbfarley@southernco.com
EV Smart Grid Integration
Requirements Study
A Collaboration of Laboratories to Identify
Barriers and Opportunities
Tony Markel
Sr. Engineer
Electric Vehicle Grid Integration
National Renewable Energy Laboratory
EPRI EV IWC Mtg. Tempe, AZ
March 25, 2015
NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC.
INTEGRATE Project
Integrated Network Testbed for Energy Grid
Research and Technology Experimentation
Task 1: Characterize ability of individual EE, RE, and DER
technologies to provide grid services
Task 2: Develop Communications, Information, and
Computation (CIC) for integration of multiple devices
Task 3: Holistic Applications - Integration System Applications
to Deliver Services - understanding the value of integrated
systems
Task 4: INTEGRATE RFP – Five project teams under negotiation (start
Q2) to engage ESIF as User Facility
The INTEGRATE Project is supported and coordinated across multiple
DOE EERE Offices (Solar, Wind, Buildings, Vehicles, Fuel Cell Technologies)
Electric Vehicle Grid Integration at NREL
Vehicles, Renewable Energy, and Buildings Working Together
Developing Systems Integrated Applications
Managed Charging
Evaluate functionality and value of
load management to reduce
charging costs and contribute to
standards development
Local Power Quality
Leverage charge system
power electronics to monitor
and enhance local power
quality and grid stability in
scenarios with high
penetration of renewables
Emergency Backup
Power
Bi-Directional Power
Flow
Explore strategies for enabling
the export of vehicle power to
assist in grid outages and
disaster-recovery efforts
Develop and evaluate integrated
V2G systems, which can reduce
local peak-power demands and
access grid service value potential
Vehicle-to-Grid Challenges
Life Impacts
Information Flow and Control
Holistic Markets and Opportunities
Can functionality be added with little or no
impact on battery and vehicle performance?
How is information shared and protected
within the systems architecture?
What role will vehicles play and what value can be
created?
3
Objectives – Multilab EV SG Requirements Study
• Leverage the expertise of multiple national
laboratories to evolve the implementation
scenarios and requirements for PEV integration
with smart grid systems
• Produce a guidance document for DOE that
details PEV grid integration system
implementation methods and remaining
research gaps
4
Overview of Report Contents
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Interest and Opportunity for VGI
Functional VGI Scenarios
Enabling PEV Integration
Existing Demos Review
Scale and Opportunity Assessment from Data
Scenario Forecasting using Simulation
Path Forward Discussion
5
Interest and Opportunity for VGI (Section 1)
Overview
• Transportation is ~1/3 of energy consumption and emissions
• PEVs present opportunity for energy and emissions
reduction but need incentives to drive adoption
• PEV load impacts
o
o
Residential – in aggregate increased stress on distribution components
Commercial – increased costs; demand charge
• Growth in renewable generation driving a demand for new
grid services and load management options
• What flexibility and dependability of load and resource can
vehicles with energy storage offer?
• Can the VGI functional value be enough to incent the growth
of PEV adoption?
6
Path Forward Discussion (Section 7)
Hardware-in-the-Loop
• Many stakeholders want to see and test all aspects of the
system
• Range likely only possible with a well designed HIL system
• Sections of system can be sub-divided to leverage
individual lab expertise
PEV smart grid integration real-time simulator (Opal-RT or RTDS)
PEV/EVSE test data
EV Fleet Simulator (e.g., V2G-Sim)
Energy Service
Provider/Aggregator
Server
Demand
Response
(OpenADR)
Campus/Building
Energy
Management
System
Sensor Signals
Actuator Signals
J2847/1/3, ISO 15118
J2847/2/3, ISO 15118
Distribution
System
Simulation
(e.g., GridLAB-D)
MODELS
EV/EVSE
Energy storage
Photovoltaics
Wind
Agent-based DC
Charging/Discharging
Controller
Electric loads
Weather
HIL Simulator Interface
IEC 61850, DNP3
Agent-based AC
Charging/Discharging
Controller
Agent-based
DER
Controllers
Agent-based
Electric Load
Controllers
VOLTRON +
SpEC module
Regenerative
Grid
Emulator
Inverter
DC Bus
AC Bus
Image Courtesy: ANL
7
Path Forward Discussion (Section 7)
Simulation
• V2G-Sim, GridLab-D, and many other tools offer
inexpensive and effective way to explore application
scenarios and develop component requirements
• Wireless power transfer and e-roadway systems have
an opportunity to reshape vehicle demand profile and
provide interface electronics for storage and
renewables
• Develop valuable data repositories that can be shared
among the team members
o
While these repositories require significant effort to create and
maintain they are needed to support cost evaluation, compare
in field applications to simulation, and help refine standards
through improved scope definition.
8
Path Forward Discussion (Section 7)
Key Concerns
• Multiple and conflicting comms and controls
structures may limit interoperability
• Tariff schedules drive the local optimization
problem and limit the global optimization
• Scale of the opportunity and cost of
implementation
• Lack of consistency regionally in the opportunities
and value make it difficult to engage auto
stakeholders
• How to make it simple and effective
9
Energy Procurement Structure and Tariffs
Market
Vertically
Integrated Utility
Market
Competitive
Energy Supplier
$+E
$+E
E
$+E
Tariff
Tariff
$
Distribution
Utility
$+E
a
Tariff
b
10
Load (Fraction of Annual Peak)
• Seasonal variations
in load and
resource maybe
important in
determining annual
value
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
Winter
0.1
Summer Maximum
0.0
0
24
48
Spring Minimum
72
96
120
144
168
6,000
5,500
5,000
4,500
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
Load (MW)
System Variability Impacts
Hour & Day
Renewables
curtailment
in high
penetration
case
11
Seasonal and Hourly Variability in
Cost of Energy and Services
Winter
60
Summer
Spring
50
40
30
20
10
At Commercial
At Home
0
0
6
12
At Home
20
18
• More hours at home
• More value at
commercial
• Less hours for high value
likely best for battery
value proposition
24
18
Reserve Price ($/MW-h)
Locational Marginal Price ($/MWh)
70
16
NYISO Reg
MISO Reg
NYISO Spin
MISO Spin
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
At Home
0
12:00 AM
6:00 AM
At Commercial
12:00 PM
6:00 PM
At Home
12:00 AM
12
Thoughts on EV Integration Opportunities
• EV charge management should first be focused on
minimizing or eliminating the capacity costs and
optimize around energy cost
o
Adjust charge pattern such that no additional power
capacity is needed at generation and distribution levels
• The provision of ancillary services from EV charging
has the potential to provide some additional value,
o
Revenue opportunities are small relative to the benefits of
reduced costs associated with controlled charging
• The unknown path forward on Distributed Energy
Resource participation in markets makes assessment
challenging
13
Charge Management System Operational Demo 9/14
14
Charge Management System Interfaces
Driver Entries
Management Tool
Databus Schedule
15
STM Garage EVSE Management Dashboard
Power (kW) 0-8
EVSE #1 (actual)
EVSE #1 (plan)
#3
#2
#4
24hr span (update 30s)
#5
Aggregate Data
Today (actuals):
STM Net Demand
STM PV
STM Agg. EVSE
Future:
STM PV forecast
STM Agg. EVSE schedule
48hr span (update 1min)
EVSE Chart Background
color denotes mode:
Green – active manage
Pink – immediate
Light blue – averaged
Orange - delayed
#36
Refresh
Now
6
2014-10-29
x 10
3
Normal PV output
1
-1
High PV output
Monthly Average PV Gen
Actual PV Gen
0
0
5
10
15
20
6
25
2
Pwr [W]
4000
3000
2000
Planned Charge Pwr Profile
Actual Charge Pwr
0
0
5
10
Time of Day
5
15
15
20
Pwr [W]
5
10
5
15
20
0
5
Low PV output
2000
Planned Charge Pwr Profile
Actual Charge Pwr
0
5
10
Time of Day
20
25
15
20
25
1000
25
3000
0
15
Plannded Charge Pwr Profile
Actual Charge Pwr
4000
1000
10
2000
0
0
5
0
3000
Monthly Average PV Gen
Actual PV Gen
0
Monthly Average PV Gen
Actual PV Gen
4000
10
-5
0
25
2014-11-03
x 10
2014-10-31
x 10
1
-1
Pwr [W]
1000
Pwr [W]
Pwr [W]
Pwr [W]
2
15
20
25
10
Time of Day
Progress Summary on INTEGRATE R&D
• Charge Management
o
Parking garage testing and research EVSEs in lab spaces
• Local Power Quality
Integrated testing platform with 2 residential transformers, grid
simulation, >12 EVSEs, simulated solar, and a tie to smart homes
lab
o Fast Charger and Wireless charger off-board electronics planned
for integration
o
• Backup Export Power
o
o
PGE utility truck with export power
Via Motors Van and others TBD
o
o
o
Mini-E with a Milbank EVSE for AC export bi-directional
Smith EVs with off-board DC fast chargers
Transit Connect EV with Ideal Power off-board inverter
• V2G Systems
18
Identifying and Overcoming
Critical Barriers to Widespread
Second Use of PEV Batteries
Jeremy Neubauer, Ahmad Pesaran
Transportation and Hydrogen Systems Center
National Renewable Energy Laboratory
March 2015
NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC.
NREL Battery Second Use Project
• Motivation: Significant interest in reusing batteries after retirement from
vehicles
– Residual value for a second use may
offset a portion of initial high battery cost
– Could transfers EOL battery management
responsibilities from automotive OEMs
– Could offer lower cost battery options to
stationary energy storage applications
– May benefit the environment by deferring
battery recycling & disposal
• Objective: Assess the feasibility and
impact of PEV battery secondary use
2
Innovation for Our Energy Future
Gaps and Key Questions
•
Gaps in the B2U literature circa 2011:
– Careful consideration of battery degradation
– Detailed analysis of repurposing costs under multiple scenarios
– Accounting of supply and demand effects in 2U applications
•
To assess the feasibility and impact of B2U, we identified the
following key questions:
– When will used automotive batteries become available, and how healthy will
they be?
– What is required to repurpose used automotive batteries, and how much will
it cost?
– How will repurposed automotive batteries be used, how long will they last,
and what is their value?
•
We’ll summarize some of our findings here. To learn more,
download the full analysis report at:
http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy15osti/63332.pdf
3
Innovation for Our Energy Future
Motivation, Objective, & Approach
Automotive Service Analysis
Post-Automotive Assessments
Repurposing Costs Analysis
Applications Analysis
Conclusions
4 NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC.
Automotive Service: Battery Degradation
• BLAST-V analysis for two
vehicles in three climates
using historical travel
pattern data from likely
PEV drivers
– BEV75 and PHEV20
(approx. EPA rating)
– Los Angeles, Minneapolis,
and Phoenix
– TCS drivers achieving
greater than 8000 mi/yr and
80% utility factor in the
BEV75
– Simulate 15 year vehicle
service life
Drivetrain
Vehicle type
Battery size
Typical electric range @ BOL
Maximum SOC @ BOL
Minimum SOC @ BOL
Auxiliary equipment
Charging infrastructure
5
BEV75
PHEV20
Midsize Sedan
Midsize Sedan
22.1 kWh
7.74 kWh
75 miles
20 miles
100%
100%
0%
20%
Heat-pump cabin heater
Conventional cabin air conditioner
Active battery cooling
At-home Level 2 (6.6 kW alternating
current, 93% efficiency)
Battery cooling active at charger
Innovation for Our Energy Future
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.3
Q2 Capacity Loss
• Calendar effects
(Q1) dominate
capacity loss in
both vehicles,
making the climate
of automotive
service important
Q1 Capacity Loss
Automotive Service: Battery Degradation
0.2
0.1
– Effect is more
pronounced on
resistance
MNP
LA
0.2
0.1
0
PHX
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.3
Q2 Capacity Loss
• PHEV batteries see
more degradation
in both capacity
and resistance due
to more frequent
high DOD cycling
Q1 Capacity Loss
0
0.2
0.1
0
MNP
6
LA
PHX
BEV75
MNP
LA
PHX
PHEV20
0.2
0.1
0
MNP
LA
PHX
Innovation for Our Energy Future
Motivation, Objective, & Approach
Automotive Service Analysis
Post-Automotive Assessments
Repurposing Costs Analysis
Applications Analysis
Conclusions
7 NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC.
Post-Automotive: Value & 2U Life
• Present Value of
Throughput (PVT)
approach developed
and applied to
calculation of health
factor (kh), comparing
value of used battery to
new battery
kh = PVTU / PVTN
10
8
6
4
2
0
8
PHEV20
60% DOD2U
0.8
Health Factor (years)
Second-Use Life (years)
• Simulated degradation
of used automotive
batteries to compute 2U
lifetime and health
factor across drivers,
climates, and vehicle
platforms
i 0.5  / 12

1  0.025
PVT  
i 0.5  / 12 Dxi
i 1 1  0.10
m
MNP
LA
PHX
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
MNP
LA
PHX
Innovation for Our Energy Future
Post-Automotive: Max Selling Price
•
Created simple model for
computing maximum repurposed
battery selling price based on new
battery manufacturing cost
forecasts and computed health
factors
•
Found a range of maximum
repurposed battery selling prices
of $44/kWh-nameplate to
$180/kWh-nameplate
New Battery
Price
Second Use
DOD
60%
$250/kWh
50%
60%
$150/kWh
50%
Max Repurposed
Battery Selling Price
Vehicle
Health Factor
BEV75
PHEV20
0.33
0.29
$73/kWh
BEV75
0.72
$180/kWh
PHEV20
0.65
$163/kWh
BEV75
0.33
0.29
$50/kWh
$44/kWh
0.72
$108/kWh
0.65
$98/kWh
PHEV20
BEV75
PHEV20
9
$83/kWh
Innovation for Our Energy Future
Post-Automotive: Supply
•
Collected PEV sales
projections and developed
two PEV deployment
scenarios
•
Applied calculated battery
lifetimes, 2U DODs, etc. to
previous PEV deployment
scenarios to create 2U
capacity availability
scenarios
•
Suggests that rolling
supplies of available 2U
battery capacity could range
from 32.2 GWh to 1.01 TWh
~45% of
2014 sales
~10% of
2014 sales
Max Deployment Scenario
– 31x difference in rolling
supply is primarily a result of
our 4.5x difference in PEV
deployments, 16.7 to 27.8
kWh range of installed
capacity, and 3 to 10 year
range of 2U battery life.
10
Innovation for Our Energy Future
Motivation, Objective, & Approach
Automotive Service Analysis
Post-Automotive Assessments
Repurposing Costs Analysis
Applications Analysis
Conclusions
11NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC.
Repurposing Costs: Economics
•
A detailed economic model of a
repurposing business has been
created. It includes:
– Local, regional, and national battery
collection options
– Floor plan that scales with module
size and requested facility
throughput
– Capital equipment purchases
(battery cyclers, work stations, fork
lifts, etc.)
– Labor expenses (technicians,
supervisors, human resources, etc.)
– Cell fault rate and its effect on facility
yield
– Return on investment requirements
•
Tool is publically available on our
B2U website:
http://www.nrel.gov/transportation/
energystorage/use.html
12
Innovation for Our Energy Future
Repurposing Costs: Primary Findings
• Selling price
(alternatively, the buying
price) has a big impact
on repurposing costs.
• A regional facility
operating at ~1 GWh/yr
of retired automotive
batteries (~45,000
BEVs) appears optimal
13
Innovation for Our Energy Future
Repurposing Costs: Primary Findings
•
The cost of buying batteries is huge
relative to other expenses, even in our
lowest battery cost scenarios
•
Aside from purchasing batteries, labor
costs constitute the majority of remaining
repurposing costs
•
Minimizing technician labor costs via
reduced handling time requirements is
key to minimizing repurposing costs.
– This will force repurposing of modules
without replacing single faulty cells
•
Our minimum cost scenario suggests
that $20/kWh-nameplate repurposing
costs and $40/kWh-nameplate selling
prices are possible
14
Innovation for Our Energy Future
Motivation, Objective, & Approach
Automotive Service Analysis
Post-Automotive Assessments
Repurposing Costs Analysis
Applications Analysis
Conclusions
15NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC.
Applications: 2U Battery Metrics
• Based on our previous analyses, here’s our expectations
for 2U battery cost and performance
Metric
Available energy per kg
Value
75-90 Wh/kg
Available energy per L
(module level)
58-69 Wh/L
Cost per available kWh
(module level)
$67-360/kWh
Cost per throughput kWh
$0.022-0.304/kWh
(module level)
Rolling supply of available
energy
32.3 GWh to 1.01 TWh
16
Notes
Assumes BOL specific energy of 115 Wh/kg
and 50%–60% energy availability in second
use
Assumes BOL energy density of 150 Wh/L
and 50-60% energy availability in second
use
Assumes $40–$180/kWh repurposed battery
selling price based on BOL nameplate
energy, translated to available energy in
second use assuming 50%–60% DOD is
employed
Applies median second use lifetime
expectations for BEV75 and PHEV20
batteries originally operated in Los Angeles,
then operated at either 50% or 60% DOD in
their second life, to cost per available kWh
computed above.
See Section 3.3 of final report
Innovation for Our Energy Future
Applications: Grid Connected Storage
• Analyzed grid connected applications using data from
Sandia and EPRI reports
• Found that high value markets exist, but have small market
sizes (saturate quickly with competing technology)
17
Innovation for Our Energy Future
Applications: Grid Connected Storage
• What about lower value markets with large market
potential?
– Less likely these markets can be served by competing tech due
to lower value
– Larger market size more likely to adequately sink the full supply
of 2U batteries
• These applications can be grouped as follows:
– Behind-the-Meter: Demand charge and time of use energy
management
– Utility Peaker Plant Replacement: Capacity firming and
energy shifting
18
Innovation for Our Energy Future
Applications: Behind-the-Meter Storage
•
A study of 98 commercial and
industrial facilities finds that
behind-the-meter storage can
offer encouraging payback
periods.
40
No. of Facilities
•
The most economically
advantageous system
configurations favor small
durations and energy levels in the
absence of incentives.
30
20
10
0
0.005
0.01
0.03
0.05
0.07
Energy Fraction
•
With incentives for longer duration
systems, this market could
exceed 50 GWh, but is
susceptible to competing
technologies in the near term.
Full report available online at:
25
0.1
15
20
No. of Facilities
•
240 min
120 min
60 min
40 min
30 min
System Duration
0.02
10
15
10
5
5
http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy15osti/
63162.pdf
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
Payback-period-minimal Battery Energy (kWh)
19
0
0
50
100
150
Payback-period-minimal Battery Power (kW)
Innovation for Our Energy Future
Applications: Peaker Plant Replacement
•
Using batteries to replace
peaker plants could provide
a much larger market, but
offers less value per kWh
•
We analyzed the value of
peaker plant operation and
BOS costs of such a system
and found that some fraction
of this market does appear
economically viable
•
Geographical and temporal
variance in plant operation
value, as well as accounting
for systems benefits and
effects of limited storage
duration present challenges
to better quantifying the
value and market potential of
this application
20
Innovation for Our Energy Future
Applications: Peaker Plant Case Study
•
Investigated better SOC management strategies to enable larger
DOD and extended life under a more realistic peaker plant duty cycle.
•
Compared supply of B2U batteries operated as such to EIA forecast
for future peaker plant demand, and found that the market could
easily consume the B2U battery stock.
•
Compared value of plant
operation to repurposing
costs and found that the
economics work: After
supporting the required
cost of repurposing,
~$21/kWh-nameplate
in salvage value can
be provided to the
automotive owner.
21
Innovation for Our Energy Future
Motivation, Objective, & Approach
Automotive Service Analysis
Post-Automotive Assessments
Repurposing Costs Analysis
Applications Analysis
Conclusions
22NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC.
Conclusions: Answered Questions
•
When will used automotive batteries become available, and how healthy
will they be?
–
•
What is required to repurpose used automotive batteries, and how much
will it cost?
–
•
We expect PEV batteries to be available only at the end of the original vehicle’s service life
with ~70% of its initial capacity.
Cost-optimal repurposing facilities will likely service modules from a single model of PEV and
operate on a regional level to minimize repurposing costs. When the processes are
optimized, repurposing costs could fall below $20/kWh-nameplate.
How will repurposed automotive batteries be used, how long will they last,
and what is their value?
–
Peaker plant replacement service appears best matched to the cost and availability of 2U
batteries. When optimized for this service, 2U battery life could exceed 10 years, cycling
less than once per day with discharge durations greater than one hour.
–
The value to the original owner is restricted to eliminating end of service costs , but the value
to the broader community could be significant: reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and
fossil fuel consumption, decreased cost and increased reliability of electricity service, and
deferral of battery recycling.
23
Innovation for Our Energy Future
Conclusions: Sensitivities
• Availability of Onboard Diagnostic Data: Critical to
minimizing repurposing costs.
• Second Use Battery Lifetime: Battery degradation in
the real-world for different chemistries and usage
conditions could vary.
• ESS BOS and Installation Costs: A large fraction of
total costs in our peaker plant replacement example.
• Value and Market Size of Applications: Highly
variable between now and when 2U batteries become
available in large quantity.
24
Innovation for Our Energy Future
Closing Thoughts
• While our analyses suggest that B2U has little ability to
reduce the upfront cost of PEVs, it can eliminate end-ofservice costs for the automotive battery owner and provide
low- to zero-emission peaking services to electric utilities,
reducing cost, use of fossil fuels, and greenhouse gas
emissions.
• Additional questions remain to be answered. If they can be
addressed, it is quite possible that B2U could become an
important part of both the automotive and electricity
industries.
• The authors are hopeful that government, industry, and
academia will recognize these benefits and continue to push
this important research area forward.
25
Innovation for Our Energy Future
Acknowledgements
•
This activity is funded by the DOE
Vehicle Technologies Office, Energy
Storage Technology
•
We appreciate the support provided by
DOE program managers
– David Howell
– Brian Cunningham
•
Special thanks to our subcontract team
led by Mike Ferry at the California
Center for Sustainable Energy
•
Technical questions regarding Battery
Second Use should be directed to
Jeremy Neubauer at 303-275-3084 or
jeremy.neubauer@nrel.gov
26
Innovation for Our Energy Future
Thank you!
27NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC.
BMW i Innovation Factory and Battery Second Life
Cliff Fietzek
Manager connected eMobility
BMW i – MORE THAN JUST VEHICLES.
Introduction to BMW i and the role of Battery Second Life in the future of sutainable mobility.
THE STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK FOR FUTURE INDIVIDUAL MOBILITY IS
DRIVEN BY LONG TERM GLOBAL TRENDS.
Environment
Climate change and the subsequent effects
Urbanisation
Politics and Regulations
By 2030, over 60 % of world population
will live in cities
CO2 - and fleet regulations,
Restrictions on imports
DRIVING FACTORS
Economics
Culture
Customer Expectations
Shortage of resources, increase in the price of fossil fuels
Sustainable mobility as part of a modern urban lifestyle;
assumption of social responsibility
Changing values
Page 2
THE FUTURE OF MOBILITY HAS JUST STARTED: BMW i3 AND BMW i8.
Vehicle:
Drive-train:
Battery:
BMW i8
EV Purpose Design
LifeDrive Lightweight Concept
2 + 2 Seater
Small combustion engine
Plug-in Hybrid plus electric engine
Lithium-Ion battery
Liquid cooling
Vehicle:
Drive-train:
Battery:
BMW i3
EV Purpose Design
LifeDrive Lightweight Concept
4 Seater
Electric engine
Lithium-Ion battery
Liquid cooling
Page 3
THE HOLISTIC APPROACH OF BMW i.
A CAR IS NOT ENOUGH.
THE BMW I3 PRODUCTION:
SETTING THE NEW BENCHMARK FOR SUSTAINABILITY
 50% less greenhouse gas in the BMW i CFRP- Process Chain in comparison
to conventional production
 80% of Aluminum in the vehicle is repurposed scrap aluminum or produced
using regenerative energy
 25% of Thermoplastic from recycled or renewable raw materials
 Use of recycled materials also for surfaces with premium feel
 The production of the BMW i Vehicles in Leipzig use 50% less energy and
70% less fresh water than conventional Vehicle production.
 100% of the energy used for the production comes from renewable
resources.
BMW i – mehr als nur Autos, Dr. Julian Weber, 21.10.2014
A SUSTAINABLE CO2 FOOTPRINT IST NOT POSSIBLE WITH HIGH CAPACITY
BATTERIES BY TODAY .
Tons CO2 Emmisions
[t CO2e]
BEV with 500km Reichweite*
BMW 118d
BMW i3*
150.000 km
Supplier
Production
Production
BMW Group
Use-Phase
(Well-to-Wheel)
Recycling
* EU-Energy-mix
Page 6
INNOVATION FACTORY BMW I.
40 MIO. KM EV CUSTOMER ANALYSIS.
Identify Potentials
Define
Requirements
Develop
Concepts
PROJECT I BATTERY 2ND LIFE.
IDENTIFYING A SUSTAINABLE WAY TO USE VEHICLE BATTERIES AS LONG
AS THEY CAN PERFORM.
PROJECTS
SYSTEM UNDERSTANDING
Opportunities to Support E-mobility
Technical Feasibility and Requirements
Market Development and Barriers
TECHNICAL KNOWLEDGE
STRATEGIC BUSINESS DIRECTION
•Extended life cycle management for BEV and PHEV
Batteries to realise maximum economic utilisation
before recycling processes.
•Ensure the sustainability of the functional chain of
project i vehicles from optimised production strategy to
the end of life procedures.
•Enable new energy market business options to support
a higher use of renewable energy sources with high
performance storage solutions.
•Maximize Vehicle battery development know-how
MARKET EVALUATIONS
APPLICATIONS FOR STATIONARY BATTERY SYSTEMS.
DELIVERY TO DIFFERENT REQUIREMENTS IS POSSIBLE THROUGH OPTIMIZED SYSTEM
ARCHITECTURES AND OPERATING STRATEGIES.
Technical scalability (kWh)/ Integration of i3 modules/ packs.
5-150kWh
HESS/ HEMS
(~5kWh, Modul)
SIZE (small/ medium/ large scale)
HESS/ HEMS Charging
Infrastructure EV
(~21kWh+, pack(s))
FACILITY
MANAGEMENT
(>50kWh, packs)
150-500+ kWh
ENERGY MARKET
(>500kWh, packs)
Page 9
BATTERY 2ND LIFE (B2L).
PROOF OF CONCEPT WITH PILOTPROJECTS IN ALL SEGMENTS.
Integration renewables
Small Systems(~10 kWh)
Peak Shaving / UPS / EV Charging
Mid Size (~100 kWh)
Regulation Energy / VPP/ Micro Grid
Grid Scale (~1 MWh)
BMS X
BMS C
BMS B
BMS A
BATTERY
SYSTEM
DEVELOPMENT OF STANDARDIZED INTERFACES ENABLES MAXIMUM
MARKET PENETRATION WITH MINIMAL COST.
STANDARDIZED B2L BATTERY INTERFACE
RENEWABLE INTEGRATION
CONSUMER ENERGY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS (HEMS)
APPLICATION
(Examples)
POWER QUALITY
UPS
DISTRIBUTION UPGRADE DEFERRAL
BLACK START
TRANSMISSION UPGRADE DEFERRAL
Utility/Grid
Operator
Source:Panasonic
Small System (10s kWh)
Medium System (100s kWh)
Large System (1 MWh+)
Page 11
VALUE CHAIN FOR BATTERY ENERGY SYSTEMS.
UNDERSTANDING POTENTIALS IN THE VALUE CHAIN.
2nd LIFE BATTERY
SYSTEM
COMPONENT
SUPPLIERS
SYSTEM
INTEGRATOR
SYSTEM SUPPLIER
SYSTEM OPERATOR
MARKET/
CUSTOMER
Inverter
System Architecture
Commissioning
Use Strategy
Regulations
System Controller
System Assembly
O&M
System Req
Gov Policies
BOS Components
System Safety
System Warranty
Application
Component Sourcing/ Req
Def
Decommissioning
Profit Potential
VEH DEV
LOGISTICS
Battery System
BATTERY
Battery System
BMS
BMS
BMW
PREP
System Integration
Customer
COST OPTIMIZATION
STANDARDIZATION/ SCALABILITY
POTENTIAL STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS AND NEW BUISNESS OPPORTUNITIES
Seite 12
BATTERY STORAGE SYSTEMS PORTFOLIO.
PROJECTS IN RELEVANT SCALES AND MARKET-SEGMENTS.
HAMBURG (Vattenfall)
Fast Charging
PV-Solar-Buffering
BMW Munich
Home Storage
16kW/ 30kWh
50kW/ 100kWh
4,6kW/ 2-8kWh
HAMBURG (Vattenfall)
Frequency Regulation PRL
Virtual Power Plant
TECH OFFICE M.V.
Facility Management
Demand Response
2MW/ 2,4MWh
2015
100kW/ 220kWh
C.LAB SHANGHAI
Facility Management
UPS, EV-Charging
University SanDiego
MicroGrid Integration
BMW FIZ
EV Charging
100kW/ 160kWh
US EAST COAST
Frequency Regulation
UPS, HESS, Facility Mgt.
30KW- 1MW
PLANT LEIPZIG
Peak Shaving / Flexibility Management
250kW/ 305kWh
50kW/50kWh
16kW/ 60kWh
Page 13
SUMMARY.
The BMW i approach of considering sustainability throughout the entire vehicle lifecycle includes
the use and re-use of high voltage batteries (B2L). The main benefits are:
 B2L allows improved utilization of renewable energies.
 B2L means re-use rather than recycling.
 B2L offsets recycling costs.
 B2L stabilizes the residual value of the vehicle.
 B2L can maximize the value of the EV Storage System
In order to verify these benefits, BMW is proving B2L
concepts in practical applications of different size
in different markets.
BMW i – More Than Vehilcles, 08.12.2014
Page 14
THANK YOU.
BMW I – THE FUTURE OF E-MOBILITY.
EVSE Metering – Weights and Measures Updates
EPRI – National Electric Transportation Infrastructure Working Council
March 25, 2015
Kristin Macey, Director
Division of Measurement Standards
California Department of Food & Agriculture
1
CA Division of Measurement Standards (DMS)
Multiple Programs Designed to:
Ensure the accuracy of commercial weighing and measuring devices Verify the quantity of both bulk and packaged commodities Enforce the quality, advertising and labeling standards for most fuels and automotive products
Protection for Consumers, Businesses, and the Environment 2
Utility Submeter Testing Equipment ‐ Examples
Probewell Standard with a Mechanical Rotation Disk Meter
Knopp FS‐8 Standard connected to a laboratory test board
3
U.S. Weights and Measures Standards
Who
• National Conference on Weights and Measures (NCWM) includes industry, regulators, federal government, international organizations
What
• No Federal Weights and Measures Laws in the United States ‐ each state must adopt model laws and regulations
How
• National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is non‐regulatory, and serves as technical advisors to NCWM and states who enforce laws
4
NIST Handbook 130
2013
• NCWM adopts a uniform U.S. method of sale for the retail sales of electricity sold as a vehicle fuel
1/01/2014
• Effective when published in National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Handbook 130, Uniform Laws and Regulations in the Areas of Legal Metrology and Engine Fuel Quality
Ongoing
• Enforceable by states which have legal authority to regulate (i.e., not in conflict with any other state law or regulation)
5
Adopt NIST HB 130 by Reference
6
Possible Jurisdiction of W & M
7
Uniform Regulation for Method of Sale
Definitions
Units/ Labeling
Street Signs
Advertising
• Electricity as Vehicle Fuel, EVSE, Fixed Service, Variable Service, Nominal Power
• Kilowatt‐hour (kWh) or megajoule (MJ)
• Whole cents/tenths of a cent/free; level of charging; AC or DC; if variable describe conditions; FTC Labeling; NEC NFPA 70
• Price per kWh or Free; Level; AC or DC
• Much more lenient than Gas Station requirements
8
California Fueling Station Signage
9
Dispenser Labeling
10
EVSE in Sacramento, CA 11
EVSE in Sacramento, CA 12
EVSE in Sacramento, CA 13
EVSE in Sacramento, CA 14
Type Evaluation of Fuel Dispensers
CTEP
• California Type Evaluation Program (CTEP) – OR –
NTEP
• National Type Evaluation Program (NTEP)
• California is one of five participating state laboratories
One‐of‐a‐
Kind
• Individual installation determines unique features
• Approval is valid for single location only
15
Type Evaluation Criteria
16
Type Evaluation Process
Application
Evaluation
Certificate
Choose CTEP or NTEP
Communication and participation are key to success
Certificate drafted by lab and reviewed by applicant
Failures/Corrections
Certificate published
Submit application, fee,
accompanying material
Administrative review, lab assignment
CTEP and NTEP websites
17
Type Evaluation Certificate
Application: For use in dispensing product, e.g., electricity, at retail facility
Identification: Location of ID badge including make/model
Sealing: Provision to provide security for meter and/or components
Test Conditions: method and equipment used to test meter
Criteria: current edition of NIST HB 44
Photos: Include photos of device and unique features, sealing provisions –
to deter “knock‐offs”
18
Commercial Device Requirements
Approved
• Must either be CTEP or NTEP approved
Registered
• Check with Jurisdiction: In California, must be registered with the County Sealer
Sealed
• Tested and sealed for accuracy and other requirements (NIST Handbook 44)
19
Registered Service Agencies
Registered
• Companies that install or repair commercial measuring devices for hire
Licensed
• Individuals (service agents) that perform work for their company
Reporting
• In California, work performed must be reported to County Sealer within 24 hours
20
Reference Information
NIST http://www.nist.gov/pml/wmd/
U.S. National Work Group for EVSE http://www.nist.gov/pml/wmd/usnwg‐evfs.cfm
NCWM and NTEP http://www.ncwm.net/
CA DMS and CTEP http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/dms/
Kristin Macey California Division of Measurement Standards
6790 Florin Perkins Road, Suite 100
Sacramento, CA 95828
(916) 229‐3000
kristin.macey@cdfa.ca.gov
21
Questions
22
National Electric Code – 2017 “First Draft”
 EPRI NEC Task Force Report
 Greg Nieminski, Chair
 March 25, 2015
Closing Date for Online Submittal Nov. 7, 2014
Code Panel (First Draft) Meeting January, 2015
First Draft Circulated for Public Comment
July 17, 2015
Comment Closing Date for Online Submittal Sept. 25, 2015
Time Line for 2017 NEC
Code Panel (Second Draft) Meeting November 2015
Panel & Correlating Committee Second Draft Ballots January – March 2015
Post Second Draft Report April 8, 2016
NFPA Technical Meeting for documents with certified amending motions June 2016
Documents with no motions will be forwarded directly to the NFPA Standards Council for action on issuance. Time Line for 2017 NEC
CMP12 met in January, 2015 to review the comments made for the 2017 edition of the NEC. A preliminary “First Draft” report of the panel actions was drafted for circulation and vote by the Panel members and Correlating Committee. Following the publication of the “First Draft” (previously ROC) report in July, 2015, additional comments can be made in response to CMP 12’s initial actions.
NEC CMP 12 Meeting For Article 625 Electric Vehicle Charging Systems, CMP 12’s preliminary actions were:
625.1 Scope ‐ Added wireless charging systems ‐
Accepted
625.2 Definitions:
• Added terms for wireless charging systems • Redefined EV Coupler as parts making conductive connection
• Added Definitions for “Fixed in place”, “Fastened in place” (EVSE) & “Portable”
NEC CMP 12 Meeting
625 Various Articles – Modified articles to include wireless charging
625.4 Voltages – Added 1000 volts ac
625.10 EV Coupler – Removed “Polarization & Noninterchangeability”
625.17(B)(1) Output Cable to EV: • Added (2) Output cable to Primary Pad
• Reinstated reference to ampacity tables (Article 400) for cables
625.19 Automatic De‐Energization of Cable – Redefined exemption as for Portable EVSE only.
NEC CMP 12 Meeting
625.44 Equipment Connection – Redefined connection to premise wiring in terms of “Portable”, “Stationary & fastened in place” & Fixed Equipment . Defined means of connection. 625.47 – Added permission for use of more than one feeder or branch circuit to supply EVSE
625.48 Interactive Systems – Clarified parts of system to be Listed
625.50 Location – Added exception for Portable EVSE
NEC CMP 12 Meeting
Added:
Part IV Wireless Power Transfer Equipment
625.101 (New) Grounding – Addresses grounding of exposed metal parts.
625.102 (New) Construction – Addresses:
(A) Type (i.e. Pedestal, wall/pole mounted, or raised concrete pad.
(B) Mounting Height
(C) Primary Pad (installation & enclosure rating)
(D) Protection of Output Cable
(E) Other Wiring Systems
NEC CMP 12 Meeting
Article 626 Electrified Truck Parking Spaces
626.31 (C) Receptacles – Added 20 A, 1000 V, 3 Ø, 3‐
pole, 4‐wire pin & Sleeve type receptacle for 1000 V applications. Panel added 1000 V, 3 Ø systems.
626.32 Overhead Gantry or Cable Management System
(A) Ratings – Added 20 A, 1000 V, 3 Ø systems
(C) Attachment Plugs/Cord Connectors – Added devices for 20 A, 1000 V, 3 Ø systems
NEC CMP 12 Meeting
Next Step for EPRI NEC Task Force:
After publication of the “First Draft” report in July, 2015, the NEC TF will: • Meet to review proposals contained in the report • Prepare comments in response to CMP 12’s initial actions
• Submit additional comments no later than September 25, 2015
• Attend and observe CMP12’s actions re Second Draft (previously ROP) report
EPRI Task Force ‐ 2015
For additional Information regarding the 2017 NEC, go to NFPA’s website, Codes and Standards section, NFPA 70: National Electric Code, Next Edition:
(copy & paste)
http://www.nfpa.org/aboutthecodes/?mode=code&code=70
2017 NEC Information
March 2015 IEC Project Stages and Timetable for Standards Development Project Stage Associated Document Name Abbreviation Minimum Timeline (for comment and/or voting) Proposal stage New Work Item Proposal NWIP 3 months for voting Preparatory stage Working draft WD 12 months recommended Committee stage Committee draft CD 2‐4 months for comment Enquiry stage Enquiry draft IEC/CDV ISO/DIS 5 months for translation (2), comment and voting (3) Approval stage Final Draft International Standard FDIS 2 months for voting Publication stage International Standard IEC or ISO/IEC 1.5 ‐2 months Page |1
March 2015 Key:  In Publications  Published -  New -  Status Change * Update Needed
Projects:
IEC TC69 Charging Station (EVSE) Standards
Stage IEC Edition NWIP Working Draft CD NEXT CD (CD#) CDV FDIS Publication 61851‐1 3 ‐ 2012‐07 (3rd) 2014‐07 (3rd) 2014‐11 2015‐03 2015‐09 61851‐21‐1 1 ‐ 2012‐07 (3rd) 2014‐09 2014‐11 2015‐01 2016‐03 61851‐21‐2 1 ‐ 2012‐07 2012‐08 (3rd) 2014‐06 2015‐09 61851‐22 1 ‐ 2010‐02 2013‐05 To be withdrawn – Consolidated into 61851‐1 61851‐23, 61851‐24 2 MT5 RR 2015‐06 2015‐07 2016‐02 2016‐11 2017‐03 61851‐3‐1, ‐2, ‐3, ‐4 1 2013‐01 2014‐08 (2nd) 2015‐01 2016‐12 2017‐07 2017‐12 Page |2
March 2015 IEC TC69 Charging Station (EVSE) Standards 61851‐1: Electric vehicle conductive charging system ‐ Part 1: General requirements 61851‐21‐1: Electric vehicle conductive charging system ‐ Part 21‐1 Electric vehicle onboard charger EMC requirements for conductive connection to a.c./d.c. supply 61851‐21‐2: Electric vehicle conductive charging system ‐ Part 21‐1: EMC requirements for OFF board electric vehicle charging systems 61851‐22: Electric vehicle conductive charging system ‐ Part 22: a.c. electric vehicle charging station 61851‐23: Electric vehicle conductive charging system ‐ Part 2‐3: D.C electric vehicle charging station 61851:24: Electric vehicle conductive charging system ‐ Part 24: Digital communication between a dc EV charging station and an electric vehicle for control of d.c. charging 61851‐3 (series): (NEW) Electric Vehicles conductive power supply system – Part 3‐1: General Requirements for Light Electric Vehicles (LEV) AC and DC conductive power supply systems Part 3‐2: Requirements for Light Electric Vehicles (LEV) DC off‐board conductive power supply systems Part 3‐3: Requirements for Light Electric Vehicles (LEV) battery swap systems Part 3‐4: Requirements for Light Electric Vehicles (LEV) communication Part 3‐5: Requirements for Light Electric Vehicles (LEV) communication ‐ Pre‐defined communication parameters Part 3‐6, Requirements for Light Electric Vehicles (LEV) communication ‐ Voltage converter unit Part 3‐7, Requirements for Light Electric Vehicles (LEV) communication ‐ Battery system Page |3
March 2015 IEC SC23H Standards EV Couplers Stage IEC Edition 62196‐2 2 62196‐3‐1 1 62196‐4 1 NWIP ‐ Working Draft 2013‐12 CD NEXT CD (CD#) CDV FDIS Publication 2014‐08 2015‐03 2016‐06 Project closed 2014‐09 2013‐07 2014‐07 2015‐03 2015‐09 TS62196‐3‐1 New 2014‐03 Failed TS62196‐3‐1 New 2nd NP 2014‐09 Failed Page |4
March 2015 IEC SC23H Standards EV Couplers 62196‐1: Plugs, socket‐outlets, vehicle connectors and vehicle inlets ‐ Conductive charging of electric vehicles ‐ Part 1: General requirements 62196‐2: Plugs, socket‐outlets, vehicle connectors and vehicle inlets ‐ Conductive charging of electric vehicles ‐ Part 2: Dimensional compatibility and interchangeability requirements for a.c. pin and contact‐tube accessories 62196‐3: Plugs, socket‐outlets, and vehicle couplers ‐ conductive charging of electric vehicles ‐ Part 3: Dimensional compatibility and interchangeability requirements for DC and AC/DC pin and tube‐type contact vehicle couplers (excludes couplers with common contacts for AC/DC power transfer) 62196‐3‐1: Plugs, socket‐outlets, and vehicle couplers ‐ conductive charging of electric vehicles ‐ Part 3: Dimensional compatibility and interchangeability requirements for DC and AC/DC pin and tube‐type contact vehicle couplers with common contacts for AC/DC) 62196‐4: (NEW) Plugs, socket‐outlets, and vehicle couplers ‐ conductive charging of electric vehicles – Part 4: Dimensional compatibility and interchangeability requirements for AC, DC and AC/DC vehicle couplers for Class II or Class III light electric vehicles (LEV). TS62196‐3‐1: Plugs, socket‐outlets, and vehicle couplers ‐ conductive charging of electric vehicles ‐ Part 3‐1: Dimensional compatibility and interchangeability requirements for a.c./d.c. pin and contact‐tube vehicle couplers ‐ Combined a.c./d.c. accessories for use with IEC62196‐2 Type 1 and Type 2 a.c. rated accessories and other combined a.c./d.c. accessories, for d.c. charging
Page |5
March 2015 IEC SC23H (Non‐Road) Standards (Shore to Ship Connectors) Stage IEC Edition NWIP Working Draft CD NEXT CD (CD#) CDV FDIS Publication 62613‐1 1 Published 2011‐06
62613‐2 1 Published 2011‐11
60309‐5 1 2014‐08 2014‐12 2016‐03 62613‐1: Plugs, socket‐outlets and ship couplers for high‐voltage shore connection systems (HVSC‐Systems) ‐ Part 1: General requirements 62613‐2: Plugs, socket‐outlets and ship couplers for high‐voltage shore connection systems (HVSC‐SYSTEMS) ‐ Part 2: Dimensional compatibility and interchangeability requirements for accessories to be used by various types of ships 60309‐5: Plugs, socket‐outlets and ship couplers for low‐voltage shore connection systems (LVSC‐Systems) – Up to 1000 volts, 500 A, (max. 1 MW) Page |6
March 2015 IEC TC69 Wireless Charging Standards Stage IEC Edition NWIP Working Draft CD NEXT CD (CD#) CDV FDIS Publication 61980‐1 1 2011‐07 2012‐12 2013‐04 2013‐11 2014‐02 2015‐02 2015‐08 61980‐2 1 2012‐12 2013‐08 2014‐11 2015‐07 2016‐07 61980‐3 1 2012‐12 2013‐08 2014‐11 2015‐07 2016‐07 61980‐1: Electric vehicle wireless power transfer systems (WPT) ‐ Part 1: General requirements 61980‐2: Electric vehicle wireless power transfer (WPT) systems ‐ Part 2 specific requirements for communication between electric road vehicle (EV) and infrastructure with respect to wireless power transfer (WPT) systems 61980‐3: Electric vehicle wireless power transfer (WPT) systems ‐ Part 3 specific requirements for the magnetic field power transfer systems. Page |7
March 2015 IEC TC69 Road Vehicles – Vehicle To Grid Communications Interface Standards Stage ISO Edition NWIP Working Draft CD NEXT CD (CD#) CDV FDIS Publication 15118‐1 1 Published 2013‐04
15118‐2 1 Published 2013‐03
15118‐3 1 2011‐10 2012‐11 2014‐05 2015‐02 2015‐04 15118‐4 1 (2nd) 2014‐07 (3rd) 2015‐07 15118‐5 1 2014‐08 (2nd) 2015‐06 15118‐6 1 2014‐07 (2nd) 2015‐03 2015‐05 2016‐08 Page |8
March 2015 IEC TC69 Road Vehicles – Vehicle To Grid Communications Interface Standards ISO 15118‐1: Road vehicles ‐ Vehicle to grid communication interface ‐ Part 1: General information and use‐case definition ISO 15118‐2: Road vehicles – Vehicle to Grid communication Interface ‐ Part 2: Technical protocol description and Open Systems Interconnections (OSI) layer requirements ISO 15118‐3: Road Vehicles ‐ Vehicle to grid communication interface ‐ Part 3: Physical layer and Data Link layer requirements ISO 15118‐4 Ed.1: Road vehicles — Vehicle to grid communication interface — Part 4: Network and application protocol conformance test ISO 15118‐5 Ed.1: Road vehicles ‐ Vehicle to grid ccommunication interface ‐ Part 5: Physical and data link layer conformance test ISO 15118‐6 Ed. 1.0: Road vehicles ‐ Vehicle to grid communication interface ‐ Part 6: General information and use‐case definition for wireless communication Page |9
March 2015 ISO/IEC JTC TC22/SC21/Electrically Propelled Road Vehicle Standards Stage ISO/IEC Edition NWIP 17409 1 2012 Working Draft CD NEXT CD (CD#) CDV (CDV#) FDIS Publication 2012‐09 (2) 2013‐02 (2) 2014‐03 2015‐01 2015‐05 ISO/IEC 17409 Electrically propelled road vehicles ‐ Connection to an external electric power supply ‐ Safety specifications P a g e | 10
J1772™ Task Force
Update
John Halliwell
Principal Project Manager, Chair J1772
EPRI IWC Tempe, AZ
March 25, 2015
© 2015 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
J1772 Status
 Task force has worked to address a total of 93 comments
since September of 2014
 4 comments remain to be resolved
– 2 related to the connector
– 1 related to connector locking timing
– 1 related to the pilot wire duty cycle vs. current tolerance
 Goal is to resolve these comments at a March 31st meeting
 Submit for a 14 day ballot in the task force in early April
 Resolve any comments and then submit for a 28 day ballot
in the Hybrid Committee
 If accepted, should be published July-August timeframe
 Work on version 7 document to begin in late summer or early
fall
2
© 2015 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Together…Shaping the Future of Electricity
3
© 2015 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
SAE PEV Communication & Interoperability Task Force Status
IWC Meeting
March 25, 2015
3/25/2015
Rich Scholer ‐ SAE Communication Task Force Status
1
Background
3/25/2015
Rich Scholer ‐ SAE Communication Task Force Status
2
SAE Communication Background
Major Documents and Functions
1. J2836™ - Use Cases (establishes requirements)
 Technical Information Report (TIR)
2. J2847 – Messages, diagrams, etc. (derived from the use
case requirements)
 -2 is Standard and others are Recommended Practice (RP)
3. J2931 – Communication Requirements & Protocol
 TIR
4. J2953 – Interoperability
 RP
5. J3072 – Interconnection Requirements for Onboard, UtilityInteractive, Inverter Systems
 Standard
3/25/2015
Rich Scholer ‐ SAE Communication Task Force Status
3
Document Interaction
Use Cases
Applications & Signals
Smart Charging
(U1 – U5)
J2836/1™
J2847/1
DC Charging
J2836/2™
J2847/2
Protocol
Requirements
J2931/1
PLC
(BB OFDM)
J2931/4
DER
Mode
PEV as
Distributed Energy
Resource (DER)
(U6 & U7)
J2836/3™
Diagnostics
J2836/4™
J2847/3
J3072
On-board
Inverter
J2847/4
Internet
Customer to PEV
and HAN/NAN
(U8 & U9)
J2836/5™
J2847/5
Wireless Power
Flow
J2836/6™
J2847/6
J2931/5
J2931/6
IEEE 802.11p
J2953/1 Interoperability, J2953/2 Test Procedures
J2931/7 Security
3/25/2015
Rich Scholer ‐ SAE Communication Task Force Status
4
Current Status
3/25/2015
Rich Scholer ‐ SAE Communication Task Force Status
5
Activate SAE Documents ‐ 2014
1.
J2836/3™ ‐ V2 ‐ Use Cases for the PEV Communicating as a Distributed Energy Resource (DER) 2. J2836/5™ ‐ V1 ‐ Use Cases for Customer to PEV
3. J2847/2 – V3 ‐ DC Charging messages/signals
4. J2847/6 – V1 – Wireless Charging messages/signals
5. J2931/1 – V3 ‐ Protocol Requirements
6. J2931/6 – V1 ‐ Digital Communication for Wireless Charging Plug‐in Electric Vehicles
7. J2931/7 – V1 ‐ Security
8. J2953/1 – V2 ‐ Interoperability requirements
9. J2953/2 – V2 – Interoperability Plan and Report
10. J3072 ‐ V1 ‐ Interconnection Requirements for Onboard, Utility‐Interactive, Inverter Systems
3/25/2015
Rich Scholer ‐ SAE Communication Task Force Status
6
V2G, DER, and Reverse Power Flow Standards
Hank McGlynn
J2836/3™ V2 - Use Cases for PEV as a DER
Started meetings since J3072 is in ballot stage
• Find and fix errors in Version 1
• Provide link to J3072 for onboard inverter
• Establish role of EVSE inverter
– EVSE to PEV clearly required to define J2847/2 DER Mode
– Should EVSE to Utility be covered? To what extent?
J3072 V1 - Interconnection Requirements for Onboard, Utility-Interactive, Inverter
Systems
• Completed Hybrid ballot March 1st.
• Completed 14 day Affirmation due to comments March 18th.
• In SAE formatting, then MVC 28 day ballot, then publication.
J2847/2 V4 - Communication Between Plug-In Vehicles and Off-Board DC Chargers
• V3 is completing MVC 28 ballot that ends April 6th.
• Barring no comments, will be published then V4 reopened for DER effects.
• include harmonization with ISO 18118-2 & -3 that have some variation to the DIN
SPEC 70121 that V3 included.
• include some Wireless Charging info to clarify items in J2847/6 since J2847/2 is
the basis for the additional WPT messages/signals.
3/25/2015
Rich Scholer ‐ SAE Communication Task Force Status
7
J2836/5™ V1 - Use Cases for Customer to PEV com
(Telematics) – George Bellino
• Document is updated and in ballot cycle.
• Hybrid committee ballot ended Feb 25th
with comments.
• 14 Day affirmation ended March 15th.
• Next is SAE formatting, then publication
• J2847/5 (V1) is next for messages and signals.
• J2931/5 (V1) for protocol follows.
3/25/2015
Rich Scholer ‐ SAE Communication Task Force Status
8
DC charging
Rich Scholer/Papiya Bagchi/Jim Allen
• J2847/2 ‐ V3 – DC charging messages and signals
– Started MVC ballot that ends April 6th.
– V4 to reopen for Hank’s DER, harmonization with ISO & WPT effects.
• J2931/1 – V3 – Protocol Requirements
– Published 12‐11‐14
– V4 reopened for Security adds
• J2931/4 – V3 – Broadband PLC
– Published 10‐22‐14
3/25/2015
Rich Scholer ‐ SAE Communication Task Force Status
9
J2847/6 – V1 - Wireless charging messages
Mark Klerer/Peter Thompson
• 2nd Topic to task force ended Jan 19th and several meetings since resolved all comments.
• Hybrid Ballot ends April 12th, then SAE formatting, then MVC ballot, then publication.
• V2 is being planned for some unresolved comments and further harmonization with ISO 15118‐6, 7 & 8.
J2931/6 – V1 ‐ Wireless charging protocol
• Initial document posted and discussions started.
3/25/2015
Rich Scholer ‐ SAE Communication Task Force Status
10
Security
Mike Bilger
• J2931/1 – V4 – Protocol Requirements
– V3 published for DC Charging
– Is reopened to include security updates (high level)
• J2931/7 – V1 – Security
– Restarted and correlating with SGIP comments on J2931/1.
– Progress is slow and more help is needed (any volunteers)?
3/25/2015
Rich Scholer ‐ SAE Communication Task Force Status
11
J2953/1 & /2 – Interoperability
Ted Bohn
• J2953/1 (requirements).
– V1 testing at Intertek (control pilot and prox) is complete and waiting for final report.
– V2 is DC communications plus J1772 V6 changes
• J2953/2 (plan & procedure) – V1 & 2 ‐ Tracking J2953/1 effort.
3/25/2015
Rich Scholer ‐ SAE Communication Task Force Status
12
Summary/Backup
3/25/2015
Rich Scholer ‐ SAE Communication Task Force Status
13
Use Case Document Status ‐ TIR
J2836/1™ ‐ Utility Use Cases
–
V1 Published 2010‐04‐08
J2836/2™ ‐ DC Charging Use Cases
–
V1 Published 2011‐09‐15
J2836/3™ ‐ PEV as a Distributed Energy Resource (DER) Use Cases
–
–
V1 Published 2013‐01‐03
V2 being revised to add requirements for DC RPF for J2847/2 & role of J3072 J2836/4™ ‐ Diagnostics Use Cases
– V1 Started for failures on control pilot and prox, but waiting for J2953/1 & /2 (Interoperability) for more data
J2835/5™ ‐ Customer to PEV Use Cases
– V1 in SAE formatting (3‐16‐15), then published
J2836/6™ ‐ Wireless Charging Use Cases
– V1 Published 5‐3‐13.
3/25/2015
Rich Scholer ‐ SAE Communication Task Force Status
14
Signal/Message Document Status – RP/Standard
J2847/1 ‐ Utility signals/messages
V1 Published 2010‐06‐16, V2 2011‐05‐09, V3 2011‐11‐9, V4 11‐5‐13
–
J2847/2 ‐ DC Charging (Standard)
V1 Published 2011‐10‐21, V2 ‐ 2012‐08‐20 to align with J1772 V5 (DC charging).
V3 in MVC ballot to align with DIN SPEC 70121 Candidate 6a V4 will be started (May, 2015) to cover
–
–
–
–
•
•
•
EVSE inverter with DC RPF (J2836/3 V2) Include ISO/IEC 15118‐2 & ‐3 updates (variations to DIN SPEC 70121)
Include Wireless Charging updates
J2847/3 ‐ PEV as a Distributed Energy Resource (DER)
–
V1 Published 2013‐12‐10
J2847/4 ‐ Diagnostics
–
Started but waiting for J2836/4™ & J2953/1 & /2 (Interoperability)
J2847/5 ‐ Customer to PEV
– Meetings to start soon since J2836/5™ Use Cases are complete.
J2847/6 ‐ Wireless Charging
– V1 in ballot cycle
– V2 planned for unresolved issues from V1 and further alignment with ISO 15118.
3/25/2015
Rich Scholer ‐ SAE Communication Task Force Status
15
Requirements and Protocol Documents ‐ TIR
J2931/1 – Requirements
–
–
–
V1 Published 2012‐01‐24, V2 Published 2012‐09‐07
V3 In ballot cycle ‐ updated for DC Charging V4 Reopened for Security additions
J2931/4 – PowerLine Carrier (PLC) – wired communication protocol
–
–
V1 Published 2012‐07‐26, V2 Published 2013‐11‐14
V3 Published 10‐22‐15 for DC Charging
J2931/5 – Telematics – wireless communication protocol
– Waiting for J2847/5
J2931/6 – Wireless Charging Communication (IEEE 802.11p) wireless charging protocol
– Started meetings
J2931/7 ‐ Security
–
Restarted to align with J2931/1
3/25/2015
Rich Scholer ‐ SAE Communication Task Force Status
16
Interoperability Documents ‐ RP
J2953/1 – Requirements
– V1 Published 2013‐10‐07.
•
V1 started testing for the analogue communications (J1772™ control pilot and prox).
– V2 is addressing digital communication for DC charging
– V3 will include WPT interop
J2953/2 – Test plan
– V1 Published 2014‐01‐22
– V2 Adding V1 updates and DC Charging
– V3 will include WPT interop
3/25/2015
Rich Scholer ‐ SAE Communication Task Force Status
17
On‐board Inverter ‐ Standard
J3072 (V1) – Requirements
• Completed Hybrid ballot March 1st.
• Completed 14 day Affirmation due to comments March 18th.
• In SAE formatting, then MVC 28 day ballot, then publication.
3/25/2015
Rich Scholer ‐ SAE Communication Task Force Status
18
The End
Questions?
3/25/2015
Rich Scholer ‐ SAE Communication Task Force Status
19
Open or Proprietary Networks?
Update on OCPP and OCA for EPRI IWC
Tempe, AZ
March 25, 2015
www.OpenChargeAlliance.org
Embracing Open Standards:
The Mission of Open Charge Alliance • Mission: open, flexible EV charging networks for the next wave of EV adoption worldwide
• Benefits:
• Invites innovation
• De‐risks hardware investments
• Future‐proofs systems
www.OpenChargeAlliance.org
Lessons Learned from Europe: Closed Networks & Genesis of OCPP
• OCPP: Utilities response to failure of proprietary networks
• EU grid companies require mix & match flexibility
• OCPP is now the industry standard in EU
• Active in 50 countries
• Over 30,000 networked installations
www.OpenChargeAlliance.org
Fast Forward to North America: OCPP is Gaining Swift Adoption
• Déjà vu: failure of proprietary networks
• Means stranded assets, costly service interruptions
• As in Europe, site hosts require mix & match flexibility
• OCPP is becoming the standard in North America
• Awareness and acceptance at federal level
• Adoption growing in key markets www.OpenChargeAlliance.org
OCPP Principles
• The protocol description is published and can be obtained free of charge • There are no constraints on the re‐use of the standard • The IP rights to the standard are vested in a not‐
for‐profit organization which operates a completely free access policy • Further development based done by consensus in a open and transparent process where anyone can contribute ideas and participate in the development process.
www.OpenChargeAlliance.org
OCA Governance and structure
• 5 Board Members • Board will grow to 7 members in 2016
• No cost to implement or use (IPR = RANDz)
• Governed by (concise) Policies and Procedures
• Planning and progress towards SDO affiliation(s)
www.OpenChargeAlliance.org
OCPP Evolution and Roadmap
In‐Market
In‐Market
OCPP 1.2
OCPP 1.5
Q2 2015
OCPP 1.6
Q4 2015
OCPP 2.0
www.OpenChargeAlliance.org
OCPP 1.5
•
•
Mature specification
Widely deployed
• 13,000+ charge points under mgmt
• Tens of vendors serving all geos
• Enables choice of hardware and back office
• Satisfies open standards mandates
• De facto European standard
• US State, Muni, Utility RFPs
www.OpenChargeAlliance.org
OCPP 1.6
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
General improvements over v1.5
Support for JSON over Websockets
Simple smart charging profiles
Enhanced Security
Direct, practical migration path from v1.5
Being finalized in parallel with Compliancy
Ready by June 2015
www.OpenChargeAlliance.org
OCPP 2.0
• Structured as core and optional extensions
• Direct, practical migration path from v1.5, v1.6
• OCPP 2.0 Extensions: optional, contain multiple feature sets
•
•
•
Monitor & Control: improved customer experience, lower O&M costs
Smart Charging: supports both PWM and ISO/IEC 15118
Pricing: basic usage‐based cost calculation on the charge point; more complex pricing models in coordination with central system
www.OpenChargeAlliance.org
OCPP Compliancy
• Optional extensions and plug‐and‐play capability require rigorous compliancy tools and processes
• OCA Compliancy WG as established to:
•
•
•
Provide compliancy tools, e.g. reference versions, test harnesses, scripts processes and procedures
Develop a path to formal third‐party certification
Administer an OCA mark for OCPP conformance
• OCA Compliancy WG covers OCPP v1.5. v1.6 and v2.0
• Based on SGIP Framework
www.OpenChargeAlliance.org
OCA Membership process
www.openchargealliance.org/how‐to‐join
•
•
Download and review the OCA Participants Agreement (PA) and Membership Fees
Send email (join@openchargealliance.org) with representative contact information and attachments:
• Signed copy of the PA (PDF file)
• Purchase Order for 2015 Participation Fee
www.OpenChargeAlliance.org
OCA Membership benefits
•
Influence and shape current and future versions of OCPP
•
Full participation in WG proceedings (telecons, workshops)
•
Full document access for “work in progress”
•
Eligibility for WG Chair and Vice Chair, OCA Board membership
•
Full voting rights at WG and OCA levels
•
Compliancy tools, processes, and events (“plug‐fests”)
•
Ability to gain formal OCA certification
www.OpenChargeAlliance.org
What are OCA Membership categories
2015
www.OpenChargeAlliance.org
How can I join OCA?
www.openchargealliance.org/join.html

Download and review the Participants Agreement (PA)

Send email (join@openchargealliance.org) with your contact information and the following attachments:

signed copy of the PA (PDF file)

Purchase Order for 2014 Participation Fee
www.OpenChargeAlliance.org
Example of OCPP‐based networks
• ESB (Irish national utility)
• One national network
• Multiple charging station vendors
• ESB tenders require the use of OCPP
• Roaming supported across Ireland and Northern Ireland
• Independent choice of vendors
• Common back office
• E‐Laad (Dutch utilities consortium)
• E‐Laad network and local/private networks
• Central authorization and clearing
• Roaming supported across Netherlands, Germany and Belgium
www.OpenChargeAlliance.org
Questions?
SAE J2894/2 Update
March 25, 2015
Richard Hodson
Introduction
• SAE J2894 /1 “Power Quality Requirements for PlugIn Electric Vehicle Chargers”
o Collaboratively developed by Utilities and OEMs, Industry, and
Government
o Requirements based on “EV Charging Equipment Operational
Recommendations for Power Quality” (EPRI document TR-109023, Oct
1997)
• SAE J2894 /2 “Power Quality Test Procedures for
Plug-In Electric Vehicle Chargers”
o Collaboratively developed by Utilities and OEMs, Industry, and
Government
History
• SAE J2894 /1 was published December 8, 2011
• J2894/2 was published on March 17, 2015
• Energy Efficiency
o J2894/1 team intended to defer Energy Efficiency to J2894/2
o There was no data available to determine the requirements at the time
• The Plan
o
o
o
o
Create J2894 /2 test procedures to address /1 parameters
Include Energy Efficiency test procedures
Perform testing and determine the requirements
Revise J2894 /1 to include Energy Efficiency parameters
J2894 Documents and Current Status
• J2894/1 Power Quality Requirements for
Plug-In Electric Vehicle Chargers
o Document is being re-opened
o Chair: Eloi Taha
o Co-Chair: Richard Hodson
• J2894/2 Power Quality Test Procedures for
Plug-In Electric Vehicle Chargers
o Document may be revised again later if needed
based on /1 revisions
J2894/1Power Quality
Parameters
Recommended Parameters
AC Level 1
AC Level 2
DC
Displacement Power Factor
Values
95%
95%
95%
Full Power Conversion
Efficiency
90%
90%
90%
Maximum Total Harmonic
Current Distortion
(%ITHD)
10%
10%
10%
120%
(in excess of
50ms)
120%
(in excess of
100µs)
120%
(in excess of
100µs)
Maximum Inrush Current
(At Maximum Nominal Current)
J2894/1 AC Service Limit
Parameters
Parameter
AC Level 1
AC Level 2
Voltage Range
90% - 110% of nominal
90% - 110% of nominal
Voltage Swell
175% of nominal for
Min. ½ cycle (8 ms)
175% of nominal for
Min. ½ cycle (8 ms)
Voltage Surge
6 kV minimum
ANSI C62.41 & C62.45
6 kV minimum
ANSI C62.41 & C62.45
Voltage Sag
Down to 80% of nominal
for 2 seconds
Down to 80% of nominal
for 2 seconds
Voltage Distortion
5%
5%
Momentary Outage
0 volts for 12 cycles
0 volts for 12 cycles
2% of nominal
2% of nominal
Frequency Variations
J2894 /2
•
Challenges with J2894 /1
o
o
o
o
o
o
•
Published in 2011
New wireless chargers
Harmonics testing
Surge testing
Swell parameters
No EE parameters
Energy Efficiency
o
o
Test methods utilize battery charge/discharge, auxiliary loads
• Based on standardized battery capacity test discharges (USABC)
• Standardized test conditions to address variability (and aux loads)
• Auxiliary loads are measured separately
Multiple facets including
• No battery mode (idle not connected)
• Maintenance mode (connected after a charge, vehicle dependent)
• Charge Return Factor (CRF)
o
•
Energy Return Ratio (ERR)
o
Importance
• Why is SAE J2894 important?
o In 2008 the CEC published the “Energy Efficiency Battery Charger System
Test Procedure”
• For small battery chargers and large battery chargers
• Large battery charger philosophy similar to J2894 due to generally
higher efficiency
o Battery charger standards adopted into California code
o Smaller battery chargers now have federal standard
• Similarly, California regulators seeking PEV standards
• J2894 developed by appropriate stakeholders,
including OEMs
• Should be used by utilities and other companies as
procurement requirements for charging
infrastructure
Next Steps
• Reopen SAE J2894 /1 for revision
• Update document by:
o Improving definitions
o Adding efficiency parameters
o Updating requirement parameters
• Use J2894 /2 and gather efficiency data
• Evaluate data and determine new efficiency
recommendations
• Publish revised SAE J2894 /1
Questions?
Richard Hodson
909-469-0337
Richard.Hodson@sce.com
Jordan Smith
909-469-0250
Jordan.Smith@sce.com