victorian electric vehicle trial mid-term report - Department of Transport

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The limited operating range of thevehicles is a complicated issue. Withreference to Figure 19, householdparticipants surveyed around six weeksinto their EV experience were biasedtowards only occasional concernsabout range limitations, howeveraround one in five participants wereconcerned the majority or all of thetime. The following quote from thediscussion board illustrates themajority view of participants:I drove Camberwell – Dandenong –Boronia – Ferntree Gully – Camberwell(91 km) … in an i-MiEV. Was a littleconcerned that I might run out ofpower toward the end, but … ended upwith 7 km to spare according to theindicator. That was actually a pretty bigdrive for a suburban commute, and Idon’t think I’d ever go further in a dayin Melbourne.Victorian Electric Vehicle Trial fleetparticipant driver feedback, 2011The range difference between vehicletypes does not appear to have overlyinfluenced driver opinion. Responsesto the question in Figure 19 from thei-MiEV drivers indicate only slightlymore concern than the LEAF drivers(3.6 versus 3.4 on a rating scalefrom 1 = ‘all the time’ to 5 = ‘hardlyat all’; aggregate std dev 1.2). Thissuggests that range may not be theprimary issue for the comparativeunderutilisation of the i-MiEV,and not an issue for most trialhousehold participants.With regards the ‘significant minority’of participants who were notcomfortable with the vehicle range,it is important to note that manywere enthusiastic at the prospect ofthe technology. This finding may besignificant in the context of publiccharging infrastructure – refer toSection 5.4.Many household participants displayedingenuity and resolve when it came tomanaging the range limitations of theirvehicle. User-generated content fromthe trial discussion board highlightsthe concept of ‘range anxiety’, howeverthe issue is more often expressedin the form of ‘range management’.Users cite a range of considerationsmade as part of this:• Trip planning and distanceestimation• Driving mode selection/benefits• Public charging options/accessarrangements• Interpretation of the in-vehiclerange indicator (of which they arehighly critical)• Efficient driving techniques• Use of heating/cooling• Other measures that assist withrange optimisation.Don’t know/unsure of question 1.3%All the time 7.9%Hardly at all 19.7%The majority the time 13.2%About half the time 11.8%Occasionally 46.1%Figure 19. Household participant responses from around six weeks into their electric vehicle experience to the question,‘How often do you feel concerned about the available range of your vehicle?’ (n = 76).
Having to make these considerationsis occasionally cited as being aninconvenience that is not felt withpetrol vehicles. A quote from thediscussion board sums this upby saying:Driving in an EV isn’t a mindlessactivity.Victorian Electric Vehicle Trialhousehold participant, 2012Of those participants who wereaccepting of EVs as a viable andeven desirable transport option, theoverwhelming majority highlightedpurchase price as being the keyobstacle to ownership. The quotesupplied by one of the householdparticipants subsequent to their threemonthelectric vehicle experienceillustrates this issue:I was very close to buying myvery own Nissan LEAF about3 months ago. In fact, I went to theshowroom and tried to find out thedifferences between the Australianmodel versus the model I had from thetrial. I also considered various financeoptions and a special leasing optionprovided by Nissan itself for the LEAF.At the end, I could not financially justifythe purchase of this EV. I went andbought a Toyota Prius instead.– Victorian Electric Vehicle Trialhousehold participant, 20124.2.3 How do people useelectric vehicles?Results suggest that householdsseamlessly adopted the trial electricvehicles into their normal travelbehaviours, and that they used theelectric vehicles as their primarytransport mode. Comparison withVictorian Government travel datasuggests that these conclusionsmay be transferred to the majorityof the Melbourne population. Vehiclerange limitations are managed bythe majority of drivers. Workplacecommuting was the most commonvehicle travel destination. Selfdescribed‘early-adopters’ were notfound to use their vehicle differentlyto mainstream market participants.BeforeCar tripsEV tripsTrial travel diary resultsDuringAfterMelbourne average0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%Total tripsFigure 20. Results from the household travel diaries where the breakdown in car travel as a percentage of total trips isreported for all travel diaries submitted across the three phases of the household vehicle allocations.CREATING A MARKET 37
Page 1 and 2: CREATINGA MARKETVICTORIAN ELECTRICV
Page 3 and 4: Measures which reduce electriccar p
Page 5 and 6: 5.4 Public charging 815.4.1 How muc
Page 7 and 8: The trial is a $5 millioninitiative
Page 9 and 10: In 2012, Mitsubishi, Nissan,and Hol
Page 11 and 12: 2.4 HOW DOES ELECTRIC VEHICLECHARGI
Page 13 and 14: Meter, Switch orDistribution BoardD
Page 15 and 16: It has brought together allthe piec
Page 17 and 18: Commercial negotiations and astruct
Page 19 and 20: TECHNOLOGY ADOPTION CASE STUDYMOBIL
Page 21 and 22: RACV considers electricvehicles to
Page 23 and 24: What we need from you: The particip
Page 25 and 26: Information gained fromthe cars has
Page 27 and 28: Alongside differences in utilisatio
Page 29 and 30: Evidence suggests that while purcha
Page 31 and 32: This sort of functionality is expec
Page 33 and 34: 4.1.5 What about electriccommercial
Page 35: A clearly positive influence on peo
Page 39 and 40: Analysis of the vehicle monitoringd
Page 41 and 42: 4.2.4 How much does it costfor an a
Page 43 and 44: Experience from overseas suggeststh
Page 45 and 46: In terms of who drives the decision
Page 47 and 48: Despite this relative under-utilisa
Page 49 and 50: Within the traditional fleet assetm
Page 51 and 52: CORPORATE CHARGING NETWORK CASE STU
Page 53 and 54: Nearly 140 household, fleetand publ
Page 55 and 56: The trial charging infrastructure v
Page 57 and 58: Through these efforts, trial partic
Page 59 and 60: To support trip planning and rangem
Page 61 and 62: 5.2 HOME CHARGING5.2.1 How much doe
Page 63 and 64: The general process for the househo
Page 65 and 66: Although this outcome was a success
Page 67 and 68: The appeal of a financial incentive
Page 69 and 70: 5.2.5 What do households thinkof el
Page 71 and 72: It provides guidance on the allocat
Page 73 and 74: An example of this was theDepartmen
Page 75 and 76: Based upon the trial experience, th
Page 77 and 78: WORKPLACE CHARGING CASE STUDYVICTOR
Page 79 and 80: Workplace charging appears to be ak
Page 81 and 82: One scenario of particular interest
Page 83 and 84: Cost data obtained from various sit
Page 85 and 86: PUBLIC CHARGING CASE STUDYON-STREET
Page 87 and 88:
Household participants were askedab
Page 89 and 90:
The following quote supplied to the
Page 91 and 92:
Despite these challenging figuresan
Page 93 and 94:
According to theory (Lieberman andM
Page 95 and 96:
The pushback by parking operatorsag
Page 97 and 98:
There’s a lot to like aboutincrea
Page 99 and 100:
The economic analysis hasexamined t
Page 101 and 102:
Under a ‘mid-range’ scenario as
Page 103 and 104:
6.1.3 What are the costs andbenefit
Page 105 and 106:
6.2 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS6.2.1 How
Page 107 and 108:
Based upon the limited informationa
Page 109 and 110:
6.3 SOCIAL IMPACTS6.3.1 How is comm
Page 111 and 112:
A key challenge for many electricve
Page 113 and 114:
The effectiveness ofthese initiativ
Page 115 and 116:
The supplementary data andinteracti
Page 117 and 118:
EV PROMOTION CASE STUDYELECTRIC CAR
Page 119 and 120:
In addition to the EV School progra
Page 121 and 122:
7.1.4 How has the local electricveh
Page 123 and 124:
7.2 INSIGHTS7.2.1 How do we best te
Page 125 and 126:
ISSUES ANDOPPORTUNITIESA significan
Page 127 and 128:
Issue Classification Sections Oppor
Page 129 and 130:
Issue Classification Sections Oppor
Page 131 and 132:
Drawing upon the learnings acquired
Page 133 and 134:
ACRONYMS,GLOSSARY ANDUNITS OF MEASU
Page 135 and 136:
OPEC - Organisation of the Petroleu
Page 137 and 138:
Actew AGL 2009, History of mobile p
Page 139 and 140:
Ergon 2012, Pool pump connections,
Page 141 and 142:
Smart Grid News 2012, Aussie firm u
Page 143 and 144:
EntityChargingInfrastructureHostCha
Page 145 and 146:
APPENDIX BEVS AND FLEETS 2012 PRACT
Page 147 and 148:
APPENDIX CCHARGING OUTLET ATTRIBUTE
Page 149 and 150:
Area Attribute DefinitionBilling /
Page 151 and 152:
APPENDIX EEV CHARGING COURTESY SIGN
show all

victorian electric vehicle trial mid-term report - Department of Transport

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?