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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

One of the objectives of the guidanceabove is to optimise the vehicleutilisation once in-service, and withthis the operational cost savings. Animplication of the observed underutilisationof the trial vehicles isthe reduced operational cost savinginput into the total cost of ownershipbusiness case. This will work againstEV uptake, which means addressingbarriers to vehicle utilisation should bea priority to promote fleet adoption.The inter-related issues of limitedrange, long charging times and a lackof widespread charging infrastructureavailability were cited by trial fleetparticipants and attendees at the fleetworkshops as a major barrier to morewidespread fleet adoption of EVs.Options to address this include:• Larger vehicle batteries – thiswould increase range, but at theexpense of purchase price andcharging time• Faster charging – next-generationEVs are likely to be capable ofdrawing 32 amps, which willeffectively halve the current‘standard’ charging times;sufficient electrical supply mustbe available or installed to supportthe increased demand (refer toSection 5.1)• Public charging network –including specifically quickcharging and/or battery swap,would greatly increase theeffective range of the vehicles,or possibly even support reducedbattery size/vehicle cost forhighly predictable vehicleapplications that align with thecharging network• Corporate charging network –including charging locations atcorporate sites, staff residencesand common corporate fleetdestinations (such as customerfacilities); this approach mayprovide additional brand-buildingbenefits (by increasing the visibilityof the vehicles whilst plugged-inat strategic locations), as wellas the battery size/vehicle costoptimisation described above.The contrasting nature of these optionshighlights the importance of fleetservice duty analysis and matchingto the EV/charging solution. Serviceduties may include tool-of-trade, pool,executive, and a range of other specificpurpose vehicle applications. Of these,vehicles which return to a centrallocation are more easily supportedwith a simple charging solution;however vehicles which operate onpredictable and relatively high mileageroutes provide potentially the greatestopportunity for EVs. By way of example,salary-packaged vehicles for staff thatcommute relatively long distances maybe supported with a home/workplacecharging strategy that will deliversignificant savings in transport energycosts that may be shared between boththe employer and the employee.Discussions with the trial fleetparticipants found that those whohad most successfully integrated theelectric vehicles into their operationalfleet were:• Designating an electric vehicle‘champion’ who can manage andpromote the vehicle/s, and trainand support staff• Mostly assigning the vehicles tosmall groups of (enthusiastic)staff, who could becomefamiliar with the vehicle throughregular use and report on theirexperiences to others• Providing staff with one-on-one/tailored training in use of the EV(EV meet’n’greet sessions werepopular, and one large fleetoperator developed an onlinetraining/assessment tool)• Actively promoting the EV to staff,and characterising it as new,exciting and interesting• Providing feedback to staff ontheir own and their organisation’sEV experience.Conversely, the various issues thatmake up the electric vehicle learningcurve were routinely cited by fleetsin instances where operational useof the vehicles had either not beenattempted or was less than successful.Noting the non-existent or less-thanidealnature of the route-planningand charge-management technologyemployed in the trial (refer to Sections4.1.1 and 5.1.1), these issues may beat least partly addressed by improvedtechnology for management ofthe vehicle.
CORPORATE CHARGING NETWORK CASE STUDYNHP ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING PRODUCTSAs a supplier of industrial electrical and automation products, NHP’s core business is in goodalignment with EV technology. NHP also have a commitment to environmental sustainability,including through a Sustainability Centre where many of their products are evaluated anddemonstrated in renewable energy applications. This background has meant that NHP wereideally placed for participation in the Victorian Electric Vehicle Trial.NHP have taken a holistic outlook towards translating this strategic alignment to theirfleet operations through their corporate EV charging strategy:• To maximise visibility, an EV charging solution has been installed out the front of NHP’scorporate headquarters• To maximise vehicle utility, an EV charging solution has been installed at the most common parkinglocation for the vehicle at NHP’s manufacturing and distribution centre, around 25 kilometresfrom their corporate headquarters• To support their standard fleet practices, charging outlets have been installed at some of the moredistant NHP staff residences to allow the EVs to be garaged at these locations overnight.As a result of their corporate electric vehicle charging strategy, NHP have averaged nearly doublethe daily EV driving distance for the trial fleet participants, at 41 kilometres per day (km/day) for thei-MiEV and 46 km/day for the LEAF (at the halfway point for that vehicle assignment). Over this sametime, NHP have trialled the vehicles in a number of different fleet service duties, and leveraged thetrial vehicles for promotional opportunities. Should they go on to deploy EVs in their fleet operations,it is not unreasonable to expect that NHP will record much greater average daily driving distanceseven using the current generation of EV technology.Figure 29. NHP ElectricalEngineering Products brandedtrial vehicle parked in frontof their SustainabilityCentre, located at theirmanufacturing anddistribution centre inLaverton North.CREATING A MARKET 51
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 and 36: A clearly positive influence on peo
Page 37 and 38: Having to make these considerations
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: Within the traditional fleet assetm
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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?