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

According to theory (Lieberman andMontgomery 1988), early-adopteradvantages that may be obtained bya parking facility operator in thissituation include:• Influence customer choice underuncertainty – early-adopterparking facilities may establish areputation for quality from havingthe latest technology, which maythen translate to a preference fromcustomers (particularly given thatparking is a relatively low-cost‘convenience good’ where thebenefits from finding a superioralternative may be insufficient tooutweigh the search effort involved)• Create switching costs forcustomers – building on theadvantage above, once a customerhas adapted to the characteristicsof a parking facility, competitorparking facilities must investadditional resources in order totempt them away from theirinitial choice.These benefits are difficult to discernat a practical level and mostly relatedto the marketing value of hosting EVcharging facilities, which has a ‘use-by’date in terms of novelty. As a result,most parking facility participants drewcomfort at the outset from the finiteterm of their trial involvement, andindicated their intention to removethe EV charging capability unlessthe corresponding parking bays metexpected occupancy levels. Someoperators also opened up the EVparking/charging bay to generaluse, but would rope the bayoff temporarily in response to anEV driver ‘reservation’.Issue Description Mitigation strategyEquipment costs Early-market designs cost $55,000–$90,000 Latest generation equipment costs have reduced to$10,000-$40,000EstablishmentcostsConnectorstandardsGrid impactsVehicle batteryimpactsUser ergonomicsExceed equipment costs – potentially$80,000 depending upon site specifics(refer to Table 14)A range of designs have emerged globally,increasing complexity and market-accessbarriersPHEVs do not generally include quick chargercapabilitySeparate connectors for standard and quickcharging increases costsQuick charging increases the peak- toaverageelectricity demand load, reducingnetwork reliability or necessitating investmentQuick charging degrades battery life morequickly than standard chargingUncertainty relating to quick charging impactson battery life, including vehicle re-saleEarly-market designs are not especiallyuser-friendlyDrivers are unfamiliar with quick chargeroperationLatest generation 25 kW quick chargers have much lowerinstallation costs with only minor impact on charging timesStreamlining through the development of ‘best practice’installation processesProvisioning during initial site development or leveragingsite redevelopment will potentially avoid trenching costs(the largest contribution to establishment costs)A combination standard is in the final stagesof development that will be globally recognised, backwardscompatible and allow for a single connector that may bepotentially adopted even by PHEVsNew standards will support grid communication anddemand management strategiesOn-site energy storage may reduce grid impacts bysmoothing the demand profileBattery technologies are evolving to reduce charging timesand increase battery lifeIncreased understanding and transparency for all EVmarket participants on quick charging impacts uponbattery lifeLatest generation/emerging standard designs are moreuser-friendlyDrivers acquire experience in the use of quick chargersTable 17. Quick charging issues and mitigation strategies.CREATING A MARKET 93