Presentation on theme: "1 Charging Ahead Power Grid Perspectives on Plug-in Electric Vehicles."— Presentation transcript:
1 Charging Ahead Power Grid Perspectives on Plug-in Electric Vehicles
2 ISO/RTO Council (IRC) North America’s 10 independent system operators (ISOs) and regional transmission organizations (RTOs) serve two-thirds of electricity consumers in the United States and more than 50 percent of Canada's population.
3 IRC Electric Vehicle Study IRC report examines grid impacts of Plug- in Electric Vehicles (PEVs). Among the study’s conclusions: One million PEVs may be on U.S. roadways in a decade -- with concentrations of the vehicles in the major metropolitan areas of the West Coast and the Northeast. Staggered charging of PEVs would reduce the potential negative impact on electric load. Power companies will need new tools to manage growth in PEV use.
4 PEV Projections – ISO/RTO Of the 1,000,000 PEVs expected over the next 10 years, more than 684,000 may be served by U.S. ISO/RTOs
The Historical Data: The Pace of Prius Market Penetration Methodology question – Why focus on the Prius? – Prius was (a) high mileage, (b) very new technology, (c) “green,” (d) relatively expensive Prius sales illustrate the introduction of a new vehicle technology – Market introduction: first generation technology, limited production capacity, high prices – Market development: second generation, improved technology, expanded capacity, growing consumer interest and acceptance The Prius study period represents “early adopters” only – Data focus on Prius concentrations, not “niches” or very small numbers – NOT focused on distribution circuits – but could be! Notes: 2000-2002 represented Prius “Gen 2” Prius “Gen 2” introduced in 2003 Note: All Prius data provided by R. L. Polk
What have we learned about Prius early adopters? New Prius Registrations – Total Prius Sales, 2000-2007* Ranking by state 1 – 10 11 – 20 21 – 30 31 – 40 41 – 51 New Prius registrations for study period: 2000 – 2007: 435,400 vehicles * Prius data provided by R. L. Polk
Buyer Demographics: Locations of New Registrations Sales of the Prius were generally concentrated in states with the highest population – but… Total New RankStateRegistrations 1CA123,989 2FL20,596 3TX18,297 4NY18,033 5VA17,828 6WA16,459 7PA14,791 8IL14,660 9MA13,723 10MD12,040 States With Highest Prius Sales Population RankState(Millions) 1CA36.8 2TX24.3 3NY19.5 4FL18.3 5IL12.9 6PA12.5 7OH11.5 8MI10.0 9GA9.7 10NC9.2 States With Highest Population, 2000-2007
What have we learned about early Prius consumers? Prius Registrations – New Regi strations Per Capita, 2000-2007* Ranking by state Per capita data 1 – 10 11 – 20 21 – 30 31 – 40 41 – 51 2.0 – 3.4 1.3 – 1.9 1,0 – 1,3 0.7 – 1.0 0.3 – 0.7 Rank Registrations per 1,000 New Prius registrations for study period: 2000 – 2007: 435,400 vehicles * Prius data provided by R. L. Polk
Buyer Demographics: Urban Concentrations …but the demographics of the Prius customer has a strong “coastal” character - and was heavily concentrated in the largest urban areas, which account for 31.6% of total U.S. sales Total New% of RankMetro AreaRegistrationsUS 1New York18,6223.7% 2Los Angeles52,70010.4% 3Chicago9,4001.9% 4Wash., DC15,1008.4% 5San Francisco42,9008.4% 6Philadelphia6,3001.2% 7Boston13,2002.6% 8Detroit3,0000.6% 9Dallas3,2000.6% 10Houston3,9000.8% Metro Areas Where Prius Was Most Popular Registrations per RankState1000 Residents 1CA3.37 2VT3.21 3OR3.04 4NH2.54 5WA2.51 6DC2.46 7VA2.29 8MD2.14 9MA2.11 10ME2.03 States Where Prius Was Most Popular Note: “Most popular” = highest per capita sales
The “Take-aways” From the Prius Review 1.Early adopters WERE NOT proportional to population size alone – Significant differences in per capita sales between states and regions – Some strong preferences, some distinct disinterest 2.TOTAL numbers WERE driven by overall population size 3.The “Coastal” phenomenon for this class of vehicle among early adopters is very clear – in both the per capita numbers and in the overall sales numbers Conclusions 1.Early adopters have a clear demographic locational component The so-called “coastal effect” appears valid 2.There are likely to be significant differences in PEV clustering among ISOs/RTOs BUT – from an ISO/RTO perspective, where clusters of significant size are needed to provide a useful level of MWs of connected PEVs, POPULATION SIZE matters more than almost any other criteria
III PEV Projections: Distribution Where are PEVs likely to be concentrated among the ISOs and RTOs?
PEVs: Where will they land? How do we apply the Prius experience to project the distribution of PEVs among the ISOs and RTOs? – Where are PEVs likely to be concentrated in significant numbers from an ISO/RTO perspective? Key to an ISO/RTO perspective – MWs – concentrations of PEVs that provide significant MW demand response resources One vehicle here and there doesn’t count Where will PEVs wind up? – The consumer model: PHEVs and EREVs (and some BEVs) The Prius analogy – applied to consumer behavior, not fleets – The “fleet” model: BEVs An “urban center” model, driven largely by population size
The “Top Twenty” Metropolitan Areas CityPopulationCityPopulation New York16,400,000Atlanta4,100,000 Los Angeles16,400,000Miami3,900,000 Chicago9,200,000Seattle-Tacoma3,600,000 Washington, DC7,600,000Phoenix3,300,000 San Francisco7,000,000Minneapolis3,000,000 Philadelphia6,200,000Cleveland-Akron3,000,000 Boston5,800,000San Diego2,850,000 Detroit-Ann Arbor5,500,000St. Louis2,600,000 Dallas-Fort Worth5,200,000Denver-Boulder2,600,000 Houston4,700,000Tampa-St. Pete2,400,000 Metro areas located within the ISO/RTO study area are in bold, other metro areas are in gray
PEVs in the “Top Twenty” Metropolitan Areas – Slide 1 of 2 Metro areas located within the ISO/RTO study area are in bold, other metro areas are in gray CityConsumer PEVsFleet PEVsTotal PEVs New York40,00014,06954,069 Los Angeles105,00014,069119,069 Chicago20,0007,89227,892 Washington, DC31,0006,52037,520 San Francisco85,0006,00591,005 Philadelphia13,0005,31918,319 Boston27,0004,97631,976 Detroit-Ann Arbor6,0004,71810,718 Dallas-Fort Worth6,5004,46110,961 Houston8,0004,03212,032
PEVs in the “Top Twenty” Metropolitan Areas – Slide 2 of 2 Metro areas located within the ISO/RTO study area are in bold, other metro areas are in gray CityConsumer PEVsFleet PEVsTotal PEVs Atlanta4,5003,5178,017 Miami8,0003,34611,346 Seattle-Tacoma23,0003,08826,088 Phoenix13,0002,83115,831 Minneapolis8,0002,57410,574 Cleveland-Akron6,0002,5748,574 San Diego20,0002,44522,445 St. Louis3,5002,2305,730 Denver-Boulder9,0002,23011,230 Tampa-St. Pete7,0002,0599,059
IV Moving from PEVs to MWs Translating from numbers of PEVs to numbers of MW in ISO/RTO metro areas
MW: Translating PEVs to Available MWs It’s not the size, it’s the miles driven – and the kWh used – that matter – PEVs come with different size batteries (e.g., 10 kW, 25 kW, 100 kW)) – PEVs come in different designs (e.g., PHEV, EREV, BEVs) – The PEV may be hooked up, but it may be already fully charged and not available for demand reduction Ultimately, MW available for demand reduction are a function of: – Number of PEVs of varying size available locally – Charging voltage (e.g., Level 1, 2, 3) – how long it takes to charge – Connection at load Likelihood that a vehicle is in fact connected at a given moment in time Likely depth of discharge at time of hook-up BOTH are stochastic
Calculating “Available” MW Implications – Our analysis estimates the number of PEVs in the SMSA clusters – We estimate a split between PHEVs, EREVs and BEVs, and locate the majority of BEVs in the larger urban centers 80% in the “top 20” – To arrive at MW estimates it is necessary to “rerate” the kW of the batteries to recognize: Some batteries are larger than others (e.g., BEVs) The likelihood that many batteries will be only partially discharged when first plugged in Our model – Consumer BEVs average 100 miles in range vs. 40 miles for EREVs – 80% of consumer BEVs are in the “top 20” metro areas – The majority of fleet vehicles will be BEVs – For this purpose, we only calculate fleet BEVs in the metro areas used throughout this analysis
MW Load and Charging Projections Assumptions – Chargers – 20% level 1; 80% level 2 – 300 kWh per mile (includes travel, AC and accessories) – Night time charging assumed; daytime charging not included – Included both Consumer and Fleet projections – Individual utility load profiles were not considered
MW Load and Charging Projections Slide 1 of 2 City Metro AreaTotal PEVs MW Load if everyone charged at the same time MW Load if charging is staged over 8 hours MW Load if charging is staged over 12 hours New York54,0694484026 Los Angeles119,069988174116 Chicago27,8922314127 Washington, DC37,5203115537 San Francisco91,00575513389 Philadelphia18,3191522718 Boston31,9762654731 Detroit-Ann Arbor10,718891610 Dallas-Fort Worth10,961911611 Houston12,0321001812
MW Load and Charging Projections Slide 2 of 2 City Metro AreaTotal PEVs MW Load if everyone charged at the same time MW Load if charging is staged over 8 hours MW Load if charging is staged over 12 hours Atlanta8,01767128 Miami11,346941711 Seattle-Tacoma26,0882163825 Phoenix15,8311312315 Minneapolis10,574881510 Cleveland-Akron8,57471138 San Diego22,4451863322 St. Louis5,7304886 Denver-Boulder11,230931611 Tampa-St. Pete9,05975139
22 Projected PEV Load ISO/RTOTotal PEVs Load if everyone charged at the same time (MW) Load if charging is staged over 8 hours (MW) Load if charging is staged over 12 hours (MW) ISO-NE61,0743387550 NYISO43,7382422718 PJM144,172797178119 Midwest ISO94,64452311778 SPP30,4591683825 ERCOT42,7692375335 CAISO267,6541,480331221 TOTAL684,5103,785819546
24 PEV Products & Services Emergency Load Curtailment (ELC)—PEVs are able to provide a quick- response load-curtailment resource for emergency events, and may be aggregated for maximum effect. Dynamic Pricing (DP)—Dynamic pricing might be a way to accomplish charging of PEV batteries in off-peak hours. However, further research on consumer behavior is necessary to understand how a PEV owner will respond to retail price differentials. Enhanced Aggregation (EA)—The potential for high concentrations of PEV loads in the evening makes managing charging over the day a priority for the ISO/RTOs. This would be complementary to time-of-use programs and be potentially linked to a dynamic-pricing product.
25 Conclusions EV can be accommodated and managed within existing Ancillary Services Products Expanded use of electricity as primary fuel powering light-duty vehicles poses a challenges and opportunities to the electricity grid. Management of PEV charging — at a minimum — can limit the impact of new PEV loads and — at its best — provide new resources. In addition to testing and demonstrating new tools, grid operators will be able to leverage experience with smart grid technology and demand response to prepare for the unique changes predicted to arrive with PEVs.
26 For More Information A copy of the full report, Assessment of Plug- in Electric Vehicle Integration with ISO/RTO Systems, is available at the IRC website, www.iso-rto.org. www.iso-rto.org