Back to TasksTask 20
Quick Charging
Objective of Task
The specific objectives of Task 20 were:
- Report on the current status of quick charging technology,
- Discuss objectively how quick charging technology can contribute to the deployment of electric vehicles,
- Share knowledge on quick charging technology deployment developments and trends,
- Get consensus and provide joint conclusions to the stakeholders related to the standardization process,
- Provide recommendations for setting up a roadmap for quick charging technology development and implementation.
working method
Task 20 based its exchange of information and interactions on regular face-to-face meetings with the presence of key experts from the main QC stakeholders worldwide. After the kick off meeting in conjunction with the EVS26 held in L.A. (US), the Task organized 3 thematic meetings in Japan, Spain, and France.
Task 20 held its second technical exchange workshop across three cities in Japan on 3-5 June 2013. The goal was to discuss the progress in the development and deployment of DC quick charging technology in Japan, Europe, and the United States (U.S.). Japan’s Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) helped to organize the meeting. The Japanese government has supported the installation of more than 1,700 QC stations throughout the country.
A total of 39 experts from the U.S., Germany, China, Spain, and Japan participated in the June meetings, representing automotive original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), charging equipment providers, research centres, utilities, and government.
Later in 2013, and again in conjunction with the EVS27, a specific workshop with special focus on interoperability as a trigger for a larger deployment of QC was organized in Barcelona (Spain). More than 30 participants from 6 countries were present representing different entities with key roles in the whole interoperability chain from public and private sides.
The last meeting of the Task was organised together with Task 10 on Electrochemistry in the framework of the International Batteries 2014 congress in Nice on 22-23 September 2014. The workshop focused on the effects of the quick charging on batteries in PEV. The meeting was attended by a number of internationally acclaimed research groups, public authorities, vehicles manufacturers and battery manufacturers.
On the other hand, IA-HEV Task 20, Quick Charging (QC) Technology, posted an online questionnaire to solicit input from the PEV community on the status and future applications of QC technology. The survey covered potential business models for DC QC as well as several issues along its value chain, including charger infrastructure, OEMs and interoperability, the impact of DC QC on the electricity grid, and the anticipated timeframe for developments in technology and regulatory frameworks.
The motivation for the survey was to identify issues that need to be addressed in order to facilitate a more widespread deployment of DC QC technology. Over 50 organizations from more than 10 different countries in Europe, Asia, and America have responded to the survey. These organizations cover all possible QC stakeholders: OEMs, charger providers, utilities, public administrations, academia, etc.
Results
The information shared by the main stakeholders of the QC technologies worldwide served as a basis of the final report of Task 20, the main deliverable of the Task. This public document, available in the HEV TCP website, described the State of the Art of the different QC technologies, the main challenges (technical, regulatory, market) these technologies faced, their potential and the main trends worldwide – with a special focus on a few case studies. The primary conclusions are summarized below.
CHAdeMO is the most widespread quick charging system in the world: as of May 2015, there were 5,737 CHAdeMO charging points installed all around the world, of which 3,087 in Japan, 1,661 in Europe, 934 in the USA, and 55 in other countries (basically Canada). The evolution of the number of charging stations in Japan and the rest of the world has been very positive, despite the appearance of another competitive and incompatible QC system (CCS) in 2013.
In parallel to CHAdeMO, several American and, particularly, European companies, such as Audi, BMW, Daimler, Ford, General Motors, Porsche, or Volkswagen, started developing a new system for quick charging: the Combined Charging System (CCS) or COMBO. The main goal behind this initiative, strongly supported by SAE and ACEA, was to develop a one “global envelope” that permits the recharging of the vehicle both in AC (slow/medium charging) and DC (quick charging) using two types of charger connectors and only one charging inlet in the vehicle.
This is an important difference with the CHAdeMO standard, since the latter has been only designed for DC quick charging and that is the only charging mode allowed by both the charger connector and the vehicle inlet. An electric vehicle designed to be charged using the CHAdeMO standard needs a separate and differentiated charging socket to be charged using modes 1 to 3 (AC), with the corresponding additional costs that this implies, although it has been a common practice among vehicle manufacturers. Furthermore, the rapid deployment of multi-system chargers in Europe, but also in North America, will change the framework of the competition among OEMs, removing the issue of connection standards and focusing it on vehicle models.
Furthermore, inductive charging is a relatively immature technology that will be ruled by the family of standards IEC/TS 61980, all of which are still under development and not expected to be published before August 2015 (Part 1: General Requirements). However, its important advantages (specially en-route inductive charging) compared to conductive charging have been translated in a big number of research projects and initiatives to further develop this technology.
In the spirit of reducing the impact of the fast-charging system in the energy grid, there has been an important work on developing advanced PE. Nowadays almost all the chargers available in the market comply with the limits of power quality establish in the standard (IEC 61000-3-12) when charging at nominal power. In any case, DC quick charging produces proportionally less quality distortion to the electrical grid than slow and medium AC charging.
One potential solution is the use of Energy Storage Systems, either using second life batteries or not, has a wide support from the stakeholders as the most promising to decrease the impact of QC on the grid, along with remote management of the charger (still in an early stage of development).
On the other hand, demand control remains as a very relevant area as well as driver’s behaviour to reduce the drawbacks of fast charging. However, modifying the EV driver behaviour is complicated and requires innovative communication and incentive programmes (rewards) to motivate positive behaviours. These strategies are not exclusively designed for reducing the impact of quick charging on the electrical grid, but they take into account all the possible charging options available for the EV drivers in the country or region.
As far as the battery is concerned, it is of vital importance including battery design within the broader concept of mobility for the purpose of lessening costs and simplifying the business model. The fact is that battery performance is also affected by how the vehicles are used (i.e., by drivers), which means it is important to link their design to the specific use that will be made of them by consumers, a matter that varies by continent, country, social condition, availability of charging points, charge frequency, and so on.
Under this dialogue that took place during the Task 20, as a main conclusion, it appears that there is no clear and unique business model solution. Several on-going projects and deployment activities are taking part across the globe with different approaches: some of them promoting the added value of using QC firstly among the costumers while in other demonstration cases, infrastructure and cars are at the front of the strategy plans. No matter how barriers (both technical and nontechnical) are confronted, the full business plan will not be completed before investing and pushing the deployment forward. The model should be flexible and evaluated, adapted to prices and real needs in the hope of enlarging the network and customers. Moreover, a better understanding of the customer behaviour and needs is precisely the starting point to defining the business model, as highlighted by the vast majority of the stakeholders that participated in the survey, especially the private sector. Continuous interaction and support to existing and potential new customers through information programmes, remote assistance, etc. have also been identified as highly important. It is therefore encouraged to establish the system for grasping EV users behaviour/movement and profile of EV users to provide more convenient service in the initial stage after switching from free of charge to charge.
Concerning the key actors around fast charging, the relatively high number of actors involved in the battery recharging process of EV creates a very complex ecosystem, with many different interests and several potential business models depending on who the owner of the EVSE is. There are many possibilities: an independent private service provider, a public foundation, a DSO, private business such as restaurants, retailers, etc. all in all, should be supported by the strong involvement of public authorities in the first stages of the deployment of the quick chargers. According to stakeholders this is essential. Subsidies for the installation, maintenance and operation of the quick charging infrastructure are seen as the most important contribution by the public sector along with other incentives to be progressively decreased when the business model is in place.
Fast charging is moving forward, opening new directions towards more added value services, among others, V2G. The future of V2G is still uncertain, regardless its potential and despite the fact that the technology is not an issue, but the knowledge about the economic, environmental and grid benefits is underdeveloped, inconsistent or not validate1. Indeed, most of the studies conducted on the matter are focused on technical aspects and, although researches have tried to assess the commercial potential of this technology, it is not clear yet how to capture this value, and several business models have been proposed. As highlighted in the business models section for quick charging, in the particular case of V2G, preferences of the users must be the central point for deriving a business model.
In summary, stakeholders agree on the idea that there is not only one good solution and the adopted approach must be the result of a thorough analysis of the current situation, needs and opportunities in each country, taking into consideration several factors (demographics, cultural aspects, business cases for the different infrastructures, etc.). In addition, governments have a wide variety of options to support the deployment of the EV and they set up measures both in the supply and the demand side. Concerning the EVSE, the most common action is to support their installation through taxes exemptions, financial incentives, and, especially for quick chargers (due to their high cost), direct, partial, or full funding. This last option may include the purchase of the equipment and its installation. Concrete examples of national programmes on deploying EVSE, and particularly, quick chargers are provided within this section.
Objective of Task
The specific objectives of Task 20 were:
- Report on the current status of quick charging technology,
- Discuss objectively how quick charging technology can contribute to the deployment of electric vehicles,
- Share knowledge on quick charging technology deployment developments and trends,
- Get consensus and provide joint conclusions to the stakeholders related to the standardization process,
- Provide recommendations for setting up a roadmap for quick charging technology development and implementation.
working method
Task 20 based its exchange of information and interactions on regular face-to-face meetings with the presence of key experts from the main QC stakeholders worldwide. After the kick off meeting in conjunction with the EVS26 held in L.A. (US), the Task organized 3 thematic meetings in Japan, Spain, and France.
Task 20 held its second technical exchange workshop across three cities in Japan on 3-5 June 2013. The goal was to discuss the progress in the development and deployment of DC quick charging technology in Japan, Europe, and the United States (U.S.). Japan’s Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) helped to organize the meeting. The Japanese government has supported the installation of more than 1,700 QC stations throughout the country.
A total of 39 experts from the U.S., Germany, China, Spain, and Japan participated in the June meetings, representing automotive original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), charging equipment providers, research centres, utilities, and government.
Later in 2013, and again in conjunction with the EVS27, a specific workshop with special focus on interoperability as a trigger for a larger deployment of QC was organized in Barcelona (Spain). More than 30 participants from 6 countries were present representing different entities with key roles in the whole interoperability chain from public and private sides.
The last meeting of the Task was organised together with Task 10 on Electrochemistry in the framework of the International Batteries 2014 congress in Nice on 22-23 September 2014. The workshop focused on the effects of the quick charging on batteries in PEV. The meeting was attended by a number of internationally acclaimed research groups, public authorities, vehicles manufacturers and battery manufacturers.
On the other hand, IA-HEV Task 20, Quick Charging (QC) Technology, posted an online questionnaire to solicit input from the PEV community on the status and future applications of QC technology. The survey covered potential business models for DC QC as well as several issues along its value chain, including charger infrastructure, OEMs and interoperability, the impact of DC QC on the electricity grid, and the anticipated timeframe for developments in technology and regulatory frameworks.
The motivation for the survey was to identify issues that need to be addressed in order to facilitate a more widespread deployment of DC QC technology. Over 50 organizations from more than 10 different countries in Europe, Asia, and America have responded to the survey. These organizations cover all possible QC stakeholders: OEMs, charger providers, utilities, public administrations, academia, etc.
Results
The information shared by the main stakeholders of the QC technologies worldwide served as a basis of the final report of Task 20, the main deliverable of the Task. This public document, available in the HEV TCP website, described the State of the Art of the different QC technologies, the main challenges (technical, regulatory, market) these technologies faced, their potential and the main trends worldwide – with a special focus on a few case studies. The primary conclusions are summarized below.
CHAdeMO is the most widespread quick charging system in the world: as of May 2015, there were 5,737 CHAdeMO charging points installed all around the world, of which 3,087 in Japan, 1,661 in Europe, 934 in the USA, and 55 in other countries (basically Canada). The evolution of the number of charging stations in Japan and the rest of the world has been very positive, despite the appearance of another competitive and incompatible QC system (CCS) in 2013.
In parallel to CHAdeMO, several American and, particularly, European companies, such as Audi, BMW, Daimler, Ford, General Motors, Porsche, or Volkswagen, started developing a new system for quick charging: the Combined Charging System (CCS) or COMBO. The main goal behind this initiative, strongly supported by SAE and ACEA, was to develop a one “global envelope” that permits the recharging of the vehicle both in AC (slow/medium charging) and DC (quick charging) using two types of charger connectors and only one charging inlet in the vehicle.
This is an important difference with the CHAdeMO standard, since the latter has been only designed for DC quick charging and that is the only charging mode allowed by both the charger connector and the vehicle inlet. An electric vehicle designed to be charged using the CHAdeMO standard needs a separate and differentiated charging socket to be charged using modes 1 to 3 (AC), with the corresponding additional costs that this implies, although it has been a common practice among vehicle manufacturers. Furthermore, the rapid deployment of multi-system chargers in Europe, but also in North America, will change the framework of the competition among OEMs, removing the issue of connection standards and focusing it on vehicle models.
Furthermore, inductive charging is a relatively immature technology that will be ruled by the family of standards IEC/TS 61980, all of which are still under development and not expected to be published before August 2015 (Part 1: General Requirements). However, its important advantages (specially en-route inductive charging) compared to conductive charging have been translated in a big number of research projects and initiatives to further develop this technology.
In the spirit of reducing the impact of the fast-charging system in the energy grid, there has been an important work on developing advanced PE. Nowadays almost all the chargers available in the market comply with the limits of power quality establish in the standard (IEC 61000-3-12) when charging at nominal power. In any case, DC quick charging produces proportionally less quality distortion to the electrical grid than slow and medium AC charging.
One potential solution is the use of Energy Storage Systems, either using second life batteries or not, has a wide support from the stakeholders as the most promising to decrease the impact of QC on the grid, along with remote management of the charger (still in an early stage of development).
On the other hand, demand control remains as a very relevant area as well as driver’s behaviour to reduce the drawbacks of fast charging. However, modifying the EV driver behaviour is complicated and requires innovative communication and incentive programmes (rewards) to motivate positive behaviours. These strategies are not exclusively designed for reducing the impact of quick charging on the electrical grid, but they take into account all the possible charging options available for the EV drivers in the country or region.
As far as the battery is concerned, it is of vital importance including battery design within the broader concept of mobility for the purpose of lessening costs and simplifying the business model. The fact is that battery performance is also affected by how the vehicles are used (i.e., by drivers), which means it is important to link their design to the specific use that will be made of them by consumers, a matter that varies by continent, country, social condition, availability of charging points, charge frequency, and so on.
Under this dialogue that took place during the Task 20, as a main conclusion, it appears that there is no clear and unique business model solution. Several on-going projects and deployment activities are taking part across the globe with different approaches: some of them promoting the added value of using QC firstly among the costumers while in other demonstration cases, infrastructure and cars are at the front of the strategy plans. No matter how barriers (both technical and nontechnical) are confronted, the full business plan will not be completed before investing and pushing the deployment forward. The model should be flexible and evaluated, adapted to prices and real needs in the hope of enlarging the network and customers. Moreover, a better understanding of the customer behaviour and needs is precisely the starting point to defining the business model, as highlighted by the vast majority of the stakeholders that participated in the survey, especially the private sector. Continuous interaction and support to existing and potential new customers through information programmes, remote assistance, etc. have also been identified as highly important. It is therefore encouraged to establish the system for grasping EV users behaviour/movement and profile of EV users to provide more convenient service in the initial stage after switching from free of charge to charge.
Concerning the key actors around fast charging, the relatively high number of actors involved in the battery recharging process of EV creates a very complex ecosystem, with many different interests and several potential business models depending on who the owner of the EVSE is. There are many possibilities: an independent private service provider, a public foundation, a DSO, private business such as restaurants, retailers, etc. all in all, should be supported by the strong involvement of public authorities in the first stages of the deployment of the quick chargers. According to stakeholders this is essential. Subsidies for the installation, maintenance and operation of the quick charging infrastructure are seen as the most important contribution by the public sector along with other incentives to be progressively decreased when the business model is in place.
Fast charging is moving forward, opening new directions towards more added value services, among others, V2G. The future of V2G is still uncertain, regardless its potential and despite the fact that the technology is not an issue, but the knowledge about the economic, environmental and grid benefits is underdeveloped, inconsistent or not validate1. Indeed, most of the studies conducted on the matter are focused on technical aspects and, although researches have tried to assess the commercial potential of this technology, it is not clear yet how to capture this value, and several business models have been proposed. As highlighted in the business models section for quick charging, in the particular case of V2G, preferences of the users must be the central point for deriving a business model.
In summary, stakeholders agree on the idea that there is not only one good solution and the adopted approach must be the result of a thorough analysis of the current situation, needs and opportunities in each country, taking into consideration several factors (demographics, cultural aspects, business cases for the different infrastructures, etc.). In addition, governments have a wide variety of options to support the deployment of the EV and they set up measures both in the supply and the demand side. Concerning the EVSE, the most common action is to support their installation through taxes exemptions, financial incentives, and, especially for quick chargers (due to their high cost), direct, partial, or full funding. This last option may include the purchase of the equipment and its installation. Concrete examples of national programmes on deploying EVSE, and particularly, quick chargers are provided within this section.